TTC: Other Items (catch all)

[W. K. Lis]

I don't think so, but the TTC has two unique problems that most other streetcar systems and practically every LRT system doesn't:

1. Our streetcars currently can't reverse because they use trolley poles. Most other cities use pantographs (Toronto will soon), so a streetcar that goes the wrong way can stop and reverse.

2. We have lots of union intersections, where a streetcar going the wrong way on a switch can easily hit a streetcar passing in the other direction. You can even see in drum118's video that a lot of streetcars going straight through will slow down a lot, just in case they do go the wrong way.



It's much more than a money issue. The company that built the TTC's current switches went bankrupt, and all the designs were lost in a fire, so whenever something breaks the TTC has to custom-order a part that's been reverse-engineered. Some accidents are also just not feasibly preventable, like this one where some road debris got into the switch and prevented it from working correctly.

At budget time, when the mayor(s) or councillors says cut, cut, cut, the streetcar track switches are always the very first thing that is cut, cut, cut.

 

[amnesiajune]

At budget time, when the mayor(s) or councillors says cut, cut, cut, the streetcar track switches are always the very first thing that is cut, cut, cut.

I'm not sure what "cut, cut, cut" you're talking about. The TTC's operating subsidy has more than doubled in the last 12 years. Its capital budget (which gets no farebox revenue) has more than tripled in that time, not including the Metrolinx-funded Eglinton LRT, to more than $1.5 billion per year. Ridership has only grown about 25% in that time, so even relative to ridership growth there's been a huge funding increase.

Let's stop spreading this lie that the TTC's funding is being cut. It might not be increasing as much as we want it to, but it's increasing a lot. The TTC's operating subsidy is actually the fastest-growing item in the city's budget, in absolute terms.

 

[smallspy]

I don't think so, but the TTC has two unique problems that most other streetcar systems and practically every LRT system doesn't:

1. Our streetcars currently can't reverse because they use trolley poles. Most other cities use pantographs (Toronto will soon), so a streetcar that goes the wrong way can stop and reverse.

I'm not sure why on earth you would possibly think something so silly. They can and do reverse all of the time.

2. We have lots of union intersections, where a streetcar going the wrong way on a switch can easily hit a streetcar passing in the other direction. You can even see in drum118's video that a lot of streetcars going straight through will slow down a lot, just in case they do go the wrong way.

Intersections are hardly unique to any streetcar system, let alone Toronto's.

It's much more than a money issue. The company that built the TTC's current switches went bankrupt, and all the designs were lost in a fire, so whenever something breaks the TTC has to custom-order a part that's been reverse-engineered. Some accidents are also just not feasibly preventable, like this one where some road debris got into the switch and prevented it from working correctly.

The lack of support and designs are a hindrance for sure, but even if the company making them was still around (for the record, they were purchased by Thales and a similar system is branded under their "SelTrac" product line) that doesn't negate the fact that the hardware is approaching 40 years of age.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I'm not sure what "cut, cut, cut" you're talking about. The TTC's operating subsidy has more than doubled in the last 12 years. Its capital budget (which gets no farebox revenue) has more than tripled in that time, not including the Metrolinx-funded Eglinton LRT, to more than $1.5 billion per year. Ridership has only grown about 25% in that time, so even relative to ridership growth there's been a huge funding increase.

Let's stop spreading this lie that the TTC's funding is being cut. It might not be increasing as much as we want it to, but it's increasing a lot. The TTC's operating subsidy is actually the fastest-growing item in the city's budget, in absolute terms.

So this story (see link) from 2016 was false?

Council backs Mayor John Tory’s request for 2017 budget cuts

Council critics say across-the-board reductions pushed by Tory will mean cuts to service for TTC riders and public housing tenants.​

or this report from this year (see link), or Steve Munro's reaction to it (at this link).

Toronto’s 2018 Budget and Continuing Transit Austerity

In a report to the City of Toronto’s Budget Committee meeting for May 11, 2017, City Manager Peter Wallace makes two recommendations that will have a major effect on transit planning and operations in Toronto:

• All spending for the 2018 Operating Budget would be frozen at 2017 levels. For the TTC, this would mean flat-lining the operating subsidy at its current level ($560.8 million for the “conventional” system, and $142.7 million for Wheel-Trans).
• No new projects would be approved within the Ten Year Capital Budget and Plan until 2027 when there is borrowing headroom available to the City to fund additional works.

 

[APTA-2048]

On the topic of demos: the TTC had an Alexander Dennis double decker drop by Hillcrest yesterday.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Other than London and Metrolinx, what cities use double deckers?

I doubt double deckers would be appropriate for the TTC, since it's not conductive to rapid and frequent alighting, but it would be neat to see them on the streets.

 

[DSC]

Other than London and Metrolinx, what cities use double deckers?

I doubt double deckers would be appropriate for the TTC, since it's not conductive to rapid and frequent alighting, but it would be neat to see them on the streets.

They are common in UK but I agree they are probably not suitable for most (all?) TTC routes. AODA etc. Of course we COULD Start agitating for double-decker streetcars like Hong Kong!

• 

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Well the ALRVs are just two CLRVs smashed and welded together.

Just top a CLRV with another CLRV and we'll have one double decker!

 

[Richard White]

Other than London and Metrolinx, what cities use double deckers?

I doubt double deckers would be appropriate for the TTC, since it's not conductive to rapid and frequent alighting, but it would be neat to see them on the streets.

As shown below from my trip to the UK earlier this year double deckers are much taller than our current fleet. They are handicap accessible on the lower level which would for the most part make the AODA compliant. They have seats that go up and down along with a ramp for handicap access.

My only concern would be come of the old CNR and CP bridges. There was one (I think it has been replaced) out near Tapscott in Scarborough that frequently had trucks wedged under it. Even now GO transit cannot run double deckers in most parts of Toronto due to low bridges.

London can run these by virtue of not having expressways. If the United Kingdom had highways like North America they would not be running those types of busses. Even the motorways in the southern coast of England near Falmouth have bridges that are able to accommodate such vehicles.

I would like to point out as well that there weren't any issues alighting and I took the bus through some of the busiest parts of London. Even in places like Trafalger Square and Victoria there weren't any issues with boarding or disembarking. Mind you the buses were so frequent you could see the one behind it while boarding the one at the stop. No need to worry about forcing your way one because there was always another bus a couple minutes away if that.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

As shown below from my trip to the UK earlier this year double deckers are much taller than our current fleet. They are handicap accessible on the lower level which would for the most part make the AODA compliant. They have seats that go up and down along with a ramp for handicap access.

My only concern would be come of the old CNR and CP bridges. There was one (I think it has been replaced) out near Tapscott in Scarborough that frequently had trucks wedged under it. Even now GO transit cannot run double deckers in most parts of Toronto due to low bridges.

London can run these by virtue of not having expressways. If the United Kingdom had highways like North America they would not be running those types of busses. Even the motorways in the southern coast of England near Falmouth have bridges that are able to accommodate such vehicles.

I would like to point out as well that there weren't any issues alighting and I took the bus through some of the busiest parts of London. Even in places like Trafalger Square and Victoria there weren't any issues with boarding or disembarking. Mind you the buses were so frequent you could see the one behind it while boarding the one at the stop. No need to worry about forcing your way one because there was always another bus a couple minutes away if that.

View attachment 120365 View attachment 120366 View attachment 120367

In your experience, is it common for standees to use the top level of the bus?

An issue with the TTC's nova bus is that people won't stand on the upper level of the bus (in the rear third of the bus), which drastically cuts the capacity of the vehicle.

 

[W. K. Lis]

What can go wrong with a low bridge?

 

[Richard White]

In your experience, is it common for standees to use the top level of the bus?

An issue with the TTC's nova bus is that people won't stand on the upper level of the bus (in the rear third of the bus), which drastically cuts the capacity of the vehicle.

It was but not as much. The problem is the stairs are narrow so people did not want to stand up there. The seats would always be full but it was easier to stand on the lower level. The day of the Grenfell Tower fire I was on the 52 bus heading from the Victoria Coach Station to the Kensal Green area of London. The bottom of the bus was packed tight but the upper level not so much. I think it was because of fact you could not get off if you went upstairs.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

The problem with TTC, the switches don't work and there no money to fix the issues

Can we stop with this thing about the switches, not working?. Yes, we use a different system then the rest of the world does that doesn't mean it's broken. Currently, the switches that are powered are set up so that they get a signal from the front of the vehicle to change based on if the driver sets it to do so. What sometimes causes problems is that the transmitter on the vehicle can be faulty either at the front or the back of it and it doesn't send the signal to the switch motor. there ther are also unpowered switches that aren't' used often like for example at short turn loops or even at some intersection. Again they aren't broken they just don't need to be powered. As of right now, they plan to stick with the single bladed switches until the CLRVS and ALRVS are retired completely.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

I'm not sure why on earth you would possibly think something so silly. They can and do reverse all of the time.

True but not easy as they have to have another operator guiding the pole through the reverse and they only usually do it in the yard and the street only if they have to get them out of the way for one reason or another. As far as I know, the TTC hasn't reversed streetcar in revenue service for a long time.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

In your experience, is it common for standees to use the top level of the bus?

An issue with the TTC's nova bus is that people won't stand on the upper level of the bus (in the rear third of the bus), which drastically cuts the capacity of the vehicle.

It was but not as much. The problem is the stairs are narrow so people did not want to stand up there. The seats would always be full but it was easier to stand on the lower level. The day of the Grenfell Tower fire I was on the 52 bus heading from the Victoria Coach Station to the Kensal Green area of London. The bottom of the bus was packed tight but the upper level not so much. I think it was because of fact you could not get off if you went upstairs.

It's not a problem unique to the Nova buses it's been like that ever since they started bringing in low floor buses people just don't want to stand on the uper level until they are forced to do it.