Stadler to supply MARTA's new railcars

https://www.railwaygazette.com/modes/st ... 76.article

USA: Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority has selected Stadler to supply 254 metro cars, with options for up to 100 additional cars. According to Stadler, this is the company’s largest ever rolling stock order by volume.

Looks like they'll be standard married pairs, the same length as the existing fleet. The article provides no delivery schedule.

What are those black things on the front?

Barriers to prevent riding between the cars,and from falling off the platform between the cars at station stops.
Also part of the ADA safety package.

MARTA is soliciting feedback on their new railcars: https://www.itsmarta.com/yourride.aspx
The highlights include a 4-car open-gangway design. No more married pairs.
One of the rough renderings shows more of a bullet nose. Per a Twitter question I had, there won't be a regular gangway passageway, but there will be an emergency door of some kind.

To perfect Mr. Matt W's link (content may be Paywalled):

https://www.railwaygazette.com/modes/st ... 76.article

Um, that's the original link I shared, and it's pretty out of date.

The new design has been revealed:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481291083401342976

Why do we have to choose the most bland option of the four? I wouldn't say this is a corporate decision since this vote was open for the public to decide. This is just like the livery vote for the Coaster Siemens Charger: the most creative one [middle] is favored, but its ultimately ignored for a simpler design. Any one of the other three designs seem better than the chosen one. At least the route designation with the LED lights is creative.

Someone has to ultimately maintain all that crap. It's also visually unappealing if you have to mix and match equipment and the graphics don't line up correctly.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

Pensyfan19 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 2:38 pm Why do we have to choose the most bland option of the four? I wouldn't say this is a corporate decision since this vote was open for the public to decide. This is just like the livery vote for the Coaster Siemens Charger: the most creative one [middle] is favored, but its ultimately ignored for a simpler design. Any one of the other three designs seem better than the chosen one. At least the route designation with the LED lights is creative.

What will be easiest to maintain, over the course of 20+ years?
number one.
otherwise, it'll look like amtrak mix and match

Mr. Pennsy, I respect how you bring a young railfan's thoughts to the Forum. Believe it or not, I was once one of such myself.

But from one, while residing away from the area, has used MARTA to get from here to there, and God and COVID willing, will do so again. I have ridden from the Airport to Dunwoody, where either hotel at which I stay when visiting - a Hyatt or Crowne - is located, and also from there to Arts Center for Atlanta Symphony concerts.

From my experiences, all a MARTA rider cares is that the train in on time, runs with sufficient frequency to be useful, and is clean regardless of its livery. A Braniff Airways or European Railroads (nowadays; when I first "went over" during '60, drab Green sufficed) "splash of colors" is simply ancillary.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 9:40 am From my experiences, all a MARTA rider cares is that the train in on time, runs with sufficient frequency to be useful, and is clean regardless of its livery. A Braniff Airways or European Railroads (nowadays; when I first "went over" during '60, drab Green sufficed) "splash of colors" is simply ancillary.

Wow,
Braniff, I think the only reason anyone under 50 would know the name would be due to the reference at the end of episodes of "south park".
Didn't they almost buy a Conchord?

Well Mr. Scratchy, I'm 80.

I never had too much occasion to fly Braniff (my military charters to and from 'Nam were Continental over, and an outfit called Trans-Caribbean coming back), but one of the most poignant books I ever read was titled "Splash of Colors" by John J. Nance (ABC News air safety commentator and Braniff Captain). His description of their shutting down South America operations was so analogous to that I personally experienced when the MILW shut down Lines West during November '79 - and I was out there to witness it first hand (for what purpose I really know not; I guess just to have non-Agreement "Chicago boots on the ground").

Now so far as Braniff and Concorde', they operated either an LHR or ORY-IAD; IAD-DFW as an interchange. The aircraft was only allowed to fly subsonic and Braniff had to have Flight Crews qualified on such. Suffice to say, I never flew on one, but from knowing one who had, the cabin was about as roomy as one would find, save some additional seat pitch, aboard a Bombardier or Embraer "puddle jumper" flown for the "big boys" with titles such as "Eagle", "Connection", or "Express". What that proved beyond "no change of plane" escapes me.

I never flew on a Concorde either, but according to contemporary accounts the narrow body resulted in seating conditions such as you describe; I thought then that your time would have to be of platinum grade to be worth saving a few hours on a transatlantic flight when a conventional first- or business-class seat would only take a few hours more. I guess a lot would have depended on what it was worth to say "oh yes, I flew on the Concorde."

Now that's Marketing.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 10:33 amNow so far as Braniff and Concorde', they operated either an LHR or ORY-IAD; IAD-DFW as an interchange. The aircraft was only allowed to fly subsonic and Braniff had to have Flight Crews qualified on such.

I had someone describe it like an Amtube, but with pretension.
Subsonic only? Then what was the point?