Miscellaneous TTC Discussion & Questions

[2044]

I'm pretty sure 6104 was scrapped a few years ago. Unfortunately, being owned by a non-profit means that they not always have the funds to keep the buses running. It was acquired by Belka in about 2006 and received its mural in 2009 as part of the Art on the Move initiative.

[T3G]

1 hour ago, D40-90 said:

6104 looks to have found a new home

https://toronto.spacefinder.org/communities/artsetobicoke.html?page=5

How do you know that this is a current photograph? I browsed the site briefly and I haven't found any info that confirms that this bus is currentl owned by these folks.

10 minutes ago, BYD said:

I wonder why the TTC never had that bus preserved in the first place as part of its historic fleet. 

This city doesn't care very much for its transit history. There was a lot of speculation on these forums around the time of the GM retirement as to whether even those would be saved - if we couldn't be certain of something as iconic as the GM being saved, why expect that a D901 would be saved? Compared to the GMs they made virtually no impact on the city.

And frankly the actions the TTC takes with the equipment it does have don't inspire much hope for the future, either. In order to charter one you have to pay nearly $2000 or get an enormous amount of people to cover the costs, and if I'm remembering correctly they don't even let the PCCs out for charters anymore?

[MK78]

7 hours ago, Downsview 108 said:

Transit now.

I've tried Transit Now, and I can't seem to display just a map with multiple bus routes. The only way I can display a map is by adding a favourite stop, and then it only shows the vehicles in one direction.

I just can't seem to find a simple app on the Play Store that allows displaying multiple routes on a map, along with the vehicles for those routes in both direction. Sadly neither TTC Watch or Bus.ly is not available on Play Store.

[TTC T6H-5307N 2252]

51 minutes ago, PCC Guy said:

This city doesn't care very much for its transit history. There was a lot of speculation on these forums around the time of the GM retirement as to whether even those would be saved - if we couldn't be certain of something as iconic as the GM being saved, why expect that a D901 would be saved? Compared to the GMs they made virtually no impact on the city.

And frankly the actions the TTC takes with the equipment it does have don't inspire much hope for the future, either. In order to charter one you have to pay nearly $2000 or get an enormous amount of people to cover the costs, and if I'm remembering correctly they don't even let the PCCs out for charters anymore?

Don’t forget the MTA has a Transit museum which houses every bus model that is saved from scrap, Same with MUNI and KCM has MEHVA

[Wayside Observer]

1 hour ago, PCC Guy said:

This city doesn't care very much for its transit history. There was a lot of speculation on these forums around the time of the GM retirement as to whether even those would be saved - if we couldn't be certain of something as iconic as the GM being saved, why expect that a D901 would be saved? Compared to the GMs they made virtually no impact on the city.

Toronto doesn't very much care for it's history, period.  It's an all-encompassing indifference that's far from being limited to transit history.  Things like the idea of a "Toronto Museum" that was debated for Old City Hall once the courts move out that you'd think are a no-brainer are debated intensely and shot down because it would cost money. The preservation of listed buildings is far from assured.  Remember the one on Yonge St. just north of Dundas that collapsed and then had the fire and had to be torn down?  And if developers wheel and deal enough, they get away with grafting a couple of old facades onto the front of the next generic condo-box they're slapping together which I guess is better than nothing, but still, and yet the usual suspects keep reminding everyone that Toronto is a world class city.  World class of third class, maybe, but not much more than that.

1 hour ago, PCC Guy said:

And frankly the actions the TTC takes with the equipment it does have don't inspire much hope for the future, either. In order to charter one you have to pay nearly $2000 or get an enormous amount of people to cover the costs, and if I'm remembering correctly they don't even let the PCCs out for charters anymore?

I went looking for the charter page on ttc.ca but couldn't find where it was linked off the main page or one level down so I ended up searching it.  $2000 would be a nice discount off the posted rate of $3,487.18 including tax and the chase car, but they require you to pay for a supervisor at $126.56 including tax.  I'm not sure if that's per hour or or a flat rate, but if that's per hour, a minimum length three hour charter's within reaching distance of $4,000.  Interestingly, the PCC had neither the supervisor or chase car on September 23rd and for a number of other private and internal events that the TTC did, so they're clearly not necessary and there is some elasticity in how closely the people who set the rules follow the rules.  At those rates, the only realistic way to ride one of those streetcars is to catch it on Harbourfront in the summer, if it's out.  Has there been any word on that for 2019?

[T3G]

12 minutes ago, Wayside Observer said:

I went looking for the charter page on ttc.ca but couldn't find where it was linked off the main page or one level down so I ended up searching it.  $2000 would be a nice discount off the posted rate of $3,487.18 including tax and the chase car, but they require you to pay for a supervisor at $126.56 including tax.  I'm not sure if that's per hour or or a flat rate, but if that's per hour, a minimum length three hour charter's within reaching distance of $4,000.

I remember looking at charter pricings this time last year and I remember coming away with a $1500 price tag. I wonder if I was looking in the wrong section or if they've increased the costs even more. In either case, this is so much worse than I could've ever imagined. You have to wonder what the point of keeping these things around is if they're going to make them so inaccessible to the general public.

I definitely remember someone mentioning something about some old historical trams not being allowed to go out on charters - I wonder if I was confusing it with the Witt, although given how that one has required an escort since time immemorial I wonder why I'd be particularly surprised at that.

14 minutes ago, Wayside Observer said:

At those rates, the only realistic way to ride one of those streetcars is to catch it on Harbourfront in the summer, if it's out.  Has there been any word on that for 2019?

Did they even make it out on the Harbourfront last summer? I thought I remembered reading something around here about how the cars would have to be converted to pantograph operation, but I'm not sure if that's the truth or not.

[Wayside Observer]

22 minutes ago, PCC Guy said:

I remember looking at charter pricings this time last year and I remember coming away with a $1500 price tag. I wonder if I was looking in the wrong section or if they've increased the costs even more. In either case, this is so much worse than I could've ever imagined.

There's a change in charter policy that took place between when you last looked and now that explains the price discrepancy on top of the annual rate increases.  The TTC added a requirement that you have a CLRV follow the PCC around and the cost of chartering the CLRV chase car's baked into the PCC charter rate as the notes on the charter page state.  From what I've heard, you're not allowed to have passengers riding on the CLRV that's following behind so if you do a charter, the cost has to be divided among however many people you have on the PCC only.

I heard one story that the reason for the CLRV following behind was because they're unsure if the PCC can be connected by drawbar to an LFLRV because that combination hasn't been tested.  I don't know if that's true or not but if that's the case, that could be determined by getting one of the PCCs, an LFLRV, a couple of operators and whoever needs to oversee testing together in one of the yards and maybe an hour at most for testing to determine if the CLRV really is needed.  The fact that the TTC has put one of the PCC cars out for their own purposes without a chase car several times strongly suggests it isn't needed.  I honestly don't think the PCC car needs to be attended to constantly by a supervisor either.

22 minutes ago, PCC Guy said:

You have to wonder what the point of keeping these things around is if they're going to make them so inaccessible to the general public.

I definitely remember someone mentioning something about some old historical trams not being allowed to go out on charters - I wonder if I was confusing it with the Witt, although given how that one has required an escort since time immemorial I wonder why I'd be particularly surprised at that.

I think what we're looking at here is a begrudging acceptance by TTC that, politically, getting rid of them is a non-starter.  But, by the same token, that doesn't mean they have to do anything with them.  It's the Peter Witt that's not allowed out on charters anymore.  There was a brief period when it was allowed out on charters after it got restored before they forbade it and it had to be bookended by newer streetcars.  On the few charters it did go out on, it was typically led in front by one of the PCC cars, 2766 in the middle, and then a CLRV bringing up the rear.  The stated reason was that it didn't have track brakes.  When it was out on charters, the people organizing them would sell three cars worth of tickets and then cycle the passengers through the streetcars so everyone would ride the Peter Witt for 1/3 of the charter, the PCC for 1/3 and the CLRV for 1/3.  I went on two of these I think.

22 minutes ago, PCC Guy said:

Did they even make it out on the Harbourfront last summer? I thought I remembered reading something around here about how the cars would have to be converted to pantograph operation, but I'm not sure if that's the truth or not.

No, they didn't put it out on the Harbourfront last year, which is why I was asking if anybody knew if it would be returning in 2019.  The PCCs don't need to be retrofitted with pantographs to run on the harbourfront; I think you might be getting confused by this statement that the TTC released where Brad Ross said that they decided not to put it out because 509 was being run with pantographs and the overhead required extra maintenance to keep the pole compatibility in good shape and that they had opted not to do that and cancel the PCC instead given all the woes with streetcars.  Steve Munro took this up with Brad Ross last summer if you scroll down to the comments on that article.  We're only halfway through February so it's probably too early to know for sure, but hopefully no PCC on 509 on Sunday is not the new status quo, but if anybody knows anything, please let us all know.

[Bus_Medic]

1 hour ago, BYD said:

Good for her. Though at the riping age of 33, the bus can be worth to photograph since this is one of the five preserved D901 buses to exist and the last in Ontario. I wonder why the TTC never had that bus preserved in the first place as part of its historic fleet. 

The air bag pylons and tubular steel over the axle areas were Swiss cheese even back in 2006. I was one of the guys charged with chipping away at the rust with a welder’s hammer during regular inspections in malvern’s pit, checking for holes clean through the beams...signed many a death warrant.

The structural rehabilitation alone would exceed $100k. 

Which sucks, I guess. The 901s were a personal favourite.

15 minutes ago, Wayside Observer said:

There's a change in charter policy that took place between when you last looked and now that explains the price discrepancy on top of the annual rate increases.  The TTC added a requirement that you have a CLRV follow the PCC around and the cost of chartering the CLRV chase car's baked into the PCC charter rate as the notes on the charter page state.  From what I've heard, you're not allowed to have passengers riding on the CLRV that's following behind so if you do a charter, the cost has to be divided among however many people you have on the PCC only.

I heard one story that the reason for the CLRV following behind was because they're unsure if the PCC can be connected by drawbar to an LFLRV because that combination hasn't been tested.  I don't know if that's true or not but if that's the case, that could be determined by getting one of the PCCs, an LFLRV, a couple of operators and whoever needs to oversee testing together in one of the yards and maybe an hour at most for testing to determine if the CLRV really is needed.  The fact that the TTC has put one of the PCC cars out for their own purposes without a chase car several times strongly suggests it isn't needed.  I honestly don't think the PCC car needs to be attended to constantly by a supervisor either.

I think what we're looking at here is a begrudging acceptance by TTC that, politically, getting rid of them is a non-starter.  But, by the same token, that doesn't mean they have to do anything with them.  It's the Peter Witt that's not allowed out on charters anymore.  There was a brief period when it was allowed out on charters after it got restored before they forbade it and it had to be bookended by newer streetcars.  On the few charters it did go out on, it was typically led in front by one of the PCC cars, 2766 in the middle, and then a CLRV bringing up the rear.  The stated reason was that it didn't have track brakes.  When it was out on charters, the people organizing them would sell three cars worth of tickets and then cycle the passengers through the streetcars so everyone would ride the Peter Witt for 1/3 of the charter, the PCC for 1/3 and the CLRV for 1/3.  I went on two of these I think.

The idea that the PCCs need escorting is more than a little paranoid. Like you suggest, if there’s any doubt wether the flexities can rescue one, test out the damned scenario and be done with. Unfortunately I never had an opportunity to ride the witts in tour tram or charter service, but have operated the two at Halton more than a handful of times, I can understand how the prospect of relying solely on that chain wheel to get it woahed up in a couple of car lengths is a scary one, if the pneumatics shit the bed.

[Orion VI]

Does anyone know which NGs still have the Orion logo on the front? Unrebuilt of course. 1609 had it today, but most unrebuilt ones don't. Why is this?

 

30 minutes ago, Bus_Medic said:

The idea that the PCCs need escorting is more than a little paranoid. Like you suggest, if there’s any doubt wether the flexities can rescue one, test out the damned scenario and be done with. Unfortunately I never had an opportunity to ride the witts in tour tram or charter service, but have operated the two at Halton more than a handful of times, I can understand how the prospect of relying solely on that chain wheel to get it woahed up in a couple of car lengths is a scary one, if the pneumatics shit the bed.

 

I think, but could of course be wrong, that the PCC on TTC-led excursions always needs a streetcar behind it. Saw this info somewhere, but I don't remember why. 

[Wayside Observer]

34 minutes ago, Bus_Medic said:

Unfortunately I never had an opportunity to ride the witts in tour tram or charter service, but have operated the two at Halton more than a handful of times, I can understand how the prospect of relying solely on that chain wheel to get it woahed up in a couple of car lengths is a scary one, if the pneumatics shit the bed.

The first time I ever rode a Peter Witt was the tour tram!  That was fun.  It was a two car tour tram too, 2424 up ahead and I was on 2894 following behind.  I had never rode on 2766 until one of those charters.

The straight air brakes on the Peter Witts is actually very reliable but you do have a bit more available to you than just the parking brake if the air fails catastrophically.  You can throw the control cutout switch and crank the controller to dynamic brake it while you're winding the handbrake on, or you can throw it into reverse and buck the motors.  I think that's what Muni teaches the F line operators driving the Milan Peter Witts and that was a standard part of London Underground training decades ago.  Both are seriously hard on equipment but if it comes down to a choice between having an accident or sending the motors out for a rewind, send the motors out for a rewind.  I read an accident report from London Underground in the early or mid 30s where reversing the train's motors was mentioned a couple of times in the documentation of what a couple of train drivers did to try to avoid crashing.  If I can find it later, I'll link it in.  Anyways, that's one of the big reasons why I disagree with the practice a lot of trolley museums have for jimmying controllers so they can't be put into parallel.  It's all cute and fun to keep the tooterville trolley going nice and slow in series and sidesteps issues in cases where operator competence is marginal to some degree but if things go seriously sideways in an emergency, it means you cannot load down the motors past series to bring it to an emergency stop.  That doesn't sit right with me, but that's my personal opinion, which I've been told I'm not entitled to.

11 minutes ago, Orion VI said:

I think, but could of course be wrong, that the PCC on TTC-led excursions always needs a streetcar behind it. Saw this info somewhere, but I don't remember why. 

Yes, but that's recent.  It wasn't the case until a year or two ago or so.

[Bus_Medic]

13 minutes ago, Wayside Observer said:

The first time I ever rode a Peter Witt was the tour tram!  That was fun.  It was a two car tour tram too, 2424 up ahead and I was on 2894 following behind.  I had never rode on 2766 until one of those charters.

The straight air brakes on the Peter Witts is actually very reliable but you do have a bit more available to you than just the parking brake if the air fails catastrophically.  You can throw the control cutout switch and crank the controller to dynamic brake it while you're winding the handbrake on, or you can throw it into reverse and buck the motors.  I think that's what Muni teaches the F line operators driving the Milan Peter Witts and that was a standard part of London Underground training decades ago.  Both are seriously hard on equipment but if it comes down to a choice between having an accident or sending the motors out for a rewind, send the motors out for a rewind.  I read an accident report from London Underground in the early or mid 30s where reversing the train's motors was mentioned a couple of times in the documentation of what a couple of train drivers did to try to avoid crashing.  If I can find it later, I'll link it in.  Anyways, that's one of the big reasons why I disagree with the practice a lot of trolley museums have for jimmying controllers so they can't be put into parallel.  It's all cute and fun to keep the tooterville trolley going nice and slow in series and sidesteps issues in cases where operator competence is marginal to some degree but if things go seriously sideways in an emergency, it means you cannot load down the motors past series to bring it to an emergency stop.  That doesn't sit right with me, but that's my personal opinion, which I've been told I'm not entitled to.

Didn’t even think those were possibilities. *smacks forehead*

26 minutes ago, Orion VI said:

Does anyone know which NGs still have the Orion logo on the front? Unrebuilt of course. 1609 had it today, but most unrebuilt ones don't. Why is this?

The double sided tape that holds them on is shit.

[Orion VI]

12 minutes ago, Bus_Medic said:

The double sided tape that holds them on is shit.

Why do I think this exists at Malvern: 

[Wayside Observer]

45 minutes ago, Wayside Observer said:

I read an accident report from London Underground in the early or mid 30s where reversing the train's motors was mentioned a couple of times in the documentation of what a couple of train drivers did to try to avoid crashing.  If I can find it later, I'll link it in.

I found it.  LPTB report on the Waterloo - Charing Cross accident from early 1938.  I thought it was a few years earlier so I re-read through it quickly in case I was misremembering anything and the references to train drivers reversing the motors in addition to applying the air brakes to try and avoid crashing are on pages 5 and 6.  There's also a good amount of discussion about traditional fixed block wayside signalling in subway applications as well as the maintenance and troubleshooting practices involved with it too which is worth a read to anybody interested in that sort of thing.

Interestingly, the second last paragraph on page 9 mentions problems evacuating the trains because the floors buckled enough to jam the end doors of the cars and make it hard to open them, and says that the design of new trains that were then on order was being modified to give more clearance for the end doors to swing over buckled flooring in case of future accidents, so this accident influenced the design of the 1938 stock and later trains, probably including the Gloucesters.

[Orion 1200]

On 2/13/2019 at 9:21 PM, MK78 said:

I'd love to hear any suggestions for such an app for Android, if anyone has them. Thanks in advance.

The closest one I've found is called Toronto Bus Map. You can see all routes system wide or one at a time, but there's no option for showing multiple routes of your choice that I've found.

Also, it can be a little weird at the start of new board periods as the developer has to change the app to accommodate new route, branches and routings and that often isn't done until weeks later. The developer is in Boston; he created the app for MBTA and then made local versions for many other NextBus systems, so he's not as in tune with Toronto as the developers of most other apps.

[MK78]

6 hours ago, Orion 1200 said:

The closest one I've found is called Toronto Bus Map. You can see all routes system wide or one at a time, but there's no option for showing multiple routes of your choice that I've found.

Also, it can be a little weird at the start of new board periods as the developer has to change the app to accommodate new route, branches and routings and that often isn't done until weeks later. The developer is in Boston; he created the app for MBTA and then made local versions for many other NextBus systems, so he's not as in tune with Toronto as the developers of most other apps.

Thanks for that suggestion, Toronto Bus Map may just do the trick. Even it though it displays all the buses, but they are displayed and refresh the position automatically.

I don't particularly need an updated route list or correct branches, hopefully it would still display the buses... I'll give it a shot for a little bit.

I've just gotten so used to TTC Watch on iPhone its been a daily usage app for me for so many years, I was surprised at not being able to find a similarly designed app for Android.

Thanks again!

[7969]

Anyone know where the island bus is held/refuled?  Does it stay on the island at all times?

[Bus_Medic]

38 minutes ago, 7969 said:

Anyone know where the island bus is held/refuled?  Does it stay on the island at all times?

There are diesel fueling facilities on the island for municipal vehicles and equipment. It’s stored  securely inside a shop at the water treatment plant, alongside the tourist trams and various pickup trucks, refuse vehicles and tractors.

[NoUse4AName]

Here's a news article from a much snowier city with some opinions and research: https://globalnews.ca/news/4550209/calgary-bus-tire-traction/

[leylandvictory2]

Just don't dispatch artics during major snow storm.  Better yet put a plow in front the bus

[Bus_Medic]

Works for NYC and their garbage trucks.

[MK78]

I always wondered if they could retrofit some sort of dispenser in front of the wheels of the bus, that would spray rock salt or some other traction aid. Sort of like streetcars have the sand. 

[Bus_Medic]

24 minutes ago, MK78 said:

I always wondered if they could retrofit some sort of dispenser in front of the wheels of the bus, that would spray rock salt or some other traction aid. Sort of like streetcars have the sand. 

Never considered that, but there is this:

may be overkill on an urban bus, and probably isn’t room for a set on a low floor.

Actually, at least one guy has fabbed a sander up:

https://www.cartpartsrus.com/Elston/Sanders.htm

[7575]

I was thinking spraying a substance out of the front bumper. Hoses could run through the floor and the space above one of the front wheel-wells could be used for storing the substance. Probably wouldn't work though.

[7575]

Does anyone know what the Events Support buses were doing today? I saw 4 buses pulling into Birchmount at around 1pm. Also, can anyone provide an update on 8924 and 9003?

[MK78]

On 2/17/2019 at 2:44 PM, 7575 said:

I was thinking spraying a substance out of the front bumper. Hoses could run through the floor and the space above one of the front wheel-wells could be used for storing the substance. Probably wouldn't work though.

Front wheels wouldn't really be effective, when the bus is stuck it needs traction aid sprayed directly in front of the rear wheels. A driver can rock the bus back and forth a bit and then it can bite in.