Everything about public transportation!
Sounds like gadgetbahn.
If we want to solve for capacity we have this.
There are no sleeping wagons during the day because people rarely sleep during the day.
Also having narrow ladder to get to half the wagon for sure will be great for elderly and disabled people.
It's not a mono-rail, it's an attempt at a better night-train car design. Will it have any success in a market where we already have nightjet, etc.? No idea. But this doesn't seem all that pie in the sky.
Yeah fair point, it should be compatible with current infrastructure, so if we assume what they claim is true and they really can increase capacity/ reduce pollution is it ok.
Sounds like gadgetbahn.
What specifically about this solution makes it a gadgetbahn? Specifics are important here - what makes it less practical than current night train solutions?
If we want to solve for capacity we have this.
How does a bilevel car improve the comfort and unit economics of the night train experience?
There are no sleeping wagons during the day because people rarely sleep during the day.
These wagons are intended to be operational specifically during night, when beds are vital. It's not a solution made for daytime travel, where we already have good configurations.
Also having narrow ladder to get to half the wagon for sure will be great for elderly and disabled people.
Having half of the spaces being accessible for elderly and disabled people seems like a good enough ratio, given their relative share of the population.
What specifically about this solution makes it a gadgetbahn? Specifics are important here - what makes it less practical than current night train solutions?
More walls means less wagon space, also if it was interested only for night travel, why half the wagon is seats? How is that better than a night wagon filled with multiple story beds and one filled with seating? And why are there giant screens if the wagon is interested for sleeping?
night train experience
These wagons are intended to be operational specifically during night, when beds are vital. It's not a solution made for daytime travel, where we already have good configurations.
From their site:
With have run Tests with over hundreds of participants, each trying our various pods. Our “users” have communicated a high attractiveness of our technology both for day and night usage.
Their website shows and mentions daytime travel as well. If it is intended only for night travel makes a bit more sense, but still seems like a gadgetbahn.
Having half of the spaces being accessible for elderly and disabled people seems like a good enough ratio, given their relative share of the population.
I don't think it's good engineering practice to just decided half your product will be unusable/unacceptable.
More walls means less wagon space, also if it was interested only for night travel, why half the wagon is seats? How is that better than a night wagon filled with multiple story beds and one filled with seating? And why are there giant screens if the wagon is interested for sleeping?
The seats recline into beds, similar to business class seating on long haul flights.
A typical night train will probably run for something like 12 hours, meaning that you won't want to be lying down fully for the whole trip.
On night trains, you typically book either a seat or a bed. The seats are an downright awful experience for anyone spending the night on the train. Seating-only wagons really have no purpose on night trains.
Their website shows and mentions daytime travel as well. If it is intended only for night travel makes a bit more sense, but still seems like a gadgetbahn.
See the previous note about night trains typically running for both sleeping hours and non-sleeping hours.
Again, I don't think these trains are intended for general purpose travel, they are specifically designed to be a better experience for overnight trips. I would not want to see them replace regular trains, that would clearly be a mistake.
I don't think it's good engineering practice to just decided half your product will be unusable/unacceptable
This is provably false - if this were true, then every bathroom would be built to full accessibility standards, but they are not. Some bathrooms get built to full accessibility standards, and the others only accommodate the majority of the population.
Good accessibility engineering means that your product can accommodate people with different requirements. With half of the seating being available without having the ability to climb ladders, this certainly fulfils that requirement.
I don't get it, you posted double-decker train, then tried to rip into this solution for being less accessible?
Double decker trains don't have a ladder, they have stairs.
Edit for clarification:
This is what stairs look like for the double decker trains, if you are in a wheelchair they are still mostly inaccessible, but we can see there are seats and spaces on the platform level for people with reduced mobility.
This are the proposed ladder(vertical stairs) for that futuristic wagon. Still inaccessible by wheelchair, but also inaccessible by people with reduced mobility.
In theory that means that one entire "floor" of the Luna is accessible, compared to just the vestibules on the traditional double-decker. Considering it's trying to be a sleeper as well, I'd say that's not too bad. There is what looks to be a solid handle there to transfer in with, so as long as the aisles are wide enough, even towards the end of the car, then it looks pretty good to me. You'd want somewhere for an attendant to park the chair as well. Granted, I'm an ambulatory chair user so I don't have a read on how difficult it would be for someone without use of their legs.
However, these are just early mockups. There's plenty of potential for more accessible pods at either end of a car, close to doors, that solve the issues you've brought up. So I just struggle to see how you could look at this and definitively say it's less accessible than current double-deck designs.
I cannot definitely say it, but from the early mockups it doesn't seem promising to me.
Also the marketing of "revolutionary" "life-changing" and "solving all problems"(hyperboly of course) and providing only a very light redesign and a 3d visual is a big red flag.
I am basically afraid of this.
Would you say this is a "very light redesign" of a traditional sleeper car?
Yes, but in not a good way, adding hard to reach areas, screens and foldable beds imo is not the right direction.
Whether you love or hate* it, I think calling it a "very light redesign" is disingenuous at best. As for screens and foldable beds, those already exist on trains as well as planes and have for decades, so calling them "added" seems strange on your part. Sure, there's likely good criticisms to be made here about this design, but you've as yet not really given any tangible ones.
