Hmm that's nice about the Metro cars - neighborhood information and all.

Now give me my effing longitudinal seating

by Max on Jul 8, 2011 8:31 am • link • report

Metro unveiled a prototype interior for its new railcars. Among other design changes, the cars will feature real-time location displays that show neighborhood attractions as the train moves.

Wow! WMATA has entered the 90s!

by Jasper on Jul 8, 2011 9:24 am • link • report

I think we KNOW the real reason WalMart avoided the White neighborhoods.

Hostages Trapped Inside Walmart Insisting They Never Shop At Walmart

The whites in DC are too snobby to shop there.

by Cyclone on Jul 8, 2011 9:41 am • link • report

Dear WMATA,

Please put in longitudinal seating. You asked for feedback on the 7000 series cars, and riders overwhelmingly asked for it. All of your ridership analysis indicates that current crush loads will only get worse without expansion of core capacity, and changes to the rolling stock is the easiest way to increase that capacity.

Furthermore, longitudinal seating will make ingress and egress easier and faster, shortening station dwell times and improving on-time performance.

You're going to be stuck with these rail cars for the next 40-50 years. Don't screw it up.

Please, tell me who is demanding that you keep the current seating arrangement? Riders want it. The system capacity needs it. It's the most obvious choice to be made with this new order, yet we're stuck with the same arrangement. Why?

by Alex B. on Jul 8, 2011 9:44 am • link • report

I thought Walmart avoided the "white" areas because of a) higher rents and b) no pressing need for retail.

I'm glad it's cleared up that it's actually because the white neighborhoods are on an ideological pedestal.

by Bob See on Jul 8, 2011 9:49 am • link • report

@Alex

Not only does it have better space capacity, but many people get motion sick because of riding backwards.

Does NYC have any non-longitudinal cars?

by TGEoA on Jul 8, 2011 9:51 am • link • report

@Alex

I like the current seating configuration. It gives you a bit more personal space. I'm not sure that seating everybody sideways is an acceptable solution to the "some people get sick when traveling backwards" problem. Sounds like a compromise in which nobody wins.

@TGEoA

Some older IND (B) division cars (most notably the R68) have a hybrid arrangement that I quite like. The longitudinal arrangement that the London Tube and IRT (A) Division of the NYC subway are famous for has more to do with the smaller loading gauge of those cars.

They're considerably narrower than the more-recently-constructed systems.

This being said, I'd fight Metro tooth and nail to avoid the Blue/Gray color scheme (and "Bus seats"). I actually find that color pattern to be somewhat dated, and if anything, stressful. Similarly, I'd like the color temperature of the lighting in the cars to match that of the stations. I seriously *hate* the new Metrobuses with the super-bright blue-hue lighting. It's oppressive.

Personally, I think that the color scheme currently in use on the 2000,3000, 5000, and 6000 series cars to be fairly "neutral" and timeless. Also, that scheme can be changed by simply replacing the seat cushions.

I love when aboveground trains pass through a gap in power, and you get a few seconds of silence and natural daylight.

My solution: Definitely buy some cars with Longitudinal seating. Run them on the Orange Line. The majority of cars should keep some sort of variation on the current scheme.

Also, keep the automated announcements and video screens to a minimum. The ones on the new NYC subway cars are incredibly obnoxious. The LED stripmaps are far more readable, provide only the essential information, and are less oppressive. (Somebody at WMATA is getting their ideas about futurism from 1984)

by andrew on Jul 8, 2011 10:08 am • link • report

Does anyone know the difference in seating capacity between cars with the current arrangement and seating that would run fore-aft?

by Fitz157 on Jul 8, 2011 10:17 am • link • report

@andrew

Having "a bit more personal space" is indeed nice. However, we have simple math to deal with here.

The simple math is that several key links in our system are well above current capacity. Short of building new tunnels, we have two options - lengthen the trains and increase the capacity on those trains. Bench-style seating in this new order of railcars accomplishes both goals.

GGW has discussed this before:

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/6640/7000-series-designs-sacrifice-capacity-for-vague-safety/

The key takeaway - bench style, longitudinal seating has almost as many seats as the current arrangement does, yet offers vastly more room for standing passengers.

The 7000 series offer a plan with 130 seats per 2-car pair. The longitudinal option has 122 seats per pair. Lose 8 seats, gain additional standing room for a far greater number of people.

It's a simple math problem based on Metro's current and projected ridership. Bench seating should be the only option under consideration when you do the math.

And I don't think your idea of only buying them for the Orange line works - Metro's future projections show that the system will have uncomfortable loads on many segments that encompass all lines. It's a change that needs to be made.

by Alex B. on Jul 8, 2011 10:17 am • link • report

@Alex

We can come to that juncture when we reach it. Refurbishment of the 4000 series, and replacement of the 2000-3000 series will happen before the system reaches that point.

by andrew on Jul 8, 2011 10:21 am • link • report

I'm with Alex. I was a little shocked that Metro is still persisting with the existing seat configuration which is horribly inefficient.

Metro has done their own studies, they know how many more people they can fit in with horizontal seating. As he said, user polls have been overwhelmingly in favor of them because of hte additional space, so how are we right back to where we started.

Metro is all concerned about the 2050 capacity of the system and the tens of billions they will need to spend to expand capacity. Well hello!!!! You can expand the capacity of the system by 25% tomorrow by doing what everyone has said to do, and changing the seat configuration for no money at all.

Seriously now...how hard is this? Why are we even having this discussion?

by freely on Jul 8, 2011 10:31 am • link • report

@Alex B.

The simple math is that several key links in our system are well above current capacity. Short of building new tunnels, we have two options - lengthen the trains and increase the capacity on those trains.

Third option: 100% 8-car trains during peak periods.

by Dizzy on Jul 8, 2011 10:34 am • link • report

@Dizzy

Metro's model calculations for 2040 already assume all 8 car trains at max headways, and there is still congestion at several key segments.

@Fitz157

http://wmata.com/about_metro/board_of_directors/board_docs/032510_37000PresentationwithResolutions032510.pdf#page=15

This old presentation contains an outdated design, but is has the math on the seating capacity.

6000 series:

A car: 64
B car: 62

7000 series transverse (current arrangement):

A car: 62
B car: 68

7000 series longitudinal (bench seating):

A car: 58
B car: 64

So, we're talking about a loss of 4 seats per car. That's it.

It should be noted that the reason the B car capacities for the 7000 series are higher across the board, regardless of arrangement, is because the 7000 series will eliminate one of the control cabs.

by Alex B. on Jul 8, 2011 10:41 am • link • report

@Bob See:

Um, I believe that's the Onion. Really, lighten up and get off your own pedestal there.

by Mike O on Jul 8, 2011 11:05 am • link • report

andrew: It gives you a bit more personal space.

It certainly makes dining less conspicuous...

by Bob See on Jul 8, 2011 11:07 am • link • report

Mike O, what pedestal? Facts? I wasn't responding to that video btw.

by Bob See on Jul 8, 2011 11:10 am • link • report

Interesting....I always assumed longitudinal seating meant significantly fewer seats. If that's not the case, we should definitely have longitudinal. Just from the comfort perspective, I'm totally willing to give up a small number of seats to have a lot more leg room when the train isn't at capacity. Also, you can open up your laptop and work on any longitudinal seat but there are only a few seats in the current configuration where that's possible. As someone who often rides from falls church to MD, that's a key benefit!

by Falls Church on Jul 8, 2011 11:20 am • link • report

Can we quit making everything in DC about race yet? It's getting a little ridiculous.

I'm guessing Walmart didn't "avoid" any area so much as they preferred other areas. So far as I know, Walmart is a business, and is trying to locate itself so it's most accessible to the demographics (income, age, lots of things besides just race) that shop at Walmart.

by Jared on Jul 8, 2011 11:59 am • link • report

When I take the NYC subway, I notice that a lot of fatties take up a good chunk of the sideways seats by stradling the ass hump seperator.

I enjoy watching someone sit down next to a bogarter and watching them give a hip check to knock em onto their portion.

by TGEoA on Jul 8, 2011 1:03 pm • link • report

Most systems with longitudinal seating are a lot narrower and shorter than metro. I'm not convinced that there's that much extra usable standing room down the middle of a metro car, as there's nothing for the people in the middle to hold onto.

I also hate the current longitudinal seats, as it's really hard to sit up as the jerky acceleration and braking throw you from side to side. I can only envision a whole 30 foot line of people sliding like dominoes down the side of a metro car.

by Mike on Jul 8, 2011 1:44 pm • link • report

@Jared

Can we quit making everything in DC about race yet? /i>

lol you must be another transplant.

by Born here in the 80's on Jul 8, 2011 2:50 pm • link • report

Alex, thanks for the info. Looks like the longitudinal seats would be a good option.

by Fitz157 on Jul 8, 2011 4:40 pm • link • report

Re: gun shops.
DC should combine gun, liquor, lottery, and pawn licenses into a jumbo "kill-the-poor-and-let-them-pay-for-it package. Then add as options Section 8 Voucher cashing, title loans, and needle exchange programs.

by Smoke_Jaguar4 on Jul 8, 2011 7:38 pm • link • report