Jump to content

Miscellaneous TTC Discussion & Questions


Orion V
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Shaun said:

Wasn't that because the newer buses where made from tubular carbon steel and not regular steel? 

Did the first gen Orion V's have frame issues? Since they were also build with tubular carbon steel? 

I’m not sure of the frame material composition, but I believe 9370 was the only first gen V that received the 12 year rebuild. It retired for a different reason all together (a CNG tank leak I believe). I think the same story goes for D40-90 6564. The only difference in this case is that this bus was a bus fire victim. I don’t know if it received a mid-life rebuild, but it did get rebuilt a few years before retirement

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

I never went into detail in that post. Cloning a simple machine is easy and is being done everyday in China. 

If you were to clone the ABS computer in your car, surely you can get it done. What happens when you get into an accident cause it failed and the police does and investigation? They found out that you used non safety certified computers which would put in at fault. As for a bus that is regulated by Transport Canada, they would need to spend years to get whatever computer they reversed engineered certified. Alternatively they can hope no one finds out if they used a clone computer for a safety critical system. 

In that application, you typically wouldn't do that in house but farm it out to a subcontractor that can do it and get it certified if you have enough volume.  Is there enough volume?  Good question.  If you get TTC plus a few other large agencies with the same model, maybe.

----

ABS computer's actually a good one.  A long time ago, my previous truck started throwing bizzaroland ABS codes, mostly implausible speeds but didn't specify which wheel so I was going to instrument the sensors for all four and see if there was one giving bogus output imploying one wheel was well ahead or behind the other three leading the ABS controller to throw the implausible speed error or, if all four were close, start working towards the ABS computer and see where the values went awry to determine what packed it in.

Anyhow, what I found was a bad wheel bearing.  It was getting hot and the speed sensor would glitch after driving for a while and eventually it failed completely and this happened before the bearing itself got noisy.  The whole time I had the truck, the ABS warning light was the early indication of a wheel bearing going out.  Luckily, the way GM designed it, the wheel bearing assembly included an ABS sensor so both problems were fixed in one repair when this used to happen.  I think I went through three total the whole time I had that truck.  Could I have gamed the ABS by taking speed sensor data from another wheel and doing some veroboard voodoo before going in on the bad bearing/sensor side?  Probably.  But that's work.  I don't have the time and the whole assembly's going to end up being replaced anyways.  I just drove the truck sans-ABS until bearing replacement each time this happened.

Reverse engineering the ABS computer itself?  If it was a paying customer, that would be a lot of work but damn, that'd be a fun project to do the test bed and field testing on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bus_7246 said:

I’m not sure of the frame material composition, but I believe 9370 was the only first gen V that received the 12 year rebuild. It retired for a different reason all together (a CNG tank leak I believe). I think the same story goes for D40-90 6564. The only difference in this case is that this bus was a bus fire victim. I don’t know if it received a mid-life rebuild, but it did get rebuilt a few years before retirement

When the first 2 buses (6618, 6636) in the class retired, they harvested parts to repair 6564 so the bus reactivated for 2 more years.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 9/23/2011 at 8:09 PM, pc8556 said:

Based on the same above allocation: (1996 12 31)

Re: DANFORTH GM'S

GM T6H=5307N

8143, 8353, 8841, 8958 & 8960 moved from Danforth to Arrow Rd

8558-8561, 8680-8683 moved form Danforth to Birchmount

8842-8843, 8955-8956, 8959, 8984 moved from Danforth to Wilson

8656 moved from Danforth to Eglinton.

25 units remained at Danforth (8304, 8311, 8313, 8361, 8363-8365, 8670-8679, 8722-8725)

8638 & 8639 moved from Arrow Rd to Danforth

8791 moved from Lansdowne to Danforth

10 units were retired from Danforth this date

8094-8096, 8140-8142, 8244, 8312, 8314, 8362

Question: Does anybody have one of these disposition sheets for when DAVENPORT closed in 93???

ie: where all the vehicles ended up?

Sorry to bump a decade old post but yes. I do.

According to the allocation sheets from January 4, 1993 in detail:

Dav>Arw (21): #8633-#8639, #8883-#8895
Dav>Dan (7): #6420-#6423, #8361, #8362, #8420
Dav>Egl (41): #6424-#6434, #8306-#8308, #8332, #8338-#8344, #8651-#8669
Dav>Lan (17): #8329, #8365-#8369, #8776-#8778, #8786-#8793
Dav>Mal (33): #6715-#6745, #8359, #8360
Dav>Wil (21): #8325-#8328, #8355-#8358, #8520-#8527, #8630-#8632, #8794, #8795

TOTAL: 139

This resulted an awkward changes to the route assignments after Davenport closed. Notably, there are weird route allocations as well (but some are not accurate, let me know the corrections).

* 7 BATHURST - Davenport and Wilson > Wilson
* 12 KINGSTON ROAD - Danforth > Birchmount
* 19 CHURCH - Davenport > Eglinton
* 20 CLIFFSIDE - Danforth > Birchmount
* 32 EGLINTON WEST - Eglinton and Lansdowne > Eglinton and Queensway
* 35 JANE - Arrow Road > Arrow Road and Lansdowne
* 46 MARTIN GROVE - Queensway > Arrow Road
* 52 LAWRENCE - Arrow Road and Queensway > Wilson
* 54 LAWRENCE EAST  - Birchmount > Birchmount and Eglinton
* 59 MAPLE LEAF - Arrow Road > Wilson
* 65 PARLIAMENT - Davenport > Danforth
* 67 PHARMACY - Danforth > Birchmount
* 75 SHERBOURNE - Davenport > Eglinton
* 77 SPADINA - Davenport > Lansdowne
* 78 ST. ANDREWS - Eglinton > Wilson
* 81 THORNCLIFFE PARK - Eglinton > Danforth
* 82 ROSEDALE - Davenport > Eglinton
* 86 SCARBOROUGH - Birchmount > Malvern
* 88 SOUTH LEASIDE - Davenport > Eglinton
* 94 WELLESLEY - Davenport > Danforth
* 95 YORK MILLS - Malvern > Birchmount and Wilson
* 96 WILSON - Wilson > Arrow Road
* 100 FLEMINGDON PARK - Davenport > Danforth and Eglinton 
* 102 MARKHAM ROAD - Malvern > Birchmount 
* 106 YORK UNIVERSITY - Wilson > Arrow Road and Wilson
* 108 DOWNSVIEW - Wilson > Arrow Road
* 113 DANFORTH - Danforth > Birchmount
* 115 SILVER HILLS - Eglinton > Wilson
* 118 FINCH VIA ALLEN - Wilson > Arrow Road
* 120 CALVINGTON - Wilson > Arrow Road
* 121 FRONT-ESPLANADE - Davenport > Eglinton
* 122 GRAYDON HALL - Eglinton > Wilson
* 126 CHRISTIE - Davenport > Eglinton
* 127 DAVENPORT - Davenport > Lansdowne 
* 142 PREMIUM EXPRESS VIA AVENUE ROAD - Arrow Road and Eglinton > Eglinton
* 165 WESTON ROAD NORTH - Wilson > Arrow Road
* 305 EGLINTON EAST-LAWRENCE NIGHT - Birchmount > Eglinton
* 319 WILSON NIGHT - Wilson > Arrow Road
* 321 YORK MILLS NIGHT - Malvern > Birchmount

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really think TTC should scrap free fare for those 12 and under.. and it looks like the biggest mistake made my John Tory and it’s definitely contributing to revenue shortfall. 

I just found out there are a lot of high schoolers (especially those who look very little) are not paying their fares.. I am 100% sure they are high schoolers because there’s a secondary school on the bus route I use.

Moreover, drivers should not open the back door when there’s nobody getting off. Some drivers choose to open both regardless and there are some absurd kids trying to hop through the backdoor without paying their fares.

They should revert back to 5 and under.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've hated the 12 and under rule. It's overcrowded so  many bus routes with screaming kids. And yes, a lot of older kids dont pay because of it too.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, raptorjays said:

I really think TTC should scrap free fare for those 12 and under.. and it looks like the biggest mistake made my John Tory and it’s definitely contributing to revenue shortfall. 

I just found out there are a lot of high schoolers (especially those who look very little) are not paying their fares.. I am 100% sure they are high schoolers because there’s a secondary school on the bus route I use.

Moreover, drivrrsshould not open the back door when there’s nobody getting off. Some drivers choose to open both regardless and there are some absurd kids trying to hop through the backdoor without paying their fares.

They should revert back to 5 and under.. 

I remember talking to a transit operator about that and even he questioned saying "we will have kids who claim to be 12 and under out at 3 AM riding free of charge."

Their accounting was most likely that the revenue loss will be made by higher ridership by this fare category. Thinking that those will continue when they turn 13 and having to purchase a monthly pass or loading a Presto card with value. At the same time, fare evasion most likely went up with adults using child concession cards to avoid paying and knowing if caught, they would simply open and activate a new card with the concession. 

I remember reading how some people would intentionally go to Shoppers Drug Mart and claim they have a child under 12 to have the concession programmed in. It is a bit different when a minimum wage employee versus one at a transit agency like Go Transit which would most likely ask for the child to be present. I remember when I had to get my post-secondary student status programmed in with Go Transit, they make the student fill out the relevant info before providing a copy that is valid for their transit system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hehe, if anything it conditions those kids that riding without paying is OK. Especially on streetcar routes with very little fare enforcement like the 503 especially on the Kingston Road segment. While there are elementary schools there, so are high schools and I see more high schoolers jump on for a few stops and not pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/1/2022 at 9:46 AM, MK78 said:

I've hated the 12 and under rule. It's overcrowded so  many bus routes with screaming kids. And yes, a lot of older kids dont pay because of it too.

 

I actually believe the free fare under 12 was an excellent decision, in fact I believe it should be extended to all those under 18!

Many teens, like 12 year old's, are unable to support themselves financially to purchase fares, often relying on parents and guardians. 

I've heard stories of honest kids who choose to walk a few kilometers to school instead of taking the TTC, because the round trip of $4.50 was unaffordable for their family. 

Additionally, many teens do not own a private vehicle, let alone drive! Free transit to teens provides a sense of independence, as they are able to travel to their home, school or anywhere where they need to be, without the fear of unaffordability! Additionally, it will create transit riders for life, eliminating cars off the streets and creating a more eco and sustainable city.

While the TTC will experience a decrease in their revenue stream, it can be made up with increased transit funding from the federal and provincial government's. I probably will get a lot of comments from this post, but I strongly believe the pros outweigh the cons. Affordability should never have to become a barrier in being able to access transit!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, MRD10 said:

I actually believe the free fare under 12 was an excellent decision, in fact I believe it should be extended to all those under 18!

Many teens, like 12 year old's, are unable to support themselves financially to purchase fares, often relying on parents and guardians. 

I've heard stories of honest kids who choose to walk a few kilometers to school instead of taking the TTC, because the round trip of $4.50 was unaffordable for their family. 

Additionally, many teens do not own a private vehicle, let alone drive! Free transit to teens provides a sense of independence, as they are able to travel to their home, school or anywhere where they need to be, without the fear of unaffordability! Additionally, it will create transit riders for life, eliminating cars off the streets and creating a more eco and sustainable city.

While the TTC will experience a decrease in their revenue stream, it can be made up with increased transit funding from the federal and provincial government's. I probably will get a lot of comments from this post, but I strongly believe the pros outweigh the cons. Affordability should never have to become a barrier in being able to access transit!

How about they offer free riders only at a specific time. Then offer a number of free riders per month via a presto card. It shouldn't be an unlimited ride monthly pass privilege, especially if you are advocating for under 18.

Offering free rides turns down the actually ridership. Personally most people would avoid riding with a bunch of kids running up and down the bus. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Xtrazsteve said:

Personally most people would avoid riding with a bunch of kids running up and down the bus. 

I've been able to adjust my work hours to get around that thankfully in recent years. But if i'm late by half an hour leaving, its a freaking nightmare.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MRD10 said:

I actually believe the free fare under 12 was an excellent decision, in fact I believe it should be extended to all those under 18!

Many teens, like 12 year old's, are unable to support themselves financially to purchase fares, often relying on parents and guardians. 

I've heard stories of honest kids who choose to walk a few kilometers to school instead of taking the TTC, because the round trip of $4.50 was unaffordable for their family. 

Additionally, many teens do not own a private vehicle, let alone drive! Free transit to teens provides a sense of independence, as they are able to travel to their home, school or anywhere where they need to be, without the fear of unaffordability! Additionally, it will create transit riders for life, eliminating cars off the streets and creating a more eco and sustainable city.

While the TTC will experience a decrease in their revenue stream, it can be made up with increased transit funding from the federal and provincial government's. I probably will get a lot of comments from this post, but I strongly believe the pros outweigh the cons. Affordability should never have to become a barrier in being able to access transit!

Yeah, I firmly disagree. Schools used to offer programs such as free tickets for those who either live too far or who are unable to afford the cost of transit (not sure if there is still that similar program, but something like that is 10x more effective then the free ride the TTC is bleeding money on today).

Im not interested in subsidizing the cost of transit for all kids (especially those who dont need it), let alone expanding the program. The costs outweigh the benefits.

These programs are designed by politicians who have very little knowledge of transit costs, and what they can really do to help with affordability.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/1/2022 at 8:14 AM, raptorjays said:

I really think TTC should scrap free fare for those 12 and under.. and it looks like the biggest mistake made my John Tory and it’s definitely contributing to revenue shortfall. 

I've never really heard anyone in the real world who wasn't happy at this. Nor have I ever seen much of a problem - almost all kids only go a few stops by themselves.

Given it only contributed $6 million of revenue - I'd think the ticket system would eat most of that money - and the cash collection, etc. And even if they got the entire $6 million as revenue it's peanuts compared to the $1.2 billion of passenger revenue (pre-Covid).

Not to mention the complications and delays when an entire class of students board, each giving their tickets. How would that even work on a streetcar?

It's an excellent policy!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, nfitz said:

I've never really heard anyone in the real world who wasn't happy at this. Nor have I ever seen much of a problem - almost all kids only go a few stops by themselves.

Given it only contributed $6 million of revenue - I'd think the ticket system would eat most of that money - and the cash collection, etc. And even if they got the entire $6 million as revenue it's peanuts compared to the $1.2 billion of passenger revenue (pre-Covid).

Not to mention the complications and delays when an entire class of students board, each giving their tickets. How would that even work on a streetcar?

It's an excellent policy!

It is not.. 

Some high schoolers who look little don't pay their fare at all... and it is ridiculous that there are no such enforcement on that... 

I don't consider it as excellent since it is acting like a loophole for those highschoolers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have an opinion on the under 12 fares but I think the idea of not opening the back doors if no one is getting off is a dated one that has long since outlived its usefulness.

There is no advantage to doing so, the driver can't (and shouldn't) enforce fares anyway, so who cares what door someone gets on through? Forcing everyone to file on through one door is massively inefficient and wastes so much time. Lots of transit agencies in Europe do all door boarding without collapsing in on themselves, why are we special in Toronto?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, raptorjays said:

Some high schoolers who look little don't pay their fare at all... and it is ridiculous that there are no such enforcement on that... 

I don't consider it as excellent since it is acting like a loophole for those highschoolers

Any child older than 10 should have a TTC proof-of-age card. If an operator can't tell the difference between a teenager and a 10-year old, then there's other issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just like @T3G said there’s no point in enforcing the fare for whoever a driver thinks is under/over 12. If the bus pulls up to a stop and there’s 40 kids waiting from a middle school or even high school they’re going to open all doors and get them on the bus and moving 

there’s a reason why the TTC and other agencies offer free rides to “X age and under” it’s to help the people in that city get around and get around safely. It’s all accounted for in the budget just like fare loss via refusal to pay is accounted for. Don’t forget transit isn’t meant to make profit, it’s meant to move the city. That’s why it’s not private. 
 

im not gonna ask a kid how old they are for a free ride, just like I'm not going to ask a senior for proof of age for their discount, the fare does not cover the cost of transit enough to justify enforcing it 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, raptorjays said:

It is not.. 

Some high schoolers who look little don't pay their fare at all... and it is ridiculous that there are no such enforcement on that... 

I don't consider it as excellent since it is acting like a loophole for those highschoolers

Do you somehow think that this is a new thing? Kids of that age are always looking for an angle. We did shit like this - and arguably worse - when I was in high school, and the generation before us was no better.

 

Dan

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/2/2022 at 8:24 PM, raptorjays said:

It is not.. 

Some high schoolers who look little don't pay their fare at all... and it is ridiculous that there are no such enforcement on that... 

I don't consider it as excellent since it is acting like a loophole for those highschoolers

I'm just going to quickly mention here that the last publicly reported time a TTC employee tried to enforce fares with a group of high schoolers, they got stabbed...

And if I remember correctly, a few years ago the TTC instructed their operators not to get involved with fare disputes for their own safety.  Fare disputes are to be left to trained and dedicated Fare Inspection Officers.  Further to some of the points made earlier by others, the TTC (and other public transit agencies) are not in the business of generating profit.  If they were, 12+ ride for free would be long gone, 2 hr transfers would not exist, and the new idea of fare capping introduced to the TTC at a recent board meeting would not have been brought forward.

Edit: March 3, 2022, 8:44pm
A second teen has now been charged in the stabbing of a TTC employee over a fare dispute that took place on February 16, 2022.
https://toronto.citynews.ca/2022/03/03/boy-charged-ttc-driver-stabbed/

Edited by TTC7447
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well, this is different - TTC press release:

Quote

News Release - Local Army Reserve conducting scheduled training exercise at Bay Lower Station this weekend 

This weekend, March 5-6, The 48th Highlanders of Canada, one of Torontobs Army Reserve units, will be conducting a previously scheduled training exercise at the TTCbs Bay Lower Station. Members of the public may see small groups of unarmed soldiers in uniform in and around Bay Station. No live ammunition will be used on this exercise.

The TTC regularly partners with public safety organizations to provide a unique venue for different kinds of training exercises.

The exercise will take place between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. both Saturday and Sunday, and signage will be posted throughout the station.

As Bay Lower Station is not accessible to the public, there will no impact to service at the station. Customers who happen to see members of their local Army Reserve should feel free to say bhellob.

The event is closed to members of the public or media.

I've got visions of dropping a Coke can down the stairs to the lower platform and shouting "fire in the hole!" (not really ...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, nfitz said:
Quote

News Release - Local Army Reserve conducting scheduled training exercise at Bay Lower Station this weekend 

This weekend, March 5-6, The 48th Highlanders of Canada, one of Torontobs Army Reserve units, will be conducting a previously scheduled training exercise at the TTCbs Bay Lower Station. Members of the public may see small groups of unarmed soldiers in uniform in and around Bay Station. No live ammunition will be used on this exercise.

The TTC regularly partners with public safety organizations to provide a unique venue for different kinds of training exercises.

The exercise will take place between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. both Saturday and Sunday, and signage will be posted throughout the station.

As Bay Lower Station is not accessible to the public, there will no impact to service at the station. Customers who happen to see members of their local Army Reserve should feel free to say bhellob.

The event is closed to members of the public or media.

On a related note... I bet this has something to do with the planned exercise at Lower Bay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/2/2022 at 8:24 PM, raptorjays said:

It is not.. 

Some high schoolers who look little don't pay their fare at all... and it is ridiculous that there are no such enforcement on that... 

I don't consider it as excellent since it is acting like a loophole for those highschoolers

How this much different to them throwing 60¢ in the box instead of $2.30?

Students that age are supposed to show their card. If TTC doesn't give enough of a crap to enforce that, why should anyone else worry about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have an idea what the reasoning the TTC uses behind the run numbering of buses on any given route?

Some routes especially shorter ones will have runs 1,2,3, then something bizarre like 79. or others will have some in the single digits, and others in upper 20's, some in the 50's...

Just curious if there's any rhyme or reason to it or its just whatever they feel like for the given schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MK78 said:

Does anyone have an idea what the reasoning the TTC uses behind the run numbering of buses on any given route?

Some routes especially shorter ones will have runs 1,2,3, then something bizarre like 79. or others will have some in the single digits, and others in upper 20's, some in the 50's...

Just curious if there's any rhyme or reason to it or its just whatever they feel like for the given schedule.

Yes. Usually routes interlined with other routes such as school trips, night routes or simply interlined routes would need a different run number so there won’t be any duplicates when that bus moves to the other route. These numbers could be run high especially for those that does 300 or 320.

 Let’s take the 32 Eglinton West. The regular range is starting from 1. The school trips we have been seeing XE40s show up are from the 52 Lawrence West. They have run numbers 44 and 45. There is also a school trip from the 63 Ossington which has the run number 43 and two school trips from 35 Jane with runs 41 and 42. The 332 night bus range are in the 90s. There is also a 87 run that does a trip on the 300.

 Express and local routes on the same corridor are given different ranges if they were to be monitor by the same supervisor. You can see that the 39 is given the range starting at 1 while the 939 starts at 41 to the 70s. This also allows the 939 to do trips in the 39 without duplicating runs. The 39 also has a special range in the 70s for the 336/339 interlined night bus. Every 36 or 39 doing the 336/339 interlined route has a different run number in the 70s range.

 Most night routes have a special range. Some don’t like the 325 which solely uses buses from the 25. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...