The EGE wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:41 am Viewdiner #68022 "Richmond" on a Bakersfield-bound San Joaquin today at Martinez. The conductor told me it was being used as an axle count car on BNSF. The rest of the consist was a Charger and four California Cars (a pretty standard SJ consist) plus a Comet.I've always wondered, why doesn't Amtrak use old heritage fleet rolling stock as axle count?
Railroad Forums
Viewliner II Delivery/Production
- Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman
Because they don't stock the parts anymore.
gokeefe
Also, they do use H-bags in Illinois service.
gokeefe wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:47 pm Because they don't stock the parts anymore.
[/quote
But why not use anything other than a brand-new dining car?
Surely running a fully-depreciated Amfleet or Horizon...or anything...is cheaper than running a brand-new multi-million dollar car.
And if the Viewliner dining car is being used as an axle car, why not at least sell seats in it or somehow use it for revenue?
Has anyone seen a Bag-Dorm on the CARDINAL or CRESCENT yet?
Andy
Andy
east point wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 5:14 pm So minimum axel counts on CN ? CN please explain the 6 axel loco and the one Siemens car going to Canada as a train ?.I’m not sure if the answer to this but I think the axle count requirement is only for trains on ex-IC routes and over a certain speed. The one car train was a bit puzzling it doesn’t have to go 79.
I may be wrong here, this is conjecture.
The new Acela: It's not Aveliable.
CN's axle counts apparently don't apply to CN's lines in Canada. You don't see VIA running extra cars on its corridor trains, many of which are shorter than Amtrak's.
ApproachMedium wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 1:32 amIsn't it true that the actual size of the contact area between wheel and rail is around the size of a dime anyway? How much smaller can it get?CHTT1 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:39 pm CN's axle counts apparently don't apply to CN's lines in Canada. You don't see VIA running extra cars on its corridor trains, many of which are shorter than Amtrak's.CN is not running this wheel profile that amtrak is running.
bostontrainguy wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 8:54 amIs this a Zeno's Paradox question?
Isn't it true that the actual size of the contact area between wheel and rail is around the size of a dime anyway? How much smaller can it get?
Perhaps if we gave up on the illusion of true high speed rail in the midwest (and the associated stability requirements that drive truck and wheel design) and just built something robust to run the CN and similar corridors at 79. This strikes me as easier than getting the FRA to come off their horse.
The new Acela: It's not Aveliable.
So, what exact wheel profiles are we talking about? The wheels on the new Siemens locomotives? The new Viewliners? CN's axle count requirements go back long before the Chargers were introduced and the only Viewliners on the Chicago-Carbondale line are, ironically, the new diners used in axle count service, also introduced long after CN's regulations, which seem to have originated in the legal department, not the signal department? Is Amtrak changing the wheel profile on the Amfleets and Horizons? What cars and locomotives have these new profiles?
Were talking about the wheel profile on literally every single passenger car, locomotive, baggage car etc. in america that runs on the amtrak network and possibly anything certified to run on it. The new wheel profile helps keep the trucks from hunting in curves, providing a smoother ride. It also helps keep them straight on crappy american track so they dont hunt on straight rails or get harmonic. I think it has something to do with wheel wear in curves at higher speeds as well because it doesn't seem like amtrak is changing wheels as often and you do not hear as many flat spots on the long haul cars as you once did.
It freaking works though. It does exactly what they designed it to do. Its met every single expectation, so far other than this crossing shunting issue. And I will remind you all, that there was shunting issues on some railroads ( i think CN) before this wheel profile change came to be in 2014/15. So with that, this is not a viewliner issue. I think it was actually the FRA who came up with the profile anyhow! But ill look in to that
It freaking works though. It does exactly what they designed it to do. Its met every single expectation, so far other than this crossing shunting issue. And I will remind you all, that there was shunting issues on some railroads ( i think CN) before this wheel profile change came to be in 2014/15. So with that, this is not a viewliner issue. I think it was actually the FRA who came up with the profile anyhow! But ill look in to that
No good deed goes unpunished.
ApproachMedium wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 2:40 am And I will remind you all, that there was shunting issues on some railroads ( i think CN) before this wheel profile change came to be in 2014/15.Agreed, this has been an issue for much longer. In the 1970s there was a similar problem for the RDC running on the Rockford train, also an IC property.
The new Acela: It's not Aveliable.
The EGE wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:41 am Viewdiner #68022 "Richmond" on a Bakersfield-bound San Joaquin today at Martinez. The conductor told me it was being used as an axle count car on BNSF. The rest of the consist was a Charger and four California Cars (a pretty standard SJ consist) plus a Comet.What a waste of money...