D
Duck
Guest
Why? You'd rather have dirty underground public-toiletesque subways?
|
|
|
Monorail for Toronto
- Thread starter ssiguy2
- Start date
Why? You'd rather have dirty underground public-toiletesque subways?
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Very true, after all what can the Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, and Germans possible teach Toronto about urban transit?
CDL.TO
Moderator
Germans? You're calling for suspension trains?
D
Duck
Guest
Germany is the home of the ALWEG (standard concrete straddle-beam style train), not just the Wuppertal system (or Siemens H-Bahn).
CDL.TO
Moderator
But yet no German city has an ALWEG monorail.
D
Duck
Guest
And no Canadian city has Bombardier high speed trains. What's your point?
CDL.TO
Moderator
That ssiguy said that Germany has something to teach us about urban transit because of monorails. Monorails they don't actually use.
I doubt anyone would claim that Canada can teach the world about HSR.
Really didn't think it was that hard to follow.
I doubt anyone would claim that Canada can teach the world about HSR.
Really didn't think it was that hard to follow.
salsa
Senior Member
Duck, new shit was tried before in this city. We "embraced the future" and ended up with an expensive, obsolete transit line that was never extended, failed to fulfil its promises, and is slated to be replaced.
Lets just stick with proven tech that the vast majority of cities are using. The DRL is the most important transit project in the GTA so how about we get it done properly instead of pursuing weird alternatives in an attempt to save money.
Lets just stick with proven tech that the vast majority of cities are using. The DRL is the most important transit project in the GTA so how about we get it done properly instead of pursuing weird alternatives in an attempt to save money.
Last edited:
jcam
Active Member
Duck, new shit was tried before in this city. We "embraced the future" and ended up with an expensive, obsolete transit line that was never extended, failed to fulfil its promises, and is slated to be replaced.
Lets just stick with proven tech that the vast majority of cities are using. The DRL is the most important transit project in the GTA so how about we get it done properly instead of pursuing weird alternatives in an attempt to save money.
Or we could have invested in the infrastructure we had like others did, and would now have something like this:
Adjei
Senior Member
Imagine these monstrosities going down King Street downtown.
Forgotten
Active Member
Or we could have invested in the infrastructure we had like others did, and would now have something like this:
Those are some nice toy trains there. A lot children would love to play with those.
salsa
Senior Member
Or we could have invested in the infrastructure we had like others did, and would now have something like this:
Ah yes, the Vancouver Skytrain. Monorail zealots love this thing to death.
So they embraced a futuristic technology (at that time), but forgot to actually plan for the future. Oops.
As for the SRT, I don't disagree that it could have been maintained better. But originally it was planned to be an LRT until the province came along and shoved ICTS down our throats. We were told it was "the most advanced urban transit technology in the world", and that it was a much cheaper medium capacity alternative to subways. So what happened? The cost of the transit line went from $85M to $196 M. Shortly after it opened, more money had to be thrown at it to fix problems with the turning loop at Kennedy station, flaws in the computer system, and ice buildup on the rails during winter. Expansion plans to malvern never materialized as it turned out to be too expensive with ICTS tech. The vehicles are now at the end of their service life, but they are no longer manufactured. A longer version of the cars are available which are used in Vancouver, but they are too long for the sharp curves of the SRT. Ironically, we were planning to replace the SRT with LRT which we were supposed to have gotten in the first place, but since then the plan has changed to a subway. Alas, some people have not learned their lesson with pursuing unconventional orphan technology. "Oh look, Bombardier has this really cool monorail now, wouldn't it be really cool to have that in Toronto because why not". I guess some people like elevated trains trundling above their heads for whatever reason, no matter how impractical it may be as a DRL.
CDL.TO
Moderator
The Canada Line isn't SkyTrain (ICTS) technology. The capacity issue isn't the fault of the technology on that line, but of the requirements demanded by the province. It should be an illustration of why a rapid transit line being "below capacity" isn't such a bad thing.
For the SRT, first place was supposed to be a reno which would maintain the ICTS tech but introduce new vehicles. Second plan was the LRT plan, at additional expense. Subway was the third plan in 4 years (?).
For the SRT, first place was supposed to be a reno which would maintain the ICTS tech but introduce new vehicles. Second plan was the LRT plan, at additional expense. Subway was the third plan in 4 years (?).
44 North
Senior Member
Interestingly, that's what the original "Downtown Relief Line" was. And it wasn't King, but Front St.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
And it is also a prime example of the perils of P3 applied in the cheapest possible manner - the private sector partner will cut corners - to the point where it closes off future opportunities.
AoD