smallspy
Senior Member
It had always been called TRHC's Wilson Yard. It seemed like it was for more long-term storage, with Keating Yard being their main hub.
As for the reasoning behind the name, I have no idea why.
Dan
|
|
|
GO Transit Electrification | Metrolinx
- Thread starter innsertnamehere
- Start date
As for the reasoning behind the name, I have no idea why.
Dan
crs1026
Superstar
I’m on an errand to Aurora, and looking at the new platform construction at Maple. The bases for what must be future OCS poles are inplace on the platform…..but their placement sure seems bizarre. I’m all for function over beauty, but putting the poles in the middle of the platform will make things look junky when the wires arrive - IMHO anyways.
Looks like there will be crossovers just north of the platform….but one would hope the double track is extended all the way south to Rutherford, enabling ise of both platforms there.
- Paul
Looks like there will be crossovers just north of the platform….but one would hope the double track is extended all the way south to Rutherford, enabling ise of both platforms there.
- Paul
MrGoose
Active Member
A preview of electric GO curtesy of Caltrain's Staedler Kiss EMUs
afransen
Senior Member
No guarantee that GO's eventual EMUs will be double-deckers. They aren't great if the goal is to reduce station dwell times.
rbt
Senior Member
RER A works okay with wide mid-level doors: This allows 2 separate streams of passengers doing the stairs simultaneously. They regularly turn over half to 3/4s of the train in ~2 minutes (3:20 operating frequencies).
That said, there's a good chance if it was built today, with modern signalling, they'd try to push frequencies to 110 seconds and stick with single-deck trains.
Last edited:
ARG1
Senior Member
This is only an argument I'd agree with if we decided to move to High Level Platforms so that we can have more doors per car. As it stands if we're going to have low floor boarding with all of our doors on the bottom floor anyway, the difference isn't as big.
guavadelic
Active Member
Those trains are a beauty. But we won't see that level of acceleration cause we're doing electro locomotives instead of EMUs.
JSF-1
Active Member
Idk Sydney seems to do a very good job using Bi-Level EMU's. For perspective service levels are apparently every 5 minutes during rush hour and every 10 minutes off-peak and on weekends. Their most heavily used line T1 - Northshore and Western Line moved 41.9 Million riders in 2021/2022. By comparison our most heavily used line the Lake Shore West moved 17 Million riders. (Also as an aside Sydney imo has to have some of the nicest Bi-Level EMU's out there.
Bojaxs
Senior Member
We already had this conversation a page or two back in this thread. If Metrolinx makes the switch to EMU's, what will they do with the 900+ bi-level coaches they have in stock?
EDIT: Page 232-233
GO Transit Electrification | Metrolinx
Because EMUs are superior in every way? I’m sure they will still be on the market when the BiLevels naturally reach the end of their life. In the meantime, nixing perfectly usable equipment strikes me as being extraordinarily shortsighted.
drum118
Superstar
Mean while ML plays with the thought of electrifying their tracks
JSF-1
Active Member
Yes I know we had this conversation, I was there when it was happening, but that's not what my post is about. All I am doing to is responding to a previous post to say that yes you can operate a frequent service with Bi-Level EMU's and posted an example of a city doing that.We already had this conversation a page or two back in this thread. If Metrolinx makes the switch to EMU's, what will they do with the 900+ bi-level coaches they have in stock?
EDIT: Page 232-233
GO Transit Electrification | Metrolinx
Because EMUs are superior in every way? I’m sure they will still be on the market when the BiLevels naturally reach the end of their life. In the meantime, nixing perfectly usable equipment strikes me as being extraordinarily shortsighted.urbantoronto.ca
T3G
Senior Member
Why is that? They're not limited to 2 doors, they could have 4 or 5 if that's what the operator requests in the design stage.
Moving between floors on a train is markedly safer and more stable than it is on a bus, so it can't be that.
Bureaucromancer
Active Member
Three would be doable, but four or five doors is a challenge for the floor plate you end up with on any double decker. And even at that the more fundamental issue than doors is internal circulation; increasing the door count might even exacerbate the issue by puttting an even higher percentage of the seating on the upper deck and making the dwell time even more dependent on speed of vertical movement.
Last edited:
marcus_a_j
Senior Member
My brother-in-law takes this almost every day to go to work. Thinks they are great. He shed a very small tear on the last in-service Gallery train
MrGoose
Active Member
They've only been in revenue service since Saturday Oct 21 lol