AFIAK, it would require some upgrades to bridges for weight concerns and power upgrades. The loop at Ashmont is also pretty tight (but should make it, I think), and the Mattapan work yard/hut/house would need to be redone to support the longer rolling stock/maintence. Totally doable, and hopefully what happens in the future (run a mix of PCCs and Type-7s as they are 'retired').i've been mystified as to why regular/older GL cars can't work on the Ashmont–Mattapan High Speed....
why not use the type _ cars until they get bashed in/ destroyed?
is it not practical to run em into the ground?
or do they cause far too much trouble as they wear out?
This.AFIAK, it would require some upgrades to bridges for weight concerns and power upgrades
That is by far the most unlikely result that will come out of the replacement study - well, full red line conversion or bustitution are booth equally unlikely. As a daily user, I am just hoping to get the hand me down type-7s as that seems like the best solution.Well, I thank that I've read that the T is contemplating replacing the Mattapan High-speed Line by extending the Red Line through that spot with the Red Line, taking over, so.
Yes, I was pretty shocked when I read that the current Lechmere viaduct can only support one train in each direction at a time.This.
Same goes for why the steel part of the Lechmere viaduct has to be replaced (trains get heavier and more power-hungry as they've already gotten about 2x to 4x longer and heavier than the original PCCs (as used @ Mattapan) and this next-gen trainset gets longer still), and why the concrete part needs upgrading structurally and for power delivery.
LTK did the same thing at same stage in the process for NJ Transit's MultiLevel EMU commuter rail procurement. That contract involved specs development for the first-ever NEC-dimensions compatible bi-level EMU's. Was awarded to LTK in mid-2014, they delivered their specs work in to NJT mid-2017, and the formal RFP to manufacturers was issued in Feb. 2018 and is currently open with deadline for bid award coming before end of this calendar year (betting odds: it's Bombardier's procurement to lose since they do so much biz with NJT).The FMCB approved a contract today with LTK Engineering Services to provide program management services for the Type 10 contract. LTK will, among other things, be drafting the specifications for the vehicles and related infrastructure, overseeing the contractors to ensure that everything moves according to schedule, and perform quality assurance of the resulting work. According to the schedule within the presentation, production deliveries of the cars is set to begin in February of 2025.
It's way early to be claiming that, because there's no way of telling this early if scope of the job is biting off more than anyone can chew.I'm glad to see that you think the Type 10s are in good hands.
Having just gotten back from vacation in Berge & Oslo, Norway, and Amsterdam, Netherlands, I feel so sad about the street trolleys in Boston....all low-floor and stretched length for Boston
Having just gotten back from vacation in Berge & Oslo, Norway, and Amsterdam, Netherlands, I feel so sad about the street trolleys in Boston.
The fact that people spend half their boarding time climbing up into the trolley, because they are not all flat like those in Berge for example, and that we only board at the front, is so inefficient. I'm quite excited to hear that we'll have all flat cars in 2025, and pay at every door in 2020-1.
I do hope the new cars can also have wide, high speed doors, as the current green line cars strike me as having (front) doors no wider than my grandparents' PCCs. I don't have measurements, but the doors of the Berge (Skyss bybanen, run by Keolis) are much nicer. I hope that's in the 2025 bid/design too.
9's and 10's will be able to trainline. The new CAF cars have no backwards-compatible trainlining ability with the Type 7's or 8's, but by cleanrooming the MU electronics the 24-to-54 units on-order (depending on whether the +30 options get tapped) will be forward-compatible with the 200+ car all- low-floor procurement.The Type 10s will. And that procurement will start very shortly after these 9s and the Green Line Extension get up and running. Type 10 will be a full fleet replacement.
Doesn't this lock them into CAF as the vendor for the Type 10s, though? I thought there was no standard for MU systems for light rail.9's and 10's will be able to trainline. The new CAF cars have no backwards-compatible trainlining ability with the Type 7's or 8's, but by cleanrooming the MU electronics the 24-to-54 units on-order (depending on whether the +30 options get tapped) will be forward-compatible with the 200+ car all- low-floor procurement.
This is incorrect. The Type 10s are 112.5ft long, the current cars are 74ft long, making them a 2-for-3 replacement of the existing fleet. This was chosen partly because Boylston and Science Park are hard limited to 225ft, so operation of 300ft trains was never going to be feasible. A pair of Type-10s will provide the capacity of a 4 car set of Type-7/8/9s, in the length of three old cars, but that comes from decreased lost space fewer couplers, operator cabs, etc. The whole modernization plan is focused on getting to systemwide 225ft platforms, which is easy on the D and E and hard as hell on the B and C, to enable pairs of new cars to operate.A two-car train of Type 10's is roughly the length of a FOUR-car train from today's fleet. No branch on the system as of 2018 has platforms 100% compliant with a train of that length. However, the D and E between them have only 5 stations left to settle up with platform lengthenings while the B and C have a whopping 15. So the plan is that 2-car 10/10 supertrains will only be running on the Riverside-Medford and Heath-Union schedules first, as all 5 short stations on the D+E will be easy to settle up by 2022 (Newton Highlands is already in design for ADA and lengthening).