TTC: Flexity Streetcars Testing & Delivery (Bombardier)

[Steve X]

Where do you come up with this garbage?

That ramp is the exact same ramp as used on several thousand low-floor cars in Europe, many of them not even Bombardier products. And it may even have a bolt-in replacement from alternate suppliers as well.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

No it's not the exact same. They are similar but not same. If it was the same ramp, maybe you can explain to me why does it take garbage BBD several redesigns and 5 years to get it right? The ramps on the current cars aren't even the final design. If it was the same European design, they should have gotten it right on the prototype cars. The European car ramps don't mean the Ontario accessibility standards.

 

[cplchanb]

No it's not the exact same. They are similar but not same. If it was the same ramp, maybe you can explain to me why does it take garbage BBD several redesigns and 5 years to get it right? The ramps on the current cars aren't even the final design. If it was the same European design, they should have gotten it right on the prototype cars. The European car ramps don't mean the Ontario accessibility standards.

Im pretty sure its been explained before in an ancient post, but can somebody explain why TTC needs such a "bespoke" ramp? Why can't the standard ones work on our system? It seems like all of the equipment we buy has some sort of bespoke spec that requires extra time, money and development.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The European car ramps don't mean the Ontario accessibility standards.

Then change the damn standards to whatever the most progressive Euros use.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Every time I see another ninny excuse for why Toronto can't use the streetcars readily available I want to scream. If your system specifications cannot accommodate the product on the market, you change your system spec, not go out and buy customized, sole-vendor product.

It's likely too bloody late now, since we've likely built all the new tracks and yards in the last 5-10 years to meet the turning capabilities of the CLRVs. Instead, when the Union Station-Queen Quay line was built, and the Leslie Barns, and all the tracks and turning loops we tear up and replace every 10-15 years, we should have looked ahead at what's available and specified whatever the global consensus is for turning radii.

Here's an American report on the topic. http://www.apta.com/resources/standards/Documents/APTA-RT-ST-GL-001-13.pdf

“Because of the inherent flexibility of the light rail/streetcar mode, it is possible to operate over extremely demanding alignments in terms of curvature and gradient. However, minimizing the use of such extremes brings numerous benefits in terms of passenger comfort, higher operating speeds, lower operating costs and the ability to purchase “standard” vehicles from multiple suppliers.”

Here's Portland, turning seems reasonable to me.

Here's Nuremberg, Germany. Another reasonable turning circle.

This site shows how to address the question of the loops. http://n-tram.blogspot.ca/2010/09/turning-trams-triangle.html

 

[smallspy]

Has the city considered changing the track network to eliminate the need for non-industry spec turning radii? The tracks are torn out and replaced every ten years or so - sounds like a good opportunity.

Not the City, but the TTC, yes. It was deemed unfeasible due to the amount of property that would have to be purchased at almost every single intersection where there are curves.

Every time I see another ninny excuse for why Toronto can't use the streetcars readily available I want to scream. If your system specifications cannot accommodate the product on the market, you change your system spec, not go out and buy customized, sole-vendor product.

Well, that depends on a bunch of different things now, doesn't it? What are your infrastructure costs going to be, in terms of track and overhead material? The costs of the downtime as you rebuild each intersection? Costs of the additional property necessary, not just for intersections but to build new garages everywhere (instead of just one)?

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[Amare]

Every time I see another ninny excuse for why Toronto can't use the streetcars readily available I want to scream. If your system specifications cannot accommodate the product on the market, you change your system spec, not go out and buy customized, sole-vendor product.

Can you really realistically imagine Toronto ripping out all the current streetcar tracks and replacing them with standard gauge tracks all across the city? This city virtually gets paralyzed when you close down one major intersection for an extended period of time, let alone multiple intersections and major arterial roads.

It would not only be political suicide for whoever would decide to through with that decision, but the city would literally be crippled. It's not like we have any transportation alternatives we could use which could alleviate that kind of mess.

 

[salsa]

Every time I see another ninny excuse for why Toronto can't use the streetcars readily available I want to scream. If your system specifications cannot accommodate the product on the market, you change your system spec, not go out and buy customized, sole-vendor product.

Here's Portland, turning seems reasonable to me.

I'd love to hear how you would fit your ideal Portland-style turning radius within our numerous tiny intersection such as Queen & Bathurst.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I'd love to hear how you would fit your ideal Portland-style turning radius within our numerous tiny intersection such as Queen & Bathurst.

Bus, wherever industry standard radii won't work. Instead, build tracks along other routes, more focused on ROWs vs. on street.

 

[MiWay1137]

Bus, wherever industry standard radii won't work. Instead, build tracks along other routes, more focused on ROWs vs. on street.

So you want to restructure pretty much the entire streetcar system just so buying streetcars will be easier. LOGIC!

 

[Admiral Beez]

It's likely too bloody late now, since we've likely built all the new tracks and yards in the last 5-10 years to meet the turning capabilities of the CLRVs. Instead, when the Union Station-Queen Quay line was built, and the Leslie Barns, and all the tracks and turning loops we tear up and replace every 10-15 years, we should have looked ahead at what's available and specified whatever the global consensus is for turning radii.

Buses or the changes I suggested above are not feasible, as I said earlier. It's too late.

So you want to restructure pretty much the entire streetcar system just so buying streetcars will be easier. LOGIC!

So, we're basically stuck with the gauge and radii chosen in 1861 by the TTC's precursor the Williams Omnibus Bus Line? That's over 155 years ago - surely we can consider restructuring as you suggest once a century?

Who am I kidding, this is the city that's stuck with above ground hydro poles and a century of neglected infrastructure. There's no way we'd ever consider moving to the standard gauge for streetcars. We can't even synchronize our traffic signals.

Did we choose a custom gauge for the Eglinton Cross Over system? I hope we didn't. Assuming not, then for some reason we're happy to use standard gauge rail when building new, but are somehow beholden to the decisions from the mid 1800s.

 

[jeffreym]

Every time I see another ninny excuse for why Toronto can't use the streetcars readily available I want to scream. If your system specifications cannot accommodate the product on the market, you change your system spec, not go out and buy customized, sole-vendor product.

It's worth pondering what it might cost both in $$ and disruption, but it's not a foregone conclusion that it's a better option to change the network. If it costs X dollars extra to get custom vehicles or 50X dollars to customize the network we darned well better be customizing the vehicles.

And yes the Crosstown will use standard gauge but it's not gauge that is what really adds to the cost. It's really the tight turning radii of the downtown system. Regardless, the Crosstown and the other LRT lines will indeed all be built so that they work for 'standard' vehicles.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Here's a good debate on the cost and feasibility http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1711537 The consensus seems to be that for better or worse, we're forever stuck with the 155 year old, Toronto-only 1,495 mm gauge. I suppose we'd better leave this debate at that.

I wonder what gauge we would have chosen had Toronto ripped out all its tracks in the 1960s as so many other North American cities did, only to re-introduce streetcars in the 1990s and early 2000s.

 

[rbt]

So, we're basically stuck with the gauge and radii chosen in 1861 by the TTC's precursor the Williams Omnibus Bus Line? That's over 155 years ago - surely we can consider restructuring as you suggest once a century

It takes TTC mechanics an afternoon to convert a tram between standard gauge and TTC gauge; they've done this several times over the years, though mostly on PCCs. That particular special requirement is pretty trivial.

I've been lead to believe the harder requirements are around vertical inclines; both the grade and rate of change of the grade (flat to incline). Fixing that requires rebuilding the tunnel portals and raising Bathurst or moving the St. Clair link.

The horizontal turn radius is also not optional; the standard European turn radius puts tracks through the sidewalks at many intersections. Also, many yard curves are even tighter and we now know what a new tram yard (holds half the fleet) costs.

So TTC had a choice. Spend a very large sum (large enough they didn't bother to calculate it) rebuilding the network or pay a couple hundred million premium on the trams. 600V DC feeds isn't particularly oddball (it's not the most common but TTC is far from alone).

Some things they did convert. The overhead will be standard for pantographs in a few years.

 

[Admiral Beez]

So TTC had a choice. Spend a very large sum (large enough they didn't bother to calculate it) rebuilding the network or pay a couple hundred million premium on the trams.

What trams though? Beyond an apparent 17 units isolated to training and operating on a few routes, where are these trams we paid a premium for?

That was the true choice you describe, both terrible; spend billions you don't have to allow off the shelf trams, or buy into an aspirational scheme pushed by shady, government-slush-addicted executives from outside of the province utilizing offshore cost cutting.

Today I am 45 years old. My bet is I will be 60 before the final units arrive.

 

[jeffreym]

That really doesn't have anything to do with the custom vehicles. From what we know Bombardier is having problems related to quality control, not anything related to the engineering of the vehicle to meet our specs.

If you're just meaning that it'd be easier to have more companies bid on the vehicles, then sure, but there's no reason to believe that a) Bombarider wouldn't have still won the contract and b) that another firm wouldn't have had similar problems.