Railroad Forums
Moderators: mtuandrew, gprimr1
electricron wrote:I thought this thread was supposed to be about "new" diesel MUs, I'm disappointed to read an argument about past diesel MUs. Can we keep the discussion on topic?Moderator's Note: electricron has a point. It's valuable to see why SPVs had difficulty, but they're not modern. Let's stick to newer vehicles.
electricron wrote:I thought this thread was supposed to be about "new" diesel MUs?Number one, there aren't any new diesel MUs in the US and this thread is making it pretty clear why that's so.
mtuandrew wrote:What "newer vehicles?" Are we to assume that we much excluded the cars produced by the defunct CRC? What about RDC rebuilds? Why precisely is the SPV suddenly a forbidden topic? Only a few months ago, there was even a new article addressing the SPVs, and while you can question the article, it is open to debate as to whether the SPV was any less "modern" in concept than the CRC DMU, which shared the same conceptual approach, albeit with modern off-the-shelf components, as opposed to late-70s off-the-shelf components. In many respects, the differences between the SPV and CRC are far less important than the similarities.electricron wrote:I thought this thread was supposed to be about "new" diesel MUs, I'm disappointed to read an argument about past diesel MUs. Can we keep the discussion on topic?Moderator's Note: electricron has a point. It's valuable to see why SPVs had difficulty, but they're not modern. Let's stick to newer vehicles.
goodnightjohnwayne wrote:Why would we assume CRC products are verboten - they're newer DMUs, no? Also, if Bombardier announced that they were shopping around a new version of the SPV (being as they own Budd's designs), it wouldn't be an issue to discuss where they went wrong with the old ones. However, we're discussing issues that have ONLY been pertinent to a vehicle since withdrawn from the rails, and unlikely to return in self-propelled form. If you wish to compare the SPV with modern DMUs (whether American- or foreign-built), be my guest, but let's not let this particular discussion devolve into one bemoaning the fate of SPVs.mtuandrew wrote:What "newer vehicles?" Are we to assume that we much excluded the cars produced by the defunct CRC? What about RDC rebuilds? Why precisely is the SPV suddenly a forbidden topic? Only a few months ago, there was even a new article addressing the SPVs, and while you can question the article, it is open to debate as to whether the SPV was any less "modern" in concept than the CRC DMU, which shared the same conceptual approach, albeit with modern off-the-shelf components, as opposed to late-70s off-the-shelf components. In many respects, the differences between the SPV and CRC are far less important than the similarities.electricron wrote:I thought this thread was supposed to be about "new" diesel MUs, I'm disappointed to read an argument about past diesel MUs. Can we keep the discussion on topic?Moderator's Note: electricron has a point. It's valuable to see why SPVs had difficulty, but they're not modern. Let's stick to newer vehicles.
There might be a couple of pivotal events later in the year concerning the future of DMU technology in North America, with one particular contract attracting a number of potential bids. Time will tell.
goodnightjohnwayne wrote:What "newer vehicles?" There might be a couple of pivotal events later in the year concerning the future of DMU technology in North America, with one particular contract attracting a number of potential bids. Time will tell.How about the Stadler GTW in service in Austin, Texas
So, vague foreshadowing of end-of-the-year contracts does no good for anyone. Please be specific.There are several potential DMU bidders for the SMART (SomonaMarinAreaRapidTransit)
