|
|
| Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? (1160989) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Jun 8 22:39:23 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jun 8 21:11:23 2012. Septa, NICTD, MTA, ME, and NJTArguably, one could take off NJT off that list given their perpetual orders of MLVs and dual mode locomotives, and Caltrain's specifications for a multiple unit imply UIC based design specs, which only leaves Denver RTD and they're buying Silverliner V clones for their electrified FRA-controlled lines. Unless we get smart enough to build more rail transit (1) and electrify some of the existing (2) the situation won't change soon. Admittedly, we're going to have to see if Caltrain's future capital programmes project can break the mold. We're stuck with the models of "freight loco and rounded body + BBD bilevels", "BART/WMATA/MARTA", or light rail/Stadtbahn, and if Caltrain is sucessful, hopefully we'll be able to bring BART/WMATA-esque performance and service levels with light rail costs to a network currently stuck with freight locos and BBD bilevels and the performance and service levels that come with that. With the approval of the Stadler units in Texas, maybe we'll see a shift to more frequent DMU runs, but otherwise, the model that seems to have developed is any system that wants frequent peak service and usable off-peak headways in the 15 to 20 minute range just ends up building a light rail line while gaining single person operation, no FRA regulation, and the flexibility to cheat with street running into the core. |
|
(There are no responses to this message.)
|
|