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

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

  • 225 posts
  • 1
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  by David Benton
 
west point wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 12:13 am Someone please explain where all the Li will come from? Li Battery technology is still in its infancy. Burned up airplanes, B-787s re placing whole battery system including fire protection, ford cars, Teslas, computers, cell phones etc. Then there is fire protection. When they burn they produce their own oxygen. Don't use water on battery fire, Tell that to Podunk volunteer fire department.

I cannot imagine a battery fire in the present old Hudson tunnel bores that do not have emergency cross connection evacuation passageways. Or for that matter the 4 East river tunnel bores. At least the new Gateway bores will have cross connectors.

Then we have a loco that will have over a 3000 HP 3600 amps at 750 volts and 4600 amps at 600 volts equivalent draw. Oh and on top of that HEP and battery charging current at what (?)1000 amps. Third rail shoes will burn out especially when gaping or worse start a fire. Can any DC substation even handle that kind of draw ? It will be interesting to have someone supply short term current ratings of third rail shoes ?

Another thought is at what rate will batteries need to recharge to maintain running over a route ? 1000 amps does not appear to be enough ? An 8 or 10 car train is going to eat up alot of battery power in a hurry. possibly overheating Li battery and fire.

EDIT ; What type operation did NYC use with its battery electric locos ?
Battery management systems take care of all that. The larger batteries are basically smaller cells in series / parallel each smaller cell having its own BMS.
  by MattW
 
Railjunkie wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 12:45 am
MattW wrote: Sat Jul 17, 2021 3:52 pm *Originally quoted post snipped for brevity*
No, Amtrak does not require dual mode trains to have an engine at both ends. Empire trains run dual mode trains everyday with one engine as does NJT. If I gap coming in I just call PSCC and ask permission to fire up the diesel and get out of the way. There is a slight grade up to the platforms, which if your speed is to low or depending on how they route you can cause trouble..

If Amtrak should require the Empire to runs push pull trains with dual modes on either end it can be taken care of by three easy clicks of a switch ( a few Hail Marys wouldn't hurt ) and a couple of pushes of a button from the leading unit and through GE magic you have gone through the mode change. You hope... There are still a few P42s kicking around that had there slow speed backing rheostats pulled and replaced for mode change ability when we did GCT a while back.
Let me clarify, I meant that I thought that Amtrak required the engineer to be leading from a locomotive which for push-pull (not currently Empire Service) would require a locomotive at each end. Don't all of the LIRR dual mode trains into and out of Penn have an engine at each end?
  by Railjunkie
 
LIRR diesel train sets are they not set up just like MNRR cab car on one end locomotive on the other. The only train that comes in to Penn with engines on either end that I can think of are the ACELA sets, we of course know they are not dual mode.

Amtrak does require an engineer on the leading end of the movement. If one has a train set with locos on either end you need to use the one facing in the direction of travel. But I know of no rule that states that dual mode push pull trains must have an engine on each end. So a cab car leading a dual mode diesel train in/out of Penn is no biggie NJT does this everyday
  by njtmnrrbuff
 
Yes that is true about NJT and on the NEC, their trains can really fly. Amtrak Keystone Trains run cab car first into and out of NYP on a daily bases pretty much. We can look forward to seeing the majority of Amtrak trains in the Northeast running in push mode eventually. That would enable for faster turn back times at the endpoints as they wouldn’t be needed to be wyed or looped.
  by MattW
 
Again, let me clarify, I'm only referring to dual mode third rail units which are only Amtrak's P32ACDms, which don't run push-pull, and LIRR's DM30ACs. As far as I know, the only LIRR dual mode trains into Penn station use a locomotive at each end. The NJT locomotives and Keystones are unaffected since there aren't any gapping issues with catenary like there are with third rail.
  by Railjunkie
 
MattW wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:30 am Again, let me clarify, I'm only referring to dual mode third rail units which are only Amtrak's P32ACDms, which don't run push-pull, and LIRR's DM30ACs. As far as I know, the only LIRR dual mode trains into Penn station use a locomotive at each end. The NJT locomotives and Keystones are unaffected since there aren't any gapping issues with catenary like there are with third rail.
Well if you say so. Never looked at LIRR trains they use higher tracks than we do on the Empire. If they are using engines at both ends perhaps its something to do with their rules, union agreements, equipment handling rules, lack of cab cars or if I remember correctly they are bigger pieces of junk than our GEs. I cannot speak to any of this as I am not employed by nor qualified on any of their rules or procedures.

All I can tell you is Amtrak has no rules that I have ever been taught, heard of, seen, rumored, ect that with dual mode push pull trains you need a loco on both ends. If there was well it was treated as a learning experience.

Been running into and out Penn for 18 yrs and have gapped maybe 5 times. You should have enough forward momentum to carry you through the gaps not to worry about it. When you start to get qualified as an engineer into Penn off the Empire connection. One of the first things you were taught, you needed a slow clear or a approach slow on the first signal into the station. It just meant you were lined into tracks 5-9 and in theory it should prevent you from gapping . Except those 5 times, ish. If you did just call PSCC get permission to fire up the diesel to get back on third rail and go back through the mode change. No biggie they turn on the fans you use some expletives it all works out.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Mr. Weaver is sorrowfully not here to respond, and Mr. Railnut no longer seems to be around, but any of the NYC "P" motors operating into GCT had "pans" of sorts to connect with overhead "strips" through the gaps.

All New Haven "EP" motors were like equipped. Now when it came to their "EDER" FL-9's, the first thirty units were so, however then the second thirty arrived these "pans" were left off.

The practice was simply if caught in a gap at GCT was, as Mr. Junkie notes at Penn, to "fire it up" and move on through.

Now Mr. Junkie reports he needs permission from one overseer or the other and all kinds of "procedures" must be followed. What I wonder is if Mr. Weaver was confronted with same "mullarkey" or could an experienced Engineer such as was he, just "fire it up", move the train, and "shut 'er down" at his discretion.
  by Railjunkie
 
Well Mr Norman the rule states I have to ask, has it been done without asking :-D. I do remember a time durring the evening rush and I gapped coming into track five. I asked and was told I dont give a rats @$$ what you just get the h3!! out of the way. Rules that are written in black and white can become quite grey at times.

Never qualified GCT but I think the gaps are quite a bit longer hence the third rail hanging from the beams above. When Albany had to run into GCT a few summers ago I know guys were talking about the gaps and hoping they didnt do so once service began more than a few did. GCT is much more complicated than Penn that much Ive gathered from the few detour trains Ive had.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Although this photo is of a model, it best shows the "pans" on all NH passenger locomotives operating into GCT:

https://www.editionlan.ch/images/produc ... es/EP2.jpg

Why the modeler chose to "McGinnisize" this locomotive never designed for that livery escapes me. Why the New Haven chose to get involved with that image do over that, first, was never more than "half baked" and what Pat spent on paint would have been better spent on soap and water - and maintenance to keep more of the equipment roadworthy!!!
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Railjunkie wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 1:05 pm Well Mr Norman the rule states I have to ask, has it been done without asking :-D. I do remember a time durring the evening rush and I gapped coming into track five. I asked and was told I dont give a rats @$$ what you just get the h3!! out of the way. Rules that are written in black and white can become quite grey at times.
Mr Junkie, I had enough experience in the Labor Relations segment of my career, to know a well meaning employee "following orders" got charged (not held from service) and assessed with 90 days. The case progressed to our level and, I think, wisely, the discipline was overturned.

I hope somehow those instructions to just move the train, presumably verbal over the radio, were documented.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
ExCon90 wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:09 pm Mr. Norman, that is a ghastly image. We may be thankful that it was never seen in real life. (I would rather have seen an FL9 in Hunter Green with gold pinstripes -- too late now even for MN to do a heritage unit that way.)
Unfortunately, two such EP-2 units, one being #322, ended up so liveried. Adding insult to injury, so was one EP-3.

Fortunately, Pat never got his paintbrushes near any EP-4. Of course by then, some EMD salesman "don't know or ask how" convinced him that the only good electric locomotive is a scrapped electric locomotive.
  by electricron
 
How a thread about Siemens Venture rolling stock and Siemens Charger locomotives turned into a conversation about GE and EMD locomotives at Grand Central Station is beyond me, but here it is. :( :( :(

Does every thread have to turn into a conversation about what was 50 years ago?
  by ExCon90
 
ExCon90 wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:09 pm Mr. Norman, that is a ghastly image. We may be thankful that it was never seen in real life. (I would rather have seen an FL9 in Hunter Green with gold pinstripes -- too late now even for MN to do a heritage unit that way.)
A friend has informed me that, contrary to my earlier post, he saw at least one EP3 in that scheme. Sooner him than me ...
  by frequentflyer
 
electricron wrote: Tue Jul 20, 2021 7:14 am How a thread about Siemens Venture rolling stock and Siemens Charger locomotives turned into a conversation about GE and EMD locomotives at Grand Central Station is beyond me, but here it is. :( :( :(

Does every thread have to turn into a conversation about what was 50 years ago?
Thank you.
  • 1
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15