by Type7trolley
The Type 9 has cameras on both sides which I believe are displayed in the cab, so the mirror seems somewhat redundant.
Even if the mirror could be eliminated, the door cycle time will always be slower than other cars. Aside from the obvious factor of the single panel doors covering more distance to close, the end doors also travel at a slower speed than most two part sliding doors. They cannot simply be sped up to decrease dwell times, as APTA specifies maximum door closing force and a larger single piece door, having more mass, must move more slowly to impart the same amount of force as a smaller, lighter door panel. I wonder if the tiny windows on the front doors are an attempt by CAF to mitigate this. Glass is heavy.
I am sure that when Boston ordered all of its rapid transit equipment with single panel sliding doors in the 1910s & 20s, this was not a consideration.
Even if the mirror could be eliminated, the door cycle time will always be slower than other cars. Aside from the obvious factor of the single panel doors covering more distance to close, the end doors also travel at a slower speed than most two part sliding doors. They cannot simply be sped up to decrease dwell times, as APTA specifies maximum door closing force and a larger single piece door, having more mass, must move more slowly to impart the same amount of force as a smaller, lighter door panel. I wonder if the tiny windows on the front doors are an attempt by CAF to mitigate this. Glass is heavy.
I am sure that when Boston ordered all of its rapid transit equipment with single panel sliding doors in the 1910s & 20s, this was not a consideration.