Sprinter ACS-64 Electric Loco: Siemens.

metroliner800 wrote:I highly doubt that our opinion matters as to what the color scheme is.

Although I agree that our opinions might not be taken into consideration, IIRC didn't Amtrak have a paint scheme design contest/vote for the wide bodies when they were built in the early 1990's?

metroliner800 wrote: And really does it matter? The important thing is that the tired and not so reliable equipment is going to be replaced.
We should be thankful that they found a way to do this. Whatever color or colors they maybe.

I agree with you on this. In freight often the crappier the loco looked, the better she ran.

CSX Conductor wrote:

frequentflyer wrote:Amtrak's livery is not the most important issue I know, but can we get the passenger cars and Amfleet or pax cars to wear the same livery? Take the Phase 4 blue stripe off the Amfleet and Viewliners. The red stripe on the bottom will connect with locomotives visually. The pax cars should go bare with only a reflective and red stripe on the bottom as they have now.

I strongly disagree with you here! Why would we remove the Blue? Are you ashamed of the R/W/B? The R/W/B should stay because it's always been on the equipment (except the Acelas), and also it's our country's colors. Wanting to do away with patriotic colors?!? Sounds like something that would be said by the type of person who doesn't think our schools should say the Pledge Of Allegiance.

If you are referring to the phase 3 paint from the 80s under Graham Claytor,with the red,white and blue stripes, then you get my point. Under that paint scheme the locos and the pax cars MATCHED! Same scheme. If a consistent theme is good enough for Acela,Pacific Surliner, and Amtrak Cascades out west, why not the rest of the system? All I am saying if the gray scheme is the new de facto scheme for Amtrak, then take the striping off the cars to match. I don't know what high cost marketing firm Amtrak paid to suggest the present scheme but its not cohesive and that has nothing to do with the reliabilty or proper maintenance on equipment.

Worth thinking about when it comes to matching color schemes along the consist:

1. Some premier legacy trains were 100% impeccably matched: Panama Limited, 20th Century, Broadway Limited, Empire Builder, and UP Cities (until late 1960s...)

2. Some were plain stainless behind colorful covered wagons: ATSF Chiefs, RI Rockets, PRR Congressionals, ACL Champion, Zephyrs

3. Other than ATSF, GN, and IC, I don't know of many roads that did try to match secondary trains. But you always saw a matching Western Star or Louisiane.

4. It's very rare to see a matching European passenger train. I don't think the mindset existed, other than on HST's like TEE or TGV. And the TGV was designed by Paul Bracq, a guy that spent more time designing BMWs and Mercedes.

Fun fact: usually the dominant railroad determined the paint scheme. WAB and MILW interline cars with UP went yellow. CofG interline cars with IC went brown/orange. However, PRR painted a handful of 10-6 sleepers in Frisco colors in the 1950s. Not sure how that happened.

Moral of the story: a totally matching and colorful consist is really rare, and only seen on the premier trains of the most prosperous railroads of decades ago.

Hello folks,

It's amusing to read all the discussions on arts and colors...so the motor shall come first..then to look...and if you look at the belgium contract from SIE...we have to wait a long time ....Ordered in dec 2006...and still THIS (2011) spring, none of them where homologated.... SIE must pay ~30Mio$ penalty.... (and Belgium is in the direct neigbourhood of SIE plants...not over the ocean and on a unknow environment)

So, lets wait for some funny and long stories..and may design studies meanwhile.

Nice day

catch wrote:Hello folks,

It's amusing to read all the discussions on arts and colors...so the motor shall come first..then to look...and if you look at the belgium contract from SIE...we have to wait a long time ....Ordered in dec 2006...and still THIS (2011) spring, none of them where homologated.... SIE must pay ~30Mio$ penalty.... (and Belgium is in the direct neigbourhood of SIE plants...not over the ocean and on a unknow environment)

So, lets wait for some funny and long stories..and may design studies meanwhile.

Nice day

Haha, point taken, but we're in America, which would precede the fact that we're free to discuss whatever about anything regardless of the circumstances or however pointless it seems. So its best to let people here enjoy themselves and have friendly discussions such as this =)

Tadman wrote:Fun fact: usually the dominant railroad determined the paint scheme. WAB and MILW interline cars with UP went yellow. CofG interline cars with IC went brown/orange. However, PRR painted a handful of 10-6 sleepers in Frisco colors in the 1950s. Not sure how that happened.

Follow up fun fact, the PRR and UP had reached an agreement and were in the final planning to launch a New York-Los Angeles train, the whole thing fell apart because a paint scheme couldn't be agreed upon.

Cheers,
Nick

ApproachMedium wrote:if its based on the EuroSprinter which is dual cabbed. I cant imagine why they would not make it this way. Having dual cabs on the electrics makes them very versatile and does not cost much more time in daily maintenance and inspections

First, EuroSprinter is a flexible platform. If you want a single cab engine, a 'power car', you get one. Nothing easier than cut one cab.
Second, two cabs involve a second set of train safety systems (at least antennas under the engine) and second cab interior (very expensive)

catch wrote:and if you look at the belgium contract from SIE...we have to wait a long time ....Ordered in dec 2006...and still THIS (2011) spring, none of them where homologated.... SIE must pay ~30Mio$ penalty.... (and Belgium is in the direct neigbourhood of SIE plants...not over the ocean and on a unknow environment)

First, Belgium was always a nightmare for electric engines. The voltage of the overhead system is not really (steady) 3 kV DC, it rise very easily up to 4 - 4,5 kV ...
Secondly, the SNCB is more or less broke, so there was no hurry to fix the EuroSprinters problem quickly.
Siemens Eurosprinter and other products run very reliable all over the world, why not in the US o A ?

.Taurus. wrote:

ApproachMedium wrote:if its based on the EuroSprinter which is dual cabbed. I cant imagine why they would not make it this way. Having dual cabs on the electrics makes them very versatile and does not cost much more time in daily maintenance and inspections

First, EuroSprinter is a flexible platform. If you want a single cab engine, a 'power car', you get one. Nothing easier than cut one cab.
Second, two cabs involve a second set of train safety systems (at least antennas under the engine) and second cab interior (very expensive)

On US locomotives we only need one set of train safety systems for the whole engine. The only thing you need duplicated in both cabs is a sonalert alarm for the alertor, a light for the alertor, an ADU for cab signals which can be repeated/slaved off the forward end cab and under loco track receiver bars for the cab signals. The actual computers and components that run all the systems are in 2 central units and work both cabs. One for cab signal/ACSES and one for the Alertor/Recorder.

Lots of news releases on lots of projects. See separate topics for empire corridor and CAF viewliners.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-0 ... -year.html

Brief, fair-use quote:

The equipment purchases, under two contracts worth $764 million, “show our commitment to long-distance service,” he said. The U.S. unit of Munich-based Siemens AG is building the locomotives and CAF USA, the U.S. unit of Construcciones y Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles SA of Beasain, Spain, has the rail-car contract.

...

The new locomotives will replace ones now operating in the Northeast, starting in 2013, Boardman said. Trains in the Northeast Corridor and between Philadelphia and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, will be able to boost top speeds to 125 mph from 110 mph, he said.

http://transportationnation.org/2012/01 ... er-trains/

This one has a link to a PDF: http://transportationnation.org/wp-cont ... -11-12.pdf

The first of 70 new electric locomotives will also be built in 2012, and will be put into operation on both the Northeast Corridor (Boston to Washington) and the Keystone Corridor (Philadelphia to Harrisburg.) In the spring of 2012, Amtrak says it will release a plan on how it will meet the forecasted growth in ridership nationwide.

The new locomotives will replace ones now operating in the Northeast, starting in 2013, Boardman said. Trains in the Northeast Corridor and between Philadelphia and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, will be able to boost top speeds to 125 mph from 110 mph, he said.

Hmnnn I was under the impression that the trains on the keystone branch where limited to 110 because of the track, not because of the locomotive.

hi55us wrote:

The new locomotives will replace ones now operating in the Northeast, starting in 2013, Boardman said. Trains in the Northeast Corridor and between Philadelphia and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, will be able to boost top speeds to 125 mph from 110 mph, he said.

Hmnnn I was under the impression that the trains on the keystone branch where limited to 110 because of the track, not because of the locomotive.

It is the track, not the locomotives. Using some of the money florida gave up they are going to increase the MAS along the line, which I believe includes removing the remaining grade crossings.

The HSIPR grants to close the 3 last grade crossings and PE/EIS work for interlocking changes were part of the original stimulus awards. The recent $40 million award to upgrade the State interlocking segment on the Harrisburg end was from the reallocated FL HSR funds. My understanding is that additional upgrades beyond what has been funded will be needed to achieve 125 mph speeds on any part of the corridor. Closing the grade crossings, however, does remove a major hurdle for higher speed operations.

The LD trains on the NEC will be able to run at 125 mph when the Viewliner II baggage-dorm and diner cars replace the Heritage equipment. But the ACS-64s are not needed to achieve 125 mph operation for neither the LD trains or Keystone East corridor. I think Boardman went with the simplified explanation to plug the ACS-64s rather than a 3-4 paragraph long explanation of how Amtrak will be able to run more trains at 125 mph over the NEC and expanded to the Keystone East in a few years. Keep it simple and short because most reporters at the press conference are not knowledgeable about railroads at all and would mangle the details if they included it in the news article.

Hi everybody,
are there more pictures from the ACS64 Mockup available?

Found this:

--> http://dizfanatic.com/Amtrak.aspx

An engineer from the days of steam would take a look at this and be completely flabbergasted.

Looks real cool though.