The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[MalcolmTucker]

Calgary's trains are having teething problems too:

Calgary Transit grounds glitchy new CTrains | Calgary Sun

This week, software glitches forced all 10 new Series 9 CTrain cars produced by German transportation giant Siemens to be pulled off the tracks and into the maintenance shop

...

“Siemens has not delivered on their promises and the trains are not operating as reliably as we’d hoped,” said Davies.
...
Calgary Transit purchased 63 of the new Series 9 LRT cars at a total price of $187 million and has only received 11 so far, but expects to take possession of 16 by year’s end.

In February, that pace is expected to pick up to four new vehicles arriving a month with the total order in place in 12-15 months, said Davies.

Addressing what he called teething problems now will likely see them headed off next year, he said.

Difference is Calgary's LRVs were ordered years later, and the last will be delivered years earlier. It is a pretty similar scale job: an entirely new build style of a tried and true model.

[GreaterMontréal]

The Azur are back. saturday

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Because it was better than what the Americans could make... but that is for a different thread.

Huh?

It was a very fast interceptor which was an obsolete concept before it even went to market. No country expressed any serious interest in ordering the jet because they wanted jets with maneuverability while the arrow basically flew in a straight line. It was an embarrassment for our government and all of its parties and that's why it got buried and covered up.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Huh?

It was a very fast interceptor which was an obsolete concept before it even went to market. No country expressed any serious interest in ordering the jet because they wanted jets with maneuverability while the arrow basically flew in a straight line. It was an embarrassment for our government and all of its parties and that's why it got buried and covered up.

Back then, most countries only bought jets they designed. The Brits had theirs, the Americans had theirs, and even Canada had ours. The Americans were not happy about how much better it was and found a way to convince Canada to buy theirs and scrap ours, and the engineers all went to work in the USA.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Back then, most countries only bought jets they designed. The Brits had theirs, the Americans had theirs, and even Canada had ours. The Americans were not happy about how much better it was and found a way to convince Canada to buy theirs and scrap ours, and the engineers all went to work in the USA.

Doesn't that sound a little too convenient? Y'know. Blame the Americans. They were buyers back then just as there still are buyers now. You honestly believe the Brits and Americans didn't sell planes to their allies back then

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Doesn't that sound a little too convenient? Y'know. Blame the Americans. They were buyers back then just as there still are buyers now. You honestly believe the Brits and Americans didn't sell planes to their allies back then

Then I guess all the history books are wrong.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Huh?

It was a very fast interceptor which was an obsolete concept before it even went to market. No country expressed any serious interest in ordering the jet because they wanted jets with maneuverability while the arrow basically flew in a straight line. It was an embarrassment for our government and all of its parties and that's why it got buried and covered up.

Yeah, it would have had a short life in the interceptor role. The MIG-25 built a decade later is pretty similar from what can see with performance figures (can't change physics), just with a little worse performance due to less exotic metals being used.

The engine program should have kept going to use in future procurement, though it was slightly less efficient per pound of thrust than comparable engines, would need to see the performance curve to judge whether you couldn't just derate them a bit, and use dry only version for transports. Smaller versions could have been mandated for purchases of non compatible applications. .

Would be somewhat comparable with what the UK did with Olympus engines. The UK and France cancelled similar projects at the time, and the USA continued with tech development for a reconnaissance role.

That being said, I think both France and the UK ended up bailing out their engine builders in the 70s. Would that have been a better use of tax dollars than creating Petro-Canada? Who knows.

[niwell]

I'm glad this came up. The mythos of the avro arrow in Canadian culture is a bit ridiculous. It was a good interceptor that cost a fortune and would be obsolete almost immediately (as many designs of the era). I've literallly heard people try and say that it would be a world class fighter even today. Haha yeah no.

Agreed with above about the engine design.

[ScreamingViking]

Yes, the Arrow would have been superseded quite quickly... fighter technology was advancing on a pretty steep curve at that time.

But I think a point that's missing here is that cancelling the project gutted a fledgling aerospace sector. So we don't know what could have come next. And many of the people responsible for making this particular program move forward ended up doing good things elsewhere.

THAT is the real loss, in my opinion.

But this is quite the tangent to the thread.

[1overcosc]

Ontario announced on Friday that over the next few years, it is doubling the size of the subsidy it gives to local transit agencies. From about $320 million today to $640 million in 2021. This is an operational subsidy (not capital funding) that has been given to all transit agencies in the province since 2004.

In exchange for this money, the province is using its legal powers to block Toronto from tolling its roads. Basically, it's: no, you can't toll the roads, but here's another way to get the same money.. oh, and we'll give to every city in the province, too.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

Yes, the Arrow would have been superseded quite quickly... fighter technology was advancing on a pretty steep curve at that time.

But I think a point that's missing here is that cancelling the project gutted a fledgling aerospace sector. So we don't know what could have come next. And many of the people responsible for making this particular program move forward ended up doing good things elsewhere.

THAT is the real loss, in my opinion.

But this is quite the tangent to the thread.

It hasn't been missed. I already mention my feelings that it may have been short sighted to cancel the whole thing over the Arrow's misdirection. Other countries have faced epic failures as well and continued. That said, I'm also aware the program's research would have become an even larger drain on resources and eventually cancelled.

Personal reasons, I'm glad we aren't in the fighter jet business. I wonder if Trump's inaugural "Beast" was made in Canada.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

It hasn't been missed. I already mention my feelings that it may have been short sighted to cancel the whole thing over the Arrow's misdirection. Other countries have faced epic failures as well and continued. That said, I'm also aware the program's research would have become an even larger drain on resources and eventually cancelled.

Ah, you did. I apologize.

However, whether it would have been a "drain" would also have been an unknown. The initial investment of time, money, and resources was huge, but if it resulted in products (Arrow or other) that generated demand then it could have been worthwhile.

I also wonder: with the consolidation that happened in the aircraft and aerospace industries in the 1960s-70s-80s... would a successful Canadian entity have survived without being swallowed by one of its larger American peers for the right price?

Anyway, "what if"s are fun but ultimately not of much more value than that.

[caltrane74]

So apparently, Bombardier is in the process of delivering streetcar 4431, the first new streetcar to arrive for the year 2017. Also on the train from Thunder Bay to Toronto, 2 new Metrolinx railcoaches. Not 100% sure if they are just coaches or the slick new cab/coach designs.

Anyways back to streetcars, so the word is Bombardier is almost good to go with 2 production lines to meet their requirements for delivery to the TTC, and once fully ramped up they could potentially be spitting out 5 new streetcars per month. Let's keep our fingers crossed for that. Also depending on when streetcar 60 is delivered the TTC might just exercise its option for the additional 60 cars plus whatever number (5 to 10?) of free cars they throw in for all the delays they've caused. (Total order will be between 205 to 275 with the option exercised, and freebies) I guess we will find out by the end of the year.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

So apparently, Bombardier is in the process of delivering streetcar 4431, the first new streetcar to arrive for the year 2017. Also on the train from Thunder Bay to Toronto, 2 new Metrolinx railcoaches. Not 100% sure if they are just coaches or the slick new cab/coach designs.

Anyways back to streetcars, so the word is Bombardier is almost good to go with 2 production lines to meet their requirements for delivery to the TTC, and once fully ramped up they could potentially be spitting out 5 new streetcars per month. Let's keep our fingers crossed for that. Also depending on when streetcar 60 is delivered the TTC might just exercise its option for the additional 60 cars plus whatever number (5 to 10?) of free cars they throw in for all the delays they've caused. (Total order will be between 205 to 275 with the option exercised, and freebies) I guess we will find out by the end of the year.

Any pictures?

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

Ah, you did. I apologize.

However, whether it would have been a "drain" would also have been an unknown. The initial investment of time, money, and resources was huge, but if it resulted in products (Arrow or other) that generated demand then it could have been worthwhile.

I also wonder: with the consolidation that happened in the aircraft and aerospace industries in the 1960s-70s-80s... would a successful Canadian entity have survived without being swallowed by one of its larger American peers for the right price?

Anyway, "what if"s are fun but ultimately not of much more value than that.

Sorry. It's a best guess that Canadian efforts would have eventually been completely overshadowed by others operating on inconceivable larger budgets. I can imagine it was already very clear to those that abruptly cancelled the program.

[OutOfTowner]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Sorry. It's a best guess that Canadian efforts would have eventually been completely overshadowed by others operating on inconceivable larger budgets. I can imagine it was already very clear to those that abruptly cancelled the program.

That's a typically Canadian, branch plant, loser mentality response.

Immediately after cancelling the Arrow we bought the useless Bomarc missle system and the already near-obsolete F-100 Voodoos and F-104 Starfighters which were retired from service by the USAF around the advent of the Viet Nam war yet kept in service by the RCAF until the advent of the Hornet in the early '80s. There were also license-built F-5 Freedom Fighters but they were disposable- the Yanks left 100's of them in Viet Nam when they left.

Regardless of how good the Arrow was or wasn't, it would have spurred further innovation, but more importantly-our entire aerospace industry was gutted overnight. The people working on the project had no choice other than to head South to work for NASA, Boeing, Lockheed, etc., and we've been left begging for scraps ever since.

Is it any wonder that Bombardier, in a country so full of 'happy to be mediocre's', faces so much domestic criticism?

How dare they be world leaders! So un-Canadian!

[someone123]

Here's a CBC article about some of Via rail's expansion plans: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scoti...ains-yves-desjardins-siciliano-1.3960280

The president and CEO of Via says that they plan to begin running a daily Halifax-Moncton route later this year. A commuter rail plan for Halifax is being jointly developed by Via and the city.

These services both seem way more useful to me than the Halifax-Montreal train, which is kind of interesting but slow and impractical.

[OutOfTowner]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Sorry. It's a best guess that Canadian efforts would have eventually been completely overshadowed by others operating on inconceivable larger budgets. I can imagine it was already very clear to those that abruptly cancelled the program.

Originally Posted by someone123

Here's a CBC article about some of Via rail's expansion plans: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scoti...ains-yves-desjardins-siciliano-1.3960280

The president and CEO of Via says that they plan to begin running a daily Halifax-Moncton route later this year. A commuter rail plan for Halifax is being jointly developed by Via and the city.

These services both seem way more useful to me than the Halifax-Montreal train, which is kind of interesting but slow and impractical.

Halifax-Moncton is a great idea. The MTL-Hali train is so chill - the stories I have, I've done it 4 times (2, there and back).

Sadly, Via's rolling stock is so old that they should market it to international tourists as a Vintage Rail Journey, like in India or Russia.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OutOfTowner

Halifax-Moncton is a great idea. The MTL-Hali train is so chill - the stories I have, I've done it 4 times (2, there and back).

Sadly, Via's rolling stock is so old that they should market it to international tourists as a Vintage Rail Journey, like in India or Russia.

It's worth doing as a tourist. But it's never going to attract a lot of passengers when it costs the same or more as a flight that takes maybe 1/15 of the time. Unfortunately, in addition to the rail lines not being able to support high speeds they have to contend with freight trains and the route is indirect.

Halifax-Moncton and the commuter rail plan could both be competitive with driving in terms of travel time (or better? maybe there could one day be trains going 150 km/h or more). The train arrives in downtown Halifax so visitors can easily get by without a car. Another nice fact about that line is it has few at-grade crossings. I don't remember what it's like as you go farther along but the suburban Halifax crossings are all cuts/tunnels or bridges.

Eventually, there could be passenger trains doing the Halifax-Moncton-Saint-John route and then buses feeding in to that. Not long ago (up until 1990 or so) there were passenger trains to many smaller areas like the Annapolis Valley. One day I could also imagine a streetcar system in Halifax that ties in with the commuter rail station, and/or a rail extension from the South Street terminal closer into downtown.

[OutOfTowner]

Originally Posted by niwell

I'm glad this came up. The mythos of the avro arrow in Canadian culture is a bit ridiculous. It was a good interceptor that cost a fortune and would be obsolete almost immediately (as many designs of the era). I've literallly heard people try and say that it would be a world class fighter even today. Haha yeah no.

Agreed with above about the engine design.

It wouldn't have been world class today but we would have developed dozens of new designs since then. You don't develop one aircraft then say "There it is, that's it!".

Though the end result fits in much better with the Canadian narrative "The USA may have sent a man to the moon but a lot of those NASA guys were Canadian" NASA North!

After all, were known around the world as "Hollywood North" or haven't you heard?

Check out Brooklyn North Pizza. I hear it's good.