top | item 39975865

BART to offer final rides on original equipment on April 20

132 points| iancmceachern | 1 year ago |trains.com

135 comments

order
[+] SllX|1 year ago|reply
If you're looking to get between Oakland and Alameda and San Francisco on that day and avoid this and other events, I rather enjoy and can recommend the Ferry. It's slower and more expensive but also more pleasant. Go without hurry and bring a book if you don't want to stare out at the water.
[+] kstrauser|1 year ago|reply
The ferry is the most civilized transit in the area. They even have a bar on board. It’s very pleasant. I’d take it all the time if I didn’t have to drive to the terminal, as opposed to catching the transbay bus that stops a block from my house.
[+] valianteffort|1 year ago|reply
Regrettably I lived in SF for years and never took the ferry across the bay. Will have to give it a try next time I'm out there.
[+] jmward01|1 year ago|reply
I read once that a huge issue with US metro is our over the top strength requirements. I wonder if that is still true. It is clear that Europe/basically anywhere has far more expertise and success in this than we do. Too bad it isn't as easy as 'we accept all country xxx regs and can start buying their stuff/using their designs'. I'm not that naive to think that is really a possibility, or that doing that would solve the other massive issues with US mass transit, but we can dream of transit like Tokyo can't we!
[+] gok|1 year ago|reply
The car strength requirements only apply to mainline rail, not rapid transit like BART which runs on dedicated rails. And even on mainline rail, the FRA now accepts Europeans rolling stock as of a few years ago.
[+] mschuster91|1 year ago|reply
> I read once that a huge issue with US metro is our over the top strength requirements. I wonder if that is still true. It is clear that Europe/basically anywhere has far more expertise and success in this than we do.

No, our trains are just waaay shorter - around 740-835 meters and a maximum weight of 2.200 tons [1].

US trains however? 3.6 km regular length limit [2], with the record being held by a 6.5km long and 48.100 tons weight. Even just at shunting, the forces in play are so much larger than here in Europe.

[1] https://die-gueterbahnen.com/news/zahl-des-tages/4.html

[2] https://www.uirr.com/en/news/mediacentre/2286-the-optimal-le...

[3] https://zmodal.com/2020/04/30/trains-are-longer-and-heavier-...

[+] bloqs|1 year ago|reply
When you mean strength, what are you referring to?
[+] bluejekyll|1 year ago|reply
Goodbye to the family seating. I have a lot of good memories riding with my family and friends in those living room like areas.

I’m a little sad those are going away.

[+] lobsterthief|1 year ago|reply
It was great until someone really sketchy sat across from you. I remember riding during the pandemic and some guy sat across from me and started smoking crack. I guess that could happen with any seating arrangement, but it was particularly uncomfortable sitting right across from me and facing me.

That’s a bigger problem than seating arrangement I guess.

[+] blackeyeblitzar|1 year ago|reply
Very cool to see these trains lasted 50+ years if I understand correctly (?). I wonder if there’s an opportunity for BART to switch to standard gauge in the future or as part of retiring trains, or if that’s even a good idea for cost savings? Could they build a narrow rail inside the wider rail? Or is this idea not worth it?
[+] danans|1 year ago|reply
> I wonder if there’s an opportunity for BART to switch to standard gauge in the future or as part of retiring trains, or if that’s even a good idea for cost savings?

I'm guessing it would be massively expensive, and it's not clear to what end they would change it.

It's not like they could then buy cheaper off-the-shelf trains, since the trains still have to be designed and built for the particular system in other ways, i.e. controls, propulsion, and custom interiors.

Also, BART doesn't share tracks with any other system, so there's no reason to do it for compatiblity's sake either.

[+] froh|1 year ago|reply
you got me curious.

"wind stability" is the given reason:

https://www.bart.gov/news/articles/2022/news20220708-2

and it is a standard gauge, "Indian gauge", just not the standard gauge. which keeps it free from freight trains and other mixed traffic, which helps with punctuality.

also if they wanted to change that they could introduce a dual gauge track, like the Stuttgart area did for their mixed tram/underground

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuttgart_Stadtbahn#/media/Fil...

[+] bronson|1 year ago|reply
The rails themselves have enough room. The issues start with the nonstandard loading platforms, track profile and switches, and power, and continue for quite a while. Once you get everything working again, any cost savings are gone.
[+] bryananderson|1 year ago|reply
The weird gauge is indeed weird, but is generally overstated as a problem for BART. There’s not much to be gained by changing it system-wide, and it would be at great cost.

It’s sometimes claimed to be a driver of costlier rolling-stock acquisition, but this is dubious. There are many track gauges around the world, and not a lot of evidence that nonstandard ones cost dramatically different amounts. And even if bespoke gauges did cost more for economies-of-scale reasons, BART’s gauge is hardly unique: it’s the same gauge used in India, and just a couple mm from the one used in Iberia and much of Latin America (in practice they are demonstrably interchangeable). So there is a huge amount of rolling stock being manufactured for this gauge. It doesn’t require reinventing the entire production process or something.

The other claimed benefit to standardizing BART’s gauge that I sometimes hear is interoperability with other systems, but this is very difficult for several larger reasons, and also not necessary or desirable. For one thing, BART also has a nonstandard wheel profile and corresponding rail profile, so you wouldn’t just need to move the rails closer together, you’d actually have to replace them all. Beyond that, mainline rail systems have tougher crash standards than fully-separated metro systems (even after recent reforms), so you couldn’t run BART trains onto mainline tracks unless you bought heavier (and more expensive) rolling stock than what BART and other metro systems normally buy. Another issue is that mainline rail systems use different signaling and electrification (if they even have electrification) systems, which would require either an incredibly expensive overhaul or the use of multi-current/multi-signaling trains, which again increases the cost. Also, mainline rail is generally not grade-separated like BART, which would need to be changed at great expense, or BART would have to accept reduced reliability due to grade-crossing conflicts (this matters less for infrequent regional rail, but is huge for BART which must timetable dozens of trains per peak hour through the Y-junction in Oakland). Stations would also need to be harmonized to the same platform height (BART’s is different from any other system in the area) and length (stations would need to match BART’s extremely long trains).

Interoperability also doesn’t offer much benefit. Usually I hear about this in the context of Caltrain: instead of having these fragmented systems, wouldn’t it be nice if BART served the peninsula? I agree! We can do this by merging the agencies and putting new logos on the trains, without worrying about replacing rails and redoing the electrification that Caltrain is just finishing up with. I’m only slightly oversimplifying. We should continue iteratively upgrading Caltrain into true rapid transit with things like BART-style level boarding, all-day high frequencies and regular intervals, and grade separation. And we should extend what is currently known as Caltrain downtown and then across to the East Bay[0], providing good transfer opportunities with current BART. If this is done well, it should all feel like one regional rapid-transit system to the rider[1], much like New York subway and Berlin U-bahn riders usually don't even realize that they’re actually using multiple incompatible systems. At the end of the day, good integration and high service quality are what matter to the rider, not the underlying technology.

I think eBART contributed a lot to the idea that BART’s gauge is a big problem, since this weird DMU thing was sold under the premise that “normal BART” was too expensive. Really the things that were (allegedly) too expensive for this low-ridership exurban tail were electrification and the huge stations necessitated by BART’s extremely long trains. Those factors would've still been there even if the rails matched up.

So was it pointless and dumb for BART to use a nonstandard track gauge? Yeah. It was part of the marketing for a “space age” system that wanted to be seen as different from ye olde train. But is it really a huge problem that’s worth correcting? Nah. It’s only worth changing part of it if you wanted to convert a segment of track from mainline to BART or vice versa—and the cost of the track stuff would pale in comparison to other factors (electrification, signaling, stations, grade separation).

[0] https://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/2021/09/down-tubes-with-dt... [1] https://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/2023/03/the-false-choice-o...

[+] banish-m4|1 year ago|reply
Last time I rode BART in 2013, the stations were creepy quiet and the cars were dilapidated. Fruitvale notwithstanding, it seemed like a place where people get stabbed. Has it improved? Or is still a typical American public transport Catch-22: not enough passengers to justify investment and not enough service to justify ridership.
[+] brcmthrowaway|1 year ago|reply
Every West Coast city has terrible public transportation systems.
[+] eweise|1 year ago|reply
Reading this I didn't think I'd feel so nostalgic for those cars but the track was at the end of my street where I grew up, so I saw and heard them all the time. My parents commuted to the city on Bart and for a few years after college we all commuted together. As kids, we terrorized the trains a bit and that's how we discovered that Bart had helicopters. The 70's sure were fun.
[+] TaylorAlexander|1 year ago|reply
I just moved to Oakland a couple years ago and I recently watched the TV show I'm a Virgo, which is set in Oakland. I never realized how iconic that sound is until I saw it on a TV show and instantly recognized it.
[+] ProfessorLayton|1 year ago|reply
I've been using BART all my life, and while I'm not old enough to have been doing so since it first came into service, I did get to experience it during its glory days. It legitimately felt like getting on an airplane, and it was fascinating to young-me, as trains are to many kids.

For those who didn't know, bart used to have:

- Generously padded cloth seats

- Carpet (!!!)

- Free parking

- Magnetic paper tickets, and the turnstile machines would stamp the remaining balance upon exit. They'd also get demagnetized all the time, or get stuck in the machine.

Yes, the cloth seats and carpet were terrible ideas, but before they got all disgusting, they looked and felt nice. Bart used to be really nice, it was clean, and people generally respected the system. I still think BART is fantastic, but I don't deny it has its problems.

Anyway, BART dropped a ton of merch when they were decommissioning their old stock, and I managed to snag an aluminum car ID plate and a real system map! https://imgur.com/a/rCvf93S

[+] UncleEntity|1 year ago|reply
I might be remembering this wrong but I seem to recall being able to start out on a bus in Livermore and make all the way to Fremont (or Frisco once to see The Smithereens doing a free concert in Justin Herman Plaza on a school day) just using transfers from the original ticket. Pretty sure the BART ticket would get you on a bus but not sure about the other way around as this was quite a long time ago.

Pretty good deal for a delinquent minor with hardly any money.

[+] eweise|1 year ago|reply
I remember it was a challenge to get the machines to accept your dollar bills.
[+] hilux|1 year ago|reply
I rode on the "final scheduled train." Now this too!? It's a lot of work being a part of history.
[+] Lammy|1 year ago|reply
I wish they could run one with the carpeted floors and fabric seats.
[+] paunchy|1 year ago|reply
It sounds like you've never sat down on a BART fabric seat only to discover it is wet. I won't miss the fabric seats.
[+] JumpCrisscross|1 year ago|reply
> wish they could run one with the carpeted floors and fabric seats

Oh dear god, you just brought back the horrors of a Southeast Ireland (Enniscorthy) pub’s carpeted fucking bathroom. You know you’re a pub. You know you’re in Ireland. And yet you chose carpeting laid in 1910 and decided every day thereafter “yeah, looks good.”

[+] mistrial9|1 year ago|reply
fun fact - early runs to Concord did in fact open the doors of the train on the wrong side of the car, more than once..

source: eyewitness

[+] downWidOutaFite|1 year ago|reply
Is the fiendish high-pitched noise in the tunnels gone with the new trains?
[+] incompleteCode|1 year ago|reply
I like it. It’s not deafening and has a unique profile.

Granted I haven’t traveled much, so I don’t know if it’s globally unique.

[+] diebeforei485|1 year ago|reply
The new trains are superior in every aspect except they seem to oscillate in a weird way that gives some people motion sickness.
[+] HWR_14|1 year ago|reply
Motion sickness seems like a pretty major negative.
[+] xg15|1 year ago|reply
> BART

Waiting for the first "LLM or municipal transport authority" guessing game to pop up...

(Disclaimer: From Europe, so I didn't know about BART. Not that we don't have ridiculous authority names around here too...)

[+] mattl|1 year ago|reply
First sentence of the article: “A Bay Area Rapid Transit prototype train poses at the Lake Merritt station in Oakland prior to the start of service, in late 1971 or early 1972.”
[+] presentation|1 year ago|reply

[deleted]

[+] luxuryballs|1 year ago|reply
I was thinking this too “if you ever wanted to hot box a BART we are having a farewell event”…