SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   CHICAGO: Transit Developments (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=101657)

OhioGuy Jan 24, 2008 2:50 AM

Looks like there is a lot less seating in these cars than the current ones. I'm not in favor of anything that reduces seating. I don't want to be stuck standing for the lengthy commute to/from the loop. I want to be able to sit down and read, or sleep, or just relax a bit.

the urban politician Jan 24, 2008 3:06 AM

Where the hell are the plasma screens in those renderings?

emathias Jan 24, 2008 3:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioGuy (Post 3303841)
Looks like there is a lot less seating in these cars than the current ones. I'm not in favor of anything that reduces seating. I don't want to be stuck standing for the lengthy commute to/from the loop. I want to be able to sit down and read, or sleep, or just relax a bit.

It doesn't reduce seating. I know it's hard to believe, but aisle-facing seating doesn't reduce seating over the current configurations. I know that seems against common sense, but side-by-side seats are actually very inefficient users of space, with fixed allotments for legroom that are too much for some and not enough for others. Aisle-facing seats have adjustable legroom and invite more people into the car, which increases total capacity considerably without reducing the number of seats.

Besides, a mass transit service needs to put capacity ahead of a rider's ability to sleep or relax. :-)

ardecila Jan 24, 2008 4:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioGuy (Post 3303841)
Looks like there is a lot less seating in these cars than the current ones. I'm not in favor of anything that reduces seating. I don't want to be stuck standing for the lengthy commute to/from the loop. I want to be able to sit down and read, or sleep, or just relax a bit.

Believe it or not, the CTA is actually planning for a net increase in the number of seats. According to chicago-l.org, the number of seats will go from 39 to 40 per car on the new cars. The longitudinal seating just brings you closer to other people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias (Post 3303891)
Besides, a mass transit service needs to put capacity ahead of a rider's ability to sleep or relax. :-)

If the existing capacity is fine, then I say keep the transverse seating. Orange, Green, Pink, and Yellow Line trains don't have any sort of problems with capacity; they don't need the extra room. I hope CTA will reassign the 3200-series cars (with transverse seating) to those 4 lines, and then let Blue, Red, Brown, and Purple have the newest 5000-series cars with more capacity, since those 4 lines need it.

amfleisch Jan 24, 2008 4:29 AM

i just cant wait for some bum to sprawl himself on 5+ seats

OhioGuy Jan 24, 2008 4:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 3304006)
Believe it or not, the CTA is actually planning for a net increase in the number of seats. According to chicago-l.org, the number of seats will go from 39 to 40 per car on the new cars. The longitudinal seating just brings you closer to other people.

I guess photos are deceiving. The ones posted on here of the new cars look like they have a big decrease in seating. Good to hear that's not the case.

Busy Bee Jan 24, 2008 4:44 AM

I must say I am VERY surprised to see the CTA propose actual interesting design features for these cars. Especially since the last I heard—and I believe we had a design discussion over it—was that the new cars would look identical to the 3200 series. What is most intriguing to me however is this exterior "pizzazz" that is being considered for the front of the cab car. While I would have preferred this accent molding to be black or perhaps white(iPod anyone?), overall I'm digging it—I'm liking the rounded bottom design more though because the second one looks very similar to the IRT cars running in NY.

I'm just excited that they're trying. This is exactly what I've always complained about. I use this as evidence that the CTA does actually realize that, at least when it comes to the appearance of its rolling stock, that may other world systems have got 'em beat. And while these are essentially a 3200 with a new fancy face and a slicked out interior, that's actually a huge step. Good for the CTA!

VivaLFuego Jan 24, 2008 4:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jstush04 (Post 3303807)
^ uhm.............really?

really??? thats what they're gonna look like?!

Not necessarily, but the contract authorizes a change order to include an industrial design that could potentially lead to a more modern look than a clone of the 3200s, which was the original plan.

in re: seating capacity, the longitudinal seating, while less comfortable for seated riders, opens up ALOT more standing room. And anyone who rides the Brown, Red, or Blue lines in the AM peak knows that CTA trains need all the room they can get to cram people in.

VivaLFuego Jan 24, 2008 4:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 3304006)

Orange, Green, Pink, and Yellow Line trains don't have any sort of problems with capacity; they don't need the extra room.

Orange gets some pretty crazy loads (approaching what Brown gets, if only for about a 15-30 minute period) in the PM peak leaving Adams/Wabash, but its still on a pretty long headway (~5 minutes). Regardless, getting a bonus 10-15% increase in capacity is a no-brainer on a full system for which capacity expansion (which would otherwise involve some combination of longer trains or more frequent service) would be cost prohibitive.

KVNBKLYN Jan 24, 2008 5:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy (Post 3303536)

Why is there a PATH map above the door of this one?

And why does this rendering look suspiciously like the new PATH cars from the PA website?

http://www.panynj.gov/CommutingTrave.../new_cars.html
http://www.nj.com/hobokennow/index.s..._unveiled.html

Nowhereman1280 Jan 24, 2008 5:18 AM

A. hopefully they will be this modern, it would be nice to see some pimped out ultra modern transit cars ready for 2016.

B. that layout sucks, I find the best layout is the old school ones with the double folding doors that run on the blue line. Even though those are not handicapped friendly in any way...

Dr. Taco Jan 24, 2008 5:30 AM

^ viva, I like the designs, but I hope most of all that they are quieter in the subway, and less shaky, somehow. And I disagree with you about the longitudal (aisle-facing) seats being less comfortable: I sit in those ones 98% of the time because my frickin knees don't have to touch anything but other people. Also, they're the easiest seats to get some shut eye in (if you lean your head against the clear plastic right next to the door)

Nowhere, those cars with the double doors? I don't know what you're smoking, cuz those cars suck. I try to avoid them at all costs. first of all, i can't fit through the doors comfortably in the first place. second, no aisle facing seats? as i said to viva, I crave aisle facing seats. But yeah, they can dump every single one of those cars in a quarry for all I care (or give them to detroit)

Thundertubs Jan 24, 2008 5:54 AM

As a former New Jerseyite, NYer, and Chicagoan, I have to weigh in for the aisle-facing seating, PATH style. The Chicago cars have cramped aisles for standing commuters (I transfered to the Red Line at Belmont every morning, I know about standing). I also think the Chicago cars are missing a rail along the roof to hang onto (I'm tall). I hated having to lean over and grab the little handle by some sitting person's shoulder.

ardecila Jan 24, 2008 8:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego (Post 3304099)
Orange gets some pretty crazy loads (approaching what Brown gets, if only for about a 15-30 minute period) in the PM peak leaving Adams/Wabash, but its still on a pretty long headway (~5 minutes). Regardless, getting a bonus 10-15% increase in capacity is a no-brainer on a full system for which capacity expansion (which would otherwise involve some combination of longer trains or more frequent service) would be cost prohibitive.

Can't the headways be increased during the PM peak? I've been on the Orange Line during this period; it's not nearly as bad as Brown or Red IMO.

If it's only a 15 minute period, that means that only 1-3 extra trains are needed to balance out the load. I'm not sure I understand how running your trains 3 more times per day costs more than replacing your trains outright.

VivaLFuego Jan 24, 2008 3:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 3304353)
Can't the headways be increased during the PM peak? I've been on the Orange Line during this period; it's not nearly as bad as Brown or Red IMO.

If it's only a 15 minute period, that means that only 1-3 extra trains are needed to balance out the load. I'm not sure I understand how running your trains 3 more times per day costs more than replacing your trains outright.

This is actually a pretty major side discussion (feel free to PM if you like), but you run up against capacity issues in the Loop, especially now that the Pink line shares the inner loop with Orange. You also, for now, run into peak-vehicle-requirement issues; CTA used to have some spares, but since Pink Line the spare ratio has gone way down (not to mention a decent percentage are out of service at any given time for maintenance for being so old). Conversely, the service reductions on the Brown Line as a result of 3-track at Belmont/Fullerton freed up some rail cars. The peak-vehicle issue also became pronounced with the slow zone epidemic, because the longer a trip takes due to slow zones, the more railcars you need to maintain the same intervals.

Short answer, yeah it would be possible to tweak schedules (including those of Pink and Green) to squeeze a couple extra Orange Line trains, but things are pretty tight as-is.

And of course, I'm not saying all old railcars should be replaced solely because of seating configuration, but rather just that as you order new cars, its prudent to maximize the potential capacity seeing as several lines are already just about at their limit and couldn't handle much more ridership growth.

10023 Jan 24, 2008 4:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioGuy (Post 3303841)
Looks like there is a lot less seating in these cars than the current ones. I'm not in favor of anything that reduces seating. I don't want to be stuck standing for the lengthy commute to/from the loop. I want to be able to sit down and read, or sleep, or just relax a bit.

The seating configuration on most CTA trains doesn't make sense. Forward facing seats are fine for commuter rail, but they take up too much space for a subway system. You can get a lot more people on a train with this configuration.

Hopefully those seats aren't fabric, either. Fabric is a bad idea on public transportation - I don't care how stain resistant or odor resistant it is, it's gross.

The CTA should emulate the trains that the MTA runs on the 4/5/6 line, and it looks like that's what they're doing.

The 6:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...way_in_NYC.jpg

ardecila Jan 24, 2008 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10023 (Post 3304738)
Hopefully those seats aren't fabric, either. Fabric is a bad idea on public transportation - I don't care how stain resistant or odor resistant it is, it's gross.

I believe the fabric the CTA has chosen is a woven form of polypropylene, similar to the material that seatbelts are made out of, but with a less-slippery texture. Under Armour is made out of a special type of polypropylene as well, and just try to stain that stuff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego (Post 3304618)
And of course, I'm not saying all old railcars should be replaced solely because of seating configuration, but rather just that as you order new cars, its prudent to maximize the potential capacity seeing as several lines are already just about at their limit and couldn't handle much more ridership growth.

Well, I'm all for replacing the entire fleet - the AC propulsion system makes it worthwhile, even if they have to do it gradually. But I'm not sure if implementing longitudinal seating system-wide is the right choice when newly-built cars (3200/ with transverse seating have no problems accommodating demand on many lines.

It's all academic anyway. CTA has no intentions to shuffle their fleet more than they need to, which is why the 3200s with transverse seating will stay in service on the Brown, Yellow, and Orange Lines while the new 5000s will go to the Blue Line (great) and the Pink Line (wtf?), and then later to the Green and Purple Lines.

VivaLFuego Jan 24, 2008 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 3305549)

It's all academic anyway. CTA has no intentions to shuffle their fleet more than they need to, which is why the 3200s with transverse seating will stay in service on the Brown, Yellow, and Orange Lines while the new 5000s will go to the Blue Line (great) and the Pink Line (wtf?), and then later to the Green and Purple Lines.

Just like to point out that anything you might have heard before the new CTA Front Office took over, regarding fleet assignments, long term plans, just about anything really, is subject to change pretty drastically.

ardecila Jan 24, 2008 11:27 PM

^ I'm going by the press release that appeared a few days ago on CTA's website, which says that the Blue/Pink/Green/Purple will have cars replaced first.

VivaLFuego Jan 25, 2008 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 3305752)
^ I'm going by the press release that appeared a few days ago on CTA's website, which says that the Blue/Pink/Green/Purple will have cars replaced first.

I think that just meant that the 2200 and 2400 series, which currently serve on the above lines, are being replaced. Doesn't necesarrily mean there won't be substantial fleet moves.


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:25 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.