Could envision that for the Dual mode Chargers.
FYI; the AL45DP uses a pair of Class 8 truck engines as the prime movers away from the wire,are becoming maintenance Queens
for engine overhauls/valve work to stay at Tier IV!

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, Amtrak67 of America, Tadman, gprimr1
Any of the trains could do their exchange in ALB, so the Maple Leaf, Adirondack and other Empire trains could still benefit from electric.jonnhrr wrote:With only 8 round trips a day between NYC and Albany Rensselaer probbaly can't justify catenary. Trains for points beyond A-R still need to be Diesel powered, although 48/49 could be electric with the Diesels to/from 448/449 used to/from Chicago.
You can’t run diesel train engines in Manhattan per New York law.rohr turbo wrote:I find it absurd that people would propose dragging a multi-million $, 100-ton electric locomotive all 375 miles (Washington-Albany) just so you have some redundant third rail shoes for a half mile in NYP station!
Putting in better third rail, or ventilation so you can run a few hundred yards in diesel mode would be far more economical solutions. Maybe in a few years there will be compact fuel cells or Tesla batteries that could be added to a locomotive to shuttle this short distance.
I am not sure what you mean. Amtrak operates diesels between the Empire Connection and Spyten Dyvil every day. The tunnel on the west side is passively vented. I am also sure that Metro-North has operated diesels around 125th Street. They are certainly not breaking New York law.STrRedWolf wrote:You can’t run diesel train engines in Manhattan per New York law.
Don't count on it. Lithium batteries are a big fire hazard. That's why they don't want you to put your laptop in a checked bag on the airplane. Big lithium batteries are a big fire hazard in tunnels and underground stations. We have not had a Tesla crash and catch fire in the Lincoln or the Holland Tunnels yet, but the first time this happens the consequences are likely to be terrible and will precipitate tighter regulations of those large batteries.rohr turbo wrote:Maybe in a few years there will be compact fuel cells or Tesla batteries that could be added to a locomotive to shuttle this short distance.
Why is that absurd? They drag mostly empty baggage cars from LA to Chicago. They drag NPCU cabbages all around the corridors when they could've easily converted a coach to a cab car. They drag axle count cars all around Illinois to keep CN pretend-safe. They drag a P42 on the tail of most Michigan trains so they don't have to run a cab car and/or turn the power. Amtrak is quite good at the "drag something around" process.rohr turbo wrote:I find it absurd that people would propose dragging a multi-million $, 100-ton electric locomotive all 375 miles (Washington-Albany) just so you have some redundant third rail shoes for a half mile in NYP station!
.
The New York city ordinance/law you're referring to bans STEAM locomotives from New York City. This law was passed after a deadly rear-end collision in the Park Avenue tunnel. There is no law or ordinance as far as I know banning diesel locomotives in NYC. Amtrak, Metro North, LIRR and NJT just avoid running them under diesel power as they smoke up Penn Station and Grand Central.STrRedWolf wrote:
You can’t run diesel train engines in Manhattan per New York law.
Nope. If that electric is pantograph, you are lugging a dead weight diesel another 225 miles to Washington. If that electric is 3rd rail, you are lugging its dead weight to Washington, plus not really solving the 3rd rail gapping issue that has been mentioned.StLouSteve wrote:Drop an electric northbound or add one southbound at Albany. Only 150 miles of dead weight and avoids taking too much time at Penn and would allow run thru of a few trains from Was to Buf (one seat service).
Might be worth a try.