Acela Disposition Discussion

the new train sets will be able to couple two sets together to make one, or remove 2 power cars and couple between sets, or remove at the articulated joints and expand with more cars. There are a lot of options here, from every day ones to future expansion ones. The current sets cannot be connected together and operated as a normal train. The new sets will be able to be plugged right in to each other without any mechanical dept help or man on the ground which will be a huge advantage for broke down trains or late equipment, combining it to keep stuff moving and on time.

We're going around in six month circles here, rehashing the same ideas and constraints. How about we lock this up until news is posted?

We don’t have any Turbotrains or Turboliners, and those were evolutionary and unique.

Acela? Aside from being the first new generation higher speed trainsets in North America, I’m not sure I’ll miss them if they’re not sent to a museum.

Understand this is not a question relating to future usage, but, did Amtrak ever consider using the Acela-1 equipment as single-ended sets of four or five cars?

mtuandrew wrote: ↑Mon Mar 02, 2020 10:10 am Understand this is not a question relating to future usage, but, did Amtrak ever consider using the Acela-1 equipment as single-ended sets of four or five cars?

They could not do that. The FRA collision standards essentially required a locomotive at each end. That may have been because a Tier II-rated cab car was harder to design than a locomotive, not 100% sure of the details. But without a rear engine or cab car, there would be no easy way to turn the train at Washington (not sure about Boston). I know at Washington, Amtrak uses dual cab locomotives and detaches the locomotives and runs them around the train.

The meatballs,the hippo's,and the ACS-64's are dual cab Motors.they don't need to be turned on the wye.

Tadman wrote: ↑Mon Mar 02, 2020 9:37 am We're going around in six month circles here, rehashing the same ideas and constraints. How about we lock this up until news is posted?

Second the motion. There just isn't anything worth discussing further until we see an update. You either scrap 'em or you don't and if you don't we all know right now there are few (probably none) options whatsoever that make any sense.

Ive been running them 4 days a week both ways since Oct. And esp after tonight, i am all for scrapping them! LOL.

Tadman wrote: ↑Mon Mar 02, 2020 9:37 am We're going around in six month circles here, rehashing the same ideas and constraints. How about we lock this up until news is posted?

ADMIN NOTE:
Mr Dunville is right. If you have something new and original to contribute (a news release from Amtrak, a scrapping contract or a donation agreement), feel free to contact a moderator to reopen this.

Until then, it's time to let the topic rest. Locked.

photobug56 wrote:Is the existing fleet so worn out that it cannot be used in another electrified corridor after repairs, renovation and updates?

Aren't they leased? Besides what intercity corridors outside NEC and Keystone are electrified?

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

Alphaboi wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:29 pm Besides what intercity corridors outside NEC and Keystone are electrified?

New York & Long Branch?

Where NY are you referring to outside NEC?

New York & Long Branch doesn't qualify as Intercity -- trains going all the way to Bay Head are commuter trains operated by NJ Transit. And the lack of low-platform access would preclude the use of the Acela fleet outside the NEC, even behind diesel.

So no other compatible overhead in the US? Or put turbines in the power cars? Recreate the turboliners as part of a rebuild?

I believe that turbines are efficient only when operating at maximum capacity and every US railroad that has tried them has found that they don't get enough chances to go flat out to benefit from that -- on Amtrak they'd spend too much time dwelling at station stops and waiting for signals to clear.