Streetcar News

[IRT_BMT_IND]

Wasn't there two stages of overhead work? The initial stuff in the late 90s was SOGR to replace life expired Ohio Brass parts with Wabco/IMPulse. The pantograph conversion was later in the 2000s as part of the fleet replacement. I remember the upside down U shape fittings on some special work into the mid 2000s. Also the OB design insulators were standard until about 10 years ago.

And wasn't the 510 built (at least partly) with "modern" overhead from the start.

 

[Wayside Observer]

11 hours ago, IRT_BMT_IND said:

Wasn't there two stages of overhead work? The initial stuff in the late 90s was SOGR to replace life expired Ohio Brass parts with Wabco/IMPulse. The pantograph conversion was later in the 2000s as part of the fleet replacement. I remember the upside down U shape fittings on some special work into the mid 2000s. Also the OB design insulators were standard until about 10 years ago.

And wasn't the 510 built (at least partly) with "modern" overhead from the start.

 

Yeah, most of the system was rebuilt in the late 1990s and early 2000s with Wabco/IMPulse.  Those companies bought the Ohio Brass catalogue some time in the past which meant it was almost a like for like rebuild and not pantograph compatible.  My recollection is the same, that the last of the really old junk including the U shaped hangers held on in special work and on some of the infrequently used stretches of diversion track and short turn loops the longest.  It felt like it was almost the day after they finished all that, they announced having to retool the overhead to be pantograph compatible for the new cars and the modification project started.  It's well along now but it hasn't been finished yet.

The overhead hardware for 510 was different.  Some of it looked like it would be pan friendly but the special work wasn't.  It wasn't built with the hardware that pushes pan sleds down and guides them by underneath the frogs, so 510 wasn't pan ready even though less of it needed modification than other lines.

[smallspy]

17 hours ago, Wayside Observer said:

I don't think there's any left now, could be mistaken, but for maximum yikes, PAT in Pittsburgh proved you can even run pantographs on circular profile trolley wire as long as the ear and hanger assemblies shove it down below anything else that could foul the clearance of the pan sled.  This, notably,  even included pantographs that were retrofitted on to PCC cars.  Including air cars, even, which is a truly wild sight.  I'm trying to find a picture but the only one I've been able to turn up is an air car in the subway in the mid-80s and it doesn't show the pantograph well.

Edit:  Found one.  Yes, it has been done, you can even put pantographs on air PCCs.

The overhead wire in San Fran for many years was a weird mix of stuff as they transitioned from the PCCs to the Boeing-Vertols. And even before that, it was done in many places in Europe, although frequently with lyres rather than pantographs early on.

 

As for pantograph retrofits, yes, it's absolutely possible. But it also requires a bit of strengthening in the roof across the ribs to stiffen the structure against the additional dead weight and loads.

 

Dan

[Wayside Observer]

37 minutes ago, smallspy said:

The overhead wire in San Fran for many years was a weird mix of stuff as they transitioned from the PCCs to the Boeing-Vertols. And even before that, it was done in many places in Europe, although frequently with lyres rather than pantographs early on.

 

As for pantograph retrofits, yes, it's absolutely possible. But it also requires a bit of strengthening in the roof across the ribs to stiffen the structure against the additional dead weight and loads.

 

Dan

Don't forget Boston.  They had the same transition from PCC to Boeing that SF did.  My family lived there for about a year in the early 1980s in the last days of green line PCCs when it was a mix of PCCs and Boeings before the Arborway line got cut back and PCCs were retired.  Multiple unit trains of air cars in the subway were cool.

[IRT_BMT_IND]

2 hours ago, Wayside Observer said:

Yeah, most of the system was rebuilt in the late 1990s and early 2000s with Wabco/IMPulse.  Those companies bought the Ohio Brass catalogue some time in the past which meant it was almost a like for like rebuild and not pantograph compatible.  My recollection is the same, that the last of the really old junk including the U shaped hangers held on in special work and on some of the infrequently used stretches of diversion track and short turn loops the longest.  It felt like it was almost the day after they finished all that, they announced having to retool the overhead to be pantograph compatible for the new cars and the modification project started.  It's well along now but it hasn't been finished yet.

The overhead hardware for 510 was different.  Some of it looked like it would be pan friendly but the special work wasn't.  It wasn't built with the hardware that pushes pan sleds down and guides them by underneath the frogs, so 510 wasn't pan ready even though less of it needed modification than other lines.

Google street view has almost complete set of photos of the 510 before the big rebuild and you can clearly see K&M overhead on the tangent sections that was probably pan compatible. Not so for the special work though.

I think the TTC was considering buying new LRVs from Europe for the line before the service cuts created a streetcar surplus, so maybe the TTC was thinking about pantograph compatibility at one point?

[Wayside Observer]

23 minutes ago, IRT_BMT_IND said:

Google street view has almost complete set of photos of the 510 before the big rebuild and you can clearly see K&M overhead on the tangent sections that was probably pan compatible. Not so for the special work though.

I think the TTC was considering buying new LRVs from Europe for the line before the service cuts created a streetcar surplus, so maybe the TTC was thinking about pantograph compatibility at one point?

The original plan for Spadina and Harbourfront was to rebuild enough PCC cars that the overall fleet of CLRVs, PCCs, and ALRVs would be adequate for the whole streetcar system including the two new lines.  Harbourfront opened with PCCs in 1990 but in between then and when Spadina opened in 1997, the PCC rebuild program was ended early and the rebuilt PCCs themselves were retired in late 1995.  The service cuts were so deep that the CLRV and ALRV fleet was enough to operate the whole streetcar system including the new 510 Spadina and 604/509 Harbourfront lines minus the rebuilt PCCs that were retired in 95.  That's how bad streetcar service was gutted.   With more lines and fewer streetcars, it meant that service levels got thinned out pretty severely across the whole city.

What you might be thinking of was some ideas that were tossed around to bring in European cars to boost the fleet back up when ridership stared going back up again but streetcar service couldn't be increased to match due to hitting the limit of the 196 CLRVs and 52 ALRVs.  Eventually the idea of an European design modified to meet the parameters of the Toronto system is what happened in terms of the Flexity replacement fleet that the city's running with now.

[smallspy]

19 hours ago, Wayside Observer said:

The original plan for Spadina and Harbourfront was to rebuild enough PCC cars that the overall fleet of CLRVs, PCCs, and ALRVs would be adequate for the whole streetcar system including the two new lines.  Harbourfront opened with PCCs in 1990 but in between then and when Spadina opened in 1997, the PCC rebuild program was ended early and the rebuilt PCCs themselves were retired in late 1995.  The service cuts were so deep that the CLRV and ALRV fleet was enough to operate the whole streetcar system including the new 510 Spadina and 604/509 Harbourfront lines minus the rebuilt PCCs that were retired in 95.  That's how bad streetcar service was gutted.   With more lines and fewer streetcars, it meant that service levels got thinned out pretty severely across the whole city.

What you might be thinking of was some ideas that were tossed around to bring in European cars to boost the fleet back up when ridership stared going back up again but streetcar service couldn't be increased to match due to hitting the limit of the 196 CLRVs and 52 ALRVs.  Eventually the idea of an European design modified to meet the parameters of the Toronto system is what happened in terms of the Flexity replacement fleet that the city's running with now.

Historically, the plans have been even more variable than that.

 

If you go back into the mid-1980s the TTC was looking at buying anywhere up to about 76 ALRVs to replace what was left of the PCC fleet. The order ended up at 52 units, but even until a year or two before the last one was delivered there were serious discussions with the TTC, UTDC and the Provincial Government to find more funding to buy more of them and replace what was left of the PCCs.

 

Of course, the PCCs that were still in service at that point were stretched so thin and were so far gone that the TTC did a heavy rebuild on the best ones - and we got the 4600s. Those too were supposed to result in a larger fleet than what we got - 25 versus the 19 actually made.

 

Fast-forward to the mid-to-late 1990s, and planning on Spadina had reached enough of a point that they were ready to start on construction on the Spadina Line. The TTC had serious discussions with a couple of European manufacturers - one of which was Skoda, the other I don't know - about ordering up to 20 cars (16 cars seems to be the final number settled on) for the new line. These were going to be modern, and have some amount of low-floor to them to allow for wheelchair access on the line. Alas, as is frequently the case, the funding never came through, and the order was never consummated. Instead, as you've noted, freed up cars from the system were used to provide service on the line.

 

Dan

[Matt]

Going to be that person... Has anyone noticed that the streetcar fleet seems to be particularly filthy as of late? We're not talking someone left a coffee cup, we're talking interiors that look like they haven't been touched in months. Is there something going on at the carhouses lately? 

[AnalogPentium]

9 hours ago, Matt said:

Going to be that person... Has anyone noticed that the streetcar fleet seems to be particularly filthy as of late? We're not talking someone left a coffee cup, we're talking interiors that look like they haven't been touched in months. Is there something going on at the carhouses lately? 

Oh my God, THANK YOU. I swore I wasn't the only one who was thinking this. Like I literally talked about that in r/TTC on Reddit the other day and got downvoted to hell for saying it.

[Xtrazsteve]

If they ain't going to bother to clean the interior, at least don't choose white.

[AnalogPentium]

9 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

If they ain't going to bother to clean the interior, at least don't choose white.

May I suggest a faux wood grain and dark chocolate brown being used instead? Perhaps even with metal seating?

[Mark Walton]

On 3/19/2021 at 12:51 AM, Matt said:

Going to be that person... Has anyone noticed that the streetcar fleet seems to be particularly filthy as of late? We're not talking someone left a coffee cup, we're talking interiors that look like they haven't been touched in months. Is there something going on at the carhouses lately? 

Are people putting their feet on facing seats?

[Mark Walton]

1 minute ago, 110B West Pickering said:

All the time.

Just like the novas

[Kelvin3157]

Seems like the TTC is exercising their option for 60 additional streetcars 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6022043

[AnalogPentium]

8 minutes ago, Kelvin3157 said:

Seems like the TTC is exercising their option for 60 additional streetcars 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6022043

Hopefully this time there won't be a bunch of delays and whatnot.

[Shemar]

I'll just leave this here:

https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_meetings/2021/May_25/Reports/1_TTC_Streetcar_Program_Procurement_of_60_Streetcars_updated.pdf

[drum118]

Alstom signs EUR 275 million tram contract for Toronto

Virtual Community Consultation on June 21, 2021!

This engagement will cover:

· Initial design work for the extension of Queens Quay from Parliament Street to the Distillery Loop, including options for getting under the rail corridor

· Design updates for the surface section on the LRT and Queens Quay East streetscape, including an update on the Yonge Street Slip

· Progress update on the design of the underground section of the LRT from Union Loop to the proposed portal locations on Queens Quay East, and a new design concept plan for Bay Street following completion of underground works

· An update on project phasing and implementation

· An overview of the upcoming Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP) for the project

· An update and a summary of feedback from the February consultations

Stay Informed: Consultation materials will be made available on the project website. A recording of the meeting will be posted on the website following the meeting.

Get Involved: Ask questions and provide your comments at the June 21 Virtual Community Consultation. A brief overview presentation will be made, followed by a one-hour question and comment period with project staff.

Provide Feedback: A brief online survey will be posted following the public meeting and will be open from June 21 – July 6, 2021.

Virtual Community Consultation Details:

If you would like to attend, please register.

Join the meeting through Zoom on:

· Date: Monday, June 21, 2021

· Time: 7:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m.

Or, Join by Phone:

· 1-647-374-4685

· Webinar ID: 629 9971 2910

· Passcode: 8255128245

If you are unable to attend this meeting, meeting notes and a recording will be shared. Please also feel free to reach out to the project team with any comments or questions you have.

We look forward to meeting with you on June 21.

[ttc rider]

Sorry if this comes across as a silly question, but are the designated "pantograph-only" sections of the overhead network really pantograph-only, or can they accommodate trolley pole operation after all?

I am asking this because CLRV 4081 is at Roncesvalles carhouse at this time (powered on).

Considering the trackwork/overhead projects currently underway, the only it could have gotten there from Russell is either via Dundas West or College Streets, which are both designated as "pantograph-only". I have a feeling it got there under its own power and was not towed.

[Turtle]

9 hours ago, ttc rider said:

Sorry if this comes across as a silly question, but are the designated "pantograph-only" sections of the overhead network really pantograph-only, or can they accommodate trolley pole operation after all?

Inside St. Clair West station.

[smallspy]

2 hours ago, Turtle said:

Inside St. Clair West station.

To elaborate....

 

The overhead in St. Clair West Station uses a type of rigid conductor rail that is far too wide in cross section to allow a trolley shoe to use it. Thus, the TTC has made the whole of the St. Clair trackage "pantograph only".

 

Dan

[Turtle]

15 minutes ago, smallspy said:

To elaborate....

 

The overhead in St. Clair West Station uses a type of rigid conductor rail that is far too wide in cross section to allow a trolley shoe to use it. Thus, the TTC has made the whole of the St. Clair trackage "pantograph only".

 

Dan

... also: the overhead is not continuous in there, if you could get a pole to track on a section of overhead, it would fall off once it reached the end of a section. The overhead is in disjoint pieces of "rail", that overlap but are not physically connected.

[Ed T.]

Steve Munro has done a comparison of speeds between Bathurst and Spadina. Bathurst wins. One of the points he makes is that the farside stops on Spadina slow the route down compared with the nearside stops on Bathurst. (We had a discussion about that somewhere here not too long ago.)

Munro also makes the statement: "Nothing can be done about the acceleration characteristics of the Flexitys."  Is this actually true? I assume that acceleration is limited by the control software, not by the motors or trucks. With all truck powered, I would think the Flexities should be able to take off like a PCC of old, were it allowed to by the software.

 

[nfitz]

I'd think a bigger issue relating to the speed, is that Spadina is much busier than Bathurst. It's rare in the daytime for a streetcar to miss even a single stop on Spadina, but many are skipped on Bathurst. And dwell times are longer with more people boarding.

I don't think this can all go on farside stops - though it's a factor.

Eliminating 2 or 3 of the Spadina stops, especially in the north, would help more than anything. And fixing the microsized platforms at Spadina and even Union.

[Wayside Observer]

4 hours ago, Ed T. said:

Steve Munro has done a comparison of speeds between Bathurst and Spadina. Bathurst wins. One of the points he makes is that the farside stops on Spadina slow the route down compared with the nearside stops on Bathurst. (We had a discussion about that somewhere here not too long ago.)

Munro also makes the statement: "Nothing can be done about the acceleration characteristics of the Flexitys."  Is this actually true? I assume that acceleration is limited by the control software, not by the motors or trucks. With all truck powered, I would think the Flexities should be able to take off like a PCC of old, were it allowed to by the software.

 

Performance on trolley poles was deliberately limited to keep current levels below what the shoe/carbon insert on the trolley pole could handle.  Then when they switched to pantographs which in theory solved that problem and I thought the things would go like a sports car once the pantographs went up and the limit on current draw came off and all axles powered, but I was seriously disappointed with how lacklustre the performance was the first time I rode a Flexity under pantograph.

Anyways, the big question is, how much adjustment range is there in the control systems parameters?  Can someone at TTC go round with a laptop and increase the maximum acceleration rate above what it is now to some value that doesn't run into damage limits for traction motors and traction power inverters or is this going to take a firmware change from Bombardier/Alstom?

[Turtle]

7 hours ago, Wayside Observer said:

Performance on trolley poles was deliberately limited...

 

Increasing acceleration rates will not help on Spadina. What slows Spadina down are all the safety rules that have to be followed, really poorly timed lights, long waits on reds because of left turn cycles, not enough time on a green for two streetcars to pass through on the same green light unless the ttc rules are bent (down trip has priority in trackwork that could create a collision if something goes wrong, like on College/Spadina on Sunday), having to travel less than 15km/h under troffs, 20km/h limit south of Dundas to Sullivan because of jaywalker fatalities, double stopping because of far side stops on red lights, ...

 

Also the LFLRVs really suck in curves, or to be more specific any changes in direction, those things will throw people out of the seats in the rear module if you go too fast. Comfortable speed entering and leaving Spadina circle is around 12-15km/h, once the whole streetcar is in the curve, it can smoothly go through a little faster but watch out for the next change in direction. Really violent cars if they aren't operated properly. Of course, nobody likes to hear a screeching streetcar every few minutes, so outdoor loops (stations, turnbacks) are limited to 5km/h in rail screech season instead of the normal 10km/h. All of Spadina tunnel is limited to 10km/h because of overhead issues - sagging overhead, bouncing pantos.

 

So many intersections with trackwork that has to be travelled through at no more than 10km/h with one or two stop check and go as well. College, Dundas, Queen, Adelaide, King, Queens Quay and Spadina, as well as the switches for Spadina loop. Then there is the tunnel to Ferry Docks (15km/h under troff, 10km/h on the curve, stop for the pedestrian crosswalk, then 10km/h the rest of the way in the station if nobody is crossing). Union loop is limited to 5km/h. Can't forget about the poor design of the row on Queens Quay, or the failure to anticipate people being people, so anywhere the tracks are beside the bike path, no more than 30km/h.