Jump to content
Shemar

TTC Orion VII Fleet Retirements Tracking

Recommended Posts

So now that 7575 isnt listed as active anymore...

What's gonna happen to it? Anyone know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, FlyerD901 said:

Mount Dennis is a mistake in their total. Even TTC makes mistakes. But good info nonetheless

Theres alot of mistakes on this list

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ultimate said:

Theres alot of mistakes on this list

 

The bottom has 288. But just to remind everyone to be mindful. Ive been guilty of the same thing and writing things down here as fact, just to be wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Rami A. said:

So now that 7575 isnt listed as active anymore...

What's gonna happen to it? Anyone know?

Isn't 2444 earmarked for restoration as well? Unless something has changed with that unit I would be doubtful of anything changing about 7575's status, going solely off its absence in this chart.

Share this post


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

Confirmed. Only 79 in active service.

No photo description available.

It’s funny how on the service summary says the there were 80 still active just over a week prior to this fleet allocation sheet. Probably the head of fleet management gave the final decision by the end of the month 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Orion VI said:

By the way, if we also count retirements from just not tracking on Transsee, 7935 might be too.

No. That's not how things work.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not the basis on how we decide a bus is retired. 7935 is marked as active on the wiki, and will continue to be until we receive information that contradicts that.

7936 wasn't marked as retired because it's not tracking... it's marked because it was taken off the active fleet roster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's my point. If you've seen any of my posts on the TTC Orion VII Movement list board, you would know what I'm talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Orion VI said:

By the way, if we also count retirements from just not tracking on Transsee, 7935 might be too.

Trackers are usually not to be trusted, as they brake often or the tracker on a specific bus maybe broken.

I am going to give you some advice here. Don't make assumptions that a bus maybe retired because it has a broken tracker. Other buses also have this happen either for rebuild, or if they are really retired. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Orion VI said:

By the way, if we also count retirements from just not tracking on Transsee, 7935 might be too.

The bus could just be simply waiting for some parts to arrive or some work to be done on it

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2019 at 9:34 PM, bus_7246 said:

It’s funny how on the service summary says the there were 80 still active just over a week prior to this fleet allocation sheet. Probably the head of fleet management gave the final decision by the end of the month 

The service summary that was posted is not an official TTC document. It was based off a listing provided by TTC as of the date listed and was updated to the format used by TTC about 10 years ago.

The document was done by an enthusiast group, Toronto Transportation Society. Yes, there are mistakes and they will be corrected. It is meant as a guideline only and was intended for TTS members. The person who posted this on Facebook did not have permission to do so.

Granted the TTS does not mind that it is out there now but please do not take it as an official document.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Seashore_518203 said:

The service summary that was posted is not an official TTC document. It was based off a listing provided by TTC as of the date listed and was updated to the format used by TTC about 10 years ago.

The document was done by an enthusiast group, Toronto Transportation Society. Yes, there are mistakes and they will be corrected. It is meant as a guideline only and was intended for TTS members. The person who posted this on Facebook did not have permission to do so.

Granted the TTS does not mind that it is out there now but please do not take it as an official document.

You have to understand where these foamers are coming from as it slightly looks a TTC document. When someone sees "Bus Maintenance Department" on a document, it looks like it's an official document. I thought it was an official document. Nowhere in that document did it say it's a fantasy sheet created by a bus fan wannabe. It was given wording that makes it look like it was issued by the TTC. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 7575 said:

You have to understand where these foamers are coming from as it slightly looks a TTC document. When someone sees "Bus Maintenance Department" on a document, it looks like it's an official document. I thought it was an official document. Nowhere in that document did it say it's a fantasy sheet created by a bus fan wannabe. It was given wording that makes it look like it was issued by the TTC. 

Check out the wording about half way up on the left side. Maybe I should have made it font size 20 so it stood out more. Good advice though ... I will update the document wording to make it sound less official.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Seashore_518203 said:

Check out the wording about half way up on the left side. Maybe I should have made it font size 20 so it stood out more. Good advice though ... I will update the document wording to make it sound less official.

I did see TTS in the document however the younger ones on the board might not have seen it and would go around saying it was a TTC-issued document. I just thought the title was a little controversial, that's all. You also had a valid point. Thank you for editing the document, much appreciated! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Seashore_518203 said:

The document was done by an enthusiast group, Toronto Transportation Society. Yes, there are mistakes and they will be corrected. It is meant as a guideline only and was intended for TTS members. The person who posted this on Facebook did not have permission to do so.

This is an outrage of the highest proportions.  Given the seriousness of this situation, I expect at least one Orion VII Event Support bus has been dispatched with a goon squad on board to ruthlessly sort out the party responsible for the unauthorized leak.  The consequences will have to be suitably swift and severe to act as a deterrent to anybody else that may be thinking about stepping out of line.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats unfortunate, and it really does a disservice to the organization’s credibility. It irks me in the same way the foamers get their sweaty mitts on official TTC high viz vests and other paraphernalia. Obsolete uniforms are fine, but I’ve seen more than a few with the current stuff. Occurrences like this just reinforce my distain. 

New York has had instances where they used them to gain unauthorized access to restricted areas. (end rant)

  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Bus_Medic said:

Thats unfortunate, and it really does a disservice to the organization’s credibility. It irks me in the same way the foamers get their sweaty mitts on official TTC high viz vests and other paraphernalia. Obsolete uniforms are fine, but I’ve seen more than a few with the current stuff. Occurrences like this just reinforce my distain. 

New York has had instances where they used them to gain una access to restricted areas. (end rant)

I don't like it either.  The prize taker to me had to be the kid on the PCC on September 23.  I hate to keep harping on that event but it was suck a cake taker that I can't help it, but this one kid was wearing a high viz vest.  I don't know why.  It wasn't a TTC vest, thankfully.  It wasn't a generic high viz vest either.  It was - get this - a Canada Post high viz vest!  Why?!?!?!?  This kid clearly didn't work there and certainly wasn't on duty.  Personally, I have a ton of construction gear in my truck because sometimes I'm required to work in permitted construction areas where it's required or I'm doing something and don't want to get my regular clothes destroyed but the last thing I'm going to do is slap the logo of some company I have absolutely nothing to do with on it.  And the kids wearing stuff from places they don't work at, why would they want to be mistaken for being an employee of someplace they aren't?  To have the headache of dealing with the general public who thinks they work there?

1 hour ago, Seashore_518203 said:

Check out the wording about half way up on the left side. Maybe I should have made it font size 20 so it stood out more. Good advice though ... I will update the document wording to make it sound less official.

Here's a smart idea:  Put it in the header.  As it stands, the first thing on that page right across the top are the words "TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION BUS MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT" in uppercase block letters in white on a red background.  Writing that across the top in the TTC's corporate colours, there's no wonder people would confuse that for an official TTC department.  Then you can deal with the little Edward Snowden in your ranks that leaked it.  All that remains is a decision, will it be the waterboard or the tucker telephone?

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

Here's a smart idea:  Put it in the header.  As it stands, the first thing on that page right across the top are the words "TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION BUS MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT" in uppercase block letters in white on a red background.  Writing that across the top in the TTC's corporate colours, there's no wonder people would confuse that for an official TTC department.  

If that isn’t deliberate misrepresentation, I don’t know what is. Even I fell for it.

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

If that isn’t deliberate misrepresentation, I don’t know what is. Even I fell for it.

Hence, this is why the document had only been circulated amongst a group of trusted contacts. It was TTC format but it just had not been officially used by the TTC since 2005. The current format that the TTC circulates only lists vehicle numbers, and not model numbers.  Don't worry though. I changed the header but will definitely not be circulating it online.

Don Anderson was the TTC employee that originally designed this format.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Seashore_518203 said:

Hence, this is why the document had only been circulated amongst a group of trusted contacts. It was TTC format but it just had not been officially used by the TTC since 2005. The current format that the TTC circulates only lists vehicle numbers, and not model numbers.

Does it have to be in the TTC format, past or present?  Isn't that just a little foamer-esque?  There's countless ways to set up a spreadsheet showing vehicle allocations to divisions with whatever ancillary data you want without having it ape being an official TTC document and thus avoiding that whole issue.

38 minutes ago, Seashore_518203 said:

Hence, this is why the document had only been circulated amongst a group of trusted contacts...Don't worry though. I changed the header but will definitely not be circulating it online.

The essential fact remains that one of those trusted contacts among your flock leaked it which means one thing: you've got a mole in your organization that needs to be hunted down.  So on February 19, once everybody's arrived in that meeting room over at Metro Hall, you've got to get security to lock the doors from the outside and get out the polygraph machine and find out who it is - and make an example out of them.  Be ruthless.  Nothing works better at keeping people in line like fear and intimidation.

Also, when you hand out hardcopies of future lists, you've got to do the numbered copy with the embedded dot pattern thing in case someone steps out of line old school style and decides to make photocopies or take cellphone photos or stuff like that.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 7575 said:

You have to understand where these foamers are coming from as it slightly looks a TTC document. When someone sees "Bus Maintenance Department" on a document, it looks like it's an official document. I thought it was an official document. Nowhere in that document did it say it's a fantasy sheet created by a bus fan wannabe. It was given wording that makes it look like it was issued by the TTC. 

LMAO. Funniest post I've read in a long while. Granted, I didn't know these sheets were unofficial. Glad they exist nonetheless. I have some dating back to 2000.

Just now, Wayside Observer said:

This is an outrage of the highest proportions.  Given the seriousness of this situation, I expect at least one Orion VII Event Support bus has been dispatched with a goon squad on board to ruthlessly sort out the party responsible for the unauthorized leak.  The consequences will have to be suitably swift and severe to act as a deterrent to anybody else that may be thinking about stepping out of line.

Maybe Julian Assange is a closet foamer.

Just now, Bus_Medic said:

Thats unfortunate, and it really does a disservice to the organization’s credibility. It irks me in the same way the foamers get their sweaty mitts on official TTC high viz vests and other paraphernalia. Obsolete uniforms are fine, but I’ve seen more than a few with the current stuff. Occurrences like this just reinforce my distain. 

New York has had instances where they used them to gain unauthorized access to restricted areas. (end rant)

I had both an NYC and TTC high visibility vest but I can assure you they were only used in picking up women.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×