• 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
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  by Jeff Smith
 
Backshophoss wrote: Mon Jun 17, 2019 4:46 pm The AL45-DP is an underpowered in diesel mode,if BBD did a little more R+D work for something better than 2 class eight truck engines
could have been developed,that 900 gal fuel tank it has limits it's range away from the wire!
<SNIP>
I thought the ALP45-DP had 4 x 400 gallon tanks? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALP-45DP
  by Jeff Smith
 
STrRedWolf wrote: Mon Jun 17, 2019 6:45 pm <SNIP>
So why can't we swing a deal with Metro North, string 60Hz catenary with a transition point between EMPIRE and INWOOD, a mobile string on the bridge, and from Metro North territory all the way up to Albany? Metro North can use catenary with their current equipment, so use it! Get rid of the DC third rail after the connection point. <SNIP>.[/i]
Only the New Haven Line fleet can run on both catenary and third rail.
  by east point
 
Please read my post . I have said an M-8 type EMU not the present M-8s. It is either that or an order of special built M-8s capable of 25 Hz! That way string CAT DV - NYP and you have an EMU capable of running from Hudson line 3r rail - NYP- Hell gate - New Rochelle = New Haven and probably all the way to BOS and maybe in future to Springfield if that line ever gets CAT.
  by EuroStar
 
east point wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2019 1:45 pm Please read my post . I have said an M-8 type EMU not the present M-8s. It is either that or an order of special built M-8s capable of 25 Hz! That way string CAT DV - NYP and you have an EMU capable of running from Hudson line 3r rail - NYP- Hell gate - New Rochelle = New Haven and probably all the way to BOS and maybe in future to Springfield if that line ever gets CAT.
Why do you insist on M-8s capable of running on 25Hz? Amtrak has no spare power capacity to electrify the 10 or so mile (let's leave aside the issue of whether it makes sense or electrify or not). Nobody else has power capacity available either in existing substations, so at least one new power substation is needed and will be fed from ConEdison. Why make the station more complicated than it needs to be by converting the 60Hz to 25 Hz? No point in doing this as no current Metro-North equipment is 25Hz capable. Leave the thing at 60Hz and assuming that there is enough clearance keep it 25kV the way the catenary is in Connecticut. Doing this allows you to run all Amtrak electrics and all currently exiting M-8s over the Empire Connection.

As already mentioned in multiple posts, DC third rail for those 10 miles will require multiple power substations the cost of which will definitely outweight the need to purchase extra M-8s. The 25kV, 60Hz catenary required only one substation. The third rail only equipment (M-9As and older) will not be able to run here, but that equipment has no place in NYP even under the current Penn Station Access plan anyway. 25kV, 60Hz plus some extra M-8s is the cheapest plan to get the connection electrified and make the Hudson line access NYP. Even this cheapest plan though is quite expensive, so it is up to NY state to decide whether they want to spend the money. There are no practical benefits for Amtrak under such a plan, but that is not relevant unless NY state decided to at least double the number of trains between NYP and Albany and that seems unlikely for the next few decades.
  by mtuandrew
 
So there are a few things at play here:
-best operationally for MNRR: third rail (because their existing fleet can use it.) Expensive.
-best operationally for Amtrak in the very long term: overhead to Albany. Very expensive.
-best future-proofing for both MNRR and Amtrak: third rail NYP-Spuyten Duyvil and overhead NYP-ALB, and converting PSNY and the tunnels to 60Hz supply. Also the most wildly expensive.

-cheapest and most practical for MNRR and Amtrak: dual-mode diesels and coaches, like today. Minimal electrical plant cost, speeds of up to 125 mph.
  by STrRedWolf
 
Jeff Smith wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:25 am Only the New Haven Line fleet can run on both catenary and third rail.
Ugh, essentially two fleets. That's expensive!
  by east point
 
3rd rail on west side line? Too many trespassers that could get fried. 12.5 Kv 60 Hz NYP to DV would be best. Sunnyside converter substation cannot provide more 25 Hz power. One reason Hell Gate line converted to 60 Hz..
  by Backshophoss
 
The Hellgate line was part of the New Haven power grid as part of the NY Connecting RR,a joint NH/PRR project.
New Haven's Van Nest shop complex included a power generating station,about the same size as Cos Cob in Greenwich Conn.
West farms substation was all that remains to feed the Hellgate wire
PC shutdown and tore out the cat and substations on the line to Bay Ridge and the two freight tracks over Hellgate bridge.
That Phase Break east of CP Gate is the change from the PRR/Amtrak Grid(13. kv 25 hz) to MN/ex-NH grid(12.5 kv 60 hz)

The IRON Core main transformer needed to allow the M-8 to run on the 25 hz power was TOO HEAVY!!!!,TOO LARGE!!!!
ConnDOT opted to set the M-8's for 12.5 kv and 25 kv for MN and shore line east services.

IF NYC had left(abaondoned in place)the infrastructure of the 3rd rail power grid along the branch,MN or Amtrak could
have restored the 3rd rail back to DV if needed.
Now it's a start from scratch project,for 3rd rail or overhead cat power to DV.
  by Railjunkie
 
Can someone please explain the need for third rail or wire from Penn to DV. I must have missed something along the way, just a simple railroader who makes big sh!t stop and go.

As for MNRR into Penn via DV if it ever happens, dedicated dual mode locos with retractable 3rd rail shoes.

125mph locomotives maybe before I retire, to get those speeds going to require some $$$ for infrastructure improvements. MNRR isnt going to care if it hits 125mph. Through the years the speeds on the upper Hudson between POU and CRT have gone down.
  by mtuandrew
 
Railjunkie wrote: Wed Jun 19, 2019 6:36 am Can someone please explain the need for third rail or wire from Penn to DV. I must have missed something along the way, just a simple railroader who makes big sh!t stop and go.

As for MNRR into Penn via DV if it ever happens, dedicated dual mode locos with retractable 3rd rail shoes.

125mph locomotives maybe before I retire, to get those speeds going to require some $$$ for infrastructure improvements. MNRR isnt going to care if it hits 125mph. Through the years the speeds on the upper Hudson between POU and CRT have gone down.
east point wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:38 pm 3rd rail on west side line? Too many trespassers that could get fried. 12.5 Kv 60 Hz NYP to DV would be best. Sunnyside converter substation cannot provide more 25 Hz power. One reason Hell Gate line converted to 60 Hz..
I’m just a simple railfan and the only reason I can imagine is because New York City would want to eliminate all diesel trains from Manhattan. Amtrak wouldn’t care to undertake electrification on its own, and MNRR wouldn’t bother, as long as both own dual-mode (diesel/third-rail) locomotives.

And in the event of New York successfully kicking the locomotive change point out to Poighkeepsie, why do we need wire when third-rail substations don’t need to be that big or that close to the rail? Four substations built a block away from the ROW in the garage of a commercial building is an option. You’ll never exceed 80 mph from NYP to DV anyway, nor will you easily convince the residents of Westchester and Putnam that overhead is necessary (and somewhat unlike the old New York Central, the locals own a good share of MNRR.)
Last edited by mtuandrew on Wed Jun 19, 2019 12:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  by Jeff Smith
 
STrRedWolf wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:20 pm
Jeff Smith wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:25 am Only the New Haven Line fleet can run on both catenary and third rail.
Ugh, essentially two fleets. That's expensive!
Legacy railroads. Oh yeah, here's a solution: buy back the FL9's (where's my sarcasm font?)! Once upon a time they did have DC capability. The solution is simply dual modes.
  by Backshophoss
 
When the NY Central still existed,the W 30th street branch was part of the 3rd rail power grid to at least W 30th street yard.
As diesel power took over,NYC ripped out 3rd rail on the High line ,then all the way back to DV Interlocking. All the supporting infrastructure
was ripped out as well
CR was still using DO(72nd st)yard as a base for the few remaining freight customers in Manhattan.
To redo the 3rd rail or overhead wire to DV is start from scratch project,that will have to jump thru more Hoops to built.
The NY Central did it under orders from the City get Steam locos off Manhattan Island back then.
  by SRich
 
mtuandrew wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:48 pm So there are a few things at play here:
-best operationally for MNRR: third rail (because their existing fleet can use it.) Expensive.
-best operationally for Amtrak in the very long term: overhead to Albany. Very expensive.
-best future-proofing for both MNRR and Amtrak: third rail NYP-Spuyten Duyvil and overhead NYP-ALB, and converting PSNY and the tunnels to 60Hz supply. Also the most wildly expensive.

-cheapest and most practical for MNRR and Amtrak: dual-mode diesels and coaches, like today. Minimal electrical plant cost, speeds of up to 125 mph.
And change the 12.5 kV 25 Hz to 12.5 kV 60 Hz on the Entire 25 Hz section of Amtraks NEC?
  by Backshophoss
 
To change the PRR grid to 60hz power is not cost effective,and Amtrak has invested in keeping the PRR grid reliable.
Swappping power feeds for the Tunnels and Penn Station not easy and the NJT Arrows are not setup for "on the fly" main transformer
tap changes,not sure if the AL45 DP can "change taps" on the fly as well,they only change modes at station stops at present. :(
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9