ALP-45-DP Usage/Service Patterns

jp1822 wrote:

srock1028 wrote:

jp1822 wrote: I have a few questions for you mr. jp1822, where do you suppose these engines get serviced and fueled if they run from Bay Head to New York? Where would the ML sets get their daily inspections and under carriage inspections if they run from Bay Head to New York?

And there lies my point (and has been since these ALP45's were conceived):

If NJT could not support the engines getting serviced and fueled to run from Bay Head to New York, along with carrying Multilevel cars - shame on NJT for EVER ordering them with taxpayer money.These were expensive locomotives to not bring about a major change. And for the record, I consider the ordering of the ALP45's and ARC two seperate issues.

You may consider them separate issues and that is why you are off base. The ALP-45s were NOT ordered with the thought of giving the NJCL a one seat ride. They were ordered for trains on the Hoboken side (where they can be supported and fueled)) and forthcoming services (like the Pocono and Northern Branch services) to have a one seat ride through the new slots that were created by ARC. The initial premise didn't even call for the Raritan trains to have a one seat ride. They were supposed to operate to SEC and turn in a new train yard.

Now that you don't have new slots, you have an orphan engine. If you want to point fingers at NJT, they should only be held accountable for being cowards. When the Bay Head residents started crying like Nancy Kerrigan about the train yard that had been there for decades, NJT should have told them to pound sand. They didn't and gave up the fueling facility.

The joke is on the NIMBY crowd which unfortunately impacts towns along the rest of the line. I

ThirdRail7 wrote:

jp1822 wrote:

srock1028 wrote:

jp1822 wrote: I have a few questions for you mr. jp1822, where do you suppose these engines get serviced and fueled if they run from Bay Head to New York? Where would the ML sets get their daily inspections and under carriage inspections if they run from Bay Head to New York?

And there lies my point (and has been since these ALP45's were conceived):

If NJT could not support the engines getting serviced and fueled to run from Bay Head to New York, along with carrying Multilevel cars - shame on NJT for EVER ordering them with taxpayer money.These were expensive locomotives to not bring about a major change. And for the record, I consider the ordering of the ALP45's and ARC two seperate issues.

You may consider them separate issues and that is why you are off base. The ALP-45s were NOT ordered with the thought of giving the NJCL a one seat ride. They were ordered for trains on the Hoboken side (where they can be supported and fueled)) and forthcoming services (like the Pocono and Northern Branch services) to have a one seat ride through the new slots that were created by ARC. The initial premise didn't even call for the Raritan trains to have a one seat ride. They were supposed to operate to SEC and turn in a new train yard.

Now that you don't have new slots, you have an orphan engine. If you want to point fingers at NJT, they should only be held accountable for being cowards. When the Bay Head residents started crying like Nancy Kerrigan about the train yard that had been there for decades, NJT should have told them to pound sand. They didn't and gave up the fueling facility.

The joke is on the NIMBY crowd which unfortunately impacts towns along the rest of the line.

We can agree to disagree regarding paragraph one. But I content that the locomotives should NEVER have been ordered if they were not for a purpose that would have brought about much change, considering their cost and complexity etc. I am only using the NJCL as an example. The major "change" would have been ARC (if fully funded). But as everyone knows, it had been on the drawing boards for years. Yes, it got a little closer with Corzine, but it was still never fully funded and as such they should not have fully funded anything till forthcoming services, or ARC were closer to reality.

And now we have orphan locomotives - expensive ones at that.

But even so, the ALP45's can NOT pull a 10 car multilevel train set - according to NJT and most people on this forum.

And I do point fingers at NJT for letting the south end of the NJCL deteriorate and not standing up for the Bay Head rail yard.

So yes, the joke is on the NIMBY's and NJT.

Did you or did you not see srocks post? He is ancNJT employee and he would know ALOT better than all of us whether or not the things can pull 10 MLs. I have personally seen one handle an 8 car train and while it was working hard that definitely did not seem to be all it had.

beanbag wrote:Did you or did you not see srocks post? He is ancNJT employee and he would know ALOT better than all of us whether or not the things can pull 10 MLs. I have personally seen one handle an 8 car train and while it was working hard that definitely did not seem to be all it had.

Yes, I did see srocks post and that's what led me to the positioning of my reply. It was noted that 10 multilevels "could" be handled but that it would be very slow. I have also commented in a previous post how opinions seem to vary on this subject. AMT out of Montreal can some how handle 10 to even 12 multilevels using its dual modes and multilevels. Sometimes it operates even with a dual mode on the back end of the train too. So it's ranged on the spectrum.

jp1822 wrote:

beanbag wrote:Did you or did you not see srocks post? He is ancNJT employee and he would know ALOT better than all of us whether or not the things can pull 10 MLs. I have personally seen one handle an 8 car train and while it was working hard that definitely did not seem to be all it had.

Yes, I did see srocks post and that's what led me to the positioning of my reply. It was noted that 10 multilevels "could" be handled but that it would be very slow. I have also commented in a previous post how opinions seem to vary on this subject. AMT out of Montreal can some how handle 10 to even 12 multilevels using its dual modes and multilevels. Sometimes it operates even with a dual mode on the back end of the train too. So it's ranged on the spectrum.

Heres the thing though, if they test it and it cant handle 10 effectively, just give it 9, there are 8-9 car multilevel sets all over the place. I could give less of a hoot about speculation, lets see the things actually try it before we dismiss them so readily. Remember how many people were saying these things were gonna be unreliable pieces of junk? And also you cant blame NJT for caving to Bay Head, they are a taxpayer funded organization, if they blow over the towns disapproval of the yard project to add the fuel pad, the media will have their lunch and it will be a huge PR disaster. If they wonder why theyre not getting one seat NY service from Bay Head in the future.. Thats their problem. A bunch of things went wrong for the 45s, the floor fell out from under them, however I still like them. No matter which way you slice it they are technological breakthroughs, and a great proof of concept.

srock1028 wrote:

jp1822 wrote: Amtrak is a minority operator of trains during rush hour. They may call the shots, but NJT far outweigh the amount of NJT trains coming into NYP.

NJT has a slot agreement with Amtrak in the AM and PM peaks where NJT is only allowed a certian amount of trains into an already crowded NY Penn Station.

I have a few questions for you mr. jp1822, where do you suppose these engines get serviced and fueled if they run from Bay Head to New York? Where would the ML sets get their daily inspections and under carriage inspections if they run from Bay Head to New York?

Well, with a pedestal track in Bay Head the inspections aren't really an issue.

However, there's also the issue of the ML's being banned west of Elberon by timetable.

There is no agree to disagree on this one JP1822. Your use of the NJCL is an unrealistic comparison. The DM wasn't intended for use in that matter. I'm open to correction, but I believe the 45s were bought because an option was utilized. This made timing right. So, you could roll the dice and hope the tunnel came through or wait and pay more for the units that might not have been ready in time.

An example of this is Amtrak's purchase of the HHP-8s. They were bought because the timing was right since they were part of the Acela package deal. As much as people (like myself) criticize their performance as a high speed engine, at least I remember the premise of the purchase. It wasn't really designed to supplement or replace the AEM-7s. The main intent was to replace the E-60s and provide reliable oomph for the long distance trains which had mail and freight in the consist. To that end, they did their job. They pulled 18+ car trains at speeds up to 110 mph. Years later, the mail and roadrailers see gone and they look like ridiculous purchase. However if you look at the intent of use versus the current use ,it made sense. Same story here. The backseat driving with this engine is occurring because they are not being used for their original intent in the foreseeable future. As such people are trying to force into a service it wasn't really prepared for and complaining about the outcome....and that is irresponsible and revisionist.

Which leads me to point 2 and Beanbag. Can this unit operate with 10 cars? Sure it can. You can put a lot of cars on certain engines. An example is the time they shut off the catenary and a 1500 hp yard switcher pulled 10 loaded Concrete tie cars, 12 loaded Herzog ballast cars and 2 ALP-44s dead in tow through the north river tunnels. When it emerged, it was down to a grand total of 4 mph but it got the job done. Should this become habit? Does this mean it was a good idea? Is this the optimal use if the equipment? A 10 car consist as mentioned wouldn't matter on a limited stop train like the PJC/NBK expresses. On a lines like the NJCL and RAR, acceleration is the key since the stops are close together.

Beanbag, I will apologize if I'm wrong but where are all of these 9 car sets being powered by diesel units? Show me which trains routinely have 8 and 9 car double decked operated with diesels. I've never noticed them. Can you point them out? Additionally, you mentioned you don't give a hoot about speculation. What road foreman or consist manager did you speak to know that they determined was best optimum usage under prevailing conditions? In other words, how do know what limitations were discovered during the testing phase? Perhaps it is also a matter of fuel conservation. Is it worth the extra fuel to make the moves that people are suggesting?
Along those lines, I'd like to ask: If they attached a fuel surcharge to your ticket on certain lines so they can receive a one seat ride, who would be agreeable?

Wow, this is great what I started! Haha. ThirdRail is right on point as usual. Oh and the ALP-45's CAN pull 10ML, is that better?
beanbag- the ML consists pulled by the PL-42's are 6 and 7 cars. Nothing more then a 7 car set.

-NO BS

I'd like to ask: If they attached a fuel surcharge to your ticket on certain lines so they can receive a one seat ride, who would be agreeable?

but... but... but... that's not fair... we're tired of fare hikes...

We've been going through fare hikes out here recently. In their infinite wisdom, CTA hiked monthly passes to equal with one-rides. I bought a bike. I charge myself one lame joke for each ride downtown and I'm quite satisfied.

srock1028 wrote:Wow, this is great what I started! Haha. ThirdRail is right on point as usual. Oh and the ALP-45's CAN pull 10ML, is that better?
beanbag- the ML consists pulled by the PL-42's are 6 and 7 cars. Nothing more then a 7 car set.

-NO BS

I never clarified I meant electrically powered sets of 8-9 cars. I just thought the 45s were taking an unnecessary amount of flack over their ability to pull 10. And yeah, youre right ThirdRail, its easy to forget such considerations as fuel consumption and consistent acceleration when youre on the other side of the fence. I mean if youre down to 4 mph you shouldnt run the train obviously, what is the reasonable threshhold for good acceleration on a commuter train? You hear fast and slow in these discussions, but the definition seems murky.

My apologies for the naiveness of my last post ThirdRail. Im still learning as you know.

In Beanbag's defense he never said other diesels were pulling 8 or 9 car MLV consists. He said they exist. Why all the fuss over '45s pulling 10 car MLV consists? I know that the MLVs are in use on the NJCL but how many 10 car sets are in use there? Why couldn't they be used effectively with shorter MLV consists and with Comets? The railroad doesn't run on 10 car MLVs alone. While ridership might go up with one seat rides it might not and to start with all that is needed is the same length consist that operates to Bay Head right now. However many cars are on the shuttles those passengers are absorbed in Bay Head now with a one seat ride they would just be absorbed sooner. The real question would be, assuming no new slots, does it make sense to drag the full consist, mostly empty, all the way down and back between Bay head and Long Branch. Are the shuttles more efficient than a single train (crew, fuel, equipment) or would a single train be more efficient?

andegold wrote:In Beanbag's defense he never said other diesels were pulling 8 or 9 car MLV consists. He said they exist. Why all the fuss over '45s pulling 10 car MLV consists? I know that the MLVs are in use on the NJCL but how many 10 car sets are in use there? Why couldn't they be used effectively with shorter MLV consists and with Comets? The railroad doesn't run on 10 car MLVs alone. While ridership might go up with one seat rides it might not and to start with all that is needed is the same length consist that operates to Bay Head right now. However many cars are on the shuttles those passengers are absorbed in Bay Head now with a one seat ride they would just be absorbed sooner. The real question would be, assuming no new slots, does it make sense to drag the full consist, mostly empty, all the way down and back between Bay head and Long Branch. Are the shuttles more efficient than a single train (crew, fuel, equipment) or would a single train be more efficient?

Think about why the shuttles are in place to begin with. You could "do away" with Long Branch all together (cost savings) and return back to the ole PRR and CNJ days of running full consists between NYP and Bay Head, with only South Amboy being another point of termination on the line. Ridership decreased as soon as the shuttles and change of trains came on line at Long Branch.

Back to topic at hand - this is all good stuff, but where is the most optimal place to put the ALP45's? They are a unique piece of equipment whereby they can operate with diesel and electric power. The most logical place for them to be beneficial would be to offer that "one-seat" ride to ______________. Otherwise, if they are not going between diesel and electric territory, NJT should have ordered more electrics or diesels.

The below appeared as a selling point for the ALP45's in various newspapers (especially on the Jersey Shore) and other publications upon their order. This info also was presented at a contract negotiation meeting I was privy to at NJT headquarters in Newark, NJ:

The locomotives are expected to be used on the Raritan Valley Line, (changing to electric power on the Northeast Corridor Line), and the North Jersey Coast Line. Use on the 'Trans-Hudson Tunnel' was also planned, prior to its cancelling. The units are currently being used on the Morristown Line, and the Montclair-Boonton Line.

I think it is pretty clear that the Raritan Valley Line was not going to see these locomotives travel into NYC unless ARC or THE was carried out. However, there have been rumblings to get at least one round trip Raritan Valley Line train in and out of NYP, using the Northeast Corridor (weekends and weekdays). We were all hoping for them on the North Jersey Coast Line, as it would restore the one-seat ride. Unfortunately, Bay Head yard came under attack but it had even been mentioned that a "pit operation" be installed here, as opposed to rotating the multilevels out to the Trenton storage facility (Morrisville, PA) or Dover.

EDIT - Trenton storage facility (Morrisville, PA changed from Port Morris).

jp1822 wrote:

andegold wrote:In Beanbag's defense he never said other diesels were pulling 8 or 9 car MLV consists. He said they exist. Why all the fuss over '45s pulling 10 car MLV consists? I know that the MLVs are in use on the NJCL but how many 10 car sets are in use there? Why couldn't they be used effectively with shorter MLV consists and with Comets? The railroad doesn't run on 10 car MLVs alone. While ridership might go up with one seat rides it might not and to start with all that is needed is the same length consist that operates to Bay Head right now. However many cars are on the shuttles those passengers are absorbed in Bay Head now with a one seat ride they would just be absorbed sooner. The real question would be, assuming no new slots, does it make sense to drag the full consist, mostly empty, all the way down and back between Bay head and Long Branch. Are the shuttles more efficient than a single train (crew, fuel, equipment) or would a single train be more efficient?

Think about why the shuttles are in place to begin with. You could "do away" with Long Branch all together (cost savings) and return back to the ole PRR and CNJ days of running full consists between NYP and Bay Head, with only South Amboy being another point of termination on the line. Ridership decreased as soon as the shuttles and change of trains came on line at Long Branch.

Back to topic at hand - this is all good stuff, but where is the most optimal place to put the ALP45's? They are a unique piece of equipment whereby they can operate with diesel and electric power. The most logical place for them to be beneficial would be to offer that "one-seat" ride to ______________. Otherwise, if they are not going between diesel and electric territory, NJT should have ordered more electrics or diesels.

The below appeared as a selling point for the ALP45's in various newspapers (especially on the Jersey Shore) and other publications upon their order. This info also was presented at a contract negotiation meeting I was privy to at NJT headquarters in Newark, NJ:

The locomotives are expected to be used on the Raritan Valley Line, (changing to electric power on the Northeast Corridor Line), and the North Jersey Coast Line. Use on the 'Trans-Hudson Tunnel' was also planned, prior to its cancelling. The units are currently being used on the Morristown Line, and the Montclair-Boonton Line.

I think it is pretty clear that the Raritan Valley Line was not going to see these locomotives travel into NYC unless ARC or THE was carried out. However, there have been rumblings to get at least one round trip Raritan Valley Line train in and out of NYP, using the Northeast Corridor (weekends and weekdays). We were all hoping for them on the North Jersey Coast Line, as it would restore the one-seat ride. Unfortunately, Bay Head yard came under attack but it had even been mentioned that a "pit operation" be installed here, as opposed to rotating the multilevels out to the Trenton storage facility (Morrisville, PA) or Dover.

EDIT - Trenton storage facility (Morrisville, PA changed from Port Morris).

Simply put, at the current time, there seems to be no real place for these locomotives to be used to their full potential until they start opening up Raritan slots into NYP next spring. I would argue that, currently, they're best used on the Morristown and Montclair Boonton lines, provided that the consists stay on those lines all day (to take use of the dual mode capabilities), but as it's been made clear before, that is not the case. Why that is not the case, one can guess. Another remedy for that issue would be to extend overhead lines to Secaucus Junction From Hoboken, but I don't think any of us see that happening any time soon.

Best use this week would be to use them to run trips from Westchester/Connecticut into Penn Station to make up for the loss of power up there.

How's that for mixing up three or four threads? If I could only have figured out a way to work in the Tunnel Box.

4522 is heading west down the Coast Line with a test train.