|
|
| Re: American Railcar gone (1005382) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (1005740) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Nov 22 01:35:32 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Nov 22 01:33:23 2010. Wrong, post... |
|
|
| (1005741) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Nov 22 01:36:25 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Nov 22 00:53:06 2010. It is far less expensive to operate commuter rail than it is a Metro or S-Bahn.And you move far less people. Cost efficiency should ultimately take a second seat to the maximization of passengers being moved, as I have no qualms about high operating costs if we're moving sizable numbers of people and providing a real alternative to cars. European train DRIVERS operate on the same skill level as domestic transit operators. Railroad jobs are high skill activities because the system hasn't been nerfed. So what's wrong with reducing the skill needed? Oh boo hoo, the government doesn't subsidize your ability to roll out of bed and randomly decide to catch a train downtown. Learn how to read a schedule and plan your day accordingly. Be on top or be left behind. The problem is that it increases the opportunity costs of traveling to the core of the city and only reinforces heavy levels of suburbanization. As a matter of personal policy perspective, I want strong urban cores, and the only way we can achieve this is to promote quick links to from our periphery into the core. I'm sorry if it eats away at your fantasy, but we need to make transit as convenient and easy to use as possible, and if this means paying the workers less in order to have more trains per hour and lower fares, then so be it. Austerity means you have to give up the less important "nice to haves". Except public transport is not a nice to have. You're just making excusing to justify your ideal railroad which isn't particularly passenger friendly. Why should SEPTA provide canopies and heaters? Wear a fucking coat. Because I live in a fucking first world country, not Brazil of the North. Given that the competition is a warm car, I think it's perfectly suitable to have some attempt at climate control. Hell, in frigging cheap ass Canada, my cousin's bus stop has a frigging heater. A frigging canopy really isn't much to ask for even if I have a coat and umbrella. |
|
|
| (1005743) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Nov 22 01:45:59 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Nov 22 00:55:34 2010. I'd rather get on the first train than wait three headways for room.I'd much rather have the crowds be distributed on different headways with minimal dwell times at real stations than everybody attempt to squeeze into one car so they can get off at your pissant flag stop. Metro stations cost 200 million a pop. Commuter rail stations don't. And yet, you get considerably more ridership out of it... |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1005745) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 01:50:00 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Mon Nov 22 01:45:59 2010. "Ridership" is not a goal in and of itself. You need a way to pay for it. |
|
|
| (1005746) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 01:51:08 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Nov 22 00:55:34 2010. I'd rather get on the first train than wait three headways for roomAgreed. The more vehicles you run, the more of a chance of something bad happening, not to mention the potential drop in average speeds. |
|
|
| (1005747) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 01:54:49 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Nov 22 00:44:51 2010. No, that wasn't it. Remember there was a Golden Age some time after? Not necessarily a cause, but it wasn't a hindrance. I'm talking 1950 and onwards. |
|
|
| (1005748) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Mon Nov 22 02:07:41 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Jersey Mike on Sun Nov 21 11:51:28 2010. You are forgetting one major problem with the lack of passthrough. EVERY station has to have platforms as long as the longest train.No, it only needs to be as long as the first door of the rear pair of cars. If we cannot afford to build a 160-175 foot platform, then why are we bothering to spend the money for a train in the first place? The platform is such a marginal cost of building a rail line that it is utterly ridiculous to build a line if you cannot afford proper platforms. Instead of having a short SEPTA style platform and letting passengers walk back you have to have one 2 or 3 MU's long. Not only does this raise construction costs and hinder demand based expansion, it completely eliminate the ability for surge capacity for special events. What system has been built anywhere in the US in the past 25 years which features platforms that are shorter than the longest operated train? Even Metra, which frequently discharged passengers onto the ballast and grade crossings next to stations has gone to full length platforms for their extensions. Take the Baltimore Light Rail. Or consider Pittsburgh, But those are light rails and exceptionally poorly designed light rail lines, not commuter operations. Were we to introduce FRA compliant DMUs, especially with an organization like MARC or NJT, they'd simply be able to substitute diesel push-pull equipment for the DMUs. It does not make economic sense to operate a DMU longer than 4 cars anyway, so if we want five or six cars, then just roll out a diesel locomotive and the appropriate number of cars. Also re safety I don't want my rail vehicle to crush at all. I want my rail vehicle to crush what it hits. In the unlikely that two crush resistant vehicles hit any resulting injury would be compensated by the reduced cost and increased efficiency of the vehicle. Way to learn all the wrong lessons from Metrolink's bumpertrain accidents. Thankfully the NTSB strenuously disagrees with you and Metrolink is now taking delivery of railcars which feature crash energy management technologies. Energy must be dissipated in a crash, and a completely rigid railcar only ensures it will be dissipated in the most catastrophic manner possible, either through buckling or jackknifing. |
|
|
| (1005761) | |
Re: No DMU's in future, American Railcar gone. |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 22 05:40:47 2010, in response to Re: No DMU's in future, American Railcar gone., posted by Broadway Lion on Sat Nov 20 22:38:59 2010. That's because that one wasn't hosted on memegenerator.com! |
|
|
| (1005819) | |
Re: No DMU's in future, American Railcar gone. |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 22 11:02:03 2010, in response to Re: No DMU's in future, American Railcar gone., posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 22 05:40:47 2010. The LION *could* connect to the website memegenerator.com. Apparently the Barracuda only takes exception to specific content. The Barracuda is a very sensitive beast.
|
|
|
| (1005821) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by The Flxible Neofan on Mon Nov 22 11:16:26 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Nov 21 15:26:29 2010. If you have 'em, use 'em. Don't let horsepower go to waste.LOL, I highly agree with this statement. I always shake my head when I see drivers of these sports cars driving so slowly that I need to pass them in my 4 cylinder "sports wagon". On some newer cars with "extra cylinders" (like the newer GTO) they seem to be able to control the pistons being used for various driving purposes. If you are simply cruising on the highway, all cylinders aren't necesarily being used. |
|
|
| (1005822) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 11:17:32 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Terrapin Station on Sun Nov 21 15:26:29 2010. False, since it most certainly canNot in the city, and not legally. Ulai again. |
|
|
| (1005823) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 11:19:17 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by The Flxible Neofan on Mon Nov 22 11:16:26 2010. I always shake my head when I see drivers of these sports cars driving so slowly that I need to pass them in my 4 cylinder "sports wagon"That's because they're driving with bullseyes on their back, and if you had to pay the car insurance they have to pay, you would drive just like they do too, because you do not want it to go up. Breaking the law is breaking the law notwithstanding. |
|
|
| (1005825) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 11:23:22 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sun Nov 21 14:49:30 2010. Admittedly, I'm left wondering if FRA regs simply make it difficult to design a diesel multiple unit that can match or beat the fuel efficiency of a locomotive with three carsWhy? Nobody's tried a FRA DEMU yet. The attempt that this thread centers around was a DHMU (or DHMMU). |
|
|
| (1005827) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by The Flxible Neofan on Mon Nov 22 11:32:31 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 11:19:17 2010. Then WHY waste the thousands of dollars to buy such a car (as well as pay for the insurance and gas usage)? It's like buying a top of the line multimedia desktop "super-computer" only to use it for email and Microsoft Word. I guess it's just something to get to be "cool". |
|
|
| (1005828) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 11:37:50 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by The Flxible Neofan on Mon Nov 22 11:32:31 2010. Then WHY waste the thousands of dollars to buy such a carAdvertisement of status . . . or "compensation" for certain shortcomings as the ladies like to say. I guess it's just something to get to be "cool" That's it indeed. If you're just worried about performance, then you don't necessarily need looks, of course . . . |
|
|
| (1005831) | |
Re: No DMU's in future, American Railcar gone. |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 22 12:02:37 2010, in response to Re: No DMU's in future, American Railcar gone., posted by Broadway Lion on Mon Nov 22 11:02:03 2010. You don't understand. It has nothing to do with being able to visit the graphical page at that site. It has to do with being able to load the graphics hosted by that site. |
|
|
| (1005832) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 22 12:03:48 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 11:17:32 2010. Yes in the city, and yes legally. I stand by what I wrote. |
|
|
| (1005833) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 22 12:05:14 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by The Flxible Neofan on Mon Nov 22 11:16:26 2010. Exactly. Olog will never get it. |
|
|
| (1005856) | |
Re: DMU's in future, American Railcar gone. Sumitomo to supply SMART |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Mon Nov 22 13:16:46 2010, in response to Re: DMU's in future, American Railcar gone. Sumitomo to supply SMART, posted by WillD on Mon Nov 22 00:16:22 2010. Well, if Nippon Sharyo's finished product looks anything like the artist renderings provided in the RFP, they could have a real winner on their hands. Sonoma's "C-car option" which calls for additional "flat-nosed" DMUs is a smart move toward maximizing flexibility in its trains. |
|
|
| (1005864) | |
Re: DMUs in future, American Railcar gone. Sumitomo to supply SMART |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 13:43:23 2010, in response to Re: DMU's in future, American Railcar gone. Sumitomo to supply SMART, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Mon Nov 22 13:16:46 2010. If Sonoma goes with high platforms instead of low, they wreck their flexibility though. Won't be able to substitute any kind of push-pull other than those that run in the northeast. |
|
|
| (1005865) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 13:44:32 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 22 12:03:48 2010. No, ulai again. Not even if you want to replace your brakes prematurely is it even remotely true. The only place you'll be able to do that is on a dynamometer. |
|
|
| (1005869) | |
US Railcar not gone? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 13:52:37 2010, in response to No DMU's in future, American Railcar gone., posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Nov 20 19:13:57 2010. All I see in the news is that American Railcar Industries pulled out of the partnership, not that US Railcar is not still pursuing DMUs; certainly American Railcar Industries is itself not gone but very much in business. A bit premature to say "No DMUs in future" thus far? Stop reading Trainodors and misinterpreting what those psychopaths say there.Columbus Business First
|
|
|
| (1005880) | |
Re: DMUs in future, American Railcar gone. Sumitomo to supply SMART |
|
|
Posted by 9 local on Mon Nov 22 14:37:26 2010, in response to Re: DMUs in future, American Railcar gone. Sumitomo to supply SMART, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 13:43:23 2010. And there are quite a few spare Comet IIIs sitting in MMC right now. Plus, Bombardier is pushing the NJT Multi-Level design now as opposed to the UTDC Tri-Level from what I can tell. |
|
|
| (1005895) | |
Re: DMUs in future, American Railcar gone. Sumitomo to supply SMART |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 22 16:31:35 2010, in response to Re: DMUs in future, American Railcar gone. Sumitomo to supply SMART, posted by 9 local on Mon Nov 22 14:37:26 2010. Sources? Check your email. |
|
|
| (1005896) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 22 16:31:58 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 13:44:32 2010. Nope. You can do it in the city. |
|
|
| (1005903) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 16:58:02 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 22 16:31:58 2010. No you can't. |
|
|
| (1005905) | |
Re: DMUs in future, Sumitomo to supply SMART |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 16:59:57 2010, in response to Re: DMUs in future, American Railcar gone. Sumitomo to supply SMART, posted by 9 local on Mon Nov 22 14:37:26 2010. And there are quite a few spare Comet IIIs sitting in MMC right nowThey're all "spare" since NJT retired 'em prematurely. Plus, Bombardier is pushing the NJT Multi-Level design now as opposed to the UTDC Tri-Level from what I can tell There's no purpose to that. That's a specialized design for low clearances. Are they "pushing" it the same way they tried to "push" the JetTrain? |
|
|
| (1005912) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Nov 22 17:11:21 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 01:50:00 2010. At one point the yearly NJDoT subsidy to maintain PSRL passenger service was enough to buy every regular rider his or her own car. |
|
|
| (1005919) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 22 17:22:57 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 16:58:02 2010. Yes you can. |
|
|
| (1005923) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Nov 22 17:29:14 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by WillD on Mon Nov 22 02:07:41 2010. No, it only needs to be as long as the first door of the rear pair of cars. If we cannot afford to build a 160-175 foot platform, then why are we bothering to spend the money for a train in the first place? The platform is such a marginal cost of building a rail line that it is utterly ridiculous to build a line if you cannot afford proper platforms.Most commuter rail systems need to run trains longer than 175 feet. If there's a football game downtown you can't just couple 6 LRV's together and run them because they'll be off the platform. Re cost the new RiverLINE/ACL trainfer station was budgeted for 40 million. That's about 20 million per station, hardly chump change. But those are light rails and exceptionally poorly designed light rail lines, not commuter operations. Were we to introduce FRA compliant DMUs, especially with an organization like MARC or NJT, they'd simply be able to substitute diesel push-pull equipment for the DMUs. It does not make economic sense to operate a DMU longer than 4 cars anyway, so if we want five or six cars, then just roll out a diesel locomotive and the appropriate number of cars. Why does NJT needs DMUs? They already have a fleet of railcars providing a full schedule of service. DMUs are a solution to new build lines as a way to contain costs. I don't mind DMUs, but I think that they should not hit people with hidden costs like full length level boarding platforms that accommodate a lack of passing through. Energy must be dissipated in a crash, and a completely rigid railcar only ensures it will be dissipated in the most catastrophic manner possible, either through buckling or jackknifing. And their new cab cars not only kill any possibility of a railfan view they lock MetroLink into semi-fixed trainsets. The hexagonal Bomber bi-level cars are simply a poor design made of aluminum and with an internal layout that offers very little end to end rigidity. What is needed is stronger railcars, not ones that suffer huge amounts of damage after every little fender bender. |
|
|
| (1005925) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Nov 22 17:37:52 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by WillD on Sun Nov 21 23:45:45 2010. Did you ever think that persons who pay commuter rail prices want to ride up high in a commuter rail vehicle? Transit type vehicles, which Europeans like to pass off as real trains, simply provide a lower class of space and comfort than full sized rail coaches. If we can self-propel standard looking railcars with electricity we can propel them with diesel engines. The British Rail Networkers came in both EMU and DMU configurations. There is no reason why someone couldn't dieselize a Comet V coach or an M-7 type coach. The result wouldn't be stuck with fixed sized train-sets that required POP due to lack of passthrough. |
|
|
| (1005934) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 22 18:11:23 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Nov 22 17:37:52 2010. POP isn't a requirement due to lack of pass-through. It's a bad idea no matter what mode implements it. |
|
|
| (1006016) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Nov 23 00:11:28 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Nov 22 17:37:52 2010. Did you ever think that persons who pay commuter rail prices want to ride up high in a commuter rail vehicle? Transit type vehicles, which Europeans like to pass off as real trains, simply provide a lower class of space and comfort than full sized rail coaches.I fail to see how the Siemens FRA compatible DMU concept for SMART, with 51 inch floors and an arrangement exactly like the CRC DMUs is in any way related to their Desiro or DMU offerings from Stadler, BBD or Alstom for the European (and intelligent US operator) market. Incidentally, most of the new transit systems in the US are operated with Bombardier Bilevels which place the passengers at exactly the same height as the GTWs. Ditto the NJT Multilevels, and pretty much every other double deck railcar other than the Gallery Cars. The British Rail Networkers came in both EMU and DMU configurations. ...which completely lack any capacity for walk-through capability, even though they are operated in four, six, and eight car sets . If we can self-propel standard looking railcars with electricity we can propel them with diesel engines... There is no reason why someone couldn't dieselize a Comet V coach or an M-7 type coach. BBD tried that and found no ready buyers for their product. Despite appearances to us foamers, and as the SPV ably illustrates, building a DMU is not a simple matter of bolting a diesel onto the underbody of a passenger railcar. That is nothing more than a recipe to so glibly dismiss the complicated integration of railcar and powerplant. |
|
|
| (1006934) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Nov 26 01:32:25 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by WillD on Tue Nov 23 00:11:28 2010. The SPV failed for reasons other than the general concept. The RDC was a success, why try to reinvent the wheel with crazy full cabs and whatnot. |
|
|
| (1006942) | |
Re: American Railcar gone |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Nov 26 02:09:39 2010, in response to Re: American Railcar gone, posted by Jersey Mike on Fri Nov 26 01:32:25 2010. Funny how the SPV turned out to be not rebuildable like the RDC. That I didn't understand. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
