Green Line Type 10 Procurement

The 105th and final Type 7 rebuild, wreck repaired car 3707, just entered service to put a formal wrap on the overhaul program. The last 3 non-rebuilt cars on the property at Riverside--wrecked-beyond-repair cars 3703, 3711, 3719--will be stripped for parts and scrapped.

Hopefully all the bandwidth they'd been devoting to getting the recent backlog of Kinki rebuild returns tested and burned-in can now be directed towards picking up the sub-glacial pace of Type 9 acceptances.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Hopefully all the bandwidth they'd been devoting to getting the recent backlog of Kinki rebuild returns tested and burned-in can now be directed towards picking up the sub-glacial pace of Type 9 acceptances.
Click to expand...

Funny that you say that because looks like they're out testing in full force today. Also according to netransit they're getting ready to accept the first production GL type 9, 3901 and 3900 being the accepted pilot cars. Lastly, netransit also says type 9's won't trainline with type 10's.

glol.png
 
HelloBostonHi said:
Funny that you say that because looks like they're out testing in full force today. Also according to netransit they're getting ready to accept the first production GL type 9, 3901 and 3900 being the accepted pilot cars. Lastly, netransit also says type 9's won't trainline with type 10's.

glol.png
Click to expand...

Interesting. F-Line, what's your source on them being compatible? The rumblings about sending the Type 9's down to Mattapan make a bit more sense if they won't be compatible with the future Type 10s.

EDIT: Looks like NETransit merely says they won't be required to be compatible.
 
ulrichomega said:
Interesting. F-Line, what's your source on them being compatible? The rumblings about sending the Type 9's down to Mattapan make a bit more sense if they won't be compatible with the future Type 10s.

EDIT: Looks like NETransit merely says they won't be required to be compatible.
Click to expand...

It means nothing's finalized because the Type 10 RFP is nowhere near ready. The trainlining electronics on the Type 9's was revamped to get rid of all legacy analog cruft and employ software abstraction for easier forward compatibility. For the 10's they either could have mandated plug-and-play compatibility as a requirement by having the bidders build to the software, or just included a feature preference for it as a scoring variable for the bidding to see what the bidders offered before making their stance. They started out leaning towards the former earlier on in the study that became GLT...now seem to be leaning towards the latter. And it might swing a couple more times before anything is put out to formal bid.

At any rate, it doesn't mean the 10's won't be trainline-compatible just because they don't have a binding mandate to be so. Since the newest makes are all very software-heavy it's not a big technical hurdle to build in the software abstraction layer for MU'ing with a Type 9. Bidders can assess technical feasibility and costs involved and offer it as an option. If they say they can do it, there's no reason for the T not to opt for it as a feature because universal trainlining compatibility is an asset. Not mandating it yet means they're just casting a wider net for potential makes and builders, and haven't yet drilled down far enough to decide whether this is a feature worth thinning the field over.


BTW...even if a handful of cars go to Mattapan, at least two-thirds of the fleet is staying on the Green Line. Nothing really changes on the fleet management side.
 
HelloBostonHi, what website is that screenshot from?
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
It means nothing's finalized because the Type 10 RFP is nowhere near ready. The trainlining electronics on the Type 9's was revamped to get rid of all legacy analog cruft and employ software abstraction for easier forward compatibility. For the 10's they either could have mandated plug-and-play compatibility as a requirement by having the bidders build to the software, or just included a feature preference for it as a scoring variable for the bidding to see what the bidders offered before making their stance. They started out leaning towards the former earlier on in the study that became GLT...now seem to be leaning towards the latter. And it might swing a couple more times before anything is put out to formal bid.

At any rate, it doesn't mean the 10's won't be trainline-compatible just because they don't have a binding mandate to be so. Since the newest makes are all very software-heavy it's not a big technical hurdle to build in the software abstraction layer for MU'ing with a Type 9. Bidders can assess technical feasibility and costs involved and offer it as an option. If they say they can do it, there's no reason for the T not to opt for it as a feature because universal trainlining compatibility is an asset. Not mandating it yet means they're just casting a wider net for potential makes and builders, and haven't yet drilled down far enough to decide whether this is a feature worth thinning the field over.


BTW...even if a handful of cars go to Mattapan, at least two-thirds of the fleet is staying on the Green Line. Nothing really changes on the fleet management side.
Click to expand...

I thought the Type-10 order was a full fleet replacement to make it fully homogenized and the Type-9s would be retired?
 
I got a sneaky feeling that since there's only a handful or the Type 9s, that some of them might eventually be transferred over to the Mattapan Line!!8 )
 
bakgwailo said:
I thought the Type-10 order was a full fleet replacement to make it fully homogenized and the Type-9s would be retired?
Click to expand...


The 9's are nowhere close to old enough to retire; they'll be around for 25 years. And they will be necessary gap-filler for several years on lines like the B and C that have a huge backlog of platforms to lengthen for the new stretched cars.


They're the most likely pick for Mattapan, but keep in mind they're so much bigger than the PCC's seating-wise that they'll only need to run as singles and a fleet of 6-8 (lower-margin than PCC cushion because they'll regularly be swapped to/from Riverside for routine maint) should cover it.
 
HelloBostonHi said:
That is correct, fabulous little website that just queries the API and then filters by car number. Then usually use this website to locate them on a map if I've got free time to go take photos (aka rarely): https://sites.harvard.edu/~wuensch/T/subway-map.html?car=G-10051
Click to expand...

Preston (newtrains.today) is working with our team at TransitMatters (TransitMatters Labs, or something, we haven't branded it yet) to take his code and develop a map/diagram to track new trains on the lines. We're near a beta test for it. Stay tuned!
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
The 9's are nowhere close to old enough to retire; they'll be around for 25 years. And they will be necessary gap-filler for several years on lines like the B and C that have a huge backlog of platforms to lengthen for the new stretched cars.


They're the most likely pick for Mattapan, but keep in mind they're so much bigger than the PCC's seating-wise that they'll only need to run as singles and a fleet of 6-8 (lower-margin than PCC cushion because they'll regularly be swapped to/from Riverside for routine maint) should cover it.
Click to expand...

Yeah - I went to the various public meetings for the Mattapan Line refurbishment - to be honest, I should probably make a dedicated thread to it. They grand plan was moving the Type-9s in a decade/once the Type-10s start rolling out to it. There was (pretty reasonable) community pushback to the idea, as its pretty much just hand me down's again for Mattapan while everyone else gets brand new fully low flow cars. Honestly sounded to me that the MBTA realized they kind of screwed up on things with the Type-9s and Type-10s and were trying to find a place to park the Type-9s as it is kind of pointless to only have them running for a decade. However, if they continue to run on the central subway, that is somewhat different story. Other changes on the line is pretty exciting, though.

Also, that site for tracking the rolling stock is pretty slick.
 
HelloBostonHi said:
Funny that you say that because looks like they're out testing in full force today. Also according to netransit they're getting ready to accept the first production GL type 9, 3901 and 3900 being the accepted pilot cars. Lastly, netransit also says type 9's won't trainline with type 10's.

glol.png
Click to expand...


Where is that tracker from?
 
Quietly, 2 more Type 9's just got accepted for service after a months-long delay for correcting some sort of door glitch. 3902 and 3904 are now taking trips along with 3900-3901.

Think they're still all confined to the D Line for the moment.
 
Why would this thread need renaming?
If it did get renamed, I like the sound of "Type 10 Supercar"
 
If the thread is considered to be just about the cars, then the current name works, but if it is about the larger Green Line Transformation project, then I'd say the name is too limited.
 
HenryAlan said:
If the thread is considered to be just about the cars, then the current name works, but if it is about the larger Green Line Transformation project, then I'd say the name is too limited.
Click to expand...

Yep. It should be named "Green Line Transformation". The project updates won't specifically be about the vehicles.
 
So what happened to the Type 9 Green Line trains? I haven't a single one since a sighting in late Spring early Summer?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top