Amtrak ACS-64 Sprinter Discussion

[8th Notch]

Mr. Approach, as I recall the two AEM-7's that found themselves "touching pilots head to head" atop HGB became one unit.

No they did not, both were repaired and put back into service.

[MACTRAXX]

Everyone:

I agree that the easiest and least controversial way to number two replacement ACS64s is to
give them numbers 671 and 672 to replace the 601 and 627.

The LIRR renumbered M3 MU cars 9891-9892 to 9945-9946 after they were returned to service
in 1994 following the December 1993 shooting incident as an example of renumbering.

Amtrak never attempted as far as I can remember to re-use AEM7 numbers 900 and 903 after
the 1987 Chase,MD wreck - and rightfully so. If I am correct the AEM7 add-on order added 7 units:
947 to 953 which did replace the 900 and 903 as part. I have also noticed that some believe that
the 901 was the first AEM7 unit since more than 30 years have passed since the Chase,MD wreck...

MACTRAXX

[ApproachMedium]

The investigation of the locomotives from both incidents looks to be over. During the period that they are, they were shrink wrapped. The cars from both are still shrink wrapped in bear DE because people were injured or killed in those rail vehicles and until the cases are totally closed, they have to hold on to them in their current state for proper evidence, should it need to be explored further.

[east point]

Another reason to number up any replacement(s). Siemens will probably come up with several modifications and improvements. Placing replacements back to original numbers would lead to confusion especially if Amtrak decides to buy more ACS-64s.

[ApproachMedium]

Another reason to number up any replacement(s). Siemens will probably come up with several modifications and improvements. Placing replacements back to original numbers would lead to confusion especially if Amtrak decides to buy more ACS-64s.

It would not make any confusion as any updates being done to the ACS is being added to the entire fleet. 3/4 of whats involved with mods on these engines is done via software and in such a short period of time there would not be a major hardware propulsion upgrade. youd need about 10 years to see something like that.

[liftedjeep]

- Head-on action shot of City Sprinter #600 "David L. Gunn" on the point of Northeast Regional #125 at North Philadelphia this afternoon 10/16:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4821592

-City Sprinter #620 with the "Silver Star" #91 in tow, chasing Septa Trenton Line #736 towards North Philadelphia:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4821588

Ben

[OrangeGrove]

On-Track-On-Line, in the October update, shows just 67 (of 70) ACS-64's in service. We're obviously aware of the circumstances of two units, but what's up with the third?

[ApproachMedium]

I am unaware of a 3rd maybe they are wrong which happens. There have not been any other wrecks with any other units yet. Unless they are somehow missing out on 670 which is part of the ECP Brake train. I am not sure if that train is still in service at the moment. It was supposed to be undergoing a years worth of on the road live testing.

[Zuccaraillo]

Veterans ACS-64 642 is currently in normal service; currently leading Keystone 645 as of the time of this posting.

[liftedjeep]

I am unaware of a 3rd maybe they are wrong which happens. There have not been any other wrecks with any other units yet. Unless they are somehow missing out on 670 which is part of the ECP Brake train. I am not sure if that train is still in service at the moment. It was supposed to be undergoing a years worth of on the road live testing.

I spotted #670 leading a Keystone Service train headed for NY yesterday 10/16, while taking pictures at North Philadelphia station.
Ben

[Gilbert B Norman]

Ben, 670 was part of the order because 666 was blanked account "the superstitious".

Still waiting for an authoritative report around here if 601 and/or 627 will be returned to service.

[liftedjeep]

Ben, 670 was part of the order because 666 was blanked account "the superstitious".

Still waiting for an authoritative report around here if 601 and/or 627 will be returned to service.

Mr Norman,
That is correct! I was merely pointing out that I saw City Sprinter #670 yesterday while railfanning. Someone had stated that they weren't sure whether or not it was back in service.

From what I've heard, there is a good possibility that #601 COULD be returned to service. Nothing in stone, mind you. #627 apparently has a damaged frame so it will be written off.
Ben

[OrangeGrove]

Answering my own question, ACS-64 #663 is the third unit out of service, listed as a "sideswipe" at Penn Station.

[ApproachMedium]

Answering my own question, ACS-64 #663 is the third unit out of service, listed as a "sideswipe" at Penn Station.

oh oh oh yes that one. yea its pretty banged up so.

[Gilbert B Norman]

Mr. Kranefeld (you're "out" with your linked Railpictures), what I am at a loss to understand is why must a piece of rail equipment be retired account a bent frame when there is an open production line for same?

It would appear that Siemens must have a sub-contract with a fabricator to provide frames for the SEPTA ACS-64 order. There's "talk" of one from MARC as well. Why couldn't Amtrak order a new frame from that fabricator when they "ramp up" to fill the SEPTA order?

Just put it on a flat car and send it on its way to Wilmington. With the Siemens technical support on the ground there, why couldn't Amtrak shop people simply reassemble 627 on a new frame.

If "too much", contract it out to Siemens.