[EastYorkTTCFan]

It'll have taken 8 years since the RFP started to get somewhere between 10-20 vehicles in service.

If we really go through with cancelling the contract, and starting a new RFP, say on January 1, 2016 ... then really we can only hope to have deliveries ramping up in 2023. Maybe 2022 if things really go well. And then deliveries through at least 2025.

If Bombardier can ultimately get their act together, and start delivering 4 cars a month, then it will be faster.

Costs would go up two ... what with nearly a decade of inflation ... and Bombardier bidding about $5 million per vehicles compared to about $7.5 million by the next closest bidder.

So why do something that would both delay things, and cost more money, unless there are significant quality issues. And all reports have been that the quality of the vehicles in service is quite good.

good points plus the CLRVs can't serve that much longer. The TTC has said they aren't worth rebuilding because they would need to be accessible and it was deem to dangerous to install a lift in them to make them accessible.

 

[Napoleon]

good points plus the CLRVs can't serve that much longer. The TTC has said they aren't worth rebuilding because they would need to be accessible and it was deem to dangerous to install a lift in them to make them accessible.

Almost impossible to imagine making these accessible. If one used a ramp, it would have to huge in length to achieve and appropriate slope. Some sort of lift would require the driver to stop and secure the person to get them up and would probably take tons of room. In the end, just not a reasonable plan. I'm sure there are also all sorts of mechanical retrofits that would need to be done aside from the accessibility issues.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

Almost impossible to imagine making these accessible. If one used a ramp, it would have to huge in length to achieve and appropriate slope. Some sort of lift would require the driver to stop and secure the person to get them up and would probably take tons of room. In the end, just not a reasonable plan. I'm sure there are also all sorts of mechanical retrofits that would need to be done aside from the accessibility issues.

Also don't forget most of the stops they make are in the middle of streets. One thing they were worried about was what would happen if someone is on the lift and it fails or a wheelchair falls off of it in the middle of the road.

 

[W. K. Lis]

good points plus the CLRVs can't serve that much longer. The TTC has said they aren't worth rebuilding because they would need to be accessible and it was deem to dangerous to install a lift in them to make them accessible.

As mentioned earlier in this thread, here, they have added a low section to older articulated trams/streetcars elsewhere.

 

[AlbertHWagstaff]

As mentioned earlier in this thread, here, they have added a low section to older articulated trams/streetcars elsewhere.

There was talk years ago of doing this with the ALRVs. If they had gone ahead, we could have had accessible streetcars at least a decade ago. Instead they went with the plan to have new fully low-floor cars.

 

[nfitz]

There was talk years ago of doing this with the ALRVs. If they had gone ahead, we could have had accessible streetcars at least a decade ago. Instead they went with the plan to have new fully low-floor cars.

With only about 50 ALRVs, it would have made Queen accessible - but not the other routes. I'm not sure how this was even an option though ... would there have been enough power to haul what would then have been a longer vehicle?

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

With only about 50 ALRVs, it would have made Queen accessible - but not the other routes. I'm not sure how this was even an option though ... would there have been enough power to haul what would then have been a longer vehicle?

and with parts getting harder to source for the clrv/ alrvs that would only be putting a band aid on a bigger problem.

 

[smallspy]

With only about 50 ALRVs, it would have made Queen accessible - but not the other routes. I'm not sure how this was even an option though ... would there have been enough power to haul what would then have been a longer vehicle?

Part of what they looked at was a very thorough rebuild, with additional and upgraded traction motors and control systems.

But indeed, as you noted, it would have only made two routes - Queen and Bathurst - accessible, and would have not provided much in terms of relief for the other lines.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[nfitz]

But indeed, as you noted, it would have only made two routes - Queen and Bathurst - accessible, and would have not provided much in terms of relief for the other lines.

The most recent streetcar fleet plan I'm aware of requires 45 Flexities and 21% spares for 501/508 for AM peak. So that's 55 Flexities for 501/508. With only 52 ALRVs - that's only going to get 501. And maybe 508. Not enough for both Queen and Bathurst.

 

[AlbertHWagstaff]

The most recent streetcar fleet plan I'm aware of requires 45 Flexities and 21% spares for 501/508 for AM peak. So that's 55 Flexities for 501/508. With only 52 ALRVs - that's only going to get 501. And maybe 508. Not enough for both Queen and Bathurst.

If you had some CLRVs scattered on Queen then you'd have enough ALRVs for Bathurst as well. The 508s would probably not be ALRVs. I guess 52 accessible cars would have still been better than zero.

 

[nfitz]

The 508s would probably not be ALRVs. I guess 52 accessible cars would have still been better than zero.

In recent years, 508s have mostly been ALRVs.

 

[AlbertHWagstaff]

In recent years, 508s have mostly been ALRVs.

The PM ones were mostly ALRVs until they cancelled the afternoon runs last year, the AMs were mostly CLRVs. Under the Accessible-ALRV scenario above the 508s would probably not all be ALRVs, since much of the run is on King.

 

[Incentro]

If Bombardier can ultimately get their act together, and start delivering 4 cars a month, then it will be faster.

Costs would go up two ... what with nearly a decade of inflation ... and Bombardier bidding about $5 million per vehicles compared to about $7.5 million by the next closest bidder.

So why do something that would both delay things, and cost more money, unless there are significant quality issues. And all reports have been that the quality of the vehicles in service is quite good.

What's so special about the streetcar in Toronto that justifies a price of $5 or even $7.5 million per vehicle?
At todays exchange rate $5 million are €3.3 million per vehicle, two years ago it have been €3.6 million.

It can't be the non standard gauge of 1495 mm. Other cities like Linz in Austria (900 mm), Brunswick in Germany (1100mm), Dresden (1450 mm) or Leipzig (1458 mm) get their vehicles despite a deviating gauge at normal prices.
Normal prices meaning € 3 million per vehicle for a series of 23 Bombardier Flexity Outlook tramcars (40 meter long, 7 sections) for Linz, delivered in 2011/2012.
Normal prices meaning € 2.5 to € 2.7 million per vehicle for a series of 18 Stadler Variotram tramcars (30 meter long, 5 sections) for Potsdam, delivered in 2011-2014.
Normal prices meaning € 2.2 million per vehicle for a series of 15 Solaris Tramino tramcars (36 meter long, 4 sections) for Brunswick, delivered in 2014-2015.

So you have ordered a series of 200 vehicles and shall pay astronomical prices?

I once read something of very tight corners and the construction with double joints offered by Siemens further suggests.
What are the dimensions of the smallest radius, the trams have to pass in regular service?
Could the network be devided into lines without tight curves (which could be used by standard vehicles) and lines with tight curves (that can only be used by specially adapted vehicles) ?

Last thing I have in mind is that the buy-canada-share drives up the price, because only Bombardier has a plant in Canada (Thunder Bay) and other suppliers would have to build one to comply with the tender.

 

[nfitz]

The 99 car order for Berlin was US$431 million - about US$4.4 million each. More expensive than ours, for deliveries through 2017. Ours was for deliveries through 2019. Your examples are for earlier deliveries.

I'm not seeing huge disparities for Bombardier vehicles. Astronomical prices? Exaggerate much? Perhaps we should have done an open bid, invited anyone company in the world to bid, and take the lowest price. Oh wait, we did ...

 

[rbt]

The 99 car order for Berlin was US$431 million - about US$4.4 million each. More expensive than ours, for deliveries through 2017. Ours was for deliveries through 2019. Your examples are for earlier deliveries.

Parts. maintenance (mid-life rebuilds included?), warranties, and penalties make up a large chunk of most of these contracts and nearly every one has different terms. Direct comparisons without adjustments aren't going to give accurate results; and I'm uncertain of the specific details of the TTC contract let alone the others.

If it's anything like the airline business, this portion of the contract will swing the vendor price by 50%.