Green Line Type 10 Procurement

IMG_0055.jpeg

Via MBTA: New Type 10 Green Line vehicle being tested on tracks at the manufacturing facility in Elmira, New York

Source | Reddit post
 
Still frustrating that they aren’t carrying the transparency from the original shutdown plan forward.
 
6086.png

So the schedule has apparently slipped this year, but not by too much - if I read this slide from the initial contract approval correctly, all 4 pilot cars should have been delivered by spring 2026. Depending on how quickly the next three pilot cars follow, we're probably about 9-12 months behind. That said, I'm not particulary concerned by that - certainly much better than the CRRC deliveries, and the prerequisite infrastructure updates have slipped further.
 
RandomWalk said:
www.nbcboston.com

PHOTOS: MBTA's new Green Line trains have officially arrived in Mass.

The first of the MBTA's new Green Line train cars have arrived in Massachusetts, and we got a first look at their arrival.
www.nbcboston.com www.nbcboston.com

That was a surprise.
Click to expand...
Grabbed some screenshots to try to compare if they were in fact able to make the path between the seats a bit wider.

IMG_6528.jpeg

IMG_6529.jpeg

IMG_6530.jpeg



Compared to
1790875258526.jpeg

CDZO534DIRD75J4RRSCWPZKSOE.JPG

1790875302140.jpeg

1790875321691.jpeg

1790875356920.jpeg

www.bostonglobe.com

Get a sneak peek of the MBTA’s new Green Line trolley at City Hall Plaza - The Boston Globe

A full-scale mockup of the new Green Line trolley will be accessible Tuesday and Wednesday and MBTA staff will be on hand to gather feedback.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com


Its hard to tell but it does honestly look a little wider.
 
Last edited:
stick n move said:
I like em but they definitely did manage to make new cars look older than they are. Those circular lights on the front could have definitely looked a bit more modern.
Click to expand...
Something something historic preservation and neighborhood character
 
stick n move said:
Its hard to tell but it does honestly look a little wider.
Click to expand...
I'll agree, but at the same time looking at these images I have to wonder why "100% low-floor" was something we actually need in a car anyway.

It's rather obvious that even if it is technically, theoretically, possible for a person in a wheelchair or with a stroller to get it down that aisle if zero other people were on the car, in practice they will never be leaving the car section they enter in.

In which case we probably could have had a cheaper train that held more people and had the same effective level of accessibility.
 
millerm277 said:
I'll agree, but at the same time looking at these images I have to wonder why "100% low-floor" was something we actually need in a car anyway.

It's rather obvious that even if it is technically, theoretically, possible for a person in a wheelchair or with a stroller to get it down that aisle if zero other people were on the car, in practice they will never be leaving the car section they enter in.

In which case we probably could have had a cheaper train that held more people and had the same effective level of accessibility.
Click to expand...
Anecdotally, I've seen at least 5 people fall on the interior stairs of the Green Line Type 8/9, including my pregnant wife. Some operators are heavy on the brake/accelerator, which can create dangerous conditions for people on/near the stairs of a crowded train.
 
Badusername said:
Anecdotally, I've seen at least 5 people fall on the interior stairs of the Green Line Type 8/9, including my pregnant wife. Some operators are heavy on the brake/accelerator, which can create dangerous conditions for people on/near the stairs of a crowded train.
Click to expand...
The interior stairs are absolutely dangerous, particularly in bad weather when the steps are wet or slick with slush brought in on passenger's feet.

The stairs also impede movement of people on and off of the train -- even though not at the doors, they slow the ability to gain access to the door area from the seating area, and vice versa.
 
HenryAlan said:
No, a level deck can hold more people than one with stairs. There are many good reasons to go with this design -- eliminating the stairs enhances safety and capacity.
Click to expand...
There also aren't as many near- off-shelf shopping options for combo high-and-low floor vehicles. Most modern makes of tram these days either all low-floor or all high-floor. The half-and-half era was pretty short-lived because it was just too hard to design modular mass-market product families around. So if the T had stuck with that design, they'd be buying completely bespoke vehicles again at a steep markup, dubious long-term parts support, and all the teething risks that come with that...instead of getting something that's 80%+ made up of a battle-tested CAF Urbos 3. The agency's Type 8 trauma casts a very long shadow. They absolutely had no choice but to evolve away from bespoke designs as much as they could physically muster, and that pretty much eliminated half-and-half designs from consideration because the only mass-market adaptable buying options were all-low-floor.
 
HenryAlan said:
No, a level deck can hold more people than one with stairs. There are many good reasons to go with this design -- eliminating the stairs enhances safety and capacity.
Click to expand...
If that's true, then never mind.

I was going off of the claims I've seen by some that the narrow-ness here is due to having to fit all the equipment into a 100% low-floor design, which implies that you could have gotten more interior square footage by not going with one.
 
millerm277 said:
I was going off of the claims I've seen by some that the narrow-ness here is due to having to fit all the equipment into a 100% low-floor design, which implies that you could have gotten more interior square footage by not going with one.
Click to expand...
If they were going to do a stretched supercar with half-and-half configuration, some of the low-level sections would have to have powered bogies instead of being unpowered like the Type 8/9 center trucks. That would end up constraining the space exactly as much as the all-low cars on the low-level sections, while still having to deal with the huge capacity/flow/safety downsides of the stairs. It would be a worse overall passenger experience than even what they have now, while also being bespoke-as-hell on the design. It's way better to just do 100% low-floor. While the seating arrangement may not be the platonic ideal, these cars will be bona fide crowd-swallowers for standees and way less a hazard for moving around despite the narrow aisles.
 
While I agree that interior stairs aren't good for anyone, I do think part of the issue in the narrow section is really just seat layout. In other LRT vehicles I've been in, including stock Urbos 3s, that doorless section has had fewer seats in at least a partial transverse layout with mechanicals under those seats so that riders legs and feet aren't in the aisle, while still giving space for the wheels. I just think the Type 10s segments are too short to actually accomplish that while retaining any semblance of seating capacity - no room on the ends for those doubles and their foot space. As a result, I think the Type 10 is perhaps just somewhat less efficiently packaged than a stock Urbos - a quick "I guessed" at volume and I actually think what systems are under some of those more inboard seats is probably in the wall pillars which is why they're extra beefy.
6215.jpg

Also, Remember that since the T is replacing doubles with single Type 10s, there'd actually be fewer seats overall despite the additional area, so I suspect they're doubly concerned about retaining as many as possible - I suspect if they went transverse they'd only have been able to get 4 seats in that section instead of 12. I also recently came across this description of the vehicles exact capacities, and they are notably lighter than previous vehicles though - somehow, CAF thinks they'll be substantially lighter than the Type 9s.
6211.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top