Delivery of next generation of rail cars delayed till 2019

After rejecting bids from two rail car manufacturers, the CTA announced delivery of the 7000 Series cars will be delayed until 2019. They were originally expected in 2016.

7000 series seatingThe first order will be for 200 rail cars instead of 100. Increasing the order size should prompt more manufacturers to bid and thus make bidding more competitive.

The new cars will NOT feature the much-hated aisle-facing seating configuration. The seating arrangement will look more like Brown Line cars, with a single seat facing forward across the aisle from two seats. This allows for more aisle standing room.

There will be a set of four aisle-facing seats at one end of the car near the bays for wheelchairs.

The total order could be up to 846 cars. From the Tribune story:

Bombardier bid $1.39 billion to produce 846 7000 Series rail cars over 10 years. The Montreal-based company has so far delivered about 500 of 714 cars in the 5000 Series under a $1.14 billion contract, officials said. Those 5000 Series cars are operating on the Pink, Green, Red, Yellow and Purple lines, officials said.

Sumitomo and its manufacturing partner, Nippon Sharyo U.S.A., submitted a $1.55 billion bid to build the 846 7000 Series cars, officials said. The companies have not previously sold rail cars to the CTA.

----------------------
If you like this post, please like my Facebook page, and follow me on Twitter.

And, never miss a post! Subscribe now to receive CTA Tattler via email. Type your email address in the box and click the "create subscription" button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • No, those car end aisle facing seats aren't for wheelchairs as they have the wheelchair space in the same place as on the 5000s.
    There's no reason for the aisle facing seats there, except to demonstrate that they still hate the riders & are desperate to justify the continuing delivery of brand new 5000s from the factory with the hated seats!

  • In reply to ScooterLibbby:

    Note that there is a dot on every seat that can fold up, while the ones at the car ends don't have the dot.
    In addition, those four aisle facing seats were in the original 7000 layouts in the middle of each car, with standard forward/backward seats at the car ends.
    There's no justifiable reason to have any aisle facing seats, except in front of the door controls.

  • In reply to ScooterLibbby:

    The whole damn car should ONLY have aisle facing benches. No door bunching, no half seats, no fatties taking up two forward facing seats, no climbing over forward facing aisle seat riders...but whatever, lets keep using a seating style that have been dead for 20 years because some old curmudgeons can't keep their eyes off of other people's crotches.

  • In reply to untitledreality:

    What planet have you been living on.
    The hatred of those seats has little to nothing about staring at crotches.
    It's about them being hopelessly uncomfortable & being squeezed in between someone & a stanchion.
    It's about the homeless stretching out across four or more seats for hours on end.
    That seating style isn't dead! It's the civilized way to travel, plus the aisle facing seats have cut the number of people that can fit into a car due to so many fat people taking up two or even three seats. With forward/backward seats, someone can still sit on half a seat & hang into the aisle.

  • In reply to ScooterLibbby:

    Whatever the cause of the hatred, what planet do you live on if you haven't gotten the message that Claypool is not going to change the arrangement on the approximately 236 cars still be the delivered?

  • In reply to jack:

    That's the $64,000 Question, why not change them?
    The riders hate them & they can easily install cantilevered seats & most likely reuse most of the seats that been bought & paid for with minor modifications.
    This is cognitive dissonance at its worst!

  • In reply to ScooterLibbby:

    On this order, it is not any question. And you haven't seemed to take cognitive notice of such things as underseat and undercar equipment.

    But I said two years ago that no matter the excuse, they made it clear they weren't changing the seats on this order, and through about 480 cars already delivered have not, except to use blue shells instead of beige, which I assume doesn't require any engineering.

  • In reply to jack:

    The car bodies are easily strong enough to support the seats, especially with fittings like those used on the buses. There's also a frame there for support.

  • In reply to ScooterLibbby:

    Where are the HVAC boxes? Why do you continue to ignore that?

    And where is you engineering analysis of your repeated conclusion? Do you have the blueprints?

  • fb_avatar

    So there are only 19 seats on the A cars and 18 on the B cars. (There are also a bunch of aisle-facing benches for people to sleep on.) What the heck kind of a train design wastes so much space without seats?

    "The new cars will NOT feature the much-hated aisle-facing seating configuration."

    No idea what you're talking about there. Each design has 16 aisle-facing space for people so stare at bums and crotches from, or lie across and take a nap on.

    These cars should obviously never be ordered and the CTA should only be buying cars with forward-facing seats.

  • In reply to Joseph Finn:

    So what about the B car, especially if a train changes ends at a crossover at the end of the line (like Kimball)? CTA sure isn't going to have flip back seats.

    However, the real issue, as I noted earlier, is that the real reason for rebidding is not given here, as the bid was not more expensive than for the 5000s. CTA has some reason for shoving it back 3 years (2 more than first indicated), whether it is that they don't have the money, they have to justify the rehab of the 3200s (which are short on seatrs, too, JF) or something like that.

  • In reply to Joseph Finn:

    Apparently you can't read or count, in that the diagram says 37 and 38, and that's what I got. That is unless you assume that the average CTA rider has such a big butt that the crack is sitting on the ridge between the two seats in a pair.

  • Personally, I'm happy to simply get a spot on the train standing, so I don't particularly mind the inward facing seats. Still, the general consensus seems to be that the seats suck, so why have any, other than the ones near the doors?

    I also saw that the new cars will not have to be compatible with the 5000 series. 'Seems a bit odd. I guess they're living with incompatible trainsets now, so continuing the tradition doesn't really change things. I assume it's cheaper to remove the requirement, since it potentially opens the bidding up to more manufacturers?

    Lastly, I noticed a 5000 series train running the Brown Line yesterday. I thought the new series were only going to be used on the Red, Yellow, Purple, Pink, and Green lines?

  • In reply to SpinyNorman:

    1. I have the feeling someone at Sumitomo told someone at CTA "we could have bid lower if we didn't have to license Bombardier technology."

    2. On the Brown Line, the question was whether you saw only 2 cars with electronic signs, in which case that was a test for retrofitting the 3200s, or an entire train, in which case it was a loan.

  • In reply to SpinyNorman:

    Decades of "system compatible" is now over now the CTA has a car fleet capable of servicing whole routes. The 5000s will equipt the red, yellow, purple, pink and green routes. Their 7000s would equip the blue, orange and brown. There is no reason for the 5000s to be compatible to any new series. This is what New York does. It just took us time to figure this out.

    SpinyNorman sadi, "I also saw that the new cars will not have to be compatible with the 5000 series. 'Seems a bit odd. I guess they're living with incompatible trainsets now, so continuing the tradition doesn't really change things. I assume it's cheaper to remove the requirement, since it potentially opens the bidding up to more manufacturers?"

    Jack said, " I have the feeling someone at Sumitomo told someone at CTA "we could have bid lower if we didn't have to license Bombardier technology."

  • The number one thing I want them to do with the layout is to get rid of those metal/plastic panels/walls near the doors that people lean against. People leaning against the doors slow down loading and unloading so much because they rarely get out of the way. I don't understand why none of the rail cars designs have done this yet.

  • In reply to tambreet:

    You'd still need the (lower) end panel to separate the center facing seats from the doorway. I'm afraid the loafs would simply stand there anyway.

  • In reply to tambreet:

    No, keep those there!!! That was one of the best things CTA ever did...it stops The Standing People from having their purses/backpacks/whatever hanging over into my lap, if I happen to be sitting in those particular seats. If they want to lean on a door, and possibly have it open unexpectedly while the train is moving, that's not my problem. Announcements are made constantly about that.

Leave a comment