# Metra DMU test



## MetraUPWest (Aug 8, 2014)

Over the next 3 days Metra will be testing and evaluating a Nippon Sharyo built DMU set. Upon completion of testing they will be shipped to Canada as they were actually built for Metrolinx's Union Pearson Express.

The rumor is the DMU test is to determine if DMUs would be viable for a completely new Metra service.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 8, 2014)

It would make more sense then those F40 hauled things Metra calls trains.


----------



## MetraUPWest (Aug 8, 2014)

You take that back!!

The DMU is cool, but I'd rather run my F40 any day. Maybe I'll change my mind by the time testing is done but I doubt it.


----------



## Shawn Ryu (Aug 9, 2014)

So any chance of seeing railroad outside of NE Regional, Keystone, South Shore and Metra Electric District is dead?


----------



## MikefromCrete (Aug 9, 2014)

Shawn Ryu said:


> So any chance of seeing railroad outside of NE Regional, Keystone, South Shore and Metra Electric District is dead?


What?


----------



## Paulus (Aug 11, 2014)

MetraUPWest said:


> You take that back!!
> 
> The DMU is cool, but I'd rather run my F40 any day. Maybe I'll change my mind by the time testing is done but I doubt it.


Who cares about how cool something is? An F40 is going to be terrible at acceleration compared to any half-decent DMU and that's all that really matters for a commuter rail system.


----------



## Shawn Ryu (Aug 11, 2014)

The whole push pull with locomotive in the front seems like a terribly outdated concept these days.


----------



## MetraUPWest (Aug 11, 2014)

The DMU can only hold 75 people per car MAX. Our "outdated" push-pull trains hold double that- and nearly every rush hour train is FULL. It'd take twice the fleet of DMUs to replace push-pull on the Metra lines- and we barely have room to store our current fleet. It'd be impossible to store that many DMUs.

DMUs are fantastic for their purpose but I just don't see them working on rush hour trains.

I was the engineer testing these DMUs all weekend, and while I was impressed with acceleration they were barely faster than our F40s. I was only a few mph faster in spots with the DMUs than I'd normally be.

I've never run the Metra Electric trains, but if yoy want an MU setup that's the way to go. They're MUCH faster than the push-pull diesel train AND the DMUs, and Metra's Highliners only hold 15 less per car than their diesel bilevels do.


----------



## Ryan (Aug 11, 2014)

Another word for "outdated" is "so well engineered, it hasn't been improved upon".

I'll take a relatively simple diesel-electric locomotive over a complex hydraulic drivetrain everyday.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 11, 2014)

A good DMU version of a gallery car would greatly improve Metras operation.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Aug 11, 2014)

So far, nobody has actually built a good double-deck DMU.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 11, 2014)

Nobody has tried.


----------



## jis (Aug 11, 2014)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Nobody has tried.


Well there are the Colorado Rail Car misadventures.


----------



## Paulus (Aug 11, 2014)

RyanS said:


> Another word for "outdated" is "so well engineered, it hasn't been improved upon".
> 
> I'll take a relatively simple diesel-electric locomotive over a complex hydraulic drivetrain everyday.


Diesel-electric multiple units aren't exactly a mind blowing concept.


----------



## Ryan (Aug 11, 2014)

That's not what these are.


----------



## jis (Aug 11, 2014)

RyanS said:


> Another word for "outdated" is "so well engineered, it hasn't been improved upon".
> 
> I'll take a relatively simple diesel-electric locomotive over a complex hydraulic drivetrain everyday.


I was wondering what is the basis of the feeling that a hydraulic drive is more complex than an electric drive, specially for the relatively low power that is involved.


----------



## Ryan (Aug 11, 2014)

It's less a matter of electric vs. hydraulic and more a matter of 6 speed automatic transmission vs fixed drive.


----------



## Paulus (Aug 11, 2014)

RyanS said:


> That's not what these are.


Thought you were objecting in general rather than specific.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 11, 2014)

jis said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody has tried.
> ...


They started with vastly heavier, less durable, corrosion prone Carbon steel. In explica, they didn't try to make a good one. They succeeded spectacularly in making a bad one.


----------



## Ryan (Aug 11, 2014)

Paulus said:


> RyanS said:
> 
> 
> > That's not what these are.
> ...


These specifically, although I'm not enamored with the idea of a DMU. Increasing the number of prime movers you have to maintain seems like a poor plan to me.

But if anyone actually gets around to building a decent one, I'll be glad to give it a fair chance at proving itself.


----------



## jis (Aug 11, 2014)

Green Maned Lion said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > Green Maned Lion said:
> ...


I agree. Hence my characterization of the whole thing as a "misadventure". For the life of me I could not figure out why they bothered with Carbon Steel in this day and age. What were they thinking?


----------



## jis (Aug 11, 2014)

RyanS said:


> These specifically, although I'm not enamored with the idea of a DMU. Increasing the number of prime movers you have to maintain seems like a poor plan to me.
> 
> But if anyone actually gets around to building a decent one, I'll be glad to give it a fair chance at proving itself.


Actually DMU's, and very decent ones, both of the hydarulic/Voith transmission variety and also the electrical transmission variety are used very very widely in the rest of the world. As usual since the laws of Physics and Engineering also suffer from American exceptionalism in the US, there is a dearth of usage of such in the US. Although some outfits are breaking out of that mold and starting to use DMU's specially in light traffic areas. An early one was NJT's RiverLINE, and that is generally considered to be a success. RiverLine's Stadlers are electric transmission. With the latest changes in FRA rules it is likely that standard Stadler units with minor changes to conform to external fixtures requirements in the US would be compliant with modified Tier I rules of FRA, thus making them easier to deploy. Even LIRR is seriously looking at DMUs for outer zone service since they realize that a 4 car +DM/DE train in which two cars perpetually run closed is not exactly a wise way to operate a service.
In general the issue is of right-sizing. A honking big mainline diesel engine hauling two or three heavy cars is not exactly energy efficient, and should be avoided on light traffic lines. Also on routes where you want frequent and performant service you might want to choose short, light, performant and frequent trains instead of long, heavy, sluggish and infrequent trains. That is what caused the folks in Toronto to rightly IMHO choose DMUs over loco hauled solution. They basically view this as a step towards eventually EMU service. In that environment a diesel push-pull would perform pretty poorly when compared to a light and quick accelerating/decelerating DMU.


----------



## MetraUPWest (Aug 11, 2014)

Just like our passenger locomotives- the MPXpress is the heaviest 4 axle ever built- all American DMUs are subject to crashworthiness standards that make them much heavier than their European cousins. The hydraulic transmission is far too complicated. The UPE DMUs were impressive when they were working properly, but all 3 days the transmissions were giving us problems- not shifting into gear when moving from a stop, as well as dropping out of gear when moving. It's FAR too complicated of a system if you ask me.

I did find it neat that they were designed so they can easily be converted to EMUs.

I agree with Jis, and this explains EXACTLY why I feel DMUs are wrong for Metra's current services. We have infrequent mid day and weekend service. Trains run every hour or 2. We fill on average 2-4 gallery cars during those mid day trips so you'd have to double that amount for DMUs. Would running 1 F40 really be that much less efficient than 6 DMUs? Probably not.

DMUs on ANY Metra line during rush hour is NOT happening, so you'd have the entire fleet of them you'd need to store somewhere. Maintaining that facility would also cost money. All your cost savings are now gone and then some.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Aug 11, 2014)

Alternatively Chicago can get its head out of its posterior and start running half hourly off peak and every five minutes on peak, like a sane commuter service.


----------



## jis (Aug 11, 2014)

Yeah, I am quite certain that Metra will never run a really frequent suburban service. They are too oriented towards generally infrequent and big trains, and any travel pattern that does not fit such, they don't want to have anything to do with. So I tend to agree with what MetraUPWest says. Unless there is a complete change in service philosophy at Metra they will not know what to do with DMUs effectively.

OTOH, and outfit like LIRR may actually be able to make really good use of them for outer zone service, even making more service to Greenport and more frequent Patchogue - Speonk or Montauk turns more feasible. Even Port Jeff could do with some filler service covering huge gaps at various times of the day, though they will probably need to start using those passing tracks in off peak hours, other than the Smithtown one.

NJT could make good use of them on Long Branch - Bay Head, or even on the Boonton Line and beyond Dover during off peak, thus making Mt. Arlington and Rt 23 more useful stations, but I am not holding my breath


----------



## NorthShore (Aug 13, 2014)

MetraUPWest said:


> DMUs are fantastic for their purpose but I just don't see them working on rush hour trains.


Is that the idea they are thinking of, however? Or is it EJ&E service and, possibly, Crosstown which might have a different sort of profile?


> I was the engineer testing these DMUs all weekend, and while I was impressed with acceleration they were barely faster than our F40s. I was only a few mph faster in spots with the DMUs than I'd normally be.


Where were they running? Sorry I didn't see this thread until today. I would have loved to witness them out on the lines and taken photos.


----------



## MattW (Aug 13, 2014)

What about the few off-peak trains Metra runs? Would these be an advantage to some of the all-stops midday trains with somewhat lighter loads?


----------



## MikefromCrete (Aug 13, 2014)

MattW said:


> What about the few off-peak trains Metra runs? Would these be an advantage to some of the all-stops midday trains with somewhat lighter loads?


IF you want to maintain two sets of equipment, it would be OK, I guess. And by the way, Metra runs more than "few" off-peak runs. The major routes _ Electric, Rock Island, BNSF, Milwaukee East and North, UP North, Northwest and West - all run hourly service on weekdays. Other than some New York City routes, I don't any U.S. commuter lines that do better than that. Metra riders enjoy two and two seating on main level and single seating on the upper level. Much better than the crappy 2-3 seating on eastern routes. Give me a Metra bi-level any time over cramped eastern cars.


----------



## Eric S (Aug 13, 2014)

New York area. And some SEPTA lines.

Also worth noting that Caltrain, FrontRunner, MARC Penn Line, at least one MBTA line, and Tri-Rail run hourly midday/off-peak service as well (although not necessarily as frequently into the evening).


----------

