UTA Should Buy FLIRTs
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 кві 2023
- I thought I'd take a break from my longer video project and provide an update on two recent and important pieces of news:
1) Salt Lake City was awarded money to study the Rio Grande Plan!
2) UTA will be getting at least 10 new train sets for FrontRunner! And I have thoughts about what type of train they should buy...
For more information on Stadler, this video is a great starting point: • Stadler Trainsets Webinar
Lastly, please be sure to check out the website for the Rio Grande Plan to learn more about our attempts to restore rail service to the Rio Grande Depot, close downtown, at-grade crossings, and reconnect the east and west sides of our city:
www.RioGrandePlanSaltLakeCity.org
Outro Music:
Hitchcock Would Have… - Chris Zabriskie: • Hitchcock Would Have F...
There is no bigger sign of how well reasearched this video is than the amount of tabs that are open.
We enthusiastically support the front runner forward initiative supported by $316M federal + $500M from the state. We ask UTA to purchase made in Utah diesel electric Stadler FLIRTs. We also enthusiastically support the RIO GRAND PLAN in Salt Lake City.
Thanks, Charlie!
Flirts have been around here in Switzerland for 20 years. They've made commuting here more accessible, faster, and more comfortable. It's interesting to see that they, as well as similar multiple units from Siemens, CAF or Alstom, only now start to catch on on the American continent. The Flirts being built in the Salt Lake City factory now might help popularizing them. I'm glad that you're recognizing the advantages of this light, fast and versatile platform, and hope that decision maker will do so, too!
Thank you for making this video and raising awareness, I have lived in Utah for 23 years now, and want to see it grow in the best ways possible. I think the grant we received is one of the most crucial moments in Utah’s future!
Greetings from Wales in the UK. As a railwayman with 38 years of experience I've just started working Flirt units. They are great !!! The unit we are are working at the moment is all diesel. The acceleration is incredible. We will shortly be taking delivery of tri mode Flirts (electric, diesel and battery) as well. I can't recommend them highly enough.
Yes, this needs to happen.. Let’s get some flirts UTA! Future proof makes so much sense..
To be honest, I think that UTA should actually go for the KISS instead mainly since they can actually reach a similar top speed and be as efficient and not to mention that they have a bilevel design like the coaches and cab cars made by Bombardier/Alstom which would increase capacity and are also just as modular as the FLIRTs.
I kind of agree, but the KISS only operates using electric power, so it would not be feasible under the current plan.
Maybe not modular enough a line with a flirt could be electrifyed easy flirt is the most flexible platform for the us it fits perfectly
I agree, but the high capital cost of electrification makes that very unlikely atm.
the only problem is that AFAIK they only have an electric version, so the whole network would have to be electrified
As a Brit it does amaze me how fixated American rail is on loco-hauled commuter trains; much as I love locos as a rail enthusiast, in practice they're best for freight and some (but not all) intercity services, for high frequency mass transport multiple-unit operation is generally far better; US style push-pull loco-haul working is just a compromise with all the problems of non-distributed drive, fixed power regardless of train length, etc, that you discussed. While every country and system does have unique characteristics that might necessitate a unique solution, in most cases there is a benefit to looking at what other countries do. And Europe and East Asia do commuter rail far better than the US.
Regarding the Flirts, the UK 'bi-mode' (diesel and 25kV electric) ones shown in the video have phenomenal acceleration; in electric mode they can accelerate at 1.0 metre per second per second (the same as the most impressive Underground trains in London), but even in diesel mode they move like 'sh*t off a shovel' as we say here. If you couple that acceleration with 90mph running you shorten journey times to the extent that not only will you bring more people off the roads, you will also need fewer sets to run your service - it might only be a 10% reduction of fleet size, but that's equivalent to bringing your $58k per seat down to $52k; add in the general efficiencies of MU operation and you can see why the rest of the world started switching to this sort of commuter train a century ago.
Anyway, it's good to see that there is this sort of investment happening, whether it's loco-hauled push-pull working or Flirt DEMUs, the trains are far better than adding more lanes to the highways.
This is actually great timing as UDOT is also considering DMUs for the point of the mountain transit project. They would use DMUs as a shuttle that would start at the Draper frontrunner station, travel through "the point" development area, cross over I-15 to the area in front of Pluralsight, and then continue through UTAs rail right of way to Lehi. Definitely worse than just extending the blue line south,, but I'm all for it if it gets Utah some Flirts!
Edit: The more that I think about this, UTA could incorporate this "branch line" to lehi into the main frontrunner trackage. Then the DMU could travel back and forth between SLC and Lehi. If someone wanted to get from the airport to silicon slopes, they would only need to make 1 seat change which would be incredible.
Are they still thinking of extending the Blue Line south or are they doing solely heavy rail alternatives now?
@@harrisonofcolorado8886 On UDOT's point of the mountain project website they discuss all the current route alternatives on the table. One of them is to extend the blue line south. I sort of doubt that will be selected though as program managers view it as the least popular. UDOT is currently in the "mode selection" phase of the project so we'll hopefully hear soon what they chose.
UTA chose to do a BRT at the point of the mountain but Utah legislature moved the project to UDOT and told them to reconsider rail options.
They said they were studying XMUs primarily so they could use the Warm Springs facility. That’s a great call out though. Let’s embrace the Wasatch S-Bahn!
UTA using its own right of way is a big plus for this too. Since the commuter trains don't have to mingle with the big freight trains, they may not need to adhere to the stringent FRA crash and weight standards that are typically a hurdle for making this sort of move.
The standards were changed a long time ago
Thanks for the this nice video, some random points:
• The “pedestrian observations” blog has been pushing for the use of European multiple units for years, granted, it's not a youtube channel.
• One reason the Stadler trains are lighter is that the shells are aluminium, the RM transit video where he visits the Stadler factory explains that.
• Electrifying or using batteries instead of diesel has the advantage of allowing regenerative braking, i.e. recapture electrical power when braking.
• Double deckers have the drawback of having a lower door/seat ratio, resulting in slower alighting and boarding. Because of this, the Swiss Federal railway (where Flirt and Kiss train-sets were introduced firsts) is considering going back to single deckers for lines with very busy commuter stations, in order to minimise the time the train waits.
• Multiple-units have the advantage of not wasting space in the station, people can board the full length of the train. The locomotive is typically "dead-track”: no passenger can board there.
Can't you use regenerative braking on a diesel/electric train? The electric engines are the same, you just chose a different way to draw or generate current.
@@valentin7574 Sure, but you have to put the electrical energy somewhere. With an electric train you can inject it into the power-line, with a battery train, you can recharge the battery, but where do you put it on a diesel-electric train? You can dissipate it with large heaters, but that's not very useful…
@@MatthiasWiesmann Most train still have some form of battery on-board.
Also, heat-dissipation is still very very useful, because it doesn't produce brake dust.
@@nanderv I agree that rheostatic braking is better than plain braking, but the kinetic energy is wasted. Batteries in conventional trains are just for keeping the lights on in case of interruption of head-end-power, and I don't think the current interconnect allows the locomotive to tell them to absorb more power because there is braking happening.
The Bi-Mode Flirt already comes with some battery power/storage. Energy from braking is now stored in batteries and is used to boost the power when accelerating. So they are a hybrid just like the Toyota Prius. That is how they are almost just as quick to accelerate when running on diesel power as they are on 25kV.
Good luck with this and remember, the less stress on rolling stock and permanent way means a more reliable system and a happier patronage.
I hope you can electify the frontrunner it one day.
Im applying for a job with UTA. If I get it, I will absolutely forward this video to management!!!
Reached out to the city via email, and they are anticipating receiving the reconnecting communities funds in the next couple of months. They say the study itself will then take about 2 years. So, still exciting, but might take a little longer than what us stated in the video.
It can be disappointing that things always seem to take longer than initially projected. But so long as something happens eventually, I will be very happy!
Thanks for the update!
Makes sense to me. The transit in Salt Lake city is far ahead of many cities in North America.
Metrolink is using Flirts on the new arrow service right now in the greater LA area. They should really consider transitioning to a full flirt fleet after the SCORE program is complete and all the lines are operating at 30 minute frequencies.
Id think they should go with KISS EMUs instead, and should go for 15 minute frequencies.
@@trevorthefoamer220 you would need to electricity the whole line. With a flirt you could install pantographs and upgrade the infrastructure afterwards, stupid but in the us it needs to be these way to get things done
@@Ghfvhvfg you do realize that Diesel Variants exist for the KISS?
@@trevorthefoamer220 never heard of them
@@trevorthefoamer220 1 diesel mode has been made and that was very custom. Stadler doesn't offer it right now
EMU's are preferred but DEMU's will work too! Great Western Railway also just launched their BEMU commuter rail service using rapid charging at end stops using a ground-based power charger under the train which eliminates the need for diesel at all! Even better! Alberta is also FLIRTING with commuter rail service, pun intended, but isn't sure whether to go the Alstom Coradia iLint with hydrogen electric or something else. As someone with asthma, as long as its 100% emissions free at the tailpipe? I am agnostic... But that does rule out diesel...
UTA could also get SC44s that would remove scrapping to much equipment, they should also refurbish the bbl coaches to similar what metrolink is doing with theirs (removes issues with electrification along UP freight tracks)
Check out the PATCO electric line that runs from suburban NJ into Philadelphia. I’ve ridden it in the 70’s and even a couple of weeks ago .
Love the video. Viva Rio Grande!
I've read in Railway Gazette that Stadler are adapting their battery variant Flirts at SLC to meet FRA regs. Bi-mode (diesel/battery) might be worth consideration for Frontrunner services since regenerative braking is then available further reducing fuel consumption, the more so if out of service or fast charge recharging facilities are provided at strategic points of the network.
Do off peak passenger levels require 4 car provision? I ask because in my part of the world we have both 4 and 3 car units. Whereas the 4 car units require 4 diesel generators the 3 car units manage close to the same amount of grunt utilising only 2. All have the capability to be worked in multiple.
I thought they got rid of those regsulations
@@erikgustafson9319 From what I have managed to glean in press articles the issue would seem to be the higher axle load requirements stipulated by FRA compared to European standards.
@@fenlinescouser4105 I am saying in terms of weight requirements
@@erikgustafson9319 My understanding is that the changes FRA implemented were to overall vehicle weight and regarding crash resilience rather than axle loading which is a different measure.
For detail on the former there is an informative Stadler presentation on the US High Speed Rail Association channel (you may care to skip the 6 min intro)
ua-cam.com/video/O0v19fOxgAc/v-deo.html
Of further interest may be a DB presentation titled Zero Emission Rail Propulsion
ua-cam.com/video/rUhziQQy1qE/v-deo.html
you make a very convincing case
Retired pax railroader here. What you propose does have merit...IF. If there is a complete transition to a new vehicle then there is real potential for savings and incremental improvement. As a mechanic I can say it is a pain to maintain multiple types/designs of vehicles. Also, as pointed out, the performance profiles are very different. And there is the benefit of "keeping the money local" with a manufacturer in state. Wish you luck on this one.
I agree, the real benefits wouldn't be unlocked until all commuter service is switched to FLIRTS - and unfortunately the expense of replacing the original fleet of trains essentially doubles the costs. Thankfully my job is just to cheerlead - for now!
@@CSLenhart All fleets get replaced when cost of maintenance exceeds the cost of replacement. Then again, operation costs and outside money available at any given time also comes into play. For generations the bugaboo of self propelled cars is they are (legally) locomotives with a higher level/frequency of inspection. But the world is moving towards integrated trainsets. For large operators locomotive/coach sets give the greatest flexibility. For smaller operators (UTA, TRE, SunRail) Flirt or something like that the savings in fuel alone justify the investment.
Great video, and you didn't even feel the need to go into how FLIRTs have a better ride quality and less creaking in general.
Congrats, you broke my record on number of tabs opened.
I think a good alternative when they do get FLIRTs maybe for an express commuter service they can get Bombardier Multilvel coaches, being able to have lowered and leveled boarding
Great video! I agree that investing in the FLIRT model trains would be a great move, less demands on rails and capacity to run at higher speeds!!! How does this video & its information get to those who make these decisions! So many places I. The US would benefit from these FLIRT trains: Georgia, Midwest cities Detroit-Toledo-Dayton/Cincy-Lexington-Knoxville-Atlanta!!!
They don't need more trains, they need to use their trains more efficiently. Last I checked a lot of frontrunner is single tracked, so trains wait a lot for tracks to be cleared.
You are correct, Frontrunner is about 1/4 double track, with the rest single. Recent PTC requirements make the meets even slower.
The upcoming improvements project will raise the amount of double track to half, but only by lengthening sidings. It's a response to political pressure to add service faster than funding is allowing them to add capacity.
But two things can be true at once. If new trains are coming one way or another, I would prefer them to be multiple units.
@@CSLenhart Wouldn't adding more trains now, simply increase the time trains spend waiting? would it actually affect capacity? I guess they might be able to run longer trains, but if I remember correctly they have station length limits they are hitting as well. Although I may be thinking of trax.
@MegaLokopo You are correct on both counts. Adding more trains will cause journey times to be longer. And there are concerns about the platform high-block length that make lengthening the trains extra complicated.
I personally would not expand Frontrunner service this way, but it isn't up to you, me, or the engineers and planners at UTA. The money they got from the legislature is for a very specific purpose, and UTA is doing their best.
My suggestion is that, since UTA has to buy more trains, they should at least consider the Stadler FLIRT.
We need a 2 track system instead of what we have now
Por que no los dos?
One thing to note is you wouldn't really be able to take advantage of the FLIRTs until the entire fleet is made up of FLIRTs since if you want a nice clockface schedule, the speed you can run is dictated by the slowest worst accelerating train. If the UTA gets FLIRTS for its fleet expansion, it would probably be at least a decade before they can improve speed since the diesels and bilevels would still be in good working order and it would be wasteful IMO to end their service prematurely.
It's also worth noting that if the UTA went with more traditional loco hauled bilevels, they'd probably be able to get many of their coaches and locos from Caltrain, which will very soon be dramatically reducing the size of their diesel fleet. They can also maybe get some more locos from MARC, as with the new Baltimore tunnel opening in 10-15 years, Amtrak is forcing MARC to run all electric trains on the Penn line.
If you really want to take over the old trains from Caltrain, you should not forget their age and that Caltrain would also replace the trains if it had not bought new EMUs.
I keep reading that Caltrain's timetable is often affected by trains that break down somewhere and have to be towed away.
if UTA were to switch to Flirt/Kiss, maybe the old trains could be sold to other locations and that would also reduce the net acquisition cost and it would be a complete new fleet.
the decision will certainly be difficult for the responsible authorities, let's hope that the environment will also be an important factor in the decision.
Unfortunately, the USA is not rich enough to achieve electrification like in Switzerland, where 99.xx percent of the nationwide rail network is electrified.
This video is very well narrated
I would propose to not use DMU Flirts but EMUs that can run on battery. This could bring the advantage that you would not need to electrify the whole route but only the termini where the batteries could load. Here in germany they are used since a few months and while there were some problems to Start with its still a great idea. The Maximum distance is currently about a 100 miles which could work? Maybe let me know for further information
as a current employee with uta i can tell you this even if they where to get Stadler trains they would probably still run them at the current set speeds to keep from having to perform more frequent rail line inspections as that takes more man hours and cost more money
That does sound exactly like how they would handle it. What would need to happen is the legislature would need to help pay for the new trains, and include a stipulation that they be run at 90 mph. And for that to happen, we need to be talking about it out here first!
I'm also very curious - what role do you fill at UTA? I ask as a former Train Host myself.
@@CSLenhart trax vehicle maintenance currently
@@mistersourskittlesGames Right on! I'm a daily TRAX commuter myself. I don't know what I'd do without the Blue Line
Would the platform heights need to be reworked for flirts? I doubt the boarding height is the same as the bi levels.
The current Frontrunner platforms have two sections, the high block for level boarding (25 inches above the rail), and the low block for the old Comet and Gallery cars UTA used to own (8 inches above the rail).
The high block section falls exactly within the range of FLIRTs worldwide, and would not need any modifications for level boarding. However, in order to run 2 or 3 FLIRTs coupled together, the low block sections of the platforms would need to be raised. This is already planned to be done for half of the stations in order to expand the current 3-car trains to 4 cars. So there would be some additional expense for accommodating FLIRTs, but nothing UTA isn't prepared for.
American FLIRT trains have a floor height of 24 inches, which is the same as the Bombardier BiLevel trains UTA currently uses.
Electrify your braking and acceleration runs. Size your diesel engines for maintaining speed not for acceleration. When you don't need a lot of energy storage for maintaining speed but just the ability to absorb a bunch of energy quickly for braking and dump a bunch of energy quickly for accelerating, double layer caps and flywheels make more sense than batteries especially if they can be stored track side rather than on vehicle.
Where can I find a pic of that thumbnail photo? It looks awesome!
Haha, I'm glad you like it! I've added it to my Maps and Figures album on Imgur:imgur.com/a/R6zLq
But be warned, it was a pretty low-effort Inkscape vectorization with some color swapping - it will probably disappoint you when viewed close up. Perfect for a thumbnail, though!
I like your ideas and arguements that you put forth in this video however, I my self, and a lot of the people I know really love the double decker trains that we already have. Would something like stadler's kiss trains work instead of their flirt trains?
If Stadler created a battery or even a diesel-powered KISS, I would fully support that option! But for now, the KISS only has the fully-electric option require overhead catenary, which goes against the whole point of this video. 🤷♂️
I agree with everything you've said except one thing. FLIRTs aren't a bi-level setup like the current Frontrunner is. I'd prefer to have this setup for the Frontrunner because separating things like bikes, wheel chairs and the priority seating on the bottom levels from the regular seating found on the top levels is something that needs to stay. Therefore what we need is something similar to the FLIRTs and KISS. A bi-level multi-unit (like the kiss) with the same diesel engine in the center (like the FLIRTs) for sections that don't have overhead wires. Otherwise, excellent video.
I agree, there are many advantages and comforts in the bilevel design. Unfortunately, stadler doesn't offer the KISS as a DEMU, so UTA would need complete electrification first. Ultimately, I think that KISS trainsets running between Provo and Ogden would be amazing, with FLIRTs continuing further north and south. Hopefully we'll get there, step by step.
@@CSLenhart Methinks Stadler could readily develop a DEMU KISS if the right customer came to the table.
Single level trains have a few advantages -
(1) station dwell times are shorter as there are fewer seats per door, this keeps overall journey times down and you might need fewer sets to operate your desired frequency (as well as getting more people out of cars).
(2) It's possible to have level boarding and level access throughout the train with single deck cars, this doesn't only help people with permanent disabilities, but also people with shopping or luggage, pushchairs (strollers?), elderly people and others who are just less mobile, and actually everyone - we all slow down when we have to look down at a step, this again positively affects station dwell time. And yes, dwell time isn't as much of an issue there as it is in some places in Europe where you are trying to get 18-20 trains through a single platform face every hour but there are still benefits to shortening journey times.
(3) Single deck cars can also be articulated ie shared bogies (trucks) between adjacent cars while keeping axle weight down. Low axle weight is obviously good for track wear, and articulation is good for ride quality and overall train weight.
You made comments about how many people a FLIRT can carry and how you could add extra consists for more capacity
However you didn’t mention at all how much each front runner bi level cars can carry. It is possible for a FLIRT to never have the carrying capacity for a similar size train as the front runner.
Also the locomotives front runner uses do have the electric braking, it is called dynamic brakes and a lot of diesel locomotives have had that ever since it was first created in the 1950s
It is typically used for hills though because it takes awhile to actually stop using that which is why everything still has the more common brake shoes which press against the wheel
You are absolutely correct about the capacity - the Bombardier bilevel cars can carry around 110 passengers per car, meaning a 10 car train could carry over 1,000 people at a time. However, accelerating that many people from a complete stop at every station would be much slower than the trains accelerate today. My logic is that - with future upgrades to allow for 15 minute service, due in 2029 - the FLIRTS will run frequently enough to never need to carry that many people at once.
Dynamic braking on modern diesel locomotives is a great innovation, but even on the most sophisticated passenger/commuter locomotives (such as the Siemens Charger), the electricity generated by dynamic braking is wasted through resistors instead of being used to charge onboard batteries like on the newest FLIRTS. Perhaps that will change by the time UTA is ready to expand its FrontRunner fleet, but for the time being, the FLIRTS offer the quieter and more sustainable form of braking.
Thank goodness. The original way they did this - making it car dependent - was really stupid. We need frequent service, added service from front runner to east west edges of the valleys, and robust bike networks all over cities that meet front runner and bus.
Wouldn't there be less room for bikes if we don't have the bi-level cars anymore?
As a bike+train commuter myself, this is a very important consideration. The answer is that the interior of the train can be configured however you like it, to include more or fewer bikes than before. So long as UTA makes it a requirement to have plenty of space for bikes, I'm sure Stadler can accommodate.
@@CSLenhartFlirts commonly feature multi-usage space (for bikes, wheelchairs or prams) next to the doors, which can be conveniently used. What makes them also very convenient for bikers is the level boarding. There's no steps in he way, which makes boarding and onboarding quicker.
If you're going to buy FLIRTS make sure they're convertible from DMU's to EMU's in the future. If you have a dedicated corridor with frequent trains making frequent stops then electrification is the way to go. The FLIRTS that TexRail are ordering have the central diesel power pack in the middle. The diesel engine could be lifted out and replaced with a transformer and a pantograph added on the roof. Future proof the trains now so that when money comes available for electrification you don't need to order more trains. Of course keeping and adding to the Bombardier fleet and buying ACS-64's in the future would work as well. There's always a market for used passenger diesel locomotives for new startup's elsewhere.
Ottawa has the same sort of set up for its Line 2.
@@Kishanth.J Line 2 will never be electrified though due to the Mooney's Bay tunnel being too short.
Did UTA get rid of the comet cars yet ?
Not all of them, yet. Many are still sitting in the Frontrunner yard in Salt Lake City. Don't know if they've all be sold off or what but they're still there.
@@UPRailRoad-xg8cb a bunch of them got bought by a scrapping company but I don’t know if they’ve gotten around to actually moving them yet
Front runner seems to have no interest in changing rolling stock for now with all their actions point to the bi levels pulled by locos lasting for another 15-20 years.
UTA is getting used cars from COASTER with options to buy all of COASTERs cars in the future if coaster wants to sell them.
right they've got 18 locos, 22 cab cars and 16 coaches. 5 coaches are coming from COASTER now which means 18 locos, 22 cab cars and 21 coaches. Those cars are just coming so they can begin to overhaul their existing fleet.
thats enough for them to run 15-16 2 car trains or more likely till they can get more coaches 13 3 car trains.
UTA is also moving towards all the MP36 being EPA T2 which is the best these engines can do without a replacement prime mover. As of now 9 units meet that.
there is 0 issue coupling and uncoupling the bi level cars if they wanted to. the couplers are lightly modified from freight units and the electrical connections get reconnected all the time on other services.
given the higher performance of EMUs they may not need 20 sets to meet the rolling stock requirements, and if they followed stadlers upkeep practices they could get away with 1 or no spares.
this, I personally hope the current consists stay for a while, I don't see any problems with switching electric for that becasue we have trax for that, but I do like your point.
This is awesome. I was annoyed by the long waits and diesel smoke. I hope this will continue to be expanded overtime making Utah better connected.
You know if the state spent the money on a DMU KISS you would have a product capable of also competing for the super liner replacement.
Flirts are ok but KISS are even better.
KISS don't exist as DMUs yet, to my knowledge. They are all EMUs. But Stadler might want to look into this.
@@markusstudeli2997 I realized that later, but is it really that crazy for some R&D?
Utah is in a unique position that if they did order a KISS DMU it could “export” it to other US states and create some jobs.
Within 7 days!
If the FLIRTs supplement the diesels and coaches I will be happy because the frontrunner will basically be a multicultural railway. With a blend of North American and European-styled commuter trains.
If the FLIRTs *replace* the existing rolling stock I will not be happy because it will basically be continued Europeanization of American railways. North America should stand out in terms of railways, not be assimilated into European rail. The UK and Japan will be the only railway countries I will be really interested in railfanning in should American railways just turn into a clone of European railways.
What even are North American styled trains? Those F59s and Gallery Cars, and the freight looking EMDs with Bombardier Bi-Level or Multilevel cars. North American rail should be influenced by any other experienced manufacturers to help shape the needs and capabilities that each transit agency needs. No matter if it European or Asian based manufacturers, if they see a need and can give a product suited or customised for service they are to operate. Aesthetics/form shouldn’t matter as much as functionality and reliability.
@@TheRandCrews LOCOMOTIVE-AND-COACHES CONSISTS ARE RELIABLE IF PUT ON THE RIGHT RAILWAY
ITS GONNA BE BILLIONS..
WHO HERE KNOWS A RICH GRANDMA
If you're reading this, send this video to your Utah state rep!
Salt Lake City could use a fully automated light metro like Vancouver's Skytrain. But at least they're flirting with commuter rail. Or should it be FLIRTing instead? 😏
So fully grade separation of the light rail?
Bilevel cars can cost a million less ordered in bulk.
Fair point. I based my price on the recent purchase by Sounder for 28 cars:
www.railway-technology.com/news/bombardier-to-provide-28-bilevel-commuter-rail-cars-to-sound-transit/
I also assumed that UTA would expand the existing 3 car train sets to 4 cars by adding the new "safety" cab car design, which cost slightly more than a regular coach.
@@CSLenhart I am totally on board with FLIRTS. As I've said in other places, I think the existing bilevels would make lovely statewide trains.
@Nathan Strain Definitely! Perhaps upgrade the seats first for longer journeys, but otherwise the current Frontrunner stock would be great for trips to Cache Valley, Moab, and Cedar City.
Better yet, they should make the capital investment in electrifying the whole line. Electric catenary wire may cost a lot to install but it pays itself back really fast, because you can use power sources that are more economical than diesel fuel. Diesel engines are also dead weight.
Oh, no doubt. I would love to see one big megaproject come along that would double-track and electrify the entire Frontrunner corridor. However, the politics of the situation seem to preclude such a project.
As mentioned in the video, UTA is being forced into slow, incremental improvements because that's the way they are being funded. It's up to the planners and strategists to choose the path of upgrades that will most efficiently get us to the full build-out we both want.
The Stadler Flirts I 've been on were horrible !!
All US commuter rail systems that are planning fleet replacements should go with the FLIRT, or a similar DEMU. Loco-hauled trains are 200 year old technology.
I would counter that UTA should start planning for electrification ASAP and buy both FLIRTs and KISSes, maybe taking delivery of the FLIRTs a little earlier to provide capacity expansion then using the KISS order to replace the existing bilevel equipment.
Within 1,753 views!
let him cook
easy. they are the only true level boarding DMU in the United States. normalize DMU usage in the US.
I wish Chicago would get these. They are by 2027 on one line. But you guys have all that frequent service granted you only have one line but it'd be nice if Chicago's metra would run like every 15 or 30 minutes all day everyday including Sundays. Early morning till 1:00 in the morning.
I needed to know why don’t dig a tunnel and do an extension for the main line Train so that they can extend the unused abandoned underground train stations.
Why couldn’t they use the part D78 Stock train doors on the sides and also restructure the front face of the A60 and A62 stock and that includes the class 313, class 314 and class 315 remix and make them all together and also redesign them an overhead line and also make them into Five cars per units and also having three Disabled Toilets on that Five cars per units A60 and A62 stock trains and also convert the A60 and A62 stock trains into a Scania N112, Volvo B10M, Gardner 6LXB, Gardner 6LXC and Gardner 8LXB Diesel Engines and also put the Loud 7-Speed Voith Gearboxes even Loud 8-Speed Leyland Hydra cyclic Gearboxes in the A60 and A62 stock, class 313, class 314, and class 315 and also modernise the A60 and A62 stock and make it into an 11 car per unit so it could have fewer doors, more tables, computers and mobile phone chargers.
A Stock Trains and also having 8 Disabled Toilets on those A stock trains. Why couldn’t we refurbish and modernise the Waterloo and city line Triple-Track train tunnel and make it more Larger and extend it to the bank station, making it into a Triple-Track Railway Line so those Five countries such as Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden to convert the waterloo and city line Triple-Track Railway tunnel into a High-Speed Railway lines?
The Third Euro tunnel Triple-Track Railway line to make it 11 times better for passengers so they could go from A to B. Then put the modernised 11 car per unit A Stock and put them on a bigger modernised Waterloo and city line Triple-Track train tunnel so it could go to bank station to those Five countries such as Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden. The modernised refurbished 11 cars per unit A stock could be a High Speed The Third Triple-Track Euro Tunnel Train So it is promising and 47 times a lot more possible to do this kind of project if that will be OK for London Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden.
oh by the way, could they also tunnel the Triple-Track Railway Line so it will stop from Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and Essex so that the Passengers will go to Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland and Sweden and also extend the Triple-Track Railway Line from the Bank to Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and Essex Stations so that more people from there could go to Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden more Easily.
Why couldn't they extend the Piccadilly Line and also build brand-new underground train stations so it could go even further right up to Clapton, Wood Street can they also make another brand new underground train station in Chingford and could they extend the Piccadilly Line and the DLR right up to Chingford?
All of the classes 150, 155, 154, 117, 114, 105, and 106, will be replaced by all of the Scania N112, Volvo B10M, Gardner 6LXB, Gardner 6LXC and Gardner 8LXB Diesel Five carriages three disabled toilets are air conditioning trains including Highams Park for extended roots which is the Piccadilly line and the DLR trains.
Could you also convert all of the 1973 stock trains into an air-conditioned maximum speed 78 km/hours (48 MPH) re-refurbished and make it into a 8 cars per unit if that will be alright, and also extend all of the Piccadilly train stations to make more space for all of the extended 8 car per unit 1973 stock air condition trains and can you also build another Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive Companies and can they order Every 37 Octagon and Every 17 Hexagon shape LNER diagram unique small no.13 and unique small no.11 Boilers from those Countries such as Greece, Italy, Poland, and Sweden, can they make Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive speeds by up to 142MPH so you can try and test it on the Original Mainline so it will be much more safer for the Passengers to enjoy the 142MPH speed Limit only for HS2 and Channel Tunnel mainline services, if they needed 16 Carriages Per units, can they use those class 55’s, class 44’s, class 40’s and class 43HST Diesel Locomotive’s right at the Back of those 18 Carriages Per Units so they can take over at the Back to let those Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive’s have a rest for those interesting Journeys Please!!!!!!!, oh can you make all of those Coal Boxes’s 17 Tonnes for all of those 142MPH Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive’s so the Companies will Understand us PASSENGER’S!! so please make sure that the Builders can do as they are told!!!!! And please do something about these very very important Professional ideas Please? Prime Minister of England, Prime Minister of Australia, Prime Minister of Sweden, Prime Minister of Germany, Prime Minister of Italy, Prime Minister of Poland and that Includes the Mayor of London.
hmmm yes, fully agree to whatever you smoked.
Please don't look directly at the camera like that, it's creepy. And the audio is a bit too quiet, the commentary especially.
i hope stadlers get used in Oklahoma city's commuter line
here are five things why they should buy Bi-Levels and Traxx engines.
1. Stadler flirts are not made to run at 90 MPH their ride quality already sucks at 60 MPH.
2. They would need at least 2 times a 4 car train or 1 8 car unit to get the capacity of the 3 Bi-Levels this would also need two power packs.
3. the floor of a Stadler flirt is at 350mm above the rail head this measurement is the standard hight of a European station platform. There will always be a big step up to the train unless they reconstruct all platforms at the stations.
4. Stadler flirts are build cheap and only have a live expectancy of twenty years normally this is fifty years.
5. Buying Bi-Levels will help having a unified fleet wich brings down operation and maintenance cost. it will still be possible to lengthen trains in the future to 4 or 5 car sets.
this is my opinion as a European and user of these Stadler units. If you ask Europeans wich are their favorite trains the Stadler flirt is not one of them.
1. Flirts have been running at 160 Km/h (~100 Mph) for 19 years in Switzerland with no problem. Norway just bought some bi-mode Flirts that can run 200 Km/h (~120 Mph) in electric mode and 160 Km/h in diesel mode.
2. Double decker don't have double capacity, you loose quite some capacity because of stair-cases, you also loose time at the station as there are less doors per seat for boarding and alighting. Double decker make sense when the stations have limited length, which is not the case here.
3. There is no such thing as standard platform height in Europe (not to mention that there are Flirt trains running in places like Azerbaijan). Stadler typically adapts the entrance height base on client needs, in fact Caltrain has Stadler Kiss trains with doors at two different heights (IMHO this is stupid, but that's another discussion).
4. True to a certain extent, although the first Flirts were built in 2004 and are still used - keeping old trains sounds nice as long as you don't factor their poor performance, the fuel costs of lugging around so much steel, the associated pollution or the fact that you might keep your frame, but the prime mover will need to be changed, these have lifespans in the 15-30 years range.
5. This is the sunken cost fallacy: it's better to keep using inadequate equipment because maintenance will be simpler. A good way to have cheap maintenance is to use very common equipment, there are 2500 Flirts running in the world…
@@MatthiasWiesmann 1. They might run at 160KM/H but if the track is not in the best condition, they start shaking from side to side in a verry uncomfortable way. There suspension is not sufficient for a comfortable ride quality. If they have flat spots on the wheels, you will feal that not just hear it.
2. A full 4 Car unit has about the same capacity as two bi-levels. Our flirts might have eight doors, but you can be sure passengers will use the door that is nearest to the exit of the station.
3. Stadler can't build the floor lower than 550mm and that would be a huge step from the low platforms bad for passengers in wheelchairs. All flirts in the us run on new constructed lines with platforms on 550mm.
4. The trains from 2004 to 2008 had to have a big refurbishment because the where corroding way more than they should. Other trains like the ones from Alstom oder Siemens don't seem to have these problems. the Stadler flirt is only laid out for a livespann of twenty-five years normally a train is built for 40-50 years. And this is only one of the many problems they found.
5. It might be better to buy double decker or semi double decker EMU's Like Bombardier Twindex or Stadler KISS
@@nashorn9745 well the Twindexx were a disaster in Switzerland, they were delivered 5 years late, and the pendulation mechanism never worked. I don't know if Alstom will even sell them anymore in place of their competing Regiolis line.
Each train type has issues initially.
@@MatthiasWiesmann you know there is the german Twindexx witch works flawlessly. SBB bought something of a peace of paper it was not built and it has never worked. Also according to SBB the Twindexx is working better than almost all other rolling stock only the ICN is working better.
@@nashorn9745 so you argument is that the Stadler trains are bad because they can’t handle bad track, but the Bombardier not being able to handle curves is ok because the SBB should never have trusted Bombardier?
I don't think UTA will buy FLIRTs. They'll probably get Siemens SC-44 Chargers and matching Venture sets.
No.
SCREW FLIRT! Bombardier forever!
But they were acquired by alstom
Foamer detected.
Bombardier was really bad at building trains in the last few years so they don't even exist anymore.
They basically went bankrupt after over-promising and under-delivering, and were acquired by french train manufacturer Alstom.
Just buy a car
Why does the USA not adopt the European style DMU or EMU trains instead of these old style Bi level cars and gas guzzling locomotives.
Because European-style multiple units are lighter in construction, and American freight trains are big and heavy. If a Stadler FLIRT collided with a freight train, it would be a mass casualty event.
And we can't just electrify because Big Oil still wields obscene amounts of political power.
NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome. There is a nice blog called “pedestrian observations” that explains this in deep…
Within 7 days!