ALP-45DP's - Usage and Delivery

ApproachMedium wrote:Lol yellow pantograph sides? What will they come up with next?

The arrows have them too.

sixty-six wrote:

ApproachMedium wrote:Lol yellow pantograph sides? What will they come up with next?

The arrows have them too.

Yea but arent they more like green/neon highlighter yellow? That AMT loco looks like yellow yellow.

Looks like the same color to me. They are new after all, no chance for UV fade yet.

morris&essex4ever wrote:

DutchRailnut wrote:each and every engine needs to do about a 1000 miles in trouble free testing, before its accepted, Im sure NJT has about same requirements.

Did all the 46A's need that much testing?

I know the 46a's were frequently doubled up on revenue trains early on. Probably different for a totally new class of locos.

ApproachMedium wrote:

sixty-six wrote:

ApproachMedium wrote:Lol yellow pantograph sides? What will they come up with next?

The arrows have them too.

Yea but arent they more like green/neon highlighter yellow? That AMT loco looks like yellow yellow.

Depends on the pan. Some are neon, some are yellow.

The 4505 was delivered to Raritan this evening for crew training.

Before anyone gets excited about one seat ride service to NY, remember, Raritan is often where new stuff is often tried out because its a relatively short run with little Amtrak running and mechanical forces are never far away.

The raritan engine house is also quite "central" to the railroad. Makes a decent location for training people from various parts of the system.

ApproachMedium wrote:The raritan engine house is also quite "central" to the railroad. Makes a decent location for training people from various parts of the system.

True, but they generally don't send people who work other lines to other places to get training or anything like that, it would be cheaper to send another loco to their home terminal than to pay everyone deadhead to get out to Raritan. However, Raritan does have the benefit of being able to run the loco up to High Bridge on the weekend and at times during the day and not bother any revenue trains.

I had my P40 training out there and thats what we did on a saturday. Took it up to High Bridge and back after having "hands on" training in the Engine House. It was raining that day, so having the enginehouse over our heads was a nice touch

cruiser939 wrote:

ryanov wrote:Why use a Comet IV cab? Don't they have any working III cabs anymore?

Better question, why does it matter?

It doesn't matter a ton, it just seems it would make sense to use OOS equipment rather than steal from stuff that (presumably) could run revenue.

cruiser939 wrote:

ryanov wrote:

michaelk wrote:I'd love that but someone (Cruiser i think) pointed out that a NEC train is pretty big (could be like 8-10 cars?) and a typical Raritan Valley Line train is relatively much smaller (more like 5?). So they couldn't likely be able to get everyone off a NEC train to transfer to a RVL train to make that work. I'm pretty sure those of us who use the RVL are hosed for the foreseeable future with the possible exception of a midday or weekend train here or there.

A couple of thoughts there are that maybe some people would stay on to Hoboken (don't know) and that you might need a longer RVL train anyway if you're running that particular one into NY. Don't know.

Huh?

I would think some, though how many I don't know, would be willing to stay ON the NEC train and go to Hoboken, and that an RVL train running into NYC might need to be longer than current trains anyway due to demand (which I guess then gives you a "where do you put the NEC passengers?" problem). What do you think would happen if they ran say a 10 car RVL train into NY and routed the NEC train that would have used that slot into Hoboken? No one would stay on to Hoboken and the RVL train would be overwhelmed even with 10 cars?

THe current trend is the train comes in off RVL, people rush to the PATH. In the afternoon, people cram the PATH, then exit to track 5 for RVL train. Would be a godsend for nwk-wtc line PATH riders if some peak RVL trains were extended to/from nyp, allowing for more folks to utilize the PATH line till 10 car operation.

Does this make sense?

I do agree RVL would be the first place for a dual mode trial. The line is already directly connected to NYP, but there's no electricfication yet.

25Hz wrote:THe current trend is the train comes in off RVL, people rush to the PATH. In the afternoon, people cram the PATH, then exit to track 5 for RVL train. Would be a godsend for nwk-wtc line PATH riders if some peak RVL trains were extended to/from nyp, allowing for more folks to utilize the PATH line till 10 car operation.

Does this make sense?

the reason why many of those people rush to the path is that they have jobs in lower Manhattan and therefore bought houses on the RVL because it "fit". If they worked in midtown where Penn would "fit" many would have bought their home on NEC, NJCL, or, more recently, midtown direct stops instead.

Some might pick NYP over PATH to WTC but it wouldn't be that the whole trainload of people would stay on and go to Penn the first day that was an option. Over time it would change (as more midtown people move in along RVL stops and as the economy picks up and more people work in midtown from wherever- and then the real estate prices would go up...) But you can't just change the pattern over night unless something like 9/11 happens.

ryanov wrote:

cruiser939 wrote:

ryanov wrote:

michaelk wrote:I'd love that but someone (Cruiser i think) pointed out that a NEC train is pretty big (could be like 8-10 cars?) and a typical Raritan Valley Line train is relatively much smaller (more like 5?). So they couldn't likely be able to get everyone off a NEC train to transfer to a RVL train to make that work. I'm pretty sure those of us who use the RVL are hosed for the foreseeable future with the possible exception of a midday or weekend train here or there.

A couple of thoughts there are that maybe some people would stay on to Hoboken (don't know) and that you might need a longer RVL train anyway if you're running that particular one into NY. Don't know.

Huh?

I would think some, though how many I don't know, would be willing to stay ON the NEC train and go to Hoboken, and that an RVL train running into NYC might need to be longer than current trains anyway due to demand (which I guess then gives you a "where do you put the NEC passengers?" problem). What do you think would happen if they ran say a 10 car RVL train into NY and routed the NEC train that would have used that slot into Hoboken? No one would stay on to Hoboken and the RVL train would be overwhelmed even with 10 cars?

I can't speak to the NEC trains that go to hoboken but i have ridden on NJCL and RVL trains that continued to Hoboken on the weekends. As a passenger you basically feel like you are hitching a ride on a non-revenue train. The conductors usually quiz you 3 times (in a nice way)- "are you sure you didn't want to change here(newark) for NY?", "Did you really want to go to Hoboken?" I have no idea why no one seems to use those trains. They happened to be helpful to my family as we would get on in Raritan and have family in Hoboken. RVL trains to Hoboken on weekends were great for us- but i totally get why they nuked them.

Back to the dream though- anyone know how long of a train can fit on most platforms on RVL? Can it even do 10 car trains anymore?

25Hz wrote:THe current trend is the train comes in off RVL, people rush to the PATH. In the afternoon, people cram the PATH, then exit to track 5 for RVL train. Would be a godsend for nwk-wtc line PATH riders if some peak RVL trains were extended to/from nyp, allowing for more folks to utilize the PATH line till 10 car operation.

Does this make sense?

10 car operation on PATH? That's not happening anytime soon.