If you designed your own DMU, what would it be like?

[Bletchleyite]

The only things that are bad about 170s are fixable - too-small luggage racks, failed internal doors and a slightly poor ride at the vehicle ends. They are otherwise a good solid unit that will I'm sure last many years.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The only things that are bad about 170s are fixable - too-small luggage racks, failed internal doors and a slightly poor ride at the vehicle ends. They are otherwise a good solid unit that will I'm sure last many years.

It's a shame they weren't ALL supplied with the lightweight bogies as found on the 172s, as although they can use Sprinter differentials they AIUI have quite high track access charges due to weight. They're also quite sluggish by all accounts!

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

It's a shame they weren't ALL supplied with the lightweight bogies as found on the 172s, as although they can use Sprinter differentials they AIUI have quite high track access charges due to weight. They're also quite sluggish by all accounts!

170s are more sluggish to get moving than Jabba the Hutt!

When the 185s came online and replaced them out of Hull for TPE, it was noted that they "went like the clappers". Mind you, I recall the former HT units seemed to "leap" into the desired speed

 

[222ben]

Please can you stop talking about 170s and get back to the thread please

 

[RichmondCommu]

What routes do the class 170's operate on nowadays? Do they still run on TPE services? I saw some Turbostars in Edinburgh last Spring, I presume they are also class 170's?

 

[southern442]

Has the OP got any ideas for ideal DMU's?

 

[222ben]

I've got one. For an IC DMU I would have a 7-car one with two high rated engines (maybe in centre coaches where I would have a buffet coach) Maybe that. Or, make an APT that actually works

 

[randyrippley]

Has the OP got any ideas for ideal DMU's?

I liked the Blue Pullmans........just needed decent engines. Now if they'd replaced the MAN diesels with Valentas or Venturas.......

 

[najaB]

I've got one. For an IC DMU I would have a 7-car one with two high rated engines (maybe in centre coaches where I would have a buffet coach)...

If you're going to have centralised power, then it makes sense to have it at the ends where swaps are easier in the case of failures as well as for regular maintenance.

 

[southern442]

I've got one. For an IC DMU I would have a 7-car one with two high rated engines (maybe in centre coaches where I would have a buffet coach) Maybe that.

I think the 7-coach arrangement is a good idea, because it allows for a long-distance run (like Scottish highlands services) that isn't as fully loaded as another IC service, and you can still have luxuries such as a buffet.

Or, make an APT that actually works

The APT was a classic design in my opinion and it's a great shame that they didn't work properly.

 

[222ben]

said wrong thing
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
for a commuter DMU i would have 3+2 seating and wide doors. Oh, and since now theres a lot of obsession with standing pax i would have a car with no seats so you can get maximum seating capacity

 

[randyrippley]

i would have a car with no seats so you can get maximum seating capacity

you could use them for overnight livestock shipments as well...cheap way to return some traffic to the railways

 

[Master29]

I like the idea of a much improved Voyager/Meridian type DMU. perhaps without the tapering body and a better more ergonomic seating layout with passenger comfort in mind rather than smelly disabled bogs.

 

[D6975]

My ideal DMU would look a bit like a Blue Pullman.
Nominally 7 coaches, but flexible.
Vehicles 1 and 7 would have a driving cab, an engine compartment and a small passenger saloon. The 2 power plants would need to be sufficient to shift an 8 coach train.
Vehicles 2 and 6 would be passenger saloons (no engines) but with power bogies, semi-permanently coupled up to 1 and 7.
Vehicles 3-5 would be intermediate trailers, this is where the flexibility comes in, you could knock one out or put an extra one in. One option could have a mini buffet.
Note that with this layout, 1 and 7 would only have passenger doors at the inner ends, so a 7 coach set would fit a 6 coach length platform.

 

[Emblematic]

Vehicles 1 and 7 would have a driving cab, an engine compartment and a small passenger saloon. The 2 power plants would need to be sufficient to shift an 8 coach train.

So, a class 43 with extra seats and windows then? Bashers might like that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Vehicles 2 and 6 would be passenger saloons (no engines) but with power bogies, semi-permanently coupled up to 1 and 7.

Sorry, missed that bit. Fit a bigger engine in the 43 as well.

 

[Clip]

said wrong thing
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
for a commuter DMU i would have 3+2 seating and wide doors. Oh, and since now theres a lot of obsession with standing pax i would have a car with no seats so you can get maximum seating capacity

Don't you mean maximum standing capacity or will you expect them to sit on the floor

 

[randyrippley]

The APT was a classic design in my opinion and it's a great shame that they didn't work properly.

The APT-E DID work properly. The problem was that it wasn't given a dedicated team of development engineers once it began trial runs. It was maintained by the staff at Shields Depot when they could spare a few minutes away from the WCML stock - which obviously took priority
If a dedicated team had been permanently allocated to fixing the teething problems then the APT would have been fine. As it was, it didn't get the engineering support it required - so it developed faults. If it had been given the correct level of support it would have been as reliable as any other new design.
Why wasn't it given support? Well, one view is that the BRB were happy with the stop-gap HST and didn't want to spend on another new idea, so just let it rot and wither

 

[222ben]

IF the APT was put into service, would we have as much complaining about the pendo's?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

IF the APT was put into service, would we have as much complaining about the pendo's?

Well, the 373s had nice big picture windows...

 

[kevin5025]

Mine might look a bit like this, but longer than 2 coaches:

http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/no/diesel/dmu/BM92/NSB9201.jpg

(Interior)
http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/no/diesel/dmu/BM92/NSB-BM92_59_Interior.jpg


Or maybe:
http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/at/diesel/dmu/5147/5147_004_Hai.jpg

Ah, I like this .

My own suggestion would be the Budd RDC - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budd_Rail_Diesel_Car Not only are they exceptionally well made, but they look amazing, to me anyway ! There have been quite a few stainless steel rolling stock designs, but this one by Budd, of which there are passenger coaches too, got it right. All the lines, and angles just look right.

I like them just as they are, but I would make a couple of changes:
- add a couple of six seat first class compartments.
- add a galley for the preparation of 'airline style' meals that could be re heated for serving.

 

[Mikey C]

In terms of DMUs, other than the low speed stopping series, I prefer the 175 type layout with end doors, to the 170 1/3 2/3 doors.

The 175s seemed very nice units though I haven't been on one for a while

 

[colchesterken]

They would look like a class 309 with sliding plug doors at the end and air con, as we have moved on they would have to be Mk3 rather than Mk1 based
Oops I think I have just designed a diesel class 442
Could we give a scrap 442 to Vivarail to play with if they could slot a class 222 motor under it, everyone here would be happy

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

What about a pantograph version of a pacer?

Is this what you were thinking of?

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Is this what you were thinking of?

Hell yes


I'll take seventy for an immediate delivery please!!!