Denver Union Station & FasTracks - Page 6

SnyderBock · #**101** Posted **Apr 20, 2009, 6:10 AM**

Yeah, but his point is that these empty parking lots in Denver are filling up with developments very rapidly, because they are building more moderate, efficient sized buildings. It's more sustainable and it doesn't flood the market with a ton of new space all at once. it's working great in Denver. As land becomes scarce and nearly all developed, the taller buildings will start to rise again. But only because the smaller building all over had brought enough people in to make Denver vibrant enough to attract larger projects on a more consistent basics.

Busy Bee · #**102** Posted **Apr 20, 2009, 1:36 PM**

Do we know what the new EMU's are going to look like?

The Dirt · #**103** Posted **Apr 20, 2009, 3:02 PM**

No, they haven't chosen a model yet.

SnyderBock · #**104** Posted **Apr 22, 2009, 3:01 PM**

RTD is leaning towards an EMU model which could also quickly have a DMU version of it become FRA-compliant. This is because Denver is building four high frequency heavy rail lines, two EMU lines and two DMU lines. All of which will share at least portions of the length with railroad ROW (not track, just ROW).

An idea floating around is the New Jersey Transit's new Aroow VI's, which can link two DMU and two EMU's together into one 4-car train capable of traversing both electrified and un-electrified portions of the system, uninterrupted.

While this is not necessary in Denver's system (since the EMU lines are going to be completely electrified), using DDMU trains would allow for inter-compatibility of all trains on all four lines (2-EMU lines, 2-DMU lines). Also, in case of a power failure, all lines could continue to operate uninterrupted. Also, segments which are not electrified, could be slowly electrified in small segments over time.

It's probably not a bad idea at all, really--you know? As for the trains appearance, I believe they are the flat noised, all silver, plain EMU's trains. Not much for aesthetics, compared to all the modern looking EMU's out there ;-)

SnyderBock · #**105** Posted **Apr 22, 2009, 3:23 PM**

Here is the Arrow III, I'm sure the Arrow VI (which Denver is leaning towards), will be simular looking:

Image by: Kevin Painter

Image by: Brandon Kaback

Image by: Eric Kreszl

Image by: Kevin Wong

llamaorama · #**106** Posted **Apr 22, 2009, 5:06 PM**

SEPTA in Philly calls their trains Silverliners, which I think might be the same as the Arrows, or at least they just look really similiar or where both made by the same people. Either way:

Silverliner V

None of these trains are very attractive. But then I guess it's about function more than looks. I would imagine solid steel construction and the boxy standard design lasts practically forever and doesn't become too outdated.

In Montreal most of the commuter trains are diesel but they have one electric line, I think because it has to go through a long tunnel they use overhead wire. Here are their trains, I thought they looked fairly new:

Pizzuti · #**107** Posted **Apr 22, 2009, 5:37 PM**

I could care less what the train looks like from the outside. The people who say "ew, public transportation is ugly" are already going to avoid RTD.

That said, I don't know why they can't just model these off the current Light Rail. I'm not saying build identical trains, but at least try to dupilciate the positive features.

The thing I like best about our light rail trains is the big windows, so you can see where you are from inside the train. It helps you find your stop (since the voice announcements so often tell you the wrong stop) and it gives you a chance to view the city from a variety of angles. And it's just pleasant to have natural daylight coming in no matter the circumstances.

I'd say the most important thing to do is increase the size of those windows.

Busy Bee · #**108** Posted **Apr 22, 2009, 6:15 PM**

^That is absolute BULLSHIT! I HATE that argument! From the perspective that good industrial design should not be considered a luxury... You CAN have both great looking rolling stock that function properly, it just requires people wanting it and expecting it.

I believe wholeheartedly that the quest for excellent transit vehicle design should be no different than the quest for excellent and forward looking automobile design or any consumer product for that matter.

Jesus, check out a book on Henry Dreyfuss, Raymond Loewy or Donald Deskey if you want to see what cutting edge design applied to public transport looked like back in the day and how that standard got diluted into the incredibly low expectations Americans have for transit vehicle aesthetics today.

Pizzuti · #**109** Posted **Apr 22, 2009, 6:19 PM**

If you care so much about what your train looks like then you be the force behind it, but I'm not going to add any tangent or condition to an already highly-politicized pro-transportation agenda unless you can provide evidence that pretty trains help the cause. I'm for public transportation getting built, in whatever form is possible, and its an uphill battle. I don't want to be the homeless person who shouts "I don't want your dimes!"

hammersklavier · #**110** Posted **Apr 22, 2009, 7:14 PM**

I agree with Busy Bee. The fact is, modern American rail passenger equipment is by and large inferior* in appearance to what it once was. What do we have today? Rather ugly DMUs and EMUs** and noncompliant LRVs? We need real masters in the field nowadays, like Raymond Loewy, whose GG1s were masterpieces of both aesthetics and transportation--there's been nothing like them since--or people like the designers of the E and F series back in the day.

*Exceptions: GE P40 (Genesis) series, EMD F59PHI, EMD AEM7.
** The progenitor of current designs, in all cases, was the Budd Rail Diesel Car (RDC).

Also, SEPTA's Silverliner IVs are the same units as NJ Transit Arrow IIIs. The Arrows are, technically, GE's later developments on the EMU template Budd laid down in its "Pioneer" (Silverliner I) series and developed in the Silverliner II and III series.

Also, it is highly unlikely Rotem's Silverliner Vs will be the same as the Arrow IVs (but probably similar).

SnyderBock · #**111** Posted **Apr 22, 2009, 8:45 PM**

Well, Denver's RTD is far from choosing a design. They in fact are allowing all the companies to "bid" for their business.
RTD's request is simply an FRA-compliant EMU, BUT they need the winning manufacturer to produce a DMU-version
of that identical EMU train and be granted FRA-compliance.

The GE/Budd style, Arrow VI's DDMU's being pursued by the NJ Transit are simply for forerunner at this time, to having a product which meets
Denver's requirements. However, RTD has a close working relationship with Siemen's. RTD-Denver is Seimen's largest LRT customer in the nation
at this time. Denver has ordered I believe 104 SD-60 model LRT's in the last 10 years or so and is expected to be ordering even more.

A Siemens EMU would be perfect for Denver's RTD, but Siemens will have to obtain FRA-Compliance for a DMU version of it,
in order to win the contract.

This is the most likely model to win Denver's contract after the Arrow type shown above...
With the huge contracts Denver has given all to Siemens for their LRT's in recent years, Seimens may be willing to expend
the funds to win this contract for over 100 EMU/DMU FRA-compliant cars (which would probably look like this):

So come on Siemens, you are Denver's best hope for a modern commuter rail train!

hammersklavier · #**112** Posted **Apr 23, 2009, 12:44 PM**

Of course, if the Rotems prove their worth here, they might become something of a standard, given that they're being assembled in Philly (which, I think, is one of the reasons they won Philadelphia's contract over Bombardier and Kawasaki, both of which have provided good, well-running equipment to SEPTA over the years).

SnyderBock · #**113** Posted **Apr 23, 2009, 3:07 PM**

With Denver's East Corridor EMU line to Denver International Airport having 8 minute peak headways (15 minute off-peak) and the Gold Corridor EMU west having 12 minute peak headways (20 minute off-peak); it is important to not confuse this commuter rail service with simular service other cities have which only run a few times a day, or once and hour during peak hours or whatnot. Even this North Corridor EMU/DMU line will have 15 minute peak headways (30 minute off-peak) and the NW Corridor DMU to Boulder will have 20 minute peak (30 minute off-peak) headways. That's from memory, so I may be off a little, but those are close o the headways for each corridor. I thought I should mention this, as it may influence the winning train model.

electricron · #**114** Posted **Apr 24, 2009, 4:59 PM**

By the time RTD needs to buy the DMU/EMUs, the FRA rules may change. The Obama Administration will be taking a close look about incorporation crash energy management technologies, that don't exist in the present FRA regulations. They have to if they ever plan on having faster than 150 mph HSR trains. So, by 2012, this review and rule changes should be complete.

If crash energy management technologies are implemented by the FRA, RTD could be buying lighter EMU/DMUs, like the Stadlers GTWs in the photos below. DART is in the lead, amongst many transit agencies, pushing for these changes.

DMU

EMU

Stadler also makes single and double deck Flirt EMU models, here's the double deck Desoto photo

SnyderBock · #**115** Posted **Apr 24, 2009, 7:38 PM**

Those are nice and efficient looking trains Electron. Are they 79mpg top cruising speed trains? if not, what is their top end and what is their top cruising speed?

electricron · #**116** Posted **Apr 25, 2009, 1:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

Those are nice and efficient looking trains Electron. Are they 79mpg top cruising speed trains? if not, what is their top end and what is their top cruising speed?

Maximum top speed for the Stadler GTWs are 120-140 km/h, 75-87 mph, depending upon configuration. Maximum top speed for the Stadler Flirts are 120-160 km/h, 75-100 mph. Note: DMUs are limited by horsepower of the diesel engines to 120 km/h, 75 mph. EMUs can go much faster.

The Dirt · #**117** Posted **Apr 25, 2009, 1:29 AM**

That train is sexy! Here it is in typical ugly RTD colors:

SnyderBock · #**118** Posted **Apr 25, 2009, 5:34 AM**

I think that looks sharp. Nothing ugly about it to me!

electricron · #**119** Posted **Apr 25, 2009, 3:24 PM**

Here's a professional made advertisement for the introduction of Stadler GTWs in the Netherlands.

• Video Link

Now, that is one sexy advertisement and train!

When was the last time you saw your local transit agency make that sexy a commercial?
And you wonder why there are many more train passengers in Holland than in America?

SnyderBock · #**120** Posted **Oct 9, 2009, 2:05 PM**

The West Corridor LRT line is now in full construction phase!