P32’s 705,706,708 are not in the new empire scheme. Have never photographed 709 but there was an older photo showing it in the old scheme.
Bill
Railroad Forums
Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman
east point wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 4:59 am. Rebuilding DC traction motors is fast becoming a lost art.There is a shop in Providence called Walco that does quite good business and they are in no danger of going anywhere. They do quite a lot of business for NYCTA. There are also quite a few shops near Houston that do the same as old locomotive traction motors often see a second life on drilling rigs after a rebuild.
DURR5017116 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 2:48 amI might be very wrong, but I thought some of the NYS Amtrak guys were not happy about the paint because they were only getting paint and body work, rather than necessary mechanical attention.mainline wrote: ↑Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:03 pm P32’s 705,706,708 are not in the new empire scheme. Have never photographed 709 but there was an older photo showing it in the old scheme.I was always under the impression that the units are sent to Beech Grove to be painted if they suffer a major mechanical failure......is that actually the case? I know for a fact that employees from Rensselaer lurk these forums lol.
Bill
DURR5017116 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2020 7:02 pm Chargers are a bad base for for an *intercity* passenger unit in my opinion. I don't trust the Cummins prime movers and I have heard they have horrendous wheelslip and dynamic braking issues through the grapevine....I don't get why Wabtec can't just make a dual mode HSP-46....they literally have the same traction motors as the P32......It's worth unpacking for some of these issues.
DutchRailnut wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2020 7:26 pm your opinion does not overrule the opinion of engineering or operational departments, just sayinn.For what it's worth here, the engineering or operational departments are not always correct with regard to motive power procurements. It seems like the freight carriers have a very conservative mindset in those departments because the company is under the gun to make numbers every quarter. Ergo they make very deliberate and conservative choices with regard to power. On the other hand, the gov't passenger carriers do not have such profitability constraints, and it's also much harder to get fired, so they seem to go into procurements guns blazing, demanding all sorts of stuff they evidently read about in Popular Mechanics. The results are not usually good. HSP, DE/DM, etc...
Tadman wrote: ↑Mon Jan 06, 2020 9:45 am2. Wabtec and the HSP. This was not a success. It hit Wabtec hard, and they are essentially out of the new passenger power business now. I don't think anybody involved in the process - MBTA, GE, Wabtec - would want to repeat that project. It was also a case of putting the customer too much in the driver seat, kind of like DE/DM, Metroliner, etc... and the results were predictable.That’s a shame too. Now that GETS is a subsidiary of Wabtec, it seems like their engineering department would be well-suited to fix the HSP’s design flaws. Or, the lessons learned could be applied to a new GEVO Genesis as had been proposed. Neither of those options are relevant to the P32ACDM though, since there realistically isn’t room for the third-rail equipment in such a necessarily-cramped carbody.