General Subway/RT Discussion

[Turtle]

Just to add to my last post, they have to do everything they can to prevent injury, death, or damage to equipment or infrastructure. If they don't, a Coroners Inquest will come back and force them to change procedures and policies.

[Kelvin3157]

TTC Cancels RFP For New Subway Trains due to lack of funding 

https://stevemunro.ca/2023/06/26/ttc-cancels-rfp-for-new-subway-trains/

[81-717]

What an absolute fucking shitshow.

[CJ.]

It looks like recently lots of stuff is being shuffled around in Greenwood, there's been a line of different various workcars right behind each other back to back visible from the fence of the yard, different TR's inside the maintainence bays every other day and looks like one of those H4's that was stored at the back of the yard next to the go train tracks in its original condition after retirement might be converted to a workcar soon as its in the 30x series track area right now with a workcar pushing it. Not too surprised its not operational and the elements didn't take much of a toll on it

[TransitMotorcoach]

23 hours ago, 81-717 said:

What a fucking shitshow.

More like a case of elitism and classism.  Line 1, which goes through some of the most affluent and wealthy areas of the city, got full funding for a TR fleet and ATC conversion. Line 2 though,  which serves a lot more working class and lower income individuals, no desire for other levels of government to invest in fleet, infrastructure, and signal upgrades. The politicians may not publicly say it, but their actions speak louder than words. 

 

The same exact way how after Mike Harris got voted in in 1995, the Eglinton West line, which would have served a lower income area, got canceled despite already being under construction at the time, while the Sheppard line, which is in a wealthy area of the city, actually got built.

[T3G]

Of course, one critical fact you omitted from your screed is that when the TRs were ordered a generation ago, the world was in a different financial situation then it is today. If the TRs were coming up for order now, you have no way of knowing whether their purchase would be prioritized or deferred. But don't let that get in the way of your grievance.

[TransitMotorcoach]

It is not a grievance, it is true. Elitism and classism have been shown in the political decision-making process time and time again, whether we are living in the better times of a decade ago or the turbulence of now. 

[T3G]

So what would you have had them do? When the TRs were ordered the oldest T1s were only 11 years old, the youngest a trivial five. They were never going to replace the T1s at the same time as the Hawkers, it would have been an insane waste of money. YUS was the line with higher ridership, so the cars were chosen to go there.

It's nice that there are some people who's lives are so good that they see a class issue in riding subway cars that are air conditioned and accessible. There used to be a time when complaints of wizened rolling stock had some weight to them but they get hollower and less impressive all the time.

[raptorjays]

On 6/26/2023 at 11:49 AM, Kelvin3157 said:

TTC Cancels RFP For New Subway Trains due to lack of funding 

https://stevemunro.ca/2023/06/26/ttc-cancels-rfp-for-new-subway-trains/

Basically, I put all the blames on Rick Leary.. 

He is just a fuckin cancer... 

According to the previous posts from Steve Munro, the future plans for the Line 2 was being planned smoothly until Rick Leary became a CEO.. 

Leary is the one who's constantly pushing for rebuild of the T1 fleet in Line 2 instead of bringing new fleets for the line..

 

and I think Leary did his best to sabotage all the effort to make any improvements (ATC or newer trains) to fulfill his wish.. 

 

Once Olivia Chow becomes the mayor, Leary should be the one who should be axed

 

[81-717]

On 6/27/2023 at 12:17 PM, TransitMotorcoach said:

More like a case of elitism and classism.  Line 1, which goes through some of the most affluent and wealthy areas of the city, got full funding for a TR fleet and ATC conversion. Line 2 though,  which serves a lot more working class and lower income individuals, no desire for other levels of government to invest in fleet, infrastructure, and signal upgrades. The politicians may not publicly say it, but their actions speak louder than words.

I have a different theory, that they just wanna keep the T1s indefinitely out of pure nostalgia (after having 86'd the Hawkers with maximum prejudice), and "lack of funding" or whatever else is just a convenient excuse. Actions do indeed speak louder than words.

On 6/27/2023 at 2:47 PM, T3G said:

They were never going to replace the T1s at the same time as the Hawkers, it would have been an insane waste of money.

In hindsight, with the Hawkers lasting only 35 years and the T1s expected to last a whopping 45–50, the scenario you're describing could have been possible had the ages simply been reversed (Hawkers lasting 45–50 years and retiring in the mid-2020s, and the T1s retiring right afterwards at the age of 30–35). Unfortunately, it's all a moot point now.

Quote

There used to be a time when complaints of wizened rolling stock had some weight to them but they get hollower and less impressive all the time.

So TL;DR, the complaints HAVE always been specifically about the Hawkers. Got it, thanks for clarifying that. 

[Shaun]

14 minutes ago, 81-717 said:

I have a different theory, that they just wanna keep the T1s indefinitely out of pure nostalgia, and "lack of funding" or whatever else is just a convenient excuse. Actions do indeed speak louder than words.

In hindsight, with the Hawkers lasting only 35 years and the T1s expected to last a whopping 45–50, the scenario you're describing could have been possible had the ages simply been reversed (Hawkers lasting 45–50 years and retiring in the mid-2020s, and the T1s retiring right afterwards at the age of 30–35). Unfortunately, it's all a moot point now.

I thought that they can't find replacement computers for the T1's which was one of the reasons why they are being retired (were).

[T3G]

9 hours ago, 81-717 said:

I have a different theory, that they just wanna keep the T1s indefinitely out of pure nostalgia (after having 86'd the Hawkers with maximum prejudice), and "lack of funding" or whatever else is just a convenient excuse. Actions do indeed speak louder than words.

This is a baseless conspiracy theory with no basis in reality. There has never been any indication that the TTC is holding onto the T1s out of nostalgia, and they didn't go after the Hawkers with "maximum prejudice" (what does that even mean?). The cars were built, they lived out their design lifespan, they were retired. What more are you expecting?

Oh, and if you want to attack the TTC for killing off the Hawkers with "maximum prejudice", you might add some facts into the discussion: most critical is the fact that different people were in charge at the time of the Hawker replacement vs now. Another is that the Hawkers were not some unloved bastard stepchild fleet like the Orion VI, all of the cars except for the H2s and H6s made it to at least 34 years of age, which meant they got a more than reasonable amount of use out of them. In point of fact, they considered replacing the H5s with more T1s, and ended up not doing that and gave them another 15-20 years of service. How's that for prejudice against the Hawkers? 

[81-717]

On 6/28/2023 at 2:20 AM, T3G said:

and they didn't go after the Hawkers with "maximum prejudice" (what does that even mean?)

On 6/28/2023 at 2:20 AM, T3G said:

What more are you expecting?

Oh i dunno, for them to have gotten the same "playing favorite" treatment as the T1s are getting now?

On 6/28/2023 at 2:20 AM, T3G said:

most critical is the fact that different people were in charge at the time of the Hawker replacement vs now.

Yes and I have to agree with those who think Rick is the worst thing that's ever happened to the ttc.

On 6/28/2023 at 2:20 AM, T3G said:

In point of fact, they considered replacing the H5s with more T1s, and ended up not doing that and gave them another 15-20 years of service. How's that for prejudice against the Hawkers?

Neutral at best, whereas had they gone through with replacement at less than 20 years of age, that would've proved my point right.

At the end of the day, we can try to rationalize it away all we want, but actions speak louder than words, and while their actions may not definitively prove the "conspiracy theory", I've yet to see ANY action that would disprove it.

[T3G]

Oh please. Not a single one of the things you just made allusion to in your post are in any way backed up by reality. Unless you can produce proof that Rick Leary is a T1 foamer, your entire theory can be thrown in the same pile as Alex Jones' ramblings about chlorine in the water turning the frogs gay. 

Rightly or wrongly, the TTC feels the financial situation does not lend itself well to renewing the subway fleet. Maybe they are right, maybe they are not. I would need to see a careful cost benefit analysis of the financial data to agree or disagree, something I don't expect will occur in this age of sneaking around, tricks, and skullduggery. But whatever their reasons, whatever their motivations are, I can guarantee you that the reason is not because the TTC foams over the T1s and wants to stick it to a decade-gone class of subway car.

Maybe they should shut down line 2 altogether. That way, the T1s don't outlive your H5s, and the proletariat doesn't have to debase themselves by riding air conditioned, wheelchair accessible subway cars. Everybody wins. Except for adults with adult problems, but no one cares about them anyway.

[81-717]

50 minutes ago, T3G said:

Rightly or wrongly, the TTC feels the financial situation does not lend itself well to renewing the subway fleet.

Because Ford & Trudeau clearly have a hand in this as well, by refusing to secure funding until it's too late.

50 minutes ago, T3G said:

and the proletariat doesn't have to debase themselves by riding air conditioned, wheelchair accessible subway cars.

You mean like how Scarberians have no choice but to debase themselves by riding line 3 (and soon debase themselves further by riding accessible & air conditioned shuttle buses)? Sure, the SRT is accessible (as is literally any subway car with level boarding ever built) & air conditioned, but everyone except railfans hates it anyway, rightly or wrongly.

[T3G]

If the shoe were on the other foot and we still had nearly 50 year old H5s still running, would you also say it was debasing to ride them?

Yeah, didn't think so.

[81-717]

I never said it was debasing to ride the T1s or SRT either, you were the one to bring it up with respect to how the general public sees it, but that was never where I'm coming from.

1 hour ago, T3G said:

But whatever their reasons, whatever their motivations are, I can guarantee you that the reason is not because the TTC foams over the T1s and wants to stick it to a decade-gone class of subway car.

And again, that hardly makes it better, given the end result is identical.

[IRT_BMT_IND]

The T1s aren't really than old, most "world class" cities known for their subway systems operate older rolling stock. One problem in terms of optics is that they really look older than they are, even when they were new they weren't exactly examples of cutting edge industrial design. The basic design of the T1s is really not that much different than the original Hawker cars (or even the MLW cars). It's telling that the Montreal Metro trains from the 60s and 70s felt more modern inside than the T1s which were still being built this century.  The TTC hasn't done the best job keeping them nice inside either (like how a lot of them look dim inside because the light fixtures are all full of dust).

[81-717]

26 minutes ago, IRT_BMT_IND said:

The T1s aren't really than old

Yes they are. They are now. "They're not that old" is something one would say a decade ago, but now it just doesn't hold water anymore. Quick math tells us that in 2031 the oldest T1s will be 36, which is as old as the H5s were when they retired. Therefore, it is not accurate to say that the T1s lasting nearly 50 years is the same as the H5s lasting 36.

26 minutes ago, IRT_BMT_IND said:

most "world class" cities known for their subway systems operate older rolling stock.

Then the H-series should have been allowed to last that long, but they weren't.

In Stockholm, the C6 from 1970 was retired earlier this year just a couple months before I visited, but the C14/15, despite being over 15 years younger, are also being retired and will be fully gone by next year, even though they could've probably lasted as long as the C6.

26 minutes ago, IRT_BMT_IND said:

One problem in terms of optics is that they really look older than they are

Exteriorwise, sure. Interiorwise however, they seem pretty ageless, probably because blandness became the new normal and stayed that way to this day.

[CJ.]

Another TR in greenwood yard..whats the point of this if they can't even be maintained in the yard because greenwood is too small to handle entire connected six car trainsets? are these trains there for tested or related to emergency backup units? It's still 5951-5956 and a 6000 set

10 minutes ago, 81-717 said:

Yes they are. They are now. "They're not that old" is something one would say a decade ago, but now it just doesn't hold water anymore. Quick math tells us that in 2031 the oldest T1s will be 36, which is as old as the H5s were when they retired. Therefore, it is not accurate to say that the T1s lasting nearly 50 years is the same as the H5s lasting 36.

Then the H-series should have been allowed to last that long, but they weren't.

In Stockholm, the C6 from 1970 was retired earlier this year just a couple months before I visited, but the C14/15, despite being over 15 years younger, are also being retired and will be fully gone by next year, even though they could've probably lasted as long as the C6.

Exteriorwise, sure. Interiorwise however, they seem pretty ageless, probably because blandness became the new normal and stayed that way to this day.

I might disagree as the average person who has no idea about transit vehicles will always assume the T1's are 50 years old, a few people who have no idea about the transit fleet told me it seems outdated, and many told me its from the 50's and 60's, well the design era kind of is so they aren't wrong, but the train itself is fine but there will always be benefits of rolling stock that is connected vs the old separated car design

[81-717]

43 minutes ago, CJ. said:

I might disagree as the average person who has no idea about transit vehicles will always assume the T1's are 50 years old, a few people who have no idea about the transit fleet told me it seems outdated, and many told me its from the 50's and 60's

Do they seriously think they're riding trains from the 1950s every time they take line 2? Unless ofc they're being hyperbolic to show how debased they feel about riding the T1s? Even the average person who doesn't care about transit would likely have a rough sense of the difference between the 1950s vs. 1970/1980s vs. 2000 and so on.

48 minutes ago, CJ. said:

well the design era kind of is so they aren't wrong

The "tin box on wheels" appearance in itself is pretty ageless I'd say, you could theoretically put in all modern equipment and make the interior similar to the TR and it would be an equally modern subway car today. It's not like the PCC design which has 1940/1950s written all over it (even if upgraded to some modern standards like wheelchair lifts or A/C).

[Bus_Medic]

[MK78]

I really have no issue with the look/design/functionality of the T1's. they still feel modern to me. I guess minus the wasted space for operator cabs where they are not used.

The wide doors really made a huge difference over the previous H trains.

 

[81-717]

On 6/29/2023 at 8:28 PM, MK78 said:

The wide doors really made a huge difference over the previous H trains.

Not really. Headways are far more important as far as capacity goes. When you have a TR running at a 5–10 min gap and a T1/Hawker 1–3 mins behind it, all the TRs' extra capacity goes out the window. 5+ min gaps during rush hour (which are the real culprit here) are still a common occurrence today, not any less so (if not more so) than when the H-trains were in service, nor were the H-trains the primary cause of said gaps (again, if anything it was the TRs). And even if the narrower doors did increase dwell times to the point of causing gaps (which they did not), they could've simply adjusted the schedules to even things out (as I'm sure New York did on lines where 75' cars mingle with 60' cars, though I also don't think that was much of an issue to begin with, either).

[MK78]

20 minutes ago, 81-717 said:

Not really. Headways are far more important as far as capacity goes. When you have a TR running at a 5–10 min gap and a T1/Hawker 1–3 mins behind it, all the TRs' extra capacity goes out the window. 5+ min gaps during rush hour are still a common occurrence today, not any less so (if not more so) than when the H-trains were in service, nor were the H-trains the primary cause of said gaps (again, if anything it was the TRs). And even if the narrower doors did increase dwell times to the point of causing gaps, they could've simply adjusted the schedules to even things out (as I'm sure New York did on lines where 75' cars mingle with 60' cars).

Oh i just meant in the ease of entering or leaving the train, not the frequency of train schedule.