If you look at
this thread, the original poster noted that there are trade-offs when designing transit vehicles with floors that low:
- Capacity for a given vehicle length is often reduced.
- Some, especially non-electric buses, aren't 100% low floor.
- The light rail vehicles that are 100% low floor often have fixed bogies which is said to cause other problems like greater wear and tear of the tracks they use.
So it is often said the only reasons that new buses and light rail vehicles (with exceptions like existing systems with high platforms) are low floor are:
- The need for level boarding has become important enough.
- High platforms might not be possible in all locations where dwelling occurs and even if they, low floor and low platforms are a cheaper and easier option for a new system.
The idea of this thread is to take this apart and look for a richer sequence of events. Let's start by noting that mere technological aspects may have little bearing on the buying decisions of the operators. They are not running theme park services and won't choose one option over another just because it is technologically superior.
Also, drivers cabs don't need to be accessible, is this because people in wheelchairs don't drive them or is this for whatever reason(s) they don't drive them?
Linear Mode
