ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Discussion related to New Jersey Transit rail and light rail operations.

Moderators: Tadman, Kaback9, nick11a, ACeInTheHole

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby EuroStar » Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:36 am

Does anyone have any idea how frequently the ability to switch from electric to diesel has come handy over the years? A few years ago I remember hearing about a Coast Line train switching after something crapped out, but really how frequently has this feature come useful?

Also aren't these things still restricted from switching power at Hoboken due to the low catenary? That is a pity as it would cut the need to keep them in diesel idle during turns. While I like the technology behind the dual modes and enjoy riding them around, as a taxpayer I really question the value for the money. There is probably a good reason why you do not find similar dual mode engines all over Europe.
EuroStar
 
Posts: 432
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 8:26 pm
Location: Middle of Nowhere

Re: ALP-45-DP Usage/Service Patterns

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:05 pm

EuroStar wrote:2. It is not surprising that NJT is looking to replace the GP's in spite of the cost as they cannot keep schedules with the heavy MLV cars -- that is why the GPs are only used on single level consists. Remember that long term thinking is that the single level cars are out.


On this one, they're not going to be completely out...the 200 NJT and 65 MNRR Comet V's aren't tabbed for any further action until at least FY2025 because that'll need to be a joint procurement by both agencies, so the Main/Bergen/Port Jerv are still going to be all-flat for a long time to come with no changes needed to power assignments there. But the 160 Comet IIM replacements for MLV III's is years overdue, and chances are they'd prefer to lump replacements for the 99 Comet IV's on the option end of that contract because otherwise the currently 21-year-old IV's would be due on any 3-5 year agency planning budget for advance funding allotments for a midlife rebuild program. Since the EMU order has been RFP'd and the loco order has been stuck on the calendar for a board vote early in the new year, it's inevitable that the next big public salvage move for the Gov.-elect's incoming NJT appointees is going to be making a big funding to-do about cueing up that overdue coach procurement.

At minimum a third of the flats are going to flip to MLV's if only the IIM's are replaced...two-thirds of the flats flipping if the IV's get back-ended onto that MLV III order rather than being held for rebuild. The loco distribution is going to have to change accordingly with that swing to 4200 HP diesel engines, as the 3000 HP's (comprised of mostly MNRR's fleet) are going to be pretty much limited to Comet V assignments by 2020-21 if they act as fast as they need to on ordering new coaches.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7334
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby time » Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:15 am

EuroStar wrote:Does anyone have any idea how frequently the ability to switch from electric to diesel has come handy over the years? A few years ago I remember hearing about a Coast Line train switching after something crapped out, but really how frequently has this feature come useful?


I think it would take a large Nor'Easter, a bad ice storm, or an electro magnetic storm to really show the usefulness of these units. But, even just one train set crapping out on Newark Draw would send the M&E and Montclair Boonton systems spiraling into unrecoverable delays (at least for a few peak hours), so if that one train set could have limped away on diesel after a catenary issue without waiting for a rescue, then to me its worth it. Also, I think you could argue that NJT needs less locomotives in its roster with dual modes, since they're so flexible compared to electric or diesel only units. Theoretically, a train that runs the NEC to Penn could become a WB to Hackettstown, turn around and come back down through Montclair Boonton, go to Hoboken, then take a trip up to Port Jervis. That would also help a lot for when equipment is late for arrival ... you can use the same train set for so many runs, compared to today where you're really limited on where that equipment can travel.
time
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:28 pm

Re: ALP-45-DP Usage/Service Patterns

Postby R36 Combine Coach » Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:01 pm

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:On this one, they're not going to be completely out...the 200 NJT and 65 MNRR Comet V's aren't tabbed for any further action until at least FY2025 because that'll need to be a joint procurement by both agencies, so the Main/Bergen/Port Jerv are still going to be all-flat for a long time to come with no changes needed to power assignments there.
265 cars is the largest of any single level Comet fleet. I don't think any of them would head east of the Hudson like MNCR's Comet IIs, since reportedly they have clearance issues and are not compatible(?) with P32s.
Since my friend continues to chain smoke nonstop, she is probably an Alco.
User avatar
R36 Combine Coach
 
Posts: 4909
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 8:51 pm

Re: ALP-45-DP Usage/Service Patterns

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Sun Nov 19, 2017 3:57 pm

No. The MTA is ordering MLV's or MLV facsimiles in a mass replacement for the MNRR Upper Hudson/Upper Harlem flats and the LIRR C3's, with CDOT then getting to mull over how much it wants to participate. That's a capacity thing for MNRR as the most crowded Upper Hudson consists already max out the lengths of their assigned GCT platforms and of the 6-car platforms north of Croton-Harmon, so they can't add more cars to overstuffed consists without creating platform dwell problems. Their solution was to go all-MLV for optimal per-car seating density to lick that problem, and to shoot for best possible unit price point by lumping in the LIRR C3 replacements into one common mega-order stretched well out with trailing options so both roads could get generous fleet increases. Other than LIRR's cabs having the extra cab signal aspects and some being painted yellow for LIRR and blue for MNRR there's expected to be zero difference between MLV's assigned to either road, and they can be shifted (esp. the trailers) from one road to the next if needs change. MNRR is going to need the future capacity expansion options for Penn Station Access-Hudson, and LIRR is going to need the future capacity expansion options for schedule expansion in Scoot territory as well as for longer consists on the remaining post-ESA Penn push-pulls because the next-gen common MTA/NYSDOT dual-mode loco order will allow for hauling more cars per train on a single loco than the DM30AC's are capable of. So for wholly capacity management reasons the MTA board made up their mind that they aren't retaining any flats and are locked into a bi-level future everywhere. Nothing changes for MNRR WoH because the Comet V replacement calendar syncs with NJT's Fleet Plan and won't feasibly happen before FY2025, but it was already anticipated that when NJT was ready to move on a final purge that MNRR would be tagging along on another common order.

The only variable with this new MTA mega-order is how far CDOT wants to go in. They could order MLV's just for the Danbury-GCT & Waterbury-GCT trains to keep the MTA happy, order lots and lots of them to equip the Danbury/Waterbury shuttles and/or Hartford Line, or order none at all because the GCT runs from Danbury/Waterbury really don't tax the 4- and 6-car platforms at GCT running all-flat. CDOT could instead see economy in dumping its oldest Shoreliner I/II cars and the Hartford Line Mafersa fleet (nearing rebuild age in a few years, and can't run into GCT) by picking over all of the MTA's 106 displaced Shoreliner III/IV's with ownership swaps, and going all-in on a unified intrastate fleet of GCT-capable, three-door Shoreliner III's/IV's with more extras piled up in New Haven for future expansion than they know what to do with. They can also use their below-cost ownership swap options to scour all the '09-rebuild Shoreliner I/II and Comet II razorblade fodder for good scrap parts to lower the costs substantially on a light rebuild program for the Shoreliner III's/IV's. So given all that, CDOT does have a lot to think about before it signs on with the MTA's MLV order and for how many because they may get a legitimately better deal playing scrap-n'-swap for a uniform rebuildable Shoreliner III/IV fleet instead of buying new.


I'm not aware of any clearance issues with the Comet V's and GCT. Since the formerly west-of-Hudson Comet II's got moved EoH after the V's were ordered, I would think that MNRR would have vested interest in making sure those things were portable over life-of-vehicle. They can certainly trainline with the P32's because they were already capable of trainlining with the P40's when NJT still had those on the roster. They're fair game with any locos on either NJT's and MNRR's rosters, whether actually paired with certain makes or not. The trailers (not cabs) could conceivably even run with LIRR's DE30AC's/DM30AC's, too, if they had the coupler adapter for LIRR's funky pin layout (which is going away in the new coach + loco orders). LIRR leased a bunch of rote-standard pin MARC II flats to run as summer extras sandwiched between double-draft locos outfitted with adapters to square the differing pin layouts, and it worked fine for them. Just means that the C3's are going straight to scrap upon the MLV replacement order and not seeing a second life elsewhere because in addition to having no low-boarding door traps any midlife overhaul would also have to change out the unorthodox pin arrangement in the couplers.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7334
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby TDowling » Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:23 pm

Why are the MTA geeps excluded from the retirement stipulation of the order? Not for nothing , but arent there more important fish to fry than worrying what paint schemes end up in what state?
I am aware that mta, at least in regard to its Orange and Rockland service, favors efficiency over reliability but this is ridiculous. The gps on the port jervis line are perhaps some of the oldest on the system. They need to be retired ...
TDowling
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: West Point, NY

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Fri Dec 08, 2017 8:41 am

TDowling wrote:Why are the MTA geeps excluded from the retirement stipulation of the order? Not for nothing , but arent there more important fish to fry than worrying what paint schemes end up in what state?
I am aware that mta, at least in regard to its Orange and Rockland service, favors efficiency over reliability but this is ridiculous. The gps on the port jervis line are perhaps some of the oldest on the system. They need to be retired ...


The MNRR 7 Geeps were rebuilt in 2007, so they're not anywhere close to as beat up as the NJT's.

I don't know when the MTA's Fleet Plan calls for replacement of those...probably not until the Comet V's are all gone on both sides of the state line.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7334
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby EuroStar » Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:17 am

TDowling wrote:Why are the MTA geeps excluded from the retirement stipulation of the order? Not for nothing , but arent there more important fish to fry than worrying what paint schemes end up in what state?
I am aware that mta, at least in regard to its Orange and Rockland service, favors efficiency over reliability but this is ridiculous. The gps on the port jervis line are perhaps some of the oldest on the system. They need to be retired ...


Also note that while NJT can use the dual mode engines in electric mode when they get sent to Bay Head or Hacketstown, the MTA has no justification for purchasing dual mode engines. No meaningful portion of the Port Jervis and Pascack Valley lines are electrified and the dual mode engines cannot even use electricity for standby power while parked at Hoboken due to low catenary. The MTA will probably buy whatever straight diesel NJT buys once they come to their senses. If NJT somehow never buys a straight passenger diesel again, then the most likely course of action for the MTA is to keep the GPs and continue refurbishing them as long as NJT keeps GPs for yard work. As long as NJT has GPs around for yard work together with the ability to maintain them, it will be cheaper for the MTA to continue using GPs as their share of the common pool than to buy dual modes. It will never be worth it for the MTA to dump 7-8 new diesel engines that are unicorn type fleet that NJT does not maintain for its own purposes. Note that even if those 7-8 engines are the same as what the MTA gets east of Hudson they cannot be maintained east of Hudson -- they need to be type of engines that NJT already maintains for its own purposes. This might change if the Secaucus loop gets built and those 7-8 engines can be exchanged and sent for maintenance when they are in NYP, but until this happens they will be maintained by NJT.
EuroStar
 
Posts: 432
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 8:26 pm
Location: Middle of Nowhere

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby trainster78 » Mon Dec 11, 2017 2:50 pm

I heard from a friend who is in contact with a NJT board member, and they said the new ALP-45DP order is also supposed to kick the current fleet already running on the Hoboken services to the NJCL, where they have started do majorly started to survey the Southern Secondary as part of the MOM project, basically more trains running electric out of NY, the changing modes in Red Bank or something.
trainster78
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2017 11:59 am
Location: Red Bank

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby Zuccaraillo » Thu Dec 14, 2017 2:36 am

trainster78 wrote:I heard from a friend who is in contact with a NJT board member, and they said the new ALP-45DP order is also supposed to kick the current fleet already running on the Hoboken services to the NJCL, where they have started do majorly started to survey the Southern Secondary as part of the MOM project, basically more trains running electric out of NY, the changing modes in Red Bank or something.

Most of the Hoboken services are 2600-series electric trains that run up to LB with ALP-46 straight electrics. But I can see 2300/2303/2312/2313 using dual modes only I am assuming
"This station is: Aberdeen-Matawan. When leaving the train, please watch the gap."
Zuccaraillo
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 5:50 pm

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby blockline4180 » Thu Dec 14, 2017 1:30 pm

trainster78 wrote:I heard from a friend who is in contact with a NJT board member, and they said the new ALP-45DP order is also supposed to kick the current fleet already running on the Hoboken services to the NJCL, where they have started do majorly started to survey the Southern Secondary as part of the MOM project, basically more trains running electric out of NY, the changing modes in Red Bank or something.


You are somewhat right... Probably keep them on the AC line mostly instead though.. But yes, the current plan is to mainly supplement the current 4200 geeps they have running still... As of now.
~Steve Pellettiere
Co-Moderator: DL&W/Erie/EL Forum
"Each of us makes his own weather, determines the color of the skies in the emotional universe which he inhabits."
User avatar
blockline4180
 
Posts: 5414
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:58 am
Location: NJ and me, Broke Together!

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby EuroStar » Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:58 pm

With 17 extra dual modes engines it is not impossible to eventually see the elimination of the shuttles between Long Branch and Bay Head. As long as there is enough space in the BH yard, the cost of eliminating the shuttles and extending all trains that currently meet with them to Bay Head is likely to be a wash if the crew schedules can be squared.
EuroStar
 
Posts: 432
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 8:26 pm
Location: Middle of Nowhere

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby R36 Combine Coach » Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:21 am

blockline4180 wrote:You are somewhat right... Probably keep them on the AC line mostly instead though.. But yes, the current plan is to mainly supplement the current 4200 geeps they have running still... As of now.
Side note: did any 4200s ever operate on NJCL (NYLB) back in their PC days?
Since my friend continues to chain smoke nonstop, she is probably an Alco.
User avatar
R36 Combine Coach
 
Posts: 4909
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 8:51 pm

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby trainster78 » Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:47 pm

I think only 4219 (the only ex-CNJ that was classed a PH-2B, after an accident in the 90s) would have seen any passenger service at all prior to joining NJT.
trainster78
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2017 11:59 am
Location: Red Bank

Re: ALP-45-DP Supplemental Order

Postby CNJGeep » Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:25 pm

trainster78 wrote:I think only 4219 (the only ex-CNJ that was classed a PH-2B, after an accident in the 90s) would have seen any passenger service at all prior to joining NJT.

Not necessarily the case, as MANY freight units were pressed into service in the '70s as the E Unit fleet crumbled. Quite a few of the -2Bs were NYC, though, so it's possible though not a huge probability
"Nobody wins unless everybody wins."
CNJGeep
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: A Small Onion

PreviousNext

Return to New Jersey Transit NJT Rail and Light Rail LRT

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests