Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

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

Moderators: Tadman, nick11a, ACeInTheHole, Kaback9

korax
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by korax » Fri Nov 23, 2018 3:36 pm

These heavyweight FRA compliant EMU mulitlevels may be obsolete in some ways from the start as the FRA has just released new crash rules permitting the purchase of lightweight mostly off the self european train sets.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2018/11/23/ ... rain-cars/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Last edited by korax on Fri Nov 23, 2018 10:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Backshophoss
Posts: 6318
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by Backshophoss » Fri Nov 23, 2018 3:46 pm

You give up too many seats for a MLV-II based EMU for pans and high voltage gear,then HVAC and Control wiring,add to that the IRON core
needed for 25hz ex PRR wire,along with a multi tap transformer to work with 12.5 kv and 25 kv wire used by Amtrak and NJT.

The next Gen Arrow IS the BETTER chose!
The Land of Enchantment is not Flyover country!

DutchRailnut
Posts: 22255
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by DutchRailnut » Fri Nov 23, 2018 4:49 pm

some European designs prove you wrong, but the 900 count (lots of Options) are probably catering to Metro North, LIRR, CDOT and maybe others needing to go for MLV's
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer. I am not a moderator.

Nasadowsk
Posts: 4009
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:45 pm

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by Nasadowsk » Fri Nov 23, 2018 6:51 pm

Backshophoss wrote:You give up too many seats for a MLV-II based EMU for pans and high voltage gear,then HVAC and Control wiring,add to that the IRON core
needed for 25hz ex PRR wire,along with a multi tap transformer to work with 12.5 kv and 25 kv wire used by Amtrak and NJT.
Stadler's KISS series puts 6000kw short time 4000kw continuous, in a 6 car train, 516 passengers (mixed class, 1st and 2nd, it'd be a bit more single class), 326 tons (roughly 110,000lbs per car). With 2.4mph/s initial acceleration to about 40mph. It does this on the 15kv 16 2/3 hz system. The only bad thing is it's 6 inches taller than a Multilevel, and it's a touch shorter and narrower, too. Stadler already offers a variant on the 25kv 50/60Hz system, and there's likely no real technical barrier to offering a dual system variant (they probably do already).

So, not only is there a workable basis for a multilvel EMU, there's a workable basis for one that's lighter than an unpowered NJT Multilevel car.

Not many good videos on Youtube, but:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAOWEDrPyDM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=279LRdK9ltc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Performance is at least respectable...

EuroStar
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 8:26 pm
Location: Middle of Nowhere

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by EuroStar » Wed Nov 28, 2018 8:33 am

Nasadowsk wrote:
Backshophoss wrote:You give up too many seats for a MLV-II based EMU for pans and high voltage gear,then HVAC and Control wiring,add to that the IRON core
needed for 25hz ex PRR wire,along with a multi tap transformer to work with 12.5 kv and 25 kv wire used by Amtrak and NJT.
Stadler's KISS series puts 6000kw short time 4000kw continuous, in a 6 car train, 516 passengers (mixed class, 1st and 2nd, it'd be a bit more single class), 326 tons (roughly 110,000lbs per car). With 2.4mph/s initial acceleration to about 40mph. It does this on the 15kv 16 2/3 hz system. The only bad thing is it's 6 inches taller than a Multilevel, and it's a touch shorter and narrower, too. Stadler already offers a variant on the 25kv 50/60Hz system, and there's likely no real technical barrier to offering a dual system variant (they probably do already).
You and Backshophoss are talking about different things. Yes, the Stadler KISS exists and with relatively minor modifications can be made to satisfy the US rules (Caltrain is getting some, isn't it?). KISS though is a *fixed* consist. While I have not investigated further than the videos you linked to, there appear to be only two pantographs for the whole sets and the transformers (no more than 1 per pantograph) and other equipment such as the HVAC is likely shared between all cars. That is very far from what NJT appears to have in mind. It is my understanding that they are not looking at anything beyond married pairs and even with married pairs you end up loosing too many seats as Backshophoss points out. On a married pair you need at least one pantograph, one huge multi tap transformer for the 25Hz and the 12.5kV vs 25kV, at least one cab, but probably two as there are very few locations to turn trains on NJT (I am aware of only two in electric territory: Hoboken and Sunnyside). On top of that you still need to have the ability to chain these things together and allow passengers to walk through from one pair to another pair (I believe that is safety requirement). You also need some (but not all) of these things to have bathrooms. Add to that ADA compliance with space for wheelchairs and such. The thing is also supposed to be able to pull at least one unpowered coach (new one or rewired old MLV), so these things need to be overpowered by 50% or so in order to pull an extra unpowered trailer.

Note that doing all of the above in a fixed 6 car consist is not too difficult, but fitting it in a married pair will leave you with the same amount of seats as two Comets which can be had for much much less. It appears to me that with all that stuff to be fitted inside, the minimum length consists should be a triple. A quad will work better though. At that point you have a short KISS consist. NJT seems to have interest in running three car consists between Hoboken and MSU/Gladstone, but I really think that they should just bite the bullet and be OK running 4 car consists there even if current ridership does not require it (hopefully eventually the ridership grows to fill the extra seats). The 4 car fixed consists easily cover all needs: Hoboken electric trains -- 1 set, NYP -- 8 cars=2 sets, 9 cars=2 sets with a rewired MLV in between, 10 or 11 cars -- same idea, 12 cars=3 sets. The overpowering requirements go down substantially especially if 11 car are never to be used together. then each 4 car set needs only extra power for 1 trailer.

njt/mnrrbuff
Posts: 3485
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:33 pm

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by njt/mnrrbuff » Wed Nov 28, 2018 7:55 pm

Well if NJT gets multilevel MUs and a minimum of four cars is a must, then that's what it will be. There are plenty of branchlines that operate with four car MUs and even more. On MNR's New Canaan Branch, at least six cars tend to operate, even during off peak hours. On the W. Hempstead Branch, probably at least six cars operate.

Four car Arrow III sets operate plenty on the electric lines into and out of Hoboken and that is for the better, especially on weekdays during the rush hour. The Gladstone Branch during the rush hour operates with four cars a lot, I think. Hopefully, NJT can make an arrangement where the Multilevel MUs can operate with a minimum of two cars, especially given the short term ridership needs during the off peak hours and weekends on the Gladstone Branch. A two car consist would only be needed for the Dinky. Four cars for the Princeton Dinky is overkill.

andrewjw
Posts: 430
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 11:48 am

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by andrewjw » Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:38 pm

Four cars would not fit in the current Dinky 'nap pod' siding at Princeton Junction.

mcgrath618
Posts: 432
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2017 12:11 pm

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by mcgrath618 » Thu Nov 29, 2018 2:17 pm

EuroStar wrote:The 900+ options in the contract will never be exercised. These are supposed to be bi-level EMUs which do not currently exist (compliant to US requirements) and could end up as white elephants as there are no other natural buyers of EMU thingies in the US. Also there is no way NJT needs 900 of these anyway in addition to the fact that it cannot afford them. The current MLVs have at least 35+ years in them (with one major overhaul), so I do not see them replaced. Anyone thinking that NJT will expand electrification needs to check the dire finances of the state first.
Wrong: The Chicago METRA Electric District uses Double-Decker EMUs.
EDIT: someone beat me

Backshophoss
Posts: 6318
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by Backshophoss » Thu Nov 29, 2018 5:29 pm

What sinks the MLV II EMU design is that "dumb" requirement to tow a MLV II as a trailer,even as a married pair will have weight issues,
a VERY BAD UNICORN design from the get go. Those EMU's designed in Europe would never pass the FRA muster,even under the "alt" rules.
A next gen Arrow could take a page from the M-8 playbook and build trailers that will work with the EMU as ConnDOT did..
And can be built as a single car or Married pair as was done in the past(The Dinky needs 1 car to do shuttle work where a married pair would be overkill
on the Dinky run)
The next gen Arrows would not have weight/height issues to deal with,the North River Tube height does hinder the double deck design
The Land of Enchantment is not Flyover country!

njt/mnrrbuff
Posts: 3485
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:33 pm

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by njt/mnrrbuff » Thu Nov 29, 2018 8:28 pm

You know, it's not too late for NJT to change their minds and order new single level MUs if they can't get a multilevel MU option that involves running a minimum of two cars. Many of NJT lines that are good for MUs during the off peak hours don't require longer sets.

Yes, Chicago Metra as well as the South Shore uses electric double decker Gallery car MUs but I don't think they can fit underneath the Hudson River Tunnels. NICTD South Shore gallery cars are able to stop at both high and low level platforms and on the South Shore, there are plenty of low level platforms.

Nasadowsk
Posts: 4009
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:45 pm

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by Nasadowsk » Thu Nov 29, 2018 9:58 pm

Backshophoss wrote:Those EMU's designed in Europe would never pass the FRA muster,even under the "alt" rules.
Might wanna inform the FRA of Caltrain's order for 16 sets of them, then. First delivery isn't too far away, either...

User avatar
lensovet
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by lensovet » Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:32 am

Nasadowsk wrote:
Backshophoss wrote:Those EMU's designed in Europe would never pass the FRA muster,even under the "alt" rules.
Might wanna inform the FRA of Caltrain's order for 16 sets of them, then. First delivery isn't too far away, either...
Caltrain is time separated from freight. That's why they can use these sets.

None of that applies to NJT territory which is shared with full blown heavy train sets 24/7.
Paul Borokhov

Last RRPicArch addition – NJ Railfan.

NJT RailCalifornia commuter (mod)

User avatar
lensovet
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by lensovet » Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:37 am

btw a lot of these comments remind me of the conversations around the dual modes when the RFPs for those first went out. like, go back and read them. it's hilarious. forums experts saying NJT is crazy, there's no way it could be done, etc, etc.

here we are in 2018 and these units are running like champs, better in diesel mode than PL42ACs.

edit: while we are rehashing an article from april, 3 actual proposals were submitted in June: https://www.njtransit.com/tm/tm_servlet ... &pkId=5794" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

so sounds like at least 3 manufacturers managed to figure this out.
Paul Borokhov

Last RRPicArch addition – NJ Railfan.

NJT RailCalifornia commuter (mod)

EuroStar
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 8:26 pm
Location: Middle of Nowhere

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by EuroStar » Fri Nov 30, 2018 9:32 am

Metra Electric runs double deckers in married pairs, but:
  • Highliner II is taller than MLV
    There is no huge double tap transformer for 25Hz plus 12.5kV vs 25kV, Metra Electric is 1.5kV
While Metro-North has a different constraint on its car geometry, it is worth pointing out that they did opt against a double tap 25Hz transformer for the New Haven Line EMUs (relevant for the Penn Station Access) with the major objection as far as I know being the weight of the iron transformer core.

While in theory NJT could try to create time separation with freight for the lines they own, they do not have that authority on the NEC, so non-compliant equipment is not an option.

Yes, the ALP45s are here and running, but they are overweight, need more maintenance and more frequent refueling (and burn more of it per mile) and cost much much more than conventional equipment. The fact that nobody else has ordered any is quite indicative. Indeed, even Montreal is planning to get rid of theirs eventually. The fact that the ALP45s exist does not make them worth it.

Back to the MLV EMUs, I never tried to make the point that married pairs cannot be done, just that they are not worth all the trouble. Yes, you can stuff everything in a married pair, but do you get the extra seating? And if you get some, is the overall cost worth it? So 3 manufacturers have figured out a way to stuff everything in there. That does not mean that the cost is worth it. NJT might get them anyway, but again that does not make them worth it.

bdawe
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:06 pm
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia

Re: Bombardier to bid on New Jersey rail contract: sources

Post by bdawe » Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:29 am

I was under the impression that the New FRA rules did not require time separation for alternate compliance. Time separation was how Caltrain got the euro-equipment before the new rules
B. Dawe's map of routes and urban populations https://brendandawe.carto.com/viz/80b9d ... /embed_map" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; NOW updated with 2016 Canadian Populations

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