Streetcar News

[smallspy]

3 hours ago, GORDOOM said:

In fairness, this is a political requirement and not a technical or even legislative one. The requirements of the ODA would have been satisfied with a partial low-floor design.

Doesn't matter. A requirement is still a requirement, regardless of where it's coming from.

 

As an example, they could have allowed for a lower power output and fewer powered axles, like was done for the ALRVs. They chose not to.

 

Dan

[dowlingm]

2 hours ago, smallspy said:

Doesn't matter. A requirement is still a requirement, regardless of where it's coming from.

As an example, they could have allowed for a lower power output and fewer powered axles, like was done for the ALRVs. They chose not to.

Dan

Except the decision to skip the ALRVs for the 512 and go straight to Flexity strongly implies the TTC has no interest in tackling Bathurst without the extra power. So - that makes it an operational imperative, not a preference.

[ttc rider]

23 hours ago, WoodbineSecondExit said:

Is there something in the design that wouldn't be adaptable to Toronto's track?

I see that Dan has already provided a list of items that makes our system unique, but for starters, referring strictly to the 15T, the bogies on the car have no complete axles, so that wouldn't work very well on our system with single-point switches. On the 15T each wheel is powered independently by its own synchronous AC motor (an unusual choice on trams) with permanent magnets and no gearboxes. The synchronous motors are small (smaller than the much more common AC asynchronous motors) which not only saves space, but also reduces the unsprung weight of the motor, so the car is "gentler" on the tracks.

Redesigning the entire truck to include axles would not be trivial, and probably cannot even be done without major redesign of the car frame and the electrical/plumbing connections between the bogies and the car frame, since the car is completely enveloping the bogies. This also must be done while also allowing a significant amount of rotation of the bogie relative to the car body (up to 20 degrees or so on the 15T, which is after all the main advantage of this design over the "traditional" construction with little or no rotation permitted). And we're even getting into things such as minimum turning radius, which is definitely an issue here but not so much in Prague where no curve has a radius tighter than 15 m, and those are found in depots only (don't know the specs for the system in Riga).

Can it be done? I don't know. Probably yes- after all the Czechs have been the largest tram manufacturers worldwide until the mid 90s, and they have been doing very well in terms of R&D since then, so they know a thing or two about trams. Heck, even the Poles have come up with a 100% LF model with pivoting bogies (the PESA Twist), which from a track wear perspective is "better" than our Flexities, so it is not a matter of their products being lemons. Even further east, I am seeing some clever designs on new trams coming from the ex-USSR countries. But with North America being a comparatively small market worldwide and with a lock on equipment by the big-name manufacturers due to protectionism etc. , I very much doubt we will ever see a big order placed with "second-tier" producers here.

 

[TheAverageJoe]

On 7/7/2017 at 4:58 PM, GORDOOM said:

IOW, just as Bombardier are finally getting their act together and more or less sticking to a delivery schedule, you're going to do a competitive tender for a subfleet of streetcars incompatible with the ones Bombardier is building? After how difficult it was to get a design that worked with the TTC's guideway infrastructure in the first place?

I get that Bombardier shat the bed with the contract before, but does it really make sense at this point to do a separate tender for 60 more cars? Or is this just a desire to punish Bombardier?

Your getting all your panties in a knot. This is just a motion to see what is out there and to see what companies can offer. It even states that there is no funding yet in the budget for the 60 cars. 

[Xtrazsteve]

Even Alstom's LRV breakthrough to Canada is quite an event even through they have their foot in North America already. Not a lot of people were expecting Alstom to be successful in getting the Ottawa order. Now they have an order for Metrolinx and an exercised option for O-Train Phase 2.

For those 2nd tier companies with no experience in the North American market, it would cost them too much to start up here. Not only they have to build something that adapt to North American standards, there's the language barrier too. They can't just send a bunch of workers her to train people if they can't speak English well. They also need the Canadian government to approve their work permit here. If there isn't significant demand, it doesn't make sense for them to take on the only order for the TTC.

[ttc rider]

2 hours ago, TheAverageJoe said:

Your getting all your panties in a knot. This is just a motion to see what is out there and to see what companies can offer. It even states that there is no funding yet in the budget for the 60 cars. 

At this point no other manufacturer would put up a better offer than Bombardier for those extra 60 cars or whatever the number happens to be, considering the lead time & costs required for the other manufacturer to complete design and engineering from scratch for a vehicle specifically designed to the TTC (stringent) requirements. This motion is just another excuse to waste time and an example of Minnan-Wong's general anti-transit stance over the years. He can go get stuffed.

[Xtrazsteve]

If the feds would fund part of the waterfront LRTs, there should be some vehicles included with that project. 264 cars isn't enough for expansion into the portlands and humber bay while carrying 15-20k daily riders. They'll need at least another 50-80 LRVs long term.

Even if the feds do fund 50% of the projects, the city would have to solve their funding crisis.

As for the 60 cars, TTC staff has already said they would stick with Bombardier if deliveries are ongoing. They won't be able to justified twice the price for no reason. This whole streetcar problem would go away by mid next year as long as they stick to schedule. No one made a big fuss when Bombardier were delivering subways cars in the past 5 years and yes they were late. Bombardier put all the fault on the door manufacture's problem. 

[smallspy]

17 hours ago, dowlingm said:

Except the decision to skip the ALRVs for the 512 and go straight to Flexity strongly implies the TTC has no interest in tackling Bathurst without the extra power. So - that makes it an operational imperative, not a preference.

My point is that it was a decision that they had make. They'd made a different choice in the last time they had to choose.

 

If they really wanted to, they could have done something as other properties had done, and purchase something like a Unimog configured to tow and push equipment up not only Bathurst, but other steep grades on the system.

 

Dan

[Tom1122]

4440 is on property.

[Articulated]

7 hours ago, Tom1122 said:

4440 is on property.

Already been reported in the Bombardier Flexity Deliveries thread:

On 2017-07-10 at 8:55 AM, bus_7246 said:

Sadly, 4440 sat on the flatcar all weekend at the offload dock. The car is being offloaded today. 

[nfitz]

On 10/07/2017 at 9:28 PM, TheAverageJoe said:

Your getting all your panties in a knot. This is just a motion to see what is out there and to see what companies can offer. It even states that there is no funding yet in the budget for the 60 cars. 

The problem is, it's the wrong direction.  They have about 20 weeks before the option expires. They won't have pricing in that time. A cynic might think it's a preperemptory strike by someone who doesn't want to buy 60 more streetcars. I wonder who the motion is from.

 

Let's see ... it's from a Denzil Minnan-Wong and a John Campbell. Do I need to say more?

[Ed T.]

21 hours ago, smallspy said:

I they really wanted to, they could have done something as other properties had done, and purchase something like a Unimog configured to tow and push equipment up not only Bathurst, but other steep grades on the system.

What are the steep grades on the system beyond Bathurst? How steep are the grades into Union, Spadina, and St. Clair West? The only other 'steep' parts I can think of are a couple of railway underpasses and a couple of railway overpasses.

Think if the new cars had to be certified for the dogleg and slope on Lansdowne north of Davenport, or the Avenue Road hill.

 

5 hours ago, nfitz said:

The problem is, it's the wrong direction.  They have about 20 weeks before the option expires. They won't have pricing in that time. A cynic might think it's a preperemptory strike by someone who doesn't want to buy 60 more streetcars. I wonder who the motion is from.

 

Let's see ... it's from a Denzil Minnan-Wong and a John Campbell. Do I need to say more?

Well, Tory supports it strongly, and this morning Andy Byford described himself, given the Bombardier deliveries, and I quote, "not a happy bunny".

[smallspy]

2 hours ago, Ed T. said:

What are the steep grades on the system beyond Bathurst? How steep are the grades into Union, Spadina, and St. Clair West? The only other 'steep' parts I can think of are a couple of railway underpasses and a couple of railway overpasses.

Think if the new cars had to be certified for the dogleg and slope on Lansdowne north of Davenport, or the Avenue Road hill.

I've got to go from memory on this as I can't find my copy of the document that shows it, but Bathurst is in excess of 8%, the Queens Quay ramp to Bay and the two ramps into St. Clair West are around 7%, and the one out of Spadina is about 5%.

 

Other than that, there are quite a few others. College and Dundas approaching the bridge over the tracks near Lansdowne are well over 4%, as is Queen/King eastbound towards the Don River. Broadview is a pretty consistent ~3% north of Dundas, with the top section near Hogarth topping out at well over 5%. There are also 5+% sections of Kingston Rd and Upper Gerrard.

 

Dan

[TheAverageJoe]

10 hours ago, nfitz said:

The problem is, it's the wrong direction.  They have about 20 weeks before the option expires. They won't have pricing in that time. A cynic might think it's a preperemptory strike by someone who doesn't want to buy 60 more streetcars. I wonder who the motion is from.

 

Let's see ... it's from a Denzil Minnan-Wong and a John Campbell. Do I need to say more?

You know what could end up happening is once Metrolinx  gets stuck with the Bombardier contract with the Alstom order they will just convert 60 of the Bombardier cars to streetcars for TTC. As Metrolinx will not need all those cars.

[Allandale25]

Tweets from Ben Spurr who is at today's TTC meeting:

• Byford says Bombardier has confirmed 70 total cars is still year-end target, but "they have said to me that figure is now challenging.
• As recently as last week Bomb. told me they were meeting all their targets. But they've told TTC achieving year-end target is a stretch
• Byford says Bomb. has rented an Antonov cargo plane to carry parts from Europe, instead of shipping them by sea.
• Most streetcars that Bomb. has had to deliver in one month so far this year is 3, in May. Will have to do 8 in Nov. (scheduled attached) 

[Ed T.]

Delete, misread previous post.

Too bad that the "not a happy bunny" quote didn't recur.

Remember Monty Python's Holy Grail.

[Xtrazsteve]

Basically Bombardier means they are meeting their target with 5 every 2 months. They are having trouble ramping up to 7-8 per two month (per assembly line or 15 in two months). The only way it's possible is to reduce the amount of assembly work at Thunder Bay such as assembling cabs somewhere else. I guess they haven't sorted that out yet.

[skyfirenet]

2 hours ago, Allandale25 said:

Tweets from Ben Spurr who is at today's TTC meeting:

<snip>

• Most streetcars that Bomb. has had to deliver in one month so far this year is 3, in May. Will have to do 8 in Nov. (scheduled attached) 

Does the Thunder Bay plant have a major shutdown in August? I'm asking because it seems odd that the production number crashes every August on that list and the October-November-December ramp-up doubts could be resolved by beating the targets for the next 3 months including July by one.

[drum118]

Accordingly to my list when TTC took delivery of the cars, TTC got 4433 in March as plan, 4434 & 35 in April with 35 being a May car, 4436 & 37 in May as plan, 4438 & 39 in June as plan and 4440 out of the plan 3 for this month so far.

TTC needs to have 4442 here by July 28 or 31 to make the 3 for this month. This could be the tell tail month of things to come. Then how CP get the cars to TTC is another story and beyond BBD control or TTC. Oct will be the do or die month for the remaining of the year deliveries.

Thunder Bay has holidays like all business and I am sure BBD has spoken to the Union to make sure there is personnel work on TTC order while most of the plant is close.

[Xtrazsteve]

They can't assembly a streetcar within a week. They take like 2 months to put the whole thing together and finish all the testing too at TB. The parts that are required to supply the TB plant needs to be completed earlier. Bombardier would know well in advance if they could make the delivery or not. Something like 4448 or even 4450 should be on the assembly line now. That said, something like the cab, frame or parts of 4456 or even 4460 should be in production now elsewhere around the world. 

We haven't heard from LilRedDave in a long while now. Maybe he has an update. Hope everything is going well up in TB.

[TheAverageJoe]

Bombardier has just started this week flying over the cabs from Europe to save a month delivery time. with a cost of $750000 CDN per flight.

[Ed T.]

7 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

They can't assembly a streetcar within a week. They take like 2 months to put the whole thing together and finish all the testing too at TB.

But they certainly can have several streetcars, all at different phases of assembly, going simultaneously.

If they're just managing 5 every two months, they're going to have to change how they're doing things to get to 7 or 8 every two months. I'd be very surprised if better management could speed up the process and cut assembly time by the required one-third. So the plant has to handle more streetcars being assembled at one time.

[smallspy]

1 hour ago, Ed T. said:

So the plant has to handle more streetcars being assembled at one time.

That's exactly what the plan is. The Metrolinx cars are going to be built in Kingston, with that production line/slots being reallocated to the TTC cars.

 

Dan

[Xtrazsteve]

This isn't going to work if they have no parts. They need twice as many parts, frames, cabs, etc. If one of the other Bombardier plants around the world can't, there's a bottleneck that would hold one of the lines. It doesn't matter if the have more crews working 24/7 and 3, 4 or 5 lines.

[TheAverageJoe]

1 hour ago, Xtrazsteve said:

This isn't going to work if they have no parts. They need twice as many parts, frames, cabs, etc. If one of the other Bombardier plants around the world can't, there's a bottleneck that would hold one of the lines. It doesn't matter if the have more crews working 24/7 and 3, 4 or 5 lines.

Parts should not be a problem going forward since they are now paying to have parts flown from Europe at a cost of $750000 per flight. This is saving a months time shipping.