jje1000
Senior Member
I wonder if full-height doors at Bloor-Yonge, St George, and Union, and partial-height doors for the other stations would best balance the need for doors vs the cost of retrofitting the platforms to fit them?
|
|
|
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
It's not retrofitting platforms to fit them it's rebuilding them to be able to take the weight of them. the current platforms are just slabs of concr3t tat sit on a small wall at the edge of the tracks and overhang that wall . From my understanding is the small wall that supports the platforms at stations outside of the newest ones built is that thy aren't strong enough to be able to support the additional weight of platform edge doors and they need to rebuild the platforms to be able to handle the additional weight.
Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
Some platform screen doors are designed to roll up into the ceiling, like window blinds. However, that depends on the ceiling height and the design of the screen doors.
Northern Light
Superstar
A Report to next week's TTC meeting updates the Commission on the Business Case and Feasibility studies for Platform Edge Doors.
Spoiler.....we're going forward.
Report: (high level link as there are attachments)
Before I go further, I must alert @Reecemartin
Now, from the above:
You'll see below a reference to Bloor-Yonge being unfunded.....I've explained my read on that....... but of note, if this is adopted, B-Y will not be the first station, they will pilot this at Dundas/TMU
***
Next bit....I'm going to say right now, even understanding the escalator they are using..........I find the estimates unacceptably high.
****
***
I have read the full base report. I have not yet read and mulled over the Feasibility Study and Business Case. I will do so later and report back.
Direct Links:
Feasibility Study: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2025/ttc/bgrd/backgroundfile-256301.pdf
Business Case: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2025/ttc/bgrd/backgroundfile-256342.pdf
Spoiler.....we're going forward.
Report: (high level link as there are attachments)
Before I go further, I must alert @Reecemartin
Now, from the above:
You'll see below a reference to Bloor-Yonge being unfunded.....I've explained my read on that....... but of note, if this is adopted, B-Y will not be the first station, they will pilot this at Dundas/TMU
***
Next bit....I'm going to say right now, even understanding the escalator they are using..........I find the estimates unacceptably high.
****
***
I have read the full base report. I have not yet read and mulled over the Feasibility Study and Business Case. I will do so later and report back.
Direct Links:
Feasibility Study: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2025/ttc/bgrd/backgroundfile-256301.pdf
Business Case: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2025/ttc/bgrd/backgroundfile-256342.pdf
cplchanb
Senior Member
Clearly whoever wrote this "study" has never set foot outside of Canada. Theyve been using rope based doors in Asia especially in korea for years and represent a solid alternative that is the best value.
How can they say theres "no proven track record".
They just skipped right to the most expensive option. Ill bet this will die off a slow agonising death just like GO RER.
also 20 YEARS?!! most of us on this board will be old or dead by then.... too expensive for too long of a construction period.
Reecemartin
Active Member
Thanks for this, very cool
I read the report and they did not say there was no track record. They said there were limited deployments (accurate).
They are deployed lightly in Asia outside of Korea and even in Korea they are not the preference. They are quite possibly the least expensive, whether they are actually the best value is highly debatable - they are less functional, don't align with the doors, and create different hazards.
cplchanb
Senior Member
The reason I say its the best value is because clearly to do the entire system with the Cadillac solution will cost a fortune and take a generation to complete. We needed this equipment last decade. The longer we stall and stretch out the project the more its going to cost. Right now we need to do something. Something 80% now/soon is world's better than nothing for a generation. Even partial doors is a better middle of the road option
north-of-anything
Active Member
I disagree. PEDs aren't a "cadillac" solution, they're the standard for a reason. On a system with Toronto's ridership, the way we mitigate costs is by prioritizing stations of high use where incidents are most likely to occur, not by putting together a half-assed solution that will end up being cursed out and torn up a few decades down the line. We don't need this equipment "last decade", certainly not as badly as we need to resolve slow orders or add a second platform at Bloor-Yonge.
I think a partial or cheap solution at TMU would be much more embarrassing than nothing at Donlands. Toronto is prone to having permanent half-measures, I'm in full support of not doing that here.
cplchanb
Senior Member
Then why do world class systems like in soeol or Tokyo have partial ped or rope solutions? We have ZERO right to look down on them when theyve been successfully implementing them for decades. Its fine to do new build with full screen doors but clearly it'll cost us a fortune in time and money to retrofit. Retrofits ALWAYS TAKE MUCH MORE TIME AND MONEY vs new build
IRT_BMT_IND
Active Member
I'm not sure they are that common, if the Korean Wikipedia is to be believed the example in the report is the only installation of these type of doors remaining in Korea, all others have been converted to full height doors. There are probably a few in Japan, but the only one I know of in Tokyo is at the JR station at Narita Airport where both limited express trains and regular commuter trains with different door spacings have to share the same platform.
If you read the report the TTC clearly already has it's preferred vendors too (and a strong preference for vendors that are already established in North America), and don't want a system that's an orphan and where every component has to be shipped from Asia.
Last edited:
crs1026
Superstar
My only reservation is the choice of test station....call me risk averse, but I would move the initial test to a less heavily used station - Rosedale maybe?
Having any teething troubles at TMU will be very painful, and therefore bad optically..
Baby steps at first, please !
- Paul
Having any teething troubles at TMU will be very painful, and therefore bad optically..
Baby steps at first, please !
- Paul
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I thought these are the 4 test stations
− Package 1A – North York Centre Station;
− Package 1B – Lawrence Station;
− Package 1C – Glencairn Station; and
− Package 1D – Old Mill Station.
NYCC and Lawrence are both fairly busy, but not impossibly so. Maybe they wanted to cover all the different typologies required?
What I don't get is how low Yonge/Bloor gets (almost to the end of Phase 4) - considering the concurrent station expansion works.
re: Rope barriers in Korea and Japan
Considering how generally orderly their societies are compared to ours - I can see why they can get away with using that and we couldn't/shouldn't.
AoD
Richard White
Senior Member
If that was the case, they would need to do Rosedale simply for the open air nature of it.
crs1026
Superstar
I have memories of the first few weeks of UP service, with people stationed at Union and Pearson to manually trigger the doors because the system wasn't functional on Day 1. Whether there were actual teething troubles, or whether the system wasn't fully complete by opening day I don't know. (I remember Wynne's repeated claims of "On time and on budget", so the latter can't possibly have been true /s)
An end of line station would be a good test point with a single side only being tested - because if a train becomes "stuck" the system can still operate via the other platform. At TMU - what happens if a train either can't open the doors, or can't close them, or things don't align? Do they just abort the stop and carry on? Any freezing or malfunction that holds an in service train will stall service on the entire line. One assumes that there would be maintenance people on hand at all times, but as the installation is highly impactful on operations, I would start very very carefully and out of the spotlight. Construct a test platform in a yard, even.
Getting these doors installed is a very high priority in my book - but "measure twice, cut once" applies.
- Paul
An end of line station would be a good test point with a single side only being tested - because if a train becomes "stuck" the system can still operate via the other platform. At TMU - what happens if a train either can't open the doors, or can't close them, or things don't align? Do they just abort the stop and carry on? Any freezing or malfunction that holds an in service train will stall service on the entire line. One assumes that there would be maintenance people on hand at all times, but as the installation is highly impactful on operations, I would start very very carefully and out of the spotlight. Construct a test platform in a yard, even.
Getting these doors installed is a very high priority in my book - but "measure twice, cut once" applies.
- Paul
IRT_BMT_IND
Active Member
One issue with PEDs is there is a lot of experience in Asia, but not so much in North America. It's a huge advantage when the nessessary engineers, spare parts supply etc are in your own country and not the other side of the world. I can imagine the TTC having to get on a frantic Zoom call with engineers in France or Japan to troubleshoot when the system fails at a major station.
And if a train overshoots and can't open the doors I would suspect the course of action would be to skip the stop and continue on. Which is less disruptive than either isolating certain doors or going through the procedures to reverse the train. I actually saw this happen years ago when a train overshot the stop marker and ended up with the first doors in the tunnel.
And if a train overshoots and can't open the doors I would suspect the course of action would be to skip the stop and continue on. Which is less disruptive than either isolating certain doors or going through the procedures to reverse the train. I actually saw this happen years ago when a train overshot the stop marker and ended up with the first doors in the tunnel.