A snippet from the article: … American Railcar announced the formation Thursday of a joint venture with Columbus, Ohio-based US Railcar LLC. The venture, to be called US Railcar Co., will design, manufacture and sell medium-speed passenger railcars that will travel between 70 and 90 mph. “We were looking for ways to diversify our business,” American Railcar Chief Financial Officer Dale Davies told the Business Journal. “And it’s a unique opportunity because the government is sponsoring so many grants.” … http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2010/02/15/daily48.htm
Does not make sense. AMTRAK wants all replacement cars to be 125 - 135 MPH cars according to their fleet plan report. That along with commuter agencies being able to piggyback car orders onto the AMTRAK orders thereby getting a cost break. Also a a commuter agency I woul not want any equipment that could not operate on any future HSR route that may be built in the future. An example is Heritage equipment operated on the NEC long distance trains limited to 110 MPH schedules thereby gumming up the fluidity. AMTRAK fleet plan calls for replacing those NEC heritage cars first. Might be moved somewhere else.
Uh, oh. Do they have any expertise in this area? Sounds like they are looking at commuter rail sales. Is there room in the market for another player? This does not sound like an outfit I’d want stock in…
US Railcar is the same outfit that bought the assets and designs of the defunct Colorado Railcar so I assume the announcement refers to Diesel Multiple Units(DMUs) rather than Amtrak coaches…
I will have to retract my earlier post. The original item that OldArmy94 used listed the speeds as 70 - 90 MPH. The above link to usrailcar states that US rail car has plans to offer 90 MPH DMU with upgrades to offer an 125 MPH DMU. These DMUs can really develop services. One item needed is the ability for these DMUs to connect to present and future single and bi-level equipment…The future looking front end may be nice looking but not very operationally flexible. ( remember BART quit ordering those fancy fronts).
There are the obvious abilities to break off a DMU from a train to fill in to an obscure destination.
1. Pennsylvanian or other train drops DMU that can carry passengers to state college.
2. Southwest Chief drop DMU at Trinidad for it to continue to Denver.connecting to Cal Z and continuing to Cheyenne. Albuqueque to go to ElPaso.
3. Empire builder: MKE - Green Bay; MSP - Rochester - LaCrosse.
4. NEC: split at New Haven - Springfield - BOS north station - join Downeaster.
5. Cardinal: Cin - Louisville - St. Louis
6. Cresent: Meredian - Jackson - Shreveport - Dallas: Birmingham - Memphis++ Atlanta - Montgomery - Mobile
7. Silver Star: Columbia - Charlotte attaches to Carolinian (Phoebee how do you like that one?)
Palmetto or other train: Either Selma or Wilson - Goldsboro - Morehead City/ Wilmi
Not so bad, then.
Colorado Railcar spent the better part of five years trying to sell their product to every commuter railroad and transit agency in business. They didn’t have a whole lot of success… I had a inspect the DMU when it was touring Texas, and it looked about as durable as a $80K motorhome on flanges…
Maybe it looked that way, but it met FRA crash regs.
So, it met FRA crash standards – doesn’t mean any of a number of things can break down.
So, “eolesen”, tell us more about what you observed? What about the DMU gave the impression that it wasn’t going to hold up?
Sounds like a “rédux” (is that a proper word? I can’t find it in my little French dictionary) of the EMD E-7 (?) B-units, the ones that had a quasi-cab, operated by the Rock Island. Doesn’t Tri-Rail (Miami, etc.) have a cabless unit in their DMU fleet, running in 3-car lash-ups?
Hays
The State of Ohio wants to buy their DMU’s for the 3-C plus 2 service. (Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati via Springfield and Dayton.)
While I agree with a lot of what is said here, I have some reservations.
[quote user=“blue streak 1”]
There are the obvious abilities to break off a DMU from a train to fill in to an obscure destination.
Serious schedule reliability issues must be resolved; and that is more likely with greater distances and heavier traffic.
Furthermore, isn’t there some threshold for ridership and revenue to justify line improvement costs, even if the above-rail costs can be covered and less than for a locomotive-hauled train? I doubt one or two cars would make it on such a low-density low-frequency service.
Would splitting the train, adding and dropping a string of cars, be a reasonable alternative to introducing another type of equipment little market application?
1. Pennsylvanian or other train drops DMU that can carry passengers to state college.
Maybe; but maybe need multiple cars, at least on weekends.
What about clearances? Last I heard the DMU’s were bi-levels.
2. Southwest Chief drop DMU at Trinidad for it to continue to Denver.connecting to Cal Z and continuing to Cheyenne. Albuqueque to go to ElPaso.
What’s the demand for long-distance space and car supply on the Southwest? DMU riders would be isolated from diner and lounge amenities.
3. Empire builder: MKE - Green Bay; MSP - Rochester - LaCrosse.
Similar as for Southwest; but Green Bay has different time-specific demand than for the Coast, has potential for a separate train, and needs more frequencies.
4. NEC: split at New Haven - Springfield - BOS north station - join Downeaster.
Totally different equipment - would be case for coupling a pair of Acela-type corridor trains. What about clearances
5. Cardinal: Cin - Louisville - St. Louis
I’m not sure of the particulars, but RI ran one of its Minneapolis-Texas trains with an RDC in the consist to cover the south end of the schedule by itself. The RDC had to be towed with its engines running in order to activate the wheel-slip control on the RDC and to provide HVAC and lighting for the car. NYC also towed RDC’s behind MU cars on some longer suburban runs to cover the run beyond the end of third rail.
In addition to NYC towing RDCs behind MU cars between GCT and North White Plains (about 24 miles), they also hooked them onto loco-hauled trains from/to Brewster (about 50 miles) to service the Upper Harlem Division. Later, when M-NR electrified to Brewster, there was across-the-platform transfers with the RDCs there. They never shut them down in GCT and ran them around one of the loop tracks to exit north. A bit of a simplified explaination, but…
Hays
Some answers using Amtrak information as a source.
1.The Amtrak fleet plan says that both single level that meet eastern clearance gauges and bi-levels from Colorado Railcar have passed vetting. Assume these and other specifications.
-
DMUs would be fully compatible with 480 HEP and would automatically switch to such when HEP power is energized thru trainline power cords.Then DMU’s diesel could be turned off. Whe In a train consist DMU could be started when arriving at split off station
-
DMUs operate on same 27 point connectors that locomotives do.
-
DMUs built to allow passengers to pass thru to other equipment either single or Bi-level. None of the fancy streamlining that we see like on Tri-Rail. Even BART realized its folly and no longer orders control cabs with streamlining.
-
Amtrak states that a 4 car train is the breakover point to go to loco hauled from DMUs
-
The problem of causing the southern long distance trains to exceed the 14 car train limitations of NYP may be solved by adding/removing the DMUs either PHL or WASH where there are very long platforms. This is similar to how C&O, SOU, ACL, SAL handled their trains south of Wash mainly. The problem of storage space at Ivy City has not been addressed yet that is reason for the PHL suggestion.
-
As stated for the conventional cars all the DMU’s appliances and car items would be the same specifications as the conventional cars.
-
Fully 125 MPH towed speed capable. / .
[quote user=“HarveyK400”]
While I agree with a lot of what is said her