jfrey40535 wrote:The Kawasaki's are one of the last pieces of equipment that are not wheelchair/ADA accessible on SEPTA. While I'm not in favor of the policy, I was wondering if SEPTA had any plans to bring routes 10,11,13,34,36,101,102 into ADA compliance.
It would be nice to say that the cars could then be used elsewhere, but in today's mass transit designed to accomodate "the few", I suspect they'd become soda cans.
It is unlikely that the Subway Surface cars need much in the way of ADA compatibility given the fact that the Subway Surface tunnel itself is unlikely to get any ADA compatible stations outside of 13th, 15th and 30th St stations in the next 20 years. If ADA compatibility were to be desired, as it likely will, it'd be far more likely that SEPTA would retrofit the K-cars with W/C lifts rather than go through with the expense and bureaucratic hoops involved in trying to get an entirely new LRV fleet when our current fleet isn't even 30 years old yet. If the PCCs can be rebuilt to accomodate wheelchairs then certainly the K-cars can be given a similar rebuild to make them just as accessable.
It is possible that the K-cars should be given a midlife rebuild nearly of the same magnitude of that given to the PCCs, such that the resulting K-cars share as many parts as possible with the rebuilt PCC IIs, from traction motors and electronics to door controls. The one change I would say the K-cars should have over the PCC IIs would be the possible inclusion of a front door W/C lift rather than a center door lift. Given the number of steps required of the operator taking a wheelchair aboard on a PCC II, I shudder to think of how the Subway Surface could screech to a halt for a wheelchair passenger at 13th St. It appears the Champion cutaway buses which SEPTA ordered for Frontier Depot and Krapf's contract operations have a wheelchair lift which fits under their single door and lifts a wheelchair almost the same distance a similar lift in a K-car would have to go. Boarding a wheelchair will likely always cause an extended stop dwell time (at least until SEPTA gets Low floor LRVs), but by using a front door lift which does not need to be folded out SEPTA's subway surface operators can shave off a few seconds and save some valuable time.
For the Rt101/102 K-cars I'd again advocate a rebuilding to PCC II standards. One possibility I've heard proposed would be a pair of lifts similar to that found on MCI's Cruiser buses. The primary problem with this design of wheelchair lift is that it'd both require four seats to be eliminated to accomodate a wheelchair passenger, take a long time to operate, and possibly require an additional door to be added in the middle of the LRV on each side. Given that the LRVs are going to require two lifts anyway, and that stops with right hand platforms are slightly more common than left handed platforms, it might make sense to gamble a small amount and have each of the Rt101/102 K-cars be rebuilt with two of the same kind of wheelchair lift that'd be fitted to the Subway Surface cars. This lift would fit into the same two blinker door opening which sits at the operators right when the vehicle is being operated from that position. The chief problem with this arrangement is that at stops with left-hand platforms where the W/C passenger boarded on the right (or vice versa) the operator will have to push the wheelchair down the length of the vehicle to reach the opposite side wheelchair lift. The possibility of a wheelchair not fitting through the aisle is a very real possibility with this approach, and it might some sense to place the one wheelchair lift in an enlarged left-side door opening (currently consisting of one two-leaved blinker door) thereby creating a car with wheelchair provisions at one end. The operator may have to walk the length of the car to load or unload a wheelchair passenger going in one direction, but on the return trip he or she will have the same W/C lifts right next to them.
As for actually replacing the K-cars, I'd like to see SEPTA buy cars from Skoda to replace both the Subway Surface and Suburban LRVs. I remain convinced that the Skoda Astra and Vektra series of trams are exactly what SEPTA needs to both reinstate service on the 'suspended' trolley lines, replace the K-cars, and possibly begin service on new LRV lines. The 66 foot long low floor Astra could be the perfect LRV to take back the 15, 23, and 56 from the buses, and later to replace the K-cars on the 10, 11, 13, 34 and 36 lines. The 105 foot long five section Vektra could also work well for crowded peak hour runs on the subway surface lines, replacing the suburban K-cars on the 101 and 102, and possibly for a new LRV line utilizing the City Subway and 33rd St to run up Henry Ave to Roxborough, replacing the 32.
Believe it or not there is a very practical side to my advocating for so many of SEPTA's LRVs to come from a single supplier. The PCC II's electrical contractor, Kiepe, used Skoda as a subcontractor to supply the traction motors for the trolleys. Those traction motors are almost identical to the traction motors in the Skoda Astra LRVs which I am advocating. If the K-cars were upgraded to PCC II standards and made compatible with those cars then they'd also be largely compatible with the newer Astra cars as well. Additionally should SEPTA carry through with an order for new E40LF ETBs from New Flyer with Kiepe again as the electrical contractor then both the electronics will be very similar to the components in the PCC IIs, and the motor, while not identical, will be very similar to those found in the PCC IIs, K-cars and Astra LRVs. This fleet-wide compatibility could allow SEPTA to slash its parts inventory and thus reduce its overhead costs associated with running the trolley and ETB lines, perhaps making them even more attractive than diesel bus operations.
Admittedly the problem with this single-source supplier would be that we would be opening ourself up to major problems should the cars themselves have problems. However, by gradually phasing in various systems over the next 20 years we can assure the quality of the Kiepe and Skoda components and reduce the chances of most of the system at being put at risk of a breakdown due to a widespread problem in the design or manufacture of the motors or LRVs. The PCC IIs could make excellent testbeds for the technologies in need for testing in the K-car's rebuild, and a modest fleet of Skoda Astras to initiate service on the 23 or 56 could verify that that design is indeed correct for the city's LRV lines before a major order is placed. All of this means that we'd have a tried and tested LRV which SEPTA would hopefully have a lot of faith in to replace the K-cars when in 10-20 or so years they've become a burden. However, so long as SEPTA views its surface transit infrastructure as a burden and an impediment to running buses for all their surface transit operations then this arrangement will remain next to impossible.
http://www.skoda.cz/PRODUKTY.ASP?Q853A= ... 61&menu=81
