From: jgrove24@hotmail.com

On Thursday, August 14, 2014 1:05:52 AM UTC-5, Glen Labah wrote:
> In article ,
> 
>  "Adam H. Kerman"  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > Colorado Rail Car had a full bi-level car as DMU, right? How much did the
> 
> > engine space intrude into otherwise usable passenger compartment?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The engine and below floor generator set didn't themselves intrude into 
> 
> the passenger area, and their drive system could probably be retrofitted 
> 
> into a Metra gallery car just fine.  The company that bought the rights 
> 
> to the design might be made to be interested in doing that.  They are 
> 
> mostly a freight car company, and so they really haven't been too good 
> 
> at entering the passenger car market.  Building a prototype this way 
> 
> might give them a chance.
> 
> 
> 
> The big problem is that the gallery cars already have a limited amount 
> 
> of air conditioning capacity, and removing it from under the car means 
> 
> finding somewhere else to put it.  If you put the condenser on the roof 
> 
> like the Colorado Railcar units in Florida have, it means adding a bit 
> 
> of height to the car.  I assume the BNSF line allows higher cars due to 
> 
> double stacks, but I don't know about Union Station.

I'd settle for a separate fleet of single level DMUs to provide increased
service without the excuse of having to use the longer consists of gallery
cars that BNSF likes to close cars on during the weekends. A fleet of 6 car
consists of DMUs would be a 
great advancement. Its a pity we only see DMUs in Chicago for photo shoots.

Now the possiblities of using DMUs to provide "express service" out of ORD via
the CTA blue line tracks, then bridging over to run on the UP-NW tracks to
downtown chicago would cause mind boggling excuses from both Metra and CTA
with all kinds of hand 
waving.

--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
 * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)