Siemens Caltrans/IDOT Venture design, engineering, testing and delivery (2012-1Q 2024)

Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
VRE is about to surplus some of their legacy bi-levels bought from METRA. Since METRA seems short of cars wonder if the cars might go back to METRA ?
 
west point said:
VRE is about to surplus some of their legacy bi-levels bought from METRA. Since METRA seems short of cars wonder if the cars might go back to METRA ?
Click to expand...
I'd have to double check but I think that METRA just put out a RFQ for new cars (unless I have that confused with locomotives....).
 
Just wondering what VRE cars going to METRA has to do with Nippon-Sharyo order? Maybe I am missing something that establishes a connection. So just trying to figure out, and not just asking a rhetorical question.
 
Well, Nippon-Sharyo has built a lot of Metra's cars, so I suppose that could be the connection - or else they are coming home to Chicago?
 
Oh yeah! BTW, the difference between the METRA cars and the Midwest bilevels is that the METRA Gallery Cars are cars with center sill, whereas the Midwest and California bilevels have no center sill. That is what most likely tripped up N-S.
 
It's a totally and completely, if not utterly, different design. The metra bilevels/highliners (I guess I can't really call them that anymore) aren't truly double-deck or two storied unlike the Superliners in the sense that you can't stand upright with someone else standing upright above you.
 
How would Amtrak's order for (at least) 130 new bi-level coaches impact Septa's purchase of new double decker coaches and Metra's soon to be purchase of new bilevel coaches?
 
Amtrak didn't buy any bi-level coaches. A multi state consortium bought cars that were supposed to be running on state supported routes currently (mostly, but California provides a good bit of its own equipment) leasing equipment from Amtrak. The ripple effect of this delay on both capacity and service expansion has been discussed extensively earlier in this thread. Maybe down the road, the problems will be fixed, and NS will be a good supplier for a future LD bi-level purchase by Amtrak when and if the money was there. Design would likely be similar to these corridor cars, not the same.
 
Specifically it should have only minimal effect, if any, on any SEPTA or Metra orders. The SEPTA order if any would be for something like the Bombardier MLV the fit within a 14'6" loading gauge, and hence quite different from any Western bi-level order. Any Metra order would like be for Gallery cars which are also very different design -cars with center sill which even NS already knows how to build.
 
jis said:
Specifically it should have only minimal effect, if any, on any SEPTA or Metra orders. The SEPTA order if any would be for something like the Bombardier MLV the fit within a 14'6" loading gauge, and hence quite different from any Western bi-level order. Any Metra order would like be for Gallery cars which are also very different design -cars with center sill which even NS already knows how to build.
Click to expand...
Do you think that Hyundai Rotem has an advantage for this bid since they got the contract for the EMUs that Septa previously ordered?

Where can I find the specifications regarding the Nippon Order (such as length and height, etc)?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Andrew said:
jis said:
Specifically it should have only minimal effect, if any, on any SEPTA or Metra orders. The SEPTA order if any would be for something like the Bombardier MLV the fit within a 14'6" loading gauge, and hence quite different from any Western bi-level order. Any Metra order would like be for Gallery cars which are also very different design -cars with center sill which even NS already knows how to build.
Click to expand...
Do you think that Hyundai Rotem has an advantage for this bid since they got the contract for the EMUs that Septa previously ordered?

Where can I find the specifications regarding the Nippon Order (such as length and height, etc)?
Click to expand...
No.

Google "PRIIA bi-level"
 
Considering the problems with the Rotem cab cars in California, I don't see them bidding on anything anytime soon.

Andrew said:
Do you think that Hyundai Rotem has an advantage for this bid since they got the contract for the EMUs that Septa previously ordered?

Where can I find the specifications regarding the Nippon Order (such as length and height, etc)?
Click to expand...
 
There is an article in Trains magazine with an update about the bi-level order. http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2016/05/10-nippon-sharyo

I know from previous experience that only subscribers can view the entire article. A brief summary is that the 42 cars ordered by California will be safe from funding issues due to the delays from the failed structure tests. The article states that the remaining cars ordered for the midwest might be at risk if congress does not make changes to address these delays. The article states that this is likely not to happen at this time.
 
Steve4031 said:
There is an article in Trains magazine with an update about the bi-level order. http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2016/05/10-nippon-sharyo

I know from previous experience that only subscribers can view the entire article. A brief summary is that the 42 cars ordered by California will be safe from funding issues due to the delays from the failed structure tests. The article states that the remaining cars ordered for the midwest might be at risk if congress does not make changes to address these delays. The article states that this is likely not to happen at this time.
Click to expand...
Let me guess, California used State money to buy the rail cars?
 
Steve4031 said:
There is an article in Trains magazine with an update about the bi-level order. http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2016/05/10-nippon-sharyo

I know from previous experience that only subscribers can view the entire article. ..
Click to expand...
Under fair use, you may copy -- cut and paste -- up to three fat paragraphs and rewrite a few others into your own words.

I always make sure to give the name of the magazine or source, as you did. I also like to name the author of the story, and add a compliment if I can, so they won't feel ripped off.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
WoodyinNYC said:
Under fair use, you may copy -- cut and paste -- up to three fat paragraphs and rewrite a few others into your own words.

I always make sure to give the name of the magazine or source, as you did. I also like to name the author of the story, and add a compliment if I can, so they won't feel ripped off.
Click to expand...
Under fair use there are no certain quantities and some have discovered that even copying 1 paragraph caused them to spend buckets full of money defending their actions in federal court.

You might want to read what the US Copyright Office has to say about the slippery, uncertain slope that is US Copyright's Fair Use Doctrine:

http://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html

. . . In addition to the above, other factors may also be considered by a court in weighing a fair use question, depending upon the circumstances. Courts evaluate fair use claims on a

case-by-case basis, and the outcome of any given case depends on a fact-specific inquiry. This means that there is no formula to ensure that a predetermined percentage or amount of a

work—or specific number of words, lines, pages, copies—may be used without permission.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Steve4031 said:
Just to clarify, was my action a violation of fair use or AU policy. If so I will notify a moderator myself. I was not intending to do anything dishonest
Click to expand...
Don't worry. It was not. Some people just want to carry on discussing things on a thread that are completely irrelevant to it. That's all. Even I do it sometimes. Just ignore it.
 
Steve4031 said:
Just to clarify, was my action a violation of fair use or AU policy. If so I will notify a moderator myself. I was not intending to do anything dishonest
Click to expand...
I spent 30 years working in the Time-Life Building. I told you what our Legal Dept told us. We were also told if the quoted material was used for profit, then you could be sued for its value. But not for profit use, not so much. Of course, anyone wanting to sue a rich and powerful national magazine with its own full legal staff would hesitate.

You did nothing to violate the law or AU policy as I understand it. In this internet era, you can always link to a source. And as I said, as a courtesy I always give the name of the publication and the author, with a complimentary word or two, 'comprehensive', 'well-reported' (if full of quotes from serious sources), 'in-depth', 'full coverage', etc.

I suggested that you could use or re-use some of the material from the block article. But Chicken Little is more scairdy than I am. LOL. So just let it go.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top