Railroad Forums 

  • Green Line Type 9 Thread

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

Moderators: sery2831, CRail

 #1330740  by bostontrainguy
 
BandA wrote:If I were the "T" I would hold on to the type 7's as long as possible. The low floor layout of the type 8's are really awkward.
They kind of are . . . the 7s are going through a complete rehab. Two are back and on the property and running through the subway as "Test Trains" without passengers right now.

There has been no talk about rehabbing the 8s.
 #1333814  by Gerry6309
 
bostontrainguy wrote:
BandA wrote:If I were the "T" I would hold on to the type 7's as long as possible. The low floor layout of the type 8's are really awkward.
They kind of are . . . the 7s are going through a complete rehab. Two are back and on the property and running through the subway as "Test Trains" without passengers right now.

There has been no talk about rehabbing the 8s.
The Type 8s are new enough that some are probably still under warranty. If the Type Nines are as troublesome, the T might still be accepting them in 2030!

Take a ride in a train with a Type 8 in front on the B line and watch the loading process at busy stops. Then do the same on a Type 7. As long as we continue with PAYE, the Type 8s will be slower because of the narrower entry, and the steps to the low floor section. Until the fare collection issue is resolved the Green Line will never operate at maximum speed and capacity.
 #1335124  by PublicTransitUSA
 
A little behind the scenes. CAF from Spain set up a Type 8 to mimic the dimensions of the Type 9s (see above the vertical window.) They are sending it out with cameras pointed at them to see if it will hit anything in service.

Image

Image
 #1350413  by BandA
 
$4.5M each for 4 Urbos 3 cars? These are actually options on the Cincinnati order. 77.4ft, low floor. Max speed 43.5MPH. Can be lengthened by adding "modules", which I assume isn't part of the order. Delivery is late apparently.

5/14/2014 MBTA Type 9. Also made by CAF. $118M for 24 = $4.91M each (so much for economy of scale). Presumably dimensions customized.

Can't find the actual contract documents.

Contrast with red/orange purchase at $566.6M for 284 = $2M each.
 #1350480  by CRail
 
The price is for the contract, not for each vehicle. Orders of 24 are going to have a ridiculous per unit cost. Everyone says we got so few trackless trolleys because they were $1.1 million a piece when, in actuality, they were $1.1 million a piece because we got so few.
 #1350544  by Gerry6309
 
CRail wrote:The price is for the contract, not for each vehicle. Orders of 24 are going to have a ridiculous per unit cost. Everyone says we got so few trackless trolleys because they were $1.1 million a piece when, in actuality, they were $1.1 million a piece because we got so few.
... Considering that we replaced 60 with 50, and then replaced the 50 with 28, it seems to indicate a steep decline in ridership. The Boston Elevated and the MTA invested heavily in trackless trolleys. Most of that investment was thrown away in less than two years ca. 1961-63. San Francisco can order 400 trackless trolleys in a flash because their investment is intact. Boston was unable to remove the last four lines, and since their removal is now politically incorrect, we pay a steep price for replacements.
 #1350628  by BandA
 
Gerry6309 wrote:
CRail wrote:The price is for the contract, not for each vehicle. Orders of 24 are going to have a ridiculous per unit cost. Everyone says we got so few trackless trolleys because they were $1.1 million a piece when, in actuality, they were $1.1 million a piece because we got so few.
... Considering that we replaced 60 with 50, and then replaced the 50 with 28, it seems to indicate a steep decline in ridership. The Boston Elevated and the MTA invested heavily in trackless trolleys. Most of that investment was thrown away in less than two years ca. 1961-63. San Francisco can order 400 trackless trolleys in a flash because their investment is intact. Boston was unable to remove the last four lines, and since their removal is now politically incorrect, we pay a steep price for replacements.
Trackless trolleys are amazing: quiet, no air pollution (except at the power station), energy efficient, mechanically simple, and last much longer than a bus. Doesn't the "T" spend more than $1.1M for a diesel bus these days? And if they need more trackless trolleys they should coordinate with SF.
 #1350732  by bostontrainguy
 
diburning wrote:Semi-related post. Kansas City has ordered similar cars (which appear to be longer than the MBTA's) from CAF, and appear to have entered production.

Photo Credit: Kansas City Streetcar
So they have dual gauge track in Elmira, NY!
 #1368978  by tommyboy6181
 
canobiecrazy wrote:
orange1234 wrote:It looks like the Type 9 contract will be awarded to CAF USA. Does anyone know what their track record is in the USA besides building the WMATA 5000 series vehicles?
Within the USA, they have also built some of Sacramento's light rail vehicles, and are contracted to provide rolling stock for the Kansas City and Cincinnati streetcars. Internationally, they have a long track record of both low floor and high floor light rail vehicles, as well as heavy rail metro trains.
In the USA, their first LRV contracts were with Pittsburgh and Sacramento. Those trains have performed well. Pittsburgh also had CAF rebuild the original Siemens-Duewag trains that were used since system inception to match the CAF vehicles. Pittsburgh uses Bombardier propulsion (Bombardier has a propulsion center in Pittsburgh) and those motors were designed to provide around 275hp due to the terrain. In Sacramento, CAF partnered with Alstom for the propulsion and those trains have also performed well.

The WMATA 5000 series are being retired at midlife due to continued problems and reliability. Keep in mind with that contract, CAF did not do the assembly of the vehicles. That was performed by AAI out of Hunt Valley, MD since CAF did not have their Elmira plant up and running at that point. AAI was bought out by Alstom. Also, WMATA rushed the contract and ended up paying big time for it. Those trains will be replaced by their new Kawasaki 7000 series cars as one of the option orders that was agreed to.

Globally, CAF tends to perform really well on their trains. Their LRV's specifically are highly standardized, known as the URBOS platform. This means that even though the trains can be customized to an extent, many of the same components are used on every project they have. It helps with reliability overall. Other companies such as Bombardier do this with their Flexity trains, Siemens with their S70 trains, Alstom with their Citadis trains, and even Hitachi Rail (formerly AnsaldoBreda) with the Sirio trains.

My opinion is that CAF should not have the problems that AnsaldoBreda had. Plus, they can actually deliver without being excessively late unlike Breda. Heck, in Buffalo, we are almost 10 years into a 27 car LRV rebuild and Breda hasn't even completed that yet.

Here is an updated rendering of the new Type 9 from the CAF website:
http://www.caf.net/en/productos-servici ... .php?p=271" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
  • 1
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 51