Jump to content

nfitz

Member
  • Content Count

    2,374
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

7,232 profile views
  1. Ah yes ... I think after that (April 2010), I heard that their solution to this, was they ended up buying the door manufacturer themselves. Which didn't mean there weren't delays ...
  2. My vague recollection of the discussion almost a decade ago, was that Bombardier purchased the door supplier when they were going bankrupt. I've no idea where I read this, or to it's accuracy now though.
  3. If they are the lowest bidder that meet technical specs. There's a lot of indication that they are trying to buy work, and will bid well below their own cost, with funding made up from the Chinese government.
  4. Anything is possible, but the schedule only calls for 122 Flexities on Sunday afternoons, compared to 140 on Saturdays, and 149 for the weekday AM peak. They delivered on Friday, and had only one 506 during the Thursday AM peak, so 122 should be easy to do. I'd expect AM peak next week would be the likeliest time to see another CLRV on 506 if it's being driven by the Flexity situation.
  5. With production car deliveries starting in in 2022, only vendors who have a design sitting on the shelf, for Toronto's tight corners, steep grade, gauge, and power systems, have a chance. Or those, willing to throw a ton of $ at it, and lose a lot of money. So it's down to Bombardier, or perhaps one of the Chinese government-owned vendors, if they want to buy the work. With the initial talk of a new RFP in 2018, where there optional cars coming from Bombardier, and then a new tender, then Alstom or Siemens were in the running. But they have no chance now, unless they are prepared to litigate the RFP, on the basis that it's been rigged so only Bombardier can win. The frame issues are a problem with Bombardier, but they solved that early problem years ago - it's unfortunate that the warranty repairs will take so long. And the production deadline issue has been overstated - while some interim promises were missed, the contractual requirement for completion in 2019 is either going to be met, or it's going to only be days or weeks late.
  6. There's no money for this new 60 car order yet either (or the 40-car option) - unless this latest budget get's approved (I assume it will show as funded in the budget numbers that should appear next week). The money has been unfunded in the TTC budget for many years, but the line item has been there as unfunded, with various debates noting that the option deadline didn't expire yet, or with quality or delivery concerns. Reports in 2018 talked about having a vote to approve it in early 2019, that never came, in some kind of bait and switch that avoid the commisioners voting on it. The Commission chose not to request city funding for the option - instead requesting funding for a new purchase. If I was a conspiracy theoriest, I'd think this was some favour to Bombardier - but I assume it's only bad management.
  7. Yeah, just saw it sitting at Main Street as I came out of the subway! So one last ride home! https://twitter.com/nfitz1/status/1203448539591958528
  8. Though (if it goes to Bombardier), all the development of the design and assembly line was already done. Which is why the original (uninflated) value was $5 million for the first 204 cars, and $3.5 million for additional cars. Though given the second lowest bidder was $7.5 million a car, and reports are that Bombardier bid too low - yeah, maybe. Though it just looks TTC look more foolish and incompetent for not triggering the optional cars back in 2018, for 2020 and 2021 delivery.
  9. The gauge difference between TTC and standard gauge, is so trivial, that some equipment can run on both! It's only a 30 mm difference on each wheel. It doesn't effect the width of the car. Toronto subway cars are about the same width (3.1 metres) as some other systems that use standard gauge. New York has some 3.05-metre wide cars on standard gauge., and I don't think most people would even notice the difference. It certainly doesn't make much difference to tunnelling or station costs. Even Vancouvers are 3.0 metres wide. I'm surprised that Ford would even mention such a minor detail. It's the length that's an issue, not the width. Why shouldn't it be able to do? That's what TTC were planning for their cancelled Line 2 extension that was going to open in 2027. Though the larger the tunnel diameter, the more they'll want to stay in bedrock, driving the line deeper, and stations more expensive. Also, compare Montreal's bedrock to Toronto - it's far more competent - you can use a backhoe on some Toronto bedrock, where it's surprisingly soft shales. Meanwhile in Montreal, there's some spots in the Metro, where they've left the bedrock exposed!
  10. It may have been the last CLRV on 506 (and the last to leave High Park at about 1 AM), but CLRVs continued on 306 all night - I think the last one was 4147 that was heading southbound on Coxwell at Lower Gerrard at 6 AM. https://www.transsee.ca/trippath?a=ttc&id=153100554 Also, 4178's last trip is listed as at 9 AM Thursday morning from Main to Broadview/Gerrard ... not long after I saw it eastbound at Greenwood. It's random runs since then, don't show up in Transee, suggesting that they were not scheduled runs. So perhaps the last proper 506 run was actually 4178 - it departed High Park around 7:30 AM.
  11. Hopefully the $414.5 million listed in the 2020-2024 capital costs for "Streetcars" is more than just buying the 60 streetcars they mention. That would be about $6.9 million per streetcar ... almost double the $3.5 million option price ($210 million) they turned down last year. I believe the option did allow for some inflation on the option price - but no where near that much.
  12. I'm not sure what you mean - as far as I know the Canada Train technology is pretty much the same as the existing Toronto subway, but with automation, and slightly narrower (and much shorter) trains. Nothing precludes building the tunnels slightly wider to handle the existing vehicles, and still automating it. Or even automating Line 1, 2, and 4, if they really wanted to spend that money and replace (or upgrade) the rolling stock. The big problem with Vancouver, is the entire train and platform is shorter than a single Line 6 LRT car. Heck, it's only 1/3 longer than a streetcar!
  13. As far as I know, Broadview modifications are buried in the budget, along with other small projects. Wasn't there a mention of this at the board or something already?
  14. I read that as a reference to the existing 508 that goes up Parliament from King to Carlton - stopping short of Bloor. The problem with that, is the demand just hasn't been there for the 65 Parliament. And in many way it duplicates the 504 feeding up to the next station (Broadview). If one was to build tracks on Parliament to Castle Frank, I'd think you'd want to run down to Queens Quay, not just to King. Still tossing out brainstorming ideas has value - nice to see some thinking outside the box. Skytrain is merely a "brand" on the Canada Line. The same way the older Skytrain technology in Toronto on Line 3 is called RT or Subway. A 6-car Canada Line would be fine. But if they'd do that, why not make the lines compatible? They announced 65 Parliament as part of the 10-minute network, and did boost service, but they've never implemented close to 10-minute service, other than some seasonal early evening service for the Christmas Market. It was every 13 minutes in AM peak and mid-day and every 18 minutes in evenings!
  15. That's the first time they've had full Flexity service out there since the brake incident. I saw 4178 heading eastbound on Lower Gerrard near Greenwood - in a bunch behind 2 Flexities at around 8:30 - hopefully it was an extra, because 3 cars together on a route that only runs every 8 minutes means there's a 24-minute gap hiding somewhere. These service cuts aren't going to encourage more people to take transit ... with the typical lackadaisical TTC route management.
×
×
  • Create New...