Posts: 10,832
Threads: 67
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
392
(03-06-2019, 04:58 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: (03-06-2019, 02:45 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Yes, but … in the countryside, where crossings are further apart, eliminating (or grade-separating) a crossing may improve the speed substantially. In a city, if there are three crossings within 500m, if you eliminate the middle one, it doesn't help as the train will have to go slow for the other two anyway.
Adding gates to the remaining uncontrolled crossings might help, too. I don't know enough detail about rail safety, though.
I did ask this already, but I'm still curious, I was under the impression trains were not slowing for crossings at all? What is the speed limit through level crossings for trains, compared with the top speed of GO Trains?
I think we need @Canard or @trainspotter139 to answer this question. My attempts at searching the Internet for answers were not successful.
Posts: 437
Threads: 2
Joined: Jun 2015
Reputation:
59
Pretty sure we're the same as the US, where gated grade crossings can be used through Class 6 — max 177 km/h, which is faster than GO will move within our lifetimes.
Posts: 8,009
Threads: 39
Joined: Jun 2016
Reputation:
215
(03-06-2019, 06:50 PM)kps Wrote: Pretty sure we're the same as the US, where gated grade crossings can be used through Class 6 — max 177 km/h, which is faster than GO will move within our lifetimes.
Thanks for the clarification. Do you know the speeds for with no gates and bells, and with no bells?
Posts: 437
Threads: 2
Joined: Jun 2015
Reputation:
59
(03-06-2019, 07:43 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: (03-06-2019, 06:50 PM)kps Wrote: Pretty sure we're the same as the US, where gated grade crossings can be used through Class 6 — max 177 km/h, which is faster than GO will move within our lifetimes.
Thanks for the clarification. Do you know the speeds for with no gates and bells, and with no bells?
Here's a US reference. It seems they now require gates at all crossings running passenger trains.
The only thing I've found for Canada is this which forbids new level crossings where the railway can exceed 177km/h.
Posts: 581
Threads: 2
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation:
26
Posts: 2,504
Threads: 9
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
74
That article states that each trip had a mere five passengers on average... Yikes.
Posts: 2,004
Threads: 7
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
125
Yet getting the GO Train to Cambridge was Doug Craig's biggest transit priority.
Posts: 4,597
Threads: 16
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
150
Posts: 6,692
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
118
More trains is fine, but "trains will be half an hour quicker" makes me much happier.
Posts: 2,504
Threads: 9
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
74
Same here. We already have two-way all-day Go service. Why people insist that it has to be by train to count is beyond me.
The bus is already good in terms of frequency- hourly service. But it's too slow, at a minimum of two hours. If travel time on at least one of the modes can be cut to 90 minutes, that's a very significant improvement.
Posts: 2,091
Threads: 18
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
60
(06-06-2019, 10:22 AM)MidTowner Wrote: Same here. We already have two-way all-day Go service. Why people insist that it has to be by train to count is beyond me.
The bus is already good in terms of frequency- hourly service. But it's too slow, at a minimum of two hours. If travel time on at least one of the modes can be cut to 90 minutes, that's a very significant improvement.
Weekends would be more important to me than getting a train. Though trains are better than buses in general. The 30 is pretty fast but due to the connection timing/potential traffic it's still slow in general.
Posts: 4,597
Threads: 16
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
150
So some effort has been put into analyzing options for GO trains to Cambridge via Guelph, and where the best location would be for a station. A surprise (to me) front runner has emerged: at the future Pinebush Ion station. It's considered centrally located in Cambridge and would have a good catchment; I guess it's a good idea if only one station is being considered, but for my money I'd go with multiple stations including Hespeler.
It's all in the P&W agenda, starting page 113. https://calendar.regionofwaterloo.ca/Cou...6c0103d9aa
Posts: 609
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation:
79
06-18-2019, 04:04 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-18-2019, 04:07 PM by KevinT.)
I've often wondered what it would take to re-lay the tracks of the Branchton sub, which splits off the CN double track mainline southeast of Cambridge near Lynden and Governors roads* and heads all the way in to the Ainslie street terminal. Very little of it seems to have been developed on, it's still mostly greenfield. It would effectively make Cambridge a new destination on the Lakeshore West line, splitting off from the Hamilton/Niagara service at Burlington bay. Google Maps / back of the napkin research shows Grand River Brewing and a few small residences on Ainslie to be about the only things affected...
* Technically it's the old Brantford bypass that splits off here, with the Branchton sub splitting off that in Harriston
...K
Posts: 10
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
0
If re-building lines is in the picture my hope is that we can reuse the Cambridge to Paris Rail Trail and on to Brantford. Create a DMU service running Guelph - Cambridge - Paris - Brantford - Hamilton with the obvious connections to Kitchener and Lakeshore trains.
Posts: 617
Threads: 7
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation:
20
(06-22-2019, 11:54 PM)Bureaucromancer Wrote: If re-building lines is in the picture my hope is that we can reuse the Cambridge to Paris Rail Trail and on to Brantford. Create a DMU service running Guelph - Cambridge - Paris - Brantford - Hamilton with the obvious connections to Kitchener and Lakeshore trains.
If it's a newly built line and not being shared with a freight company, wouldn't it make more sense to build an electrified line and run EMUs?
|
