CtDOT Fleet Plans - Coaches

David Benton wrote:The case for electrification may change quite rapidly in the next few years, as high carbon pricing becomes more necessary.

At the moment it appears that pricing for renewables will beat everyone to the punch.

In other "on topic" news I would imagine the first cars should be ready for initial testing and delivery within a few weeks.

ConnDOT will move the Shoreliner I's to the New Haven - Springfield service as MN/ConnDOT Bi-level loco hauled stock order is made and delivered,
that will allow the leased MBB's drop into "T" west service Springfield - Greenfield.
(as long as BBD doesn't screw up the UNICORN NJY EMU order! )

The next question for Siemens will be: Will their cars Fit in GCT if Amtrak diverts to GCT???

Backshophoss wrote: (as long as BBD doesn't screw up the UNICORN NJY EMU order! )

It won't be screwed up, but it'll be sub-optimal. NJT's too in bed with BBD to actually complain about a bad product from them.

The next question for Siemens will be: Will their cars Fit in GCT if Amtrak diverts to GCT???

I'm sure they already have an answer, and that answer is 'yes'. They didn't design the Brightline stock for just the Brightline...

The real question is who else bids for the next gen corridor order. Siemens no doubt has the inside track. Besides them, maybe Stadler (it's not them, but they seem to want the US market pretty badly), Bombardier (will be rejected), Alstom (could be the dark horse - a loco-hauled set based on their Acela replacement?), CAF (stop laughing, though I honestly think the whole story on the VIIs isn't getting out), Talgo (no), CCRC (political non-starter).

The cars are next gen spec compliant on dimiensions as I understand it. If those specs can clear NYG then that may be your answer.

Jenny on a M2 wrote:That said, I agree with eolesen 200% that this isn't the place to have this discussion...the MNR board is. Mods, would you support moving this discussion fork over to the Hartford Line thread or maybe even starting a new topic over there?

Your thoughtful admin complies...

For Siemens CA/IL/Midwest fleet replacement discussion: viewtopic.php?f=46&t=166354" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Discussion of Amfleet I replacement: viewtopic.php?f=46&t=167954" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why, thank you! Such service!

Nasadowsk wrote:

daybeers wrote:I highly doubt the New Haven-Springfield Line will ever be electrified: it's not worth it.

njt/mnrrbuff wrote:The Springfield Line will never get electrified. There's probably no need for it to.

At 34 trains a day between Hartford and New Haven already, there's a good case for it. That's a few more a day than the Keystone Corridor. Only issue is the M-8s can't go faster than 100mph. There's nothing that says that CT has to buy M-8s, though, other than some economy of scale with maintenance (maybe).

Frequency has little to do with electrification. Out in Chicago they operate probably 60+/day on the BNSF to Naperville behind diesels without a problem. And the LIRR handles 40+/day with diesels on the Port Jeff- on a single-track line, to boot.

The two primary benefits of electrification are higher speed and faster acceleration. Barring an absolutely massive grade-crossing-elimination project the Springfield line is never going to be a 150mph railroad, so you can cross off higher speed as a benefit. And the stations on the Springfield Line aren't really so close that the electric's fast acceleration is necessary. We're not talking the Stamford Local here, with a station every mile and a half between Old Greenwich and Mount Vernon.

Remember, the Keystone Corridor was electrified by the PRR back in the 1930's, in steam days. A far different calculus applied back then.

Electrification generally has a higher base cost (both capital and maintenance) than diesel, but the marginal cost of operations is often lower. On a purely cost perspective, the breakover point for passenger operations is somewhere in the range of 20-40 movements per track per day. However, there are lots of other considerations. Freight often complicates electrification (especially on privately-owned corridors), and the high upfront cost often discourages otherwise worthwhile projects. In other cases - steep grades, lots of tunnels, short stop spacing, >125mph speeds - electrification may have benefits even at lower frequencies. In certain cases (the retention of the San Francisco trolleybus system, and electrification near Spokane), cheaply available hydroelectricity also changed the cost balance.

The Springfield Line is planned to soon have 25+ daily operations per track, and there are certainly operational benefits to allowing electric through service and environmental/health benefits to removing diesel emissions from populated areas (especially since these trains should be reducing auto emissions). I suspect that once we see what level of service there is actually demand for, there will be a public conversation about electrification. Until we're at full operational level, though, it's just speculation.

In general, many of the stops on the Springfield Line aren't that close to each other, but there are some exceptions. Even stations that are close to each other-it's not like the Stamford Locals. It's also not like NJT's former Erie Lackawanna electric lines either. Having been living in Montclair a while, I know that once you get railroad east of Montclair State University down to Watsessing Avenue Station, the stops are extremely close to each other, many of them, in fact, being no more than 4/5ths of a mile from each other. Between Upper Montclair and Mountain Avenue station, that's 2/5ths of a mile. Since the Montclair Connection opened up, the electrified stretch of the Montclair-Boonton Line is literally like a enhanced version of a light rail line because of the spacing between stops, making MUs more suitable for locals but ALP hauled consists make up the Midtown Direct trains and those ALP46s and 45DPs have good acceleration. Charger and Siemens consists would work great on Amtrak trains. As for the CDOT owned commuter trains, I think the Shoreliners would do quite well operating on the SPG Line. There are multiple center door CDOT owned Shoreliners that aren't that old and they could be considered for Ctrail service, especially if CDOT is broke to order brand new equipment for Ctrail trains in the short term.

Even the oldest CDOT coaches the end doors were frame up rebuilt by Bombardier not to long ago and are good for at least another 20 years.

the overhaul of GP40-2h and current overhaul of P40's will extend their life by at least 15 years.
So unless someone comes up with concrete info about replacements this whole tread is just buff blah blah blah

Note: I made this topic to discuss fleet plans on coaches, not on electrification, which was beaten to death in the original NHHS thread. So let's leave that out of this topic. Otherwise, by all means, start a separate electrification topic.

This topic is also not on motive power (thus, the title "coaches").

At least on the CtDOT-supported Amtrak service on their New-Haven Springfield shuttle, the service is short a couple of cars. And the MBB's are leased. Thus, the topic.

As has been mentioned elsewhere, it's likely that as MNRR replaces their older push-pull Bombardier coaches, they'll likely migrate to CtDOT services. I could even see them on SLE, as the end doors would be useful on curved high level platforms (a problem they're going to have at New London if they ever get enough M8's to run them there).

If Shoreliners happen to come back to SLE, it won’t be the first time that that has happened. Of course, it would be nice when M8s enter revenue service on SLE. The Shoreliners would definitely do well on the Hartford Line service, especially with many platforms being high level platform.

The ConnDOT Transportation Infrastructure Capital Plan (as of 9/30/2018) includes the following interesting line -- found here https://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?a=1383&Q=454340

Project - DOT0300
Route - All
Town- Various
Description - Rail Fleet (111 coaches @ $5M each)
Total Project Cost - $550,000,000
FFY2020 Fed & State - $550,000,000
FFY2020 Fed - $0
FFY2020 State - $550,000,000
Funding Source - Ramp Up

I don't think this project has a funding source yet, but I could be wrong.

Would 111 coaches be enough for MN (ConnDOT branches), SLE (if needed at all, post M-8s) and the HL?

lets see If New CDOT commisionerJoe Giulietti can get that budget request past the dream state and bankrupt CT legislation.

Currently CDOT has 49 MN pool cars (one cab car totalled), 24 SLE Mafersa cars , and 10 leased MBB cars
so 111 new MLV's would be one hell of overreach .

to be eligible for Federal funding the cars would need to be build in USA that means all of it not like NJT cars which were build in Lapocatier and assembled in Plattsburg.