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 

TheTigerMaster said:
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)
Click to expand...
They are now but when Metrolinx bought them off of the city they were originally part of the Transit City order and an extension of the streetcar contract. Metrolinx just didn't want to pay any changer feres which is what most of the lawsuit was actually about they thought they could use the late delivery of the legacy fleet as a bargaining chip despite the fact that they had nowhere to put all the cars they had on order., even if Bombardier had delivered them to them.
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
They are now but when Metrolinx bought them off of the city they were originally part of the Transit City order and an extension of the streetcar contract. Metrolinx just didn't want to pay any changer feres which is what most of the lawsuit was actually about they thought they could use the late delivery of the legacy fleet as a bargaining chip despite the fact that they had nowhere to put all the cars they had on order., even if Bombardier had delivered them to them.
Click to expand...

The Metrolink LRV's were apart of the Transit City order, and because the Transit City order was not compatible with TTC Track Guage, so are the new Eglinton LRV's
 
thettctransitfanatic said:
The Metrolink LRV's were apart of the Transit City order, and because the Transit City order was not compatible with TTC Track Guage, so are the new Eglinton LRV's
Click to expand...
A different track gauge doesn't mean they can't share common parts like doors, door motors, traction motor and many other things. In railroad terms, the gauge isn't really that much of a difference when it comes to parts for various things. Most of the parts in the Flexity range form Bombardier are interchangeable that's why they used the term flexible meaning that it's flexible for many different systems and not just for the joints between systems. Both vehicles are quite similar as far as parts are concerned and they were chosen to be so because as I said before Metrolinx was put in charge of the Eglinton line it was being built and planned by the city of Toronto. Metlox bought the order of cars off of the city and refused to change the amounts and delivery times in them when the other projects they were being ordered for were either delayed or cancelled.
 
Kyle Campbell said:
Are they? Despite very similar appearances on the outside I didn't think they used the same parts bin.
Click to expand...
The two differences are currently the different power supplies (600V vs 750V) and different gauges. However, those differences equate to different bogies and ideally different motors (You can theoretically use a motor rated for 750V (whatever the output power is, that information is not available to my knowledge) under 600V, but it will cause more wear on the motor due to the higher currents being supplied). Everything else about the vehicle, with the exception of the aesthetics and the number of doors, is about the same. You can't run them on the same line, but I'd assume you'd be able to use the same parts for pretty much all aspects of each vehicle. (Note, the streetcars also have accessibility ramps which are not present on the existing LRVs, so there are components there that you won't find for the Freedoms).
 
Streety McCarface said:
(Note, the streetcars also have accessibility ramps which are not present on the existing LRVs, so there are components there that you won't find for the Freedoms).
Click to expand...
That was a necessity because of the legacy fleet operating in city streets where they couldn't easily add a platform for level boarding and also because the existing platform fights would be a challenge in some places to make a level with the height of the vehicle.
 
IMG_0812.JPG
IMG_0811.JPG
IMG_0810.JPG
IMG_0809.JPG
IMG_0806.JPG
IMG_0804.JPG
IMG_0801.JPG
IMG_0800.JPG
IMG_0796.JPG
IMG_0795.JPG
IMG_0794.JPG
IMG_0793.JPG
 
We already have elevated rail here in Toronto, and have had it for more than 30 years (ie: the Scarborough SRT). It certainly got people accustomed to it alright, because now everyone wants it buried.
 
Amare said:
We already have elevated rail here in Toronto, and have had it for more than 30 years (ie: the Scarborough SRT). It certainly got people accustomed to it alright, because now everyone wants it buried.
Click to expand...
I wonder if a plebiscite was taken for the people of Scarborough if that statement is true. Then again is their opinion based on the brainwashing from politicians on either side or is that an educated opinion...
 
^ I don't think people in this neck of the woods even care, they just get on the RT and go. The only people who would respond with any sort of meaning would be the poor souls who live next to the RT at Brimley and STC. Even then I wouldn't take much consideration into what they may say since the primary issue on that stretch of the RT is one of maintenance and not overall design.
 
Rainforest said:
The main complain there is the transfer at Kennedy. Not many people complain about the elevated line.
Click to expand...
Which I tell the same people to cry me a river, because now as it currently stands they will get to enjoy long and unnecessary transfers at Scarborough Town Centre via longer bus commutes. And they can thank their crying about 2 min transfers for it.
 
Amare said:
We already have elevated rail here in Toronto, and have had it for more than 30 years (ie: the Scarborough SRT). It certainly got people accustomed to it alright, because now everyone wants it buried.
Click to expand...
Don't forget also north of Yorkdale the subway is elevated over the 401 as well as the Bloor viaduct and the section by old mill on the Bloor Danforth line. well, none of those examples are like say Chicago or new york in some cases Elevated transit can cost just as much or more to build then it does to build underground.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top