Amtrak DMUs

All those engines and all those fuel tanks will cost tons of labor in life of unit. just figure all those filters you need to change, just think of how many times each train would need to be spotted for fuel , believe me a real long fuel pad not only takes up a lot of space but also becomes an environmental nightmare with waste water and oil water separators, grey water tanks etc etc etc.

electricron wrote:But that rule doesn’t apply universally when discussing train units.
TexRail will have 4 cars per DMU FLIRT, Arrow ordered 2 cars per FLIRT with Stadler suggesting they up it to 3 cars, DART’s Cotton Belt will probably have 4 cars initially but they hint at expanding that to 5 cars in their DEIS for the future. So how many cars can a DMU FLIRT train set have; two, three, four or five? The answer is all of them!

So how can that be? With Stadler’s DMU FLIRT, each car can have one power bogie (truck) with just one diesel power car added to the unit. The point being that each car in the unit doesn’t require a very noisy and vibrating diesel engine under the floor.

That’s also an old idea. Budd didn’t want railroads (B&M and New Haven?) to tow trailers with RDCs, so they developed the half-power single-engine RDC-9. Still had one rattling diesel, but it was less noisy, had less to repair, and used less fuel anyway.

Dutch: agreed on the fuel pad, but how is the gray water issue any different for DMUs versus regular passenger cars?

mtuandrew wrote:That’s also an old idea. Budd didn’t want railroads (B&M and New Haven?) to tow trailers with RDCs, so they developed the half-power single-engine RDC-9. Still had one rattling diesel, but it was less noisy, had less to repair, and used less fuel anyway.

The New Haven went so far as to equip several Coaches with MU trainlines - and paint them Silver in the process - that when Budd learned of such, their response was."you have just voided your warranty".

No doubt this prompted development of the RDC-9 as noted by Mr. Stephens, however the New Haven never ordered any of such other than the fixed consist "Roger Williams", which survived into the Amtrak era.

note that on Roger Williams each car did have two engines.

george matthews wrote:

SouthernRailway wrote:I'm not a fan of any DMUs, at least the ones that I've been on (I prefer not to feel the vibrations from the engines).

However, I agree about short locomotive-hauled trains being way overpowered. The Hartford shuttles and the Piedmont in NC (one locomotive on each end, but only a couple of cars) come to mind, and I'd rather deal with engine vibrations than waste cash and fuel by overpowering a train.

The Hartford line would be ideal for a conventional EMU service - after electrification. Once an hour all day, at least as far as Springfield.

Something like the Swedish X60 could work well. I rode one of these in Stockholm.

DutchRailnut wrote:All those engines and all those fuel tanks will cost tons of labor in life of unit. just figure all those filters you need to change, just think of how many times each train would need to be spotted for fuel , believe me a real long fuel pad not only takes up a lot of space but also becomes an environmental nightmare with waste water and oil water separators, grey water tanks etc etc etc.

So how does the rest of the world make it work then?

MattW wrote:

DutchRailnut wrote:All those engines and all those fuel tanks will cost tons of labor in life of unit. just figure all those filters you need to change, just think of how many times each train would need to be spotted for fuel , believe me a real long fuel pad not only takes up a lot of space but also becomes an environmental nightmare with waste water and oil water separators, grey water tanks etc etc etc.

So how does the rest of the world make it work then?

Most DMUs are used for regional/commuter services, and typically consist of either DMU+Steering Car, 2 DMUs or 2 DMUs sandwiching an unpowered trailer. Then there are a few longer-distance trains suchs as the British HST with powercars at each end and unpowered trailers in the middle (think a Diesel-powered RDC) or with 4-5 cars of which all are powered (such as the German ICE-TD).

DutchRailnut wrote:note that on Roger Williams each car did have two engines.

I'll stand corrected on that point, Mr. Railnut. Somewhere "along the way" I rode in one well after the "Roger Williams" set had been broken up.

"Just another RDC Rattle trap".

David Benton wrote:The whole idea of DMU's is you don't "tow trailers", if you want to add cars you simply add another DMU, so the power /weight ratio is always correct.

There were rumours of VIA Rail testing an unpowered car in between RDCs for the Jasper-Prince Rupert service but it never came to anything in service. Any warranties are long gone now on that equipment so no harm done.

DutchRailnut wrote:All those engines and all those fuel tanks will cost tons of labor in life of unit. just figure all those filters you need to change, just think of how many times each train would need to be spotted for fuel , believe me a real long fuel pad not only takes up a lot of space but also becomes an environmental nightmare with waste water and oil water separators, grey water tanks etc etc etc.

And yet European operators choose to do it. Irish Rail's Rotems have their MTU engines on rafts to facilitate maintenance swapouts. http://www.irrs.ie/Journal%20170/170%20 ... 0Class.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

DutchRailnut wrote:All those engines and all those fuel tanks will cost tons of labor in life of unit. just figure all those filters you need to change, just think of how many times each train would need to be spotted for fuel , believe me a real long fuel pad not only takes up a lot of space but also becomes an environmental nightmare with waste water and oil water separators, grey water tanks etc etc etc.

Its quit easy to change filters for the tanks, and the same work must also be done by an diesel engine.

Volks, how many takers around here for a ride in a CIE Rotem DMU set from, say, New Haven-St Albans (OK; Springfield-St Albans with a 14X train connection) in.one of those contraptions?

Yes, the route following the Connecticut and then the Winnoski is relatively flat, but listening to those engines accelerate if you sit center car will be fun.

Sure, Tel Aviv-Jerusalem is one thing (Colonel sir; thoughts?), but 360 miles in one?

Frank wrote:

ConstanceR46 wrote:Ahh, my favorite criticism. "You want to do what almost every other country has done to trains? Obviously a marxist."

Obviously government ownership of anything at all doesn't compute to some folks.

Y’all have very selective hearing.

I said nationalizing the freight network without compensating the shareholders is Marxism, not “doing what every other country has done”. There’s a big difference.

I also didn’t say “government ownership of anything”. I clearly referred to the railroad system.

You can BS all you want, but the facts don’t lie: we have the biggest economy the world has ever seen, and it’s based on a framework of private Of industry and transport.

We’re not going to change that for someone’s wet dream of a passenger train network.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Volks, how many takers around here for a ride in a CIE Rotem DMU set from, say, New Haven-St Albans (OK; Springfield-St Albans with a 14X train connection) in.one of those contraptions?

Irish Rail* 22000 class onboard videos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSkEw5KwMbw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F9sI-XtNwQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

* Hasn't been CIE in an operating sense since 1987.

Tadman wrote:
Y’all have very selective hearing.

I said nationalizing the freight network without compensating the shareholders is Marxism, not “doing what every other country has done”. There’s a big difference.

I also didn’t say “government ownership of anything”. I clearly referred to the railroad system.

You can BS all you want, but the facts don’t lie: we have the biggest economy the world has ever seen, and it’s based on a framework of private Of industry and transport.

We’re not going to change that for someone’s wet dream of a passenger train network.

maybe the USA needs a little marxism tbh

https://media.amtrak.com/2018/06/amtrak ... equipment/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;