CTrain - U2 cars

[D40LF]

Are the older cars just used for the rush hour?

They are used during all times of the day on both routes.

[mersar]

Forgot to mention this, but I noticed a small article in the Metro the other day that CT is looking into refurbishing the U2 cars... Gotta head out the door right now, but when I get back I will try to look up more info on this.

I can add some context for you.

Essentially Bombardier approached a few council members last year just after the election about trying to get them to bring up the proposal of refurbishing the U2's and not buying as many SD160's as CT had been planning to with the Greentrip funds. The idea is that Bombardier can refurb each U2 for about $1M, and give them another 15 years of service, similar but not quite as an extensive refurb as they are currently doing for Edmonton Transit. The council members brought this forward to council as an option during the greentrip debate (Shane Keating, who's ward contains a significant chunk of the SE LRT was one of the ones behind it), and its gained some traction as a way to allocate more money to actually preparing for the SE LRT by acquiring property and the likes, while not sacrificing the size of the LRV fleet.

In my opinion its probably the wrong approach though, its spending $1M to postpone spending another $4, and I seriously question Bombardiers ability to get the refurb done as cheap as they claim (ETS is paying $1.4M+ if I recall) considering the state of our LRV's is considerably more used then Edmontons. Not to mention it seems like Edmontons refurb is taking forever and a day to complete as well, initially it was believed it should take a month or two for each LRV and some of them ended up being gone for as long as 18 months, and only a quarter or so of their fleet has been done since they started in 2008.

[D40LF]

I can add some context for you.

Essentially Bombardier approached a few council members last year just after the election about trying to get them to bring up the proposal of refurbishing the U2's and not buying as many SD160's as CT had been planning to with the Greentrip funds. The idea is that Bombardier can refurb each U2 for about $1M, and give them another 15 years of service, similar but not quite as an extensive refurb as they are currently doing for Edmonton Transit. The council members brought this forward to council as an option during the greentrip debate (Shane Keating, who's ward contains a significant chunk of the SE LRT was one of the ones behind it), and its gained some traction as a way to allocate more money to actually preparing for the SE LRT by acquiring property and the likes, while not sacrificing the size of the LRV fleet.

In my opinion its probably the wrong approach though, its spending $1M to postpone spending another $4, and I seriously question Bombardiers ability to get the refurb done as cheap as they claim (ETS is paying $1.4M+ if I recall) considering the state of our LRV's is considerably more used then Edmontons. Not to mention it seems like Edmontons refurb is taking forever and a day to complete as well, initially it was believed it should take a month or two for each LRV and some of them ended up being gone for as long as 18 months, and only a quarter or so of their fleet has been done since they started in 2008.

With any refurb the first ones always take the longest, just look at the VIA F40PH-2s being done by Cadrail. The first few took forever, now they are popping out at a fast pace.

[TransitOp]

With any refurb the first ones always take the longest, just look at the VIA F40PH-2s being done by Cadrail. The first few took forever, now they are popping out at a fast pace.

For those wanting to know, these are the slow orders every day now with no end in sight of the slow downs, especially after the Rail Grinder blew a hose last week.:

1. Area of Haysboro Interlocking, both directions, both tracks: 40 km/h

2. Inbound on the Outbound in the area of Southland: 20 km/h

3. Inbound on Henry Kruger Bridge (when leaving Bridgeland): 30 km/h

4. Inbound at Deerfoot crossing: 40 km/h

5. Inbound in the area of Southland: 40 km/h

6. Inbound area of 58th Ave: 40 km/h (this one has been around over a year already)

7. Inbound area of 50th Ave: 40 km/h

8. Restricted Speed coming into Whitehorn Outbound. Restricted Speed is open to interpretation of the operator. Anywhere from 1 to 60 km/h in this stretch of track.

9. Outbound area of Signal C100 (underneath Shaganappi Tr): 40 km/h

10. Inbound area of Signal C117 (underneath 53rd St): 30 km/h

11. Inbound area of Dalhousie (when you leave the platform to just past the switches): 40 km/h

- Any crossing gates that are stuck up or broken or struck down: 20 km/h (RULE 405).

-There is a dip in the tracks outbound as you arrive at Sunnyside station when the train is at the 2nd car marker or just past the shelter on the platform. Noticeable on every stop on every type of train CT has in service. So far no repair and no slow order.

- Other problems have been reported at: Fish Creek outbound going over the switches and Anderson outbound going over the switches. So far no slow orders there, but they are coming.

Rather than just putting up slow order after slow order, how about they fix some of them?

How in the hell is anyone supposed to keep a schedule now with all of this and also lights on 7th Ave out of synch in addition to passenger loads, and being cut off by busses on 7th Ave?

[CTrainDude]

For those wanting to know, these are the slow orders every day now with no end in sight of the slow downs, especially after the Rail Grinder blew a hose last week.:

1. Area of Haysboro Interlocking, both directions, both tracks: 40 km/h

2. Inbound on the Outbound in the area of Southland: 20 km/h

3. Inbound on Henry Kruger Bridge (when leaving Bridgeland): 30 km/h

4. Inbound at Deerfoot crossing: 40 km/h

5. Inbound in the area of Southland: 40 km/h

6. Inbound area of 58th Ave: 40 km/h (this one has been around over a year already)

7. Inbound area of 50th Ave: 40 km/h

8. Restricted Speed coming into Whitehorn Outbound. Restricted Speed is open to interpretation of the operator. Anywhere from 1 to 60 km/h in this stretch of track.

9. Outbound area of Signal C100 (underneath Shaganappi Tr): 40 km/h

10. Inbound area of Signal C117 (underneath 53rd St): 30 km/h

11. Inbound area of Dalhousie (when you leave the platform to just past the switches): 40 km/h

- Any crossing gates that are stuck up or broken or struck down: 20 km/h (RULE 405).

-There is a dip in the tracks outbound as you arrive at Sunnyside station when the train is at the 2nd car marker or just past the shelter on the platform. Noticeable on every stop on every type of train CT has in service. So far no repair and no slow order.

- Other problems have been reported at: Fish Creek outbound going over the switches and Anderson outbound going over the switches. So far no slow orders there, but they are coming.

Rather than just putting up slow order after slow order, how about they fix some of them?

How in the hell is anyone supposed to keep a schedule now with all of this and also lights on 7th Ave out of synch in addition to passenger loads, and being cut off by busses on 7th Ave?

Not sure this is the right thread for your concerns, though.

[vicinity]

For those wanting to know, these are the slow orders every day now with no end in sight of the slow downs, especially after the Rail Grinder blew a hose last week.:

1. Area of Haysboro Interlocking, both directions, both tracks: 40 km/h

2. Inbound on the Outbound in the area of Southland: 20 km/h

3. Inbound on Henry Kruger Bridge (when leaving Bridgeland): 30 km/h

4. Inbound at Deerfoot crossing: 40 km/h

5. Inbound in the area of Southland: 40 km/h

6. Inbound area of 58th Ave: 40 km/h (this one has been around over a year already)

7. Inbound area of 50th Ave: 40 km/h

8. Restricted Speed coming into Whitehorn Outbound. Restricted Speed is open to interpretation of the operator. Anywhere from 1 to 60 km/h in this stretch of track.

9. Outbound area of Signal C100 (underneath Shaganappi Tr): 40 km/h

10. Inbound area of Signal C117 (underneath 53rd St): 30 km/h

11. Inbound area of Dalhousie (when you leave the platform to just past the switches): 40 km/h

- Any crossing gates that are stuck up or broken or struck down: 20 km/h (RULE 405).

-There is a dip in the tracks outbound as you arrive at Sunnyside station when the train is at the 2nd car marker or just past the shelter on the platform. Noticeable on every stop on every type of train CT has in service. So far no repair and no slow order.

- Other problems have been reported at: Fish Creek outbound going over the switches and Anderson outbound going over the switches. So far no slow orders there, but they are coming.

Rather than just putting up slow order after slow order, how about they fix some of them?

How in the hell is anyone supposed to keep a schedule now with all of this and also lights on 7th Ave out of synch in addition to passenger loads, and being cut off by busses on 7th Ave?

This is an outrage the C-train sucks latley the city centre always misses the crowfoot downtown aswell ! the whole system is so slow and inefficent!

[CTrainDude]

This is an outrage the C-train sucks latley the city centre always misses the crowfoot downtown aswell ! the whole system is so slow and inefficent!

An outrage? Seems like an awfully intense word for this situation.

Not to this extent, but this happens EVERY year around this time. Frost heaves don't just affect roads you know. And essentially it comes down to this: You keep running the trains at track speed over these areas, and the rail cracks apart and potentially leaves a train laying in the ground (which would cause even more of a disruption than a slow order), or you keep running over it a little slower until the ground settles back down. Which would you pick?

And some of these have been around for a while, but it may not be as easy just to 'fix it already'. Maybe they'd need to dig up the whole right of way for two weeks? That would probably also cause quite the disruption.

And if our system is so slow and inefficient, instead of just throwing words around like the mayor (who seems to think that because he used to ride Transit, he's now an expert on how to run a Transit system), make some feasible suggestions to make it better. As in any business, it's easy for outsiders to sit around and say 'do this' and it will be fixed, but it's never as simple as that. Especially when you have 15 bosses (City Council) that all think they know how to fix everything, but have no experience running any of the businesses that they oversee. They're not picked because they know what they're doing, it's all a popularity contest..

End rant (in the U2 thread, of all places).

[TransitOp]

An outrage? Seems like an awfully intense word for this situation.

Not to this extent, but this happens EVERY year around this time. Frost heaves don't just affect roads you know. And essentially it comes down to this: You keep running the trains at track speed over these areas, and the rail cracks apart and potentially leaves a train laying in the ground (which would cause even more of a disruption than a slow order), or you keep running over it a little slower until the ground settles back down. Which would you pick?

And some of these have been around for a while, but it may not be as easy just to 'fix it already'. Maybe they'd need to dig up the whole right of way for two weeks? That would probably also cause quite the disruption.

And if our system is so slow and inefficient, instead of just throwing words around like the mayor (who seems to think that because he used to ride Transit, he's now an expert on how to run a Transit system), make some feasible suggestions to make it better. As in any business, it's easy for outsiders to sit around and say 'do this' and it will be fixed, but it's never as simple as that. Especially when you have 15 bosses (City Council) that all think they know how to fix everything, but have no experience running any of the businesses that they oversee. They're not picked because they know what they're doing, it's all a popularity contest..

End rant (in the U2 thread, of all places).

It is the wrong thread, its something the public has a right to know about. Nenshi should know about it too. Frost heaves happen every year. Usually its Haysboro and 2 or 3 other places. What ever happened to preventative maintenance? What we have now is a joke as far as trying to keep a schedule. A bigger joke is Supervisors who hide in parking lots adjacent to C-train tracks and do radar to catch operators going even 2-3 km/h over the limit in slow order areas. Sometimes its easy to forget all the slow downs until you are in the area.

[CTrainDude]

It is the wrong thread, its something the public has a right to know about. Nenshi should know about it too. Frost heaves happen every year. Usually its Haysboro and 2 or 3 other places. What ever happened to preventative maintenance? What we have now is a joke as far as trying to keep a schedule. A bigger joke is Supervisors who hide in parking lots adjacent to C-train tracks and do radar to catch operators going even 2-3 km/h over the limit in slow order areas. Sometimes its easy to forget all the slow downs until you are in the area.

I guess my follow-up would be: What preventative maintenance do you think prevents frost heaves? And believe me, it's not the rail grinder.

[LRT]

The slow orders are there to bust the operators for speeding!! (sounds logical to me!)

[TransitOp]

I guess my follow-up would be: What preventative maintenance do you think prevents frost heaves? And believe me, it's not the rail grinder.

Let's take Sunnyside for example. Outbound when arriving past the 2 car marker past the shelter on the platform there is a bump or dip on the tracks when each and every train stops, the track is not going to get any better by ignoring the problem and doing nothing. Even Management types like yourself should understand this.

If track is defective or damaged, it should be fixed.

The slow orders are there to bust the operators for speeding!! (sounds logical to me!)

I've got no problem with them busting people who overspeed on purpose. Sometimes the train slides and speedometers are not properly calibrated. Calling operators in for discipline for going 2 over the limit is BS. What is the level of training of these Supervisors for radar guns anyways and how often are the guns inspected and calibrated?

[1604]

2072 has none of those grippy handles (mounted on the stanchions) to hold on to when you're standing..real convenient at rush hour

[LRT]

Looks like city council decided against refurbing the U2s, there too far gone!! Looks like we will be getting new trains folks!! I hope the city gets something different other then Siemens....

unlikey though....

[LRT]

City hall rejects plan to restore old C-Train cars

Aldermen are backing off proposals to refurbish 30-year-old C-Train cars instead of buying new ones, with a decision that sets back hopes for aggressive upgrades to southeast transit.

A council committee voted to instead buy 50 new LRT vehicles to bolster the existing fleet, which commits the vast majority of a long-awaited provincial transit grant to current train lines instead of a future southeast LRT expansion.

Ald. Shane Keating had hoped to commit $73.4 million from the $225-million Green Trip program for transit in his quadrant, and save money by fixing up old train cars instead of purchasing new.

Under the plan colleagues voted for Friday, the southeast will only reap up to $20 million in the short term — but that depends on how good a deal Calgary Transit can get for its new trains.

“It may not get the complete bump, but it will get some,” Keating said after voting against transit officials’ proposed spending plan.

“It’s the first amount that’s been set aside (for southeast transit) for a long time.”

Calgary Transit has warned it must retire some of its oldest, worn-out LRT cars and add more to its fleet to follow through on plans for four-car service later this decade.

Keating and some other colleagues had been lobbied by major transportation firms and had believed that the old trains could be refurbished for about half the costs of new ones.

However, fleet manager Russel Davies and other transit officials successfully argued that the massive amount of repairs and upgrades the Siemens U2 cars needed would total around $2.2 million, compared with $3.6 million for new vehicles.

Ald. John Mar, whose west-end and downtown residents would benefit from expanded service and fewer breakdowns on existing C-Train lines, said it made little sense to extend the old cars’ lives by only nine years, while the city could get decades out of new C-Trains.

“We’d still be in the same position now in two decades,” he said. If the city did refurbish, it would take several years to get all the upgrades done.

That idea suffered a further blow when transit staff warned that under current provincial rules, the Green Trip transit grant money couldn’t go to repair existing equipment.

The committee voted to set aside $200 million for the 50 new vehicles. If there are any savings, they’d go to improve bus service in the southeast, or buy land for a future LRT line.

Davies predicted there would be, since the last batch of new C-Trains cost only $3.6 million per car and this will be the largest bulk order the city has placed since the system’s inception.

Keating got his fellow aldermen to agree that any future Green Trip instalments will go predominantly to the southeast, which is the least-served city quadrant in many respects — including libraries, transit and recreation centres.

Council could modify the aldermanic panel’s decision. Mayor Naheed Nenshi has been a leading skeptic of the need for a massive order of new C-Train cars.

jmarkusoff@calgaryherald.com

© Copyright © The Calgary Herald

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/City+hal...l#ixzz1Lxjh3Q00

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/City+hal...2616/story.html

[LRT]

I guess they want 50 new ones insted....

[1604]

A few thoughts: 3.6 million per car? I thought it was much closer to 4 million, or at least 3.8. Also, refurbishing would only extend the U2 lives by 9 years? What? I thought Edmonton was planning to run theirs for another 20-30 years. Speaking of Edmonton, I can only imagine if Bombardier was doing a faster or better job with their U2s that Calgary might have made a different decision.

Anyway, what a poorly written article and I'm surprised at how inept some aldermen are. This whole thing seems like it's turned into opinion vs opinion on the refurbishment of the cars, and less about what is actually a better idea. I'm personally sad to be seeing the U2s going, but I'm happy that CT is moving into the future with newer, modern trains with more amenities.

One last thing: why don't orders for new cars go out for tender? The SDs are perfectly fine, and I can understand CT would want to keep a standardized fleet, but, for example, we now have the series 8s with entirely new dashboards. I know the rest of the train is more-or-less the same to the older SDs, but wouldn't a little competition from another manufacturer only help drive costs down & quality up?

[CTrainDude]

A few thoughts: 3.6 million per car? I thought it was much closer to 4 million, or at least 3.8. Also, refurbishing would only extend the U2 lives by 9 years? What? I thought Edmonton was planning to run theirs for another 20-30 years. Speaking of Edmonton, I can only imagine if Bombardier was doing a faster or better job with their U2s that Calgary might have made a different decision.

Anyway, what a poorly written article and I'm surprised at how inept some aldermen are. This whole thing seems like it's turned into opinion vs opinion on the refurbishment of the cars, and less about what is actually a better idea. I'm personally sad to be seeing the U2s going, but I'm happy that CT is moving into the future with newer, modern trains with more amenities.

One last thing: why don't orders for new cars go out for tender? The SDs are perfectly fine, and I can understand CT would want to keep a standardized fleet, but, for example, we now have the series 8s with entirely new dashboards. I know the rest of the train is more-or-less the same to the older SDs, but wouldn't a little competition from another manufacturer only help drive costs down & quality up?

I think the order for 50 cars may actually see some competition this time. The problem in the past is that CTs orders are too small to attract interest from a company like Bombardier, so they're stuck with Siemens. The larger the order, the more competition and lower prices you can get for the LRVs.

[LRT]

A few thoughts: 3.6 million per car? I thought it was much closer to 4 million, or at least 3.8. Also, refurbishing would only extend the U2 lives by 9 years? What? I thought Edmonton was planning to run theirs for another 20-30 years. Speaking of Edmonton, I can only imagine if Bombardier was doing a faster or better job with their U2s that Calgary might have made a different decision.

An unrefurbished Edmonton car is mint compared Calgary's cars. Calgary's cars have tripple the mileage then Edmonton's cars, Edmonton's cars are more or less going through a modernization then a refurb.

One last thing: why don't orders for new cars go out for tender? The SDs are perfectly fine, and I can understand CT would want to keep a standardized fleet, but, for example, we now have the series 8s with entirely new dashboards. I know the rest of the train is more-or-less the same to the older SDs, but wouldn't a little competition from another manufacturer only help drive costs down & quality up?

The seires 8 cars are a modified ETS vehicle, the train is really complety differnt car compared to the old SD160s

[mersar]

I think the order for 50 cars may actually see some competition this time. The problem in the past is that CTs orders are too small to attract interest from a company like Bombardier, so they're stuck with Siemens. The larger the order, the more competition and lower prices you can get for the LRVs.

Yep. And CT indicated in the report that went to the LPT committee that it would take an order of at least 50 units for another company to even be interested in bidding due to the sheer cost of setting up a production line and doing all the engineering work to design the new LRV's (or at least adapt them from an existing model they've designed)

[LRT]

OK going a bit off topic but I would love to see some CAF cars out here connected to some series 8s like these babys..

Looks like the Series 8 is a copy cat from the CAF cars...

[1604]

I was talking to a friend today who was on a U2 consist (specifically 2017) this afternoon. At Lions Park, where she got on, she said the doors would only open half way, and then close again. After pressing the button again, they opened fully and closed properly. When the train got to SAIT, she said the door on her side was making a clicking sound ("like when they try to close") and that all of the doors she saw did the same thing (open about half way, then close, then open again). She said the train then would move up a couple inches every so often (doors were off) before the driver announced the train was out of service due to "technical difficulties". When everyone onboard tried to get off (train was still at SAIT), the door lights were on but doors wouldn't open for a little while (30 or so seconds, I think.)

Anyone know what this was about? I've never heard of this happening before.

[vicinity]

I was talking to a friend today who was on a U2 consist (specifically 2017) this afternoon. At Lions Park, where she got on, she said the doors would only open half way, and then close again. After pressing the button again, they opened fully and closed properly. When the train got to SAIT, she said the door on her side was making a clicking sound ("like when they try to close") and that all of the doors she saw did the same thing (open about half way, then close, then open again). She said the train then would move up a couple inches every so often (doors were off) before the driver announced the train was out of service due to "technical difficulties". When everyone onboard tried to get off (train was still at SAIT), the door lights were on but doors wouldn't open for a little while (30 or so seconds, I think.)

Anyone know what this was about? I've never heard of this happening before.

I was standing at city haul wb and noticed 4 mcknights and only 1 somerset train the a NIS u2 which included 2017

[LRT]

This is interesting:

LRV_Fleet_Plan.pdf

LRV_Fleet_Plan.pdf

LRV_Fleet_Plan.pdf

LRV_Fleet_Plan.pdf

LRV_Fleet_Plan.pdf

[newcdn]

Wow, a lot of good stuff in there.

Some highlights:

- 8 U2s being retired each year starting in 2013 (3 in 2012).

- 50 new cars needed by 2016. Delivery starting in 2014. Another 73 starting in 2017.

- Total of 123 new cars needed by 2022.

- SD160s start retiring in 2031.

[LRT]

Actually the SDs are to be rebuilt at there midlife point and to be made compatible to run with the Series 8 cars. More upgrades for them in the future too. I don't think there going to retire them unitill the hit at least 40 years old. (As per policy)

No mention of 2101 & 2102 either. Also a possibility of the sale of some of the U2 cars is mentioned. They reference the old San Diego cars there as well..... Hmmm the ETS purchase of 20 cars rumor is becoming to come to life.