TTC: Flexity Streetcars Testing & Delivery (Bombardier)

[TheTigerMaster]

Does the public really draw a line between different kinds of delays or do they just slide into "blame the ttc" mode?

Lazy union scum at TTC and/or Kathleen Wynne will be blamed for ECLRT delays. The private sector is perfect. They never make mistakes or fail to deliver on time or budget.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The only somewhat bizarre thing about ICTS are the LIMs.

Don't the linear induction motors allow for faster acceleration, which is apparently one of the benefits of ICTS/ART over light rail? And why wouldn't they want LIMs? What about them makes them less attractive than the alternatives?

Vancouver's also not entirely wedded to ICTS (e.g. the Canada line). The Evergreen Line has to be ICTS since it's an extension of the existing ICTS system.

ART still has the challenges associated with using proprietary tech. And how difficult would it be to upgrade Evergreen to ART, since ART and ICTS are closely related?

 

[ehlow]

Most systems have a good deal of proprietary technology anyways, especially with signalling systems which are almost all proprietary. Payment systems, also, tend to be proprietary.

The only somewhat bizarre thing about ICTS are the LIMs. Nobody's ever explained, though, why ICTS lines couldn't just be modified to run normally propelled vehicles. There are, in fact, ICTS systems which don't run on LIMs. Other requirements, like turn radii and length, could presumably be dealt with in future vehicle tenders just like the TTC's streetcars.

Vancouver's also not entirely wedded to ICTS (e.g. the Canada line). The Evergreen Line has to be ICTS since it's an extension of the existing ICTS system.

Lots of cities use systems like ICTS. Kuala Lumpur, Taipei and Yongin all use Bombardier's automated metros. There are at least a half dozen VAL systems in Europe and Asia. AnsaldoBreda's driverless metros are in half a dozen cities. Proprietary technologies are popular with consumers in tons of fields; the inability to swap components hasn't exactly dulled our enthusiasm for iPhones. Proprietary isn't necessarily bad.

"Lots of cities"?? Vancouver, Kuala Lumpur & the ones you just mentioned are like the only non-airport shuttle train ones in the world. They're all listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardier_Innovia_Metro

That's not much at all. Look at how many cities are using standard heavy rail (subway) & light rail tech. Why would anyone choose ICTS over an elevated & automated heavy or light rail line?

Also, iPhones are based on the same chip designs that all phones use, although Apple does have an in house hardware design department, it's all based on licensed standards. Everything in technology is based on widely used standards whether hardware (ex ARM) or software (ex Unix/POSIX).

Just like the underlying tech in all subways, streetcars, LRTs is basically the same. ICTS/Skytrain is the outsider that isn't standard.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Comparing iPhones to this is a little silly. We're talking about a $700 product vs. multimillion dollar infrastructure. Ditching your iPhone to buy a new phone is a minor inconvenience at worst. Having to abandon and rebuild multibillion dollar transit infrastructure can bring an entire city to a hault.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Most systems have a good deal of proprietary technology anyways, especially with signalling systems which are almost all proprietary. Payment systems, also, tend to be proprietary.

The only somewhat bizarre thing about ICTS are the LIMs. Nobody's ever explained, though, why ICTS lines couldn't just be modified to run normally propelled vehicles. There are, in fact, ICTS systems which don't run on LIMs. Other requirements, like turn radii and length, could presumably be dealt with in future vehicle tenders just like the TTC's streetcars.

Vancouver's also not entirely wedded to ICTS (e.g. the Canada line). The Evergreen Line has to be ICTS since it's an extension of the existing ICTS system.

Lots of cities use systems like ICTS. Kuala Lumpur, Taipei and Yongin all use Bombardier's automated metros. There are at least a half dozen VAL systems in Europe and Asia. AnsaldoBreda's driverless metros are in half a dozen cities. Proprietary technologies are popular with consumers in tons of fields; the inability to swap components hasn't exactly dulled our enthusiasm for iPhones. Proprietary isn't necessarily bad.

Or course most (if not all) rapid transit systems use propitiatory tech. But how many use proprietary tech for something as critical as their vehicles? Replacing a proprietary payment or signalling system can be done with little or no disruption to critical services at a relitavely small cost, whereas replacing all or most of your rails, electrical equipment, maintenance facilities (etc...) will certainly result in significant cost and service disruption.

The only thing I can think of that would be remotely comparable is propitiatory signalling systems, and even that is a relitavely small deal compared to using proprietary tech for your vehicles.

 

[ehlow]

Comparing iPhones to this is a little silly. We're talking about a $700 product vs. multimillion dollar infrastructure. Ditching your iPhone to buy a new phone is a minor inconvenience at worst. Having to abandon and rebuild multibillion dollar transit infrastructure can bring an entire city to a hault.

Smartphone manufacturers have to make sure that the components they need to assemble the phone are available in the future. Sometimes that means that even if the company that manufactures a given component, like the camera, goes out of business, there are other manufacturers that can make the same equivalent component. This also benefits in terms of negotiating prices, and provides safety that you can continue manufacturing the product.

Similarly, every transit system needs to buy new vehicles in the future to fit their transit lines. Vancouver runs the largest Skytrain/ICTS system in the world, a proprietary tech developed in Ontario and only used in a handful of cities... so they'll have to make sure someone is making these things in the future.

 

[officedweller]

LIM-motor vehicles are popular in Japan.

https://darylvsworld.wordpress.com/2013/09/06/list-of-linear-induction-motor-rapid-transit-systems/

https://darylvsworld.wordpress.com/2014/12/05/sendai-skytraintech-metro-2015/

and will be used for a new Tokyo beltline subway:

https://darylvsworld.wordpress.com/...-declared-for-60km-outer-belt-metro-in-tokyo/

Note that when Daryl uses "SkyTrain technology" he is using it in a generic sense
to mean "LIM motor, automated operation", not the Bombardier product.

The main advantage is the reduced profile and small tunnels required, versus LRT overhead catenary.
The main issue with snow is the gap between the LIM and the reaction plate getting clogged with snow.
There is no "slippage" problem, like you see on rotor-driven motors.

Here's a llink to Hitachi's linear induction motor subway vehicles -
That's right, it's NOT all Bombardier! (it's not all about Canada, either)

http://www.hitachi-rail.com/products/rolling_stock/linear/index.html

Non-adhesion drive
Trains accelerate and decelerate rapidly
Trains can negotiate steep gradients
Adverse weather conditions (heavy snow, rain) do not affect train operations
Maintenance labor costs reduced

Non-adhesion drive system
The attraction and repulsion of linear motor magnets drive the car.

Adhesion drive system
The friction between the wheels and rails drives the car.
Since the wheels are rotated by electric motors, excessive rotating force causes the wheels to slip.

http://www.hitachi-rail.com/products/rolling_stock/linear/feature01.html

Flat linear motor used
Simplifies care maintenance saving labor
Uses maintenance-free motor bearings, reduction gear, and couplings
Uses small-diameter wheels, a short wheelbase, and steering mechanism
Use fully electric brakes for stopping
Reduces maintenance on brake blocks significantly
Reduces tunnel cross sections by lowering car floor

http://www.hitachi-rail.com/products/rolling_stock/linear/feature02.html

 

[ehlow]

LIM-motor vehicles are popular in Japan:

https://darylvsworld.wordpress.com/2013/09/06/list-of-linear-induction-motor-rapid-transit-systems/

The main advantage is the reduced profile and small tunnels required, versus LRT overhead catenary:

Here's a llink to Hitachi's linear induction motor subway vehicles -
That's right, it's NOT all Bombardier! (it's not all about Canada, either)

http://www.hitachi-rail.com/products/rolling_stock/linear/index.html


http://www.hitachi-rail.com/products/rolling_stock/linear/index.html

You can use third rail power instead of overhead power:

There are many "light metros" with standard third rail powered EMUs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Metro
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docklands_Light_Railway

I'm glad we're moving away from Skytrain/ICTS tech.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Smartphone manufacturers have to make sure that the components they need to assemble the phone are available in the future. Sometimes that means that even if the company that manufactures a given component, like the camera, goes out of business, there are other manufacturers that can make the same equivalent component. This also benefits in terms of negotiating prices, and provides safety that you can continue manufacturing the product.

Similarly, every transit system needs to buy new vehicles in the future to fit their transit lines. Vancouver runs the largest Skytrain/ICTS system in the world, a proprietary tech developed in Ontario and only used in a handful of cities... so they'll have to make sure someone is making these things in the future.

That's exactly right. In the consumer tech industry, it's typical for companies like Apple to source the same parts from multiple manufacturers. For example, some iPhone screens may come from LG and some from Samsung; some CPUs may be made by Samsung and others by TSMC. Only a few components, such as the camera assembly, may be provided by one supplier (I believe Sony). The point is to ensure that you have ample supply, and to ensure that your product can't be held up if one company fails to deliver.

In fact, a great example of this is right here in Toronto. Right now Bombardier is having trouble delivering the Flexity LRVs. If things get bad enouch, Toronto could go to Siemens or other companies, while Bombardier gets their business together. Our streetcar system can't be held up because one manufacturer can't or won't deliver.

 

[rbt]

LIM-motor vehicles are popular in Japan.

Of course, LIM's are two-piece component. One part on the track and the other on the vehicle, both of which are highly encumbered by patents.

To switch to a different vehicle component, you would also need to change the track level component. This means no mixed rolling stock and a fairly major outage to transition between the two.

 

[diminutive]

"Lots of cities"?? Vancouver, Kuala Lumpur & the ones you just mentioned are like the only non-airport shuttle train ones in the world. They're all listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardier_Innovia_Metro

That's not much at all. Look at how many cities are using standard heavy rail (subway) & light rail tech. Why would anyone choose ICTS over an elevated & automated heavy or light rail line?.

Lots of cities use systems "like" ICTS, is what I said. Including other proprietary systems like VAL or the AnsaldoBreda one, lots of cities do use proprietary driverless metros.

Just like the underlying tech in all subways, streetcars, LRTs is basically the same. ICTS/Skytrain is the outsider that isn't standard.

Right, but my original point was that outside of the LIM component, there's not necessarily any huge difference between an ICTS system and a more traditionally powered system like the Canada Line. For instance, in Taipei a line using VAL trains was later retrofitted to use Bombardier ARTs.

If I was building a line from scratch there's no way I'd want to have LIMs, but the extent to which ICTS's "proprietary-ness" is a limiting factor is routinely exaggerated. The only two really proprietary things about it are the LIMs, which are admittedly bizare, and the signalling, which is always proprietary anyways.

Comparing iPhones to this is a little silly. We're talking about a $700 product vs. multimillion dollar infrastructure. Ditching your iPhone to buy a new phone is a minor inconvenience at worst. Having to abandon and rebuild multibillion dollar transit infrastructure can bring an entire city to a hault.

Both Presto and the new TTC signalling system are proprietary and cost 100s of millions of dollars to install. Moreover, I think it's specious to argue that the anybody would have to 'abandon' any ICTS system anymore than Toronto would have to 'abandon' the existing streetcar network for using a non-standard power supply and track layouts, or 'abandon' the Montreal Metro for using rubber tires.

But how many use proprietary tech for something as critical as their vehicles? Replacing a proprietary payment or signalling system can be done with little or no disruption to critical services at a relitavely small cost, whereas replacing all or most of your rails, electrical equipment, maintenance facilities (etc...) will certainly result in significant cost and service disruption.

So all the service outages on the Yonge Line due to signalling upgrades no longer count as "disruption to critical services."?

If Bombardier were sucked into a black hole and no one could ever build another SkyTrain, nothing would happen. TransLink could contract with any other rolling stock provider to provide traditionally powered rolling stock which could operate on the network, which is basically the same position every system is in.

 

[muller877]

You can use third rail power instead of overhead power:

There are many "light metros" with standard third rail powered EMUs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Metro
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docklands_Light_Railway

I'm glad we're moving away from Skytrain/ICTS tech.

Unless it is underground 3rd rail does not work in winter climates. Heat causes ice which causes faulty connections which cause sparks which cause either fire or smoke.

Prime example is the SW Trains in the UK. For the 5 days it snows in the southern UK there are 1 or 2 days when it feels like the whole line shuts down.

 

[wopchop]

Unless it is underground 3rd rail does not work in winter climates. Heat causes ice which causes faulty connections which cause sparks which cause either fire or smoke.

Prime example is the SW Trains in the UK. For the 5 days it snows in the southern UK there are 1 or 2 days when it feels like the whole line shuts down.

What about the third rail on the aboveground segments of the TTC subway?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

What about the third rail on the aboveground segments of the TTC subway?

Anecdotally, I think the aboveground segments may have lower level of reliability in winter (just thinking the Islington-Kipling section), though the difference could be due to section specific issues (e.g. switches, signals) than the third rail itself. it would be interesting to see how it compares to a system using pantographs in an apples-to-apples setting.

AoD

 

[nfitz]

Unless it is underground 3rd rail does not work in winter climates. Heat causes ice which causes faulty connections which cause sparks which cause either fire or smoke.

Prime example is the SW Trains in the UK. For the 5 days it snows in the southern UK there are 1 or 2 days when it feels like the whole line shuts down.

Good job we don't have any outdoor third rail on the subway in Toronto then!

Do you want to clarify that?