August 2, 2006
Metro Plays Musical Chairs
For as long as we have been posting on transportation, you guys have been asking one question in the comments more than any other. When, oh when, is our dear Metro going to debut those new seating arrangements we've been hearing so much about? We showed you a few pictures a few weeks ago, but this week, Metro went live with the new designs, showing them off to the public and reporters on Monday morning.
Starting this week, Metro will be testing several new seating designs, looking for rider feedback. The first, car # 3262, started rolling on the Orange Line on Monday with 10 fewer seats and no floor-to-ceiling poles or windscreens inside the doors.
The car will circulate among the Green and Red Lines over the next few weeks, as a second design is rolled out on half a dozen other cars. This one removes the 2 center rows, leaving 64 seats. It also adds new double-overhead handrails, and removes some of the windscreens.
Finally, by the end of the year, a more thoroughly rearranged 48-seat car will begin running on the Red, Green, and Orange Lines. This design will feature lots more open space, to sets of bench seats in the center of the car, fold down seats in the front, a leaning area at the rear, and spring-loaded handles overhead.
Metro is going to conduct extensive rider surveys once field testing is complete. But honestly, we put way more stock in your comments and reactions than any sanitized "market research" could ever provide. So have at it! What thinks you of the new Metro design proposals?
|
So let me get this straight - ridership is higher than ever, yet they'll be less seats? Sure, I understand that they're going for efficiency, and maybe not everyone needs a seat, but what the heck am I (at barely 5'2") supposed to hold onto if I'm in the middle of a car?
So, what do you hold onto if you find yourself somewhere in the middle of this open space and you're a shorter person--like myself? The next closest rider? Did they base this setup on a particular model or study? I'd like to know why they consider this "superior."
In my opinion, we--and Americans in general--need to deal with the fact that our ideal, 3-foot radius of "personal space" isn't always possible. (And it wouldn't hurt if we put down our Express or Soduko for a few seconds to shift ourselves/move slightly while others exit the train.)
why can't we have the straps that hang down from the ceiling similar to New York?
I'm 5'-8" and sometimes find it not acceptable to hold the top rail (for example on hot days like today)
I don't mind standing - and often after a long day sitting at my desk, I want to stand - but I gotta hold onto something. Less floor to ceiling bars at the entrance does are a great idea to stop the entrance blockage but I don't want to fall into a strangers lap!!
That might depend on the stranger...
That might depend on the stranger...
These may not be perfect solutions, but they look good to me. I can't wait to see them on my commute every day. Getting rid of the windscreens will end much of the door crowding and that by itself should be celebrated.
I'm glad to see Metro doing some things differently. It shows they are trying to make the most of what they have, something more agencies should try to do. These open designs are going to make getting on and off the train and allow for people with baggage too.
The only draw back is going to be an increase in bitching from lazy tourists who think they are entitled to a seat because they are here on vacation.
The bench-like seats improve space efficiency for shorter rides or heavy crowds (see NYC subway), but really require hanging straps. Even as an average height male rider (5'11"), I find the ceiling bars a bit high for comfort when standing.
We'll just wait for the first person to dislocate their arm while trying to reach for the "too high" bar - then maybe they'll reconsider.
i don't understand the complaints about the bars... why can't people hold onto the bars that are at waist level on the seats?
Aren't there poles that come down from the ceiling to the backs of the seat? Wouldn't that help you people in the middle who can't reach too high? And is DC that short that we can't have similar set ups to nearly every transit agency I can think of? And no, Metro isn't any more or less crowded than a comparably busy line in any other city? Are masses of short people falling over in New York, Chicago and San Francisco? Because I hadn't heard that.
It's hard to tell completely from the pictures, but it looks like there's bars on the seats like usual, and where there's no seats, it appears as though there's a waist-high bar running along the wall.
and as long as there are SOME poles for short people to hold onto, then you just always board that section of the car... it's not *that* inconvenient... not any more inconvenient that untilizing public transit in the first place... PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PREVAILS! VIVE LESS POLLUCION!
So what's the word on removing those pesky armrests on the seats? It would be a lot easier for me to squeeze my buns in next to the significantly more ample buns of some of my fellow riders if that damn armrest wasn't digging into my side.
Straps would be a nice touch. I suspect WMATA won't too it because it's "too much like NYC."
Does everyone around here have short arms? I don't think mine are long. I'm 5'10" and have no problem with the overhead bar.
And yes, there are bars on the backs of the seats for you shorter people, as well as rails on the wall. I'm sorry if you feel like this is discriminatory because it prevents you from standing by the door all the time. It doesn't take that much longer to get off the train from the middle.
Is there a link where we can see all of the different configs?
From the looks of this config., there's a lot of space but not a whole lot of places for a shorty like me. I would have to fight for some prime pole real estate.
And for Hmmmmm -- the increased ridership is precisely the reason they have to remove some of the seats. Each seat takes up more space than a person would standing. Remove a few seats and theoretcially you've increased capacity and improved flow on and off the trains.
Ask and ye shall receive:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/31/AR2006073101246.html
there's a link to a graphic just below the photo on the right.
Heck, I'll just post the direct link. I thought it was a pop-up. I was wrong.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2006/08/01/GR2006080100123.html
Mike B. You Rock.
I'm short too, but you don't have to be small to see that there are wide spaces in the new config that don't have something to grab onto at all except the overhead bar. There is a lot of territory between those bench seats and the wall bar, and I'd prefer not to fight my way through the already cranky crowd to my designated short person spot. Hopefully another design will include more options a la New York, London and other great transit places.
Ugh, more short people bitching. It's called the hand rail on the back of the seats -- that's why they're there!
Also, yes, more riders, less seats. Seats take up room. Less seats = less crowded trains.
The Post had diagrams of the 3 proposals. Probably still there. The 58-seat configuration is the best overall compromise. Ideally, I'd just make it a typical "subway" configuration, but the half-way approach recognizes that Metro is an urban and sub-urban system.
I still think they could squeeze a few more rails on the walls of the cars. For example, near the system map in the 2nd pic shown above. Overall, a good comprimise. Old people, short people, and fat people will still complain that they can't get a reserved seat for their 1 hr commute, but that's life.
Now, start digging another Potomac crossing, and laying 3rd and 4th tracks so we can have locals and expresses. (Whoa- the heat's making me delusional)
Don't let the heat get to you Bill. Yeah, I was just noticing that on the second picture. They really should put railing there.
To clarify mmmm and Mike B., yes they're removing seats to improve capacity somewhat, but I think the other reason is to speed up loading and unloading. Metro runs on about the tightest intervals they can, and if the operators are holding the doors for people at the stations even a couple seconds too long, that screws the whole system up. Note that most "true" subways have 4 doors per side, whereas Metro has 3, so that slows things down too.
The rails on the back of the seats are often a poor option. People hang on to them from the seat behind it, people lean their heads back onto them. Since they're low and you're holding them off to the side, they're not very effective for bracing myself if the train stops/starts quickly. When I'm able, I hold onto a bar around shoulder level. The overhead bars are damn near impossible - I'm practically swinging from them.
I'm sorry that our desire to ride to work without falling over, swinging from overhead poles, or crashing into strangers inconveniences you, Ed.
But why keep that unfortunate shade of orange? I had assumed it was left over from the 70s, not a current design decision!
"Ugh, more short people bitching. It's called the hand rail on the back of the seats -- that's why they're there!
Also, yes, more riders, less seats. Seats take up room. Less seats = less crowded trains.
[21] Posted by: Ed | August 2, 2006 5:10 PM "
Less seats also = less back of seat hand rails
What's the big deal with emulating NYC? Straphangers Campaign is a longstanding rider advocacy group (http://www.straphangers.org/). That's what Metro really needs.
Why all the hate against short people? jeez.
I think the new design is a good start, but DC has to realized that if it wants to move lots of people on mass transit, the system has to compromise on some areas. Namely, get rid of those two-seaters. More long benches will accommodate more people and are easier to get in and out of quickly.
I've lived in SF and NY and both have trains that seem to move vast quantities of people in and out of the cars much quicker.
Lastly, I'm glad the metro will be introducing pull-down straps. This may help. However, I don't think it is a good idea to totally remove some of the floor-to-ceiling bars. Kids especially need a handle to hang onto and these serve that purpose.
MSP,
The pictures on this page don't make it clear, but there are more vertical poles that go from the backs of the seats to the ceiling.
I don't know for a fact, but I would estimate that the revised designs have more "vertical feet" of pole than the existing configuration.
Here's another perspective for short people (and others). The purpose of the design is to draw people farther inside. Since there are more poles closer to the seats, you're more likely to quickly score a seat when somebody gets up than you would if you were hugging the pole by the doors!
Just trying to be positive folks!
Short people will do what they currently do when they can't get to a vertical bar. They'll ask people to move! It happens all the time.. just happened on the train I was on not 10 minutes ago, and that train was jam-packed. I'm not sure why some people think it's suddenly going to be anarchy with the new configurations.
Here's a solution to slow boarding and unloading at each station and not being able to fit everyone on the train: Hurry the hell up and get on the train! If people don't move for you, push them! Or say "Hey, is there room there next to you?!" Seriously, it's so annoying to see someone sodukuing and taking up too much space. Or not moving to the center of the car. People! Squeeze in! There is plenty of room!
yes! communicate with fellow passengers on packing in if need be - that's the only way people learn. and, i haven't seen the new cars yet, but i am concerned about there being plenty of places to hold on (in the new open area, at reasonable level).
It looks to me like they've inexplicably removed all handholds surrounding the system map -- there's no vertical, waist-level or overhead bars? Where's the logic in that?
BTW, for all those who want "hanging straps," Mike B.'s Post link mentions that "spring-type hand holds [will be] added to handrails in the next few weeks". Presumably, they will be similar to those found in the Dulles Mobile Lounges (see this picture).
Mike B.,
Thanks for the link. My vote is for 48 seat version. That's still plenty of room for the fat tourists to park their butts.
TC
Yeah, why did they keep the orange seats? Urgh! Orange and brown carpet :-p As a design student, I'm disgusted. I've seen some blue and red ones, why can't we stick with those? Those also seem more DC-appropriate.
Although perhaps orange/brown masks the gum better...not to mention the vomit and urine that you might encounter on a weekend night...
Note that there are multiple things going on here. They're redesigning and reconfiguring existing cars -- those will stay orange -- and they're bringing in totally new cars -- those will be red and blue.
As far as bars by the maps, there is a bar present in the right foreground of the first picture near the map. However, there is clearly no bar in the 2nd picture. I'm not sure why there's a difference. They may only have handrails that to go the left (as you face the door). That doesn't make much sense, but we all know that wacky things happen with public entities.
For non-short people who keep suggesting that the short people can just hang onto the back of the seat bars, as a short person (5'2"), I can tell you that those bars are almost useless as a means of stabilizing yourself. I know, I've tried, and spent the entire ride stumbling. As a former New Yorker, I have no problem with fewer seats. But Metro has always suffered from a paucity of short person support. Which is why I always end up crowding the door--that's where I can hang on--if I can.
And if you think the red sea parts to allow short people to reach somewhere they can hang on, you are mistaken.
The first photo clearly shows a huge space where the only available support is overhead. This will cause the same clumping problems Metro has now.
Politburo -- those pictures are of two different car configurations. So it just happens that one has the bar by the map and the other doesn't. But in the one that has the bar by the map, since the bench takes up the wall there's no need for a bar on the other side. I think the general point just is that where there is space on both walls for bars, they should be installed.
Mod - The space is not as large as it seems. There's a vertical bar attached to the wall just off right foreground and you can barely see a vertical bar in the left foreground. Also note the vertical bars in the aisles. It doesn't seem much larger than the current "dead zone", but I wasn't there in person.. anyone seen this car yet?
These new cars need more handrails on both the side (for shorties) and on top (for talls; I know a 6'5" lady who loves to ride Metro, and I'd hate to see her topple over others if the car she was in made a sudden stop during a standing-room-only situation).
And the orange seats? Well, I guess it conjures up Metro nostalgia. However, unless Laura Prepon and Topher Grace are reuniting to revive "That '70s Show," it really isn't needed.
So what do they do in Japan where the average height is 5'6 for males and 5'2 for females?
while i think that it is great that wmata is trying a different config of the metro cars, i agree with the "short" posters on here that there is nowhere to hold onto, if you are stuck in the middle. i think ppl are confusing the "middle" as the space between the two-seaters, when i think the issue is the "middle" space between the long bench and the other side of the car. when i get on the train in the morning and it is packed, it will be hard enough to get on, let alone try to make my way to the "middle" (between the two-seaters) to hold onto the bar on the backs of the seats. and while eliminating the glass panels on the sides of the doors *should* create more flow, i have a feeling that ppl will still stand by the doors so they can get out quickly, thus forming a panel of humans, creating the flow problem once again.
Mike - You're right. And in the pics of the new 6000 series cars, they have the "map bars" on both sides.
I think people won't be as inclined to clump near the doors. There are two factors. One is the desire to get out quickly. That's never going away and there's little that can be done about this except to have the mean lady shout at us every time the doors open. That's a rider awareness issue, not a car configuration issue.
The other factor is that in the current setup, the vertical bars are all right near the door. With vertical bars running down the aisles, people won't be able to walk in and park themselves on the pole or windscreen right next to the door.
Where the heck are the rails to hold onto in the middle of the car? What the f**k!
Okay, i think the short person, tall person debate has been covered. (but i will add, this is a trial run, if it's going to be as bad as many people think it is, then metro will figure this out with their "extensive rider surveys" and do something about it -- at least we can hope.)
But i don't think anyone has mentioned this -- these new car configurations should/will be great for times of peak ridership, but what about those times when it's not packed to the brim and i want to sit, but there's ten or twenty less seats on the train?
I hate the idea. I commute from Grosvenor to Union station, and don't relish the thought of paying rush hour fares, and having to stand for more than half an hour.
Yes, these cars work in New York, and London...but studies have shown that, in both cases, the average ride is just a few stops. Not the Shady Grove-downtown, or Alexandria-bethesda variety.
Short people got no reason to live!
As a 3'8" DC resident I am appalled!
If these new cars come into being, I will be forced to grab the nearest crotch or purse in order to brace myself. How dare you all suggest that I grab onto a seat rail. I want that pole in the middle of the car not only for support during the day, but I also like to use it for my dance routines at night to get tips...
j - Bluntly, tough shit. It's a tradeoff and it's clear to me that the existing configurations are no longer optimal.
wombat - I'm not sure what to say, except: feel free to drive if you must have a seat. There's nothing worse than a train pulling up to my home station in the morning and not being able to even get on because it's at capacity. Metro is about getting there, not about having a comfy seat.
Wow, the short people haters need to chill...
Just look at the pictures of where those chairs are located. Look at all the empty space with nothing to grab on to. (esp. that top photograph) Think rationally now. People of all sizes are going to go towards those chairs, and fill up that space. So then you have a lot of extra space (which is still nice I guess) where there is NOTHING to grab onto. Yea there are the wall bars, but you know there's going to be people leaning on those and blocking them.
So just picture yourself in the middle of that wide expanse of carpet. The chairs are way the the middle of the car. What do you suggest the short people grab onto then? Or even the tall people as there is only one wee bar down the middle of the ceiling and then one small bar down the left hand side? (and this is speaking at a 5'8 female)