News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.1K     0 

Looks like the perspective is foreshortened in the pic. The nose of the streetcar is just south of the median here: https://goo.gl/maps/pK9j7

The driver of the truck either tried to hang a left in front of the streetcar in the intersection, heading south on Spadina: https://goo.gl/maps/ug9jr

or else tried to cut in front heading east from Lake Shore, as fc000 suggested: https://goo.gl/maps/11bl0

I think the latter scenario is more likely. The truck nearly made it through before its driver's side rear fender made contact with the streetcar's front nearside. The streetcar seems to have held up pretty well, judging by the panel that came loose and the crooked skirt under the bumper.
 
I think the latter scenario is more likely. The truck nearly made it through before its driver's side rear fender made contact with the streetcar's front nearside. The streetcar seems to have held up pretty well, judging by the panel that came loose and the crooked skirt under the bumper.
I hope they have plenty of bumpers for these new streetcars. They seem to be about 10 times more likely to be in a collision than the older ones. I'm guessing that's more a function of the route they're on versus their length.
 
I hope they have plenty of bumpers for these new streetcars. They seem to be about 10 times more likely to be in a collision than the older ones. I'm guessing that's more a function of the route they're on versus their length.

Well, at least they won't have to fabricate them as they do for the CLRV/ALRV ... I hope.
 
The damage seems to be too heavy for it to be the latter case...the streetcar wouldve had to been travelling quite a bit faster to tip that truck into a spin with that much rear damage.
I guess the official police reports and cctv footage will explain it all.
 
From this and the previous accident where the Flexity was sideswiped by a CLRV - it's encouraging that the damage is mostly cosmetic - they seem to be good and sturdy vehicles.

- Paul
 
4409 is back in service today.
DQqPPrm.jpg
 
did they send back one or both of the first two prototype/test vehicles.....really thought BBD would work on returning those fast to "pad" the new delivery schedule.....guess they never went back or there was more to redo on them
 
did they send back one or both of the first two prototype/test vehicles.....really thought BBD would work on returning those fast to "pad" the new delivery schedule.....guess they never went back or there was more to redo on them
4402 went back in June. At the time they said it was due back in October if I recall correctly. It's all discussed above somewhere.
 
We're not the only ones having trouble with Bombardier.

The rolling stock on the C line has become something of a running joke. Every summer, the MTA replaces the R32s with fancy new cars due to concerns over air conditioning power, and every fall, riders are disappointed when the cars, which debuted during Lyndon Johnson’s presidency in 1964, make their return. Had all gone according to plan, the MTA would be gearing up to phase out those 51-year-old subway cars along with the R42s in use on the J/Z line. But all has not gone according to plan, and it’s about to cost the MTA at least $50 million over the next few years.

The story first came to us from Dan Rivoli. The Daily News transit reporter combed through copious amounts of MTA budget documents to find the note on Page V-222 of this pdf file. In this brief note, the MTA notes that final delivery of the R179s has been pushed back a few years, and “increased revenue service fleet requirements” means these cars can’t be retired until 2022, five years later than expected. Maintenance to keep the the ancient rolling stock moving will total $1.1 million next year, $15.9 million 2017, $17.7 million in 2018, and $15.5 million in 2019.

The delay stems from performance issues with Bombardier. The Canada-based manufacture had been, to much fanfare in 2012 from the governor, set to produce these cars in its Plattsburgh, NY plant, but delivery, originally scheduled to begin this year, is not on time. The MTA hasn’t divulged the cause of the delay, but ours isn’t the only transit agency experiencing trouble with the company. Toronto’s TTC may terminate a billion-dollar contract with Bombardier over delivery delays, and the company is going through some economic turbulence these days.

So what exactly went wrong? With the company remaining silent, it’s hard to say, and it’s not as though they’re new to the game. Bombardier had fulfilled various rolling stock orders throughout the 1980s and 1990s for Metro-North, Transit and the LIRR. In fact, the 1030-car R142 order consists entirely of Bombardier-made rolling stock.

Yet, a closer look at the MTA’s board documents from early 2012 [pdf] reveals some early caution flags. Bombardier’s bid of $599 million for the rolling stock order came in under a bid by an Alstom/Kawaski. In its board materials, the MTA noted a cost savings of around $12.4 million — a total that has been completely wiped away by Bombardier’s late delivery. The bid assessment notes that Bombardier’s technical presentation was “acceptable” but that the ALSKAW bid “ranked higher” in “technical merit.” In other words, ALSKAW was better positioned to deliver on the specs of the R179 order, but Bombardier offered a better price. Since the MTA hadn’t disqualified Bombardier, the company won the contract, and here we are.

Originally, Bombardier was to deliver the test set of the R179s late last year with the remainder split between delivery around now and early 2017. Now, new cars won’t start arriving until 2018, and much to the consternation of regular riders, retirement won’t arrive until early next decade. The R32s, which average only 58,101 miles between breakdowns, will have to keep chugging along until then, and while I hate to draw conclusions on a company that had delivered on promises in the past, I am tempted to say that you get what you pay for. It’s a lesson in low-bid contracts we learn over and over again.

http://secondavenuesagas.com/2015/08/14/as-bombardier-struggles-r179-delay-to-cost-mta-50-million/
 
wow.....even without 20/20 hindsight, I wouldnt penny pinch $12m over a technically inferior product...considering that their budget is much larger than ours. It seems that they really got screwed like us
 
wow.....even without 20/20 hindsight, I wouldnt penny pinch $12m over a technically inferior product...considering that their budget is much larger than ours.
If their rules say they have to go with the lowest acceptable bidder, then there's no choice.

This is why a bidding process that results in the lowest acceptable bidder winning often fails. Frequently it's awarded to the company that screwed up the bid. We've seen some of that with the Spadina extension station construction.

As the article notes, it’s a lesson in low-bid contracts we learn over and over again.
 

Back
Top