Jump to content

Procurement of more gallery cars


Busjack

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, maths22 said:

Is the statement here: http://chicagorailfan.com/rosmetcb.html (at the bottom) no longer accurate then?  Are the BNSF cars electrically compatible with the other lines?

I thought it was updated that they were, based on the BNSF lines getting some 6000s and 8500s, but that seems to indicate the opposite direction for modification (which wouldn't make sense). The 400 series of locomotives have run elsewhere, such as Ollie Tibbels starting on the BNSF but also having been sent to the Milw N. Clearly the 480 volt power comes from the locomotive.

The specs for the new cars say that they have to be compatible with everything, including 700s and 800s. The only reference I saw to particular railroads was that the cab signal system had to cover the different signal systems on the BNSF, RI, and various UP lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, artthouwill said:

At that time,  each RR ran its own commuter lines.   Now Metra is responsible for the service and equipment with Metra only outsourcing the BNSF and UP lines.

But did Metra then use the Burlington anti-telescoping requirements for new coaches? Is that why all the Metra coaches except the old C&NW green & yellow ones aren't used there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, strictures said:

But did Metra then use the Burlington anti-telescoping requirements for new coaches? Is that why all the Metra coaches except the old C&NW green & yellow ones aren't used there?

You can look at the link math posted and figure it out. My reading is that they did not, but read them for yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Everything is compatible. BNSF cars are in use on some SWS trains, Looks like Metra has been playing CTA lately. Many higher 8500s from BNSF are on the Milwaukee, UP has some of the Milwaukee 8500s, some of the UP 6000 and 8400 have found their way to the Milwaukee too. Also, there was a Pullman on a Heritage train this afternoon. Many 8200s (old cab cars) have been rehabbed, so they should be around for awhile (thank God !)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, trainman8119 said:

Everything is compatible. BNSF cars are in use on some SWS trains, Looks like Metra has been playing CTA lately. Many higher 8500s from BNSF are on the Milwaukee, UP has some of the Milwaukee 8500s, some of the UP 6000 and 8400 have found their way to the Milwaukee too. Also, there was a Pullman on a Heritage train this afternoon. Many 8200s (old cab cars) have been rehabbed, so they should be around for awhile (thank God !)

Besides #8580, have there been any cars from other routes that made their way to the RI? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
4 minutes ago, transit kid 12 said:

Has Metra ever even considered single-level cars? UTA has some comet cars. On most trains there is one comet and three bombardier cars, and their passengers say the like the overall setup of the comets better.

This requisition is for cars compatible back to the 700s, so no.

Also, it was pointed out that with most bilevel trains already blocking crossings when stopped at stations, going to single level cars would not work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I still dont understand why metra doesnt consider the trilevel design or a lower level bilevel.   There are other designs than the barbardier tri levels if they are worried about the structure.

 

He big step of the 1960s gallery cars is difficult to board with high step.  Yeah wheelchairs have a lift but its slow time consuming and labor intensive.  Also for folks older with a bum knee or with packages luggage the steps are difficult

 

CMAP 2040 calls for vehicles with better passenger amenities and conveniences.  Why doesnt metra just play along and at least test a train set.  Its like when they fought bikes on board trains

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, west towns said:

I still dont understand why metra doesnt consider the trilevel design or a lower level bilevel.   There are other designs than the barbardier tri levels if they are worried about the structure.

 

He big step of the 1960s gallery cars is difficult to board with high step.  Yeah wheelchairs have a lift but its slow time consuming and labor intensive.  Also for folks older with a bum knee or with packages luggage the steps are difficult

 

CMAP 2040 calls for vehicles with better passenger amenities and conveniences.  Why doesnt metra just play along and at least test a train set.  Its like when they fought bikes on board trains

 

I guess you did not read the spec that this has to be compatible with all prior Metra cars. It looks like Metra does not want to run mixed train sets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats the problem .  Metra does not want to change.   There can be a mixed fleet as ibe said in past amtrak runs superli ers and low level fleets so mixed fleets can work 

 The excuse  metra needs only one type of equipment doesnt hd water as the electric equipment only stays on electric so they do have dedicated fleetd.  They just dont want to change to better serve passengers

  No innovation

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, west towns said:

Thats the problem .  Metra does not want to change.   There can be a mixed fleet as ibe said in past amtrak runs superli ers and low level fleets so mixed fleets can work 

 The excuse  metra needs only one type of equipment doesnt hd water as the electric equipment only stays on electric so they do have dedicated fleetd.  They just dont want to change to better serve passengers

  No innovation

 

The electric district has different equipment simply because it was the only electrified line when Metra took it over, making unique equipment a necessity. Your analogy fails because electric and diesel equipment aren't run on the same trains, which there is no practical way to do anyway. It's been said many times on this forum that less variety of equipment saves money on maintenance costs. Specifying new cars must be compatible with existing ones, especially when capital funds to buy them are scarce, doesn't indicate "no innovation".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong,  but compatibility is mostly related to couplings,  and electrical issues.   Obviously the old lounge cars were single level and ran with the bilevel cars.  Could a trilevel car work?   Possibly,  if the cars height fits in with the other cars.  Then there's the capacity issue of if the composition of crews needs altering.   Trilevels would need their own parts stock,  which increases costs.   Personally,  the only way I consider it is on a new start service,  such as Southeast Service, if it ever comes to be.  Honestly a trilevelb is a mixture of a single level and a bilevel in the same car.  Look at the Twin Cities MetroTransit North Star cars as an example.   Thus honestly a trilevel really doesn't work on most Metra lines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

 Could a trilevel car work?   Possibly,  if the cars height fits in with the other cars.

If you are suggesting a Bombardier car (clearly not a trilevel) those are just pop cans, and don't offer any capacity increase. This claims 136, which is about the same as a Metra car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a slightly off-topic question.

Why do you have to step up from the platform to the first step of the gallery cars at Ogilvie?

It's not like anyone is going to be running oversized freight equipment through there!

Why hasn't the platform been raised up to the level of the first step. It would sure make unloading faster.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/5/2016 at 0:28 AM, Pace831 said:

The electric district has different equipment simply because it was the only electrified line when Metra took it over, making unique equipment a necessity. Your analogy fails because electric and diesel equipment aren't run on the same trains, which there is no practical way to do anyway. It's been said many times on this forum that less variety of equipment saves money on maintenance costs. Specifying new cars must be compatible with existing ones, especially when capital funds to buy them are scarce, doesn't indicate "no innovation".

Scarce capital funds didnt stop metra from planning the boondoggle starline it had its own decicated fleet of dmus.  So that arguement doesnt work.  Metra was gung ho with star line and had all the communities believing the man behind  the curtain.  What a waste in time and funding.  Glad to see pace is doing something real in the corridor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also its not just capacity of new car but amenities

   The high step of the galery cars is a killer for those with bad knees or with luggage and stollers and bags.  My point is metra is fixated on a 1960s design built in a passenger be damned rsilroad era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, west towns said:

Also its not just capacity of new car but amenities

   The high step of the galery cars is a killer for those with bad knees or with luggage and stollers and bags.  My point is metra is fixated on a 1960s design built in a passenger be damned rsilroad era.

Then why don't you offer to Oberman to take over Orseno's job?

 

25 minutes ago, west towns said:

Scarce capital funds didnt stop metra from planning the boondoggle starline it had its own decicated fleet of dmus.  

Which might have escaped you that that project is as dead as about everything under the 2006 bill, or the Tollway and Pace would not have entered into the I-90 project, including the part where you asked tonight where the construction was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, west towns said:

Scarce capital funds didnt stop metra from planning the boondoggle starline it had its own decicated fleet of dmus.  So that arguement doesnt work.  Metra was gung ho with star line and had all the communities believing the man behind  the curtain.  What a waste in time and funding.  Glad to see pace is doing something real in the corridor

That was 10 years ago, has since been deemed impractical, and Metra is now under new management with more expertise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im well aware of the I90 service plans having watched it over the yrs.  My issue was metra has and was planning for dedicated fleets so the standard fleet issue goes out the window.

 

Why doesnt metra test a trainset of low level equipment and see what the pubic thinks.  What are they afraid of. People will like them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, west towns said:

Im well aware of the I90 service plans having watched it over the yrs.  My issue was metra has and was planning for dedicated fleets so the standard fleet issue goes out the window.

 

Why doesnt metra test a trainset of low level equipment and see what the pubic thinks.  What are they afraid of. People will like them?

No, they are afraid they can't intertrain them  with the current fleet. Also, your "test" costs $4 million per car.

Also, the proposed and dead STAR line was never intended to interchange with other Metra lines.

Why don't you ask Metra itself, or ask NICTD why it doesn't intertrain 300s with other series?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Busjack said:

No, they are afraid they can't intertrain them  with the current fleet. Also, your "test" costs $4 million per car.

Also, the proposed and dead STAR line was never intended to interchange with other Metra lines.

Why don't you ask Metra itself, or ask NICTD why it doesn't intertrain 300s with other series?

Metra could've had a number of the two level cars with low boarding from Los Angeles a few years ago to at least test the concept out, when LA Metrolink decided to replace all their rolling stock & get coaches with a higher standard of anti-telescoping bracing, after the Chatsworth collision. They would be excellent for the UP North Line, as it has almost no freight service & is dual or triple track all the way to Waukegan. Plus the grade crossings on the UP North Line have little truck traffic, unlike the crossings in LA or on any of the other Metra lines around here. Metrolink uses the old SP line which is just a single track from the West San Fernando Valley to Oxnard, which is why the crash occurred at Chatsworth. Having ridden it, it's an odd ride to be on such a curving single track including the three tunnels between Chatsworth & Simi Valley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, strictures said:

They would be excellent for the UP North Line, as it has almost no freight service & is dual or triple track all the way to Waukegan.

Except that the UPN has almost all new cars.

Also, I see that this same topic was mentioned a couple of months ago, so west town's rehashing is not adding anything to the discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...