Colorado DMU questions

Discussion about RDC's, "doodlebugs," gas-electrics, etc.

Postby wigwagfan » Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:18 pm

miamicanes wrote:CRC's fault? AAR's fault? Random bad luck?


Not sure, details on it are virtually impossible to find and everyone is hush-hush as to what happened. My gut says, however, it was a case of random bad luck - especially as the car had been refurbished and converted from "demonstrator" to "revenue" configuration and painted for SFRTA, and was essentially en route to Florida after shakedown testing in Pueblo.

CRC is left without a known demonstrator unit, however I believe they might have an arrangement with SFRTA that allows CRC the use of their equipment for demonstration purposes should someone request it.
--------------------------------------------------
Erik Halstead - Portland, Oregon
User avatar
wigwagfan
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:57 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

DMU Cars Vermont

Postby RRBUFF » Wed Aug 09, 2006 10:06 am

In the Burlington Vermont Newspaper there is a story on a proposal from Amtrak to operate 5 DMU cars to replace the Vermonter from New Haven Ct. to St. Albans Vt.
RRBUFF
 
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Maine

Re: DMU Cars Vermont

Postby wigwagfan » Wed Aug 09, 2006 9:14 pm

RRBUFF wrote:In the Burlington Vermont Newspaper there is a story on a proposal from Amtrak to operate 5 DMU cars to replace the Vermonter from New Haven Ct. to St. Albans Vt.


See this thread on the Amtrak forum...
--------------------------------------------------
Erik Halstead - Portland, Oregon
User avatar
wigwagfan
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:57 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Postby matthewsaggie » Wed Aug 09, 2006 9:25 pm

I think that there is a good chance that we will be looking at DMU's for the north line here in Charlotte. Obviously, it will be a bid situation, so we won't know who's for a while. We are probably still 2 years away from that decision.
matthewsaggie
 
Posts: 457
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:11 pm
Location: Matthews NC

Postby railfanofewu » Wed Sep 27, 2006 12:07 am

I have noticed the problem with the CRC DMU as far as cab placement. They only seem to be on one end, so it would require the use of an un-powered trailer. The Budd could run in one-car trains, though.

Still, I like the DMU, and think we could use more of them. Last summer, I observed an Everett SOUNDER run with only two cars. If one of them had been a DMU, SOUNDER could have saved fuel considerably.
Bus and Rail fan of the Pacific Northwest
User avatar
railfanofewu
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 9:54 pm
Location: Seattle, Wa.

Postby wigwagfan » Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:56 am

railfanofewu wrote:I have noticed the problem with the CRC DMU as far as cab placement. They only seem to be on one end, so it would require the use of an un-powered trailer. The Budd could run in one-car trains, though.


Actually CRC will customize the DMU to buyer's spec. The TriMet cars will have cabs at both ends. In fact, TriMet's order is for three DMUs and one trailer, with two trains typically in operation. The hope is to later purchase a second trailer (it was actually part of the original plan, but cost overruns forced it to cut from the order) so that all trains are two cars, plus a spare. TriMet's cars will also have two doors per side (total of four doors).

Interestingly, the most recent pictures I've seen are of an Aero DMU - so going one way the train will have an Aero cab; the other way (since there are no turning facilities) will be a squared-off cab. I questioned that immediately to the Project Manager - using just a conventional car end at both ends will save money and increase capacity. Haven't gotten word from whether that will be implemented.
--------------------------------------------------
Erik Halstead - Portland, Oregon
User avatar
wigwagfan
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:57 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Postby railfanofewu » Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:11 pm

Nice to see that they can build to customer specs. I was thinking recently, with the tunnel option chosen to replace Highway 99's Alaskan Way Viaduct,(Same city that made Great Northern move it's trains off the waterfront and into a tunnel under Downtown built a double decker freeway, constructed by the lowest bidder, to block the Waterfront. That was in 1952. The Ideal X sailed in 1955 from Newark and changed shipping forever, making the piers and wharves on the Seattle Waterfront north of Washington Street obsolete.), vehicles on Colorado Railcar's will be needed up here.

There are three options being considered. The City prefers a tunnel with 6-lanes(to replace existing capacity), the state prefers a bigger elevated(current capacity, but with shoulders, and wider lanes), and Plan B for the city is a surface boulevard. All three will have traffic impacts, SOUNDER could use the up to 218 passenger capacity of the bi-level trailers(although Tri-Rail only carries 180, more legroom), to help take a bite out of I-5 traffic, which will get worse, no matter which option is chosen for the Viaduct. SOUNDER will be needed to fill the gap. Just like increasing the capacity of Metro Buses.
Bus and Rail fan of the Pacific Northwest
User avatar
railfanofewu
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 9:54 pm
Location: Seattle, Wa.

Postby mxdata » Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:08 pm

Looking at their website, there has been very little posted in the last six months. Does anybody have some up to date news of what is going on?
"We Repair No Locomotive Before Its Time"
User avatar
mxdata
 
Posts: 1677
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 4:30 pm

Postby railfanofewu » Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:38 pm

I noticed that too, and there have been many times they have gone without updates. That is strange.
Bus and Rail fan of the Pacific Northwest
User avatar
railfanofewu
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 9:54 pm
Location: Seattle, Wa.

Postby mxdata » Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:03 am

By the way, going back to the question asked on page 1 of the discussion by Sir Ray, I went back through my slides and notes from the 1970s and found a number of instances where Amtrak had Budd RDC's cut into a conventional locomotive powered train as a coach. In all the cases I found they were on the back of the train (had to be - no steam lines). Is it efficient to do this? Probably not, unless it is a ferry move. If I recall the systems on the RDC correctly, you would have to idle an engine to provide light and heat.
"We Repair No Locomotive Before Its Time"
User avatar
mxdata
 
Posts: 1677
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 4:30 pm

Postby wigwagfan » Sun Nov 19, 2006 1:48 am

railfanofewu wrote:I noticed that too, and there have been many times they have gone without updates. That is strange.


I'm very surprised that CRC hasn't publicly announced the order from TriMet. Would have figured it'd be something they would prop up.
--------------------------------------------------
Erik Halstead - Portland, Oregon
User avatar
wigwagfan
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:57 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Postby railfanofewu » Sun Nov 19, 2006 1:59 am

I find it odd that at first, the Oregonian did not put much in the paper about the order. One fan-site for certain Colorado Railcar products had the first news of it posted, and it was from the Beaverton Valley Times. Plus, there is also the possible order from the State of Vermont, currently in doubt(they ware waiting until the next session of the legislature), to run on one of their Amtrak Routes.
Bus and Rail fan of the Pacific Northwest
User avatar
railfanofewu
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 9:54 pm
Location: Seattle, Wa.

Postby mxdata » Fri Jan 12, 2007 11:27 pm

Still no updates on their website, very strange, you would think they would want people to know if they have projects they are working on.
"We Repair No Locomotive Before Its Time"
User avatar
mxdata
 
Posts: 1677
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 4:30 pm

Postby DutchRailnut » Fri Jan 12, 2007 11:32 pm

Plenty of news just no good news:

Commuter rail is too tall a test
By ERIC ANDERSON, Deputy business editor
Click byline for more stories by writer.
First published: Friday, January 12, 2007

ALBANY -- A double-deck commuter rail car operating in Florida won't undergo winter testing in upstate New York, as state officials had hoped.

That's because the rail car, at 19 feet 6 inches tall, would not fit under some bridges and in tunnels along the proposed route. The discovery came as officials of the state Senate High Speed Rail Task Force and the car's manufacturer, Colorado Rail Car Co. of Fort Lupton, Colo., met this week to discuss plans for a commuter rail demonstration project in the Capital Region.

The Federal Railroad Administration requires that two months of the two-year demonstration project for the double-deck car be conducted in winter conditions. Currently, the car is operating on a commuter line in the Miami area. The rail car contains its own diesel engine, eliminating the need for a separate locomotive.

John Egan, director of the task force, had envisioned using the train as a way to demonstrate the feasibility of commuter rail service between Saratoga Springs and the Rensselaer train station. The equipment also was being eyed for testing on the Adirondack rail line north to Montreal.

Florida officials said in October that Wisconsin, Vermont and a rail line north of Boston also were being considered for the winter testing.

Meanwhile, Egan's group is looking at the single-level versions of the diesel-powered passenger rail cars that Colorado Rail Car also produces, as well as the rebuilt turbotrains now in storage in an Amtrak rail yard outside Washington, D.C., for possible use in a commuter demonstration in the Capital Region.
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer
User avatar
DutchRailnut
 
Posts: 21228
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Postby railfanofewu » Sat Jan 13, 2007 1:00 am

I wonder, why did they even consider Albany for testing the vehicle in cold weather? Why not just go for Chicago, it might give them an idea what they might be looking for on the STAR Line.
Bus and Rail fan of the Pacific Northwest
User avatar
railfanofewu
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 9:54 pm
Location: Seattle, Wa.

PreviousNext

Return to Self-Propelled Railcars

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest