Miscellaneous TTC Discussion & Questions

[nfitz]

16 hours ago, PCC Guy said:

Some neat archival footage from 1966, around the time of the opening of the BD subway (line 2 who?)

They didn't seven seem to refer to it as BD in the interview. East-west and crosstown!

One day they'll be talking about building the crosstown ... along Steeles or Major Mac!

The shots of the downtown stations didn't seem any less crowded than today. I guess when there's a full train arriving there's as many people to get on and off no matter what the frequency.

[Shaun]

2 hours ago, nfitz said:

They didn't seven seem to refer to it as BD in the interview. East-west and crosstown!

One day they'll be talking about building the crosstown ... along Steeles or Major Mac!

The shots of the downtown stations didn't seem any less crowded than today. I guess when there's a full train arriving there's as many people to get on and off no matter what the frequency.

I thinks highway 7 is a likely candidate to convert the BRT into LRT and that's how it was designed in the first place. 

[John Oke]

4 minutes ago, Shaun said:

I thinks highway 7 is a likely candidate to convert the BRT into LRT and that's how it was designed in the first place. 

Kingston Rd/Dundas St./Bond St./King St. from STC/UofT Scarborough to Oshawa is another one as well although it’s a long way 

[leylandvictory2]

On 12/11/2020 at 5:57 PM, wil9402 said:

Past by Kennedy Station this afternoon. They've reopened South Service Rd. Buses are using it to enter and exit the station. I didn't read the turn restriction sign but it might be bus only access too. Not sure if North Service Rd is still being used.

it is restricted to buses only but drivers don't read. the road signs.  North service is open but the road ends at the commuter parking lot hence all buses are leaving via south service road.  South service road is extremly tight.  you can't have 2 buses turning at the blind corner at once.  

[Wayside Observer]

Alright, which one of you was it?

[Ed T.]

When and how did the TTC use the streetcar tracks running south from Queen on Neville Park?

A part of the trackage is set in concrete, so it can't be from a hundred years ago. The rest further south is not visible except for bad pavement over the tracks themselves.

Neville Park is a dead end with houses right around the end, and it was a dead end back in the late 1920s which is the earliers aerial photo I can find (and that photo has nowhere the resolution to see details of the track). If the tracks were serving the beach or some amusement park, that park seems to have been gone by the late '20s.

The tracks also seem to run right down to the dead end, which is quite a distance.

 

[Articulated]

2 hours ago, Ed T. said:

When and how did the TTC use the streetcar tracks running south from Queen on Neville Park?

A part of the trackage is set in concrete, so it can't be from a hundred years ago. The rest further south is not visible except for bad pavement over the tracks themselves.

Neville Park is a dead end with houses right around the end, and it was a dead end back in the late 1920s which is the earliers aerial photo I can find (and that photo has nowhere the resolution to see details of the track). If the tracks were serving the beach or some amusement park, that park seems to have been gone by the late '20s.

The tracks also seem to run right down to the dead end, which is quite a distance.

The track on Neville Park Boulevard was part of an old tail track for Neville Park Loop; Transit Toronto indicates that the connection was severed in May 1989 (presumably this date would correspond with the introduction of the ALRVs, and modifications made to Neville Park Loop to accommodate these cars).

[Shaun]

https://www.tbnewswatch.com/local-news/national-unifor-president-warns-that-thunder-bays-bombardier-plant-faces-closure-3270041

Building streetcars in Thunder Bay makes a lot of sense, since it's a very unique situation. 

In terms of the subway cars, are they just going to order more TR's for line 2? Don't they have to put that to tender? Are they going to keep the same design? Are there improvements in technology since they where designed?

Is there any other company that could be a contender in building subway cars for Toronto? 

I guess the major hurdle would be finding a facility in Ontario that has the space and capability of building that type of rolling stock. And then compiling a workforce that has that experience and be able to deliver a proven design within the given timeframe. 

Not that I don't think TB should get the job, just wanted to know if there would be other contenders. 

Siemens? 

[Wayside Observer]

53 minutes ago, Shaun said:

https://www.tbnewswatch.com/local-news/national-unifor-president-warns-that-thunder-bays-bombardier-plant-faces-closure-3270041

Building streetcars in Thunder Bay makes a lot of sense, since it's a very unique situation. 

In terms of the subway cars, are they just going to order more TR's for line 2? Don't they have to put that to tender? Are they going to keep the same design? Are there improvements in technology since they where designed?

Is there any other company that could be a contender in building subway cars for Toronto? 

I guess the major hurdle would be finding a facility in Ontario that has the space and capability of building that type of rolling stock. And then compiling a workforce that has that experience and be able to deliver a proven design within the given timeframe. 

Not that I don't think TB should get the job, just wanted to know if there would be other contenders. 

Siemens? 

You know, I hadn't thought about that but with Alstom buying Bombardier's rail car product line, they inherited the Thunder Bay plant.  Does this mean they still need to build that new plant in Brampton to build the Metrolinx LRV order vs. move that work to the plant in Thunder Bay that already exists?

Other contenders?  Hyundai-Rotem, CRRC, Kawasaki, those come to mind.  They've all built rail car orders in the US to various degrees of success and if any of them bid on an order here that has a made in Ontario or made in Canada content requirement, the Thunder Bay plant might be desirable for that.  If we've learned anything out of the pandemic, we should know by now that we let entire cross sections of industrial base disappear at our own peril.  Boy is that a big if though about learning from that experience.

[Xtrazsteve]

3 minutes ago, Wayside Observer said:

You know, I hadn't thought about that but with Alstom buying Bombardier's rail car product line, they inherited the Thunder Bay plant.  Does this mean they still need to build that new plant in Brampton to build the Metrolinx LRV order vs. move that work to the plant in Thunder Bay that already exists?

Other contenders?  Hyundai-Rotem, CRRC, Kawasaki, those come to mind.  They've all built rail car orders in the US to various degrees of success and if any of them bid on an order here that has a made in Ontario or made in Canada content requirement, the Thunder Bay plant might be desirable for that.  If we've learned anything out of the pandemic, we should know by now that we let entire cross sections of industrial base disappear at our own peril.  Boy is that a big if though about learning from that experience.

If they move again, they'll have to retrain all the people. I highly doubt people working here would be willing to move there. It made logical sense to move from Ottawa to Brampton since they were building vehicles at the now in operation MSF and they don't have a manufacturing plant in Ottawa. The 2nd phase LRVs will be built here along with Metrolinx' order. Part of the team were already here to begin with. 

If they keep moving, the products would likely be assembled and supervised by inexperienced workers resulting in incorrectly installed components like bad wiring that the first TTC streetcars got. 

[AnalogPentium]

6 hours ago, Shaun said:

In terms of the subway cars, are they just going to order more TR's for line 2? Don't they have to put that to tender? Are they going to keep the same design? Are there improvements in technology since they where designed?

I have a feeling the answer is no considering the fact that the TTC was consulting the public last year on what the "next generation of subways" should be like. Besides, I don't think they'd keep the exact same technologies present on the TRs just because the tech present in them aren't exactly the most state of the art anymore, especially when you look over at the NYCTA's new R211s.

As for the design, chances are it'll be similar considering nearly all the TTC's subways were iterations of the previous generation. But with that said, an iterative design could probably only happen if Alstom chooses not to trash the Movia family.

But who knows, I could be totally wrong.

[smallspy]

13 hours ago, Wayside Observer said:

You know, I hadn't thought about that but with Alstom buying Bombardier's rail car product line, they inherited the Thunder Bay plant.  Does this mean they still need to build that new plant in Brampton to build the Metrolinx LRV order vs. move that work to the plant in Thunder Bay that already exists?

Well, no - at least not yet. The plant in Brampton is simply an assembly plant putting together subassemblies shipped up from many other locations, but primarily Alstom's main plant in Hornell, NY.

 

13 hours ago, Wayside Observer said:

Other contenders?  Hyundai-Rotem, CRRC, Kawasaki, those come to mind.  They've all built rail car orders in the US to various degrees of success and if any of them bid on an order here that has a made in Ontario or made in Canada content requirement, the Thunder Bay plant might be desirable for that.  If we've learned anything out of the pandemic, we should know by now that we let entire cross sections of industrial base disappear at our own peril.  Boy is that a big if though about learning from that experience.

Unfortunately, I don't think any of those is likely. The Thunder Bay plant is a huge, integrated facility - far more capable than what those builders would need. They just want/need an empty space with a roof overhead, and it doesn't even need to be that big.

 

13 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

If they move again, they'll have to retrain all the people. I highly doubt people working here would be willing to move there. It made logical sense to move from Ottawa to Brampton since they were building vehicles at the now in operation MSF and they don't have a manufacturing plant in Ottawa. The 2nd phase LRVs will be built here along with Metrolinx' order. Part of the team were already here to begin with. 

So? Where do you think the "team" in Brampton came from?

 

The creation of assembly plants like it is really, really easy. And why companies like Rotem and CRRC tender the way that they do. It's the plants where they create the more complicated subassemblies that require skills that are not nearly as transferable.

 

13 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

If they keep moving, the products would likely be assembled and supervised by inexperienced workers resulting in incorrectly installed components like bad wiring that the first TTC streetcars got. 

Which is the risk that all manufacturers - and frankly, tenderers - continue to take with the way that the bidding has been set up over the past 30 or so years.

 

8 hours ago, AnalogPentium said:

I have a feeling the answer is no considering the fact that the TTC was consulting the public last year on what the "next generation of subways" should be like. Besides, I don't think they'd keep the exact same technologies present on the TRs just because the tech present in them aren't exactly the most state of the art anymore, especially when you look over at the NYCTA's new R211s.

What you perceive as "state-of-the-art" is pretty humorous.

The MTA is finally only catching up to what has been standard practice around the rest of the planet for the past 40 years. They have a long way to go before they can start to worry about being "state-of-the-art".

 

8 hours ago, AnalogPentium said:

As for the design, chances are it'll be similar considering nearly all the TTC's subways were iterations of the previous generation. But with that said, an iterative design could probably only happen if Alstom chooses not to trash the Movia family.

But who knows, I could be totally wrong.

The TTC has already created a design brief for the new series of cars that they've issued to the prospective tenderers. They will share much in common with the TRs - but will feature some "improvements" to the design based on the operating experience of running those cars in service for some time.

 

Dan

[Flalex72]

14 hours ago, Wayside Observer said:

You know, I hadn't thought about that but with Alstom buying Bombardier's rail car product line, they inherited the Thunder Bay plant.  Does this mean they still need to build that new plant in Brampton to build the Metrolinx LRV order vs. move that work to the plant in Thunder Bay that already exists?

The new facility in Brampton is already operating - there have been media pictures from inside and units are arriving in Ottawa on trucks now.

The other facility to consider in Ontario is Kingston.

[Wayside Observer]

1 hour ago, smallspy said:

Well, no - at least not yet. The plant in Brampton is simply an assembly plant putting together subassemblies shipped up from many other locations, but primarily Alstom's main plant in Hornell, NY.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think any of those is likely. The Thunder Bay plant is a huge, integrated facility - far more capable than what those builders would need. They just want/need an empty space with a roof overhead, and it doesn't even need to be that big.

I know.  For assembly, you don't need much more length than a completed car.  How wide I guess depends on how many builds you want to have taking place at the same time, a test and burn in area, some space to warehouse stuff as it comes in before going out to the assembly floor.  The sad thing is, I can think of several empty factory buildings that are probably larger than necessary for this that are a short drive from Toronto and there are certainly more out there that I don't know about.  Thunder Bay is/was almost a fully vertically integrated manufacturing operation with an old school near-"do anything" capability necessary for what they were building.  The GM locomotive plant in London was the same way.  Even traction motors were built in house there; until they started outsourcing things in the late 1990s, only two things were brought in from outside as one packaged unit which was the diesel engine itself with the generator already mounted on it.  Everything else was made in that complex.

Quote

What you perceive as "state-of-the-art" is pretty humorous.

The MTA is finally only catching up to what has been standard practice around the rest of the planet for the past 40 years. They have a long way to go before they can start to worry about being "state-of-the-art".

Being behind the times is a New York tradition that has been in place for a very long time which began when the BMT and all the innovative things they were doing were ended.

Quote

The TTC has already created a design brief for the new series of cars that they've issued to the prospective tenderers. They will share much in common with the TRs - but will feature some "improvements" to the design based on the operating experience of running those cars in service for some time.

One can only hope given how the Toronto Rockets showed up and it was painfully obvious that neither TTC or Bombardier did any passenger testing with these things.

53 minutes ago, Flalex72 said:

The new facility in Brampton is already operating - there have been media pictures from inside and units are arriving in Ottawa on trucks now.

The other facility to consider in Ontario is Kingston.

Ah ok, I haven't been paying close attention.  I thought it was still to come.

[Wayside Observer]

I guess this thread is as good a place as any for this:

Remember Smart Track?  The 15 stop surface subway that John Tory said would be open by 2021 (aka sometime this year)?

According to the Toronto Star (alternate link) it's being pruned back by another two stops to only five out of the original 15.  So how about that 1/3 of the original Smart Track that remains?  It won't be opening this year.

"The city that works"

[J. Hollingsworth]

7 minutes ago, Wayside Observer said:

I guess this thread is as good a place as any for this:

Remember Smart Track?  The 15 stop surface subway that John Tory said would be open by 2021 (aka sometime this year)?

According to the Toronto Star (alternate link) it's being pruned back by another two stops to only five out of the original 15.  So how about that 1/3 of the original Smart Track that remains?  It won't be opening this year.

"The city that works"

To be fair, the reasoning for the cancelled stations from that plan is technically a good thing,

those are stations that Metrolinx have been planning as well for both the RER program and for the Ontario Line for years, the station at Gerard is currently having detailed design work completed.

When MX was planning these they have indicated that they will still serve Smartrack 

2026 is a big blow though

[T3G]

To tie into the conversation about tail tracks from the previous page, the track maps that come with the supplement to Bromley's 50 Years of Progressive Transit shows that there was another wye that ran down Maclean Avenue south of Queen. According to Pursley's Street Railways of Toronto 1861-1921, if I am reading the map right it looks like Maclean might have formed the eastern entrance/exit tracks to the Scarboro carhouse, though that was not inherited by the TTC and was marked on Bromley's earliest track diagram (1923) as being defunct. Meanwhile, the Maclean wye was still present on track maps as late as 1954.

Does anyone know why this wye was kept around for so long, considering that Neville and Woodbine loops were both also nearby, and why and when did they finally end up condemning it? There's nothing on Transit Toronto that I've been able to find, and in fact unless I have overlooked it it doesn't appear as though they have an article on Scarboro carhouse at all.

[Wayside Observer]

1 hour ago, PCC Guy said:

To tie into the conversation about tail tracks from the previous page, the track maps that come with the supplement to Bromley's 50 Years of Progressive Transit shows that there was another wye that ran down Maclean Avenue south of Queen. According to Pursley's Street Railways of Toronto 1861-1921, if I am reading the map right it looks like Maclean might have formed the eastern entrance/exit tracks to the Scarboro carhouse, though that was not inherited by the TTC and was marked on Bromley's earliest track diagram (1923) as being defunct. Meanwhile, the Maclean wye was still present on track maps as late as 1954.

Does anyone know why this wye was kept around for so long, considering that Neville and Woodbine loops were both also nearby, and why and when did they finally end up condemning it? There's nothing on Transit Toronto that I've been able to find, and in fact unless I have overlooked it it doesn't appear as though they have an article on Scarboro carhouse at all.

I don't have any details for you unfortunately but some wyes and wrong way crossovers held on for a very long time for the purpose of reversing work and snow clearing equipment.

[AnalogPentium]

23 hours ago, smallspy said:

What you perceive as "state-of-the-art" is pretty humorous.

The MTA is finally only catching up to what has been standard practice around the rest of the planet for the past 40 years. They have a long way to go before they can start to worry about being "state-of-the-art".

 

Haha I meant as in the actual customer experience inside the car. When we look under the hood, what we have already is eons ahead of what the MTA uses.

23 hours ago, smallspy said:

The TTC has already created a design brief for the new series of cars that they've issued to the prospective tenderers. They will share much in common with the TRs - but will feature some "improvements" to the design based on the operating experience of running those cars in service for some time.

Makes sense.

[nfitz]

8 hours ago, AnalogPentium said:

Haha I meant as in the actual customer experience inside the car.

The new electronic signs on MTA are neat - but also more necessary in a more complex system, especially with the branching and express trains.

But it's amazing how little of their rolling stock still doesn't have internal walkways between cars. And how they still think cattle-car style seating is okay, even in the very wide cars.

I do have to say though, the urine smell at the lesser used exits seems to have significantly improved in recent years though - at least pre-covid.

[smallspy]

23 hours ago, AnalogPentium said:

Haha I meant as in the actual customer experience inside the car. When we look under the hood, what we have already is eons ahead of what the MTA uses.

Inwards-facing bench seats made of fiberglass and lighting so harsh that you could fry an egg with it is a better customer experience? I suppose if you are a masochist....

 

Dan

[Wayside Observer]

1 hour ago, smallspy said:

Inwards-facing bench seats made of fiberglass and lighting so harsh that you could fry an egg with it is a better customer experience? I suppose if you are a masochist....

 

Dan

Now, in these COVID-19 times, that lighting might not be adequate.  Some would argue it's needs to be turned up even more, ideally with a hefty ultraviolet component to sterilize any potential COVID-19.  Note that such UV exposure is dangerous in itself but the hazards are surmountable:  Would you like some SPF-60 suntan lotion and a pair of welder's goggles to go with your non-medical face mask before you start your subway journey?

In all seriousness, why does the interior brightness level of transit vehicles keep getting cranked up higher and higher every time something new comes along?  At the rate things are going, the welder's goggles are going to become necessary while riding the TTC sometime in the next 10 years.

[wowzhao]

On 1/22/2021 at 11:21 AM, Wayside Observer said:

In all seriousness, why does the interior brightness level of transit vehicles keep getting cranked up higher and higher every time something new comes along?

I'm guessing it's just becoming more cost-efficient to bring in newer LED lighting that doesn't fade like the old incandescents and is also brighter for less power.

That and possibly a version of hostile architecture but adapted for transit. Can't stop a homeless person from getting on a bus but you can certainly make it more miserable for them if they're trying to take a nap while no one's looking.

[smallspy]

On 1/22/2021 at 11:21 AM, Wayside Observer said:

Now, in these COVID-19 times, that lighting might not be adequate.  Some would argue it's needs to be turned up even more, ideally with a hefty ultraviolet component to sterilize any potential COVID-19.  Note that such UV exposure is dangerous in itself but the hazards are surmountable:  Would you like some SPF-60 suntan lotion and a pair of welder's goggles to go with your non-medical face mask before you start your subway journey?

I suspect that you might be entertained by some of the methods and techniques that some agencies are using to decontaminate their vehicles. I've seen photos of what could be best described as patio lanterns strung up inside a subway car, equipped with what are likely UV bulbs. Kim Mitchell would be proud.

 

On 1/22/2021 at 11:21 AM, Wayside Observer said:

In all seriousness, why does the interior brightness level of transit vehicles keep getting cranked up higher and higher every time something new comes along?  At the rate things are going, the welder's goggles are going to become necessary while riding the TTC sometime in the next 10 years.

There are likely a couple of factors.

 

On some older vehicles, it wasn't easy to access the housings containing the lights - thus, they would get filled with airborne particulate matter and allow less light to pass through. (In some cases, it may just be that they stopped doing that kind of cleaning as the vehicles got closer to their demise.) Thus, when newer vehicles entered service, without the benefit of having years of accumulated grime to shield the photons, seem to be considerably brighter inside.

 

Newer materials, again without having been affected by age, may be more reflective and thus reflect more light as well.

 

Another likely factor is that - well, they are actually brighter inside. The current trend for public areas is to be brighter, as it is frequently felt that brighter = safer. (Whether it actually is remains up for debate, but sometimes it's better to err on the side of perception than anything.)

 

Dan

[Flalex72]

2 hours ago, smallspy said:

Another likely factor is that - well, they are actually brighter inside. The current trend for public areas is to be brighter, as it is frequently felt that brighter = safer. (Whether it actually is remains up for debate, but sometimes it's better to err on the side of perception than anything.)

This - it feels like a CPTED thing, crossed with the ease of use and maintenance of LED lighting.

LEDs also tend to be a cooler colour temperature, which is perceived as brighter at night.