Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Wasn't sure where to post this, so I figure here's as good a place as any. I spent the last week or so recreating John Bromley's map of the streetcar network, as of February 13, 1945. Was unquest

I've heard rumours they are planning on 4-digit Arabic numerals this time.

It isn't a joint. The rail itself is fine.   The issue is with a concrete slab within the track allowance on the west side of the Don River Bridge. They found that it would move 2 to 3 inche

Posted Images

10 hours ago, dowlingm said:

The one I was thinking of was 4445 on May 22

The impact on 4445 was enough to push it off of the tracks - and it yet still returned to service a couple of days later. There is a lot less force and energy to dissipate in this kind if impact and thus the likelihood of structural damage is almost nil. The only way that this car will be out of service for any significant length of time is if the is a need to wait for replacement panels or glass. I suspect that it'll be back before the middle of the week.

 

Dan

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

The impact on 4445 was enough to push it off of the tracks - and it yet still returned to service a couple of days later. There is a lot less force and energy to dissipate in this kind if impact and thus the likelihood of structural damage is almost nil. The only way that this car will be out of service for any significant length of time is if the is a need to wait for replacement panels or glass. I suspect that it'll be back before the middle of the week.

 

Dan

But my point above Dan was that 4445 was a different impact - head on where impacts are highly anticipated in the design/crashworthiness. But hopefully your prediction is correct - need every AC car these days!

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, smallspy said:

The impact on 4445 was enough to push it off of the tracks - and it yet still returned to service a couple of days later. There is a lot less force and energy to dissipate in this kind if impact and thus the likelihood of structural damage is almost nil. The only way that this car will be out of service for any significant length of time is if the is a need to wait for replacement panels or glass. I suspect that it'll be back before the middle of the week.

 

Dan

I think it is very difficult to make predictions as to how long repairs will take by simply looking at pictures.

For what is worth, after the collision on the evening of 18-May, car 4445 was back in service on 24-May.

On the other hand, after the collision on 26-Jul-2016, which at least superficially, looked similar as far as the damage was concerned, but with no derailment, car 4413 was out of commission for 29 days, returning to service on 25-Aug.

I've attached a couple of pictures for comparison.

Of course, another factor to consider is whether replacement parts are immediately available or need to be ordered.

Now, with respect to yesterday's accident on St. Clair, something similar happened on 13-March of this year, when car 4422 was involved in a side-swipe accident on King St, resulting in broken windows, damaged panels etc. on one side of the car. It returned to service on 11-April, so it took 28 days to be repaired.

Collision_Derailment_4445_King_University_18_May_2018_pic2.jpg

Collision_4413_College_26_Jul_2016.png

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/1/2018 at 11:01 AM, ttc rider said:

I think it is very difficult to make predictions as to how long repairs will take by simply looking at pictures.

For what is worth, after the collision on the evening of 18-May, car 4445 was back in service on 24-May.

On the other hand, after the collision on 26-Jul-2016, which at least superficially, looked similar as far as the damage was concerned, but with no derailment, car 4413 was out of commission for 29 days, returning to service on 25-Aug.

I've attached a couple of pictures for comparison.

Of course, another factor to consider is whether replacement parts are immediately available or need to be ordered.

Now, with respect to yesterday's accident on St. Clair, something similar happened on 13-March of this year, when car 4422 was involved in a side-swipe accident on King St, resulting in broken windows, damaged panels etc. on one side of the car. It returned to service on 11-April, so it took 28 days to be repaired.

Collision_Derailment_4445_King_University_18_May_2018_pic2.jpg

Collision_4413_College_26_Jul_2016.png

And thus my comment about being dependent on the availability of parts. In the case of the incident involving 4413, many of the parts were not yet available, and thus its long layoff. The supply of parts held in storage is much better now, although there may still be delays for certain, specific components.

 

One would hope that things would be better now, but evidently looking at how long it took to get 4422 back into service, one does worry.

 

Dan

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, lip said:

At this rate the TTC should have the option of getting those potential 60 streetcars from Bombardier for a 50% discount minimum. It just never ends with that company.

I would be astounded if we see those 60 extra streetcars - ever!

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, dowlingm said:

oh boy...

(also - is 4401’s trip to La Pocatiere linked to this perhaps?)

I believe the children today call this an "epic fail" 🤔🤔🤔🙄

25 minutes ago, TTC T6H-5307N 2252 said:

Then postpone the retirements of the CLRVs and ALRVs, I'm sure there's some retired cars at Leslie barns that could be rebuilt 

LOL hey they did it with the Orion IIIs when they were in the midst of retiring those. 😂 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, dowlingm said:
oh boy...

(also - is 4401’s trip to La Pocatiere linked to this perhaps?)

I thought there was a report ages (years?) ago that there was a problem with the welds on some cars, and there was going to have to eventually be some repairs. Though the scope of it surprises me.

I'm guessing that 4401 is the prototype for this weld repair now. And then I'd guess 1 or 2 more get sent in the fall, then we won't hear much more about it, until in 2019 sometime.

 

2 hours ago, lip said:

At this rate the TTC should have the option of getting those potential 60 streetcars from Bombardier for a 50% discount minimum. It just never ends with that company.

They are doing this for no extra cost. I'm not sure how you extract much of a penalty for that, other than some loaners. Part of the penalty delivered as additional cars  - though they've already maxxed out that claim.

They are already have the option of a 26% discount. The original cars cost $990 million for 24 cars - $4.9 million each. The additional 60 are priced at $3.6 million.

Remember that back in 2009, Siemens bid $1.526 billion ($7.5 million) for 204 cars. And it would be higher per car for a 60-car order, instead of 204 cars.

It's pretty obvious to me that TTC should be dropping $3.6 million per car for the 60 cars (hopefully there are some freebies) for 2020 delivery... or else we'll find we are out $8 million per car and won't see anything until the mid-2020s!

 

1 hour ago, ttc rider said:

I would be astounded if we see those 60 extra streetcars - ever!

I fear that the TTC board is that stupid and vindictive. But hopefully that this is being discussed at next week's board meeting is an indication that they've sorted out all the penalties and issues with Bombardier, and the next 60 will be rubber stamped. As not getting them until 2026 doesn't seem to be an option (particularly as the latest fleet plan, requires 290 streetcars available in 2026, not 264!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, WMATAC40LF said:

So does anyone know where the problem area is? 19 weeks per car sounds fairly significant to me. I'm very disappointed, but it sounds like they've thought out a plan for dealing with this.

" Company representatives said the problem is a “lack of fusion” in some of the welds on the car’s skeleton, particularly around bogie structures and the articulated portals where different sections of the articulated vehicle are joined. The company says it brought the issue “under control” last June and it won’t be repeated in future deliveries. "

9 hours ago, WoodbineSecondExit said:

 It will be interesting to see if the origins of the problem are in Thunder Bay or Mexico.

" A spokesperson for the company stressed the welding problem, which originated at Bombardier’s plant in Sahagun, Mexico, poses no safety risk to the public. Eric Prud’Homme described the work as “preventative maintenance” and said Bombardier made the decision to take the vehicles out of service for repairs because without the work they may not last their contractual 30-year service life. "

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

67 units means up to 4466 which was the defective unit sent back for repairs recently. They should've kept 4466 to be re-welded instead of sending it back to the TTC so soon. Unless of course they wanted this vehicle to be counted as a delivered unit before July 1 2018.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is being blown up more than it really needs to be; people just want another reason to bash BBD and criticize the TTC. At the end of the day BBD says it poses no safety risk to the public. The fix is needed because the defect may not allow the cars to reach their contractual 30 year service life.

Considering BBD are the ones building the cars, I’ll take their word when it comes to safety.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Doppelkupplung said:

I think this is being blown up more than it really needs to be; people just want another reason to bash BBD and criticize the TTC. At the end of the day BBD says it poses no safety risk to the public. The fix is needed because the defect may not allow the cars to reach their contractual 30 year service life.

Considering BBD are the ones building the cars, I’ll take their word when it comes to safety.

While BBD may remanufacture these cars to meet safety margins and make TTC nominally whole post 2022, these are already cars which TTC is using because it has to at less than half the contracted MDBF. This process will remove 67 cars from TTC service availability for about 22-23 weeks each over the course of the repair (allowing for recommissioning on return - which in turn takes operators out of service rotation to perform). 10,000 vehicle-days where CLRVs must be kept in service or streetcar service replaced by buses. This isn't the same as bringing your car to the shop to have a part replaced in an afternoon. How much blowing up will you accept?

  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Doppelkupplung said:

I think this is being blown up more than it really needs to be; people just want another reason to bash BBD and criticize the TTC. At the end of the day BBD says it poses no safety risk to the public. The fix is needed because the defect may not allow the cars to reach their contractual 30 year service life.

Considering BBD are the ones building the cars, I’ll take their word when it comes to safety.

Bombardier told everyone the problems in Mexico were fixed. Over and over. Again. Both sides were grinning over how well the vehicles were performing when they knew they had defects in them. The TTC and Andy Byford kept this whole thing under wraps until he was settled in at his new post. The criticism is more than deserved!

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Downsview 108 said:

It amazes me in this day and age how people are such servants to corporations that the exchange of money for a product as advertised is a foreign concept. 

Indeed. But it's not just individuals. Metrolinx was also very naive and not understanding contract law - thinking that they could simply walk away from the Bombardier contract.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nfitz said:

Indeed. But it's not just individuals. Metrolinx was also very naive and not understanding contract law - thinking that they could simply walk away from the Bombardier contract.

Sounds like it was more political than practical. 🤔

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...