i already like the seating configuration of the current models, just wish the seats were not cloth and have reduced size for a wider aisle to walk through..
I like A and C. Please add head rest for those us that commute a lot and far so we can take our naps with our head positions the appropriate way and so our necks and spine get the support they need.. :)
Eh whatever the trains outside concept looks hella ugly and inside concept b looks alright. btw bart runs four lines on two tracks during peak and sometimes off-peak hours and needs to shut down during late hours for maintenance.
regarding seating layouts, i would support an A variant, with fewer seats. Nothing wrong with the A layout presented here, it is very similar to the existing BART train layout. I just think standing room should be upped a bit, for rush hour.
Even taking only one or two rows out (that's just 4 or 8 seated individuals) would enable 16-32 additional passengers aboard (under the generally held convention that 1 square meter of floor area can accommodate 4 standing individuals).
enclosed glass wall à la Paris Metro sounds like a great idea... they should support that. They always are talking about safety on BART: this is a one-time expense that BART should absolutely attempt to absorb. I know I would feel safer.
Also, get PRE-RECORDED STATION ANNOUNCEMENTS on the train. The driver having to do that on the miserable loudspeaker system a) sounds incredibly uncool, b) is a task he/she should never have to be burdened with, I don't care how easy or simple it may be.
@Sulaco516 Trust me, you do not want Hyundai Rotem building the trains. They've been banned from Taiwan for horrible performance and their first projects in the US are all late. They were recently rejected from Washington in favor of Kawasaki because Rotem was not even close on technical merit and costs. If you want a good, reliable train, Alstom, Bombardier or CAF would be the top 3 choices.
@tommyboy6181 You have a point there. Alstom previously built BART's 150 C1 cars in the 1980s. And Bombardier completed the overhaul of BART's 439 Gen 1 (Rohr) cars after they bought ADTranz. I've seen the CAF rail cars that are used by BART's sister system WMATA MetroRail. WMATA almost penalized CAF as a matter of software problems that delayed the service introduction.
@Sulaco516 CAF now having been in the US for 10 years seems to have gotten their act together. WMATA was partially at fault because they were rushing to get cars in service, and CAF had them as the very first US project. Another issue was AAI which did the assembly- they were eventually bought by Alstom. Since that time and once the bugs were worked out, the CAF cars have been running pretty well. Sacramento and Pittsburgh got better cars though once the dedicated facility was built.
@tehatemachine GE is no longer actively doing traction motors for mass transit as they are now focusing in their diesel locomotives. Westinghouse merged with AEG to become AdTranz in the early 1990's, which then became Bombardier in 2000. Basically the options for motors would now be the Bombardier Mitrac (Washington 5000 series), Alstom Onix (Washington 2, 3, 6000 series), Mitsubishi Electric (Hong Kong K-Train), Siemens Sitrac (NYC R160B), or from Fuji Electric (Singapore C151A).
@tommyboy6181 GE though can still design and built mass transit traction motors. But most of that work would have to be custom. any company that i mentioned can do that work. But like you where mentioning. most of the m got bought out. Which is the sad thing taht this world has come to with fewer choice of suppliers.
Concept A seems to be the most efficient but C adds some art. I don't like B because it's too disorganized. I'm most into C because it adds personality to the all business look of A. C will be my choice.
in the future beside new trains, they should install glass walls and glass doors on every station platform like they have on the automated peoplemovers at airports.
I agree with detaer. We need a few trains every hour between 12:30 am and 4 am. Not having a reliable way to get across the bay after 12:30 am is ridiculous--I've never seen that restriction in any other major city. It's detrimental to the nightlife, culture, and music scene, and also makes travel after that time across the bay more dangerous and less reliable. Anyone been on the transbay 880? It's frightening and takes forever.
I like concept C, except for the fact that there are no holding bars near the doors. We need those! Concept A is too much like a bus, and pretty similar to what we have now...it also means fewer passengers because all that space is taken up by sitting people. I didn't see any bike space either. Concept B is nice, and allows for more passengers via more standing space, but it's pretty similar to what we have now. I didn't see any bike space there either.
I'm going to go against the grain. I like "B"- Sometimes the "social" seating arrangement is good for parties of people. "A" a close second. "C" - to funky
@Coppertop4x4 Right? B is too close to what we have now. I can't stand when chairs or benched are faced different ways. It cramps the area. All facing forward is great I think.
Oddly enough, the proposed train in the video reminds me of an alternate type of train car that had been proposed at the very beginning of BART design. The type A interior seems to be a typical subway car interior, while the poles of type C are unusual.
@JiaLinBraswell AGREED. the rohr cars had a very unique design for that time. They should keep that but make it more modern and sleek. with bigger windows.
I like A since it is simple and probably more cost effective. Doesn't help when you have all those knob in design C if you only going to have 1 pole. Design B would be the worst since you know at night where the drunk and the homeless would just put their feet up at the lounge style chair and it doesn't offer much standing room during the commute hour.
for some reason i'd prefer the old style Rohr front end nose. BMW needs to work on the lead car a bit more. I liked that one train they did for france, it looked pretty cool. Should also have more lights.
Kudos to the production of this video - very well done. Let's hope board members keep the costs associated with this 'fleet of the future' in check (or within reason!)
At last, an inspired decision by BART to bring trains up-to-date and listen to our opinion as passengers... Concept A looks like it would work fine, and those seats in concept B are interesting. Can we get a mixture of both? Concept C looks odd.
The bar right in the middle of the entryway just seems like an obstacle for wheelchairs. Also, I notice that each concept has arm rests between each seat. THAT HAS TO GO! Why is that there other than to police whether patrons are lying down? So what if someone lies down? Also, none of those arm rests looks padded either. My un padded armrests on my office chair has inadvertently, over time, given me pain on my lower forearms. Just get rid of the armrests!
It looks to me as if Concept A has more ways for short people to hold on to a handle or pole when standing. I, at 5'1", cannot reach anything across the top.
Seats look very uncomfortable, hope I don't have to ride in them very far or for long. Is any consideration being given to working on the tracks themselves? They are a far cry from the smooth rails when BART was first operating. At times it feel like the cars are about ready to jump the track.
You definatly havent visited Abu Dahbi
Ak47eier 5 days ago
you call that the future train? deam... what kind of train do you have where u at right now ? let me guess a steem strain kkkkkkk
Ak47eier 5 days ago
that train needs to be in NEW YORK CITY in 2023
MrDjvance 1 week ago
Want to see that and ride it in S.f
mquiroz90 1 week ago
Why spend money on this when all everyone really wants is a BART extension?
melvenorc12 1 month ago 3
i already like the seating configuration of the current models, just wish the seats were not cloth and have reduced size for a wider aisle to walk through..
no40 6 months ago
Comment removed
no40 6 months ago
Can we get robocops that know the difference between a gun and a taser?
Mszette16 6 months ago
I like A and C. Please add head rest for those us that commute a lot and far so we can take our naps with our head positions the appropriate way and so our necks and spine get the support they need.. :)
HarmonicMOD 6 months ago 2
Please get rid of the cloth seats. Please.
Louisscruz 6 months ago 3
I wonder if the future fleet will be fitted with the same motors that the Gen 1 cars were refitted with?
Sulaco516 6 months ago
Eh whatever the trains outside concept looks hella ugly and inside concept b looks alright. btw bart runs four lines on two tracks during peak and sometimes off-peak hours and needs to shut down during late hours for maintenance.
GhettoStarFresh 6 months ago
BMW used to mean BART,Muni, walk.
mylifeisJDM 6 months ago
regarding seating layouts, i would support an A variant, with fewer seats. Nothing wrong with the A layout presented here, it is very similar to the existing BART train layout. I just think standing room should be upped a bit, for rush hour.
Even taking only one or two rows out (that's just 4 or 8 seated individuals) would enable 16-32 additional passengers aboard (under the generally held convention that 1 square meter of floor area can accommodate 4 standing individuals).
OettingerCroat 6 months ago
enclosed glass wall à la Paris Metro sounds like a great idea... they should support that. They always are talking about safety on BART: this is a one-time expense that BART should absolutely attempt to absorb. I know I would feel safer.
Also, get PRE-RECORDED STATION ANNOUNCEMENTS on the train. The driver having to do that on the miserable loudspeaker system a) sounds incredibly uncool, b) is a task he/she should never have to be burdened with, I don't care how easy or simple it may be.
OettingerCroat 6 months ago
@OettingerCroat agreed. closed glass walls ARE expensive though. And they should only put them in the busiest stations where it gets really crowded.
tehatemachine 6 months ago
what about an enclosed glass wall like in airports? This can prevent suicides and push murders
jarjarbinx79 6 months ago
WHERE is the BIKE STORAGE??
pbsurpher 6 months ago
I hope that Hyundai Rotem gets the contract to build the new fleet.
Sulaco516 6 months ago
@Sulaco516 Trust me, you do not want Hyundai Rotem building the trains. They've been banned from Taiwan for horrible performance and their first projects in the US are all late. They were recently rejected from Washington in favor of Kawasaki because Rotem was not even close on technical merit and costs. If you want a good, reliable train, Alstom, Bombardier or CAF would be the top 3 choices.
tommyboy6181 6 months ago
@tommyboy6181 You have a point there. Alstom previously built BART's 150 C1 cars in the 1980s. And Bombardier completed the overhaul of BART's 439 Gen 1 (Rohr) cars after they bought ADTranz. I've seen the CAF rail cars that are used by BART's sister system WMATA MetroRail. WMATA almost penalized CAF as a matter of software problems that delayed the service introduction.
Sulaco516 6 months ago
@Sulaco516 CAF now having been in the US for 10 years seems to have gotten their act together. WMATA was partially at fault because they were rushing to get cars in service, and CAF had them as the very first US project. Another issue was AAI which did the assembly- they were eventually bought by Alstom. Since that time and once the bugs were worked out, the CAF cars have been running pretty well. Sacramento and Pittsburgh got better cars though once the dedicated facility was built.
tommyboy6181 6 months ago
@tommyboy6181 AD tranz to is good. GE can make some really good traction motors as well as Westinghouse (which is what they already have)
tehatemachine 6 months ago
@tehatemachine GE is no longer actively doing traction motors for mass transit as they are now focusing in their diesel locomotives. Westinghouse merged with AEG to become AdTranz in the early 1990's, which then became Bombardier in 2000. Basically the options for motors would now be the Bombardier Mitrac (Washington 5000 series), Alstom Onix (Washington 2, 3, 6000 series), Mitsubishi Electric (Hong Kong K-Train), Siemens Sitrac (NYC R160B), or from Fuji Electric (Singapore C151A).
tommyboy6181 6 months ago
@tommyboy6181 GE though can still design and built mass transit traction motors. But most of that work would have to be custom. any company that i mentioned can do that work. But like you where mentioning. most of the m got bought out. Which is the sad thing taht this world has come to with fewer choice of suppliers.
tehatemachine 6 months ago
Concept A seems to be the most efficient but C adds some art. I don't like B because it's too disorganized. I'm most into C because it adds personality to the all business look of A. C will be my choice.
igeekone 6 months ago 3
do concept A and or C but not B because Concept B people would more likely to pute their feet on the seats which makes the seats lot dirtt.
sideslide23 6 months ago 3
in the future beside new trains, they should install glass walls and glass doors on every station platform like they have on the automated peoplemovers at airports.
sideslide23 6 months ago
Concept B looks much more informal
fardonaghue 6 months ago
Concepts A and C: Row-by-row seating is not a good idea for a subway car; it takes up too much space.
Concept B: Reminds me of an R46. Not every seat will be taken because the L puts people too close to strangers.
The best option would probably be bench seats or option A with fewer seats.
LIRR175 7 months ago
that train looks hidious i like nyc R160s better
DCAreaTransitFan 7 months ago
I agree with detaer. We need a few trains every hour between 12:30 am and 4 am. Not having a reliable way to get across the bay after 12:30 am is ridiculous--I've never seen that restriction in any other major city. It's detrimental to the nightlife, culture, and music scene, and also makes travel after that time across the bay more dangerous and less reliable. Anyone been on the transbay 880? It's frightening and takes forever.
cyberkristin 7 months ago
I like concept C, except for the fact that there are no holding bars near the doors. We need those! Concept A is too much like a bus, and pretty similar to what we have now...it also means fewer passengers because all that space is taken up by sitting people. I didn't see any bike space either. Concept B is nice, and allows for more passengers via more standing space, but it's pretty similar to what we have now. I didn't see any bike space there either.
cyberkristin 7 months ago 4
I love the music... who is that?
ulicheva 7 months ago
I'm going to go against the grain. I like "B"- Sometimes the "social" seating arrangement is good for parties of people. "A" a close second. "C" - to funky
antmooak 7 months ago
Concept C has a modern touch...I like it
lilmanjt 7 months ago 3
it will look like that for about 2 weeks then it will look hideous.
RealAnthonyL 7 months ago
Does this mean the SVRT project is still going forward? If so, could I please have my job back?
pooie0116 7 months ago
What ever you do get rid of the friggin cloth seats.
dblueguy 7 months ago 17
Step one: Get rid of cloth seats.
Step two: run trains every hour after midnight to help enable arts and culture events and through late night public transit.
Step three: Electric vehicle chargers at stations to help generate revenue.
Step four: take all of the seats out of 2 trains during commute hours to maximize rider density.
Some time in the future, when it actually matters (never) make the insides of the trains pretty.
detaer 7 months ago 28
@detaer Step two will never happen, because BART runs through residential areas..
The rest sound feasible.
theonetruekirk 2 months ago
@theonetruekirk I live next to bart tracks in a residential zone and I would ask everyone I know to vote for a measure allowing bart to run 24 hours.
detaer 2 months ago
Comment removed
chestnutmike 7 months ago
i like the yellow bars by the doors telling you when they are about to close. That's great usability right there.
CGCGrayfox 7 months ago 2
Concept C for sure
Coppertop4x4 7 months ago
@Coppertop4x4 Right? B is too close to what we have now. I can't stand when chairs or benched are faced different ways. It cramps the area. All facing forward is great I think.
carterdriggs 7 months ago 3
I choose C
Josegiantsfanforlife 7 months ago 4
Oddly enough, the proposed train in the video reminds me of an alternate type of train car that had been proposed at the very beginning of BART design. The type A interior seems to be a typical subway car interior, while the poles of type C are unusual.
NobHillBorn 7 months ago
@JiaLinBraswell AGREED. the rohr cars had a very unique design for that time. They should keep that but make it more modern and sleek. with bigger windows.
tehatemachine 7 months ago 2
I'm actually excited for the user of BART. This can only be great for the region. I like Concept's A and C with Concept A being my favorite.
tenta20 7 months ago
Hopefully they actually clean these seats.
n8ball 7 months ago
"A" is the clear winner, but they all need more overhead grips. Design "C" is the Train from Planet Barf.
pandaKrusher 7 months ago 3
Design A seems to have the most places to hang onto when it gets crowded, and it reflects the traditional BART style, just more contemporary.
0511kimbo 7 months ago 2
Design C reflects the creativity of the digital mecca this bay area has.
hotneo7 7 months ago
I like A since it is simple and probably more cost effective. Doesn't help when you have all those knob in design C if you only going to have 1 pole. Design B would be the worst since you know at night where the drunk and the homeless would just put their feet up at the lounge style chair and it doesn't offer much standing room during the commute hour.
victorfyip 7 months ago
for some reason i'd prefer the old style Rohr front end nose. BMW needs to work on the lead car a bit more. I liked that one train they did for france, it looked pretty cool. Should also have more lights.
tehatemachine 7 months ago
Where do the bikes go?
mojo1819 7 months ago
Kudos to the production of this video - very well done. Let's hope board members keep the costs associated with this 'fleet of the future' in check (or within reason!)
apierce5 7 months ago
Love the signs in B or C - they need signage inside the trains!
8118LT 7 months ago
At last, an inspired decision by BART to bring trains up-to-date and listen to our opinion as passengers... Concept A looks like it would work fine, and those seats in concept B are interesting. Can we get a mixture of both? Concept C looks odd.
CalCalypso 7 months ago
I like concept A
jdjarvis1 7 months ago
The bar right in the middle of the entryway just seems like an obstacle for wheelchairs. Also, I notice that each concept has arm rests between each seat. THAT HAS TO GO! Why is that there other than to police whether patrons are lying down? So what if someone lies down? Also, none of those arm rests looks padded either. My un padded armrests on my office chair has inadvertently, over time, given me pain on my lower forearms. Just get rid of the armrests!
EffeminateRecords 7 months ago
I like Concept B London Underground Style then Concept C last but not least Concept A
LyokoTravels 7 months ago
It looks to me as if Concept A has more ways for short people to hold on to a handle or pole when standing. I, at 5'1", cannot reach anything across the top.
446Shelley 7 months ago
After looking at concept "C," all I can think about is that funky looking pole. Face into pole, that's a lawsuit.
Akit317 7 months ago
Seats look very uncomfortable, hope I don't have to ride in them very far or for long. Is any consideration being given to working on the tracks themselves? They are a far cry from the smooth rails when BART was first operating. At times it feel like the cars are about ready to jump the track.
kvr521 7 months ago
I hope they keep bikes out of the train. :P
btipling 7 months ago
Looks cool! Wish they had some color coded, dedicated cars for bike-riders and passengers with luggage/hand trucks.
hazeywolf 7 months ago