News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6K     0 

MBTA's Green Line, which is very comparable, has an employee in each unit on two-unit "trains", because in the outer (above ground) zones, fares are collected on board. They serve no function in the underground portions. I have never seen such bored/disengaged transit workers anywhere. That's not a good model for Crosstown, and I doubt they would attempt it. One driver, and roving fare inspectors, makes much more sense.

- Paul
 
Kyle Campbell said:
I dunno, I think a really long LRT train is kinda cool
https://twitter.com/x/status/1053261677041541120
Click to expand...

I dont mind with those Alstoms because thats as long as they make 'em.

I think its stupid to couple together eventually 3 short 5 segment Flexities when a 7 segment already exists. Should have bought 7 segments and coupled 2 of them together for 14 segments from the get go.

With the 3 train coupling there will be cost waste with an operator cab essentially have been built for no reason in the middle train.
 
I think ultimately there will come a time where this coupling trend with LRTs will be abandonned, and ultimately there will be standard 5-9 car segment trains will be taken up by transit operators. All the wasted capacitiy in between the coupled section wil prove to be very valuable in the future, much like the space between married subway cars is very valuable in today's age.
 
robmausser said:
I dont mind with those Alstoms because thats as long as they make 'em
Click to expand...

Actually, they support a 5th module to bring them up to 59m long per vehicle. Here in Ottawa the underground stations already have the longer platforms and the surface ones are prepped for a platform extension at one end. I guess the equivalent would be a 9-10 section flexity which I think does exist in Europe. So far only Edmonton and Ottawa seem to be willing to use the longer vehicles that have been around for a long time across the pond. The GTA will get them for Hurontario and Finch, but that was only due to the whole Crosstown prototype vehicle fiasco. The crosstown will never run in single vehicle mode, I wonder if they considered it or just applied the normal conservativeness of North American transit agencies to new ideas.
 
Last edited:
Kyle Campbell said:
Actually, they support a 5th module to bring them up to 59m long per vehicle. Here in Ottawa the underground stations already have the longer platforms and the surface ones are prepped for a platform extension at one end. I guess the equivalent would be a 9-10 section flexity which I think does exist in Europe. So far only Edmonton and Ottawa seem to be willing to use the longer vehicles that have been around for a long time across the pond. The GTA will get them for Hurontario and Finch, but that was only due to the whole Crosstown prototype vehicle fiasco. The crosstown will never run in single vehicle mode, I wonder if they considered it or just applied the normal conservativeness of North American transit agencies to new ideas.
Click to expand...

The whole concept of Transit City was "off the shelf" parts and products, no reinventing the wheel, use whats available and standardized for the most affordable solution.

I guess that specifically meant for North America, and in 2007 there were no other cities asking for the longer LRT train types.

That might be why they went with the 5 module.
 
Transit City was supposed to be for the entire LRT network (seven LRT lines). The LRVs weren't picked for ECLRT specifically, but rather for the entire LRT network. From that POV, the five-module LRV makes perfect sense for all of Transit City, including Eglinton.

If we were picking LRVs just for Eglinton however, we'd probably go with a different config
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Transit City was supposed to be for the entire LRT network (seven LRT lines). The LRVs weren't picked for ECLRT specifically, but rather for the entire LRT network. From that POV, the five-module LRV makes perfect sense for all of Transit City, including Eglinton.

If we were picking LRVs just for Eglinton however, we'd probably go with a different config
Click to expand...
and of course, god forbid Metrolinx to change anything in the design of because they would be charged a change fee for them,
 
robmausser said:
Yeah but the streetcars run on a completely different gauge and power supply voltage so I dont see why that matters.

The streetcars and LRTs are completely incompatible.
Click to expand...
Since the TTC was going to be maintaining them it made sense that they could interchange parts with the legacy streetcar fleet like motors and other parts.
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
Since the TTC was going to be maintaining them it made sense that they could interchange parts with the legacy streetcar fleet like motors and other parts.
Click to expand...

The LRVs are Metrolinx property, so I don't think the TTC will want parts they own in Metrolinx vehicles. If TTC owned the ECLRT LRVs, then sure the components could be interchanged (my speculation)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top