• 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: CRail, sery2831

  • 715 posts
  • 1
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  by typesix
 
The T8s center section have stub axles, with each pair connected by U shaped frames to allow for a lower floor and provide the proper parallel distance for the wheelset.

It can be seen on page 12 of this report:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/878c/7 ... 0e4527.pdf
  by MBTA DMA
 
3914 has been accepted for service.
  by Type 7 3684
 
3917, 3918, and 3919 have been delivered
  by Type 7 3684
 
3915 has been accepted
  by apodino
 
How has the reliability of these vehicles been? Just curious because it seems like there were some teething issues, but from what I can see (granted I live in Fort Worth Texas now), the new cars have not had nearly the issues that the Type 8's had.

And one other thing about these I find curious. The T has only ordered 24 of these, but is already going to procure a type 10? If these vehicles prove themselves, why not order more of these to replace the Type 7's and 8's rather than design another new streetcar for service, which if the past is any indication, is always a challenge given the infrastructure of the Green line.
  by The EGE
 
The Type 9s are still the same 74-foot-long footprint as the Boeing LRVs, and it's a one-of-a-kind design. It's an improvement over the Type 8s, but it's not something you want to base your fleet around for 30+ years. It's space-inefficient because the cabs and couplers are a fairly large percentage of the vehicle length, it has an inefficient door configuration, and it's only partially low-floor. The Type 9s were bought as an expansion fleet for the GLX, long before the Type 10s were in development.

Going to the Type 10s lets you use much longer vehicles that are more space-efficient: a single 110-foot car can carry as many passengers as two 74-foot cars. When you have high demand and constrained platform lengths across the system (and limited yard space), that's a big deal. Along with planned infrastructure changes, you can buy a proven, nearly-off-the-shelf vehicle that's 100% low-floor. (That means you can have true level boarding at all doors at all stops - and thus vastly smaller dwell times.) A smaller number of longer cars also means easier maintenance - you have fewer HVAC units, fewer signal units, etc to maintain.
  by apodino
 
Thanks for the explanation, that makes perfect sense. It seems like there is some forward thinking at the MBTA finally. If I am not mistaken, one possibility that I have heard is for the Type 9s to eventually replace the PCCs on the Mattapan line.
  by bostontrainguy
 
The EGE wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:19 pm Going to the Type 10s lets you use much longer vehicles that are more space-efficient: a single 110-foot car can carry as many passengers as two 74-foot cars . . . A smaller number of longer cars also means easier maintenance - you have fewer HVAC units, fewer signal units, etc to maintain.
And half the payroll.
  by BandA
 
And double the fare evasion.
Last edited by CRail on Fri Jun 19, 2020 11:44 pm, edited 1 time in total. Reason: Unnecessary nesting quotes removed. Do not use the "quote" button as a reply button.
  by MBTA DMA
 
3920 has been delivered as of May.
  by MBTA DMA
 
3916 has been accepted.
  by MBTA DMA
 
3921 delivered this month.
  by charlesriverbranch
 
On Friday, I rode one of the new cars from Eliot on the Riverside line to Park Street. I was favorably impressed; it took the curve at Boylston with barely a squeak. The seat I was in seemed to be wider, and the announcements sounded more like a real person speaking instead of bits of sentences spliced together.

I notice the new cars do not use folding doors, but doors that open like the ones on the old Boeing/Vertol cars. I wonder if that'll be a problem down the road... err, rails.
  by R36 Combine Coach
 
charlesriverbranch wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 10:49 am I notice the new cars do not use folding doors, but doors that open like the ones on the old Boeing/Vertol cars. I wonder if that'll be a problem down the road... err, rails.
I vaguely recall reading the Boeing doors had issues and had to be modified during the 1996 MK/Amerail overhaul.
  by typesix
 
The original doors were heavy and the complicated operating mechanism for each door had about 300 parts, compared to about 50 in a PCC.
  • 1
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48