Hello,
I would order the Walther Metroliners.
I have a question, these Metroliners ran in units of 2. But what was the combination of the units of 2 cars.
Coach an snack bar coach or coach and parlor car or coach and coach or snack bar coach and parlor car
Walthers brings 3 different cars: Metroliner Snack Bar Coach, Metroliner Parlor Car and Metroliner Coach
Also was it possible for passengers to go from one unit of 2 cars to an other unit of 2 cars durging a run?
Hope someone can give me the information
Hi - I saw your post on the MR "prototype info" forum before seeing this one, so look there and I've provided some info about how these trains were made up, etc. Hope it helps, Art
Metroliner trains ran in 4 or 6 car trains. I rode a bunch of them, but don't remember the consist order exactly. My recollection was the parlor seating was on north end of the train. The cafe car could be anywhere, though I don't ever remember it being the last car.
You might check railpictures.net to get an idea.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Metroliners ran in units of two, but unlike similar commuter cars, there were couplers at both ends of the car, and they could be paired back to back in any order that was appropriate for the particular schedule. A typical six car train would often be coach, coach snack-bar coach, coach, coach, parlor, Sometitmes two parlors and one less coach. Although a cab was located at one end, and the other was either blind or with a simple back-up controller, otherewise each car was self-contained, unlike the typical pairs of mu's in commuter service, where one car might have the compressors and the other the motor generator and batteries, for example, and a drawbar insead of coupler between the two cars. All cars had panatogrpahs, but only half were used at one time. One could walk the length of the train, and on occasion I did that.
daveklepper Metroliners ran in units of two, but unlike similar commuter cars, there were couplers at both ends of the car, and they could be paired back to back in any order that was appropriate for the particular schedule. A typical six car train would often be coach, coach snack-bar coach, coach, coach, parlor, Sometitmes two parlors and one less coach. Although a cab was located at one end, and the other was either blind or with a simple back-up controller, otherewise each car was self-contained, unlike the typical pairs of mu's in commuter service, where one car might have the compressors and the other the motor generator and batteries, for example, and a drawbar insead of coupler between the two cars. All cars had panatogrpahs, but only half were used at one time. One could walk the length of the train, and on occasion I did that.
...you could often go all the way to the head end and peer out the front window. Sometimes the engineer would even chat with you a bit.
who built the metro liners?
Budd in Philadelphia built the carbodies. Poppa told me that the manufacturer had their own style of trucks, but "the railroad" (which would have to be the PRR and shortly thereafter the Penn Central) would have none of that and specified the rough-riding drop equalizer style "pedestal" trucks things things had.
The Silverliner MU's which were the progenitor to the Metroliners had the inside-roller bearing "Pioneer III" trucks as did the Amfleet cars that followed. Maybe someone could fill me in on the fine points of the Pioneer III truck, but they look to me much like the PCC streetcar truck. Also, the Pioneer III truck is a kind of "poor man's passive tilt train" in their outside air springs give much less outward lean on curves and are FRA approved to run a bit faster on curves.
As to the electrics, I had read that (in gummint fashion to spread the work around), half the Metroliners had GE electric gear, the other half had Westinghouse.
The Metroliner MUs had a reputation as being car barn queens owing to sundry faults with the electrics. They were also higher horsepower than any other MU and heavy as well. I had read in a trade magazine that they weighed at least 80 tons and were rated at 2500 HP. Based on what Poppa told me, that they had to be rated at 160 MPH top speed with their flat-faced ends, the 160 MPH being a gummint requirement that the US could claim bragging rights of being faster than the 150 MPH Japan Bullet Train, having also lighter train cars and the famous bullet streamline noses.
Ratings are kind of complicated. I am thinking the 2500 HP per MU car was a short-term rating. What I am reconstructing from going through back issues of Trains at the Wisconsin State Historical Society is that the Budd Silverliner was the basis for the Metroliner concept, that is, an electric MU car was a good starting point for a high-speed intercity train. The US DOT put together a four-car Silverliner test train that achieved a peak speed in excess of 150 MPH.
I am thinking the Silverliner had 500 continuous HP, but to accelerate within the confines of the NEC to reach the 150 MPH test speed, they were operated at their short-time rating of 1000 HP. Since the Metroliner was supposed to be 150 MPH capable, the specified a continous rating of 1000 HP with of course a higher short-term rating.
Perhaps the 150 MPH rating was just bragging rights as I am not sure they operated much over 120 MPH in revenue service. Something closer to a production Silverliner probably could have done the job more reliably and with less fanfare, but that was the era of Moon landings.
What I also read was that by making various patches and fixes, the maintenance crews pretty much go the Metroliners to be healthy and productive in revenue service. Then what happened was that the edict came down to rebuild and "improve" the poor things, the rebuilding was done with respect to the original blueprints without regard to all of the fixes, and the rebuilt Metroliners were back to being car barn queens. Paul Reistrup was Amtrak President, he purchased those "Metroliner shells" known as the Amfleet cars, essentially Metroliners without MU propulsion, and he also purchased off-the-shelf Swedish electric locomotives with light weight, insanely high horsepower to what people thought possible, and advance wheel slip control, and "Metroliner service" became an AEM-7 locomotive with 4 Amfleet cars in tow, initiating the NEC as we now know it.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Paul Milenkovic I am thinking the Silverliner had 500 continuous HP, but to accelerate within the confines of the NEC to reach the 150 MPH test speed, they were operated at their short-time rating of 1000 HP. Since the Metroliner was supposed to be 150 MPH capable, the specified a continous rating of 1000 HP with of course a higher short-term rating. Perhaps the 150 MPH rating was just bragging rights as I am not sure they operated much over 120 MPH in revenue service. Something closer to a production Silverliner probably could have done the job more reliably and with less fanfare, but that was the era of Moon landings.
I recall seeing "short time rating" associated with the 2500HP spec for the Metroliners, but don't have a recollection of the hourly or continuous ratings for the motors. The metroliners were supposed to be capable of accelerating at 1.1MPHPS from 0 to 100 MPH, so would need lotsa HP to accomplish that. My guess is that the short term rating is only good for 5 minutes or so. MU motors probably get less cooling airflow than locomotive motors, so the continuous rating in llocomotive service would be higher than MU service.
It's possible that the larger motors would not fit on the Pioneer III trucks which were likely derivations of the trcks Budd designed for the Pioneer series of lightweight, low cost passenger cars in the late 1950's.
IIRC, there was only one stretch on the NY-Wash line that could support speeds higher than 120 MPH, so the 150 MPH top speed would only have been useful on a brand new high speed line. With that in mind, a slightly uprated Silverliner probably would have been more successful and cheaper to boot.
- Erik
The individual traction motor continuous ratings on the Metroliners were 255 HP for the GE motors and 300 HP for the Westinghouse motors.
One of the reasons that the Metroliners were hangar queens was that they were essentially prototypes that were rushed into service without proper de-bugging. While the Silverliner design may have been a starting point, there was a lot of upgraded technology involved with which there was little real experience. This resulted in a 61-car fleet of testbeds.
Paul Milenkovic Perhaps the 150 MPH rating was just bragging rights as I am not sure they operated much over 120 MPH in revenue service. Something closer to a production Silverliner probably could have done the job more reliably and with less fanfare, but that was the era of Moon landings.
I think 120 was it, but the engineer would cheat a bit. I recall seeing 127 on the speed indicator on one trip.
Moon Landings? I rode a Metroclub car the day the first landed on the moon. I was 13.
I saw 136 mph on the digital speedometer having a cab ride (front platform ride) on a NY - Washington business trip whhen the engineers (motorman?) was a fellow railfan.
It wasa mistake for Budd to cave in on the truck question.
oltmannd Paul Milenkovic: Perhaps the 150 MPH rating was just bragging rights as I am not sure they operated much over 120 MPH in revenue service. Something closer to a production Silverliner probably could have done the job more reliably and with less fanfare, but that was the era of Moon landings. I think 120 was it, but the engineer would cheat a bit. I recall seeing 127 on the speed indicator on one trip. Moon Landings? I rode a Metroclub car the day the first landed on the moon. I was 13.
Paul Milenkovic: Perhaps the 150 MPH rating was just bragging rights as I am not sure they operated much over 120 MPH in revenue service. Something closer to a production Silverliner probably could have done the job more reliably and with less fanfare, but that was the era of Moon landings.
My brother was a Westinghouse electrical engineer as the time the Metroliners were being developed. He told me that they tested 150 mph on a test run somewhere in New Jersey. He did not witness the test. So what he said, at least from a legal perspective, is hearsay. Having said that, he is not know for exaggeration.
Whilst living in New York I made numerous trips on the Metroliner to Philadelphia and Washington. If I remember correctly, several of the crew members (I ask because I am essentially noisy) told me that the train was authorized for 125 mph in regular service for short sections of the run. Again, this is what I was told. I don't have any hard data to support it.
Your brother is on the mark on the test run, which was made by modified Silverliner cars. A speed of 156 MPH was reached.
Sam1 My brother was a Westinghouse electrical engineer as the time the Metroliners were being developed. He told me that they tested 150 mph on a test run somewhere in New Jersey. He did not witness the test. So what he said, at least from a legal perspective, is hearsay. Having said that, he is not know for exaggeration. Whilst living in New York I made numerous trips on the Metroliner to Philadelphia and Washington. If I remember correctly, several of the crew members (I ask because I am essentially noisy) told me that the train was authorized for 125 mph in regular service for short sections of the run. Again, this is what I was told. I don't have any hard data to support it.
The first of Steffee's speed surveys to cover the Metroliners mentioned one part of the NY-Wash run carded for a start to stop average speed of 95 MPH. This would support the 125 MPH authorization.
As CSS Paul mentioned, the modified Silverliners did reach 156 MPH in tests. The test track was authorized for speeds of 160MPH with a "slow order" of 140 MPH for a curve. I recall that the Metroliners were also tested on that track and were able to beat that speed (don't have any hard data for this). The reports were that the GE equipped Metroliners could reach 160 MPH and the Westinghouse equipped Metroliners were good for 165 MPH. This would be consistent with CSS Paul's comment on the continuous ratings of 255HP for the GE motors and 300HP for the Westinghouse motors.
Sounds like your brother was at Westinghouse about the time that the original BART motors were being made.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.