[PRCo] Re: Portland Green Line

[John Swindler]

Low floor is the way to go.  Gets rid of ramps, lifts, and people climbing steps.  

 

 


 
> Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:53:39 -0700
> From: pcc_sr at yahoo.com
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Portland Green Line
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> 
> Mr.Allman;
> 
> The point I made which hasn't been addressed is the
> side impact issue isn't it. After such a collision there
> shall be more people come under the ADA law won't
> there. Portland and other cities had wayside lifts to
> board wheelchairs; whether or not it is less expensive
> to outfit each vehicle is lost on me. I would suspect
> it is not less expensive but since tax dollars pay the
> cost then the sky is the limit. Yes, they look goofy.
> I am not enamored with the Siemens equipment;
> ride quality is poor. This has been stated on this list
> before.
> 
> I don't see a difference in schedules because of these
> low cars.
> 
> I still prefer the high floor section of the vehicle - for safety;
> in America I am allowed my preference regardless of
> what individuals might say. I am not saying this to the
> exclusion of anyone else; it is noted above that
> alternatives for inclusion exist / abound.
> 
> I am suspicious of those who argue a cause after the
> fact; quite often that opinion was 180-degrees opposite
> before the law took hold. This is a time tested observation
> by many isn't it.
> 
> Country doctor sounds very appealing; income may be just
> the opposite. This is a term that almost disappeared isn't
> it. You probably have a degree of satisfaction from a job
> well done that many of us don't experience. While health
> care is an item now I still believe we have excellent
> resources and quite possibly the best health care in the
> world. Any number of friends have told me of miraculous
> cures. Fortunately I just deal with minor aches and pains,
> so far. Health care in the U.S.A. seems to be an
> under-appreciated asset doesn't it.
> 
> 
> Phil
> Without a 'coast' but not a 'cause.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: richard allman <allmanr at verizon.net>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 6:56:22 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Fw: Re: Portland Green Line
> 
> Phil-taste cannot be argued but a couple observations:
> the Tri Met Type 3 cars( I think!) are a bit goofy looking but
> are functional beyond belief re: efficient boarding/
> unboarding and ride quality. The new Siemens' cars I 
> just happen to like a whole lot-became totally enamored of 
> the design in San Diego 2-1/2 years ago for futuristic 
> apearance and performance, but that's just me! What does
> a simple country doctor know about LRV design? RICH
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Phillip Clark Campbell" <pcc_sr at yahoo.com>
> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
> Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 8:23 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Portland Green Line
> 
> 
> > Mr.Allman;
> >
> > I am not enamored of these low-floor cars; I am more
> > traditional and prefer the Bombardiers with standard
> > floor. When I ride the low-floor I look for a seat in the
> > standard floor section, each end of the car. I am
> > concerned with side impact collisions; something
> > could put a whole new door in this equipment. Maybe
> > I will like them better when I really 'need' such an
> > amenity.
> >
> > It is a different story if low-floor 3756 comes along
> > isn't it.
> >
> > The Bombardier equipment is superb; I am very
> > favorably impressed. Tri-Met known for attention to
> > detail; this is but one example isn't it.
> >
> >
> > Phil
> > Without a 'coast' but not a 'cause.'
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: richard allman <allmanr at verizon.net>
> > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> > Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 3:07:13 PM
> > Subject: [PRCo] Re: Portland Green Line
> >
> > every Tri MET train has one low floor car so the boarding is rather swift!
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Edward H. Lybarger" <trams2 at comcast.net>
> > To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 8:20 AM
> > Subject: [PRCo] Re: Portland Green Line
> >
> >
> >> That's apples vs. oranges. If you use that to select a transportation
> >> mode,
> >> that's one thing, but if you compare transit systems you have to look at
> >> those areas. And it's not just the ramp...it's the operator's time away
> >> from the platform that's a big factor in the dwell time.
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
> >> [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org] On Behalf Of 
> >> Joshua
> >> Dunfield
> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 7:35 PM
> >> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> >> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Portland Green Line
> >>
> >> 2009/9/16 Edward H. Lybarger <trams2 at comcast.net>:
> >>> 22 mph isn't so bad when you figure that a New York express train does
> >>> maybe
> >>> 17 or 18. You have to look at the number of stops and the dwell time,
> >>> which has increased most places because of the need to accommodate the
> >>> handicapped patrons.
> >>
> >> If I'm comparing it to driving, walking, or biking, I really don't need 
> >> to
> >> look at the stops or the dwell time. MAX wheelchair ramps are pretty
> >> fast,
> >> anyway.
> >>
> >> Fred: yes, I got that far, but I didn't see anything on that page that's
> >> obviously an 80 page brochure. I don't feel like going through
> >> 15 links.
> >>
> >> -j.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

_________________________________________________________________
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222985/direct/01/