Undead
Senior Member
Old but gold lol
|
|
|
Bojaxs
Active Member
Hypothetical question, but if there is a collision with a vehicle at the at-grade portion of the line, does that mean the entire underground and grade separated stretches of the central and western portions of the line have to halt operations?
reinventingthewheel
Active Member
No, that would be an awful design flaw. Trains drive both directions and there are several track crossovers, allowing zonal isolation in response to incidents.
Kyle Campbell
Active Member
The above ground portion doesn't use cbtc does it? In Ottawa if a train breaks down they all stop everywhere for a few minutes while they reconfigure the system to route around
urbancog
Active Member
I believe going Eastbound automated train control would stop at Laird Station and the driver would manually operate from there to Kennedy Station.
There are cross-overs either side of Laird, plus an "storage track" E of Laird where drivers can swap cabs.
Also there are cross-overs E of Science Centre:
There are cross-overs either side of Laird, plus an "storage track" E of Laird where drivers can swap cabs.
Hidden caverns open wide to build Laird Station and Crosstown
Latest updates to Eglinton Crosstown's Laird Station
www.metrolinx.com
crs1026
Superstar
The likely scenario would be trains short-turning at a signalled crossover, possibly using the tail tracks where these exist. But service would halt in whatever section is blocked by the accident recovery and investigation. It is unlikely that TTC would attempt "single track" operation in the aboce ground portion.
- Paul
- Paul
rbt
Senior Member
Finch LRT does [Thales SelTrac, derived from the Vancouver Skytrain system] primarily to prevent bunching and provide transit control feedback. Being able to slow down the vehicles in-front of a problem is useful for preventing large gaps in service. I'm not sure about Eglinton but I don't see why they would disable CBTC outside of the tunnelled portion: they'll still want to know where the trains are located.
In both cases a human oversight is also required to intervene for roadway traffic concerns.
CBTC does not mean full automation of service.
Last edited:
ZEBuilder
Active Member
The way it works with the ION is when a crash happens the section where the crash gets isolated from the rest of the line, so if a crash happens let's say between Mill and Kitchener Market, trains will run from Fairway to Mill and then Kitchener Market to Conestoga with a bus bridge created between Mill and Kitchener Market.
Since Kitchener and Waterloo both have sections of single direction line (Duke St and Charles, Borden and Ottawa, King and Caroline) it's possible to keep the trains running through the line but it would create weird scheduling issues since you'd get too many trains on one side of the single line sections so it's more complicated doing it that way.
Since Kitchener and Waterloo both have sections of single direction line (Duke St and Charles, Borden and Ottawa, King and Caroline) it's possible to keep the trains running through the line but it would create weird scheduling issues since you'd get too many trains on one side of the single line sections so it's more complicated doing it that way.
smallspy
Senior Member
The version of SelTrac used on the Finch West Line is a supervisory system with extremely limited ability to protect against headway deviation. It's an ATP.
To call it derived from the system used on the Skytrain (and SRT) is also an unfair statement. The interface is very similar, yes. But the back end of the system itself is not nearly as complex as an ATO/ATC system, nor is its level of communication between the equipment and the wayside. SelTrac as much as anything is now just a marketing term with multiple discrete systems being branded under it, rather than describing a set of technologies. For instance, the N/A system used by the TTC's legacy network is now branded as SelTrac as well - and yet, there is very, very little equivalency between it and any ATP or ATC or ATO system.
The system used on the surface sections of the Crosstown is a Bombardier product that is basically their equivalent to the version of SelTrac used on Finch West.
Dan
Metroscapes
Active Member
At City Council, Mike Colle was blasting the Premier on Bill 212. During the rant, he makes a comment that "He should complete the f-ing Eglinton Crosstown. After 13 years, you'd think he would focus in on finding out why the Eglinton Crosstown tunnel is sinking."
I know folks here are adamant that there's no crack in the Eglinton - Yonge station box. But I'm very curious if there's basis for Colle's comment.
I know folks here are adamant that there's no crack in the Eglinton - Yonge station box. But I'm very curious if there's basis for Colle's comment.
stevedean
New Member
I don't think he knows anything - just like any of the other people at the City.
ishblack1
New Member
If the tunnels were sinking they wouldn’t be testing them so frequently and so heavily.
nfitz
Superstar
If the tunnels were sinking, they most certainly WOULD be testing them heavily! That's the whole point. Some sinkage would be expected - the question would be how much.
With TTC staff now regularly in the tunnels, if there was something going on, TTC senior staff should know about it. Colle's son is the Chief Strategy and Customer Service Officer for the TTC. If something is wrong, then surely Mike Colle would have heard.
On the other hand, perhaps he's been reading some of the same rumours we have. There's certainly been a FUBAR vibe to the whole thing in the last 18 months or so.
ThenWhat
New Member
This is a great opening for city reporters. CTV, Global, CBC --- where are you? Go interview Mike Colle and ask him what basis he has for that comment. Either it will turn out he made it up, or we will learn something we didn't know.
reinventingthewheel
Active Member
I figure that remark was a bit of a throwaway. It’s unfortunate it detracts from his main point: Bill 212’s approach to congestion takes away from the non-quick-fix solutions. (paraphrased)