News   Apr 23, 2024
News Roundup for April 23, 2024
 267     0 
News   Apr 23, 2024
Shimmy
 469     0 
News   Apr 22, 2024
Ferris + Associates Merges with NAK Design Strategies, Reshaping the GTA Landscape
 1.3K     0 

TTC: Other Items (catch all)

nfitz said:
Like they are supposed to do. It's unusual for a 504 driver to open the rear doors. On occasions when I've complained to the driver, because I was at the rear door, they either look at you funny, or tell you they are a bus, not a streetcar.

Are you observing that? The only time I really see it consistently, is when people start entering the rear, before the door has had a time to close.
Click to expand...
That's TTC policy now they did that on St Clair when it was replaced by buses. The 504 extras may be operating by different riles as they are extras and not replacements.
 
I wonder if Toronto emergency serves would consed to allowing them to have a bare track bed from the last cross street/ driveway before the tunnel entrance poel would probably see of this is a railroad I shouldn't be on this. Alos Waterfront toronto should pave the small roadway beside the harbour castle so poel will know that it's a road and not a part of the sidewalk. It looks very confusing if you don't know what it is.
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
That's TTC policy now they did that on St Clair when it was replaced by buses. The 504 extras may be operating by different riles as they are extras and not replacements.
Click to expand...

The rules are ALL buses operating signed as 5XX streetcar routes, whether as extras or replacements, are to do all-door boarding. This has been the rule since January 1 2016 since all-door boarding was implemented for all streetcars. However, as other posters and many people tweeting to @ttchelps have noted, it doesn't matter what the policy is because the majority of the bus drivers don't know/care and refuse to follow the policy. It's nice if a few of the St Clair buses did it, but the evidence has shown that to this day the majority of their buses on streetcar routes simply don't do it. It could always change this time, but somehow I'm skeptical as the TTC regularly declines to acknowledge it as a meaningful problem.
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
I wonder if Toronto emergency serves would consed to allowing them to have a bare track bed from the last cross street/ driveway before the tunnel entrance poel would probably see of this is a railroad I shouldn't be on this. Alos Waterfront toronto should pave the small roadway beside the harbour castle so poel will know that it's a road and not a part of the sidewalk. It looks very confusing if you don't know what it is.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I've been saying for years. It makes such eminent sense!
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
That's probably why it hasn't been done it would make too much sense. That and waterfront Toronto has its head up it's ass and can't see the mess they made of the street.
Click to expand...
Not true and need to blame the EMS and Fire Department for this mess. If grass was place as plan, then drivers would know they aren't allow there, but you will get a few clueless drivers. Having a huge fine for driving on this ROW would do some rethinking by drivers.

TTC should have done more to tell drivers you are not allow at the portal than they have to date. This even goes back before the road was rebuilt.
 
micheal_can said:
I could see it freezing up in the winter.
Click to expand...

Guess it never freezes or gets colder in Ukraine than in Toronto... not!

average-temperature-ukraine-kiev.png
 
From the Overhaul of 30 Canadian Light Rail Vehicles (CLRV) and Maintaining non-Overhauled Streetcars in a State of Good Repair report, see link:

1. Overhaul of thirty (30) Canadian Light Rail Vehicles as a Capital Project. The overhaul scope includes a major truck overhaul (wheel replacement, bearings, traction motor, gearbox, track brake) and roof repair for corrosion damage and leak;

2. Refurbishment of critical mechanical, pneumatic and electrical components to maintain the non-overhauled CLRVs in a state of good repair (compressor, air dryer, air valves, sander, contactors etc.); and,

3. Refurbishment of critical mechanical, pneumatic and electrical components to maintain the non-overhauled ALRVs in a state of good repair (similar to that performed on the non-overhauled CLRVs).
​
I have a question about the overhead. Will they continue to be using trolleys, or will they replace them with pantographs, at certain point?

streetcar-4504-09.jpg


Then there is the question if the historical streetcars (PCC and Peter Witts) will remain with trolleys, or will the change over to pantographs as well?
 
W. K. Lis said:
I have a question about the overhead. Will they continue to be using trolleys, or will they replace them with pantographs, at certain point?
Click to expand...
One would presume, although not ideal, that the new catenary going up is backward compatible to trolley pole. And on the ALRVs....the obvious has eluded me all this time. I had no idea that they came with panto, or did, as IIRC, there's air-conditioning units in those spots now.

Googling on this took me to the site the pic comes from:
[...]
The Prototype Arrives
Car 4900, as originally built, featured a pantograph instead of a trolley pole, hand controls instead of foot controls, Brown Boveri propulsion components, WABCO brakes, was gauged at standard rather than TTC gauge (4 feet, 10 and 7/8 inches), and tested an electronic rollsign. For operation on the TTC, the vehicle had to be regauged (the TTC furnished replacement trucks) and the pantograph was replaced by a trolley pole. The hand controls remained, and the TTC decided to test the effectiveness of the electronic rollsign (although electronic rollsigns are the norm now for TTC buses, the TTC has never replaced the streetcar ‘linens’, likely because the sign cavity is too small for an effective electronic sign). Revenue service proved effective, and the TTC agreed to purchase 52 modified ALRVs at $1.369 million per vehicle, with an option for 11 more, should they be needed on the proposed Harbourfront and Spadina LRT lines.

After its successful testing testing, ALRV 4900 was stored at St. Clair Carhouse, venturing out only occasionally for demonstration trips (for transit visitors and railfans). The car was loaded onto a flatbed trailer on March 7, 1987 and removed from TTC property the next day. Returned to the UTDC’s Kingston test facility, the car was used as a test and tow car for the TTC ALRV contract which produced ALRVs 4200-4251. On March 24, 1988, while it was parked at the end of the UTDC test track in total darkness it was rear ended, at about 13mph, by TTC ALRV 4211, which had suffered an electric brake failure during a high-speed test run for ‘electric-brake-only’ evaluation. In 1997 car 4900 was sold for scrap to, and removed by, Kimco Refuse Systems of Kingston, Ontario.
[...]
Click to expand...
http://transit.toronto.on.ca/streetcar/4504.shtml

Ouch! Since thirty of these were refurbished, one has to wonder how much more life is left in them? That's a pretty major overhaul...and one also wonders if standard gauge bogies can be re-installed, or is it just not worth it? If it is worth it, and if the couplers are still extant off the CLRVs and in storage, can these be made into trains as originally envisaged, and one of the options would be to sell them on? With TTC gauge bogies, the market is virtually non-existant.

Many thanks for that link Lis!

Edit to Add: Following Lis' link back to Munro, I read this:
Richard L | August 9, 2012 at 3:12 pm

Thanks for the Boston CLRV photos.

Since the TTC uses 1495 mm gauge while Boston uses standard 1435 mm gauge, were there separate bogies for TTC versus standard gauge, or was each set of bogies easily regauged?

Steve: They were regauged, and when a truck is designed for this sort of thing, it’s easily done. It would have made no sense for UDTC to build a truck that could only be used on Toronto when the rest of the potential market was standard gauge systems.

The same question would apply to CLRVs 4000-4005 when they were being tested on the standard gauge Chemin de fer Orbe-Chavornay in Switzerland. By the way, Flickr-member “Trams aux fils” has 2 pictures of CLRV 4004 at the Gare d’Orbe in 1977 here and here.
[...]
Steve: Given that the MBTA already had the Boeing fleet (although it was giving a lot of problems), and they were really in the market for artics, I don’t think the CLRVs quite fit the bill. There is an interesting thread on this topic at railroad.net.
[...]
Click to expand...
https://stevemunro.ca/2012/08/09/clrvs-visit-boston/#comment-30081

Trump has just gutted the transit funding schemes for US cities...those renovated ALRVs might just be worth something to Boston and/or other cities.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top