[81-717]

Care to explain the UPX, then?

Dan

Ok, i forgot about that one. So what's stopping them from putting PSDs on L2 right now, in that case (aside from money)?

 

[zang]

Care to explain the UPX, then?

Or about ½ of all train lines in Tokyo.

 

[evandyk]

Ok, i forgot about that one. So what's stopping them from putting PSDs on L2 right now, in that case (aside from money)?

It's just money. And the people making the decisions about the money don't ride the TTC, so they're not affected by the constant delays.

 

[CMQSD402F9011]

Among others. Montreal's MR-63 cars started delivery in 1965 and were retired in 2018. 53 years. Montreal's MR-73s started delivery in around 1974, and are still in service 52-years later. They are planned to be replaced in 2036 - at the age of 60 years.

NYC are still retiring their R44s, with deliveries starting in 1971, and probably all gone by the end of 2026 - 55 years service. The R42s did 50 years. The R32s from 1964 were retired in 2022 - 58 years.

The 1972 London tube stock are likely to be replaced in the late 2030s or early 2040s. Well over 60-years old, might hit 70! However the 1973 stock should be gone in 2030 - only 57 years old. The final 1938 stock was withdrawn in 2021 - 80+ years. Though the final 30 or so years was by British Rail (and successors) on the Isle of Wight.

The subway in Buenos Aires is still using some some subway cars from 1954 - over 70 years old. Paris's MP 59 (very similar to Montreal's MR-63) trains were in service for over 60 years from 1963 to 2024 while their MF 67s entered service in 1968 and won't be fully retired for 2034 - over 65 years of service.

The 1972 stock is hardly an outlier. Yeah, it requires more work as it gets older. But it's 100% an option; but harder to fund maintenance than capital costs in Ontario.

You forgot to mention that SEPTA is still running the Kawasaki B-IV subway cars from the early 1980s on the Broad Street line. They want to run them to 50 years I think, something TTC never did on the H5s back then.

 

[turbanplanner]

It’s not quite a subway, but it’s crazy thing Boston and I think Philadelphia still run PCC’s

Also does anyone know what’s going on at downsview (Sheppard west)

 

[81-717]

(transferring this discussion over to the more appropriate thread)

In the last 2 years of operation the ALRVs spent more time out of service than in service.

Quite unlike the H6s...

while no such thing exists with the far more reliable T1s?

So far...

The TTC did feel the need to push quite hard (hah!) over the past few years before someone finally heard them.

Those were the one-offs, but the point is that they didn't hesitate to retire any of them that early, when, for an H5 or T1 to be retired at that age, they would have had to sustain catastrophic accident damage.

So what was the reason for their 2011/2012 retirement? I don't recall them having an accident or fire (like 5717 that same year). To rephrase the point of my question, what was the lifespan of the shortest-lived cars that retired during mass retirement in 2013/2014?

But I appreciate the T1s for their ruggedness, reliability, and being the last representatives of a Toronto that no longer exists

Well to me, they're one of the reasons why that Toronto no longer exists (since 1999) and I never got to experience. And in that Toronto, they were what the TRs are in this Toronto.

Am I happy, for instance, that a private owner owns an ex-TTC Orion V which I am unlikely to ever get to photograph?

I am (not overly happy since it's not an H5, but happy nonetheless). I haven't been lucky enough to see it out on the streets yet, but it'd sure be exciting if/when the opportunity presents itself.

My life would be unchanged if it had been scrapped.

Mine may or may not be (since it's not an H5). But if 5707 were, heaven forbid...

 

[CMQSD402F9011]

Question, when TTC was designing their TRs, how come they went with the sloped aerodynamic designs whereas NYC’s MTA (or the MBTA) didn’t, for their new subway cars? I’m sure many still miss the railfan window on the H5s or H6s to be precise.

 

[turbanplanner]

Question, when TTC was designing their TRs, how come they went with the sloped aerodynamic designs whereas NYC’s MTA (or the MBTA) didn’t, for their new subway cars? I’m sure many still miss the railfan window on the H5s or H6s to be precise.

Customer preference is never a factor for the TTC lmao

 

[smallspy]

Question, when TTC was designing their TRs, how come they went with the sloped aerodynamic designs whereas NYC’s MTA (or the MBTA) didn’t, for their new subway cars? I’m sure many still miss the railfan window on the H5s or H6s to be precise.

How many MTA or MBTA trainsets operated in fixed lengths that don't change? The answer is that none of them do - they reconfigure their trainsets all the time, and so they have designed them with that flexibility in mind.

It's the same reason why they have been so against open gangway cars until now.

Dan

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Streetcars make right turns from the left lane. To indicate, drivers in the right lane have to notice the right turn signal on the streetcars (if they don't have blinders on).

In the province of Québec, they use diagonal white bars so that buses can turn left from the right lane.

Toronto should do the same using right leaning diagonal transit signals for streetcars turning right at signalled intersections. They should also locate them on the nearside of the intersection at either the stop line, pedestrian crossing, or where the tracks actually turn right, not the farside, Along with a regular red traffic signal for the motorists (located on the nearside).

That's for signalled intersections. For unsignalled intersections, we should put up YIELD TO STREETCAR signs, to give the crowded streetcars priority, unlike nowadays where they are waiting for permission from the single-occupant automobile drivers.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1605331887962353665

 

[81-717]

How many MTA or MBTA trainsets operated in fixed lengths that don't change? The answer is that none of them do - they reconfigure their trainsets all the time, and so they have designed them with that flexibility in mind.

It's the same reason why they have been so against open gangway cars until now.

Dan

MTA's current trains are all in permanent 4/5/6-car sets, and they only ever couple 2 sets together, so there isn't that much flexibility to spare, not nearly as much as with married pairs (train length can basically only be either 1 set or 2 sets, and only a few lines, like G, run 1-set trains). And having a TR-style front end doesn't necessarily preclude sets from being coupled together & running in that configuration, as is the case in Stockholm, or even here on line 5. And the implementation of open gangways changed nothing about the configuration or operational flexibility of each set, since a 5-car R160 is just as much of a fixed set as a 5-car R211, and a full train still consists of 2 R211s coupled together.

 

[CMQSD402F9011]

How many MTA or MBTA trainsets operated in fixed lengths that don't change? The answer is that none of them do - they reconfigure their trainsets all the time, and so they have designed them with that flexibility in mind.

It's the same reason why they have been so against open gangway cars until now.

Dan

What I do mean is that why they (MTA) never went with Sloped Aerodynamic fronts like what the TRs have in the 21st century. Apart from having the R40s aka Slants many years ago.

 

[smallspy]

MTA's current trains are all in permanent 4/5/6-car sets, and they only ever couple 2 sets together, so there isn't that much flexibility to spare, not nearly as much as with married pairs (train length can basically only be either 1 set or 2 sets, and only a few lines, like G, run 1-set trains). And having a TR-style front end doesn't necessarily preclude sets from being coupled together & running in that configuration, as is the case in Stockholm, or even here on line 5. And the implementation of open gangways changed nothing about the configuration or operational flexibility of each set, since a 5-car R160 is just as much of a fixed set as a 5-car R211, and a full train still consists of 2 R211s coupled together.

Right, but the same 8/10/11 car trains are not operated with the same sets of cars all day, every day. The swap them around - like the TTC swaps around pairs of T1s to make a 6-car trainset. They do move from line to line in some cases, and so they need to retain some of that flexibility.

In the TTC's case it was decided that the requirement to swap around pairs was not necessary anymore - thus they went to a fixed-length trainset. That conversation hasn't seemed to have happened yet in New York or Boston.

What I do mean is that why they (MTA) never went with Sloped Aerodynamic fronts like what the TRs have in the 21st century. Apart from having the R40s aka Slants many years ago.

The design of the R40 slants had nothing to do with aerodynamics - it was all Raymond Loewy.

As for now - an aerodynamic front requires space that can't be used to carry passengers. Depending on the design, it can complicate access and coupling as well. It would seem that MTA has decided that is makes more sense to prioritize passenger capacity and the ability to couple trains without concern than it does to focus on any aerodynamic benefit.

Dan

 

[81-717]

In the TTC's case it was decided that the requirement to swap around pairs was not necessary anymore - thus they went to a fixed-length trainset.

Well, it'll still be necessary to have pairs on line 2 for the foreseeable future (until Kipling yard), hence the new fleet being redesigned to allow it. I wonder if the new cars will also be swapped around, or if they'll be uncoupled only for maintenance without being swapped around otherwise.

 

[Northern Light]

Just a note for frequent patrons of Yonge/Bloor, the washrooms are closing next week for a reno and won't reopen til late April.