News   Dec 19, 2025
 691     0 
News   Dec 19, 2025
 551     0 
News   Dec 19, 2025
 790     0 

TTC: Streetcar Network

That video is very interesting, I think that's the first time I've ever seen images or video of CLRV's on Toronto tracks running in multiple-unit operation. [...]
Very cool indeed!! I'd never seen this before:

5E7AA049-CED3-4419-AC32-B26B02955360.png
CFE63926-4F4F-43AB-9448-BAA8BBCC419E.png
~5:50

75C9B84E-2573-41C5-A757-E8C8BD2671E6.png
~8:20

---

Just thinking about the design of the CLRVs, it seems like they would've been well suited for a third set of doors at the rear, like Tatras.

Was this ever contemplated?
 
The issue is that you would need someone in the second car to check fares so it defeats the purpose of running two at a time.

They did this in Budapest for many years. They would have fare inspectors hope on at random locations to check that people paid.

Nobody knew where they would get on and so everyone paid. They also did not care if you were homeless and would toss you on your ass if not paying a fare.
 
^ FFS, I was talking about the possibility of having a rear door, like the Flexities have, Tatras have, and certain PCCs in the States had. I remember PCCs with three sets of fold-out doors at the rear (Chicago/Boston?)

The issue is that you would need someone in the second car to check fares so it defeats the purpose of running two at a time.
Yeah, we didn't used to have fare inspection on streetcars, certainly not it the 1980s when this was shot.

If you want to go that route, someone on this forum once said the ticket checkers sitting in the trailing car on Boston's Green Line are about the unhappiest people around.

Then there's the Stockholm Tvärbanan where the conductor at stations would run between the double sets.

Not to mention this is before the CLRVs were castrated by having their couplers removed, and having skirts installed.

They did this in Budapest for many years. They would have fare inspectors hope on at random locations to check that people paid.

Nobody knew where they would get on and so everyone paid. They also did not care if you were homeless and would toss you on your ass if not paying a fare.
I don't want to get into what plainclothes fare inspectors do for the Helsinki tram network.
 
Last edited:
^ FFS, I was talking about the possibility of having a rear door, like the Flexities have, Tatras have, and certain PCCs in the States had. I remember PCCs with three sets of fold-out doors at the rear (Chicago/Boston?)


Yeah, we didn't used to have fare inspection on streetcars, certainly not it the 1980s when this was shot.

If you want to go that route, someone on this forum once said the ticket checkers sitting in the trailing car on Boston's Green Line are about the unhappiest people around.

Then there's the Stockholm Tvärbanan where the conductor at stations would run between the double sets.

Not to mention this is before the CLRVs were castrated by having their couplers removed, and having skirts installed.


I don't want to get into what plainclothes fare inspectors do for the Helsinki tram network.
In reply, here's an image of old PCC streetcar used in Chicago.
1765914495220.png
 
The issue is that you would need someone in the second car to check fares so it defeats the purpose of running two at a time.
No, the purpose of running the two cars coupled was so that you could get two cars worth of passengers through a single green light. And in that context, they worked quite well.

Dan
 
Very cool indeed!! I'd never seen this before:

View attachment 703203
View attachment 703204
~5:50

View attachment 703205
~8:20

---

Just thinking about the design of the CLRVs, it seems like they would've been well suited for a third set of doors at the rear, like Tatras.

Was this ever contemplated?
The CLRVs were supposed to be prototype light rail vehicles for the planned Scarborough Rapid Transit Line (and possible Etobicoke Rapid Transit Line). Then the provincial government got involved and suggested something completely different.

See https://transittoronto.ca/subway/5107.shtml

1765916756433.png


1765916797350.png


The Scarborough Town Centre opened to the public on May 2, 1973. The Borough of Scarborough hoped that the shopping mall and the civic buildings beside it would become the core of the borough's new downtown. Although Scarborough was eager to link their downtown to rapid transit, Metro Council had voted only to extend the eastern terminus of the BLOOR-DANFORTH subway from Warden Station to near the Kennedy/Eglinton intersection, miles from the Town Centre site. The Scarborough rapid transit line proposal was revised to close the gap, again using streetcars on private right-of-way. With Scarborough developing the lands on and around the old Canadian Northern Railway line into residential housing, the Metropolitan Toronto Transit Plan review, under advice from advocates and experts like Bob Wightman and Steve Munro, recommended that streetcars operate out of Kennedy Station and turn north, following Canadian National's Uxbridge Subdivision to Ellesmere Road, and then operating east either at grade along the middle of Ellesmere or along an elevated guideway, to the town centre.

At the time, TTC and Metro planners declared that the subway extensions to Kennedy and Kipling stations would be the last to be built for some time, citing the rising costs of subway construction (the 1.6-mile, single-station extension from Warden to Kennedy was planned to cost at least $41 million in late 1970s dollars) and the fact that the densest areas which were economical for subways to serve were now largely served by subways.

The Scarborough LRT line, as proposed in 1975, was seen as just the first phase and a trunk of a new rapid transit tree that would branch out into northeastern Scarborough, providing inexpensive transit to newly developing neighbourhoods, while giving them a fast single-seat ride to the subway. The stations did not have to be as large as subway stations, and small stations were planned for the line halfway between Lawrence and Eglinton and over Brimley Road. There were serious plans to extend the Scarborough LRT line as far as the intersection of Finch and Morningside. There were long-term proposals to take the line to the Toronto Zoo, and perhaps even into Pickering. The first phase of the 13.2-kilometre line, from Kennedy to Scarborough Centre, would cost just $85 million -- roughly 40% of the cost of a full-fledged subway at the time. The line would make use of the planned new CLRV streetcars - of the 196 contracted to be built, 22 were to be used on the Scarborough Line, operating in trains of up to three cars.

Meanwhile, the provincial plan to build a maglev demonstration line at the Canadian National Exhibition ran into trouble. There were issues over the fact that Krauss-Maffei's "Transrapid" system had been conceived as an inter-city high-speed express train and was impractical for inner-city service featuring closely-spaced stations. The West German government also decided to consolidate its options for maglev technology to other companies and cut back its support for Krauss-Maffei's initiative. This forced Krauss-Maffei to back out of its deal with the Ontario government. Work on the GO-URBAN test line was abandoned, having felled some trees and built foundations for a few support columns that would never rise.

With the GO-URBAN ICTS project dead, the Davis government shifted tactics. In June 1975, it rebranded the Ontario Transportation Development Corporation into the Urban Transportation Development Corporation (UTDC) to make it less insular. It took on the task of designing and building the next generation of Toronto's streetcars - the CLRVs - to keep the crown corporation active and producing while it continued to work on the Intermediate Capacity gap issue. UTDC soon announced it had established a consortium to develop the maglev technology. Working with SPAR Aerospace, Standard Elektrik Lorenz, Dofasco, Alcan and Canadair, it created a design that used linear induction technology to pull computer-controlled railcars operating with steel wheels on steel rail. Work began on a prototype vehicle that was soon moving on a test track at UTDC's Millhaven plant.
 
Why didn't they continue the two car operation?
That's why they ordered the 52 (not counting the prototype) ALRVs. Instead of having two employees on a pair of coupled streetcars, they had one employee. It was cheaper to operate. An ALRV was equivalent to 1 ½ CLRVs.

Of course, the Flexity Outlook is equivalent to 2 CLRVs.
 
They did this in Budapest for many years. They would have fare inspectors hope on at random locations to check that people paid. Nobody knew where they would get on and so everyone paid. They also did not care if you were homeless and would toss you on your ass if not paying a fare.
This would be one of the most profound changes to the TTC streetcar network, where you know that all the passengers around you paid their fare. Everyone pays, with a near assurance that if you don't you'll be caught and tossed, and no one GAF who you are or your personal circumstances. Pay or get off. Start with blanket enforcement in the box of Parliament, College, Bathurst and Queen's Quay. You fish where the fish are, and this is prime scofflaw territory.
 
Last edited:
Why didn't they continue the two car operation?
Because ridership was dropping, and so they didn't need to continue to run the equipment like that. They could save money on (not having to) maintaining them, for instance.

So........no.

MU operation on Queen ended in 1977. Despite that, the couplers weren't actually removed until 1989 or so.

The skirts were only added in 1984, after a couple of incidents. But the couplers were still there, just in behind the skirt.

Dan
 

Back
Top