Blessing in disguise

In a turn of events, an interview between Jim Cameron and Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT) Commissioner Giulietti suggests that CTDOT may be forced to rethink its highly problematic procurement of new railcars for its diesel lines. Cameron writes, “The [CTDOT] request to the tiny rail car industry for new cars proposals brought a dismal response.” Upon reading the request for proposals (RFP) that Giulietti approved, the reason why is clear.

Despite the claim that the railcar industry is diminutive, the same builders that gave CTDOT’s procurement short shrift build plenty of rail cars yearly, including for the New York City Subway. The only reason that the railcar industry appeared small to CTDOT is because of unnecessary constraints specified in its RFP. Page ten contains what is likely the biggest offender: specification of the old Federal Railroad Administration rule that a car body must not deform when an 800,000-pound force is applied to its end. Basically no other country imposes this criterion on its passenger rail cars, and barely any manufacturers build to it.

Comically, the RFP does not even make reference to the correct subheading in the regulation! Whereas it claims “structural requirements” are found in 49 CFR Part 238, Subpart D, the actual regulation has been rearranged.

Worse, by making no mention of the FRA’s alternative compliance avenue—basically the Euronorm—finalized about three years ago, the RFP constrains carmakers to the old rule. Other US agencies are thankfully catching on to the benefits of the new rules; Metrolink is welcoming the first of its Eurospec diesel multiple units (DMUs). Despite a claim by a retired Metro-North manager, there is no reason why European trains cannot deliver level boarding at Northeast Corridor stations; plenty of them have floor heights of 48” above the rail, which is level or nearly so with any American high platform.

If the new cars were on their way, riders would have little to celebrate. The CTDOT vision for the branch lines is outdated by a century. The cars on order would be unpowered and require a diesel locomotive to haul them, which is about the worst-performing setup out there. Concentrating all the motive power into one locomotive increases maintenance costs and failure rates. Reliable coaches matter little when the machines that haul them go haywire routinely. While diesel locomotives struggle to travel 20,000 miles between failures, the unusually complex and heavy M8 electric multiple units (EMUs), which were built to the old FRA rules, routinely exceed tenfold that. Worst of all, diesels, especially diesel locomotives, have never and likely never will match the acceleration and braking of electric multiple units, which would consign inland Connecticut riders to large trip time penalties—likely a minute per stop.

Today, Metro-North ridership into Grand Central hovers around half of its pre-pandemic level, and they don’t use their M8 EMUs efficiently at all—sometimes having them lay over for hours in Midtown Manhattan. Were it to rationalize consist lengths and turn its trains around in reasonable windows, it would likely have enough cars to furnish decent service to the inland branches. The price that CTDOT was prepared to pay for one unpowered car would be enough to electrify about a mile of route assuming it could stick to the cost Amtrak incurred on its New Haven-Boston overhead line project. The sum it is prepared to commit for about seventy new trailers would wire most of the combined mileage of the Danbury Branch, Waterbury Branch, and Springfield Line.

The silver lining is that change may be afoot, by default, at the Connecticut Department of Transportation. Hundreds of senior staff have retired or will in the coming months. It is imperative that the Governor look for more enlightened transportation experts as he sets up for a likely second term.