Jump to content
6688

Toronto Rocket Subway Cars

Recommended Posts

I don't know why the TTC didn't start the blue seat business earlier. I'm assuming all the flip seats will be replaced so all the current red flip seats will be useless. Unless replacing the fabric is cheap (which I highly doubt) this is going to cost some money to replace all the flip seats in 50+ train sets. Unlike buses, streetcars and T1s, those red seats can be reused in other seat locations, these flip seats can't.

They don't need to replace the seats, just the inserts. And the inserts are similar enough in shape that they may in fact be interchangeable with the regular seats.

If that is in fact the case, than the cost for the changeover is very minimal, as the inserts would be taken out and simply put into the bin with the other replacement seat inserts.

Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All that labour though to change blue seats. For something that isn't enforceable is really a waste of time.

TTC By-law No. 1

3.13 No person, unless otherwise authorized, shall do any act in contravention of instructions,

(iv) make available a seat in the designated priority seating area to a person who is disabled or has a physical limitation requiring priority seating.

4. Penalties and Enforcement
4.1 Any person who contravenes any provision of this by-law may be removed from the transit system and TTC property and may have any fare media confiscated by the TTC.
4.2 Any person who contravenes any provision of this by-law is guilty of an offence and upon conviction is liable to a fine as provided for in the Provincial Offences Act.
4.3 The provisions of this by-law may be enforced by a proper authority as defined in this by-law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't need to replace the seats, just the inserts. And the inserts are similar enough in shape that they may in fact be interchangeable with the regular seats.

If that is in fact the case, than the cost for the changeover is very minimal, as the inserts would be taken out and simply put into the bin with the other replacement seat inserts.

Dan

I know they will just replace the fabric only. How hard is it to ply the red fabric out?

There is no pointing of quoting the unenforced bylaw. It's pointless when no one is fined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no pointing of quoting the unenforced bylaw. It's pointless when no one is fined.

I realize that it is extremely rare to see this enforced. I was just responding to the statement that the rule isn't enforceable. Rules is rules.

This is one I believe that should be enforced more and more. With an ageing population, and an increasingly selfish attitude among the general public...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize that it is extremely rare to see this enforced. I was just responding to the statement that the rule isn't enforceable. Rules is rules.

This is one I believe that should be enforced more and more. With an ageing population, and an increasingly selfish attitude among the general public...

Like service expansion, hiring officers cost money. That money also goes back to the city, not the TTC.

What would you rather they spend money on? Enforcing priority seating or additional bus service? This is why enforcement is something they like to do but can't afford right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like service expansion, hiring officers cost money. That money also goes back to the city, not the TTC.

What would you rather they spend money on? Enforcing priority seating or additional bus service? This is why enforcement is something they like to do but can't afford right now.

Enforcing an existing by-law costs nil. It's not like I'm saying we need to have a blitz every few days. More often than not though, operators are the ones who shame people into giving up a priority seat. The blue seats just make it a bit more obvious.

Of course spending money on additional service is preferable. But we also have no new bus garage capacity until 2018 at the earliest, and that is still $90 million short. Spending little extra to change a few seats to blue isn't a big deal. Same material, just a different colour. I wouldn't be surprised if the TTC was hanging on to some of the replaced stuff to replace other seats. Remember, this work is done in house, and those people are getting paid to be there anyways.

Let's hope this new term in city council yields a decent increase in the operating budgets to at least increase some off peak service in the meantime. I don't remain very optimistic on that front though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TTC By-law No. 1

3.13 No person, unless otherwise authorized, shall do any act in contravention of instructions,

(iv) make available a seat in the designated priority seating area to a person who is disabled or has a physical limitation requiring priority seating.

4. Penalties and Enforcement
4.1 Any person who contravenes any provision of this by-law may be removed from the transit system and TTC property and may have any fare media confiscated by the TTC.
4.2 Any person who contravenes any provision of this by-law is guilty of an offence and upon conviction is liable to a fine as provided for in the Provincial Offences Act.
4.3 The provisions of this by-law may be enforced by a proper authority as defined in this by-law.

lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like service expansion, hiring officers cost money. That money also goes back to the city, not the TTC.

What would you rather they spend money on? Enforcing priority seating or additional bus service? This is why enforcement is something they like to do but can't afford right now.

Bus service, bus service, bus service!. Did I mention bus service? That's why TTC will always do the complete opposite. This is fluff, it doesn't cost too much and it looks like they're doing something, not much, but something, but hey you folks packed like sardines don't worry, we got purty new seats for you to sit on,..maybe, ...oh wait, ...those aren't for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An Operator from my understanding cannot force anyone out off the blue seats. We can only ask. There are posters posted everywhere.

Correct, just like you cannot force anyone to pay a fare or kick them off the bus, you must accommodate them. If another paying customer refuses to move, guess what? all the priority blue seats in the world don't amount to nothing. Does anyone really think an operator is going to take a bus out of service to wait for the 'rainbow cops' or supervisors to show up to remove and/or charge someone for sitting in those seats? And as for 'shaming' people out of those seats as some here have claimed, that's not for the operator or anyone else to do either. Operators have been called in more frequently now for the reason of 'embarrassing' customers, for whatever the dispute, real or imaginary. Posters are fine, as long as people who know how to read, read them and understand, still no guarantees, since it's human nature were talking about here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An Operator from my understanding cannot force anyone out off the blue seats. We can only ask. There are posters posted everywhere.

I've never seen an operator stop anyone from walking through the bus entrance of a subway station. That doesn't mean that transit cops have never ticketed someone.

Presumably if transit enforcement was in a subway car, and someone refused to give up a seat, it's entirely possible that someone would get ticketed.

But is this really a big problem? I'm always very impressed when carrying a baby in the subway (or streetcar), how many people jump up to give me a seat. (And often I don't want one; the baby, well toddler now, is strapped to me well, I'm often only going a few stops, and it's often easier to remain standing, than to sit down ... at which point the kid wants to get out!). Ditto for getting on with children a bit older - and there's no requirement for people to give up seats for a 4-year old (or heck, even for someone with a baby), and still I feel overwhelmed with others.

I can't imagine that with all those blue seats, that if someone came on who needed it, that there'd be too many cases where no one would give one up. I suspect when it does happen, it's more a case of the person being too adsorbed in whatever, that they aren't aware they should move.

Best I saw on a streetcar one day, was someone in their 90's slowly climbed on a busy car one day. And people get jumping up to give him their seat, and he got pissed off at them all, and bluntly told them where to go. It was heart-warming ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct, just like you cannot force anyone to pay a fare or kick them off the bus, you must accommodate them. If another paying customer refuses to move, guess what? all the priority blue seats in the world don't amount to nothing. Does anyone really think an operator is going to take a bus out of service to wait for the 'rainbow cops' or supervisors to show up to remove and/or charge someone for sitting in those seats? And as for 'shaming' people out of those seats as some here have claimed, that's not for the operator or anyone else to do either. Operators have been called in more frequently now for the reason of 'embarrassing' customers, for whatever the dispute, real or imaginary. Posters are fine, as long as people who know how to read, read them and understand, still no guarantees, since it's human nature were talking about here.

Technically under the law, even the supervisor cannot force someone off the bus. They don't have the power.

These people who breaks the bylaw knows how tedious the process is and knowing that it would take an hour to patience to charge them, they take control of the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard from operators that the T1s are faster than the TRs. And The hawkers are even faster. The slowest were the G cars.

BINGO!

Can anyone enlighten me on how a maximum design speed is determined? The TR's have a lot more hp than any older models, but their maximum design speed is still specified as 88 km/h. Is there a system that prevents the motors from ever exceeding a certain limit that is well below 208 hp? It seems logical that speed is proportional to power output, yet it contradicts what one sees in reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BINGO!

Can anyone enlighten me on how a maximum design speed is determined? The TR's have a lot more hp than any older models, but their maximum design speed is still specified as 88 km/h. Is there a system that prevents the motors from ever exceeding a certain limit that is well below 208 hp? It seems logical that speed is proportional to power output, yet it contradicts what one sees in reality.

The motors on the trains are still DC motors if I'm not mistaken. It always have been a DC motor. You can read up on Wikipedia on how DC motors work. The more current you feed into the motor, the higher the acceleration the motor can sustain. That would result in higher possible speed as the motor can turn faster. That's why higher voltage systems like Hong Kong's Movia trains have 1.3m/s^2 while our Movia (TR) trains have ~0.9m/s^2. There must always be a resistor to limit the current to prevent overheating, the last thing anyone whats to happen is to draw too much current. The motors are limited by the system on purpose to avoid drawing too much current so the motors don't catch fire and not to blow the power supply. The weight also have an effect maximum speed. The heavier the load, the more power it will consume to move the load.

Other factors also limit the maximum speed. Technically a train can run at 300km/h or faster. The areodynamic drag will take effect once they hit around 100km/h. The TRs' shape aren't design for this purporse. The 3rd rail isn't designed for 100+ km/h as it will overheat thanks to friction. Track conditions also don't meet the railway standard. How the tunnels are built and the foundation also affects the maximum allowed speed. The trains are probably purposely controlled at 88km/h for safety reasons and could be ran faster if overridden.

I don't know how the TR trains are design, but considering how much computers they have on board, there must be current regulators, thermosensors and other fancy things to ensure that it uses the electricity effective and not overload the power feed or cause any overheating. Older trains uses a fixed resistor to do the same. Technically these TRs are smarter but smarter doesn't mean better. The slower acceleration could also be purposely programmed by the TTC to reduce power usage. There was a TTC report last year or so saying the new trains are taking too much power.

Just remember that they hit 90km/h on the new streetcars while they were designed for 70km/h.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The TR speed is fine IMO. There is only so much space for the trains to get up to speed between stations, so too high a speed would mean too fast acceleration and deceleration, which standees do not appreciate (though this is reduced when there are 1000+ people crammed on a train, as there isn't even enough space to fall over haha). As it is, it only takes me about 8-10 minutes to get from Davisville to Queen every day, including the dwell time at Bloor-Yonge, which i think is pretty good.

High speeds also wear down the rails much faster.

I believe I read somewhere that the Gs were slow because they were built too heavy for the motors they used. Or they chose a poor motor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhh Boo. Faster=Better. ^^^

There are posters located everywhere statingTTC employees cannot kick anyone out of the Blue seats. We cannot assume someone is disable, we don't have any authority as an operator to make that call. I don't care how ablebodied the person looks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are posters located everywhere statingTTC employees cannot kick anyone out of the Blue seats. We cannot assume someone is disable, we don't have any authority as an operator to make that call. I don't care how ablebodied the person looks.

True enough. Even a fully-abled body person may have a temporary injury or something that makes it very painful to stand. Heck, even a short-term foot problem, or a muscle strain. I recall hobbling home once, simply having somehow pulled a muscle walking through a station mezzanine - and making a detour on my route home to take the longer route that meant I didn't have to walk more than a few feet home. Was fine in 24-hours ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The motors on the trains are still DC motors if I'm not mistaken. It always have been a DC motor. You can read up on Wikipedia on how DC motors work. The more current you feed into the motor, the higher the acceleration the motor can sustain. That would result in higher possible speed as the motor can turn faster. That's why higher voltage systems like Hong Kong's Movia trains have 1.3m/s^2 while our Movia (TR) trains have ~0.9m/s^2. There must always be a resistor to limit the current to prevent overheating, the last thing anyone whats to happen is to draw too much current. The motors are limited by the system on purpose to avoid drawing too much current so the motors don't catch fire and not to blow the power supply. The weight also have an effect maximum speed. The heavier the load, the more power it will consume to move the load.

Other factors also limit the maximum speed. Technically a train can run at 300km/h or faster. The areodynamic drag will take effect once they hit around 100km/h. The TRs' shape aren't design for this purporse. The 3rd rail isn't designed for 100+ km/h as it will overheat thanks to friction. Track conditions also don't meet the railway standard. How the tunnels are built and the foundation also affects the maximum allowed speed. The trains are probably purposely controlled at 88km/h for safety reasons and could be ran faster if overridden.

I don't know how the TR trains are design, but considering how much computers they have on board, there must be current regulators, thermosensors and other fancy things to ensure that it uses the electricity effective and not overload the power feed or cause any overheating. Older trains uses a fixed resistor to do the same. Technically these TRs are smarter but smarter doesn't mean better. The slower acceleration could also be purposely programmed by the TTC to reduce power usage. There was a TTC report last year or so saying the new trains are taking too much power.

Just remember that they hit 90km/h on the new streetcars while they were designed for 70km/h.

T1s and TRs use AC traction motors, not DC. On top of that, the TRs have 4 fewer motors per train, although on paper their horsepower-to-weight ratio is still vastly superior.

However....

Those horsepower ratings are for unlimited motors. When used in service, the motors are quite limited in terms of how much power they can put out. This greatly increases the time between failures of the motors. And if you follow the lineage of the various types of subway cars, they have been getting more and more limited with each subsequent design.

As for things like top speed, it is true, aerodynamics do have a major effect on it, and subway cars until the TRs have not be very well set up for it. There is, however, a practical limit to how fast any given train can go (wheel rotation & bearing speeds are one of the biggest, followed very closely by motor rotational speed), and there is absolutely, positively no way in hell you could get a subway train up to 300km/h safely. 150 would be pushing the limits of what they are capable without serious modifications.

Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for things like top speed, it is true, aerodynamics do have a major effect on it, and subway cars until the TRs have not be very well set up for it. There is, however, a practical limit to how fast any given train can go (wheel rotation & bearing speeds are one of the biggest, followed very closely by motor rotational speed), and there is absolutely, positively no way in hell you could get a subway train up to 300km/h safely. 150 would be pushing the limits of what they are capable without serious modifications.

Dan

TRs are limited to 79 km/h in the fastest sections. 80 or above will stop the train. That's a programmed limit. T1s with speed control are limited to 79km/h in the fastest sections. Technically the limit is 75km/h, I won't get into too many details but the train will only stop at 80. To get a T1 going that fast, you need a pretty good hill.

The acceleration rates were chosen by the TTC. They could be programmed faster if they wanted them to be. The T1s were designed to match the acceleration curve of a H5. The TRs accelerate differently, but the rate is still limited to that figure whatever it is. It's something the TTC determined was a safe and comfortable rate.

A higher top speed is no benefit to service on most sections of the line. The trains already do 70+ in a bunch of places because of grades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why were the TR's end trucks left unpowered? I read somewhere it was to make a quiet environment for the operators, but what's the point if the motors are almost silent anyways?

Quiet environment for ops = that is a good gem!

You can turn the question around and ask what's the point of having all of the axles motorized if fewer motors will do.

On one hand, fewer motors means less weight, therefore reducing maintenance requirements (not that there is lots of maintenance to be done on AC motors to begin with, since there are no brushes to replace, which is the biggest pain in the neck with heavy-duty DC motors, but you do have the replace the bearings periodically etc.).

On the other hand, and this is the most important consideration, an AC motor can theoretically get up to 35-40% tractive effort versus at most ~ 25% for DC motos, so AC motors can accelerate at their set maximum, for much longer. This is one reason why AC powered rail vehicles (especially if designed to operate in multiple units, like the Toronto Rockets are) very rarely power every single truck. In fact, the TTC's powering 10 out of 12 trucks - or 20 out of 24 axles - on the TRs is unusually high; if you look at other similar contracts Bombardier has landed throughout the world, their standard six-car metro sets based on the fixed-configuration Movia design usually have the first and last cars completely unpowered (so they are essentially trailers with a driver's cab).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Wiki the G's were heavier than the longer newer cars and only had 51 hp per motor, vs well over 100 for M's/H's. What was the top speed for G's?

It was 68 hp per motor, designed for a car weighing about 61,000 lb, not 83,000 lb. The top speed depended on the direction, uphill or downhill. Downhill on the north Yonge or Spadina, G trains could top out at 75-80 km/h. Uphill, half of that, maybe, depending on the grade. Better performance on reasonably level track with wider station spacing to get up to speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TRs are limited to 79 km/h in the fastest sections. 80 or above will stop the train. That's a programmed limit. T1s with speed control are limited to 79km/h in the fastest sections. Technically the limit is 75km/h, I won't get into too many details but the train will only stop at 80. To get a T1 going that fast, you need a pretty good hill.

Let me try my comment again....

80km/h is the maximum allowed speed, and 88km/h (55mph) is the maximum speed that they are designed to run at.

That 150km/h number is a theoretical number that *might* be attained should all of the safety systems be cut out, all of the limiting software disabled, with enough track and power to allow the train to continue to accelerate, and ultimately not have the train self-destruct. And even then, the motors would be spinning so fast that they may just simply disintegrate.

Dan

Share this post


Link to post
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

×
×
  • Create New...