What Will Run On The Rails? Part I
 By Mark ForsytheThe Kansas City Post One of the may concepts that is being knocked around for transit in Kansas City is the Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) railcar. Manufactured by Colorado Railcar, it is a self-propelled commuter railcar with the capacity to pull two full-sized commuter rail coaches. Basically it's a locomotive with seating. When Kansas City's Southern's Warren Erdman made his presentation to the City Council's Transit and Infrastructure Committee he put forth the potential of "one seat from Blue Springs to Olathe." This is the vehicle some people feel is the answer. This vehicle could travel on existing freight rails from Blue Springs, arriving in the either the Rivermarket or directly into Union Station. Then west and southwest along I-35 into Olathe. As I've mentioned before, any route directly into Union Station from the east is probably not feasible because of freight traffic. This vehicle is more for commuter rail than inter-urban transit, although I present it as an option because there are some who feel the DMU could run through through the streets of the urban core during morning and afternoon rush hours.  Advantages: - Full FRA Compliance - This means the DMU meets Federal Railroad Administration guidelines for crash standards allowing it to run on the same tracks as freight trains. - It's available now and manufactured in the United States which is a requirement of most federal funded programs - It is self-propelled so it needs no overhead catenaries or electrified third-rail. - It is scalable so you can either run one unit or pull up to two more passenger cars as demand warrants. Disadvantages: - It's huge! It's not even light rail. Its FRA compliance means it's heavy rail. - It's loud. The manufacturer claims it is "neighborhood friendly" but this thing was never intended to run on city streets. It's a locomotive, not a trolley. - It's the least fuel efficient of all the rail-based options. Conclusion: I feel the DMU is not a viable option for anything other than commuter rail. I cannot conceive this vehicle running through the streets of KC. But then again, I've seen a lot of things happen that I couldn't fathom. |
posted by Mark at 7:51 AM
Comments on "What Will Run On The Rails? Part I"
-
Anonymous said ... (2:05 PM) :
-
Mark said ... (3:50 PM) :
-
DaveKCMO said ... (5:47 PM) :
-
doinkman said ... (6:50 PM) :
-
DaveKCMO said ... (7:38 PM) :
-
mainstream said ... (8:02 AM) :
-
Mark said ... (9:06 AM) :
post a commentSpeaking of running Mark, was that you I saw running through the Plaza and up that massive hill on Broadway today? Dude you are a freak. I can't even walk up that hill!
All the sniping about the route and the only comment I get on the DMU is someone saw me running? I guess everyone likes the big locomotive?
anonymous, yes that was me. I love running hills. The older I get the harder I train. When you look over your shoulder and see a guy in a black cloak and a sickle following you it tends to keep you moving!
the freight congestion you refer to is on the existing two or three terminal tracks that exist today. there is plenty ROW for additional tracks through US. erdman referenced the existing ROW to build a direct line connecting the eastern (KCS) and southern (BNSF) routes. if not, condemn that worthless surface parking lot next to the freighthouse. as i've mentioned before, the busiest rail hub on the continent (chicago) can handle adeptly handle freight congestion, amtrak, AND twelve distinct commuter lines -- it's called signaling and scheduling, and i'd rather trust a railroader on that topic than someone who drives buses all day long.
this is good discussion, but is only a tangent from the light rail issue. DMUs would not be used for our actual light rail starter line, but allow commuter rail and light rail to share part of their tracks to build synergies between the modes. erdman was really just trying to remind everyone to look at the transportation question *holistically*, just like the professional planners have been doing for the last few years with smartmoves.
I say Boooo on the DMU. If the plan is going to have some sort of hub, regardless of where it is commuters from the burbs can get off and transfer to a car better suited for inter-urban transportation.
We need something thats cool and quiet and it needs to have free Wi-fi service too. Imagine surfing the web and checking news while blissfully being transported from Waldo to downtown in luxurious railcar. Your grandchildren may someday live this dream*.
*sorry, I spent the day in the bowels of the municipal court... so i'm a little cynical about KC getting anything right...
AFAIK, caltrain in SF is the only rail system in the US with on-board wi-fi. some VIA corridor trains in canada have wi-fi, but it's pricey and only 804.11b. you're better off getting a verizon or sprint broadband card at this point.
that being said, i'd love for sprint to step up and offer some subsidy to use KC's system as a technology test bed. why not offer residents sprint phones that have tap-n-go technology for fares?
i hear what you're sayin' about the KC system moving sloooooow. i guess we could use the analogy of a big ol' freight train slowly gathering steam...
I think everyone is going to agree that DMU is a bad idea. Aren't we talking LIGHT rail? Yikes!
mainstream, I was considering titling this post "OMG It's Coming This Way!" :-)
Today's post on traditional LRVs is a little less scary, but still expensive. Look for Wednesday and Thursday posts. Those are the two options I'm excited about.