News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.3K     0 

yrt+viva=1system said:
I have noticed that in the last couple of months there are more incidents of people smoking in stations and on board trains. It seems to be getting worse, even yesterday evening a bunch of kids were smoking joints in the first carriage of my train and another person was smoking a joint in the third carriage.

Noticed today for the first time of what looks to be a smoke detector on board the TR.

View attachment 376614
Click to expand...

I took a look this morning, this may actually be a speaker missing its cover.
 
Richard White said:
Noticed this on the NW corner of Brimley and Eglinton Ave East today.

First time seeing such a thing.

View attachment 376123
Click to expand...
This one is on Church, north of Front, and has been there for several years. It is on a loop rather than a regular route.

1643124680032.png
 
Richard White said:
I presume these are for Line 2?
Click to expand...

Line 2's rolling stock is what is being replaced.

But I'm not sure that any decision has been arrived at as to whether Line 2 will get the new trains, or whether the Rockets will move to Line 2, and the new trains operate on Line 1
 
Northern Light said:
Line 2's rolling stock is what is being replaced.

But I'm not sure that any decision has been arrived at as to whether Line 2 will get the new trains, or whether the Rockets will move to Line 2, and the new trains operate on Line 1
Click to expand...
It's actually for both lines - full replacement of the T1s on Line 2, and another 17 or so trains for additional service on Line 1. There are also options for various potential future extensions.

l've not heard anything more beyond the original documents sent out to respondents oh so long ago, so I'd expect that those requirements are still in force.

Dan
 
Northern Light said:
Line 2's rolling stock is what is being replaced.

But I'm not sure that any decision has been arrived at as to whether Line 2 will get the new trains, or whether the Rockets will move to Line 2, and the new trains operate on Line 1
Click to expand...

I assume the latter would only happen if there was some capacity improvement from having the newer trains on Line 1. Like, they were 10% bigger or could operate at higher frequencies for some reason etc. They will do anything to squeeze some more capacity out of Line 1.
 
robmausser said:
I assume the latter would only happen if there was some capacity improvement from having the newer trains on Line 1. Like, they were 10% bigger or could operate at higher frequencies for some reason etc. They will do anything to squeeze some more capacity out of Line 1.
Click to expand...
I'm somewhat skeptical, there are a lot of things the TTC doesn't do despite endless talk of L1's capacity woes. Other cities would be using the full platforms and adding more entrances and circulation space to congested stations. (Not our 1B BY plan)
 
It will be a great mistake not having 7 equal length cars to fit a 500' platform for both lines. Trains can be longer with the cab pass the platform using video system like other system do. There been talk for over a decade to add an 50' car to the existing TR and will that change in the future?? Doing so allows more riders per trains that is badly needed 2 decades ago.

As for more exits, it cannot happen to all of the old stations due lack of room and access to business. Need to put in more exit where possible for all stations that are heavy used.

I would still replace some of the TR's with new TR2 and put them on Line 2 as well having 500'+ trains on both lines.

Will we still going to be going the Thunder Bay to have cars built there even if Alstom doesn't get the contract?? Then, will Alstom be going to Europe to bring cars over here like they have with Montreal REM train for the new fleet??

Going to the market is TTC best option these days to help reduce capital cost that will allow them to buy more with the same dollar like they have done in the past going to Thunder Bay..

Having 7 equal length cars will reduce the centre to centre distance that will help to reduce the wear and tear on everything as well reducing the squealing on curves..
 
superelevation said:
I'm somewhat skeptical, there are a lot of things the TTC doesn't do despite endless talk of L1's capacity woes. Other cities would be using the full platforms and adding more entrances and circulation space to congested stations. (Not our 1B BY plan)
Click to expand...

Something that is always mentioned however when ATC is brought up is that they could just barely squeeze a 9th car onto the existing platforms. So I'm thinking they could use this tender as an opportunity to do such a thing.

Not sure what the ramifications would be at the maintenance yards though, but a whole extra car would be huge in terms of capacity.
 
robmausser said:
Something that is always mentioned however when ATC is brought up is that they could just barely squeeze a 9th car onto the existing platforms. So I'm thinking they could use this tender as an opportunity to do such a thing.

Not sure what the ramifications would be at the maintenance yards though, but a whole extra car would be huge in terms of capacity.
Click to expand...
You mean a 7th middle car (which wouldve been modified to a shorter length).

When the TTC was exploring this idea, I recall there were some stations that would've had issues (ie: St.Clair West for instance) due to platforms being on a curve and leveling issues. ATC was always a pre-condition of the idea ever coming to fruition.

Honestly I dont see this ever happening, as the subway car length the TTC has gone ever since the Gloucester days seems to be the default they prefer. But never say never I guess.
 
Amare said:
Honestly I dont see this ever happening, as the subway car length the TTC has gone ever since the Gloucester days seems to be the default they prefer. But never say never I guess.
Click to expand...
Yes six definitely has become the default, but the TTC would occasionally run 8-car Gloucester trains. Obviously though the Gloucester cars were shorter than the 75' M1's and H-series trains that they shared the network with.
ttc-gloucester-nb-glencairn-19780914.jpg
 
Amare said:
You mean a 7th middle car (which wouldve been modified to a shorter length).

When the TTC was exploring this idea, I recall there were some stations that would've had issues (ie: St.Clair West for instance) due to platforms being on a curve and leveling issues. ATC was always a pre-condition of the idea ever coming to fruition.

Honestly I dont see this ever happening, as the subway car length the TTC has gone ever since the Gloucester days seems to be the default they prefer. But never say never I guess.
Click to expand...
The outline documents that were given out earlier in the current tender process specifically outlined a scenario - an option - for the tender that would call for an additional 75 foot long car that would be inserted into these trainsets should the need arise, and the option taken. As part of the insertion of the additional car, the trainset would also automatically lock out the first and last doors on the trainset, and prevent them from opening as they would be off of the platform at just about every single station.

The biggest issue with a train that is longer than the current 450 foot length of a 6-car train is that there are (and were) a number of locations where the track and signal system simply couldn't handle a longer train. The signal system is being replaced, so that issue is being taken care of, although it still doesn't resolve the couple of tracks that aren't and can't be lengthened.

Dan
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top