GO Transit Electrification | Metrolinx

[reaperexpress]

in terms of the union train shed. i do recall a document releasing a few months back about metrolinx using a certain type of wiring that fits the shed fine. might have been under the heritage thing for platform 20/21
i dont think its that complex

Yes that's correct. They have been proceeding on the design already, and the preferred solution for the heritage shed is to install an overhead rail within the smoke ducts above the tracks, though those ducts need to be shifted in a few places to properly line up with the tracks. The new platforms south of the shed will use ordinary overhead wires.

Although our head start on design work gives us an advantage over CalTrain, a lot of the time which CalTrain spent was simply installing the vast number of pole foundations, which is largely a function of line length.

Even the shortest pair of viable segments (25 km Bramalea-Union + 31 km Union-Unionville) is already 56 km of lines, which is more than CalTrain's entire electrification program. But given that the Whitby Yard will likely be the initial base for electric trains, LSE (50 km) would probably be part of the initial operating segment, and if LSE is electric, they'll want LSW as well to avoid terminating at Union (+35 km to Oakville). So even if the initial operating segment is just the Lakeshore East and half of Lakeshore West, that's already 85 km. More likely it would be both of the above, plus the Pearson guideway, for a total of 144 km.

 

[ARG1]

Caltrain's electrification is currently scheduled to last 8 years between awarding the contract and running the first train in service. That's for 49 km of double-tracked lines (around 120 track-km mainline plus maintenance/storage facilities).
View attachment 371046

GO's electrification is for 260 km of lines of varying widths (687 track-km), and electrifying Union Station will be considerably more complex than electrifying San Francisco's King Street station, which doesn't even have a trainshed. The new south platforms at Union are being designed with overhead wires from day one, but at least some of the historical plaforms also need to be electrified before a single electric service can start running. I suspect that the planned reconfiguration of the USRC west of the station would be the limiting factor for the speed implementation, given that Metrolinx won't want to electrify tracks that they're about to demolish anyway.

As depressing as it sounds, I wouldn't be surprised if 2031 is indeed the start of electrified revenue service on the central portions of the core network (e.g. to Oakville, Bramalea/Pearson, Aurora, Unionville, Oshawa) with the remainder of the core network (to Burlington, Barrie, Lincolnville) coming online incrementally afterward. From a railfan perspective, the bright side is that electric trains will start testing much earlier than that. My guess is that they will start by electrifying between Pickering to Oshawa as a testing segment since the Whitby yard is already designed for electric trains.

Looking at this timeline though, it seems like a lot of time was spent building the facility that would manufacture the vehicles. I'm assuming that if the team with Alstom wins, they can easily retool the Thunder Bay plant to build the new EMUs thus decreasing the time spent on building the trains. Obviously you still have to deal with the issue of catenary installation, but that's still a major section of the process that can be cut out entirely.

 

[reaperexpress]

Looking at this timeline though, it seems like a lot of time was spent building the facility that would manufacture the vehicles. I'm assuming that if the team with Alstom wins, they can easily retool the Thunder Bay plant to build the new EMUs thus decreasing the time spent on building the trains. Obviously you still have to deal with the issue of catenary installation, but that's still a major section of the process that can be cut out entirely.

But the vehicles weren't the limiting factor for the timeline. CalTrain bought second-hand AEM-7 locomotives from Amtrak a couple years ago so they could start testing before the Stadler KISS EMUs started arriving, but the Stadler trains are arriving now and the infrastructure still isn't ready for testing.

 

[smallspy]

Yes that's correct. They have been proceeding on the design already, and the preferred solution for the heritage shed is to install an overhead rail within the smoke ducts above the tracks, though those ducts need to be shifted in a few places to properly line up with the tracks. The new platforms south of the shed will use ordinary overhead wires.

The ducts are already aligned with the center-line of the tracks. And the new ducts installed during the trainshed rehab are several inches shorter than the original ones, to allow for clearances around the catenary/rail system that will be installed.

Dan

 

[Allandale25]

I actually change my original estimate. I'm going to say 2034/2035 until we see a line electrified.

 

[reaperexpress]

The ducts are already aligned with the center-line of the tracks. And the new ducts installed during the trainshed rehab are several inches shorter than the original ones, to allow for clearances around the catenary/rail system that will be installed.

To clarify: they need to shift ducts to align with the tracks which are being realigned.

From https://www.metrolinxengage.com/sites/default/files/unionstation_ministers_consent_27nov20_0.pdf

Design and layout changes are required including selective removal and realignment of specific tracks to accommodate platform widening whic h also
entails selective smoke duct realignment and the reconfiguration of low voltage wireways (LVWs).

 

[nfitz]

I wonder if this is why they reneged on the grass roof, because they didn't want the optics of removing parts of it 5 years later.

 

[Amare]

I wonder if this is why they reneged on the grass roof, because they didn't want the optics of removing parts of it 5 years later.

Nope it has nothing to do with that, they simply opted to remove it as part of the renovations. Moreso due to disinterest, but the most likely public explanation you would see out there if they were really pressed on it would be "costs" and "maintenance".

 

[iYass]

Hello everyone!

According to you, which applicant is likeky to be awarded ?
Okay, get your bets down!

 

[ARG1]

Hello everyone!

According to you, which applicant is likeky to be awarded ?
Okay, get your bets down!

Probably Alstom/DB

 

[TRONto]

World's second largest mining corporation orders four Wabtec battery-electric locomotives

Wabtec announced that mining company Rio Tinto placed an order for four of its FLXdrive battery-electric locomotives to reduce its emissions.

electrek.co

Another prototype - up to 350 miles. If there was no catenary coming Metrolinx would be able to consider this for UPX

(Cross-posted to General Railway and Coming Disruption to transport)

 

[ARG1]

World's second largest mining corporation orders four Wabtec battery-electric locomotives

Wabtec announced that mining company Rio Tinto placed an order for four of its FLXdrive battery-electric locomotives to reduce its emissions.

electrek.co

Another prototype - up to 350 miles. If there was no catenary coming Metrolinx would be able to consider this for UPX

(Cross-posted to General Railway and Coming Disruption to transport)

And in what universe is there no catenary coming?

 

[John Bisan]

Hello everyone!

According to you, which applicant is likeky to be awarded ?
Okay, get your bets down!

95% sure it will be Aecon/Alstom/DB

 

[TRONto]

And in what universe is there no catenary coming?

Not this one. But for that universe where there was no catenary, it'd be an option (hence the if)

 

[ssiguy2]

I don't think battery-only trains are a good idea especially in such a huge commuter/RER network like GO. Batteries don't work as well or last as long in colder climates and as the batteries drain so does their performance on such things as de/acceleration. Battery-only trains also weigh a ton which offsets much of their advantage in terms of de/acceleration over DMUs and there is the big added cost of having to replace them all when they reach their end of lifecycle. Perhaps battery-only in 20 or 30 years when the technology is far more advanced but not now.

This is why I have always supported a battery-cantenary system. They allow the batteries to be recharged when on route. This is done by having overhead connections and recharging at just the stations themselves as well as regenerative braking. This allows the trains to always be fully charged so they are always operating at peak efficiency. They also require far fewer batteries greatly reducing the weight of the train and when replacement is eventually needed you are having to replace far fewer batteries. There is also no downtime required to recharge and time is money. This is very similar to many battery buses in Europe where the buses recharge only at key transit stops/stations so the buses are always fully charged allowing for top efficiency and being able to ply far longer routes than battery-only buses like what the TTC has.

All this at the same time you get all the advantages of battery-only..................less infrastructure to build and maintain, allowing for easy expansion of electrification without the time and cost of putting more catenary lines up, electric supply not being at the mercy of Mother Nature, and no visual pollution.