Green Line Type 9 Thread

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

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby RailBus63 » Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:31 pm

diburning wrote:The problem is that MBTA buys cars from companies with no experience. Before the MBTA orders, Boeing didn't make light rail vehicles, Breda didn't make light rail vehicles (only subway cars)


Breda did build light-rail cars prior to the Type 8 order (Cleveland, San Francisco)

and Siemens didn't make heavy rail vehicles (only modern LRVs).


Siemens did build heavy-rail metro cars for various systems in Europe and the Far East starting in the 1990's.

Bombardier is a great manufacturer. Those 01800s are near 20 years of service. However, Bombardier hasn't built any light rail vehicles so I wouldn't go with them.


Yes they have - according to their website, "Bombardier has supplied more than 2,500 trams and light rail vehicles to approximately 100 cities in more than 20 countries across the globe."

Hyundai Rotem is the one company you should have put on your list - their light-rail experience is just about nonexistent.
User avatar
RailBus63
 
Posts: 1872
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 1:48 pm

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby sery2831 » Tue Oct 13, 2009 4:05 pm

And to add to that, the T didn't seek Boeing out, it was a Government project.
Moderator: MBTA Rail Operations
User avatar
sery2831
 
Posts: 5136
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: Manchester, NH

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby diburning » Tue Oct 13, 2009 5:34 pm

Wow, sorry, I woke up and decided to come on here... Not a good idea! My brain hadn't woken up yet. Duh!

Did Breda build any low-floor cars prior to the Type 8 order?

Would it be possible that Breda might build hte type 9s?
User avatar
diburning
 
Posts: 2975
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 7:37 pm
Location: Practicing safe CSX by using Three-Step Protection

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby jwhite07 » Tue Oct 13, 2009 5:53 pm

I would think it unlikely that Breda would be awarded a Type 9 contract in the aftermath of all the problems with the Type 8 procurement... if my memory serves me correctly, they were disqualified from bidding on the Blue Line No. 5 car contract for that reason, and they could still be on the list of persona non grata for future contracts.
User avatar
jwhite07
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:39 pm

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby Arborway » Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:14 pm

Purely conjecture, but I've had this feeling that after the Type 8 debacle, the "We don't care if you're the lowest bidder" thing with the Blue Line order, that the T and Breda somehow made amends. Breda suddenly deciding to build the last five bonus Type 8s for free seemed like penance to me.
Arborway
 
Posts: 899
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Jamaica Plain, MA

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby ferroequinarchaeologist » Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:42 am

>>The MBTA’s needs for the Green Line are unique – these are a heavy-duty car as streetcars go and this prohibits the Authority from buying an off-the-shelf design.

Railbus, could you expand on this? It's still a mystery to me that Boston can't buy an off-the-shelf car body/undercarriage design.

PBM
ferroequinarchaeologist
 
Posts: 531
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 8:12 pm
Location: Darkest Atkinson, NH

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby RailBus63 » Wed Oct 14, 2009 3:18 pm

ferroequinarchaeologist wrote:>>The MBTA’s needs for the Green Line are unique – these are a heavy-duty car as streetcars go and this prohibits the Authority from buying an off-the-shelf design.

Railbus, could you expand on this? It's still a mystery to me that Boston can't buy an off-the-shelf car body/undercarriage design.


The main restriction I’m aware of is the tight curves at Park Street which require a narrow front-end profile (even the Breda cars for San Francisco’s Muni are too wide at the ends for the Green Line). There may be other restriction in height and carbody profile required to fit in the line’s 100-year-old tunnels.

Any new cars also have to be capable of pushing or pulling a dead Type 7 or Type 8 car (weighing 85,000 to 90,000 lbs.) along any section of the line, including the various grades. I’m not sure if some of today’s standard designs are heavy enough to do so.
User avatar
RailBus63
 
Posts: 1872
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 1:48 pm

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby StevieC48 » Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:36 pm

Intresting to see they are going to try sliding doors again. Hope they do not have 250+ parts per door lol. :wink:
Farewell old friend thanks for the memories.
#4 EBT cars Hawker Siddley 1978-2009

Instructor/Inspector SERY
Member 25 years proud
User avatar
StevieC48
 
Posts: 1635
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 8:43 pm
Location: Taunton, MA

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby MBTA3247 » Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:00 pm

I would expect that the sliding doors used on any number of modern LRVs could be used without modification on the Type 9s. Good thing they've had 30-odd years to work out the kinks.
"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: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby Disney Guy » Thu Oct 15, 2009 1:24 pm

StevieC48 wrote:Intresting to see they are going to try sliding doors again.:

In the late 70's or early 80's there was a discussion about the compromises the T had to accept in a nationwide standard LRV (the Boeings): "The T had preferred a folding door...".

But the Type 6 design, which came just before the Boeings, had sliding doors.
RailBus63 wrote:The main restriction I’m aware of is the tight curves at Park Street which require a narrow front-end profile (even the Breda cars for San Francisco’s Muni are too wide at the ends for the Green Line). There may be other restriction in height and carbody profile required to fit in the line’s 100-year-old tunnels.

I would think a longer front overhang might permit setting the motorman's cab further forward, allow freer movement around the front door, and maybe even permit a half width door on the left side behind the cab. The front would have to get even narrower to get around the curves but a very sleek modern appearance could be designed into it. The San Francisco Breda's have this fourth half width door.
(To the theater stage manager) Quit twiddling the knob and flickering the lights while the audience is entering and being seated. (To the subway motorman) Quit twiddling the knob and dinging the doors while passengers are getting off and others are waiting to board.
User avatar
Disney Guy
 
Posts: 790
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:10 am
Location: Nashua, NH

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby ags » Thu Oct 15, 2009 6:17 pm

Why is there a concern for cars rated at 55mph when the fastest green line vehicle rarely exceeds 35mph?
ags
 
Posts: 346
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 10:46 pm

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby typesix » Thu Oct 15, 2009 7:47 pm

The current limit for Riverside is 40 mph, but it used to be 50 mph a few years ago and someday may go back to 50 mph.
typesix
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 11:23 am
Location: Boston

Re: Green Line Type 9 concept drawings

Postby ceo » Sun Oct 25, 2009 9:10 pm

The reasons why the T can't use an off-the-shelf design have to do with the Green Line's >100-year-old infrastructure that was designed for much smaller streetcars: the overall tunnel dimensions are very restrictive, and as mentioned there's the curves at Park Street.

A 100%-low-floor car wouldn't work very well on the Green Line, because those vehicles use independently rotating wheels, like the center truck of a Type 8. Indeed, many of them resemble several slightly longer Type 8 center sections strung together, with the motors on the outsides of the trucks. Remember that one of the main reasons the Type 8s had so much trouble was that the center truck was prone to derailing, in large part because the lack of the solid axles of a conventional truck meant that it couldn't self-steer around curves as well. A 100%-low-floor car would have even more trouble.

The problem with a ramp inside the car is that there wouldn't be room for it, if you wanted the center section to still be useful for wheelchairs. The ramp would have to be entirely in the end sections; it couldn't cross the joint between sections, for obvious geometrical reasons, and it couldn't be where the doors are either. And standing on a ramped floor would get really annoying really quickly.
ceo
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 9:28 am

MBTA Type 9 ?

Postby 3rdrail » Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:46 pm

Check out this Bombardier Flexity Streetcar operating up in Vancouver, B.C. What a beauty ! I love the mixed seating. Would love to see this on the Highland Branch !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zR-KPmacYSQ
~Paul Joyce~
[i]Moderator: Toy Trains, Model Railroading, Outdoor and Live Steam

Paul Joyce passed away in August, 2013. We honor his memory and his devotion at railroad.net.
User avatar
3rdrail
 
Posts: 5641
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:10 pm
Location: Boston

Re: MBTA Type 9 ?

Postby WoofyMutt80 » Wed Jan 27, 2010 6:25 pm

I could definitely see that in the future for the green line, only if the T wasn't in debt!
User avatar
WoofyMutt80
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:52 pm
Location: Norwood

PreviousNext

Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests