4 ms·

Of note, the further below the surface train stations are, the more inefficient they are, especially for daily use and commuting type lines. It takes time to ge

by CPLX 11y ago

Of note, the further below the surface train stations are, the more inefficient they are, especially for daily use and commuting type lines. It takes time to get that far down in the ground from the street level. It's less of an issue for long haul transit of course, but in that case there's few stations and they can be big downtown stations anyways. As someone who grew up in Washington DC and moved to NYC, it was immediately and obviously noticeable. The ability to just hop down a few stairs and jump on a train is a major improvement to convenience. The multiple levels, elevators or long, long escalators, and so on, can double or triple the amount of minutes it takes to go 3-4 stops.

mapt 11y ago
We have available to us high-speed, high-capacity elevators now, standard in large buildings. The DC Metro's escalators were a lot of things, among them great big monumental architectural Statements; But as you and anyone else from the area knows, they were not particularly well thought-out (and we are still paying for that mistake in maintenance problems, wait times, expensive rain shelters, et cetera). Their progenitor, as I recall, went to the great lengths of riding them aboard a wheelchair every day in a pained attempt to prove to the planning committee that elevators, which would have spoiled his precious vaulted look, were not necessary.
- dredmorbius 11y ago
  Elevators and the numbers of bodies you need to move with mass transit really aren't amenable. A ten-car train in an urban commuter rail system might have 40-80 passengers per car. That's up to 800 people deboarding (say, for a downtown terminal station), though generally you're looking at a low few hundred. Dumping that demand onto 3-4 escalators is doable, and the streaming is continuous. For elevators, I don't see it working. Too many people and elevators don't operate continuously as escalators do. Unless there've been tremendous advances I'm unaware of. Schindler's high-capacity elevators are rated for 6-21 people. It would take 38 elevator trips to empty the train I described above (divide among multiple shafts and/or car trips as you like, but realize that speed is 1-1.6 m/s (about 3.6 mph), or just over 60s to travel 100m, plus return and dwell time. If train service intervals were ten minutes, you'd need ten shafts assuming 3 minutes per round-trip to clear 800 passengers. http://www.schindler.com/content/pl/Internet/pl/modernizacja/_jcr_content/rightPar/downloadlist/downloadList/80_1351088438162.download.asset.80_1351088438162/SCHINDLER%205400%20(eng).pdf http://www.schindler.com/content/pl/Internet/pl/modernizacja...
  - kazinator 11y ago
    > [E]levators don't operate continuously as escalators do. [...] Unless there've been tremendous advances I'm unaware of. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternoster http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternoster :)
    - GFischer 11y ago
      Very interesting... if Hitachi did go past the prototype stage, it could indeed be the answer... Video from the link (in Japanese): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7YIBWve0n4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7YIBWve0n4
      - jacquesm 11y ago
        Paternosters have been used in the past but usually were discontinued because of (gruesome) accidents. There were a couple in Amsterdam in my childhood.
        GFischer 11y ago
        Yes, the old versions (where there were periods in which someone could fall into a shaft) look dangerous. The Hitachi version is interesting because it incorporates the behaviour one expects from standard elevators, at the cost of some speed. It sounds ideal for a mass transit station, and it could use the same pattern as is currently used for subways (a small time it remains motionless, then the doors close after a beep). I found an English version of their video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnX5WZhvzZY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnX5WZhvzZY and ThysenKrupp is also working on a similar idea: http://rt.com/news/210143-maglev-horizontal-elevator-thyssenkrupp/ http://rt.com/news/210143-maglev-horizontal-elevator-thyssen... Though Hitachi has decided to focus on speed instead: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/ist/?next=/smart-news/worlds-fastest-elevator-will-be-built-china-180951203/ http://www.smithsonianmag.com/ist/?next=/smart-news/worlds-f... I hope the innovation in this space doesn't dry out :)
        dredmorbius 11y ago
kposehn 11y ago
Excellent point! The Japanese started engineering for this as well when they went through a bonanza of submerging rail lines in Tokyo. At first, they started digging super deep with smaller tunnels (the trains use a linear motor/reaction-rail for much tighter loading gauges). However, they started to realize that it made the the now submerged trains more inefficient to be so deep. More recent lines are elevated or much more shallow.

by CPLX 11y ago

mapt 11y ago

We have available to us high-speed, high-capacity elevators now, standard in large buildings. The DC Metro's escalators were a lot of things, among them great big monumental architectural Statements; But as you and anyone else from the area knows, they were not particularly well thought-out (and we are still paying for that mistake in maintenance problems, wait times, expensive rain shelters, et cetera). Their progenitor, as I recall, went to the great lengths of riding them aboard a wheelchair every day in a pained attempt to prove to the planning committee that elevators, which would have spoiled his precious vaulted look, were not necessary.

dredmorbius 11y ago
Elevators and the numbers of bodies you need to move with mass transit really aren't amenable. A ten-car train in an urban commuter rail system might have 40-80 passengers per car. That's up to 800 people deboarding (say, for a downtown terminal station), though generally you're looking at a low few hundred. Dumping that demand onto 3-4 escalators is doable, and the streaming is continuous. For elevators, I don't see it working. Too many people and elevators don't operate continuously as escalators do. Unless there've been tremendous advances I'm unaware of. Schindler's high-capacity elevators are rated for 6-21 people. It would take 38 elevator trips to empty the train I described above (divide among multiple shafts and/or car trips as you like, but realize that speed is 1-1.6 m/s (about 3.6 mph), or just over 60s to travel 100m, plus return and dwell time. If train service intervals were ten minutes, you'd need ten shafts assuming 3 minutes per round-trip to clear 800 passengers. http://www.schindler.com/content/pl/Internet/pl/modernizacja/_jcr_content/rightPar/downloadlist/downloadList/80_1351088438162.download.asset.80_1351088438162/SCHINDLER%205400%20(eng).pdf http://www.schindler.com/content/pl/Internet/pl/modernizacja...
- kazinator 11y ago
  > [E]levators don't operate continuously as escalators do. [...] Unless there've been tremendous advances I'm unaware of. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternoster http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternoster :)
  - GFischer 11y ago
    Very interesting... if Hitachi did go past the prototype stage, it could indeed be the answer... Video from the link (in Japanese): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7YIBWve0n4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7YIBWve0n4
    - jacquesm 11y ago
      Paternosters have been used in the past but usually were discontinued because of (gruesome) accidents. There were a couple in Amsterdam in my childhood.
      - GFischer 11y ago
        Yes, the old versions (where there were periods in which someone could fall into a shaft) look dangerous. The Hitachi version is interesting because it incorporates the behaviour one expects from standard elevators, at the cost of some speed. It sounds ideal for a mass transit station, and it could use the same pattern as is currently used for subways (a small time it remains motionless, then the doors close after a beep). I found an English version of their video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnX5WZhvzZY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnX5WZhvzZY and ThysenKrupp is also working on a similar idea: http://rt.com/news/210143-maglev-horizontal-elevator-thyssenkrupp/ http://rt.com/news/210143-maglev-horizontal-elevator-thyssen... Though Hitachi has decided to focus on speed instead: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/ist/?next=/smart-news/worlds-fastest-elevator-will-be-built-china-180951203/ http://www.smithsonianmag.com/ist/?next=/smart-news/worlds-f... I hope the innovation in this space doesn't dry out :)
        dredmorbius 11y ago

kposehn 11y ago

Excellent point! The Japanese started engineering for this as well when they went through a bonanza of submerging rail lines in Tokyo. At first, they started digging super deep with smaller tunnels (the trains use a linear motor/reaction-rail for much tighter loading gauges). However, they started to realize that it made the the now submerged trains more inefficient to be so deep. More recent lines are elevated or much more shallow.