Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Calgary orders new next gen lrv

  1. #1

    Default Calgary orders new next gen lrv




    CANADA: Calgary Transit announced on September 11 that it had ordered 60 light rail vehicles from Siemens for its expanding CTrain network, at a total cost of C$200m. The first of the S200 series cars is expected to arrive from the company’s Sacramento plant in August 2015, with deliveries to be completed by the end of 2016.

    The city’s traditional supplier won the contract following an international tender, being selected ahead of bids from Hyundai Rotem, Kinki Sharyo and CAF in a procurement process that began in December 2012. Mayor Naheed Nenshi said he was ‘very excited’ that the City Council had authorised the extra cars, which would ‘ease overcrowding and increase comfort and reliability’.

    With the CTrain network carrying more than 300 000 passengers a day, Calgary Transit has been extending platforms to accommodate longer trains for some time, but needed to put in place the funding for the additional rolling stock. The City Council had allocated C$67m for new vehicles, which will be augmented by C$133m from the province of Alberta’s Green Trip programme.

    Calgary Transit expects to use 35 of the new LRVs to increase capacity, allowing the introduction of four-car trains on the busiest route between Crowfoot and Somerset. The remaining 25 will start the replacement of the city’s oldest U2 cars which date from 1981. The city’s Route Ahead strategic plan envisages that the CTrain fleet will need to grow from 192 to around 300 LRVs over the next 30 years.

    Unlike the existing steel-bodied cars, the S200s will have bonded aluminium side panels. The windows will be triple-glazed to reduce energy losses, along with improved air conditioning and regenerative braking. There will also be a glazed partition behind the cabs rather than a solid screen. Each car will offer wheelchair accessibility from every door, and there will be a partial return to transverse seating, following customer feedback about the use of all longitudinal seating on the most recent build of SD160NG cars supplied in 2010-12.

    http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/u...tion-lrvs.html
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  2. #2
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,679

    Default

    ^ beautiful
    The world is full of kings and queens, who blind your eyes then steal your dreams.
    It's heaven and hell!

  3. #3
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    It looks like there is continued development in high-floor LRVs after all.

    They look good.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    It looks like there is continued development in high-floor LRVs after all.

    They look good.
    Of course there will be. It's not like all the cities with existing high floor LRT networks are suddenly going to change to low floor because its the latest trend. High floor LRVs will still be produced until I'm too old to care anymore....

  5. #5

    Default

    If you need specialty vehicles it just costs more.

    and its not like there are special High Floor LRV R and D departments.. all the same components and new technologies are used in both high and low floor.

    did you check out some of the other LRV manufactures that bid on it the contract.. Its also interesting to note who didn't bid...like Alstom... who doesn't appear to have any high floor LRV offerings anymore, assuming they even had the product in the first place..

    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 16-09-2013 at 02:24 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  6. #6

    Default

    Way better promo video here...

    They get to choose between 3 designs. I like the mask the most.

    http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/black-and-...aled-1.1450156

    I kind of wish we didn't refurb the old U2's O well they are retro cool but the lack of AC really SUCKS!
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  7. #7
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    If you need specialty vehicles it just costs more.

    and its not like there are special High Floor LRV R and D departments.. all the same components and new technologies are used in both high and low floor.

    did you check out some of the other LRV manufactures that bid on it the contract.. Its also interesting to note who didn't bid...like Alstom... who doesn't appear to have any high floor LRV offerings anymore, assuming they even had the product in the first place..

    ]
    Incidentally calgary's order cost about 20% less than waterloo's, per meter of vehicle. Waterloo is tagging along with a massive order from Toronto, so it's not a volume discout.

    Maybe high-floor is actually cheaper and easier to build.

    (This isn't really at you, EDP, rather another poster who had claimed that high-floor wouldn't see any more development. )

  8. #8
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    I don't think Alstom ever had High-floor LRVs, but I could be wrong.

    If they were to bid for an Edmonton or Calgary contract it would have been with a modified metro-type equipment.

    I am surprised that bombardier didn't bid, I know that they have done high-floor in the past.

  9. #9

    Default

    ^ This is built on the SD platform which is far from new...

    The new Low floor trams have tighter turner radius and other things... I am not sure we are comparing apples to apples... we would need to be looking at the cost of Seiman's lowfloor for that.

    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I don't think Alstom ever had High-floor LRVs, but I could be wrong.

    If they were to bid for an Edmonton or Calgary contract it would have been with a modified metro-type equipment.

    I am surprised that bombardier didn't bid, I know that they have done high-floor in the past.
    Sorry I thought I posted this... http://newsroom.calgary.ca/pr/calgar...nt-248269.aspx

    this is the press release.

    Calgary Transit thanks all bidders (Bombardier, CAF, Hyundai Rotem, Kinki Sharyo, Siemens) for their interest in seeking The City of Calgary as a customer.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 16-09-2013 at 05:37 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  11. #11
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    I understand that the typical low-floor tram has similar performance specs to a high-floor. Toronto's new low-floor streetcars are specially designed for tighter turn radius than is standard, but was normal for old high-floor streetcars.

    I like this new design, and I also appreciate the retro-metro look of the old U2. And i apologize for bringing this up.

    New aside:

    Should Edmonton order a bunch of these, perhapse tagged on to Calgary's order if possible?
    Our U2s are refurbished but are even older than theirs, and we could probably use more trains to improve crowded conditions in the south. We would get delivery in the winter of 2016/2017, so thare's 4 more years of ridership growth and aging vehicles before they would enter service.

  12. #12

    Default

    We have a bunch of SD70's on the way I Believe.. and the refurb of the u2's carried out bombardier (I believe) put about another 20 years ( I think ) on the u2's
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  13. #13
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    All the SD-160s have been here for a while, and I think all the U2s are back.
    There are 37 U2s, and 57 SD160s, including the 20 purchased for NLRT. So there are enough now, but if they do provide decent service on the nait line then there won't be much for growth.

    S70s are 70% low-floor.

  14. #14

    Default

    Thanks for the correction
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  15. #15
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    We have a bunch of SD70's on the way I Believe.. and the refurb of the u2's carried out bombardier (I believe) put about another 20 years ( I think ) on the u2's
    It's interesting that Calgary's U2s are ready to be replaced while ours will be going strong for so much longer.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    It's interesting that Calgary's U2s are ready to be replaced while ours will be going strong for so much longer.
    I read somewhere that Calgary's wear a bit faster, as more exposed to the elements (ie no tunnel). They might do more kms as well (as Calgary has the model, until these arrive, of three car trains more frequent).

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    We have a bunch of SD70's on the way I Believe.. and the refurb of the u2's carried out bombardier (I believe) put about another 20 years ( I think ) on the u2's
    It's interesting that Calgary's U2s are ready to be replaced while ours will be going strong for so much longer.
    I simply thing they didn't choose to refurb... when they could have. not pretty or new enough for them... The new onews will likely hold more people as well.

    They also needed to order more for the platform extensions...

    that is my guess.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  18. #18

    Default

    here is the report where they justify replacing over refurb

    http://agendaminutes.calgary.ca/sire...3043250837.PDF

    from the report...

    Edmonton
    Edmonton Transit currently operates 37 U2 vehicles that were constructed between 1978 and 1981.
    These cars are now between 27 and 30 years of age, and have accumulated service Km similar to
    Calgary’s cars, but over a slightly longer operating period and under slightly more favourable operating
    conditions (the underground portion of the ET system) and carrying far fewer passengers.
    Edmonton has defined an overhaul program for all 37 cars. The goal is to extend each car life a further
    10 to 15 years
    . The costs for the whole program are made up of the following major systems (costs
    shown are on a per car basis):
    Contracted Services to Bombardier Transportation - $950,000
    New Coupler - $100,000
    New Bogies - $250,000
    New Pantograph system (to address additional power) - $20,000
    New Auxiliary Power System - $45,000
    Wheelchair Ramps - $40,000
    Total Edmonton Rebuild Cost - $1.4 million/car

    Most (the calgary report leads to all) existing u2 fleets are or have been replaced.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 17-09-2013 at 05:40 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  19. #19
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,415

    Default

    $1.4 million/car for refurbishment to extend the U2s for 10 to 15 years compared to $3.7 million/car for replacement with new SD200s with a 30 year life cycle. Wouldn't be surprised if the U2s remain in service longer than projected as the wearable components (coupler, bogies, seats, ramps, etc.) were replaced on the same timeline as the newer SD160s.

    And so far as the U2s lacking air conditioning, I prefer being able to open the windows on those few hot and sweaty Edmonton days. Plus, the tunnel is a natural air conditioner.

    The City's decision to refurbish the U2s is certainly a defensible one.
    Last edited by East McCauley; 17-09-2013 at 07:31 PM.

  20. #20

    Default

    o no I love the a/c

    i am not upset they refurbed the u2's but I love the AC
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •