News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.2K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.5K     0 

To add on to to everyone's comments, there isnt full funding for all the required trains the TTC requires.

The most the TTC could theoretically do is place an order for some of the trains they require with an option for the remaining additional trains.
 
To add on to to everyone's comments, there isnt full funding for all the required trains the TTC requires.

The most the TTC could theoretically do is place an order for some of the trains they require with an option for the remaining additional trains.
In that case they could only spend the City's money since the provincial share is contingent on the federal contribution.
 
To add on to to everyone's comments, there isnt full funding for all the required trains the TTC requires.

The most the TTC could theoretically do is place an order for some of the trains they require with an option for the remaining additional trains.
That's a way to pay more and what happens if the others don't come on board re funding? Running two models on same line adds to cost. It's 'all or nothing'.
 
That's a way to pay more and what happens if the others don't come on board re funding? Running two models on same line adds to cost. It's 'all or nothing'.
If running two models on one line causes problems, that is symptomatic of a much larger problem in the city. Standardization should be a 'nice to have' that we can possibly strive for, but it should not inform fleet policy when there are other considerations at play.

All or nothing is also a very bad approach if you have two lines in the pipeline which may one day possibly be completed and will require extra trains to run. If the feds don't cough up, then what do? Tell the people of Scarborough and York Region that there's not gonna be a subway for them after all? Well, we should have done that already, but it's a bit too late to close Pandora's box now.
 
That's a way to pay more and what happens if the others don't come on board re funding? Running two models on same line adds to cost. It's 'all or nothing'.
I guess adding new TR's trains to line 1 was a problem as they had to run 2 different sets for a number of years until there was enough TR's to move the T1 to line 2? So what is the different between Line 1 and 2 stopping doing it on line 2??

TTC ran how many different H series cars on the subway network for years long before the T1`'s show up??

You can find system that run different sets of trains on the same line and they seem to have no issues doing so.
 
I guess adding new TR's trains to line 1 was a problem as they had to run 2 different sets for a number of years until there was enough TR's to move the T1 to line 2? So what is the different between Line 1 and 2 stopping doing it on line 2??

TTC ran how many different H series cars on the subway network for years long before the T1`'s show up??

You can find system that run different sets of trains on the same line and they seem to have no issues doing so.
I'm sure there is going to be a federal announcement for the funding at the right time for them to do so.

They need the votes.
 
I'm sure there is going to be a federal announcement for the funding at the right time for them to do so.

They need the votes.

The provincial government needs to complete the paperwork to request funding first. This took them years for the last round of transit funding.
 
The new trains will be maintained at Greenwood, which can only do repairs on units in 2-car increments.

Unless there is funding to completely overhaul Greenwood first; the new trains will have to be breakable into 'pairs'.

So these will not be identical. '

I believe the intent is to allow for a full-train length gangways, however, not withstanding the modified design.
TTC have already announced that Greenwood will be modified to handle the T1 replacement trains. It's part of the $2.8 billion budget for Line 2 Capacity Enhancement (which is in addition to the $800 million for ATC, $2.5 billion for the new trains, and $1.5 billion for the Bloor-Yonge station enhancements). The Capacity Enhancement program runs until 2041, and the cost in the 10-year budget (2023 to 2032) is $1.1 billion, of which about $0.9 billion is funded.

Presumably the Greenwood yard upgrades are within the next 10 years, but it's not clear to me what in the next 10 years is unfunded. It looks like the initial focus is on Spadina station, including the extended streetcar platform, but the latest update says the design for the Greenwood modifications are underway.

So they could be identical!
 
TTC have already announced that Greenwood will be modified to handle the T1 replacement trains. It's part of the $2.8 billion budget for Line 2 Capacity Enhancement (which is in addition to the $800 million for ATC, $2.5 billion for the new trains, and $1.5 billion for the Bloor-Yonge station enhancements). The Capacity Enhancement program runs until 2041, and the cost in the 10-year budget (2023 to 2032) is $1.1 billion, of which about $0.9 billion is funded.

Presumably the Greenwood yard upgrades are within the next 10 years, but it's not clear to me what in the next 10 years is unfunded. It looks like the initial focus is on Spadina station, including the extended streetcar platform, but the latest update says the design for the Greenwood modifications are underway.

So they could be identical!

1701398317285.png


***

1701398344860.png


1701398379524.png

*****

From a comment made by Steve Munro on his website:

1701398497113.png



See comment #2
 
Curiouser and curiouser.

There's no way they'd be getting non-open walkway trains these days. This will be an interesting design, assuming someone doesn't come to their senses.

Perhaps @smallspy who I know has kept an eye on this file may be able to offer greater insight.
 
Perhaps @smallspy who I know has kept an eye on this file may be able to offer greater insight.
Just because they are configured as two-car couplets doesn't mean that they will be stored in that manner.

Electronically, the TRs are configured as 3-car sets with 2 sets making up a train. But they certainly aren't stored in that manner, and the vast, vast majority of work done to them doesn't require those pairs of sets to be broken apart.

My understanding about the changes to the maintenance facilities at Greenwood is that they will echo the changes done to Wilson, where improvements were done in a staged basis to allow the existing facilities to operate while some of the new facilities will be built. And the new facilities will be designed to allow an entire 6-car train to be maintained as a whole, without taking it apart.

Dan
 
Just because they are configured as two-car couplets doesn't mean that they will be stored in that manner.

Electronically, the TRs are configured as 3-car sets with 2 sets making up a train. But they certainly aren't stored in that manner, and the vast, vast majority of work done to them doesn't require those pairs of sets to be broken apart.

My understanding about the changes to the maintenance facilities at Greenwood is that they will echo the changes done to Wilson, where improvements were done in a staged basis to allow the existing facilities to operate while some of the new facilities will be built. And the new facilities will be designed to allow an entire 6-car train to be maintained as a whole, without taking it apart.

Dan
I thought that the plan was to allow the cars to be separated and moved in the yard using remote control or some console with a dongle? (For the cars without a cab)
 
I thought that the plan was to allow the cars to be separated and moved in the yard using remote control or some console with a dongle? (For the cars without a cab)
That has never been a plan that has been conveyed to me.

And honestly, it makes no sense as the couplers are a major maintenance expense that they would like to do without if they can. More coupling and uncoupling means more wear-and-tear, which means more maintenance.

Dan
 

Top