A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Take a break from playing the game and chat here about real-world transportation issues!
User avatar
kamnet
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6780
Joined: 28 Sep 2009 17:15
Location: Eastern KY
Contact:

A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by kamnet » 24 Jul 2018 21:29

http://theoldmotor.com/?p=148269

The Evans Auto-Railer, 1935. The chassis was produced by Chevrolet. The Auto-Railer bus didn't gain any sales, but Evans' road-to-rail system was widely fitted to a variety of vehicles.

http://www.oocities.org/trackworker.geo/evanstext1.htm
http://www.magazineart.org/main.php/v/a ... s.jpg.html

It was also employed during WWII for cargo transport, including vehicles with fifth-wheel trailers.
http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/esM36-6.jpg

User avatar
YNM
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 3544
Joined: 22 Mar 2012 11:10
Location: West Java

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by YNM » 25 Jul 2018 07:34

I guess this is only second to that then.

Image
YNM = yoursNotMine - Don't get it ?
「ヨーッスノットマイン」も合うでしょう。

User avatar
nicfer
Director
Director
Posts: 529
Joined: 03 May 2005 20:50
Location: Somewhere in a country called Argentina

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by nicfer » 25 Jul 2018 23:57

Or this abomination:

Image

And it's second version:

Image

There was one of the first version on my city, connecting the terminal with various universities and a few more areas. It was so bad, it got quickly replaced with those '40 decade relics:

Image

Yep.
Sorry for my english I am argentinian
TTO don't crashes in Windows XP; XP crashes TTO

Formerly known as UnderBuilder.

MyMiniCity

User avatar
61653
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2080
Joined: 29 Sep 2009 09:13
Location: Batley, the People's Republic of West Yorkshire.

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by 61653 » 04 Oct 2018 17:14

Those look like a more modern version of our infamous Pacer units... if there'd ever been a second generation of them they'd probably look very similar.
The Penistone Line Partnership:http://www.penline.co.uk/
Formerly known as 47434
Last train journey I could be bothered to look up the headcode for: 04/02/2016, Mirfield to Batley, 2J34 1459 Huddersfield to Leeds, Northern Rail 144015

User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1949
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by acs121 » 04 Oct 2018 19:24

I don't think what we had was much better.

Image

It's even simpler than anything said previously : they just took buses, then replaced their rubber tyres by flanged wheels.
Yep. Despite the fact that we are a rich country, we like making very cheap stuff. France is great.

User avatar
SquireJames
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1867
Joined: 07 Aug 2004 11:56
Skype: squirejames5
Location: Stoke-on-Trent
Contact:

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by SquireJames » 04 Oct 2018 22:57

61653 wrote:Those look like a more modern version of our infamous Pacer units... if there'd ever been a second generation of them they'd probably look very similar.
Second generation Pacers?

Please don't. You'll give someone ideas and then...it's too horrific to contemplate
Image

User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1949
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by acs121 » 05 Oct 2018 14:29

I beg to differ.
The refurbished Pacers are even uglier than the original ones.

User avatar
Pilot
General Forums Moderator
General Forums Moderator
Posts: 7517
Joined: 04 Aug 2010 15:48
Location: Manchester

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by Pilot » 05 Oct 2018 18:10

I mean, exterior-wise, the refurbished pacer (the 144e) is no different to the original ones bar a different paint scheme.

Unless of course, you mean the different cab which is in place on the 143s and 144s when compared to the 142? But that isn't the result of a refurb, they were built like that.

User avatar
61653
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2080
Joined: 29 Sep 2009 09:13
Location: Batley, the People's Republic of West Yorkshire.

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by 61653 » 06 Oct 2018 00:27

Pilot wrote:I mean, exterior-wise, the refurbished pacer (the 144e) is no different to the original ones bar a different paint scheme.

Unless of course, you mean the different cab which is in place on the 143s and 144s when compared to the 142? But that isn't the result of a refurb, they were built like that.
I will agree (if that's what's being suggested) that the paint scheme on 144012, specifically the silly "bite-mark" or "frown" caused by the purple indent to the yellow warning panel does make it look a bit odd, if not downright ugly.
The Penistone Line Partnership:http://www.penline.co.uk/
Formerly known as 47434
Last train journey I could be bothered to look up the headcode for: 04/02/2016, Mirfield to Batley, 2J34 1459 Huddersfield to Leeds, Northern Rail 144015

User avatar
YNM
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 3544
Joined: 22 Mar 2012 11:10
Location: West Java

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by YNM » 10 Oct 2018 16:23

SquireJames wrote:You'll give someone ideas and then...
Boris Bus based Pacers ?
YNM = yoursNotMine - Don't get it ?
「ヨーッスノットマイン」も合うでしょう。

User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1949
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by acs121 » 10 Oct 2018 21:51

If this happens the entire UK rail system is doomed.
Also, i saw a map of railways in the UK, and it sure seems that, like, 60-70% of your lines are not electrified. That may explain why a huge part of the UK's rail rolling stock is diesel. To say, electrification will surely make redundant all those diesel relics like the Pacer and all the old locos (not the Class 43s, the others).

User avatar
Pilot
General Forums Moderator
General Forums Moderator
Posts: 7517
Joined: 04 Aug 2010 15:48
Location: Manchester

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by Pilot » 10 Oct 2018 22:00

acs121 wrote:If this happens the entire UK rail system is doomed.
Also, i saw a map of railways in the UK, and it sure seems that, like, 60-70% of your lines are not electrified. That may explain why a huge part of the UK's rail rolling stock is diesel. To say, electrification will surely make redundant all those diesel relics like the Pacer and all the old locos (not the Class 43s, the others).
It won't happen, these guys are merely joking. There are newer (diesel) trains being built (and about to enter service) to replace the pacers, which have to be withdrawn from operation by the end of 2019 as they not compliant with disability regulations. As for old diesel locos (except the HSTs), there are very few that are running; 4/5 a day in scheduled passenger service, whilst most freight is hauled by Class 66s, built from 1999 until 2015.

Additionally, lines are being electrified in certain areas (Manchester to Liverpool, Preston (via Bolton) and Blackpool for example), which is also allowing diesel trains to be replaced, but this takes time, money and political will to do. Another path we are taking at the moment is Bi-Mode trains, which run on the overhead wires where they exist, and diesel where they do not. These are replacing most of the HSTs.

User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1949
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by acs121 » 10 Oct 2018 23:23

Yeah, but difference is that Manchester-Liverpool is a somewhat important railway corridor and it is not electrified.
Electrification goes no further than Reading for those that want to go to Bristol. This, while no one can say it isn't an important corridor.
In the north, you can't go further than Glasgow and Edinburgh. Good luck for those needing to go to Aberdeen.
The same way, you can't go from Manchester to Liverpool, Sheffield, Bradford and Leeds while they all are quite close to themselves.

Think about it : while Switzerland did need electrification due to its railways going quite high, The Netherlands or France did electrify their network although they have a very, very flat country.

User avatar
Pilot
General Forums Moderator
General Forums Moderator
Posts: 7517
Joined: 04 Aug 2010 15:48
Location: Manchester

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by Pilot » 11 Oct 2018 07:50

acs121 wrote:Yeah, but difference is that Manchester-Liverpool is a somewhat important railway corridor and it is not electrified.
It is, and has been since 2015.
acs121 wrote:Electrification goes no further than Reading for those that want to go to Bristol. This, while no one can say it isn't an important corridor.
It goes as far as Didcot, and will very soon be extended to Bristol Parkway and Cardiff. In the meantime, bi-mode trains seamlessly switch over from Electric to Diesel at the push of a button at Didcot.
acs121 wrote:In the north, you can't go further than Glasgow and Edinburgh. Good luck for those needing to go to Aberdeen.
Those going to Aberdeen have it fine, using diesel trains. When LNER are able to introduce the "Azuma" trains, they will have bi-mode trains that run on Electric from London to Edinburgh, and diesel from Edinburgh to Aberdeen, whilst Scotrail are just starting to introduce their short-formed HSTs onto the route, improving the passenger experience massively.
acs121 wrote:The same way, you can't go from Manchester to Liverpool
You can, on the Electric Class 319s (mentioned above) via Chat Moss, or on diesel trains via Warrington Central.
acs121 wrote:The same way, you can't go from Manchester to Sheffield, Bradford and Leeds while they all are quite close to themselves.
You can. You just get onto a DMU, which runs perfectly fine. Manchester to Sheffield once had a second route that was wired, but it was using non-standard technology to the rest of our network (1.5kV DC OHLE). Passenger services were withdrawn along this route in 1970 (this being diverted to the Hope Valley route, which was deemed Socially important), and when the freight market started to decline the route was closed 1981. Manchester to Leeds is due to be electrified over the next 5 years, and will shortly have yet more Bi-mode trains introduced to take advantage of the wires where these exist.

One thing Electrification does not guarantee is the usage of Electric trains on the route. For example, daily on the West Coast Mainline, there are a couple of services that run from London to Glasgow/Edinburgh via Birmingham New Street. Several of these trains are formed by pairs of diesel Super Voyagers, despite running under the wires throughout (there being 2 of these pairs, as well as one single Super Voyager running the route today), so even if we did electrify everywhere, there is no guarantee of there being the Electric trains to run it (especially as most companies/factories that can build trains to Britain's restrictive loading gauge are currently working flat-out to fulfil current orders).
acs121 wrote:Think about it : while Switzerland did need electrification due to its railways going quite high, The Netherlands or France did electrify their network although they have a very, very flat country.
While you folks were electrifying, we were trying to make our railway, that was losing money hand over fist, economically viable, including the so-called "Beeching Cuts". We did not have the money at the time to go electrifying every single random route like you folks did.

I have never once said we do not need more Electrification, we need more of it, but at the same time, there is still going to be a place for Diesel and Bi-Mode trains, and that will remain for quite a while, unless we're going to start electrifying the West Highland and Far North Lines!

--

Anyways, this is getting off-topic now (I see a common theme starting whenever ACS is involved), so let's get this back onto Railbus' please!

User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1949
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by acs121 » 11 Oct 2018 17:53

Let's say that when i say you can't go further than X it was "you can't go further with an electric locomotive".

Now with the last thing : you're wrong. France didn't have the Beeching cuts, but in fact we did close most of our less-important lines by the 60s-70s. Something quite normal at that time, for the sole reason that in Europe, having a car was said to have freedom, etc, nonsense of whatever.

Also, let's get back on track, sure.

McZapkie
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1176
Joined: 18 Jan 2014 18:10

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by McZapkie » 12 Oct 2018 11:55

Ultimate railbus is only one:
Image
Image
Image
My experimental openTTD server: 149.156.194.203:3979 non-standard client, now testing: JGRPP http://tiny.pl/ggnch
Projects: Reproducible Map Generation patch, NewGRFs: Manpower industries, PolTrams, Polroad, 600mm narrow gauge, preindustrial houses, wired, ECS industry extension, V4 CEE train set.
Addicted to freeciv longturn.

User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1949
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by acs121 » 12 Oct 2018 15:55

Wth is that thing ? What is its name ?

User avatar
Drury
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2151
Joined: 09 Dec 2008 16:20
Skype: yes
Location: Slovakia
Contact:

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by Drury » 12 Oct 2018 22:34

It's a prototype based on the Ikarus 260 bus.
Image

Only dumb people quote themselves, and only the truest retards put such quotes in their forum signatures
-Drury

User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1949
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by acs121 » 13 Oct 2018 19:32

I think its problem is that it's not bidirectional.

User avatar
YNM
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 3544
Joined: 22 Mar 2012 11:10
Location: West Java

Re: A most railbus-sy of railbuses!

Post by YNM » 14 Oct 2018 13:07

acs121 wrote:France didn't have the Beeching cuts, but in fact we did close most of our less-important lines by the 60s-70s.
Beeching cuts also saw the closing of what possibly could've saved the cost of building HS2 today.
YNM = yoursNotMine - Don't get it ?
「ヨーッスノットマイン」も合うでしょう。

Post Reply

Return to “Real-World Transport Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests