|
|
| Re: Just a little information on the R-211 subway car order (1135163) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Just a little information on the R-211 subway car order |
|
|
Posted by Outside the Box on Fri Jan 27 01:20:01 2012, in response to Re: Just a little information on the R-211 subway car order, posted by monorail on Thu Jan 26 14:40:48 2012. They should consider 67' length cars with 5 pairs of doors per side. Montreal Metro has cars that are 55' long 8'-2.5" wide that have 4 pair per side. The Canarsie Line could use them in 8 car trains to max out BMT Eastern Division platform infrastructure while retaining truck and car count. 603' 9 car consists could fit 600' BMT Southern Division and 600' and 660' IND platforms.If you have advanced door controls (specifically with selective door control), trains can operate safely with parts of the first and/or last car can be beyond the platform footprint. A 670' train could safely operate at Roosevelt Island and BMT Culver Elevated with some of the doors in the first and last cars remaining closed while having all doors open at 74st-Roosevelt Ave and 6th Ave stations. Another design to consider would be 60'-67' rapid transit cars with 45'-54' truck centers, featuring wide covered vestibules similar to those in Bombardier Movia series metro rail cars. They would allow a few more people to fit on a train in the space between cars otherwise left unused. An odor control door could be an option. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movia Having covered vestibules may make it feasible to run trains much longer than platform length. Long distance riders would use the first or last car. For instance, subway riders from the Bronx and Upper Manhattan heading to Brooklyn would ride (and maybe get a seat in) the more spacious beyond the platform cars until they get to Lower Manhattan. They can then safely prewalk the train for their exit station stair location while in motion. Less technically advanced would be 60' rail cars like the R160, but with traverse seats (single back against the wall, 4 in pairs traverse back to back, and another single against the wall) instead of bench seats. That would have the same number of seats but save some space near the doors (11" wide spaces adjacent to each door of the pairs of side doors) for people to stand there but not block the doorway. That would widen the effective doorway in real world operation, speed up train boarding and alighting, cut station dwell time, and improve peak hr reliability and capacity. |
|
|
|