Amtrak ACS-64 Sprinter Discussion

Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, gprimr1, Amtrak67 of America, Tadman

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby east point » Tue Oct 17, 2017 9:51 pm

Would think that just shipping salvaged parts or even full unit of special flatcar to Siemens might be better to prevent Amtrak making a one off hanger queen.
east point
 
Posts: 694
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:50 pm

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby ApproachMedium » Tue Oct 17, 2017 11:13 pm

Gilbert B Norman wrote: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.



That is not how these things are constructed. Its not just a bent "frame" These are Unibody, so thats the entire body shell, along with many other expensive components that were destroyed in the wreck, like the transformer some power electronics. There becomes a point where the machine becomes a total loss much like your brand new 2017 automobile would if somebody hit it good enough, even if its a luxury car valued much higher. At some 7 million dollars a piece, and amtrak as it is always a constant issue with funding they arent going to just replace one because the production line is running. I am not sure what insurance may have paid out on the wrecks, but it may not have been enough after dealing with all the injuries etc to warrant replacement. Most likely that money would have been channeled elsewhere. They do not need all 70 ACS 64s to run daily service.
No good deed goes unpunished.
User avatar
ApproachMedium
 
Posts: 5597
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: From here to There

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby electricron » Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:52 am

What do you think the insurance companies do with total loss wreck cars and trucks?
They sell them to scrap dealers, who remove and refurbish the parts they can sell and make a profit on later. Then the scrapers crush them for scrap metal to not let any part of the original vehicle go to waste. The purpose of my reply is to suggest even if Amtrak doesn't scrap these locomotives for parts, some one else will.
electricron
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby DutchRailnut » Wed Oct 18, 2017 7:50 am

lets just say that unibody can be fixed, even Amtrak 82 was fixed and is still in service.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/p1BmDzeAeGY/maxresdefault.jpg
Attachments
P030wreck3.jpg
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer
User avatar
DutchRailnut
 
Posts: 21200
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby ApproachMedium » Thu Oct 19, 2017 12:29 am

DutchRailnut wrote:lets just say that unibody can be fixed, even Amtrak 82 was fixed and is still in service.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/p1BmDzeAeGY/maxresdefault.jpg



All depends on the machine and how it was wrecked. The ACS64 is almost 30 years newer than the unibody design of the P40/42 shell. From my understanding the crash energy management that is designed into these newer shells and coupler system is what sacrificed itself in the 89 wreck, thus destroying the body shell. Amtrak if they decide to scrap the body, will keep whatever they can off of the body shell inside and out. More than likely, just like with the AEM-7s they will keep it as long as they can until they deem it in the way or totally useless and then cut it up. A locomotive doesnt get taken away like your car does when its totaled and resold by the insurance company at auction. The insurance companies do that to try and make back some money on the total loss payout because they know people will buy them to strip for parts, use them for wreck repairs, or to rebuild the unit and put it back on the road. Nobody is buying ACS-64 parts other than amtrak or trying to rebuild them.
No good deed goes unpunished.
User avatar
ApproachMedium
 
Posts: 5597
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: From here to There

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby east point » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:41 am

It may be one or more of the wreck(s) no longer can be used in 125 MPH service. Who is to say they could not be put into work train service ? What is work train MAS ?
east point
 
Posts: 694
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:50 pm

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby DutchRailnut » Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:30 am

same FRA rules apply to either service including crush load strength.
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer
User avatar
DutchRailnut
 
Posts: 21200
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby 8th Notch » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:33 pm

east point wrote:It may be one or more of the wreck(s) no longer can be used in 125 MPH service. Who is to say they could not be put into work train service ? What is work train MAS ?


An electric in work train service is not very useful, not all sidings and tracks on the corridor are wired not to mention some projects are done with plate order in effect.
8th Notch
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:23 pm

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby ApproachMedium » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:42 am

east point wrote:It may be one or more of the wreck(s) no longer can be used in 125 MPH service. Who is to say they could not be put into work train service ? What is work train MAS ?



above mentioned comments about crush strength etc i will add the amtrak work train service has enough neglected junker shoppers 24/7 do not want or need another thank you.
No good deed goes unpunished.
User avatar
ApproachMedium
 
Posts: 5597
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: From here to There

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby east point » Fri Oct 20, 2017 8:30 pm

The idea behind ACS-64 work train is ========== The need to ferry various equipment to various locations especially the supply trains that need to go thru NYP. Would guess supplies for the station work would have to get ferried on track needing to be under wire.
Of course a diesel might be needed in consist for operation outside of wire limits .
east point
 
Posts: 694
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:50 pm

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby Backshophoss » Fri Oct 20, 2017 8:37 pm

Believe that was the plan after the E44-E60 trade between Amtrak and NJT Ages ago! :wink:
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 4575
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby ApproachMedium » Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:35 am

Amtrak will use the ACS-64 to go ferry things thru penn station but with the current "disaster recovery" work that has been going on where they take wire out in the station and require a diesel anyways, diesels have been doing the moves negating the need to borrow an electric. Usually when these moves are done they happen overnight so if an electric is needed they borrow it off of a long haul train and then return it when done. So there is no need for a dedicated locomotive.
No good deed goes unpunished.
User avatar
ApproachMedium
 
Posts: 5597
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: From here to There

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby ryanov » Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:40 pm

I'm pretty sure that other stuff was done to 4148 when it was renumbered into 4219 (some sort of rebuild). I'm awfully skeptical of the idea that people remember locomotive numbers.
|=| R. Novosielski |=|
User avatar
ryanov
 
Posts: 4585
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Newark, NJ

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby ApproachMedium » Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:33 am

ryanov wrote:I'm pretty sure that other stuff was done to 4148 when it was renumbered into 4219 (some sort of rebuild). I'm awfully skeptical of the idea that people remember locomotive numbers.


Ask any transit engineer who was alive at the time. Pretty much anybody working the hoboken side knows about it. If you come in and dont know, and you have it as a student engineer who does know they will probably tell you about it.
No good deed goes unpunished.
User avatar
ApproachMedium
 
Posts: 5597
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: From here to There

Re: ACS-64 Sprinter Testing, Developments, & Sightings

Postby ryanov » Mon Oct 23, 2017 2:59 pm

I would have thought it was clear, but I mean "the general public." I'm sure the staff remember, but the staff also know "hey, 4219 was 4148."
|=| R. Novosielski |=|
User avatar
ryanov
 
Posts: 4585
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Newark, NJ

PreviousNext

Return to Amtrak

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher, Ridgefielder and 13 guests