Waterloo Region Connected
ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Printable Version

+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit (/showthread.php?tid=14)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 02-19-2018

(02-19-2018, 11:09 AM)Canard Wrote: Trailing-point half-crossovers like ours are inherently safer - a mis-thrown switch doesn't have the possibility of leading to a head-on collision between vehicles, like leading-point half-crossovers do.

There's no need to have full-full crossovers, either, unless you want to reverse-run for a short section of a route due to platform or track maintenance in a short section and have a pinch (not an issue when your headways are as big as ours, but that's another discussion...).  Our system was never designed with that capability in mind (otherwise there would be full crossovers at much more frequent intervals).

The trailing-point setup we have will be just fine for ion.  Simple, cheap, and effective - the motto of the entire system, really, and an excellent model for others to follow.

Indeed, and lately I’ve been wondering why (almost) all the TTC crossovers are double — I know some used to be terminal locations, but there are several that have always been nothing more than intermediate short turn locations and it’s not clear to me why they would ever use the facing-point half of the double crossover.

I was raising the issue in the context of somebody pointing out that each track could be used in either direction and therefore one should look both ways before crossing. Of course they are correct as a matter of prudent behaviour, but I’m wondering how often our trains will actually run in the opposite direction, given that the crossovers are not designed to make opposite-direction running convenient (except on the Spur Line of course).

Incidentally, I don’t understand why we have double crossovers and dual platforms at the terminal stations. It seems like just having the two tracks join into a single track just under one half of a minimal headway’s travel time from the end would work fine. One switch instead of four, no diamond, and a single buffer. Of course space should be left to extend the double track to the end of the line to allow for future extension.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - KevinL - 02-19-2018

(02-19-2018, 01:37 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: The document I referenced in the winter walking thread also defines, among other things, non-compliant track geometry and spells out the fines for non-compliance for track geometry ($20,000 per non-compliance event).

Well, this is one good explanation for the recent track corrections.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Pheidippides - 02-19-2018

(02-19-2018, 02:50 PM)KevinL Wrote:
(02-19-2018, 01:37 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: The document I referenced in the winter walking thread also defines, among other things, non-compliant track geometry and spells out the fines for non-compliance for track geometry ($20,000 per non-compliance event).

Well, this is one good explanation for the recent track corrections.

Doesn't explain why they weren't found and fixed earlier though. GrandLinq has been lucky the LRVs have been so late to have this much slack in their schedule.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 02-19-2018

They don’t though. They’re now holding up LRV delivery!

(02-19-2018, 02:37 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: given that the crossovers are not designed to make opposite-direction running convenient (except on the Spur Line of course).

ijmorlan: the Spur half-crossovers are the exact same trailing point configuration as the two urban ones. There is no added convenience.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - timc - 02-19-2018

Idle speculation time: does having two tracks at the terminal ends give more flexibility in scheduling? I'm trying to think of a scenario in my head, but it isn't working.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Canard - 02-19-2018

Yes, it does - it allows a train to come in on Platform 1, and sit for a little bit longer (gives that operator a moment to take a washroom break, etc.). Next train comes in and uses Platform 2, and does the same thing. Now the first train that came in on Platform 1 can leave. It doubles the time that a particular LRV can wait at the end. If it's lunch time for that operator, it might sit there for a couple of cycles. etc...

(basically, exactly what you said - it affords flexibility.)

One end of G:link was done as a single track but it's actually double tracks and they extended a "temporary-ish" platform over the second tracks. It has a single half crossover IIRC. As many of the same system partners built our line I'm assuming they decided it seemed like a good idea on paper to do that but in reality the extra flexibility to have two terminus tracks would be nice to have, and added it into our design.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 02-19-2018

(02-19-2018, 04:11 PM)Canard Wrote: They don’t though. They’re now holding up LRV delivery!

(02-19-2018, 02:37 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: given that the crossovers are not designed to make opposite-direction running convenient (except on the Spur Line of course).

ijmorlan: the Spur half-crossovers are the exact same trailing point configuration as the two urban ones. There is no added convenience.

Not the one just south of Northfield. I mean immediately south of the platform. And the reason for it is that single-track operation is planned late at night. So by “on the Spur Line” I mean that the single-track operation will be on the Spur Line. Southbound traffic will use the facing-point crossover to get onto the northbound track, and stay there until near Erb and Caroline, where the “wrong way” traffic returns to the southbound track the normal trailing-point crossover.

You know this, but for the benefit of anybody who sees the track configuration near Erb and Caroline and wonders, there is a “facing-point” crossover also, but I understand it is only for the freight train and only has temporary overhead wire installed for testing.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - timc - 02-19-2018

(02-19-2018, 08:26 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Not the one just south of Northfield. I mean immediately south of the platform. And the reason for it is that single-track operation is planned late at night.

Why will there be single track operation on the spur line? The freight usage will be outside of ion service hours, right?

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 02-19-2018

(02-19-2018, 05:45 PM)Canard Wrote: Yes, it does - it allows a train to come in on Platform 1, and sit for a little bit longer (gives that operator a moment to take a washroom break, etc.).  Next train comes in and uses Platform 2, and does the same thing.  Now the first train that came in on Platform 1 can leave.  It doubles the time that a particular LRV can wait at the end.  If it's lunch time for that operator, it might sit there for a couple of cycles.  etc...  

(basically, exactly what you said - it affords flexibility.)

One end of G:link was done as a single track but it's actually double tracks and they extended a "temporary-ish" platform over the second tracks.  It has a single half crossover IIRC.  As many of the same system partners built our line I'm assuming they decided it seemed like a good idea on paper to do that but in reality the extra flexibility to have two terminus tracks would be nice to have, and added it into our design.

I would say that if two LRVs are regularly present at the end of the line, just get rid of one of them. Even if the operators need a substantial layover, the vehicles don’t. There is no reason to keep operators attached to their vehicles. This is especially so at the headways we are planning — with never less than 7 minutes between trips, there should not be any terminal congestion at all. Having said that, having a place to stash a vehicle out of the way isn’t a bad idea. But then again, that’s also true in places not at the ends of the line, and we don’t have any storage tracks at all (other than at the OMSF).

I’ll be interested to see how the tracks actually get used at the ends of the line, as potentially evidenced by rust and wear patterns, once the system has been open for a time.

An in-between terminal solution is used at Santee Town Center on the San Diego Trolley. The two tracks reduce down to one after the 2nd-last station, and continue to the last station, where they split into two tracks serving two platforms. This gives almost all the benefits of the double crossover and extra platform track. The only limitation is that you can’t have a train arriving and leaving simultaneously. But at our headways that is never necessary anyway so it’s not a real limitation. If I recall correctly the second platform’s rails are fairly rusty but it’s been a while since I was there so I might be wrong or things might have changed.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 02-19-2018

(02-19-2018, 08:31 PM)timc Wrote:
(02-19-2018, 08:26 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Not the one just south of Northfield. I mean immediately south of the platform. And the reason for it is that single-track operation is planned late at night.

Why will there be single track operation on the spur line? The freight usage will be outside of ion service hours, right?

The last I heard, which admittedly is some time ago so things may have changed, the rules were to be one northbound freight between 23:00 and 01:00. During this time LRT would operate using only the northbound track. From 01:00 to 05:00 no LRT traffic and freight can run as much as they want (which in practice means one southbound trip during that time).

During the period of concurrent operation, the shared trackage between northbound LRT and freight consists of the track from the switch at Waterloo Town Square to the freight crossover by the Perimeter Institute, maybe about 300m. For southbound LRT the shared trackage exists from the freight crossover to the LRT crossover, maybe 75m.

I’ve actually been a bit surprised to see freight still going north around 21:00. LRT isn’t in operation yet of course but I had been expecting the freight to start operating within the LRT restrictions by now.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - KevinL - 02-19-2018

(02-19-2018, 08:31 PM)timc Wrote:
(02-19-2018, 08:26 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Not the one just south of Northfield. I mean immediately south of the platform. And the reason for it is that single-track operation is planned late at night.

Why will there be single track operation on the spur line? The freight usage will be outside of ion service hours, right?

Not under the current service model, but I've heard this is a possible way to have 24-hour service on the line, if the Region ever wants to go ahead with that.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Pheidippides - 02-19-2018

The project agreement actually answers a couple of questions that have come up today:

Normal Operations
A. The normal operations for the LRT lines will be a right-hand-running trains operating between the terminal stations at Fairview Mall and Conestoga Mall. Each train will stop at each LRT Stop on its route. When the trains are within Semi Exclusive Roadway Right of Way, reverse running is not permitted under normal operations. When the trains are within Semi Exclusive LRT Right of Way and under ATP reverse running is possible within the limits of Project Co design for Train Control Systems and procedures established for reverse running.
B. The normal operations for the LRT shall include the incorporation of one northbound movement of freight railroad service during evening off peak LRT service hours.


Contingent Operations
A. Project Co shall design the LRT System for contingent operations to address conditions that may result from failure management and maintenance-related operations. Reverse running within Semi Exclusive Roadway Right of Way may be necessary to remove failed trains or to use the turnback crossovers located near the Pine Street and Cedar Street stations as part of revenue service contingent operations. The design of the traffic control signals shall assist in reverse running at these designated turnback locations.
B. The continent operations for the LRT shall include the incorporation of one southbound movement of freight railroad service during off peak LRT service morning hours.


Central Control Facility (CCF)
(i) System Operating Criteria and normal hours of operations for the System shall be as set forth in the Project Agreement. Refer to the Baseline Service Plans found in Schedule 15-3, Appendix D for train schedules. Due to railroad operations on the Waterloo Spur, Project Co shall not operate revenue service LRT trains on the track section occupied by freight railroad trains after 1:00 am and before 5:00 am on weekdays. For greater clarity, Project Co may operate test or maintenance trains (for snow and ice clearing) between 1:00 AM and 5:00 PM provided there is no freight trains occupying the tracks. Project Co shall single track or control train movements on up to four designated week days that permit this freight railroad movement. 

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - timc - 02-19-2018

Well, I learned something today. Thanks!

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 02-20-2018

(02-19-2018, 10:52 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: The project agreement actually answers a couple of questions that have come up today:

[....]

Thanks, that’s very helpful. So it sounds like in the specific location we were discussing the only likely reverse running would be a “tow” vehicle running backwards to reach a dead vehicle in order to couple up and drag it back to the OMSF.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 02-20-2018

(02-19-2018, 01:37 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: It also says that after the simulated service work during testing, "Project Co shall provide an augmented Baseline Service Plan which includes the arrival times for each LRT Stop along the Route." and that the, "Plan will include a general layover time of 4 minutes and not less than 3 minutes,"
I'm sorry, what? So, of the journey from Conestoga Mall to Fairview Park Mall, at least 48 minutes, possibly 1h04 will be dwell time, for just one direction? I know loading doesn't occur instantaneously, but surely I must be misunderstanding that the train needs to spend at least 3 minutes at each stop.