UD2
Active Member
LRV trains are perma linked. You can't just take one out.
|
|
|
Justin10000
Banned
Yes, you can. It's LRV's coupled together.
12 minutes off peak is far more frequent than many US systems. I think it's not frequent enough, but it's hardly "US style".
Why would you spend money to automate a system that isn't going to be more frequent than 5 mintues?
Markster
Senior Member
Considering that It's going to be a grade separated line replacing a mixed traffic bus service, you're probably still going to get to your destination in less time. In more comfort to boot.
BMO
Senior Member
Why wouldn't you want to automate the system? I'm sure it can only add to the efficiency of the line :S Why don't I send mail anymore? because a computer can automatically send an e-mail for me much more efficiently! If the costs for implementing Automation were more than just running them as is, then I can understand, but I really think automation provides an opportunity for cutting costs. Especially if automation is built-in to the system (like the SRT originally was)
Justin10000
Banned
The line will be equipped with ATO. It's going to be pretty damn efficient especially if the frequencies are planned to be 6 min peak. and 12 off peak.
What is your rationale for automation resulting in cost-savings? Just because a train has no driver doesn't mean you save on labour. You're still going to need people to watch the trains in a control centre, highly trained employees to maintain the computers, and a maintenace staff that will need to be trained to repair and fix highly complex systems.
What is your rationale for automation resulting in cost-savings? Just because a train has no driver doesn't mean you save on labour. You're still going to need people to watch the trains in a control centre, highly trained employees to maintain the computers, and a maintenace staff that will need to be trained to repair and fix highly complex systems.
BMO
Senior Member
what's the difference between ATO and ATC? I was under the impression that ATC allows the train to receive signals within the train cab, allowing it to funciton even if the physical tunnels signals aren't functioning. What does ATO do?
EnviroTO
Senior Member
ATC is control, mainly in cab signalling and rules enforcement (i.e. speed limits, blocking of tracks, etc.). With ATC the driver tells the train to go and sets a desired speed and it will try to go that speed or go as fast as possible largely dependent on what is ahead of the train and the set speed limits. ATC is mostly about safety.
ATO is operation which includes the underlying ATC components but differs in that the train is controlled from a central system which looks after scheduling and often problem resolution. Interestingly enough the fact that the conductor will sit in the cab at the end of the train rather than the middle might be what enables the TTC to get the largest benefit from ATO... turning around a train quickly both at the end of the line or when there is a problem at a station. Imagine a train is disabled or stopped due to a passenger alarm in the station. Currently one direction of train traffic backs up and the other direction continues but ends up catching up to the backlog. With ATO the system would even out the flow, possibly have every third train pass through the station in opposing directions and have the rest turn around before getting into the backlog. Compare that to ATC which without any manual intervention would just hold all trains in the backlog until the tracks clear.
ATO is operation which includes the underlying ATC components but differs in that the train is controlled from a central system which looks after scheduling and often problem resolution. Interestingly enough the fact that the conductor will sit in the cab at the end of the train rather than the middle might be what enables the TTC to get the largest benefit from ATO... turning around a train quickly both at the end of the line or when there is a problem at a station. Imagine a train is disabled or stopped due to a passenger alarm in the station. Currently one direction of train traffic backs up and the other direction continues but ends up catching up to the backlog. With ATO the system would even out the flow, possibly have every third train pass through the station in opposing directions and have the rest turn around before getting into the backlog. Compare that to ATC which without any manual intervention would just hold all trains in the backlog until the tracks clear.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Of course automation saves money on labour which is why cities are switching over to it. Labour costs are the highest operating expense of any transit system and the lower it can be brought down the better. Considering Toronto and the TTC are constantly bitching to Queen's Park about not having enough senior government level support to help run the system the TTC should try to reduce it's operating expenses as much as possible.
This is one of the reasons why SkyTrain runs at such high frequency even when demand isn't near as high............due to have relatively low electrical costs it costs very little to offer the better service.
This is one of the reasons why SkyTrain runs at such high frequency even when demand isn't near as high............due to have relatively low electrical costs it costs very little to offer the better service.
Eug
Senior Member
I think Eglinton should be the poster child of underground TTC 3G / 4G voice and data support. With all the new tech going in fresh, it'd be a great opportunity to showcase the stuff. I don't understand why the TTC is taking so long in allowing implementation of this across the city's subway systems.
Eug
Senior Member
Steve Munro muses that person may just be confused:
"Steve: Or equally likely, the person answering the question didn’t know what he was talking about."
I'm not optimistic, but I hope Mr. Munro is correct. Those quoted intervals do not impress, for a main subway trunk.
BMO
Senior Member
to be fair, I'm sure the reduced frequencies will shave a fair amount of money from servicing, especially considering a 3 car LRV has plenty of room for the ridership, by the time the passengers disembark from their bus, and head down to track level they'll only be waiting around 3-4 minutes at peak.
Not really. If you take a couple minutes to get from your bus to the platform, and you reach the platform just as the train is pulling out of the station, you'll still be waiting 6 minutes. A 6 minute headway is a 6 minute headway, the amount of time it takes someone to walk down a flight of stairs is irrelevant.
k10ery
Senior Member
Why do we care about the Metrolinx opinion on headways, when the line is to be operated by the TTC?
Mapleson
Active Member
Because Metrolinx is paying for the design, and the design influences and is influenced by the headways. Thus, Metrolinx should have a good idea of what standard they need to build to and willing to share the info, while the TTC has more at stake in telling the public a figure that might not be realised.
BMO
Senior Member
Plus Metrolinx will own the Eglinton LRT, I forget partially why it is important for the province to own it. I remember one of my co-workers explaining to me something about it being easier to put upfront capital to expand a line if the province owns it, as opposed to if the city owns it.
The Province was looking at owning "extensions" to existing subway lines, but it was found that it just wasn't practical or feasible to do this.
This is why it seems like Metrolinx is keen on owning the whole TTC rapid transit system. And subsequently the TTC would own the surface bus routes, etc.