[Kelson]

You do realize there's still the western extension to Renforth under construction and yet another proposed extension to Pearson?

There is a separate thread for the Western extension though. Though I understand there will be pages of debate on this thread dissecting every bump, delay, and driver taking an extended sh*t break at Mount dennis until the page # reaches 3000

 

[jordanmkasla2009]

Besides the surface section limitations, they used a garbage bespoke signalling system instead of standard, off-the-shelf technology. Signalling / software issues were widely reported in the last couple of years, e.g. Globe and Mail. It's mind boggling to build an expensive custom solution, as if Metrolinx wanted the project to fail.

They ARE using an off-the-shelf system Bombardier/Alstom Cityflo 650 CBTC. But like all modern signalling systems they have to be programmed bespoke.

 

[drum118]

Sprinkler pipe bursts at Mount Dennis station days before opening, video shows​

 

[T3G]

Bombardier BiLevels are outdated tech,

How so? I have a lot of gripes with the way GO does things, but I've never had a problem with their train rolling stock. I'm not a believer in changing something that works perfectly fine just because it's built to an older design, that is money that could be used far more constructively ... such as in buy outs of rail corridors or buying new buses / refurbishing the old ones, to stop the issues they're having with their equipment right now.

I would be outraged if any movement whatsoever was made to replace the BiLevels. That's not where GO's problems lie.

 

[urbanclient]

What would that baseline be? Also, I'm pretty sure Kuala Lumpur bought MK IIIs that were built in Ontario.

See "post-opening", which I can promise wasn't edited in since you quoted it. And my later edit that 3 of 5 didn't even use Canadian-built trains ever.

What would that baseline be? [...] What would you say is outdated about them? I find those door switches annoying to, but that seems like a really minor issue, and appears to be more of a supplier problem.

They're poor quality and/or outdated, not to mention expensive compared to even European-built trains (see below). For GO specifically, I am comparing GO trains with intercity and commuter rail in East Asia (as well as NS in the Netherlands, which also run bi-levels). Someone else chime in here. Euro S-bahn-y, commuter, and intercity trains tend to be much nicer than GO trains that aren't even truly walk-through right... But again, the GO bi-levels are a legacy holdover, and changing to completely new stock would be expensive.

If we're doing would've should've could've: Toronto Rocket's should've been built with lighter, (cheaper?) materials (less stainless steel, more aluminum), larger diameter wheels, with colour LCD screens, and better integrated A/C units (why is the ceiling so low), among other things. Having been on metro rolling stock of the same or earlier era, the Toronto Rockets leave a lot to be desired: https://www.blogto.com/city/2014/07/ttc_set_to_fix_most_annoying_feature_of_rocket_trains/

I previously compared Finch West's Citadis Spirit to Paris T9's Citadis 405. 30% more money for less reliable (see ongoing OTrain disaster), worse-turning, LCD-screenless, uglier trams with narrower gangways, and somehow one less door (7 instead of 8 per side).

But there is no way to say either way if this is due to being manufactured in North America. Bogie design is probably European. Though I'm not entirely sure if they were manufactured in Europe.

The bogie designs for the Citadis Spirit are uniquely North American, at least nominally. The Citadis bogies are called Iponam aka Ixège Pour North America. For the Freedom's case, the bogies are almost certainly not unique to NA. However, even if we forget the Euro-Flexity Outlooks from the early 2000s, the first Flexity 2 entered service in 2012, versus 2019 for the Freedom, and 2026 for Eglinton. Low floor bogies capable of higher yaw angles (i.e. better turning) now exist. Poorly turning bogies are the core problem with low-floor trams. That is why I say Canadian-built rolling stock is outdated.

The Freedoms are not that different from the Outlooks introduced 12 years ago. Don't forget the lack of LCD screens.

And in Eglinton's case, the reliability appears to be poor too. The "ongoing issue [...] when they operate over 60" is not the first time Eglinton train reliability has been questioned. Cheap Cutting-edge Reliable . So what kind of value-for-money did we get here?

 

[McGillicuddy]

So, to recap the arguments we're hearing:

1. Metrolinx are ignorant fools and Line 5 is fully cooked because, like the boomers they are, they insisted on developing a fancy new bespoke signalling system instead of doing the obviously, trivially correct thing and sticking with off-the-shelf technologies that have been thoroughly tested and shown to work in similar installations.

2. Metrolinx are ignorant fools and GO Transit is fully cooked because, like the boomers they are, they insist on running off-the-shelf bilevel coaches that have been thoroughly tested and definitely work in this specific installation, instead of doing the obviously, trivially correct thing and experimenting with novel technologies that might prove unsuitable.

 

[ctf5650]

So, to recap the arguments we're hearing:

1. Metrolinx are ignorant fools and Line 5 is fully cooked because, like the boomers they are, they insisted on developing a fancy new bespoke signalling system instead of doing the obviously, trivially correct thing and sticking with off-the-shelf technologies that have been thoroughly tested and shown to work in similar installations.

2. Metrolinx are ignorant fools and GO Transit is fully cooked because, like the boomers they are, they insist on running off-the-shelf bilevel coaches that have been thoroughly tested and definitely work in this specific installation, instead of doing the obviously, trivially correct thing and experimenting with novel technologies that might prove unsuitable.

Hit the nail on the head, dude is chasing his own tail. "Constructive feedback" and "accountability" isn't writing off North American rail manufacturing as a whole because you can't figure out how to open a bilevel door.

 

[urbanclient]

So, to recap the arguments we're hearing:

1. Metrolinx are ignorant fools and Line 5 is fully cooked because, like the boomers they are, they insisted on developing a fancy new bespoke signalling system instead of doing the obviously, trivially correct thing and sticking with off-the-shelf technologies that have been thoroughly tested and shown to work in similar installations.

2. Metrolinx are ignorant fools and GO Transit is fully cooked because, like the boomers they are, they insist on running off-the-shelf bilevel coaches that have been thoroughly tested and definitely work in this specific installation, instead of doing the obviously, trivially correct thing and experimenting with novel technologies that might prove unsuitable.

I love the strawman for 2... I never advocated that they get rid of them. I have brought up the cost counter-argument multiple times. Are newspapers written at the 6th grade level for Urban Toronto members like you?

But again, the GO bi-levels are a legacy holdover, and changing to completely new stock would be expensive.

why haven't GO carriages been upgraded to [ones with] proper open gangways? Probably cost and familiarity with the legacy stuff.

The doors being finicky and needing force to open is not the same as outright door sensor failures that keep doors open between cars that I have seen enough on Lakeshore West to be worthy of mentioning. This problem wouldn't exist on walk-through Bilevels in Europe, no matter EMU or locomotive traction.

I like the BiLevels, but they are definitely outdated. They are far from cutting-edge. That is the argument. You are all sidestepping the argument. Replacing them would be too costly, and wouldn't make sense currently. However, a rolling stock change may happen in the future due to a switch to EMUs after starting with electric locomotives. But that would still make GO behind the times. Go Bilevels are not cooked at all. And I never said they were.

Line 5's rolling stock is outdated, even @APTA-2048 has admitted as such (EDIT: apparently they did not mean this, that's my mistake). It's not entirely the rolling stock manufacturer's fault, as project delays lead to train tech aging for no fault of their own.

The meat of the argument is that Canadian rolling stock tends to be more expensive, less reliable, and somehow also less technologically advanced than European or Asian-built counterparts. Often sharing the same family name, but the end product is demonstrably inferior. Do I need to repeat the the Citadis Spirits are worse in basically every relevant way, and yet cost 30% more than the Citadis 405s for Paris?

Are y'all ok with the fact that Flexity Freedoms started testing on Eglinton in late 2019, and now over 6 years later, they somehow still have teething issues? How is that remotely acceptable anywhere on the planet, much less Europe or Asia?

 

[T3G]

How exactly is the line 5 rolling stock outdated? What exactly do newer trams do that these can't?

I don't view an absence of an LCD screen as being a problem. These kinds of features are nice-to-have cosmetic add ons; they don't affect the experience of using the vehicle for 99% of its users.

 

[urbanclient]

How exactly is the line 5 rolling stock outdated? What exactly do newer trams do that these can't?

I don't view an absence of an LCD screen as being a problem. These kinds of features are nice-to-have cosmetic add ons; they don't affect the experience of using the vehicle for 99% of its users.

See previous post:

However, even if we forget the Euro-Flexity Outlooks from the early 2000s, the first Flexity 2 entered service in 2012, versus 2019 for the Freedom, and 2026 for Eglinton. Low floor bogies capable of higher yaw angles (i.e. better turning) now exist. Poorly turning bogies are the core problem with low-floor trams. That [and more] is why I say Canadian-built rolling stock is outdated.

If we are paying more for Canadian labour, fine. But we should at least be getting better value-for-money than the Spirits in general and Freedoms on Eglinton. Let's be real here.

The Freedoms are fine elsewhere, sure, but that doesn't negate the problems with them on Eglinton. Last year, and now with the 60 kph speed cap underground.

Eglinton Crosstown LRT vehicle 'availability and reliability' latest issue to face line before launch

Metrolinx CEO Michael Lindsay said crews are figuring out the 'maintenance profile' of the 10-year-old Eglinton Crosstown LRT vehicles.

toronto.citynews.ca

“This is outrageous”: NDP responds to Eglinton LRT vehicles getting too old to operate after years of delays

TORONTO – NDP Shadow Minister for Public Transit Doly Begum (Scarborough Southwest) issued the following statement in response to the Eglinton LRT Crosstown being delayed due to its aging vehicles.

www.ontariondp.ca

 

[T3G]

That problem can be countered by having banked turns, no?

 

[urbanclient]

That problem can be countered by having banked turns, no?

Do you really think it's feasible to retrofit banked turns on any of the LRT lines in Canada? Especially for Eglinton at this stage. Be serious.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Don't forget the 20 minutes to wait for the 32 to move through all the Allan traffic and turn into the station.

You mean the automobile drivers don't read the signs?

 

[T3G]

Do you really think it's feasible to retrofit banked turns on any of the LRT lines in Canada? Even for Eglinton at this stage. Be serious.

Well, common sense would dictate anticipating a problem before it happens and trying to deal with it right away. It has been known for more than 20 years that, all else being equal, a low floor tram can't handle turns as well as a high floor one, and other cities have adopted exactly such solutions to deal with the problem. But considering that the we didn't even bother to look at best LRT practices from KW, never mind anywhere from Europe....

You still see this kind of exceptionalist thinking on this forum. Every time someone suggests a solution from Europe, and is called a Europhile, the person doing the calling is just creating more of the culture that they are trying to avoid having. Lines 5 and 6, in the exact forms we received them in, could've been smash successes, but we as a city are far, far too arrogant to contemplate the idea that we may have something to learn from others, and that's why transit in this city looks the way that it does.

 

[APTA-2048]

See "post-opening", which I can promise wasn't edited in since you quoted it. And my later edit that 3 of 5 didn't even use Canadian-built trains ever.

Kuala Lumpur bought Mk IIIs long after their system opened, though. Who were the three that didn't use Canadian built trains?

They're poor quality and/or outdated, not to mention expensive compared to even European-built trains (see below). For GO specifically, I am comparing GO trains with intercity and commuter rail in East Asia (as well as NS in the Netherlands, which also run bi-levels). Someone else chime in here. Euro S-bahn-y, commuter, and intercity trains tend to be much nicer than GO trains that aren't even truly walk-through right... But again, the GO bi-levels are a legacy holdover, and changing to completely new stock would be expensive.

Again I'm not sure what you're expecting the BiLevel to be. Others have already explained why the BiLevels don't have open gangways.

If we're doing would've should've could've: Toronto Rocket's should've been built with lighter, (cheaper?) materials (less stainless steel, more aluminum), larger diameter wheels, with colour LCD screens, and better integrated A/C units (why is the ceiling so low), among other things. Having been on metro rolling stock of the same or earlier era, the Toronto Rockets leave a lot to be desired: https://www.blogto.com/city/2014/07/ttc_set_to_fix_most_annoying_feature_of_rocket_trains/

Do you know what the TTC actually wanted? I'm pretty sure they explicitly wanted a stainless steel carbody. I can't speak for the wheels, but Dan seemed to have explained that. In the early 2000s when these were conceived, LCD screens likely cost more than the TTC was willing to accept. I don't recall seeing LCD screens on various metros I've been on during that time either. Montreal was lucky that their design process started in the late 2000s. As for the HVAC, it's a huge unit. It's unfortunate. They didn't want it under the train because of debris, so it takes up a lot of space on the roof.

I already said elsewhere I wasn't a fan of the TRs, but these issues have nothing to do with them being built here.

The bogie designs for the Citadis Spirit are uniquely North American, at least nominally. The Citadis bogies are called Iponam aka Ixège Pour North America. For the Freedom's case, the bogies are almost certainly not unique to NA. However, even if we forget the Euro-Flexity Outlooks from the early 2000s, the first Flexity 2 entered service in 2012, versus 2019 for the Freedom, and 2026 for Eglinton. Low floor bogies capable of higher yaw angles (i.e. better turning) now exist. Poorly turning bogies are the core problem with low-floor trams. That is why I say Canadian-built rolling stock is outdated.

The first Flexity Freedom was built in 2016/2017. The design process began back in 2011 or 2012, maybe earlier than that. When did Flexity trams in Europe start using a new bogie design different from the Flexity 2? Seems like the Crosstown Flexity used the same technology as their European contemporaries. Could the Flexity Freedom be redesigned, sure, but there's no incentive to because there are no orders. They're not outdated by design.

And in Eglinton's case, the reliability appears to be poor too. The "ongoing issue [...] when they operate over 60" is not the first time Eglinton train reliability has been questioned. Cheap Cutting-edge Reliable . So what kind of value-for-money did we get here?

"Cheap" is in a way subjective. Cutting edge? They were when they were ordered. Reliability with rolling stock is also an issue with other manufacturers who build outside of Canada. It's not uncommon for manufacturers to have issues with their products.

To write-off the whole industry in Canada is still unfair.