andrewjw wrote:It seems that you were correct.Backshophoss wrote:At first glance,they look like MBTA Rotem cab cars,with a twist of NJT's ML-II's built in.I suspect the cab end of the cab cars will not have low platform openings becuase they decrease the structural integrity around the engineer. So perhaps the far end of the car has them.
Don't see any low platform door openings.
Railroad Forums
SEPTA Cancels CRRC multi level order (Was:SEPTA to get multi-level railroad coaches)
- Discussion relating to Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (Philadelphia Metro Area). Official web site can be found here: www.septa.com. Also including discussion related to the PATCO Speedline rapid transit operated by Delaware River Port Authority. Official web site can be found here: http://www.ridepatco.org/.
Moderator: AlexC
Does anyone know what these railcars are gonna be named as?
zebrasepta wrote:Does anyone know what these railcars are gonna be named as?Lèsè Xiāng Huǒzāi
and the English translation is ?????
The Land of Enchantment is not Flyover country!
Backshophoss wrote:and the English translation is ?????Dumpster Fire
(I have no idea what they will be named.)
zebrasepta wrote:Does anyone know what these railcars are gonna be named as?My guess would be SEPTA III
The original rendering and the actual body shell shown have little similarity on the head end. The actual shell looks more like a SLIV with an extended roof line. There is a door at the cab end opposite the engineer's position but it looks to be high level only. They are obviously also following more recent standards of no door or trap under the engineers side of the cab.
Glenn
GlennK: I wonder if there will be a short (under 6”) composite extension on the nose - that would account for the different looks and also protect against metal damage in low-speed incidents.
Backshophoss wrote:Figure on SEPTA and Atlas doing a SEPTA schene'ed version on a ML II model in HO to go along with the Bachmann HO ACS-64.Models will be forthcoming, but not from Atlas.
with the added value MSRP to cover the SEPTA license Fee.
It appears there may be a road block for CRRC to sell multi level cars to SEPTA using federal dollars:
A new bill moving they the Senate proposes a 1 year ban on Chinese built busses and rail cars made in China while the House seeks measures to strengthen “Buy American” laws.
https://www.enotrans.org/article/senate ... companies/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A new bill moving they the Senate proposes a 1 year ban on Chinese built busses and rail cars made in China while the House seeks measures to strengthen “Buy American” laws.
https://www.enotrans.org/article/senate ... companies/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Last edited by NorthPennLimited on Fri Aug 03, 2018 4:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
A quick scan of that article,anything already under contract is safe,SEPTA bi-levels,MBTA Red line cars,and Chicago RTA Cars.
One of the targets is"Build Your Dream " Bus manufacturer, having delivered some "under performing" electric buses to
various cites in the US.
One of the targets is"Build Your Dream " Bus manufacturer, having delivered some "under performing" electric buses to
various cites in the US.
The Land of Enchantment is not Flyover country!
Backshophoss wrote:A quick scan of that article,anything already under contract is safeHowever the Senate version includes the following:
(2) A rail rolling stock manufacturer described in subsection (a) may not use funds provided under a contract or subcontract described in paragraph (1) to expand the manufacturer’s production of rail rolling stock within the United States to an ‘amount of rolling stock vehicles or railcars’ that is greater than the amount required under contractual obligations of the manufacturer as of the date of enactment of this ‘Act including all options per for additional rolling stock.’OK, I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV but it seems that clause, if included in the final legislation, could short-circuit SEPTA's option for a 10-car expansion.
Requiem for it's/its, your/you're, than/then, less/fewer. They were once such nice words with such different meanings...
JeffK wrote:I would say that's a reasonable interpretation. I stand by my original assertion a year ago that we (SEPTA) should have gone with the well proven BBD multilevel cars but that ship obviously sailed.Backshophoss wrote:A quick scan of that article,anything already under contract is safeHowever the Senate version includes the following:(2) A rail rolling stock manufacturer described in subsection (a) may not use funds provided under a contract or subcontract described in paragraph (1) to expand the manufacturer’s production of rail rolling stock within the United States to an ‘amount of rolling stock vehicles or railcars’ that is greater than the amount required under contractual obligations of the manufacturer as of the date of enactment of this ‘Act including all options per for additional rolling stock.’OK, I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV but it seems that clause, if included in the final legislation, could short-circuit SEPTA's option for a 10-car expansion.
Glenn
Backshophoss wrote:A quick scan of that article,anything already under contract is safe,SEPTA bi-levels,MBTA Red line cars,and Chicago RTA Cars.Massachusetts and the MBTA aren’t using federal funds on the Orange and Red Line cars from CRRC so this ban wouldn’t apply anyway.
One of the targets is"Build Your Dream " Bus manufacturer, having delivered some "under performing" electric buses to
various cites in the US.
So, SEPTA needs to put ink to paper ASAP to exercise that option.