 |
Re: Nippon Sharyo pulling out of USA- Why?
Author: Dr Zarkoff
Date: 08-16-2018 - 22:07
> IIRC, with the new alternative crash energy management standards, the "old" crash standards are optional.
No, the old standards are definitely not optional for new construction (never have been). Besides they are for safety, not "energy management". "Old cars" are grandfathered until undergoing a certain level of rebuilding.
> Unfortunately, the new N-S cars had been designed under the old standards, which they obviously did not meet, and reengineering was too expensive/time-intensive.
The new N-S bi-level plain coaches were built to what you call the "new" standards, which date back about 25 years, and they passed the maximum compressive forces test of 250,000 lbs.
What didn't pass were the bi-level cab cars, which failed in the crew cab crumple zone test, a separate test which is applicable only to cab cars.
Since N-S was the only builder producing bi-level cab cars, they threw in the towel because without a cab car, who is going to order more new bi-level coaches if there are no matching cab cars available?
No, the old standards are definitely not optional for new construction (never have been). Besides they are for safety, not "energy management". "Old cars" are grandfathered until undergoing a certain level of rebuilding.
> Unfortunately, the new N-S cars had been designed under the old standards, which they obviously did not meet, and reengineering was too expensive/time-intensive.
The new N-S bi-level plain coaches were built to what you call the "new" standards, which date back about 25 years, and they passed the maximum compressive forces test of 250,000 lbs.
What didn't pass were the bi-level cab cars, which failed in the crew cab crumple zone test, a separate test which is applicable only to cab cars.
Since N-S was the only builder producing bi-level cab cars, they threw in the towel because without a cab car, who is going to order more new bi-level coaches if there are no matching cab cars available?
