TTC: Other Items (catch all)

[T3G]

That's why you, as the transit operator, would ideally want to procure new equipment, yes.

But if politicians are doing their thing and refusing to fund new equipment, your choices are either to sit there and cry, or to nut up and do a life extension program. It's not about what is ideal, it's about making the best of a bad situation. It's not like this is a new problem we've just discovered, there have been rumblings about T1 replacements since at least 2019. Did no one at any point in those 6 years at the TTC ask themselves what they were going to do, if the funds didn't come, or if the new trains were garbage and they had to keep the T1s going longer?

Side note: how often does a life extension come up at a comparable price point to new equipment, anyway? If a LE was done that cost the same as new equipment, it poses the question of why the agency doesn't just use that money to procure the new equipment themselves, rather than begging at the feet of bigger government. I can't imagine it's a very common occurrence, or no one would be refurbishing their equipment out of their own pockets at all.

 

[Kyle Campbell]

Side note: how often does a life extension come up at a comparable price point to new equipment, anyway? If a LE was done that cost the same as new equipment, it poses the question of why the agency doesn't just use that money to procure the new equipment themselves, rather than begging at the feet of bigger government. I can't imagine it's a very common occurrence, or no one would be refurbishing their equipment out of their own pockets at all.

Entirely different concepts financially. You can borrow against capital projects, much like you finance a car, but you have to come up with the cash on hand for a life extension project. So it's more about how it affects your budget right now, rather than how much was spent in the long haul

 

[Northern Light]

But if politicians are doing their thing and refusing to fund new equipment, your choices are either to sit there and cry, or to nut up and do a life extension program. It's not about what is ideal, it's about making the best of a bad situation. It's not like this is a new problem we've just discovered, there have been rumblings about T1 replacements since at least 2019. Did no one at any point in those 6 years at the TTC ask themselves what they were going to do, if the funds didn't come, or if the new trains were garbage and they had to keep the T1s going longer?

They not only asked themselves about it, they put it into the 10-year capital plan. Rick Leary had nixed the plans for new rolling stock for Line 2 in favour of a life extension plan.

But it never got started before it was made clear that the new trains could indeed be funded, and the life extension program was nixed in favour of the new trains.

 

[T3G]

They not only asked themselves about it, they put it into the 10-year capital plan. Rick Leary had nixed the plans for new rolling stock for Line 2 in favour of a life extension plan.

But it never got started before it was made clear that the new trains could indeed be funded, and the life extension program was nixed in favour of the new trains.

Too bad they didn't think to go for both, as securing funding is no guarantee that the vehicles would be sufficiently reliable and the T1s wouldn't need to keep going anyway. If those interviewed in the Star article that sparked this discussion are correct and the funds for the new order remain in jeopardy, we'd be able to sleep a lot easier if the life extension had gone ahead from the getgo.

 

[APTA-2048]

Speaking of lack of money. The TTC appears to be in the process of disposing of its heritage fleet. A friend photographed a PCC on a flatbed.

Such a shame. Other cities can offer fun things while we have to be content with just the bare bones of keeping the system running.

 

[81-717]

If the purchase of new equipment fails...

...those responsible need to be held accountable.

Or why we do capital replacement of the fleet at only 30-years, rather than life extension out of operating funds.

Why not go back in time 15–30 years ago and ask the same question then? Oh right, nobody cared back then.

Side note: how often does a life extension come up at a comparable price point to new equipment, anyway?

Are you implying this was only true in the case of the Hawkers?

Speaking of lack of money. The TTC appears to be in the process of disposing of its heritage fleet. A friend photographed a PCC on a flatbed.

Such a shame. Other cities can offer fun things while we have to be content with just the bare bones of keeping the system running.

Probably going to HCRR or some other museum, not a scrapyard? In any case, HCRR and other museums have lot's of identical units anyway.

 

[T3G]

Are you implying this was only true in the case of the Hawkers?

What do the Hawkers, whose fate was sealed in December 2006, have to do with discussions of current rolling stock replacements, in January 2025? Last I checked, I didn't say anything in my post about the Hawkers at all, and I am trying to be civil, but your insistence on shoving the Hawkers into every conversation about the subway is trying my patience.

If push had come to shove, I have no doubt in my mind that the TTC would have been able to extract more out of the Hawkers, yes. But we're not talking about that, we're talking about what to do with the T1s.

 

[turbanplanner]

Speaking of lack of money. The TTC appears to be in the process of disposing of its heritage fleet. A friend photographed a PCC on a flatbed.

Such a shame. Other cities can offer fun things while we have to be content with just the bare bones of keeping the system running.

Is it possible it's going for some sort of repair work?

If the purchase of new equipment fails, you start a life-extension program. This isn't rocket science.

Even the CLRVs wouldn't have been a problem, had the ALRV life-extension have been as extensive as it should have been and done it's job and extended that fleet through 2025 or so as originally planned.

I don't understand the hand-wringing on this. Or why we do capital replacement of the fleet at only 30-years, rather than life extension out of operating funds.

How long would tendering everything out etc take? Also I remember the cost was in the ballpark of about half what the new fleet would cost but I could be wrong.

...those responsible need to be held accountable.

Might be off topic but what does accountable look like? It's rarely just 1 person making a decision and when a different branch of government "oopsies" a deadline they can wave it off as having priorities elsewhere. Honestly aside from people on this forum who would even know who to blame?

 

[APTA-2048]

Is it possible it's going for some sort of repair work?

You know what? I actually wasn’t explicitly told where it was going. That could be a possibility. Would be curious what needs to be done that the TTC couldn’t do themselves, though.

 

[turbanplanner]

You know what? I actually wasn’t explicitly told where it was going. That could be a possibility. Would be curious what needs to be done that the TTC couldn’t do themselves, though.

Yeah they do seem fairly simple, the kenosha streetcar museum posts tiktoks and it seems no harder to repair than a road car out of the same vintage.

 

[81-717]

But we're not talking about that, we're talking about what to do with the T1s.

And I say they should do exactly the same as they did with the Hawkers.*

*including not only in terms of retirement age, but also in terms of their final destination

They not only asked themselves about it, they put it into the 10-year capital plan. Rick Leary had nixed the plans for new rolling stock for Line 2 in favour of a life extension plan.

But it never got started before it was made clear that the new trains could indeed be funded, and the life extension program was nixed in favour of the new trains.

What was Leary even thinking when he nixed the replacement plans in 2017, other than perhaps his own pro-T1 bias (that's the only explanation that comes to mind)? Had he not done that, we would've probably had funding secured years ago and even had the first pair of prototype trains already delivered now (and @T3G, that's why the plan is to start with 2 prototypes, to ensure the new trains aren't garbage. Even though I think the H6 case was a one-off that's hard to replicate).

Might be off topic but what does accountable look like? Honestly aside from people on this forum who would even know who to blame?

I don't know (to both questions), I just said it would need to happen, whatever that would entail.

 

[Kyle Campbell]

How long would tendering everything out etc take? Also I remember the cost was in the ballpark of about half what the new fleet would cost but I could be wrong.

If it's 50%, then that definitely doesn't seem to make the cost worthwhile. You'd spend 50% of the cost of a new vehicle, but you'd probably get only 10-15 additional years at best out of it before you either need to refurbish again or buy a new set of vehicles anyway. That's not including the likely higher ongoing maintenance costs due to the age of the vehicles.

But, if they can't secure funding, that's what will happen, even though it's way more money long run.

 

[T3G]

And I say they should do exactly the same as they did with the Hawkers.

Jesus Christ.

That's exactly what they plan to do, if they can secure funding.

What's your alternative solution if they can't secure said funding?

This discussion has taken a good 10 years off my projected lifespan, I think.

 

[APTA-2048]

You know what? I actually wasn’t explicitly told where it was going. That could be a possibility. Would be curious what needs to be done that the TTC couldn’t do themselves, though.

Found out from another friend, that the cars are supposedly being moved off property temporarily due to construction. So looks like not disposed of after all.

 

[smallspy]

Or why we do capital replacement of the fleet at only 30-years, rather than life extension out of operating funds.

Equipment is replaced when it's lifespan has been attained - at that point, reliability usually falls off in a rather precipitous manner.

In Toronto's case, the TTC has spec'd their subway equipment to last 25 years. This is done for many reasons, not the least of which is that it allows for a weight savings - which then translates to other savings elsewhere on the network (less wear-and-tear on bridges, lighter weight rails, etc.).

That's the thing, these things don't exist in a vacuum - it's a system. It's all integrated. One change will cause other affects downstream. Some may be positive - some may be negative.

Dan