SC-44 Siemens Charger Locomotives

Alcochaser wrote:But for some reason they seem to be beholden to tagging on an order to a Metro North/LIRR order. They really need to tell the MTA to pike off and work on a dual mode overhead electric diesel.

That's because New York State is paying for the engines and they want something thay can work for their electrical systems.

Running into GCT with a P32 is as "simple" as changing the shoes. If they bought a Diesel/Catenary engine, that would not be possible. I'm pretty sure the dual mode chargers NY State orders will feature the same technology as the shoes featured on M8s which will allow the use of both third rail types without having to swap the shoe.

The prospect of eliminating engine changes is interesting with a diesel/e-caternary engine... but it makes me wonder about the Pennsylvanian because the engine change is part of it's route. With Amtrak's current pull-only operation policy, the engine on the Pennsy isn't going to be in the direction of travel when it hits 30th Street Station. You got to ether find a way to make it U-turn around 30th street, have it back up and wye around ZOO, or run with both ends having a Charger.

I think others aren't in that situation where you gotta pull into a major transfer point and slap an engine on the other end before you go out the same way you came back in. Yeah, you got the "back out onto the main line" routes but no "swap engines while we're at it" anywhere else other than the Pennsy.

EDIT: Wait, there's a way, but NJ Transit and SEPTA has to get on it. They have to rebuild the West Trenton route, electrify it, and run the Pennsy through it. This means Amtrak would be served on the upper concourse of 30th Street. In other words, it's a logistic mess.

Any dual mode charger will be a combined Amtrak/LIRR/Metro-North order and yes they will be third rail dual modes cause they are much lighter and GCT has and can not accomodate catenary.

gregorygrice wrote:

avgeeky wrote:That makes total sense, thanks RedWolf. I'd forgotten about the whole contractors running the railroad bit. I guess I'm still skeptical it can do 125 with 8 full coaches on an evening rush hour train, but I will wait to be hopefully proven wrong.

Here's a video of it testing on the NEC well over 125mph; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9334BQBvjeA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The only but is that the Siemens Charger is powering the train but also the Amtrak ACS-64 is helping it, so 125 mph is not an problem when an powerfull electric locomotive is also giving power to a consist with the charger.

Doesn't a dual or tri-mode loco need 6 axels due to axel load limits ?

east point wrote:Doesn't a dual or tri-mode loco need 6 axels due to axel load limits ?

Not necessarily. (See the ALP-45DP for diesel/AC catenary, the P32ACDM and the DM30AC for diesel/DC third rail.) Only reason the FL9 was designed with five axles is to account for both the third-rail equipment and the steam boiler.

FL-9 3 axle rear truck was for huge water tank, it had nothing to do with Electric operation. all electric components were above electric cabinet inside dynamic brake type hatch.
only item related to electric operation in rear was a relatively small electric air compressor located on top of water tank.

Just to be clear ... I take it from the responses that a tri-mode is out of the question completely? I'm asking this solely from an electrical and mechanical standpoint of feasibility.

I'm sure NY has no interest in this.

Tri mode would probably be out of the scope and probably of zero possible use anyways other than for some kind of emergency protect.

Would there be any interest in service running through from PHL to ALB?

The tri-mode could help improve capacity at Penn and Sunnyside by allowing certain regional trainsets to run through. Here are some other examples ....

WAS-ALB
RVR-ALB
NPN-ALB
NFK-ALB
LYH-ALB
ROA-ALB
CLT-ALB

I could go on but I think this makes the point well enough. Having this kind of flexibility might allow Amtrak to do some interesting things to help alleviate congestion.

I'm only asking if it's mechanically feasible ... The Charger seems to be a very different platform and consequently may be more easily adapted to a tri mode configuration.

As noted above, there is wiring in the Empire Connection tunnel right next to Penn, so none of the above require anything more than an AC overhead + diesel dual mode. Technically, there is third rail through the North River Tunnels so a P32 could even run these routes (running in diesel mode except in a very small neighborhood of NYP).

On the dual mode front, I understand that the ALP-45DP is good for 125 mph in theory only, and the qualification runs that Amtrak performed did not end up with a 125 mph certification. So, perhaps as with the MP36 diesels (which MARC limits to 90 mph despite 110 mph gearing), pushing the limits of 4 axle locomotive weight doesn't result in good high speed tracking characteristics.

Imagine that! Perhaps don't order the ALP-45DP then.

So really the only thing Amtrak loses is the ability to run into NYG in an emergency?