Metrolinx: Bombardier Flexity Freedom & Alstom Citadis Spirit LRVs

[EastYorkTTCFan]

I remember reading how the then NEW CLRV streetcars were put into service on the LONG BRANCH (507) until the first snowfall. They salted the roads which resulted in having the salt water shorting out the CLRVs. They had to take all of them out service for repairs and alterations.

One reason for "winter testing" on the new streetcars and light rail vehicles.

That was because the pads in the steps at the rear door shorted out. Soon after they tested it in brine instead of water after fixing it as they realized it was because of salt water coming off of peoples boots and shoes.

 

[Steve X]

Actually Metrolinx will need to have it's own prototype as well unless they are somehow piggy backing on the Ottawa order and not making any changes to the vehicle themselves.

I suspect it would be more likely be a pilot vehicle than a prototype for them to test on.... what? They don't have tracks, never mind. If they make changes to the trucks, braking system, frame and exterior, they'll have to send it in for a lot more tests like climate testing (TTC sent 4400 to Ottawa), dynamic testing and etc. It would add months to the delivery schedule. Doesn't ML want their LRVs sooner?

On top of that, they still have to install teh BBD CityFLO 650 ATO equipment and test that too. Of course Ottawa's Conferation line is completely grade separated and will employ ATO by the Thales SelTrac system not Alstom.
https://www.thalesgroup.com/sites/default/files/asset/document/Ottawa LRT PR draft_190213_Final.pdf

 

[smallspy]

It seems far more likely to me that Citadis will run on non Crosstown lines, but it seems madness to me to build to tolerances other manufacturers of *30m* cars can't meet. Having lifting jacks customized to a specific tram seems like vendor lock in to me. Ontario light rail lines are built to "standard" voltages, vehicle widths and rail gauges and *should* have enough tolerance to be able to shop around as needed.

Alstom and Siemens both build a 30m car. They'll even build them to the same width as the Flexity Freedoms. There's no vendor lock.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[dowlingm]

Alstom and Siemens both build a 30m car. They'll even build them to the same width as the Flexity Freedoms. There's no vendor lock.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

I was responding to posts upthread which seemed to assert otherwise.

 

[smallspy]

I was responding to posts upthread which seemed to assert otherwise.

Then this goes back to my posts from the weekend about getting too focused on the cars as they are getting built. These are by no means the only versions of either one available.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[steveintoronto]

Alstom and Siemens both build a 30m car. They'll even build them to the same width as the Flexity Freedoms. There's no vendor lock.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

That does add a factor to adding in modules, no matter who the manufacturer is, and surprisingly, there's been little mention of the added module option so far. Length and storage/service bays as built are a limitation, but since that is coming up for re-assessment, one wonders if it isn't an apt time to consider capacity for even longer trains in the future, and/or, bays long enough for two shorter trains, or one longer one in the future? The Citadis family can be stretched to at least seven modules. There's advantage in operating and cost efficiency as well as increased passenger load per train length.

One can only hope for Metrolinx thinking 'forward compatibility' on this. Ditto for some sets being spec'd dual voltage to be operable (regs and control systems being compatible) on RER lines when lower volumes of all-day operation present themselves.

Edit to Add: The subject of 'how many modules' has come up prior in this string, but only in relationship to the then presumed oligarchy of BBD trams.

http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...edom-alstom-citadis-spirit-lrvs.18819/page-28

The topic is being forced again with the longer Alstom sets, and the platform length/train length debate has vexed many of Toronto's prior rail vehicle projects.

Rule of thumb in most other jurisdictions now, especially bored tunnel ones, is *always* overbuild length allowances, even if not finished. A few pennies extra now saves hundreds of dollars later.

 

[steveintoronto]

Then this goes back to my posts from the weekend about getting too focused on the cars as they are getting built. These are by no means the only versions of either one available.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Some models are even offered with toilets! There's an assumption that the 'book' Spirit version is the one coming. That's really short-sighted. Alstom don't mind in the least what you order them with, as long as they can meet the "25% Cdn content" requirement.

It's like ordering a burger, you can get whatever fixings you like, some for free, some extra.

The range of options is astounding...

 

[drum118]

When I first dealt with Alstom back in 2005, I was told by the Director of Canada that their cars are design to allow the removal of a section or add sections based on the need of the system who bought the cars in the first place. This allow the X system to custom cars to match their service needs as require. An extra power section would be needed after X length.

I do agree that Metrolinx has fail to look at longer platforms to meet future needs since 3 cars weren't going to cut it over time. This also effect the yard.

 

[dowlingm]

When I first dealt with Alstom back in 2005, I was told by the Director of Canada that their cars are design to allow the removal of a section or add sections based on the need of the system who bought the cars in the first place. This allow the X system to custom cars to match their service needs as require.

Dublin upgraded their 30m units to 40m because they underestimated demand.

 

[steveintoronto]

An extra power section would be needed after X length.

Excellent info! I suspected as much, but could never find that in the promo material. Also of note, especially with the grades and icing conditions in Toronto, is the number of driven wheels. I've lost track (bad pun, unintended) of which manufacturer has the most wheels driven per loading and the consequent adhesive and tractive effort rendered, but it is an important point.

I do agree that Metrolinx has fail to look at longer platforms to meet future needs since 3 cars weren't going to cut it over time. This also effect the yard

TTC is doing it again with with the 'Relief Line', albeit it's more than just platform length and yard considerations. Frankly, I think they should overbuild almost every aspect of running infrastructure, including making it LRV running with forward compatible RER, and long stations with no platforms higher than a few inches. And full bore to allow RER DD loading gauge. The added costs initially are small for oversizing, the gain later is massive. Initially, running it LRT will make it much cheaper than orthodox subway. Later, when increased demand and connections to RER are made, the line can be connected to the regional network, with no interchange.

Dublin upgraded their 30m units to 40m because they underestimated demand.

Not only does it add capacity, it increases the efficiency (if the module has driving wheels) since the passenger space to train length ratio also increases due to not having a pair of cabs wasted by coupling two shorter trains together.

GREEN LINE PLATFORMS ARE GETTING LONGER

Starting in early Dec 2016 some of the platforms on the Luas Green Line are being lengthened to 54m.

Currently there are 66 trams in the Luas fleet; 40 x 40m trams and 26 x 43m trams. To serve future demand 7 new 54m Luas trams have been ordered.

The platforms on the new Luas Cross City extension, Dawson – Broombridge, are long enough to accommodate the new longer trams and as part of these works St. Stephen’s Green platforms have been lengthened. The platforms on the extension of the Luas Green Line from Sandyford to Brides Glen opened in Oct 2010 were built long enough to accommodate longer trams. However platforms at 11 of the original Luas Green Line stops, Harcourt – Stillorgan are currently not long enough for the new trams.

Over the next year platforms at 11 Green Line stops, from Harcourt – Stillorgan, will be extended from their current 40m to 53m to comfortably accommodate the new longer trams.[...]

https://www.luas.ie/greenline-platform-works/

Interestingly, Googling to get that info, I tripped across a number of 'warning of damnation and traffic chaos' articles. The car crowd is choking on its own exhaust...

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

Also of note, especially with the grades and icing conditions in Toronto, is the number of driven wheels.

The Crosstown is being built with minimal gardes. The TTC did order the Flex to have all trucks powered due to the stepper garde on the legacy system though mainly the hill between Bathurst and St. Clair but there are a few steep grades that it probably helps out on as well in regular service most likely the one into Queens Quay as it wasn't constructed to lessen the slope like Spadina was when it was built.

 

[robmausser]

When I first dealt with Alstom back in 2005, I was told by the Director of Canada that their cars are design to allow the removal of a section or add sections based on the need of the system who bought the cars in the first place. This allow the X system to custom cars to match their service needs as require. An extra power section would be needed after X length.

I do agree that Metrolinx has fail to look at longer platforms to meet future needs since 3 cars weren't going to cut it over time. This also effect the yard.

I do recall reading that the station boxes for the Crosstown can accommodate 4 car (bombardier 30m) trains if modifications are made. As in the station boxes are long enough, they just currently have 3 car length platforms with walled off sections that can be used for storage etc.

They can tear down these walled areas and lengthen the platforms in the future if the demand warrants it.

 

[cplchanb]

I do recall reading that the station boxes for the Crosstown can accommodate 4 car (bombardier 30m) trains if modifications are made. As in the station boxes are long enough, they just currently have 3 car length platforms with walled off sections that can be used for storage etc.

They can tear down these walled areas and lengthen the platforms in the future if the demand warrants it.

I wonder if in the future either of these companies can adapt a full length light metro platform to suit Crosstowns low height, sort of a small hybrid low floor tr type of vehicle. That way they can maximize capacity for a 6 car train

 

[Steve X]

I do recall reading that the station boxes for the Crosstown can accommodate 4 car (bombardier 30m) trains if modifications are made. As in the station boxes are long enough, they just currently have 3 car length platforms with walled off sections that can be used for storage etc.

They can tear down these walled areas and lengthen the platforms in the future if the demand warrants it.

The original project specification said begin with 2 cars (~60m) station box that can be extended to 3 cars. Since ML taken over the project, it seems like they said about 100m with the station box being 120m. The 20m are reserved for fan/ventilation and mechanical equipment rooms. There isn't any tear down wall for 4 cars trains.

Theoretically they can excavate another 30m of space in the future similar to how North York Centre got build. It would be difficult to do if they were to mine out 30m from the platform without digging from the ground down. If Eglinton ever reach that much ridership, it might make more sense to build another line. Otherwise it would be another case of the Yonge line where the TTC play down the needs for a Relief line until the recent years.

The Eglinton line is only projected in 2031 for a max ridership of 5,500 ppdph eastbound approaching Cedarvale (Eg West). Other underground parts of the line would only be at 3,000-4,000 ppdph. The LRT with ATO @ 90 sec headways and Alstom Citadis Spirit can theoretically carry up to 24,000 ppdph. 15,000-20,000 ppdph would be more reasonable which is still 3-4 times the expected ridership. The current bus capacity along Eglinton is less than 2,000 ppdph. When the BD line was under construction, the Bloor streetcar was carrying around 9,000 ppdph with over 100 streetcars on the line. (not even King is near this much ridership). Now, it's around 26,000 ppdph after 50 years. With this assumption, Eglinton will never need 4-car trains till 2070s or 2080s.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I do recall reading that the station boxes for the Crosstown can accommodate 4 car (bombardier 30m) trains if modifications are made. As in the station boxes are long enough, they just currently have 3 car length platforms with walled off sections that can be used for storage etc.

They can tear down these walled areas and lengthen the platforms in the future if the demand warrants it.

Unfortunately that doesn't look to be correct

From the EA:
The typical station box accommodates a 90 metres platform with a 40 metres service area at one end and a 20 metre service area at the opposite end resulting in a total station box length of 150 metres. Initially the LRT operation will consist of a 2-car trainset requiring a 60 metres platform. To protect for the ultimate 3-car train set the 90 metres platform would be constructed, but then temporary walls would be installed to create the initial 60 metres long platform. A 2.5 metres wide corridor would bisect the remaining 30 metres reserved portion of the platform leading to an additional secondary entrance. Exhibits 91 and 92 show a typical station configuration. Exhibit 93 shows an example of secondary station entrance.

http://thecrosstown.ca/sites/defaul...3-project-description-sections-3-1-to-3-4.pdf