Transit City Gauge

[fiendishlibrarian]

"since Metrolinx is looking at forcing the TTC to convert the streetcar system"


Convert it to what? Standard gauge? Allow me to think worst-case here: So I take it then that it will be Metrolinx that will pay for the ripping up of what is fairly new track across the entire city, not to mention the carhouses and Hillcrest? Will Metrolinx and its honchos take the political flak for this? Will it be Metrolinx that addresses the questions of waste and duplication? Will it be Metrolinx that takes the blame and the finger pointing and accusations of short-sightedness and lack of planning? The only precedent I can think of where something like this occurred on such a large scale was after 1922, when the TTC had to rebuild all the former TCR and TRC lines in order to accommodate the then-new Peter Witts that required more space.

Or are we simply saying that Metrolinx is forcing the TTC to convert any *new* streetcar lines to standard gauge, and leave the legacy system as is? Because anything else is pure insanity.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

The new streetcars are going to be highly customized to Toronto's specs.

so where are these savings for adopting standard gauge? we won't be using off the shelf (if such a thing exists) designs then anyway. wasn't this the reason for adopting standard gauge in the first place? to avoid so called costly customizations?


it would be very tragic if transit city gets cancelled and we are left with a sheppard east LRT with standard gauge. it would be another misfit somewhat like the SRT.

 

[Darwinkgo]

so where are these savings for adopting standard gauge? we won't be using off the shelf (if such a thing exists) designs then anyway. wasn't this the reason for adopting standard gauge in the first place? to avoid so called costly customizations?


it would be very tragic if transit city gets cancelled and we are left with a sheppard east LRT with standard gauge. it would be another misfit somewhat like the SRT.

Well, considering I believe that the TTC Flexities are wider than most standard guage designed Flexities that while a TTC guage flexity could likely be converted to standard guage, that the opposite would likely not be true.

Changing it isn't just changing the boggies like they likely did with the PCC car conversions. Lower flow cars

There will be savings for adopting standard guage, I think the problem you have is you still considered the standard guage cars to be 'TTC Streetcars', where "new streetcars are going to be highly customized to Toronto's specs." is obviously referring to the legacy network.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

Well, considering I believe that the TTC Flexities are wider than most standard guage designed Flexities that while a TTC guage flexity could likely be converted to standard guage, that the opposite would likely not be true.

Changing it isn't just changing the boggies like they likely did with the PCC car conversions. Lower flow cars

There will be savings for adopting standard guage, I think the problem you have is you still considered the standard guage cars to be 'TTC Streetcars', where "new streetcars are going to be highly customized to Toronto's specs." is obviously referring to the legacy network.

so the LRT veichles for transit city will have no customizations? (in regards to being able to operate on the transit city network.)

 

[Darwinkgo]

so the LRT veichles for transit city will have no customizations? (in regards to being able to operate on the transit city network.)

They shouldn't need any, beyond the stop call out system, the livery, and the seat fabric type. The biggest customization would be for signalling if Metrolinx decides it wants a formal signalling system, and that is a swappable component.

Since the order is so big some other things could likely be customized at close to zero cost, like the LRV's 'face'.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

They shouldn't need any, beyond the stop call out system, the livery, and the seat fabric type. The biggest customization would be for signalling if Metrolinx decides it wants a formal signalling system, and that is a swappable component.

Since the order is so big some other things could likely be customized at close to zero cost, like the LRV's 'face'.

but that's the thing, the order is so big that wouldn't the cost of manufacturing these to operate on TTC gauge be next to none? there's only a difference of 6cm between the gauges.

 

[smallspy]

Convert it to what? Standard gauge? Allow me to think worst-case here: So I take it then that it will be Metrolinx that will pay for the ripping up of what is fairly new track across the entire city, not to mention the carhouses and Hillcrest? Will Metrolinx and its honchos take the political flak for this? Will it be Metrolinx that addresses the questions of waste and duplication? Will it be Metrolinx that takes the blame and the finger pointing and accusations of short-sightedness and lack of planning? The only precedent I can think of where something like this occurred on such a large scale was after 1922, when the TTC had to rebuild all the former TCR and TRC lines in order to accommodate the then-new Peter Witts that required more space.

Or are we simply saying that Metrolinx is forcing the TTC to convert any *new* streetcar lines to standard gauge, and leave the legacy system as is? Because anything else is pure insanity.

Nope, you were right the first time. And yes, I think that it is nothing short of lunacy as well.

but that's the thing, the order is so big that wouldn't the cost of manufacturing these to operate on TTC gauge be next to none? there's only a difference of 6cm between the gauges.

In theory, yes.

However, it seems that Metrolinx is looking at the bigger picture in the sense that we could potentially have one standard vehicle for all of the systems in Ontario, and potentially the ability for systems to share vehicles as necessary.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[CDL.TO]

I'm skeptical. Do you have citations, smallspy? A Star article from just last week, which included an interview from a Metrolinx rep, said pretty unequivocally "There are no plans to convert the TTC's existing routes to standard gauge."

 

[Darwinkgo]

but that's the thing, the order is so big that wouldn't the cost of manufacturing these to operate on TTC gauge be next to none? there's only a difference of 6cm between the gauges.

The wider gauge is harder to accommodate in low floor vehicles, which necessitates wider vehicles since the bogies are entirely within the envelope of the car, with the motors attached on the exterior of the wheels.

The FLEXX Urban Bogies - Source Bombardier

The wider car adds weight, and causes a need for extra strength. The last thing an LRV manufacturer wants is a problem like with Siemen's Combinos which cost almost a million euros a unit to fix since the cars were not built to high enough force levels.

You can see it a little better in this picture, how making for a wider guage will cause design changes to ripple through the vehicle. (Combino bogie)

Source: WIKI

As an aside, I wouldn't be surprised if Metrolinx's tender allowed a 70% low floor model to see if there were appreciable savings vs 100% low floor.

 

[ShonTron]

The whole idea of 100% low floor cars was dumb and political - I would not at all be surprised that it was used to help Bombardier's bid, and look like they were appeasing the disabled (who didn't even demand 100% low floors, even the ADA doesn't require it).

It's not that there's anything wrong with accommodating the disabled. A 70% low-floor car would be more "off the shelf" and cheaper and easier to engineer and repair. Orion VII buses are 60-70% low floor. We aren't buying any more 100% low floor buses after that Orion VI fiasco - suburban agencies still stuck with them are at least running them into the ground and using them for lighter load routes (except when MT sticks them on Hurontario).

But 100% low floor sounds a lot better, doesn't it? But it won't make the service itself any more accessible, and we're stuck with more complex trams.

 

[CapitalSeven]

The math doesn't support your point, Darwingko. Bombardier makes lots of trams that are 2.3 and 2.4 metres wide on standard gauge. The TTC streetcars would be 2.54 metres, or at least 14 cm wider. How does a 6-cm wider gauge cause a problem in a 14 cm wider vehicle?

 

[nfitz]

Given how much of a disaster the partial low-floor buses are, I can't imagine they would go back to the mixed height vehicles

 

[CDL.TO]

Given how much of a disaster the partial low-floor buses are, I can't imagine they would go back to the mixed height vehicles

Except, as Shon pointed out, the all low-floor buses were an even bigger disaster. Do you remember when the TTC ordered the all low-floor buses off the road? Those buses could only seat 28 people.

Partial low-floor buses are a compromise, designed to minimize the negative issues associated with all low-floor. The partial low-floor D40LF is one of most successful bus models ever produced in North America and can seat 39.

 

[nfitz]

Except, as Shon pointed out, the all low-floor buses were an even bigger disaster. Do you remember when the TTC ordered the all low-floor buses off the road? Those buses could only seat 28 people.

Partial low-floor buses are a compromise, designed to minimize the negative issues associated with all low-floor. The partial low-floor D40LF is one of most successful bus models ever produced in North America and can seat 39.

To tell the truth, I missed the all-low floor era. I was gone for about 15 years between 1990 and 2005 ... so I haven't actually seen one (are there any still running), nor do I understand the issues with them.

Well maybe in theory it could seat 39, but invariably it sits far less, given that it's almost impossible to get to the back seats. Time and time again, I see the front so crowded that people can't get on, and there are only one or two people standing on the high-floor section, and there are still one or two empty seats. And then try and get from one of the rear seats to the door once there are standees ... it's nigh impossible ... and have you tried standing up there? The seats aren't generally wide enough these days, so the second person is sticking partially into the aisle on both side, and the person standing is knocking everyone accidentally ... it has to be the most miserable bus design I've ever seen. The old GM buses seem infinitely more spacious in the rear.

 

[CDL.TO]

To tell the truth, I missed the all-low floor era. I was gone for about 15 years between 1990 and 2005 ... so I haven't actually seen one (are there any still running), nor do I understand the issues with them.

Well maybe in theory it could seat 39, but invariably it sits far less, given that it's almost impossible to get to the back seats. Time and time again, I see the front so crowded that people can't get on, and there are only one or two people standing on the high-floor section, and there are still one or two empty seats. And then try and get from one of the rear seats to the door once there are standees ... it's nigh impossible ... and have you tried standing up there? The seats aren't generally wide enough these days, so the second person is sticking partially into the aisle on both side, and the person standing is knocking everyone accidentally ... it has to be the most miserable bus design I've ever seen. The old GM buses seem infinitely more spacious in the rear.

The all low-floor buses are all gone IIRC; retired before their time because they were so terrible. They had basically all the same issues as you describe, even without stairs.

The Orion 7s certainly have the problems you describe, and I'm not a big fan of them. Though I have stood "upstairs" many times (it's where I head on a crowded bus, since other passengers are often unwilling to head up there).

But you can't compare with an all high-floor GM bus. The era of high floor buses and LRVs are over due to modern accessibility requirements. The only fair comparisons is between different designs of low-floor buses and LRVs (unless we build high platforms, but that's not likely to happen), and I'll take a partial low-floor over a full low-floor any day of the week.