 |
Re: New Cars for Amtrak California?
Author: espee2472
Date: 08-31-2017 - 10:25
SP5103 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > i'd would be more interested in how
> > a proven design was deemed unacceptable?, what
> > criteria was
> > changed and why?
>
> I don't think it was a "proven design" by any
> means, and I believe they were being designed from
> scratch and the issue was meeting the current
> crush/collision stadards, which I believe were
> updated after the Metrolink vs UP head on.
>
> Since the order has stayed at 130 cars, the
> question is how seats this money is buying because
> I assume the bi-level design had more seating. As
> pointed out, an advantage of the bi-level design
> (whether standard or high pass through) is that
> the lower level is fairly easily handicap
> accessible especially with an 8" platform height.
>
>
> Back in the day, you had Pullman, Budd and others
> continuing to improve their designs and compete
> for orders from the railroads. Now there are very
> few builders to compete according to government
> bidding standards, the government agencies (and
> their consultants) tend to write their own unique
> specification requirements, not to mention
> government safety standards that now seemingly
> change every 5-10 years often requiring
> substantial redesign and re-certification. There
> isn't a real steady flow of orders split between
> the builders, so they are having to absorb the
> drawn out bidding and design process not to
> mention the buyer's funding cycles, so it has
> become a feast or famine business of building
> custom rail cars in limited runs, despite agencies
> trying to combine orders to save money.
>
> Imagine the locomotive market if EMD or GE only
> got a 500 engine order every few years? On the
> commuter side, that is exactly what is happening.
> What has GE built since the P40/P42? EMD can
> barely get the F125 into service which so far only
> has one buyer. Even MPI which had little trouble
> selling their fairly standardized MP36/40 line is
> now fighting for every commuter engine order.
well i guess it boils down to interpretation of "proven design"
and it' s survivability?, my bench
mark is caltrain morgan hill,
nothing has even come close since
then, pullman/nippon sharyo still
stands as #1
-------------------------------------------------------
> > i'd would be more interested in how
> > a proven design was deemed unacceptable?, what
> > criteria was
> > changed and why?
>
> I don't think it was a "proven design" by any
> means, and I believe they were being designed from
> scratch and the issue was meeting the current
> crush/collision stadards, which I believe were
> updated after the Metrolink vs UP head on.
>
> Since the order has stayed at 130 cars, the
> question is how seats this money is buying because
> I assume the bi-level design had more seating. As
> pointed out, an advantage of the bi-level design
> (whether standard or high pass through) is that
> the lower level is fairly easily handicap
> accessible especially with an 8" platform height.
>
>
> Back in the day, you had Pullman, Budd and others
> continuing to improve their designs and compete
> for orders from the railroads. Now there are very
> few builders to compete according to government
> bidding standards, the government agencies (and
> their consultants) tend to write their own unique
> specification requirements, not to mention
> government safety standards that now seemingly
> change every 5-10 years often requiring
> substantial redesign and re-certification. There
> isn't a real steady flow of orders split between
> the builders, so they are having to absorb the
> drawn out bidding and design process not to
> mention the buyer's funding cycles, so it has
> become a feast or famine business of building
> custom rail cars in limited runs, despite agencies
> trying to combine orders to save money.
>
> Imagine the locomotive market if EMD or GE only
> got a 500 engine order every few years? On the
> commuter side, that is exactly what is happening.
> What has GE built since the P40/P42? EMD can
> barely get the F125 into service which so far only
> has one buyer. Even MPI which had little trouble
> selling their fairly standardized MP36/40 line is
> now fighting for every commuter engine order.
well i guess it boils down to interpretation of "proven design"
and it' s survivability?, my bench
mark is caltrain morgan hill,
nothing has even come close since
then, pullman/nippon sharyo still
stands as #1
