Jump to content

General Subway/RT Discussion


FlyerD901
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, raptorjays said:

Probably another evidence that Line 2 is treated like trash.

Do you people realize how ridiculous these comments sound in the era of air-conditioned, wheelchair accessible transit vehicles?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, T3G said:

Do you people realize how ridiculous these comments sound in the era of air-conditioned, wheelchair accessible transit vehicles?

The issue with the T1's was finding new computer components and spares which are becoming difficult to find. 

Its not like the H1 and H2 days where you could just rebuild or reverse engineer components or build new ones that fit. 

With that said would it be possible to build and replace the entire computer system with new technology? And would that be more cost effective than buying new rolling stock? 

The T1's use a GTO VVVF traction motor which is still very commonly used around the world so I'm sure someone knows how to create a code for it. Maybe you can use an existing software and modify it to fit the current profile programmed today. 

I don't know how plausible that is but it could extend the life of the T1's without having to worry about computer components. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NEW SUBWAY TRAINS

his Request for Proposals is an invitation by the Toronto Transit Commission to those Proponents that were pre-qualified under Request for Supplier Qualification P76PH22075 - New Subway Trains to submit Proposals for New Subway Trains. The successful Proponent will be responsible for all Deliverables associated with the NST of every kind (Car and non-Car), in every stage of their preparation and completion, to be provided, and all work, including warranty work and latent defect work. For clarity, this scope of Work includes associated equipment necessary to facilitate operation and maintenance of the trains.

Request for Proposal documents are available for download through TTC’s Bonfire Portal at https://ttc.bonfirehub.ca/opportunities/55969

The Proponent must have been pre-qualified by TTC for its Proposal to be evaluated. Only the following companies have been pre-qualified by TTC and only Proposals submitted by these prequalified Proponents will be evaluated and accepted: 1. Alstom Transport Canada Inc. 2. CRRC Qingdao Sifang Co., Ltd. 3. Hyundai Rotem Company 4. Kawasaki Rail Car, Inc

Name of Trade Agreement(s) that is Applicable to the procurement - Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) Chapter 19, Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) Chapter 506, Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) chapter 15 and United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) chapter 13.
 

I hope everyone is able to read it, if not let me know

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, FlyerD901 said:

NEW SUBWAY TRAINS

his Request for Proposals is an invitation by the Toronto Transit Commission to those Proponents that were pre-qualified under Request for Supplier Qualification P76PH22075 - New Subway Trains to submit Proposals for New Subway Trains. The successful Proponent will be responsible for all Deliverables associated with the NST of every kind (Car and non-Car), in every stage of their preparation and completion, to be provided, and all work, including warranty work and latent defect work. For clarity, this scope of Work includes associated equipment necessary to facilitate operation and maintenance of the trains.

Request for Proposal documents are available for download through TTC’s Bonfire Portal at https://ttc.bonfirehub.ca/opportunities/55969

The Proponent must have been pre-qualified by TTC for its Proposal to be evaluated. Only the following companies have been pre-qualified by TTC and only Proposals submitted by these prequalified Proponents will be evaluated and accepted: 1. Alstom Transport Canada Inc. 2. CRRC Qingdao Sifang Co., Ltd. 3. Hyundai Rotem Company 4. Kawasaki Rail Car, Inc

Name of Trade Agreement(s) that is Applicable to the procurement - Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) Chapter 19, Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) Chapter 506, Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) chapter 15 and United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) chapter 13.
 

I hope everyone is able to read it, if not let me know

Interestingly, Siemens is left out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, John Oke said:

Interestingly, Siemens is left out

My instincts say the Chinese company will be cheapest but likely won't win. Alstom likely has the upper hand since they have the facility to build trains in TTC gauge and could modify the TR design.  

Hyundai and Kawasaki may be good candidates.  

Do they have to pick the lowest bidder?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Shaun said:

My instincts say the Chinese company will be cheapest but likely won't win.

 

Let's hope the TTC management learned from the BYD eBus debacle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MK78 said:

Let's hope the TTC management learned from the BYD eBus debacle.

Look how long it took Boston to accept their new Chinese trains into service. Something like 4 years? They finally retired their Hawker cars from the 70's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Shaun said:

Look how long it took Boston to accept their new Chinese trains into service. Something like 4 years? They finally retired their Hawker cars from the 70's.

I just don't think it's smart to give contracts to a Chinese company in today's political climate. China is our adversary not an ally.

Its probably gonna be Alstom because of their experience working with the TTC as Bombardier and have manufacturing facilities here.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2022 at 7:47 PM, Shaun said:

The issue with the T1's was finding new computer components and spares which are becoming difficult to find. 

Its not like the H1 and H2 days where you could just rebuild or reverse engineer components or build new ones that fit. 

With that said would it be possible to build and replace the entire computer system with new technology? And would that be more cost effective than buying new rolling stock? 

The T1's use a GTO VVVF traction motor which is still very commonly used around the world so I'm sure someone knows how to create a code for it. Maybe you can use an existing software and modify it to fit the current profile programmed today. 

I don't know how plausible that is but it could extend the life of the T1's without having to worry about computer components. 

From an Alstom perspective, a T1 rehab would be like gold.  Think about it:  The TTC does a 10 year life extension on the T1s that'll include a significant buy in of Alstom parts plus maintenance parts over the next decade, plus possibly consulting.  Then, towards the end of the 10 years of extended life, Alstom gets to sell the TTC a fleet of new subway trains as the preferred vendor and current owner of the factory in Thunder Bay and Bombardier/Hawker-Siddeley intellectual property.

That one-two punch of T1 life extension followed by new fleet a few years after is a lot more lucrative than a straight up sale of new subway cars now that won't be replaced for another 30ish years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Wayside Observer said:

From an Alstom perspective, a T1 rehab would be like gold.  Think about it:  The TTC does a 10 year life extension on the T1s that'll include a significant buy in of Alstom parts plus maintenance parts over the next decade, plus possibly consulting.  Then, towards the end of the 10 years of extended life, Alstom gets to sell the TTC a fleet of new subway trains as the preferred vendor and current owner of the factory in Thunder Bay and Bombardier/Hawker-Siddeley intellectual property.

That one-two punch of T1 life extension followed by new fleet a few years after is a lot more lucrative than a straight up sale of new subway cars now that won't be replaced for another 30ish years.

 After what happen with the Hawker trains, I doubt they'll be able to resell them. But the refrub makes sense as a short-term goal. I'm sure the first of these trains won't be on property until a decade from now, and the usual delays. 

I assume this order of new trains is too small for it to be split amongst two suppliers?

Another issue, Greenwood yard currently cannot facilitate 6-car permanent sets, so I'd like to see what the set up will be for these trains. And will they rebuild the CN spur connection to Greenwood yard for deliveries of these cars, or deliver them the same way as they did with the TRs to Wilson?

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2022 at 8:13 PM, Wayside Observer said:

From an Alstom perspective, a T1 rehab would be like gold.  Think about it:  The TTC does a 10 year life extension on the T1s that'll include a significant buy in of Alstom parts plus maintenance parts over the next decade, plus possibly consulting.  Then, towards the end of the 10 years of extended life, Alstom gets to sell the TTC a fleet of new subway trains as the preferred vendor and current owner of the factory in Thunder Bay and Bombardier/Hawker-Siddeley intellectual property.

That one-two punch of T1 life extension followed by new fleet a few years after is a lot more lucrative than a straight up sale of new subway cars now that won't be replaced for another 30ish years.

Well, Bombardier never had the chance to prove itself by doing a life extension of the M/Hs prior to producing the T1s & TRs, nor did UTDC have the chance to prove itself by doing a life extension of the Gs prior to producing the H6s (although considering how the H6s turned out, UTDC probably wouldn't do a very good job at rebuilding the Gs either). In any case, having a company do a life extension of an older fleet has never been a prerequisite for said company to build the replacement fleet – why should this time be any different? If the T1 replacement trains hopefully arrive on schedule, the T1s would probably only require a minor rebuild to last until the late 2020s / early 2030s.

11 hours ago, FlyerD901 said:

I'm sure the first of these trains won't be on property until a decade from now, and the usual delays. 

Hopefully that won't be the case here (although the outlook is looking pretty grim unless some major changes happen ASAP). The first TR arrived on property in 2010, merely 5 years after the design was first proposed in 2005, and that's including all the delays involved.

11 hours ago, FlyerD901 said:

Another issue, Greenwood yard currently cannot facilitate 6-car permanent sets, so I'd like to see what the set up will be for these trains.

They could always go back to the married-pair configuration. Plenty of models that came out after the TR continue to use that configuration (i.e. Montreal REM, Long Island Railroad M9, Metro North M8), and while those aren't technically subways, there's no reason why the subway can't do the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard from others that the next order will be TRs but are 2 pair married cars instead of the current 4 or 6.

If that's the case, does it mean a trainset of 6 cars will only have every 2 coupled cars that can be walk through. You cannot as a passenger walk from end to end of a 6 car train anymore?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Cityflyer said:

I heard from others that the next order will be TRs but are 2 pair married cars instead of the current 4 or 6.

The TR trains are configured as two 3-car sets. The documents suggest that these new trains will be configured of three 2-car sets.

44 minutes ago, Cityflyer said:

If that's the case, does it mean a trainset of 6 cars will only have every 2 coupled cars that can be walk through. You cannot as a passenger walk from end to end of a 6 car train anymore?

Just like on the TRs where there is an open gangway at the "end" of the set, these will have open gangways to allow people to walk the full length of the train, regardless of how many cars it is configured of.

 

The current planning is that the cars will be configured of 3 different car types - an "A" car which will have an aerodynamic cab at one end, a "B" car which will be completely open all the way through and needs to be controlled from another car, and a "C" car which will look like a "B" car but will have a hostler's control panel built at one end. The idea being that the pairs will be configured as either A-B or C-B sets, and can easily be configured into either a 4- or 6-car trainset for service.

 

The hope too is that should the need arise, it will be easy to add a "D" car - a single car roughly of "B" car configuration - to allow for the operation of 5- or 7-car trains with little additional effort.


Dan

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, smallspy said:

The TR trains are configured as two 3-car sets. The documents suggest that these new trains will be configured of three 2-car sets.

Just like on the TRs where there is an open gangway at the "end" of the set, these will have open gangways to allow people to walk the full length of the train, regardless of how many cars it is configured of.

 

The current planning is that the cars will be configured of 3 different car types - an "A" car which will have an aerodynamic cab at one end, a "B" car which will be completely open all the way through and needs to be controlled from another car, and a "C" car which will look like a "B" car but will have a hostler's control panel built at one end. The idea being that the pairs will be configured as either A-B or C-B sets, and can easily be configured into either a 4- or 6-car trainset for service.

 

The hope too is that should the need arise, it will be easy to add a "D" car - a single car roughly of "B" car configuration - to allow for the operation of 5- or 7-car trains with little additional effort.


Dan

If the TRs are 3 car trainsets, they operate as ABC as a 3 car set? Can this TR be driver from the C car as the front lead car without the cab compartment?

And how does the 3 car trainset work in the Line 4 configuration?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, smallspy said:

The TR trains are configured as two 3-car sets. The documents suggest that these new trains will be configured of three 2-car sets.

Just like on the TRs where there is an open gangway at the "end" of the set, these will have open gangways to allow people to walk the full length of the train, regardless of how many cars it is configured of.

 

The current planning is that the cars will be configured of 3 different car types - an "A" car which will have an aerodynamic cab at one end, a "B" car which will be completely open all the way through and needs to be controlled from another car, and a "C" car which will look like a "B" car but will have a hostler's control panel built at one end. The idea being that the pairs will be configured as either A-B or C-B sets, and can easily be configured into either a 4- or 6-car trainset for service.

 

The hope too is that should the need arise, it will be easy to add a "D" car - a single car roughly of "B" car configuration - to allow for the operation of 5- or 7-car trains with little additional effort.


Dan

So C cars can move on their own or as a trainset? 

Was there something about the 6 car configuration that they didn't like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Presumably, the hostler controls on the C car will offer the ability to move the cars quickly around the workshops during servicing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Cityflyer said:

If the TRs are 3 car trainsets, they operate as ABC as a 3 car set?

Yes. This was done in testing at Thunder Bay.

 

16 hours ago, Cityflyer said:

Can this TR be driver from the C car as the front lead car without the cab compartment?

In theory, sure. It would be awfully breezy, however.

 

16 hours ago, Cityflyer said:

And how does the 3 car trainset work in the Line 4 configuration?

It doesn't normally. That's why those sets were modified to allow them to operate in that configuration.

And is the reason why the next generation of trains will be going back to a 2-car couple.

 

13 hours ago, T3G said:

Presumably, the hostler controls on the C car will offer the ability to move the cars quickly around the workshops during servicing.

This is the idea and the hope. That, and it will allow for their use at existing facilities with a minimum of modification.

 

Dan

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can a regular person tell the difference between a B and a C car of the TR model?
Are there extra control panels or lights at the end corners of the C car?

By going with TR 2 car couplers, this means Greenwood can be maintained as an active garage without the new Kipling garage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Cityflyer said:

How can a regular person tell the difference between a B and a C car of the TR model?

You can't, at least not from inside or at platform level. The differences are entirely underneath.

5 hours ago, Cityflyer said:


Are there extra control panels or lights at the end corners of the C car?

No.

5 hours ago, Cityflyer said:

By going with TR 2 car couplers, this means Greenwood can be maintained as an active garage without the new Kipling garage?

In theory. There will still need to be another place to more store trains once the Scarborough Extension opens, as Greenwood can now no longer be expanded for train storage without sacrificing some of its other capacities.

 

Dan

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...