News   Apr 30, 2024
Void If Removed
 234     0 
News   Apr 29, 2024
Sustainability Month: Alternative Energy Sources Help Drive Sustainability in Building Industry
 1.6K     0 
News   Apr 29, 2024
Hidden Histories to be Revealed at Doors Open Toronto 2024
 1K     1 

1233 Queen East | ?m | 8s

Mapleson said:
The TTC uses a non-standard gauge for it's rails (both LRT and HRT). As such, they can't fix on anything outside Toronto without been retooled, which is more expensive than trucking them.
Click to expand...

That's irrelevant. I see where you're going with this, but the older subway cars were put onto flat train cars (terminology? flatbeds?) and transported. There was a photo on Transit Toronto but I can't find it right now.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
 
new.flyer.408 said:
That's irrelevant. I see where you're going with this, but the older subway cars were put onto flat train cars (terminology? flatbeds?) and transported. There was a photo on Transit Toronto but I can't find it right now.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
If the cars were standard gauge, they could drive down directly, so it's not irrelevant. Going by railcar to Washago or any intermediate destination and then by truck is going to more expensive than trucking the full route, or else why wouldn't they have done it to save costs and increase profits? Loading/unloading time would be the main driver of it.

Here's one of the old trains taken away on a truck: http://spacingtoronto.ca/2007/12/03/funeral-for-a-subway-car/
 
Regardless of gauge, coupler compatibility and so on, there's no way a TTC subway car could be legally pulled on a mainline railway. Transport Canada/FRA regs wouldn't allow something to roll along the tracks that isn't a fully-certified in its own right.
 
Platform 27 said:
Regardless of gauge, coupler compatibility and so on, there's no way a TTC subway car could be legally pulled on a mainline railway. Transport Canada/FRA regs wouldn't allow something to roll along the tracks that isn't a fully-certified in its own right.
Click to expand...
Oh no ... don't post anything like that here. We need speculation, and "I know better than the experts" comments. Not facts!
 
Saw the new subway train in service today at North York Center...BUT IT WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE of the platform...in the end, I still didn't get a chance to ride it...sigh...bummer
 
Mapleson said:
If the cars were standard gauge, they could drive down directly, so it's not irrelevant. Going by railcar to Washago or any intermediate destination and then by truck is going to more expensive than trucking the full route, or else why wouldn't they have done it to save costs and increase profits? Loading/unloading time would be the main driver of it.

Here's one of the old trains taken away on a truck: http://spacingtoronto.ca/2007/12/03/funeral-for-a-subway-car/
Click to expand...

It would have made sense if these were streetcars headed to Hillcrest, which (I believe) still has direct rail access, and hope the new streetcars will be delivered this way. Greenwood lost its rail spur access and the cars are headed to Downsview Yard, which has no direct rail connection. Davisville of course had the connection with the Belt Line, which was used for the G and M series car deliveries from 1953-1963 (though some cars were sent to Hillcrest first, then trucked to Davisville).

I would have liked to see the cars brought by rail, but I guess with the extra modal transfer, truck remains the cheapest way to go.
 
canmark said:
Since the first day (when I took a brief ride), I have not seen (let alone ridden) one of the new Rockets despite riding the subway 5 days week. Where is that thing lurking?

I agree that, since there is now more standing space, there should be more poles or places for people to hang on to. A vertical pole in the middle won't do, as the open concept allows people to walk end to end and the vertical pole in the middle of the train blocks movement. I wonder if they considered a 'double' pole. For example, instead of a single pole suspended from the ceiling in the middle of the train, why not have 2 poles a foot apart? Or where there is a vertical pole attached to the seats, why not have it divide into 2 vertical poles 6 inches apart?
Click to expand...

Do some poles in the middle really getting in the way of people walking through the train? If it's busy enough that the poles are being used I don't think people would be able to get through anyways.

A similar number of poles as the T1 (and a similar layout) could do the trick.
 
noctis said:
Saw the new subway train in service today at North York Center...BUT IT WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE of the platform...in the end, I still didn't get a chance to ride it...sigh...bummer
Click to expand...

I've been on it twice so far - entirely due to blind luck.
 
syn said:
Do some poles in the middle really getting in the way of people walking through the train? If it's busy enough that the poles are being used I don't think people would be able to get through anyways.

A similar number of poles as the T1 (and a similar layout) could do the trick.
Click to expand...
If you are in a wheelchair or have a stoller, it's obvious how it impedes your progress. Other than getting in the way, they get in the view. One of the design concepts was to increase sight lines to reduce feelings of claustrophobia.
 
Rode one from Union to Wilson today. Pretty impressive. Much quieter ride then I expected. The pull downs are pretty squeaky though. And at Wilson the platform is 3 inches below the door.
 
Komiksulo said:
That's the bit I didn't know. I thought there was still a subway yard that had direct rail access.
Click to expand...
All that's missing is the final switch, to connect to the mainline - it seems to have vanished with recent work. I'd think you could still offload there with a crane, if you really wanted to ... but there seems no desire to do this, these days.
 
ShonTron said:
It would have made sense if these were streetcars headed to Hillcrest, which (I believe) still has direct rail access, and hope the new streetcars will be delivered this way. Greenwood lost its rail spur access and the cars are headed to Downsview Yard, which has no direct rail connection. Davisville of course had the connection with the Belt Line, which was used for the G and M series car deliveries from 1953-1963 (though some cars were sent to Hillcrest first, then trucked to Davisville).
Click to expand...

Davisville was the spot where the G- and M-class cars were delivered, and lost its rail connection shortly thereafter. Hillcrest hasn't has rail access since the early 1980s at the latest.

Greenwood lost its connection when CN started the third track construction on the Kingston Sub was started about 5 years ago. In theory the TTC could pay to put it back, but is it really worthwhile?

The new streetcars will be trucked down, likely in sections, to Hillcrest.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
Mapleson said:
If you are in a wheelchair or have a stoller, it's obvious how it impedes your progress. Other than getting in the way, they get in the view. One of the design concepts was to increase sight lines to reduce feelings of claustrophobia.
Click to expand...

If the train is rammed, your progress will be impeded whether the poles are there or not.

Do the trains really feel that much more claustrophobic with some poles downt he middle? This is the first time in my life I've ever heard anyone mention the idea.

I wouldn't mind the lack of centre poles if they made more of an effort to ensure there was something to hold on to (like the T1s). Right now, in a crowded train...there just isn't enough to hold on to.
 
I asked this earlier, but didn't get a response so I'll try asking it again: Is it too late to install more comfortable seating in some of the later TRs to be constructed? Something that is similar to those planned for the new streetcars:

2009-06-08_streetcar02.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top