The future of the SEPTA fleet

zebrasepta wrote:

TrainPhotos wrote:

MACTRAXX wrote:

zebrasepta wrote: AEM-7's and ALP-44 aren't in service on the Lansdale/Doylestown line at all (NIMBYs...) and they forgot about the Media/Elwyn and West Trenton lines using the engines

ZS:

There is more then just NIMBY opposition to using the AEM7s and ALP44 on the Lansdale-Doylestown Line...

From what I recall each time they have tried using a push-pull train on a peak hour express such as the North
Penn Limited they had problems keeping the schedule meaning the train ran late more then it was on time and
there is the problem with the small capacity substation on the Doylestown Branch as well along with the NIMBY
complaints about the motor noise from these locomotives when they are stored in the Doylestown yard...

I also remember that the RDG side power supply limits the use of push-pull trains to only two and they have
both been assigned to two West Trenton peak hour expresses and at one point one of these trainsets was
assigned to a Warminster peak round trip...With these new locomotives if SEPTA plans on adding more RDG
side push pull trains the power supply needs to be beefed up to accomodate them and if not most of the new
multilevel trains will be going on the Paoli-Thorndale, Wilmington-Newark and Trenton Lines...

This new equipment will be a significant improvement for the Regional Rail system and hopefully SEPTA does
operate more push-pull trains on more lines that can use them...

MACTRAXX

They do plan to replace all of the RDG era substations and what have you, so that won't be an issue for much longer...

You can look at the substations they're working on here:
http://septa.org/rebuilding/substation/overview.html

Everyone:

I looked at the list of substations that SEPTA plans to work on and they are basically on three lines:
Media-Elwyn, West Trenton and Lansdale (Note - I am not including Doylestown - there is no added information
about this substation and if SEPTA plans to do any work there) which should be for the added power capacity
that would be needed for new push-pull trains using either the AEM7s before they are retired or the new ACS64
locomotives along with either the current single level or new multilevel cars...

SEPTA may be planning on terminating all push-pull trains at Lansdale and not operating them at all on the
Doylestown Branch which would seem like that they are either giving in to the local NIMBYs in Doylestown or
not extending more then one or two peak hour runs with the new equipment past Lansdale and may be planning
to deadhead push-pull trains the ten miles back and forth between Lansdale and Doylestown for overnight storage...

Another thought is that the plan for Lansdale trains using P/P equipment is that they may be scheduled to run
back to Center City similar to the way that it is done on the Wilmington-Newark Line by running an extra reverse
express in both the morning and evening to get the one trainset back and forth on this line...

I noticed that the Chestnut Hill East substation is part of the proposed improvements - a short branch with stations
that are closely spaced will continue to be served by MU cars - I remember back in 1987 when the P/P trains were
new they were tested on both the CHE and CHW Branches - the AEM7s barely were able to get going before getting
to the next station and applying the brakes to stop again - thanks to these test runs it was found that AEM7 hauled
trains were better used on longer runs with more distance between stations...

In closing it is good to see this large SEPTA improvement program moving forward and many of these proposed
projects are going to help SEPTA overall in the long run...

MACTRAXX

Anything to help packed trains will be welcomed during rush hour. It's going to be even harder to get a seat when the new office tower at Penn opens up by 30th St., and Comcast II opens next to Suburban Station.

I agree with the thought process, not much room to run 6 and 7 car trains during rush hour. If you can't build trains horizontally, build them vertically (double dockers). Now you can split a 6 car consis of MU's during rush hour and run more frequent "short locals" behind the express trains and turn them at Glenside, Bryn Mawr, and Marcus Hook.

Heck, maybe if the crew and equipment shortage ever corrects itself, they could run express to Torresdale, and run short locals to Holmesburg Jct.

Isn't the purpose of bustitution on the Doylestown Line so that they could replace the substation in Doylestown? I thought that was already a done-deal.

What I'm wondering about is that if SEPTA orders multilevel cars, are they gonna get 3x2 seating in the multilevel cars or 2x2 seating?
I got a feeling that they're gonna go for 2x2

I think SEPTA is going to go with the 2x2 seating for the multi-level cars. The multi-level trains are already tight enough in their own way.. so 3x2 might not work.

2x2 seating is fine.

That 3rd (middle)seat on trains and airplanes are THE WORST places to sit. Nobody wants to be shoulder to shoulder with a stranger for 30-40 minutes.

Most people would rather stand than have to "ask" people to move over or put their bags on the overhead rack to open up that middle seat in the train.

Looks like the new coaches and new engines will be just in time to help with the growing ridership / equipment capacity.

If I remember correctly, the SL-V order, while more cars than the previous fleet of Budd cars, offered no significant net gain in passenger seats.

NorthPennLimited wrote:2x2 seating is fine.

That 3rd (middle)seat on trains and airplanes are THE WORST places to sit. Nobody wants to be shoulder to shoulder with a stranger for 30-40 minutes.

Most people would rather stand than have to "ask" people to move over or put their bags on the overhead rack to open up that middle seat in the train.

Looks like the new coaches and new engines will be just in time to help with the growing ridership / equipment capacity.

If I remember correctly, the SL-V order, while more cars than the previous fleet of Budd cars, offered no significant net gain in passenger seats.

I don't know exactly how much SEPTA bombers can seat but I'm pretty sure the multilevel coaches will add some capacity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardier ... evel_Coach" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Capacity
127 (cab car)
132 (trailer car with restroom)
142 (standard trailer car)

zebrasepta wrote:What I'm wondering about is that if SEPTA orders multilevel cars, are they gonna get 3x2 seating in the multilevel cars or 2x2 seating?
I got a feeling that they're gonna go for 2x2

ZS:

The LIRR tried 3/2 seating in their original ten C1 bilevel cars that were built in 1990 as a prototype test for
the MTA by the Tokyu Car Company of Japan - this turned out to be the biggest complaint about these cars
and when the C3 car fleet was being designed later in the 90s 2/2 seating on both levels was what the LIRR
opted for back then which was and is the right move for bilevel cars...

Another thought that I remember mentioned was that the C1 3/2 seats were designed with Japanese people
in mind - they tend to be smaller in stature and weight then North Americans are...

SEPTA's Multilevel cars should be very similar to the NJ Transit and MARC versions - the AMT (Montreal) cars
are built with the end doors for low level platforms and the inner doors for high platforms - which for AMT are
only at Central Station in downtown Montreal...

MACTRAXX

I'm guessing people Doylestown fought PP's because of the noisy electric clicking they do. Do ACS64's do that?

SCB2525 wrote:I'm guessing people Doylestown fought PP's because of the noisy electric clicking they do. Do ACS64's do that?

The noise is something to do with condensation draining or pressure blow-off from the air system in the locomotive. It basically dries the air for the whole train...

The MLV fleet is amt/njt only, right now isn't it? In any case, the doylestown substation is to be replaced as well, just farther down the road. I believe it is last or near last on the list, but it IS on the list and it WILL be replaced. Be patient...

NorthPennLimited wrote:I think the running times / scheduling can be addressed utilizing push-pulls to Doylestown. The track grades are predominately up hill, there needs to be a little time added to allow for slower acceleration on a locomotive-hauled train as opposed to a MU consist. Especially on northbound trains to Doylestown.

They've got no room to lay up a 6 or 7-car PP set with locomotive at Doylestown any more. When they did run one up there, not only was it before the yard was built up there, but it parked on the Long Siding behind the Doylestown Hunt development. Those are the folks who complained about the motors. Now, the Long Siding is main track, used for meets at certain times, and is the headroom for trains to enter and exit Doylestown Yard, of which none of the tracks can hold 6 cars + a locomotive, let alone seven. When 6576 ran 7-cars, that set had to be split up when being yarded at Doylestown, as it did not even fit on the platform at the station there.

SCB2525 wrote:Has SEPTA ever ordered equipment off the shelf? I would be extremely surprised if they ordered them as-is.

Yes. The AEM-7 and Bombardier coach fleet.

Speaking of which, if Rotem is overhauling 22 cars, and I assume that does not count the 3 cars already completed in-house by SEPTA, that makes 25 cars of the original fleet completed. So ten original cars (1987) and the ten center door cars (2000) are going to be left in the cold.
With 13 locomotives on order, and a wish for 45 multilevel cars, that plus the 25 overhauled coaches will give them a total of 70 push-pull coaches to work with. And, if the MLV's have the same door control setup as the MARC cars, they will be able to mix with single-level cars. Unlike the NJT MLV's, the door controls on the MARC cars are the standard setup as seen on the SEPTA Bombers, Amfleet, etc. When the traps are raised, and a trainline door command issued, only the end doors will open; with traps down, a trainline command will operate ALL doors.

TrainPhotos wrote:The MLV fleet is amt/njt only, right now isn't it?

Nope. MARC has 54 MLV cars now, with all but the cab cars now in service.

Silverliner II wrote:

NorthPennLimited wrote:I think the running times / scheduling can be addressed utilizing push-pulls to Doylestown. The track grades are predominately up hill, there needs to be a little time added to allow for slower acceleration on a locomotive-hauled train as opposed to a MU consist. Especially on northbound trains to Doylestown.

They've got no room to lay up a 6 or 7-car PP set with locomotive at Doylestown any more. When they did run one up there, not only was it before the yard was built up there, but it parked on the Long Siding behind the Doylestown Hunt development. Those are the folks who complained about the motors. Now, the Long Siding is main track, used for meets at certain times, and is the headroom for trains to enter and exit Doylestown Yard, of which none of the tracks can hold 6 cars + a locomotive, let alone seven. When 6576 ran 7-cars, that set had to be split up when being yarded at Doylestown, as it did not even fit on the platform at the station there.

SCB2525 wrote:Has SEPTA ever ordered equipment off the shelf? I would be extremely surprised if they ordered them as-is.

Yes. The AEM-7 and Bombardier coach fleet.

Speaking of which, if Rotem is overhauling 22 cars, and I assume that does not count the 3 cars already completed in-house by SEPTA, that makes 25 cars of the original fleet completed. So ten original cars (1987) and the ten center door cars (2000) are going to be left in the cold.
With 13 locomotives on order, and a wish for 45 multilevel cars, that plus the 25 overhauled coaches will give them a total of 70 push-pull coaches to work with. And, if the MLV's have the same door control setup as the MARC cars, they will be able to mix with single-level cars. Unlike the NJT MLV's, the door controls on the MARC cars are the standard setup as seen on the SEPTA Bombers, Amfleet, etc. When the traps are raised, and a trainline door command issued, only the end doors will open; with traps down, a trainline command will operate ALL doors.

TrainPhotos wrote:The MLV fleet is amt/njt only, right now isn't it?

Nope. MARC has 54 MLV cars now, with all but the cab cars now in service.

Ok, thank you for the clarification!

As for 2x3 seating in MLV, i'm not sure people understand how the seats are designed in the MLV if they are mentioning 2x3. You'd have to basically design and develop a totally new seat to fit 3 rear ends plus some other issues. If you note in the image below, the lower level has a "well" aisle between the seats. This width cannot be changed, as the sections under the seats are a structurally integral part of the car's frame. For 2x3 seating to work, you'd need to move that aisle off to one side. Not happening.



I do however wonder if SEPTA plans to mix single and MLV cars. That would be interesting to see, as NJT currently does not do this on revenue trains...

TrainPhotos wrote:
Ok, thank you for the clarification!

As for 2x3 seating in MLV, i'm not sure people understand how the seats are designed in the MLV if they are mentioning 2x3. You'd have to basically design and develop a totally new seat to fit 3 rear ends plus some other issues. If you note in the image below, the lower level has a "well" aisle between the seats. This width cannot be changed, as the sections under the seats are a structurally integral part of the car's frame. For 2x3 seating to work, you'd need to move that aisle off to one side. Not happening.

I do however wonder if SEPTA plans to mix single and MLV cars. That would be interesting to see, as NJT currently does not do this on revenue trains...

Although MBTA doesn't use the same equipment as NJT, they mix their trains with singles and bi-level cars and are the multilevels and bombers compatible?

zebrasepta wrote:

TrainPhotos wrote:
Ok, thank you for the clarification!

As for 2x3 seating in MLV, i'm not sure people understand how the seats are designed in the MLV if they are mentioning 2x3. You'd have to basically design and develop a totally new seat to fit 3 rear ends plus some other issues. If you note in the image below, the lower level has a "well" aisle between the seats. This width cannot be changed, as the sections under the seats are a structurally integral part of the car's frame. For 2x3 seating to work, you'd need to move that aisle off to one side. Not happening.

I do however wonder if SEPTA plans to mix single and MLV cars. That would be interesting to see, as NJT currently does not do this on revenue trains...

Although MBTA doesn't use the same equipment as NJT, they mix their trains with singles and bi-level cars and are the multilevels and bombers compatible?

Yes. MARC mixes everything with everything, and those are verbatim NJT-spec cars siphoned off the NJT option orders. AMT mixes theirs with their Comets. NJT has an operational preference for segregating flats with flats and MLV's with MLV's. But that's more about their power assignments. The GP40 fleet is a wimpier 3000 HP, so they like to go all-flat with those to minimize the acceleration penalty. Some lines like the NEC in particular are so overcrowded and car-hungry they always do 100% MLV's. And the Arrows serving as the single-levels of choice in electric territory ends up making most of the Comets live in diesel land. Those three big centers of gravity for equipment assignments end up creating a pronounced skew by with the various coach pools across the system that lends itself best to fully uniform consists. But there's absolutely no functional restriction on mixing them. It does happen, just not regularly.


I somewhat doubt SEPTA's going to want to keep its flats when the order is finished. The new cars will come with ASA destination/information displays both inside and out as well as other associated automation, which the flats obviously won't have at all except for being able to repeat the audio announcements. And if they're anything like the MBTA's ASA that their Rotem bi-levels have and their Kawasaki bi-levels are being retrofitted with during midlife overhaul, the ASA computer will live in the cab car and thus you must have a bi-level cab car for the displays and annoucements in any of the trailers to work. Throw in the fact that the old stuff is really worn out and I doubt the upside is their for keeping a remainder fleet--especially one that small--vs. just getting the cleanrooming over with. Even the T's fleet plan calls for purging all 200 of its remaining flats in another 5 years if it can scrape together the money for such a huge procurement, just for sake of getting it over with and having a completely uniform fleet they no longer have to keep in balance on the per-consist mixture. So are Metro North and NJT with their even more aggressive 2018-2025 fleet plans to purge their huge numbers of flats. And MARC (34 remaining MARC IIB single-levels after this MLV order is done) and AMT (24 Comet II's) aren't going to take more than 3-5 years to dip in for more supplemental orders to scrape off their last tiny remainders of flats. Given the way it's trending across every current user of flats...just get the transition over with as quickly and cleanly as possible and don't over-complicate by hanging on to the old stuff for too long.

I believe the comet 2 cars were overhauled at some point, giving them the interior mounted info boards viewable from the platform. Perhaps that will be done to the SEPTA fleet? Cab end info boards could probably be installed as well. Is this possible/practical? Will they simply replace the push pull equipment currently in operation with MLV-ACS64 as numbers allow? Would be kind of cool from a passenger/layperson's perspective to have an actual and substantial fleet expansion, and not just a one to one replacement. Then all you'd need is more crews and maybe get around to my pet cause, the half hour intervals...

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:

zebrasepta wrote:

TrainPhotos wrote:
Ok, thank you for the clarification!

As for 2x3 seating in MLV, i'm not sure people understand how the seats are designed in the MLV if they are mentioning 2x3. You'd have to basically design and develop a totally new seat to fit 3 rear ends plus some other issues. If you note in the image below, the lower level has a "well" aisle between the seats. This width cannot be changed, as the sections under the seats are a structurally integral part of the car's frame. For 2x3 seating to work, you'd need to move that aisle off to one side. Not happening.

I do however wonder if SEPTA plans to mix single and MLV cars. That would be interesting to see, as NJT currently does not do this on revenue trains...

Although MBTA doesn't use the same equipment as NJT, they mix their trains with singles and bi-level cars and are the multilevels and bombers compatible?

Yes. MARC mixes everything with everything, and those are verbatim NJT-spec cars siphoned off the NJT option orders. AMT mixes theirs with their Comets. NJT has an operational preference for segregating flats with flats and MLV's with MLV's. But that's more about their power assignments. The GP40 fleet is a wimpier 3000 HP, so they like to go all-flat with those to minimize the acceleration penalty. Some lines like the NEC in particular are so overcrowded and car-hungry they always do 100% MLV's. And the Arrows serving as the single-levels of choice in electric territory ends up making most of the Comets live in diesel land. Those three big centers of gravity for equipment assignments end up creating a pronounced skew by with the various coach pools across the system that lends itself best to fully uniform consists. But there's absolutely no functional restriction on mixing them. It does happen, just not regularly.


I somewhat doubt SEPTA's going to want to keep its flats when the order is finished. The new cars will come with ASA destination/information displays both inside and out as well as other associated automation, which the flats obviously won't have at all except for being able to repeat the audio announcements. And if they're anything like the MBTA's ASA that their Rotem bi-levels have and their Kawasaki bi-levels are being retrofitted with during midlife overhaul, the ASA computer will live in the cab car and thus you must have a bi-level cab car for the displays and annoucements in any of the trailers to work. Throw in the fact that the old stuff is really worn out and I doubt the upside is their for keeping a remainder fleet--especially one that small--vs. just getting the cleanrooming over with. Even the T's fleet plan calls for purging all 200 of its remaining flats in another 5 years if it can scrape together the money for such a huge procurement, just for sake of getting it over with and having a completely uniform fleet they no longer have to keep in balance on the per-consist mixture. So are Metro North and NJT with their even more aggressive 2018-2025 fleet plans to purge their huge numbers of flats. And MARC (34 remaining MARC IIB single-levels after this MLV order is done) and AMT (24 Comet II's) aren't going to take more than 3-5 years to dip in for more supplemental orders to scrape off their last tiny remainders of flats. Given the way it's trending across every current user of flats...just get the transition over with as quickly and cleanly as possible and don't over-complicate by hanging on to the old stuff for too long.

the reason I'm saying this is because I remember SEPTA saying that they might order 45ish multilevels which doesn't seem enough for the 18 ACS-64's they're ordering
even with the 5 options, 45 multilevels seems like a small amount for 13 locomotives unless for whatever reason SEPTA decides to keep the bombers...