Jump to content
PCC Guy

TTC CLRV/ALRV updates and discussion

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, CLRV4002 said:

FDA5E1EB-4AC1-4715-88F9-46930C8229BB.thumb.jpeg.b40a88d9ed1e27b3abb3b51c47efeffb.jpegC7182C98-6AF0-45FA-AF4E-A2DBD93F0C28.thumb.jpeg.696a5d2c657305523ea02d0ecefe7067.jpeg7DA01AF3-1141-45F8-80CF-87CA4A32561A.thumb.jpeg.54c4243dc3a55a9506aef761aaee55e7.jpeg39F4A483-6DFD-4C4C-85BF-06BCE6CA9670.thumb.jpeg.299d26d61742d926fbd9fcc3a743bb41.jpeg

There’s a few pics from Russell today. 4087 has its pole tied down, 4065 still has its lights on but looks very dirty. I notice 4208 is behind 4228 with its lights still on. 

I couldn’t see 4002 anywhere, anyone know where it’s located ? 

4002 was in the repair bay last I checked

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, TechnicaProductions said:

4002 was in the repair bay last I checked

Well that’s a good sign I suppose 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the evidence that it’s lights were on, 4208 should be off the retired list, I suppose

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jor said:

With the evidence that it’s lights were on, 4208 should be off the retired list, I suppose

It was said before that it was stripped, but it doesn’t appear to be from the part of the car that I could see. Does anyone know for sure ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2019 at 9:43 AM, Tom1122 said:

The major factor in the cars not running at museums is the electronics which are more complicated than say a PCC or Witt. 

 

Seriously Tom, I had written this a half hour before you posted:

On 5/3/2019 at 9:14 AM, smallspy said:

I wouldn't worry about it too much. The LRC loco owned by the Toronto Railway Museum is of a similar heritage and with similarly-vintage electronics, and for the amount of use that the unit sees the electronics have not yet been an issue. And should the day come that they do become an issue, the TRM has lots of spares of the various computer cards to swap out faulty cards, or to even have new ones made. No doubt that HCRY will have the same when the time comes to receive their cars.

 

Once again, and not to belabor the point too much - the electronics are NOT going to be an issue, not for a very, very long time.

 

Dan

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things kind of went full circle because the last time I heard about the problem where the substation could explode, it was from a very, very senior streetcar operator at the trolley museum winter gathering at NYTM back in February and it was from the same guy that I heard it the first time all those years ago, with the same information from two or three others during the intervening time.

If they're all telling me that stepping on the brakes on a CLRV at HCRR stands a good chance of making the substation explode, I believe them.  I believe them now more than ever because six months ago, if someone told me there was a non-zero risk a freight train could fall out of the sky and crush a trolley museum substation, I would've laughed them off. Now, not so much.  Substations seem to invite disaster these days so I wouldn't want to be around one in case it decides to go all Mount Pinatubo or something while the CLRV's running.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I caught 4001 today, and im just having to say this car is i believe the oldest car alive and Russell wants to scrap it by the end of next month.

Ive been trying my own best to keep this one car alive by convincing them how many toronto'ns love the CLRV.

I tried to catch this car at main street this morning but unfortunatley it went off service prior to a issue. 

I hope they keep this one alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When did 4003 get put back in service? I caught it yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Basket said:

I caught 4001 today, and im just having to say this car is i believe the oldest car alive and Russell wants to scrap it by the end of next month.

Ive been trying my own best to keep this one car alive by convincing them how many toronto'ns love the CLRV.

I tried to catch this car at main street this morning but unfortunatley it went off service prior to a issue. 

I hope they keep this one alive.

4002 is the oldest.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, 7749 said:

4002 is the oldest.

4002 is being repaired, though

1 hour ago, Basket said:

I hope they keep [4001] alive.

Wonder if any other L1s will be preserved (other than presumably 4002)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Imgursdownvote4love said:

4002 is being repaired, though

Wonder if any other L1s will be preserved (other than presumably 4002)

Sadly, intrested buyers want best quality. I hope they give hope for the old cars as well though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Imgursdownvote4love said:

4002 is being repaired, though

Is it? The most recent update we had from Dan was that they were still trying to decide whether to.

12 hours ago, Basket said:

Ive been trying my own best to keep this one car alive by convincing them how many toronto'ns love the CLRV. 

This argument wouldn't really work on anyone, I don't think. For one thing most Torontonians, outside of transit fans and nostalgia buffs, can't stand the CLRVs (as with every old vehicle), and for another, just because someone loves a vehicle doesn't mean that they will save one on that basis (otherwise 4041 would still be in tact). The fact of the matter is that the CLRVs are way overdue for retirement, and you can't save them all.

It's possible that one of the preservation folk may end up picking up 4001, but if they don't, it will fall to the scrapper, just like 4000, 4041, 4199, 4200, or 4251 have/will.

11 hours ago, Basket said:

Sadly, intrested buyers want best quality. I hope they give hope for the old cars as well though.

What do you mean? If the conversation is about preservation, then surely the criteria for taking a car from the TTC is going to be very different from someone running a regular revenue service operation. No one in their right mind would buy a second hand CLRV for a revenue service operation, but if it's a preservation group the criteria will be which of the cars is in the best condition following retirement.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PCC Guy said:

Is it? The most recent update we had from Dan was that they were still trying to decide whether to.

That was 2 weeks ago. Things may have changed since then. Perhaps the damage to the stairwell and floor was not nearly as dire as it first appeared.

 

1 hour ago, PCC Guy said:

This argument wouldn't really work on anyone, I don't think. For one thing most Torontonians, outside of transit fans and nostalgia buffs, can't stand the CLRVs (as with every old vehicle), and for another, just because someone loves a vehicle doesn't mean that they will save one on that basis (otherwise 4041 would still be in tact). The fact of the matter is that the CLRVs are way overdue for retirement, and you can't save them all.

That's not even remotely true. Over the past 10 to 15 years there's a been a huge upswing in interest from John Q Public over the history of this City, and more specifically for the TTC. Look at how popular things like Doors Open are, or the advent of groups such as Heritage Toronto, or how well read articles on the TTC do on the various newspaper sites or BlogTO. People, now more than ever, want to find out more about the TTC and its history.

 

You should also see the responses that people give us when the Rapido New Look comes out to shows. A lot of people obviously look fondly on older vehicles such as those, as it reminds them of their youth. Even though its only been 7+ years since the last New Look ran in service here, people already struggle to remember them.

 

As for 4041, what relevance does that have to this conversation?

 

1 hour ago, PCC Guy said:

What do you mean? If the conversation is about preservation, then surely the criteria for taking a car from the TTC is going to be very different from someone running a regular revenue service operation. No one in their right mind would buy a second hand CLRV for a revenue service operation, but if it's a preservation group the criteria will be which of the cars is in the best condition following retirement.

I think that you'd be very surprised.

 

Dan

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, smallspy said:

That's not even remotely true. Over the past 10 to 15 years there's a been a huge upswing in interest from John Q Public over the history of this City, and more specifically for the TTC. Look at how popular things like Doors Open are, or the advent of groups such as Heritage Toronto, or how well read articles on the TTC do on the various newspaper sites or BlogTO. People, now more than ever, want to find out more about the TTC and its history.

 

You should also see the responses that people give us when the Rapido New Look comes out to shows. A lot of people obviously look fondly on older vehicles such as those, as it reminds them of their youth. Even though its only been 7+ years since the last New Look ran in service here, people already struggle to remember them.

That's fair enough, but to what extent does this attitude translate into the way passengers receive the old clunkers that they have to ride to work every day? The New Looks, or PCCs, are disconnected enough from the modern commuting experience that they draw interest, but in my experience, most of the articles that have been published about the CLRV in recent time have been met with comments largely unfavourable to them. I'm sure a few years after the CLRVs have been retired, and the historical units start making their rounds around the city, then we'll start to see an upswing in appreciation for them among members of the general public, but while they continue to be king along Queen and Carlton, I'm personally skeptical. Most of the people whose opinions I've read on the internet just think of them as the 40 year old clunkers that freeze up in the winter and have no air-conditioning in the summer.

I don't know whether Basket has connections to the big cheeses in streetcarland, but surely,  in the scenario that they posed above, 4001 wouldn't receive a reprieve just because they claim that a lot of Torontonians love the CLRV? The TTC is not going to renege on the CLRV scrapping program just because some people, somewhere, are fond of the cars.

27 minutes ago, smallspy said:

As for 4041, what relevance does that have to this conversation?

Just another example of what I mentioned above. I'm sure that someone could've mentioned to the TTC big cheeses that 4041 was generally well liked among transit and nostalgia buffs, but it wouldn't have been particularly effective at reversing its fate.

27 minutes ago, smallspy said:

I think that you'd be very surprised.

What else factors into the decision? I get that preservationists will want cars in good condition instead of substandard heaps of garbage, but what else do their requirements have in common with a revenue service operation? They don't have to worry about passenger amenities or the like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, PCC Guy said:

That's fair enough, but to what extent does this attitude translate into the way passengers receive the old clunkers that they have to ride to work every day? The New Looks, or PCCs, are disconnected enough from the modern commuting experience that they draw interest, but in my experience, most of the articles that have been published about the CLRV in recent time have been met with comments largely unfavourable to them. I'm sure a few years after the CLRVs have been retired, and the historical units start making their rounds around the city, then we'll start to see an upswing in appreciation for them among members of the general public, but while they continue to be king along Queen and Carlton, I'm personally skeptical. Most of the people whose opinions I've read on the internet just think of them as the 40 year old clunkers that freeze up in the winter and have no air-conditioning in the summer.

Time.  As you mentioned, once they're gone and some time's passed, people will start to get nostalgic about them.  It's part Joni Mitchell "you don't know what you've got till it's gone" and part viewing the past through rose coloured glasses and part wanting to share an experience with others.  Whenever one of the PCC cars is out like on September 23rd or on the Sundays down on the Harbourfront, you'd see lots of parents with kids showing them what a streetcar used to be like when they are young.

44 minutes ago, PCC Guy said:

What else factors into the decision? I get that preservationists will want cars in good condition instead of substandard heaps of garbage, but what else do their requirements have in common with a revenue service operation? They don't have to worry about passenger amenities or the like.

The part of your comment that Dan quoted makes several different points and it's not clear which specific point or points he was speaking to.  Broadly speaking, unless there's some overriding issue of serious importance, preservation groups would want cars that are in good shape.  For example, Seashore made the curatorial decision to get a dead MBTA Boeing car because there was some aspect of historic significance that was important to them.  I've forgotten the details but it was important enough that they opted to get one with a fried LVPS vs. one retired by the T in working condition but this the best example I can think of, of an exception to the rule.  Otherwise, why make it unnecessarily hard on yourself?  Revenue service operations, like say, MUNI, have a budget, a heavy shop, staff, a purchasing department etc. they can handle fleets of cars in inevitable various states of condition.  Plus, hypothetically, if a revenue operation of some kind picked up a bunch of run of the mill retired CLRVs, they'd get sent out for heavy overhauls before starting on their second careers.  Most preservation groups can't afford to send cars to Brookville, Gomaco etc.

Speaking of not worrying about passenger amenities... Here's a sadistic thought:  What do trolley museums like?  Original condition.  When do trolley museums operate?  Summer.  What should trolley museums bring back on the CLRVs?  Sealed windows and no air conditioning!  :P

On another note, Steve Munro's replied to another comment in a different article on his blog again going on about the flipping electronics.  Seriously, does anyone have any idea why this guy has such a bee in his bonnet about electronics?  I read about how he thinks they're positively antique and I get up every morning and try to do the Peter Pan thing as best I can and then I feel old, like I'm going to wind up stuffed and mounted next to a CLRV at HCRR with a little sign that says, "Late 20th century electronics technologist.  White.  Male.  Bad temper.  Drinks too much coffee.  Hates people.  Social maladjustment possibly attributable to exposure to non-RoHS 60/40 leaded solder."  Honestly, considering Steve's age, his computer background should have included a lot of electronics exposure back in the day so he should know better, and yet he seems to be intent on proving the theory that IT guys are no good when it comes to hardware.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

That's fair enough, but to what extent does this attitude translate into the way passengers receive the old clunkers that they have to ride to work every day? The New Looks, or PCCs, are disconnected enough from the modern commuting experience that they draw interest, but in my experience, most of the articles that have been published about the CLRV in recent time have been met with comments largely unfavourable to them. I'm sure a few years after the CLRVs have been retired, and the historical units start making their rounds around the city, then we'll start to see an upswing in appreciation for them among members of the general public, but while they continue to be king along Queen and Carlton, I'm personally skeptical. Most of the people whose opinions I've read on the internet just think of them as the 40 year old clunkers that freeze up in the winter and have no air-conditioning in the summer.

As noted above - time. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. When people long for the "good old days", they don't remember that those days were really not so good at all. They focus on the good times - it's human nature.

 

Another example - look at people's response to the PCCs or Peter Witt coming out.  You get a lot of "oohs and ahhs", notwithstanding the fact that they were generally seen as being noisy and uncomfortable when they were actually in service, and that people looked forward to their replacement with newer vehicles. That too is human nature.

 

Quote

I don't know whether Basket has connections to the big cheeses in streetcarland, but surely,  in the scenario that they posed above, 4001 wouldn't receive a reprieve just because they claim that a lot of Torontonians love the CLRV? The TTC is not going to renege on the CLRV scrapping program just because some people, somewhere, are fond of the cars.

By that same token, why did the TTC save the New Looks that they did? The PCCs that they did? That particular Peter Witt? A lot of it comes down to practicality - which units are in the best shape. The TTC isn't likely to save a particular car, but to save a representative of that particular fleet.

 

A museum, however, may be more interested in the historical aspect not just of the fleet as a whole, but also of the historical specificity of that single vehicle.

 

Quote

Just another example of what I mentioned above. I'm sure that someone could've mentioned to the TTC big cheeses that 4041 was generally well liked among transit and nostalgia buffs, but it wouldn't have been particularly effective at reversing its fate.

There were a couple of drivers who liked 4041 for whatever reasons, but there was zero additional historical significance for 4041 versus any other particular car in the fleet. And I can't say that I've ever heard of any of the "nostalgia buffs" - for which I include myself - having any particular affinity for it.

 

Quote

What else factors into the decision? I get that preservationists will want cars in good condition instead of substandard heaps of garbage, but what else do their requirements have in common with a revenue service operation? They don't have to worry about passenger amenities or the like.

That depends on the property, what they want to do with it and their capabilities. A car that may be in rough shape body-wise but having very low mileage on the mechanical bits would be well suited for an organization that has some body work capability and planning on running a car for some time. And conversely, a car that looks good but is a basketcase mechanically would be an appropriate donation for a group looking to stuff-and-mount a car, rather than running it.

 

Dan

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, smallspy said:

There were a couple of drivers who liked 4041 for whatever reasons ...

I'm surprised. It was very noisy, even when it was cold outside. I boarded one chilly day when it was particularly noisy, and asked the operator if he drew the short straw or something!

Even on warm days, there was nothing to stop people opening the windows.Though I think I rode it for years, without ever hitting it on a hot day until last summer - when I finally got to appreciate it.

Share this post


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

Is it? The most recent update we had from Dan was that they were still trying to decide whether to.

Last I heard it was in the service bay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, smallspy said:

By that same token, why did the TTC save the New Looks that they did? The PCCs that they did? That particular Peter Witt? A lot of it comes down to practicality - which units are in the best shape. The TTC isn't likely to save a particular car, but to save a representative of that particular fleet.

 

A museum, however, may be more interested in the historical aspect not just of the fleet as a whole, but also of the historical specificity of that single vehicle.

I feel like we're misunderstanding each other. I never said that 4001 couldn't be selected as a historical representative of the CLRV fleet, either in Toronto, or elsewhere. For as much as I know, it could end up being the last CLRV to exist in history.

Basket reported (whether right or wrong) that there are plans to scrap 4001 by the end of next month at Russell, and that they (Basket) were trying to keep that particular unit alive by convincing the big cheeses of streetcarland that the CLRVs are well loved by the general populace.

What fate awaits 4001 after it has stopped running in regular service is irrelevant. What I'm saying is that I don't think that the people in charge will suddenly decide not to retire that particular unit, based on that particular argument. Maybe that source knows something the general readership of this forum doesn't, like 4001 being in bad shape. That being the case, all the support in the world wouldn't be able to stop that unit from being scrapped. Like what happened with 4000.

On the other hand, 4001 could be saved, but again the reasoning for that particular unit being saved is going to be far more complex than "people like CLRVs".

All I'm saying is that "people like [vehicle]" isn't enough of a reason to stop any individual representative of that class from being scrapped, if it is not feasible to save. And that's the basis of my comments about 4041 too - there were a whole bunch of us that were rather fond of the car (not employees), but that was never going to be enough to stop it from being scrapped.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I feel like we're misunderstanding each other. I never said that 4001 couldn't be selected as a historical representative of the CLRV fleet, either in Toronto, or elsewhere. For as much as I know, it could end up being the last CLRV to exist in history.

Basket reported (whether right or wrong) that there are plans to scrap 4001 by the end of next month at Russell, and that they (Basket) were trying to keep that particular unit alive by convincing the big cheeses of streetcarland that the CLRVs are well loved by the general populace.

What fate awaits 4001 after it has stopped running in regular service is irrelevant. What I'm saying is that I don't think that the people in charge will suddenly decide not to retire that particular unit, based on that particular argument. Maybe that source knows something the general readership of this forum doesn't, like 4001 being in bad shape. That being the case, all the support in the world wouldn't be able to stop that unit from being scrapped. Like what happened with 4000.

On the other hand, 4001 could be saved, but again the reasoning for that particular unit being saved is going to be far more complex than "people like CLRVs".

All I'm saying is that "people like [vehicle]" isn't enough of a reason to stop any individual representative of that class from being scrapped, if it is not feasible to save. And that's the basis of my comments about 4041 too - there were a whole bunch of us that were rather fond of the car (not employees), but that was never going to be enough to stop it from being scrapped.

I think that we're basically on the same page here, even if we're looking at it from different angles. I agree that to the TTC, 4001 may not be historically significant enough to save.

 

(For the record, I was never referring to 4001 specifically, but more about any single individual unit within the fleet.)

 

There may be a number of other outfits, museums, properties, etc, however, that may not agree with the TTC's view on that particular car - provided that is in fact the TTC's view - and may want to save it. For instance, Seashore had long held that they wanted one of the three units that were sent to Boston. Unfortunately, it looks like they may not get any.

 

And perhaps that's the problem with the TTC's viewpoint. They understand that the vehicles may be significant as a whole, but not WHY they are significant.

 

Dan

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, smallspy said:

And perhaps that's the problem with the TTC's viewpoint. They understand that the vehicles may be significant as a whole, but not WHY they are significant.

They don't understand why, or they don't care why?

Personally, I'd like to see one L1, one L2,  and one L3 preserved. Don't really care who preserves it. Like someone once said somewhere in the Western Canada forum, "Not every [vehicle] needs to be preserved"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll buck the trend and say that specifics or minutiae don’t matter, so long as one or two get saved. Therefore, it would simply be most cost effective and expedient to retain the one or two in the best structural condition. Mechanical cherrypicking can be done as the final dozen or so get disassembled. The goal is to provide a tangible snapshot of the past to the residents of Toronto at large, not the safety vest brigade. They’ve never heard of the terms L1 or L2, nor do they care to.

The museums can squabble over the remainder.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Imgursdownvote4love said:

They don't understand why, or they don't care why?

Personally, I'd like to see one L1, one L2,  and one L3 preserved. Don't really care who preserves it. Like someone once said somewhere in the Western Canada forum, "Not every [vehicle] needs to be preserved"

 

2 hours ago, Bus_Medic said:

I’ll buck the trend and say that specifics or minutiae don’t matter, so long as one or two get saved. Therefore, it would simply be most cost effective and expedient to retain the one or two in the best structural condition. Mechanical cherrypicking can be done as the final dozen or so get disassembled. The goal is to provide a tangible snapshot of the past to the residents of Toronto at large, not the safety vest brigade. They’ve never heard of the terms L1 or L2, nor do they care to.

The museums can squabble over the remainder.

You'd want a couple scattered around in preservation.  If only one or two are preserved in the same place, you're at risk of being one disaster away from having none.  Consider the Washington pre-PCC car that was lost in the National Capital Trolley Museum fire a number of years ago.  It was the only example left showing the stages of development that were rapidly heading towards the early PCC cars and now it's gone.  One egg in one basket is not a good situation to be in.

The safety vest brigade probably thinks an ST7805 is a bus.  I'd happily be proved wrong but I'm not optimistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should have prefaced my post that I’m biased. My stint at Halton ended on a very sour note, and left an indelible mark.

Call it personal grudge if you like, because on it’s face, basically it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...