Amtrak Empire, LIRR, MNRR/CTDOT Dual Mode Procurement - Charger Variants

On the AC EMU fleet, CDOT and NJT should create a pool fleet that runs on NJT and to NHV for run-through service. Running through to LIRR would be too expensive and cumbersome to have an even more bespoke fleet that then wouldn't fit into GCT-Madison or Brooklyn, but NHV is a piece of cake. It's AC all the way. Combined with a rebuilt NYP post-MSG, Gateway, and a rebalancing of traffic to Hoboken, Brooklyn, and LIC, the run-through could significantly increase capacity and decrease congestion at NYP and make a much more fluid rail system throughout the region.

I've been doing some research on the ALC-42E's (Charger variant) for use in the New York Metro area. As everyone knows, the E versions will be dual modes (love them or hate them). There will be two variants of the "E's" for Amtrak's National Network and certain state-supported corridors:

https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/in ... trak-airo/

-the Charger locomotive is coupled to a powered, pantograph-equipped passenger coach called an APV (Auxiliary Power Vehicle). The APV has an underfloor transformer to handle the Northeast Corridor’s 25kV and 12.5 kV AC catenary power, a 4QS (Four-Quad Chopper), and four powered axles with AC traction motors. The APV is connected to the Charger locomotive with a DC link. In AC catenary mode, the Charger’s diesel engine and traction alternator are shut down; the APV is powering its own four traction motors as well as the four on the Charger, for a total of eight. Siemens calls this “distributed traction.”
-Battery-hybrid push/pull trainsets equipped with a Charger locomotive and a Battery Coach with a DC Link but without powered axles. The Battery Coach supplies traction power to the Charger locomotive on routes or locations (such as some stations in non-electrified territory) where diesel emissions are prohibited or restricted, for example, on Empire Service trains originating in Penn Station New York that currently use dual-mode (diesel/third-rail) P32AC-DMs.

The benefit of using a power trailer is that you still get the full utility of a diesel engine, while being able to operate on catenary where available. I'm not sure what the range on a standard Charger is, but the benefit here is huge. You also can service the engine separately from the trailer. Simplifies maintenance it seems.

So obviously, these will be used to bridge non-powered gaps and eliminate engine changes at Hartford, as well as bring trains into Penn from NYS-supported Empire Service. They could be used for new service such as those proposed to Scranton over the Lackawanna Cutoff, and new Inland service HFD-SPG-WOR-BOS.

Now, about the two NYC area MTA commuter services: the MTA's LIRR and MNRR. There's no mention anywhere of an ALC-42E being used with a trailer car for DC. So I guess what they're going for could be called an "SC-44E".

From Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_C ... (New_York)

In December 2020, New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority approved a Federal Transit Administration-funded $335 million contract for 27 dual-mode locomotives based on the Charger design. The new locomotives will replace the 27 existing GE Genesis locomotives used on the Metro-North Railroad's Hudson Line, Harlem Line, and Danbury Branch; they will use third rail electric power to enter Grand Central Terminal. The first 19 locomotives are scheduled to be completed in mid-2026. The contract has options for 144 additional locomotives: 32 for Metro-North, 66 for the Long Island Rail Road, 20 for the New York State Department of Transportation (for Amtrak Empire Service trains), and 25 for the Connecticut Department of Transportation.[68][69]

Forgot this from an MTA Board Meeting:

METRO-NORTH RAILROAD
COMMITTEE ACTIONS and PRESENTATIONS
SUMMARY for DECEMBER 2020

Siemens Mobility, Inc. $334,873,148 Metro-North Railroad on behalf of itself, Long Island Rail Road (LIRR), Connecticut Department of Transportation (CDOT) and New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) requests Board approval to award a competitively-solicited contract to Siemens Mobility Inc. (SMO) in the total amount of $334,873,148 for the design, manufacture, testing, and delivery of 19 dualmode locomotives and related locomotive equipment and for the exercise of an initial option for 8 additional locomotives. The contract is funded by a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grant.
Master Page # 5 of 247 - Joint Metro-North and Long Island Committees Meeting 12/16/2020
____________________________________________________________________

Jeff Smith wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 10:15 amI've been doing some research on the ALC-42E's (Charger variant) for use in the New York Metro area. As everyone knows, the E versions will be dual modes (love them or hate them). There will be two variants of the "E's" for Amtrak's National Network and certain state-supported corridors:

Both of those locomotive/trailer combinations sound kind of terrible. The ALP-45DP has proven that a fully functional AC dual-mode locomotive is perfectly practical, and while they make no sense for commuter operations (just electrify everything), that type of locomotive has a legitimate need on Amtrak where services could go well off-corridor into diesel territory. It shouldn't be that hard to create a more fuel efficient version that would be a fully functional 3,600HP diesel and a fully functional 5,000HP electric, at least for shorter routes where they don't need the fuel capacity of an ALC-42.

Meanwhile, the stupid third rail dual-mode debacle continues on. For only a little more than they are spending on these things they could have just electrified Oyster Bay, Port Jeff, Patchogue, Poughkeepsie, and Danbury. The two trains a day to Wassaic could be diesel and originate/terminate at North White Plains, with New York traffic switching.

The SC42-DM is coming.

Why would NYDOT still need 25 units if Amtrak is procuring an Battery-Diesel Electric ICT or will the 25 unit bought for Amtrak Long Distance service...

additional future service?

The 25 locomotives for the Empire Service is just an option in the original contract - NYS is under no obligation to exercise it. Since the Empire Service trains will get the Airo trainsets, NYS would simply just not exercise that option. The LIRR/MNRR Siemens locomotive contract was awarded several months before Amtrak's Airo order, so presumably either the decision to include the Empire Service fleet in the Airo contract wasn't finalized yet, or an option for Empire Service locomotives was included in the LIRR/MNRR contract anyway as a backup.

The Airo trainsets will not help with the LSL or any other train out of NYP that runs through Albany but uses LD equipment (there currently aren't any other than the LSL, but they could choose to add more later).

The other option this NYS option offers is to allow the Airo battery + ACS42E order to be replaced with Airo unpowered sets + SC42DMs (like the Cascades is getting since the Cascades Airo trains will use the existing WSDOT SC44s).

What a bunch of dumb, half-baked solutions. With electrification of commuter rail routes, the only dual mode that should really be needed is an AC dual mode, basically an ALP-45DP that has better fuel economy and bigger fuel tanks for regional services.

ElectricTraction wrote: ↑Sun May 21, 2023 6:31 pm What a bunch of dumb, half-baked solutions. With electrification of commuter rail routes, the only dual mode that should really be needed is an AC dual mode, basically an ALP-45DP that has better fuel economy and bigger fuel tanks for regional services.

You did notice that the SC-42DM has both the electrical pickup and diesel in a single engine, i.e., if its design is dumb, its no dumber than the ALP-45DP, and unlike the ALP-45DP, can run on the 101 miles of the MNRR that are electrified?

RandallW wrote: ↑Sun May 21, 2023 7:15 pm

ElectricTraction wrote: ↑Sun May 21, 2023 6:31 pm What a bunch of dumb, half-baked solutions. With electrification of commuter rail routes, the only dual mode that should really be needed is an AC dual mode, basically an ALP-45DP that has better fuel economy and bigger fuel tanks for regional services.

You did notice that the SC-42DM has both the electrical pickup and diesel in a single engine, i.e., if its design is dumb, its no dumber than the ALP-45DP, and unlike the ALP-45DP, can run on the 101 miles of the MNRR that are electrified?

The current P32DM-AC is also capable of doing that running on 3 rail.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_9HExyle00

I'd just as soon MNRR gets full Airo sets and get rid of the Bombardier coaches. They've got to be approaching Many are over 30 years old; most at least 20: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro-Nor ... ll_coaches

Jeff,

Has Metro North then also ordered Airo/ICT trainsets ?
I thought that only Amtrak has ordered ICT's ?

No. Only Chargers. My point was that they should.

SRich wrote: ↑Sun May 21, 2023 1:36 pm




The SC42-DM is coming.

Why would NYDOT still need 25 units if Amtrak is procuring an Battery-Diesel Electric ICT or will the 25 unit bought for Amtrak Long Distance service...

Interesting to see that the new variant is called the SC42-DM. One thing I noticed is that the option for LIRR has changed from 66 to 65 Locos. This would be an expansion of 20 or so locomotives compared to the 46 delivered (much less are actually in service) DE/DM30's. Also 4200 HP units vs the 3000 of the DE/DM's. This could lead to increases in service and frequency in diesel territory if the options are executed. Hopefully this includes more trains direct to NYP. The next question, possibly for another topic, is what are LIRR plans for increasing the number and availability of passenger cars in diesel territory. I haven't even seen whispers of what a future C5 order would look like.