TTC: Flexity Streetcars Testing & Delivery (Bombardier)

[Jonny5]

How much do we owe on the streetcar order to date? I thought we paid as the vehicles were delivered, mins a modest upfront deposit, which I can only imagine was already paid. If we don't owe the money now, is it just going to sit in a bank account until we use it up and could someone theoretically yank it for something else? Just being paranoid here. As long as Ford is in office, I really won't believe it's 100% certain we have the new streetcars until I see one in revenue service.

 

[allabootmatt]

I think it's safe to say (knocks on wood) that if Ford had any intention of cancelling the streetcar replacement program, we'd have heard about it by now. Or, rather, I'm sure he has or had the intention, but suspect the penalty clauses on contracts already signed dissuaded him, or at least his advisers.

The 'surplus must pay for streetcars' strategy is, to me, just a handy club Ford can use to justify the cuts to the operating budget he so dearly wants to make. It's actually rather clever, since in theory it could pit left-leaning councillors against each other ('well, we could keep that pool open, but instead Miller ordered streetcars'). Except the whole thing is based on a lie.

The streetcars were 'unfunded' in the same way almost every other capital expenditure is 'unfunded.' That is, they were to be paid for with a combination of debt, subsidy from the province, and a small amount of general City revenue. The only difference is that, given the mechanics of replacing in one shot the infrastructure of a network that carries more daily passengers than all of GO Transit, the numbers are big. I've never heard Ford complain about Miller's purchase of unfunded subway cars, but that's exactly what he did.

There is a larger issue here, which is that the overall capital needs of the TTC outstrip available resources. But that's got nothing to do with streetcars specifically.

 

[nfitz]

How much do we owe on the streetcar order to date? I thought we paid as the vehicles were delivered, mins a modest upfront deposit, which I can only imagine was already paid.

Some of it was upfront. If you look in the 2011 10-year Capital budget you'll see the total of $1.45 billion left to pay, with payments of about $160 million in 2011, $134 million in 2012, $80 million in 2013, ... continuing through $144 million in 2018 and finally $19 million in 2019. There were also payments before 2011, but I don't have those at hand.

If we don't owe the money now, is it just going to sit in a bank account until we use it up and could someone theoretically yank it for something else?

No. 1/3 would be paid by the Ontario government to TTC as it's spent. And the other 2/3 is being financed by increasing the cities debt.

Just being paranoid here. As long as Ford is in office, I really won't believe it's 100% certain we have the new streetcars until I see one in revenue service.

I think we've past that point. By this point, the city would be out a few $hundred million already, would lose the $500 million or so the province was paying, and would have to pay significant penalties for cancelling the contract with Bombardier (normally such penalties at least cover their lost profits over the next decade), along with the contract to build the new carhouse at Ashbridges that should be awarded any day now. And they'd still have to replace over 250 streetcars that are approaching retirement. At a minimum they'd be looking at almost 400 buses to do so, requiring 2 new garages, and a lot of $ on buses.

Quite early in the Ford administration, it was clear that it didn't make any sense financially to cancel it. And it's not even remotely possible he'd get council support at this stage.

This danger is past. And we should see the first streetcar here for testing in the fall.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Since this thread is about the new streetcars, and Toronto streetcars and light rail vehicles are different vehicles entirely, a new thread called New TTC Light Rail Vehicles should help to differentiate between the two.

 

[CDL.TO]

Toronto streetcars and light rail vehicles are different vehicles entirely

"Entirely"? Seeing that (AFAIK) they are both Bombardier Flexity vehicles, it's more like the difference between buying the hatchback or the sedan.

 

[Dan416]

One day streetcars and LRT are both light rail vehicles, the next day they're completely different. If LRT's supporters can't even decide what they are or aren't, how can they rag on anyone else for calling a streetcar/LRT one thing or another?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

One day streetcars and LRT are both light rail vehicles, the next day they're completely different. If LRT's supporters can't even decide what they are or aren't, how can they rag on anyone else for calling a streetcar/LRT one thing or another?

Sigh... The difference is in how they operate. An LRT is much more subway like. It operates significantly faster then a streetcar with further stop distances, longer vehicles, separated lanes and doors on both sides. It also has the flexibility to be operated underground where dedicated lanes are not appropriate. On the other hand a streetcar is more bus like. It provides local service, operates in mixed traffic, travels significantly slower, uses shorter vehicles and has shorter stop distances.

If you need an analogy its kind of like how our Toronto Rockets could theoretically be used as commuter rail (GO train) vehicles if station spacing was significantly increased and track was laid in suburban and rural areas to connect different city centres.

 

[Dan416]

Sigh... The difference is in how they operate. An LRT is much more subway like. It operates significantly faster then a streetcar with further stop distances, longer vehicles, separated lanes and doors on both sides. It also has the flexibility to be operated underground where dedicated lanes are not appropriate. On the other hand a streetcar is more bus like. It provides local service, operates in mixed traffic, travels significantly slower, uses shorter vehicles and has shorter stop distances.

If you need an analogy its kind of like how our Toronto Rockets could theoretically be used as commuter rail (GO train) vehicles if station spacing was significantly increased and track was laid in suburban and rural areas to connect different city centres.

IIRC our subways can't run on regular railroad tracks for the same reason European commuter trains can't. Or maybe I'm just inferring.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

IIRC our subways can't run on regular railroad tracks for the same reason European commuter trains can't. Or maybe I'm just inferring.

If the TTC laid the same tracks used on our subways to connect different city centres the Toronto Rockets could theoretically be used as some kind of commuter rail unless there is a technical limitation that I'm not thinking of. But this is purely theoretical and I am in no way endorsing a plan to use the TRs as some kind of commuter rail.

My point is that we shouldn't get caught up in the type of vehicles that are being used. At the end of the day a million different vehicle configurations could be called LRT. A great example of this is how Nigeria will be using our H series subway cars on a LRT system. What is far more important is how the vehicles are going to be operated. A LRV that operates exclusively at grade in mixed traffic with short stop distances is a streetcar. A LRV that operates above, at-grade or below ground with large stop distances, dedicated lanes and priority signalling (Finch, Sheppard, Eglinton) is a LRT.

 

[smallspy]

If the TTC laid the same tracks used on our subways to connect different city centres the Toronto Rockets could theoretically be used as some kind of commuter rail unless there is a technical limitation that I'm not thinking of. But this is purely theoretical and I am in no way endorsing a plan to use the TRs as some kind of commuter rail.

There is absolutely nothing preventing the TTC from doing this kind of thing. Except, of course, funding. As in a lack of.

My point is that we shouldn't get caught up in the type of vehicles that are being used. At the end of the day a million different vehicle configurations could be called LRT. A great example of this is how Nigeria will be using our H series subway cars on a LRT system. What is far more important is how the vehicles are going to be operated. A LRV that operates exclusively at grade in mixed traffic with short stop distances is a streetcar. A LRV that operates above, at-grade or below ground with large stop distances, dedicated lanes and priority signalling (Finch, Sheppard, Eglinton) is a LRT.

The issue more so is that it is all relative. "Light rail" is called that because it is a less-intensive service than "heavy rail", and frequently (but not always) built to lighter standards.

The Lagos example is a good one to use in this situation. They are calling it "light rail" because they already have an existing and incompatible "heavy rail" system that is more akin to our freight railways. But here in Toronto, those same cars are considered "heavy rail" as they we have an existing "light rail" that runs a less intensive service on the streets. And yet, we still have a commuter railway as well that is incompatible with both.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[W. K. Lis]

The Chief Executive Officer's Report Period 3 February 26 to March 31, 2012, at this link, has this bit of information:

LRT Program and Maintenance & Storage Facility

The low floor light rail vehicle procurement project is partway through the Final Design phase. The first of the three prototype LRVs (streetcars) is scheduled for delivery in early September, 2012, with the other two scheduled for delivery before year end. The prototype vehicles will undergo extensive vehicle reliability, performance and technology verification tests. System compatibility tests including accessibility features, platform and on‐street boarding interface with the vehicle, its bridgeplate and ramp deployment, fare collection and overhead power interface, etc. will be conducted.

Based on the prototype tests, a baseline vehicle configuration will be established for production vehicles, scheduled for delivery beginning in the fall of 2013.

Once the prototypes had done their winter testing conditions of leaves, snow, and salt, we could expect to see them enter revenue service in 2013. However, before they could even enter revenue service, the current fare collection has to evolve with the Presto system first. With delivery of the production vehicles in late 2013, we will need to see Presto first on the current TTC vehicles, hopefully sooner than later.

 

[nfitz]

Once the prototypes had done their winter testing conditions of leaves, snow, and salt, we could expect to see them enter revenue service in 2013.

That seems optimistic. With the first production vehicles not due to Fall 2013 (which could be as late as December 20, 2013, and still be on schedule), I doubt we'll see any units in revenue service well intol 2014 ... and I doubt that the 3 prototypes will be the first ones into revenue service, if at all. The first CLRV into revenue service didn't occur until Fall 1979, almost 2 years after the delivery of a prototype. I'm not sure when the prototypes entered service.

However, before they could even enter revenue service, the current fare collection has to evolve with the Presto system first. With delivery of the production vehicles in late 2013, we will need to see Presto first on the current TTC vehicles, hopefully sooner than later.

I don't think there's any requirement for Presto to be implemented, to use the new vehicles. If that were true, you'd not be able to pay your fare without Presto, unless you had a Metrocard, or a valid transfer. While it will be interesting to see the new ticket machines on the vehicles, and at selected stops, presumably they will be able to take other media than Presto, such as coins and tokens.

 

[doady]

If the TTC laid the same tracks used on our subways to connect different city centres the Toronto Rockets could theoretically be used as some kind of commuter rail unless there is a technical limitation that I'm not thinking of. But this is purely theoretical and I am in no way endorsing a plan to use the TRs as some kind of commuter rail.

My point is that we shouldn't get caught up in the type of vehicles that are being used. At the end of the day a million different vehicle configurations could be called LRT. A great example of this is how Nigeria will be using our H series subway cars on a LRT system. What is far more important is how the vehicles are going to be operated. A LRV that operates exclusively at grade in mixed traffic with short stop distances is a streetcar. A LRV that operates above, at-grade or below ground with large stop distances, dedicated lanes and priority signalling (Finch, Sheppard, Eglinton) is a LRT.

I guess that explains why the current streetcars called Canadian Light Rail Vehicles. Obviously, they have nothing to do with light rail at all.

 

[the lemur]

I don't think there's any requirement for Presto to be implemented, to use the new vehicles. If that were true, you'd not be able to pay your fare without Presto, unless you had a Metrocard, or a valid transfer. While it will be interesting to see the new ticket machines on the vehicles, and at selected stops, presumably they will be able to take other media than Presto, such as coins and tokens.

What I'd like to see is fare vending machines at the stops themselves, since buying fares on the vehicle tends to slow the boarding process down.

 

[car4041]

What I'd like to see is fare vending machines at the stops themselves, since buying fares on the vehicle tends to slow the boarding process down.

As nfitz said, the plan is to have both: vending machines in the cars and at busier stops.