Amtrak's Five Year Plan: SPG-NHV implications

Thanks very much!

Rhinecliff wrote:My experience with DMUs is limited to the shuttle trains that the Metro-North once operated between POU and CRT during off-peak hours. Noise and vibration caused by the engines were a significant impediment to relaxation. In addition, with the engines below the cars and the ac units on top of the cars, there was a general lack of space, and the ac units frequently leaked into the cabins. Now I understand that things have supposedly come a long way, but I cannot imagine that the interior of a DMU will ever be as quiet and vibration free as the interior of a traditional coach -- especially a Bi-Level one. But I could be wrong.

I rode aboard the Colorado Railcar DMU when it was being run on NJ Transit's Princeton branch in April. I remember the noise and vibration being very subdued, although I will concede that it's not as quiet as a non-powered coach obviously. But it was certainly quieter than the Rohr/Super Steel Turboliner power car. I was suprised at the amount of noise and vibration under acceleration the first time I rode in business class on one of the rebuilt "RTL 3" turbos. Granted, the Turboliner gets up to 110 mph on the way to Albany, whereas the DMU probably didn't break 60 mph in Princeton shuttle service.

Also, the CRC DMU has plenty of space. The optional 2-2 seating is quite comfortable (the demo unit had samples of the different options for seating throughout the car). One end of the car had table seating and a counter area, so food service is certainly possible.

<i> I was suprised at the amount of noise and vibration under acceleration the first time I rode in business class on one of the rebuilt "RTL 3" turbos.</i>

You expected a helicopter engine to be any quieter in a train than in a helicopter? You've got two of them within a few hundred feet of you, both sucking in and discharging a few pounds of air per second. Oh yes, and there's that nice gearbox to reduce the 10,000 or so rpm of the power turbine to the few hundred rpm of the wheels.

One common complaint about the RTG in France has been that it's a noisy unit. The RTL is basd on the RTG, so I don't see why it should be any different.

In any case, now that the US DOT has proven <b>once again</b> that gas turbines in trains are a stupid idea, could they please stop wasting taxpayer dollars on this? (Yes, they did in fact partly fund and were in fact involved with the RTL III, it's listed on the FRA's website)

Back on topic - Why are Springfield corridor riders so special that they deserve a direct trip to NYC? I live 8 miles from the Queens border and yet I have to change trains at least once, if I take the train from the nearest station, to get to NYC. Direct service is nice - who's going to pony up the money for electrification, or new third rail dual modes (since GE's existing design no longer meets FRA or EPA requirements).

Neither's cheap, the latter's historically offered poor performance and reliability, the former depends on a supply of electric equipment - not readilly available now, and in any case, yearly ridership that's less than the daily ridership of a number of commuter rail systems in the US makes catenary hard to justfiy.

One potential way would be to couple DMUs up to a train and let them get pulled as trailers (I believe this can and is done in some places, and was actually done on this line in the 80's), but that still means a (currently) time consuming couple at New Haven, and timming precision that frankly, Amtrak just doesn't have. It's not going to be a 5 minute stop.

I tend to agree with the last one, it is easier, faster and cheaper to transfer the passengers than to transfer (switch) the cars.
If I were traveling from Hartford to New York, I would rather cross the
platform in New Haven for a five minute connection than endure a 15 or
more minute power change or a switching move with the car(s).
In the New Haven Railroad days, there were a number of trains from
Springfield that met up at New Haven with trains from Boston giving the
people coming down from Springfield, Hartford and the other stations on
that line the opportunity to cross the platform at New Haven and board a
non stop or very limited stop(s) express train for New York while the
Springfield train left a few minutes later not as an all stops local but as a
train serving a number of intermediate stops between New Haven and
Stamford before running express from Stamford to New York.
Most of the Springfield Line passengers chose to transfer at New Haven.
They preferred a quicker trip as opposed to a one seat trip.
Noel Weaver