SEPTA Cancels CRRC multi level order (Was:SEPTA to get multi-level railroad coaches)

Dcell wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 3:19 pm NJTransit this spring is scheduled to receive the first powered and unpowered bi-level coaches it ordered a few years ago. Could SEPTA order this equipment? Some allege these cars have clearance issues with some overpasses on SEPTA's system. True?

D: Clearance issues for SEPTA first and foremost is the height of the catenary wires
above the cars in question - which MUST have enough clearance to avoid any possibility of
an AC “flash over” to the roofs of equipment which can be a dangerous problem…

The low wire between 30th Street Station Upper and the Suburban Station tunnel portal
is the best example of an overhead clearance trouble spot on SEPTA Regional Rail…

One example I recall occurred back in 1993 during “Railworks” when SEPTA was planning
to lease Amtrak F40PH 413 -a former GO Transit unit used in commuter service-to provide
through trains to 30th Street Upper from West Trenton and/or Doylestown during the RDG
trunk construction outage…During a clearance test in this same area they “shot the line”
knocking out power to this key track segment returning #413 promptly to Amtrak…
SEPTA decided on using leased NJT U34CH locomotives for this alternate service…

MACTRAXX

Dcell wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 3:19 pm NJTransit this spring is scheduled to receive the first powered and unpowered bi-level coaches it ordered a few years ago. Could SEPTA order this equipment? Some allege these cars have clearance issues with some overpasses on SEPTA's system. True?

The NJT Multilevels would be fine on SEPTA; the CRRC cars would have been built to the same clearance envelope.

But forget about ever seeing any multilevels on SEPTA now. Current management no longer sees them as fitting Regional Rail operations and is now focusing on Silverliner VI to cover everything.

Ideally the Silverliner VI should be back to basics, a single level MU. An overhead AC catenary MU variant of
ConnDOT's new single level coaches should be the first choice (with low level boarding). If ConnDOT seems
satisfied, this might also be the basis for the future M-10.

R36 Combine Coach wrote: ↑Sat Apr 27, 2024 4:26 pm Ideally the Silverliner VI should be back to basics, a single level MU. An overhead AC catenary MU variant of
ConnDOT's new single level coaches should be the first choice (with low level boarding). If ConnDOT seems
satisfied, this might also be the basis for the future M-10.

The specs in the RFP indicate it will be a single-level MU, but with not only single-stream quarter-point doors for high-level boarding, but also end vestibules and doors (except at the engineer's position) to handle either just low level boarding or low and high boarding with steps and traps. Gone are singles and married pairs; indications are also that they may be 3-unit sets, or possibly 4-unit sets, and full compatibility/interoperability with Silverliner V is required.

Single units and pairs offer the best versatility and operational flexibility. The M-6 Cosmopolitan "triplets" were
not well received.

Would all units be motors or would a motor-trailer concept be used like Lackawanna and the new NJT Multilevels?

Regarding the two SEPTA pilot cars now orphaned, my thought is that with shades of 2308 given as a in-kind
settlement over the Norristown Line cars, with litigation and other settlements, it could reached for those two
to be modified by CRRC to Exo specs for their BBD Multilevels and given at no charge as part of a SEPTA
settlement so Exo can expand capacity by two cars at no charge, much like what happened to 2308 with ABB.

Is there a more up to date RFP than what was floated a few months back? Given the lead times one new rail cars, it’d be better to just high-level the system (line by line), order a high-level only SL VI, then use the Vs on lines that aren’t all high platform yet.

3 or 4 car sets allows for open gangway/ Jacobs bogies, and far fewer things to maintain. A 4 car train of pairs has four cabs to maintain, a four car quad has two. Not to mention fewer transformers, etc.

Is SEPTA at least pulling its head out of you-know-where, and allowing for alternate compliance, or are they stuck in the 1950s still?

A new RFP/bidding process will happen in the aftermath of this contract cancellation. How urgent is the need for new rail cars? We know powered and unpowered bi-levels MUs are in production for NJTransit. Are any single-levels MUs in production for another transit agency that would work on the SEPTA system? Or does SEPTA have to go with custom-designed equipment? Time keeps on slipping slipping slipping....

I don't think there is an MU car being made today that will work with SEPTA's 12 kV 25 Hz AC electrification (the M8s and the KISS units for Caltrain are both 25 kV 60 Hz equipment and the only overhead electrification MU units I'm aware of in production in North America). The M8s can only serve high level platforms, so that design would need to be modified to handle low level platforms. The Caltrain KISS units are 15' 10 1⁄2" (16.5" taller than the NJT MLVs), so unless SEPTA can handle equipment that large, that design would also need to be modified to work for SEPTA.

I think the low wire between 30th St. and Suburban Station (and maybe to the portal north of Jefferson?) mentioned above by MACTRAXX would rule that out.

Based on the above responses, it seems no new rail cars until the 2030s.

Nasadowsk wrote: ↑Sun Apr 28, 2024 8:42 am Is there a more up to date RFP than what was floated a few months back? Given the lead times one new rail cars, it’d be better to just high-level the system (line by line), order a high-level only SL VI, then use the Vs on lines that aren’t all high platform yet.

3 or 4 car sets allows for open gangway/ Jacobs bogies, and far fewer things to maintain. A 4 car train of pairs has four cabs to maintain, a four car quad has two. Not to mention fewer transformers, etc.

Is SEPTA at least pulling its head out of you-know-where, and allowing for alternate compliance, or are they stuck in the 1950s still?

I'll have to go digging into their website (it wasn't easy to find) but the current RFP is not quite a month old. And from the conceptual drawings, it looks like open gangways between each car of the triplet set.

R36 Combine Coach wrote: ↑Sun Apr 28, 2024 2:58 am Single units and pairs offer the best versatility and operational flexibility. The M-6 Cosmopolitan "triplets" were
not well received.

Would all units be motors or would a motor-trailer concept be used like Lackawanna and the new NJT Multilevels?

All are to be powered cars.

Oh, if you find the link, post it, sounds like they’re trying something new. Last time, they got the Silverliner II, which was actually quite advanced (technically) for its time

The proposed Silverliner VI renderings....
The proposed drawings make it appear that they will be all married pairs, but the verbal word was they were considering triplet sets. We will see....

As mentioned, I recommend against triplets, especially after the experiment with the M-6 Cosmopolitan.

No single units being considered suggest a conspiracy to ax Cynwyd service in favor of bus (much like NJT's
Dinky), but a 700 series single Silverliner V could be used.

There's no requirement to use single cars on the Cynwyd. I've gone up there plenty of times with a married pair or even a full length consist. A single car is *preferred* to free up other cars but it's not set in stone