In the City Planning report at Executive Committee on March 9, 2016, two options for the configuration of a “combined” SmartTrack and GO Transit/Regional Express Rail (RER) service remain on the table. These are referred to as Option C and Option D.
The number of trains/hour cited here has bothered me for some time, and a recent conversation with Jonathan Goldsbie of NOW Magazine got me digging a bit deeper. Here is the service plan for the Stouffville and Kitchener corridors as shown on the Metrolinx RER website, in the “How Will I Benefit” page.
Peak service on the Stouffville corridor totals 7 trains/hour or one every 8.6 minutes as shown in Options C and D.
In the Kitchener corridor, there are 8 trains/hour, but two of these are service to Kitchener which would run express from Bramalea to Union leaving only 6 “local” trains in that segment.
The service levels and station plans have profound implications for the transit network now under study.
- There is no distinct SmartTrack service, only GO trains and (maybe) a few new stations. There will be no “SmartTrack” branded fleet.
- If TTC fares will be offered on SmartTrack, this will really consist of giving people cheaper rides on service GO is already operating.
- If “Regional Fare Integration” means that TTC rapid transit (subway) fares rise and GO fares for short trips come down, then SmartTrack will be a cash grab from subway riders to cross-subsidize SmartTrack riders on GO trains.
- Demand models for SmartTrack indicate that very frequent service at TTC fares is required to attract substantial ridership, with 12 trains/hour (one every 5′) performing best in the model runs. The proposed service is considerably less frequent. “TTC fares” implies full transfer rights at no premium to and from the TTC network.
- The existence of frequent SmartTrack service and stations in Scarborough is an integral part of the plan to build the subway extension as a one-stop express route to the Town Centre.
- Part of the justification for keeping the Relief Line alignment to the north along Queen Street rather than King is to avoid competition with SmartTrack. However, there won’t be any SmartTrack service for it to compete with, only GO trains.
- Tax Increment Financing requires that SmartTrack contribute something to the uplift in property values that would not occur absent the new service. However, the “new” service will entirely be GO Transit’s, and it will occur whether anything called SmartTrack exists or not.
The obvious question here is “where is SmartTrack”? In fact, it has completely vanished from the map, and at best would be represented by a handful of new stations, none of which is in Scarborough in Option D.
Is this the master plan, the culmination of John Tory’s election campaign and all of the vitriol poured over his critics?
The emperor has no clothes.
Steve Munro 
Something is not right with the Kitchener diagrams.
If there are 8 trains per hour, and 2 are express from Bramalea, then the peak direction from Bramalea-Union has a 10 minute headway, not 15.
Or there are still 8 trains, but an asterisk is missing on the Mount Pleasant paragraph, and those 2 trains are express from Bramalea as well.
Or there are only 6 trains, including 2 express and for some reason service 2 of the 4 local trains do not offer non-peak direction service between Mount Pleasant and Bramalea.
In the latter two cases, there actually are 2 additional “Smart Track” trains. But I think Steve’s interpretation is the likeliest.
Steve: I read the chart to show two services. One is the 15-minute “RER” service to Bramalea. The other is the service to Mt. Pleasant which is every 15 minutes with alternate trains continuing to Kitchener. These last two trains run express east of Bramalea.
The result is 2 trains/hour west of Mt. Pleasant, 4 trains/hour between Mt. Pleasant and Bramalea, and 6 (stopping) trains/hour from Bramalea to Union. The problem lies, I think, in the text describing the services.
Similarly, the combined 20 minute Lincolnville and 15 minute Unionville headways make for the 7 “SmartTrack” trains on the Stouffville line.
I imagine then that the 11 trains on the Lakeshore West portion of Smart Track trains are 7 from GO Stouffville and 4 from 15 minute headways on GO Lakeshore West.
So … SmartTrack consists of either 7-8 new stations (C) or 4-5 new stations (D). Costs are for station construction and side tracks for those stations. Since ST/RER is defined by headway and not travel time, adding stations does not require adding trains, just schedule time.
It appears that besides Crosstown West, ST will not strain the City’s debt limits at all.
We (may) at least have this: Tory has managed to get Crosstown Phase II (West) to be a priority again, and that’s a good thing, certainly better than UPX. And it could actually be built within his timeline too.
LikeLike
It seems to me that this is beyond incompetence at this point and I’m starting to think that the smart track peddlers never imagined that it would be built and it is perhaps a deliberate attempt to increase development and tax revenue without having to invest in the transit service that was supposed to generate it. In short, a scam.
Steve: The origins of the ST proposal were heavily biased to making land in Markham and south of the Airport more developable by increasing transit capacity to them.
LikeLike
Glad Steve mentioned
Partly due to age, but I have to re-read a lot of what is being touted, claims conflict. Going to have to study this closely later today.
Beside the possible conflict of claims there, there’s an oddity in the present running timetable for the afternoon trains that come inbound to Union running express from (Malton from failing memory).
There’s no decrease in running time, even though intermediary stops are missed, from the earlier trains that do stop. *Apparently* from all times I’ve had to go to Union instead of Bloor, the train runs at full line speed through those skipped stations. Perhaps arriving early has no consequence as the train goes on lay-by before doing the return northbound some half an hour later?
The apparent lack of demand for the train to stop south of Malton raises a number of questions for all day RER. And that also pertains to lack of ridership on the full 12 car train in all but rush hour. Would RER render the need for 12 car trains servicing that corridor redundant save for rush-hour? Ostensibly RER, if diesel/electric MU, could serve the length to K/W when that service starts in lieu of running virtually empty 12 car trains?
As to how that would affect staffing and lay-by logistics is another question. All-day is wonderful, but not if the trains are running far below capacity. Perhaps it will be necessary and optimal to change trains in Bramalea, EMUs to DMUs to continue further north?
I have limited sympathy for the argument that ‘a single ride’ is necessary … especially as that pertains to the Scarborough subway justification. The University/Bloor Y got the TTC into a very difficult situation never resolved save for running the lines independently.
LikeLike
If this is the only thing that comes out of the whole SmartTrack debacle it will still be a huge victory.
Steve: The big challenge and cost depends on whether this is only on the “SmartTrack” corridors (Scarborough, Weston, central Lake Shore) or on all GO lines within the 416.
LikeLike
Why the attack on Tory? He’s actually backed down from the stupider elements of his Smarttrack plan. He’s deferred to expert opinion. In wish he’d done that with the East Gardiner. Don’t kick a guy for finally doing the right thing.
Steve: Tory spent much of the past year telling people that SmartTrack could not be changed and that people just wanted the city to get on with building something. Same attitude on the Scarborough subway. Some of this surfaced again this morning in a CBC interview.
The problem is that this created an environment where the “professional, expert” staff report includes compromises to suit the political situation, not the best available advice. Background studies made assumptions about the network and service configurations that are now abandoned by Tory’s change of heart.
We have wasted time chasing a plan that was flawed when announced in May 2014 and defended against all criticism until very recently. Tory can’t wiggle out of responsibility by pointing to his campaign team and personal advisors.
LikeLike
Having been a rider on the Lakeshore west line for a long time, I always just assumed that GO had a plan for incremental expansion for each line as service was required … and that sometimes it would be as easy as buying a new set of vehicles (likely bought as part of an ongoing plan) … and other times it required rebuilding stations/bridges/tracks and that those things would be done over a period of 10-15 years in a way that increased the service on the inner parts of the line first so the extra service could be provided there first.
This whole SmartTrack exercise seems to be advocating for a 2-3 year period where specific lines get all their improvements at the same time and service increases quickly … while this is a great idea, the problems are beginning to be evident…
1) Go and Metrolinx aren’t/weren’t prepared for the extra planning/work required (needed a ramp up period)
2) Go and Metrolinx now have to have a “Toronto” overlay on their planning (everything has to go through council)
3) Big plans have way more NIMBY and trouble being accepted than “we need 3km of double track instead of single track” every couple months
4) Resources/focus are getting pulled away from the other lines that need incremental expansion (ie Lakeshore west electrification)
5) Nobody knows if the service is required, if it is attractive, if there are other factors at play … incremental allows for problems to be detected and planned around
LikeLike
A question perhaps not so much for Steve as some of the more knowledgeable railfans here. From Ellesmere GO north to just south of McNicoll, the rail corridor appears to be difficult to widen without extensive expropriation, and, realistically, a fair bit of demolition. That’s a 5km stretch, with Agincourt GO station in the middle of it.
The question is, is it at all feasible to run 7 peak-direction and 4 reverse-direction trains/hour through here? 11 trains/hr is about a train every 5.5 min. If we assume trains have 1 minute of dwell time, and (simplifying) assume a fairly consistent speed then a train will take about 2.5 minutes between Ellesmere & Agincourt, 1 min at Agincourt and another 3.5 min to south of McNicoll. (Using scheduled times of 7 min Kennedy-Agincourt and 7 min Agincourt-Milliken, which includes dwell time.) That 6 min is close enough to 5.5 that it might work if 2 trains were run peak direction then 1 counter-peak, then 2, etc. But it seems like the tolerances would be very close, and it could be quite fragile.
Or is the only reasonable approach to plan for full double-tracking with whatever that requires?
Steve: GO has already done an EA for double-tracking the line to Unionville. The track layout is shown in the T series of drawings, and the stations in the ST series. Note that this EA does not include any new grade separations.
LikeLike
From reading the bit about the Kitchener service:
The question becomes is the 15 minute service from Mt. Pleasant in addition to the 15 minute service from Bramalea or in addition to it and is the 30 minute service from Kitchener part of or in addition to the 15 minute service from Mt. Pleasant? Do only the Kitchener trains run express between Bramalea and Union or do the Mt. Pleasant trains also run express. What is the actual service level at Malton, Etobicoke North and Weston?
Where do the trains that start at Mt. Pleasant in the morning come from. There was supposed to be a 4 or 6 car yard at Mt. Pleasant but there is no sign of it anymore. The lead to it that was put in a couple of years ago had been removed for a road underpass and there is no sign that any provision is being put in for it. The yard at Georgetown that was supposed to be removed has had the land extended to the east and a new set of switches is lying around that would expand the yard to 12 cars long. If the inbound morning trains come from Georgetown then why not run them in service from Georgetown?
Does the left hand know what the right hand is doing? Does the part responsible for construction talk to the arm responsible for operations? If they only electrify to Bramalea then the service beyond that must be diesel hauled which means that there would be two 15 minute services, one diesel hauled and one electric. Would it be possible for Metrolinx to actually state what the service levels would be at each station, which trains would be local and which would be express? I think that the answer to this is god only knows and he is not talking to us mere mortals, not even the almost Omnipotent Keeper of this blog.
Steve: I read the chart as having two services. One is the 15 minute service to Bramalea, likely electrified. The other would be diesel on a 15 minute headway with half of the trains turning back at Mt. Pleasant (or some equivalent given your concern about track) and half going through to Kitchener. The Kitchener trains would run express east of Bramalea, the Mt. Pleasants would run local along with the Bramalea trains.
LikeLike
This will happen only if the TTC fares for rapid transit are raised to the same level as GO fares. The province cannot afford the subsidy required and the suburban regions are not going to pay higher subsidies so that the fares within the 416 can be lowered, even if it is partly for their own citizens. Everyone will blame everyone else the failure of this to occur.
LikeLike
I can’t remember the plans for the rolling stock, but surely the Bramalea service would use the EMUs, and the Kitchener/Mount Pleasant would use the 12 car locos. There’s little advantage to switching at Bramalea, especially since Kitchener is running express. The 2 local Mount Pleasant diesels may stop a lot, but the ST stop spacing isn’t outrageous for diesel.
In any case, who cares if the trains don’t run at capacity during non-peak hours? The capacity is there for peak hours. Mid-day trains are to make non-car travel at least feasible for the majority of the populace that doesn’t work 9-5 downtown. Ridership on mid-day trains also increases peak ridership.
LikeLike
Should we even be surprised? No, we’re just coming back to reality. When I first heard of Tory’s ST plans, I laughed. How is he going to get all through trains through Union? Surface subway at 15min. headway? That’s not going to attract people. How would they even built on the Eglinton corridor. One thing that has change is RER being introduced.
Now we see these points come to reality. ST won’t exist and we’ll only see more stations within Toronto. Scarborough is made worst from a multi stop S(L)RT to a single station subway extension without the Sheppard LRT.
Steve: This will sound a tad nasty, but in some ways Scarborough gets exactly what they deserve. Their politicians bought into a scheme that had severe flaws, but were willing to trade in their “sure thing” of a subway for a “better” plan with SmartTrack, the “express” subway and the LRT line. Now they will wake up to the limitations of what they agreed to.
That said, the people of Scarborough deserve better transit, but the pols have to stop making promises they cannot keep.
LikeLike
I read it that way too, but the text mentions 3 services in the 3 paragraphs, so once we assume that isn’t true, there are a number of interpretations, even if some are pretty unlikely.
For demand modelling, whether these are scheduled as 3 (or 2) services or 1 interleaved service matters. If the Bramalea service has 15 minute headways, the 2 local Mount Pleasant trains that fall somewhere within the hour won’t reduce the max headway to be less than 15 minutes. If however the services are interleaved so that 6 local trains leave Bramalea on a 10 minute headway, that’s a better, more attractive service. If some trains are diesel-only, this isn’t an option.
Same goes for the Stouffville branch. If these aren’t interleaved at Unionville, every hour there will be a 15 minute headway south of Unionville. The 11 trains on Lakeshore West are numerous enough that the effect is reduced, but in any case, the max headway will not be 5.5 minutes. A free numeracy lesson for Toronto Planning: frequency rate 1/headway.
Which brings us back to the demand and diversion forecasts for little-J RL vs. SmartTrack vs both. ST/RER is either 10 or 15 minute headways, depending upon implementation, with 5 minutes now definitely out.
Here’s my question: If Yonge is at capacity in 2041 with both little-J RL and 5 minute SmartTrack, what are the chances that with 10 or 15 minute SmartTrack, big-J RL will now be needed?
Steve: That is precisely the question City Planning needs to answer. They have been studiously avoiding the “big J” while overstating the benefits of ST with frequent service it will not actually operate.
LikeLike
Interesting ideas, I wonder how well public transit rail will work so late with such a decentralised spread out urban sprall the GTA is . Rail transit and cities that function grow together slowly .
LikeLike
John Tory is a brilliant politician. He appears to have noticed the clear advantages that incumbency conveys in municipal politics and that voters have a dubious ability to differentiate between truth and bovine effluent.
Given this situation, it only makes sense for a politician to promise whatever it takes to get elected. When challenged on details, just shout louder. Smarttrack! Subways, Subways, Subways! Swan boats pulled by unicorns! All paid for by the private sector!
When the election is over and the politician actually has to deliver, who cares? He is now the incumbent. Four years later that incumbency delivers a huge advantage in getting re-elected.
John Tory is not stupid. I suspect that he had an inkling all along that the more outrageous parts of Smarttrack were not going to happen. Things like “subway frequency of trains.” Or the new underground station downtown that would be 100% paid for by the private sector.
But because Mr. Tory is not stupid, he probably figured all along that he could rebrand some part of GO RER as “Smarttrack” and declare victory. So when re-election time comes, he can ride that incumbency advantage right back into the mayor’s chair.
Also, Canadian voters have a high tolerance for politicians who break their promises. Just so people don’t think my examples are all Conservative, I’ll pick that very successful Liberal politician Jean Chretien. Who came to power on promises to repeal the GST and rip up the Free Trade Agreement with the USA. He did neither, but got re-elected. Twice.
The moral of the story is this: promise whatever it takes to get into power, facts be damned.
Steve: I might buy that if Tory had shifted position on various aspects of ST earlier last year, but be refused to do so, and I understand that even losing the Eglinton West spur to the LRT line was a bitter pill for him to swallow. Now he has lost the rest of “SmartTrack”, but we are still pretending it is there. Candidate and Mayor John Tory has some very bad advisors, but he trusts them, and must answer for sticking to a plan that was always unworkable.
LikeLike
Obviously the best plan is for the City to completely abandon Smart Track – which was obvious from the start. GO RER can do what needs to be done for regional transit – and maybe a little lobbying could change the bias against in city fares – but Toronto’s investment and interest in transit lies elsewhere. In fact it lies with the Scarborough Commuter Relief Line which will aid deserving downtown commuters in their quest to avoid Bloor/Yonge.
LikeLike
I can see why Paul Aitken asks why chase Mr. Tory; but Steve’s response is eminently sound. From a climate perspective, we should have been doing things by now, and more delay is a Real Problem, though not if we continue to do the less-wise to wrong things. Time will tell; but if it emerges that the Tory idea was a mere rebranding of the RER, and it was done knowingly, do we call it Smart Trick? At least it worked enough to excise Ford from mayoralty.
LikeLike
Honestly, do I care whether SmartTrack exists?
This is a damn good plan! Most cities in the US would kill for 15-minute all-day service, on electrified lines, with seven infill stations and fares equalized with the subway — in fact community groups in Chicago have been trying to get Metra to do this for over 40 years with no success!
I really hope this GO RER plan gets built and ASAP. It would be a first for North America and might wake up the ultra-conservative managers at our “commuter rail” systems in the US. Honestly I don’t care if Mayor Tory unfairly takes credit for it, even though he obstructed it… all I care is that I want to see it done!
LikeLike
Thanks for the interesting analysis. On top of the progressive shrinkage of the promised network, what worries me most is that there will still be one-way service on most of the corridors. This will remain a fundamental flaw, preventing RER to become a fully-integrated and viable transit option for “upstream” commuters. For example, if I understand correctly, the Centennial station on the Stouffville corridor will only service southbound trains in the morning and northbound in the evening, preventing it from serving any Centennial College students wanting to commute to the college from downtown or anywhere south of the 401.
LikeLike
I have to challenge that. LIRR and San Diego Trolley immediately come to mind. I’m still a huge fan of SDTrolley, years ahead of its time in North Am, some brilliant footage on Youtube of sections now open that weren’t during my residence there. Note the acceleration from stops, and remarkable smoothness of the Siemens vehicles. They only had the now older ones when I was there, but they also ran remarkably damped and stable on the straight high-speed run down to San Ysidro (Mexican border). Of course, track quality makes that possible. They run every fifteen minutes or sooner, all day on that line. More frequently on the more local ones. It’s the fourth highest ridership of any transit line in North Am.
I give to you the example of UPX! Running 12 cars trains virtually empty is like serving Nunavut with a 747. During rush hours, it makes perfect sense, as even with 12 cars, some runs are packed with many standing. That indicates the need for more rush-hour runs, which I’m still trying to figure out how many are scheduled, albeit Steve and others have deduced what appears to be good answers. There’s still some mystery as others point out as to the interleaving of headways.
Running almost empty trains is hugely inefficient, wears track, cars, and locos unnecessarily, increases maintenance load, decreases life, increases emissions, and slows scheduling.
If Metrolinx are going to be ordering new vehicles (and the type is still not detailed that I can find, whether AAR approved EMU or lighter ones, perhaps LRTs…) then some foresight at this time could see leasing DMUs, or even buying, to get RER rolling now before electrification, and using that same DMU stock cascaded to doing the all-day runs in lieu of almost empty 12 car loco hauled later on the extremities of the system. They can *still* run express south of Bramalea or where-ever. That doesn’t change. What changes is that the locos and consists will last a lot longer and stay in better shape if they’re not being wasted hauling air.
And for the inevitable line block, once service is restored, the nimbleness of DMUs (almost inevitably with a higher thrust-to-weight ratio, or tractive effort) will be better at catching up to the timetable. I’d suggest the present UPX Nippon stock for the task, save for many complicating factors, not the least limited stock and the high cost of adding more.
LikeLike
Addendum to my prior post on San Diego Trolley and rapid acceleration of the vehicles:
Oddly, SDTrolley uses 600V catenary. This has advantages and disadvantages. Disadvantage, as with subway third rail, is significant line-loss in distribution over wider areas. That can be addressed with higher voltage distribution in AC form (in more modern systems) and then rectified, regulated and distributed locally in sections.
The huge advantage for vehicle acceleration is *considerably less weight of vehicles* due to no need of an on-board transformer. Especially with modern stepping and chopper controlled power supplies, that advantage is multiplied. The drive motors on the bogies can be fed with a much beefier ‘source impedance’ (as if they are being fed with more power than they actually are).
RER is projected to be using the modern internationally predominant catenary voltage of 25kV AC, ostensibly 60 cycles, so it can be sourced directly from local power lines of adequate capacity. *IF* a decision is made to run LRTs (something I think must be considered) then RER might have to be run on its own reserved track, at least on some routes, if that weighty transformer is to be avoided.
*IF* the LRT vehicle is common to what will be run on other Toronto LRT routes, (which offers huge flexibility at destination for onward running on streets or RoW) a the probability is that the catenary voltage will be around 1500 VDC. (I’ve searched for the actual voltage spec’d, can’t find it)
Dual voltage vehicles are widely available that automatically sense and switch to voltage and current difference, but to cater to high-voltage AC, they must have a transformer. That means lugging substantial weight, even as an autotransformer, the core is steel and of a substantial mass.
Very high voltage solid-state switching is now available for distribution systems (Quebec Hydro, for instance), but I’m unaware of it being so for for rail vehicle use…and would question whether it would meet necessary safety standards in such tight quarters.
This debate, possibly because it is too technical for many pundits, is sadly missing. That could be a mistake in the making, as costing and servicing for projected electrification will be dependent on facilitating it. That precise debate, btw, is one more aspect missing in the SmartTrack discussion. To have presumed the sharing of track is one thing, the overhead catenary is quite another.
LikeLike
My primary concern is the 15-minute off-peak headway. This is nowhere near the level of service conducive to real growth in transit ride-share. I’d be surprised if a 15 minute off-peak frequency remains the ultimate service level as it’s already been acknowledged that peak service needs to be 5 to 10 minutes. Yes… the 15 minute number is ultimately derived from RER, but do you expect the off-peak service concept to improve at all for the portion of SmartTrack between Kennedy and Mount Dennis?
Steve: No, I do not. I do not think that Toronto Council is prepared to pay what it would cost to operate service beyond the level that GO chooses to provide. There is also an equity question about why whatever “SmartTrack” might mean by the time it is implemented. Today about the only surviving part of the concept is the TTC level fare. And even that is dubious considering the smoke-and-mirrors surrounding the “fare integration” strategy. Why should riders who live beside the “SmartTrack” corridor get lower fares and, maybe, better service than GO would otherwise provide at city expense when riders along other corridors (Lake Shore, Barrie, Richmond Hill, Milton) would not?
LikeLike
There are some major errors in your statement:
1. Edmonton Transit opened its LRT line on April 22nd, 1978 and Calgary opened its on May 25th, 1981. Both were ahead of San Diego’s starting date of July 26, 1981. while it may have been “years ahead of its time” in the US it was definitely not ahead of its time in North America. The two Alberta cities beat it out.
Steve: Indeed, the reason the San Diego Trolley’s designation blinds said “City Centre” (Canadian spelling) is that they were manufactured in Edmonton.
2. While LIRR would be close to an RER and also the Metro North lines out of New York as they operate with heavy rail at speeds and station spacing for Commuter rail, the San Diego Trolley, while very good at what it does, is not an RER type of service.
3. San Diego has 53.5 miles of track and 53 stations and so its station spacing is closer to urban rather regional rail.
4. Its maximum speed is only 55 mph not 80 to 100 for RER.
5. It is not “the fourth highest ridership for any transit line in North Am(erica)” but is rather the fourth highest ridership for a US Light rail System. In North America it is behind Toronto (though one may not want to count TTC’s street running as LRT), Guadalajara, Calgary, Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco. from Wikipedia:
St. Louis would be a better comparison because it runs 46 miles of track with 37 stations, has a top speed of 65 mph and is basically one long line with a spur. As an exercise I took the operating schedule for the St. Louis LRT and applied it to the Barrie line using Zone express service in the rush hour with 3 zones: Allendale to Gwillumbury, Gwillumbury to King and Aurora to Union. The running times would be just over an hour from Allendale, 45 minutes from Gwillumbury and 35 minutes from King to Union.
Unfortunately the opportunity to do that has been lost because Metrolinx through GO only wants to run heavy rail RER service. If GO had used half a brain they could have through routed Barrie and Stouffville with LRT by using temporal separation as San Diego does and running freight service, where there still is any, after the end of daily passenger service. The only rail connection to Stouffville is at Scarborough Junction so it will never be a detour for CN or CP. I am not sure but I believe CN does any diversion from the west over the Weston Sub and any from the east over the Bala Sub (Richmond Hill.)
I am afraid that Metrolinx is set on big boy trains and that is what will go everywhere. But the two Lakeshore lines and the Kitchener line need FRA/TC compatible trains anyways because they will run on tracks with freights. I think that they are only electrifying track that they own at first to show it is compatible with CN on their mainline.
I don’t think that you want to put 25 kV AC on an LRT because it would increase the weight, transformer, and insulation requirements. It use 600 VDC because that was the standard voltage for LRT and HRT at that time. It is now 750 VDC but the solid state controllers can also operate at 1500 and 3000 VDC.
The Metrolinx LRT lines will use 750 VDC. The TTC’s Bombardier car can run at 600 VDC or 750 VDC. Like a lot of modern electronics the switching controllers can operate over a large voltage range. The TTC was going to run the St. Clair car up Jane St LRT to the shop at the Kodak plant. It would have used 750 VDC once on Jane St. When Metrolinx decided to run standard gauge that killed that idea.
This statement has the implication that you are qualified to make technical comments but most of the rest of us are not. That is a highly egotistical statement to make. It is easy to find the voltages for the cars, the voltage ratings for IGBT controllers and other information on the internet so you can make correct statements. In 2000 they were capable of operating at 1800 V and the newer IGBTs (Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistors) are rated at 6000 V blocking voltage so they should be able to run at 1500 or 3000 VDC.
You are right in saying the sharing of overhead is another thing. Railway overhead has to be much higher than for LRT as it must provide clearance for auto racks and stacked containers at 25,000 VAC.
Steve: Yes, Saines would help his case a lot if he did not make factual blunders with such ease while dissing everyone else’s capabilities.
LikeLike
SmartTrack was a smart idea in the same league as the idea of an atom, quantum mechanics, and the expansion of the universe – it is sad that politics killed it but it is still a brilliant idea.
Steve: SmartTrack was nowhere near any of those concepts. The basic premise was that more use should be made of the GO Transit corridors (plus a dedicated track along Eglinton West to the airport), but at a level much greater than the infrastructure could handle without significant investment and disruption of surrounding communities. It was a classic “line drawn on a map” by “experts” who knew little about the subject, but were more than happy to shill for a mayoral candidate. If the atom, quantum mechanics and the expansion of the universe had been designed by the same people as SmartTrack, none of us would be here today.
LikeLike
Really, just simply have the SmartTrack from Union to Unionville GO! That is what we all want!
Steve: Easier said than done. You are going to get GO/RER at the service level GO can fit on the infrastructure Queen’s Park is prepared to fund.
LikeLike
It is quite different from *incrementally* improving an operating “commuter rail” system into a high-frequency system with urban rail pricing. The last time that happened in the US was probably the 19th century. LIRR retains “premium” pricing, as do all the other “commuter rail” operations in the US. SEPTA in Philadelphia in the 1980s tried to create urban rail frequencies, with moderate success. They also tried to create urban rail pricing but failed utterly due to union issues; the “steam railroad” workers felt that they were higher-class than the “subway” drivers and refused to unify either the pay or the staffing.
LikeLike
Just to clarify, GO/RER/SmartTrack will have service in BOTH directions and all day? Don’t want that little loophole to go unnoticed until a true schedule is posted.
Steve: Yes. Just look at the charts on the RER site for each route.
LikeLike
For those who might wonder, I have purged two long comments by Stephen Saines here and have lost patience with his attitude to others on this site.
LikeLike
Quick comment re: SEPTA and Philadelphia…
Having lived there, I know that their commuter rail works like a subway for in city stops, where if you have the equivalent of a metro pass for the city transit, you can also use the commuter trains (electric) within your zone.
This is true fare integration, and what I would expect GO RER to look like!
I wonder why no one uses this as an example of what Toronto transit should look like in 2020!
LikeLike
SEPTA runs all the transportation, local and commuter rail in the Philadelphia area. From what I have read a a lot of the residents of the city of Philadelphia are not happy with their local transit, especially the street car service. I for one do not want Metrolinx taking over day to day operation of any of the local transit services. They have a horrible record of finishing any project within two years of stated finish date.
LikeLike
I believe that for the sake of simplicity, Metrolinx has not noted the higher counter-direction headways. For instance, Centennial gets 60-minute bidirectional service on the mid-day, evening and weekend diagram, so it is hard to believe that counter-direction service will not also existing during rush hour.
Contradicting this point is that the Lakeshore West rush hour diagram does explicitly show 60 minute bi-directonal service as well as more frequent directional service. However, I believe this is to distinguish the two spurs, since the new West Harbour/Confederation stations are only getting unidirectional service.
LikeLiked by 1 person
UPX’s problem is not low headways. Headway is perhaps the one thing they got right.
As for Nunavut and 747s, you’ve totally lost me as to the relevant comparables.
We’re dealing with local and regional service here. Whether we’re discussing buses, LRVs or heavy rail, there is value in providing off-peak service that is not captured by measuring load factor, which by definition should be lower than during peak hours. Note that when you don’t use vehicles during certain hours of the day, their load factor falls to zero for that period, which is perfectly inefficient when your goal is mobility.
What your ‘inefficient’ argument boils down to is whether or not Mount Joy gets 60 minute service in the mid-day, which in each direction is about 6 trips per weekday out of 86. I doubt decoupling some cars for a few hours to make trains shorter saves costs, as this is not done on Lakeshore today.
For that matter, I think there’s a strong argument for higher frequency service to Mount Joy during the mid-day. Brampton will be approaching 1 million souls by then. Metrolinx probably would plan for more if it owned the track.
Steve: Please note that Stephen Saines will not be able to reply as I am tired of his gratuitous insults.
LikeLike
I said:
I meant Mount Pleasant, not Mount Joy.
LikeLike
As I expected, SmartTrack is now nothing but a few new GO stations funded by the city and an Eglinton LRT extension. It seems like a perfectly sensible plan which has a low cost, but limited benefit.
The map on the GO electrification page seems to suggest that the Stouffville line will be electrified all the way to Lincolnville. In this case, the weird frequency of 7 trains an hour does not make sense.
The frequency of the Stouffville line will be limited by the fact that it shares track with the Lakeshore East line. On the other hand, the combined frequency of Lakeshore East and Stouffville on the shared section will be a lot more than 7 trains per hour, so the ridership should be higher on that section. It is unclear how many of those trains will be local and how many will be express.
TTC fares are a necessity if this is going to be successful. I am surprised how few people are using the UP Express between Weston and Union after the fare reduction. The UP Express however cannot possible handle the demand at TTC fares, as we saw with the free weekend.
LikeLike
Has there been any discussion of through-routing the Barrie RER trains through to the Stouffville corridor? My understanding is that the plan for that corridor is 4+ trains per hr as far as Aurora. Those four trains would go a long way to reducing headways on “SmartTrack East” to that 5m level, without increasing the load at Union.
Steve: No. Also, it’s not a question of what can be through-routed, but how many trains/hour will fit on the available track without substantial upgrades.
LikeLike
What a disaster (in the making )
LikeLike
Chris, it’s my opinion that the GO upgrades aren’t a disaster, but you might be referring to Tory’s original vision.
For 15-minute-and-better services where offpeak bilevels are usually massive overkill, I am envision 6-coach bilevel EMUs, and utilizing peak-period double-berthing at Union for opposite-direction services. (Union is preloaded today with GO trains before peak, possibly the same thing can still continue for smaller 6-coach trains)
LikeLike
Through-routing is pretty practical offpeak, but at peak apparently it’s very hard to through-route because of the accelerated rate of departures. This is what many have said to me in the past.
What they do today is pre-load Union full of trains just before peak, and then use an accelerated rate of departures, unhindered by incoming trains (Train traffic bottleneck). They do this for LSE/LSW.
One LSW-to-LSE through-routing appears to be skipped during peak (at least according to timetable), to help with peak-period departures.
Presumably, if electrification involves 6-coach bilevel EMUs for more appropriate 15-minute offpeak operations, they could preload two trains per platform (that go in opposite directions).
I think the intent is to do substantial upgrades to increase train throughput — the question is how /substantial/ the upgrades will be — how much money is thrown at this…
Steve: When I am speaking of constraints, I am not just referring to Union. It does not matter how fast trains can leave from Union if there is a bottleneck somewhere else on the line.
LikeLike
And yet Smarttrack shill Miller is still living in a world where none of this is true.
How does he never get called on this? Why do the media still go to him, when he’s so demonstrably over-hyped it?
Steve: There is a certain desire at the Star to hype his work, and I suspect that some of their writers don’t know the background. Tess K., however, should know better.
LikeLike
Alas, this be true. And money would need to be thrown at these constraints.
My view is a lot (not all) of the external constraints are much easier than trying to increase train throughput at ultra-constrained Union. While there’s no room for more tracks at Union without a tunnel, there’s barely room for an extra track (and sometimes two) elsewhere in LSW and LSE, etc. Sometimes with things like signal hardware and the odd abutting (mostly industrial) yard in the way, but a far easier tackle than, say, the SkyDome wall.
LikeLike
RER (Phase 1) isn’t about fixing everything, but it’s a transitional shift in the system given the timeframe and money on the table.
Stouffville is limited by the double tracking, which currently is only out to Unionville. It’s not so far from Centennial GO, if they still wanted to commute.
SmartTrack was a smart idea, but not because it was revolutionary, but because it didn’t really promise to do anything beyond what was already in the works and which they City had no control over.
SmartTrack isn’t an atomic idea, it’s the ether. A fundamentally flawed solution invented to fit the parameters of the problem because they didn’t want to accept the alternative.
Steve: In using the term “SmartTrack” we must be careful to distinguish the campaign version (5 minute, TTC fare) from what we are now likely to see.
This map is more about TPAP approval than actual construction at this point. They are preserving the option of storing electric trains at the Lincolnville Layover, but it might not actually get built in the first wave of electrication.
Through-routing reduces capacity at Union/USRC.
To get under the pile foundations of Union, you’d have to start the tunnel out near Bloor or Exhibition. The preferred option at this time are satellite stations, depending on how much money is on the table. Elevated stations above Don Yard and Bathurst North Yard and/or a tunneled double-track four-train eight-platform station under/near Simcoe St.
LikeLike