• Penn Station turnaround for Empire Connection?

  • 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

  • 126 posts
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 9
  by Backshophoss
 
The possible weight cure could be the A-1-A Flexicoil truck used on the FL-9.s.
Could envision that for the Dual mode Chargers.
FYI; the AL45DP uses a pair of Class 8 truck engines as the prime movers away from the wire,are becoming maintenance Queens
for engine overhauls/valve work to stay at Tier IV! :P
  by Greg Moore
 
This is why I keep arguing the ultimate answer is change the Empire Service to catenary... limit 3rd rail to the Harlem Valley and operations into GCT.

Then you get more flexibility for Amtrak, can flip trains in NYP from ALB to points south, etc.
  by jonnhrr
 
With only 8 round trips a day between NYC and Albany Rensselaer probbaly can't justify catenary. Trains for points beyond A-R still need to be Diesel powered, although 48/49 could be electric with the Diesels to/from 448/449 used to/from Chicago.
  by Greg Moore
 
jonnhrr wrote:With only 8 round trips a day between NYC and Albany Rensselaer probbaly can't justify catenary. Trains for points beyond A-R still need to be Diesel powered, although 48/49 could be electric with the Diesels to/from 448/449 used to/from Chicago.
Any of the trains could do their exchange in ALB, so the Maple Leaf, Adirondack and other Empire trains could still benefit from electric.

And NY has talked for years about adding additional round trips.

You're also excluding all MNRR trains that could use catenary to POU and change over just before GCT. (This also gives MNRR the opportunity to travel further north if they ever want to expand service).
  by rohr turbo
 
I find it absurd that people would propose dragging a multi-million $, 100-ton electric locomotive all 375 miles (Washington-Albany) just so you have some redundant third rail shoes for a half mile in NYP station!

Putting in better third rail, or ventilation so you can run a few hundred yards in diesel mode would be far more economical solutions. Maybe in a few years there will be compact fuel cells or Tesla batteries that could be added to a locomotive to shuttle this short distance.
  by STrRedWolf
 
rohr turbo wrote:I find it absurd that people would propose dragging a multi-million $, 100-ton electric locomotive all 375 miles (Washington-Albany) just so you have some redundant third rail shoes for a half mile in NYP station!

Putting in better third rail, or ventilation so you can run a few hundred yards in diesel mode would be far more economical solutions. Maybe in a few years there will be compact fuel cells or Tesla batteries that could be added to a locomotive to shuttle this short distance.
You can’t run diesel train engines in Manhattan per New York law.
  by EuroStar
 
STrRedWolf wrote:You can’t run diesel train engines in Manhattan per New York law.
I am not sure what you mean. Amtrak operates diesels between the Empire Connection and Spyten Dyvil every day. The tunnel on the west side is passively vented. I am also sure that Metro-North has operated diesels around 125th Street. They are certainly not breaking New York law.
rohr turbo wrote:Maybe in a few years there will be compact fuel cells or Tesla batteries that could be added to a locomotive to shuttle this short distance.
Don't count on it. Lithium batteries are a big fire hazard. That's why they don't want you to put your laptop in a checked bag on the airplane. Big lithium batteries are a big fire hazard in tunnels and underground stations. We have not had a Tesla crash and catch fire in the Lincoln or the Holland Tunnels yet, but the first time this happens the consequences are likely to be terrible and will precipitate tighter regulations of those large batteries.
  by Tadman
 
rohr turbo wrote:I find it absurd that people would propose dragging a multi-million $, 100-ton electric locomotive all 375 miles (Washington-Albany) just so you have some redundant third rail shoes for a half mile in NYP station!
.
Why is that absurd? They drag mostly empty baggage cars from LA to Chicago. They drag NPCU cabbages all around the corridors when they could've easily converted a coach to a cab car. They drag axle count cars all around Illinois to keep CN pretend-safe. They drag a P42 on the tail of most Michigan trains so they don't have to run a cab car and/or turn the power. Amtrak is quite good at the "drag something around" process.
  by rohr turbo
 
Tad: I agree some of your examples are Amtrak absurdity also, and should be fixed. Yes cab cars would be far more sensible than double end diesels or Cabbages. If those Chief baggage cars are only carrying bags for <1% of their run, that would be absurd. But I suspect they are performing some level of useful service for their entire run (though bag-dorms would be more sensible IMO.)

EuroStar: I do recognize the risks with Lithium batteries. But technology advances. Dreamliners are flying again despite their far more precarious situation with high-power-density Li batteries in a transport setting.
  by RRspatch
 
STrRedWolf wrote:
You can’t run diesel train engines in Manhattan per New York law.
The New York city ordinance/law you're referring to bans STEAM locomotives from New York City. This law was passed after a deadly rear-end collision in the Park Avenue tunnel. There is no law or ordinance as far as I know banning diesel locomotives in NYC. Amtrak, Metro North, LIRR and NJT just avoid running them under diesel power as they smoke up Penn Station and Grand Central.
  by Backshophoss
 
NY Penn has limited Fresh air intake from the beginning,made worse with the Decking over of "A" interlocking at street level,leaves the West Side Yard
owned by LIRR as the only fresh air access untill that gets decked over as well.
Believe there was never designed Forced Air Venting System for Penn's track level
LIRR's DM's are unhappy jumping the long gaps in the 3rd rail thru the puzzle switches.
Amtrak has gone as far as leasing a NYCTA work Diesel for Penn Station work trains
GCT is closer to street level and there are plenty of Subway type Venting Grates along Park Ave to allow fresh air at both track levels.
(Note: LIRR DEEP level is Forced Air Venting) The only time that was not quite enough was when the Turbos operated in GCT
  by StLouSteve
 
Drop an electric northbound or add one southbound at Albany. Only 150 miles of dead weight and avoids taking too much time at Penn and would allow run thru of a few trains from Was to Buf (one seat service).

Might be worth a try.
  by rohr turbo
 
StLouSteve wrote:Drop an electric northbound or add one southbound at Albany. Only 150 miles of dead weight and avoids taking too much time at Penn and would allow run thru of a few trains from Was to Buf (one seat service).

Might be worth a try.
Nope. If that electric is pantograph, you are lugging a dead weight diesel another 225 miles to Washington. If that electric is 3rd rail, you are lugging its dead weight to Washington, plus not really solving the 3rd rail gapping issue that has been mentioned.
  by DutchRailnut
 
you mean buffs might not have solution?
  by Backshophoss
 
Hanging wire on the Hudson Line is not an answer The 3rd rail works well enough.
Would have been nice if the 3rd rail grid still existed on the W 30th st Branch with a gap long enogh to go from underrunning to overrunning 3rd rail
near CP Empire with the M-8 shoes
The PC merger put the end of 3rd rail electric motors and the next -gen 3rd rail loco's.
The current "Hang up" is the energy "storage" module and it's weight!
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 9