Acela Replacement and Disposition Discussion

bostontrainguy wrote:Christian Science Monitor reporting:

"By 2021, Amtrak says you will be able to travel from New York to Boston in less than 90 minutes on one of Amtrak's 28 new Acela Express trains."

Wow, I guess these are very magical trains.

Oh, uh yeah.

now consulting Christian Science monitor for railroad news is dumber that the statement they made.

DutchRailnut wrote:now consulting Christian Science monitor for railroad news is dumber that the statement they made.

I would assume they get their railroad news the way the rest of the mainstream media gets it - regurgitating a press release coupled with top-notch info from politicians like Schumer and analysis colored by a deep understanding of the industry gained by watching multiple episodes of Thomas the Tank Engine...

Which leads to reporting describing the engineer as the "driver" or "conductor" and the engine as the "engine car"...

electricron wrote:True, for a corridor without an overhead catenary. The Central Valley will have an overhead catenary that they could lease train sets for, and Acela train sets might be available depending upon what Bombardier does with them. If I had a fleet of 20 train sets coming off an existing lease, I would be looking for customers that might wish to lease them, and I would be in negotiations as soon as I could legally. Now, I'm not going to suggest a deal will happen, but I believe a short term deal could happen.

Sorry, but I still don't buy it. The HSTs are an out-of-the-box solution with a reasonable (I guess) track record, but would California lease sets that must be coming up on their first heavy rebuild? Also, will there be enough Phase I catenary for these units to be worthwhile before something better comes along? We are dealing with trainsets old enough to have a Driver's License as it is, and they will be old enough to drink legally by the time Bombardier can shop them around. Talgo (and others like Siemens' Brightline single-levels and the Alstom Avelia Liberty) allow for 110 mph+ diesel now and 150 mph+ electric later with the change of a locomotive.

mtuandrew wrote: Sorry, but I still don't buy it. The HSTs are an out-of-the-box solution with a reasonable (I guess) track record, but would California lease sets that must be coming up on their first heavy rebuild? Also, will there be enough Phase I catenary for these units to be worthwhile before something better comes along? We are dealing with trainsets old enough to have a Driver's License as it is, and they will be old enough to drink legally by the time Bombardier can shop them around. Talgo (and others like Siemens' Brightline single-levels and the Alstom Avelia Liberty) allow for 110 mph+ diesel now and 150 mph+ electric later with the change of a locomotive.

Why should Califronia even consider buying a train with a maximum speed of 186 mph when they are building a HSR corridor for maximum speeds of over 200 mph, maybe as high as 225 moh?
Some math follows, 225 - 186 = 39, 200 - 186 = 14, 79 + 14 = 93, 79 + 39 = 118, 90 + 14 = 104, 90 + 39 = 129, 110 + 14 = 124,
110 + 39 = 149, 125 + 14 = 139, 125 + 39 = 164.
A 39 mph speed difference is a significant speed decrease. If CDOT and CHSR bough Alstom HSR train sets, they would want AGV models vs Avelia Liberty models.

And it is quite true that the existing Acela trains will require half life overhauls, to be paid for by the leasing company owning them, not by California who would be leasing and operating them. As I responded earlier, leasing the Acela train sets should/would be an interim solution. Upon initial startup they could have trains traveling at speeds of 150, possibly 160, mph vs diesel propelled or Sprinter propelled locomotives with a max speed of 125 mph. A 25 to 35 mph max speed increase is significant.

Of course, as in my earlier reply, it all depends upon what the lease payments and maintenance costs were, in comparison with other rolling stock available. Which brings back the purpose of my replies, I'm not suggesting wether it would be wise for anyone to lease them, I suggesting where the soon to fall off Amtrak lease Acela trains could be used with little to no modifications. Keystones and CHSR are the two possibilities where there is or could be an overhead catenary they could use.

electricron wrote:
Why should Califronia even consider buying a train with a maximum speed of 186 mph when they are building a HSR corridor for maximum speeds of over 200 mph, maybe as high as 225 moh?
Some math follows, 225 - 186 = 39, 200 - 186 = 14, 79 + 14 = 93, 79 + 39 = 118, 90 + 14 = 104, 90 + 39 = 129, 110 + 14 = 124,
110 + 39 = 149, 125 + 14 = 139, 125 + 39 = 164.
A 39 mph speed difference is a significant speed decrease. If CDOT and CHSR bough Alstom HSR train sets, they would want AGV models vs Avelia Liberty models.

.

The Liberty trainsets are 220 mph units without the optional tilt mech installed per Alstom docs. That said, Cali might prefer the EMU AGV for other reasons.

I could understand Amtrak wanting to get Acela off their books. I don't think it would necessarily preclude Acela going on Keystone - as long as Pennsylvania and Bombardier worked out their own arrangement for ownership and maintenance? Bombardier stay "in the picture" for higher speed rail, Pennsylvania can offer their voters both higher speed Keystone but also that Amtrak aren't larding the deal with anything other than crewing and track/power charges. If it works out, then PA and Amtrak could discuss Avelia on Keystone, if not then revert to Tier 1.

Acela could go out to California, yes, and probably wouldn't have to worry about barfing from snow any more, but I'm not clear on what else California gains from an interim 150mph fleet which will still have to be qualified against local signalling and whose heavy 25Hz transformer core and multisystem capability isn't needed there.

Let see, California builds a brand, new railroad at a cost of billions of dollars. The project has been targeted by anti-rail forces with all kinds of lawsuits. And then, it begins service with 20-year-old, used equipment from the east coast. Let the howling, moaning and groaning, investigations and indictments begin!

With the current bridge-related limits on traffic over the northern NEC, as discussed here, and the stated intent for the new Acelas to operate across it each way every hour "throughout the day", I'm wondering what's expected to give. Is the replacement plan assuming that the traffic limits will be relaxed, or will there be many fewer Regionals operating alongside the more numerous Acelas?

gokeefe wrote:

JimBoylan wrote:Possibly the new power cars are also shorter, allowing more room for passenger cars without making the new train too long.

I know we've heard that MN has lifted those restrictions but perhaps Amtrak wants to allow tilting operations in other territory as well? I don't think they're restricted anywhere else ...

Didn't know this happened. So is a speed-up planned for the Acelas?

eventually in future/your dreams / maybe

If these trains are as smooth as the Virgin Pendolinos I rode aboard in England, they should be a nice improvement over the current Acela equipment. It stands to reason that with lighter weight, better tracking, and a more effective tilt mechanism, the trains should be allowed greater cant deficiency (maybe close to what the Swedish X2000 was allowed when it ran on the NEC back in 1993), but this is the first confirmation of such that I've seen:

"The Avelia has other cool features, though, that will benefit Amtrak right away: It can tilt up to seven degrees on curves, compared with four degrees for the current Acelas. According to Alstom, this permits the train to take curves 30 percent faster, and Amtrak says that will shorten trip times as soon as the trains hit revenue service in five years."

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/201 ... y_way.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Matt Johnson wrote:According to Alstom, this permits the train to take curves 30 percent faster

30% faster than a non-tilting train, they probably mean. The new train isn't going to go thru the Elizabeth S at 100 mph.

The more I read about Avelia Liberty the more I like it. It's the epitome of "Made for the USA" without all the disadvantages of the Bombardier "one off" that happenned with Acela.

timz wrote:

Matt Johnson wrote:According to Alstom, this permits the train to take curves 30 percent faster

30% faster than a non-tilting train, they probably mean. The new train isn't going to go thru the Elizabeth S at 100 mph.

I was wondering the same. Along the same lines I wonder what the speed improvements through Connecticut will look like.