hw621
Senior Member
It is "damned" streetcar no? Why are we suddenly calling it an LRT now?
A streetcar would be an LRV, not LRT. And we've been calling the streetcars LRVs (CLRV and ALRVs) since the late 1970s.It is "damned" streetcar no? Why are we suddenly calling it an LRT now?
All Streetcar Projects that operate entirely in dedicated lanes are for all intents and purposes "LRTs", and were called as such during their construction (St. Clair LRT, Harbourfront LRT, etc). In fact, when the Harbourfront Streetcar opened in 1990, it was featured subway map as a rapid transit route, as if it was equivalent to the other Subway Maps, but they removed such designation 6 months later because they realized it was stupid and made no sense.It is "damned" streetcar no? Why are we suddenly calling it an LRT now?
I think it's safe to assume we'll be ordering driverless streetcars before double-ended ones, so we can put this discussion to restThe question of double-end cars has been discussed at GREAT length elsewhere on UT - let's not get sidetracked here. The extension of the route along Commissioners to the Barns IS 'in the plans' but I doubt that most of us will live long enough to see it happening as the cost will be high - new bridge needed over the new Don plus the actual track.
In all seriousness, it won't do anything of the sort. I'm almost certain that the cost differential between double or single ending an automated vehicle is going to be greater than for a conventional given you will need the full sensor suite at both ends. And in any case, the real argument from the TTC at least publicly has been about internal circulation when they will almost never be using off side doors (frankly I think that one is BS - this is a "we've always done it this way" issue first and foremost).I think it's safe to assume we'll be ordering driverless streetcars before double-ended ones, so we can put this discussion to rest