Axle Count Thread - Split from v2 delivery thread

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

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, gprimr1, Amtrak67 of America, Tadman

Axle Count Thread - Split from v2 delivery thread

Postby dowlingm » Mon Oct 29, 2018 10:40 am

mtuandrew wrote:True, Amtrak could use any box on wheels to satisfy CN’s axle count nonsense. It has a deep backlot still at Beech - why not any shell of a car, like a wreck-repair Horizon or Amfleet without a complete interior? It even might have a few MHCs that could serve the purpose, if they can get COTS successfully.

I suppose Amtrak think if a Horizon is fit enough to be axle-count, it can't be sold for scrap, but also it's harder to ask Congress for repair funds since "it's doing a job without $".
dowlingm
 
Posts: 1126
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:42 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Viewliner II Delivery/Production

Postby ApproachMedium » Mon Oct 29, 2018 11:56 am

dowlingm wrote:
mtuandrew wrote:True, Amtrak could use any box on wheels to satisfy CN’s axle count nonsense. It has a deep backlot still at Beech - why not any shell of a car, like a wreck-repair Horizon or Amfleet without a complete interior? It even might have a few MHCs that could serve the purpose, if they can get COTS successfully.

I suppose Amtrak think if a Horizon is fit enough to be axle-count, it can't be sold for scrap, but also it's harder to ask Congress for repair funds since "it's doing a job without $".



Cannot just use a car without interior. There are certain safety requirements for daily interior car inspection that a gutted body would not pass. The cars also must have functional HEP, COMM and MU passthru on the daily. The one Horizon car that for whatever reason was gutted of the electronics and used for interior fitment and design at Wilmington is also up for sale presumably for scrap.
No good deed goes unpunished.
User avatar
ApproachMedium
 
Posts: 5849
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: From here to There

Re: Viewliner II Delivery/Production

Postby mtuandrew » Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:20 am

For the most part I agree. In particular, tables would be great - especially with a small 1-2” ledge in the center with a few outlets to guarantee your assigned work space.
Tadman wrote:What to do for axle count cars? Honestly, I've always thought that if this rule is going to stay for long term, Amtrak should order six-axle power and passenger cars. Yes, it's more costly and old fashioned, but how crazy is dragging empty and old baggage cars around? How crazy is it to drag around brand new diners? None of the above makes any sense.

Problem solved!
AB7028C9-C836-4A49-81F1-C080E4CE4E53.jpeg
User avatar
mtuandrew
 
Posts: 5129
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 2:59 am
Location: the Manassas Gap Independent Line

Re: Viewliner II Delivery/Production

Postby ApproachMedium » Wed Oct 31, 2018 1:42 pm

The other thing not realized here, the reason cars are added for axle count is because the train doesnt have the ridership to support said "rollers" being in the train but they need to be there to satisfy stupid CP and CN axle count requirements.
No good deed goes unpunished.
User avatar
ApproachMedium
 
Posts: 5849
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: From here to There

Re: Viewliner II Delivery/Production

Postby east point » Wed Oct 31, 2018 5:20 pm

Thought axel count was CN and UP river runner line ?
east point
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:50 pm

Re: Viewliner II Delivery/Production

Postby CHTT1 » Wed Oct 31, 2018 7:13 pm

Right, the axle count is a stupid requirement of CN --- and now apparently UP on its St. Lou-KC route. Shouldn't the FRA or NTSB investigate the apparently unsafe operating conditions that require such restrictions?
CHTT1
 
Posts: 502
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:38 pm

Re: Viewliner II Delivery/Production

Postby ApproachMedium » Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:08 pm

I believe the reason it exists is to prevent an unsafe condition. The higher axle counts is to maintain proper axle detection in the modern block detection and grade crossing speed prediction system. On a line that may not see frequent traffic corrosion of the rails could prevent engine and 2 or 3 cars from making a proper shunt esp since amtrak cars are lighter than freight cars.
No good deed goes unpunished.
User avatar
ApproachMedium
 
Posts: 5849
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: From here to There

Re: Viewliner II Delivery/Production

Postby electricron » Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:36 pm

Minimum axle counts are not a stupid requirement. Shunting circuits efficiency vary by electric/electronics used along each corridor. If Amtrak or the States we’re willing to fund all the additional costs modernizing all the signals, minimum axle counts could be reduced. But they aren’t, and the freight railroads can live with the higher axle counts or reduced speeds of their trains.
DCTA installed a fairly modern signals along 21 miles railroad corridor, which works fine with 8 axles (2 RDCs) and 12 axles (2 GTWs) on a train, but had difficulties and further expenses getting the minimum axle count down to 6. Increase maintenance chores in scrubbing and grinding the rails are needed for proper shunting with 6 axle trains, which is far more more likely to be done on a rail corridor 21 miles long than on a rail corridor 210 miles long.
Don’t expect freight railroads to maintain their rails for passenger trains than what they need for freight trains free of charge.
Amtrak has chosen to add cars to their consists rather than fund upgrades to the signal systems. It was their choice.
electricron
 
Posts: 4349
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: Viewliner II Delivery/Production

Postby mtuandrew » Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:14 pm

I think it’s stupid in that it’s less costly to Amtrak to waste fuel and haul around tons of otherwise-useless steel than it is to build an exciter/rail scrubber into its locomotives and cab cars. I’m really annoyed that they are putting wear and tear on brand-new cars that aren’t allowed to be used, since they changed concepts mid-delivery. I’m not thrilled with either CN or UP either, at not wanting to turn up the track circuit sensitivity a little and get a couple more false positives, though I can understand not wanting to go fix all the track bonds to like-new. This hasn’t been a problem on the other majors as far as I know. (Also, is it an issue for VIA on CN? I’ve never seen it mentioned, whether it’s because they always beat the axle limit or they don’t have that problem.)

Sorry, this is way beyond V-IIs.
User avatar
mtuandrew
 
Posts: 5129
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 2:59 am
Location: the Manassas Gap Independent Line

Re: Viewliner II Delivery/Production

Postby ApproachMedium » Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:57 pm

This is beyond just adding line specific items to locomotives or cars which would be exponentially expensive. Anything that deals with interferance of the signal detection system has to be designed tested and approved. You cant just turn track circuit sensitivity up and false positives are just as bad if not worse than false negatives!

This is a problem that mostly exists because of outdated infrastructure on lines that do not see the daily traffic they should see to warrant not needing such requirements. If the line traffic went up then maybe not as much of a problem.
No good deed goes unpunished.
User avatar
ApproachMedium
 
Posts: 5849
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: From here to There

Re: Axle Count Thread - Split from v2 delivery thread

Postby east point » Fri Nov 02, 2018 1:07 pm

This problem brings up a question not thought of before. Is this problem any way related to the problems on the airport line in Denver that often has only a 2 car EMU ? Would not think so but ? ? ?
east point
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:50 pm

Re: Axle Count Thread - Split from v2 delivery thread

Postby EricL » Fri Nov 02, 2018 4:36 pm

Food for thought: there was never a problem before the affected host RR's started installing new grade crossing equipment. Everything worked just fine with the old stuff.

For folks that don't know, this isn't at all about failure to shunt the track with regards to block signals. It's about alleged failure to activate street crossings.
I have a story about it which I can't tell here, but long story short, there never was any real failure to begin with. The whole situation is overblown, and I can't believe that these operating conditions still continue today.
hey there guy
EricL
 
Posts: 801
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 8:41 pm


Return to Amtrak

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CNJGeep, Jenny on a M2 and 14 guests