Author: Steve

by

Goodbye Metrolinx, Hello Metrolinx

Earlier today I learned that Bill 163, the act to amalgamate GO Transit with Metrolinx and dump the politicians from the new Board, is expected to pass third reading imminently with proclamation shortly thereafter.

This means that the planned Board meeting on May 15 will be the new, wet behind the ears, but ever so non-political board.  Whether they will choose to meet in public much less discuss anything of consequence remains to be seen.  The date is still on the Metrolinx events calendar, but a week is a long time in politics.

by

AC or DC?

Robert Wightman has been looking into the question of AC versus DC traction motors, and posted the following long comment.  I have moved it to its own thread.

At the end of the note, Robert asks that people send him additional info if they have it.  I have removed his email address to avoid harvesting by web crawlers, but if someone needs this, just let me know in a comment and I will pass on the address in a private response.

Continue reading →

by

Hot Docs 2009: Part II

Saturday was a quieter day for screenings, although that was in part due to a concert by the Vancouver Symphony who were in town for the evening.  That pre-empted my documentary viewing for a few hours.

Reviewed here:

  • Orgasm Inc.
  • Presidio Modelo
  • Audition

Continue reading →

by

Hot Docs 2009: Part I

The annual Hot Docs film festival started Thursday evening (two days ago), although I was off absorbing culture of another flavour (the Tokyo Quartet playing Beethoven) and didn’t attend the Opening Night Gala.  My festival started on Friday, and I made a full day of it.  The number of titles looks daunting, but most were not feature-length.

Reviewed here:

  • Paul Tomkowicz, Street Railway Switchman
  • Corral
  • Nails
  • The Back-Breaking Leaf
  • Nobody Waved Goodbye
  • Paris, 1919
  • Clubland
  • Jackpot

Continue reading →

by

A Few Details About New Streetcars

Based on some of the comments here as well as a few of my own interests, I recently posed three questions to the TTC about the new Bombardier cars.

1. What are the “specified options” mentioned in the report, and when will we know which of these, if any, will actually be included in the order?

Specified options include security camera system, wheel flange lubrication, pantograph current collector, cab training simulator etc. 

Timing for ordering optional equipment depends on:

  • better definition of scope of work and system offered (e.g. camera system);
  • technical and noise necessity (e.g. flange lubricator);
  • system compatibility (e.g. pantograph); and,
  • completion of negotiation of the design and scope of work (e.g. cab simulator).

 2. When will a plan showing the interior layout be available which accurately reflects the dimensions of the Toronto car? Will there be an opportunity to fine tune this, or will that be done as part of the prototype operation when there’s a real car for people to walk around in? I have to assume this must already be available for discussions with ACAT.

While the exterior dimensions are fairly well set, the interior layout can be an evolving process. As noted at the April 27, 2009 Commission Meeting, there are four cost-neutral layouts that would afford flexibility in the final configuration. The current schedule calls for completion of the Conceptual Design Phase four (4) months after Notice of Award (NOA); Preliminary Design Phase twelve (12) months after NOA.

There will be opportunities to review the design through computer modeling and presentations during the design phases. A full-scale, half-car mock-up is scheduled for delivery in 18 months NOA. This would offer a “real car” feel for stake holders including ACAT to critique. The actual Prototype Car No. 1 is scheduled for delivery 26 months [after] NOA.

3. For the transit city network, will this be built to TTC gauge or to standard gauge? In other words, will the two systems and fleets be physically able to interoperate (assuming the TC cars stay away from “tricky” parts of the legacy network) or will the two systems remain disjoint?

This has a specific application to the St. Clair line because there has been talk of connecting it to Jane and operating it out of a TC carhouse. This would require that the 512’s trackage be made compatible with the TC fleet. This has obvious and immediate implications if the specs for the TC fleet have to be nailed down within the next year.

The Transit City network will be built to TTC gauge. Note that once the carbody structure, bogies, articulations etc. of the legacy system vehicles are proven through design, Finite Element Analyses, testing and validation, there will be savings in “proven” equipment and configuration for the TC vehicles, as well as savings through common tooling, manufacturing and quality control processes, if negotiation with the base vehicle carbuilder is successful.

TTC’s wider gauge also offers a wider aisle width and roomier interior, with little incremental construction cost, compared with a “standard gauge” vehicle.

Interoperability obviously involves more than track gauge. If Jane cars are required to operate on St. Clair, a whole host of challenges will have to be addressed, including tight radius curves and steep grades at St. Clair West station and short turn loops en route.

 Thanks to Brad Ross, Director, Corporate Communications at the TTC for this information.

After receiving Brad’s reply, it occurs to me that if St. Clair cars are to be based at a TC carhouse via Jane Street, this would be done by keeping some “city” cars at the new Eglinton West carhouse and running them over the TC network down to St. Clair.  This assumes, of course, that the Jane line is on the surface and makes a physical connection with an extended 512.  All of that is many years in the future, and St. Clair cars will be based at downtown carhouses for many years to come.

by

Who Will Pay for New Streetcars?

A great deal of bilge was pumped out by Ottawa and Queen’s Park over the past few days about the TTC’s proposed order of new streetcars from Bombardier.

In today’s Globe & Mail, John Barber did a particularly nice job of eviscerating George Smitherman, the Minister of Infrastructure, for his apparent total ignorance of the TTC’s funding needs and requests.

It’s no secret that the TTC is looking for new streetcars.  The original bid process had to be halted when no vendor came up with a technically and commercially compliant proposal, and more recently the whole process of getting a second set of bids has been well covered in the media.

Many of us will remember walking through Bombardier’s mockup display at Dundas Square which happens to be in Smitherman’s riding.  Maybe he was out of town at the time and missed it.

Smitherman claims that the City can’t make up its mind what its priorities are.  Strange that in a letter to Dalton McGuinty, copied to Smitherman, dated December 16, 2008, Mayor Miller wrote of upcoming meetings of Finance and First Ministers:

Toronto’s first priority for infrastructure is to build Transit City, the 21st century modern public transit network that our city needs.  The Government of Ontario has demonstrated foresight and leadership in its support for Transit City.  Toronto City Council has unanimously agreed to request the Government of Canada to provide:

  • $368 million toward the streetcar fleet’s replacement and expansion; and
  • the federal $6 billion share of Ontario’s $17.5 billion Move Ontario 2020 commitment for the Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan.

The streetcar fleet replacement also shows up in the list of funding requests under the stimulus program by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities.

Other related letters to both Queen’s Park and Ottawa can be found on the City’s website.

Meanwhile, Smitherman’s comment that the TTC shouldn’t be awarding a contract without knowing funding is in place shows that he is badly out of touch.  First off, the TTC has not signed the contract, and its execution is dependent on funding being in place.

Second, there is a long history of agencies such as Metrolinx (a provincial body) announcing plans for which they have no funding, and for which even discussion of proper funding won’t happen for years into the future.  There are two subway extensions (Spadina/Vaughan and Richmond Hill) of which the first was not fully funded until long after the project was announced, and the second still does not have full commitments.

That’s how projects like this work.

The streetcar purchase will run over a 10-year period, and funding it can hardly be called a short-term stimulus.  Funding would likely come from some other program, but the funding should come.  Toronto is asking, in effect, for $40-million a year from Ottawa and from Queen’s Park to re-equip the core of central Toronto’s transit system and to anchor the expansion of LRT in our city.

by

Analysis of 501 Queen Service Winter 2008/2009: Part II Long Branch to Parkside

In the previous installment, I reviewed the headway patterns for the 501 Queen route outbound to terminals at Neville, Humber and Long Branch.  Now I will turn to the operation of the west end of the route between Long Branch and Parkside Drive.  I used Parkside (the east side of High Park, and the continuation of Keele Street south of Bloor) as the eastern end of the measurement because it is at the end of the private right-of-way and because this avoids problems with variations caused by operations at Roncesvalles.

The charts presented here show headways (the frequency and regularity of service) as well as link times (the time needed to traverse part of the route).  Headways are important to riders because they show how predictable service will be, and they also bear on riding comfort because crowding is directly affected by regularity of service.  Link times are important for service planning because they show where and when congestion occurs, and how predictable (or not) the running time between locations will be. Continue reading →

by

Service Changes for May, 2009

Effective May 10, 2009, several service changes, mostly seasonal, will occur.

In addition to these:

Subject to vehicle and operator availability, a PCC will operate as an extra on 509 Harbourfront on Sundays from May 10 to September 6 between 11:30 am and 7:30 pm.

Fare collection eastbound on Queen’s Quay for the 509 and 510 Spadina routes will be handled at Union Station, not onboard vehicles, as in previous years to reduce loading times on weekends after 3 pm.

Continue reading →

by

WWLRT Public Meetings: Park Lawn to Long Branch

There will be two public meetings to discuss the design for this section of the WWLRT, essentially an upgrade of the Long Branch streetcar.

Monday, May 11, 2009
2:00pm-4:00pm 6:30pm to 9:00pm
Mimico Adult Learning Centre
255 Royal York Road

Tuesday, May 12, 2009
2:00pm to 4:00pm 6:30pm to 9:00pm
The Assembly Hall
1 Colonel Samuel Smith Park Drive

For further information, including the display panels from the previous open houses, please see the project’s website.

After the first round in December 2008 where many felt that the available information and proposal left much to be desired, this is described as a “re-start” of a “new consultation process”.