Amtrak: Connects US // American Jobs Plan Infrastructure Legislation

Is not a $75 billion 15 year expansion plan more than the $66 billion Congress allocated? Most, if not all, of that $66 billion is going to be spent with local transit - streetcars, light rail, metro rail - and Amtrak intercity services assocated with the Northeast corridor, There isn't going to be $1 billion left for intercity passenger train expansion located elsewhere than the Northeast with just a few exceptions for high speed trains in their own dedicated corridors - CAHSR, Brightlline West, and Texas Central. Studies will probably be approved, but nothing else will get funding for building. We'll have to wait for a future funding appropriation for other intercity services funding.
To many pundits get over excited when representatives and senators get funding for rail studies, many which will have new studies performed a decade from now because nothing gets done. Obamas infrastrucure building program studied many passenger corridors, I-35 in TX and MN, I-20 in TX,LA, and MS, and I-10 om FL, AL, and MS. Studies started over a decade ago, and not one has been built. the only Amtrak expansion being implemented by Amtrak after all those studies were in Vermont and and Virginia - both extension of existing Northeast Corridor trains. None were a brand new service. The New Orleans to Mobile train is close to being finished, but it is a shorter extension of what used to exist New Orleans to Jacksonville or Orlando. I am not so sure we should be celebrating getting less than half we used to have.
Other improvements to existing trains, like the potential Cascades higher frequencies, is just more of what we already have. More services being made available on a service with declining passenger counts? Worse yet, Washington state is not desiring more of what it already has, they want faster trains and are deeply studying HSR train corridors. But they are not going to get HSR trains in a dedicated corridor with this $66 billion allocation.

What is frustrating about Connects is there is no ambition for speed. Or decarbonization. It is either frequency or new routes trundling along freight lines. And I know that's how it works.

But there is nothing in there (and maybe more details are forthcoming) about journey time decrease works, and electrification. At minimum, New York to Albany, DC to Richmond, Hiawatha, Cascades and the Surfliner should be fully wired. And others beyond that, get to NC from Richmond and cover off the Piedmont. Downstater. Anything vaguely frequent.

Maybe it's less sexy PR than a reopening, and it's in there. But feels a miss to just duplicate the slow services of today further.

The problem with electrification is train frequencies. Two trains a day, if you are so lucky, one in each direction, is not sufficient numbers to make electrification remotely efficient and affordable. Where Metro North has already electrified its corridors to Poughkeepsie with DC volts and New Haven with AC volts, Amtrak already runs more than daily trains on them.

The only other locations Amtrak runs multiple trains a day in significant numbers to make electrification efficient and affordable are in California (Capitol Corridor and Surfliner) and Wisconsin (Hiawatha). I do no think the Michigan numbers have enough passenger trains to make electrification efficient and affordable. Whereas the rail corridor to Milwaukee probably could be electrified with ac volts, the Metra south corridor already electrified is using DC volts. Differing types of voltages would make using the same locomotives out of Chicago's depot very difficult.

And while some of California's commuter rail lines might be electrified soon, they are only doing so on lines shared with CHSR, which is taking forever to be built. Which means electrifying all the share lines will also take forever. even California is looking at hybrids using battery power and hydrogen power systems so they will not have to electrify their lines everywhere. O expect many other states will want to do the same.
So I really do not expect massive electrification projects in great numbers soon, if ever.

I'm curious - can commuter railroads apply for funds to double track and electrify?

electricron wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 12:40 pm The problem with electrification is train frequencies. Two trains a day, if you are so lucky, one in each direction, is not sufficient numbers to make electrification remotely efficient and affordable. Where Metro North has already electrified its corridors to Poughkeepsie with DC volts and New Haven with AC volts, Amtrak already runs more than daily trains on them.
<SNIP>

MN’s Hudson Line is only electrified as far as Croton-Harmon.

The likes of Stadler have trains that can use multiple power sources , plus battery .
Partially electrified routes are obvious candidates for these types of trains to make savings that exceed a new electrifications benefits.

Jeff Smith wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 2:06 pm

electricron wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 12:40 pm The problem with electrification is train frequencies. Two trains a day, if you are so lucky, one in each direction, is not sufficient numbers to make electrification remotely efficient and affordable. Where Metro North has already electrified its corridors to Poughkeepsie with DC volts and New Haven with AC volts, Amtrak already runs more than daily trains on them.
<SNIP>

MN’s Hudson Line is only electrified as far as Croton-Harmon.

LIRR is electrified to Ronkonkoma, Babylon and Huntington. Oyster Bay line, Port Jeff, etc. are all using run down diesel junkers including some DM's.

electricron wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 12:40 pmThe only other locations Amtrak runs multiple trains a day in significant numbers to make electrification efficient and affordable are in California (Capitol Corridor and Surfliner) and Wisconsin (Hiawatha). I do no think the Michigan numbers have enough passenger trains to make electrification efficient and affordable. Whereas the rail corridor to Milwaukee probably could be electrified with ac volts, the Metra south corridor already electrified is using DC volts. Differing types of voltages would make using the same locomotives out of Chicago's depot very difficult.

The Metra Electric District is its own unique ecosystem from the diesel lines, including Amtrak. There should be no need to run equipment on both voltages, as the systems never interact.

The Hiawatha should have been given a proper high-speed treatment at least a decade ago. I wonder if anyone thought of that.

TurningOfTheWheel wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 6:35 pm

electricron wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 12:40 pmThe only other locations Amtrak runs multiple trains a day in significant numbers to make electrification efficient and affordable are in California (Capitol Corridor and Surfliner) and Wisconsin (Hiawatha). I do no think the Michigan numbers have enough passenger trains to make electrification efficient and affordable. Whereas the rail corridor to Milwaukee probably could be electrified with ac volts, the Metra south corridor already electrified is using DC volts. Differing types of voltages would make using the same locomotives out of Chicago's depot very difficult.

The Metra Electric District is its own unique ecosystem from the diesel lines, including Amtrak. There should be no need to run equipment on both voltages, as the systems never interact.

The Hiawatha should have been given a proper high-speed treatment at least a decade ago. I wonder if anyone thought of that.

I mean, up until 63, there was electric Hsr on the route.

It is time for METRA electric and South shore to buy dual current capable equipment. The DC for current operations and the future needed 12.5 / 25 Kv 60 Hz that will be the standard in about 20 - 25 years. Now if the engineering departments will get plans to add 60 Hz to the preset equipment when needed all the better.

Just add 60 Hz transformer that reduces voltage to present DC voltage. Send that thru a full phase rectifier giving the DC equipment proper DC voltages. Probably would be smoother DC than present operation.

Most modern electrics rectify the A.C to D.C anyway, then use a inverter to chop it up to controlled a.c , or a Pwm to give stepped d.c. so the incoming hz is not overly important, the main thing it effects is the weight of the transformer iron core. The lower the hz, the heavier the core has to be. Modern power supplies use very high hz, which allows the use of small Transformers, hence a Pwm power supply will be a lot lighter than a straight transformer one.

scratchyX1 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 8:12 pm

TurningOfTheWheel wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 6:35 pm The Hiawatha should have been given a proper high-speed treatment at least a decade ago. I wonder if anyone thought of that.

I mean, up until '63, there was electric HSR on the route.

Quite off-topic here and could easily be killed, as there is only tangential reference to Messrs. Scratchy's and Trurning's captioned points.

If somehow the C,NS,&M, or otherwise the North Shore could have hung on for another ten years, or until formation of the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA), it would still be here and providing an overhead electrified line between Chicago and Milwaukee.

Having ridden it once in this life Mil to Chi in conventional equipment (Electroliners had to wait for me until they got to SEPTA) operating at 79mph over the array of Grade X-ings. The probability of "something happening" was all too great. To add to the "thrill", there was a "railfan seat" in the conventional cars offering the same view as enjoyed by the Motorman (no Fireman).

Further the NS served the most affluent Chicago Suburban area, and "if something happened" all too many today would have had their "trusty lawyer on speed dial".

I think my Amtrak related point is I must question if the North Shore would have become the route of the Hiawathas.

Methinks we, myself included, have strayed OT into electrification. It is relevant in some ways but not the focus of Connect Us.

Jeff Smith wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 6:08 am Methinks we, myself included, have strayed OT into electrification. It is relevant in some ways but not the focus of Connect Us.

Agreed. I didn't mean it to get super tehcnical. But as a macro topic, it's super relevant.

Connects is about more and more cow trains, mostly to new places but also replicating slow services more times a day - but not about making things much better - or faster - which is what's needed to compete with car use / decarbonize. As well as frequency. Look at the Scranton/Reading services, all ripe for wires and faster service - but even the Raritan route isn't done yet, which should be a trunk again, heading west.

Rightly, 1tpd electric services are not viable. But it's chicken and egg in a good way - look at Keystone. The Hartford line is nearly there too, and that's fairly recent.

The 'sparks effect' is a known thing. I would suggest Metro North should be fully AC except for Harlem-GCT. I would start with replacing the Croton section and getting to Albany/Schenectady at least (and 125 to the AC wires on NH route). Harlem route could be last, as least benefit - but maybe get to Wassaic when it comes. I digress, as this isn't Amtrak.

electricron wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 12:40 pm The problem with electrification is train frequencies. Two trains a day, if you are so lucky, one in each direction, is not sufficient numbers to make electrification remotely efficient and affordable. Where Metro North has already electrified its corridors to Poughkeepsie with DC volts and New Haven with AC volts, Amtrak already runs more than daily trains on them.

If Penn - Albany is going to be electrified doesn't require that Amtrak or NY state DOT buy the already leased line from CSX.

Electrifying the empire connection with 12(.5?) kV 25 Hz is a no brainer. The new Amtrak ICT's can use the pan from the MNRR connection to Penn, and use the pan from [s]Poughkeepsie[/s]Croton–Harmon.

Even MNRR can use the wires for their own, and over time the 3 rail can be replaced with AC.