Waterloo Region Connected
ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Printable Version

+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit (/showthread.php?tid=14)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 03-01-2023

(03-01-2023, 04:07 PM)Bytor Wrote: It could be a procurement issue, also, if the Region simply didn't buy enough (or any) catenary scrapers to go along with the 14 trams.

Not region...the Grandlinq contractor...they were responsible for all this stuff.

This is why it's a P3 failure...

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - taylortbb - 03-01-2023

(03-01-2023, 04:32 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(03-01-2023, 04:07 PM)Bytor Wrote: It could be a procurement issue, also, if the Region simply didn't buy enough (or any) catenary scrapers to go along with the 14 trams.

Not region...the Grandlinq contractor...they were responsible for all this stuff.

This is why it's a P3 failure...

Were they though? Because the region purchased the trains separately. I doubt the agreement was that the region hands over trains and washes their hands of it, there was almost certainly specs about associated equipment. I can see ice scrapers falling through the cracks, with contract ambiguity about who's responsible.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 03-02-2023

(03-01-2023, 09:51 PM)taylortbb Wrote: Were they though? Because the region purchased the trains separately. I doubt the agreement was that the region hands over trains and washes their hands of it, there was almost certainly specs about associated equipment. I can see ice scrapers falling through the cracks, with contract ambiguity about who's responsible.

I believe we’ve discussed this. The contract provides that the system shall be capable of continuing to operate in conditions such as those we have. Therefore, as far as I’m concerned, they have to buy whatever equipment is required in order to meet the contract.

But who knows. I assume the PPP contract is cleverly written to avoid actually committing them to much of anything.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - taylortbb - 03-02-2023

(03-02-2023, 01:39 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: The contract provides that the system shall be capable of continuing to operate in conditions such as those we have. Therefore, as far as I’m concerned, they have to buy whatever equipment is required in order to meet the contract.

Those specs in the contract might only apply to things that GrandLinq designed/built/supplied. For example, if the region supplied trains that were totally incapable of operating freezing rain, I can't imagine GrandLinq would then be on the hook for the system not working. I think that's reasonable, that GrandLinq doesn't owe penalties if something they didn't supply doesn't meet requirements.

There's definitely issues with P3s, but this might be the fault of the region/Metrolinx. There's a reason these contracts normally include vehicles.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 03-02-2023

(03-02-2023, 03:12 PM)taylortbb Wrote:
(03-02-2023, 01:39 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: The contract provides that the system shall be capable of continuing to operate in conditions such as those we have. Therefore, as far as I’m concerned, they have to buy whatever equipment is required in order to meet the contract.

Those specs in the contract might only apply to things that GrandLinq designed/built/supplied. For example, if the region supplied trains that were totally incapable of operating freezing rain, I can't imagine GrandLinq would then be on the hook for the system not working. I think that's reasonable, that GrandLinq doesn't owe penalties if something they didn't supply doesn't meet requirements.

There's definitely issues with P3s, but this might be the fault of the region/Metrolinx. There's a reason these contracts normally include vehicles.

Grandlinq took the contract...if they didn't feel the equipment was capable of satisfying the contract, they shouldn't have taken the contract, but they did, so now it's on them to fulfill it.

The only circumstance that they wouldn't be on the hook is if the region was in breach of contract, i.e., the region stated they would supply some equipment to manage the weather and the region failed to do so, but AFAIK that is not the case.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - taylortbb - 03-02-2023

(03-02-2023, 04:57 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Grandlinq took the contract...if they didn't feel the equipment was capable of satisfying the contract, they shouldn't have taken the contract, but they did, so now it's on them to fulfill it.

Grandlinq signed the contract years before the LRVs were delivered, before the LRVs were even finished being designed. Why on earth would they accept liability for a product they weren't supplying, and wasn't even finished being designed yet? If the Region asked for those terms no competent builder would have signed.

I'm certain the contract has exclusions related to the vehicles, it would be insane for Grandlinq to be responsible for them. Whether those exclusions are a factor in the freezing rain situation I don't know, all I'm saying is it's possible.

We'll know soon. The agenda is up for P&W committee next week, but it just says "7.3.3 Verbal Update: ION LRT Winter Operations" so we'll have to wait for the webcast.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 03-02-2023

(03-02-2023, 06:00 PM)taylortbb Wrote:
(03-02-2023, 04:57 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Grandlinq took the contract...if they didn't feel the equipment was capable of satisfying the contract, they shouldn't have taken the contract, but they did, so now it's on them to fulfill it.

Grandlinq signed the contract years before the LRVs were delivered, before the LRVs were even finished being designed. Why on earth would they accept liability for a product they weren't supplying, and wasn't even finished being designed yet? If the Region asked for those terms no competent builder would have signed.

I'm certain the contract has exclusions related to the vehicles, it would be insane for Grandlinq to be responsible for them. Whether those exclusions are a factor in the freezing rain situation I don't know, all I'm saying is it's possible.

We'll know soon. The agenda is up for P&W committee next week, but it just says "7.3.3 Verbal Update: ION LRT Winter Operations" so we'll have to wait for the webcast.

The vehicles aren't the failing component though. Doors aren't freezing shut, motors aren't shutting down in the cold, this is an issue of operating an LRV in icy weather. No other vehicle would operate differently. They knew they were operating an LRV with an overhead power centenary system.

And others have read the Grandlinq contract, it sets explicit requirements for operations in acclimate weather, requirements that Grandlinq is not meeting.

I mean, for their update, I'm placing a sizeable bet on the "Our contractor failed us..." line coming out.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - taylortbb - 03-02-2023

(03-02-2023, 06:21 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: The vehicles aren't the failing component though. Doors aren't freezing shut, motors aren't shutting down in the cold, this is an issue of operating an LRV in icy weather. No other vehicle would operate differently. They knew they were operating an LRV with an overhead power centenary system.

And others have read the Grandlinq contract, it sets explicit requirements for operations in acclimate weather, requirements that Grandlinq is not meeting.

Grandlinq could easily come back with "The OCS isn't failing under the weight of the ice, the substations are supplying power, we've met our requirements. The only reason this doesn't work is that the vehicles aren't suitable for freezing rain, as they lack a second pantograph. We can couple two vehicles and then things work, but you didn't supply us enough vehicles to operate the whole system under those conditions" . A second pantograph, sometimes without current pickup and just a scraper, is a common solution to freezing rain. Something our vehicles weren't designed with, and likely outside Grandlinq's scope of responsibility.

I definitely think it's possible for there to be a reasonable argument that this is a vehicle problem. The problem is occurring at the interface between the region-supplied vehicle, and the Grandlinq-supplied OCS. That leaves room for disputes.

It's quite possible that both second pantographs and advance application of de-icing gel to the OCS are viable solutions. With both the region and Grandlinq preferring the solution that the other would have to pay for.

(03-02-2023, 06:21 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I mean, for their update, I'm placing a sizeable bet on the "Our contractor failed us..." line coming out.

That I agree with.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - mpd618 - 03-03-2023

It’s hurting the Region’s credibility that they’re basically not saying anything about the ION + ice situation to the public. Some of that is certainly because the responsibilities are unclear — which is not a point in favour of the P3 arrangement. But some is also that the Region of Waterloo just doesn’t seem interested in talking to the public.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 03-03-2023

(03-02-2023, 09:02 PM)taylortbb Wrote:
(03-02-2023, 06:21 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: The vehicles aren't the failing component though. Doors aren't freezing shut, motors aren't shutting down in the cold, this is an issue of operating an LRV in icy weather. No other vehicle would operate differently. They knew they were operating an LRV with an overhead power centenary system.

And others have read the Grandlinq contract, it sets explicit requirements for operations in acclimate weather, requirements that Grandlinq is not meeting.

Grandlinq could easily come back with "The OCS isn't failing under the weight of the ice, the substations are supplying power, we've met our requirements. The only reason this doesn't work is that the vehicles aren't suitable for freezing rain, as they lack a second pantograph. We can couple two vehicles and then things work, but you didn't supply us enough vehicles to operate the whole system under those conditions" . A second pantograph, sometimes without current pickup and just a scraper, is a common solution to freezing rain. Something our vehicles weren't designed with, and likely outside Grandlinq's scope of responsibility.

I definitely think it's possible for there to be a reasonable argument that this is a vehicle problem. The problem is occurring at the interface between the region-supplied vehicle, and the Grandlinq-supplied OCS. That leaves room for disputes.

It's quite possible that both second pantographs and advance  application of de-icing gel to the OCS are viable solutions. With both the region and Grandlinq preferring the solution that the other would have to pay for.

(03-02-2023, 06:21 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I mean, for their update, I'm placing a sizeable bet on the "Our contractor failed us..." line coming out.

That I agree with.

Grandlinqs requirements include operating the trains, not just the catenary power system. They are the operator of the whole system. They are very clearly failing at those requirements. Even if they felt that they could not operate the service in winter, they should have raised that issue. Simply silently failing to meet your contract isn't something that can be excused by "wrong equipment" They are required to KNOW what equipment they need. More, there are systems all over operating trams similar to ours (in some cases almost extremely similar as bombardier based these LRVs on ones sold in Europe) in similar weather conditions and without this problem.

The problem is not our weather conditions or trains, but the terms of the P3 being inadequate or our region being unable or unwilling to enforce those terms. If Grandlinq wants to make weak arguments in their defense of their refusal to meet their contractual obligations, they can make them in court, where they'll lose. But the region does not seem willing to force the issue.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 03-03-2023

Also, I think you folks are wrong about the timeline:

This [1] article from railjournal and this [2] one from the globe, both peg the purchase of LRVs being approved in July 2013:

[1] https://www.railjournal.com/passenger/light-rail/waterloo-opts-for-bombardier-lrvs/
[2] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/waterloo-regional-council-approves-purchase-of-bombardier-lrt-vehicles/article13124993/

But the wikipedia page [3] from Grandlink says that the RFP was issued in June with it being due by December 2013, and final contract close the next year. Grandlinq cannot claim not to have known what equipment they would be operating when they prepared their bid.

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GrandLinq

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Bob_McBob - 03-03-2023

I've posted about several mentions of "scrapers" on the scanner during recent winter storms. I gather it's a bit of a balancing act exactly how they're deployed because the carbon strips cause more wear to the OCS, especially in dry conditions. The first night of the big 48 hour outage, it didn't sound like they sent out scrapers until after trains lost power, and the ones they sent out were on hi-rails or shunters and had to laboriously move around the system working around broken down trains.

During the last storm, they specifically deployed a train equipped with a scraper around 10:45pm, 1 1/2 hours after operators started reporting power loss. They also ran coupled "ice trains" all night. It really feels like they aren't proactively addressing the issue enough, and the whole procedure of deploying scrapers and coupling trains is so long winded the system can barely function once it starts, even if they can maintain power.

https://www.schunk-group.com/transit-systems/ja/products/detail/ice-scraper-carbon-strip~p6375

https://www.schunk-carbontechnology.com/en/products/produkte-detail/integral-carbon-strip-with-arc-protection

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Bob_McBob - 03-03-2023

Lol, on the scanner just now:

"We should start a pool to see how long the ION lasts tonight."

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ac3r - 03-03-2023

(03-03-2023, 07:34 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: Lol, on the scanner just now:

"We should start a pool to see how long the ION lasts tonight."

Looks like the first cancellation was at 18:00 between Conestoga and R&T: https://twitter.com/AlertsGRT/status/1631792765418840065

At 18:25 the first Conestoga to Fairway train was cancelled: https://twitter.com/AlertsGRT/status/1631794275988955141

19:15 sees the first Fairway to Conestoga cancelled: https://twitter.com/AlertsGRT/status/1631794276920094721

There isn't even freezing rain...looking out my window there is maybe 3 centimeters of snow? What is the justification this time?

I hope this shit show of a PPP is held accountable if this is going to continue. 1 billion dollars (give or take) on a "rapid transit" system that falls apart in the slightest bit of winter precipitation, crawls along like a turtle for most of the route, has doors that seem to be breaking more frequently, constantly gets into accidents due to an absolute moronic track route and so on.

Grand River Transit, Keolis and GrandLinq suck. People hate our transit, rightfully so. This recent Reddit thread which questions "what would it take to get you to start using transit/biking" etc and most replies point to the obvious: the LRT is slow as shit - you can walk faster than it moves in many places - and busing anywhere takes way more time than it should. A 15 minute drive by car can be an hour long, multi-bus and/or LRT journey. They can't manage the bare minimum and make transit for a region with a population so large an embarrassing situation. And now it seems like when it comes to winter time, everything falls apart. And the price to use it just keeps going up and up and up.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - nms - 03-03-2023

Out of curiosity, how do Toronto's equivalent LRVs fare during this kind of weather? If their performance is better in the winter, what are they doing differently?