RAILROAD.NET

In philadelphia I often see a car that looks to me as an electric multiple unit. I also saw one in North jersey what are they?

Former Metroliner Cab Cars. The original Metroliners were MU cars and ran through the 1980's.

No these are not the Metroliner Mu's. These have the shape of our comet cars and it had no windows

That was a pretty vague description...but was it this? That's a catenary maintenance car that was converted from an old (non-MU) coach built by Budd for the PRR.

Hey I worked on the equipment before thats the wire train. We took that out to Hunts Point when that CSX train derail and tore the wires down.

astrosa wrote:That was a pretty vague description...but was it this? That's a catenary maintenance car that was converted from an old (non-MU) coach built by Budd for the PRR.

Yes that was the car i saw thanks for the info

I'm pretty sure that in the annals of history on this forum this must have been brought up, but searching on forums always irritates me, so I'm just going to write it here: why wasn't the Acela designed as an EMU rather than a locomotive driven train? Shinkansen, Pendolino, new ICE, and the new TGV are EMU and they're some of the most successful high-speed trains out there, so why wasn't the Acela modelled after them (especially the Shinkansen considering its status in the rail world).

There is no EMU TGV out there. Perhaps you meant the next generation TGV, if there is one in development?

Tier II safety requirements dictate that no passengers can occupy the lead or trailing unit of the train, so that kind of eliminates EMU's from consideration.

hsr_fan wrote:There is no EMU TGV out there. Perhaps you meant the next generation TGV, if there is one in development?

Tier II safety requirements dictate that no passengers can occupy the lead or trailing unit of the train, so that kind of eliminates EMU's from consideration.

The new TGV in development (I think AGV, "a" standing fro automotrice) is an EMU. I didn't realise the Tier II requirements, but I assume that it still allows EMU trainsets to operate for commuter railroads such as NJT's NEC and M&E lines and the New Haven Line for MNRR.

Tier II only applies to 125mph and faster operation. For now.

Nasadowsk wrote:Tier II only applies to 125mph and faster operation. For now.

OK. I'll never quite understand the sense in most of these rules.

Neither do we!

Neither does the FRA or AAR, I think. The former reacts to accidents, much as the predecessor ICC did. (Recall Chase MD in particular.)

Mr. King, we should note that the EMU is a "been there done that' with the premium service equipment. the Metroliner MU cars were obviously a commercial success in that they engendered 492 "look alike' Amfleets. But alas, they were mechanical nightmares, and were withdrawn from premium service by 1980. Today, some "soldier on" as de-motored cab units in bi-directional equipment assignments.

Lastly Mr. King, I think you will find the php search tool here to be easy to use and quite effective, but if you have a dial-up ISP connection, PATIENCE is the byword when using.

that the EMU is a "been there done that' with the premium service equipment.

Does this mean we shouldn't try again? Has nothing changed in the past 40 years in railroad mechanical engineering that we couldn't learn from? Why just because we tried something once a long time again can we not revisit the idea? Aside from the FRA requirements that make this particular topic illegal (passengers in High-Speed EMU's) I'm just curious why many times someone asks a question a response is "been there, done that" but over 30+ years ago is used to seemingly (at least to me) dismiss the idea. I would be interested in knowing how AMTRAK could adapt some of the advances in railroad engineering to the U.S. environment.

Moderator: If I need to move this message, let me know.