[spmarshall]

Re: New Subway Car Layout Sharply Criticized by Commissioner

If it wasn't for the seating issue (material and arrangement), I'd be all for the new subway cars - I like the idea of the gangways and the new technological features, but apart from the gangways, the new technologies could be put into a T-2 model.

The T-1s brought us the wider doors, which does a lot for loading and unloading time when the trains are full (though the doors open and close slightly slower than the smaller H series doors). A point was made that perimeter seating would get people to move inside the cars more. Why? I was thinking about this on my subway ride home in a T-1, and I think the reason people bunch around the doors is to be near the doors, not because of the seating arrangement, and the wider T-1 doors help this more than anything over the H-5s and H-6s. I still stand by the idea that all perimeter seathing would increase standing capacity is more a myth than anything.

 

[wyliepoon]

Re: New Subway Car Layout Sharply Criticized by Commissioner

Alvin,

MTR train seats are easy to clean, but who needs to clean them anyway? No food and drinks allowed in the trains, and almost everybody takes their Metro newspapers with them when they get off. Way to go in keeping down the maintenance cost.

But the MTR's new Disneyland Resort Line trains bucks the whole trend of perimeter steel seats for high-capacity MTR trains (ie. except the Airport Express).

Not only are the seats heavily padded, but the bench seating curves into the aisle to form front-back seats. Maybe this is what TTC riders are looking for. (minus the pixie dust and the Mickey Mouse windows, of course)

 

[cdl42]

Re: New Subway Car Layout Sharply Criticized by Commissioner

I'm glad you asked, fiendish! Luckily, there are answers to your questions (all according to the TTC).

"Who's "they"? And what is the "standard"? By what measurement? New York? Chicago? LA? Paris? Berlin? Madrid?" ... Falling behind? Behind who?

All of the above. The TTC staff included New York, Berlin, and Madrid in their study, along with Tokyo, Hong Kong and a number of other places. Standards like safety, reliability, and efficiency which I will get in to below.

"Unsafe?"

Sure. In the event of an evacuation people with poor mobility have a poor time moving to the evacuation doors at the ends of the train, and have to be carried. Without doors between cars passengers, including those in wheelchairs, will have no difficulty reaching the ends of the train. The T1s have ladders for those evacuating through the doors at the ends of the train in order to access the tunnel floor. New trains have replaced these with ramps reducing evacuation time by a considerable amount (a third?). There are a number of other factors as well, such as flamibility. The T1s are safe, that's for sure, but the safety standards aren't up to what's being done in new trains elsewhere.

"Unreliable? ... Every TTC report I've ever read stated that when T1s become the dominant piece of equipment on a given line, delays were reduced."

You make a good point, the T1s produced a considerable increase in reliability, reducing downtime over previous trains by IIRC a quarter. But new designs can reduce downtime by a quarter over the T1s again. Why would the TTC want to ignore that?

"Inefficient?"

The new subway cars, mostly through reduction in weight will be able to provide the same performance with fewer motors on the train. Every axle on the T1s is powered, while a number of the axles on the new trains won't (can't remember the ratio). They will use far less electricity, which is becoming a greater and greater expense for the TTC.

"The newish R142s I rode up and down Broadway were nice, but nothing fancy. The newer R160s coming in seem like an evolution from that design, not a radical departure."

The T1s are basically an evolution from the original G cars, which were an evolution of New York-style designs. The TTC is basically looking at deviating from that lineage and look into designs from Europe and Asia, it's not as if we're going in to uncharted waters. I don't think a radical departure once in every 52 years is in any way unreasonable.

 

[fiendishlibrarian]

Re: New Subway Car Layout Sharply Criticized by Commissioner

Fair enough. I'm just worried that the TTC will get stuck with a design that will prove too good for its own good. Even you will admit that when the TTC embarks on a "radical departure" in its vehicles, it often gets burned (RT, Orion buses, etc.). My fear is that the improvements you mention may bring with it hidden costs that outweigh the benefits in the form of toothing problems, incompatable equipment, etc. It's not like the TTC has a stellar track record in this department. That's why I would rather exhaust all possibilities in improving upon the existing trains, even if the alternatives are not "uncharted waters".

 

[cdl42]

Re: New Subway Car Layout Sharply Criticized by Commissioner

You think in the same way that much of the commission does, preferring not to mess around with things that work. You're exactly right that the TTC has been burned before (but in all those cases the TTC wasn't playing a major role in designing the vehicles like they are here IIRC), and the managers and commissioners asked the same questions as you did. Basically, for the reasons listed here, it just isn't an option at this point.

The T1s were still a pretty huge departure from the H cars, and could of potentially caused major problems, but a good design and good work prevented that from happening. We can only hope that the next round will see the same results.

 

[Suicidal Gingerbread Man]

Re: New Subway Car Layout Sharply Criticized by Commissioner

Last time i checked, i didn't board a subway to be comfortable. I take it to get to work faster. If we can speed up the loading and unloading of cars, I'd be much happier than having some comfortable seat i never get to use anyway.

If all the TTC had to worry about was you, there wouldn't be a problem. We're talking about simply a minimal level of comfort, somewhere in between metal benches and, as you say, "plush leather couches."


As for the efficiency debate, the stated necessary improvements are a given. What is not necessary is the redesigning of the interior, aside from perhaps the creation of gangways in between vehicles.

So let's place an order for those T1.1s

 

[samsonyuen]

Re: New Subway Car Layout Sharply Criticized by Commissioner

I like the stainless steel seats, and the idea of one long train. The ones we currently have now aren't that comfortable either. I find the most comfortable ones in the Victoria line in London.

 

[drum118]

Re: New Subway Car Layout Sharply Criticized by Commissioner

I have never seen the commissioner read the riot act to staff like I did at this meeting.

The chair started off after the first few slides were show when the curve bench seats was show my saying in a very disgruntle meander "Who authorized you to come up with this design†and I felt sorry for Chris who was doing the presentation and as it was downhill for him from this point on.

The chair came more incense when the slides were shown of systems using the benches seats to the point he call them "Cattle cars and where the feeding box for them".

Majority of the commissioners started using the cattle car term from this point on for the reminder of the presentation as well during discussion of the interior after it.

All the other remarks regarding terrorist, safety issues as well US standards was a bunch of crap for better term on my part and over blown in the first place.

Those who were out at Rocketriders this month will agree on most of this.

This train is being design for engineers, not the riders.

I will not go into the RFP issue as that is an issue by itself.

Bottom line, staff recommendations is over kill where that over kill will increase the cost of the train in the first place.

Bottom line and it is fact, T1's interiors are to be used for the new trains with modification being done at the ends for the gangway.

Also, the public is to be consulted as to what upgrading they would like to see within the coming months for the T1's.

My recommendations:
More leg space between the seats.

More padding is needed in the seats and no metal seats.

Full one piece window between doors.

Round all comers off on all seats framing.

Better interior colours and material.

Better interior partitions at the doors with a set back for wider space since riders stand there and block the doorway in the first place.

Jump seats at accessibility areas as this will allow the disability rider to get into their spot without any help since the seats will be in an upright position when no one is sitting on them.

Bike support in the accessibility areas.

I still prefer bench seating, but I can live with the T1’s seating arrangement. There are not going to be as many front face seats on the new cars as there are on the current T1’s.

 

[wyliepoon]

Star: Name the New TTC Subway Train

From the Star:

Link to article

This concept shows the exterior of a possible new TTC subway car.

This concept shows the exterior of a possible new TTC subway car.

Subway cars seek catchy monikers
May 17, 2006. 11:44 AM
KEVIN MCGRAN
TRANSPORTATION REPORTER

Maybe you didn't know it, but for the past 50 years, you've ridden the M-Car, the G-Car, the H-Car and the T1.

But the TTC has finally had enough of boring, old internal "engineer speak" it uses to refer to the various of models of subway trains it has used through the years.

With the TTC opting for a radical new design for its next-generation trains, it wants a radical new name for the fleet. So it's having a Name the Subway Train contest.

"We think this is quite the significant departure from the traditional way that we've done things in Toronto," said TTC project manager Chris Heald. "We're going away from these 2-car trains to 6-car trains. We don't think T2 is the right designation. We're saying: `Why don't you tell us what you think it should be called?'

"The `Silver Bullets?' We don't know. We have no idea."

Commissioners will discuss details of the contest as well as the future of the subway at their monthly meeting today. It's expected the contest will be part of a new train unveiling June 5 at Davisville Station. One of the current T1s will be reconfigured to look — as much as possible — like the kind of car the TTC will be purchasing to begin replacing the fleet in 2009.

The seats will be all along and under the window, facing the middle. The rear doors will open allowing people to move through cars. And the driver's cockpit will exist only in the front and rear of the 6-car configuration.

The TTC will also seek comments from riders about what they hope to see in new trains via a website, a survey and various public events this summer.

"We're trying to get as much consultation and feedback from the public as we can," Heald said.

Bombardier, which has the exclusive right to deal with the TTC for new subway trains until September, is expected to make a formal proposal to supply trains at the end of this month with negotiations continuing in June.

If no agreement is reached, the TTC will go to the open market for its new trains. Even if Bombardier and the TTC reach a deal, it will still be scrutinized by an independent consultant company.

"If they don't think we're getting value for money, or if they don't feel it's competitive with today's world market, then we can't sign with Bombardier," Heald said. "But they are competitive. They know what the prices are worldwide better than anyone. We're not expecting them to be too far away from what we're looking for."

The current fleet of 372 T1s were built by Bombardier. The T stands for Toronto.

The remaining 306 subway trains (H-cars) were built by Hawker-Siddeley Canada Ltd. The M-Cars were built by Montreal Locomotive Works Ltd. and were phased out in the 1960s. Bombardier now owns Hawker-Siddeley and MLW.

The G-cars came from Gloucester Railway Carriage & Wagon Co., of Bristol, England. They were the first subway trains, often called "Gloucesters" (pronounced Glos-ters). Some say the red Gloucester gave the TTC its "Red Rocket" nickname; others say it is derived from red streetcars.

 

[Suicidal Gingerbread Man]

The M-Cars were built by Montreal Locomotive Works Ltd. and were phased out in the 1960s.

Try phased in in the 1960s, phased out by 1999. They need a transit geek fact checker.



The "T2s," for lack of a better term, look great! They got rid of the benches, which is frankly no surprise.

 

[billonlogan]

I'm submitting "6-Pack"

I can hear it now "I'll meet you at Pape station and we can take the 6 pack downtown"

 

[Suicidal Gingerbread Man]

^
Nah. Whenever I think of "6-pack" I think of how a 6-pack of beer is nicknamed a "Scarborough briefcase."

 

[GregWTravels]

Don't tell anyone (cause I don't want anyone stealing it), but here's my proposal. The ED-209.

It's based on how much the exterior of the model looks like....

...the ED-209 from Robocop.

 

[spmarshall]

I love it. That machine could replace the paternalistic female voice on the PA. "Give your seat up for an elderly or disabled person - you have 10 seconds to comply". Now THAT would get results.

I'm also reminded of Robocop II - the memorable "Thank you for not smoking" scene where Robocop, reprogrammed by OCP, makes a rather dramatic show of force. "Thank you for not blocking the doors".

I'm also glad to see the steel all-longtudinal benches gone in that mockup.

 

[officedweller]

The rear doors will open allowing people to move through cars. And the driver's cockpit will exist only in the front and rear of the 6-car configuration.

The rear doors will open? i.e. not an open gangway but a door you have to open and close??