future electrification routes?

eolesen wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 2:48 pm

Railjunkie wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 12:47 am Allow me to point something else out to you instant power on a freight train can be good and bad. Most of what I'm thinking is bad, broken knuckles, pull aparts, drawbars. To much power all at once and these things happen.

Or worse, you stringline...

You really have to work at that one. Never run 100+ car freight trains heaviest thing I've ever done is a loaded welded rail train, interesting and took a bit to get accustomed to. Train handling being the biggest.

I don't think this is a cohesive argument. China routinely operates 2.6km long trains, using AAR knuckles and electrics, and tested up to 4km long ones. Similarly, South Africa has few problems operating electrics on trains 3.7km long. Too much at once is driver error which is possible on any form of power.

eolesen wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2024 9:39 pmNope. Not even close.

You really seem to enjoy projecting onto other people.

eolesen wrote: ↑Tue Nov 12, 2024 9:46 pmYeah, not so fast. Literally. Track geometry (curvature and grade) are what ultimately drive operating speeds in the hills, not the capability of the locomotives.

Not when your train is going 9mph up a grade and your MAS is 30 or more. Hotshot intermodals are often over-powered so that they can keep schedule, but it doesn't make sesne for most trains with diesel at 4400HP a unit and a lot of diesel fuel burned. With electrics you'd get 7,000-10,000HP per unit.

Railjunkie wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2024 12:47 am Point being the power desk knows the length, tonnage and territory the train is going to traverse. It will only give it just enough to get the job done. Train crews can work for 12 hours and if it takes 12 hours to move a train across a subdivision the railroad does not care. Your theory on wire is not going to make a damn bit of difference, if it takes 16.000HP to move that train then 16,000HP it will be.

You need a certain amount of tractive effort to move a train. Diesels are 4400HP. An electric with the same tractive effort would have 7,000-10,000HP, meaning that they wouldn't be able to pull more, but they would be able to pull it up a hill much faster.

It matters for line fluidity on busy mainlines. You could significantly increase fluidity and capacity when you can get trains up hills consistently at MAS without having to slow down to grind up the hill.

ElectricTraction wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2024 12:08 am You really seem to enjoy projecting onto other people.

Nah, I really just enjoy calling out people who try repeatedly to position their academic theories as being superior to basic industry facts/tenets, operating practices and collective bargaining principles.

If you can't say something in two sentences or less, it's probably not worth typing out the third or fourth sentences.

eolesen wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2024 1:43 amNah, I really just enjoy calling out people who try repeatedly to position their academic theories as being superior to basic industry facts/tenets, operating practices and collective bargaining principles.

Nice try changing subjects.

If you can't say something in two sentences or less, it's probably not worth typing out the third or fourth sentences.

That's just not how the world works.

It doesn't matter how your engine is powered or how many hp your engine can do if the boss says run in the optimizer mode your never going to see the fast speeds. What is the cost to benefit ratio that the beancounters want to run at?

Electric short term ratings are far superior to diesel. So you don't need extra engines for the whole route, to cover one or two hills.
Mountainous territory is where it shines, for the above reason, and the regenerative braking.
I would say a section like the Cajon pass would pay for itself within a time that would please the bean counters.

The Southwest Chief would require long-distance dual-mode locomotives because of Raton Pass. Amtrak should also rebuild the old Santa Fe from Ash Fork to Crookton in order to directly serve Williams and the Grand Canyon which likely wouldn't be electrified either. A half mile of wire on either end or a long lead paralell to the Transcon would allow Amtrak to stop and switch to electric off of the Transcon's main tracks.

Red Wing wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2024 7:43 pmIt doesn't matter how your engine is powered or how many hp your engine can do if the boss says run in the optimizer mode your never going to see the fast speeds. What is the cost to benefit ratio that the beancounters want to run at?

They are optimizing power and speed because diesel fuel is expensive. When you have cheap electricity don't need to optimize and you have the option of keep speeds up so that faster trains aren't stuck behind slower ones.

David Benton wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2024 9:13 pmMountainous territory is where it shines, for the above reason, and the regenerative braking.

Definitely. Mountainous terrain is where you see the speed advantage of electric over diesel chugging up hills.

Suspect that Diesel fuel is going to remain about the same for the next 4 years. One problem of CAT wires is maintenance of the tracks. Just watching CSX do some rail replacement here the amount of equipment that would foul the CAT wire is surprising. Had no idea how many higher cranes work well above the CAT clearance lines. CAT would mean different equipment with height restriction hardware / software to prevent fouling the CAT.

west point wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2024 10:59 pmSuspect that Diesel fuel is going to remain about the same for the next 4 years. One problem of CAT wires is maintenance of the tracks. Just watching CSX do some rail replacement here the amount of equipment that would foul the CAT wire is surprising. Had no idea how many higher cranes work well above the CAT clearance lines. CAT would mean different equipment with height restriction hardware / software to prevent fouling the CAT.

Seems that Amtrak, NJT, Metro-North, CalTrain, and Denver RTD are able to maintain their trackage. Even if you discount CalTrain and RTD since they are relatively new, Metro-North, Amtrak, and NJT are operating electrification systems that are not. I believe MN and Amtrak occasionally turn the wire off for maintenance during overnight hours, and the few trains that run during this time are run with diesels.

west point wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2024 10:59 pmSuspect that Diesel fuel is going to remain about the same for the next 4 years.

There's a good chance diesel prices will be driven down, and they're already down about 10% year over year.

There's no questioning the financial and futures markets responded positively when the election results came out last week. The dollar had one of its best weeks in ten years, and energy analysts are predicting that oil could be down in the $60 range by next year (it's currently around $70-75, and peaked in the $110-120 range about two years ago).

And that's before any increased domestic production kicks in, which just about everyone expects to go up after Trump takes office January.

Also, don't overlook that hydro at Glen Canyon and Hoover are both at risk due to continuing droughts in the upper Colorado River Basin, and both are now only about 400 ft above dead-pool levels and their hydro plants are operating at reduced output. Add in coal plants continuing to go offline, and I don't know how anyone can project electricity getting cheaper at the same pace that oil will.

There are mega solar farms producing electricity at o.5 cents per kwh.
Most USA fracking fields are not economic below $ 70 a barrel, so you will be subsiding them to end up with more expensive energy.
But just ask eastern coalminers how trustworthy political slogans are.

It just makes me wonder how much could’ve, or would’ve been changed if the PRR did somehow electrify to Pittsburgh at a certain stage, and how much that may have changed for Conrail (and maybe Amtrak) later on.

What would the system be like today if that had been achieved?

Almost certainly a different operating system . Fast and frequent , rather than long drags.
Probably would have held onto a lot more traffic that has gone to trucking.