First ride on Trimet Type 4
Gordon
See www.trimet.org.
So the other day I got to take a first ride on Trimet's
new Type 4 rail car. The Type 4 is the latest light
rail vehicle. Several were bought to support expanded
service on the new green line. But they are deployed
system wide.
So I was waiting for the MAX at Quatama and a Type 4
train set pulled up. Cool. I headed toward my favorite
seats at the center of the train. Only to discover that
the seats don't face sidways like they do on the type 2
and 3 trains. Some how they have arranged the wheels
so that the seats are arranged to face forward.
then I turned toward the back of the train and got another
supprise. There is only one opperator cab. At the
back of the train (in the forward car), there is a seating
area where the cab would normally be. And you can see throuth
the big rear window (which would be the driver's windshield)
and into the following car.
The ride was much quieter. The annoying voice that announces
stations and warns of closing doors was much mellower and
pleasent. Starts and stops were smoother. When the train
pulled out of the stations the electric drive made a sound
like the Enterprise going into warp.
In all it was an enjoyable ride on a very nice rail car.
gl4...@yahoo.com
<go...@alltomyself.com> wrote:
> The ride was much quieter. The annoying voice that announces
> stations and warns of closing doors was much mellower and
> pleasent. Starts and stops were smoother. When the train
> pulled out of the stations the electric drive made a sound
> like the Enterprise going into warp.
These are standard cars (in North America called the "S70" but in Europe
they have an actual type name). The fact that TriMet is now using fairly
off the shelf equipment, rather than custom ordered stuff like their
previous few orders, means they should be getting better equipment. It's
worthwhile to put extra time and effort into a product that can be used
everywhere rather than just a few cars by one agency - and an agency that
really doesn't have that large a transit car fleet at that.
The bad news is that TriMet ordered cars with a specially castrated
maximum speed. The TriMet version can only go 55 miles per hour, but the
ones in use by Houston and Dallas can go 65 mph, and in Europe these are
used on main lines, where they certainly go faster than 55 miles per hour.
--
-Glennl
Please note this e-mail address is a pit of spam, and most e-mail sent to this address are simply lost in the vast mess.
Clark F Morris
>In article <Xns9C9A79339E1...@194.177.98.144>, Gordon
><go...@alltomyself.com> wrote:
>
>> The ride was much quieter. The annoying voice that announces
>> stations and warns of closing doors was much mellower and
>> pleasent. Starts and stops were smoother. When the train
>> pulled out of the stations the electric drive made a sound
>> like the Enterprise going into warp.
>
>
>These are standard cars (in North America called the "S70" but in Europe
>they have an actual type name). The fact that TriMet is now using fairly
>off the shelf equipment, rather than custom ordered stuff like their
>previous few orders, means they should be getting better equipment. It's
>worthwhile to put extra time and effort into a product that can be used
>everywhere rather than just a few cars by one agency - and an agency that
>really doesn't have that large a transit car fleet at that.
>
>The bad news is that TriMet ordered cars with a specially castrated
>maximum speed. The TriMet version can only go 55 miles per hour, but the
>ones in use by Houston and Dallas can go 65 mph, and in Europe these are
>used on main lines, where they certainly go faster than 55 miles per hour.
Don't bet on that, Koln replaced 100 km/h stadtbahn cars with 80 km/h
versions.
Miles Bader
> Don't bet on that, Koln replaced 100 km/h stadtbahn cars with 80 km/h
> versions.
Why?
-Miles
--
Success, n. The one unpardonable sin against one's fellows.
Gordon
news:gl4317-0410...@69-30-10-82.pxd.easystreet.com:
> In article <Xns9C9A79339E1...@194.177.98.144>, Gordon
> <go...@alltomyself.com> wrote:
>
>> The ride was much quieter. The annoying voice that announces
>> stations and warns of closing doors was much mellower and
>> pleasent. Starts and stops were smoother. When the train
>> pulled out of the stations the electric drive made a sound
>> like the Enterprise going into warp.
>
>
> These are standard cars (in North America called the "S70" but in
> Europe they have an actual type name). The fact that TriMet is now
> using fairly off the shelf equipment, rather than custom ordered stuff
> like their previous few orders, means they should be getting better
> equipment. It's worthwhile to put extra time and effort into a
> product that can be used everywhere rather than just a few cars by one
> agency - and an agency that really doesn't have that large a transit
> car fleet at that.
>
> The bad news is that TriMet ordered cars with a specially castrated
> maximum speed. The TriMet version can only go 55 miles per hour, but
> the ones in use by Houston and Dallas can go 65 mph, and in Europe
> these are used on main lines, where they certainly go faster than 55
> miles per hour.
>
TriMet has been a pace setter in this. They have been building
the MAX system for 38 years. I am at a loss to come up with
another light rail system that was opperational at that time
(well, BART). So who was building light rail vehicles? So
it's not suprising that the first few orders had to be custom
builds.
Then everyone started to come to Portland to see the wonderfull
light rail system we were building. And they basicly copied it.
So now with St. Louis, Dallas, Atlanta, Seattle, (and a few others
I'm sure) having light rail systems, it makes sense to have
an off the shelf design that can be used by several agencies.
Actually, I think these trains were made by Semiens. So they
would have been sold to transit agencies on that side of the pond
too.
Miles Bader
> TriMet has been a pace setter in this. They have been building
> the MAX system for 38 years. I am at a loss to come up with
> another light rail system that was opperational at that time
> (well, BART).
I suppose it depends on how you define "light rail"...
-Miles
--
"Don't just question authority,
Don't forget to question me."
-- Jello Biafra
Nobody
MAX for 38 years? I thought the first line to Gresham opened sometime
in 1986?
Sacramento, CA I think was close on Portland's heels in 1987.
In Alberta, Edmonton launched its system in early 1978 in time for the
Commonwealth Games.
The opposition down in Calgary came up with C-Train beginning in May
1981.
BART isn't exactly "light rail".
Clark F Morris
>Clark F Morris <cfmp...@ns.sympatico.ca> writes:
>> Don't bet on that, Koln replaced 100 km/h stadtbahn cars with 80 km/h
>> versions.
>
>Why?
You'd have to ask the KVB (Kolner Verkhersbetreib I think) but my
guess is that they have changed the stop spacing so that high
acceleration is more important than high speed. This is quite a slow
down on the Rhine River route between Koln and Bonn which at one time
had express trains operated at 120 km/h. My guess is that with tariff
confederations, the faster traffic has moved to the DB so that only
local traffic is left on the routes between Koln and Bonn. 70 km/h is
the top speed for many light rail operations in Europe and 80 seems to
be the highest for other than tram-trains. Maybe Hans-Joachim will
have more (and probably better) information.
>
>-Miles
gl4...@yahoo.com
<go...@alltomyself.com> wrote:
> gl4...@yahoo.com (gl4...@yahoo.com) wrote in
> > The bad news is that TriMet ordered cars with a specially castrated
> > maximum speed. The TriMet version can only go 55 miles per hour, but
> > the ones in use by Houston and Dallas can go 65 mph, and in Europe
> > these are used on main lines, where they certainly go faster than 55
> > miles per hour.
> >
>
> TriMet has been a pace setter in this. They have been building
> the MAX system for 38 years. I am at a loss to come up with
> another light rail system that was opperational at that time
> (well, BART). So who was building light rail vehicles? So
> it's not suprising that the first few orders had to be custom
> builds.
No, it has not been a pace setter. TriMet has very intentionally used San
Diego's light rail line as an example to copy, and you will find that most
anyone involved in the actual construction of the first two light rail
projects here will tell you that.
The only cars that TriMet had any excuse to custom order were the first
cars on the WestSide line, as no one was making 55 mph low floor cars
then. After that, the S70 was available, and put in service in San Diego,
Houston, Dallas, and several other cities.
TriMet was dead last in ordering a modern, off the shelf car.
A great example of how far behind Portland is compared to real transit
systems, look no further than the Portland streetcar. End to end the
average speed is about 6 miles per hour, and that now includes dedicated
right of way between South Waterfront and Riverplace.
Strassbourg, France has a very similar streetcar line. It runs in city
streets, and is very local in nature. It's average end to end speed is
slightly over 16 miles per hour.
One line is almost competitive with walking. The other is almost faster
than driving directly, and certainly faster than parking a car on a city
street and walking to the destination.
Naturally, Strassbourg's line carries some 10 times the number of
passengers, because it is designed to attract people away from driving.
A key part of being faster is having a 100% low floor, and many doors so
that passengers can board and detrain fast at station stops.
Today, Houstan and Toronto have ordered 100% low floor cars for their
lines, that will allow for much faster boarding.
Today, Portland Streetcar has ordered more of the same outdated car design
(though this time from a domestic maker under licence) that is a copy of
Skoda's outdated design. That car design, for the past 15 years, would be
considered outdated almost anywhere in Europe because 100% low floor cars
are able to deal much more effectively with station stops.
Tomorrow, Portland will have continued to fall behind other transit
systems due to its insistance in using outdated methods and equipment
designs.
Bill Bolton
> Strassbourg, France has a very similar streetcar line.
Only similar in that it runs on rails... <rolls eyes>
Bill Bolton
Sydney, Australia
Gordon
news:gl4317-0710...@69-30-10-94.pxd.easystreet.com:
>
> Today, Houstan and Toronto have ordered 100% low floor cars for their
> lines, that will allow for much faster boarding.
>
> Today, Portland Streetcar has ordered more of the same outdated car
> design (though this time from a domestic maker under licence) that is
> a copy of Skoda's outdated design. That car design, for the past 15
> years, would be considered outdated almost anywhere in Europe because
> 100% low floor cars are able to deal much more effectively with
> station stops.
>
> Tomorrow, Portland will have continued to fall behind other transit
> systems due to its insistance in using outdated methods and equipment
> designs.
>
What does Portland Streetcar have to do with Trimet's MAX??
All of the Portland Streetcar fleet are low floor.
All of Trimet's fleet since the Westside expansion are
low floor. Only the original Type 1 from the first
east side line are high floor. The type 2, 3 and 4
are all low floor. As you pointed out, a proper low
floor vehicle was not available when the first MAX
line was built.
gl4...@yahoo.com
<go...@alltomyself.com> wrote:
> gl4...@yahoo.com (gl4...@yahoo.com) wrote in
> news:gl4317-0710...@69-30-10-94.pxd.easystreet.com:
>
>
> >
> > Today, Houstan and Toronto have ordered 100% low floor cars for their
> > lines, that will allow for much faster boarding.
> >
> > Today, Portland Streetcar has ordered more of the same outdated car
> > design (though this time from a domestic maker under licence) that is
> > a copy of Skoda's outdated design. That car design, for the past 15
> > years, would be considered outdated almost anywhere in Europe because
> > 100% low floor cars are able to deal much more effectively with
> > station stops.
> >
> > Tomorrow, Portland will have continued to fall behind other transit
> > systems due to its insistance in using outdated methods and equipment
> > designs.
> >
>
> What does Portland Streetcar have to do with Trimet's MAX??
As stated in my original posting, it is an example of how far behind
Portland is from where it should be (just like TriMet's light rail car
selection), if it is supposed to be held up as an example of how to do
rail transit correctly.
> All of the Portland Streetcar fleet are low floor.
The Portland streetcar fleet have 70% low floors, which was considered a
vastly improved car design in the 1980s. By the 1990s this design was
sort of still acceptable in many places, but today no one in Europe who is
trying to make their streetcar lines attract large numbers of passengers
orders cars with such limited capacity and passenger boarding speed.
See the above original message as to why this design is no longer
considered acceptable.
This is why Houstan and Toronto went with 100% low floor car designs in
their recent orders (yes, Houston has noted even their 65 mph version of
the Siemens S70 - the TriMet type 4 - has limitations due to having only a
partial low floor, and now understands why 100% low floor is desirable).
As those cars start operating in those cities, more cities will probably
decide to use modern designs, as opposed to the designs that were selected
for the Portland streetcar.
So, most likely what will happen will be the same thing that happened with
TriMet and the S70 car design: large numbers of other cities will buy the
modern and improved design first, and Portland will get modern cars long
after modern car designs have been operating in other cities.