• Viewliner II Delivery/Production

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

  by Rockingham Racer
 
There are three places that a minimum axle count is in effect, AFAIK:

the CN on the former ICG
the UP on the Missouri River Runners
and recently, the UP north of Los Angeles
  by WhartonAndNorthern
 
electricron wrote: Mon Sep 09, 2019 5:44 pm Wouldn’t it be better for Amtrak to buy new coach cars with triple axle trucks to run on these axle limited rail corridors than just adding empty cars with dual axle trucks to these trains?
Take for example a 32 axle limit. With 4 axles per locomotive and coach, one locomotive and seven cars are needed. With 6 axles per coach, one locomotive and five cars are needed. Yes, triple axle trucks are more expensive than dual axle trucks, but wouldn’t the savings of reducing two cars from these trains balance those expenses?
4-axles is a magic number for rail cars. Two axles is more likely to hunt and six axles is more likely to derail. Six axles on a locomotive is apparently not an issue. I remember reading about this somewhere (maybe not this aprticular forum) in a thread on 286k cars on shortlines. "Why can't they just run 6-axle hoppers to that grain elevator on the non-upgraded shortline?"

Plus you have increased wear and tear: two axle trucks turn easier than three, and you have more wheels to go flat, more brakes to inspect and replace, etc.
  by mtuandrew
 
If the short trains are having trouble tripping he sensors, it seems like the railroad needs PTC interlocked crossing gates, and the passenger train needs an electromagnetic shunt between the rails to make sure any crossings will activate properly. Can’t be worth wasting the fuel and wearing out your cars.
  by bostontrainguy
 
mtuandrew wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:13 am If the short trains are having trouble tripping he sensors, it seems like the railroad needs PTC interlocked crossing gates, and the passenger train needs an electromagnetic shunt between the rails to make sure any crossings will activate properly. Can’t be worth wasting the fuel and wearing out your cars.
And how the hell did we survive all those short RDCs running around New England 50 years ago with no such problems? This makes no sense. What is going on here?
  by BandA
 
It should be possible to add extra brushes or wheels to cars to establish whatever impedance is desired, and have the vehicle detect continuity faults & send alarms to the cab, dispatch and PTC computer.
  by gokeefe
 
bostontrainguy wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:27 pmAnd how the hell did we survive all those short RDCs running around New England 50 years ago with no such problems? This makes no sense. What is going on here?
Actually if I recall from previous reading this was a problem 50 years ago as well that the B&M identified. They had to add some kind of device to the axles in order to ensure the automatic crossing relays tripped.
  by Backshophoss
 
RDC's had wheel wipers and some sort of "Exciter" circuit to ensure track shunt,that was used on the RDG RDC's used on the" Wall Street"
to Newark Penn Station.
  by mtuandrew
 
Backshophoss wrote: Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:02 am RDC's had wheel wipers and some sort of "Exciter" circuit to ensure track shunt,that was used on the RDG RDC's used on the" Wall Street"
to Newark Penn Station.
Right, that’s what I remember reading. Hard to imagine that 60 year old tech would be impossible to install and maintain (and be failsafe) in Amtrak locomotives or potential future DMUs, or that it would take up so much space that Amtrak would have to do major surgery on its P42s.
  by Rockingham Racer
 
bostontrainguy wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:27 pm
mtuandrew wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:13 am If the short trains are having trouble tripping he sensors, it seems like the railroad needs PTC interlocked crossing gates, and the passenger train needs an electromagnetic shunt between the rails to make sure any crossings will activate properly. Can’t be worth wasting the fuel and wearing out your cars.
And how the hell did we survive all those short RDCs running around New England 50 years ago with no such problems? This makes no sense. What is going on here?
We didn't. The B&M had tower operators put in an absolute block rule following single Budd cars, because they were'nt shunting.
  by WhartonAndNorthern
 
I know that MoW high rail pickup trucks generally don't shunt the track circuit to activate , but if Sperry cars or 2 geeps on a local job running can shunt the track circuit (at least on CSX they do), why the heck can't a Genesis and a handful of coaches shunt a track circuit.

What the heck is wrong with CN/UP's crossing circuits? If it can't handle an Amtrak, it probably can't handle a short local and I wonder why hasn't the FRA gotten involved?
  by electricron
 
WhartonAndNorthern wrote: Wed Sep 11, 2019 9:01 am I know that MoW high rail pickup trucks generally don't shunt the track circuit to activate , but if Sperry cars or 2 geeps on a local job running can shunt the track circuit (at least on CSX they do), why the heck can't a Genesis and a handful of coaches shunt a track circuit.

What the heck is wrong with CN/UP's crossing circuits? If it can't handle an Amtrak, it probably can't handle a short local and I wonder why hasn't the FRA gotten involved?
The FRA is involved, and regulates how fast a train can go with poor shunting capabilities. Amtrak puts on extra cars to maintain higher passenger train speeds, locals freights just keep going slowly.
  by BandA
 
Again, the RDC can have it's own ohmmeter that tests the resistance or impedance and sends an alarm or sets a penalty if necessary. If the tracks have leaves on them (or pollen or dirt) the car may not be detected. Road salt or rain could cause false positive.
  by RRspatch
 
Rockingham Racer wrote: Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:18 am There are three places that a minimum axle count is in effect, AFAIK:

the CN on the former ICG
the UP on the Missouri River Runners
and recently, the UP north of Los Angeles
I've often wonder what's behind this axle count thing. Is this a real problem with short trains disappearing or is this just UP and CN screwing with Amtrak. During my time with BNSF the rule was a movement had to have OVER 10 axles or it was absolute block behind it. Now BNSF has a Track Geometry train that runs around the system. It's usually pulled by a Gevo (6 axles) with two four axle cars. These cars are either the Geo test car and one support car or the Geo test car and a covered hopper car which I assumed was loaded. This train with it's 14 axles was allowed track speed. Never once did I ever see this train "disappear" from any of my screens. Yes, the Geo test train did survey the Southern Trans-con where A3 and A4 were allowed 90 MPH. Either CN and UP have poor signals systems on those two routes or they're trying to screw with Amtrak (make them burn more fuel and cost them more money). I wonder if the FRA has looked into this?
  by Backshophoss
 
Does CN or UP need to upgrade gear that dates back to the '50's??
Time,weather and road salt in winter can and does create crossing gate/lights malfunctions
UP and CN would love to have Amtrak pay that bill!
  • 1
  • 296
  • 297
  • 298
  • 299
  • 300
  • 321