General Subway/RT Discussion

[Doppelkupplung]

On 10/21/2022 at 3:49 PM, 2044 said:

The final look of the TRs very much look like the early renders presented to the public. That's why I'm a pretty disappointed with how these cars will look after seeing this early render.

 

For what it's worth, I came up with an idea for fun last year of what I thought new cars could look like.

Concept subway train for Toronto by Adrian Badaraco, on Flickr

Something a bit minimalist, but with a little excitement. Added some red to match the LFLRVs as embracing the red was the direction the TTC was going. The upper portion of the front was a little nod to the old Hawker cars. Really liked that detailing they had.

Yeah, I always liked this design of yours, especially the upper portion. But the piano black does it for me the most, it reminds me of the BVG Class IK, which look similar. Same w/ DB Class 483. 

[smallspy]

8 hours ago, Orion VI said:

Talking about this? https://www.wheel-rail-seminars.com/archives/2017/rt-papers/presentations/RT 2 WRI 2017 - Torontos New Subway Cars rev4.pdf

The 13th slide has information on the contour of the TR vs the older models. The TR has almost 1/3 of the drag that a flat-nosed train does.

 

This looks familiar - I think it's the one I'm thinking of.

 

Dan

[81-717]

On 10/21/2022 at 10:20 AM, T3G said:

I've never cared for the TR design either, but as far as I'm concerned the pinnacle of subway car design was the H5/H6/T1 kleenex box style of subway car so any deviation from that is something I'm not hugely keen on. Interior wise I find the TR to be more agreeable than the T1, which is far too dark.

Interior-wise, I say the H5/6 wins hands down. Exterior-wise, I'm 50–50 on the H5 vs. the H1–4. It'd also be nice if the new trains' interiors end up being similar to the Alstom Metropolis in Budapest, which is pretty nice compared to most modern interiors.

On 10/22/2022 at 1:23 PM, Shaun said:

Are there any factors in regards to fixed trainsets that they found was a disadvantage? Is that the reason why the new TR's can be broken up into pairs or 3's?

On 10/22/2022 at 5:22 PM, Xtrazsteve said:

And allow them to defer the Kipling yard indefinitely 

To the point, while the proposed configuration of the new trains is a viable solution to the present limitations of Greenwood yard and lack of a Kipling yard, in the long term if & when Kipling yard is built, they would then have the option to link the trains into a TR-type configuration, just like MTA linked their R62s and R68s (into sets of 5 and 4 respectively).

[Xtrazsteve]

23 minutes ago, 81-717 said:

 

To the point, while the proposed configuration of the new trains is a viable solution to the limitations of Greenwood yard & the lack of a Kipling yard, in the long term if & when Kipling yard is built, they would then have the option to link the trains into a TR-type configuration, just like MTA linked their R62s & R68s (into sets of 5 & 4 respectively) during rebuild.

For sure this allows Kipling yard to be completed half way through the order. If they really need it, It just needs to be completed in 2030/31 instead of the beginning of the order in 2027/28.

[2044]

23 hours ago, Doppelkupplung said:

Yeah, I always liked this design of yours, especially the upper portion. But the piano black does it for me the most, it reminds me of the BVG Class IK, which look similar. Same w/ DB Class 483. 

Thank you. I think the black looks very slick. And really it's not a new idea. The concept for the H5 had rather large gloss black sections on the front. I thought that looked cool.

Of course, it could be a complete non starter with the TTC if they're still worried about visibility in the tunnels.

[Wayside Observer]

On 10/23/2022 at 11:14 AM, Orion VI said:

Talking about this? https://www.wheel-rail-seminars.com/archives/2017/rt-papers/presentations/RT 2 WRI 2017 - Torontos New Subway Cars rev4.pdf

The 13th slide has information on the contour of the TR vs the older models. The TR has almost 1/3 of the drag that a flat-nosed train does.

 

Interesting, thank you.

I read through it and something else jumped out at me:   I wasn’t expecting the gearbox losses with the PCC style hypoid right angle drive to be so severe either.  The TR would be the first time the Toronto subway has had anything except that style of gearbox except for the old repurposed streetcars that were used as work cars in the very early days of the subway.

[T3G]

On 10/24/2022 at 12:29 AM, 81-717 said:

To the point, while the proposed configuration of the new trains is a viable solution to the present limitations of Greenwood yard and lack of a Kipling yard, in the long term if & when Kipling yard is built, they would then have the option to link the trains into a TR-type configuration, just like MTA linked their R62s and R68s (into sets of 5 and 4 respectively) during the GOH overhaul.

Nitpick: neither the R62 nor R68 ever underwent a GOH.

The reason for the GOH of the 60s era SMEE stock was because the subway was devastated from decades of deferred maintenance. The preferred solution these days is SMS (Scheduled Maintenance System), which tries to get ahead of the need for a large scale overhaul by replacing components as they reach their end of life (yes, that sounds to me like regular maintenance practice, too). As well, the R62s were linked into sets in 1991, long before they would've been ripe for anything resembling an overhaul, anyway.

Also to keep this post at least somewhat on topic, the building of Kipling yard doesn't actually solve the space issues at Greenwood that necessitate the TR Mark IIs to be built in the way that they are. I know of no plans to decomission Greenwood yard, so unless they renovate it to make servicing TRs possible, linking the cars together will not be on the table.

[81-717]

11 hours ago, T3G said:

Nitpick: neither the R62 nor R68 ever underwent a GOH.

Ah, I see, I assumed they did, just like the R44/46s. The R44/46s would actually be a better example here, since iirc they were originally delivered as unconventional "married pairs" (cab car & non-cab car), before being linked into 4-car sets (some, like 6152–6153–6207–6206, were linked even more recently).

11 hours ago, T3G said:

As well, the R62s were linked into sets in 1991, long before they would've been ripe for anything resembling an overhaul, anyway.

So basically when they were still almost brand new.

11 hours ago, T3G said:

Also to keep this post at least somewhat on topic, the building of Kipling yard doesn't actually solve the space issues at Greenwood that necessitate the TR Mark IIs to be built in the way that they are. I know of no plans to decommission Greenwood yard, so unless they renovate it to make servicing TRs possible, linking the cars together will not be on the table.

When Kipling yard is built, the trains could be serviced at Kipling, while GW could be used only for storage (and for servicing other equipment like work cars). After all, the TRs have been stored there overnight on a few occasions when they ran on line 2, they just wouldn't have been maintained there.

 

[MK78]

I don't know if its been discussed, but i was wondering now that Line 1 has switched to full ATC, is the entire line now running with a single operator per train? (OPTO I think).

If so, what did they do with the other operators? I'm curious how the TTC & the union handled this.

[GTAmissions1]

49 minutes ago, MK78 said:

I don't know if its been discussed, but i was wondering now that Line 1 has switched to full ATC, is the entire line now running with a single operator per train? (OPTO I think).

Line 1 still has one operator train operation between Vaughan Metro Centre and St. George. Can confirm when I was at St. George, they were doing an operator change off to continue to the Yonge side.

St. George to Finch (Yonge side) still operates with two operators on each ends. It will take time before all of Line 1 is transitioned to one operator train operations since ATC work finished up recently for the remaining stretch. 

[smallspy]

4 hours ago, GTAmissions1 said:

Line 1 still has one operator train operation between Vaughan Metro Centre and St. George. Can confirm when I was at St. George, they were doing an operator change off to continue to the Yonge side.

St. George to Finch (Yonge side) still operates with two operators on each ends. It will take time before all of Line 1 is transitioned to one operator train operations since ATC work finished up recently for the remaining stretch. 

Further to this, the rest of the line will convert to OPTO with the November board period.

Dan

[MK78]

4 hours ago, smallspy said:

Further to this, the rest of the line will convert to OPTO with the November board period.

Dan

Oh, so I was not far off.

[Archer]

On 11/1/2022 at 4:19 PM, smallspy said:

Further to this, the rest of the line will convert to OPTO with the November board period.

Dan

Unfortunately.

[MK78]

So back to a part of my question, what will they do with the excess operators?

[T3G]

I believe the union agreement mandates them to find them alternative positions within the commission.

As they should.

[Ed T.]

If there are issues with crew changes taking too long and delaying operations, perhaps using the extra trained operators to make those go more smoothly, say by a double or triple step-back?

Naaaah, the TTC will undoubtedly think of much better ways of redeploying employees, in ways that DON'T make operations more reliable and increase customer satisfaction.

[Shaun]

On 11/5/2022 at 11:14 AM, Ed T. said:

If there are issues with crew changes taking too long and delaying operations, perhaps using the extra trained operators to make those go more smoothly, say by a double or triple step-back?

Naaaah, the TTC will undoubtedly think of much better ways of redeploying employees, in ways that DON'T make operations more reliable and increase customer satisfaction.

There was a time when the stepback crew member would take the train from Finch to Sheppard, get off and then take the northbound train back to Finch. What was the advantage of doing that?

[smallspy]

10 hours ago, Shaun said:

There was a time when the stepback crew member would take the train from Finch to Sheppard, get off and then take the northbound train back to Finch. What was the advantage of doing that?

That has never been a thing.

 

Dan

[Shaun]

On 11/10/2022 at 8:52 AM, smallspy said:

That has never been a thing.

 

Dan

I have seen it. Unless it was a crewing adjustment. 

[Xtrazsteve]

14 hours ago, Shaun said:

I have seen it. Unless it was a crewing adjustment. 

Yeah a crew is late. This happens a lot on Line 2 years ago when I use to take it after pm rush. Sometimes it happens twice on the same trip. They do this with the 501 too, not sure they still do.

Basically the crew is suppose to be already at southbound Sheppard (in this case) but they are behind and only reach northbound Sheppard. They swap so they are in the position where they magically made up time. Of course that means the crew that got swap would be super late and another crew change would be needed to bring them up to speed.

[nfitz]

11 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

Yeah a crew is late. This happens a lot on Line 2 years ago when I use to take it after pm rush. Sometimes it happens twice on the same trip. They do this with the 501 too, not sure they still do.

You used to see it on 506 pre-Covid, with crew swaps in both directions at Coxwell.

So what happened to step-back crewing anyhow?

[TTC Guy]

17 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

Yeah a crew is late. This happens a lot on Line 2 years ago when I use to take it after pm rush. Sometimes it happens twice on the same trip. They do this with the 501 too, not sure they still do.

I was on a 501 car from Dufferin Gate Loop to Queen and Dovercourt in October 2022 and they stepped back at King and Dufferin

[Cityflyer]

Does anyone know where they plan to stage and dig the big hole to either extract or put in the bore machine for the North Yonge extension near Finch Stn?

Unlike the other 3 big provincial priority projects, I don't see any big plot of empty land they can do this near Finch Stn.

[Bus_Medic]

1 hour ago, Cityflyer said:

Does anyone know where they plan to stage and dig the big hole to either extract or put in the bore machine for the North Yonge extension near Finch Stn?

Unlike the other 3 big provincial priority projects, I don't see any big plot of empty land they can do this near Finch Stn.

Move the YRT terminal to the park and ride lot. Presto, problem solved.

Actually, the tail tracks must go halfway way to practically cummer, so I dunno.

 

 

[Orion V]

6 hours ago, Cityflyer said:

Does anyone know where they plan to stage and dig the big hole to either extract or put in the bore machine for the North Yonge extension near Finch Stn?

Unlike the other 3 big provincial priority projects, I don't see any big plot of empty land they can do this near Finch Stn.

Looking at this diagram (assuming it's to scale!) and the Finch Station article on Transit Toronto, it seems the tail tracks should extend around the full station length since it accommodates a full 6 car trainset. As a result, using Google Maps, the north end of the tail track tunnel should end around the area of this empty plot of land. Logically, this seems to be the best place to dig the hole for the bore machine(s) as everywhere else is built up unless they buy it out like they did with the Line 2 extension at Sheppard/McCowan.

I highly doubt they would buy and relocate those high rise apartments/condos nearby.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7838176,-79.4164032,3a,75y,275.44h,97.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEwuJQIXB4wQ2H8DbFrv6aA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192