Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Share Stories  |  Traffic  |  Columns  |  Q&A     |  Get Gridlock:    Twitter |    Facebook  |     RSS   |  phone Alerts

Metro Looking at New Cars

The next generation of Metrorail cars, which could be about five years away, will be a sharp break from the design of the past four decades.

7000 interior 1.jpg Side view of new interior. (Metro photo)

Metro managers made their first, very preliminary presentation about this today to the transit authority board. I'll show you the pictures they displayed, and they should be fun to talk about, but don't think of the design specifics as set.

As board members pointed out, they can have a dozen meetings just to discuss redesign of the Metro logo, let alone how the interior of the cars should look. [See story by Lena H. Sun in Friday's Post.]

More significant is the basic concept: In buying new generations of rail cars, Metro has sought to make each new series compatible with the previous series. That gives transit managers more flexibility when they put together the four-car, six-car or eight-car sets that we ride on. As you stand on a platform watching the cars pass by, you may be looking at three generations, all designed to work together.

That's great for flexibility in setting up trains, but it means that the most recent purchases had to blend with the technology of the first purchases, back in the 1970s.

7000 interior 2.jpg Looking down the aisle. (Metro photo)

The next round would be a radical break with the past, inside and out. The exterior would be made of stainless steel, rather than aluminum, and should be easier to keep clean. The end doors would be moved 30 inches closer to the center of the car, to better balance the passenger load.

Some aspects of a redesign would be less obvious to passengers, but nonetheless would have an impact: A new-style coupler between cars would allow for vastly improved electronic communications among the cars. The operator would see a lot more information about the condition of the train carriage and the doors displayed on screens. The operator could trace a malfunction from the cab rather than having to walk back and inspect it.

The inside of the cars could be very different, as the Metro pictures show: A new type of seat, no carpets and overhead grab handles for standees. (Here again, don't make too much of this. The Metro board has always had trouble with change. Previous boards proved relucant to abandon that ghastly mustard-like seat color from the original design. So expect a lot of debate before anything actually happens.

7000 exterior.jpg New exterior: America's Metro? (Metro photo)

But do ponder the implications of having two fleets of cars operating. One would be the youngest portion of the cars we ride on now, and the other would be this new generation, which probably would be incompatible with the older cars. Think also about the huge cost likely to be associated with buying this next round, called the 7000 Series.

Metro has yet to develop a financing plan for this. But it will have to be done. By the time, these new cars would arrive, many of the cars we're riding on will be 40 years old. There will come a point where it's just not worth fixing them any more.

It will be a radical step, but what choice do we have?

By Robert Thomson  |  January 10, 2008; 8:58 AM ET
Categories:  Metro  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Repairs Will Slow Red Line Travel
Next: The Weekend and Beyond

Comments

Make the dang doors BIGGER. Getting people on and off the train more quickly is essential to improving current conditions and achieving the shorter dwell times that the future requires.

It's not rocket science, it's not hugely expensive; make the door openings 2 or 3 feet wider.

Posted by: Josey23 | January 10, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Agreed, Josey. Also, I'd like to see bench-style seating along the entire length of the car walls (instead of the 2-abreast style currently in use and depicted above) to allow for more standing room.

Posted by: iammrben | January 10, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Well, the full-length bench seating is good during much of the peak rush hour but I admit that it is less desirable during other times.

In the past WMATA management has been extremely resistant to this idea but they never ride the trains anyway.

Posted by: Josey23 | January 10, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

I just hope they finally get rid of the orange and brown colors of the seats! Those are just awful!!

Posted by: dancermommd | January 10, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

iammrben -- more standing room:

That's fine if you are young, agile, and don't need the support that seats give, but not all of us are. With bad shoulders, knees, and backs, some of us need to be able to sit and if we get on closer in, may not get the few seats in the car. If this happens, I hope that you and others like you get up so we can sit.

Posted by: Mother | January 10, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

wider doors mean fewer seats for fatties

Posted by: Anonymous | January 10, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

if you're so desperate for a seat, take a cab

we're sick of you standing there in our armpits bittching about how you can't get a seat when no one else can either

Posted by: Anonymous | January 10, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Wait, they don't know how they're going to fund the new cars??? Raise fares to the point that each person actually purchased a car before riding. That means they don't have to worry about other passengers, can sit where they want and enjoy the ride. Then again, going with another fare increase could actually mean bringing back 2-car trains because nobody would be riding.

Posted by: Jarrod | January 10, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

That is one ugly logo...what is wrong with a big brown M? It may not be flashy but it works. Also wasn't the 7000 series to be part of the Silver Line (including their cost)?

Posted by: Craig | January 10, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

A previous commenter mentioned Armrests. As America's waistlines expand, and people prefer to swivel, rather than get up and down (and I've caught countless buttons and pockets on them), it's time for the armrests to go. I noticed an armrest on one of the bench seats in the photo, and I really hope that they get rid of them.

Posted by: Joe in SS | January 10, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Could someone please do something about the annonymous putz? I know we've had people get banned from other blogs around here for pulling junk like that.

Looks like they're taking some interior design cues from Baltimore light rail trains. I'm just glad right now that they're getting on this very early so we might get something useable out of the gate next time.

Posted by: EricS | January 10, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

I like the idea of moving technology forward.

As for mixing cars, why does this matter? Each train can consist of either the new cars or the older cars. So what?

If it's really a problem, put all the new cars on one line (love to see the fight over which) until there's enough for all lines.

Posted by: ah | January 10, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

To the poster signed "Mother":

I agree entirely with your comment that not everyone is able bodied or easily able to stand for a long ride. Some riders are selfish or self absorbed, others are kind and considerate. I hope you mostly encounter the latter, as I have.

As to the former, a doctor recently pointed out in an article in the Post that some people have what he called Empathy Dysfunction Disorder. They are hampered by an inability to look at things from someone else's perspective. He discussed in his articlet how that failing affects their personal and business relationships adversely but said there are ways to overcome it, with effort.

Unfortunately, regarding giving up seats, riders can't always tell who is in distress. I noted on this blog a couple of years ago that I used to ride Metro with my terminally ill sister for a couple of months when she went to her chemo sessions. It was cheaper and easier for her to use the Metro at the time. Cabs cost more and were not always reliable. The wait time for a cab, once called from home, ranged anywhere from 5 minutes to 45 minutes. Believe it or not, it was less stressful to ride Metro, at least until she became too weak to do so.

Until she started wearing a scarf due to the effects of chemo, I doubt most Metro riders could tell my sister was a cancer victim, one in the late stages of terminal illness, at that. Most people didn't offer her a seat, even after she was wearing the tell-tale scarf. We tried not to schedule appointments for rush hour but at times it was unavoidable. Fortunately, we only rode a few stops.

Once you go through the experience of helping a loved one through their last days, you really become sensitive to other peoples' situations. My sister died several years ago but to this day, when the Metro train I am on passes the stop for the medical center we used to go to, I look up to see if any of the passengers seem in greater need of the seat I am in than I am. There and elsewhere, I've given up my seat for women and men alike, young and old, whoever seemed to most need it.

There's a flip side to that, to end this long posting on a lighter note. I once got on an inbound train to go to work during morning rush. Only a few seats were available. I was only riding a few stops and stood. The rest of the seats soon filled up. I observed a young woman, of college age, sitting in the end seat of the traincar with a textbook in her lap and a bookbag next to her. She occupied two seats. OK, well, maybe she got on at the beginning when the train was not so full. Soon after I got on, she closed the textbook and put it in the bag. I thought, oh good, she's going to place the bag in her lap, some customer who now is standing will get to sit. But she put the bag beside her and laid her head down on it, making herself as comfortable as she could, sprawled across two seats to nap.

I had to laugh. Such a total lack of awareness or caring for other passengers. Really clueless and selfish. At first I was annoyed but then I thought, nah, ya gotta feel sorry for her. Think of all the promotions she will miss out on once she enters the working world simply because she appears to lack the empathy and people skills that bosses look for when placing people in charge of others!

Longtime Metro Rider

Posted by: Note to | January 10, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Note to:
WELL SAID!

Posted by: CyanSquirrel | January 10, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Thank you CyanSquirrel for your kind words -- and may I say, I always find your posts worth reading, BTW. Glad to see you're still posting here, I haven't looked in here at GetThere for awhile. My note was supposed to be signed "Note to 'Mother' re seats, selfishness, etc." but that was too long for a name and it got truncated. I should have figured there was a character limit on names and not tried to substitute a header for a name, won't work, LOL.

Posted by: Longtime Metro Rider | January 10, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

you can't get to a seat when there are 40 people between the doors

if we can't have more trains, lets get rid of the seats

Posted by: Anonymous | January 10, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

most riders are self absorbed that is why they try to climb onto departing trains instead of waiting the 30 seconds for the next train, these people should be dragged off the trains and beaten

Posted by: go away | January 10, 2008 9:50 PM | Report abuse

please ban the Nazi EricS, Nazis should not be welcome here

Posted by: Anonymous | January 10, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

Not just wider doors, but more of them? If Metro would make it 4 doors per side rather than 3, passenger flow would increase significantly and dwell times could be reduced. Boston's MBTA added a door with the newer Red Line trains, which helped quite a bit.

If you're totally redesigning new train cars and repositioning the doors anyway, it's not like the door location needs to match the old anyway.

Posted by: nashpaul | January 11, 2008 7:12 AM | Report abuse

I can't see where the wheelchairs go in these pics.

Posted by: dkf747 | January 11, 2008 8:17 AM | Report abuse

Here's the link to the interesting article about empathy deficit disorder, which I think I mistakenly called empathy dysfunction disorder in my earlier posting about self absorbed riders.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/21/AR2007122102266_pf.html

In answer to another suggestion raised above, the article in today's newspaper makes it clear that unlike older train cars, which could be linked to each other, regardless of age, series and manufacturer (Breda or whatever), the new ones would not be technologically compatible. You couldn't create an 8-car train with some new and some old rolling stock as you now can.

Posted by: Longtime Metro Rider | January 11, 2008 8:33 AM | Report abuse

I could care less about how the cars *look* -- if we could get them running on time and not breaking down every thirty seconds, I'd be happy. I need Metro to get me where I need to go with some degree of reliability and preferably without it costing me an arm and a leg; maybe they should tackle these issues first, instead of wasting money on fancy new rail cars.

I would much rather my fare increase go to functional changes than cosmetic ones.

Posted by: Anonymous | January 11, 2008 8:53 AM | Report abuse

if you are too frail to stand you shouldn't try to take the metro during rush hour

It might work if you have a wheelchair, cane, or walker, but then you might be personally responsible for dozens of people not being able to get on or off of the train.

Posted by: too crowded | January 11, 2008 8:59 AM | Report abuse

wheelchairs have brakes, and no doubt they will go where they go now: in front of the doors

Posted by: wheely | January 11, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

what is this nonsense about changing from aluminum to steel so that they can keep the trains clean? How about just making sure that they run? I don't care if the outside is clean. And now they're going to a heavier metal, won't that lead to greater power consumption and more trains rolling backwards when the drivers can't figure out how to accellerate?

Posted by: WTF | January 11, 2008 9:06 AM | Report abuse

Dr. Gridlock said this: "But do ponder the implications of having two fleets of cars operating. One would be the youngest portion of the cars we ride on now, and the other would be this new generation, which probably would be incompatible with the older cars."

I don't see why this ought to be a problem. New York has successfully operated multiple generations of cars for years. They also have to manage the difference between the IRT cars (numbered lines and the 42d Street Shuttle) and the BMT/IND cars (all other lines) because the IRT cars are narrower. Surely Metro, which basically operates a little toy train set compared to New York, ought to be able to manage different types of cars on its much smaller system.

Posted by: Rich | January 11, 2008 9:44 AM | Report abuse

"if you are too frail to stand you shouldn't try to take the metro during rush hour." That often is beyond the control of the people riding. Unless they die young, everyone ages. You too will be old and frail someday, if you live long enough. I doubt you'll want to sequester yourself when you're old, your needs are as valid when you are old as they are when you are young and able bodied. I'm not old yet but I've never understood why some younger people treat older people as if they are a nuisance.

I don't know if your grandparents still can drive or use public transportation to get to their medical appointments. If your grandmother or grandfather was suffering from some ailment for which a doctor could provide relief, but was unable to drive, would you tell her or him "don't take the 9:00 am appointment the doctor's office is offering for this Tuesday, suck it up and live with the pain. You should wait until the next open slot they are offering, which is the next Monday at 11:00 am, because you shouldn't be riding Metro during rush hour." I would hope not, I woul'd want them to get relief as soon as they can.

Telling frail people never to ride during rush hour is as unrealistic as telling young women in the workforce not to start families because it would be too disruptive to their employers. People have to juggle different things and not everyone makes choices the same way. You just can't control others' behaviors to that extent. I am sure you would bristle if someone singled your identity group out and said "people of x-age or whatever should never blah blah blah."

The number of old people among the metropolitan area's population is going to be rising greatly in the next couple of decades. Recognizing that people reach a point where they no longer can drive easily or safely, some communities actually already are working up plans to assist with transportation the increasing number of their aging residents. It's prudent to prepare for handling the needs of an aging population. As is the case with many others, the DC area has a high number of aging baby boomers, the oldest of whom are hitting retirement age now, who are living in the area. That's just a demographic fact.

Posted by: Longtime Metro Rider | January 11, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

When I read the part about replacing the old M logo and brown stripe, I got excited. Then I saw the picture. That new logo is hideous!! "America's Metro"?? Come off the patriotic crap, man! DC is an international city! Can't we come up with something a little more cosmopolitan and a little less Souvenir-shop-on-the-4th-of-July??

Posted by: Chris L | January 11, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

To Longtime Metro Rider

I have to admit I read your original post with a cynical smile.

As someone who grew up working/volunteering in hospitals and has since developed into an advocate for Internet accessibility, I gave up my seat on my commute from downtown to Dunn Loring more times than I can remember. But I can remember so many people who did not.

My all-time favorite/least favorite moment (however you want to rank rudeness), was on an evening rush commute. A blind gentleman with his dog boarded the train with me at Federal Triangle. It was one of those lovely, "second" Orange line trains (you know the ones - they come about 30 seconds after a packed one leaves the station), so seats were taken but there was plenty of end-of-car standing room. We both gravitated towards the back of one of those cars that is pretty open at the back (i.e. - no driver equipment was present).

We struck up a conversation (one of my friends used to train guide dogs), and at Court House, a young man in his 20's in khakis and a tie boarded, carrying a backpack. He stood right next to the both of us, and was unimpaired by headphones of any sort (this was well before iPods, but DiscMans were certainly around), and he was hanging up a cell phone as he entered the train.

Part of the conversation we were having at that point included how difficult it could sometimes be to have a guide dog on the Metro. People wanted to pet or play with her, and keeping people from sometimes stepping on her when she laid down was difficult. So he liked either standing where we were, or having the end of row seats so she could easily crawl under (and out from) underneath. We weren't screaming this conversation, but this young man probably couldn't have helped but hear it. He certainly saw the man standing there with his German Shepherd, no way he could have missed it.

At East Falls, the train emptied out, and the end of row seats were vacant. As I turned my head to tell the blind gentleman that the seats he wanted were available, this young man *sprinted* towards the seats, sat in one and put his backpack on the other.

I stood there agape for a second, and "excuse me"'d him a couple of times. No response - he deliberately turned his head away.

I kept myself from shaking him (I didn't want to open myself up to an assault case) and the blind gentleman told me the situation was more common than I realized. So pathetic.

Who raised these people?

Posted by: Chasmosaur | January 11, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Wow, Chasmasour, that is really a sad story. Who raises these people, indeed. Where does that sense of entitlement come from? Why wouldn't you look at the blind man and think, man, I'm lucky in comparison, what can I do to make his life a little easier?

I once got off at a transfer station and instead of waiting for my train, went out of my way to help a blind woman with a seeing eye dog get on the right escalator to get where they needed to go. (I asked if I could help because it seemed they didn't know which way to go. It turned out it she wasn't familiar with that station as it was not the one she customarily used). I only lost a few minutes of time by missing my transfer train. Fortunately, my schedule was open ended at that point so I could wait for the next one.

I have a lot of respect for disabled people (and the service animals who help them) who make their way around on Metro. I have zero respect for people such as Mr. Backpack in your story and Ms. Backpack in mine. But somehow, in different ways, I think their path through life is going to be more arduous than that of the man with whom you conversed. If you never develop the life skills to act appropriately in public places, it's bound to hamper you on the job and elsewhere. I've never seen people give their all in working for a self-centered, selfish boss, the necessary bonds never develop. I think many managers understand that and take "emotional intelligence" into account in deciding whom to promote and place in charge of others. Who wants to promote someone who alienates others through selfishness, doesn't understand how he or she fits in among others, and increases the risk to the employer of litigation and grievances filed because of their lack of people skills?

Posted by: Longtime Metro Rider | January 11, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

From Dr. Gridlock: Rich, as you know, among U.S. subway systems, there's New York and then there's everything else. Many comparisons are difficult because they involve the New York subway's unique history and scale.

NYC probably would love to be have one type of rail car -- and one set of parts -- that works for all lines. Easier to buy and easier to fix.

Unlike NYC's century-old system, Washington's much newer and smaller Metrorail was built under a single plan. Over more than three decades, transit managers have stuck with the integrated system for ease of operations and repairs.

Now, Metro is talking about a sharp break in technology, that would create a two-fleet system: The old trains and new trains could not be linked into single train sets, Metro would have to order two types of parts for repairs, mechanics -- already in short supply -- would have to be trained to work on two very different types of equipment.

Also, the new cars might get dispatched only from certain rail yards, where the proper mechanics are stationed. The Metro board wasn't discussing this on Thursday -- this is still at such an early stage -- but might we get into a situation where for many years a new fleet of cars that riders really liked was operating only on the Red Line, or only on the Orange and Blue lines?

Metro does think it could manage a two-fleet system, and it's at least five years away, but I think there are many issues we should consider along the way.

Posted by: Robert Thomson | January 11, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Longtime Metro Rider, you should practice reading more than one sentence a day. It will work wonders for you.

Posted by: learn to read | January 11, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

There seems to be an attitude here that the entire system should grind to a halt for a few people who would be better off avoiding the crowds or paying attention to their surroundings.

Here's an example: I was waiting for a train at L'Enfant one evening at rush hour. As usual, trains were delayed or had problems or something so the platforms were crowded. A man and his elderly mother or grandmother were waiting to get on a train. When the train arrived, she stood directly in front of the door, reducing the number of people who could get out by 50%. She then hobbled very slowly onto the train, holding up the people behind her. The man then quickly wheeled her EMPTY wheelchair onto the train.

It's a wonder more of these self absorbed people don't get run over crossing the street.

Posted by: too crowded | January 11, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

I don't think older people move slowly because of self absorption, it's because of physical limitation. If you're ever unlucky enough to break an ankle and have to hobble into trains on crutches - or try to get through a crosswalk before the light turns red -- you'll get a sense of what how much that slows you down. (The timing of lights at crosswalks is another thing I've seen planners and community activists debate. The fact that seniors often move slowly and the need to keep them safe when they are pedestrians has been part of that debate.)

I once had to help a young family member who was on crutches, believe me, that person just could not move fast. Have you ever wheeled someone in a wheelchair into a Metro car? I've been lucky, I haven't had to do it to date. Is it easy to do (does the ledge at the train door align sufficiently level with the platform to do it smoothly)? Whether his concerns were warranted or not, I'm guessing the man with the elderly woman may have had some doubts as to whether he easily could push the chair with her in it over the ledge into the car. He may have miscalculated and thought it was harder to do than it is. Or she may have been reluctant to use the wheelchair. I've seen people walk onto trains before while someone else pushes an empty wheelchair. Some people prefer to try to make it on their own as far as they can.

I've seen people in motorized chairs scoot over the ledge at the train door ok. But I've never had to push a transport wheelchair over the ledge. If anyone has, I'd welcome hearing from you as to how easy or not that is to do. Keeping an eye out for others and giving up your seat to those in need is easy. Dealing with wheelchairs, not so much, I suspect.

Posted by: Longtime Metro Rider | January 11, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

I usually see people on crutches or in wheelchairs start into crosswalks (or just out into intersections) when it is illegal for them to do so. I don't know why we have crosswalks in this area, no one uses them legally.

Posted by: no more crosswalks | January 11, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

The completly redesigned cars should have 4 doors a side instead of the current three. This is the most common arrangement on other metros.

Posted by: matt | January 11, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

The gap between a train and the platform is somewhat smaller than the giant wheels on wheelchairs. But the more important point is that the interests of thousands of commuters cannot be outweighed by self-absorbed door blockers. It is my constitutional right to block a train door.

Posted by: big wheels | January 11, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

that should be must be, not cannot be, if you don't like me being in your way, stay home

Posted by: big wheels | January 11, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Jeez, longtime metro rider, slow day at work? What's with all the novel length posts?

Posted by: crushem | January 11, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

I'm not at work. Skip reading them if you like that's ok by me. Deborah Tanen would understand LOL

Posted by: Longtime Metro Rider | January 11, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

People have differing conversation styles. Mine is of the type equivalent to a bunch of people with the time to talk, sitting together telling stories to each other and speculating on what their experiences mean. It's a very anecdotal style. I don't know of any other way to tell about my experiences except to tell the stories. Sure, that long winded style can be annoying because not everyone is inclined to pull up a chair and join the group sitting with me, especially if they're reading posts at work -- but it isn't meant to annoy anyone.

Someone else may have a different, equally valid style of communicating, more akin to walking through the room and throwing out a comment over their shoulder without stopping. I could have conveyed what I discussed at length by posting, "Hey old people are human, too. They're in the mix here on Metro. Anyway, most of the examples of thoughtlessness I've seen have involved young people, sheesh," without telling the story about the young woman with her backpack. But then you wouldn't know how I formed my conclusion.

Taking time to share details illuminates things sometimes. When the other poster told the story about the old woman laboriously entering the train at L'Enfant while a man with an empty wheelchair followed, I gained some insights into why he feels frustrated at times. It helped me get it. In such situations, when I see people who I think will hold up other passengers in entering when the train pulls up, sometimes I hurry over to another train door to enter, especially when I'm not feeling patient enough to wait behind them. Oddly enough, while I've had trains close their doors and pull out without my being able to step on, it's never been because of old people in front of me, it's because the people exiting took a long time to get off. More train doors would help with passenger flow. Having ridden the subways in NYC, I'm an advocate of bench seating myself.

Posted by: Longtime Metro Rider | January 12, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

I'm a Metro riding wheelchair user. To the comment about brakes: The brakes do not prevent tipping over.

To the comment about gaps: On some stations or types of train cars, the gaps are scary. On most they are fine. A powerchair can usually handle the gaps with enough speed. Manual chair loading is easier if you go backwards (when pushing someone else) and keep the small wheels from falling in the gap. Someone wheeling themselves has to know how to wheel on just the two big wheels by popping a wheely (whatever you call lifting the small wheels off of the ground) for a second as they are crossing the gap.

Posted by: dkf747 | January 12, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

To dkf747:

Thank you so much for taking the time to answer my question. I have some experience in helping a family member who occasionally uses a transport wheel chair (the type with all four small wheels). That is the only type of wheelchair available to us (it's lightweight, easy to fold up, light enough to carry up and down stairs when not in use, etc.) I asked my question because I'm uneasy about ever having to push it onto as subway train. To date, I haven't tried that. By visual inspection, it looks to me as if not all the train cars and platform edges align level enough to do this easily. It seems to me that it is easier to push someone in a wheelchair into a train if you are using the type of wheelchair with two big wheels and two small wheels (which can be pushed by someone else or propelled by the user himself). Perhaps that is why the old woman at L'enfant walked herself onto the train and the man followed with the empty wheelchair. The writer who described this didn't say whether it was an all small wheels transport wheelchair or one with two big wheels and two small ones.

Thanks again, most helpful

Posted by: Longtime Metro Rider | January 12, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

People who want to bar the lame and halt from riding Metro are cruel and thoughtless. If it's rush hour and you miss your stupid train, get another one.

Posted by: Lindemann | January 12, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

I don't care if some lame passenger grinds the system to a halt, they are more important than all of you wimps put to gether.

All hail the lame. Sieg Heil!

Posted by: Lindemann | January 14, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

I don't see whats wrong with standing in front of and blocking a train door. So what if people can't get off? I'm the FIRST person on the train and I an the MOST IMPORTANT person in the world.

My mommy told me so.

Posted by: metro rider | January 16, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Bottom line, new technology is needed. At some point parts will have to be custom made if they keep using such old technology, therefore costing more. Why for a Metro area does the rider pay 55% of the cost of riding the train when every other city its only 25 to 40%. The local governments here SUCK!

Posted by: Daily metro rider | February 4, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company