Amtrak Empire, LIRR, MNRR/CTDOT Dual Mode Procurement - Charger Variants

The ALC42Es rely on the Airo trainsets to provide the pantograph. Unless the LSL is going to become a Chicago-Boston train with a connection in Albany to NYP (or the LSL NYP section is going to carry a coach that terminates at Albany), I don't see the ALC42Es providing power for it. (Although maybe if the Broadway Limited was reintroduced, following the route of the Capitol Limited west of Pittsburgh, Eire would be the only city to loose direct service to NYP if the Albany to NYP section became its own train.)

ElectricTraction wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 9:12 pm They need to convert the whole thing to overhead AC electrification from Highbridge to Poughkeepsie (and Albany for Amtrak). Somewhere on the Empire Connection the 25kV/60 could meet the 11.5kv/25 and PRR third rail from NYP.

M-8s do not work on 25 Hz. Why not just convert the CAT to 60 Hz 12.5 kV into the location at NYP that 3rd rail ends on the Empire corridor? Then extend the 12.5 Kv 60 Hz on the west line thru SD and onto the Hudson line where the 3rd rail can be used by the M-8s to POU?

The M-8s could then use the Hudson line thru NYP to drop passengers from the Hudson line at stations on the Hell Gate line. Of course as well the opposite direction. That gives many more possible one train rides.

M-8's are an expensive option; you'd probably have to double the fleet. I would expect that they are also more maintenance-intensive. Then there's the cost of catenary, and it's maintenance, on a line that already has power. I've also heard, on here, that the FRA would likely not approve dual electrification; it's one or the other.

Then there's design and clearance issues. It would be great if you could get High(er) Speed Rail on the Hudson, but you still need that DC for last mile through the Park Avenue Tunnel. You're adding a lot of weight just to provide a solution in search of a problem.

west point wrote: ↑Mon Apr 24, 2023 1:17 pmM-8s do not work on 25 Hz. Why not just convert the CAT to 60 Hz 12.5 kV into the location at NYP that 3rd rail ends on the Empire corridor?

That's what I said. The 11.5kv/25 and PRR third rail would meet (with PRR third rail overlap for transition) the 25kv/60 that the M-8s can run off of.

Jeff Smith wrote: ↑Mon Apr 24, 2023 1:57 pmM-8's are an expensive option; you'd probably have to double the fleet. I would expect that they are also more maintenance-intensive. Then there's the cost of catenary, and it's maintenance, on a line that already has power. I've also heard, on here, that the FRA would likely not approve dual electrification; it's one or the other.

There are three key advantages to switching the Hudson line to 25kV/60 at Highbridge and along the Empire Connection:

1. Amtrak could electrify and run AC power all the way to Albany.
2. MN could eliminate dual-mode operations with 25kV/60 run to Poughkeepsie and Danbury.
3. Switching at Highbridge provides an unimpeded freight route from Selkirk to Oak Point and Fresh Pond with no third rail.

Switching at Highbridge preserves access from the Harlem Line to Yankees Stadium on DC power.

Yes, the M-10 fleet would need to be big, but if combined with adding tracks south of NWP on the Harlem and increasing the substation capacity to full acceleration with 12-car sets all the way to Southeast, the Harlem could soak up about 2/3 of the Hudson Line M-7 fleet, the rest could be rebuilt for LIRR, as they'd soak up those cars plus hundreds more with electrification to Port Jefferson, Oyster Bay, and Patchogue, not to mention reactivating the Central Branch further into the future.

MN should really get AC EMUs that can run on 25hz and handle low level boarding but not third rail and pool those with CDOT for electrification to Springfield and SLE to Westerly, which would allow for all-AC operations into NYP from POU and NHV, but that's a different issue.

Then there's design and clearance issues. It would be great if you could get High(er) Speed Rail on the Hudson, but you still need that DC for last mile through the Park Avenue Tunnel. You're adding a lot of weight just to provide a solution in search of a problem.

At one point I recall seeing a map that showed 19' Autorack clearance to the GM plant at Tarrytown from the North, which is no longer there, so the only clearance issues for Plate C clearance under 25kV/60 would be for 18mi south to Highbridge. The M-8 design is proven on the New Haven Line, and yes, it is a bespoke solution for NYC, but it has a lot of benefits, and combined with 25kV/60 to Danbury/New Milford would eliminate the kludgy dual-mode diesels, so it's a worthwhile trade-off.

On the AC EMU fleet, CDOT and NJT should create a pool fleet that runs on NJT and to NHV for run-through service. Running through to LIRR would be too expensive and cumbersome to have an even more bespoke fleet that then wouldn't fit into GCT-Madison or Brooklyn, but NHV is a piece of cake. It's AC all the way. Combined with a rebuilt NYP post-MSG, Gateway, and a rebalancing of traffic to Hoboken, Brooklyn, and LIC, the run-through could significantly increase capacity and decrease congestion at NYP and make a much more fluid rail system throughout the region.

I've been doing some research on the ALC-42E's (Charger variant) for use in the New York Metro area. As everyone knows, the E versions will be dual modes (love them or hate them). There will be two variants of the "E's" for Amtrak's National Network and certain state-supported corridors:

https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/in ... trak-airo/

-the Charger locomotive is coupled to a powered, pantograph-equipped passenger coach called an APV (Auxiliary Power Vehicle). The APV has an underfloor transformer to handle the Northeast Corridor’s 25kV and 12.5 kV AC catenary power, a 4QS (Four-Quad Chopper), and four powered axles with AC traction motors. The APV is connected to the Charger locomotive with a DC link. In AC catenary mode, the Charger’s diesel engine and traction alternator are shut down; the APV is powering its own four traction motors as well as the four on the Charger, for a total of eight. Siemens calls this “distributed traction.”
-Battery-hybrid push/pull trainsets equipped with a Charger locomotive and a Battery Coach with a DC Link but without powered axles. The Battery Coach supplies traction power to the Charger locomotive on routes or locations (such as some stations in non-electrified territory) where diesel emissions are prohibited or restricted, for example, on Empire Service trains originating in Penn Station New York that currently use dual-mode (diesel/third-rail) P32AC-DMs.

The benefit of using a power trailer is that you still get the full utility of a diesel engine, while being able to operate on catenary where available. I'm not sure what the range on a standard Charger is, but the benefit here is huge. You also can service the engine separately from the trailer. Simplifies maintenance it seems.

So obviously, these will be used to bridge non-powered gaps and eliminate engine changes at Hartford, as well as bring trains into Penn from NYS-supported Empire Service. They could be used for new service such as those proposed to Scranton over the Lackawanna Cutoff, and new Inland service HFD-SPG-WOR-BOS.

Now, about the two NYC area MTA commuter services: the MTA's LIRR and MNRR. There's no mention anywhere of an ALC-42E being used with a trailer car for DC. So I guess what they're going for could be called an "SC-44E".

From Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_C ... (New_York)

In December 2020, New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority approved a Federal Transit Administration-funded $335 million contract for 27 dual-mode locomotives based on the Charger design. The new locomotives will replace the 27 existing GE Genesis locomotives used on the Metro-North Railroad's Hudson Line, Harlem Line, and Danbury Branch; they will use third rail electric power to enter Grand Central Terminal. The first 19 locomotives are scheduled to be completed in mid-2026. The contract has options for 144 additional locomotives: 32 for Metro-North, 66 for the Long Island Rail Road, 20 for the New York State Department of Transportation (for Amtrak Empire Service trains), and 25 for the Connecticut Department of Transportation.[68][69]

Forgot this from an MTA Board Meeting:

METRO-NORTH RAILROAD
COMMITTEE ACTIONS and PRESENTATIONS
SUMMARY for DECEMBER 2020

Siemens Mobility, Inc. $334,873,148 Metro-North Railroad on behalf of itself, Long Island Rail Road (LIRR), Connecticut Department of Transportation (CDOT) and New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) requests Board approval to award a competitively-solicited contract to Siemens Mobility Inc. (SMO) in the total amount of $334,873,148 for the design, manufacture, testing, and delivery of 19 dualmode locomotives and related locomotive equipment and for the exercise of an initial option for 8 additional locomotives. The contract is funded by a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grant.
Master Page # 5 of 247 - Joint Metro-North and Long Island Committees Meeting 12/16/2020
____________________________________________________________________

Jeff Smith wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 10:15 amI've been doing some research on the ALC-42E's (Charger variant) for use in the New York Metro area. As everyone knows, the E versions will be dual modes (love them or hate them). There will be two variants of the "E's" for Amtrak's National Network and certain state-supported corridors:

Both of those locomotive/trailer combinations sound kind of terrible. The ALP-45DP has proven that a fully functional AC dual-mode locomotive is perfectly practical, and while they make no sense for commuter operations (just electrify everything), that type of locomotive has a legitimate need on Amtrak where services could go well off-corridor into diesel territory. It shouldn't be that hard to create a more fuel efficient version that would be a fully functional 3,600HP diesel and a fully functional 5,000HP electric, at least for shorter routes where they don't need the fuel capacity of an ALC-42.

Meanwhile, the stupid third rail dual-mode debacle continues on. For only a little more than they are spending on these things they could have just electrified Oyster Bay, Port Jeff, Patchogue, Poughkeepsie, and Danbury. The two trains a day to Wassaic could be diesel and originate/terminate at North White Plains, with New York traffic switching.

The SC42-DM is coming.

Why would NYDOT still need 25 units if Amtrak is procuring an Battery-Diesel Electric ICT or will the 25 unit bought for Amtrak Long Distance service...

additional future service?

The 25 locomotives for the Empire Service is just an option in the original contract - NYS is under no obligation to exercise it. Since the Empire Service trains will get the Airo trainsets, NYS would simply just not exercise that option. The LIRR/MNRR Siemens locomotive contract was awarded several months before Amtrak's Airo order, so presumably either the decision to include the Empire Service fleet in the Airo contract wasn't finalized yet, or an option for Empire Service locomotives was included in the LIRR/MNRR contract anyway as a backup.

The Airo trainsets will not help with the LSL or any other train out of NYP that runs through Albany but uses LD equipment (there currently aren't any other than the LSL, but they could choose to add more later).

The other option this NYS option offers is to allow the Airo battery + ACS42E order to be replaced with Airo unpowered sets + SC42DMs (like the Cascades is getting since the Cascades Airo trains will use the existing WSDOT SC44s).

What a bunch of dumb, half-baked solutions. With electrification of commuter rail routes, the only dual mode that should really be needed is an AC dual mode, basically an ALP-45DP that has better fuel economy and bigger fuel tanks for regional services.

ElectricTraction wrote: ↑Sun May 21, 2023 6:31 pm What a bunch of dumb, half-baked solutions. With electrification of commuter rail routes, the only dual mode that should really be needed is an AC dual mode, basically an ALP-45DP that has better fuel economy and bigger fuel tanks for regional services.

You did notice that the SC-42DM has both the electrical pickup and diesel in a single engine, i.e., if its design is dumb, its no dumber than the ALP-45DP, and unlike the ALP-45DP, can run on the 101 miles of the MNRR that are electrified?

RandallW wrote: ↑Sun May 21, 2023 7:15 pm

ElectricTraction wrote: ↑Sun May 21, 2023 6:31 pm What a bunch of dumb, half-baked solutions. With electrification of commuter rail routes, the only dual mode that should really be needed is an AC dual mode, basically an ALP-45DP that has better fuel economy and bigger fuel tanks for regional services.

You did notice that the SC-42DM has both the electrical pickup and diesel in a single engine, i.e., if its design is dumb, its no dumber than the ALP-45DP, and unlike the ALP-45DP, can run on the 101 miles of the MNRR that are electrified?

The current P32DM-AC is also capable of doing that running on 3 rail.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_9HExyle00