ION Stage I: what would you do differently?

[ijmorlan]

I would throw out the cycle infra on Northfield and implement the central trail proposed by .... I don't remember who, but basically they proposed a trail between the LRT tracks for the duration of the bridge. It's not ideal, but it's the best idea I have so far for Northfield given the interchange.

That was me!

Although I actually take it as a good sign that in at least one person’s mind it isn’t “ijmorlan’s weird idea” but rather “a cool idea I heard somewhere”. Now if we can just expand that to the larger population of people who aren’t quite as enthusiastic about bicycle infrastructure…

[Bytor]

I would echo people who want better signal integration/priority.

For example, when the trams pull away from the stations, it's shouldn't just be a few feet and then to wait for the lights. The signals should change just as the dwell time is ending and the tram should just pull away into full acceleration for that segment.

[ac3r]

Speed can be improved even now, without changing any of the tracks or stations.

Just like all day GO service, I'll believe it when I'm actually sitting on the train moving faster than car traffic.

[Bytor]

Another thing would be grass on the embedded sections like you find in Europe. A nice looking boulevard of down the roads.

[ac3r]

Another thing would be grass on the embedded sections like you find in Europe. A nice looking boulevard of down the roads.

I'm terribly disappointed they didn't do this. I figure they thought it would be too much work to maintain or that they thought grass would cause wear on the concrete ties...or maybe didn't think of it at all. It would be nice to see this one day but I doubt they'd put the money into it now. It would look great, be beneficial for the environment and ecology, provide better drainage and minimize heat island effects.

[JoeKW]

The incredibly slow turns are really dispiriting to the whole experience

[Bytor]

Speed can be improved even now, without changing any of the tracks or stations.

Just like all day GO service, I'll believe it when I'm actually sitting on the train moving faster than car traffic.

Pick a few straight section between stations and I'll do the calculations for theoretical max speed at a few common rail accelerations, and we can compare that to actual speeds.

[ijmorlan]

I would echo people who want better signal integration/priority.

For example, when the trams pull away from the stations, it's shouldn't just be a few feet and then to wait for the lights. The signals should change just as the dwell time is ending and the tram should just pull away into full acceleration for that segment.

The LRT doesn’t even get the first signal necessarily. I often drive north on King St. and it actually annoys me that I can be waiting at Allen St. for the green light while the LRT is waiting also, having just finished serving the stop. Then my light turns green first. I mean, I’m happy to be getting home a few seconds earlier, but really it makes no sense to give me the light first: the LRT should go first, then me.

Flip side is that at several locations both directions of motor vehicle traffic stop for the LRT even though it only blocks one direction of traffic. This is true at King/Allen, King/railway overpass, and Charles/Benton at least. All of these locations should be upgraded so that a single LRV only stops one direction of motor vehicle traffic. Of course if LRVs come in both directions at the same time then the way it works now is fine.

So improvements in signalling could significantly speed up the LRT while having only a tiny effect on motor vehicles, or maybe even no net effect.

[tomh009]

Speed can be improved even now, without changing any of the tracks or stations.

Just like all day GO service, I'll believe it when I'm actually sitting on the train moving faster than car traffic.

Note that I said it can be improved. And you can take that to the bank. Whether they prioritize the LRT and increase the speeds is something that I can't promise, though.

But I can guarantee to you that it would cost far, far less to implement than 2WADGO.

[Bytor]

Speed can be improved even now, without changing any of the tracks or stations.

Just like all day GO service, I'll believe it when I'm actually sitting on the train moving faster than car traffic.

So I went and measured the steps along the ION LRT where the judged the inter-station path to be "not very bendy" (si scientifique, non?) such that it would not greatly impact maximum theoretical speeds.

The final column is the 0.4m/s² acceleration time rounded up to the next minute and then difference between that and the scheduled time in an attempt "steelman" the current schedule.

Since the scheduled times also include a 1 minute dwell at each station, unless I have made some huge error here there doesn't seem to be a lot of leeway to speed up the trains in the straight-a-ways since the difference is only 1 minute. I probably could have done 0.5m/s² acceleration, but that is awfully high for passenger trains, as some differences are 0, so I would guess those sections are already running that maximum possible speeds.



I used the spreadsheet I had originally made to check possible HSR speeds and times, later used to calculate GO Kitchener times.

[tomh009]

Thanks! Your spreadsheet calculates the difference at five minutes per direction, and without rounding it's about 10 minutes per direction. Of course, this doesn't take traffic lights into account (or assumes that the LRT has priority).

Still, 5-10 minutes improvement per direction is good. Reduce the dwell time to 45 seconds and we could see a 15-minute improvement in the end-to-end time.

Curves ... I don't know how much improvement can be had there. But, based on the current sound of steel-to-steel contact, I do wonder whether the lubricators are working at full efficiency.

[jeffster]

I think it's super easy to be critical of everything wrong with the LRT design, etc., and say "this is what I would have done different.." But, here we go.

1) Trains could go faster, especially along some stretches.
2) Traynor Ave, the lack of crossing, was a huge mistake.
3) Better co-ordination with traffic lights.
4) On the expensive side: They could have put the LRT underground through DTK - Central Station to Charles. But this likely would have killed the project due to costs.
5) The Uptown Waterloo set-up is, weird. But I have no ideas what could have been down.
6) I think they should have spent extra money at each station to offer better protection from weather.

[ijmorlan]

The final column is the 0.4m/s² acceleration time rounded up to the next minute and then difference between that and the scheduled time in an attempt "steelman" the current schedule.

Are you sure that’s an appropriate acceleration for LRT? LRT can accelerate faster than mainline rail; I believe 1m/s² is easily attainable, with the maximum noticeably higher than that.

[ac3r]

You get what you pay for haha. Dollar store rapid transit really.

[panamaniac]

You get what you pay for haha. Dollar store rapid transit really.

Indeed, although “bare bones” might be a better way to describe it.