Dan416
Senior Member
Me too. Well, drivers anyway.
|
|
|
- Thread starter goodboys
- Start date
Me too. Well, drivers anyway.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Cars accelerate faster because they are carrying only one occupant, the driver. The streetcars carry more than a full loaded car. Try accelerating with a fully loaded car and trunk.
In fact, streetcars while capable of accelerating fast, the drivers should be practicing something calling "defensive driving". They should be anticipating all driving errors, aggressiveness of other drivers, road and weather conditions, jaywalkers, and should be driving safely. That is something streetcar drivers are taught when they get trained. (BTW. You have to pass at least a Class C license. Used to be no driver's license was required to drive a streetcar because it was considered a railway.)
In fact, streetcars while capable of accelerating fast, the drivers should be practicing something calling "defensive driving". They should be anticipating all driving errors, aggressiveness of other drivers, road and weather conditions, jaywalkers, and should be driving safely. That is something streetcar drivers are taught when they get trained. (BTW. You have to pass at least a Class C license. Used to be no driver's license was required to drive a streetcar because it was considered a railway.)
Last edited:
Eug
Senior Member
Hmmm… Interesting… I would have guessed it would have been something home grown (as in Germany, not Kassel specifically). Kassel is very proud of its manufacturing heritage (war notwithstanding). eg. 15000 employees with Volkswagon there.
If I had known, I would have taken a much closer look instead of just snapping a few exterior pix.
As for the right-of-way, in the city centre it was intermingled with the pedestrian area (with no cars allowed), but in some less central areas it had its own (at-grade) lanes, so no direct traffic blockage.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Is 204 new low-floor streetcars enough? We are expecting the first prototype late in 2011 or 2012.
The first prototype CLRV arrived in 1977, with the last ALRV arriving in 1989 or so. The PCC's were still being used in the meantime.
The 604 Harbourfront (now 509) started operation in 1990, and the 510 Spadina started operation in 1997, using (at the time) surplus streetcars. However, no additional streetcars were ordered or built after 1989, as the PCC fleet was retired. The current order is to replace the current fleet.
When the new 204 low-floor streetcars, we will still have CLRV and ALRV available. However, as that fleet gets even older and retired, will we have enough streetcars for good service, and with any streetcar route expansion? (Unless RF gets us into trouble.)
The first prototype CLRV arrived in 1977, with the last ALRV arriving in 1989 or so. The PCC's were still being used in the meantime.
The 604 Harbourfront (now 509) started operation in 1990, and the 510 Spadina started operation in 1997, using (at the time) surplus streetcars. However, no additional streetcars were ordered or built after 1989, as the PCC fleet was retired. The current order is to replace the current fleet.
When the new 204 low-floor streetcars, we will still have CLRV and ALRV available. However, as that fleet gets even older and retired, will we have enough streetcars for good service, and with any streetcar route expansion? (Unless RF gets us into trouble.)
nfitz
Superstar
I believe it was designed the current routes, and anticipated growth with the 204 vehicles completely replacing the CLRV and ALRV fleet. It's not designed for service expansions, such at the Waterfront East line. TTC still has an option for further vehicles, and presumably they would exercise.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Too bad Toronto wouldn't be getting the catenary-free version streetcars and light rail vehicles.
[video=youtube;AsfkUipDSNM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsfkUipDSNM[/video]
Not recommended for inclines.
[video=youtube;AsfkUipDSNM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsfkUipDSNM[/video]
Not recommended for inclines.
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
What makes you say it's not recommended for inclines?
W. K. Lis
Superstar
More electricity or power is needed to go up on a hill or incline, just as you need to press down on the accelerator to go uphill. Works best on a level or downhill incline. Bombardier puts their limit of a gradient of up to 6% for their Primove system. Toronto has gradients of 7% to 8% (the hill at Bathurst and Davenport). Overhead catenary would be still be required for those streetcar inclines. Don't know the inclines for the Transit City lines.
Last edited:
Fred.S
Active Member
Cool technology, but would be sort of inconvenient for operators if we're still using trolley poles when changing track sections. I find wires are only really intrusive at junctions. I think a lot of it could be simplified if we moved to pantograph.
On a related note, I saw crews replacing the overhead on Bathurst between Hillcrest and St Clair. Is it to make it pantograph-friendly? I thought I heard somewhere that they'll be testing pantograph operation on St Clair when the prototype LRVs arrive. Anyone know anything about this?
DSCToronto
Superstar
The TTC are doing a large scale upgrade of the overhead and there are now lots of parts of the network that can deal with pantographs. Not sure if they ahve done any junctions yet. These are the most difficult as they need to be able to cope with both pantographs and poles at same time as older cars will still be with us for many years.
Dan416
Senior Member
It would be nice to go wireless, but Toronto isn't exactly a transit innovator. Expect to see this around 2050 if we're lucky.
Justin10000
Banned
Conventionall OCS works just fine. Why waste money on a new technology? If the price is reasonable, fine, but ground level powe collectionr is 3 times the cost of OCS at the moment. No need to spend the money. If you want innovation, move out of Toronto.. Oh wait, you do not even live in Toronto.
junctionist
Senior Member
Maybe there are stretches of road where it's very desirable to have ground level power collection, where we want to achieve the best we can and fashion ourselves as leaders. We have to balance quality and quantity with more diverse solutions than "X is cheaper, therefore X must built everywhere ".
That's just pathetic and insulting to the city. For shame. The fewer people who live in Toronto that think this way, the better off it'll be.
Justin10000
Banned
We do not need transit innovation in this city. The last time we went with an innovative project, we got stuck with the Scarborough RT. You want a repeat of that? Maybe we should take the route of Nancy, and Caen, France and try the innovative GLT concept, where the trams were prone to derailments, and system suffered from lengthy shutdowns? I am not even going to talk about the problem with the concrete already needing to replace due to tire ruts.
I want tried, and proven transit solutions. I do not want to spend money on pie in the sky ideas that someone dreamed up using CAD, and photoshop. If you want innovation in transit, Toronto is not the city for you. Been there, done that. Not again.
APS, and PRIMOVE is not at the stage where it can be implemented on a large scale at an affordable cost. I doubt you'll be able to make a business case for ground level power collection in Toronto.
Last edited:
junctionist
Senior Member
Yes, we need innovation in transit. We need LRT, transit priority signals, automated subways, and fare cards. Innovation means new solutions to problems. Whether you like it or not, we will keep on adopting innovations. Vancouver uses the same innovative technology as the SRT, and I think they're proud of their system, a fully grade separated rapid transit system that has as much trackage as ours for a city with at least a million fewer people, built in less than half the time as our rapid transit system.
Ground level power collection might never be that affordable, but if the kinks can be worked out, there are probably some prominent areas where it could be done with a high concentration of tourists, locals. I see as something worth considering at least on a limited basis for parts of the city where we'd like to show our best.