gregorygrice Posted January 3, 2010 Share #1 Posted January 3, 2010 Besides the Metro North and the LIRR my favorite commuter railway is Network West Midlands. I see that for most of their non-electrified routes they use DMUs instead of locomotives. Like these... Class 170 Class 158 Would DMUs be better if the Metro North used them? In My opinion I think that DMUs look better on the outside and the inside.(even though I still love the GEs). What's Your opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted January 3, 2010 Share #2 Posted January 3, 2010 Not too long ago: Not into GCT, but everywhere else they were used. Reading, PRR, CNJ, NYC, NYNH&H... they all used them. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregorygrice Posted January 3, 2010 Author Share #3 Posted January 3, 2010 It would be cool if they returned. They also have Diesel/Electric models too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1447 Posted January 4, 2010 Share #4 Posted January 4, 2010 What car model are these and when did they retiree? (If they did) Not too long ago: Not into GCT, but everywhere else they were used. Reading, PRR, CNJ, NYC, NYNH&H... they all used them. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted January 4, 2010 Share #5 Posted January 4, 2010 Not too long ago: Not into GCT, but everywhere else they were used. Reading, PRR, CNJ, NYC, NYNH&H... they all used them. - A The Long Island also experimented with RDCs...I would personally love to have a few LI-livery Budd RDCs for my N scale layout. Here's a page with plenty of photos: http://www.trainsarefun.com/lirr/lirr_rdc.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
error46146 Posted January 4, 2010 Share #6 Posted January 4, 2010 Besides the Metro North and the LIRR my favorite commuter railway is Network West Midlands. I see that for most of their non-electrified routes they use DMUs instead of locomotives. Like these... Class 170 Class 158 Would DMUs be better if the Metro North used them? In My opinion I think that DMUs look better on the outside and the inside.(even though I still love the GEs). What's Your opinion? i love driving them in BVE lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted January 4, 2010 Share #7 Posted January 4, 2010 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred G Posted January 4, 2010 Share #8 Posted January 4, 2010 courtesy bellefontetrain.org They always show this shiny clean side of them, but they looked more like this in action: courtesy George W Hamlin IINM the last RDC ran on the MN Waterbury branch in the 80's. I dunno why they don't run DMU's on the branches. It seems more efficient but if the locomotive/coach idea is lower maintenance (probably the case) then why fix it if it ain't broke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIRR 154 Posted January 4, 2010 Share #9 Posted January 4, 2010 I wish the could purchase some trains like these, but the just like trains that just look alike, . And for the first time I agree with the MTA. I wouldn't want to see no DMU's on either commuter rail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgedPolaris Posted January 5, 2010 Share #10 Posted January 5, 2010 I'm surprised nobody mentioned the SPV-2000 yet. I don't know the story about them other than they seemed to have mechanical problems, but it does prove DMUs were very much being thought of until the late 1970s. I guess if they had proven themselves a little better, we'd be seeing more of them on the MNRR and less of what we see today. I personally think commuter trains in the UK look pretty amazing, ours are so utilitarian looking in comparison... this has nothing to do with the original question, just the fact that they have so many different classes of DMUs/EMUs the HSTs and what not. Cool stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted January 5, 2010 Share #11 Posted January 5, 2010 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoodciti Posted January 5, 2010 Share #12 Posted January 5, 2010 I'm surprised nobody mentioned the SPV-2000 yet. I don't know the story about them other than they seemed to have mechanical problems, but it does prove DMUs were very much being thought of until the late 1970s. I guess if they had proven themselves a little better, we'd be seeing more of them on the MNRR and less of what we see today. I personally think commuter trains in the UK look pretty amazing, ours are so utilitarian looking in comparison... this has nothing to do with the original question, just the fact that they have so many different classes of DMUs/EMUs the HSTs and what not. Cool stuff. SPV-2000's didnt last too long. They looked pretty good. It seems that was the end of DMU's in the US until Colorado Railcar popped up with there DMUs being used on Oregon's tri-met and tri-rail in florida. It would nice to see more DMUs in the U.S. on short commuter lines. I can think of a few lines that would ideal.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul P Posted January 5, 2010 Share #13 Posted January 5, 2010 There are commuter rails where only DMUs are used, I sometimes wish MN and LI Railroads were one of them, but it's nice to see change of scenery once in a little while... it's just that the newer locos aren't that interesting in design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queens Surface Posted January 5, 2010 Share #14 Posted January 5, 2010 I wonder why LIRR stopped using DMUs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted January 6, 2010 Share #15 Posted January 6, 2010 I wonder why LIRR stopped using DMUs. LIRR has "streamlined" and abandoned many branches and routes and stations, in combination with electrification and the use of dual mode locos, the DMU model no longer really fit with the needs, plus some of them were getting quite old. They also didn't want limitations on where equipment could run to/from, so away they went. LIRR's RDC don't/didn't have any livery, only "LONG ISLAND" in black lettering on the side above the windows, so i can theorize that they were not heavily interested in them from the beginning unlike CNJ, Reading, NYNH&H.... - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queens Surface Posted January 6, 2010 Share #16 Posted January 6, 2010 Hmm, looking at a few photos of the LIRR DMUs, it looks like they were testing them out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregorygrice Posted January 9, 2010 Author Share #17 Posted January 9, 2010 i love driving them in BVE lol Yeah thats what made me think of writing this thread lol! There are commuter rails where only DMUs are used, I sometimes wish MN and LI Railroads were one of them, but it's nice to see change of scenery once in a little while... it's just that the newer locos aren't that interesting in design. Well I like locos but it would be nice to see a combo of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain82 Posted January 24, 2010 Share #18 Posted January 24, 2010 in the 70s there was a budd built DMU version of the M-1 used on the Long Island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregorygrice Posted January 24, 2010 Author Share #19 Posted January 24, 2010 in the 70s there was a budd built DMU version of the M-1 used on the Long Island. Are there any pictures of this? I would love to see it:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deaks Posted January 25, 2010 Share #20 Posted January 25, 2010 It's alright using DMUs, but the problem is that instead of the engine being housed in the locomotive there's several of them, a few inches below your feet. The noise and vibration gets very tedious after not a long time. The obvious benefit is that when train length is restricted for whatever reason, all of it can be used for carrying people, rather than having a 'locomotive area' which carries nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted January 25, 2010 Share #21 Posted January 25, 2010 It's alright using DMUs, but the problem is that instead of the engine being housed in the locomotive there's several of them, a few inches below your feet. The noise and vibration gets very tedious after not a long time. The obvious benefit is that when train length is restricted for whatever reason, all of it can be used for carrying people, rather than having a 'locomotive area' which carries nothing. Try riding an arrow 3 sometime... :cool: MU will always be noisier and have "power near the pax" issues. Loco + coach only makes sense if you need a few thousand HP and several coaches, enter the multi-unit. Yea their speed may not be as fast as loco moved trains, but you're not going to use them for the bulk of your service if you got 100+ mph tracks ( excluded B)). In any case, our rail regulations favor heavy equipment, whereas DMU/EMU operations are most efficient when approaching light rail spec. Till this changes any real advancement in rail transport will be lame compared to what they have going in in europe & asia. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deaks Posted January 25, 2010 Share #22 Posted January 25, 2010 Yea their speed may not be as fast as loco moved trains, but you're not going to use them for the bulk of your service if you got 100+ mph tracks ( excluded B)). - A MUs are normally faster I think as you can distribute the power through more driven axles. The only remotely high-speed train (by European standards anyway ) that is a loco + cars arrangement is the Railjet thing they have going in Austria. I think that tops out at about 140mph. All the others are EMU equipment. I have never ridden a TGV but Deutsche Bahn's ICE's MUs are super trains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKorean Posted January 26, 2010 Share #23 Posted January 26, 2010 It is my belief that all lines should be electrified, 3rd rail or not. The whole disel powered locomotive is nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregorygrice Posted January 26, 2010 Author Share #24 Posted January 26, 2010 It is my belief that all lines should be electrified, 3rd rail or not. The whole disel powered locomotive is nonsense. Now what happens when the third rail happens to need repairs or shuts down for a period of time? Diesels are there to the rescue. I like both electric and diesels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKorean Posted January 26, 2010 Share #25 Posted January 26, 2010 Thats a good point, I mean, keep around trains that can both serve oin electrified and non-electrified tracks but a modern day commuter railline using disel engine sounds a bit ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.