Discussion relating to the operations of MTA MetroNorth Railroad including west of Hudson operations and discussion of CtDOT sponsored rail operations such as Shore Line East and the Springfield to New Haven Hartford Line

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, FL9AC, Jeff Smith

  by Clean Cab
Some of the details of the M8s are coming to light. Here's a few of the literaly thousands of details..........

There will be three types of cars built. A, B and C cars. A & B married pairs and A & C married pairs. The cars will weigh in at 136,000 pounds and be 14' 8" high and be 85' long. The seating capactity is "A" 110, "B" 101 and "C" 60 which leads to speculation that this "C" or "Bar Car" will have a pretty fair sized bar not unlike the current M2 "C" cars.

They are speced out to run on 25k VAC (60 cycle) , 13k (60 cycle) VAC, 11k (25 cycle) VAC and 700 VDC. They will have ACSES compatible cab signal system and a full spectrum radio that can acess all AAR channels.

The minimum order is for 50 "A" and 50 "B" cars with options for 140 additional "A", "B" and as many as 24 "C" cars. Bidding ends on March 1, 2006.

More info can be provided if asked.

  by Otto Vondrak
Just curious as to the source of this information? I sincerely hope there are bar cars as part of the M-8 order.


  by Clean Cab
I know someone who worked on the proposal and can answer most general questions you may have about them.

So ask away!!
Last edited by Clean Cab on Fri Jan 13, 2006 9:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

  by M&Eman
Will these look like the M7s+pans? Will they sport an MN paintjob with ConnDOT red or McGuinness paint? Will they have Genny style movable third rail shoe?

Hopefully they will not overweight like a certain unspeakable disgrace to MU technology. :wink:

  by Nasadowsk
* 136k lbs the hoped for weight or the max allowed by spec?
* What's the variance for bar and bathroom cars?
* What kind of propulsion? Vendor been picked? IGBT?
* How many HP, what kind of axle arrangement?
* Trucks specified? Inboard, outboard bearing?
* Brake resistor location?
* Pan per car, pan per pair?
* Full width cab?
* Acceleration rates?
* Braking rates?
* Why 25hz? Does MN honestly think they'll be able to get into penn Station anytime soon? This order being grafted onto/shared with the Silverliner V? (The weight suggests it)
* Main transformer ratings specified? i.e. how many MVA?
* Any interesting new technology propulsionwise?
* Where will Bombardier be assembling them?
* Given the length of NH trains, why not triples or quads?

  by 7 Train
Full width cab?
Virtually certain.
Where will Bombardier be assembling them?
La Pocatiere or Montreal, QC (Canada) and Plattsburgh, NY (final assembly).
Given the length of NH trains, why not triples or quads?
The more cars in a sets, the more problematic with equipment failures.

  by Nasadowsk
But the NYCTA with a fleet on the order of 10 times the size of the LIRR + MN, has gone with multiple car sets...

If you do a normal, PM routine frequently, it works and saves you money because you get rid of plenty of failure points and plenty of equipment (cabs, compressors, couplers). It's a toss up, though.

This also assumes the shops are set up for it - I doubt Stamford or New Haven are, and moving a train to Croton for just about everything is plain unrealistic.

  by DutchRailnut
no shops including Harmon could handle 4 car sets.
yes it will be full cab.
99% sure it will be same trucks as M7's outboard bearings.

  by Clean Cab
I'm trying to recall from memory............

Yes, full width cabs, like on M7s.

Weight is rated for 136,000 to 139,000 pounds.

AC propulsion. 1000 horsepower per car. Vendor not selected.

Acceloration rate is 2.0 MPH per second.

Same trucks as on M7s.

Brake resistor under car.

One pantograph per pair. Type of pan and actual location TBD.

25hz for Penn Station access is part of proposal and is not tied into any other orders.

Bidders are Bombardier, Seimens and Kawasaki, Seimens has elected not to bid.

Bombardier is the odds on favorite to win the bidding and assembly will be done at their Plattsberg (sp?) NY facility.

Triplets have proven to cause too many problems due to if one car in triplet requires to be taken out of service, three cars are lost for service. The longest train (consist) on the New Haven line is 12 cars. Plus all shops are not compatible with 4 car sets. Pairs the only types of MUs MNRR will consider.
  by Head-end View
I see Phil's point re: the efficiency of having fewer cab-cars. But I personally prefer married pairs. Yes it does cost more, but it gives the railroad maximum flexibility in making up train sets. And in removing a defective car or pair. No matter what happens in this imperfect railroading world, you will always be able to operate a married pair from either end. You lose that advantage with cab-less cars. :-D

  by NJD8598
There is an article in today's Advocate that discusses the additional service options Metro North would have if these new cars are purchased to be compatible in non Metro North areas, mainly Amtrak's territory from new Rochelle to Penn Station. Now I'm not saying any of this stuff is happening, just thought people may like the article.

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/lo ... -headlines

  by Rockingham Racer
That would be interesting. New London-Penn Station?
Co-OP City in the Bronx would have to be a stop, based on its huge population, possibly Parkchester/Tremont Ave., too. It would cause a mess at CP 216, don't you think? The flyover there sounds better all the time. :P

  by grabber
capecodlocoguy wrote:

Bombardier is the odds on favorite to win the bidding and assembly will be done at their Plattsberg (sp?) NY facility.
Good Lord I hope not.
I would really like to see Kawasaki get the order but I don't think that is possible considering the "ties" between Bombardier and the MTA.

  by Dieter
Given the low cost deals MTA gets from dealing with Bombardier, plus the fact that the units are entirely manufactured in North America, I can stand another Bombardier deal over Kawasaki.

I echo Otto's cry for a Bar Car order, and I can guarantee you that if there isn't, there will be a near riot from the Nutmegers!

Here's a new question for you. OK, we're losing the windows on the front and rear (make your videos while you can) for cabs. It's going to be an M-7 with pantographs, a given. Will there be COAT HOOKS, and will the spacing between the seats be the same as on the M-7's?

The spacing between the seats on the M-7 is almost as narrow as on an airliner in the 3rd world. With an aging population in a poliltically correct society newly obcessed with handicapped accessibility, the M-7 makes it impossible for the unchallenged to stand up straight between the seats.

This is a serious problem which should be addressed on any future order from Bombardier on any model of these trains.


  by DutchRailnut
Your right about the adessng of problem, so why are same people that whine about these issues not at transportation meetings like the Conneticut Commuter Counsil???????????????????????????????????????


Wednesday January 18 – 7:00 pm

SACIA – 1 Landmark Sq., Stamford CT

1) Welcome new member(s)

2) Approval of the December minutes

3) Public Comment Period


1) Monthly Operations and Planning Report – December CDOT / MNRR

2) M8 Specifications – discussion All

3) Main Line Issues All

4) Branch line Issues:

Shore Line East Issues CDOT / SLERA / Council

New Canaan Branch issues CDOT / Metro North

Waterbury Branch Issues CDOT / Metro North

Danbury Branch Issues CDOT / Metro North

5). Progress Report – CDOT

- New Locomotives, VRE Cars, New Haven Repair Shops

6) MNRR union negotiations - role of CT vs NY MNRR / CDOT

7) Other


1) Stamford Parking Garage City / Council

2) Reverse commute pricing – cost / benefit Mr. Jelley

3) Other

Next Meeting: Wednesday February 15th , 6:00 pm / New Haven RR Station