Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagopcclcar1
... We don't need any doors on the outside or coupled trainsets with no bulkheads.
...
|
For the record, I do not advocate change just to change. Every single change I suggested is rooted in a desire to improve present problems. The problems may not be big problems, but they are still problems created by present design.
Integrated trainsets allow people to move through the train, this simplifies emergency evacuations, allows crowded cars to self-distribute into less-crowded cars, which makes boarding more efficient, and reclaims the presently wasted space in between cars for additional riders.
Doors that slide out do two things, first they allow the walls of the interior to be the same depth across the entire car, which marginally allows more space, but more importantly stops the problem of the areas nearest the doors being narrowest. It's not a huge difference, but I think it creates a psychological barrier, particularly for less-frequent riders, and contributes to passengers crowding near the doors and preventing more efficient boarding processes and even distribution of passengers in the car.
Second, doors that slide out allow more windows. This is simply aesthetics, but as your photos illustrate, the fact that Chicago's cars are mostly elevated gives riders a great view of the city. Why wouldn't you want to give riders as much window area as possible to be able to enjoy the views that you clearly also appreciate?
So, please, quit patronizingly saying that calls for change are about "change for change sake" - you may not agree that the problems these changes solve are worth the effort, but they are not merely change for change sake.