Pulling trains out of Hudson River tunnels?

The only "spare engine" that I saw parked by the NY Hudson River tunnels was an AEM7 (this was on the NY side - and it was inbetween tunnels and platforms and not one they use for occasional station switching). This is where they used to park a spare diesel for the same purpose a few years ago (before it disappeared).

They used to have a diesel parked in the same location where I noticed the lone AEM7 yesterday evening. The diesel was often called into service to pull the Clockers, with their E60s, out of the tunnels (when the Clockers became clunckers in the tunnel). One would think instead of an AEM7 it should be a diesel on the sidelines for backup - or both for that matter. I spotted this AEM7 last night and said - boy that's odd, and then read the same in the NY Times this morning. They also used to keep a NJT ALP46 on hand at Secaucus. But that was also discontinued a few years ago.

Not sure what comprimising couplers are either - per NY Times. They should only have trouble getting hooked onto the Acela Express I would think. The NJT ALP 46's often lockup when they are dead. I've been on a stuck NJT of this nature and the diesel couldn't pull us/tow us due to the ALP 46's traction being in some sort of lockdown mode.

As per the third rail. When the PRR put catenary through to Penn station, therefore replacing third rail, they had to dig out the base of the tunnels to add clearance for the catenary, which I assume would have made the third rail inoperable at that point. But it was mentioned above that the third rail was recently re-laid in the Hudson River tunnels (from NY to NJ) during their rehab? I always thought it still existed in some form, but could never reconcile this in my mind. I know NJT would like to get their Raritan Valley trains into NY Penn via third rail capability. That's one of THE tunnel's (ARC) objectives.

If the NY Turboliners were running on the NYP to Albany route, rather than sitting in storage, they could free up some dual mode Genesis diesel units and be placed as backups. But I won't get into that debacle.

jp1822 wrote:Not sure what comprimising couplers are either - per NY Times. They should only have trouble getting hooked onto the Acela Express I would think.

NJ Transit's Arrow III MU cars use a non-knuckle coupler, so you could need a compromise coupler to go between the rescue engine (with normal couplers) and the couplers on the MU cars.

The LIRR does something similar on the other side of Penn and into Queens, when they have two diesel protect engines stationed near Harold interlocking.

Acting Amtrak Chief Executive Officer David Hughes said in a letter made public today that the railroad would station alocomotive at Penn Station to retrieve trains that use overhead power if there is a total electrical failure like the one on May25. Amtrak in the future won't let trains into tunnels if electric voltage dips again as it did on June 2 and 3.

DailyRecord.com

<i>If the NY Turboliners were running on the NYP to Albany route, rather than sitting in storage, they could free up some dual mode Genesis diesel units and be placed as backups. But I won't get into that debacle.</i>

Why would you put a mainline diesel into use doing what really is suited for a cheap switcher, geared to a low speed, and ballasted to pull a train?

Seriously, the 'rescue' loco should be something that basically has no real value, and can be dumped there to finish off it's days as a useful unit. No use having a multimillion dollar unit with a long life left on it sitting idle...

Good observation, Phil. If it wasn't for clearance problems an old EMD SD unit at $150-200k? would be fine because 6 axles will allow the traction weight needed to handle the longer trains without needing a second unit. Better visibility on a road switcher too. Put in a standby block heater, take it out switching once a week and you're all set.

Bill

How about those MP15D's that Amtrak got? They would be able to slowly push stuff out.

I don't think there are any 6 axle units left that are lower than 15' 5" so they clear catenary.

Not to be overly realistic, but Doyle McCormack’s Utah 306/NKP 324 RSD4/5 is only 14’5’’ high, 360,000 lbs. 15’0” is about the maximum allowable height. As an Alco however it would need a variance from New York’s railroad smoke regulations :-).

Bill

jp1822 wrote:The NJT ALP 46's often lockup when they are dead. I've been on a stuck NJT of this nature
and the diesel couldn't pull us/tow us due to the ALP 46's traction being in some sort of
lockdown mode.

Will the rescue engine also have the proper laptop computer, since another post (about the
June power problem near Trenton, N.J.) mentioned that a laptop computer is necessary to
release the brakes on an Acela after power is restored?
As for running North Jersey Diesel services into Penn Station, North Jersey Transit put out a
press release at the start of "Boonton" electric service that there was no existing Diesel loco
that could run under the A.C. catenary in the Hudson River tunnels. They must know
something bad about the various Amtrak, Long Island, and New Haven Diesels that run
into Penn Station!

JimBoylan wrote:Will the rescue engine also have the proper laptop computer, since another post (about the
June power problem near Trenton, N.J.) mentioned that a laptop computer is necessary to
release the brakes on an Acela after power is restored?

I was the one that posted that article. My understanding is that under normal circumstances Acelas do not have any problem powering up and releasing breaks when power comes back (indeed another Acela Express passed by us soon after power was restored in the OHE), or even releasing brakes when power is out. That particular Acela set had an additional failure which caused that problem. Of course, since such problems are known to take place occasionally upon power failures, until they fix the control software on the Acelas, they would need some contingency planning to drag an Acela with such a problem out of the tunnel. This may involve carting a laptop plus a technician out from Sunnyside when such a failure occurs in the tunnel again.

We had several rescues of ACELA equipment on MNCR but never needed laptops, hardest thing to do was get the lousy shroud open over coupler.

Amtrak up until several years ago staged two coupled FL-9's as
protect engines in Penn Station for rescues. After the FL-9's were
retired, several "Pumpkin" GP-7/9's were used as protect in a rotation.
Now, since the Pumpkins were retired there has not been any protect
engine in Penn Station for well over a year.
Currently, Amtrak is holding a P32ACDM for protect owing to the
recent power problems over the last 2 weeks.

So it's ok for diesels to run into NYP when acting as protect?

Why cant NJT run their Geeps in?

And there is a 3rd rail in the hudson tunnels right? So the genesis engines could run on the 3rd rail?

amtrakhogger wrote:Amtrak up until several years ago staged two coupled FL-9's as
protect engines in Penn Station for rescues. After the FL-9's were
retired, several "Pumpkin" GP-7/9's were used as protect in a rotation.
Now, since the Pumpkins were retired there has not been any protect
engine in Penn Station for well over a year.
Currently, Amtrak is holding a P32ACDM for protect owing to the
recent power problems over the last 2 weeks.

The P32ACDM are dual mode diesel engines that can run with or without third rail, so this is the best decision Amtrak has made in putting a "rescue engine" in place. Question is - are there enough of the P32ACDM's? This is why I brought up the Turboliner issue - if the Turboliners were running, they would free up the P32ACDM's. But I am sure Amtrak can spare one of these units rather than opening the can of worms with the Turboliner issue.

As for NJT diesels in the Hudson River tunnels - we all know that diesels can't operate in the tunnel, but as a backup for rescue, I think the issue is - would they be able to fit (physically) in the Hudson River tunnels? I believe Amtrak's F40s couldn't fit, and NJT operates many diesels similiar to the F40 design.

PS - I remember seeing those "Pumpkin" diesels on the sidelines of Penn Station. Then as mentioned, they were withdrawn and nothing was put in place afterwards. They used to have to go and rescue the E60s that stalled out in the Hudson River tunnels.

<I>The P32ACDM are dual mode diesel engines that can run with or without third rail, so this is the best decision Amtrak has made in putting a "rescue engine" in place. </I>

No, it's not. It's wasting a very expensive locomotive on something that shouldn't be needed in the first place. It's doing nothing but losing money for Amtrak. There's no reason why a dual mode, 110mph, HEP equipped passenger unit should be basically left sitting around doing a job that's better suited for an old switcher that's otherwise going to be put to pasture (but is nonetheless reliably functional). We're talking pulling a dead train a few thousand feet to get it SOMEWHERE that's not a tunnel. Not pulling that train at high speed to Washington DC. You use something that's got no value for this job.

The LIRR (amazingly enough) got it right - an old, but well maintained pair of locomotives sitting in a siding, that are otherwise useless for any real service.

<i>Question is - are there enough of the P32ACDM's?</i>

No, and GE's not building new ones unless the order is bigger than a certain number (I've heard 10 - 12 units). So far, nobody's stepped up to order enough to get GE to spend a few dozen million on tooling (of course, that cost's eaten by the customer, so a small number order is even more expensive)