Siemens to manufacture 83 Airo Intercity Trainsets for Amtrak: Design, Delivery, Acceptance

There is only one LD train that doesn't use ACS-64s out of NYP, and those LD trains that use ACS-64s will continue to do so. The only odd-ball train (in terms of not getting Airo trainsets and not using ACS-64s) is the Lake Shore Limited. Since the Kaufman Act ultimately became a ban on steam locomotives, the LSL could use standard ALC-42s.

I think another difference between an ALC-42 and an ALC-42E is that the ALC-42E is semi-permanently coupled to it's Airo trainset while the SC-44s will not be (I understand that the power lines between the APV and locomotive means that standard knuckle couplers can't be used).

lordsigma12345 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 10, 2024 2:47 pm One big difference with the Metro North Chargers is that they will be designed to operate in third rail mode all the way to Southeast or Croton-Harmon on the Harlem and Hudson lines instead of switching to diesel after exiting the tunnels from GCT.

Yeah, that was promised with the DM-30s years back. Nope, they swap to diesel pretty much ASAP. Siemens did the traction equipment on those, too.

I expect MN's new wunderloks to swap once they exit the tunnels, along with the LIRR ones, too.

Apparently, electric operation is too dangerous to be used outside of tunnels.

Even though some of the worst accidents in railroad history have been tunnel fires.

RandallW wrote: ↑Tue Dec 10, 2024 7:28 pm (I understand that the power lines between the APV and locomotive means that standard knuckle couplers can't be used).

Wasn't the reason the Acelas didn't have a roof bus that the FRA frowned on it?

I have been told long ago by a source that I forget that if you have a bus over the roof connecting traction power to another car, your coupling must be semi-permanent (IE only uncoupled by shop folks) becuase "people can get hurt".

I'm unaware of any inuries at GN or RDG from roof busses...

Nasadowsk wrote: ↑Tue Dec 10, 2024 8:42 pm

lordsigma12345 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 10, 2024 2:47 pm One big difference with the Metro North Chargers is that they will be designed to operate in third rail mode all the way to Southeast or Croton-Harmon on the Harlem and Hudson lines instead of switching to diesel after exiting the tunnels from GCT.

Yeah, that was promised with the DM-30s years back. Nope, they swap to diesel pretty much ASAP. Siemens did the traction equipment on those, too.

I expect MN's new wunderloks to swap once they exit the tunnels, along with the LIRR ones, too.

Apparently, electric operation is too dangerous to be used outside of tunnels.

Even though some of the worst accidents in railroad history have been tunnel fires.

The biggest reason for swapping third rail to diesel with the P32s is overall MAS (50mph) and I don't think the inverters can handle that type of load for that long of a period. The engine was designed to get you into and out of a tunnel with third rail not run on third rail.
The LIRR dual modes were junk from the start, they have never run right.

SRich wrote: ↑Tue Dec 10, 2024 3:23 pm That is also a reason that i find it strange that Siemens is building 2 ALC-42E locomotives for WSDOT/Amtrak instead of the regular SC-44 or Amtrak regular ALC-42. All the Cascades are D model Airo trains.

I have seen conflicting reports on that myself on which Charger version they are building for Washington. The ALC-42 did incorporate some “lessons learned” from the state owned SC-44s (one of the biggest being the redesigned nose section which is much better for repair and replacement after grade crossing accidents.) So that may be a factor. Doesn’t Amtrak have a “joint ownership” arrangement with Washington state where ownership of the engines is split between Amtrak and the state or does the state own everything?

The money for the Empire Service Airos appears to be coming from Amtrak’s IIJA advanced appropriations - also from the concept drawings the liveries and interiors seem to match the NEC variants. NYSDOT also has a very small office with limited staffing for oversight of the passenger rail services - I doubt they want to be bothered with managing equipment - I would anticipate they will be Amtrak owned.

The MNRR SC44 seem to have 4 shoes on each side of loco. Maybe hoping that reducing amps to each shoe will allow 3rd rail operation? The decision may take a year to really know the results as the locos get fully broken in.

Railjunkie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 11, 2024 12:45 am
The biggest reason for swapping third rail to diesel with the P32s is overall MAS (50mph) and I don't think the inverters can handle that type of load for that long of a period.

Yup the big difference with the new Chargers is the speed. The new dual mode Chargers are being designed to operate at 110 on diesel and 79 on third rail.

lordsigma12345 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 11, 2024 7:55 am

Railjunkie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 11, 2024 12:45 am
The biggest reason for swapping third rail to diesel with the P32s is overall MAS (50mph) and I don't think the inverters can handle that type of load for that long of a period.

Yup the big difference with the new Chargers is the speed. The new dual mode Chargers are being designed to operate at 110 on diesel and 79 on third rail.

Top speed for MNRR on the Hudson on third rail 75mph, north of Harmon 80mph. 110mph works for Empire service trains. If it works why try and re-invent the wheel with battery packs and such.

Mr Junkie,

You mentioned that beside the Airo trainset(what ever version it will be) Amtrak has still an need for dual modes ALC's is that for the lonely LD train?

Japanese railroads have used battery/deisel hybrid passenger trains in regular revenue service since 2007 on regional, local, express, commuter, and luxury excursion trains. This means the question is not "does battery power work for trains?", but is instead "can Siemens produce a working battery propulsion for trains?" I think the answer will turn out to be "yes", and we will find that batteries will be used at stations to provide hotel services, allowing the Diesel engine to idle at very low speeds if not be completely off, making working around the train or being on the platform boarding the train a quieter experience.

This is America. I doubt we will be seeing any kind of significant engine modulation, if any, on these trains. We still have people wondering if electric cars are "ready" for prime time a decade after they've been ready.

Agreed entirely, however, that there's nothing particularly novel about this technology either.

SRich wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 6:57 pm Mr Junkie,

You mentioned that beside the Airo trainset(what ever version it will be) Amtrak has still an need for dual modes ALC's is that for the lonely LD train?

The section of the Lakeshore Limited that runs New York to Albany will need a dual mode locomotive. I don't see Airo sets being used on The Maple Leaf or Adirondack either. Rumor has it five to ten years before the Empire see them. But what do I know, I just make them stop and go.
Hopefully I never see any of these "upgrades" before I retire. The last thing you will find me doing is riding a train, thirty years is enough.

I'm reminded of this report from NBC's Today show about battery powered aircraft:




The point I make here is that it's possible that we can get a train engine that has the right battery controller to send the juice to the traction motors and get a whole trainset in and out of Penn. House power? That's smaller batteries under the carriage.

Railjunkie wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 11:52 am Top speed for MNRR on the Hudson on third rail 75mph, north of Harmon 80mph. 110mph works for Empire service trains. If it works why try and re-invent the wheel with battery packs and such.

I don't really get the benefit myself. The only explanation I can think of is it's a cheaper cost up front to go with batteries in this particular design. At first I thought maybe it had to do with keeping all the locomotives interchangeable but they made it sound like if they pivot to third rail propulsion they will modify the business/power car where the batteries would be to include the third rail power equipment instead and the hybrid Charger locomotive itself would still be the same and interchangeable with the locomotives on the NEC sets. The fact that they are just building one prototype now at first tells me someone is starting to question it. I would expect the prototype battery set earlier than 5-10 years so that they can test it and have time to make up their mind on what they want to do before Siemens finishes building all the catenary sets and gets to building the rest of the Empire Service sets. Whether the prototype will be used in revenue service or just in test runs who knows.

Railjunkie wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 12:54 am I don't see Airo sets being used on The Maple Leaf or Adirondack either.

They are included in the procurement - though they are at the back of the line along with Empire Service. Way down the road after those are done would be buying options for replacing the Horizons on any start up routes they end up on (Borealis, Gulf Coast, etc.) Lake Shore isn't accounted for but they haven't made any decisions about single level long distance fleet in general yet. Supposedly they are going to start thinking about that once the notice to proceed goes out on the bilevel equipment.

The only thing that's known about the single level long distance side is that there are options in the Airo contract for a long distance variant to replace the Amfleet II cars - the trainsets would be designed to be paired with the Viewliner equipment if they went this route. Alternatively they may go with a entirely separate single level procurement like what VIA is doing. The primary decision point is the Viewliner I sleepers and the prospects of life extension for them. If they decide to life extend - then they are likely to go with the Siemens options. If they decide to replace them then it will likely be a similar procurement to what they are doing for bilevel.