|
|
| Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? (1160755) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (1160980) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jun 8 21:11:23 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by J trainloco on Fri Jun 8 20:55:47 2012. With only Septa, NICTD, MTA, ME, and NJT, not enough market to support more vendors. Septa and MTA won't need any new cars for a couple decades after all of the SLVs, M-8s etc are running. Unless we get smart enough to build more rail transit (1) and electrify some of the existing (2) the situation won't change soon. |
|
|
| (1160987) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Fri Jun 8 22:27:01 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. A company that builds EMUs could reconfigure their assembly line to build LRVs, Rapid Transit vehicles and commuter vehicles, potentially opening up more ccustomers than just the commuter properties with EMUs. It's not likely to happen, but we can dream. |
|
|
| (1160989) | |
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. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1160990) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Jun 8 22:58:08 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by J trainloco on Fri Jun 8 22:27:01 2012. It's not likely to happen, but we can dream.I'd look at it from this perspective. Outside of GE, what other large firm has some degree of railcar manufacturing experience and electrical engineering to design a multiple unit? And if said firm exists, would it want to stay in an industry with questionable profits and where the consumer of the product orders in inconsistent small batches with the exception of one agency? In turn, how do you beat foreign competition with a proven track record and far better export markets, combined with the Chinese now entering your potential export markets and undercutting the prices of the established players? Of course, the success of Bombardier in the market belies this, but they lucked out by having a provincial government that was willing to give them a massive chance due to ethnic nationalism, along with the ability to purchase patents and smaller firms to enlarge their footprint. The question remains if we're willing to play full blown dirigisme and swallow some questionable rolling stock to have an American-based builder, or if we'll continue with the status quo. |
|
|
| (1160991) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by CJ on Fri Jun 8 23:04:21 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Jun 8 19:54:05 2012. I'm surprised the R10/27/30s lasted as long as they did along with the R16s looking at how decrypt the subway was in the 70s and 80s and the lack of maintenance many of those cars had during that time period. Sadly only 8/1150 cars from each type were preserved, possibly due to them being severely abused for such long periods of time. |
|
|
| (1160994) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Jun 8 23:24:45 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by CJ on Fri Jun 8 23:04:21 2012. That's what happens when you're not willing to spend the money to maintain stuff. Things don't stop wearing out just because you're broke. |
|
|
| (1160999) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Jun 9 00:06:06 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by J trainloco on Fri Jun 8 22:27:01 2012. The small, irregular market is not a rational place to invest. Mind you I cheered Bill Agee's M-K attempt, but we all know he went bankrupt. |
|
|
| (1161000) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Jun 9 00:07:45 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Jun 9 00:06:06 2012. And the various incarnations of the Colorado Railcar dewd ... |
|
|
| (1161002) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat Jun 9 00:20:25 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by J trainloco on Fri Jun 8 20:55:47 2012. Good point. The R211s should be built by Gunderson, Trinity, or Greenbriar. |
|
|
| (1161010) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Sat Jun 9 02:22:52 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by GIS Man on Fri Jun 8 09:47:47 2012. Ford is awesome now. You should see the Taurus SHO I drive. |
|
|
| (1161011) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by CJ on Sat Jun 9 02:29:17 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Jun 8 23:24:45 2012. You got that right. |
|
|
| (1161029) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by BLE-NIMX on Sat Jun 9 10:11:41 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Jun 8 19:54:05 2012. I spent the last three days tearing through the old gal north. Except for a pair of rusted resistor grids which might need a megger testing, it took power the last time we hooked it up a couple of years ago. Not bad for a car with more cobwebs and beehives sitting longer in outdoor elements than fire damaged R44s with blue stripes. Only one of the low voltage relays failed after 15 years of storage, and that was in the MG circuits which was modified anyway by removal of the trickle circuit. For a simple unit switch run groupbox, there is no reason other than deferred maintainance I can see by design as to why these cars were failures. They were a close identical to the WH R10s. I repaired a lighting and a 24 wire circuit short both caused by pinched wires while being handled by those who should have known better. One thing i noticed is where OEM wiring bundles existed, the string used before zip ties was still keeping everything tide and away from screwholes and brackets, while at replaceable switches and ESPECIALLY under the seats where they hacked into the original door feeds to run the bundle lengths to meet the new pocket motors, , wires were laid on the FLOORS, no zip ties, running near the door guides where water inevitably gets in and soaks the insulations. Either TA only viewed the new doors at a test to look at for a few years knowing it wouldn't last longer than that or were going to replaced by the R46s as originally planned. I swear they just phucked those cars up so bad and didn't fix em. The electric motor and air brake shops at CIY did alot of work on R10 parts when the tens were getting greener compliments of capital money like those NYAB rotary screws. They probably didn't see an R16's parts unless they had to during the R46's fiasco |
|
|
| (1161034) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by RailBus63 on Sat Jun 9 11:25:17 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by Train Dude on Fri Jun 8 11:28:39 2012. Ther's also something to be said for competition, provided that the suppliers are qualified. |
|
|
| (1161052) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Jun 9 14:36:59 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by BLE-NIMX on Sat Jun 9 10:11:41 2012. Well ... back in those days they were short-sheeted for people and several dollars short, so no surprise. Even further back when I was there, they were hard-pressed to make service any way they could and I can only imagine how bad it got in the 80's.I know how you love your toy, and I was quite surprised to see how good you had it looking. The 16's though already had their reputation in the early 70's as "am I going to make the terminal?" Only got to deal with those a handful of times and made it to the other end, I usually got 32's and arnines and so did get a bit spoiled. :) But BOY did I hear war stories on the 16's even back then ... |
|
|
| (1161075) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Sat Jun 9 16:18:17 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Fri Jun 8 22:58:08 2012. The way I look at it is this: today's manufacturing process is often highly broken up into components from different manufacturers. A railcar maker would be assembling those components into the final product. This is why I mentioned Caterpillar, with its Progress rail solutions unit, because it could almost become supplemental business for a company like this. |
|
|
| (1161081) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by BLE-NIMX on Sat Jun 9 16:43:30 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Jun 9 14:36:59 2012. Its getting there. A dormant car has its share of problems. Dirt gathers up behind the seats attracting moisture and rotting door pockets. I'm okay with the stick welder but its not meant for 16 gauge so I'm getting some dough ready for wire/MIG. I love having chosen the R16, I learned alot of skills only a broadbanded maintainer group E could be proud of... One car is much easier. will either make the bridge or it won't |
|
|
| (1161084) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Jun 9 16:57:09 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by BLE-NIMX on Sat Jun 9 16:43:30 2012. Heh. Yeha, the Manny B separated the dead motors from the sheep indeed. Nothing like hearing on the radio that they were backing up a set of 32's to run an arnine around it to push me over the top. :)Really wish this year wasn't so insanely busy on my end, I'd love to come down and help out. Electricals are my thing, plumbing not so ... it'd be even nicer to see that thing running under its own power and maybe hotwire 825 as well ... you know I'd be all over that if only I could get down there. Hopefully next year. |
|
|
| (1161087) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Jun 9 17:05:05 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by BLE-NIMX on Sat Jun 9 10:11:41 2012. Question..why did they drop the R16 GOH program?That prototype car rebuilt by 207 was sweet! |
|
|
| (1161150) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by BLE-NIMX on Sun Jun 10 00:13:31 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by Edwards! on Sat Jun 9 17:05:05 2012. Maybe they were too heavy but there was no overhaul program scheduled for the R16s. They decided on only the GE R30s, collector car retros and newer to go to complete GOH while the 110 WH R10s got mini overhauls. GE 10s and GE R27s were disposed of. I didn't know there was a car done, but I'd imagine they added up the costs when it was finished and decided against it for its age as most everything that went through a GOH except for the collectors was not much older than 25 years. It really shocked me to see 30+ year old R10s getting the money they got and not the R16 considering the conductors working safety and working conditions. |
|
|
| (1161152) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Jun 10 00:19:41 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by BLE-NIMX on Sun Jun 10 00:13:31 2012. From a maintenance standpoint the R-16s were a nightmare - especially the "flat bottoms". I had only brief experience with them and was perfectly happy to see them go for good. I do not recall any overhaul program scheduled for them in the 80s. Short of replacing the entire control groups, that would have been throwing good money after bad. |
|
|
| (1161198) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by BLE-NIMX on Sun Jun 10 10:39:27 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by Train Dude on Sun Jun 10 00:19:41 2012. But if there minor differences in the WH group boxes, why not? The green R10s were a dream to run and brake, even though except for one car that went back as a test to J-1 relay with iron shoes, they didn't attempt the deadly brake adjustments that led to the Willy B? They got their original major electric and air brake overhauled and cleaned, including limit relays, line relays, door engines and compressors and MGs replaced with brand new tech. It would have been nice to have decent running single cars in the BMT anyways. |
|
|
| (1161208) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Jun 10 11:28:31 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by BLE-NIMX on Sun Jun 10 10:39:27 2012. The "Green" R-10s were a publicity stunt. The air engines were rebuilt, not replaced IIRC but those trains were in for maintenance every night. Had they been serious, they would have hung an SCM-1 group box and with the 100 HP motors, those cars would run fine but with the old door operators and no AC, they were just not worth the investment. Also keep in mind that those trucks were also well past their metallurgical lifespan - so there was also that. |
|
|
| (1161214) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by BLE-NIMX on Sun Jun 10 12:10:38 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by Train Dude on Sun Jun 10 11:28:31 2012. But the R16s had newer bodies and trucks, replacement door engines less than 10 years old, maybe even 5 years at the 1984 mark in time where the GOH, clean car program and minor overaul periods the Green tens went through, with teh same switch box components the R10s got the nightly maintainance for. What was the real reason they didn't want to keep the R16s instead of choosing the older cars, did Gunn and Pendergast really like the R10s that much. Not that I'm complaining because I love the tens too, but I think keeping the 100 WH R16s might have opened up more possibilities while the R38 and up cars were getting the works done to them. |
|
|
| (1161216) | |
Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract? |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Jun 10 12:19:11 2012, in response to Re: Poll - Who should win the R211 contract?, posted by BLE-NIMX on Sun Jun 10 12:10:38 2012. The WH 16s were likely more viable. As I said previously, I had little experience working on them. I do know that they were significantly heavier than their B division successors, however and that translates into more wear and tear on the infrastructure. How much of a factor that was in the decision to scrap them, I really couldn't say. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
