Trains.com

Could the kneeling bus technology be incorporated onto single level railcars?

5475 views
41 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, June 22, 2015 8:33 AM

I am surprised about that news about the CTA 5000s.  I don't think for one moment that it is a good idea, and think CTA made a dumb decision to accept it.  Just one more item to maintain.   Other car-builders and other systems seem to do perfectly well with the necessary equipment for AC-motor propulsion without this extra complication.  Boston's Blue Line cdars have even more restrictive clearances than CTA.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, June 22, 2015 8:26 AM

s

Stutgartt, with its high platforms in the middle of streets, has all three conditions:  Paved track but reserved for light rail only (and emergency vehicles), center reservation without fensing, center reservation with fensing, for higher speed portions of lines.  The latter duplicates the South Chicago Metra Electric conidtions.   Some of the stations, in the middle of streets, have street furniture including canopies.

Once you have canopies and benches and ticket machines, high platforms aren't much of an eyesore.

This is also true of the South Chicago Branch.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Monday, June 15, 2015 10:15 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH

Retractable steps do not meet the requirements of the Americans With Disabilities Act.  Metra has at least one car in each train that is equipped with a retractable lift for wheelchair passengers, and I'm sure that Amtrak and the other various suburban rail operators have similar equipment.

 

On the last trip that my wife took, she sat in a transfer chair (lighter and easier for me to manage than a wheel chair was) to move around in. At most stops, a ramp (carried in the car) was used to move her on or off the train; at one stop, a power lift was used--and it took longer to set it in place that it took to place a ramp. I have noticed the presence of a power lift at each of many stations, now. However, a lift is almost absolutely necessary for gaining access to Viewliner and other single-level cars with high floors.

Johnny

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Monday, June 15, 2015 7:43 AM

wccobb

The guys with pickup trucks are properly laughing at this mass of stupidity.  It's a long way from the ground to the floors of their trucks and for this such as JC Whtney has bolt-on retractable steps.  They fold down when needed and fold up when not needed.  It'll take some good old-fashioned engineering to resolve the details: how to attach the retractable step, how to make it work, how to power it, when to use it, etc. etc.  Most obvious that if this can be done on a pickup truck, it can be done on a railroad car.  Does give cause to ponder: he who starts something like this ... which is larger, his IQ or his shoe size ?  Oh well ...

 

Some time back in the 60s I was on a fan trip on the DM&IR. The equipment was the usual mix of Q rolling stock, but in the consist was an older coach either DM&IR or NP I forget witch. But anyway the car had the unusual equipment that had a large lever in the vestibule against the outside wall. When pulled up a step under the usual vestibule steps swung out eliminateing the need for a step box. Always wondered why this did not become standard . Never saw this anywhere else.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, June 15, 2015 6:55 AM

Retractable steps do not meet the requirements of the Americans With Disabilities Act.  Metra has at least one car in each train that is equipped with a retractable lift for wheelchair passengers, and I'm sure that Amtrak and the other various suburban rail operators have similar equipment.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 88 posts
Posted by wccobb on Saturday, June 13, 2015 6:58 PM

The guys with pickup trucks are properly laughing at this mass of stupidity.  It's a long way from the ground to the floors of their trucks and for this such as JC Whtney has bolt-on retractable steps.  They fold down when needed and fold up when not needed.  It'll take some good old-fashioned engineering to resolve the details: how to attach the retractable step, how to make it work, how to power it, when to use it, etc. etc.  Most obvious that if this can be done on a pickup truck, it can be done on a railroad car.  Does give cause to ponder: he who starts something like this ... which is larger, his IQ or his shoe size ?  Oh well ...

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Saturday, June 13, 2015 9:30 AM

Kind of related to the topic but not exactly.....BOARDING PLATFORM HEIGHT

I actually like the former step up to the train via vestibule stairs.    I think two things are happening here.    One they are trying to cut costs for boarding of physically challenged people.     Two U.S. Citizens are getting obese and no longer like to climb anything.

High level platforms are more of an eyesore at rural stations than sidewalk level platforms in my opinion.

I am fine with mixed high level and low level I guess with maybe 1 gradual slope between the two BUT what I don't like is when they intermix the two high level then low level then high level again (DART is guilty of this at some stations)........again it looks stupid and detracts from the surrounding architecture.

So my choices are low sloping to high with one ramp.   All High Level or All Low Level.

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Friday, June 12, 2015 8:39 PM

Wizlish

 

Instead, it jacks DOWN the conventional suspension.  

 

All the kneeling buses I have worked with did so by evacuating the right front air bag. Can you imagine the air suspension system trying to cope with a jack trying to collapse one of its air bags?

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Friday, June 12, 2015 12:50 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH

I'm not sure how much this feature will be used.

 

It's my understanding that it operates each time the doors are opened on 5000 series cars, although I can't say I've ever detected it when riding them.

From CTA's web site on the features of the 5000s.

"These cars also have an active suspension system that helps to better align the interior car floor with the height of station platforms in a variety of conditions."

I was told by the Bombardier Engineers that the cars sit high to provide adequate clearance for the AC propulsion equipment. The cars then lower at the stations (when dynamic clearance isn't an issue) to align with platform heights.

But the point is we've all been telling the OP "it's a silly question" and "do some research" when to a limited extent (not as much kneeling as on a bus) it actually exists.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, June 12, 2015 12:03 PM

I'm not sure how much this feature will be used.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Thursday, June 11, 2015 8:56 PM

Having somewhat criticised this idea note the following feature of the new CTA 5000 series L cars!

 

  • hydraulic active vehicle suspension system to lower car floor height at platforms

I had forgotten about this feature of the 5000s.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, June 8, 2015 6:49 AM

The IC South Chicago branch operates on a fenced private right-of-way down the middle of 71st Street, it isn't quite street running like South Shore in Michigan City.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, June 7, 2015 4:51 AM

Did not Dallas have the same system until adding a middle-cente low-floor section matching the low platforms exactly and eliminating the need for the use of steps for thos boarding and exiting at the center platform. I think some European systems have done the same.  Stuttgart is a real exception, and one sees long high platfomrs right in the middle of some streets, sort of like the IC South Chicago Branch.  Pardon me, showing my age, METRA-Electric, of course.  

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Sunday, June 7, 2015 1:49 AM

Deggesty

Salt Lake City TRAXX has the same system.

 

 

As does Denver

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Saturday, June 6, 2015 5:31 PM

Salt Lake City TRAXX has the same system.

Johnny

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,515 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Saturday, June 6, 2015 4:58 PM

I was impressed by Sacramento, CA's light rail systems handicap access system. It was a very simple one where they had a small ramp and platform at the end of the platform where the motorman could spot the front door of the car (which was adjacent to his cab) and the car contained a metal gap filling plate which he could position to provide a level passage from the boarding area to the car. No hydralics, no machinery to fail. A real KISS solution. Saw it used by individual motorized wheel chairs and while it took about a minute for the motorman to exit the cab , position the plate, assist the passenger, and then stow the plate, it seemed very efficient. 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Saturday, June 6, 2015 4:39 PM

rode the FDC on a fan trip.   Told the experiment was ended when the brotherhoods refused one-man operation of the limited capacity vehicle.

SF's MUNI had Boeings, has Bredas, and will some new LRV's that are high-floor in the subway designed for heavy rapid transit and stepped-boarding on the streets outside the subway.  Each three-trucked two-section car has four doors on each side.  Each door has a motorized "trap."  Both panels are at the normal 42" high-floor level in the subway.  Street operaton sees the outer panel as a step at 14" about rail height and the inner panel at 28."  

For wheel-chair and babycarriage loading in street operaton, both panels drop to 14" and together raise the load to the 42" level of the car floor.   Works, but requires maintenance.   Neded because the subway was not designed for the purpose for which it is used.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Saturday, June 6, 2015 3:23 PM

Observation of a kneeling bus had a 0:01:30 ( 90 second cycle time.) not counting boardings and deboardings.   Imagine that a kneling rail car might take 3 minutes to cycle.  So a 20 stop run would add an hour to the schedule.

Longer travel times decrease passenger appeal, increase crew costs, prevent equipment from being used for another trip which increases need for more equipment that is more expensive.  Anyone think this is a good idea ?

Almost goes along with the thread about Denver's commuter rail going with single level high platform trains. 

 

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Toronto, Canada
  • 2,560 posts
Posted by 54light15 on Saturday, June 6, 2015 12:32 PM

In the U.S. Navy it was called "the brow" for some reason. Never did figure out why.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Saturday, June 6, 2015 10:09 AM

The bus drivers may be aware that civilized people use gangplanks for boarding and exiting ships and boats?

Johnny

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Toronto, Canada
  • 2,560 posts
Posted by 54light15 on Saturday, June 6, 2015 9:48 AM

Toronto buses have gangplanks that fold out for the use of wheelchair-bound passengers. People call them that. So far, not one driver has been heard saying "ARRR!" except maybe on "talk like a pirate day."

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Saturday, June 6, 2015 9:13 AM

Many Metra cars are equipped for wheelchair access.  They use a folding, hydraulic ramp in the center vestibule.  Why reinvent the wheel when a decent system is already used?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, June 6, 2015 6:40 AM

blue streak 1

IMO a high level platform with a gauntlet track so freight can pass would be a cheaper option instead of building a one off kneeling car.

NICTD has already done this with several stations on the South Shore Line.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Friday, June 5, 2015 3:18 PM

IMO a high level platform with a gauntlet track so freight can pass would be a cheaper option instead of building a one off kneeling car.

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Friday, June 5, 2015 10:59 AM

BaltACD

 

 
daveklepper

A one-car "rail-bus" might use the idea.  A one car-rail bus to restore passenger service on a branch line where the road crossings are used as the passenger boarding and discharge points instead of station platforms.

 

Wasn't 'rail-bus' the concept of the Aerotrain?  And as a railcar it rode worse.

 

 

More like the New Haven Mack railbus or the UK's Pacers (Leyland National buses).

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, June 5, 2015 10:15 AM

daveklepper

A one-car "rail-bus" might use the idea.  A one car-rail bus to restore passenger service on a branch line where the road crossings are used as the passenger boarding and discharge points instead of station platforms.

Wasn't 'rail-bus' the concept of the Aerotrain?  And as a railcar it rode worse.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Friday, June 5, 2015 8:19 AM

And what about the structural integraty of the typical single-level car monocoque car construction?  The day of coaches and sleepes being consructed as a house on a flatcar has long past.  These days the entire floor is part of the strength of the structure.

I wish you would really try and learn a bit more about the topics you wish to discuss before making your suggestions, and then they will be constructive.

When I make suggestions, they also may appear unworkable because of the politics or corporate policies involved, but at least they make technical sense.  I assure you, a kneeling passenger train car does not make any sense whatsoever, and if it did, it would be an outlandishly expensive solution to a problem solvable by far more economical measures.

A one-car "rail-bus" might use the idea.  A one car-rail bus to restore passenger service on a branch line where the road crossings are used as the passenger boarding and discharge points instead of station platforms.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Thursday, June 4, 2015 9:39 PM

Wizlish
 
BaltACD
Don't forget US passenger equipment uses tightlock, interlocking couplers which endeavor to keep all cars in the same horizontal plane. To lower the vestibule end of one car, it would also lower the end of the adjoining car it was coupled to, this could be a problem unless cars were coupled at the vesitbule end and both cars were lowered as a unit

 

What I'm thinking is a little different.  Imagine each side of the 'stairs' in the vestibule was made separate and ran on vertical rails, like a little elevator car.  That is the only section that moves, and it is forcibly 'kneeled' against permanent restoring spring pressure.  The center sill of the car (and the couplers and HEP and brake lines, etc.) doesn't move; doesn't need to move.

 

Would that not still add a step at the top rather than at the bottom--unless each passenger is brought up separately?

Johnny

  • Member since
    October 2014
  • 1,644 posts
Posted by Wizlish on Thursday, June 4, 2015 8:45 PM

BaltACD
Don't forget US passenger equipment uses tightlock, interlocking couplers which endeavor to keep all cars in the same horizontal plane. To lower the vestibule end of one car, it would also lower the end of the adjoining car it was coupled to, this could be a problem unless cars were coupled at the vesitbule end and both cars were lowered as a unit

What I'm thinking is a little different.  Imagine each side of the 'stairs' in the vestibule was made separate and ran on vertical rails, like a little elevator car.  That is the only section that moves, and it is forcibly 'kneeled' against permanent restoring spring pressure.  The center sill of the car (and the couplers and HEP and brake lines, etc.) doesn't move; doesn't need to move.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy