[Duck]

Lots of nice Bombardier trams coming out of Bombardier Vienna.

I have a feeling that TB got the FLEXITY 2 designs from Austria and were tasked with "North-Americanizing" them for Toronto's Outlook and Freedom. Crash protection changes, fattening them up, generally clunking them up a bit more to satisfy our silly rules and horrid weather.

I wonder if a lot of the problems revolve around that.

 

[Napoleon]

I would have too. It's possible it's slipped into town on a different flatbed than usual; but I'll put my money on a problem.

I think you're on to something...the last few delivery spacings have been 20, 44, 27, 19, 15, and around 3 or 4 days. (4416 had a bit of an ambiguous delivery date.) We're at at least 27 days since the last delivery right now, which is bigger than all but one of the last 6 gaps. It's even pushing the mean delivery time of 34 ± 20 days since the strike. Maybe they're planning to deliver in spurts, but with 4416 not yet in service, I'm worried there's an issue.

 

[nfitz]

Though I'd expect to add 14 days to what you'd expect, as I assume they'd have 2-week Christmas shut-down. Still ...

 

[Duck]

The last TTC report said production in Thunder Bay had halted. I asked Brad Ross on Twitter about it and he said it was an outdated statement or something... But maybe not.

 

[crs1026]

The current gap is long enough that even if they'd have slipped a new transporter into the cycle, the original ones would also have been loaded.

We would likely have heard if production had fully stopped - by now they would be into layoffs.

There may be a "problem", but they may still be laying down new units, with production continuing up to the point where whatever problem or missing component is encountered.

I'm hoping beyond hope that we see a ketchup-bottle-type 'glurp' emerge shortly.

- Paul

 

[Duck]

It really sucks there is zero communication about it though with the public. It is very frustrating. I don't get any reply ever from @BombardierRail on Twitter. Their lawyers probably said not to say anything after the TTC said they were suing.

 

[Edward Skira]

Does anybody actually like the new streetcars? I think they look very cool on the outside but find them quite cramped on the inside.

 

[crs1026]

Does anybody actually like the new streetcars? I think they look very cool on the outside but find them quite cramped on the inside.

They are much more pleasant than the CLRV's/ALRV's on the inside - or maybe they just get cleaned better.

They strike me as poor users of space, but I'm a dinosaur from an era where one actually expected to get a seat on public transit. The acid test won't come until they are subjected to the crush loads that you get on 501 or 504. It's nice to have rear boarding doors - much less of the "crammed at the front, but no one will/can push back to the empty space at the rear" dynamic that you get on a CLRV.

- Paul

 

[44 North]

Does anybody actually like the new streetcars? I think they look very cool on the outside but find them quite cramped on the inside.

For layout and whatnot, I prefer the interiors of the CLRVs. Or rather, the older cars that were modified to have the single row of seats going all the way to the back. Much more spacious and easy to maneuver. The newer cars are definitely a bit awkward, particularly with the steps/levels. Another issue with the Outlooks is the white/light grey plastic. I think this will get grimy and etched over time and show its age much quicker than the interior and faux wood paneling of the A/CLRVs.

 

[nfitz]

It's nice to have rear boarding doors - much less of the "crammed at the front, but no one will/can push back to the empty space at the rear" dynamic that you get on a CLRV.

I've never found that dynamic as bad on CLRVs as it is on the buses, where no one seems to want to stand on or above the steps. Normally, when it's full, there's one person stood in the tail of the CLRV (and that's all that fits, and people lined up both sides of the aisle leading to it.

With the low-floor requirement, it's never going to be as great a use-of-space as the CLRVs - but there's lots of space to stand. Haven't hit one under crush load, as most of my Spadina/Harbourfront trips are off-peak.

 

[Duck]

Oh absolutely - I like the exterior, but I don't love it. Module 2, 3 and 4 are fine. But I hate the rounded styling of 1 and 5 (and I don't like that they didn't make them symmetric - I generally dislike unidirectional transit vehicles). I also don't like that there isn't a grey stripe or band somewhere.

The interior is excellent though - I'm curious, why do you think it's a poor use of space? Wherever there are wheels, there are back to back seats. Then there are some seats in a few other areas. What would you change?

 

[crs1026]

I'm not sure there is a lot that can be changed.

I think it's the number of diaphragm areas that gets me - I find those areas unappealing, on just about every type of vehicle that has one. A Flexity has four of them. ALRV's are far worse in this respect. The TR's are much more pleasant, don't ask me why.

- Paul

 

[Duck]

Weird - it's subjective, certainly - I far prefer the diaphragms on the LFLRV's. On the TR's, they have these sort of elipse-curved panels with light grey rubber boots with teeth and I just hate them. They make me uncomfortable.

 

[robmausser]

The interiors are not as nice as the CLRV/ALRVs in terms of space and move-ability, but thats the tradeoff you make for low floor accessibility.

I'd rather have a streetcar that all people can use thats a little cramped feeling at times, than a spacious one that leaves people out in the cold.

 

[Duck]

The only area that feels a little cramped is the aisle between the seats directly over the wheels in module 1/3/5. Is that what you mean?