Noel Weaver wrote:I didn't say they weren't comfortable or ride good. They're excursion equipment so they have to be comfortable. But, I still think they shouldn't have been used for commuter service. Here are some other criticisms straight from wikipedia:realtype wrote:I don't know what the RTA was even thinking. Those things should have never been used for commuter service. Just look at how it dwarfs the B'dier bilevel and the F40. They probably couldn't even come close to matching the clearance reqs. for any passenger RR in the Northeast. I wonder if that can even reach 80mph safely. These cars were intended for excusion use, CRC wanted to make an extra buck by pitching them for commuter use, and Tri-Rail fell for it.I do not agree with you, these cars easily fit clearances here in South Florida, they ride as good as anything else and they
are new and clean, I hope they stay at least halfway decent over the coming years.
I think this equipment is working out OK on Tri-Rail and I don't think Tri-Rall fell for anything.
If they are able to get parts for them as necessary, I think they will be running for at least a while.
The DMU consists are generally considered more comfortable in terms of seating than the Bombardier coaches they were acquired to replace. However, they suffer from a lack of bicycle and luggage storage that have been a continual source of irritation and complaints from daily and airport commuters ever since the DMU's original prototype phase. Additionally, wheelchair accessibility is compromised by the entrance steps necessitated by the unit's higher floorboards (required to clear the Detroit prime movers). This problem remains uncorrected, despite the acquisition of the new Colorado Railcar rolling stock.
Additionally, operators contended that a single DMU and trailer car are underpowered for sufficient in-service acceleration, and could not effectively negotiate the 40+ foot grade over the New River Bridge without a helper locomotive, thus defeating the purpose of a self-propelled coach. The addition of a second DMU to the two car motor/trailer consist has since appeared to solve the problem of the New River bridge grade, but acceleration still remains an issue in practice. Whether the DMU's prime movers will accept the strain of present revenue operations remains to be seen."
It seems to be that these are serious (and predictable) problems that stress the point that the CRC designs were never intended for commuter rail.