VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

General discussion of passenger rail proposals and systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.

Moderators: gprimr1, mtuandrew

Re: VT company buys DMUs for future commuter rail

Postby electricron » Tue Apr 25, 2017 11:42 am

As the tracks are now, where Amtrak runs the existing Vermonter, all they can do is run one round trip each day. That 's towards Essex Junction in the morning, and away during the evenings. On the line towards Rutland, they could run two round trips per day, that is until Amtrak extends the Ethan Allen to Burlington once the track work is completed.
To do more than that, signal improvements on the rail lines will need to be done. :)
electricron
 
Posts: 3818
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby Jeff Smith » Wed Apr 26, 2017 11:49 am

I believe the threads have been combined; thanks! As for forum, I'm fine with it here in General rather than in New England as it's very specific to passenger service. Contrasted with the Housy thread which talks about a short line with freight only and a pie in the sky passenger dream. This involves real money.
Next stop, Willoughby
~Jeff Smith (fka "Sarge") :: RAILROAD.NET Site Administrator
Jeff Smith
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7404
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:28 am
Location: MP 67.2 Georgia Southern Railway

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby Jeff Smith » Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:40 pm

I love the old Budd cars. Regarding the ADA issue upthread; they probably dealt with the ADA issues when DART put them in service. Regarding EPA? Not a clue. This has been an issue with other equipment such as FL9's. Again, since they were rebuilt for DART, one would think that issue has also been dealt with. Is there a market in Montpelier? This is the smallest state capital in the 48 CONUS. I haven't been up in this area since 2000. I'd think there'd be a greater need into VT from Springfield in conjunction with CtDOT's new service. I could think of a few lines around CT as a matter of fact, including our favorite punching bag Housy (at least as far as New Milford, for which CtDOT could trade an investment in Housy's trackage that they unfortunately DON'T own). I'd add New London -Worcester as well, which would be ironic as I believe that route was last serviced by a Budd RDC.
Next stop, Willoughby
~Jeff Smith (fka "Sarge") :: RAILROAD.NET Site Administrator
Jeff Smith
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7404
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:28 am
Location: MP 67.2 Georgia Southern Railway

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby Backshophoss » Wed Apr 26, 2017 8:25 pm

The RDC's are powered by a pair of Detroit Diesel Prime movers ,at that time were used as motors for GMC buses
If they change the motors to the Current Version of Detroit Diesel series 60 engines used on the Class 8 trucks,could meet Tier 4 with
exhaust treatment used on (that "urea" fluid) on Class 8 trucks.
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 4516
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Wed Apr 26, 2017 8:58 pm

Wouldn't need to, as the EPA rules only apply to engines manufactured after 1/1/1973, and remanufacture of engines pre-dating 1/1/1973 only if that reman upgrades the engine to something different than original spec. Therefore a Budd could have been remanufactured multiple times to like-new condition now containing more new parts than old, but since (1) it was originally built before 1973 and (2) provided that the Detroit engines have been maintained to factory performance through all those remanufactures...it's fully exempt.

Doesn't matter if it's an RDC, a first-gen GP40, or a 2-8-2 steamer...if it was built before Watergate, and you keep rebuilding it without changing the type of main engine make or that engine's performance rating, you can operate wholly outside the EPA tiers in perpetuity under the most-current 2008 regs.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?S ... 3&rgn=div5
^-- Can jump to the relevant passages just by doing a CTRL-F browser search for "1973" and clicking through the dozen or so search results.


If you do repower it with something different than factory spec then, yes, it qualifies under the new rules and must conform to the emissions tier for the given model year of the upgrade remanufacture. Which would mean Tier 0 for anything 1973-2001, as I very much doubt there's been a single RDC yet re-powered with a 21st century engine make.

The fact that nearly all operable Budds escape the EPA regs is why they're so sought-after. ADA isn't hard to mod, and anything newer than a Tom Thumb can be hooked up to PTC with the right interface for the make/model's controls. Since that very Budd-like belch of smoke is a bit of a turn-off for modern uses outside of museum ops, the most you'd be obliged to do is install sensible add-on emissions controls to tame the visible and smellable exhaust at the stacks. Something that can easily be implemented by many different means without modding the engines themselves.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7108
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby electricron » Thu Apr 27, 2017 12:48 am

Backshophoss wrote:The RDC's are powered by a pair of Detroit Diesel Prime movers ,at that time were used as motors for GMC buses
If they change the motors to the Current Version of Detroit Diesel series 60 engines used on the Class 8 trucks,could meet Tier 4 with exhaust treatment used on (that "urea" fluid) on Class 8 trucks.

All the TRE RDCs, just about all RDCs with previous VIA ownership, have had their old Detroit Diesels removed long ago. From page 2 of the previous link I posted.
" Equipped with two, completely independent, diesel engines mounted under the floor; (Via Rail repowered all cars in early 1980’s with Cummins NTA855R engines and Twin Disc TAC-22-1304 transmissions)"
electricron
 
Posts: 3818
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby Backshophoss » Thu Apr 27, 2017 1:35 am

If the Goal is to meet current emissions standard(Tier IV) you will wind up needing to replace those Cummings engines
with something built to the current Class 8 truck emissions standards.
Backshophoss
 
Posts: 4516
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Thu Apr 27, 2017 8:11 am

Backshophoss wrote:If the Goal is to meet current emissions standard(Tier IV) you will wind up needing to replace those Cummings engines
with something built to the current Class 8 truck emissions standards.


Not if they replace with the same Cummins engines at same performance spec. Then it only has to be Tier 0 per the regs.

That's "current" for rebuilds of engines manufactured between '73-01, or engines manufactured pre-'73 that were upgraded. You only get dinged by the higher tiers on rebuilds of 21st century equipment that hasn't been around long enough to go through midlife overhaul yet.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7108
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby electricron » Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:52 am

EPA regulations can get confusing! Well, let's list the various ones that might apply, and explain why they don't.
40 CFR Part 86 On Highway (RDCs don't run on highways, doesn't apply)
40 CFR Part 89 Non Road (Only equipment built after the start date for an engine category 1999-2006 depending on the category is affected by the rule. See Note below)
40 CFR Part 92 Locomotives (RDCs have less than 1,006 hp or 750 kW total, rules doen't apply)
40 CFR Part 1039 New and In Use Compression-Ignition Engines (Only equipment built after 2007 is affected by the rule. See Note below)

Note: Because the diesel engines in the ex-TRE RDCs were built before 1996, they don't need to meet any of the EPA Rules, Parts 89 or 1039. If a new engine had or will be needed to be installed, any new engines would. It's when the new engine is built that counts, not when it is installed. Unlike in Part 92 where rebuilding or replacing an old engine of a locomotive makes it effectively a new locomotive.
Of course, the EPA did place limits on the shelf life of engines in the various vendors warehouses, which have all expired by now. So you're going to have to find an old replacement engine from another RDC from which you can rob from Peter to pay Paul to rebuild if you don't want to buy a brand new EPA Tier 4 engine. ;)
electricron
 
Posts: 3818
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby dowlingm » Sat May 06, 2017 8:12 pm

It seems VIA Rail wanted the TRE units. http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/column ... -do-better

Edit: is it possible these guys have a notion that the RDC-2s they picked up in the Moncton bankruptcy sale could be made accessible?
dowlingm
 
Posts: 965
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:42 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby GP40MC1118 » Mon Jun 26, 2017 12:08 pm

Do we know the roadnumber of the TRE RDC that wasn't sold to All-Earth?

d
GP40MC1118
 
Posts: 3295
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:06 pm

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby electricron » Mon Jun 26, 2017 12:53 pm

I don't know, but I suspect the very first, 2001. Here's why......
All but 2007 and 2011 were leased to DCTA. Those leased to DCTA had interior refurbishments, new seat covers and flooring, etc. Those would be the ones AllEarth would want. TriMet would want to install their own seat covers onto the two they bought from AllEarth, therefore it's likely they will get 2007 and 2011. Which means all the others would have had their interiors refurbished, and TRE would probably cherry pick one of them for themselves. Why not the very first one?

Like I wrote earlier, I don't know. If I was the one cherry picking which one not to sell, I would keep 2001, the very first one!

But it could have been either 2007 or 2011, one of the two they didn't lease to DCTA, or any of them. I guess we'll know for sure when they start arriving at their destinations and photos are published or someone publishes a new photo of the one remaining in Irving.
electricron
 
Posts: 3818
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby dgvrengineer » Thu Jul 20, 2017 7:57 am

12 Budd RDC cars on the rear of a eastbound BNSF freight at LaPlata, MO at 7:50am CDT today. Headed to Vermont?
dgvrengineer
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 10:22 am

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby electricron » Thu Jul 20, 2017 3:38 pm

dgvrengineer wrote:12 Budd RDC cars on the rear of a eastbound BNSF freight at LaPlata, MO at 7:50am CDT today. Headed to Vermont?

10 of the 12 should be, 2 should be heading towards Portland, Oregon. Whether the last two go all the way to Vermont or not is questionable....., unless All Earth wishes to cherry pick the two heading for Portland in Vermont. I could see those two being switched off near Chicago, because the cherry picking should have occurred in Irving at the TRE yard.
Let me repeat what I wrote earlier, TRE 2007 and 2011 were not leased to DCTA, and still have the TRE interiors installed in 1996. The rest had DCTA interior renovations done in 2011, 15 years later. I'm thinking it will be those two that will be heading towards Portland - as TriMet will want to install their own interiors, and install their PTC systems. AllEarth will not need to install PTC if they keep the number of passenger trains down to 6 round trips per railroad corridor.
If Amtrak eventually runs a second train through, either originating in Boston or New York, that would count for two round trips from Montpelier through Essex to St. Albans. That would still allow an additional four round trips for commuter trains ( which could be 2 in the morning and 2 in the afternoon). on those tracks. Those 4 round trips would still allow 2 more round trips on the tracks from Essex to Burlington. Depending upon how Vermont sets up their commuter rail system, and whether they use Burlington or Essex as their hub of operations, they could run up to 10 round trips trains.
electricron
 
Posts: 3818
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: VT Burlington - Montpelier - St. Albans Commuter Rail

Postby Rockingham Racer » Thu Jul 20, 2017 3:52 pm

Reportedly they were on a BNSF train headed to KC. That's the long way from Dallas to Portland, OR.
User avatar
Rockingham Racer
 
Posts: 2865
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 9:25 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion - Passenger Rail

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests