Jump to content
CLRV4037

Streetcar News

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Tramguy said:

Maybe bent frames rendering 50+ or so cars having to be stripped down completely, failure to meet production deadlines and a myriad of challenges we know nothing about made Bombardier less and less attractive.  Let's see what Alstom , Siemens or others have to offer.

We're already seeing how the Alstom vehicles are handling in Ottawa. 

I'm not even sure you can run Citadis vehicles (in the current North American form) on the city streets because of the turn radii. The Citadis has a turning radius of 25m while the flexity Outlooks have one of 12m. Granted, the freedoms have a turning radius of 25m, but the construction of the frame seems to allow for the increased turning radius. I'm not sure you can get this with a Citadis. Besides, it would cost Alstom a crap ton to develop a new model just for the Toronto streets, so I doubt they'd be willing to offer them for less than 10M a vehicle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Orion V said:

I was surprised that LACMTA Metro bought Chinese models for their heavy rail lines for delivery in 2020 despite what everyone thinks about Chinese products. So anything can happen.

If they are the lowest bidder that meet technical specs.

There's a lot of indication that they are trying to buy work, and will bid well below their own cost, with funding made up from the Chinese government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone complains about the Bombardier product, and even though the reliability stats dont meet the required standard, that doesn't mean that the competition will.   Look at Ottawa and their problems, you dont see GRT having those kinds of problems do you? 

Some of those issues may be a result of poor management, but not all of it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shaun said:

Everyone complains about the Bombardier product, and even though the reliability stats dont meet the required standard, that doesn't mean that the competition will.   Look at Ottawa and their problems, you dont see GRT having those kinds of problems do you? 

Some of those issues may be a result of poor management, but not all of it. 

I think it's been mentioned in the Ottawa section that the problems arise from how frequent the service is during rush hours on the Confederation Line while ION operates at max 10min frequencies. At the ION frequency, all the door problems Ottawa has can be fixed before the next trainset comes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve just posted an updated proposed streetcar network for 2022 after getting for streetcars.

https://swanboatsteve.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/streetcarnetworkenhancement.jpg

This brings up a question (I can't remember if this was asked before so I apologize if it's been asked). Besides having no funding for the extra 60 additional streetcars (where the option to take them is long gone), is it also because they don't have storage capacity in 2020 to house 60 additional units with Russell just started upgrading its facility and Hillcrest not yet upgraded to house 30m long cars? The storage issue is seen from the increase in blue night service on routes 501, 504 and 510 currently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MK78 said:

Interesting, they still have plans to return 503 to streetcars...

I’m not sure if this holds true (historians with stronger knowledge and memory of this can explain this better than I could), but the 503 Kingston Rd. Tripper would return to its former routing when the PCCs were in their prime if the route runs from Dufferin Loop - Bingham Loop

Share this post


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

More interestingly is they plan to run the split 501 again after proclaiming their experiment a decade ago saw no improvements.

It’s not the same split however. The new 501 split would be similar to the one on King where the downtown/central portion of the route is served by A and B branches (between Broadview and Sunnyside). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CLRV4002 said:

It’s not the same split however. The new 501 split would be similar to the one on King where the downtown/central portion of the route is served by A and B branches (between Broadview and Sunnyside). 

Odd though ... when I took 504 pre-split into downtown, a lot of riders got on at Sumach/Sackville/River Parliament.

When I take 501, I'd say as many get off at Broadview as on. And the next stops aren't particularly busy to Parliament. It would be interesting to see a map of where the demand is along Queeen, but I'd think you'd need a lot of capacity between Broadview towards Coxwell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, nfitz said:

Odd though ... when I took 504 pre-split into downtown, a lot of riders got on at Sumach/Sackville/River Parliament.

When I take 501, I'd say as many get off at Broadview as on. And the next stops aren't particularly busy to Parliament. It would be interesting to see a map of where the demand is along Queeen, but I'd think you'd need a lot of capacity between Broadview towards Coxwell.

In which case I’m curious if this proposal means the 503 will be running all day, everyday instead of just a peak period tripper. Or at the very least running all day during the weekdays. Currently it runs all (week)day in the absence of the 502, so I can imagine the same idea will apply going forward. If the TTC does in fact get more streetcars, the 503 streetcars should fix the capacity issue east of Broadview. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cityflyer said:

This brings up a question (I can't remember if this was asked before so I apologize if it's been asked). Besides having no funding for the extra 60 additional streetcars (where the option to take them is long gone), is it also because they don't have storage capacity in 2020 to house 60 additional units with Russell just started upgrading its facility and Hillcrest not yet upgraded to house 30m long cars? The storage issue is seen from the increase in blue night service on routes 501, 504 and 510 currently.

Once all of the work at Russell and Roncy is completed, the total storage capacity of all three streetcar barns is about 264 cars - what the total fleet size would be should the next order be for 60 cars.

 

The concern is that with ridership downtown going up higher than the system-wide increase that they are looking to buy 100 cars, not 60. Those extra 40 cars would need to be stored somewhere, and that's where the current nascent plan to convert part of Hillcrest to streetcar storage would come into play.

 

Dan

Share this post


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

Once all of the work at Russell and Roncy is completed, the total storage capacity of all three streetcar barns is about 264 cars - what the total fleet size would be should the next order be for 60 cars.

 

The concern is that with ridership downtown going up higher than the system-wide increase that they are looking to buy 100 cars, not 60. Those extra 40 cars would need to be stored somewhere, and that's where the current nascent plan to convert part of Hillcrest to streetcar storage would come into play.

 

Dan

So if TTC had taken the extra 60 units which were suppose to come right after the 204th unit, we will be getting the last 60 units from 2020 to 2021. Will Russell and Roncy finish their upgrades in time to store 264 units or I wonder did they purposely not take this order until 2022 so they know for sure Russell and Roncy will have their upgrades done and all 264 units can be properly stored instead of having them stored at Exhibition loop overnight and doubling the blue night streetcar route frequencies to compensate for the lost overnight storage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CLRV4002 said:

In which case I’m curious if this proposal means the 503 will be running all day, everyday instead of just a peak period tripper. Or at the very least running all day during the weekdays. Currently it runs all (week)day in the absence of the 502, so I can imagine the same idea will apply going forward. If the TTC does in fact get more streetcars, the 503 streetcars should fix the capacity issue east of Broadview. 

If 502/503 didn't already run east of Broadview, it would fix it.  Though the 501 and 503 already run every 6.5 minutes at AM peak.

I don't really see how this works, unless you keep the east-side 501A at 6 minutes, and also run the westside 501B every 6 minutes, with 3 minutes downtown.

So who thought up putting the east-side 504 as 504B and east-side 501 as 501A? How about some consistency?

Hmm, looks from the map that Steve Munro posted, that before (if) they build Riverside Loop, first they's loop 501B east of Queen somewhere - presumably Church/Richmond/Victoria - bringing regular service vehicles on Victoria and Richmond for the first time in many years. 

streetcarnetworkenhancement.jpg

Share this post


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

Once all of the work at Russell and Roncy is completed, the total storage capacity of all three streetcar barns is about 264 cars - what the total fleet size would be should the next order be for 60 cars.

The concern is that with ridership downtown going up higher than the system-wide increase that they are looking to buy 100 cars, not 60. Those extra 40 cars would need to be stored somewhere, and that's where the current nascent plan to convert part of Hillcrest to streetcar storage would come into play.

The earlier numbers for "New Streetcar MSF" (presumably Hillcrest) in the TTC 2019-2028 budget was $900 million, with the bulk of spending from 2024 through 2027. The Streetcar MSF value in the new 2020-2024 five-year plan is only $85 million, with the bulk of spending in 2022 and 2023, and nothing on 2024.

I'd assume that the $80 million MSF is for the next 60 cars, and not a later 40+ car order. I'm not sure if that's part of Hillcrest, or further upgrades/expansions at Russell/Leslie/Roncesvalles. I assume there are more unfunded MSF and streetcar purchase costs in the 6-10 year budget numbers ... I wonder if those will come out this week.

Interesting to see that Steve Munro noted in his article today, that starting streetcar delivery in 2022 was based on them being Bombardier cars. Are they going to sole-source the next 60 cars, based on no one else could possibly deliver them in time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

More interestingly is they plan to run the split 501 again after proclaiming their experiment a decade ago saw no improvements.

 

2 hours ago, CLRV4002 said:

In which case I’m curious if this proposal means the 503 will be running all day, everyday instead of just a peak period tripper. Or at the very least running all day during the weekdays. Currently it runs all (week)day in the absence of the 502, so I can imagine the same idea will apply going forward. If the TTC does in fact get more streetcars, the 503 streetcars should fix the capacity issue east of Broadview. 

They need to rethink the numbering scheme on this map. Looking at it is making my head hurt.

The 501B should be numbered as the 507. It's a long branch streetcar and it should be signed as such. 

The 504A should be numbered as the 514, it runs to the distillery and will eventually run further down Cherry. 

The 504B should be numbered as the 504, it stays on King the longest. 

The 501A should be numbered as the 501, it stays on Queen the longest. 

 

Interestingly, there's the lack of the 508. Looks like this map was made before the changes were made, or the 508 is dying in favor of the 504B. 

Share this post


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

I'd assume that the $80 million MSF is for the next 60 cars, and not a later 40+ car order. I'm not sure if that's part of Hillside, or further upgrades/expansions at Russell/Leslie/Roncesvalles.

I wonder if they could demolish the actual carhouse building at Russell, since it cannot accommodate the LFLRV's, and is freaking ancient, and simply put more outside track storage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, nfitz said:

If 502/503 didn't already run east of Broadview, it would fix it.  Though the 501 and 503 already run every 6.5 minutes at AM peak.

I don't really see how this works, unless you keep the east-side 501A at 6 minutes, and also run the westside 501B every 6 minutes, with 3 minutes downtown.

I’m assuming that the TTC thinks that with Flexities on the 503 instead of the current bus operation that capacity should increase. Although who knows at what intervals those streetcars will be scheduled at. 
 

2 hours ago, nfitz said:

So who thought up putting the east-side 504 as 504B and east-side 501 as 501A? How about some consistency?

B for Broadview? 😂😂
 

One thing I don’t understand is this Park Lawn Loop thing. By constructing this new loop it makes Humber Loop effectively useless as nothing will turn there anymore, except for maybe the odd short turn. So instead of using Humber Loop to turn the 504B they’re going to construct a new one a block away to do the same thing? If they want to allow for 504B layovers while not blocking the path of the 501B, wouldn’t a minor redesign of Humber Loop be sufficient? 

Also what’s the purpose of running the 504B to Humber/Park Lawn anyways? Effectively all that does is provide people who get on/off between Roncesvalles and Humber Loop with not having to board a 501. Those continuing on west of Park Lawn/Humber will still have to switch to a 501 car at some point. Seems like sort of a waste of time. The 504B should continue to Long Branch similar to the 508 today or use Charlotte to turn back the 503 and continue to operate the 504B to Dufferin Gate only. Or keep both the 504B and 503 turning back at Dufferin and extend the 504B to Long Branch during peak periods as a replacement for the 508. Those are just some possibilities as the current scheme doesn’t provide much benefit for the extra running time the 504B would be faced with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CLRV4002 said:

One thing I don’t understand is this Park Lawn Loop thing. By constructing this new loop it makes Humber Loop effectively useless as nothing will turn there anymore, except for maybe the odd short turn. So instead of using Humber Loop to turn the 504B they’re going to construct a new one a block away to do the same thing? If they want to allow for 504B layovers while not blocking the path of the 501B, wouldn’t a minor redesign of Humber Loop be sufficient? 

Integration with a future GO station. 

3 minutes ago, CLRV4002 said:

Also what’s the purpose of running the 504B to Humber/Park Lawn anyways? Effectively all that does is provide people who get on/off between Roncesvalles and Humber Loop with not having to board a 501. Those continuing on west of Park Lawn/Humber will still have to switch to a 501 car at some point. Seems like sort of a waste of time. The 504B should continue to Long Branch similar to the 508 today or use Charlotte to turn back the 503 and continue to operate the 504B to Dufferin Gate only. Or keep both the 504B and 503 turning back at Dufferin and extend the 504B to Long Branch during peak periods as a replacement for the 508. Those are just some possibilities as the current scheme doesn’t provide much benefit for the extra running time the 504B would be faced with. 

Probably has to do with reducing impacts on traffic. Increasing the number of left turns at Dufferin probably isn't a good idea. On top of it, increasing service that significantly will probably overcrowd the dufferin gate loop. 

Perhaps they want a more permanent terminus for the 504 when construction will eventually hit the area. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, CLRV4002 said:

One thing I don’t understand is this Park Lawn Loop thing. By constructing this new loop it makes Humber Loop effectively useless as nothing will turn there anymore, except for maybe the odd short turn. So instead of using Humber Loop to turn the 504B they’re going to construct a new one a block away to do the same thing? If they want to allow for 504B layovers while not blocking the path of the 501B, wouldn’t a minor redesign of Humber Loop be sufficient? 

Also what’s the purpose of running the 504B to Humber/Park Lawn anyways? Effectively all that does is provide people who get on/off between Roncesvalles and Humber Loop with not having to board a 501. Those continuing on west of Park Lawn/Humber will still have to switch to a 501 car at some point. Seems like sort of a waste of time. The 504B should continue to Long Branch similar to the 508 today or use Charlotte to turn back the 503 and continue to operate the 504B to Dufferin Gate only. Or keep both the 504B and 503 turning back at Dufferin and extend the 504B to Long Branch during peak periods as a replacement for the 508. Those are just some possibilities as the current scheme doesn’t provide much benefit for the extra running time the 504B would be faced with. 

Pawn Lawn serves the huge influx of condo dwellers there. There are plans to put another block of condos north of Lake Shore in that area. Having both 501 and 504 there will give the residents more frequent service and options to go downtown.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cityflyer said:

Pawn Lawn serves the huge influx of condo dwellers there. There are plans to put another block of condos north of Lake Shore in that area. Having both 501 and 504 there will give the residents more frequent service and options to go downtown.

So then what’s the plan with Humber Loop? According to this plan it will just become a stop, not really used as a loop anymore. Seems like sort of a waste to have a loop which is essentially a stop and a link to the Prince Edward bus. Especially a loop that got work done on it not too long ago. 

 

19 minutes ago, Streety McCarface said:

Integration with a future GO station.

This makes more sense. I wasn’t aware of the overall plan. In which case maybe the eastbound 501B will also turn north on Park Lawn on its way to get to the GO Station and perhaps do away with or modify the 176 bus since many of the current riders won’t need to access Mimico Station anymore if a Park Lawn one gets built. By then I can assume the 66 Prince Edward would be more frequent and even more necessary to serve Marine Parade and northbound to the subway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, CLRV4002 said:

So then what’s the plan with Humber Loop? According to this plan it will just become a stop, not really used as a loop anymore. Seems like sort of a waste to have a loop which is essentially a stop and a link to the Prince Edward bus. Especially a loop that got work done on it not too long ago. 

I'm wondering if they could extend the 77 to the Humber loop, or perhaps create a route that runs strictly on the Kingsway. Perhaps it can be a more direct link between the 501 and the Bloor Subway. Problem with this is accessing the Eastbound Queensway. 

I have a feeling Humber will see other uses in the future, whether it's as a bus/streetcar terminal, or an alternative short-turn location. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Streety McCarface said:

 

They need to rethink the numbering scheme on this map. Looking at it is making my head hurt.

The 501B should be numbered as the 507. It's a long branch streetcar and it should be signed as such. 

The 504A should be numbered as the 514, it runs to the distillery and will eventually run further down Cherry. 

The 504B should be numbered as the 504, it stays on King the longest. 

The 501A should be numbered as the 501, it stays on Queen the longest. 

 

Interestingly, there's the lack of the 508. Looks like this map was made before the changes were made, or the 508 is dying in favor of the 504B. 

TTC loves branches while the rest of the world don't create this many branches. For routes that operate with similar routings like the 510 or 927 would benefit from branches but two overlapping routes deserves their own numbers. Especially when they originate from downtown thus barely anyone will transfer between 501A and 501B or 504A and 504B.

5 hours ago, CLRV4002 said:

So then what’s the plan with Humber Loop? According to this plan it will just become a stop, not really used as a loop anymore. Seems like sort of a waste to have a loop which is essentially a stop and a link to the Prince Edward bus. Especially a loop that got work done on it not too long ago. 

Humber Loop has served its purpose in history. It was a great loop that allowed people to transfer between suburban and urban streetcars. Since the 70s with the completion of Line 2 to Etobicoke, traveling patterns has changed and made Humber loop an obstacle more than a popular transit hub. Then with the reason development around Park Lawn, it doesn't make sense anymore to terminate service at Humber Loop. People ride the 501 90% of the way just to have to wait for another streetcar for the last leg. The 66A Prince Edward bus isn't that popular either compared to the 66B. Clearly people want to go further west.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Streety McCarface said:

Integration with a future GO station. 

Probably has to do with reducing impacts on traffic. Increasing the number of left turns at Dufferin probably isn't a good idea. On top of it, increasing service that significantly will probably overcrowd the dufferin gate loop. 

Perhaps they want a more permanent terminus for the 504 when construction will eventually hit the area. 

There is also in the plans at Exhibition place for a new and improved Dufferin Gates Transit Hub so this may be apart of the talks

  • Like 1

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...