Showing posts with label dmu; colorado rail car. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dmu; colorado rail car. Show all posts

Friday, May 21, 2010

Minutes of 2010 Annual Meeting

Minutes of Committee Meeting

AP070(1) SELF POWERED RAIL CAR TECHNOLOGIES SUBCOMMITTEE

Wednesday January 13, 2010 at 10:15 AM

WASHINGTON HILTON HOTEL, WASHINGTON DC

David Nelson, Chairman Thomas Cornillie, Acting Secretary

Webpage: http://trbsprc.blogspot.com/

Call to Order

Committee Chair, David Nelson (Jacobs Engineering), called the meeting to order at 10:15 AM.

Attendence

Members and friends of the subcommittee introduced themselves. A total of 21 people were in attendance. Please see the attached sign-in sheet.

Agenda

See attached meeting agenda.

Committee Secretary Position

Chairman Nelson reported that the position of Committee Secretary remains and requested a volunteer to fill the role for today’s meeting. Thomas Cornillie agreed to take notes and prepare minutes for this meeting. Anyone interested in filling the position should speak to the Chair.

Website

Chairman Nelson noted that the subcommittee has a website: http://trbsprc.blogspot.com where meeting notes, agenda, and other information are available.

Committee Name

Sub-committee members in attendance voted unanimously to re-affirm the sub-committee’s name: “Self-Powered Rail Car Technologies Subcommittee”

Presentations

Two presentations were made to the committee:

  1. Research to Support the RSAC Task Force: Presentation by David Tyrell of US DOT Volpe Center
  2. Introduction to US Rail: Presentation by Michael Pracht, President and CEO

Update on Research to Support the Rail Safety Advisory Committee Task Force

Mr. Tyrell gave a presentation about the US DOT Volpe Center’s efforts to develop criteria and procedures for evaluating rail vehicle crashworthiness. The results were published in the Federal Register on January 8, 2010 and are viewable at the following address: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-01-08/html/E9-31411.htm

The ensuing discussion covered collision speeds, collision survivability and car deformity, and the relationship between crash energy management and buff-strength.

Introduction to US Rail

Mr. Pratt, the President and CEO of US Railcar gave a presentation about the acquisition of the assets of the bankrupt Colorado Railcar corporation by the Value Recovery Group of Columbus, OH and the formation of US Railcar.

The presentation included an overview of the accomplishments of Colorado Railcar in developing its DMU design and their plans to adapt the design based on revenue service experience.

Recent Industry and Service Developments

The committee briefly discussed the following recent developments:

  • Challenges facing the SunRail project

  • The role in the FRA and the commencement of revenue service on the Austin-Leander MetroRail system

Mid-Year Meeting
The mid-year meeting tentatively set for mid-June in Vancouver, BC Canada


Proposed Research and Session Topics For 2010 Annual Conference

1. Strategies for “bridging the gap” to permit true level boarding.

2. Potential to use PTC to facilitate interoperability of equipment of varying structural standards

3. Documentation of best practices developed in existing services

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 11:58 AM.

Distribution: Subcommittee members

Section Chair

Group Council Chair

TRB Staff Representative


Sunday, March 29, 2009

Field Trip on Colorado Rail Car Double Decker DMU


On Saint Patrick's Day 2009, I finally got the opportunity to inspect the DMU demonstration rolling stock in South Florida. Miami’s Tri-Rail uses a very small fleet of very large double deck self-propelled diesel rail cars. I rode the DMU train set southward from Pompano to Sheridan Street in midday revenue service.

My reactions were mixed.

On the positive side, the seating was very comfortable and the views from the windows were absolutely spectacular, especially from the upper deck. The reported maintenance and reliability statistics are positive.

But, the negatives make the car a hard sell; lackluster fit and finish, rocky ride quality, lots of clutter on the lower deck, and a floor covering that doesn’t seem to be responding well to the wear and tear of daily use. I’d find the ride quality and finish acceptable in a car that’s 25 to 30 years old but unsettling in a car with less than 1,000 days of operation.