MNRR Bilevel/Double Decker Coaches Proposal

Firm makes bid for service to Penn Station
By Mark Ginocchio, Staff Writer

Published August 23 2006

A rail car manufacturer that recently lost a bid to design a new New Haven Line fleet has returned to the state with a proposal to build double-decker rail cars for a new express service from Connecticut to Pennsylvania Station in Manhattan.

Officials from Bombardier of Quebec told the state Department of Transportation the double-decker cars could carry more passengers than a standard rail car, be delivered within two years and complement Metro-North Railroad's New Haven Line service, according to a letter obtained by The Advocate...

See the rest of the story here: http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/lo ... 2597.story

Interesting, but very strange that Bombardier would come to CDOT right after loosing a HUGE bid.

The idea of express service to Penn sounds nice, it would be great for me, cut down on my subway time. Still though, why double decker cars. It seems like they just want to take advantage of having a design ready after NJT.

Well of course Bombardier wants to recover from losing a large bid. However, they claim that since they are geared up for building NJT's cars, they could deliver CDOT cars by 2008. The Kawasaki cars aren't supposed to arrive until 2009. As stated in the full article, there are no additional slots for MN service to Penn, and there are currently no "spare" sets for this service either. The Kawasaki order is nearly $1 billion, how can they justify anotehr billion-dollar order?

-otto-

Of course....where would MN get the locomotives to do this from?

Looks more like BBD's sore that big K beat them, and they're looking for a way to derail that.

I wouldn't be surprised if, after this silly offer gets rejected, you see a lawsuit comming from BBD...

DDs to Penn would have a host of troubles - no locos, no way to go to GCT (too tall), piling into an already supercrowded station. My guess is BBD's answer to the 'no loco' issue is a few ALP-46s, and while those aren't bad units, they can't go into GCT, or even third rail territory. So they'd be useless to MN. And nonstandard vs the rest of the fleet.

I think this is what is called "wheel slip". I think it is going nowhere.
Noel Weaver

CDOT bilevels running on express MN NH trains to Penn Station is a good idea. In fact, it might not be a bad idea for making some of the trains to GCT bilevels.

For those of us just joining the program, yes, we already established this is a BAD idea. And if you bring any bi-levels into GCT, they will quickly be turned into single-level coaches. HARD.

-otto-

Is that really true? The LIRR bi-levels aren't too much taller than an M-7, perhpas VERY close in hight to the top a an M-2

I do remember that the LIRR C1's were tested into GCT, and if I recall the 2 outside tunnels can't be used at all by the bilevel coaches. If MN were to do such a thing, what tracks at GCT could be used?

anybody know what the actual height of the C3 is? The Park Avenue tunnel has a height restriction of 14'10....and I know that the tunnel leading to Flatbush caused the C3's to be prohibited from running on the Atlantic branch west of Jamaica - hense no diesel runs out of Flatbush.

I'd imagine that anything that could make it through the tunnels would have no trouble platforming anywhere on the upper level. While the lower level platforms have plenty of height clearance, the ladders may be a tight fit. Does the locomotive restriction on the lower level apply to Electric locos as well (assuming MNRR acquired electric-only engines to pull them)?

The height of the C3's are 14' 5.59"

Can you say "Sore Loosers"?

I'm amazed they didn't take a page from Kawasaki's playbook and threaten to sue MN after losing....

From what I Understand A few years back They tested Double Deckers into The Park Ave Tunnel but only on Tracks 1 and 2... Tracks 3 and 4 (Outside Tracks) Are Rounded off at the top..

So then, as it seems, double deckers would work on tracks 1 and 2 and could platform on the upper level......sounds good to me.