[EastYorkTTCFan]

An ALRV with a pantograph, from Transit Toronto:

But they were never in service with them only tested in Europe where the prototypes were builty I belive.

 

[W. K. Lis]

But they were never in service with them only tested in Europe where the prototypes were builty I belive.

And were tested in Boston.

 

[reaperexpress]

Personally I could live with poles indefinitely, if doing so diverted money towards accelerating installation of new track switches so the cars could run through without stopping/slowing

From Steve Munro's blog:https://stevemunro.ca/2017/09/12/pantographs-up-on-harbourfront/

"Steve: Advantages of pantographs include:

• 
  
  
  • Dewirements are not possible.
  • Operation through curves and special work is less concerned about pulling down the overhead.
  • Operation under bridges with low clearance does not shift the pantograph into a position where contact with the overhead is less reliable.
  • A higher power draw is possible. This is important for larger cars (Flexitys) where a single point of contact with the overhead must handle power for a vehicle that is the equivalent of at least two CLRVs. This can be seen when Flexitys running with poles pass under section gaps and arc much more than older cars.
  • During ice storms, pantographs maintain better contact with the overhead.
  • Not really applicable to the TTC, but pantographs enable much higher speed operation than trolley poles.

The overhead structure for trolley poles is simpler than for pans."


Given that the upgrade to pantograph-ready overhead was done as a part of routine maintenance and infrastructure replacement, the marginal cost of converting to pantographs was relatively small, and the cost-benefit ratio may well be as good or better than switch replacement. And nothing about pantograph conversion conflicts with the replacement of track switches. In fact, if switches were converted while still running trolley poles, there might still need to be a speed restriction through switches due to the threat of dewiring.

 

[smallspy]

Given that the upgrade to pantograph-ready overhead was done as a part of routine maintenance and infrastructure replacement, the marginal cost of converting to pantographs was relatively small, and the cost-benefit ratio may well be as good or better than switch replacement. And nothing about pantograph conversion conflicts with the replacement of track switches. In fact, if switches were converted while still running trolley poles, there might still need to be a speed restriction through switches due to the threat of dewiring.

Except that the "marginal cost" wasn't so marginal, as the TTC has been doing the "upgrades" before many of the components were life-expired.

And before anyone accuses me of being obstructionist, I'm not against pantographs per se. For a lot of reasons, it does make sense to switch to them. But it would have saved a lot of money to have changed fittings and rebuilt the overhead AS it became life-expired. Sure, it may take longer to convert the system, but this way they're not going to be throwing out perfectly good overhead fittings. Which is what they are doing (although admittedly to the benefit of numerous museums and historical societies).

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[DSC]

Except that the "marginal cost" wasn't so marginal, as the TTC has been doing the "upgrades" before many of the components were life-expired.

And before anyone accuses me of being obstructionist, I'm not against pantographs per se. For a lot of reasons, it does make sense to switch to them. But it would have saved a lot of money to have changed fittings and rebuilt the overhead AS it became life-expired. Sure, it may take longer to convert the system, but this way they're not going to be throwing out perfectly good overhead fittings. Which is what they are doing (although admittedly to the benefit of numerous museums and historical societies).

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Sometimes it is actually cheaper to 'do it all at once' - replacing/upgrading overhead in a piece-meal way as bits need replacement does not really strike me as being better. (A bit like buildings where they replace light bulbs as they 'die' compared to ones where they do a 'total lamp replacement' once a year or so. The latter may cost more in bulbs but is FAR less expensive in labour and I bet the costs of overhead replacement are primarily labour.)

 

[amnesiajune]

Sometimes it is actually cheaper to 'do it all at once' - replacing/upgrading overhead in a piece-meal way as bits need replacement does not really strike me as being better. (A bit like buildings where they replace light bulbs as they 'die' compared to ones where they do a 'total lamp replacement' once a year or so. The latter may cost more in bulbs but is FAR less expensive in labour and I bet the costs of overhead replacement are primarily labour.)

It wasn't piecemeal. It was done pretty quickly, over the last 5 years or so. The TTC did conversion work whenever streetcars were replaced by buses - for example, on College during the street & sidewalk rebuilds, on Queen during the Eaton Centre bridge replacement and on St. Clair during the platform modifications. There are still a few segments left to do in the next couple of years (Broadview, for example, is the reason why the 504 isn't getting the new streetcars yet), but most of the system is done.

 

[DSC]

It wasn't piecemeal. It was done pretty quickly, over the last 5 years or so. The TTC did conversion work whenever streetcars were replaced by buses - for example, on College during the street & sidewalk rebuilds, on Queen during the Eaton Centre bridge replacement and on St. Clair during the platform modifications. There are still a few segments left to do in the next couple of years (Broadview, for example, is the reason why the 504 isn't getting the new streetcars yet), but most of the system is done.

I would repeat that, in my opinion, the new overhead installation has been done in a very piecemeal way. They did quite a bit of the tangent (straight) overhead on King Street but not around Yonge and Jarvis and only now are they working on the intersections. (York was done recently, Church and Parliament are untouched). They are doing the right turn corner at Church/Wellington - though another section of Wellington has no wire and needs a few new poles and there is currently no service on the street. They have done quite a lot of Queen but not the intersections at Victoria and Church, for example They have done some of Carleton - though the 506 is the last route to get the new streetcars, I realise it is complicated (see several useful pieces on Steve Munro at https://stevemunro.ca/ ) but I DO think the work has been piecemeal.

 

[smallspy]

Sometimes it is actually cheaper to 'do it all at once' - replacing/upgrading overhead in a piece-meal way as bits need replacement does not really strike me as being better. (A bit like buildings where they replace light bulbs as they 'die' compared to ones where they do a 'total lamp replacement' once a year or so. The latter may cost more in bulbs but is FAR less expensive in labour and I bet the costs of overhead replacement are primarily labour.)

It's true it can be cheaper in the case where you need to hire a crew to come in quickly to do that kind of work versus having one person on call. But the TTC has a couple of overhead crews on staff that they keep at the ready for dealing with emergencies and regularly-scheduled replacements. There's really no cost-savings to be had by accelerating the work.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[amnesiajune]

There's really no cost-savings to be had by accelerating the work.

It would probably cost more, because you can't have streetcars running when this work is done. If it was a standalone project, the city would have to do a separate bus replacement for each streetcar segment being worked on.

 

[reaperexpress]

It's true it can be cheaper in the case where you need to hire a crew to come in quickly to do that kind of work versus having one person on call. But the TTC has a couple of overhead crews on staff that they keep at the ready for dealing with emergencies and regularly-scheduled replacements. There's really no cost-savings to be had by accelerating the work.

Personally here's how I'd roll out pantographs:
1. Make a firm decision to switch to pantographs in the future - all new vehicles and overhead must now support both trolley poles and pantograph operation.
2. Over then next decade or two, bits and pieces of pantograph-ready overhead will naturally appear, including some longer stretches such as where ROWs and/or overhead are totally rebuilt like on St. Clair (2007) and Queens Quay (2015).
3. After a while, there are enough stretches of pantograph-ready overhead that it's worth connecting them together, even though this means replacing some equipment that has not reached its full lifespan. Now certain routes can begin operating with pantographs, eliminating the threat of dewiring which causes hesitation or delays around track switches and sharp curves.
4. Areas of the network can now begin to be designated as pantograph-only zones, and finicky high-maintenance trolley equipment such overhead switches can be removed. Since vehicles are now dual-system-compatible (see #1) they can revert to trolley poles to cover the segments which are still "trolley pole" zones.

This is what happened.

 

[amnesiajune]

Make a firm decision to switch to pantographs in the future - all new vehicles and overhead must now support both trolley poles and pantograph operation.

The TTC did that a while ago. Streetcars 4461 - 4604 are going to be pantograph-only. The delays actually worked out nicely for the TTC because it gave them more time to do the conversion work.

Over then next decade or two, bits and pieces of pantograph-ready overhead will naturally appear, including some longer stretches such as where ROWs and/or overhead are totally rebuilt like on St. Clair (2007) and Queens Quay (2015).

Practically all of the main revenue trackage is ready for pantographs now. It's just a few sections (for example, the curves on Broadview) and some of the non-revenue trackage (Church, Shaw Street, parts of Coxwell, etc.) that needs to be upgraded.

 

[DSC]

Practically all of the main revenue trackage is ready for pantographs now. It's just a few sections (for example, the curves on Broadview) and some of the non-revenue trackage (Church, Shaw Street, parts of Coxwell, etc.) that needs to be upgraded.

Unfortunately "practically all" is not good enough and pantos cannot operate unless all of their route is done; operators cannot be constantly switching between poles and pantos. All parts of KING (the busiest route) are not yet done. The TTC ARE making progress but the network won't really be ready for pantos for a few months yet.

 

[smallspy]

This is what happened.

While I agree with your timeline, your contention that this is what happened, isn't. I agree - this should have been much more long-term project, maybe a decades-long project, focused one route at a time. It isn't, and it hasn't been.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[amnesiajune]

Unfortunately "practically all" is not good enough and pantos cannot operate unless all of their route is done; operators cannot be constantly switching between poles and pantos. All parts of KING (the busiest route) are not yet done. The TTC ARE making progress but the network won't really be ready for pantos for a few months yet.

Like I said in another comment, the TTC does the replacement whenever they get a chance. The only thing that's missing on Broadview are the skates for the pantographs, for example, and the rest of the 504 is ready. But the three larger points:

1. The TTC has committed to going pantograph-only in the near future - only the first 60 streetcars will have trolley poles

2. Most of the trackage is set up for pantograph operation, and the entire streetcar network is supposed to be ready for them by the time the last flexity streetcars show up. The TTC plans to keep 30 ALRVs in operation for at least the next ten years, with a retrofitted pantograph on them.

3. Even if the whole system isn't ready for pantographs by 2021, they'll still have 30 rebuilt ALRVs and 60 flexity streetcars with trolley poles, which is enough to run at least a quarter of the streetcar system.

 

[smallspy]

1. The TTC has committed to going pantograph-only in the near future - only the first 60 streetcars will have trolley poles

As has been pointed out several times, all of the units will be delivered with a pantograph and a trolley pole.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.