News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

APTA-2048 said:
I believe New Jersey Transit wants to do something like this with their new Multilevel IIIs.
Click to expand...
this could actually work well for GO to get cheap multiple units without mothballing everything. rebuild/order bi level power unit cars so that every 3rd or every other one is a power car and book end the cab cars.
hopefully DB will consider this option. this is essentially EMU conversion using the existing fleet.
 
^There have been lots of inexpert suggestions over the years that the traditional GO bilevel model is compatible with a EMU or maybe DMU configuration..... and lots of artwork from consultants who didn't have to build, maintain, oroperate same.... but I'm not convinced that anyone ever asked a PEng if it was feasible or desirable.
Seems to me that the design has maxed out the interior space (ie passenger capacity) at the expense of underfloor space and/or weight carrying ability. So to my layman's perspective, the design might be a terrible starting point for a self propelled car design.
I would speculate that when GO seriously contemplates self propelled cars, (as they should) they will land on a different design that is purpose built for that operating and maintenance mode.
The last thing we need is for a builder to cram electrical or diesel components into some disfunctional arrangement that is hard to maintain or pushes the envelope on stress factors for the car. So my bet is, the bilevel fleet ends up behind electric locos or mu'd to some new power equipped railcar.
There's a difference between how professional designers think and those who just say "wouldn't it be neat if....."

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
^There have been lots of inexpert suggestions over the years that the traditional GO bilevel model is compatible with a EMU or maybe DMU configuration..... and lots of artwork from consultants who didn't have to build, maintain, oroperate same.... but I'm not convinced that anyone ever asked a PEng if it was feasible or desirable.
Seems to me that the design has maxed out the interior space (ie passenger capacity) at the expense of underfloor space and/or weight carrying ability. So to my layman's perspective, the design might be a terrible starting point for a self propelled car design.
I would speculate that when GO seriously contemplates self propelled cars, (as they should) they will land on a different design that is purpose built for that operating and maintenance mode.
The last thing we need is for a builder to cram electrical or diesel components into some disfunctional arrangement that is hard to maintain or pushes the envelope on stress factors for the car. So my bet is, the bilevel fleet ends up behind electric locos or mu'd to some new power equipped railcar.
There's a difference between how professional designers think and those who just say "wouldn't it be neat if....."

- Paul
Click to expand...
spitballing some creative armchair ideas, since the 2 levels and diaphragms are connected via the mid landing on either side, maybe they can still keep the bi level body and house all the power equipment on the lower deck and block out access.
or they go the FLIRT way and have a passageway through the powerpack car. maybe a retrofit isnt possible but using the existing body with a strengthened frame on a new build is possible.
 
I'm no expert in tamping machines, but a bit of googling says that these are high end European format tampers - an interesting youtube video here.

The benefit being, fairly sophisticated get on/work/get off machines that minimise the time tracks are out of service for surfacing.

- Paul
 
I just wonder where equipment like that is stored and maintained, haven't seen stuff like that at either Willowbrook or Whitby.
 
RS3488 said:
I just wonder where equipment like that is stored and maintained, haven't seen stuff like that at either Willowbrook or Whitby.
Click to expand...

Until the Ontario Line work started in earnest, one often saw work equipment stored at Dufferin. Also at Nickle and Humberview on the Weston Sub, east of Danforth on LSE, and in laydown yards on the Newmarket and Stouffville Subs. And in the USRC.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
Until the Ontario Line work started in earnest, one often saw work equipment stored at Dufferin. Also at Nickle and Humberview on the Weston Sub, east of Danforth on LSE, and in laydown yards on the Newmarket and Stouffville Subs. And in the USRC.

- Paul
Click to expand...
GO has also taken over the remnants of the old Mimico Yard as an MOW track laydown site, and they can sometimes be found there.

The larger and more-seldom used hi-rail equipment usually gets stored in a yard on Magnificent Rd.

Dan
 
They changed the configuration of the existing old cab cars, now there’s two doors that are closed when the cab isn’t in use, blocking off the conductor and engineers seats, but keeping the door to the front of the car exposed:
IMG_9260.jpeg
IMG_9261.jpeg

Foamers will love this for the views

This is what it previously looked like when the cab was out of service:
IMG_1962.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Willybru21 said:
They changed the configuration of the existing old cab cars, now there’s two doors that are closed when the cab isn’t in use, blocking off the conductor and engineers seats, but keeping the door to the front of the car exposed:
View attachment 529452View attachment 529453
Foamers will love this for the views

This is what it previously looked like when the cab was out of service: View attachment 529433
Click to expand...
From what I’ve seen, only 251 and 252 are configured like this. I’ve noticed them being midset on the weekday Kitchener Line trains and then the consist being split into 6 car sets on the weekends with them leading.
 
cplchanb said:
Like how the slides show EMUs 😏
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how long it will take until we see them, but I'm pretty sure we will. I don't think 14 billion dollars is going to be spent just to run a few more GO bi-level trains per hour. Metrolinx could easily have continued its double tracking and station construction works without this massive contract with ONxpress. Also, if the goal was just electrification that would be a simpler contract. I'm pretty sure the idea of ONxpress (Alstom and Deutsche Bahn) is to change things significantly and I'm not sure why they would recommend electric locomotives here while largely having EMUs in Germany except for freight operations. If ONxpress orders locomotives I would guess they would be hybrids for the purpose of lines and parts of lines that will not see electrification or for high capacity rush hour trips which will probably continue to rely on GO bi-levels.
 
EnviroTO said:
I'm not sure why they would recommend electric locomotives here while largely having EMUs in Germany except for freight operations.
Click to expand...
Because we have our own operating conditions.

It doesn't matter what they have in Germany, what matters is what we have here.
 
Dec 15
Caught 257 on the rear with 239 as a coach departing Union eastbound and no idea which line they will run on other than RH or Stouffville.
53415425488_a8d089da0b_b.jpg

53414340602_b570ecf54b_b.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top