Re: Passenger Cars and the long haul

[Craig Haber <albatross@harnessnet.com.au>]

Hi,

Terry Burton wrote:
> Yes that's true, but what if a State EPA decides that retention
> toilets are required, that would presumably include hand basins
> and showers.?  Amtrak faced that one a long time ago.

The thing with pass cars is that you can get very long life out of the
steel body, and seriously modify the rest of the vehicle as need be.

For example the S cars on the VR/PTC/WCR etc.  In their most developed
form (the BRS car) you have modern electrical and aircon equipment,
'new' bogies (ie, the SOP bogies have all been replaced by Harris
bogies), and there's no reason why you can't continue to modify the
interior as the market demands.  By recycling a carriage as such, you
can save lots of $$$.  Another example are the BZN cars.  

Retention toilets are an interesting issue, and obviously there are
restrictions depending on the design of the carriage.  I believe Amtrak
simply lock the train toilets when travelling though states where
retention toilets are required.  Is this correct?  A contact was
recently in Europe - he said in parts of Europe they have traditional
toilets, and run a 'lime train', which drops lime on the lineside within
1km of each station!

I guess my point is that providing the steel frame/body remain sound,
there's no reason why you can't continue to develop a carriage according
to more modern requirements, and this will save the cost of
designing/developing/building prototypes/testing/accepting/etc etc new
rollingstock.

Cheers,
Craig.
-- 
Craig Haber
albatross@harnessnet.com.au
Manufacturing Systems Engineer (almost) 
Web Page Designer, Harness Racing, Railways, and Essendon Football Club
fanatic
http://www.harnessnet.com.au/