Welcome Guest!
In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 15 Vote(s) - 3.93 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit
(06-27-2017, 10:30 AM)trainspotter139 Wrote: Colorado Railcar has made 19ft 9.5 in Ultra Dome rail cars for tourist rail lines before  Tongue 

Ah, you beat me to it. I do mean two full floors like those.

(06-26-2017, 04:09 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Do you know how tall the existing GO cars are? Would your idea be cars that look more like the tall Amtrak cars I’ve seen? They appear to be like that, with the connection from one car to the next on the upper level and doors on the lower level (note: I’ve never been in one of those cars, however, so I have very limited information).

The Amtrak Superliners are, like GO's, one-and-a-half storey cars with the lower level dropped between the wheels and only one level available above the wheels, in order to fit in the ~16′ height envelope (similar to a modern standard boxcar). Amtrak's differ in having a flat upper floor and non-standard passage height, whereas GO's drop to standard floor height over the wheels, as they originally coupled single-level cab cars to bi-level coaches.

There's actually room to go a little bigger than the Colorado Rail cars, within the overlap of freight plates F and K, and some reasons to — going to full width (10′8″) would allow 5-across seating on the lower level without pain, and ensure freight could safely pass passenger platforms where necessary. Total seating capacity would be ~40–50% greater than the current bi-levels, depending on whether you add upper doors for bi-level boarding at busy stations.

Quote:As to catenary height, is it that GO wants lower catenary that wouldn’t allow double-stack containers to pass? If so I’m surprised this is really contentious because they already have pretty tall cars so I’d be surprised if they saw much of a benefit by having lower overhead (i.e., it can’t be much lower, so why not just put it as high as the railways want it?).

Overhead wiring needs to be a minimum of about 2–3 feet above the highest car, depending on line voltage. GO appears to be interested in European-scale EMUs, like the Stadtler KISS that Caltrain has ordered to replace its Bombardier bi-levels. These (unless significantly customized) are a foot shorter than GO bi-levels and a bit tight upstairs.
(Caltrain is probably going for 25kV at 22′, which is too low for autoracks and double-stacks.)

I don't actually think there's any chance of GO using bigger cars, of course; this is not the GO of the 1970s that could commission innovative and successful rolling stock.

(This should probably move to the GO thread or elsewhere if continued.)

Final ninja edit: mixed-height trams.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Messages In This Thread
RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - by kps - 06-27-2017, 01:37 PM
[No subject] - by Spokes - 08-28-2014, 04:16 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 131 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links