'Houston airport subway, it's the only example of a WEDway people mover built by Disney outside of the parks.';

'>>1992917
The DDZ is still looking good... Quite aesthetic solution hiding the loco under the upper passenger deck.

I (mildly autistic) am to this day bothered by the design of Stadler GTWs due to that fucking engine/electrics compartment. It's like putting a small freight wagon into a passenger consist just because.

Inb4: they need to put the engine or electrical components somewhere
So does Alstom, Siemens and Bombardier, yet they don't need a fucking freight car for it.';

'>>1993631
But they need to put the engine or electrical components somewhere cheap.
But putting it in the middle they can keep the other components mostly the same, no matter if the final product is an EMU or DMU.';

'>>1993631
Seems fine, keeps the mechanical components separated from the passenger cabins and makes them easier to access for maintenance crews

>yet they don't need a fucking freight car for it
It's more akin to a locomotive than a freight car';

'>>1993631
It's not just Stadler, Materfer in Argentina also make a DMU like that.
Except this one is laid out like a tram and has a bogie directly under the engine compartment';

'The Nova 3s, simply because of how they came about.

> Be TransPennine Express
> You want to off-lease half of your existing, uniform fleet
> Order some iets but they won't be ready for a while
> Order an EMU and some loco-hauled stock based off those planned for the Caledonian Sleeper from CAF, so they arrive before the iets
> You ordered your trains from CAF, so they arrive late and are riddled with faults to the point that their introduction is so close to the iets, you may as well have not bothered
> The lateness of the CAF trains cause you to extend your lease on the legacy fleet
> You can now improve capacity because you have more of the legacy fleet than planned
> Covid hits and you now have more trains than you know what to do with
> As a result, your loco hauled trains become niche and basically stuck to 1 route
> Eventually realise that they don't really fit within your fleet and decided to send them off-lease and keep your legacy fleet alongside the other 2 trains

They sounded cool though, and that's all that matters (Class 68 my beloved)';

'Rotary snow plough. When a normal blade won't cut it.

>>1993959
Didn't the Nova 3 carriage sets also have problems with cracking? I heard that it's happened with the other CAF Mk 5 carriages (Caledonian sleeper).

This is along with unreliability and noise complaints from the class 68s, which is all why they're being withdrawn so soon. It's a shame but I wonder if Chiltern will take them. They're looking for new stock and this might be able to fill gaps in their roster.';

'>>1993893
Reminds me of the Lego monorail system, which I guess belongs in this thread as an unusual toy train system. Nobody else used a single-sided horizontal gear and flat road surface, did they?

I can't understand the logic behind this on real trains though, and I've seen it too on the Twin Cities light rail (Siemens S70, I think?) you've put the part that's most likely to fail in between two long, half-supported frames so reaching it is a hassle, and in a head-on collision it's a nice solid lump of metal to crush your passengers against.';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'Metro transfer with dynamometer car A17 serving as a brake van.

Dv12 numbers are slowly decreasing :(';

'Brazilian mining concern Vale operates a handful of railways and ordered locomotives with 8 axles instead of 6. I believe they're also narrow gauge';

'>>1992917
Early bilevel EMUs from the 80s had a hard time fitting all the mechanical components. In Switzerland the first such "EMUs" were pseudo-EMUs consisting of three bilevel cars and a matching locomotive, all coupled together into a fixed set. Then they couple those sets together, up to three per train.';

'>>1993631
>I (mildly autistic) am to this day bothered by the design of Stadler GTWs due to that fucking engine/electrics compartment. It's like putting a small freight wagon into a passenger consist just because.
>Inb4: they need to put the engine or electrical components somewhere
>So does Alstom, Siemens and Bombardier, yet they don't need a fucking freight car for it.
I understand your autism, but it's actually not a bad solution. The advantage is that except the far ends of the cars theyhave completely level floor at platform height, while other EMUs have a much more irregular floor height with ramps and protrusions hidden below the seats and whatnot. From that perspective I actually find them superior, although I think by now this is an obsolete model.';

'undefined';

'undefined';

'>>1994794
>The advantage is that except the far ends of the cars theyhave completely level floor at platform height, while other EMUs have a much more irregular floor height with ramps and protrusions hidden below the seats and whatnot. From that perspective I actually find them superior, although I think by now this is an obsolete model.

The new TGV-M have a little "wagon" named greffon just behind the two loco, it have several advantages, first, until now due to design the TGV must have been two types of coachs now all the coach are the same and shorten by 1m and it reduce cost increase fexibility and also shorten the loco by 4 meters so no space lost, second, technical equipments are moved in those greffon and above all they are equiped with big batteries allowing autonomous of the train for few hours in case of powerline shutdown and the ability for the train to move at low speed to a station or a functional power line. This capacity can also be used in case of overloading of the electric network to smooth consumption.';