Railroad Forums 

  • UK Vivarail D-Train to be tested in US cities

  • General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.
General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.

Moderators: mtuandrew, gprimr1

 #1464857  by DutchRailnut
 
shrug it off , as for knowledge you can't fit 2 gallons of knowledge in a half gallon container :-)
 #1464903  by mtuandrew
 
I could think of a few routes, a couple in the Twin Cities (ex-MILW 29th St corridor shuttle, ex-NP Skally Line) and a couple elsewhere (NJT Northern Branch, Princeton Branch, and a few in South Jersey, and any potential Ottawa O-Train shuttles) but these cars seem too cute by half for most American service.
 #1464933  by talltim
 
RRspatch wrote:
* England, the only country in the world that runs narrow gauge trains on standard gauge tracks. :P
As opposed to Ireland (Eire and Northern) that run narroaw gauge trains on broad gauge track :P
 #1465858  by D40LF
 
If Viva Rail really wanted to do business in the US, they would apply their UK technology to US style railcars. There are plenty of FRA compliant single level commuter cars (like the Budd M1s) that are available second hand, and could be modified just like the D78 Stock.
 #1465866  by mtuandrew
 
D40LF wrote:If Viva Rail really wanted to do business in the US, they would apply their UK technology to US style railcars. There are plenty of FRA compliant single level commuter cars (like the Budd M1s) that are available second hand, and could be modified just like the D78 Stock.
Could, but the M1/3s (and NJT Arrows, SEPTA Silverliner 4s, whichever) have millions of miles under their floors. The whole thought with these Underground cars is that they don’t have much fatigue or wear for the price.
 #1465882  by BandA
 
electricron wrote:D train Wiki https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_ ... _D78_Stock" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
S train Wiki https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_ ... d_S8_Stock.." onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
Per Wiki:
In November 2014, ...replaced by S Stock before the end of their lifespan, so that the subsurface lines (Circle, District, Hammersmith & City and Metropolitan) could have a common rolling stock fleet compatible with a new ATO system.
I'd like to hear about London's new ATO system!!!

Would these DMUs be usable under wire also? That would be quite a win. As diesel-electric they would be more "modern" than an RDC, though not as flexible.
 #1465890  by electricron
 
BandA wrote:I'd like to hear about London's new ATO system!!!

Would these DMUs be usable under wire also? That would be quite a win. As diesel-electric they would be more "modern" than an RDC, though not as flexible.
Yes, diesel electric propulsion wouldn’t prevent it. But these ex-underground cars don’t have a pantograph - these would have to be added. London’s underground trains use 630 volts DC fourth rail system, a transformer would also have to be added for much higher voltage catenary AC power. These all require design and engineering before installing. Golly, they could be used with new batteries or hybrid systems.
If you’re willing and have the money to spend engineering alternate power systems for these used cars, you should also have the money to spend on brand new trains anyways. What would you rather spend your money on?
 #1465894  by djlong
 
Would be nice to see them here in New Hampshire, but the big objection to extending Boston's Lowell Commuter Rail Line into NH has been the cost of upgrading the swamp-like 10MPH rail to something faster than a paralyzed turtle's speed.

The cost of the rolling stock isn't as daunting as the cost of practically rebuilding the line.
 #1465907  by mtuandrew
 
electricron wrote:If you’re willing and have the money to spend engineering alternate power systems for these used cars, you should also have the money to spend on brand new trains anyways. What would you rather spend your money on?
I’d rather new (or sometimes rebuilt-heritage like PCCs) but we also don’t know how much Vivarail wants for these cars. Could be 10x less than any other modern DLRT.
 #1465908  by electricron
 
djlong wrote:Would be nice to see them here in New Hampshire, but the big objection to extending Boston's Lowell Commuter Rail Line into NH has been the cost of upgrading the swamp-like 10MPH rail to something faster than a paralyzed turtle's speed.

The cost of the rolling stock isn't as daunting as the cost of practically rebuilding the line.
There are various recent examples we could look at on how the costs of introducing commuter rail services were divided. Let’s just look at one close to where I live. DCTA rebuilding 21 miles of single track rail, building O&M facility, building new train stations, and buying new trains. They didn’t have to buy the DART owned corridor - but they are paying DART yearly for access rights.
Upfront capital costs to access track from DART $0
Cost of rebuilding tracks and building new stations $231.5 (see math below) (71%)
Cost of building new operations & maintenance facility $20.5 million (6.5%)
Cost of buying new trains $73 million (22.5%)
Total capital building costs $325 million
But we can do a little math to discover the costs of rebuilding the tracks.
325 - 73 - 20.5 = 231.5

So you’re correct, even the costs of buying new trains is small compared to the costs of rebuilding the rail corridor infrastructure. DCTA skews this data point lower than most because they didn’t have to buy the rail corridor or pay way too much for access rights from a for profit ran freight railroad corporation.
Last edited by electricron on Wed Mar 21, 2018 5:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 #1465912  by mtuandrew
 
Looking at those numbers, Ron, these cars are designed to need minimal O&M facilities (a shed with a hoist, and a nearby heavy truck mechanic), minimal track improvements (an ATS system only - they don’t even need signals; FRA Class III maintenance; minimal grade preparation assuming the line wasn't abandoned that long ago), and minimal platform needs (essentially a covered, lighted wooden porch with a wheelchair ramp and extendable platform edges.) I have no idea how much a modern IIATS system costs such as is installed on the RIVERline, but a wild guess would be no more than $200k/mile for a 5 mile line.

As for reconstructing an abandoned track from scratch, a Middle America (not Northeast necessarily) price should be closer to $100k/mile for a government-owned non-trailbanked right of way, single track, wooden ties, unsignaled, little/no regrading and reballasting work necessary, and passive grade crossing signals. (+$100k for each signaled crossing.) Set aside a couple million for court challenges too.

All of this goes out the window if you have to work with a Class II or (perish the thought) Class I railroad in any capacity, and mark my words, these cars will never polish rails owned or operated by a Class I.
 #1465996  by electricron
 
mtuandrew wrote:All of this goes out the window if you have to work with a Class II or (perish the thought) Class I railroad in any capacity, and mark my words, these cars will never polish rails owned or operated by a Class I.
I, as well as Vivarail, completely agree with you on that point. That’s why they stated these will need FRA exemptions.
But there are plenty of rail corridors running through American cities that are not owned by a Class 1 railroad.
 #1578208  by Pensyfan19
 
They did it... Carnegie Mellon University tested one of these on the East Broad Top for "Pop Up Metro".

https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/li ... annel=home
Along for the ride, Henry Posner III, the chairman of Railroad Development Corporation (RDC) and an adjunct instructor at Carnegie Mellon University, sits eager to demonstrate his vision for a rail-based mass transit system in the United States. The original concept for Pop-Up Metro— a battery-powered, modular train that can be inserted onto existing infrastructure—evolved in parallel with his Department of History class, The American Railroad-Decline and Renaissance in the Era of Deregulation.

“There are more possibilities for railroads than you might think,” said Posner, who together with his wife, University Trustee Anne Molloy, is also a generous benefactor of CMU. “A lot of urban areas in this country have underutilized freight lines that could also support transit service. People might not have considered these opportunities because it’s been perceived as too expensive, too lengthy and too risky. With Pop-Up Metro, you can do that project quickly on a demonstration basis. You don’t have to spend $100 million.”

For the pilot project, Pop-Up Metro, an RDC affiliate, imported remanufactured passenger railcars from Britain to Rockhill Furnace. The cars have been retrofitted with battery technology by Vivarail, another RDC affiliate. Posner said the battery train is the only one of its kind in the Western Hemisphere and its timing is good in view of the current focus on the environment and technology. It’s now using 1.8 miles of the Shade Gap Branch of the East Broad Top Railroad as a proving ground.
(Sign me up for that history class about American Railroads in the Era of Deregulation! :wink:)
 #1578396  by wigwagfan
 
See the 2009-current experiment known as TriMet's Westside Express Service, or WES.

Step 1: Someone shows off a fancy railcar and says how great it is. (oooh, look, a British DMU, we have to buy this European design!)

Step 2: Local governments/transit agencies search in vain for some rail line to run the car on, with zero regard for true transit planning. (I think there's a rail line here that isn't used much, maybe we can run trains here again?)

Step 3: After blowing the original budget by 200%, the line opens to mass media hype and fanfare, which quickly fizzles out when the public realizes the service is hardly feasible. (Yay, publicly funded party with all the elected officials that drove up - and home - in their SUVs!)

Step 4: We wonder why transit ridership is in the gutter when we've spent $165 million to build the system, another $30-40 million in capital expenses afterwards, $16 million a year (times 12 years) to actually pay to run the system...but because we blew all this money we had to cut the transit service people actually did use, resulting in people being forced to drive. Because buses suck and trains are the best thing since sliced bread, even if those trains don't go anywhere people want or need to go, whereas the buses did.