Sprinter ACS-64 Electric Loco: Siemens.

Is this based off the Eurosprinter or Vectron? I've heard both so far and frankly, the rendering shares elements of both.

Yes, it's official! 70 new AC propulsion electric locomotives for $466M from Siemens! See the AMTRAK link below:

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentSe ... 1267278292

It's a shame that these foreign firms are even allowed to bid on these contracts. The Europeans should be forced to partner with a domestic locomotive manufacturer (GE, EMD or MPI) to develop a composite locomotive like the AEM-7. If no domestic manufacturer steps up well then Amtrak can continue to use its existing rolling stock indefinitely...which would not necessarily be a bad thing.

Several questions coming to mind; first: whither the funding. Does Amtrak have an appropriation for these locomotives, or are they "pulling a stunt" such as they have with the 130 cars from the Spanish concern. In the case of these cars, Amtrak has funded a 'down payment' from their "surplus' arising from the increased ridership, the rest?.....well.

Amtrak is in an enviable position when compared with other Federal agencies. Since so much of their "budget" arises from "Service Fees", i.e. transportation revenue, they get to keep the excess and are not under any obligation to commit "bureaucratic suicide' by returning the exccess to the Treasury.

Secondly, from reading this and related topics, I was of thought that there were going to be strong "buy American" conditions associated with this locomotive order. Since the "first and last all-American" equipment orders were the SDP-40F, P-30CH, and E-60 locomotives (the Amfleet and Superliner I running gear was foreign sourced) - and we all know what "champs" they were!, I guess that was just so much "smoke and mirrors"; but oh well, final assembly will be here and so of course will the "photo ops"for the pols.

Finally, i must wonder how much additional costs are being incurred in that the manufacturing of these locomotives is being spread over three different Siemens US facilities?

Just some thoughts from an enquiring mind.

Justbecause the name has sprinter in it does not mean it is based on Euro sprinter.
The Amtrak units is actually based on Vectron platform

Pacific 2-3-1 wrote:Ach, du lieber, Augustin!

Drei mal hoch an Siemens! Eins Zwei Gsuffa!

Curious about the Alpharetta, GA facility. If it's the one I think, it's off of Georgia 400 in VERY north Alpharetta; over the county line, in fact. Off of GA 400 (a metro Atlanta highway spur), no rail anywhere nearby. Closest rail is NS (Crescent line) over in Duluth.

How much life to the AEM7s have left in them? After all, we won't see the first new unit for 3 years and the rollouts will be happening for 6 years after that - so the last HHP goes away roughly in 2019.

And as far as 'partnering with an American manufacturer', at least they've gone this far:

"As the global leader in rail innovation, we are thrilled that Amtrak has selected our proven locomotive technology which will create 250 green manufacturing jobs in the United States," said Daryl Dulaney, president and CEO, Siemens Industry, Inc. "These locomotives will ATK-10-141 be built in America using renewable energy and provide cleaner, more efficient movement of people on the most heavily traveled rail route in the country."

They won't be built in America, they will be bolted together in America using semi-skilled labour. The AEM-7s were based on the Sweedish Rc4s, but they were heavily Americanized with the body and frame components being built from raw materials in the US with US design tweaks. EMD's GM roots really shows through in how they turned a bland front nose into something with a more aggressive look.

I'll admit that we don't have the skillz to make trucks or traction components, but at least if an American firm had some design responsibilities they would begin to learn about the more critical technologies. Look how everything China imports ends up as some joint venture. We should do no less.

Nasadowsk wrote:(ACS 64? Amtrak City Sprinter 6000kw, 4 axles, or 6400kw? Here's hoping it's the latter....)

If the model naming follows the same standard as the ES-64 series roaming Europe, then it will be 6400kw.

And after using a quick online calculator to "Americanize" that number, I came up with that being an equivalent 8582 HP.

Jersey_Mike wrote:WTF Amtrak was actually serious about buying new locomotives??? Where the hell did they get all this money?!?! It's like NJT syndrome replacing equipment just because someone drops off a catalog. Those AEM-7AC's and their Budd built shells would have been good for another 20 years as I think that Sweeden hasn't even begun to scrap its older Rc units that the AEM-7 was based on. The NEC ain't right if it isn't running on Americanized toaster power.

LMAO. It's so true, they just keep buying, buying, buying. What Amtrak should really be doing is capitalizing on NJT's money guzzling and pick up and overhaul some of the ALP-44's, which are pretty similar to AEM-7's.

The other question that quickly comes to mind, is why on earth did they go looking for some new, unproven (in America) locomotive when NJT has one of the most impressive locomotives ever made currently running through much of NJ and as far north as New Haven on the NEC already?

As to electrifying commuter operations, its hard to say. MARC could get a few. I don't think CDOT is going to buy any, as they are planning on going the M8 route for SLE, even though it would be hugely cost advantageous to go loco-hauled given that NJT has extra locos lying around, at the trade-off of not being able to run direct to GCT.

MBTA is very stubborn about electric, even though it's an important improvement that Providence line needs. There may, however, be a clearance issue with putting wire up, as P&W runs autoracks around Providence.

As fuel prices and pollution concerns go up, I think more operations will electrify- if the money can be had to electrify. I think the most logical ones that will go first are diesel-hauled lines that branch off of the NEC.

Jersey_Mike wrote:It's a shame that these foreign firms are even allowed to bid on these contracts. The Europeans should be forced to partner with a domestic locomotive manufacturer (GE, EMD or MPI) to develop a composite locomotive like the AEM-7. If no domestic manufacturer steps up well then Amtrak can continue to use its existing rolling stock indefinitely...which would not necessarily be a bad thing.

Jersey,

You can't be serious!!! You want Amtrak to run the equipment indefinitely until a domestic builder steps up? I'm quite sure when Amtrak put the bid out there the few domestic companies probably had no interest. From my understanding GE is not really interested in electric locomotives and if they were, it would be a new start for them and by that I mean a new development. EMD-----forgetabout it. Believe it or not parts are getting harder and harder to find for the AEM-7 locomotives and they are taking a beating each and every day. The shell may be good, except there are alot of holes which needs to be plugged for water, but underneath the shell there are alot of issues.

SantaFe5811 wrote:Cross referencing the AEM-7AC's and their NJT counterparts - the ALP44M, are Amtrak having serious issues with the AEM7's?

From conversations with an Amtrak engineer, as well as the number of locomotive failure reports I get to hear about every week or so, yes, Amtrak has been having reliability issues with both the AEM-7AC remans and the AEM-7DC units as well. The bodies and frames may have life left in them, but the innards and gear are talking a different talk. I don't even see the SEPTA units lasting much longer if they don't get them through overhaul in a few years...

LIRR272 wrote:The units will probably never look like what is in the drawing. Well say good bye to the HHP-8 since all of them will be gone along with some of the AEM-7 units. Better start taking pictures soon.

Not some. All of the AEM-7 units are going into retirement. The Amtrak press release on their site stated the AEM-7DC's will be first to be retired, followed by the AEM-7AC units being removed from service, with the HHP's being last to be retired.

Jersey_Mike wrote:but will MARC seize the initiative and take over enough units to dump diesel operation from the NEC entirely? How many electrics would the MBTA need to dump diesels from the Providence Line?

Both MARC and MBTA cycle equipment between trips on the NEC and their diesel lines with enough frequency that keeping dedicated electric consists would be an operational headache and not worth the cost of acquiring electric power. For the MBTA's part, that was discussed and discarded back in 1999 when electrification work was almost complete up there. For MARC, it all comes to cost, and that is why they use diesel consists from the Camden and Brunswick lines on the midday Penn trains.

GP40 6694 wrote:MBTA is very stubborn about electric, even though it's an important improvement that Providence line needs. There may, however, be a clearance issue with putting wire up, as P&W runs autoracks around Providence.

The wire is already there, so no clearance issues around Providence to deal with. Still, you're right about MBTA; I don't see them going electric, specially since they cycle consists onto the other lines often through the day.

Silverliner II wrote: From conversations with an Amtrak engineer, as well as the number of locomotive failure reports I get to hear about every week or so, yes, Amtrak has been having reliability issues with both the AEM-7AC remans and the AEM-7DC units as well. The bodies and frames may have life left in them, but the innards and gear are talking a different talk. I don't even see the SEPTA units lasting much longer if they don't get them through overhaul in a few years...

The wire is already there, so no clearance issues around Providence to deal with. Still, you're right about MBTA; I don't see them going electric, specially since they cycle consists onto the other lines often through the day.

Then overhaul them. If they are maintained with the same precision that aircraft in this country are, then failures will be exceedingly rare. That's true of pretty much any old equipment that's running around.

The equipment cycling argument is used over and over, but ultimately, the other lines shouldn't be pulling the Providence line's performance way down by forcing it to be diesel as well. They would need some additional maintenance facilities, as currently they cycle around to get the toilets pumped and such, but taking one line out of the cycle and giving it a dedicated set of equipment shouldn't be that difficult.

There is no wire on some of the Providence line. I don't know which places are and aren't electrified, but there's a stretch near Boston that doesn't have wire, the station at T.F. Greene isn't under the wire, the autorack cleared section near Providence doesn't have wire, and none of the yards have wire. Here's a picture of a Provdience train not under the wire:

http://photos.nerail.org/showpic/?20091 ... providence

What I don't know is whether the autoracks would fit under the wire in Providence. I think they cross under the wire somewhere, but the rest of their route may not also have that clearance.

If MBTA did electrify the line, it would sure make it easier for Amtrak, as the MBTA trains would be able to get out of their own way, so they'd have a chance of getting out of another train's way.

Jeff Smith wrote:Curious about the Alpharetta, GA facility. If it's the one I think, it's off of Georgia 400 in VERY north Alpharetta; over the county line, in fact. Off of GA 400 (a metro Atlanta highway spur), no rail anywhere nearby. Closest rail is NS (Crescent line) over in Duluth.

So am I, Sgt. Smith; I have now scanned Google "Sat Maps' along the US19-GA400 between GA140 Holcomb Bridge Rd (with which i am quite familiar as the Marriott Courtyard at which I always stay when visiting Atlanta is there) and GA 141 looking for Siemens facilities.

There are plenty, but nowhere does there appear a facility of adequate size to assemble rail equipment.

GP40 6694 wrote:There is no wire on some of the Providence line. I don't know which places are and aren't electrified, but there's a stretch near Boston that doesn't have wire, the station at T.F. Greene isn't under the wire, the autorack cleared section near Providence doesn't have wire, and none of the yards have wire.

The only portion of the PVD commuter rail not wired is between Holden & Thatcher interlockings on track #3 in Attleboro, so electric trains can't make Attleboro Station going westbound. The TF Greene station probably never had catenary installed for two reasons: 1)That track was designed and built (funded by the state of Rhode Island) pretty much for the Providence & Worcester railroad to stay out of Amtrak's way. 2) Even with plans of expanding MBTA service, why install wire if there was no sign of the MBTA purchasing electric locomotives.

GP40 6694 wrote:What I don't know is whether the autoracks would fit under the wire in Providence. I think they cross under the wire somewhere, but the rest of their route may not also have that clearance.

The autoracks would not fit under the wire. The P&W crosses the main line west of the new TF Greene airport station at Packard Interlocking which is the end of Track #3. They go off the Main Line at Malcom Interlocking from Track #2 and onto #4 and into Davisville to Quonset Point. They pass through PVD station on Track#7 which has no wire, no platform and is not for revenue passenger trains.

We need to get back onto the topic of the new locos.

The Meatballs are rumored to be converted into Cabbage cars so that all trains going to Richmond, Newport News & Lynchburg can be operated push-pull.