Green Line Type 10 Procurement

Jahvon09 said:
The co. that's making the new Red & Orange Line railcars say that even if one of the doors were to not operate & won't open, a passenger in a wheelchair can still get on the train just by using the one side door that opens.
Click to expand...

Are there any non-MBTA examples of subway / metro / light rail doors that are at least as wide as what we're going to have on the new Red Line / Orange Line cars?
 
citylover94 said:
The type 10's haven't been designed yet so we don't know exactly how wide the doors will be the Type 9's are really just slightly revamped Type 8's. I will say though that as far as I know there aren't any Light Rail trains with doors quite that wide but I could be wrong as I can't remember the exact dimensions. I would expect the Type 10's to be an off the shelf or nearly off the shelf design now that the inner loop at Lechmere will no longer be a constraining factor once the GLX is completed and it is currently the tightest curve in the system.
Click to expand...

http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=309512#post309512 has some discussion and a link to a thesis that has a whole bunch of detail on the tight curves; it seems to be the case that merely eliminating the Lechmere loop isn't nearly enough to run off the shelf light rail cars. There's also discussion there that maybe there's a trade off where being able to handle a tighter curve radius might limit top speed to less than what ought to be achievable on the D branch.

We should keep in mind that Boston has one of the busier light rail systems in this country, and that implies that rather than trying to copy the average US light rail system, we ought to be thinking about whether there are things we should be doing a bit differently to maximize capacity. Given how busy the MBTA Green Line is, it might very well be appropriate for it to end up with the widest doors of any light rail system in the country.
 
Joel N. Weber II said:
Are there any non-MBTA examples of subway / metro / light rail doors that are at least as wide as what we're going to have on the new Red Line / Orange Line cars?
Click to expand...

Yes. The NYCT R110A cars have 64 inch wide doorways, exactly the same as on the new Red and Orange Line cars.
 
Yes, that is correct. They were used to test the technology that would eventually be incorporated into the R142/R142A fleets. As for vehicles that are currently in service, I recall that most of the Hong Kong MTR heavy rail vehicles had doorways that were of similar width. They were much wider than other doorways that I had seen. I also believe that some of London Underground's rolling stock have some pretty wide doorways.
 
Joel N. Weber II said:
Are there any non-MBTA examples of subway / metro / light rail doors that are at least as wide as what we're going to have on the new Red Line / Orange Line cars?
Click to expand...


None that I know of.

Even the newest trains on the Blue Line don't have doors that wide.
 
datadyne007 said:
No, they open out.
Click to expand...

These are plug doors (the same style as on the Boeing LRVs and San Francisco's Bredas, but an improved mechanical design) that slide rather than fold. They're safer on the extremely narrow platforms on the B and C branches, and are compatible with 12" high platforms for true level boarding (which the MBTA will hopefully move to with the Type 10s).
 
Joel N. Weber II said:
http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=309512#post309512 has some discussion and a link to a thesis that has a whole bunch of detail on the tight curves; it seems to be the case that merely eliminating the Lechmere loop isn't nearly enough to run off the shelf light rail cars. There's also discussion there that maybe there's a trade off where being able to handle a tighter curve radius might limit top speed to less than what ought to be achievable on the D branch.

We should keep in mind that Boston has one of the busier light rail systems in this country, and that implies that rather than trying to copy the average US light rail system, we ought to be thinking about whether there are things we should be doing a bit differently to maximize capacity. Given how busy the MBTA Green Line is, it might very well be appropriate for it to end up with the widest doors of any light rail system in the country.
Click to expand...

Likely the only modification necessary is a front shaped like the one on the Type 8 and Type 9 trains which is the only major change required right now to make the vehicles compatible with the curves. I don't believe that has any effect on top speed and that the speed limits are because of the Type 8's higher derailment risk.

Boston does have by far the busiest light rail system particularly when comparing riders per mile. The green line actually has more riders per mile than any heavy rail transit system in the country other than the NYC subway, the PATH system, and the MBTA subway so I can see how having wider doors would be a benefit that should be considered as long as it isn't cost ineffective to buy custom equipment. There is always the risk of having more mechanical issues when making requests for more customization.
 
citylover94 said:
Likely the only modification necessary is a front shaped like the one on the Type 8 and Type 9 trains which is the only major change required right now to make the vehicles compatible with the curves.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is just the nose shape, but also the wheelbase and how long the un-pinched low floor can be that's the issue.

What would it take to get Type 10 to have two doors per side per low floor section? Two per side per end, (8 in total, both sides), versus the Type 8's total of only 4 low-section doors?

It seems like other systems, besides having square noses (with no door), have longer unpinched low floor sections between the center bogie and the front/rear bogie/nose, allowing them to have a longer, full-width low-floor section, which seems like a longer wheelbase (and longer turning radius).

In cities like Norfolk , Baltimore, and Minneapolis, it is easier to roll a bike, stroller, or wheelchair into the low floor section because you can roll forward to the other doors, instead of having to back out (or 360 turn) to get back out the door you entered

Other systems seem to pull this off by either having longer trains (simply stretching the train in the low-floor sections) or by at least placing the bogies farther apart (resulting in a longer turning radius that the T can't accommodate)
 
The EGE said:
These are plug doors (the same style as on the Boeing LRVs and San Francisco's Bredas, but an improved mechanical design) that slide rather than fold. They're safer on the extremely narrow platforms on the B and C branches, and are compatible with 12" high platforms for true level boarding (which the MBTA will hopefully move to with the Type 10s).
Click to expand...

Does that mean we won't see these on street running portions of the E Branch? The fold out doors present the warning message to drivers that they must stop for disembarking passengers. How would these cars provide such notice?
 
HenryAlan said:
Does that mean we won't see these on street running portions of the E Branch? The fold out doors present the warning message to drivers that they must stop for disembarking passengers. How would these cars provide such notice?
Click to expand...

Is that warning message actually effective? I seem to recall that, having learned to drive in a different state (one where I believe the only railroad crossings involve a tourist railroad, which I believe always has flaggers for the crossings because they don't expect drivers there to actually know how to deal with a railroad crossing) the first one or perhaps few times I was driving in the right lane when a Green Line train stopped in the left lane, I was completely confused by the situation, and the stop sign on the door really didn't help me to understand it at all. (I might have been less confused by this if the state driving manual had explicitly stated that this currently only occurs on the E branch on Huntington and South Huntington at the Fenwood Road, Mission Park, Riverway, and Back of the Hill stops; I think I may have seen the text, and figured it was completely obsolete and therefore ignorable based on what I had seen with the B and C branches and / or inner E.)

Installing school bus style stops signs might be a lot more effective. People might not quite be expecting to find those on a Green Line train instead of a yellow school bus, but I think drivers everywhere in this country do learn about school bus stop signs.

Better yet, we could build proper wheelchair accessible boarding platforms that would eliminate the need for passengers to cross the travel lane while the train is stopped at Mission Park and Riverway, and eliminate Fenwood Road and Back of the Hill.
 
So here's the Type 10 presentation from the 5/7/18 FMCB that everyone is talking about:
https://cdn.mbta.com/sites/default/...formation-program-construction-management.pdf

BBa2neoh.png

rczgnbsh.png

mX5fdyhh.png

V3ptmi7h.png

HKkF2Z2h.png

G7ukrlJh.png

vUcAeAqh.png

TGBXuTQh.png

4UT9Cc1h.png

P4r1PIfh.png

GXL6c5Ih.png

4psEMN3h.png

BGQ0tseh.png

s9nqYEWh.png

xzHUgdwh.png

yr8sFGdh.png

dmvqIxRh.png

fjTz7iah.png

PB2QlRYh.png

PELorxSh.png

4FQjAZ4h.png

3obNV0dh.png

mMVmqpEh.png

mmS2Q4Xh.png

xL2XGWzh.png

6agiE3bh.png
 
Thanks buddy, for doing this upgrade!

This helps to put a whole new light on things. The MBTA is really planning to make commuting smooth for everyone, I think. I love those renderings of how the vehicles may look. They need to get away from the current design & go with something new & fresh.

The idea of no stairs to climb sounds good to me! :cool:
 
Re: MBTA is Considering a Complete Green Line Replacement.

and the article you linked is more than 2 years old
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top