The TTC is on the lookout for its next generation of streetcars. The photos above are screenshots from an animated video Siemens Canada produced to sway the TTC’s commissioners and purchasing department. Its good to see Siemens hasn’t be entirely turned-off from doing business with the TTC after the controversial subway train deal that was awarded to Bombardier in 2006. The streetcars eventually purchased will also be used on the City’s proposed Transit City LRT plan.
There is not much substance to the video, but it does provide us with an idea of what transit could look like in the near future. Also, below is a little more info from Steve Munro’s blog about Siemens PR push [ his links are to PDF downloads ] :
A wraparound ad on the August 16 issue of 24 Hours extols Siemens new streetcars and refers readers to a website with more information. The layout has the earmarks of an ongoing advertising campaign with cheeky copy:
- Say hello to the streetcar that rings your bell.
- Introducing the Combino Plus.
- Save your stair climbing for the gym.
- Sitting on a stranger’s lap is now optional.
The Siemens page includes an animated look at the Combino Plus car as proposed for Toronto including simulation of the car on the Spadina and Queen lines. There is a link to a data sheet on the Lisbon version of the car as well as a non-functioning [as of noon on August 17] link to a Melbourne presentation.
A Siemens mockup is on view at the CNE grounds on Princes’ Boulevard along with the Bombardier mockup that appeared recently at Dundas Square.
If you get bored with the streetcars, you can watch people getting fired out of a cannon. Whether this will be yet another alternative for transit service remains to be seen.
photos are screenshots from Siemens video — view images on Spacing’s Flickr page
24 comments
Apart from running the 510 along Queen, and retaining an active destination sign on the arse end of the thing, they’re seriously fudging the distance up from the street, which is one of the many Toronto irregularities that is going to make it difficult or impossible for a company to deliver streetcars we can actually use. These things have to be genuinely wheelchair-accessible, not claimed accessible.
I suppose it’s unthinkable that a vendor will lie through its teeth and sell us a billion bucks’ worth of streetcars that do not meet spec.
But the video is so pretty 🙂
I’m sure that the TTC will, of course, be issuing Siemens a cease-and-desist letter as quickly as they did to the anagram map guy for his unauthorized use of the TTC logo.
I love the current streetcars, all the new ones look so modern and flashy, there’s something to be said for subtlety on the street. But all in all, dressed up in the TTC livery, this one doesn’t look too bad.
How do they propose the driver take fares or check passes? Should his chair spin around every time he stops?
I like the look of the Siemens’ streetcar. I hope they are as durable and long lasting as our present streetcars as well.
I’m not steve, but maybe you should take off the links to the pdf or else you’re destroying his bandwith usage…
Oh for fsck sake Joe get some happy pills wouldya. I read your piece on the website RFP, fair go, it seems to be a botched effort. But it seems that god forbid Siemens actually try and drum up some enthusiasm from the public for new streetcars by putting together a website and a little video with Toronto streetscape rather than some anonymous city. Although given Toronto’s role as “Chicago” and other US cities that would be a little ironic.
It’s a demo, not a spec sheet, probably put together back home in Germany if the author name at the end is any guide. In fact, they publish the spec sheet as a PDF. If the distance up from the street is a problem it’s surely a Roads problem rather than a Siemens or Bombardier one since these are existing vehicles in service elsewhere.
Miles – the intention is apparently to go all Proof-of-Purchase as on Queen.
It’s obvious the folks at Siemens have put some thought and work into their proposal, I like the little video. I like the fact that a company like Siemens is willing to put that much work into their proposal, to reach the public, rather then just the fat cats at TTC council.
Now the distance from the street, I am sure the folks at Siemens are well aware of the problem, if they are going to research enough to be able to put an actual TTC destination in their video, and an actual TTC logo and livery on the car, then they are going to be aware of the distance from the street issue as well. I expect that new lines built will have raised platforms, with the height determined by the vehicle chosen, so that isn’t an issue. Existing lines with raised platforms, the platforms are probably high enough already, if they aren’t an additional cap layer of cement can fix that right quickly.
I also expect that at least one door of the vehicle to have a flip out(like an Orion VII bus does) or slide out ramp, that can be either operator or passenger operated, for areas where there is no raised platform. This problem is one that Bombardier also has.
It’s too bad we can’t visualize these newer and longer streetcars on a Front St. transitway instead of Queen – the odds are these heavier vehicles will tend to trash out the older lime-based masonry of older Queen St. etc. etc.
And longer, bigger vehicles may well be an excuse for less service to keep servicing the burbs with costly transit, which is absolutely needed to some degree, but the old urban core is getting hollowed out some.
> Miles – the intention is apparently to go all Proof-of-Purchase as on Queen.
This is the first time I’ve heard that, and I hope it isn’t true. It would definitely erode Toronto’s friendly attitude because it would necessitate jerk “fare checkers” to hop on and off the system randomly downtown and bully people who don’t have transfers, like in San Francisco. Some of the rudest cops I’ve ever met when you DO have your fare.
Otherwise it would result in massive fraud and fare skipping, which in such a fare-reliant transit system would be a nightmare.
I hope one day the TTC will get with the smart card program and make all customers swipe their card to board.
From these renderings, they look a little fat too me. Does anybody know their width? Will they be the same width as the old ones?
Hamish > I don’t think these are heavier than the ones already in operation.
But please give the FSE a rest for one comment — this is done by a company trying to win a bid, not change the policy and future plans of the transit authority. Though, I agree the larger size cars could mean decreased service time. But I believe those cars are the ones that would be used on the Transit City routes, which are to be spaced out almost like subway stops, which means they need the ability to carry a capacity greater than our current streetcars. .
Kevin, GO and Viva both use proof-of-purchase systems and their fare inspectors are unfailingly polite in my experience. Also, if POP-based transit systems could collapse from fare skipping, Vancouver would’ve shut down the SkyTrain long ago.
And I have to admit that by now I sort of hope that the extension does get built, and in jig time we have thousands of cars a day on it, just because I’m curious what opinions Hamish holds on anything else in the entire world, and having the FSE actually built and running may be the only way I’ll ever find out.
People are asking how the Combino Plus compares to the CLRVs and ALRVs. The Siemens brochures have some specs for comparison.
It’s slightly narrower (2.5 m, vs. 2.54 for C/ALRVs). It’s almost twice the length of a CLRV (28.34 m, vs. 15.44 for CLRVs, 23.16 for ALRVs).
As for weight, people complain that the current streetcars are tanks that pound the pavement. At a crush load, the CLRVs are 8.0 tonnes/axle, and the ALRVs are 8.5. The Combino Plus info doesn’t specify vehicle weight, but does say helpfully that they have a maximum axle load of ” less frequent service has been a big concern of mine. TTC riders will rue the day that new double-length LRVs replace existing streetcars (or buses) and suddenly service frequency is cut in half because we only need half as many vehicles to provide the same level of passenger capacity.
That’s some good info to add Brent. Except you seemed to leave out to some info that’s represented by a quotation mark.
And I agree with your and Hamish’s concern about reduced service. Though, on King, these cars coming every 10 minutes would be better than our current CLRV’s coming every 7 packed to the brim. I think these longer ones would be used in the Transit City plan (like Matt states) and smaller ones downtown. I think that’s what I’ve read/heard. Could be a wrong, tho.
As for the other sub-discussion going on here: I have been a mouthy commenter towards Hamish and I mean no harm to him personally. Its just a shame that he doesn’t seem to respect the memory or intellect of the Spacing Wire readers. I’m sure most of us are on-side with him so its a wonder why he is so compelled to keep mentioning the FSE to us — I would assume the majority of readers are regulars, so his sermon is preaching to the converted. this isn’t the Star where 500,000 read the thing each day and a voice can be drowned out. this is the people who care and understand the issues. Being talked down to by a know-it-all is one way to isolate your potential supporters.
And again, because his brings up the FSE, it detracts from the discussion on this post and we waste time discussing the type of streetcar the city is going to choose.
I know Hamish isn’t asking for advice, but I’ll give it anyway: please be judicious when you bring up FSE and make sure its appropriate part of the discussion. I don’t think anyone will fault you if you took that kind of approach (i know I would shut up).
Did it again!! Must be that darned “less than” symbol. A maximum axle load of “[less than] 10 tonnes.”
I have not heard anything about ordering a second fleet of smaller vehicles for the “traditional” streetcar routes. Everything up to now has been based on a larger vehicle. Even back before Transit City, when the TTC was simply looking to replace the existing fleet, they were proudly stating that they would need fewer new vehicles to replace the CLRVs because the new vehicles would be larger. (And of course they failed to mention that the reduced fleet would also mean reduced service frequency!)
The problem is the low-floor requirement. I only know of one streetcar that is partially low-floor AND a standard length – the Vario LF from the Czech Republic, which is like a PCC or CLRV with a low floor between the two bogies and high floor at either end. Everything else seems to be one of these extra-long animals.
Kevin – in Dublin Veolia run very frequent fare inspections on their LUAS system and while you hear the odd complaint on boards over there it doesn’t seem to be widespread. As in Vancouver there will be some revenue loss but the increase in boarding efficiency will reduce dwell time at stops and thus the number of streetcars required. If we can get streetcars moving with a higher average speed over the route as part of transit city by enforcing restrictions on traffic blocking their progress, this will result in lower headways.
The objective should be that we increase ridership to the point where we have the same headway as now with longer streetcars, not merely satisfy the current ridership numbers with poorer service and thus justify a lower vehicle (and driver) number. We have to make LRT something that residents clamour for, as LUAS has done in Dublin where there is a huge drive to extend and expand the network.
Interestingly, I saw a poll – I think it might have been on the mystreetcar site before they yanked it that listed Eglinton LRT as preferred first line at *78%*. Maybe we should put a wee hold on Finch West and Sheppard East and give the people what they apparently want (although online polls are usually not the most scientific), but Mammoliti would probably have a conniption if the former was delayed.
Kevin throws great parties but often shows his lack of experience/knowledge of urban issues in these comment threads. Make sure you’ve got a good handle on the topic, Kev, before sounding off ’cause these avid-Spacing readers will slap you upside the head quickly if you’re wrong.
PS: I love your parites Kev and don’t want to see the shine wear off NMS ’cause you’re making knee-jerk comments!
Hey Simone, thanks for the advice-without-explanation, I took it as a friendly but empty suggestion! 🙂
Re: GO Transit’s POP, GO is a commuter service, not urban light rail, and is worthy of comparison more to the New York’s LIRR or Metro North than the new streetcar. The method of GO’s fare checking is incredibly inconvenient because it makes buying a ticket on the train impossible, which, when trains only come once an hour, is a major hindrance to getting home in a hurry without worrying about a $500 fine.
GO should also dump their POP-or-fine system, check all fares on every ride and charge a $5 fee for on-train tickets. It would save riders the outrageous prospect of massive fines while allowing them to hop on the afternoon train to Newmarket that’s leaving in 4 minutes from Union Station.
Also re: SkyTrain, British Columbia pays for far more of their budget than Ontario does the TTC’s, and just talking to riders will reveal that people skip fares all the time. I think it has been made clear enough, especially at Spacing, that the TTC should be pinching pennies.
Hopefully some effort will be invested in preventing the kind of fraud the TTC estimates is responsible for up to 1% annual losses in revenue on the new streetcars, and Smart Cards are clearly the best solution on the table for not only preventing fraud, but generating revenue.
Mark, donne-moi un break. I don’t see how the distance up from the pavement is “a Roads problem,†implying that guys in hard hats employed by the city can come along and fix it.
And confidential to the Wogster: We aren’t going to be building platforms alongside streetcar tracks. (Quick: Where does one of those fit at Queen and Church, with its intersecting tracks?) A ramp simply isn’t going to work above a few inches’ displacement; the Orion VIIs have to bridge the much shorter distance between kneeling height and curb, while streetcars have to get you from street height all the way up.
Of course they “know†about the problem. I’m saying there’s a risk they’ll blow smoke up our arses and claim it’s been solved. Once we buy the things and try to get somebody in a chair into the 505 on Broadview north of Dundas in the dark of winter, poof, we find they don’t work.
Frequency of service is my #1 concern. More space on the streetcars is important. But not as important as the confidence a streetcar will come soon, whatever time of day it is.
A small drop in rush hour frequency would be okay because they come so often, but I’d like to see a guarantee of no drop in off-peak frequency. Otherwise, the TTC becomes less convenient, not more.
Really not as interested in the vehicle as in how the system is promoted and used. Toronto’s streetcar network is theoretically the 2nd largest in the English-speaking countries (after Melbourne) but is treated like a half dozen minor bus routes. What I really want to see is not so much which new vehicle is picked as much as a commitment to delete many existing stops (seriously – Bay-Yonge-Victoria-Church = 3 stops too many), a dedicated right of way, off-vehicle payment, and anything else that would let the streetcars act as actual rapid transit. And for god’s sake add them to the subway maps! If you were a tourist in Toronto, you would not even know how to find a streetcar route…
Joe – since all *new* LRT lines will be in right-of-way there will be platforms on them. Your point presumably refers to existing mixed traffic streetcars which over time will become a smaller proportion of the system and hopefully partially if not fully refitted by reducing car lanes at some point (boy can dream eh?)
Regardless, unless there are streetcars that can lower like kneeling buses, it’s going to be hard for any manufacturer including Siemens and BBD to provide the level boarding you seek on existing non-ROW lines.
uskyscraper – maybe making LRT an express service stopping at major intersections supported by a parallel stopper bus might do what you’re looking for but otherwise you know councillors are going to fight tooth and nail over the most obscure stops – my favourite is on the 504 King-Broadview. Stop at Jilly’s, turn the corner, stop again!