• New NY Dual Mode Discussion

  • This forum will be for issues that don't belong specifically to one NYC area transit agency, but several. For instance, intra-MTA proposals or MTA-wide issues, which may involve both Metro-North Railroad (MNRR) and the Long Island Railroad (LIRR). Other intra-agency examples: through running such as the now discontinued MNRR-NJT Meadowlands special. Topics which only concern one operating agency should remain in their respective forums.
This forum will be for issues that don't belong specifically to one NYC area transit agency, but several. For instance, intra-MTA proposals or MTA-wide issues, which may involve both Metro-North Railroad (MNRR) and the Long Island Railroad (LIRR). Other intra-agency examples: through running such as the now discontinued MNRR-NJT Meadowlands special. Topics which only concern one operating agency should remain in their respective forums.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, FL9AC, Jeff Smith

  by Fishrrman
 
My solution for the Hudson line service, both Amtrak and Metro-North:

Put up AC catenary from CP 12 to Rensselaer (or even Schenectady).
Extend existing catenary from the north end of the Empire tunnel to CP 12.

Now...
Amtrak service runs with electrics Penn Station to Albany/Ren. (Use existing design, just order more)

Metro-North changes to M-8 style equipment for Hudson service, with the changeover taking place between CP 11 and CP 12.

Metro-North can now extend service through to Rhinecliff (with connecting bus to Kingston).

No new locomotive technology required and the solution uses less (as in, "no") fossil fuels...
(J.Albert)
  by bostontrainguy
 
Fishrrman wrote: Wed Jul 22, 2020 1:01 pm No new locomotive technology required and the solution uses less (as in, "no") fossil fuels...
(J.Albert)
And what generates the electricity pray tell?
(Just being a wise ass)
  by Jeff Smith
 
The juice is NOT worth the squeeze there, Mr. Fishrrman. Why would MNRR want to replace third rail? M8's carry a weight penalty and are more expensive. Then there's the cost; can you imagine what it would cost? Not just south of Croton, but all the way to Albany and beyond? An ALP-45 obviates the need for any additional infrastructure on either route.
  by west point
 
Not enough round trips to Albany to justify electrification. Now if a way to get jobs ---- Maybe ? To justify we probably would need 12 or more round trips. New Haven - BOS has 19 scheduled RTs week days..
  by StLouSteve
 
In a perfect world, we would electrify to Buffalo or Chicago as part of rebuilding the line for higher speed service. Given the old four track ROW from Albany west, two tracks could be left diesel for freight service and one track solely for passenger service. If we were in Europe, this would have been done already. Here, I don't know if I will see it in my lifetime.

Eventually we may see battery power for the short distance from NYP to the West Side line or for dragging through the tunnel to Sunnyside for service. Shore power could be connected when parked in Penn or Sunnyside.

Didn't NYC have battery diesels on the west side line once upon a time?
  by Jeff Smith
 
Let's move on from electrification expansion; there are other topics out there that talk about that. This is about DM replacement.
  by scratchyX1
 
StLouSteve wrote: Thu Jul 23, 2020 10:08 am In a perfect world, we would electrify to Buffalo or Chicago as part of rebuilding the line for higher speed service. Given the old four track ROW from Albany west, two tracks could be left diesel for freight service and one track solely for passenger service. If we were in Europe, this would have been done already. Here, I don't know if I will see it in my lifetime.
Unless virgin/brightline moves operations north when florida is too waterlogged to continue operations.

Eventually we may see battery power for the short distance from NYP to the West Side line or for dragging through the tunnel to Sunnyside for service. Shore power could be connected when parked in Penn or Sunnyside.

Didn't NYC have battery diesels on the west side line once upon a time?
Yes, they did have battery diesels, everything old is new again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GE_three-power_boxcab
  by BandA
 
According to wikipedia, the ALP45-DP has TWO Cat 3512C diesel prime-movers with Tier-2 emissions (Cat website says 3512C has Tier-3 emissions) So the new units will presumably have 3512E which is Tier-4. These are made in USA, so will be shipped to Europe then back in the finished locomotive.
  by Backshophoss
 
But this 2nd gen units will still be shop Queens to maintain tier IV emissions
They are Class 8 Truck engines!!!
  by nomis
 
Coming up this Wednesday Dec 16th, the MTA Board will vote to approve Siemens to provide 27 dual mode locomotives for $334 million.
Metro-North Railroad on behalf of itself, Long Island Rail Road (LIRR), Connecticut Department of Transportation (CDOT) and New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) requests Board approval to award a competitively-solicited contract to Siemens Mobility Inc. (SMO) in the total amount of $334,873,148 for the design, manufacture, testing, and delivery of 19 dualmode locomotives and related locomotive equipment and for the exercise of an initial option for 8 additional locomotives. The contract is funded by a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grant.
Joint Metro-North and Long Island Committees Meeting December 2020 - See Page 5 - Board Meeting Info
  by DogBert
 
Would these go to MNCR or be split somehow? Looks like MN, LI & Amtrak own around 80 dual modes total.
  by NH2060
 
I was wondering the same thing at first, but notice how it says Metro-North “on behalf of” LIRR, Amtrak, and ConnDOT. Sounds like they’re the ones getting them first and then the other 3 will piggyback.

MNRR currently has 27 P32s on their roster (ConnDOT has 4) so with the option order they would be just replacing not expanding their owned potion of the fleet. I would have thought they would order a few more for spares and any post-COVID service expansion(s).

It’ll be interesting to see what ConnDOT does. Last we heard the CT2030 plan called for buying up to 18 new locomotives and 120-130 coaches for Danbury, Waterbury, Hartford Line, and Shore Line East. But with the GP40-3H and P40 rebuilds holding the latter two lines down (and those were complete overhauls so they’ve got another at least 15-20 years of life in them?) totaling another 18 units I don’t see how the new Siemens units (presumably all dual modes) won’t be kept to just the branch lines and any mainline expresses.
  by bostontrainguy
 
I know Amtrak is looking into dual-modes so that they can eliminate the engine changes at places like Washington D.C., but these have a top speed of only 160kph/100mph so I don't see them fitting the bill since with the new Viewliner IIs, all of the LD trains north of D.C. will be able to do 125mph.
  by STrRedWolf
 
dgvrengineer wrote: Mon Dec 14, 2020 6:33 pm Here is a good explanation of the order and options. It does say that diesel potentially for Amtrak would be either 110 or 125mph.
https://www.thelirrtoday.com/2020/12/mt ... v3oW5uKrHQ
Good article. Wish I could visit the site as a whole myself.

That said, given the Siemens Charger is rated for 125 MPH... and that Siemens already have a viable dual-mode design from their EU designs, 125MPH isn't out of the question.