metsfan Posted February 17, 2009 Author Share #51 Posted February 17, 2009 I just want something modern. For 100 years usa lead the way in rail technology, seems we are stuck in 1948 though. The steps as they are now work fine, yes, however i think it would serve better to have a lighter design with more room without the need for trap door, as i said, like the acela. Instead of having vestibule doors , which are technically "outside" and part of the impact crumple zone and are akin to the old gated heavyweights simply with enclosed ends vs iron gating. I think this is a fundamental issue that needs to be resolved with EMU, because the self-propelled car is an interesting idea, however i think it's time to respectfully part ways and adopt trainset EMU vs self propelled car consist EMU. I think it will save weight, allow better acceleration and braking abilities, and finally end the "between cars" noise from the couplers and baffles and other things clanking around. Yea it's nice to have interchangeability in case there's a problem, but i don't see it being an issue. Plus, if you need more capacity, you could hook 2 trainsets together, and platform the train in a way that allows people to board both front and rear trainsets. Similar to how say HBLR operates today. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaback9 Posted February 17, 2009 Share #52 Posted February 17, 2009 You think to radical my friend, one step at a time, lets get a contract first and take it from there. Then we can worry about what it looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted February 17, 2009 Author Share #53 Posted February 17, 2009 You think to radical my friend, one step at a time, lets get a contract first and take it from there. Then we can worry about what it looks like. Isn't (NJT) famous for putting in specs for what they want though? :cool: I agree, we need someone to come forward with interest. I still hope it's GE or GE+bomb. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R44 5278 Posted February 17, 2009 Share #54 Posted February 17, 2009 I would say doors like the Eurostar. Back to windows, they should be the size of Comet Vs and Oval shaped with UV protection. NJT also needs full stainless steel exteriors like the Comet Vs and Comet VIs so they can clean off graffiti without any remnants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted February 17, 2009 Author Share #55 Posted February 17, 2009 I would say doors like the Eurostar. Back to windows, they should be the size of Comet Vs and Oval shaped with UV protection. NJT also needs full stainless steel exteriors like the Comet Vs and Comet VIs so they can clean off graffiti without any remnants. There is no "Comet VI". With modern paints it doesn't have to be all stainless either. It's not like the subway which is plagued with vandalism, in fact the worst i've ever seen on NJT rolling stock was a seat rip. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Kreszl Posted February 17, 2009 Share #56 Posted February 17, 2009 There is no "Comet VI". - A Comet VI are the Multi-Level Cars. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R44 5278 Posted February 18, 2009 Share #57 Posted February 18, 2009 Metsfan, check this out: http://rides.webshots.com/photo/1371681065068906618fkhIug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaback9 Posted February 18, 2009 Share #58 Posted February 18, 2009 Hey lets stick to EMU's please...cars are tagged up every day. Its sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted February 18, 2009 Author Share #59 Posted February 18, 2009 I think it wouldnt need to be raw stainless, but anti-graf would i'm sure be a topic visited by any parties involved in building & (NJT). Do you guys think they should have 4 electrified axles or 2? Do you think it should have 2 trucks per section/car, or have trainset with articulation? - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Kreszl Posted February 18, 2009 Share #60 Posted February 18, 2009 A trainset with articulation would be harder and more expensive to maintain for NJ Transit. NJ Transit does not like the Arrow III MU Cars because maintenance wise they have to be treated as locomotives due to FRA requirements and the fact that they all can be operated. Married pairs included. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted February 18, 2009 Author Share #61 Posted February 18, 2009 A trainset with articulation would be harder and more expensive to maintain for NJ Transit. NJ Transit does not like the Arrow III MU Cars because maintenance wise they have to be treated as locomotives due to FRA requirements and the fact that they all can be operated. Married pairs included. Eric So based on that a complete trainset with 4 axles per car. Now, how many cars get a pantograph? Perhaps all of them should, but only 2 are ever used? - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaback9 Posted February 18, 2009 Share #62 Posted February 18, 2009 1 pantograph per two cars? Technically two if they go with the more streamlined single arm design.(* Edit for clarification Talking about Married pairs BTW) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Kreszl Posted February 18, 2009 Share #63 Posted February 18, 2009 So based on that a complete trainset with 4 axles per car. Now, how many cars get a pantograph? Perhaps all of them should, but only 2 are ever used? - A NJ Transit Arrow III MU cars only need 1 pantograph for both single unit cars and Married pairs. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaback9 Posted February 18, 2009 Share #64 Posted February 18, 2009 Correct the gear on top is just spaced out on the Married Pairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted February 18, 2009 Author Share #65 Posted February 18, 2009 I mean, if you have a full 11 car trainset (not married pair) you should put them on every other section anyways, because A-B-B-A operation is 100% possible, just not ideal. Every other car with a set to face one way or the other, that way no diamond pant needed, still save weight. Acab-B-A-B-A-B-A-B-A-B-cabA... Each A has 2 lightweight pants one for either direction/just in case, and B units would not need any collection equipment. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaback9 Posted February 18, 2009 Share #66 Posted February 18, 2009 They would probably have all pans for the direction the train is going in up as the main car can only put the pans up and down, there would be no way to select which pans are up and down unless they manually went from car to car in each cab deciding which cars pan would be up and which cars would be down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted February 18, 2009 Author Share #67 Posted February 18, 2009 They would probably have all pans for the direction the train is going in up as the main car can only put the pans up and down, there would be no way to select which pans are up and down unless they manually went from car to car in each cab deciding which cars pan would be up and which cars would be down. Yea, you'd only do that if the desired one wasnt working. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R44 5278 Posted February 18, 2009 Share #68 Posted February 18, 2009 About GE as a builder, what's seriously so good about it? I mean, they still build cars out of carbon steel. Lol, we're in the 21st century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share #69 Posted February 19, 2009 About GE as a builder, what's seriously so good about it? I mean, they still build cars out of carbon steel. Lol, we're in the 21st century. You could have them build the power systems, and have bomb build the carbodies and do final assembly. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaback9 Posted February 19, 2009 Share #70 Posted February 19, 2009 Exactly, a GE provided system might not be such a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share #71 Posted February 19, 2009 GE power system would be really advanced, reliable, home grown, and if it ends up being corrugated like the arrow 3 you could call it a GE toaster!:cool::eek: - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R44 5278 Posted February 19, 2009 Share #72 Posted February 19, 2009 Reliable? Really? I've lost trust in GE since my water cooler leaked and flooded my house. Also, my A/C system in the house has broken down only after a decade of installment. GE is not reliable. For propulsion system, I'd rather have Alstom, Westinghouse/Adtranz, or Siemens do the job. Not that I don't have any American pride, but it's just not like that anymore. Just look at what GE did with the last R32 set and the R38 sets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaback9 Posted February 19, 2009 Share #73 Posted February 19, 2009 GE house appliances and GE locomotives are two different things the current GEVO units the Genesis and the Dash 8 and 9 series are all top of the line locomotives that yes have their problems but nothing that is to hard or a pain to fix and for the most part the customers seem satisfied otherwise why would GE be the #1 primemover builder in the US. You want Alstom? Ever hear of an enigne called the PL42AC? That thing has been a problem child for transit since the outset. Siemens would be nice to see them come up with something but I'm not sure they will bite knowing its a one time deal. Adtranz is part of Bombardier now so I guess were looking at an M8 variant or something completely new from them for transit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share #74 Posted February 19, 2009 Reliable? Really? I've lost trust in GE since my water cooler leaked and flooded my house. Also, my A/C system in the house has broken down only after a decade of installment. GE is not reliable. For propulsion system, I'd rather have Alstom, Westinghouse/Adtranz, or Siemens do the job. Not that I don't have any American pride, but it's just not like that anymore. Just look at what GE did with the last R32 set and the R38 sets. I hope you're kidding about alstom. Their (NJT) stuff has been a disaster. Water heaters have nothing to do with traction motors & tration control systems. GE has been in the motor biz for a LONG time, and amtrak alone has hundreds of GE locomotives. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_GE_locomotives#Passenger_locomotives So, my point, is to have bomb build them in vermont, using in house carbodies, and GE power system. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaback9 Posted February 19, 2009 Share #75 Posted February 19, 2009 Bombardier got rid of their Vermont shop! They would need to lease out space at one of the remaining facilities of a competitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.