Railroad Forums 

  • Commuter Rail Electrification

  • Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.
Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: sery2831, CRail

 #1567636  by Diverging Route
 
During a recent webcast, TrainRiders Northeast noted they have budgeted 14 minutes for the engine change at New Haven for their proposed Boston North Station to NY Penn service (via the Grand Junction, Worcester, Springfield, Hartford, New Haven).
 #1567681  by nomis
 
New Haven station has a physical plant that makes engine changes efficient for both East and West bound through trains. That 15 minutes was even with the addition/subtraction of a coach off the head end of the consist in one cut for the Vermonter.

Unless you are going to alter the physical plant with switches mid-platform, you will not be able to achieve anywhere close to that level of efficiency in stub-ended terminals.
 #1568760  by CRail
 
Nonsense. There is zero reason you can't cut cars in a station, do a class 1 inspection, and send it out again within the time frame a set typically lays over anyways. All you'd need for the station to be staffed with a full mechanical crew.
 #1568849  by Trinnau
 
That carries it's own risk in the inspection uncovering defects that aren't easy fixes, you don't want that in the terminal. Cut and drop to ground air/ground power to keep the test and the internal coach temperatures moderated. Still likely requires a mechanical crew.
 #1568914  by CRail
 
Actually I said the wrong thing, I meant a class 1A inspection, which is required any time the consist changes. If said equipment might fail that test, you don't want to be on it. I agree you'd want to keep the stuff on house air and power but that's not going to get you out of conducting the required tests. There's always the chance of a fluke, but you're typically not going to discover something after putting a train together that was not discovered in the previous maintenance inspection. Just like the required brake test every time a train changes ends, I've never seen one fail on the road. When I have seen it fail, it's been a valve or cut out cock improperly set.
 #1568934  by Trinnau
 
I think we're on the same page as to process here but for clarification sake the test required when adding pre-tested cars or swapping ends is the same, it's a Class II (49 CFR 238.317). The scenario we're discussing here is item 4 after the morning rush and item 3 prior to the PM rush.
§ 238.317 Class II brake test.
(a) A Class II brake test shall be performed on a passenger train when any of the following events occurs:

(1) Whenever the control stand used to control the train is changed; except if the control stand is changed to facilitate the movement of a passenger train from one track to another within a terminal complex while not in passenger service. In these circumstances, a Class II brake test shall be performed prior to the train's departure from the terminal complex with passengers;

(2) Prior to the first morning departure of each commuter or short-distance intercity passenger train where a Class I brake test remains valid as provided in § 238.315(a)(1);

(3) When previously tested units (i.e., cars that received a Class I brake test within the previous calendar day and have not been disconnected from a source of compressed air for more than four hours) are added to the train;

(4) When cars or equipment are removed from the train; and

(5) When an operator first takes charge of the train, except for face-to-face relief.
 #1572794  by ElectricTraction
 
Amtrak's engine changes at New Haven and Washington are typically scheduled in the 20-30 minute range, but I'm not sure it really takes that long, I think some of it is just schedule slop/padding before venturing out onto single track lines where they want to be more on schedule.

Interestingly, the ability to make and break EMU consists isn't exactly a major selling point for EMU operations. Generally, MN just runs larger sets and doesn't make and break them and still benefits from all of the other benefits of EMUs.

Diesel push/pull is the slowest and dirtiest way to run a commuter train, and should only be used for a handful of long and thin routes like the Old Colony and Greenbush lines. But with electrics, if you put enough horsepower, you can get close to EMU performance, although EMUs are the king performance wise, assuming they have adequate traction power. LIRR has many areas that don't, so they run their EMUs at half acceleration, and MN has areas limited to only 6 cars, whereas MBTA would be running on 25kV AC, so that should help to be able to run them at full acceleration speed with full length trainsets.

Generally, single level cars make a lot more sense than multilevel cars, except in the most capacity constrained runs, due to less dwell time at each station. But as a transition, I think it would make sense for MBTA to operate with loco-hauled push-pull, at least for a while, as they phase in single level EMUs, and figure out where each design makes sense. There may be some routes where the MBTA double decker coach design is necessary to support ridership, and where they could be run with 8-12 cars with two locomotives providing decent acceleration.

Due to the need to electrify in order to build the North-South rail link, all lines except Greenbush and the Old Colony Lines should be fully electrified, allowing for one smoothly running system that runs through the rail link, and then separate above ground trackage for Greenbush and Old Colony, as well as Amtrak trains terminating at South Station.

The reliability discussion is puzzling, as electric with EMUs is WAY more reliable than diesel. Yes, it occasionally fails, but redundancy can be built into the design of the system, as it is with Amtrak's Shore Line traction power system. Diesels fail all the time, there's just way more to fail, and a single-locomotive electric push-pull would be somewhere in the middle.

Except for weird fringe cases where seasonal or low-volume service is provided, platform height and length standardization should be done across all commuter rail lines. Naturally, this is mostly only a problem in the Northeast, as everywhere else uses low-level platforms, and they are generally easier and cheaper to make longer. In the MBTA's case, standardization of length for high-level platforms as was done with Old Colony and Greenbush makes total sense, and would further improve the schedules with less dwell time.
 #1572805  by R36 Combine Coach
 
ElectricTraction wrote: Thu Jun 03, 2021 3:23 pm Interestingly, the ability to make and break EMU consists isn't exactly a major selling point for EMU
operations.
That usually works only if there are multiple branches on the same line (such as the Lackawanna to
Dover and Gladstone).

Even electrified New Canaan was a shuttle through the years except some peak through service.
 #1572853  by Rockingham Racer
 
ElectricTraction wrote: Thu Jun 03, 2021 3:23 pm Amtrak's engine changes at New Haven and Washington are typically scheduled in the 20-30 minute range, but I'm not sure it really takes that long, I think some of it is just schedule slop/padding before venturing out onto single track lines where they want to be more on schedule.

AFAIK, the engine change at New Haven disappeared with the electrification to Boston. The New Haven RR did in 7, Amtrak about twice as long.
 #1572898  by 8th Notch
 
Rockingham Racer wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 5:17 am
ElectricTraction wrote: Thu Jun 03, 2021 3:23 pm Amtrak's engine changes at New Haven and Washington are typically scheduled in the 20-30 minute range, but I'm not sure it really takes that long, I think some of it is just schedule slop/padding before venturing out onto single track lines where they want to be more on schedule.

AFAIK, the engine change at New Haven disappeared with the electrification to Boston. The New Haven RR did in 7, Amtrak about twice as long.
Through Springfield, Vermonter, and 67/66 (occasionally) still do power swap in NHV. The New Haven RR did in a fraction of the time because blue flag protection did not exist back then to the extent that it does now.
 #1572929  by ElectricTraction
 
8th Notch wrote: Fri Jun 04, 2021 2:42 pmThrough Springfield, Vermonter, and 67/66 (occasionally) still do power swap in NHV. The New Haven RR did in a fraction of the time because blue flag protection did not exist back then to the extent that it does now.
Exactly. It's only a few trains a day, not a few dozen, but it's still the same procedure regardless. There is also Philly/Harrisburg that I forgot about before.
 #1573196  by BandA
 
Should be able to use technology to speed up the engine swaps: "...robots, with LASERs!" can do the scurrying around, plugging & unplugging cables.
 #1576022  by skranish
 
The Amtrak Siemens train set order will include 'dual mode' locomotives, which would be ideal for BON-SPG-NHV-NYP service. I cannot say much about the hybrid/battery train sets until we know more about their specs.
On a side note, one use of hybrid/battery sets may be layovers at remote locations such as Brunswick, ME. There is usually local opposition to layover yards because of noise and fumes. This would sidestep the issue, without requiring extensive 'ground power' service.
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 29