NJT MLV EMU Procurement

This is why they went for powered trailers .
less passengers so only one set of doors on power car.
No controlling air equipment , cause its already on cab car except for compressor.
no toilet as each car on either end has one.

for a short train a cab car can be coupled on each end for minimum of 3 car train.

for longer trains any combination can be used , believe the power cars are actually good for 4 car blocks of cars , so a 12 car train would only require 3 power cars.

From NJT's "FYI" newsletter distributed today:

"...113 'next-generation' multilevel rail cars (MLV III). Fifty-eight of the MLV III cars are self-propelled electric cars which allows them to connect with other MLV cars and operate without a locomotive. The remaining MLV III rail cars are cab cars (with a locomotive engineer's compartment) and trailer cars, including six cars equipped with restrooms. The new railcars will feature two-by-two seating, similar to the existing MLV fleet, as well as USB charging ports, an onboard LED information system, and bicycle storage, and will be fully compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The MLV III fleet will replace our oldest Arrow III single-level rail cars that are more than 40 years old and reaching the end of their useful lives, helping to increase service reliability, seating capacity, efficiency and customer comfort. Testing of MLV III prototypes is scheduled for the third quarter of 2022, with revenue service debut scheduled for the 2nd quarter of 2023"

Some thoughts/questions gleaned:

- Will any of the self-propelled cars have cabs, or are they all regular coaches?
- Will the MLV III's work with the MLV I and II fleet? (Essentially, will the entire MLV fleet be interchangeable)
- Can old cabs be used with the EMU cars?
- USB ports - will these be at every seat, window seats only, and where?
- These are replacing the "oldest" Arrow IIIs, but not all of them initially
- What will configuration be (e.g. Cab, power, trailer, power, trailer, power, trailer, power, cab)?

Forgive the ignorance: Unlike Amtrak cars and Arrows it was my understanding that all NJT locomotive hauled cars were unidirectional. If that is the case how will the bracket a power car with two cab cars?

by wiring a second set of receptacles, on one end of power car, or by modifying a few cab cars.

Modifying the cab cars I get but that would be incredibly inefficient as they would need to be tracked seperately.

Are you saying that while there are two sets of identical/symmetrical receptacles on each railcar that only one side of the car is actually wired since they are uni-directional? I've always wondered about that. What would the cost be to enable both sets fleetwide?

just take look at pictures of receptacles , currently the traction trainline at one side and communications trainline on other side.
to couple up with cars reversed the receptacles should be switched to other side.
.

DutchRailnut wrote:just take look at pictures of receptacles , currently the traction trainline at one side and communications trainline on other side.
to couple up with cars reversed the receptacles should be switched to other side.
.

Hmm...so I suppose they had to do this with the current cab cars being used in front of the locomotives (due to the locomotive PTC installation process),as they are facing the opposite direction? Or do the locos have identical receptacles on each side...?

andegold wrote:Modifying the cab cars I get but that would be incredibly inefficient as they would need to be tracked seperately.

There are only 62 cab cars in the fleet right now. They can start adding jumper sockets now and be ready when the MLVIII power cars arrive

just like a locomotive I suspect bi directional receptacles at each end of powercar .l

EuroStar wrote:It is worth noting that the only other bid was from the Chinese and as of right now they lack any record for equipment built for US standards, use, abuse, lack of maintenance, etc.,

Look to Buenos Aires. The Chinese have built all of the commuter and long distance equipment purchased in the last ten years. The results have not been spectacular. There are two diesels, the SDD7 (30 mile commuter route) and CKD8 (6-32 hour long distance). There are also two similar MU fleets, the Roca fleet on AC wire, and the Mitre & Sarmiento, on 85vDC third rail.

The SDD7 has a Cat prime mover and someone undersized it, leading to some serious finger pointing and blame game between the Chinese and Cat. The CKD has not been the paragon of reliability, either, and it's not uncommon to see a 45 year old EMD on the point of El Tucumano, the longest overnight train (32 hours) in Argentina. It's a bit incongruous seeing said grimy EMD at the point of a new Chinese-built streamliner.

Regarding the MU fleet, it is my understanding that at any time there are lots of these MU's out of service and quite a few are permanently laid up due to workmanship, maintenance, and lack of support. What is amusing is that after five years of such antics, the Argentines ordered 100+ more cars to retire the last of the 35yo Toshiba cars.

This is worth mentioning because (a) it's the most complete CRRC lifecycle outside of China; (b) China, USA, and Argentina all have similar non-European environments. Lots of space, imprecise track, reactive maintenance. Given this, Chinese equipment should be designed with such environment in mind and hold up, but it is not so far. Were CRRC equipment to be run hard on the NEC in Jersey, I predict similar results.

If you want to see my pics of this operation, which I quite enjoy: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set ... cd196107a6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wiki articles on the rolling stock: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSR_EMU_(Argentina" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSR_SDD7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNR_CKD8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Problem: the Arrow MLV is an overpriced beast of a railcar with no more than four possible operators (NJT, SEPTA, MARC and Metro North). It’s also overkill for the Princeton Branch.
Problem: the first-generation Stadler DLRVs are wearing out and will be due for replacement soon.

Solution: why not explore some of BBD’s Vario and Vario Twindexx units? They meet the speed requirement (up to 200 kmh, ~125 mph), are modular to be either EMU or locomotive-hauled, can be specced to board at low or high platforms, and appear to have both DMU and EMU options. The bilevel appears to clear the North River Tunnels as well.

Or does that make too much sense?

Didn’t NJT state that the Dinky will be operated by single level cars. I thought I saw that in the Packet.

mtuandrew wrote:Problem: the Arrow MLV is an overpriced beast of a railcar with no more than four possible operators (NJT, SEPTA, MARC and Metro North).

...

Or does that make too much sense?

MNRR also doesn't have the same power type anymore, having gone to 60hz. I doubt Arrows can run on it. Other than that, perfect sense.

Jeff Smith wrote:

mtuandrew wrote:Problem: the Arrow MLV is an overpriced beast of a railcar with no more than four possible operators (NJT, SEPTA, MARC and Metro North).

...

Or does that make too much sense?

MNRR also doesn't have the same power type anymore, having gone to 60hz. I doubt Arrows can run on it. Other than that, perfect sense.

mtuandrew is referring to the BBD MLV III power cars as "Arrow MLV" and surely they could be built to operate on MNRR.

My bad, I should have seen that. Thanks.