News   Feb 03, 2026
Five 60-Storey Towers Proposed Near Ajax GO Station
 527     0 
News   Feb 03, 2026
News Roundup for February 3, 2026
 390     0 
News   Feb 03, 2026
Iconorama
 601     0 

GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

Taken from the GO Transit Reddit page:

IMG_1828.png


IMG_20260202_100932.jpeg


IMG_9387.jpeg
 
crs1026 said:
The derailment was directly under the skywalk at John St.

Not serious equipment wise but in a very critical location.

- Paul
Click to expand...
Thanks Paul, looks pretty serious from the photo I saw, but I know nothing of locomotives or their coaches.
 
WB62 said:
Taken from the GO Transit Reddit page:

View attachment 712374

View attachment 712375

View attachment 712376
Click to expand...
Completely forgot to check the sub!
Relevant comment to the post- On-site user says RTC moved switch while train on it. *NOTE: Others have discussed that this shouldn't be possible. Sounds like hearsay, so take as-is and no solid proof.

Edit: I've elected to remove the image as it was also deleted on Reddit- and as others have pointed out may not be totally okay for everyone involved if it stays up.
 
Last edited:
lastcommodore said:
Completely forgot to check the sub!
Relevant comment to the post- On-site user says RTC moved switch while train on it. View attachment 712379
Click to expand...

This is why I miss the old system. Granted that the interlocking towers are anqtiuated tech now but at least they locked out the switches.

Very bad location for a derailment but thankfully it was close enough to Union to have both emergency and track crews nearby to assist.
 
Voltz said:
I don’t think I’d be taking and posting this picture if I worked there, making people you work for look bad isn’t a good idea
Click to expand...

I have to agree that the remarks made represented a serious risk to someone's employment.... but... I would never criticise a possible whistle blower.

The question of ML ought to be, will there be a TSB investigation and a publicly discoverable report?

There are technical allegations here that deserve to be investigated by the safety agency and that deserve transparency. We can count on ML to bury the whole event as deeply as they can.

Simply put: the whole point of having a complex, techncially high quality interlocking signalling system is to prevent anyone or anything from throwing a switch under a train. And, even if someone or something tried to do that, why did the machinery not refuse to follow that command? The allegation that the switch was thrown under the train inadvertently or knowingly is very concerning. (At this point, that allegation is not necessarily proven, tThere are other possible explanations so I would not take this allegation to the bank.....yet.) But... it deserves to be reviewed objectively by independent examiners, and either disproven or verified.

This is a case where I hope our lurking investigative reporters from the formal media are reading and taking action. This may be the kind of "mundane" service interruption that commuters endure and quickly forget, but it's extraordinary in terms of ML's safety management system.

If ML is not willing to openly discuss and assist with a third party investigation, it's a very serious indictment of both their safety culture and their public responsibilities.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
crs1026 said:
I have to agree that the remarks made represented a serious risk to someone's employment.... but... I would never criticise a possible whistle blower.

The question of ML ought to be, will there be a TSB investigation and a publicly discoverable report?

There are technical allegations here that deserve to be investigated by the safety agency and that deserve transparency. We can count on ML to bury the whole event as deeply as they can.

Simply put: the whole point of having a complex, techncially high quality interlocking signalling system is to prevent anyone from throwing a switch under a train. And, even if they tried to do that, why did the machinery not refuse to follow that command? The allegation that the switch was thrown under the train inadvertently or knowingly is very concerning. (At this point, that allegation is not necessarily proven, but it deserves to be reviewed objectively by independent examiners, and either disproven or verified). There are other possible explanations so I would not take this allegation to the bank.....yet.

This is a case where I hope our lurking investigative reporters from the formal media are reading and taking action. This may be the kind of "typical" service interruption that commuters endure and quickly forget, but it's extraordinary in terms of ML's safety management system.

If ML is not willing to openly discuss and assist with a third party investigation, it's a very serious indictment of both their safety culture and their public responsibilities.

- Paul
Click to expand...
There should be a TSB report, as they are a very capable body that does excellent and thorough investigative work. But since GO is a provincial transit company and it's on a Metrolinx right-of-way, all safety investigations are provincial jurisdiction. TSB only gets brought in at MTO's request.
 
crs1026 said:
I have to agree that the remarks made represented a serious risk to someone's employment.... but... I would never criticise a possible whistle blower.

The question of ML ought to be, will there be a TSB investigation and a publicly discoverable report?

There are technical allegations here that deserve to be investigated by the safety agency and that deserve transparency. We can count on ML to bury the whole event as deeply as they can.

Simply put: the whole point of having a complex, techncially high quality interlocking signalling system is to prevent anyone from throwing a switch under a train. And, even if they tried to do that, why did the machinery not refuse to follow that command? The allegation that the switch was thrown under the train inadvertently or knowingly is very concerning. (At this point, that allegation is not necessarily proven, tThere are other possible explanations so I would not take this allegation to the bank.....yet.) But... it deserves to be reviewed objectively by independent examiners, and either disproven or verified.

This is a case where I hope our lurking investigative reporters from the formal media are reading and taking action. This may be the kind of "mundane" service interruption that commuters endure and quickly forget, but it's extraordinary in terms of ML's safety management system.

If ML is not willing to openly discuss and assist with a third party investigation, it's a very serious indictment of both their safety culture and their public responsibilities.

- Paul
Click to expand...

The deleted comment says RTC moved the switch while the train was on it, and someone responded that:

They're lying. It's physically not possible for a switch to be moved remotely when a train is occupying the switch. Anyone who says otherwise has no understanding of a conventional signalling system.

The switches are electrically isolated after the route is selected and when the train is occupying the track circuit. A very, very bad wrong side failure would have had to occur for what they were describing to happen. Like a relay melting.
Click to expand...
 
Allandale25 said:
The deleted comment says RTC moved the switch while the train was on it, and someone responded that:
Click to expand...
It just sounds like a lot of information being spitballed.

I should probably rescind my comment as well given that there's a lot of rumors and no official statement yet.

lastcommodore said:
Oh wow, post is deleted.
I can pull my repost down as well if everyone thinks its best to do that.
Click to expand...

I'm probably going to do the same given I do not like to dwell in mis/disinformation.
 
Totally agree that we all need to keep our minds open and not second guess or prejudge the findings.

The point is, this is a very heavily trafficked zone where there are frequently multiple trains moving adjacent to each other. The incident is therefore a "near miss" with a potential harm level that is greater than the norm. Those types of events are the ones that most need thorough investigation.

The very fact that some immediately respond "it can't happen" is what makes it important to avoid assumptons or complacency and dig further..... did something happen here that is evidence that a safeguard failed?

- Paul
 
This reminds me of a time at work.

A metal bar that was part of a gate mechanism on a small dam got bent out of shape and rendered inoperable until it was replaced. It was raised during a regular weekly engineering meeting, and most people around the table rolled their eyes and vented that a junior employee had probably overextended it by operating the motor too far. The upper level manager shut down the chatter, and told everyone that a full investigation was needed before jumping to conclusions. After a few weeks, turns out the bar had overextended itself due to thermal expansion of the sun, and the junior employee had done everything right.

I carry that lesson with me to this day. Jumping to 'logical conclusions' can leave unforeseen and systematic issues uncovered.

Yet again why I think the TSB is well-equipped to investigate.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top