Welcome Guest!
In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 15 Vote(s) - 3.93 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit
11/11 - Saturday, October 15, 2016

   
I saved the best for last: the crossover at Conestoga!  I just love all the fixture work for securing this very complex piece of special trackwork.

   
Reply


(10-16-2016, 09:00 AM)Canard Wrote: I hate to sound negative, but I'm not really happy with how these pedestrian crossings turned out for trail crossings on the Waterloo Spur.  I hate to use the term, but they feel hostile.  I'm not sure what could be done to improve the look or feel of them.


Showing the new 6-lamp crossing lights - the two lamps facing the tracks are white, and indicate to train operators that the signal is in fact activated (they flash at the same time as the two red ones facing those wishing to cross).

Hostile is exactly the word to use. You are not the only one to feel this way.
Reply
Are these signals and lights and barriers only necessary because the line carries heavy freight rail or is it some other law? i.e. if it were a dedicated LRT right of way with no other train traffic would the same precautions be taken?
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
(10-16-2016, 10:53 AM)Pheidippides Wrote: Are these signals and lights and barriers only necessary because the line carries heavy freight rail or is it some other law? i.e. if it were a dedicated LRT right of way with no other train traffic would the same precautions be taken?

This was my thought, but as was pointed out to me, similar barriers and fences are in place along the Hydro Corridor which carries no freight.
Reply
Canard, some of those pics look like the rails turn down William St E!
Reply
There is a 65km/h speed along that stretch and electric trains are kinda quiet so that's probably part of the reason that they have those gates. Is there an off-the-shelf solution besides these kinds of gates?
Reply
Lost-esque sonic barriers?
Reply


(10-16-2016, 08:43 AM)Canard Wrote: Two separate issues.  The media is correct that the new platform rework that started in the past few weeks was for the distance to the rail CL.  They don't know about the grounding issue.

So here's what I don't get. if this new issue has nothing to do with the grounding of the rebar, why are they removing concrete so far back? Can't they just bring in a cutter and shave off those few errant millimetres?
Reply
I think most of the hostility comes form the fencing. If they were

A) not grey chianlink fences, or at least covered by some shrubs / trees, and
B) didn't have the 2 perpendicular pieces and the opening that look like they are "funnelling" people though,

it would look a lot nicer.
Reply
(10-16-2016, 01:37 PM)clasher Wrote: There is a 65km/h speed along that stretch and electric trains are kinda quiet so that's probably part of the reason that they have those gates. Is there an off-the-shelf solution besides these kinds of gates?

On the other edge of the park there is a similar ROW that carries traffic often moving at 65 km/h and sometimes no noisier than the LRT.  It's called a road.

It has everything to do with the general railway regulations and nothing to do with the specific conditions and needs of this particular installation.
Reply
(10-16-2016, 02:17 PM)GtwoK Wrote: I think most of the hostility comes form the fencing. If they were

A) not grey chianlink fences, or at least covered by some shrubs / trees, and
B) didn't have the 2 perpendicular pieces and the opening that look like they are "funnelling" people though,

it would look a lot nicer.

I agree for the most part, the chain link fences, and the "funnels" are quite hostile looking.  But I don't think much of the gates either.  They aren't quite as hostile, but are still out of place.  On a pedestrian ROW there is no need for giant lights and bells, with an enormous car sized gate arm.  Something pedestrian sized would function the same (or even better as the lights would be at eye level) and look far better IMO.
Reply
(10-16-2016, 02:11 PM)KevinL Wrote: So here's what I don't get. if this new issue has nothing to do with the grounding of the rebar, why are they removing concrete so far back? Can't they just bring in a cutter and shave off those few errant millimetres?

If it was too close, maybe - though you can't really cut the concrete accurately and keep a smooth surface. And some of the edge may be too far away. They have to cut back to the rebar so the new concrete bonds properly, otherwise it would just fall off. The tolerance is 1400 +5/-0 mm from track CL to platform edge, which is very tight for "bridge building" techniques.
Reply
To your knowledge Canard, how susceptible to heaving in northern climates are these tolerances.
Reply


Since the embedded track slab and platform are touching/one body, once it's together I don't imagine there will be any issue. The nominal gap will be 75 mm between the platform edge and the wear strip on the train, so even though they're doing all this rework it's not like a train would have crashed or scraped on its way in - they weren't out that much.
Reply
(10-16-2016, 08:50 AM)Canard Wrote: That 12 km/h sign is going to drive my OCD nuts every time I pass by it.  It's because of the curves (C12-3 and C12-4) immediately prior to it, but still... could we not have rounded this up or down to a nice nominal 5 km/h increment? Smile

That 12 km/h limit is quite an interesting quirk!

What's more concerning to me though is the 35 km/h signs past that and then the 30 km/h sign in the background. I suppose those limits are there to take into account the curve in the road and the resulting track geometry, but that seems very slow. The rest of the traffic along that stretch of King will be going 50 km/h (or at least that was the limit pre-construction, haven't driven there since then so don't know if it's changed), but the LRVs will be plodding along 15-20 km/h slower. How will we encourage people to leave their cars at home and try out our new system when it will appear so much quicker to drive? I realize that in the grand scheme of a journey a 15-20 km/h difference isn't that huge, but perceptions are such an important part of encouraging transit use.

The 25 km/h stretch along Charles between Manulife and Victoria is another one that seems unreasonably slow.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 14 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links