|
|
| Re: Penn Central Post, March 1969: Metroliner article (1558372) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Penn Central Post, March 1969: Metroliner article |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Thu Sep 24 01:14:16 2020, in response to Re: Penn Central Post, March 1969: Metroliner article, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Sep 23 22:21:03 2020. dreams? no, sales presentations. As I commented back then, they did achieve 124 in revenue, 160.4 in test w/o concrete ties or fully CWR. Sadly, however, the actual Metroliner EMUs turned out to be lemons (hangar queens?); and had terrible OTP. Was it the PRR's insistence on obsolete trucks; Budd wanted to use Pioneer IIs. Can anyone find out if the MDBF of the Westinghouse and GE units differed? I do know that originally the WE cars blew substation breakers. This is why the first trains were parlors and coach/snack cars (all GEs). What was done to fix the WE units? current limiters? Larger feeders with higher rated CBs?We do do know that the window sashes in P70s had to be redone because Metroliner test runs sucked the windows out as they zoomed by. Physics teaches us that powered axles under each car are more efficient than engines pulling unpowered cars. That said, despite all of the EMUs built since the M's, Amtrak has now twice done the worst of both worlds--engine hauled trains of inflexible consists. Tres triste. |
|
|
|