• NJT MLV EMU Procurement

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

Moderators: lensovet, Kaback9, nick11a

  by DutchRailnut
andrewjw wrote:
MNRR also doesn't have the same power type anymore, having gone to 60hz. I doubt Arrows can run on it. Other than that, perfect sense.
mtuandrew is referring to the BBD MLV III power cars as "Arrow MLV" and surely they could be built to operate on MNRR.
the power car would work on MN catenary , but as single car it would not be any good on third rail.
  by njtmnrrbuff
When the Arrow IIIs are retired, I sort of agree that having a three car Multilevel MU set for the Princeton Branch might be overkill. However, there are probably many people who ride the Dinky and at times, there might be standing room only. Look at Metro North's New Canaan Branch-on the shuttles, there are typically six car sets and even though the trains aren't filled up all the way during off peak hours, the ridership is still pretty healthy. Of course, the New Canaan Branch is a little longer than the Princeton Branch.
  by andrewjw
Usually, only one of the two cars on the Princeton Branch is open for seating, and it only fills up at the start and end of breaks at the University. The only time the second car is open is during Reunions at the University. This is about a dozen days each year when any more than the seating room of one of the two Arrows is needed.
  by EuroStar
I do not understand why people are so obsessed about the new electric MLVs and how they will run on the Princeton branch. They will not. After NJT retires the Arrows, they will have so many to cannibalize for parts that they can keep two pairs running for another two decades. NJT could also lease a pair or two of Silverliners from Septa, so the Princeton Branch is a non-issue.
  by ryanov
I can tell you why: there are constant rumblings about eliminating it. Eventually the Arrow IIIs will all need to be retired, regardless of how many they have. If the plan currently indicates they will eliminate all of the equipment that can service this route, people want to know what the heck is going to happen (and if it is elimination of the branch, to kick up a fuss).

A small fleet of aging Arrow III cars would be an attractive elimination, I suspect.
  by njtmnrrbuff
Yes, all of the Arrow IIIs will be replaced. Even if NJT decided to keep a few Arrow IIIs for the Dinky for a bit longer than many of the other Arrow IIIs, they will all go eventually. It’s like how after many of the FL9s were retired from Metro North in the early 2000’s, there were some that were kept around a little longer to cover branchline duties.
  by mtuandrew
If NJT doesn’t otherwise provide, a good solution would be a Stadler seconded from the RIVERline. Maybe a battery-electric deal. Not my preferred solution of course, but better than no rail service, and NJT is going to have to order new single-level self-propelled equipment whenever they build out Glassboro anyway.
  by njtmnrrbuff
I know that I have said this many times and I know that many people have said the same thing many times too but maybe NJT should consider converting the Dinky to a light rail shuttle. It seems that it might be a waste of money to constantly be having three car multilevel sets with only one car open shuttle back and forth between Princeton and Princeton Jct. The Multilevel MUs would probably be better off used elsewhere, especially on the NEC and the M&E. Personally, I want to see them operate more on the former Lackawanna electric lines given the ridership needs and spacing between stops. It doesn't surprise me that most of the time, only one of the two Arrow IIIs operating on the Dinky are open. That makes sense about when the two cars would fill up the most. If the Dinky were to ever be converted to light rail, maybe the line could actually terminate a little closer to Downtown Princeton rather than where it is right now. There are plenty of people who live in Princeton near the downtown area who will still get in their cars and drive to Princeton Junction.
  by JamesRR
As stated, with so many Arrow IIIs, NJT could rebuild a few sets for the Dinky. It's a slow moving line and the Arrows serve it fine. MLVs make no sense of the Dinky - people climbing stairs for a short ride. The Arrows are far more efficient. It's like the Times Square shuttle essentially.
  by kilroy
Maybe we should resurrect this idea for the Princeton Branch....


Or maybe lease the Colorado Rail Car they tested (if it even exists anymore. I know the company doesn't.).
  by EDM5970
That Colorado Rail Car unit is history, burned up. Something like the Riverline cars would make far more sense, and NJT (or BBD) knows how to maintain them.
  by ALP45DP 4515
Perhaps something among the lines of a Stadler FLIRT? Given that there are already catenary lines in place it would be more efficient to have an EMU run the Dinky rather than the diesel GTW units that are found on the RiverLine. If NJT wants a BBD product, they have the Aventra, or the talent.
  by Nasadowsk
I suspect that if anything, the dinky replacement will be...a bus. NJT has no love for the line at all.
  by njtmnrrbuff
I really hope that they don't make it a bus, even if it is a bus rapid transit route. If they do make it a bus, then it better operate as a true rapid transit bus straight from where the present NJT Princeton Rail station is to Princeton Junction and meet every eastbound NJT train there and as many westbound NJT trains as possible.

If they can at least run some sort of single level self propelled vehicle that runs on rails, then that would be good. By the way, that is very true about the step situations inside the Multilevel MUs being another reason why there is no need to use them on an extremely short branch like the dinky.
  by DutchRailnut
small trolley barn , two double ended light rail vehicles and lower juice on that catenary to 700 volt.
  • 1
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 29