[andomano]

I don't know what kind of couplers will be on these subway cars, but I highly doubt they'll be compatible with mainline trains nor contain any of the following: electromagnets, re-sealable adhesive goo, velcro, or ball-hitches. I imagine T1-compatibility was seen as a useful attribute in case a disabled train has to be towed or something.

I was wondering solely for shipping purposes (never mind the gauge difference). I too would assume that TTC would use a standard coupler if any towing or shunting would be necessary.
Could've just done the research myself earlier (no knuckles here)-> http://transit.toronto.on.ca/images/subway-5505-13.jpg

 

[TTCboy13]

cool

I was wondering solely for shipping purposes (never mind the gauge difference). I too would assume that TTC would use a standard coupler if any towing or shunting would be necessary.
Could've just done the research myself earlier (no knuckles here)-> http://transit.toronto.on.ca/images/subway-5505-13.jpg

cool so shiny

 

[smallspy]

A few comments deserve facepalms. I'll be polite and not name names.

In terms of delivery, they'll load individual unjoined subway cars wrapped/tarped onto mainline flatbed cars, and ship them that way to Greenwood.

Not Greenwood. The CN spur was torn up a year or two ago. All future subway car deliveries will be by truck to a new unloading facility recently completed at Wilson. I would assume that they will be shipped by train to a point nearby, say CN's MacMillian yard and then transloaded to a truck there.

That means there won't necessarily be any reason to send all six cars from an eventual complete subway train in a single batch.

Not true. Only the end cars will have couplers - the connections between cars in a trainset will be by drawbars.

I don't know what kind of couplers will be on these subway cars, but I highly doubt they'll be compatible with mainline trains nor contain any of the following: electromagnets, re-sealable adhesive goo, velcro, or ball-hitches. I imagine T1-compatibility was seen as a useful attribute in case a disabled train has to be towed or something.

Couplers will likely be the same as they've been since the M1's - modified Scharfenburgs with integrated PA, brake and air connections. They will likely not have any sort of electrical connections on the couplers, as the trains will only need to be coupled for emergencies.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[simply Dan]

This complex shipping process from Thunder Bay seems just a little ridiculous to me - they should have just fabricated them at Downsview or something instead.

 

[nfitz]

Not Greenwood. The CN spur was torn up a year or two ago.

It was there this summer, didn't look well used, but it was there. Now perhaps the switch leading to it has gone? Being on the GO train, it's hard to see what's underneath you.

 

[Asterix]

This complex shipping process from Thunder Bay seems just a little ridiculous to me - they should have just fabricated them at Downsview or something instead.

Downsview? You mean in the non-existent streetcar manufacturing plant?

That's further not accounting for the political reasons for supporting a heavy manufacturing facility of a Canadian company in a place like Thunder Bay.

 

[simply Dan]

Of course a rail car fabrication facility would have to be set up at a place like Downsview, but Alsom was willing to build a new facility in Quebec for new subway cars in Montreal - costly, but entirely feasable. Bombardier already has significant operations at Downsview.

 

[Asterix]

Of course a rail car fabrication facility would have to be set up at a place like Downsview, but Alsom was willing to build a new facility in Quebec for new subway cars in Montreal - costly, but entirely feasable. Bombardier already has significant operations at Downsview.

Bombardier operations at Downsview are not rail. I don't believe they can retool or update their facilities to construct subway cars all that much cheaper than anyone else building a brand new facility. Do you really think that cost would be less than what it takes to ship the product from an existing production line in Thunder Bay?

I also don't think it is feasible to expect a company to build a new plant immediately adjacent to where they got their latest order from. Bombardier sells to a lot more cities than just Toronto, so once they finish with this TTC production, do they shut down the plant in Downsview and build a new one next to the following customer?

Lastly, you really need to account for the political angle in which the Feds would not be at all keen of a manufacturer such as Bombardier (recipient of many Fed dollars) to pack up from Thunder Bay and take all those jobs elsewhere.

 

[smallspy]

It was there this summer, didn't look well used, but it was there. Now perhaps the switch leading to it has gone? Being on the GO train, it's hard to see what's underneath you.

The switch is gone, ergo the spur no longer exists. The TTC still uses their part of it for storing equipment.

Of course a rail car fabrication facility would have to be set up at a place like Downsview, but Alsom was willing to build a new facility in Quebec for new subway cars in Montreal - costly, but entirely feasable.

Alstom was not going to build a plant. The are numerous contract manufacturing corporations in the Montreal area, and they would have partnered with one of them.

Bombardier already has significant operations at Downsview.

The construction methods and techniques for manufacturing trains and planes are completely different. And Bombardier likely doesn't have enough room to do both there.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[simply Dan]

The TTC isn't simply placing "another order" with Bombardier, but rather the single largest order of light rail vehicles in history as well as a sizeable subway car order - that plant will be humming for years thanks to the TTC. Having them manufactured so far away, and for many years transporting everything such a great distance to Toronto doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. Relocating the plant to a more modern facility in a large population centre like Toronto (which is closer to other large cities within North America for future customers) doesn't sound like a ludicrous idea to me...

 

[nfitz]

The switch is gone, ergo the spur no longer exists. The TTC still uses their part of it for storing equipment.

Interesting. I guess the switch must have gone when they added the third track recently. I'll have to keep my eyes open the next time I'm on an eastbound GO ... though it's normally dark; so it might well be April or May before I'm there in daylight. That would explain why the track itself looked unused.

I wonder what the logic is ... I'd have thought it would have been the easiest way to bring in and out vehicles.

 

[hkric88]

Boy that's going to be a lot of trucks...

 

[nfitz]

Boy that's going to be a lot of trucks...

230 cars over a 2-year period? That's about 2 a week. Only one truck needed.

 

[rbt]

Boy that's going to be a lot of trucks...

Just wait until you figure out a large portion of the parts come from Asia and will use a truck, a boat, and a train to get to the factory.

Some of those parts will be pre-assembled from other smaller parts which took trucks and trains to get to the factory which created that part.

From the time the ore for a screw is excavated to the time it is delivered as part of a train to the TTC, it may have been on a dozen trucks, half dozen trains, and possibly 2 boats (ore/metal slugs to China from Canada, component of motor from Taiwan coming back).

 

[andomano]

Hows about air delivery...