Discussion relating to the operations of MTA MetroNorth Railroad including west of Hudson operations and discussion of CtDOT sponsored rail operations such as Shore Line East and the Springfield to New Haven Hartford Line

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, FL9AC, Jeff Smith

  by Jeff Smith
 
Over in the NJT topic, Nomis posted about an additional acquisition of ALP-45A's (the original nomenclature being ALP-45DP). Here's the topic for you to see the post: viewtopic.php?p=1548014#p1548014

I've said it in other topics, but given the additional cost of running M8's into Penn (third rail gap, unable to switch Hertz? I think?), as well as Amtrak's reticence on letting 8's onto SLE, why shouldn't CtDOT pick up some ALP-45'S? First, they'd be perfect for branch service on the Danbury and Waterbury; I believe the diesel range is sufficient. Not sure about the range on the Hartford Line, but if CtDOT wants to extend Hartford runs to Stamford? Perfect.

The MTA and NYS are strapped from COVID, and there's talk of Penn Access being scrapped. But if CtDOT wants it that bad? Simplify East Bronx Stations, cut them back to two, and run it themselves, with MNRR and/or Amtrak pilots. Be creative with equipment turns, and substitute them on the "maxi's" that currently run to GCT but instead run those as frequencies to/from Penn.

I think they're perfect for CtDOT.
  by Backshophoss
 
Their fuel tanks are too small(900 gal )and under powered in diesel mode,wold have fits with the topstone grade on the Danbury branch.
The cat engines are shop queens to maintain Tier IV specs. BBD needs to repower it with a proven prime mover.
  by Jeff Smith
 
Checking on some of the specs: NJT has 4 400-gallon tanks, total 1600. I think AMT has a higher capacity. AMT runs them on one line, the Mascouche line. It's a 32-mile line; they switch to diesel at Mont Royal. Danbury is shorter at 24 miles, Waterbury 28.5, Hartford 62. About the longest I see on NJT is Morristown, 60m in total, not sure how much is diesel territory. So Springfield might be a stretch; Hartford is a much closer and comfortable 36.7 miles. So the range is doable with end point refueling. They don't have to run to Penn; Stamford is probably adequate, and it could platform on the new track 7 out of the way. and refuel there. I'll give you diesel HP would be an issue for Topstone. So all three "branches", including Hartford (turning there) are doable. Get creative with the equipment turns, maybe get MNRR/MTA interested, it could work.
  by njtmnrrbuff
 
MNR nor CDOT are not ordering any ALPs-it’s a done deal and has been for a while.
  by Pensyfan19
 
njtmnrrbuff wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 4:00 pm MNR nor CDOT are not ordering any ALPs-it’s a done deal and has been for a while.
Now hold on one second. Metro North and CDOT are still looking for new DMUs and other new equipment for some of their lines. I could definitely see an ALP-45 Grand Central to Danbury or Waterbury service, or in this case with the ALP-45 being a tri-mode locomotive. Time can only tell. :wink:
  by njtmnrrbuff
 
No, MNR and CDOT are not looking at DMUs for their own operations.
  by Pensyfan19
 
njtmnrrbuff wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 6:12 pm No, MNR and CDOT are not looking at DMUs for their own operations.
Well they're looking for something, likely coaches, but locomotives could be considered and would make sense for these operations.
  by Backshophoss
 
There was 1 GP-35 repowered with a Cummings prime mover,the BL-20's are shop queens with the MTU prime mover
The ALP-45's are better motors when on the wire
MN,ConnDOT,and LIRR are considering the MLV-II as replacements for the "Shoreliner"(Comet) fleet
  by Jeff Smith
 
njtmnrrbuff wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 4:00 pm MNR nor CDOT are not ordering any ALPs-it’s a done deal and has been for a while.
Did I say they were ordering them? I was posting an idea where I thought it could work for CtDOT with their branches, and their own services (Hartford and SLE).

Could even be someone else like Siemens.

The fact is, the P32's are going to have to be replaced fairly quickly; why not just put the branch through service into NYP with catenary and forego third rail extension. For CtDOT, this would work both intrastate, and NYP bound.
  by BandA
 
They could string wires where the slope is challenging. Do the locomotive switch modes gracefully?
  by nomis
 
The ALP-45’s need to be stopped for several minutes to change modes. Works ok during a long passenger stop.
  by Jeff Smith
 
The design allows them to do it on the fly, however, NJT disabled that option in the software. I don't think catenary is a real option for the branch, certainly not that far up, even if it's only for a short distance. The infrastructure cost and operational complexities would be prohibitively expensive. That's kind of why I'm where I'm at with the ALP-45. I think something like it, if not the ALP, is a great intrastate CT option.