Metrolinx $55 Billion Plan

[Rainforest]

Shaving five minutes of travel time for $10 billion is like trading a kingdom for a horse.

The magnitude of time saving will be very different on different routes. On Eglinton, the introduction of LRT will be a huge improvement over the present mixed-traffic bus service. This is partly due to the underground section between Jane and Leslie, and partly because the buses are held back by congestion so much. Between Bathurst and Yonge, during peak hours and heavy snow, a bus can trail a pedestrian.

The average speed of Eglinton LRT should be somewhat better than on other TC routes, due to the underground section. Based on 32 kph for subways and 22 kph estimate for Sheppard LRT (almost all in the middle of street), average of about 25 kph should be expected on Eglinton. This is good enough for mid-range trips. For long trips, the service area is not that far from Bloor subway, and hopefully will benefit from the Midtown GO service in future.

 

[isittimetomoveyet]

The wider the stations/stops are on any rapid transit line, the faster it will be. The fastest streetcars are on the Queensway, especially running downhill from Parkside Drive westbound. It can really reach high speed, passing cars going 60 km/h, if there are only green lights ahead and no stops. However, if it has to stop at each and every stop for passengers, it will be slower.

Totally... but I'll be damned if I have to walk, like 500 or 600 hundreds yards, to the nearest station. F*** that!

 

[adma]

And wide stops also provide more disincentive for those like myself who like to walk the route until a streetcar encounters me--like, I don't like to be forced into standing still martyred to a streetcar stop in blustery weather like today...

 

[Ansem]

Only on the Green line, which uses older trains than the others.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=fTwWzQSc0oI&feature=channel_page

 

[khris]

I love the noise that it makes. I have been trying to understand what causes that noise, and why it doesn't seem to happen in every station on every train. Can anyone explain that sound? It almost sounds like an accordion.

 

[RedRocket191]

I love the noise that it makes. I have been trying to understand what causes that noise, and why it doesn't seem to happen in every station on every train. Can anyone explain that sound? It almost sounds like an accordion.

From wikipedia:

The MR-73 is the second generation of high-performance metro cars, identified by rectangular cab headlights, orange interiors (which are gradually being replaced with blue and dark orange interiors, as part of the mid-life refurbishment), 124 kW (168 hp) traction motors that growl while accelerating out of a station, have side vents and a unique three-note sound signature when the train pulls out of a station. The initial rate of acceleration of the MR-73 model is 1.43 m/s² (5.2km/h or 3.2 mph per second). The three-note sound is produced by traction motor control equipment called a "current chopper", which is used to control and power the motors on the train in stages without incurring a power surge. It does this by modulating the current in 5 consecutive stages (90, 120, 180, 240 and 360 Hz), the latter 3 being normally audible. A prototype for the current chopper has been built by the Canron company using a Jeumont original design in the early 1970s on an MR-63 train. Two of the three elements of this "Jeumont Train" are currently operated on the Line 1 Green among rheostatic-started MR-63s. One is much louder than the other. They are the only two to exhibit the whole five-note audible signature in normal operation, even though it is possible to hear them during longer than usual starts on regular MR-73s.
These notes are the same as the first three notes of Aaron Copland's "Fanfare for the Common Man", one of the musical themes for Expo '67, though this is apparently just a coincidence

Bombardier Skytrain technology uses the same principle.

 

[khris]

Sweet! Thanks for the quick response.

 

[Dan416]

I think the tunnel section of Eglinton would operate more efficiently (i.e. faster) if it didn't have to deal with the above ground sections.

The TTC should really be judging methods of rapid transit by how rapid they are.

 

[Rainforest]

I think the tunnel section of Eglinton would operate more efficiently (i.e. faster) if it didn't have to deal with the above ground sections.

The speed of tunnel section does not depend on the above ground parts.

The reliability of service might be affected, but hopefully not much as the above ground sections will run in their own right-of-way. That means, slower than they could in a tunnel, but protected from most of traffic disruptions.

The TTC should really be judging methods of rapid transit by how rapid they are.

I guess the TC creators should not have branded those LRT lines as "rapid" transit. As the current plans go, their function will be more of premium local service than of a rapid trunk route for the area they serve.

Even the Eglinton line which should be faster than others, will be more suitable for short and medium length trips than for traveling from one end to the other.

 

[Ansem]

http://urbanrail.net/index.html

This web site has all the subway systems on the planet.

Giambrone, jabroni, (whatever is name is) should look at this site.

How can he justify a city like Toronto to have so few subway stations?

Even Mexico has a huge coverage and their stations looks nicer than ours.

Eglington, Sheppard (from Scarborough to Etobicoke), Don Mills, Jane should be subway lines. Period.

Aren't we the third public transporter in North America?
Aren't we on the top 5 cities in north America?
Why not act like one.

We only have 0.8 more subway KM than montreal. Not normal for the population we have.

Or maybe am I being unreasonable.

 

[isittimetomoveyet]

Unreasonable, absolutely not. But as a people, as Torontonians, and as Canadians, we seem to be very less receptive for taking on public debt than we used to be. The result is that some of the 'frills' (I dont doubt that it is not a frill but a necessity, but this is usually how transit is treated) like subway over LRT just don't have the clout and dollars behind them that they should.

Berlin has a sublime transit system from what I hear... but how much debt was accumulated to pay for it?

I think the whole issue boils down to funding... if we had unlimited (or at least substantially increased) access to funds, we could put subways in the places where they would work best i.e. Eglinton. We need long-term funding mechanisms in place so we can plan and get the proper technologies in the proper corridors.

 

[Filip]

I think that in this economic climate, the DRL should be priority #1. EAs can be completed in a few months, design can start immediately and tentatively we could have shovels in the ground within a year. Government funding, assuming the government is serious about billions for infrastructure, should come easy. There shouldn't be a reason why the TTC and Metrolinx are sitting on this until 2018 when such an opportunity will most likely not come again for a very long time.

Sometimes the lack of initiative in this city (and country) truly makes me pity where we live.

 

[RedRocket191]

I don't think anyone disagrees that a downtown relief line should be a highly ranked priority, but in a world where we have a limited amount of funds we have to be very careful about where we spend that cash.

Will the DRL make improve transit for many thousands of people - no doubt. But there are hundreds other areas which deserve improved transit and can be made better with much less expense.

If we have sustainable capital funding resources then by all means build. But until the day comes where we don't have to worry about then we'll always have places that get and places that don't.

 

[Dan416]

I don't think anyone disagrees that a downtown relief line should be a highly ranked priority, but in a world where we have a limited amount of funds we have to be very careful about where we spend that cash.

Will the DRL make improve transit for many thousands of people - no doubt. But there are hundreds other areas which deserve improved transit and can be made better with much less expense.

If we have sustainable capital funding resources then by all means build. But until the day comes where we don't have to worry about then we'll always have places that get and places that don't.

If funds are scarce, why is the TTC wasting money on projects that'll shave a couple minutes off a commuter's trip? Is that worth billions of dollars? Why waste money to stub-ify Sheppard permanently? Care to explain that one? Any mouthpiece may answer.

 

[RedRocket191]

If funds are scarce, why is the TTC wasting money on projects that'll shave a couple minutes off a commuter's trip? Is that worth billions of dollars? Why waste money to stub-ify Sheppard permanently? Care to explain that one? Any mouthpiece may answer.

I hope you're not calling *me* a mouthpiece... Because you wouldn't be the first... Or the second...

Anyway, cities are dynamic and priorities change over time. But, if you feel strongly about it, why not email the TTC chair and ask him?