Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...

Hi everyone, I'm new here

I have a misunderstanding about the loop at Kennedy. As far as I know, the loop is not active for a long time now, because of being too sharp for the trains. However, I did found some "evidence" on the web which clearly show train sightings on the loop. For example: https://www.flickr.com/photos/9911655@N08/3791043704 this photo is from 2009. 

My question is, how often do they use the loop and for what purposes?

 

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

Hi everyone, I'm new here

 

I have a misunderstanding about the loop at Kennedy. As far as I know, the loop is not active for a long time now, because of being too sharp for the trains. However, I did found some "evidence" on the web which clearly show train sightings on the loop. For example: https://www.flickr.com/photos/9911655@N08/3791043704 this photo is from 2009. 

My question is, how often do they use the loop and for what purposes?

The loop was originally built back when what is now Line 3 was supposed to be a light rail line run using single-ended streetcars; therefore, they needed a way to turn around. When the line was changed to ICTS technology and double-ended cars, which had difficulty negotiating the loop, Kennedy station was modified into its current one-track with crossover arrangement.

As for how the loop is used nowadays, it occasionally sees use acting as a tailtrack. It will enable trains to be stored out of the way on the line if they're experiencing mechanical or other difficulties, or rarely holding a spare/standby train.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Articulated said:

The loop was originally built back when what is now Line 3 was supposed to be a light rail line run using single-ended streetcars; therefore, they needed a way to turn around. When the line was changed to ICTS technology and double-ended cars, which had difficulty negotiating the loop, Kennedy station was modified into its current one-track with crossover arrangement.

As for how the loop is used nowadays, it occasionally sees use acting as a tailtrack. It will enable trains to be stored out of the way on the line if they're experiencing mechanical or other difficulties, or rarely holding a spare/standby train.

Thank you for the answer! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
On 2016-07-23 at 10:22 PM, Articulated said:

The loop was originally built back when what is now Line 3 was supposed to be a light rail line run using single-ended streetcars; therefore, they needed a way to turn around. When the line was changed to ICTS technology and double-ended cars, which had difficulty negotiating the loop, Kennedy station was modified into its current one-track with crossover arrangement.

As for how the loop is used nowadays, it occasionally sees use acting as a tailtrack. It will enable trains to be stored out of the way on the line if they're experiencing mechanical or other difficulties, or rarely holding a spare/standby train.

One thing I've always been curious about is whether the city/TTC ever calculated how much it would have cost to rebuild the loop to handle the ICTS cars. There is no question that it would have cost a lot more than the single track-crossover arrangement that we have today. However, the fact that the work could be done without disrupting operations and give a capacity boost to the line makes me wonder if the plans for it were in the works when plans to extend the line were being developed in the 90's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Screw Line 3 - The SRT was a mistake and set rapid transit in Scarborough back over 30 years - It's time for a change, and a 3-stop extension to the Bloor-Danforth line would provide the best foundation for a long-term solution for Scarborough

The Scarborough RT was a mistake - Rob Ford saved us from making another mistake

LRTs work for some routes, but the Toronto subway system is long overdue for extensions to resolve current traffic and transit issues, better accommodate high density areas, and to encourage development – The reason the Bloor-Danforth subway was not extended in Scarborough is the Scarborough RT killed any chance of extending it UNTIL NOW – The existing Scarborough RT (developed by the UTDC in the late 70s) was a huge mistake – The plan in 2012 was to run an LRT from Kennedy and Eglinton to Scarborough Centre, and another LRT from Don Mills and Sheppard to the Scarborough Centre - The idea of replacing the existing Scarborough RT with a new LRT was going to be a new mistake – It made absolutely no sense to have two major modes of transportation terminate at Scarborough Town Centre when there are points North and East of Scarborough Town Centre that need service now and in the immediate future – Thank goodness the existing Scarborough RT line and route is being scrapped and finally replaced with a new extension to the Bloor-Danforth subway from Kennedy and Eglinton, along McCowan Road, to the Scarborough Town Centre - It should eventually be extended to Markham, Markville Shopping Centre, and even further North to McCowan Road and 16th Avenue – The time to finally build it and get it right is NOW!!!

Better one stop than none!

Friend me on Facebook, follow me on Twitter at @pprenticeii, and visit www.TorontoTransitBlog.com and www.SmarterTracks.com to see my plans for rapid transit and for information on traffic and transit in the GTHA

 

PhaseIV.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 years later...

What colour were the seats originally on the RT? Thinking back when I was a kid, I remembered them as red, but vinyl. Though now I’ve seen some photos that show them in orange and brown vinyl a bit like the H5s.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, 2044 said:

What colour were the seats originally on the RT? Thinking back when I was a kid, I remembered them as red, but vinyl. Though now I’ve seen some photos that show them in orange and brown vinyl a bit like the H5s.

When I first rode them in the late 80s it was as you described it. Same as CLRV/ALRV original seats.

The floor was a light tan with small circles.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/21/2020 at 4:10 PM, Bus_Medic said:

Burgundy vinyl.

It looks like they will be replacing the SKYTRAIN cars with new ones from Bombardier.  If we weren't building a subway (if that happens) would the cost to tack on another set of cars be feasible instead of tearing the whole thing down? Are the stations and right of way still in good condition to last another 20 years?

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

It looks like they will be replacing the SKYTRAIN cars with new ones from Bombardier.  If we weren't building a subway (if that happens) would the cost to tack on another set of cars be feasible instead of tearing the whole thing down? Are the stations and right of way still in good condition to last another 20 years?

If it was that easy, then don't you think that the TTC would have bought additional ICTS cars when Vancouver was buying them in 2000, 2009, 2010, 2016 or 2018?

 

Dan

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, smallspy said:

If it was that easy, then don't you think that the TTC would have bought additional ICTS cars when Vancouver was buying them in 2000, 2009, 2010, 2016 or 2018?

 

Dan

If i'm not mistaken they did get a quote but felt it was too expensive. 

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

If i'm not mistaken they did get a quote but felt it was too expensive. 

With the exception of the Mark 1 cars, the cars that Translink have been ordering are too big to fit on Toronto's system. The retrofits to accommodate the longer Mark II or Innovia Metro 300 cars would require shutting down the line to replace both Kennedy Station and the tunnel north of Ellesmere.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, smallspy said:

If it was that easy, then don't you think that the TTC would have bought additional ICTS cars when Vancouver was buying them in 2000, 2009, 2010, 2016 or 2018?

TTC voted in about 2006 to get new ICTS cars, along with upgrades to the line to support them, and longer trains. The cost for the line modifications were about the same as for the 44 new cars.

It was Mayor Miller who screwed this up, and forced them to instead lump it in with Transit City - and this became the eighth Transit City LRT after the announcement of the initial 7.

It really was this easy.

7 hours ago, Shaun said:

If i'm not mistaken they did get a quote but felt it was too expensive. 

There is no indication in the August 31st approval in principle that it was too expensive.

The amount in the 2006 report was $170 million for 44 new cars - or 3.8 million per car. In 2016 Vancouver paid $93 million for 28 cars - only $3.3 million for 28 cars ... as an option on the 2012 contract to build 28 cars for only $90 million ($3.2 million per car).

In 2006 Vancouver awarded Bombardier a contract to build 34 cars for $99 million ($2.9 million per car) with an option to build 38 additional cars for $92 million ($2.4 million per car).

So why would it have been too expensive in 2005/2006 for TTC when they'd already budgeted $3.8 million per car?

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2020 at 6:06 PM, nfitz said:

TTC voted in about 2006 to get new ICTS cars, along with upgrades to the line to support them, and longer trains. The cost for the line modifications were about the same as for the 44 new cars.

It was Mayor Miller who screwed this up, and forced them to instead lump it in with Transit City - and this became the eighth Transit City LRT after the announcement of the initial 7.

It really was this easy.

There is no indication in the August 31st approval in principle that it was too expensive.

The amount in the 2006 report was $170 million for 44 new cars - or 3.8 million per car. In 2016 Vancouver paid $93 million for 28 cars - only $3.3 million for 28 cars ... as an option on the 2012 contract to build 28 cars for only $90 million ($3.2 million per car).

In 2006 Vancouver awarded Bombardier a contract to build 34 cars for $99 million ($2.9 million per car) with an option to build 38 additional cars for $92 million ($2.4 million per car).

So why would it have been too expensive in 2005/2006 for TTC when they'd already budgeted $3.8 million per car?

 

People Like to forget this. 

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...