Turboliners

actually turboliners are running not to far from Bahgdad , i believe Iran has a set of french built ones .

RMadisonWI wrote:I don't see how Amtrak could "fail" to run the Empire Corridor. NY doesn't currently contract with Amtrak to run the corridor, which is probably the #1 reason why Metro-North doesn't run it now (that is, NY gets the service for "free").

This is why I always laugh when letters to the editor say Amtrak is too expensive on the ALB/NYP corridor and Metronorth could do it better/cheaper.

I guess folks somehow think MN makes a profit.

Greg Moore wrote:

RMadisonWI wrote:I don't see how Amtrak could "fail" to run the Empire Corridor. NY doesn't currently contract with Amtrak to run the corridor, which is probably the #1 reason why Metro-North doesn't run it now (that is, NY gets the service for "free").

This is why I always laugh when letters to the editor say Amtrak is too expensive on the ALB/NYP corridor and Metronorth could do it better/cheaper.

I guess folks somehow think MN makes a profit.

The two above quotes are absolutely right on the mark.
Noel Weaver

I wonder if it would have been more economical for New York to rebuild these DMU sets rather than the Turboliners. I'm sure they could've been fixed up nicely for 110 mph service, if not 125!

SPVs? Nah, no hope in those. Don't forget the alternate meaning for that acronym, "Seldom-Powered Vehicles"...

Modern DMUs can do decent 125-mph service (think Flexliner), but anything running in and out of NY Penn will have to be dual-mode as well. (Of course, the Flexliners can do EMU/DMU dual-mode...but I think that if you were to try a Metroliner/SPV EMU/DMU dual-mode setup back then, someone would have tried some way to mess it up.)

Nothing to stop them from being rebuilt as decent trains though (other than lack of money). I'm sure the bad parts could be replaced with tried-and true diesel equipment... the carbodies are just regular Amtubes.

I just came across this brief mention of the Turboliner fiasco.

Frustratingly, 2005 looks it may well be another of year of little or no progress on the many goals that we support to improve rail service in New York State. With the State/Amtrak lawsuit slowly progressing towards a 2006 trial date, we can only hope that both sides can put their differences aside and agree to an out-of-court settlement as quickly as possible. Barring such a settlement, it is highly unlikely that we will see NYSDOT and Amtrak working together any time soon.


2006?! So, does this mean that there is no chance of the Turboliners leaving storage before 2006? Talk about a boondoggle...this waste of taxpayer funds is outrageous!

http://www.israrail.org.il/english/index.html

Somewhere deep in this thread, we discussed the feasability of Amtrak acquiring Danish built Flexliner equipment. Such equipment is the mainstay of the Israeli Railway passenger operations.

After reviewing Schedule and fares (did they use the same website designer as did Amtrak, or what?), it appears that the longest run they have is Tel Aviv Haifa, or some 80 miles if even that. Tel Aviv Jerusalem is a like distance.

In short, simply because this equipment is suitable for the short distances within Israel harldy means it is suitable for Amtrak use, save CHI-MKE or NHV-SPF. Possibly some local initiative may have differing ideas, pull the strings they must to get FRA waivers, order the equipment, and proffer such on Amtrak, taking a page out of the Albany playbook, capriciously announce "run it".

But in any event, as soon as the boys and girls (remember Israel has female combat soldiers) decide it's time to put the pop guns away for a while, it appears there will need be another Flexliner order. From vie wing TV news clips, some of that equipment, shall we say, "got taken out".

Gilbert B Norman wrote:http://www.israrail.org.il/english/index.html

Somewhere deep in this thread, we discussed the feasability of Amtrak acquiring Danish built Flexliner equipment...In short, simply because this equipment is suitable for the short distances within Israel harldy means it is suitable for Amtrak use, save CHI-MKE or NHV-SPF. Possibly some local initiative may have differing ideas, pull the strings they must to get FRA waivers, order the equipment, and proffer such on Amtrak, taking a page out of the Albany playbook, capriciously announce "run it".

http://www.trainweb.org/washarp/demoric3.html

I never had a chance to ride it as it was always sold out but I did see it pass through as I was living in Corvallis (near Albany) at the time. Have a few pictures of it. It also made some tours on the area's branchlines to try and drum up support for commuter rail service.

Oregon was seriously considering using the IC3 - and it's probably better sized for the Portland-Eugene route than the Talgo trains. I'm not sure exactly what killed it off other than funding, and Washington's desire to go with the Talgos. However, I believe FRA requirements have tightened up since, and they are not compliant with current rules.

hsr_fan wrote: 2006?! So, does this mean that there is no chance of the Turboliners leaving storage before 2006? Talk about a boondoggle...this waste of taxpayer funds is outrageous!

I've seen no sign they'll come out of storage any time soon.

However, it does appear State Senator Bruno's latest take on 'high speed' rail is perhaps the most realistic and is focusing on things like signals, grade-crossings, etc.

I'd still love to see 110 mph running speed south of Hudson more than 125 north of it.

110 mph running speed to NYC including stops would blow away the 2 hour barrier.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:In short, simply because this equipment is suitable for the short distances within Israel harldy means it is suitable for Amtrak use, save CHI-MKE or NHV-SPF. Possibly some local initiative may have differing ideas, pull the strings they must to get FRA waivers, order the equipment, and proffer such on Amtrak, taking a page out of the Albany playbook, capriciously announce "run it".

Maybe something similar to the Canadian LRC or the British HST would've been more fitting? Didn't in fact Amtrak have a couple of LRC sets, where were these used?

The only "off the shelf"; "take itor leave it' or otherwise same as when UENI walk into the dealer to purchase an auto, foreign sourced equipment Amtrak has ever acquired were two ANF Turbos from French sources. This equipment was so off the shelf that the "potties' were labeled "WC" and the operating instructions and maintenance manuals were written in French. This equipment operated under FRA waiver (but they did have US style couplers on the power units). Four additional sets were acquired from same source, but these were modified to meet Amtrak requirements prior to delivery.

Other equipment acquired that have incorporated foreign sourced components and technology are the quite successful AEM-7 electric locomotives, the 'adequately successful' GE Genesis diesel locomotives, and both the HHP-8 and Acela Power units; regarding which can best be stated "the jury is still out". Trainsets are of course the Turbos that are the focus of these twelve pagesof discussion.

Amtrak has tested numerous foreign sourced locomotives and train sets. Locomotives tested were both a French and Sweedish electric locomotive, Trainsets tested have included a Canadian LRC set, a Sweedish tilt mechanism equipped set, a German ICE set, and the earlier-noted Danish IC-3 DMU set. No Asian sourced equipment has been tested to date.

It seems that the underlying "foreign source" philosophy prevailing in Congress is that foreign technology is OK, but the equipment must be at least assembled here in the US. After all, this presents more appropriate "photo ops' for the pols, than, say, equipment being off loaded from a maritime vessel.

Hope this helps Mr. US Fan; corrections and additions will be noted with due respect.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:

After reviewing Schedule and fares (did they use the same website designer as did Amtrak, or what?), it appears that the longest run they have is Tel Aviv Haifa, or some 80 miles if even that. Tel Aviv Jerusalem is a like distance.

The Israel Railways webpage looks distinctly 1990s, i.e. a bit clunky in design (though not necessarily in usability), mixing typefaces and linking to Excel spreadsheets. Blue is the "in" color right now -- Amtrak is blue, VIA Rail is blue too, Railroad.net is blue, Jetblue is blue, even Southwest (orange) is shifting its interiors towards blue. Windows XP was very blue, Vista was going to be gray but now it's back to light blue.

Other equipment acquired that have incorporated foreign sourced components and technology are the quite successful AEM-7 electric locomotives, the 'adequately successful' GE Genesis diesel locomotives, and both the HHP-8 and Acela Power units; regarding which can best be stated "the jury is still out". Trainsets are of course the Turbos that are the focus of these twelve pagesof discussion.

What was foreign about the Genesis? Almost everything has an imported component nowadays, but the Genesis was designed in the US, wasn't it?

Back to the Turboliners -- it is my impression that the deeper a dispute gets into ligitation, the lawyers tend to dictate the settlement more than management does.

Trucks were made by M.A.K. in kiel Germany, Now Vosloh.

Some mentioned the Danish IC3 MU sets - I rode them around Denmark and was very pleased. I would not have any problem riding these sets 200+miles. So although they not be used for runs that long, I don't see it being an issue.