FRA issues draft rule change for lighter passenger rail cars

General discussion of passenger rail proposals and systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.

Moderators: gprimr1, mtuandrew

FRA issues draft rule change for lighter passenger rail cars

Postby STrRedWolf » Thu Dec 01, 2016 10:57 am

Posting from my phone but here's the article:

http://usa.streetsblog.org/2016/11/30/f ... nt-trains/

The FRA expects the new rules will enable railroads to use trains that are safer, more energy efficient, and cheaper to operate. The rules will allow American passenger train operators to purchase rolling stock designed to European safety standards (but not Japanese standards), without going through an expensive waiver process.
I ride the (MTA Maryland) Penn Line (between Odenton and Baltimore). I used to work for MTA Maryland's IT department, and out of professional courtesy my responses may be limited. Wikimapia is wonderful (for track/interlocking locations)!
User avatar
STrRedWolf
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 5:18 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: FRA issues draft rule change for lighter passenger rail

Postby bdawe » Thu Dec 01, 2016 11:38 am

The proof will perhaps be in when any agency actually acts upon these proposals.
B. Dawe's map of routes and urban populations https://brendandawe.carto.com/viz/80b9d ... /embed_map NOW updated with 2016 Canadian Populations
User avatar
bdawe
 
Posts: 508
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:06 pm
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia

Re: FRA issues draft rule change for lighter passenger rail

Postby bdawe » Thu Dec 01, 2016 4:37 pm

What a shame however, that this has come *after* contracts were signed and much equipment delivered for ACS-64s, corridor SC-44, corridor bilevels, and other FRA compliant orders around the country
B. Dawe's map of routes and urban populations https://brendandawe.carto.com/viz/80b9d ... /embed_map NOW updated with 2016 Canadian Populations
User avatar
bdawe
 
Posts: 508
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:06 pm
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia

Re: FRA issues draft rule change for lighter passenger rail

Postby Nasadowsk » Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:25 pm

bdawe wrote:The proof will perhaps be in when any agency actually acts upon these proposals.


California is buying a few Stadler KISS sets for the San Jose electrification. Ft Worth is buying Stadler FLIRTs for a new rail line. IIRC, the Austin and Denton GTWs are basically euro-spec already.

The KISS units will be interesting to see, since they're spec'd to be 6000kW for a 6 car train, 2.24 mph/s acceleration, though they don't say yet what speed that'll be maintained to. 110mph top speed. But 60Hz only. It'll be interesting to see how the weight compares to the SBB units. A 60hz transformer is a big saver, but they'll have beefy air conditioning. I bet it's a wash...

Oddly, dual height platform capability...

If the MBTA had any brains (ok, ok, work with me here...), they'd watch this one closely...
Nasadowsk
 
Posts: 3788
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:45 pm

Re: FRA issues draft rule change for lighter passenger rail

Postby DutchRailnut » Thu Dec 01, 2016 9:42 pm

Keep in mind it is a draft rule, and in no way final see FRA page : http://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/details/L18433#p1_z5_gD
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer
User avatar
DutchRailnut
 
Posts: 21176
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Re: FRA issues draft rule change for lighter passenger rail

Postby bdawe » Thu Dec 01, 2016 11:45 pm

Nasadowsk wrote:
bdawe wrote:The proof will perhaps be in when any agency actually acts upon these proposals.


California is buying a few Stadler KISS sets for the San Jose electrification. Ft Worth is buying Stadler FLIRTs for a new rail line. IIRC, the Austin and Denton GTWs are basically euro-spec already.

The KISS units will be interesting to see, since they're spec'd to be 6000kW for a 6 car train, 2.24 mph/s acceleration, though they don't say yet what speed that'll be maintained to. 110mph top speed. But 60Hz only. It'll be interesting to see how the weight compares to the SBB units. A 60hz transformer is a big saver, but they'll have beefy air conditioning. I bet it's a wash...

Oddly, dual height platform capability...

If the MBTA had any brains (ok, ok, work with me here...), they'd watch this one closely...


However, all of those orders were through time-segregating waivers. I believe that the plan for the Caltrain corridor is 110 mph maintenance, for the benefit of coming HSR runthrough mostly

They seem like they could make a lot of sense on the Marc Penn Line with proper power supply
B. Dawe's map of routes and urban populations https://brendandawe.carto.com/viz/80b9d ... /embed_map NOW updated with 2016 Canadian Populations
User avatar
bdawe
 
Posts: 508
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:06 pm
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia

Re: FRA issues draft rule change for lighter passenger rail

Postby ExCon90 » Fri Dec 02, 2016 2:58 pm

DutchRailnut wrote:Keep in mind it is a draft rule, and in no way final see FRA page : http://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/details/L18433#p1_z5_gD

By the same token, if there's anything in there you don't like, click on Dutch's link to get the docket number and decide whether you want to have some input. As far as I know you don't have to have "standing" to comment in a rulemaking proceeding--although it's as well to stick to facts, avoid rhetoric, and keep adjectives and adverbs to a minimum; at the end of every final decision there's a sentence that goes something like "other submissions have been considered and found to be without merit."
ExCon90
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:22 pm

Re: FRA issues draft rule change for lighter passenger rail

Postby STrRedWolf » Fri Dec 02, 2016 8:38 pm

bdawe wrote:They seem like they could make a lot of sense on the Marc Penn Line with proper power supply


Well, all MARC lines to be honest. They are going 100% diesel after all.
I ride the (MTA Maryland) Penn Line (between Odenton and Baltimore). I used to work for MTA Maryland's IT department, and out of professional courtesy my responses may be limited. Wikimapia is wonderful (for track/interlocking locations)!
User avatar
STrRedWolf
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 5:18 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: FRA issues draft rule change for lighter passenger rail

Postby bdawe » Sun Dec 04, 2016 2:31 am

I was referring to Caltrain's electric order. Caltrain is going nearly 100% electric
B. Dawe's map of routes and urban populations https://brendandawe.carto.com/viz/80b9d ... /embed_map NOW updated with 2016 Canadian Populations
User avatar
bdawe
 
Posts: 508
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:06 pm
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia

Re: FRA issues draft rule change for lighter passenger rail

Postby electricron » Sun Dec 04, 2016 3:10 am

DutchRailnut wrote:Keep in mind it is a draft rule, and in no way final see FRA page : http://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/details/L18433#p1_z5_gD

Yes, the link is a draft, but the FRA has been working on these rules for years, it's going to be a new set of rules.
When the two largest states, specifically California and Texas, demand new rules, new rules get implemented.
The DCTA A Train GTWs had time separation operations with freight trains, they were allowed to run simultaneously with RDCs. FWTA TexRail Flirts desire simultaneous operations with freight trains, TRE locomotives and trailers, Amtrak locomotives and Superliners, and GVRR steam locomotives with heavy weight excursion coaches. There's no way they could set up a time separation schedule for all the different users using the same track. ;)
Likewise, Caltrains KISS multilevel will be sharing their tracks with CHSR. In both Texas and California cases, the main European contractor, Stadler Rail, has been in frequent discussions with the FRA, taking the time to answer all the FRA questions. The DCTA trains had more improvements than CapMetro trains, and the eBART trains have some more improvements. I believe Stadler has satisfied most of the FRA concerns over many years, to the point the FRA is finally ready to release the proposed draft of the new rules. ;)
electricron
 
Posts: 3818
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:35 pm


Return to General Discussion - Passenger Rail

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests