[smallspy]

I can't tell if this is sarcasm or if you are seriously incredulous that a signalling system system can do what it is designed to do, to the point that nothing other than commercially protected excerpts of code and scans of wiring diagrams will convince you.

• Do you have some kind of insider knowledge that puts you in a better informed position than the experts consulted by professional journalists at Canada's highest circulation newspaper?
• Is there some reason that trains would be unable to close their own doors automatically, a function performed safely and without human intervention by literally every elevator and commercial building in the world?
• Is there a reason that Andy Byford, the outgoing CEO of the TTC who no longer has any stake in internal TTC politics, would be part of a conspiracy to hide this?

Until you are able to answer those basic questions, maybe you shouldn't challenge the reference that you asked for.

Just to recap:

Level of evidence needed by other people:
Something akin to what you would expect in an air crash investigation

Level of evidence needed by Dan:
Just a vague sentiment that the reference is wrong, without any articulation of why that could be the case.

Here is your goddamned reference, unless internally commissioned documentation isn't acceptable and I need to hack into TTC archives.

Since you don't seem to understand how these kinds of systems work....

There are ATC/ATO systems that are designed to be completely free from human input. For instance, the version of SelTrac used on the Vancouver Skytrain. The train stops, opens its doors, counts down a timer, closes the doors, pauses for a second, and then starts moving again.

And there are other systems that are designed to have some minimal level of human input - perhaps closing the doors, or pressing a button to initiate operation. The system can move the train on its own, but needs to be told that it is okay to do so. And sometimes these systems are designed to be "upgraded" to fully automated systems, and sometimes they are not.

For instance, the system currently being installed in our subway system requires the operator to close the doors, and then press a button to begin the operation of the train on its own.

What no one here knows yet is whether it can be operated completely free of human input.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

There are metros (subways) and light rail systems around the world where the passenger has to press a button to open the door to enter or egress the train.

See the arrow pointing to the button to open the door. Useful for platforms that are outdoors (Rosedale or Davisville stations for example) like on Eglinton East or Eglinton West.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

There are metros (subways) and light rail systems around the world where the passenger has to press a button to open the door to enter or egress the train.

See the arrow pointing to the button to open the door. Useful for platforms that are outdoors (Rosedale or Davisville stations for example) like on Eglinton East or Eglinton West.

Maybe this would be something they take into account with the replacements for the T1's

 

[Rainforest]

You know, the thought occurred to me that if we are building a "streetcar in a ROW" style LRT, then the Weston-Dixon to Airport corridor actually makes a lot more sense than Eglinton for that specific type of transit.

Makes for much easier Jane connection, interchange with Weston UPX (which becomes SmartTrack?), and the development potential for Weston and Dixon roads is a lot higher. You can build the idealized St Clair-esque urban corridor around such a transit line all the way to the airport.

Dixon Rd is interesting as a light rail corridor. However, a route via Weston would be problematic. Weston is very narrow in many places, with houses sitting very close to the existing lanes and no room for more lanes. Furthermore, it is not directly connected to Dixon Rd; they are separated by Humber River.

Instead, I would consider splitting the Eglinton line at Royal York. One branch would continue along Eglinton and connect to Renforth Gateway and the employment areas south of Pearson. The other branch would go up Royal York to Dixon, then turn west on Dixon and continue to the Pearson terminals.

Royal York is wider than Weston, and the houses are located further from the road. There should be room for two in-median light rail lanes.

 

[Palma]

Dixon Rd is interesting as a light rail corridor. However, a route via Weston would be problematic. Weston is very narrow in many places, with houses sitting very close to the existing lanes and no room for more lanes. Furthermore, it is not directly connected to Dixon Rd; they are separated by Humber River.

Instead, I would consider splitting the Eglinton line at Royal York. One branch would continue along Eglinton and connect to Renforth Gateway and the employment areas south of Pearson. The other branch would go up Royal York to Dixon, then turn west on Dixon and continue to the Pearson terminals.

Royal York is wider than Weston, and the houses are located further from the road. There should be room for two in-median light rail lanes.

And you think those homeowners on Royal York would want this?

 

[crs1026]

A better route would be Scarlett. Royal York is quite narrow also, and the turn onto Dixon would be awkward. Lots of width on Scarlett.

Serving Dixon would get high marks for social equity - but - I wonder where those riders need to go. My impression is that taking them along Eglinton isn't helpful. They more likely want to go straight along Lawrence Again, we need to consider what BRT might accomplish rather than jumping straight to rail.

I wonder if a successful King streetcar pot will spin off added curiosity about bus lanes outside the core. Lawrence is crying for faster, less impeded bus service.

- Paul

 

[ADRM]

The places without development potential are just opportunities to cut stops and make the line faster. St. Clair would be quick if it weren't for all the stops and red lights.

The stop frequency on both St. Clair and Spadina in the grade-separated sections really is annoying and bizarre, and I'd hate to think that self-defeating oddity is being replicated here, where the environment is even less urban.

 

[Leo_Chan]

The stop frequency on both St. Clair and Spadina in the grade-separated sections really is annoying and bizarre, and I'd hate to think that self-defeating oddity is being replicated here, where the environment is even less urban.

Do you mean dedicated right of way and not grade separated?

 

[ADRM]

Do you mean dedicated right of way and not grade separated?

Indeed I do.

 

[robmausser]

Its odd to me that the Mississauga Transitway, a BRT system, warrants such expansive grade separations, yet for an LRT the need is not there.

Metrolinx is odd.

 

[Leo_Chan]

Its odd to me that the Mississauga Transitway, a BRT system, warrants such expansive grade separations, yet for an LRT the need is not there.

Metrolinx is odd.

Well, the Mississauga Transitway was proposed well before Metrolinx was even a thing. And a median ROW for LRT or BRT don’t usually have grade separation. So either the EWLRT has to have its own corridor, or being completely underground is the only way for it to have grade separation. If neither of these reasons make sense, then Metrolinx just doesn’t make sense.

 

[sixrings]

The stop frequency on both St. Clair and Spadina in the grade-separated sections really is annoying and bizarre, and I'd hate to think that self-defeating oddity is being replicated here, where the environment is even less urban.

St. Clair Streetcar spacing is 250M per stop. Eglinton West stop spacing is 800M apart. Personally I think Eglinton with a third of the stops of St. Clair will be just fine.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Its odd to me that the Mississauga Transitway, a BRT system, warrants such expansive grade separations, yet for an LRT the need is not there.

Metrolinx is odd.

I assuming that the logic behind no grade separations for the Eglinton West LRT is because the LRT in Etobicoke will have more ridership than the BRT in Mississauga, therefore doesn't need grade separations.

WAIT A MINUTE!! That makes no sense!!

More likely it's cents, not sense.

 

[Avenue]

Eglinton West stop spacing is 800M apart.

No. Weston to Martin Grove is 6.1 km and average spacing is 610M, with from Royal York to Martin grove average distance reducing to 500m. That and the lousy Toronto invention "wait for left turns" signaling priority this line is at risk of not offering enough speed advantage to justify its existence.

 

[sixrings]

So 610 vs 250. People are acting as if people will be walking faster than the lrt when in fact it will be considerably faster than the bus it replaces