TTC: Flexity Streetcars Testing & Delivery (Bombardier)

[ProjectEnd]

From last March. This was the first and most likely last time I'll see an ALRV on Spadina. I wouldn't be surprised if it's the last time an ALRV will be down there if they're retired on time. The things rarely go down there because if they were to break down in the station there would be no [easy] way to get them out due to their weight. I was way too excited to catch the thing

Interesting. I was not aware of this. Is the weight the only issue or are there other reasons why they don't run on Spadina?

 

[smallspy]

Interesting. I was not aware of this. Is the weight the only issue or are there other reasons why they don't run on Spadina?

There are a number of issues with running As on Spadina, but they are all between the beginning of the tunnel into Ferry Docks station and the Union Station loop. But because cars aren't necessarily assigned only to King trips, they can't guarantee that it wouldn't make it down to Queens Quay, so they just avoid the issue altogether and not run them on Spadina.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[gweed123]

They'll be the last to go, now that 30 are getting a 10-year life extension.

Presumably this would mean a capacity boost for streetcar lines like Carlton, which will be the last to get the new LRVs, no? When routes running ALRVs get the new LRVs, will those ALRVs get pushed to routes currently running CLRVs, so those vehicles can be retired? Similar concept to the introduction of the new TRs. The TRs on YUS push the former YUS T1s onto B-D, and the H-Series B-D cars get retired.

 

[nfitz]

Presumably this would mean a capacity boost for streetcar lines like Carlton, which will be the last to get the new LRVs, no? When routes running ALRVs get the new LRVs, will those ALRVs get pushed to routes currently running CLRVs, so those vehicles can be retired? Similar concept to the introduction of the new TRs. The TRs on YUS push the former YUS T1s onto B-D, and the H-Series B-D cars get retired.

Who knows ... though presumably once there's enough Flexities other routes will be getting capacity increases as well, in the same manner 504 and 512 already have (though 504 has backfired some, with the Flexity delay resulting in them having to revert to buses once all the streetcar construction had ended in late 2014).

 

[gweed123]

Who knows ... though presumably once there's enough Flexities other routes will be getting capacity increases as well, in the same manner 504 and 512 already have (though 504 has backfired some, with the Flexity delay resulting in them having to revert to buses once all the streetcar construction had ended in late 2014).

The biggest capacity boost for the system I think will be when Queen gets the new LRVs. Assuming they do a 1 for 1 swap (1 new LRV for 1 ALRV), that means the TTC can swap a CLRV for an ALRV somewhere else on the system. That would either boost capacity, assuming the swap is 1 for 1, or reduce operating costs (2 CLRVs for 1 ALRV). Given how the TTC introduced the artics into the fleet though, it will likely be the latter.

 

[robmausser]

Presumably this would mean a capacity boost for streetcar lines like Carlton, which will be the last to get the new LRVs, no? When routes running ALRVs get the new LRVs, will those ALRVs get pushed to routes currently running CLRVs, so those vehicles can be retired? Similar concept to the introduction of the new TRs. The TRs on YUS push the former YUS T1s onto B-D, and the H-Series B-D cars get retired.

A more recent report by Andy Byford says that he was pushing for a more even phasing-in of the new Flexities so that all lines would get a couple at first vs the rollout plan they had before. So instead of 510 getting all of them until no CLRV's are left, then 509, then etc etc, they would be equally rolled out along the system where demand is high, for an even mix of Flexities and CLRVs.

I wonder if that plan got any traction.

 

[gweed123]

A more recent report by Andy Byford says that he was pushing for a more even phasing-in of the new Flexities so that all lines would get a couple at first vs the rollout plan they had before. So instead of 510 getting all of them until no CLRV's are left, then 509, then etc etc, they would be equally rolled out along the system where demand is high, for an even mix of Flexities and CLRVs.

I wonder if that plan got any traction.

That would certainly make sense. That way nobody really feels like they're getting "shafted". It also has the benefit of making all streetcar lines wheelchair accessible sooner. Granted, it would still be inconvenient because people would have to potentially wait several streetcars in order to get a new LRV, but at least the option would be there. They may be able to update the app in such a way that, during the transition, it shows which streetcars on the road are wheelchair accessible and which aren't.

 

[crs1026]

Rolling out right across the system would require platforms and islands and stops to be ready on all routes right from the start - how close to that state are we today?

- Paul

 

[robmausser]

That would certainly make sense. That way nobody really feels like they're getting "shafted". It also has the benefit of making all streetcar lines wheelchair accessible sooner. Granted, it would still be inconvenient because people would have to potentially wait several streetcars in order to get a new LRV, but at least the option would be there. They may be able to update the app in such a way that, during the transition, it shows which streetcars on the road are wheelchair accessible and which aren't.

That is already possible, and how I in fact time leaving for work every day so I can ride a Flexity!

http://www.nextbus.com/googleMap/?a=ttc&r=510&d=510_1_510B&s=478

The ones with wheelchair symbols are the Flexities

 

[gweed123]

That is already possible, and how I in fact time leaving for work every day so I can ride a Flexity!

http://www.nextbus.com/googleMap/?a=ttc&r=510&d=510_1_510B&s=478

The ones with wheelchair symbols are the Flexities

Cool, thanks! I haven't used that system much, so I wasn't aware that it had that capability. In that case, yes deploying relatively evenly over all streetcar lines makes even more sense.

 

[CDL.TO]

Seeing that the capacity of the new streetcars is so much higher than that of a CLRV, running a mix of vehicles seems like it wouldn't be making very good use of the capacity (presumably, they would have to treat the LFLRV as a CLRV).

 

[nfitz]

The biggest capacity boost for the system I think will be when Queen gets the new LRVs. Assuming they do a 1 for 1 swap (1 new LRV for 1 ALRV), that means the TTC can swap a CLRV for an ALRV somewhere else on the system. That would either boost capacity, assuming the swap is 1 for 1, or reduce operating costs (2 CLRVs for 1 ALRV). Given how the TTC introduced the artics into the fleet though, it will likely be the latter.

They are not planning a 2:1 swap for CLRVs to ALRVs though.

The best table to look at is the somewhat dated table Steve Munro put together in June 2013 - https://swanboatsteve.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/lvlrvcap201306.pdf as part of his article https://swanboatsteve.wordpress.com/2013/06/25/ttc-low-floor-lrv-roll-out-plan-released

The numbers have changed a bit since then, but not significantly. For AM peak, Queen gets will get 119% of the current capacity. But it's the smallest. King is 132% (though some of this was already rolled out during the 2014 service increase for 504 that anticipated that the new Flexities would release enough CLRVs). But the real winners are 156% on 505, 170% on 511.

This is because the 11 (then) current CLRVs were to be replaced by 10 Flexities on Bathurst. And the 19 CLRVs on Dundas would be replaced by 14 Flexities. If you look at the January 2015 Fleet Plan in https://swanboatsteve.wordpress.com/2015/01/28/ttc-2015-fleet-plans/ these are still the same numbers (though 505 is now expected to increase to 17 Flexities by 2019!)

There is no where near a 2:1 replacement ratio!

A more recent report by Andy Byford says that he was pushing for a more even phasing-in of the new Flexities so that all lines would get a couple at first vs the rollout plan they had before. So instead of 510 getting all of them until no CLRV's are left, then 509, then etc etc, they would be equally rolled out along the system where demand is high, for an even mix of Flexities and CLRVs.

I wonder if that plan got any traction.

I don't think it got any traction, because even more recently on January 23, they promised to have converted 510, 511, and 510 to the new streetcars by the end of the year - http://www.ttc.ca/News/2015/January/0123_third_charter.jsp

 

[gweed123]

They are not planning a 2:1 swap for CLRVs to ALRVs though.

The best table to look at is the somewhat dated table Steve Munro put together in June 2013 - https://swanboatsteve.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/lvlrvcap201306.pdf as part of his article https://swanboatsteve.wordpress.com/2013/06/25/ttc-low-floor-lrv-roll-out-plan-released

The numbers have changed a bit since then, but not significantly. For AM peak, Queen gets will get 119% of the current capacity. But it's the smallest. King is 132% (though some of this was already rolled out during the 2014 service increase for 504 that anticipated that the new Flexities would release enough CLRVs). But the real winners are 156% on 505, 170% on 511.

This is because the 11 (then) current CLRVs were to be replaced by 10 Flexities on Bathurst. And the 19 CLRVs on Dundas would be replaced by 14 Flexities. If you look at the January 2015 Fleet Plan in https://swanboatsteve.wordpress.com/2015/01/28/ttc-2015-fleet-plans/ these are still the same numbers (though 505 is now expected to increase to 17 Flexities by 2019!)

There is no where near a 2:1 replacement ratio!

Thanks for the info. I didn't mean 2:1 as an exact ratio, but more that the frequencies weren't going to remain identical after the switch, and that they would have done what they did with the artics, where they in essence did a net zero capacity change (higher per vehicle capacity but lower frequency).

I'm glad to see that there will be a capacity boost as a result of the switch-over though, and that it won't be like the artics.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Interesting. I was not aware of this. Is the weight the only issue or are there other reasons why they don't run on Spadina?

Nope.

The other issue is that the tail end of the ALRV has a much larger swing than the CLRVs. This is a problem at Union and Spadina Stations, because the tail end of the streetcar could swipe people on the platform.

 

[AlbertHWagstaff]

Nope.

The other issue is that the tail end of the ALRV has a much larger swing than the CLRVs. This is a problem at Union and Spadina Stations, because the tail end of the streetcar could swipe people on the platform.

How is that possible when the ALRV is basically two 3/4 sections of a CLRV put together? The truck centres are the same on both cars (7,620 mm), and the back end of an ALRV appears to be identical to the back end of a CLRV. In fact, the diagrams for both cars show that the distance from the centre of the last truck to the end of the car is 3,823mm. How can an ALRV have longer tail swing?

I think the actual issue is that the tail swing on an ALRV is not within sight of the operator when leaving those loops, unlike a CLRV.