Green Line Type 10 Procurement

ceo said:
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.
Click to expand...

No less a vendor lock-in than DC-traction Kinki-Sharyo Type 7's from 1986 being retrofitted to MU with with AC-traction Breda Type 8's from 1998. There's no universal industry standard for MU'ing, but you can spec a compatibility baseline that accommodates a buyer's own mixed fleet. It's actually easier now than it was when the 7/8 MU'ing system was kludged together 20 years ago because the newest generations of rolling stock are so software-heavy that establishing trainlining compatibility is more about firmware programming than electrical/mechanical mods.

The break in backwards compatibility on the Type 9's was to ensure that whatever MU compatibility customization is done with the Type 10's stays largely firmware-oriented and requires fewest component touches.
 
Per NETransit. . .

The T has declined the contract option with CAF for an additional 30 Type 9 cars, opting instead to proceed full-speed with Type 10 design work. The ongoing order will be capped at the contract base of only 24 cars.

This says a lot about how quickly they plan to expedite all the prelim work on design and lineside modifications for the next-gen stretched cars, as well as what willingness the state is telegraphing about lining up funding for this massive 200-unit procurement. If the Type 10 Request for Proposals were on a pace to lag for a few years starved for funds they would've conversely felt moved to draw on those extra 30 Type 9 options right now so they could start running 3-car trains more immediately for overcrowding relief. This move indicates they feel somewhat confident they can wrap up the GLT study data collection and get a Request for Proposals to the starting gate within no more than a couple years.

----- ----- ----- ----- -----

In other trolley miscellany: the Type 7 rebuild program is winding down, with just 6 units--all of them late-90's era 3700's--left at Alstom in NY, and two more back at Riverside for testing. All 86 of the 3600-series rebuilds are now back in revenue service, including wreck rebuild car 3609 which just rejoined the active roster for the first time in over 10 years. All of the other 3600-series wrecks that held as parts donors for the program have now been scrapped, and the three wrecked-beyond-repair 3700's at Riverside that are being stripped for parts for the program will get scrapped in the next few weeks to make room for more Type 9 deliveries.

With 8 Bredas out long-term for lack of parts, there's now 9 more active Type 7's than Type 8's...a number that's going to swell over the next month to a 17-car differential.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Per NETransit. . .

The T has declined the contract option with CAF for an additional 30 Type 9 cars, opting instead to proceed full-speed with Type 10 design work. The ongoing order will be capped at the contract base of only 24 cars.

...

This move indicates they feel somewhat confident they can wrap up the GLT study data collection and get a Request for Proposals to the starting gate within no more than a couple years.

...

With 8 Bredas out long-term for lack of parts, there's now 9 more active Type 7's than Type 8's...a number that's going to swell over the next month to a 17-car differential.
Click to expand...

This is great news on the Type 10 front. Hopefully they can make it work with all that line prep they need to do in advance of the new design.

The ratio of 7s to 8s would be hilarious if it weren't such a huge negative impact to the functioning of the Green Line. As a rider thereof, I don't have the luxury of having enough distance to appreciate the humor.

Thanks for the update.
 
FWIW...all-7's consists are not "banned" in any way on accessibility grounds. It's just that an all- high-floor train would have to be directly followed on the same given branch by a train with a low-floor car in it to avoid an accessibility shortfall on consecutive trains. There's always been more rostered 7's than 8's because of the contract settlement with Breda truncating that order short of its units goal. This is just the first time since the full Breda fleet was accepted for service that the number of day-to-day available Kinkis has significantly outstripped day-to-day available Bredas, and thus the first time that 7-7 trains (which have always made very infrequent cameos during any given service week) are going to be on any sort of noticeable regular rotation. And it figures to stay that way for awhile since the parts warehouse for the rebuilt 7's has been amply restocked by Alstom + stripping/scrapping of all the unrepairable cars. Conversely those eight sidelined Type 8's need the FCMB to approve a component renewal/custom-parts buy procurement before they can get touched with a single shop wrench, because there's nothing available right now to get them running again.
 
Any chance we'll see 3-car 7-8-7 or 7-7-8 consists?
 
Arlington said:
Any chance we'll see 3-car 7-8-7 or 7-7-8 consists?
Click to expand...

I don't see why not, since they've done it before with these fleets and the car supply will be flush as more Type 9's get added. I guess it would depend on what projects are in the near-term construction queue. They might refrain from it if there's significant power or platform repair work scheduled. Otherwise at least the D should be able to handle it seamlessly. Possibly also the B since they made that work last time on a trial basis by tweaking the stopping points to squeeze in door openings on the short un-renovated platforms like Blandford and the stops up the hill. It could also be expedited a little better than last time by assigning the staff with hand scanners to the priority surface stops running triplets.

They do plan to put the 8 sidelined Bredas through repair when parts get ordered, so that will help too. That just doesn't have a schedule attached to it yet because the FCMB has to vote on putting the parts package out to bid as part of a larger procurement for selective component replacement on the whole Type 8 fleet (not a rebuild, just targeted maint for the most worn-out systems so the fleet lasts 5-7 more years at tolerable reliability).

-------------------------

One thing getting the Type 8 maint package squared will allow for is sidelining a few Type 7's from revenue service so they can be converted into work cars that'll last awhile. The 3 Boeing work cars have all been sidelined for 2+ years with shot propulsion that can't be easily repaired from lack of parts:

  • Re-railer car (all-white paint with black/yellow "T maintenance" stripes...used to be stored on the pocket track between Boylston-Arlington). Tasked with towing derailed vehicles and fitted with hydraulic equipment for getting a vehicle back on the tracks, while interior stores hand tools and inspection equipment.
  • Track geometry inspection car (orange & creme paint like a PCC), which analyzes track alignment
  • Maintenance of Way car (dark-green), used for "dirty jobs" like ROW trash pickup or transporting track gangs and their greasy tools to a job site
At least 3 of the Kinkis are needed to replace those critical functions, since it puts too much strain on a revenue car to have to borrow it for that kind of heavy-lifting. And they're also short on many other work former PCC work cars that were retired in the late-90's when the overhead wire was changed from dual- trolley pole + pantograph compatible to strictly pantograph hangers in anticipation of the Bredas. Snow plowing, for one, is currently done by revenue vehicles; they probably could use another +1-2 general-purpose MOW cars for that. And there might be other specialty tasks befitting a specialty trolley conversion as opposed to just bringing in generic diesel track equipment from Everett Shops.
 
Posted aboard newly in-service Kinki rebuild 3700 between Park & Boylston. . .


New trolley smell is a very nice smell.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Posted aboard newly in-service Kinki rebuild 3700 between Park & Boylston. . .


New trolley smell is a very nice smell.
Click to expand...

I'm still looking to get on board a Type 9 (nvm a refurb type 7) and see the new trolley feel, so far I've only been able to find them in testing and not actually get on one...
 
HelloBostonHi said:
I'm still looking to get on board a Type 9 (nvm a refurb type 7) and see the new trolley feel, so far I've only been able to find them in testing and not actually get on one...
Click to expand...

There's still only 1 CAF car in-service, which means you'll virtually never find it running during peak because singlets at rush are a form of torture. Apparently some door issue is holding up car 3901 from being accepted into service, so not being able to run as pairs limits where they can slot 3900 in the service rotation.


FWIW, "new trolley smell" has a vaguely leathery air to it. 3700 has only been back in-service for a couple days, so the seat cushions (which are MUCH comfier than the old ones) and squeaky-clean floor rubber were still giving off a fresh-from-factory smell. Also felt like the 3700's HVAC units still blow interior air a lot harder than the 3600's...which was very true of the pre-rebuilds, but now that both the 1986 and 1997 fleets have been given exactly the same heating and A/C retrofits I wonder if the 37's were simply born with bigger air ducts in the ceiling.
 
Per NETransit, Type 9 3901 finally accepted into service. You now have a much better chance of seeing them in the wild any hour of the day with two revenue cars being able to run in a pair, instead of formerly singlet 3900 having to play keep-away from peak hours like before.
 
I noticed this alarming post on Railroad.net

On Friday, 15-Feb-19, with stopwatch in hand, I went for a few LRV rides. The front door mirror on the Type-9s is only part of the problem. On the Type-9s, the front door takes 8 seconds to open and ten seconds to close before the train can move. This includes the time for the mirror to unfold/unfold as well as the door opening procedure. By contrast, the Type-7s and the Type-8s take two seconds to open and two seconds to close. That’s fourteen extra seconds at each and every stop. With eighteen stops from Park to Riverside, that’s more than four minutes. Of course, if one is a commuter who goes both ways, that’s eight minutes a day or forty minutes a week.

Because the train is undergoing testing, there is a supervisor on the train in addition to the motorman. When I reported my findings to the supervisor, he was totally unconcerned.

But wait, there’s more. When I went online about 10:40, car 3900 was inbound at Copley. The next Riverside car inbound was one minute behind them. I don’t know when either car left Riverside, but read on.

When I went online at 11:21, car 3900 was at Fenway, outbound. Best case, I figured 30 minutes to Riverside at current scheduled times, and another five minutes back to Waban, which is where I get on the train. When I arrived at the station at 11:55, car 3900 was already at the station, but he was outbound. It had taken him 34 minutes to go ten stops, or 3.4 minutes per stop. Back in 1959, the schedule was 2.0 minutes per stop. This was 70% longer than 1959, and 33% longer than current time tables. After 3900 left for Riverside, two trains followed within six minutes.

After I parked my car and was waiting for 3900 inbound, a type7/8 train passed Waban at 12:07. One minute later, at 12:08, car 3900 picked me up. Because we were right behind the previous train, there were no passengers at Eliot, Newton Highlands, or Newton Center. We saved 54 seconds because the doors did not open. I wonder if this was intentional. When we arrived at Copley at 12:42, it had taken us 34 minutes to go 13 stops, or 2.6 minutes per stop. Despite the 54 second savings, we still took longer than the scheduled 2.5 minutes per stop.
Click to expand...

When I asked the inspector to whom I should address this problem, he would not tell me. His tart response was that the vehicle was working as designed. Period. He tried to blame it on the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and he grew annoyed when I was not accepting that excuse. The tone of his voice was, "Go away, little boy. You bother me."
Click to expand...

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=65717&start=570
 
That guy on Railroad.net dare I say, cares a litttttlllleeee bit too much about every single tiny thing about the MBTA if you read some more of his posts. And I mean yeah he's probably not wrong, but look at the speed of the stainless steel series redline cars vs the old orange line cars. The orange line doors absolutely fuckin slam shut whereas the new cars slowly shut (I suspect the difference between air and non air doors). I personally think it's a pretty big overreaction from someone who cares just a little bit too much. Also inspectors, drivers, and station personnel have no say in the speeds the doors open or close and you know what if I was an inspector minding my own business I would be pretty pissed off if some random dude came up and tried to tell me how to do my job. They're operating as designed he's correct and absolutely not the right person to bitch at if you have a problem with how they're designed. And yes the ADA has strict requirements on the strangest of things but if it is in fact an ADA requirement then there is literally nothing the MBTA can do about it.
 
That post was exactly 1 month ago. There are CAF techs doing ride-alongs all day weeding out little quirks that'll only show themselves under hundreds of hours of real-life usage conditions.


I remember the Bredas very well when they were first introduced. The door sensors were so oversensitive and the folding mechanisms so slow it could take multiple minutes to get them closed at a crowded platform because they'd just cycle endlessly. Made worse by the door chimes being deafeningly loud and so shrilly high-pitched they could make a dog's ears bleed. It was most definitely complained about, and most definitely made trains late.

Guess what: between pilots and production cars they recalibrated the sensors, sped up the door motors, and completely changed the tone of the chimes. Of all the numerous things that suck about those cars, the door timings--once the very worst customer-facing experience--ceased being one of those problems about 19+ years ago.


As it goes with almost literally every pilot car ever delivered in any new/updated-design rolling stock procurement in the last hundred years. We don't ever remember this annoying stuff after it gets fixed.
 
For my money, I think the T (and other public organizations) need to realize that citizen advocacy is only going to become more pervasive, not less. Joe or Joanne Inspector shouldn't have to answer Yellowspoon's questions -- but they should also be trained to know exactly whom to direct members of the public to (ideally a single person, with a name). That solves the entire problem. It gets people like Yellowspoon to move along, it allows the inspector to get back to work, and it provides a clear channel for legitimate concerns to be raised (and for people to feel listened to). For better or worse, being in public in a T uniform means that you are seen as a representative of the T, just like if I'm wearing a company polo shirt at a conference, I'm seen to be representing my company. In both cases, management shouldn't leave their employees to fend for themselves, but should give clear guidelines about where to direct concerns to.

Hell, in the T's case, print out business cards with the contact information for the designated point-person and make sure all employees have access to them and can carry a few any time they're in uniform. A customer starts to bug them with questions they shouldn't have to answer, "Here you go, sir, contact this person and they should be able to give you more information. Have a lovely day."
 
Riverside said:
For my money, I think the T (and other public organizations) need to realize that citizen advocacy is only going to become more pervasive, not less. Joe or Joanne Inspector shouldn't have to answer Yellowspoon's questions -- but they should also be trained to know exactly whom to direct members of the public to (ideally a single person, with a name). That solves the entire problem. It gets people like Yellowspoon to move along, it allows the inspector to get back to work, and it provides a clear channel for legitimate concerns to be raised (and for people to feel listened to). For better or worse, being in public in a T uniform means that you are seen as a representative of the T, just like if I'm wearing a company polo shirt at a conference, I'm seen to be representing my company. In both cases, management shouldn't leave their employees to fend for themselves, but should give clear guidelines about where to direct concerns to.

Hell, in the T's case, print out business cards with the contact information for the designated point-person and make sure all employees have access to them and can carry a few any time they're in uniform. A customer starts to bug them with questions they shouldn't have to answer, "Here you go, sir, contact this person and they should be able to give you more information. Have a lovely day."
Click to expand...

Oh geez, don't bring COMMON SENSE into the discussion!!!!

It is pathetic that this simple standard operating procedure in almost every other city is somehow a foreign concept with the T.
 
As far as contacting the 'T, I agree that a single point of contact for complaints/questions/suggestions makes sense. I have found that tweeting @MBTA is usually quite effective. Probably all forms of social media should work. I'd put those on the card, and maybe the name and e-mail address of a single official. But emphasize social media first, named ombudsman as last resort.
 
HenryAlan said:
As far as contacting the 'T, I agree that a single point of contact for complaints/questions/suggestions makes sense. I have found that tweeting @MBTA is usually quite effective. Probably all forms of social media should work. I'd put those on the card, and maybe the name and e-mail address of a single official. But emphasize social media first, named ombudsman as last resort.
Click to expand...

Yeah tweeting is better because its public. Everything is goes into the void
 
And then there was one: Type 7 car 3707, a wreck revival that hasn't run in years, is the very last car left in the rebuild program at Alstom. All others are back in service, with the 2 most recent returnees to Riverside undergoing non-revenue testing before rejoining the revenue ranks sometime next week. 3707 will malinger a little while longer since it's being spliced backed together with donor parts. The last three unrepairable wrecks sitting behind Riverside--partially stripped cars 3703, 3711, 3719--will probably be scrapped in the next couple weeks to make room for more Type 9 deliveries.

The active Kinki ranks have now swelled over the century mark, and other than 1 or 2 cars held for a few days after collisions with autos or for being the trailing car in a Type 8 derailment...none of the rebuilds have yet gone out-of-service with any significant breakdowns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top