News   Dec 20, 2024
 1.4K     7 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 952     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 1.8K     0 

GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

I certainly concur that dedicated passing tracks are not coming to every GO station in the system, or even most, in the near to medium term. But I think its reasonable enough to imagine that can come to more stations, and strategic choices may be deliverable and inordinately beneficial, indeed for reasons other than passenger safety as well.

Interestingly, some stations on the Barrie line appear to have been built with room for a third (expressish) track in the center.

The problem is partly the narrowness of the row, and the many places where thing have been squeezed to fit. In so many places it would take land acquiition and a major civil project to widen things out. That's not a good reason to do nothing, but one has to be realistic about where and how often that will be affordable.

But the bigger problem is that it would be very constraining to insist that non-stopping trains never, ever be scheduled or routed over platform tracks. A simpler but very constraining patch would be to impose speed restrictions on every non stopping train at platforms.... but that would wreak havoc on scheduling and dispatching.

I broadly agree, but I think that's just a bit too fatalistic.

I hope I wsn't sounding indifferent. I was simply taking the risk profile of an unprotected platform, multiplied by frequency of trains, multiplied by time. If the probability of an incident at a platform is non-zero, even if it is very small.....something will happen eventually.

Let me offer a few things I think are practical.

1) Platform edge lights, embedded, which light up when a train is approaching. The utility here is that many people wear headphones/earbuds and may not hear a fast moving train approaching in a timely way, and they may, if walking away from it, not see it either. But lights up/down the platform edge would be highly visible and an indicator of warning/pay attention. This is perfectly feasible, though only cost-effective during platform reconstruction.

A very good idea. I wonder if there are other technologies as well. My imagination wonders how one might transmit an energy field that raises a shiver as trains approach. Flashing light definitely would be a start and could convey direction of approach too.

Finally, I think when it comes to education, I'd like to see a full sized screen (the kind for ads) that can be used for PSAs at at least one spot along a platform at most stations overtime. Then the key to the PSA being effective is to realistically reenact accidents (not in a gory way), but in a way that is scary and shows people why proximity to the edge is dangerous, including due to loose clothing or backpacks that may project out from one's body more than the wearer knows.

I'm wondering how many people will actually watch.... a bit like safety demonstrations on airliners.....but they can't hurt. One ML practice I would offer is the on-platform ambassadors, who I am noticing more and more often actually engaging passengers helpfully on the platform. Some are wooden, and nobody responds well to being corrected, but some are real people people.....and as someone who spends their Saturdays (as a volunteer) asking people to stand behind a yellow line, there is nothing like a smile and a personal connection to get someone's attention.

- Paul
 

Latest on this incident as it was discussed here at the time.



Given the volume of trains and the limited number of tracks, etc, I would have to imagine the suggested in the bold could be a challenge? @smallspy @crs1026
Yeah, not an option at this time.

Maybe if we get to the point of a full build-out of all of the corridors - 4 tracks or more - that could be something that happens.

I also wonder if she was walking in the narrow section that is shown in the picture of the article.

View attachment 603421
She was not.

She was walking along the section past (away from) the stairs, and took a step towards to her left - and towards the track - to pass a slower passenger also walking in the same direction. She just happened to do so right as the VIA was passing.

Dan
 
^ thanks. Not that I guess it matters but I had forgotten until you mentioned it that it was a VIA "express train" and not a GO express train.
 
^ thanks. Not that I guess it matters but I had forgotten until you mentioned it that it was a VIA "express train" and not a GO express train.
There was an announcement at Bramalea the other day. "just a reminder that standing, walking or sitting on the yellow line is strictly prohibited and trains can pass at anytime.". As if that should even be necessary.
 
Is there not a need to place an order to replace the D4500's? More double deckers?
Metrolinx has been dragging their feet in ordering new buses for a while now. They don’t want to get any more double deckers. They want a low floor highway coach, but didn’t like the design from MCI. Essentially what they want doesn’t actually exist. Also the lead times for even just a conventional high floor coach can be very long. They are currently in discussions with manufactures, though.
 
Metrolinx has been dragging their feet in ordering new buses for a while now. They don’t want to get any more double deckers. They want a low floor highway coach, but didn’t like the design from MCI. Essentially what they want doesn’t actually exist. Also the lead times for even just a conventional high floor coach can be very long. They are currently in discussions with manufactures, though.
What's not to like about the D4500crt?

Most routes require double decker capacity though.
 
What's not to like about the D4500crt?

Most routes require double decker capacity though.
They didn’t like how the lowered vestibule on the D45 CRT LE was isolating passengers with disabilities.

The current SuperLos don’t seem to be going anywhere for a while. The first batch is also getting refurbished (and so are some of the older MCIs). I think for some routes if capacity is a problem, increasing service would be better.
 
Metrolinx has been dragging their feet in ordering new buses for a while now. They don’t want to get any more double deckers. They want a low floor highway coach, but didn’t like the design from MCI. Essentially what they want doesn’t actually exist. Also the lead times for even just a conventional high floor coach can be very long. They are currently in discussions with manufactures, though.

What's not to like about the D4500crt?

Most routes require double decker capacity though.

They didn’t like how the lowered vestibule on the D45 CRT LE was isolating passengers with disabilities.

The current SuperLos don’t seem to be going anywhere for a while. The first batch is also getting refurbished (and so are some of the older MCIs). I think for some routes if capacity is a problem, increasing service would be better.

First off, loving the insight here, thanks!

Second, I agree the D45 CRT LE is...weird. Forgive my ignorance, but is there a physical / mechanical reason highway coaches have high floors other than bag storage? I imagine there's a good reason, no way we've gone this far in accessible bus history without someone making a coach variant of an intercity bus layout / load method.
 
First off, loving the insight here, thanks!

Second, I agree the D45 CRT LE is...weird. Forgive my ignorance, but is there a physical / mechanical reason highway coaches have high floors other than bag storage? I imagine there's a good reason, no way we've gone this far in accessible bus history without someone making a coach variant of an intercity bus layout / load method.
Then order high floor single deck buses. D4505?

I guess they don't want to go the Orion V route and order suburban LFS versions...
 
First off, loving the insight here, thanks!

Second, I agree the D45 CRT LE is...weird. Forgive my ignorance, but is there a physical / mechanical reason highway coaches have high floors other than bag storage? I imagine there's a good reason, no way we've gone this far in accessible bus history without someone making a coach variant of an intercity bus layout / load method.
I think it’s because highway coaches typically make a lot less stops than a transit bus, so there’s less chance of needing to quickly load and unload mobility aids. The point about needing baggage space also makes sense.

European manufacturers have something closer to what Metrolinx wants. Examples include the Volvo 8900 and MAN Lion’s City LE. Even closer is the Plaxton Panther LE which is more of a coach and has a little bit of underfloor storage.
 
I think it’s because highway coaches typically make a lot less stops than a transit bus, so there’s less chance of needing to quickly load and unload mobility aids. The point about needing baggage space also makes sense.

European manufacturers have something closer to what Metrolinx wants. Examples include the Volvo 8900 and MAN Lion’s City LE. Even closer is the Plaxton Panther LE which is more of a coach and has a little bit of underfloor storage.
Stretch the LFS frame to 45ft 😂
 
Better seats would help. But low floor buses in general have a hard ride. The other issue is maintaining highway speed. They would need tweak the gearing.
Not to mention poorer doors that don't need to open/shut as frequently, they whistle like crazy on the highway. Guelph Transit runs a route using NOVA LFS briefly on Highway 6, it would not be good doing that on a longer run.

If baggage is the main issue, I would question how often they carry passengers needing it. Maybe during weekends before/after holidays when university students go home, but otherwise, it seems rarer these days beyond a backpack.
 

Back
Top