[EastYorkTTCFan]

Honestly, the new trains should have different announcements than the Toronto Rockets. For example, would it really hurt to include announcements for regional/intercity services?

For example: Arriving at Union, Union Station. Exit here for all GO Regional rail lines, GO Regional buses and VIA intercity services. Doors will open on the left. (Vaughan bound train)

And for stations connecting with one GO line,

Example: Arriving at Downsview Park, Downsview Park Station. Exit here for GO Transit's Barrie line. Doors will open on the left.

This can be applicable to the rest of the fleet as well. Except for the T1's and the Mark I since they would be going out of service.

Why would they announce information for another systems operations, is this something that happens anywhere in the world?

Like for example do they announce on the London underground or some other systems in the world about connections with unrelated systems?

 

[turini2]

Why would they announce information for another systems operations, is this something that happens anywhere in the world?

Like for example do they announce on the London underground or some other systems in the world about connections with unrelated systems?

Yes, this is very common around the world. Usually with actual voice recordings rather than the text to speech the TTC uses.

2 examples - The next station is Euston. Doors will open on the right hand side. Change for Northern line, London Overground and National Rail services. Victoria Line, London
(National Rail services are 'mainline' national and regional rail services, and London Overground are frequent commuter trains run by TfL that run on National Rail tracks)

The next station is Shibuya (JY-20). The doors on the right side will open. Please change here for the Tokyu Toyoko Line, the Tokyu Den-en-toshi Line, the Keio Inokashira Line, the Ginza Subway Line, the Hanzomon Subway Line and the Fukutoshin Subway Line. Please watch your step when you leave the train. Yamanote Line, Tokyo
(Tokyu, Keio and the two Subway operators - Toei and Tokyo Metro - are different companies than JR East, which runs the circular Yamanote line)

 

[Northern Light]

Honestly, the new trains should have different train announcements than the Toronto Rockets. For example, would it really hurt to include announcements for regional/intercity services?

For example: Arriving at Union, Union Station. Exit here for all GO Regional rail lines, GO Regional buses and VIA intercity services. Doors will open on the left. (Vaughan bound train)

And for stations connecting with one GO line,

Example: Arriving at Downsview Park, Downsview Park Station. Exit here for GO Transit's Barrie line. Doors will open on the left.

This can be applicable to the rest of the fleet as well. Except for the T1's and the Mark I since they would be going out of service.

Sure, w/the caveat that the words need to be chosen carefully. Simple reasoning, I fully expect all TTC announcements to be bilingual in the future. (English/French).

You don't want the announcement for each station to have to start the moment you depart the previous one!

 

[smallspy]

I do not have said account.

Could you provide some highlights, please?

Coles Notes version:

Two scenarios could play out for the tender, depending on monies (all being 6-car trains, semi-permanently coupled with full-width gangways):
Scenario 1) 18 train base order, 62 train option #1, 7 train option #2, 25 train option #3
Scenario 2) 80 train bases order, 7 train option #1, 25 train option #2

Rather than the 3-car blocks that the TRs were built in, it is suggested the trains be configured - again - as 2 car blocks. Each train would be thus configured as such: A-B + B-C + B-A
Where the "A" car is a cab car containing no air compressor and with traction motors only on the trailing truck, the "B" car contains the air compressor but no operating controls and all axles driven, and the "C" car with no air compressor, all axles driven and a hostler control.

Cabs would be enlarged again when compared to TRs - the desktop control will be about half of the width of each car, requiring the emergency exit ramp to be offset to the left-hand side of the front of the car. Staff doors to the cab will be inward swinging (hinged), rather than the sliding plug door as found on the TRs. There would also be located on the off-side of the cab a folding/stowing seat for trainers - something sorely lacking from the TRs.

The onboard announcement system must be able to convert the crews announcements via the PA system to text on the various display screens throughout the train (2 second lag between the announcement being played and the text being shownis considered acceptable).

The TTC also asks about a bunch of features that would be nice-to-haves - built-in fire suppression, frontal object detection & auto-braking, etc.

Trains could be configured as 4-, 5-, 6- or 7-car trainsets easily and quickly by simply uncoupling pairs and re-configuring them - the onboard software should automatically detect these changes in configuration and make the required changes to the operational parameters.

Here is where it gets a bit weird - they talk about the 7th car (a "D" car) in a number of locations throughout the documents (and that a theoretical 7-car train would have a length of 525 feet, and that the trains must allow for automatic selective door opening in that configuration) but then make no accounts for it within the bidding scenarios. Its like the TTC is saying "plan for it, but we don't really want to hear about it just yet".

I really dislike how people keep pointing out that they are broken because of this. The switches that are used currently in the existing streetcar network are from an older time and weren't replaced as they were able to design the CLRV's and ALRv's around them. Also at the time that they were put in place, there wasn't any sort of extra signalling put in place for them so the only way the driver can tell if the switch is set in their favour is to look at it. Most likely whenever the TTC orders the next batch of switches to replace the ones installed recently they will probably switch over to something more modern and probably have some sort of signal added that shows the direction that the switch is set.

You realize that the Flexities were built to operate with those switches just fine, right?

I think right now they have ordered the same model for all of the switches in the system on the streets. Leslie barns uses modern two bladed switches and there is apparently a few trailing switches that have been changed to two bladed ones as well. There has also been something mentioned about one of the switches at King and Sumach being changed out for another type of switch to help reduce noise at the intersection.

The TTC changed their switch supplier about 7 or 8 (or more now?) years ago. The new switches seem to be holding up better, and with less maintenance than the older designs.

The trailing switches at King & Sumach are being changed to a "blade-less" style of switch that should in theory be quieter as blade simply flexes in the appropriate direction as the car runs over it. They've had one installed eastbound at Lansdowne & College for about 7 or so years now, and it has fared quite well, although it certainly doesn't see as many turning movements as the ones at Sumach will see.

The downside with this design is that the TTC will now have to stock multiple kinds of switch components - before (with the exception of the switches at Leslie), they used the exact same type of switch points regardless of whether they were facing or trailing. Additionally, setting the switch to be able to back over it now requires tools and parts - before all it took was a switch iron, which is on every single car.

Dan

 

[Northern Light]

Coles Notes version:

Two scenarios could play out for the tender, depending on monies (all being 6-car trains, semi-permanently coupled with full-width gangways):
Scenario 1) 18 train base order, 62 train option #1, 7 train option #2, 25 train option #3
Scenario 2) 80 train bases order, 7 train option #1, 25 train option #2

Rather than the 3-car blocks that the TRs were built in, it is suggested the trains be configured - again - as 2 car blocks. Each train would be thus configured as such: A-B + B-C + B-A
Where the "A" car is a cab car containing no air compressor and with traction motors only on the trailing truck, the "B" car contains the air compressor but no operating controls and all axles driven, and the "C" car with no air compressor, all axles driven and a hostler control.

Cabs would be enlarged again when compared to TRs - the desktop control will be about half of the width of each car, requiring the emergency exit ramp to be offset to the left-hand side of the front of the car. Staff doors to the cab will be inward swinging (hinged), rather than the sliding plug door as found on the TRs. There would also be located on the off-side of the cab a folding/stowing seat for trainers - something sorely lacking from the TRs.

The onboard announcement system must be able to convert the crews announcements via the PA system to text on the various display screens throughout the train (2 second lag between the announcement being played and the text being shownis considered acceptable).

The TTC also asks about a bunch of features that would be nice-to-haves - built-in fire suppression, frontal object detection & auto-braking, etc.

Trains could be configured as 4-, 5-, 6- or 7-car trainsets easily and quickly by simply uncoupling pairs and re-configuring them - the onboard software should automatically detect these changes in configuration and make the required changes to the operational parameters.

Here is where it gets a bit weird - they talk about the 7th car (a "D" car) in a number of locations throughout the documents (and that a theoretical 7-car train would have a length of 525 feet, and that the trains must allow for automatic selective door opening in that configuration) but then make no accounts for it within the bidding scenarios. Its like the TTC is saying "plan for it, but we don't really want to hear about it just yet".



You realize that the Flexities were built to operate with those switches just fine, right?



The TTC changed their switch supplier about 7 or 8 (or more now?) years ago. The new switches seem to be holding up better, and with less maintenance than the older designs.

The trailing switches at King & Sumach are being changed to a "blade-less" style of switch that should in theory be quieter as blade simply flexes in the appropriate direction as the car runs over it. They've had one installed eastbound at Lansdowne & College for about 7 or so years now, and it has fared quite well, although it certainly doesn't see as many turning movements as the ones at Sumach will see.

The downside with this design is that the TTC will now have to stock multiple kinds of switch components - before (with the exception of the switches at Leslie), they used the exact same type of switch points regardless of whether they were facing or trailing. Additionally, setting the switch to be able to back over it now requires tools and parts - before all it took was a switch iron, which is on every single car.

Dan

Thank you so much!

Excellent info, and insight!

Much appreciated!

 

[kotsy]

Yes, this is very common around the world. Usually with actual voice recordings rather than the text to speech the TTC uses.

2 examples - The next station is Euston. Doors will open on the right hand side. Change for Northern line, London Overground and National Rail services. Victoria Line, London
(National Rail services are 'mainline' national and regional rail services, and London Overground are frequent commuter trains run by TfL that run on National Rail tracks)
\

The tube also calls out famous landmarks. "Exit here for Buckingham Palace.", has occasional reminders to take your belongings with you, mentions if a station has step-free access and calls out the final destination for that train. They also have a recording for when trains terminate and everyone must exit.

I really wish they'd revert back to having an actual human record the announcements. These sound SO much better than our computer generated voices. Or maybe I'm just in love with a British accent. NYC even went as far as hiring a radio anchor to do theirs.

 

[JasonParis]

Honestly, the new trains should have different train announcements than the Toronto Rockets. For example, would it really hurt to include announcements for regional/intercity services?
For example: Arriving at Union, Union Station. Exit here for all GO Regional rail lines, GO Regional buses and VIA intercity services. Doors will open on the left. (Vaughan bound train)
And for stations connecting with one GO line,
Example: Arriving at Downsview Park, Downsview Park Station. Exit here for GO Transit's Barrie line. Doors will open on the left.
This can be applicable to the rest of the fleet as well. Except for the T1's and the Mark I since they would be going out of service.

Another reason why I'd like to see the GO rail lines lettered. It's way quicker to read.

 

[Johnny Au]

Here's an example of a station announcement from the MARTA in Atlanta:

 

[RapidTransit]

Coles Notes version:

Two scenarios could play out for the tender, depending on monies (all being 6-car trains, semi-permanently coupled with full-width gangways):
Scenario 1) 18 train base order, 62 train option #1, 7 train option #2, 25 train option #3
Scenario 2) 80 train bases order, 7 train option #1, 25 train option #2

Rather than the 3-car blocks that the TRs were built in, it is suggested the trains be configured - again - as 2 car blocks. Each train would be thus configured as such: A-B + B-C + B-A
Where the "A" car is a cab car containing no air compressor and with traction motors only on the trailing truck, the "B" car contains the air compressor but no operating controls and all axles driven, and the "C" car with no air compressor, all axles driven and a hostler control.



Dan

What kind of examples are out there that have semi-permanently coupled cars with full-width gangways? I assume it means each pair would be open gangways, but not a full 6 car like the TR? Eg, if its 3 car sets, they would be open gangways between 3 cars only, and not all 6 cars from end to end? And at the end of each 2 or 3 car set there would be the semi-permeant couplers for another set? I guess an example would be the Innovia 200 concept for the Skytrain in Vancouver. That makes sense considering how the cars are currently in pairs permanently anyways. And Greenwood Yard will be able to accommodate them.

 

[KevinT]

I vaguely remember than when the screens started showing up on subway platforms the idea for real-time surface schedules was suggested. The TTC shot it down as they worried some passengers would aggressively run up the stairs to catch it and it would end in a slip and fall.

The solution to that isn't to have no displays at all, it's to drop routes from the display a minute or two before they actually leave.

 

[max]

The solution to that isn't to have no displays at all, it's to drop routes from the display a minute or two before they actually leave.

After witnessing their resistance to balance displays on the Presto readers, I have no faith that the TTC will bother trying to think through any solutions that potentially expose them to liability.

 

[smallspy]

What kind of examples are out there that have semi-permanently coupled cars with full-width gangways?

The TRs running today. While they operate as a 6-car train in service, they are configured of two back-to-back 3-car sets. Either 3-car set can (and has, in testing) operate independently of the other.

I'm sure that there are others around the world, but I don't know that level of detail for those systems.

I assume it means each pair would be open gangways, but not a full 6 car like the TR?

It seems that the intention is to have it just like the TRs - once coupled, there will be no inclination from inside the train of the different sections.

Eg, if its 3 car sets, they would be open gangways between 3 cars only, and not all 6 cars from end to end?

No - all intermediate cars would have full-width gangways at both ends.

And at the end of each 2 or 3 car set there would be the semi-permeant couplers for another set?

The couplers at the cab-ends of the "A" cars would likely be the same as the ones on the TRs today, and would likely only have the very basic connections needed to connect the train.

The couplers at the "semi-permanent" ends of the pairs - where the different pairs would connect to each other - would likely be more like the couplers between the T1s, containing both a mechanical coupler with the basic fittings & connections, and complex electrical connectors to allow for the sharing of information/communication with the adjoining pairs.

Dan

 

[kali]

Rouge Hill GO AV shuttle pilot delayed:

 

[TossYourJacket]

I really wish they'd revert back to having an actual human record the announcements. These sound SO much better than our computer generated voices. Or maybe I'm just in love with a British accent. NYC even went as far as hiring a radio anchor to do theirs.

Ottawa has a real person as well, because it was easier to do that for the bilingual announcements than have a robot try and speak in two languages.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Way back when the TTC ran suburban commuter service.

The History of Gray Coach and the time TTC went to Niagara Falls

See link.