MNRR Joint EMU Procurement with LIRR - Alt/Successor to EMU

While searching this regarding acquisition of shuttle/switcher locomotives based on a post in the M8 thread, I came across this (Page 89(92)):

http://www.mta.info/mta/pdf/CP/ProposedProgram.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

EMU Replacement – 30 Cars
Funding is allocated in this project to purchase 30 EMU cars for service on the Hudson, Harlem, or New Haven Line. The exact procurement will be based on a rolling stock strategy currently under development jointly with Long Island Rail Road. Total cost for this proposed 2010-2014 Capital Program project is $100 million.

Which led me to this:

http://www.mta.info/lirr/about/Procurem" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... -RFI-6.pdf

MTA COMMUTER RAIL CAR PROCUREMENT (M-9 EMU's AND ALTERNATE CONFIGURATION CARS)

As a follow up to the Railroads' previously issued Supplemental Request for Information ("SRFf") No. 81908, Metro-North Railroad ("Metro-North") seeks input from carbuilders as to whether alternate configuration cars (that is, other than married pair M-9 EMU's) would best meet the Metro-North's rolling stock needs which are currently projected to be fulfilled by the forthcoming MTA Commuter Rail Car procurement, The major concern for Metro-North with married pair EMU's is meeting future seating capacity requirements, while operating in an increasingly restricted operating environment at Grand Central Terminal. Based upon prior designs, it appears that the maximum number of seats that can be expected in a married pair car is approximately 105 seats per car.

As part of the Rail Car procurement Metro-North shall also be soliciting proposals for single car EMU's (with and without propulsion), as a means of optimizing available seating capacity and increasing operating flexibility. Metro-North will also be soliciting proposals for locomotives and coaches, especially multi-level coaches, as alternatives to the married pair and single M-9 Cars. AC/DC dual mode and DC/Diesel dual mode locomotive are of interest to Metro-North.

Accordingly, Metro-North requests concise RFI responses addressing whether carbuilders have interest. and capacity to provide locomotive/coach consists, preferably based upon existing units whose designs can be adapted to the requirements of the Metro-North's Harlem and Hudson Lines. A response is requested no later than September 30, 2011. Metro-North intends to discuss this issue at the carbuilder meetings to be scheduled in response to this SRFI issued on September 4, 2011.

I was surprised that they were looking at alternatives to M9's. Everything I've read in the past indicated multi-levels were out. I would assume they'd be looking for P32 replacements, of course.

"Single cars" wasn't a surprise, nor was "with or without propulsion", based on the trailer/single M8 cars ordered. My assumption would be given the reference to M9's, and the timing of the additional M8 order of 25 cars, the two are not related except in concept.

Any thoughts as to what they are looking at, and what's going on here?

Interesting stuff, MNR seems to be open to the idea of dual electric mode locomotives(DC/AC), as well as the dual mode DC/diesel locomotives. That would make it easier to add coaches to the consists than having to mix and match pairs and single EMUs.

As far as the single EMU M8s, I'll guess we'll see, I mean they thought that the triplets would be a good idea. Time will tell.

Have they considered purchasing ALP 45's?

morris&essex4ever wrote:Have they considered purchasing ALP 45's?

ALP45 is good for everything but running into GCT... (if it can be adapted to have a 3rd rail capability then your golden also no catenary south of pelham on the NHL)

Adding third railgear to a ALP45dp would raise the weight of Locomotive far beyond the weight capacity of park avenue viaduct.
even a Genesis can not run with full 2200 Gallons of Fuel and is restricted to 2000 Gallons.

RearOfSignal wrote:Interesting stuff, MNR seems to be open to the idea of dual electric mode locomotives(DC/AC), as well as the dual mode DC/diesel locomotives. That would make it easier to add coaches to the consists than having to mix and match pairs and single EMUs.

As far as the single EMU M8s, I'll guess we'll see, I mean they thought that the triplets would be a good idea. Time will tell.

Has anyone, anywhere built an AC/DC, overhead/3rd rail dual mode electric locomotive since GE delivered the EP5s to the New Haven in 1955?

Considering that the max seating capacity for the end door Shoreliner coaches is 130 passengers it might make sense for them to equip more of the express runs with new models of those cars pulled/bracketed by whatever dual mode/3rd rail electric loco MNRR decides on. The drawback, of course, being the not-so-quick loading and unloading times at each stop for end door equipment without the added center door, but if they're not making each and every stop it shouldn't be a problem. Since they mentioned the possibility of "trailer" EMU's perhaps they could make a non-powered coach car version of the M-7 that would have comparable seating capacity as the Shoreliners to use with the *hypothetical* dual mode and/or electric locos.

with all the Fancy Electronics we have now i am surprised cant do all mode all rail loco yet

lets stick to facts, not to what is possible and should MNCR get in dream stuff.

Hey Dutch, saw this over in the NJ Bi-Level EMU topic:

DutchRailnut wrote:No they did not, but Multi levels ala NJT are still being studied at MNCR engineering with Dutch MDDM as sample Power car.

The M-9a will be DC only, and pretty much be like M-3a was to M-1a, so basicly a improved and upgraded M-7a

Would any M-9's have dual shoes for inter-operability with LIRR?

What program would an MNRR bi-level program fall under, an M-10?

We are way to far from designing a car to speculate on what type of shoe mechanism it will have.
my expectration is in long run MNCR and LIRR will go with a single type of mechanism like on the M-8.
Which can be used on either third rail. not so much for interchangability but for simplifying purchasing and parts.

I'm hoping that the M-9 series is the All Bar-Car Fleet. Not only would revenue increase, but ridership as well.

-otto-

You could start that with delivery 301 of the M8 fleet for that!

there would not be M9- or M-11 bar cars, as Harlem and Hudson do not use Bar cars only bar service before boarding.
as for M-8's thanks for going off topic.

DutchRailnut wrote: as for M-8's thanks for going off topic.

You're welcome. The allusion was to OV's bar car remark, and the fact that yes, they would not run on the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad. Therefore, they'd have to be 8''s.