Multi-Level Cars—Delivery/Status

TR-00 wrote:Head brake...head brake...mmmmmmmfffff...it's a family site and I can't say it..!

Darn...too bad Sullivan won't get to AC...I love freshly minted trainmen.

haha, I love it. Who knows, maybe you'll get one in me in a few years if your still around. I don't think i would mind at all though.

TR-00 wrote:Sorry Nick, it was NOT based on the Comet V. As a member of the design group, we tried damned hard to not make the same mistakes that were made with the V. These cars were wrung out by both engineers and conductors, and there were a lot of mods made because of that.

Ugly? Who really gives a damn? Most of you guys are ugly too, but we still like ya.

That's good to hear there TR. I was referring to the cosmetics though and visual appearance- which are similar.

Darn...too bad Sullivan won't get to AC...I love freshly minted trainmen.

Sullivan, if you want my advice, railfan to railfan, friend to friend, O'Sullivan to Sullivan, 85er to 85er, stay away from the AC.

Ken S. wrote:It's PL42AC

Good heavans Sullivan, you still calling these things PL32ACs?

TR-00 wrote:Ugly? Who really gives a damn? Most of you guys are ugly too, but we still like ya.

Hey I'm pretty!

I thought about saying that, but it would be too close to the truth to be truly funny.

I'm going to assume that they didn't start with a fresh new design with these, so if you look at Bombardier's web site, they have some examples of them for various agencies in the US and Canada. See here: http://www.bombardier.com/index.jsp?id= ... _3_1_5.jsp

I think they look fine. The 2+2 seating is a nice idea, in my opinion. Of course, the most important aspect will be actual operation. Hopefully they will keep them in solid sets.

My favorite bi-level is the Kawasaki design, which is monocoque stainless steel construction and very pleasing to look at. I rode them on the MBTA. The C-3 also is on the LIRR and similar cars are on MARC.

I'm going to assume that they didn't start with a fresh new design with these, so if you look at Bombardier's web site, they have some examples of them for various agencies in the US and Canada

Those would be too tall for the North River tunnels; most of them have doors that would not suit high platforms.

nick11a wrote:

Darn...too bad Sullivan won't get to AC...I love freshly minted trainmen.

Sullivan, if you want my advice, railfan to railfan, friend to friend, O'Sullivan to Sullivan, 85er to 85er, stay away from the AC.

IT'S PL42AC!!!

Good heavans Sullivan, you still calling these things PL32ACs?

Advice taken and i don't know why, for some reason I always write PL32!! I know that are 42's but I just cant get rid of that number!

Ignore TR - remember, hes alone on the "head" end - again, this is a family site -

You know how some people say they have a face for radio? Well, there's a reason why TR is an engineer and not a trainman!!!

TR you can't retire until I start trainhandling and you show me how to perfect your famous Hammonton High Speed Stop"!

JT...when you start train handling, I am going to retire (for my own safety).

Before I met you, I had never actually seen a motorcycle with training wheels...

Can someone answer....

1) What is the aisle headroom clearance on both levels and,

2) Where are the emergency exit pop-out windows on these things.

thanks.

These cars are going to be annoying as hell without a center door.

How?

Longer dwell times is how.

The only way to have a bilevel with a center door is to do it as a gallery car...but then it would be close to impossible to build them to a height of 14' 9", though.

They won't have higher dwell times as the cars have 4 ADA sized doors per side. only car with only 3 is on cabcar engineers side.

4 doors to be used on high level platforms and only 2 end doors at low level platforms.
So basicly same as a C5, but since the Bi-level has 2x2 seating it also serves the same amount of passengers but at a greater comfort level.
Don't we always hear commuters and railfans bitch about the 3 x 2 seating ???