Province wants them built in Thunder Bay.
I don't care where they are built.
I just want them built right and at a fair price.
We all want them built ASAP but the 'fair price' idea really depends on having a fair and open bidding process. Of course, it would be good to build them in Ontario (or Canada) but the price IS important too. Sole source contracts are often FAR more expensive then competitive ones,
That is what I was eluding to.
I don't care if they are built in Germany or Thunder Bay. What do I care about is if they are reliable and if they are a fair price for the work.
Looking at how the Orion VI order was split in two, with half of the order built as Orion Vs, as well as how one of the most recent bus orders was also split between Nova (6600s) and NFI (6000s), both for the sake of speeding up the process, or even considering how the M1 and H1 were both part of a single 200-car order despite being built by 2 different manufacturers, I wonder if splitting the current new subway car order between 2 manufacturers would likewise help speed things up, or if it would only complicate things.
I also don't particularly care where they are built, as much as I care their deliveries don't get delayed even a single extra year more than they already are (gonna 4 years late already in the best-case scenario, they were originally supposed to start arriving as soon as next year, and we might even have had the first prototype on property by now if they were).
What is your argument here, exactly? You're surely not arguing that NYC thinks that we are worse because we don't have rolling stock of R46 vintage in service, right?
Re-read what
you wrote:
New York, who had to keep the R32s going for 57 years, would be laughing at us right now if they could find us on a map.
What is
your argument here, exactly? You're surely not arguing that NYC thinks that we are worse because we don't have rolling stock of
R32 vintage in service, right?
And whoever thinks this argument for longevity only applies to rolling stock of NTT vintage is as hypocritical as can be. It either applies to all rolling stock equally, or to none at all.
Frankly I don't know why New York chose to keep the R32s going that long at the expense of several newer car types, if they could keep the R32s going for 57 years I'm sure they could've instead kept anything from R38 to R44 going for a few years less (than the R32) and retire rolling stock more sequentially.
Jesus Christ.
That's exactly what they plan to do, if they can secure funding.
I'll believe it when I see it (if/when every last one of them is scrapped, just like every single H1/2/5/6 (except 5707 ofc), no more, no less).
What's your alternative solution if they can't secure said funding?
I dunno, maybe divert half of line 1's fleet to line 2 and run reduced service on both lines (plus shuttle buses)? With 76 6-car TRs you could run 38 trains on each line, or maybe a split of about 43 for line 1 and 33 for line 2 or so (with a 0% spare factor if you're desperate enough), resulting in a few years of overcrowding until half of the angry crowd gathers outside the feds' house demanding that new trains be funded right this instant and the feds have no choice but to cave in to the peer pressure.
This discussion has taken a good 10 years off my projected lifespan, I think.
As opposed to the 20+ years taken off
my projected lifespan due to at least 15–20 years of constant misery, anger/frustration, hopelessness and being on edge inflicted on me by the ttc & hcrr since 2013/2014 to at least 2030–2033, if not for the rest of my life if the 2030s don't go as planned (new train deliveries, scrapping the current ones), if you know what I mean.
Too bad this discussion didn't instead take a good 10 years off the T1 & TR projected lifespan, eh?