Jump to content
PCC Guy

TTC CLRV/ALRV updates and discussion

Recommended Posts

4179 was on the 503, then the 501 and 301 last night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/28/2018 at 7:29 PM, lip said:

 Exactly, neither the Bloor-Danforth, nor Yonge-University lines would be considered accessible, regardless of even if they were 85%, 90%, 95%, etc% accessible. An individual would easily be able to file a valid non-compliance complaint against the TTC stating that they did not provide accessible service if one of the stations they boarded or exited did not have an elevator.

I'm not sure what's going to happen between now and 2025, but i'm sure the TTC and/or province will come up with some kind of solution to the remaining stations which most likely wont meet the deadline (ie: Islington and Warden). I'm guessing there will be some kind of skirting around the AODA (ie: potential Wheel-Trans service available from inaccessible stations, but what the ultimate solution will be I have no idea.

If the province does take over the subway I absolutely could see stations like Chester,  Summerhill, and Glencairn being closed rather than making them accessible. I doubt Ford's cabinet would be super enthusiastic about spending millions of dollars making stations with low ridership accessible when they are focusing so heavily on spending cuts, especially in ridings the PCs will never win. The PC base certainty would't care, they could even spin it as making the subway faster for commuters from the suburbs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/31/2018 at 11:20 AM, dowlingm said:

I doubt it - if TTC operated an accessible bus bridge between functioning accessible stations while it's broken and committed to fix it in a reasonable time. You think TTC, who is running so scared of David Lepofsky it wouldn't put Presto balances on readers until the weight of ridicule got too much to bear, would just say "too bad so sad"?

 

That's just it, I don't think that they will either. I think that they will continue to do what they've done in the past - bus bridges, special shuttles, etc.

 

Honestly, I can see a point soon - likely once all 204 of the Flexities are delivered, or maybe after a couple more of the key stations are made accessible - where the TTC will argue that they are already meeting the regulations because the network is accessible. Just because it is the shortest or most direct possible route doesn't mean that it's the most efficient or most effective.

 

19 minutes ago, IRT_BMT_IND said:

If the province does take over the subway I absolutely could see stations like Chester,  Summerhill, and Glencairn being closed rather than making them accessible. I doubt Ford's cabinet would be super enthusiastic about spending millions of dollars making stations with low ridership accessible when they are focusing so heavily on spending cuts, especially in ridings the PCs will never win. The PC base certainty would't care, they could even spin it as making the subway faster for commuters from the suburbs.

They better hurry up then, Chester is already underway.

 

 

Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IRT_BMT_IND said:

If the province does take over the subway I absolutely could see stations like Chester,  Summerhill, and Glencairn being closed rather than making them accessible. I doubt Ford's cabinet would be super enthusiastic about spending millions of dollars making stations with low ridership accessible when they are focusing so heavily on spending cuts, especially in ridings the PCs will never win. The PC base certainty would't care, they could even spin it as making the subway faster for commuters from the suburbs.

Ford is a buffoon there is no doubt about that fact, but there is no way in hell that thought would even cross his mind. His IQ level would be basically nil if he ever came out with an idea like that.

He would be way more likely to close down the Yonge-University loop on the premise that "downtown has enough subways", rather than closing down stations outside of the core because of accessibility concerns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4011 is at Hillcrest. 4145 was in service on the 506 on New Year's eve.

4074 is on the 501.

4180 is at Hillcrest now. I presume this is not a good sign for an unrefurbed car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PCC Guy said:

4011 is at Hillcrest. 4145 was in service on the 506 on New Year's eve.

4074 is on the 501.

4180 is at Hillcrest now. I presume this is not a good sign for an unrefurbed car.

4190 has gone AWOL again after its one-week in service

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Robert Lubinski said:

4190 has gone AWOL again after its one-week in service

 

Thanks for the update.

4011 was just deadheaded back to Russell too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, PCC Guy said:

Thanks for the update.

4011 was just deadheaded back to Russell too.

On the 1st I watch 4184 couple up the 4011 and pull it to the back of Russell. 4086 also followed under its own power. I also realized 4086 has a broken rolllsign

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ultimate said:

On the 1st I watch 4184 couple up the 4011 and pull it to the back of Russell. 4086 also followed under its own power. I also realized 4086 has a broken rolllsign

And now 4184 is at Hillcrest.

4037 hasn't run since Christmas Day, 4081 since Dec 27, 4117 since Dec 29/30, 4125 since Dec 29/30, and 4192 since Dec 26/27.

4115 is at Roncesvalles, not seen since Dec 30, and so is 4170, last seen Jan 2.

Assorted ALRVs are MIA again.  4204, 4230 (out now) and 4249 are the only ones to have run recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PCC Guy said:

And now 4184 is at Hillcrest.

4037 hasn't run since Christmas Day, 4081 since Dec 27, 4117 since Dec 29/30, 4125 since Dec 29/30, and 4192 since Dec 26/27.

4115 is at Roncesvalles, not seen since Dec 30, and so is 4170, last seen Jan 2.

Assorted ALRVs are MIA again.  4204, 4230 (out now) and 4249 are the only ones to have run recently.

IMG_0209.thumb.JPG.b64f56052e830b5bcee0076a69d1b781.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4081 is on the 501, 4125 and 4184 are on the 506.

According to TransSee vehicle history, it doesn't appear any ALRVs made it out onto the 501 this morning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the correction. None of those units have been indicated as being in service since last night... proving that nothing can beat sightings with one's own eye!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Wayside Observer said:

4229, 4230, and 4204 were on Long Branch about 7:30 this morning.  An abundance of ALRVs.

In this new board period, the ALRVs are supposed to be only trippers. I guess the data files haven't been updated to include these trippers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ed T. said:

In this new board period, the ALRVs are supposed to be only trippers. I guess the data files haven't been updated to include these trippers.

Cubic hasn't updated the Nextbus data yet for the January 6 board. So there's stuff missing from the data - particularly where there's been schedule changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4187 and 4192 on 501

Once the current crop of MIA cars comes back or is retired as confirmed, there won't be any updates on the status of MIA cars for a while because NextBus oh-so graciously wiped cached vehicle locations a few days ago, so I won't know which units are MIA and which ones are not.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×