Double deckers

Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

Double deckers

Postby MBTA F40PH-2C 1050 » Mon Sep 20, 2004 7:36 pm

doesn't the T have an order for like 20 new double deckers for delivery in the next few years?
MBTA F40PH-2C 1050
 
Posts: 3498
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:57 pm

Postby Robert Paniagua » Tue Sep 21, 2004 6:18 am

Yeah they actually do, but not Cab coaches however, otherwisw the FRA will have to inspect those every three months, and the T doesn't want to have to put up with that headache.
~Robert Paniagua
Moderator: WMATA :: General Railroad Operations
User avatar
Robert Paniagua
 
Posts: 4418
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:11 am
Location: Weymouth, MA 02188

Postby Diverging Route » Tue Sep 21, 2004 7:21 am

According to NETransit, the 28 new bilevel trailer coaches to be delivered in 2005 will tentatively be numbered 782 to 809, and have restrooms. This means that "solid" bilevel trains will be possible, since now a 500- or 1500-series car must be on every train to provide a restroom.

http://members.aol.com/rtspcc/roster/MBTAroster.html
User avatar
Diverging Route
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 3:35 pm

Postby lstrong » Tue Sep 21, 2004 10:53 am

Are they able to use double-decker cars behind the engine? I thought there was a problem with the ventilation systems on the cars sucking in the engine exhaust. Will these new cars fix that problem?
lstrong
 

Postby octr202 » Tue Sep 21, 2004 1:58 pm

lstrong wrote:Are they able to use double-decker cars behind the engine? I thought there was a problem with the ventilation systems on the cars sucking in the engine exhaust. Will these new cars fix that problem?


I would hope that's not a problem, considering that there are so many commuter railroads that run full bi-level consists behind diesels, including ones that Kawasaki has made. But then again...this is T equipment...

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=70648
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=70215
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=76363
Wondering if I'll see the Haverhill double-tracking finished before I retire...
Photo: Melbourne W7 No. 1019 on Route 78, Bridge & Church Streets, Richmond, Victoria. 10/21/2010
User avatar
octr202
 
Posts: 4142
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 8:13 am
Location: In the land of the once and future 73 trackless trolley.

Postby jwhite07 » Tue Sep 21, 2004 5:45 pm

It was indeed a problem when the bilevel coaches were first used in service. The problem was that the ventilation intakes on the coaches are on top of the car, and when a bilevel was coupled directly to one of the "stretched" F40PH-2Cs, the exhaust from the small HEP engine was only a few feet away from the vent intakes on the bilevel. The exhaust was still far too concentrated when it got sucked into the coach, and it would simply overwhelm the capacity of the coach's air filtration system. Result - a smelly blue haze in the coach, especially in the Back Bay Tunnel.

The bilevels have since undergone modifications which pretty much eliminated the problem, and on rare occasions one can see a bilevel directly behind the engine. But the preferred practice remains of putting at least one single-level car between the locomotive and the first bilevel coach - it is a convenient, and I suppose aesthetic, place to position the "toilet car" in the train's consist.
User avatar
jwhite07
 
Posts: 1409
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:39 pm

Postby octr202 » Tue Sep 21, 2004 7:50 pm

Well, I stand corrected. I wonder if that's why Kawasaki changed the roof top design on the MARC and VRE cars, in order to help keep the exhaust out of the HVAC systems
Wondering if I'll see the Haverhill double-tracking finished before I retire...
Photo: Melbourne W7 No. 1019 on Route 78, Bridge & Church Streets, Richmond, Victoria. 10/21/2010
User avatar
octr202
 
Posts: 4142
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 8:13 am
Location: In the land of the once and future 73 trackless trolley.

Postby ST214 » Tue Sep 21, 2004 9:00 pm

I highly doubt they will be #'ed 782-809. I think they will be numbered 800-819 and possibly 900-919. Reason being is taht they are different from the other cars, and they will want them to be a different # series. I am gonna go with 900-919, that way, if they get more non-bathroom BTC's, they can be numbered from 782 all they way to 899.
Hoping for a rebirth of the Screamer fleet.
User avatar
ST214
 
Posts: 1472
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Cleveland Heights, OH

Postby Robert Paniagua » Wed Sep 22, 2004 6:09 am

Are they able to use double-decker cars behind the engine? I thought there was a problem with the ventilation systems on the cars sucking in the engine exhaust. Will these new cars fix that problem?

Actually believe it or not, they DID indeed run a Kawasaki bi-level right behind the engine on some Old Colony South Shore/Southeastern Mass trains (Kingston/Middleboro). Such happened to me when I was riding down to Braintree one time, and our KAW BL was right directly behind the locomotive, and it seemed that there were no problems as a result of that configuration. Also, there is no long tunnel stretch on the Old Colony Lines unlike the Attleboro/Stoughton/Framingham-Worcester/Franklin lines, which have to pass through the tunnelways, save for some Franklin trains that sometimes circumvent the Back Bay tunnels by going on the Fairmount route, and thus being able to probably use KAW's behind the engine as well.
~Robert Paniagua
Moderator: WMATA :: General Railroad Operations
User avatar
Robert Paniagua
 
Posts: 4418
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:11 am
Location: Weymouth, MA 02188

Postby CSX Conductor » Wed Sep 22, 2004 9:11 am

Robert, as Jonathon stated earlier, the bi-levels have been modified over the years so that there are no placement restrictions.


As far as avoiding the Back Bay tunnel by taking the Dorchester Branch, the negative side of that is that the Kawasakis are restricted to 10MPH (maybe even 5, I'll have to double-check the timetable) on the Columbia Road overpass.


On the subject of clearances, unless height clearances are raised, which they probably won't now that the electrification is complete, Kawasakis will not be able to go to TF Green if the Providence CR line is extended that far because they are not allowed past Providence due to height restrictions.
User avatar
CSX Conductor
 
Posts: 5458
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:04 am
Location: Boston, Mass

Postby octr202 » Wed Sep 22, 2004 9:32 am

Are there specific low clearences in RI on the NEC between Providence and TF Green, or is that just simply a convienent place to impose the restriction since they currently don't have any reason to go past there?
Wondering if I'll see the Haverhill double-tracking finished before I retire...
Photo: Melbourne W7 No. 1019 on Route 78, Bridge & Church Streets, Richmond, Victoria. 10/21/2010
User avatar
octr202
 
Posts: 4142
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 8:13 am
Location: In the land of the once and future 73 trackless trolley.

Postby ST214 » Wed Sep 22, 2004 9:14 pm

Last i heard, there is still a speed restriction for them at Bradford, but other than that, they are also clear on all Northside lines.
Hoping for a rebirth of the Screamer fleet.
User avatar
ST214
 
Posts: 1472
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Cleveland Heights, OH

Postby MBTA F40PH-2C 1050 » Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:43 pm

there are 4 new double deckers on the way over from Japan, they should be here in Boston by Dec. They have bathrooms and the venting system have been modified so that they will be abled to be behind locomotives
MBTA F40PH-2C 1050
 
Posts: 3498
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:57 pm

Postby Robert Paniagua » Thu Nov 04, 2004 6:31 am

Oh good, that's nice. 'Bout time we get some more, and I know for a fact that they'll be used in the Old Colony Kingston/Middleborough Lines as well.
~Robert Paniagua
Moderator: WMATA :: General Railroad Operations
User avatar
Robert Paniagua
 
Posts: 4418
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:11 am
Location: Weymouth, MA 02188

Postby bierhere » Thu Nov 04, 2004 10:06 am

I was on the Kawaskai site and I noticed that the MBTA is the only reailroad using the Double Deckers sitting 2-3 across. LIRR, MARC both seem to be using a 2-2 seating.

Is there a reason for the difference other than the MBTA trying to get greater capacity out of them?
bierhere
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 4:09 pm

Next

Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BigUglyCat and 11 guests