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 Thread

Postby bostontrainguy » Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:11 pm

I misspoke. What I was trying to say is that everything in Boston is fiberglass once the new Red and Orange cars come online. I was pointing out that the new Greenline cars are unique by being the only new cars with cushioned seats in the MBTA subway system.
Last edited by CRail on Fri Dec 01, 2017 7:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Unnecessary nesting quotes removed.
bostontrainguy
 
Posts: 1333
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby orange1234 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:33 pm

bostontrainguy wrote:It also appears that they are retaining the cushion seats. This is unique to the Greenline since just about everything else in Boston is fiberglass (there are a few heavyrail/lightrail cars with uncushioned fabric covers).


The Type 9 will, in fact, feature fiberglass seats. It's not easily apparent in those pictures, but the MBTA's RFP documents specify them. The T is moving away from padded seating as it reduces maintenance costs.
orange1234
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 4:01 pm

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby csor2010 » Mon Mar 05, 2018 11:22 pm

First car is out and about in Elmira: https://twitter.com/LMRAMIREZGM/status/970668332591583232
User avatar
csor2010
 
Posts: 219
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:00 pm
Location: Transbay Tube

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby RailBus63 » Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:39 am

csor2010 wrote:First car is out and about in Elmira: https://twitter.com/LMRAMIREZGM/status/970668332591583232


Man, that front end is even uglier than the drawings. Makes the Type 8 look decent by comparison.
User avatar
RailBus63
 
Posts: 1877
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 1:48 pm

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby R36 Combine Coach » Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:59 pm

The posted shot of the demo unit could pass for somewhere on the Mattapan Line or Riverside Branch (with snow of course).

Since CAF's Elmira Heights shop is building the stainless Viewliners from the ground up (with full stainless welding capability), are the Type 9s built on site or kit shells shipped for assembly in Elmira?
Since my friend continues to chain smoke nonstop, she is probably an Alco.
User avatar
R36 Combine Coach
 
Posts: 5214
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 8:51 pm

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby BandA » Sun Mar 11, 2018 12:14 am

Looks like great visibility but poor glare control??
User avatar
BandA
 
Posts: 2460
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:47 am

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby bostontrainguy » Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:10 am

BandA wrote:Looks like great visibility but poor glare control??


Looks just like the existing Type 8s to me. And they have crappy non-adjustable fold down metal sun shades with sharp edges too!
bostontrainguy
 
Posts: 1333
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby The EGE » Sun Mar 11, 2018 1:15 pm

The Type 9s were never supposed to be a great leap forward over the Type 8s (except for not derailing, obviously). They're a small fleet expansion to cover the GLX, not a wholly new fleet.
User avatar
The EGE
 
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: Waiting for the N Judah

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby CRail » Sun Mar 11, 2018 3:27 pm

That's correct. What the T was looking for with the Type 9 order was basically reliable Type 8s. The fact that they will not trainline with them is insane to me, though.
Moderator: Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
Avatar:3679A (since wrecked)/3623B (now in service as 3636B).
User avatar
CRail
 
Posts: 2285
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 8:27 am
Location: Eastie

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby BandA » Sun Mar 11, 2018 3:39 pm

Wow, trainlining is important. As for glare, there are polarized sunglasses
User avatar
BandA
 
Posts: 2460
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:47 am

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby bostontrainguy » Sun Mar 11, 2018 4:26 pm

CRail wrote:That's correct. What the T was looking for with the Type 9 order was basically reliable Type 8s. The fact that they will not trainline with them is insane to me, though.

Trying to get the Japanese speaking Type 7 to talk to the Italian speaking Type 8 was difficult enough. Now trying to throw in a Spanish speaking third version probably can't be easily done. They won't run together, but they will be able to physically couple if necessary.
bostontrainguy
 
Posts: 1333
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby BandA » Sun Mar 11, 2018 5:00 pm

That's insane that there isn't a standard connection.
User avatar
BandA
 
Posts: 2460
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:47 am

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby diburning » Mon Mar 12, 2018 10:54 am

Is there a need for a standard connection? Most transit agencies that operate light rail either have a homogenous fleet, or if they do have mixed fleets, they either are similar enough to interoperate, or they suck it up and keep them separate. Also, it can be argued that orders for light rail vehicles as a whole are not frequent, so having a standard might be moot as technology improves quickly. The MBTA is no exception. The Type 7s were not able to trainline with the Boeings, which were also not able to trainline with PCCs. The MBTA had to get the T7s and T8s to trainline because they weren't replacing the entire T7 fleet with T8s, and thus needed a solution for ADA purposes. (the latter order of T7s, the 3700s, were relatively new when the T8s were ordered. The T8s were delayed and ended up being lemons which meant that it would have been foolish to order more)

bostontrainguy wrote:
CRail wrote:That's correct. What the T was looking for with the Type 9 order was basically reliable Type 8s. The fact that they will not trainline with them is insane to me, though.

Trying to get the Japanese speaking Type 7 to talk to the Italian speaking Type 8 was difficult enough. Now trying to throw in a Spanish speaking third version probably can't be easily done. They won't run together, but they will be able to physically couple if necessary.


The Type 7 is nearly analog, as in very little to no computer control at all. The Type 8s were very computerized, so all they did was slap in the Type 8's computer onto the Type 7s, and coupled them together. It was a very rudimentary trainlining at best. The differences in acceleration and deceleration curves probably caused excess wear on both fleet types. Based on my observations as a passenger, it appears that they fixed the problem by rebuilding the T7s, and adjusting the T8s so that the propulsion system cuts out and coasts at lower speeds to prevent conflict (but can cause wheelslip for the T7 as it is dragging/pushing the dead weight of a T8). The T8's computer systems are probably very old/outdated by today's standards.

The Type 9s (I am assuming) have the innards of the CAF Urbos 3 platform, so they're more modern than the 7s and 8s, which might be why they can't trainline. It wouldn't make financial sense to re-do the entire T7 and T8 fleet to upgrade the computer to allow trainlining for the very few T9s.
User avatar
diburning
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 7:37 pm
Location: Practicing safe CSX by using Three-Step Protection

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby R36 Combine Coach » Mon Mar 12, 2018 8:10 pm

diburning wrote:Is there a need for a standard connection? Most transit agencies that operate light rail either have a homogenous fleet, or if they do have mixed fleets, they either are similar enough to interoperate, or they suck it up and keep them separate. Also, it can be argued that orders for light rail vehicles as a whole are not frequent, so having a standard might be moot as technology improves quickly. The MBTA is no exception. The Type 7s were not able to trainline with the Boeings, which were also not able to trainline with PCCs. The MBTA had to get the T7s and T8s to trainline because they weren't replacing the entire T7 fleet with T8s, and thus needed a solution for ADA purposes. (the latter order of T7s, the 3700s, were relatively new when the T8s were ordered. The T8s were delayed and ended up being lemons which meant that it would have been foolish to order more
LIRR could have its entire fleet between 1908 and 1963 compatible. And NYCT's entire postwar "SMEE" fleet from 1948 to 1989 is too. SEPTA once operated mixed Silverliners (II, III, IV). Why have engineers and technicians nowadays are now making everything new unique and incompatible with older equipment is in a way, sad. Compared to back in the day: goes against cost savings, flexibility and interchangeability.
Since my friend continues to chain smoke nonstop, she is probably an Alco.
User avatar
R36 Combine Coach
 
Posts: 5214
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 8:51 pm

Re: Green Line Type 9 Thread

Postby CRail » Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:33 am

It is. AAR standards make it so locomotives from different manufacturers and decades apart can run in multiple unit, but transit vehicles make this impossible.

I can’t imagine the complexity of compatibility as an afterthought yet we did it. Starting fresh you have no preexisting obstacles. Designing a new car that isn’t able to communicate with older equipment is nuts.
Moderator: Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
Avatar:3679A (since wrecked)/3623B (now in service as 3636B).
User avatar
CRail
 
Posts: 2285
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 8:27 am
Location: Eastie

PreviousNext

Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 4 guests