Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

[crs1026]

Y'all wearing tinfoil hats that the OL will be different because Metrolinx wants to build something different to spite the TTC/Toronto is laughable. They simply want to the builders/consortiums to build more efficiently without being contained by TTC's legacy systems and rolling stock. (I know the TR trains and signalling are relatively modern. Hold your pitchfork. Read on.)

You might want to check your history before you start with the y’alls and tinfoil and pitchfork references.

Remember this ?

Ontario to table legislation to upload new Toronto subway expansions

And I suppose you never heard the term “Superlinx”?

While I have my share of gripes about the TTC, there is no doubt that the Province has done plenty to poison the relationships between Ml and transit properties. For a while there was indeed fear that ML would take over everything (as the original Board of Trade paper proposed) - until everyone realised that ML would collapse under its own weight if that ever happened.

Now, ML is more of a laughing stock and source of frustration than anything. Some of the funniest stories I hear from transit contacts are about the disconnects between Ml departments, and how ML staffers call outside agencies to get information that other departments in their own organization won’t share or haven’t communicated.

The suggestion that Ml is getting this right where others got it wrong is laughable.

- Paul

 

[kamira51]

Funny, the union didn't stop the TTC from running the SRT in auto mode at first. The fact that it runs in manual mode now is because of the outdated computer system.

Also, if the union is what's blocking full automation on the subway, how come they've already gone and implemented OPTO on line 1?

Your conspiracy theory is baseless.

From what I understood is the srt was always being manually operated because of the union.

And my "conspiracy theory" isn't baseless, if you did some basic googling.

Sources

The literal Wikipedia for line 3

Line 3 Scarborough - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The trains are also able to be operated exclusively by computers, becoming one of the earliest installations of Standard Elektrik Lorenz's "SelTrac IS" system (now owned and delivered by Thales Rail Signalling Solutions), doing away with the need for a human operator. However, due to opposition from the transit workers' union and public perception, operators were retained; the union has firmly opposed driverless trains. (Other systems took full advantage of the automated operation and Vancouver's SkyTrain has been automated since 1985 without incident.) The Line 3 trains have had only one operator since inception.

And an article from the Star

Driverless subway trains? Not in nervous Toronto, says TTC head

CEO Andy Byford has effectively parked the idea of trains run solely by computers, though they’re used safely in many cities.

www.thestar.com

Byford offers three reasons:

• Push-back from the union representing the TTC’s 612 subway operators and guards would be substantial. But that’s not his main objection, he said.

If you have any other sources do post them.

 

[afransen]

You realize that the whole "light metro" thing is nothing more than some slick marketing wank, right? The cars are not substantially smaller than our existing subway cars, and are bigger than what passes for a subway car elsewhere in the world. The capacity of the line will rival the existing subway lines. Nothing of the Ontario Line is being built "lighter" than the current network. It can't be.

TTC trains capable of the same grades and curves as OL?

 

[T3G]

From what I understood is the srt was always being manually operated because of the union.

And my "conspiracy theory" isn't baseless, if you did some basic googling.

Sources

The literal Wikipedia for line 3

Line 3 Scarborough - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And an article from the Star

Driverless subway trains? Not in nervous Toronto, says TTC head

CEO Andy Byford has effectively parked the idea of trains run solely by computers, though they’re used safely in many cities.

www.thestar.com

If you have any other sources do post them.

The SRT retained drivers to operate doors and monitor the train, yes.

The trains themselves however operated themselves for a long time. If you actually care to do some digging beyond the surface level, if you click on the article that was cited on Wikipedia you will see that Bob Kinnear indicated that the SRT trains were able to drive themselves 80% of the time.

As for your article, really? That was 9 years ago. Last I checked, since that article was written, OPTO has been employed on lines 1 and 4. No amount of union pushback was able to stop that, now has there? Do you perhaps have anything from the current decade to back up your union hate?

 

[DirectionNorth]

Oh, by the way, you may not want to look too closely at other cities that have gone through the same process as the TTC for that.

So we'll deal with the ineptness of a new organization that can't manage its own projects out of a wet paper bag?

Thanks, I'd rather the devil I know than the devil I don't (or that won't show me who he is).

You know what they say about the definition of stupidity ...

You might want to check your history before you start with the y’alls and tinfoil and pitchfork references.

Remember this ?

Ontario to table legislation to upload new Toronto subway expansions

And I suppose you never heard the term “Superlinx”?

While I have my share of gripes about the TTC, there is no doubt that the Province has done plenty to poison the relationships between Ml and transit properties. For a while there was indeed fear that ML would take over everything (as the original Board of Trade paper proposed) - until everyone realised that ML would collapse under its own weight if that ever happened.

Now, ML is more of a laughing stock and source of frustration than anything. Some of the funniest stories I hear from transit contacts are about the disconnects between Ml departments, and how ML staffers call outside agencies to get information that other departments in their own organization won’t share or haven’t communicated.

The suggestion that Ml is getting this right where others got it wrong is laughable.

- Paul

The previous process wasn't working. I, at least, am willing to put up with Metrolinx if it means we actually get transit built sooner.

The devil's bargain, maybe. Follow at your own risk.

 

[44 North]

Castles. Definitely castles.

All valid points, but you're whistling in the graveyard. The city/TTC had numerous opportunities to build a standard Toronto subway relief line. Jack Layton, Olivia Chow, et al, said no to a DRL in the 80s and 90s in order to keep their downtown castles undisturbed. David Miller went against TTC advice and misguidedly went all in on Eglinton. He didn't even include a relief line in Transit City. And Tory wasted valuable time on his marketing gimmick SmartTrack that could have been spent advancing a relief line.

Toronto reaped what it sowed.

This is kinda dumb. RL was in the Big Move for 2031, TTC pushed for it, the City pushed for, Prov accepted it at least on paper, data showed it was needed. Yet for some reason Metrolinx came out and said it wasn't needed, despite it being in their RTP. Literally the only project in their transportation plan out of dozens they singled out and said meh it could be buses. Then after dawdling for a few years they finally looked at the data and said it was needed. Oh yeah but it can't use any of the rail corridor whatsoever. You want to talk about stymieing a relief line...

 

[44 North]

I think there’s some validity to your points, in that from a TTC perspective the OL is subpar. However, Metrolinx is a different entity, and I’ll try explain some of my reasoning.

I said interlining because you repeatedly mention it’s going to interface with existing TTC infrastructure. But if it isn’t going to interline with them, the only concern is accessing facilities, which we have already seen Metrolinx is ok with building new ones of. I’ll agree that some of the stated sharing of infrastructure is nice-to-have, but by no means necessary.

I’ll agree that the TTC and Mx are not really on the same page for what the OL should look like, but it isn’t malicious. My point of the interregional Line is that Metrolinx has a regional mandate and regional interests, and so the Ontario Line must be designed for that from the get-go, namely for large scale expansion. Huge TTC lines are not suitable for that. It’s simply a different scope of interests at play.

The “medium capacity” part moreso reflects how the tech (“light metro”) is better suited for down the line (edit: expansion) compared to what the TTC operates, IMO. All the subways extended into other municipalities have been done at great cost and are fairly minimal in scope. Tunneling up Don Mills would be the latest in a long list of wasted dollars grade separating lines in the most expensive way possible. This has been inherent to the modern TTC. Using a lighter tech is at least an attempt from one agency to mitigate spending.

Oh c'mon. I've supported light metros in the GTA for years. But "lighter tech"? It's not magic, it's a shorter train with lower capacity. And with pantos added the profile of the train is now bigger. Also this is the only subway project that shouldn't be light on capacity. You mention down the line that less capacity is optimal, but that's a bit of a paradox. Lower capacity means less likelihood of things like branching or further extensions. It's limiting.

 

[Sunnyside]

Oh c'mon. I've supported light metros in the GTA for years. But "lighter tech"? It's not magic, it's a shorter train with lower capacity. And with pantos added the profile of the train is now bigger. Also this is the only subway project that shouldn't be light on capacity. You mention down the line that less capacity is optimal, but that's a bit of a paradox. Lower capacity means less likelihood of things like branching or further extensions. It's limiting.

I’ll start with your reply before smallspy as I’m short on time.

As they said, we are achieving the same capacity with shorter trains, which is due to higher frequency. A smaller train means smaller stations; that’s where the ease of expanding it comes from. I say medium capacity because this class of metro is typically “lighter” on capacity, but we are operating such that this isn’t an issue. It is primarily lighter from an infrastructure standpoint compared to what a conventional TTC style subway requires.

I’m not saying less capacity is optimal, I’m saying that lighter infrastructure is optimal- that means less capacity per train. With that, the way the Ontario Line is planned now is actually much better suited to branching. With smaller trains at high frequencies, you can branch and build more while maintaining acceptable headways. See the Vancouver skytrain. The OL ‘trunk’ will thus be the part of the line that maintains the high capacity we expect from the TTC network.

Again, if we think of how far we want the OL to go, we should ensure the design makes that easy. This line’s design does, more so than older plans.

 

[NoahB]

Those of us who know the insides of Metrolinx have a different inclination that you, however.

Do tell what you know of the insides of Metrolinx. You have worked there or with them before?

And how, pray tell, will that happen with equipment that is almost as large (and yet requires a larger tunnel) and almost as weighty as the current stock?


And yet, both fleets have operated with the others on both lines. So.......yeah?

Center tunnels get to be slightly more expensive, but then have every extension deep into the suburbs and to the airport be elevated and cheaper. Seems like a good deal to me.

"Operated" in the past tense. T1s cannot operate on Line 1 during service hours without disabling ATO on Line 1. That is the reason why Line 2 has larger than normal spare trains. These are the ones that moved over from Lines 1 and 4 that couldn't be used there anymore during service. Sure, they can be driven out of service hours but that cumbersome process doesn't need to exist for a new line that gets to have a new yard.

What makes you think that the same thing couldn't happen on the Ontario Line?

That simply will not happen on a line like the OL because there will never be any drivers, or track that is not GoA4 rated. Only exceptional circumstances would cause a train to be driven manually. Vancouver is a local example. Modern GoA4 metros with PSDs are simply more secure.

Oh, by the way, you may not want to look too closely at other cities that have gone through the same process as the TTC for that.

Not sure what you are trying to say here. Crashes happen ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ so the TTC's procedures with GoA3 trains are excused?

So we'll deal with the ineptness of a new organization that can't manage its own projects out of a wet paper bag?

Thanks, I'd rather the devil I know than the devil I don't (or that won't show me who he is).

Metrolinx isn't new. They now have knowledge from awarding the Crosstown and Finch West LRT. Crosstown is delayed and slow, but Finch is going on schedule. The OL is being executed differently. The swift execution of the OL, ECWE, and SSE gives me confidence. I don't care which devil it is if they can produce results. How about you?

Also, wait: you're going to really try and play the budget card? Really? Do you understand how laughable that is with Metrolinx right now?

Budget as in what is stated in the contract or whatever funding envelope is set by the gov. I'm not laughing that shovels are in the ground. Suit yourself.

 

[NoahB]

You might want to check your history before you start with the y’alls and tinfoil and pitchfork references.

Remember this ?

Ontario to table legislation to upload new Toronto subway expansions

And I suppose you never heard the term “Superlinx”?

While I have my share of gripes about the TTC, there is no doubt that the Province has done plenty to poison the relationships between Ml and transit properties. For a while there was indeed fear that ML would take over everything (as the original Board of Trade paper proposed) - until everyone realised that ML would collapse under its own weight if that ever happened.

Now, ML is more of a laughing stock and source of frustration than anything. Some of the funniest stories I hear from transit contacts are about the disconnects between Ml departments, and how ML staffers call outside agencies to get information that other departments in their own organization won’t share or haven’t communicated.

The suggestion that Ml is getting this right where others got it wrong is laughable.

- Paul

I dont see what uploading the subway has to do with wanting to build a new line with international standards.

The stories from your contracts are concerning. But if the OL gets built then that's an improvement over whatever the TTC/City of Toronto have been doing.

 

[smallspy]

TTC trains capable of the same grades and curves as OL?

If you listen to the marketing, no.

In reality however? Yes.

Because they are functionally the same. They are multiple units of individually powered cars, with all or almost-all axles powered. Power-to-weight ratio will be very similar, tractive effort will be very similar.

Do tell what you know of the insides of Metrolinx. You have worked there or with them before?

I don't work at Metrolinx, no. I have had to deal with them both on a personal and professional level however.

Center tunnels get to be slightly more expensive, but then have every extension deep into the suburbs and to the airport elevated and cheaper. Seems like a good deal to me.

But that's a function of route planning, not of the rolling stock or technology used.

"Operated" in the past tense. T1s cannot operate on Line 1 during service hours without disabling ATO on Line 1. That is the reason why Line 2 has larger than normal spare trains. These are the ones that moved over from Lines 1 and 4 that couldn't be used there anymore during service. Sure, they can be driven out of service hours but that cumbersome process doesn't need to exist for a new line that gets to have a new yard.

T1s can operate on the YUS right now. But doing so will put the system into a degraded mode, with much lower frequencies. Nothing needs to be disabled.

TRs can operate on the BD with no issues whatsoever.

That simply will not happen on a line like the OL because there will never be any drivers, or track that is not GoA4 rated. Only exceptional circumstances would cause a train to be driven manually. Vancouver is a local example. Modern GoA4 metros with PSDs are simply more secure.

That's dependent on having a good contractor doing the installation, and good oversight of the contractors.

Not sure what you are trying to say here. Crashes happen ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ so the TTC's procedures with GoA3 trains are excused?

What's I'm saying is that you shouldn't believe everything from the companies that market the various items. They may have the slightest reason for doing so in the best light.

Metrolinx isn't new. They now have knowledge from awarding the Crosstown and Finch West LRT. Crosstown is delayed and slow, but Finch is going on schedule. The OL is being executed differently. The swift execution of the OL, ECWE, and SSE gives me confidence. I don't care which devil it is if they can produce results. How about you?

Crosstown is delayed due to poor contractor oversight. Finch is delayed - albeit not as badly - due to likely poor contractor oversight. The USRC resignalling project - after having been reissued twice - is delayed due to poor contractor oversight. Many of the various projects along the GO network have been delayed due to poor contractor oversight.

To you, this means that Metrolinx is doing a fantastic job, apparently.

Budget as in what is stated in the contract or whatever funding envelope is set by the gov. I'm not laughing that shovels are in the ground. Suit yourself.

Budget as in what they had originally projected to be built. What they had even promised to have the line built at. That figure is set to be doubled. The organization has a very, very serious problem with over-promising and under-delivering. The news that comes out of them is almost exclusively good, and they try and bury the bad news.

But yeah, they're doing a fantastic job, apparently.

Dan

 

[MovingBlock]

T1s can operate on the YUS right now. But doing so will put the system into a degraded mode, with much lower frequencies. Nothing needs to be disabled.

TRs can operate on the BD with no issues whatsoever.

Has the TTC ripped out the legacy wayside equipment on line 1 yet?

If you listen to the marketing, no.

In reality however? Yes.

Because they are functionally the same. They are multiple units of individually powered cars, with all or almost-all axles powered. Power-to-weight ratio will be very similar, tractive effort will be very similar.

TTC Subway loading gauge is very wide compared to most other metro systems. This could be an issue at hard points on the line (such as the ROW in Leslieville), though I don't know for sure.

That simply will not happen on a line like the OL because there will never be any drivers, or track that is not GoA4 rated. Only exceptional circumstances would cause a train to be driven manually. Vancouver is a local example. Modern GoA4 metros with PSDs are simply more secure.

Every system has degraded modes where a train must be driven on-sight. If a train is unable to receive a Movement Authority (MA), the only way to move it is to disable the ATP system and drive it on-sight. If an axle counter were to fail (and thus lose count of axles in the blocks it controls), the only way to reset it is to drive a train on-sight through the blocks to confirm that they are in fact clear. Every system (including those with GoA4 operations) needs some employees who are qualified to preform these tasks, and safety procedures for them.

The reason the Osgoode incident occurred is because the TTC did not have proper procedures for ensuring safe movement when the ATP system needs to be disabled. In most systems, drivers are not allowed to rely on the signaling system to determine if it is safe to proceed when the ATP is disabled, and must use their own eyesight (and no other means) to verify that the track ahead is clear. We shouldn't blame the signaling system for an incident that was the result of the TTC's own unsafe procedures.

 

[smallspy]

Has the TTC ripped out the legacy wayside equipment on line 1 yet?

In drips and drabs, yes.

If you're wondering if it could be reactivated, the answer is no.

TTC Subway loading gauge is very wide compared to most other metro systems. This could be an issue at hard points on the line (such as the ROW in Leslieville), though I don't know for sure.

The funny thing about subway loading gauges.....

They are designed to fit within the loading gauges of the freight railroads. Because, you know, the equipment has to be delivered from somewhere.

So while yes, the TTC's 10'4" wide equipment is quite substantial, it still (barely) fits within the railroad loading gauge.

Dan

 

[MovingBlock]

The funny thing about subway loading gauges.....

They are designed to fit within the loading gauges of the freight railroads. Because, you know, the equipment has to be delivered from somewhere.

So while yes, the TTC's 10'4" wide equipment is quite substantial, it still (barely) fits within the railroad loading gauge.

Dan

Thanks for the response, though my thought was more toward the design of the OL right-of-way. A less constraining loading gauge could be useful when designing the alignment at difficult locations compared to using TTC loading gauge.

 

[Towered]

A whole block of buildings on the south side of Queen west of Spadina is fenced off with green mesh - I’m assuming it’s for OL station construction.