Push-Pull Vs EMUs?

TrainPhotos wrote:

keyboardkat wrote:I was on a Long-Branch-NY morning train the other day, which had six MLVs and an ALP46 pushing. The engineer had the front vestibule open, and I took advantage of it until a lady collector closed it. But when the engineer pegged the throttle, you could feel the surge as the ALP shoved from behind - she had it up to about 86mph at one point, before beginning to slow for the next stop. Blended braking was smooth, too. Given the lower acquisition cost and lower maintenence costs of push-pulls, I think it's no contest.

Would love to know from an engineer's perspective how they handle as more cars are tacked on. Then compare the less-than-flat NEC vs the coast line...

They felt slow as anything on the M&E.

If you're sittin in the upper level, it will naturally feel a bit slower because you're higher up, and thus further from the ground. In an airliner at 36,000 feet, if you look down, the ground hardly seems to be moving.

Ken S. wrote:

TrainPhotos wrote:

keyboardkat wrote:I was on a Long-Branch-NY morning train the other day, which had six MLVs and an ALP46 pushing. The engineer had the front vestibule open, and I took advantage of it until a lady collector closed it. But when the engineer pegged the throttle, you could feel the surge as the ALP shoved from behind - she had it up to about 86mph at one point, before beginning to slow for the next stop. Blended braking was smooth, too. Given the lower acquisition cost and lower maintenence costs of push-pulls, I think it's no contest.

Would love to know from an engineer's perspective how they handle as more cars are tacked on. Then compare the less-than-flat NEC vs the coast line...

They felt slow as anything on the M&E.

Is this a 10 car train or 6-7? Route profile hilly or mostly flat?

Ken S. wrote:

kilroy wrote:It was posted around here several years ago when NJT wanted to go all loco hauled and no emu because the arrows inspection cycle is like a locomotive at 30 days (I think) and unpowered cars have a 90 day inspection cycle (I think, again).

I guess the question is how much does it cost to do an inspection? If everything was locomotive hauled, how many inspectors can NJT get rid of?

The only reason they haven't is because of one or two branches that are meant for MU operation although one could, has, and does operate push-pulls and the other has a vocal group trying to keep NJT from converting it to a bus route (Two Arrow IIIs can hold a lot more than a transit bus).

A single Arrow III can hold more than twice the passengers of a transit bus.

keyboardkat wrote:Given the lower acquisition cost and lower maintenance costs of push-pulls …

There is no "lower maintenance cost", especially with the MLVs' frequent brake inspections. Off-the-line acceleration of MUs is still superior; not even a train of six single-levels with ALP-46 can beat Arrows on a local-stopping train on the Erie section of the Montclair-Boonton. MLV door placement will still mean longer dwell times even if a MU version comes out.

And when is NJT going to shake off "Shirley Time", which was implemented by someone with fraudulent credentials and caused a 10-mph drop in average speed (at its worst)?

NJT did a cost benefit study many years ago and the Mechanical dept felt it leaned toward push pull operation.
They did not consult the track department (wheel slip wear and tear to track structure causing increased maintenance)or the operating department as most engineers prefer MU ops when tight schedules are in effect. The M & E was laid out for MU ops from its inception and most lines are more suited to MU ops due to the closeness of stations and the punishing schedules. Negating the NEC where loco hauled expresses pulled by 46's and 45's really come into there own. Any consist above eight cars, on NJT owned lines, tax loco hauled trains as heat in summer and wheel slip in fall and winter IMHO beat the hell out of a 46 and 45 and I think it shows up in increased shop time and expenses for that fleet. The reality is there are always trade offs but a 10 car MU set under 25KV catenary is a pretty fast animal as 20 plus traction motors vs. four is a no brainer when it comes to maintaining a tight schedule.

How many of the 230 Arrow 3s rebuilt by Alstom in the early 1990s are still in service? And how long are they planned to remain in service?

Dcell wrote:How many of the 230 Arrow 3s rebuilt by Alstom in the early 1990s are still in service? And how long are they planned to remain in service?

There is a topic on these somewhere that i saw a few weeks ago. It has the official numbers of how many they intend to retire, and how many to remain in service, and how many to be stored serviceable. Based on what I've read in other threads, most of the ones to be retired immediately have all ready been hauled off to the dead line for scrapping...

amtrakowitz wrote:There is no "lower maintenance cost", especially with the MLVs' frequent brake inspections.

I recall MUs require more frequent inspections as each car is a "operating unit" or locomotive.