Railroad Forums 

  • SEPTA to Piggyback on NJT MLV III (EMU) Order?

  • 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

 #1505256  by mcgrath618
 
So considering recent info these will apparently come in married... triplets? If SEPTA is getting 250 of these MLV IIIs/Silverliner VIs, I assume that they're keeping the SLVs. What lines do we think that these won't be used on? Obviously the Cynwyd and Fox Chase lines, but do the CHE/W lines have enough ridership for multi levels?
 #1505270  by rcthompson04
 
mcgrath618 wrote:So considering recent info these will apparently come in married... triplets? If SEPTA is getting 250 of these MLV IIIs/Silverliner VIs, I assume that they're keeping the SLVs. What lines do we think that these won't be used on? Obviously the Cynwyd and Fox Chase lines, but do the CHE/W lines have enough ridership for multi levels?
I think the Airport line is another candidate for not hosting these units.
 #1505271  by ExCon90
 
Especially considering the number of passengers carrying bulky luggage. If Warminster trains need MLVs they may have to considering alternative pairing for the Airport Line--with CHE? (Another advantage in a way--the only grade crossing would be the existing one at Eastwick, and CHE is all double track.
 #1505509  by rcthompson04
 
ExCon90 wrote:Especially considering the number of passengers carrying bulky luggage. If Warminster trains need MLVs they may have to considering alternative pairing for the Airport Line--with CHE? (Another advantage in a way--the only grade crossing would be the existing one at Eastwick, and CHE is all double track.
Yea it would make sense to use the MLVa on everything but the Airport, CHE, CHW, and Fox Chase.

Thinking of the MLVs, are we really looking at really Loki g at married sets of 3, 4, and 5?
 #1506328  by andrewjw
 
Considering only low-level stations (since the problem is obviated at high-level stations) on lines which regularly run multilevels (so not Atlantic City), it looks like very few have any significant superelevation - after all, this is usually found only on routes designed for speed, and most of the fast sections on NJT have been fully upgraded to high-level. But it looks like Orange might be a good example:
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=2083698

Regardless, I don't know what you expect would perform poorly at slanted stations. The stairs are at the same level as on a single-level, and the interior slant will be just the same.
 #1506596  by rcthompson04
 
35dtmrs92 wrote:The Metropark station tracks are banked (canted). I have never heard of the bank causing any boarding issues there.
Metropark has high level platforms. I am think of Rosemont, which was my home station for 3 years. It is not that hard to board there, but I could see why some might be concerned.
 #1523404  by ChemiosMurphy
 
Any word about Septa piggybacking onto NJT's MLV emu order? NJT mentioned it in a presser a while back, curious if there has been any motion on this no-bid contract.
 #1523411  by CNJGeep
 
They have to find the money in the couch cushions. So far it's not a certain thing.
 #1523453  by Backshophoss
 
A EMU based on the MLV design is still an R&D project that might not happen,a not so bright idea of NJT's,you loose too
space for the transformer and other needed items.
NJT has a requirement of the EMU's tow MLV-II coaches as well,the BIG mistake of the entire project, doomed to fail
 #1523475  by rcthompson04
 
Backshophoss wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 5:42 pm A EMU based on the MLV design is still an R&D project that might not happen,a not so bright idea of NJT's,you loose too
space for the transformer and other needed items.
NJT has a requirement of the EMU's tow MLV-II coaches as well,the BIG mistake of the entire project, doomed to fail
I am highly skeptical of the approach being taken by NJT and glad to see SEPTA being tagged onto the order. Let someone else work out the bugs for once (just like SEPTA did when it bought the ACS-64s). I would like to see SEPTA get its hands on the soon to be redundant MR-90s from EXO, upgrade them for SEPTA service, and use them to relieve some of the Silverliner IV units.
 #1523555  by andrewjw
 
They have a maximum service speed of 68 mph and they run only off 25 kV 60 Hz. I'm suspicious that upgrading them for compatibility with the 12kV 25 Hz system would be impractical (or at least decrease their top speed significantly due to increased weight). However, they might still run well on local trips and they would allow SEPTA to make a smaller order of MLVs and space their fleet replacement more evenly with roughly 1/3 of the fleet being replaced every 15-20 years (instead of 2/3 needing replacement at a time). I will comment more in the relevant thread in the Canadian forum with other possibilities.
 #1523579  by NorthPennLimited
 
Instead of reinventing the wheel, what’s wrong with using a proven design like the Chicago Highliner MU? They worked since 1971.

To eliminate the need for a converter, can everything on the new ML-V EMU run off alternating current? Traction motor, HAVC, lights, air compressor, etc?

I’m sure Siemens, Tesla, or Westinghouse can invent a compact transformer to handle the power demand.
Attachments:
FAFB018B-632D-49CD-9BF7-1C0A5263D592.jpeg
FAFB018B-632D-49CD-9BF7-1C0A5263D592.jpeg (29.46 KiB) Viewed 2805 times