|
|
| Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July (643832) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 5 |
||
|
| (644692) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 12:24:17 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Fred G on Sat Jul 5 12:08:18 2008. American Paper and Apple Computer - it couldn't be clearer! |
|
|
| (644695) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 12:35:33 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Jul 5 12:10:30 2008. There are shorter tracks for work trains, which don't have third rail. if I recall right. But the two tracks nearest to the two Pt Jefferson Branch tracks do have 3rd rail, and during daytime hours, it wasn't - a few years ago - too uncommon to see EMUs stored there, starting from just east of the Pulaski Rd crossing to maybe about 500' west of the terminal. |
|
|
| (644698) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Jul 5 12:41:01 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 12:35:33 2008. I've never seen EMU's stored here, only idling diesels waiting to tun back to Port Jefferson. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (644701) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Sat Jul 5 12:42:39 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Jul 4 01:25:03 2008. Whose military does that?your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (644702) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Jul 5 12:45:14 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Fred G on Sat Jul 5 12:42:39 2008. Ours. It issues a wish-list of specs, contractors fall all over themselves to meet them, cost be damned. |
|
|
| (644703) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Jul 5 12:49:25 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 12:22:58 2008. There's space for a yard near Sayville.Everything from Huntington either comes from the west or it deadheads all the way from Hillside. A yard in Patchouge is not necessary, it's a luxury. |
|
|
| (644716) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Jul 5 13:27:58 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by RonInBayside on Sat Jul 5 10:31:43 2008. Electrifying any railroad is not a bad idea, as long as treaffic warrants the capital output. |
|
|
| (644729) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 15:43:55 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 11:48:13 2008. As far as the Lehigh Line goes, wires need to be at a certain height. Under-bridge clearance for double-stackers is 23 feet without electrification, just for perspective. |
|
|
| (644731) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 15:44:44 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 11:48:13 2008. As far as the Lehigh Line goes, wires need to be at a certain height. Under-bridge clearance for double-stackers is 23 feet without electrification, just for perspective.Double-stackers already run under the electrification at West Trenton, but those wires are 11kV 25Hz. |
|
|
| (644733) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 15:48:04 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Jul 3 23:08:57 2008. There's a lot of limiting factors. It'd be easier if the spec called for an increase in weight and more axles. This thing's going to need Tier II emission controls, a lot more cooling, et cetera. |
|
|
| (644735) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 15:50:20 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 15:43:55 2008. That's the easy part, as I recall. The hard part is that, as I recall, the trackage owner demands many other concessions. |
|
|
| (644736) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jul 5 15:52:04 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 15:44:44 2008. Double-stackers already run under the electrification at West Trenton, but those wires are 11kV 25Hz.I've seen double stack's under SEPTA's wiring at Norristown, so double stacks certainly do not preclude catenary installation... |
|
|
| (644737) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Sat Jul 5 15:53:22 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Jul 5 12:45:14 2008. Wish list, yes, specs not really. Private industry reads minds and develops a plan :Dyour pal, Fred |
|
|
| (644742) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jul 5 16:05:57 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Jul 5 11:48:02 2008. The RVL should be #1 on NJT's list of electrification expansion projects.Under current operating constraints, I'd leave the RVL wiring off the table. It makes far more sense to finish the electrification and minimize the operating costs of dual fleets on the NJCL and Royal Montclair-Boonton Electrified Railway than increase operating costs with a new half-electrified railway. Secondly, if you're going to electrify the RVL, you might as well electrify the entire line to reduce operating costs and simply line schedules. The last thing you want to occur is riders bypassing their local stations to pick up the electric service in Raritan. The partial electrification only replicates the half-assed situation in Long Branch on the NJCL with a small clunky yard and transfers for everybody going somewhere "useful". |
|
|
| (644744) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat Jul 5 16:11:44 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jul 5 16:05:57 2008. Interesting points. You want to avoid a Ronkonkoma type situation (is that the appropriate comparison?) |
|
|
| (644747) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 16:13:20 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Fred G on Sat Jul 5 11:52:37 2008. If you can tell me what kind of "expertise" can basically do the equivalent of shoe-horning an ALP46 onto a PL42AC without adding axles to distribute the weight, let's hear it.One thing you gotta consider is that you aren't going to be able to reduce the size of the transformer—that's limited by the equation VS/VP = NS/NP (in other words, you are going to need a lot of coil "turns" to accommodate the high voltage in order to step it down to a lower voltage for traction, and those turns are always the same, plus you're going to need the same kind of cooling capacity so that you don't burn out that transformer). Also, BBD has limited off-the-shelf diesel locomotive technology. The only one they offer is the Traxx DE (think of an ALP-46 as a diesel). The prime mover in that series of loco is built by MTU (yup, the same MTU that owns Detroit Diesel), rated at 2950 horses at a rather high 1860 RPMs. If BBD can glue that and the ALP46 together (which is itself a Traxx electric) and keep everything on four axles and under 295,000 pounds while meeting FRA crashworthiness and emissions specs plus meeting the horsepower and HEP requirements on the NJT RFP, it'll be nothing short of a miracle |
|
|
| (644751) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Sat Jul 5 16:31:00 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 16:13:20 2008. Dude, if I knew the answer I would not have to hire an expert :D I determine boundaries and rights-of-way and field stake track alignments. I get you a place to operate your trains; you gotta do the rest.But...I do know how to find an expert when I don't know the answer and so does NJT. your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (644761) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 17:27:34 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Fred G on Sat Jul 5 16:31:00 2008. BBD has a bad habit of taking on projects that don't work out. Case in point: Acela Express. If they bit off more than they could chew there, they're setting themselves up big-time.You don't need to be an expert to find out some of the absolutes that exist in physics. I outlined a few. If NJT's chasing idealism instead of expertise, they are setting up a huge debacle. Other countries are not even considering stuff like this; they're going right to electrification. (SNCF has been playing around with the interim B 82500 class EMU/DMU, which can apparently use two different voltages of electrification plus run on diesel power; these aren't single-unit locomotives, though, and have a lot of redundancy, and can't hit NJT's goal of 100 mph in diesel mode. SNCF still has plans to go all-electric on all lines.) |
|
|
| (644762) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 17:29:03 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Dutchrailnut on Fri Jul 4 19:30:34 2008. Certainly raises the question as to why they built in such a bad location in the first place. |
|
|
| (644764) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jul 5 17:43:34 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by RonInBayside on Sat Jul 5 16:11:44 2008. You want to avoid a Ronkonkoma type situation (is that the appropriate comparison?)That's the most extreme situation due to the scarce diesel service, but it's the perfect example of what I'm talking about. Due to the lack of frequent and direct service to Penn Station, riders flock to Ronkonkoma crowding the large lots and overburdened Long Island Expressway to get there instead of using stations closer to home. The problem is exacerbated by the LIRR's electrification system which means that any extension to the next stop, Medford, will require at least two to three substations alone. In contrast, with an overhead catenary system, two or three substations would have been sufficient to electrify as far as Greenport. While many may say that the service out east has no need for electrification, the LIRR gets the benefit of reducing its need for what may become an decreasing diesel fleet. So instead of buying expensive diesel locomotives that will see little use with extended electrification, the LIRR can simply order more MUs (read: large M-8 order) or buy an off the shelf electric locomotive (read: ALP-46A) with specifications for 750vdc third rail, 11kV@25hz & 25kV@60hz overhead catenary. Mind you, this is all in the long-term 15-25 year horizon at minimum. This is definitely not in the short or medium term range in terms of planning or any implementation. |
|
|
| (644772) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Jul 5 17:51:34 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 17:29:03 2008. They did not built, they leased a existing building, they later got a better deal at the now closed Air force base in Plattsburgh with much better rail, connections at a major rail route. |
|
|
| (644783) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 18:43:25 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jul 5 17:43:34 2008. or buy an off the shelf electric locomotive (read: ALP-46A) with specifications for 750vdc third railIs that feasible? That's certainly what the DM30s have been unable to do - run at or near timetable speeds operating off of the 3rd rail. Neither do P32DMs do this, so far as I know. |
|
|
| (644785) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 18:48:14 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 17:27:34 2008. and can't hit NJT's goal of 100 mph in diesel mode.NJT rarely goes 100 mph in electric mode.... What's the need for that goal? |
|
|
| (644787) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 18:58:25 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 18:48:14 2008. It's just specific to the NEC. The rest of the Newark Division is 80 mph max; most of the Hoboken Division is 70 mph max.That's why I don't see why they're bothering to get the ALP46A certified for 125 mph if they won't get any of the Comets or multilevels recertified for that speed. Not unless they're going to lease them to Amtrak? |
|
|
| (644789) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 19:00:50 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jul 5 15:52:04 2008. Yeah; I'd say we've reached the bottom line there. |
|
|
| (644794) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 19:10:23 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 5 18:58:25 2008. With no foreseeable plans for electrification, that certainly must be the speculation. |
|
|
| (644798) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Jul 5 19:27:46 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 18:43:25 2008. A locomotive would never work on third rail, first in push mode the engineer has to guess for where gaps are and sppeds over 60 mph give such a creature a big chance of burning up (flash overs)Old electric locomotives like DD-1 were long , had no HEP or complex high horsepower stuff running while going trough gaps in third rail and were always in lead, so engineer could see the gaps. Even a off the shelf ALP-46 would need to be heavely modified with lots of weight added to be able to work of Third rail. Like a step up inverter for third rail, shoe beams, circuit breakers for DC power etc. |
|
|
| (644836) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jul 5 22:54:18 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Jul 5 19:27:46 2008. Even a off the shelf ALP-46 would need to be heavely modified with lots of weight added to be able to work of Third rail.The theory is that this locomotive would based on similar multivoltage locomotives in use in Europe that can work on both AC and DC networks, but with 750 vdc third rail equipment installed. In fact, Alstom managed to get the TGV to work on the English third rail network, so I would consider such a locomotive to be somewhat *feasible* and not impossible to design. Admittedly, the big problem is still with the gaps... |
|
|
| (644844) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Sat Jul 5 23:12:45 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by trainsarefun on Fri Jul 4 11:42:03 2008. The very fact that NJT appreciates that they want a train that can pull power from the hi-voltage AC catenary to keep costs down is a testament to precisely the path that they are rejecting, i.e., electrification.No, NJT wants a train that will be able to operate from diesel territory to Penn Station. And, as said before, if this technology works out successfully, and not as an anemic, obese gimmick, that's wonderful, but NJT just subsidized every purchaser of that locomotive down the line. Who knew that they were in the charity business? Except that according to the OP, NJT has already established a per unit cost of purchasing the locomotives. Do you know whether electrifying the remaining portion of NJT unelectrified territory is cheaper than the cost they have established? I would be willing to bet that NJT did a cost analysis study, whereas I think you did not (cerrect me if I am wrong). And, someone has to build the thing first. That doesn't mean that NJT is in 'charity' work. It means that they have a need that they need to fill, period. |
|
|
| (644845) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Sat Jul 5 23:13:07 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Jul 4 17:30:21 2008. Sez you. |
|
|
| (644848) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sat Jul 5 23:16:04 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jul 5 22:54:18 2008. European multi voltage locomotives also weigh 35 000 Lbs less and do not run of third rail. |
|
|
| (644866) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 5 23:47:36 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by j trainloco on Sat Jul 5 23:12:45 2008. NJT wants a train that will be able to operate from diesel territory to Penn Station.That's quite easy, once NJT explains how they will get trains from any point in non-electrified territory to either NYP or the ARC terminal: AMTK and MNR do it regularly. Except that according to the OP, NJT has already established a per unit cost of purchasing the locomotives. The OP most certainly didn't assert that, since the OP was me. The relevant excerpt from NJT's announcement is: Authorization is requested to contract (No. 07-062) with Bombardier Transit Corporation of Bensalem, Pennsylvania, for the purchase of 26 Dual-Powered Locomotives, including spare parts, at a cost not to exceed $309,921,369, plus five percent for contingencies, subject to the availability of funds. Authorization is also requested to amend the contract (No. 05-098) with STV, Incorporated of New York, New York, for design and engineering assistance during the manufacture of the dual-powered locomotives at a cost not to exceed $7,904,000, plus five percent for contingencies, for a total contract authorization of $13,352,850, subject to the availability of funds. You will notice several conditions in there, such as the deal being contingent on the availability of funds, and also that there is a cost ceiling, which itself can always be amended in the future. Do you know whether electrifying the remaining portion of NJT unelectrified territory is cheaper than the cost they have established? I would be willing to bet that NJT did a cost analysis study, whereas I think you did not (cerrect me if I am wrong). NJT's own policy plan was formerly to extend electrification before the current era that has once again seemingly abandoned efforts at electrification in favor of the dual mode strategy. Was the earlier generation of NJT directors simply off base? It means that they have a need that they need to fill, period. There's a difference between needs and wants. |
|
|
| (644921) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jul 6 00:49:14 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by j trainloco on Sat Jul 5 23:12:45 2008. "Trainsarefun" totally thrashed you in his reply. |
|
|
| (644922) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jul 6 00:51:13 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Thu Jul 3 23:23:08 2008. AMT needs to do what NJT ought to do, that being extend their electrification up the Repentigny-Mascouche. (AMT seems plagued by their own backpedallers; they were even contemplating buying old E60MAs for the service thereof.) |
|
|
| (644929) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sun Jul 6 01:02:36 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jul 6 00:51:13 2008. that being extend their electrification up the Repentigny-MascoucheCanadian capital rail spending makes America look like Europe. :) IIRC, the theory that AMT is operating under is that they're just going to run this with a handful of trains with whatever clearance they're given by CN to run trains during peak. In turn, if they wanted "frequent" service, they would have blown the cash on extending Ligne 5 to Anjou and told everybody else to ride a bus. The Deux-Montagnes line is a bit of a fluke with its frequent service and was the de facto Ligne 3 of the Montréal Métro... |
|
|
| (644966) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jul 6 02:06:25 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sun Jul 6 01:02:36 2008. Canadian capital rail spending makes America look like EuropeTruth . . . IIRC, the theory that AMT is operating under is that they're just going to run this with a handful of trains with whatever clearance they're given by CN to run trains during peak. In turn, if they wanted "frequent" service, they would have blown the cash on extending Ligne 5 to Anjou and told everybody else to ride a bus. The Deux-Montagnes line is a bit of a fluke with its frequent service and was the de facto Ligne 3 of the Montréal Métro They had better stop sitting on their hands. Reminds me of NJT games indeed. Gasoline prices up that way are averaging (in US dollars) $5.60 per US gallon. They're in pretty rough shape. |
|
|
| (645012) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jul 6 08:39:46 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jul 6 00:51:13 2008. The did buy E-60's. They are sitting up on Montreal island somewhere behind a chain-linked fence |
|
|
| (645022) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Jul 6 09:25:15 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Joe V on Sun Jul 6 08:39:46 2008. They and others are being scrapped in Syracuse as we speak. |
|
|
| (645024) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Jul 6 09:28:53 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Jul 6 09:25:15 2008. For pictures of E-60 scrappimg see bottom of this thread:http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=50506 |
|
|
| (645051) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Jul 6 10:58:36 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Jul 6 09:28:53 2008. Thanks for the link. |
|
|
| (645084) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Jul 6 12:17:01 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jul 5 16:05:57 2008. I disagree. Electrifying the RVL would serve far more riders than the Lower Coast Line and the WORM Secondary. |
|
|
| (645088) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Jul 6 12:20:10 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Jul 5 17:43:34 2008. Catenary is by far the best type of electrification, but the LIRR has a vast fleet and infrastructure which uses DC third rail. Adding a third power source would be insane. |
|
|
| (645090) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Jul 6 12:24:40 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July, posted by Fred G on Sat Jul 5 16:31:00 2008. The argument here is the expense to "find" the answer for a practical dual mode versus investing in a solution which we all know works...wires. |
|
|
| (645091) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Jul 6 12:39:48 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sun Jul 6 12:20:10 2008. Not really-- especially if the goal is to reduce it to 1 or 2 eventually. MNCR works. |
|
|
| (645093) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Jul 6 12:53:20 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by R30A on Sun Jul 6 12:39:48 2008. But with 380(m-8's) MU's that cost twice what a single mode MU cost in initial investment and probably doubles the maintenance cost as well. So at what penalty is something like the New Haven a success. |
|
|
| (645097) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Jul 6 13:08:39 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Jul 6 12:53:20 2008. 2.1 million X2 = 2.4 million? |
|
|
| (645099) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Jul 6 13:21:42 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by R30A on Sun Jul 6 13:08:39 2008. The final tab is still not in for M-8's but cost is gone be close to 4 million a car. |
|
|
| (645100) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Jul 6 13:24:34 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Jul 6 13:21:42 2008. Says you. |
|
|
| (645101) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sun Jul 6 13:25:35 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by R30A on Sun Jul 6 12:39:48 2008. Notr when you have to start from scratch. However, extending third-rail judiciously along LIRR's existing lines can be worthwhile. |
|
|
| (645108) | |
Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sun Jul 6 14:15:13 2008, in response to Re: NJT Board considering large capital expenditure on new rolling stock, including DMs & EMUs, July 9th, posted by Dutchrailnut on Sun Jul 6 13:21:42 2008. What was the cost ratio between M1 and M2? And between M3 and M4? |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 5 |
||
