Silverliner V

tinmad dog wrote:I liked the bit about allowing clearance for the 3rd rail in penn station, as if SEPTA will ever operate to there again.

SEPTA equipment still does operate to PSNY: once a year, as Amtrak Holiday Specials. SEPTA would be foolish to forfeit the income, however paltry, from leasing its cars to Amtrak two days a year.

Silverliner II wrote:When the Airport trains only went as far as Temple U, SEPTA did a reasonably good job at keeping these cars captive to the Airport Line. As later schedule changes merged runs and routes to get the most trips with the least amount of equipment possible, the through-routing of the Airport trains to various Reading-side points (currently Glenside/Warminster weekdays, and Warminster/West Trenton weekends) made it impossible to keep dedicated equipment on the line. And unless they go back to the old way, that is still the case today.

I think the through-routing of Airport trains to Warminster predated SEPTA's dedicating a portion of the fleet to Airport service.

And a coupla years ago, SEPTA took a half-hour of slack out of the Warminster layover and turned back the former Glenside trains at Roberts, thus saving a train and crew.

CComMack wrote:SEPTA equipment still does operate to PSNY: once a year, as Amtrak Holiday Specials. SEPTA would be foolish to forfeit the income, however paltry, from leasing its cars to Amtrak two days a year.

And it makes sense to make the equipment PSNY-compatible to facilitate its use in a mass evacuation of New York (which of course we hope will never be necessary).

Bids have to be submitted by December 2nd.

I found of intrest Item 1.15 (Car Numbers) and Item 1.16 (Train Consist Operational Compatibility). I also found something really interesting regarding equipment compatibility.

These items are on Page 21 (of 596) of the proposal. The document is in .pdf format.

http://www.septa.org/business/over25000 ... _05_r0.pdf

If anybody can't access the file, here is the text of the pertinent two sections:

1.15 CAR NUMBERS
Single cars shall be numbered consecutively, starting with 701. Married pairs shall be numbered consecutively, starting with 801. "B" cars shall carry odd numbers while "A" cars shall carry even numbers.

1.16 TRAIN CONSIST OPERATIONAL COMPATIBILITY
Silverliner V cars shall be capable of fully-functional operation in dedicated Silverliner V train consists, and shall be capable of operation with other equipment types at a reduced level of functionality. Details are described below:

Train consists comprised exclusively of Silverliner V cars: The cars shall be fully compatible for normal operation in trains of up to 12 cars, made up in any combination of single and married pair cars, coupled in any orientation. While expected normal train consists will not generally exceed 6 cars, this will permit one disabled train to couple to another train, and also for regular shop movements of empty trains.

Mixed Silverliner V and Silverliner IV train consists: SEPTA will continue to operate its fleet of single and married-pair Silverliner IV electric multiple-unit cars, built by the General Electric Company in 1974-1976. The Silverliner V car shall be capable of operating in the same train consist with Silverliner IV cars. There is no intention to routinely operate Silverliner V and Silverliner IV cars together in normal revenue service in mixed consists. This capability will instead be used for emergency rescue of a disabled train with passengers, and also for regular shop movements of empty trains.

Mechanical coupler systems, pneumatic systems and necessary electrical trainlines on the Silverliner V cars shall be completely compatible and fully operational with the corresponding systems on the Silverliner IV cars without use of any adapters. The Silverliner IV cars are equipped with a WABCO Transit Division model N-2-A coupler and New York Air Brake Company PS-68 brake control. Coupler and pneumatic compatibility features of the Silverliner V shall be subject to approval by the Engineer.
A level of trainline control compatibility shall be provided between the Silverliner V and Silverliner IV cars sufficient to provide the Operator with full propulsion and braking control of the train, plus fully operable communications buzzer and crew intercom systems, regardless of which type car is in the lead. Trainline control and functions applicable to the case of mixed Silverliner V and Silverliner IV consists shall be subject to approval by the Engineer.

Locomotive-hauled operation: The cars shall be fully compatible for unlimited duration movement when locomotive-hauled, or coupled to conventional freight cars as in a freight train. The cars shall be provided with an appropriate coupler adapter to connect to an Association of American Railroads knuckle coupler, and equipped with a permanently connected brake pipe hose. Hose orientation shall be similar to the arrangement used on the Silverliner IV cars and shall use the identical style hose. Additional details are provided in Sections 4 and 12.

Weren't they talking about retrofitting new couplers to the Silverliner IVs--whatever coupler is selected for the Silverliner V?

Matthew Mitchell wrote:Weren't they talking about retrofitting new couplers to the Silverliner IVs--whatever coupler is selected for the Silverliner V?

Yes, they were.

SEPTA mum on bids for railcars

The agency wouldn't say who offered proposals to build 104 railcars in a round of bidding prompted by a suit settlement.

Nearly two years after its first try dissolved in controversy and litigation, SEPTA has resumed its search for a company to build a fleet of regional railcars. However, SEPTA has decided not to disclose who is bidding for the work. It won't even say how many firms are seeking what is expected to be a $250 million contract. The bidding deadline for a contract to design and assemble at least 104 stainless-steel railcars passed late yesterday afternoon... SEPTA spokesman Maloney said that once the contract is awarded, a pilot car will be due from the manufacturer in 910 days. All of the new cars are expected to be in service by the summer of 2009, he said.

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/13316256.htm

*pulls bushes apart and pokes head out*

Interesting.....veddy interesting.....

*withdraws head and lets the bushes close*

Inky reporter wrote:Tomar said Kawasaki built cars for SEPTA twice in the past

Yeah, but not for regional rail. Kawasaki's got a track record for building push-pull commuter cars in the USA, but not commuter EMUs, so that'd be new territory for them. A competitor of theirs, Nippon-Sharyo, built single-deck EMUs for Indiana's South Shore Line (NICTD) and double-deck EMUs for the Metra Electric (IC) lines...

I don't think it's a huge step, though - they've built hundreds of subway cars for NYC, they're obviously capable of building commuter stuff. The propulsion systems are going to be sourced from Mistbishi, ABB, Alstom, or whomever....

Propulsionwise, it might be in SEPTA's interests to do a study on the first few sets to see how often those braking resistors are actually used, and I bet it won't be very often at all, provided they can regen into the catenary. There's a few thousand pounds and a maintenance headache / fire hazzard that could be deleted....

It'll be fun watching where these cars come in on the scales - Septa's had trouble here before.

Oh yeah, and just GIVE the darn contract to KRC since they're going to whine/sue if BBD or anyone else gets it...

Nasadowsk wrote:Oh yeah, and just GIVE the darn contract to KRC since they're going to whine/sue if BBD or anyone else gets it...

I wouldn't call their action last year "whining." They had a darn good case. SEPTA changed the qualifications in a way that made Rotem eligible, then didn't reopen the bidding. Thus other companies that would not have met the initial criteria didn't get a chance to get in after the criteria were changed. You might say that wouldn't have affected Kawasaki, but they may well have offered a lower price in their bid if they knew that certain competitors would be eligible instead of ineligible.

I was very impressed with Rotem after seeing their display at the International Transit EXPO in Dallas back in September. They have really invested themselves into the goal of cracking the U.S. market, and based on the wealth of promotional material they gave out (each visitor to their booth--which included a full-scale mockup of the front end of a railcar--received a bag with literature that was over an inch thick), their products look technically capable. Their biggest drawback, clearly, is the relative youth of the company, but I'm curious to see what they can do.

http://www.rotem.co.kr/

Heard thru my sources at 1234 that only Kawasaki and Rotem bid on the new car contract.

Very interesting. I can't imagine contractors being eager to work with SEPTA after what happened to one of the contractors on the Market St Elevated reconstruction project.

SEPTA doesn't have the facilities to build their own EMUs, so they'd have to rely on contractors...