AC/Diesel Dual-Mode Locomotives in the news

The June issue of Railway Age has an article about Catenary/Diesel dual-mode locomotives.

Hope springs eternal..................

Clearfield wrote:The June issue of Railway Age has an article about Catenary/Diesel dual-mode locomotives.

Hope springs eternal..................

I read that article. It's actually about dual-mode MUs. They're calling them DMMUs. (Dual-mode-multiple-unit) NJT seems to be the one driving the effort, putting money into R&D for this to develop more exact specifications. The proposal mentioned in the article was something like a 3 car consist - an A car, a B car, and a D car. Cars A and B have powered trucks. B has the pantograph and transformers, and D has two diesel gensets, but no traction motors.I think this was a proposal for the Comet V or something. I'll have to re-read the article to be certain.

It would seem to open up possibiities for running through the commuter tunnel.

limejuice wrote:I read that article. It's actually about dual-mode MUs. They're calling them DMMUs. (Dual-mode-multiple-unit) NJT seems to be the one driving the effort, putting money into R&D for this to develop more exact specifications. The proposal mentioned in the article was something like a 3 car consist - an A car, a B car, and a D car. Cars A and B have powered trucks. B has the pantograph and transformers, and D has two diesel gensets, but no traction motors.I think this was a proposal for the Comet V or something. I'll have to re-read the article to be certain.

Actually, they are two different married pairs. The straight electric pairs an A car and a B car, while the dual-mode pairs an A and a D. On NJ Transit, the straight electrics would replace the Arrow IV fleet, while the dual-modes would be used to offer one-seat ride service to NYP from lines that are presently not electrified. AMT in Montréal is also involved in this project; they would use the dual-modes to equip a new branch off their Deux-Montagnes line. SEPTA is not mentioned here, but there are obvious applications, particularly for Newtown and Quakertown.

One thing that gives me optimism about this development project (though I remain skeptical) is that two major consulting firms are working on it: LTK and STV. If you read carefully, you'll see that they have not yet solved the packaging problem, but are working on it. There is no mention of the performance compromises that will be necessary to make a dual-mode MU, but then with all the advances that have been made on the diesel side (see the CRC and Rotem DMU contracts), and improvements in traction and propulsion technology, the potential is there.

This is a *major* part of the strategy in the NJT/Port Authority of NY & NJ "ARC" project, which aims to more than double peak hourly volumes into and out of NYC with new rail tunnels to supplement the existing North River Tunnels, and one-seat ride dual mode service from NJT branches that are currently served by diesels (and require at least one transfer to get to NYC).

Chalk one up for SEPTA for not building a multi-million-dollar transfer facility at Lansdale that's going to become useless in a few years.

Anyone know if NJT would ever be interested in moving Atlantic City service into Suburban Station with a train of these things?

-asg

amusing erudition wrote:Anyone know if NJT would ever be interested in moving Atlantic City service into Suburban Station with a train of these things?

-asg

If the dual-mode units were available, and NJT were using them, there is still the issue of refining SEPTA's position on what can and cannot use the tunnel.

Clearfield wrote:If the dual-mode units were available, and NJT were using them, there is still the issue of refining SEPTA's position on what can and cannot use the tunnel.

Indeed, but first NJT'd have to be interested in it before SEPTA would even look at the issue. My thinking progresses as follows:

1) NJT would already be using them in North Jersey
2) NJT might be interested in using them for South Jersey if they could get access to the tunnel, for which they would require electric power (otherwise they probably wouldn't care because it wouldn't be that important to run electric just from Shore to 30th St.)
3) SEPTA already doesn't use track 0, for example, that I'm aware of (I've been there many times during both rush hours plus other times and have never seen any train use track 0)
and of course
4) Sticking these things in SEPTA's face would be a good idea.

SEPTA's ridiculous ban on diesels in the tunnel (while off; obviously there's a good reason not to run them down there) will fall eventually.

-asg

amusing erudition wrote:SEPTA's ridiculous ban on diesels in the tunnel (while off; obviously there's a good reason not to run them down there) will fall eventually.

-asg

"Times change, and so do SEPTA staffers. I predict that within 5 years, dual-modes (if built and available) will be running in the tunnel."

Nostradamus

These would be great, if SEPTA could find the initiative to have any diesel service to begin with.

NJT seems to be the one driving the effort

Watch this fade rapidly when Warrington departs.

SEPTA doesn't need dual-modes to restore diesel service (all of the alternate routes to 30th Street's lower level have been discussed to death)...

Irish Chieftain wrote:

NJT seems to be the one driving the effort

Watch this fade rapidly when Warrington departs.

SEPTA doesn't need dual-modes to restore diesel service (all of the alternate routes to 30th Street's lower level have been discussed to death)...

Good point, but one-seat rides are all we've got going for us at SEPTA, and a cross-platform transfer would be very unpopular.

benltrain wrote:

Irish Chieftain wrote:

NJT seems to be the one driving the effort

Watch this fade rapidly when Warrington departs.

SEPTA doesn't need dual-modes to restore diesel service (all of the alternate routes to 30th Street's lower level have been discussed to death)...

Good point, but one-seat rides are all we've got going for us at SEPTA, and a cross-platform transfer would be very unpopular.

Not only that, but the more specialized a service, the less useful it is. If there were cars that all they could do is run, for example, Quakertown to 30th St. lower (where you don't even get a cross-platform transfer to Suburban, instead it requires going up three levels or transferring at an earlier station) and back, the service is less useful than a car set that can run all the way through the tunnel and even onto a branch on the other side of the system possibly. Granted a diesel could run through 30th St. lower and continue south, but that's still specialized to a degree. Poorly adminstrated though it is, there is something elegant about the RRD design and its run through Center City. Adding service that is going to be necessarily inconvenient from the start while prohibiting system interchangeability is a bad idea.

It's the same reason you wouldn't want a transportation system consisting of a commuter rail line to the north, a busway to the east, a light rail system to the west, and a new freeway to the south. It's just a mess, though this would be more nuanced.

-asg

amusing erudition wrote:

benltrain wrote:

Irish Chieftain wrote:

NJT seems to be the one driving the effort

Watch this fade rapidly when Warrington departs.

SEPTA doesn't need dual-modes to restore diesel service (all of the alternate routes to 30th Street's lower level have been discussed to death)...

Good point, but one-seat rides are all we've got going for us at SEPTA, and a cross-platform transfer would be very unpopular.

Not only that, but the more specialized a service, the less useful it is. If there were cars that all they could do is run, for example, Quakertown to 30th St. lower (where you don't even get a cross-platform transfer to Suburban, instead it requires going up three levels or transferring at an earlier station) and back, the service is less useful than a car set that can run all the way through the tunnel and even onto a branch on the other side of the system possibly. Granted a diesel could run through 30th St. lower and continue south, but that's still specialized to a degree. Poorly adminstrated though it is, there is something elegant about the RRD design and its run through Center City. Adding service that is going to be necessarily inconvenient from the start while prohibiting system interchangeability is a bad idea.

It's the same reason you wouldn't want a transportation system consisting of a commuter rail line to the north, a busway to the east, a light rail system to the west, and a new freeway to the south. It's just a mess, though this would be more nuanced.

-asg

The through-routing is efficient, and very unelegant. It's awful, because when I want to get to 30th Street I have to spend a long dwell at Market East and an even longer one at Suburban Station. But, it saves a LOT of money, so I am not complaining.

benltrain wrote:The through-routing is efficient, and very unelegant. It's awful, because when I want to get to 30th Street I have to spend a long dwell at Market East and an even longer one at Suburban Station. But, it saves a LOT of money, so I am not complaining.

And this is inelegant compared with... having to get off the train in second-storey Reading Terminal, go down to the street, enter the subway at 11th and then ride a mile and a half west on the Market subway, after paying another fare (if you didn't have a pass to begin with), or walk? The long stops are part of its administration that I do not endorse, but running the trains through the city is both economically efficient, as you agree, and a fairly elegant solution to the poor design they inherited so many years ago with two stub terminals.

It is also possible we are using the word differently; I'm definitely using it from more the mathematical definition.

-asg