• 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 Backshophoss
 
The weight issue is the hang up (MN's Park Ave viaduct) the possible fix could be the use of A-1-A trucks as the FL-9 used
  by electricron
 
What is the max speeds allowed on MTA North tracks towards New Haven? Is it not 79 mph? Why should MTA spend money for either 110 or 125 mph geared locomotives?
What is the max speeds allowed of MTA North tracks towards Albany? Is it not 90 mph? Again, why should NY state or Amtrak spend money for either 110 or 125 mph geared locomotives?

It is so easy to overspend for locomotive capabilities you will never need in its’ life span.
Maybe 25 years from now, after signals and tracks have been improved for higher speeds it would be appropriate to buy faster locomotives, but not now. In 25 years, they will be buying the next generation of locomotives to replace those they are buying now.
  by Backshophoss
 
Setting the right gearing at the traction motor should allow a 85-90 MPH Max speed for the power,and still work well in commuter service
System wide MAS is 79 MPH
  by STrRedWolf
 
electricron wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:41 pm What is the max speeds allowed on MTA North tracks towards New Haven? Is it not 79 mph? Why should MTA spend money for either 110 or 125 mph geared locomotives?
What is the max speeds allowed of MTA North tracks towards Albany? Is it not 90 mph? Again, why should NY state or Amtrak spend money for either 110 or 125 mph geared locomotives?

It is so easy to overspend for locomotive capabilities you will never need in its’ life span.
Maybe 25 years from now, after signals and tracks have been improved for higher speeds it would be appropriate to buy faster locomotives, but not now. In 25 years, they will be buying the next generation of locomotives to replace those they are buying now.
The question about "Why should we overspend?" can be answered by asking a few questions:
  • Is there any equipment that is max 80 MPH that can haul 10+ cars stuffed full of passengers trying to get to work/home?
  • What is available "now" that fits what is needed "now"?
From what I read from the above LIRR Today article, Siemens already has an engine setup that'll do the job in Germany (the Vectron DM), and it will be a "short" development cycle to adopt it to US standards. Alstrom/Bombardier and MPI would require a "long" development cycle to get there, because they don't have anything... and Metro-North/Amtrak/etc would be paying for that development.

A "short" cycle is cheap in comparison to a "long" cycle, especially if you're paying for it. 2025 vs 2030+?

I really doubt it's an overspend when you can match MAS with "current, off-the-shelf" equipment.
  by Jeff Smith
 
Very informative, thanks.

A couple of observations:

- Board approval given in December 2020 for 19+8 initial order
- 66 month timeline for delivery of initial 19. Given 5 1/2 years from today, order will be done late 2026/early 2027 at the earliest if no delays
- They are including them, potentially, in Penn Access; would the shoes be dual as the 8's are?
- Related to shoes: the LIRR page specifically says shoes adapted to under running; seems to me that should be dual
- CtDOT, LIRR, MNRR and (NYSDOT) (Amtrak) would have options for another 144 in total
- If NYSDOT exercises those options, they will meet Amtrak spec's
- Bi-level coaches are mentioned
  by NaugyRR
 
I was wondering how they'd satisfy the requirement for an escape hatch on the nose; the second-man's window is a pretty clever solution
  by eolesen
 
These are still over five years away from delivery.... Stunning considering that the Sprinter and Charger are already in service.
  by Jeff Smith
 
I'm not sure the first delivery will take five years, just that it would take that long for the total of 27 in the base order + first option.
  by NH2060
 
I would think the first pre-production unit could be finished as soon as 2024 (?) pending the progress and completion of the ALC-42 and VIA Rail/extra Brightline orders.
  by eolesen
 
Jeff Smith wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 7:43 am I'm not sure the first delivery will take five years, just that it would take that long for the total of 27 in the base order + first option.
I'm going off the 50 month statement for the pilot locomotive plus an inevitable delay somewhere between contract approval and final FRA certification.

66 month commitment is only for the first 19.

Combined with the Amtrak announcement this week, Siemens sounds like they'll be running above their current capacity for several years. Maybe they'll be able to surprise us and keep up. Or not.
  by ConstanceR46
 
While looking through the LIRR one i noticed it was said they'd be equipped with the 32-pin system primarily used for the DM/DE30s and C3s; pehaps this is an indication that the C3 fleet will simply be augmented by the multilevels?
  by ElectricTraction
 
Fishrrman wrote: Wed Jul 22, 2020 1:01 pmMetro-North changes to M-8 style equipment for Hudson service, with the changeover taking place between CP 11 and CP 12.
You're thinking along the right lines. But move the transition to Highbridge. Harlem Line M-7s can get to Yankees, freight traffic doesn't have to deal with third rail. Win-win.

Unfortunately, LIRR and MN have backed themselves into a corner where they have to replace the DMs or else get rid of direct service from diesel branches, as they have dragged their feet for decades on electrification to Danbury, Poughkeepsie, Oyster Bay, Port Jefferson, and Patchogue. LIRR could just go back to "switch at Jamaica" until electrification is completed, MN has dug themselves a worse hole as they don't have a good alternative for Danbury and Poughkeepsie.

ALP-45DP style locomotives would open up a LOT of possibilities for Amtrak.
  by Jeff Smith
 
They've backed themselves into a corner by basically procrastinating on their replacements, not by the lack of electrification.

That's not to say that some electrification extension is not worth it. However, DC electrification extension is by its nature very expensive with the need for many more substations. When MNRR electrified the Upper Harlem in the early 80's, they did a poor job of it, underestimating the power draw of the M-1's and 3's. Except for some short LIRR projects and Penn Access, I don't see DC being extended anywhere.

The 20-year plan for MNRR at some point talked about extension of the Hudson to Peekskill; Poughkeepsie is a "Bridge too Far".

No mention of the "upper" Upper Harlem. It's 53 miles GCT to Southeast; it's another 29 to Wassaic. That's a lot of work for very little yield. DMU's would work instead of shuttle mini-Bombs; maxi's for through service.

Danbury? That's been bandied about for years, but always written off as too expensive for the yield. The 45's would be ideal for through service on Danbury, and Waterbury (to New Haven or Stamford), if those could be routed to Penn.

I would electrify to Patchogue; there's been a lot of growth there, and there's room to turn. It should be a two-platform station anyway. Ditto OB.

PJ I'm not too sure; that is a little farther.