# The best worst train!?



## traindesign (Jun 4, 2008)

I am a industrial design student currently working on a concept for a new subway train. so what i am interested in is *feedback *about things concerning the subway. any subway. tell me about the things you *hate *and *love *about your daily commuting or occasional trip underground. what do you consider to be the most important thing in a subway train. from passenger flow int hte waggons, heated seating, lighting, airconditioning, windows, railing, interface etc... anything!

I really appreciate your answers


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Jun 5, 2008)

Traindesign, I think it would be helpful if we knew a bit more of what you have in mind; if you will, a baseline for your concept. Perhaps you could post any preliminary drawings, and/or a sort of mission proposal statement about your project, and feedback could proceed from there.

My local subway is the Los Angeles Metro Red Line, and I'm pretty happy with it, although the braking seems a bit abrupt at times, jostling standees.

Which leads to the question of your focus. Are you talking about designing an entire system, or just the rolling stock? Again, knowing these things would be helpful for those, like myself, who would be happy to provide a little input on your project.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Jun 5, 2008)

To be honest with you, I'd say the key thing with trainsets is their durability. The R32s have long outlasted the R34s and R36s on the NYC subway, because they were really well built, shot welded stainless steel Budd cars.

Seating is also practically irellevant. Most people who get a seat on the subway are happy to get it- most people stand.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Jun 6, 2008)

traindesign said:


> I am a industrial design student currently working on a concept for a new subway train. so what i am interested in is *feedback *about things concerning the subway. any subway. tell me about the things you *hate *and *love *about your daily commuting or occasional trip underground. what do you consider to be the most important thing in a subway train. from passenger flow int hte waggons, heated seating, lighting, airconditioning, windows, railing, interface etc... anything!I really appreciate your answers


I think heated seating makes some sense in automobiles because it can start working long before the radiator has warmed up. (This is especially important in a hybrid car if the owner is trying to proudly show off how the car can run in all-electric mode for the distance I can walk in ten minutes.)

Whereas in a subway car, typically the HVAC system has a chance to start working long before the passenger boards.


----------



## George Harris (Jun 6, 2008)

You have picked a subject that is good for books, week long professional seminars, and extensive studies. Anything here can hardly more than scratch the subject.

Appropriate for conditions is the key starting point.

A high volume system with closely spaced stations needs cars with multiple doors per side, at least three, or even four, minimal seating, usually a bench style on each side, etc. You do want windows that go high enough that the standees can see out, as you must be able to see where you are. That also means you need to have multiple large easily seen signs with the station name on them in every station. If you have a multi-lingual population, the signs should be also, particularly if not all styles of wirting used are in the Roman alphabet. The above description would apply to places like New York, Tokyo, Hong Kong, etc.

A lower volume system that has wider spaced stations can have more seating and fewer doors per side. San Francisco BART cars have only two doors per side and transverse seating. Again, you still need the windows and the station signs, and BART is very poor on the signage score.

Appropriate for climate is also important. Ground temperature also goes higher as you get closer to the equator. Therefore, the ground is not a good "heat sink" in tropical climates, meaning the system ventilation must be able to move much larger volumes of air, otherwise the air in the tunnel can get so hot that the train air conditioning fails.

In Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei, and probably else where, but these I know, there are no doors between cars. Instead there are open gangways, with vestibule bellows, of course, so that there is easy passage the full length of the train. This helps even out passenger loading, but I regard it as a smoke/fire hazard, in that any fire anywhere in the train results not in a car full of smoke, but a train full of smoke.


----------



## GG-1 (Jun 6, 2008)

George Harris said:


> In Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei, and probably else where, but these I know, there are no doors between cars. Instead there are open gangways, with vestibule bellows, of course, so that there is easy passage the full length of the train. This helps even out passenger loading, but I regard it as a smoke/fire hazard, in that any fire anywhere in the train results not in a car full of smoke, but a train full of smoke.


Aloha George

That is a good point that must be considered, I hope you mentioned the smoke hazard as an experienced rail person, not from dealing with such an emergency. In addition, tunnel escapes and access are also important to deal with emergency's.


----------



## Heading North (Jun 7, 2008)

Seating also depends on the length of the run. I live along the "A" train in New York City, and have a 40-minute ride to work... and the train continues even beyond that to JFK Airport, which is IIRC another 40 minutes or so. (I've only made that trip a couple times, and not recently.) People with commutes like mine, or passengers headed for the airport, will probably hope to sit.

The fun thing about seating, especially in NY, is that everyone's got an opinion. NYC has three types of subway seating: a bench seat on the oldest and newest cars, some older cars with both bucket seats lengthwise and perpendicular pairs of bucket seats, and other older cars with only lengthwise bucket seats. There's an ongoing debate over benches vs. buckets, and I'm glad that we've gone back to the benches, where people divide seating up proportionally as they see fit.

One other note: in Paris I noticed that the doors always opened on the same side of the car. This was extremely annoying, because no one ever wanted to move into the car and then have to crowd and push back out again.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Jun 7, 2008)

Heading North said:


> Seating also depends on the length of the run. I live along the "A" train in New York City, and have a 40-minute ride to work... and the train continues even beyond that to JFK Airport, which is IIRC another 40 minutes or so. (I've only made that trip a couple times, and not recently.) People with commutes like mine, or passengers headed for the airport, will probably hope to sit.
> The fun thing about seating, especially in NY, is that everyone's got an opinion. NYC has three types of subway seating: a bench seat on the oldest and newest cars, some older cars with both bucket seats lengthwise and perpendicular pairs of bucket seats, and other older cars with only lengthwise bucket seats. There's an ongoing debate over benches vs. buckets, and I'm glad that we've gone back to the benches, where people divide seating up proportionally as they see fit.
> 
> One other note: in Paris I noticed that the doors always opened on the same side of the car. This was extremely annoying, because no one ever wanted to move into the car and then have to crowd and push back out again.


Personally, I usually prefer standing.


----------



## tp49 (Jun 8, 2008)

An interesting feature on the Taipei Metro was that a portion of the car between the head end and the first set of doors was standing room only with a rail on each side of the car. Good for rush hour to fit in more standees.


----------



## George Harris (Jun 8, 2008)

tp49 said:


> An interesting feature on the Taipei Metro was that a portion of the car between the head end and the first set of doors was standing room only with a rail on each side of the car. Good for rush hour to fit in more standees.


True for either the second set, third set and more recent cars ordered, but not the originals delivered in about 1993 or 1994. They had seats all the way to the ends.

TP49, are you in Taipei, or have been there / lived there recently? I lived there 1990-2007, but worked elsewhere mid 1995-mid 1998


----------



## George Harris (Jun 8, 2008)

GG-1 said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > In Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei, and probably else where, but these I know, there are no doors between cars. Instead there are open gangways, with vestibule bellows, of course, so that there is easy passage the full length of the train. This helps even out passenger loading, but I regard it as a smoke/fire hazard, in that any fire anywhere in the train results not in a car full of smoke, but a train full of smoke.
> ...


Writing as a rail person. Subway fire is an experience I have missed, and I would like to keep it that way. Tunnel evacuations and exits have a standard that covers the subject extensively. It is NFPA 130. That is National Fire Protection Association standard no. 130, Standard for Fixed Guideway Transit and Passenger Rail Systems Even though not legally in effect there, the Taipei system was built to comply with NFPA 130 requirements for walkways, evacuation routes, etc. The system is also fully handicapped accessble.


----------



## tp49 (Jun 8, 2008)

George Harris said:


> tp49 said:
> 
> 
> > An interesting feature on the Taipei Metro was that a portion of the car between the head end and the first set of doors was standing room only with a rail on each side of the car. Good for rush hour to fit in more standees.
> ...


I visited Taipei in February. Enjoyed it a lot even rode the HSR down to Kaoshuing but their metro wasn't opened yet.


----------



## smackfu (Aug 4, 2008)

The Mexico City system uses pictographs to represent every station, presumably due to illiteracy? Very clever though because it's easier to remember a rooster than Inigo Montoya station.

(Also, it's only $0.20 per ride!)


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Aug 4, 2008)

smackfu said:


> The Mexico City system uses pictographs to represent every station, presumably due to illiteracy? Very clever though because it's easier to remember a rooster than *Inigo Montoya* station.


Let's keep his father out of this...


----------



## transit54 (Aug 5, 2008)

One of the more impressive subways systems I've been on has been in Barcelona, at least as far as the actual rail vehicles are concerned. On some lines they have fully articulated cars with no doors between each car, allowing one to stand at one end of the train and see completely to the other end. Outside of the fact it created a lot more space for people to stand, it very very cool to be able to watch the front part of your train bend around a curve while you stood at the back.

This photo isn't great, but it gives you the general idea: http://lh5.ggpht.com/_y1MjKTNJHxY/R44XChnw...Yo/IMG_7096.JPG


----------



## amamba (Aug 10, 2008)

I take a commuter rail into a major city every day for work. The coaches have seating that is 3-2 with an aisle in the middle. It is a huge waste because no one wants to sit in the middle seat and the seats are really uncomfortable, especially when the a/c isn't working and you have to snuggle with the person sitting next to you. I think that they should rip out all the seats and put new 2-2 benches in, hopefully ones that are a little wider to accomodate the wider bottoms of americans these days


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 10, 2008)

Assuming you mean Boston, there are some new coaches that have been ordered; I'm not sure what the seating configuration is. It certainly is true that the commuters for the most part really don't want to sit five across, as far as I can tell. And there isn't really much room to stand relative to the subway cars.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 11, 2008)

amamba said:


> I take a commuter rail into a major city every day for work. The coaches have seating that is 3-2 with an aisle in the middle. It is a huge waste because no one wants to sit in the middle seat and the seats are really uncomfortable, especially when the a/c isn't working and you have to snuggle with the person sitting next to you. I think that they should rip out all the seats and put new 2-2 benches in, hopefully ones that are a little wider to accomodate the wider bottoms of americans these days


Commuter cars are supposed to be efficient, not comfortable. People prefer 5 across seating to standing, which is why they are used in high-volume systems.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 11, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Commuter cars are supposed to be efficient, not comfortable. People prefer 5 across seating to standing, which is why they are used in high-volume systems.


Are you asserting that I am not a person?


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 11, 2008)

Perhaps I should have added an "It seems to me most people" to the "prefer 3 across to standing"


----------



## VentureForth (Aug 12, 2008)

I like the idea of distance based fares with huge system map signboards where you buy your ticket so you can find your destination and you know exactly how much to buy. Common and very practical in Japan.


----------



## AlanB (Aug 12, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Commuter cars are supposed to be efficient, not comfortable. People prefer 5 across seating to standing, which is why they are used in high-volume systems.


Actually to my knowledge people hate the 5 across seating. I've seen more trains with 30 or 40 people standing, while most of the middle seats in the 3 person bench go empty.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 12, 2008)

VentureForth said:


> I like the idea of distance based fares with huge system map signboards where you buy your ticket so you can find your destination and you know exactly how much to buy. Common and very practical in Japan.


Traditionally on the MBTA Commuter Rail system, it has been possible to inform a human where you are going and have them inform you how much money you are going to hand them in exchange for a ticket good for that destination. Although I don't think that really works now that we have the vending machines.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 13, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Commuter cars are supposed to be efficient, not comfortable. People prefer 5 across seating to standing, which is why they are used in high-volume systems.
> ...


Thats not what I see, I see often three clearly unrelated people sitting together on rush hour trains.


----------



## amamba (Aug 25, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Commuter cars are supposed to be efficient, not comfortable. People prefer 5 across seating to standing, which is why they are used in high-volume systems.


I disagree. I take the MBTA every day to Boston from my surrounding suburb and people will stand rather than sit 5 across. In fact, sometimes the aisles are totally full of standers while the middle seats remain empty. I wish that my line had the double decker cars that I see on the south shore, but I'm not sure if the tunnel on my route limits the height of the cars.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 25, 2008)

amamba said:


> I disagree. I take the MBTA every day to Boston from my surrounding suburb and people will stand rather than sit 5 across. In fact, sometimes the aisles are totally full of standers while the middle seats remain empty. I wish that my line had the double decker cars that I see on the south shore, but I'm not sure if the tunnel on my route limits the height of the cars.


I have seen someone claim that these days there are no height issues on the north side of the MBTA system with the bilevel coaches the MBTA owns. However, there have been issues with derailments through an interlocking when they've tried running bilevel coaches on the north side in the past.

However, that's sufficiently Nth hand information that it should be taken with a canister of salt.

(Where are there any north side tunnels?)

I assume the MBTA's plan when they get the new Rotem coaches is to start running bi-level cars everywhere and retire the old single level cars, but with ever increasing demand, the sensible thing is probably to keep running everything they have now and simply add the Rotem cars.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Aug 25, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Green Maned Lion said:
> ...


I think I have heard it said that New Yorkers' sense of personal space is smaller in a way that might very well explain why New Yorkers tolerate this and Bostonians don't.


----------



## AlanB (Aug 25, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > AlanB said:
> ...


New Yorker's don't tolerate this either. I've seen many, many trains where there were standees and plenty of empty middle seats.


----------



## amamba (Aug 26, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> (Where are there any north side tunnels?)
> I assume the MBTA's plan when they get the new Rotem coaches is to start running bi-level cars everywhere and retire the old single level cars, but with ever increasing demand, the sensible thing is probably to keep running everything they have now and simply add the Rotem cars.


There is a tunnel on the Newburyport/Rockport line between Swampscott and Salem. The tunnel is underneath Washington Street in Salem. The line also becomes only one track at some point in Salem through the tunnel and then through Salem and over the bridge into Beverly rather than dual track, so this is a point where there are often issues with the trains.


----------



## HP_Lovecraft (Sep 15, 2008)

I read somewhere that MBTA just purchased 75 new Rotem bilevel trains for the North Station rails.

They are slighly smaller then the bi-level Kawasaki trains used from the South Station, maybe so they can fit in tunnels?

Below the MBTA specifically states that they will be upgrading the Newburyport line with Bi level trains:

Here is the MBTA link


----------



## amamba (Sep 17, 2008)

HP_Lovecraft said:


> I read somewhere that MBTA just purchased 75 new Rotem bilevel trains for the North Station rails.They are slighly smaller then the bi-level Kawasaki trains used from the South Station, maybe so they can fit in tunnels?
> 
> Below the MBTA specifically states that they will be upgrading the Newburyport line with Bi level trains:
> 
> Here is the MBTA link


Thanks for posting that report, which I actually I had read parts of before. I would like to see specifically somehwere in the news where they said that they actually purchased 75 rotem coaches for the north shore recently, because that report is full of fanciful thinking and plans, not concrete things that they are doing because they have money to do it. I did notice that it said that the bilevel coaches would be in place by 2020, which is a long time of standing on the train to/from Boston everyday. However, even just increasing the trainsets by one car would make a huge difference.

For example, many of the "short term" improvements in that report, such as an MBTA parking garage in Salem, are probably 5+ years away. I know that the Beverly one is finally moving forward because the state of Massachusetts has provided funding for it, but the Salem one is still far away, even though the new courthouse is under construction already with NO parking. The parking in Salem is so bad that people park all along the North River in a flood plain along Bridge Street everyday.

I think the most fanciful parts of the study are the ferry service and additional station suggestions. Sure, they'll do a ferry from Lynn to Boston, just like they are going to extend the blue line. Maybe in 20 years


----------



## Ryan (Sep 17, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Joel N. Weber II said:
> 
> 
> > Green Maned Lion said:
> ...


To add another data point, I very rarely see folks standing in MARC's single level cars until all the 3rd middle seats are filled.


----------



## Guest_Zoltán_* (Sep 19, 2008)

I would be extremely interested to see the designs you come up with!

It's a delightful coincidence that as I write this, I have a few basic diagrams I've drawn of a design for new cars for the MARC's Brunswick Line, though only sketches of a far less advanced academic level as what you'll be working to produce.


----------



## zoltan (Sep 19, 2008)

Do excuse me; the above was me, but... damnit, I'm new to this forum! And so I totally cocked up a comment and a thread before realising i wasn't logged in. D:


----------



## HP_Lovecraft (Sep 19, 2008)

> I would like to see specifically somehwere in the news where they said that they actually purchased 75 rotem coaches for the north shore recently, because that report is full of fanciful thinking and plans,


This is where I read it

But now that I read it again, it is a bit more vague and says



> The MBTA Board of Directors today approved the purchase of 75 new bi-level commuter rail ...Rotem Corp. will deliver four coaches by the end of 2010 with the remaining 71 coaches slated for delivery by 2012


So, the key part is "Approved the purchase". That might just be wishful thinking. Though I see they have already assigned the numbers: 800-846

and 1800-1827. Maybe that will tell you where they plan on using them?


----------

