Shortcuts or otherwise, it certainly looks the part. Without going into any great detail, the only thing that gives me any cause for concern in the basic model is that perhaps the cab isn't raked back far enough. Have a look at the prototype to see whether you agree.

I'm not quite sure what you are referring to here, Rich - the 778 series and 760 series driving trailers (the latter of which you linked to here) are, in fact, that different in their external appearance, with the 778s having been given a cab front based on that of the Bombardier double deckers.

Okay - I thought as much, but wanted to ask just in case you were meaning to make a point which I missed .

But ouch the cab on the DBmq776 looks like a total after thought! Asthetic design wasn't top of the brief with that one. A former DR design I guess?

Yes, that's the original DR cab design, and I agree that it looks, well, ugly . Interestingly, the 760 series driving trailers have cabs which are mostly identical to those on the class 143 electrics, including the speed control function, thus providing additional driver comfort.

Never ceases to amaze me how many different designs of double deck stock there are in Germany. I'm most familiar with the

Munich, Landshut, Muhldorf and Passau areas on Germany (I have family there) and the driving cars in use there are different again.

I guess you were referring to the 761 and 762 series driving trailers as well? Far as I remember these were first introduced in Bavaria. They can also work with class 218 diesels, which is why I suspected you were referring to them when you mentioned Mühldorf.

I see you replaced the link, Rich . I understand you were meaning to compare these refurbished Dostos to the Bombardier ones, such as this 766 series driving trailer? From what I can tell (having seen both types in parallel around Leipzig), the front actually is a bit less raked on the 778 series.

I know what you mean about the number of different dosto designs, I keep thinking I should buy the book I've seen about them, but I have a feeling the story ain't over yet.

I agree with your feeling - have you seen this Bombardier press photo of the newest generation yet?

Click

The front closely resembles that of the class 442 "Talent" EMUs, including crash protection elements according to the newest UIC specifications.

Hi Dominik, in the rake of the cab I'm purely comparing model to prototype.

Oh, I see. That I haven't been able to compare as of yet.

And I think you've done my trick and given the same link twice where you meant to give two different ones!

You mean the bit with the 761 and 762 series? There are some differences between these two types, although they pretty much look alike. Looking at the type designation, the 761 series one has the following properties:

D = double deck

B = 2nd class

b = provisions for handicapped passengers

z = ETS power supply

f = driving trailer with TDM controls and/or 36-pole command cable

Meanwhile, the 762 series has these:

D = double deck

AB = 1st and 2nd class

p = open coach with central aisle and air conditioning

b = provisions for handicapped passengers

z = ETS power supply

f = driving trailer with TDM controls and/or 36-pole command cable

Also note the different placement of the ventilation grilles towards both the cab and vestibule end on the upper level, as well as the different window layout on the upper level.

Perhaps I should have pointed this out in my previous posting...my apologies . I'm still quite groggy from hauling furniture till late last night and the subsequent drive back from Koblenz.

Hi Dominik, I don't mean the "early DB" 761s and 762s, I mean in the following post you link to the same pic of a 766 twice rather than showing the latest Bombardier product!

*facepalm* You're right . Well, let's try this again:

Click.

Whoah! Autocouplings? Are DB planning to take NS's lead and fit some locos with auto couplings for push-pull operations?

I haven't heard of the DB going quite that far yet. However, far as I did read thus far, the idea is to also offer powered driving trailers (!) so as to allow the formation of what would essentially be multiple units with a variable number of intermediate trailers - for which I think auto couplers on the cab ends would make quite a bit of sense. This, of course, would constitute a kind of revival of the class 445 "Meridian" EMU which never went beyond the prototype stage. Of course, I guess those powered driving trailers could also be used as booster units of sorts for loco-hauled formations, provided they would be fitted with the same MU control package.

For the sake of completeness - this is what the 445 looked like: Click. I believe one of the reasons why it was never ordered was that the doors - especially on the driving trailers - were considered too narrow, thus unacceptably slowing down the passenger flow. However, I believe this issue mostly applied to suburban operations, for which the 445 was to be used as well. On regional workings, I personally would assume this to not have been much of a problem.

Also, the traction equipment was quite voluminous, taking up lots of valuable space above the bogies, which I think could and would be done differently nowadays. Being a prototype, the 445 used many off-the-shelf components also fitted to locomotives, where of course passenger space is not a requirement.