News   Jul 16, 2024
Minto Submits Modifications to Grand Park Village Plan in Mimico
 13     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
News Roundup for July 16, 2024
 449     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
The Urban Jungle
 555     2 

Metrolinx: Bombardier Flexity Freedom & Alstom Citadis Spirit LRVs

Isn't the intent to run the Crosstown trains as 2x5 Module units?

Running 1x7 Module unit would be a shorter train.
 
Wow, even better if it's 3x5. It's been a while since I've watched any of the animations. That's going to look fantastic gliding in and out of the stations.
 
This may have been posted before... but when does Waterloo need to start receiving ION LRT vehicles from BBD? Is there any indication that BBD will have trouble delivering them on time, considering the TTC Flexity Outlook fiasco?
 
Every time I've asked (Mayor, Rapid Transit team, Bombardier directly), I'm told everything is on-time. Delivery of the first vehicle is scheduled for Fall 2016. The Spur line (OMSF to Waterloo Park) is due to be complete by Summer of 2016 for spur line testing as soon as the first train arrives.

The first train will go to Kingston in late spring/early summer for high-speed testing.
 
nfitz said:
I thought plan was 3-car trains most of the time. Alternatively two 45-metre units might have made more sense than 30-metre units.
Click to expand...
The original plan was to run 2-trains at the start with stations built to fit 3-car trains. They'll probably run one car LRVs on Finch West from the start.

With ATO, they really have the option to decouple the LRVs at Mt Dennis and have one car head back to the carhouse driverless. So they can run 3 cars at rush hour and 2 cars in offpeak periods. In this case a mechanic can decouple them and someone will wait at the carhouse to park them or have them park themselves. TTC used to decouple subways back in the 70s in the evenings.
 
nfitz said:
Where has there been any indication that the ATO operation would allow for driverless vehicles?
Click to expand...
ATC/ATO means the computer controls the trains. It's totally possible but aren't done so for safety reasons. Transit control should able to control the computer to drive it safely back to the carhouse just a block east without the needs of a worker on the train. The SRT/skytrain doesn't need someone to close the door and that was 1985. Why is it not possible now?

With technologies today, door closing can be done remotely with video feeds from the cameras if they really wanted. It's not a big deal now since large data transmissions is rather cheap to implement.
 
Steve X said:
ATC/ATO means the computer controls the trains. It's totally possible but aren't done so for safety reasons. Transit control should able to control the computer to drive it safely back to the carhouse just a block east without the needs of a worker on the train. The SRT/skytrain doesn't need someone to close the door and that was 1985. Why is it not possible now?
Click to expand...
It's not possible now, because as far as I know, Metrolinx hasn't ordered the necessary equipment to run unstaffed trains.

I'm not challenging whether it is possible or not. Of course it's possible - the use of this technology for decades elsewhere makes that clear.

The question I'm asking, is simply where is the indication that the Eglinton vehicles would be capable of this - because I haven't seen anything official.

What is your source?
 
nfitz said:
It's not possible now, because as far as I know, Metrolinx hasn't ordered the necessary equipment to run unstaffed trains.

I'm not challenging whether it is possible or not. Of course it's possible - the use of this technology for decades elsewhere makes that clear.

The question I'm asking, is simply where is the indication that the Eglinton vehicles would be capable of this - because I haven't seen anything official.

What is your source?
Click to expand...
That was just my suggestion to save operation cost. If they needed a crew to move LRVs back and forth, then it's not worth it to decouple them.

I don't think it's that difficult. It's more software than hardware to upgrade the trains to be fully driverless. It just needs to be able to communicate through an antenna and override the manual controls. The real cost would be the communication receivers in the tunnel. With computer system controlled trains, technically someone can hack the train, overwrite the firmware and take control of the LRV remotely by locking the driver out. They already done it with cars and that's definitely not ATO. Remotely controlling it is cheaper than having a decision making central system. It's not the same.

Hopefully Metrolinx and the consortium have finalized that signal system and not get into the mess TTC got into.
 
Steve X said:
I don't think it's that difficult. It's more software than hardware to upgrade the trains to be fully driverless. It just needs to be able to communicate through an antenna and override the manual controls. The real cost would be the communication receivers in the tunnel.
Click to expand...
I don't really see the point of doing this on a line that has at-grade intersections with city streets. I can't imagine that anyone will let an unstaffed train do this anytime soon. Is that being done anywhere in the world?

If we were to see such technology, I'd think it would appear first on Line 1 or 2. Or a completely new subway line.
 
Keep in mind, the initial suggestion was that LRVs decouple and return to the maintenance yard from Mt Dennis. i.e. the station right next to the yard access. No one is talking about running driverless vehicles through at-grade intersections.
 
Markster said:
Keep in mind, the initial suggestion was that LRVs decouple and return to the maintenance yard from Mt Dennis. i.e. the station right next to the yard access. No one is talking about running driverless vehicles through at-grade intersections.
Click to expand...
But they obviously aren't going to drop that much money just for that kind of folly. It would have to be part of a bigger plan.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top