Sprinter ACS-64 Electric Loco: Siemens.

You can't be serious!!! You want Amtrak to run the equipment indefinitely until a domestic builder steps up? I'm quite sure when Amtrak put the bid out there the few domestic companies probably had no interest. From my understanding GE is not really interested in electric locomotives and if they were, it would be a new start for them and by that I mean a new development.

Yes I am. There is no reason one can't get 50 years out of a well built electric locomotive. Hell, I just was on a Charter with some this past weekend. If you browse Wikipedia and look at the rosters of various European state owned railroads you'll find tomes of locomotives that date from the 1960's (lots of Alcos too).

What needs to happen is what we would do with weapons systems. The government throws money at GE or EMD until an electric locomotive pops out. Yeah its not very efficient, but it is what every other country on Earth has done to break into our key export markets. If we refuse to play the game we'll keep getting creamed by foreign competitors.

Could Denver, Colo. and South San Francisco, Calif. be early purchasers of used Amtrak electric locomotives, as they seem to be talking about imminent electric commuter operation?

JimBoylan wrote:Could Denver, Colo. and South San Francisco, Calif. be early purchasers of used Amtrak electric locomotives, as they seem to be talking about imminent electric commuter operation?

You can forget Denver, they're buying EMUs very similar, if not exactly the same, as Philadelphia's Silverliner Vs. San Francisco is another matter altogether. It'll be a while before they electrify the corridor, they're depending upon CHSR to do so. By then, they'll be looking at buying faster, lighter trainsets. Their galley cars will start getting old by then.
The only buyers I see for Amtrak's old AEM7s or HHP-8s is MARC, if only for a cheap source for spare parts, but possibly also for double-heading Penn Line trains for more reliability. Another advantage of double-heading Penn Line trains is reducing the number of cab cars needed for the Penn Line, which increases the number of cab cars available for their other two lines.

Jersey_Mike wrote:They won't be built in America, they will be bolted together in America using semi-skilled labour. The AEM-7s were based on the Sweedish Rc4s, but they were heavily Americanized with the body and frame components being built from raw materials in the US with US design tweaks. EMD's GM roots really shows through in how they turned a bland front nose into something with a more aggressive look.

I'll admit that we don't have the skillz to make trucks or traction components, but at least if an American firm had some design responsibilities they would begin to learn about the more critical technologies. Look how everything China imports ends up as some joint venture. We should do no less.

Why bother setting up a joint venture for such a small order that is unlikely to be repeated for decades? Currently, there is a tremendous overcapacity for electric locomotive production around the world. It's a very competitive global market, and beyond this 70 unit order, there's no domestic market in North America, beyond a couple dozen units for various commuter agencies over the new few decades. In other words, why invest in a really bad business venture with terrible prospects?

The New York Times take on the purchase highlights the fact that the new units will have regenerative braking -- which sends electricity generated by braking back through pantographs and into the catenary and ultimately the grid -- a feature lacking on some or all of the AEM-7s, which seems like a good reason to retire the toasters to me. Do we know which of the AEM-7s, if any, had regenerative braking? What percentage of energy consumed by a typical loco would be returned to the grid with regenerative braking (or dissipated into the air with dynamic braking?

Also, it appears Amtrak has concluded the HHPs were a failed experiment--all of those will be retired and replaced by the Siemens locos. Does anyone know when the last 20 of the units will be delivered, and the HHPs will begin leaving the property?

I'm going to say its still a bit to early to have a good idea when the last of the 20 units or even the first will be delivered. All dates at this time are most likely approx.

travelrobb wrote:The New York Times take on the purchase highlights the fact that the new units will have regenerative braking -- which sends electricity generated by braking back through pantographs and into the catenary and ultimately the grid -- a feature lacking on some or all of the AEM-7s, which seems like a good reason to retire the toasters to me. Do we know which of the AEM-7s, if any, had regenerative braking? What percentage of energy consumed by a typical loco would be returned to the grid with regenerative braking (or dissipated into the air with dynamic braking?

While it sounds good to be "green," it remains to be seen how well these locomotives perform in service.

goodnightjohnwayne wrote:While it sounds good to be "green," it remains to be seen how well these locomotives perform in service.

The Siemens built EuroSpinter electric locomotive has been around since 1992. I think by now everyone knows how these locomotives will perform. It's not like Amtrak is buying an all new design [sarcasm].

electricron wrote:It's not like Amtrak is buying an all new design [sarcasm].

To be fair, even the GG1 was not an "all new design" but was based on the New Haven's EP3. In fact, I'd argue there are definite advantages attached to "not" being the first adapter of any technology-- let someone else get the bugs out first. (see- DeHaviland Comet, the John Quincy Adams, etc.)

I hope these units will be more reliable than the HHP-8's.

the springfield line woudl seem a likely candidate for electric operation but that might add the need for what, four or five locomotives? would be nice to see other extensions (albany? west of harrisbrug, south of washington?)but I don't see it happening. the Hiawathas?

Rather than a quote in this case, I will simply reply.
I can relate to the E-60 era, at the time Amtrak's esteemed management had no clue whether they would remain in business and they apparently were not forward thinking enough to insure that indeed Amtrak would. Thus the order for SDP-40, P-30, E-60's etc, locomotives that could be converted for freight use upon Amtrak's demise. Surprise, Amtrak has lasted all through these years while the above three models are long gone.
The E-60's were the wrong locomotive for the NEC, too big, too heavy, freight trucks and too much junk on them. They became unreliable long before their time and I don't think very many Amtrak engineers were sorry to see them go. The ones whom I knew at the time shed no tears at their passing. They rode like bricks, had many speed restrictions and weight restrictions as well and were like using a Union Pacific Big Boy steam engine on a 6 car passenger train and expecting to run it at 100 + MPH, actually the Big Boy would probably have done a better job if it were not for the size.
I ran the E-60's a lot and I guess I can say that I was lucky, I never died with one of them to the point that I couldn't get in but I had a couple of very close calls and had to get towed once from the head end of the inbound train at New Haven to the Motor Storage, an air compressor problem caused this one.
EMD built a decent locomotive with the AEM-7 but up until then, no decent AC electric locomotive had been built since the GG-1's and the New Haven 150 class freight engines which were very much like the GG-1's.
Locomotives do not last forever and to expect 50 trouble free years out of any locomotive whether it be electric or diesel is just unreasonable. The American locomotive builders do not build locomotives as well as the Europeans and the Japanese at least in the case of electric locomotives. This is entirely reasonable as we do not have much electrification in the US with the exception of a little in Chicago and the Northeast Corridor.
While I know this probably doesn't belong here it has been mentioned earlier, Boston and the MBTA would do very well to buy some MU equipment for the Providence service, the line is already electrified and instead of poking out of stations and not being able to run higher than 80 MPH, they could probably do 80 or better between most station stops which would result in better service to their commuters and less delays to Amtrak as well. In most cases if the wires are already up, it is far better to use them rather than diesels and Boston is no exception. Putting wire on a short stretch of track around Attleboro would not be that big of a deal and it would give Amtrak some flexibility as well if necessary.
Noel Weaver

travelrobb wrote:The New York Times take on the purchase highlights the fact that the new units will have regenerative braking -- which sends electricity generated by braking back through pantographs and into the catenary and ultimately the grid -- a feature lacking on some or all of the AEM-7s, which seems like a good reason to retire the toasters to me. Do we know which of the AEM-7s, if any, had regenerative braking? What percentage of energy consumed by a typical loco would be returned to the grid with regenerative braking (or dissipated into the air with dynamic braking?

Also, it appears Amtrak has concluded the HHPs were a failed experiment--all of those will be retired and replaced by the Siemens locos. Does anyone know when the last 20 of the units will be delivered, and the HHPs will begin leaving the property?

The 29 AEM7AC locos all have regenerative braking while the remaining 20 are straight DC type motors with dymanic brake. How much power is returned to the overhead varies since the loco itself will draw off some of the power to feed HEP and loco auxiliaries and then will feed the overhead. Rarely, the units will use dynamic (resistive) brake if the overhead cannot take the excess regenerative power.

What I am dying to know is, is why in the world did Amtrak waste money on that ridiculous looking locomotive when they could have bought streamlined trainsets for both the Keystone and the NEC??? Here we are trying to be a so-called leader in HSR and Amtrak goes and buys these things... I mean come on who in the global community is actually believing that we will have HSR? And top speeds of 125mph? I read that if the Acela trainsets' tilting mechanisms were reengineered they would easily be able to do 150mph+ in more parts of the NEC.

Why is it we are so proud of making advances that are always miles behind the rest of the world?

After the Acela, which apparently will require replacement after only 20 years of service, it's hard to argue to European style trainsets for Regional services. More to the point, the schedule improvements from limited running over 125 MPH are very modest. Look at the Acela, and the shorter schedule depends on limiting the number of station stops far more than tilting and 150MPH running.

The reality is that conventional locomotive hauled coaches are apparently better suited to the conditions and operational demands of North America.