ALP-45DP's - Usage and Delivery

Port Jervis wrote:

cruiser939 wrote:The units will be sufficiently tested before being placed into revenue service.

Said testing will have to meet with Amtrak's approval. Didn't Amtrak ban the PL42's from their trackage until 2007?

Obviously when testing the ALP-45's on Amtrak's property, they will be informed of the testing. File this one in the "blatantly obvious" drawer please.

amtrakhogger wrote:Why can't the order be cancelled just like the ARC tunnel?

Because the units are already being produced and there is a tangible product in hand...

Another post for the "blatantly obvious" drawer.

Port Jervis wrote:

Jtgshu wrote:yes, Amtrak has to allow the '45s over their railroad and approave testing before they might be added to the timetable, but i can't see why they would cause an issue. One would think the opposite in that they might require/want MORE testing, and check things out so they can be addressed quicker and easier than waiting til later on. Although you never can tell with those guys sometimes..............

Given the chaos that would be caused if one of these new beasts lays down in one of the Hudson River tubes, I can imagine it will take a LOT for Amtrak to feel comfortable allowing them into NYP.

How does this make any sense at all? How would an ALP-45 crapping out in the tunnels be any different from any other type of equipment crapping out in the tunnels?

Port Jervis wrote:

cruiser939 wrote:What does NJT do with them... run trains I would imagine. You can't extend any existing service from PSNY until the FDNY certifies the dual modes for the tunnels and Amtrak certifies them for the NEC. At that time, you can extend M&E and MSU trains can go all the way to Hackettstown and Long Branch trains can get extended to Bay Head. As for the RVL, you can't fit any more rush hour trains through the tunnels, that's kinda what "at-capacity" means. In fact, that's exactly what "at-capacity" means.

To be fair, "capacity" for the Hudson tunnels is what Amtrak says it is, not exactly the physical restraints of the infrastructure. If Amtrak would cooperate, I could see 2 or 3 slots for peak RVL dual modes to NYP becoming a reality.

To be fair, you're wrong.

Capacity is not determined by Amtrak but rather the signaling system and the infrastructure. I don't know what gives you the basis for your assumption of an additional 2 or 3 slots for peak direction RVL service, but you couldn't be farther off.

cruiser939 wrote:

Port Jervis wrote:

Jtgshu wrote:yes, Amtrak has to allow the '45s over their railroad and approave testing before they might be added to the timetable, but i can't see why they would cause an issue. One would think the opposite in that they might require/want MORE testing, and check things out so they can be addressed quicker and easier than waiting til later on. Although you never can tell with those guys sometimes..............

Given the chaos that would be caused if one of these new beasts lays down in one of the Hudson River tubes, I can imagine it will take a LOT for Amtrak to feel comfortable allowing them into NYP.

How does this make any sense at all? How would an ALP-45 crapping out in the tunnels be any different from any other type of equipment crapping out in the tunnels?

Electric locomotives have a long record of reliability. This new engine is something totally new, something I predict Amtrak will be looking very carefully at before permitting it to run into NYP.

Even the LIRR's dual modes were built on a somewhat proven concept (FL-9).

[Port jervis] The LIRR DM's don't operate like the FL9's at all. FL9's didn't break down unexpededly =). I know this is off topic so please do not grill me on it. I think the LIRR should've kept there FL9's or at least maybe invest in the ALP45DP. Although with the budget deficit they probably couldn't afford it. =(

peanut1 wrote:[Port jervis] The LIRR DM's don't operate like the FL9's at all. FL9's didn't break down unexpededly =). I know this is off topic so please do not grill me on it. I think the LIRR should've kept there FL9's or at least maybe invest in the ALP45DP. Although with the budget deficit they probably couldn't afford it. =(

The ALP-45 would do nothing for the LIRR as it is designed to run on ac power (catenary) while in electric mode.

cruiser939 wrote:

amtrakhogger wrote:Why can't the order be cancelled just like the ARC tunnel?

Because the units are already being produced and there is a tangible product in hand...

Another post for the "blatantly obvious" drawer.

Tangible product, eh? We'll see about that.

Port Jervis wrote: Electric locomotives have a long record of reliability. This new engine is something totally new, something I predict Amtrak will be looking very carefully at before permitting it to run into NYP.

They're going to be using line power going into NYP, so there's you're reliable electric locomotive.

OportRailfan wrote:

Port Jervis wrote: Electric locomotives have a long record of reliability. This new engine is something totally new, something I predict Amtrak will be looking very carefully at before permitting it to run into NYP.

They're going to be using line power going into NYP, so there's you're reliable electric locomotive.

Long record of reliability - kinda like the HHP-8's?

Matt Johnson wrote:I know if I had one I'd use it to pick up chicks! I'd roll up to the ladies and be like, "This beauty can take you anywhere on the NJ Transit rail system. Want a one seat ride from NYP to Bay Head? Then I'm your man!"

we could make the coors light train jersey style

161pw165 wrote:

OportRailfan wrote: They're going to be using line power going into NYP, so there's you're reliable electric locomotive.

Long record of reliability - kinda like the HHP-8's?

It's an ALP46 stuffed in there with 2 CAT engines. Forget fantasizing about them. Just wait and see how they do.

Don't worry, I think these will beat the all time failure rate currently held by the PL42.

cruiser939 wrote:

amtrakhogger wrote:Why can't the order be cancelled just like the ARC tunnel?

Because the units are already being produced and there is a tangible product in hand...

Another post for the "blatantly obvious" drawer.

to be fair cruiser, wasnt there a tangible product being produced before the state of NJ nixed the ARC project. There was work being done, such as closing down,and then tearing down the Mcdonalds in Bergen, and putting in an overpass in the road(Is that Tonnelle Ave, I forget) that will carry the ARC tracks into the tunnel extrance among other things.With that said, theres nothing to stop this order from being cancelled. I for one dont want to see this happen. I want these damn things to work, but I cant see much use for all the units that were purchased

BuddSilverliner269 wrote: I want these damn things to work, but I cant see much use for all the units that were purchased

Hey Buddy!

There is always that simple fact they will just be used out of Hoboken in Electric Mode and/or diesel mode on the non electrified tracks... I guess since ARC won't be built they will just retire half of the GP40/F40 fleet.