MLV EMU Procurement

Discussion related to New Jersey Transit rail and light rail operations.

Moderators: Tadman, nick11a, ACeInTheHole, Kaback9

Ken S.
Posts: 1624
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Whiting, NJ

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by Ken S. » Sun Aug 05, 2012 4:11 pm

DutchRailnut wrote:The Highliners and Metra equipment are 1500 DC and do not need transformers.
So there's no voltage changes or anything else that NJT has between the CSS&SB and IC systems?

DutchRailnut
Posts: 22272
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by DutchRailnut » Sun Aug 05, 2012 4:16 pm

nope
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer. I am not a moderator.

amtrakowitz
Posts: 1112
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 6:33 pm

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by amtrakowitz » Sun Aug 05, 2012 4:54 pm

DutchRailnut wrote:The Highliners and Metra equipment are 1500 DC and do not need transformers.
The new ones have AC traction motors, so they would need inverters though.
Fan Railer wrote:
Ken S. wrote:There's all this talk about transformer placement and stuff on these things. One question. How do they do all of this on the Highliner and Gallery MUs used by METRA and NICTD or am I missing something about those cars?
Those cars are regular double deck cars with sufficient underfloor clearance to mount equipment. Our cars have a much lower clearance under the floor, so I have no idea where they're going to shove all of the electrical equipment unless they plan to do away with some of the seating space.
Metra Electric (and NICTD) Highliners are also close to 16 feet in height above rail, whereas NJT MLV cars are 14' 6" with the special notched-off roof corners for clearance through the North River tunnels.

25Hz
Posts: 4624
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 4:06 pm
Location: Newtown, PA (or PATH towards WTC)

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by 25Hz » Mon Aug 06, 2012 6:21 am

Title should read: MLV EMU design contract official.

There is actually plenty of space under the seat section of a MLV floor, however the aisle section is like 4 inches above the rail. There's a thread that talks all about an EMU multilevel.

Transformer.... You'd need maybe 2 or 4 small ones.. Easily placed at the ends instead of the 2 rows of seats. Probably at the rear of the cab car. There is also space between the lower ceiling & the upper floor where you could put stuff. Lots of places to put all the needed components. The trick will be weight and balancing the weight fore/aft & to the sides.

It bears repeating: bomb has all of budd's designs. It would not be unreasonable to create a modern arrow with all the benefits of 35 years of technological advancements.

The only other option I can think of is NJT grabs some catenary only low platform capable M8 derivative, or they could try an all new design that works well for passengers & crew etc.
Next stop the square, journal square station next!

Patrick Boylan
Posts: 3469
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 1:44 pm
Location: Here is a stupid picture, pay attention to me. Burlington Township, NJ 08016

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by Patrick Boylan » Mon Aug 06, 2012 6:36 am

Although there may be space between the upper level passengers' feet and the lower level passengers' heads, is that the best place to have high voltage?

25Hz
Posts: 4624
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 4:06 pm
Location: Newtown, PA (or PATH towards WTC)

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by 25Hz » Mon Aug 06, 2012 6:54 am

This absolutely is for a multilevel power car, not converting existing or option fleet.

And on weight: you'd end up removing one HVAC system of the 2, since you'd need one end of the roof for the panto and dynamic brake grid. I also feel that there could be significant changes in roof end design, namely using lighter materials on the non-load bearing bulkheads and interior panels & on the roof itself. You could end up with a 2200 hp power car with less weight than a MLV cab car.

There is a lot of room under the cars at both ends. A re-designed truck with 2 or 4 motors (1 or 2 per axle) probably wouldnt weigh that much more.

In any case... The fact is a MLV based self propelled car is entirely feasable technologically. I wonder about cost. I also wonder about having so many coaches and dual modes with very little talk of system expansion. Perhaps that's the next big announcement? Cape may? West Trenton? Philipsburg? Water gap? That's what I sense anyways. This is the first of 2 shoes to drop.
Next stop the square, journal square station next!

25Hz
Posts: 4624
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 4:06 pm
Location: Newtown, PA (or PATH towards WTC)

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by 25Hz » Mon Aug 06, 2012 6:56 am

Patrick Boylan wrote:Although there may be space between the upper level passengers' feet and the lower level passengers' heads, is that the best place to have high voltage?
Technically it's all ready inches from people in the current fleet. I don't see a problem as long as the insulation isn't made in someone's basement as a hobby. :)

I was talking more secondary stuff, just using that space as an example of how much room there really is to work with.
Next stop the square, journal square station next!

Jersey_Mike
Posts: 4689
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:39 am
Location: CHARLES aka B&P JCT MP 95.9

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by Jersey_Mike » Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:07 am

::facepalms::

Wow, some people just refuse to learn. Is buying an M8 just to easy? It's like every tome NJT makes an equipment purchase decision these days they look around to make sure that nobody else has done anything remotely similar just so they can be....idk, different? Avant guard? With its fixation on cramming people into Penn Station with one seat rides and providing 2+2 seating you'd think that NJT was hard up for ridership and was doing everything it could to get people out of their cars. The truth is that with the congestion and costs associated with driving into the city, NJT doesn't have to pander. They can tell riders to change at Secaucas. They can tell riders to lose some weight and suck into the middle seat. Instead they throw away millions on overpriced custom equipment that will probably have severe reliability and operational issues.

Jtgshu
Posts: 11744
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:32 pm
Location: MP 39.1

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by Jtgshu » Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:50 am

25Hz wrote:This absolutely is for a multilevel power car, not converting existing or option fleet.

And on weight: you'd end up removing one HVAC system of the 2, since you'd need one end of the roof for the panto and dynamic brake grid. I also feel that there could be significant changes in roof end design, namely using lighter materials on the non-load bearing bulkheads and interior panels & on the roof itself. You could end up with a 2200 hp power car with less weight than a MLV cab car.

There is a lot of room under the cars at both ends. A re-designed truck with 2 or 4 motors (1 or 2 per axle) probably wouldnt weigh that much more.

In any case... The fact is a MLV based self propelled car is entirely feasable technologically. I wonder about cost. I also wonder about having so many coaches and dual modes with very little talk of system expansion. Perhaps that's the next big announcement? Cape may? West Trenton? Philipsburg? Water gap? That's what I sense anyways. This is the first of 2 shoes to drop.
Sure, just take off one HVAC unit. That gives lots of room! Who needs the HVAC unit on that end anyway?

Lighter materials on the "non-load bearing bulkheads" - the walls already shake like crazy quite often, making them lighter will make them shake less! riiight

There is some room hidden in the cars, and there is some space to work with, but not a whole heck of a lot. And under the lower level seats? Its a few inches - what good is that going to do?

I think you will see opposite ends of the mezzanine levels used for placement for various systems, as well as maybe loosing a row or two of seats on one side on the lower level especially for traction motor blowers or something like that.

Cape May? West Trenton? Huh? These cars would replace the Arrow 3 MUs, which there are now 229 of (remember 1308 went away!). Thats a HUGE chunk of the roster. If they can get this idea to work, they might be able to not have to do a 1:1 replacement. Get 100 power cars, and rebuild the Comet 3s and 4s. Thats more than 230 cars right there.

Who knows, but this is going to be interesting.....

it would be kind of cool to see them take one of the ML cars and then take all the parts they took off the 1308 and see if they could figure out a mock up!
On the RR, "believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see"
John, aka "JTGSHU" passed away on August 26, 2013. We honor his memory and his devotion to railroading at railroad.net.

lirr42
Posts: 2726
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: Montauk, NY (MP 115.8)

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by lirr42 » Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:18 am

Jersey_Mike wrote:Wow, some people just refuse to learn. Is buying an M8 just to easy? It's like every tome NJT makes an equipment purchase decision these days they look around to make sure that nobody else has done anything remotely similar just so they can be....idk, different?
M8's would be a waste on NJT. What would NJT want with third rail shoes and all their related equipment? It would just be wasted space and wasted weight.

And the M8's are high-level only, so that means they can only be used on...what, the Northeast Corridor between Penn and Trenton? (and not Jersey Avenue and not Hoboken).

And that isn't a waste? I'd rather see NJT "throw away millions on overpriced custom equipment that will probably have severe reliability and operational issues" that can be used on more than one line...

Jersey_Mike
Posts: 4689
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:39 am
Location: CHARLES aka B&P JCT MP 95.9

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by Jersey_Mike » Mon Aug 06, 2012 10:02 am

Yes of course it would be an AC-only M8 with SL-V style doors. Even with modifications we know Kawasaki won't screw it up as they have a consistent track record of making good MU products. NJT needs plain old conventional MU trains for its all stops local services. This shouldn't be hard as a perfectly cromulent design already exists.

ACeInTheHole
Posts: 2786
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 10:31 pm

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by ACeInTheHole » Mon Aug 06, 2012 10:35 am

Jersey_Mike wrote:Yes of course it would be an AC-only M8 with SL-V style doors. Even with modifications we know Kawasaki won't screw it up as they have a consistent track record of making good MU products. NJT needs plain old conventional MU trains for its all stops local services. This shouldn't be hard as a perfectly cromulent design already exists.
I personally enjoy NJT being different and taking the risks with the new technology, if we dont, then someone else will, and also this new tech means we will be among the best equipped fleets in the business

Jersey_Mike
Posts: 4689
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:39 am
Location: CHARLES aka B&P JCT MP 95.9

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by Jersey_Mike » Mon Aug 06, 2012 2:09 pm

beanbag wrote: I personally enjoy NJT being different and taking the risks with the new technology, if we dont, then someone else will, and also this new tech means we will be among the best equipped fleets in the business
Best equipped?? Are you kidding? Their fleet is dysfunctional and poorly suited for the tasks being asked of it. Moreover you WANT someone else to take risks with new technology...its called being a guinea pig and that's generally not seen as being advantageous. It was cool when NJT used push-pull sets on it premium limited stop corridor and Midtown Direct trains. Then, forgetting that cookies are a sometimes food, NJT has proceeded to gorge themselves on the concept trying to push-pull heavier cars with longer trainsets on all stops locals.

NJT would be better served if it innovated with its service plan instead of its rolling stock. For example making all Penn bound PP trains limited stop and providing local connections through all stops MUs

lirr42
Posts: 2726
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: Montauk, NY (MP 115.8)

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by lirr42 » Mon Aug 06, 2012 2:57 pm

Jersey_Mike wrote:...NJT would be better served if it innovated with its service plan instead of its rolling stock. For example making all Penn bound PP trains limited stop and providing local connections through all stops MUs
NJT does not have the ability to guarantee a push-pull set or an MU set on any particular train on any particular day. It's works out however the equipment pool works. Trends emerge, but there is no way to nail down a set schedule of push-pull/MU only trains.

Any electric set can be assigned to any electric run, with the exception of Arrows on MidTOWN Direct services (with limited exceptions)

25Hz
Posts: 4624
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 4:06 pm
Location: Newtown, PA (or PATH towards WTC)

Re: MLV EMU procurement official

Post by 25Hz » Mon Aug 06, 2012 4:12 pm

Jtgshu wrote:
25Hz wrote:This absolutely is for a multilevel power car, not converting existing or option fleet.

And on weight: you'd end up removing one HVAC system of the 2, since you'd need one end of the roof for the panto and dynamic brake grid. I also feel that there could be significant changes in roof end design, namely using lighter materials on the non-load bearing bulkheads and interior panels & on the roof itself. You could end up with a 2200 hp power car with less weight than a MLV cab car.

There is a lot of room under the cars at both ends. A re-designed truck with 2 or 4 motors (1 or 2 per axle) probably wouldnt weigh that much more.

In any case... The fact is a MLV based self propelled car is entirely feasable technologically. I wonder about cost. I also wonder about having so many coaches and dual modes with very little talk of system expansion. Perhaps that's the next big announcement? Cape may? West Trenton? Philipsburg? Water gap? That's what I sense anyways. This is the first of 2 shoes to drop.
Sure, just take off one HVAC unit. That gives lots of room! Who needs the HVAC unit on that end anyway?

Lighter materials on the "non-load bearing bulkheads" - the walls already shake like crazy quite often, making them lighter will make them shake less! riiight

There is some room hidden in the cars, and there is some space to work with, but not a whole heck of a lot. And under the lower level seats? Its a few inches - what good is that going to do?

I think you will see opposite ends of the mezzanine levels used for placement for various systems, as well as maybe loosing a row or two of seats on one side on the lower level especially for traction motor blowers or something like that.

Cape May? West Trenton? Huh? These cars would replace the Arrow 3 MUs, which there are now 229 of (remember 1308 went away!). Thats a HUGE chunk of the roster. If they can get this idea to work, they might be able to not have to do a 1:1 replacement. Get 100 power cars, and rebuild the Comet 3s and 4s. Thats more than 230 cars right there.

Who knows, but this is going to be interesting.....

it would be kind of cool to see them take one of the ML cars and then take all the parts they took off the 1308 and see if they could figure out a mock up!
You could make the one HVAC unit do the work of 2 with more efficient components. And under the seat section i meant for running cables or pipes, not putting a transformer or battery box. Lighter panels could be made to shake less if designed properly. A lot of vibrations could be nulled with less lose fitting latches, and pads to hold them in position & absorb shocks.

I agree, probably going to lose a row or 2 on the bottom level. To minimize this you could simply start the rows a lil farther inboard, say next to where the photographer was standing. (see photo)

Image

I am curious... where would you put the dynamic brake grid if not on teh roof on one end..? Too tall of a car to put it on top of the middle...

I know they are to replace the arrows, but if you have an 8 car train, no locomotive and 4 of the cars are power cars, you automatically in theory have a spare locomotive & 4 plain mlv's somewhere. Multiply that by so many trains keeping the 45dp in mind, you could end up with a bunch of "spare" loco+coach sets, depending on how many power cars you end up getting, that's all i'm saying.


And, the comment on M8 and 3rd rail stuff, obviously it'd be removed since there is no 3rd rail in NJ aside from the north river tunnels (if it's still even in there), and you'd modify the shell to have a low opening door on one end. If it works for metro north it should work for NJT...
Next stop the square, journal square station next!

Return to “New Jersey Transit NJT Rail and Light Rail LRT”