[CMQSD402F9011]

Question, when TTC was designing their TRs, how come they went with the sloped aerodynamic designs whereas NYC’s MTA (or the MBTA) didn’t, for their new subway cars? I’m sure many still miss the railfan window on the H5s or H6s to be precise.

 

[turbanplanner]

Question, when TTC was designing their TRs, how come they went with the sloped aerodynamic designs whereas NYC’s MTA (or the MBTA) didn’t, for their new subway cars? I’m sure many still miss the railfan window on the H5s or H6s to be precise.

Customer preference is never a factor for the TTC lmao

 

[smallspy]

Question, when TTC was designing their TRs, how come they went with the sloped aerodynamic designs whereas NYC’s MTA (or the MBTA) didn’t, for their new subway cars? I’m sure many still miss the railfan window on the H5s or H6s to be precise.

How many MTA or MBTA trainsets operated in fixed lengths that don't change? The answer is that none of them do - they reconfigure their trainsets all the time, and so they have designed them with that flexibility in mind.

It's the same reason why they have been so against open gangway cars until now.

Dan

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Streetcars make right turns from the left lane. To indicate, drivers in the right lane have to notice the right turn signal on the streetcars (if they don't have blinders on).

In the province of Québec, they use diagonal white bars so that buses can turn left from the right lane.

Toronto should do the same using right leaning diagonal transit signals for streetcars turning right at signalled intersections. They should also locate them on the nearside of the intersection at either the stop line, pedestrian crossing, or where the tracks actually turn right, not the farside, Along with a regular red traffic signal for the motorists (located on the nearside).

That's for signalled intersections. For unsignalled intersections, we should put up YIELD TO STREETCAR signs, to give the crowded streetcars priority, unlike nowadays where they are waiting for permission from the single-occupant automobile drivers.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1605331887962353665

 

[81-717]

How many MTA or MBTA trainsets operated in fixed lengths that don't change? The answer is that none of them do - they reconfigure their trainsets all the time, and so they have designed them with that flexibility in mind.

It's the same reason why they have been so against open gangway cars until now.

Dan

MTA's current trains are all in permanent 4/5/6-car sets, and they only ever couple 2 sets together, so there isn't that much flexibility to spare, not nearly as much as with married pairs (train length can basically only be either 1 set or 2 sets, and only a few lines, like G, run 1-set trains). And having a TR-style front end doesn't necessarily preclude sets from being coupled together & running in that configuration, as is the case in Stockholm, or even here on line 5. And the implementation of open gangways changed nothing about the configuration or operational flexibility of each set, since a 5-car R160 is just as much of a fixed set as a 5-car R211, and a full train still consists of 2 R211s coupled together.

 

[CMQSD402F9011]

How many MTA or MBTA trainsets operated in fixed lengths that don't change? The answer is that none of them do - they reconfigure their trainsets all the time, and so they have designed them with that flexibility in mind.

It's the same reason why they have been so against open gangway cars until now.

Dan

What I do mean is that why they (MTA) never went with Sloped Aerodynamic fronts like what the TRs have in the 21st century. Apart from having the R40s aka Slants many years ago.

 

[smallspy]

MTA's current trains are all in permanent 4/5/6-car sets, and they only ever couple 2 sets together, so there isn't that much flexibility to spare, not nearly as much as with married pairs (train length can basically only be either 1 set or 2 sets, and only a few lines, like G, run 1-set trains). And having a TR-style front end doesn't necessarily preclude sets from being coupled together & running in that configuration, as is the case in Stockholm, or even here on line 5. And the implementation of open gangways changed nothing about the configuration or operational flexibility of each set, since a 5-car R160 is just as much of a fixed set as a 5-car R211, and a full train still consists of 2 R211s coupled together.

Right, but the same 8/10/11 car trains are not operated with the same sets of cars all day, every day. The swap them around - like the TTC swaps around pairs of T1s to make a 6-car trainset. They do move from line to line in some cases, and so they need to retain some of that flexibility.

In the TTC's case it was decided that the requirement to swap around pairs was not necessary anymore - thus they went to a fixed-length trainset. That conversation hasn't seemed to have happened yet in New York or Boston.

What I do mean is that why they (MTA) never went with Sloped Aerodynamic fronts like what the TRs have in the 21st century. Apart from having the R40s aka Slants many years ago.

The design of the R40 slants had nothing to do with aerodynamics - it was all Raymond Loewy.

As for now - an aerodynamic front requires space that can't be used to carry passengers. Depending on the design, it can complicate access and coupling as well. It would seem that MTA has decided that is makes more sense to prioritize passenger capacity and the ability to couple trains without concern than it does to focus on any aerodynamic benefit.

Dan

 

[81-717]

In the TTC's case it was decided that the requirement to swap around pairs was not necessary anymore - thus they went to a fixed-length trainset.

Well, it'll still be necessary to have pairs on line 2 for the foreseeable future (until Kipling yard), hence the new fleet being redesigned to allow it. I wonder if the new cars will also be swapped around, or if they'll be uncoupled only for maintenance without being swapped around otherwise.

 

[Northern Light]

Just a note for frequent patrons of Yonge/Bloor, the washrooms are closing next week for a reno and won't reopen til late April.

 

[Coolibop]

Just a note for frequent patrons of Yonge/Bloor, the washrooms are closing next week for a reno and won't reopen til late April.

They were already closed last week when I passed by (and noticed patrons complaining about it)...

 

[Northern Light]

They were already closed last week when I passed by (and noticed patrons complaining about it)...

Weird they bothered to put signs with a date and then start more than 2 weeks early.

 

[Richard White]

Weird they bothered to put signs with a date and then start more than 2 weeks early.

I wonder if a pipe exploded.

It has happened to ttc washrooms in the past, notably Warden when the temperatures fluctuated

 

[zang]

I wonder if a pipe exploded.

It has happened to ttc washrooms in the past, notably Warden when the temperatures fluctuated

Bloor-Yonge station is one of the hottest stations on the line. If a pipe were to explode there, it’d be from steam.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Not a TTC article but BART added fare gates (partially to deter undesirables) and station maintenance costs dropped off a cliff.
Feel like enforcing fares would fix 80% of our issues that aren't related to transit speed!

View attachment 714534

Looks like BART's heading for life support.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/10/us/bart-bay-area-san-francisco-transit.html

Paywall free: https://archive.is/KkjZP

 

[urbanclient]

Looks like BART's heading for life support.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/10/us/bart-bay-area-san-francisco-transit.html

Paywall free: https://archive.is/KkjZP

Rapid transit systems in the US having abysmal ridership except for NYC seems like a US-specific issue. I won't expand on possible reasons because it belongs in a different thread.