Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby diburning » Mon Aug 08, 2016 8:51 pm

The Rotems all have power doors.
User avatar
diburning
 
Posts: 2975
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 7:37 pm
Location: Practicing safe CSX by using Three-Step Protection

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby chrisf » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:05 pm

trainbrain wrote:Do the Rotem cars have manual doors like the rest of the fleet has? If they have automatic doors, will the Kawasaki cars get them during the rebuild?

Some Kawasakis already have power doors, and all those being rebuilt will be equipped with them.
chrisf
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 9:35 pm

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby trainbrain » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:09 pm

Thanks for the info. Seems like having power doors would be low hanging fruit for speeding up running times (since all the doors can be opened).
trainbrain
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 7:11 pm

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby ohalloranchris » Tue Aug 09, 2016 5:10 am

But you can only use the power doors at stations that have full length high level platforms, which only amounts to a handful of stations.
ohalloranchris
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 8:42 am

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby octr202 » Tue Aug 09, 2016 7:17 am

Anyone on here have any insight regarding the long doors used by NJT and a few others? I've never been on equipment with them in use, but the concept seems good - doors can be trainlined and opened/closed with the traps either up or down. Are they problematic in snow and ice, or is it just a case of the T being highly conservative in equipment design?

I can't help but thinking that having these doors could do wonders for some of the high volume stops on high volume lines with lots of low platforms (i.e., Worcester, Providence, Lowell).
Wondering if I'll see the Haverhill double-tracking finished before I retire...
Photo: Melbourne W7 No. 1019 on Route 78, Bridge & Church Streets, Richmond, Victoria. 10/21/2010
User avatar
octr202
 
Posts: 4142
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 8:13 am
Location: In the land of the once and future 73 trackless trolley.

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby trainbrain » Tue Aug 09, 2016 7:31 am

I don't believe that long doors are problematic in snow and ice. In fact they're actually better in a way because snow and ice can't get on the stairs, making getting on and off safer. NJT is the only agency I'm aware of that has them.
trainbrain
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 7:11 pm

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby MBTA3247 » Tue Aug 09, 2016 8:01 am

AMT also uses them, but I don't think they have traps behind the doors (they don't on their single-level EMUs, I can't find any photos of their multilevels with the doors open).
"The destination of this train is [BEEP BEEP]" -announcement on an Ashmont train.
User avatar
MBTA3247
 
Posts: 2609
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 6:01 pm
Location: Milton

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby Komarovsky » Tue Aug 09, 2016 4:46 pm

octr202 wrote:Anyone on here have any insight regarding the long doors used by NJT and a few others? I've never been on equipment with them in use, but the concept seems good - doors can be trainlined and opened/closed with the traps either up or down. Are they problematic in snow and ice, or is it just a case of the T being highly conservative in equipment design?

I can't help but thinking that having these doors could do wonders for some of the high volume stops on high volume lines with lots of low platforms (i.e., Worcester, Providence, Lowell).


I used to ride NJT growing up in NJ and it's not only power doors, but power traps as well IIRC. You're also correct that it allows conductors to open all the doors at low level stops with the push of a button. The biggest issue I've noticed is the door sensors not registering a door closed, which prevents the train from departing.

When I moved to Worcester and started taking the train there I was mystified at the lack of long doors etc. I too figured it was an issue with the weather, but given the frequency of frozen traps due to snow/sleet blowing onto the bottom of the trap, I can't imagine that long doors would make the issue any worse than it is. Hopefully someone can chime in with some sort of reason.
Komarovsky
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:11 pm

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby trainbrain » Tue Aug 09, 2016 5:45 pm

The traps on NJT cars are all manual. The long doors allow them to be open while the train is between stations. The conductors will move through the train and change them as needed, but they don't need to open and close them at every low platform stop. If there are multiple low platform stops in a row, the traps can stay open until the next high platform stop. On MBTA trains, the traps need to be opened and closed at every low level stop, so only the doors attended by a conductor can be opened, slowing down boarding. On NJT trains, the conductors can open all the traps between stations and push a button to open all the doors upon arrival.
trainbrain
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 7:11 pm

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby diburning » Tue Aug 09, 2016 6:23 pm

Please pardon my ignorance, but what exactly is a long door? I tried googling it, but the two words are common enough even when put together that I wasn't able to find any info on them.
User avatar
diburning
 
Posts: 2975
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 7:37 pm
Location: Practicing safe CSX by using Three-Step Protection

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby trainbrain » Tue Aug 09, 2016 6:32 pm

Long doors cover the low platform stairs, allowing the traps to be open between stations. The doors on MBTA cars do not cover the low platform stairs and they are exposed to the elements. If the traps are opened between stations on MBTA cars, one can fall onto the tracks while the train is moving.

Google NJ Transit train, and any pictures you see of the doors should show what I'm talking about. The Arrow 3 EMU cars are the only equipment in the fleet without them. The Comet 1's are pretty similar to MBTA single levels because didn't have long doors, and the doors were manual. NJT doesn't run them anymore.
trainbrain
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 7:11 pm

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby Komarovsky » Tue Aug 09, 2016 9:10 pm

trainbrain wrote:The Comet 1's are pretty similar to MBTA single levels because didn't have long doors, and the doors were manual. NJT doesn't run them anymore.


Sure about that? The Whippany Railway Museum has a few preserved and on their website they clearly had long doors originally. http://www.whippanyrailwaymuseum.net/exhibits/equipment/passenger-cars/comet-i-commuter-coaches Maybe the rebuilds removed them.....? My memory is fuzzy on this since it's been a while since they've been in service and longer since I've ridden one.
Komarovsky
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:11 pm

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby chrisf » Tue Aug 09, 2016 9:51 pm

The Comet IIs are most like MBTA coaches: http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4508121
They were later rebuilt with a door that covers the stairwells. http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3810863
The Comet I's, originally built for Erie Lackawanna/NJ DOT were designed for low platforms only– this is obvious in comparing how low the doors are relative to those on the Comet II and later. Consequently, there were originally no movable trap doors in the Comet I cars, and the sliding door covered the entire opening including the steps.
chrisf
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 9:35 pm

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby Komarovsky » Wed Aug 10, 2016 5:20 am

Ah, interesting. I always figured that the 200 series were based on the comet I design, since they were both built by Pullman. If they're more closely related to the comet II design that makes sense that they'd both have short doors.

I'm starting to wonder if the decision to go for short doors was a fleet commonality decision rather than an operational one. i wonder if any of the bi-levels(K or R) could be rebuilt with long doors in an economical way(yes I know the K-cars are getting a rebuild now and the R-cars probably wouldn't be worth rebuilding).
Komarovsky
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:11 pm

Re: Rotem Cars Discussion (new bi-level cars)

Postby chrisf » Wed Aug 10, 2016 6:27 am

Komarovsky wrote:I'm starting to wonder if the decision to go for short doors was a fleet commonality decision rather than an operational one. i wonder if any of the bi-levels(K or R) could be rebuilt with long doors in an economical way(yes I know the K-cars are getting a rebuild now and the R-cars probably wouldn't be worth rebuilding).

It seems very unlikely that it would be possible to use an arrangement like the Comet cars. The K and R cars have a truck that's got an outside frame and the cars are narrower than the Comets so there is very little clearance from the truck to the outside of the car.
Compare the 700 http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=1231691 to the 600: http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4070011
chrisf
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 9:35 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 11 guests