All passenger cars that have traditional end of car vestibules and floor height that need to operate at high level and low level platforms have traps. Amfleet and Horizon cars are all this way.
The exceptions would be Gallery cars that have mid-car doors that straddle the center sill and Superliner/California Cars that are of a well design and have low platform height doors.
The original Metroliner cars did not have traps and could only stop at high level platforms. The Budd M1, M2 et. al. had center doors and needed high level platforms.
Septa’s new Silverliner Vs have bizzare mid-car doors that can work both high level and low level platforms.
It would seem that high level platforms are the ideal except they preclude Gallery cars, Superliners and Talgo equipment completely.
Note on opening side by side vestibule doors: there is a vestibule at only one end of some cars therefore it would behoov the yardmaster or whoever makes up a train to see that makeup would have the doors together if possible.
And yes, commuter equipment, Heritage equipment, and contemporary inter city equipment are breeds apart in many ways.
Hi-level platforms do not preclude the use of bi-level gallery coaches. IC/Metra has had them in service as electric MU cars since 1972 and South Shore’s 300-series cars are gallery coaches.
Probably not. The floor level on Metra’s gallery coaches is lower than the standard floor level. The difference is noticeable as you walk between cars since you step up to the diaphragm as you leave the car and then step down as you enter the next car. On the IC MU coaches, there is a short ramp from the center vestibule to the floor of the coach.
There is no restriction on push-pull , not even for high speed.
the FRA rules for Tier II (high speed) do however require a unoccupied(passengers) on head end as shield vehicle.
A Acela with a dead power car can still run at full speed as long as all other equipment works.
The X-2000 was not considered a viable candidate unless a unoccupied cab car or second power car was used.
The ACELA was designed so one power car could move train at normal service speeds even if other power car was dead and even if later 4 more cars were added to consist.
Thanks for the information. So, theoretically, if Acela ran push-pull, the leading cab car has to be vacant? When MARC runs its HHP-8 on the NEC to 120+ MPH, if the HHP-8 is pushing, is that lead cab car devoid of passengers, too?
And since our discussion drifted to doors, I have to say that I dislike the high-platform-only, mid-car doors on Metro-North and the horribly tiny, miniature, car-end doors for low platforms. I almost missed a stop not knowing anything about the special push button at the end of the car and the suicidally steep stairs on those car-end doors. Can’t they all have center doors that can handle low and high platforms? Feh!!
No one seems to have mentioned that the Amtrak Cascades Talgo trainsets operating between Eugene, OR and Vancouver, B.C. are operated in a push-pull configuration, with de-powered F40s used as cab-cars and F59s as power (usually; sometimes a Genesis).
If I remember correctly, and I rode them, both the United Aircraft Turbotrain and the Rohr French design were not push-pull but definitely had power cars on both ends. Other lightweights, like the current Talgo, the GM train, and the New Haven Roger Williams were neither push-pull nor dual-direction. The Budd Daniel Webster was mu-diesel and bidirectional .
My understanding also is that the latest Frrench high speed trains have traction motors under several cars other than the front and rear units, that the tractive effort is distributred through the train rather than concentrated at the ends. Similar to mu operaton, and many interurban lines and rapid trainsit lines did have “non-driving motors” as well as “control trailers.”