ssiguy2
Senior Member
I suggest you watch it. It had nothing to do with London's BRT and everything to do with Kitchener's ION. I want Reece to do a video about Edmonton's LRT because I'm very curious about what's going with the CTrain.
|
|
|
GO Transit Electrification | Metrolinx
- Thread starter innsertnamehere
- Start date
asey20
New Member
This may have been asked or answer before but is there a considerable height difference for the overhead wires between running bilevels and using EMU single level train sets? Would EMU's be able to run on the bilevel overhead wire height or would the wires have to be lowered eventually?
reinventingthewheel
Active Member
High reaching pantographs can extend over a 3m height difference between extended and folded position.
MrGoose
Active Member
Overhead lines and double stack containers are possible.
generalcanada
Senior Member
catenary poles can change their height. as you can see.
the only consideration is a design decision when building the EMUs as to how the catenary pole is going to be built.
crs1026
Superstar
Google “ Metra Highliner”. Running bilevels under catenary is nothing new.
Go’s existing fleet will undoubtedly fit - and any new equipment procurement will assure this also.
We just have to wait and see what Oncorr’s designers propose.
- Paul
cplchanb
Senior Member
as the photo clearly shows, its possible to design the OCS to accommodate to the double stack and autoracks from the CN/CPKC lines and bi levels
its all dependant on their spines. clearly CPKC/CN are too afraid of change so are resistant to allow for OCS on their lines. RH couldve been part of this too.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
This is not a relevant assessment of GO's stop spacing, because the video was not suggesting to use EMUs all across the existing network, it was suggesting to use EMUs on some services on the core part of the network in the future.
This entails two key points:
1. Only the core 260 km of the network is being electrified, so obviously that's where EMUs would operate. The stop spacing outside of this area is irrelevant to the tradeoff between Electric locmotives and EMUs.
2. Many new stations are planned within the core network, so by the time the lines are electrified, station spacings will be closer than they are today.
Here are the stop spacings for the core local services in the future network. These are the services which would be the top candidates for EMUs. The remainder of services can happily continue using BiLevels with Electric, Bi-Mode or Diesel locomotives for the forseeable future.
Based on these spacings, it seems that the Bramalea-Unionville local service would be a great candidate to be run by EMUs. So when it inevitably comes time to buy some new trains to accommodate ridership growth and replace old coaches, it would make sense for those new trains to be EMUs. Those new trains could be assigned to that service, and then gradually rolled out to other local services.
Of the 47 inter-station distances in the future core network, 26 are under 5km:
I think we all agree that electric locomotives are a good jumping-off point into electrification, but if GO does not seriously consider EMUs at this point in the design process, they will get locked in to buying new locomotives and coaches indefinitely into the future. This pertains primarily to the design of their maintenance facilities, which have different requirements if EMUs are to be serviced.
Metrolinx did tweet that they decided to only use locomotives instead of EMUs, but that was immediately after OnExpress was selected as the preferred proponent - far too early for them to have actually made a solid decision on that point. I think it is still worth discussing the merits of EMUs, even if they aren't necessarily part of the initial rollout of electrification.
Last edited:
Willybru21
Active Member
Even without EMU’s the proposed OnXpress time savings are still very impressive, the combination of shorter trains and faster acceleration from electric locomotives aren’t to be taken for granted. It does make me wonder how fast it would be with EMU’s though.
Last edited:
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Just because GO doesn't mention EMUs now doesn't mean they won't in the future. When you have nearly 900 bi-levels, you can't just sell them for pennies on the dollar. I can see them gradually being phased out especially for lines with closer station spacing. As for the longer routes ie to KW/Niagara/Barrie, I could potentially see them never getting phased out. EMU's due indeed faster acceleration than electric locos {EL} but the further out you get and the wider the stop spacing, the less of a disadvantage that becomes.
The longer the trip, the more important the quality and comfort of the ride becomes. EMU's, due to multiple propulsion, gives it an acceleration advantage over EL but conversely doesn't offer the ride quality. Due to EL only having one moving cab, the rides on the actual passenger cabs are quieter and smoother than on EMU where the passenger are sitting a top the engines. For longer distance trips, that makes a big difference and makes the service more appealing for those distance commuters. EMUs are ideal for the original RER portions of the system and EL hauling bi-levels for the longer distance ones.
The longer the trip, the more important the quality and comfort of the ride becomes. EMU's, due to multiple propulsion, gives it an acceleration advantage over EL but conversely doesn't offer the ride quality. Due to EL only having one moving cab, the rides on the actual passenger cabs are quieter and smoother than on EMU where the passenger are sitting a top the engines. For longer distance trips, that makes a big difference and makes the service more appealing for those distance commuters. EMUs are ideal for the original RER portions of the system and EL hauling bi-levels for the longer distance ones.
Dan416
Senior Member
The Caltrain bilevel trains seem very short. I saw one at Millbrae but didn’t get a great picture, as I was rushing to catch my flight, but I’ll just post it anyway. I think they had only 4 coaches. They seemed to accelerate quicker than a GO train.
cplchanb
Senior Member
its all physics. when you have only 1/3 of the weight to pull its natural
afransen
Senior Member
Longer distance will need hybrid and/or battery locos to go beyond the electrified area, no?
drum118
Superstar
I don't know that photo of double stack was taken, but, it will not work for most countries in Europe that have tunnels.
If you look at the BiLevel equipment in Europe, you will see they are not square box like NA cars to the point you better not sit next to the windows on the upper deck if you are 6 feet plus, as you will be hitting head on the ceiling of the car.
I am 6' and the first time I stood up by the window seat, bang my head on the curve part of the ceiling. You get up with your head on an angle so you don't hit your head.
Unless tunnels and overpasses have been enlarge for height to handle double stack and BiLevel equipment as well the OS, the RR will opposed the electrifying of their lines and why you mainly see single stack in Europe. End of the day, its the RR you will yes or no for electrifying their line regardless it can be shown it will work in the first place.
Many RR have lower their tracks as well moved from 2 track tunnel to one to allow double stacks and auto racks in that tunnel or underpass. Only have to look at Hamilton and Windsor to see where CP moved from 2 tracks to one as well lower the tracks for double stack and auto racks.
Metrolinx has indicated over the years that there will be places where the tracks will have to be lower to get under the overpasses to allow electrifying of the line. One of LA new metro extension has the pans about 1-2 feet above a single level train.
The question becomes, how do we convince CN/CPKC to allow electrifying of the line, since we know it will work??
afransen
Senior Member
I'm pretty sure that shot is from India.