Derailment at NY 8/9/2011

I don't think it is so much a trait of Bombardier but rather the stiff trucks of Alstrom Design and build. They are more ridgid than m-3's and arrows and have little tolerance of curve worn rail. I would be willing to hedge that it is a combo cause of a truck that is ridgid and rail that is not perfect.

They are more ridgid to for higher speeds and I do not feel that RR's keep their track pristine, especially in turnouts and curves. (Sad part is, the ridgid trucks wear the rail quicker than the old style trucks)

railmason357 wrote:I don't think it is so much a trait of Bombardier but rather the stiff trucks of Alstrom Design and build. They are more ridgid than m-3's and arrows and have little tolerance of curve worn rail. I would be willing to hedge that it is a combo cause of a truck that is ridgid and rail that is not perfect.

They are more ridgid to for higher speeds and I do not feel that RR's keep their track pristine, especially in turnouts and curves. (Sad part is, the ridgid trucks wear the rail quicker than the old style trucks)

This is exactly what I am talking about. They will wear the rail more esp if they are not maintained correctly. Something about the side bearings too? I have two working models in scale that I can use to demonstrate the different between the two now for those who dont get why these trucks dont do what the old ones did.

JamesRR wrote:While NJT deserves a lot of blame for some of its problems, I think buying the ML equipment was one of the smarter moves in increasing capacity

I agree, which is why the Raritan Valley Line should not be 100% multilevels...some or all of those 10 RVL sets should go to lines which have higher ridership, either the Corridor or the Coast Line...