News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.6K     0 

Reecemartin said:
Was on the subway a day or two ago and Phil Verster and the guy at Metrolinx who did the Hydrail presentation at the last board meeting got on and sat next to me at Union. I believe they were discussing that the intended direction was to have consortiums have an option to choose hydrogen or catenary when they make their bids (I think we all know what they will choose), they were saying something about it being built into the RFQ in a flexible way. I'd like to have listened more but they got off at Queen's Park and I had class.
Click to expand...
Nice job.
 
I'm trying to figure out if anything significant was said about electrification was said at the town hall last night. If I heard correctly, ML is on a path to seek proposals from vendors, with ML just wanting a supply of traction power and open minded about what that could be. I think I heard the ML CEO say the proponent takes the risk and whatever they think they can best deliver is OK with ML?

- Paul
 
^ That's generally what I heard so I think that summarizes it. I may watch the video of the response to refresh my memory.
 
TPAP notice to proceed is now signed.

http://www.gotransit.com/electrification/en/docs/Notice to Proceed signed.pdf

B18C5158-B577-49B0-BA9F-931570243AEC.jpeg
76595807-B7B9-4B3A-8412-F1B01601AB03.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • B18C5158-B577-49B0-BA9F-931570243AEC.jpeg
    B18C5158-B577-49B0-BA9F-931570243AEC.jpeg
    246.2 KB · Views: 443
  • 76595807-B7B9-4B3A-8412-F1B01601AB03.jpeg
    76595807-B7B9-4B3A-8412-F1B01601AB03.jpeg
    127.7 KB · Views: 507
Metrolinx is saying they will all be electrified at the same time, in 2025. Lakeshore West has to be the first one though, as it provides access to the main train yard.

Electrification works are scheduled to begin in 2019, I believe.

no idea on the vehicles. Probably 2019 or 2020.
 
DKsan said:
Globe and Mail reporter Oliver Moore on Twitter:

"Five pre-qualified operators have emerged from the RFQ for RER, Metrolinx says. The consortia include many of the names you'd expect: Keolis, SNCF, MTR, Deutsche Bahn, RATP Dev, FirstGroup"

https://twitter.com/moore_oliver/status/944335544359759873
Click to expand...
That's pretty much the UK's rail system operators in a trainshed.

innsertnamehere said:
no idea on the vehicles.
Click to expand...
For a variety of reasons, I think single decker EMU coaches may now have an edge on double-decker. One reason is for RER in tunnel. Some cities (Paris, Sydney, etc) do DD in tunnel, but the space inside the coaches is really tight, and to bore any greater size tunnels than now being done for LRVs limits interoperability and loading/unloading time for DD, is still an issue of discussion in Sydney esp. Sydney now leaning to single deck.

I see RER in tunnel being the new norm instead of very expensive and slow subways for Toronto, and of course, running on extant rail lines to connect to those tunnels into the core.
 
Last edited:
Am I reading that release correctly? Is this the "Phase III" procurement - which covers not only electrification, but operation of RER?

- Paul
 
So SNCF and RATP went seperate bids? RATP controls the Paris RER, and SNCF controls TGV. That would of almost made a perfect marriage in ontario for the RER and HSR. I would think Deutsche knows how to turn a profit too - they are much more massive then MTR. I could a scenario where Deutsche gets both RER and HSR.
 
cplchanb said:
They need to award it to MTR. they definitely know how to run a rapid transit network at a profit
Click to expand...

Why is them shipping a profit back to HK good for us in Ontario paying for the service?

Seems the ideal tender would have so much competition that the margins on the winning contract has very thin margins and strong penalties for failure to provide a well defined service (such as a 1 seat per passenger minimum on 95% of rush-hour trips).
 
Last edited:
rbt said:
Why is them shipping a profit back to HK good for us in Ontario paying for the service?

Seems the ideal tender would have so much competition that the margins on the winning contract has very thin margins and strong penalties for failure to provide a well defined service (such as a 1 seat per passenger minimum on 95% of rush-hour trips).
Click to expand...

well unless bbr operates this none of the bidders are from here. I would rather have a foreign entity operate our system at great profit than to have a native operator get only a small profit. at this point there really is no point to play patriotic games if our system is so far behind
 
cplchanb said:
well unless bbr operates this none of the bidders are from here. I would rather have a foreign entity operate our system at great profit than to have a native operator get only a small profit. at this point there really is no point to play patriotic games if our system is so far behind
Click to expand...

I'm not being patriotic. I'm asking why you want higher than necessary fares or subsidies in order to provide a foreign firm with a "great" profit.

Surely we should be selecting the tender with the lowest bid (since we're customers paying for it), not the highest margin.

We can count on all of them delivering the minimum of what the tender requires and nothing more.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top