Railroad Forums 

  • Silverliner Vs Out of Service - Technical Topics

  • 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/.
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

 #1394433  by pumpers
 
thanks for the link. It sounds like the new equalizers for testing (some forged, and some welded but hopefully correctly) will arrive in a few weeks. I wonder how long it will take to get enough data to be sure they have it right. JS
Anyone know the sources of the new beams for testing?
 #1394458  by fishtruk
 
Yes Litz I saw that one. I think the cracks are underneath unshown where that arrow is. Considering the directions of stress and strain does it have to be welded under there? Would this problem not have happened?
Using the wrong filler could cause this failure without doubt.
 #1394463  by pumpers
 
This whole business started I believe when one equalizer didn't just have cracks, but broke clear through, into 2 pieces I assume (and caused that leaning carbody).
Has anyone seen any pictures of that beam? (or the 2 pieces I should say)
I would love to see it - it would be a classic that would show up in the textbooks for the next 50 years...
JS
Not to mention a picture of the leaning car...
 #1394904  by Broadway
 
Found out that Rotem will be repairing the trucks at their South Philly plant. Only the trucks will be sent there. They will/are detrucking some of the SL V's and using trucks from the comet cars as shop trucks while repairs will be made.
 #1395194  by swampoodle
 
Broadway wrote:They will/are detrucking some of the SL V's and using trucks from the comet cars as shop trucks while repairs will be made.
Unconfirmed rr rumor has it the terrible mass of the Vs may be too great for even the mighty Comet trucks to accommodate... Really hope that's not the case, as it would be an extremely elegant solution to that problem. The brake-less Comets remain parked in the middle of Robert's with their diesel anchor.
 #1395230  by pumpers
 
Over on the Schedule/Service Discussion thread, on Saturday, silverlinerfan22 posted:
It appears for now the goal is to have 10 cars back by Sept.1st and 80 cars back in service by Halloween.
I don't know if this is pure wishful thinking, or is good news that they know something concrete about the problem AND how to repair it and parts/labor availability. It has been over 2 weeks since I have read about any official press conference on all of this from SEPTA. Has there been any official word from SEPTA lately involving the repair plan?
Then again, maybe they are keeping quiet because of swampoodle's rumor in the previous post....
JS
PS. Related to my post last week about wanting to see the 2 pieces of the broken equalizers, it sounds like now it is at least 3 pieces - when it broke it was jammed in so tight that they had to cut it out. http://billypenn.com/2016/07/03/why-sep ... y-a-third/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 #1395260  by SCB2525
 
This has me wondering whether SEPTA should consider keeping a portion of the IV's longer than first planned by slowly rebuilding the best of them when the bilevels come in. Doing it slowly allows you to adapt to any issues with the rebuilds and if the rebuilds prove reliable, you could continue to lean on them well into any continued V issues or future bilevel or VI issues. This issue tells me we should have a larger contingency fleet spread across multiple types/generations.

Is there some FRA nonsense that precludes this like the II's and III's?
 #1395262  by BuddCar711
 
SCB2525 wrote:Is there some FRA nonsense that precludes this like the II's and III's?
With the SL-IIs and SL-IIIs, it's the stainless steel frameheads. With the SL-IVs, it could be the vestibules (which could also affect the sister Arrow IIIs as well), which is why the SL-Vs came with 1/4 point doors and traps because the FRA outlawed vestibules on MUs unless built for raised platforms only.
 #1395301  by R36 Combine Coach
 
Not sure if the SLIIIs have stainless frameheads like the IIs since they were of different construction. Since St. Louis Car Company did not purchase the rights to Budd's shotweld stainless construction under license, the Silverliner IIIs and Arrow Is were built using conventional [carbon-based] steel framing, with flash welded stainless sheetmetal for the exterior shell, including the sides, roof and ends. Had stainless frameheads been the problem on the IIIs, the Comarrows wouldn't be running at Caltrans.
 #1395334  by ex Budd man
 
Both the SL-II and SL-III had carbon steel end frames, as does the SL-IV and V cars. The body, center sills and cross bearers are Stainless steel. The IIs and IIIs were retired because it was deemed too expensive to bring them up to current FRA standards. The SL-IVs COULD be fitted with center doors ala the NJT Arrow cars but again SEPTA doesn't want to spend the money because there simply are not enough high platform stations to warrant the expense. And building more high platform stations is out of the question, like adding toilets on the trains. ;-)
 #1395355  by R3 Passenger
 
ex Budd man wrote:And building more high platform stations is out of the question, like adding toilets on the trains. ;-)
But aren't high platforms required for all new station construction per ADA?
 #1395453  by roadmaster
 
R3 Passenger wrote:But aren't high platforms required for all new station construction per ADA?
lefty wrote:All new platforms must be ADA but there plenty of grandfathered stations that are still ground level. They will eventually be brought up to code but that will take a number of years.
Don't get caught up into "They all must..."

From the ADA Standards for Transportation Facilities wrote:810.5.3 Platform and Vehicle Floor Coordination. Station platforms shall be positioned to coordinate with vehicles in accordance with the applicable requirements of 36 CFR part 1192. Low-level platforms shall be 8 inches (205 mm) minimum above top of rail. In light rail, commuter rail, and intercity rail systems where it is not operationally or structurally feasible to meet the horizontal gap or vertical difference requirements of part 1192 or 49 CFR part 38, mini-high platforms, car-borne or platform-mounted lifts, ramps or bridge plates or similarly manually deployed devices, meeting the requirements of 49 CFR part 38, shall suffice.

EXCEPTION: Where vehicles are boarded from sidewalks or street-level, low-level platforms shall be permitted to be less than 8 inches (205 mm).

Advisory 810.5.3 Platform and Vehicle Floor Coordination. The height and position of a platform must be coordinated with the floor of the vehicles it serves to minimize the vertical and horizontal gaps, in accordance with the ADA Accessibility Guidelines for Transportation Vehicles (36 CFR Part 1192). The vehicle guidelines, divided by bus, van, light rail, rapid rail, commuter rail, intercity rail, are available at http://www.access-board.gov" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. The preferred alignment is a high platform, level with the vehicle floor. In some cases, the vehicle guidelines permit use of a low platform in conjunction with a lift or ramp. Most such low platforms must have a minimum height of eight inches above the top of the rail. Some vehicles are designed to be boarded from a street or the sidewalk along the street and the exception permits such boarding areas to be less than eight inches high.
  • 1
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 16