Train delay: 8 locomotives stand in way of rail car expansio

Some random thoughts:

IIRC, it takes 15 locomotives to run Amtrak's Empire Service. At any given time, one can be out for maintenance, another one or two out of service for other repairs. No way is Amtrak going to lease out any of their P32ACDM's.

The P40's were built in '93, not '96. Amtrak's first order of P42DC's were built in 1996.

I see a lot of posts with the magic number of "15", as if tomorrow CDOT showed up on GE's door with a purchase order and a very large check that it would be a done deal. In my opinion, GE is going to think long and hard about wanting to jump back into the realm of dual modes. The P32ACDM's were/are a huge headache for GE. Lots of reliability issues. Poor reliability and warranty failures equals money out of GE's pocket. The other point is that the market for dual modes is way too small -- simply put there's not enough money to be made. When you build 1000+ locomotives of the same design for railroads like BNSF and UP over the course of several years, a small order of 15 locomotives which are of a unique and special design, it just doesn't make sense. Small special orders like that are not worth GE's time. I would be very surprised to see GE ever build another dual mode locomotive.

And further, even though I'm not a fan of electric push-pulls, if an order is going to made for 15 loco's, unless it's a joint purchase between CDOT and another agency, they should go with dual mode electrics that can run on catenary and third rail. The current draw problem may be solved by running two locos per train and put a horsepower restriction on both when in third rail territory.

Jay we discussed this already Dual mode electrics won't work in push/pull service, not with third rail, its gaps.
and even with overhead third rail it would not work, as engineer can not see the overhead rail and know were to put the hotshoe up.

Ok, what about putting locos on both ends of the train? Would it help any having the engineer always in the "front" end?

at % million a pop putting locomotives at both ends of a push pull train you may as well built Mu's
a 10 car Push pull train would run 37 million 2 x 5 plus 10 times 2.7
a 10 car MU train cost you 47 million but with much more flexibility like splitting etc.

Oh -- I kinda figured that. Which is why I though it would only would be worthwhile to obtain electrics if an order was placed by CDOT going it alone for 15 or more locos (which would probably never happen with any sort of loco costing ~$5 mil a pop). But the idea was only worthwhile if it could be used to pull those cars CDOT has now that they can't use.

Oh but then, I just thought, because a new design would have to be drawn up, it would probably take just as long as M8s to come in, and wouldn't help add missing seat capacity until then. Oh well, I guess it was an idea that wasn't for temp solution if CDOT ever had the $80 mil to blow.

I'd rather MU's anyway.

<i>No way is Amtrak going to lease out any of their P32ACDM's.
</i>

I thought NY State paid for them. And, given how Amtrak's been shafting NY lately, if that's the case, than IMHO, NY should take them back and let Amtrak have 'their' turbos for the EC service...

Nasadowsk wrote:<i>No way is Amtrak going to lease out any of their P32ACDM's.
</i>

I thought NY State paid for them. And, given how Amtrak's been shafting NY lately, if that's the case, than IMHO, NY should take them back and let Amtrak have 'their' turbos for the EC service...

I don't think that New York State paid for those engines. Even if they did
and even if they took them back, it would not accomplish NOTHING as
there would then be NO SERVICE.
Noel Weaver

Well...... Amtrak has resorted to using P43DCs down the hudson, and using AEM7s to come out and drag trains in.

Not that, this is any solution. Amtrak needs those units, and the lack of an escape hatch bars them from regular GCT use.

I agree with JayMan about buying Electric Locomotives. I am not an engineer but I cant see why they could not put a jumper from the Engine to the car directly behind it with 3rd rail shoes. I assume there are no gaps in GCT that would be larger than 120'. This would also guarantee CDOT control over there engines. They would no longer be farmed out over the system & they would be repaired in Connecticut instead of Harmon.

Jumpering other than control voltage is not allowed by FRA.

Only on permanently coupled cars, like married MU pairs which are connected by drawbars.

With the HEP jumpers there's alot of redundancy built in and several control circuits to protect employees but nobody will allow you to jumper 700 V DC or higher.

The EF-4's had high voltage jumpers between units, but maybe that was before that sort of thing was scrutinized. Come to think of it, maybe that was before the FRA(?)

ATK wrote:The EF-4's had high voltage jumpers between units, but maybe that was before that sort of thing was scrutinized. Come to think of it, maybe that was before the FRA(?)

The former Virginian motors did have a HV bus jumper between the units.
The former Reading MU's also had a HV bus jumper between the units.
An arrangement like that would be a cumbersome mess to switch from
one end to the other in a move at any point. The benefit of using push/
pull trains is to save on yard switching moves or the necessity for an
engine to run around the cars and thus allowing a much faster turn at each
end of the trip.
As "Dutch" and I have been trying to tell you all, electric motors will not
make sense with the type of operation that is conducted between New
York and various Connecticut points.
MU cars are the best solution to the present situation. You can run an
eight car train inbound and after the passengers have gotten off, an
emergency engineer can go in the cab of the fourth car and make the
cut by means of a key in a button and a controller key. In a minute or
two, you have two four car trains for non rush hour service. Same thing
in the afternoon, a four car train comes in on top of another four car train.
Passengers get off and an emergency engineer ties the second four car
train to the first one right on the platform, electrical and brake tests are
done and you immediately have an eight car rush hour train ready to
again load passengers and be gone.
Electric motors might please some of the railfans but Metro-North would
not benefit from their presence.
Electric motors were fine when we had big, heavy trains that went in solid
in the morning, a yard puller would pull the cars out from the block and
the engine would go to 49th Street for water. Later on another emergency
crew would put the same engine back on the same cars or maybe a
different set of cars for an evening train out.
Much of the stuff laid in Grand Central for the day. Trains do not run that
way anymore. The equipment is expected to earn its keep nearly 24 hours a day.
I believe all of the overhead third rail in GCT has been removed, there has been no need for it for some time now.
Noel Weaver

I dont think anyone was disputing the fact that MU's are the best solution in the long term. This discussion was on the VRE cars and Bombardier Coaches do not have enough power to move them. It has been said that GE needs a minimum order of 15 units so P42' or 32's were not going to happen. I would of liked to seen a HHP8 or an ALP equivalent used on the Shoreline (NLC-GCT) freeing up the SLE GP-40's and putting the remaining FL9's and 10's out to pasture. Dutch say's they can not jump from Coach to Engine but there has to be another solution, some kind of helper behind the Engine to make it through the gaps.

Swedish Meatball wrote:I dont think anyone was disputing the fact that MU's are the best solution in the long term. This discussion was on the VRE cars and Bombardier Coaches do not have enough power to move them. It has been said that GE needs a minimum order of 15 units so P42' or 32's were not going to happen. I would of liked to seen a HHP8 or an ALP equivalent used on the Shoreline (NLC-GCT) freeing up the SLE GP-40's and putting the remaining FL9's and 10's out to pasture. Dutch say's they can not jump from Coach to Engine but there has to be another solution, some kind of helper behind the Engine to make it through the gaps.

Who, might I ask, do you think will build 10 or 15 custom built electric
locomotives? I have been around railroad equipment for a long time and
I can tell you the more stuff you build into a locomotive, the greater the
possibility for major problems and service disruptions. To design, build
and test such electric locomotives would take several years if a willing outfit is ever found to build them.
The last I heard the VRE cars were not going to be used into New York so they do not need electric engines to pull them.
Noel Weaver