CtDOT/SLE GP40-2H STATUS THREAD

[NH2060]

MBTA's putting some/most/(all?) of its GP40MC's up for sale when its new MPI HSP-46 order comes in. And since those just came out of a full top-deck overhaul and HEP rehab program last year they're in arguably the best shape they've ever been in as passenger power. They simply don't want them because they're fleet outliers on what will be a majority HSP-46 + F40PH-2C/F40PHM-2C fleet and parts are getting more scarce.

Wait, isn't MPI getting the MCs as a trade of sorts for some kind an emissions experiment or is that limited to only a few units?

So CDOT could be playing this correctly rebuilding its Geeps while running the P40's into the ground like their time on this planet is short.

They've already BEEN run into the ground pulling commuter trains LOL. And part of the RFP includes overhaul of the P40s so if by "their time on this planet is short" you mean as work train locomotives acting as commuter locos then yup.

Secondhand purchases with more maint commonality to their mainstays might be more economical than bothering to give the less-than-stellar first generation Gennie crud a midlife overhaul.

Even after 40+ years? I'm rather amazed that ConnDOT is going ahead with rehabbing them, but then again they aren't the first diesels to be used in passenger service after that long

Those P40's have plenty of life in them, if you maintain them, and that includes both parts and paint.

Exactly.

Older stations are grandfathered... And they could have a wheelchair lift to allow people who use a wheelchair to get in and out.

Not sure if that would work well on such a curved platform with such significant superelevation. And unless I'm mistaken I'm not sure having just a lift fulfills the ADA requirements.

If they got toasters for four-car trains, their trains would be so overpowered that they would probably do just as well as EMU's, if not better in acceleration.

Two problems. 1) The AEM-7's days are numbered and are not likely to see revenue service anywhere else once Amtrak retires them 2) Most, if not all, of the SLE Mafersa coaches are going to NHHS so in 2016 once it starts up and all M-8s are delivered. Now if New London and Mystic can't be reconfigured to spot even just 1 or 2 M-8s on a high level platform ConnDOT might just set aside 1-3 locos and some Mafersa or maybe even ex-MBTA coaches -if they grab any- for NLC and Westerly service should it start up around the same time.

EMUs don't help dwell times, but they do help acceleration compared to diesel.

And there lies the rub LOL. That's really the dealbreaker here.

Toasters doing 80 with the Mafersas would be better than what we have now. Isn't NJT stuff 125? Don't they have a bunch of old single-level coaches to sell? Or even if it's 110, that would be more than enough. I'd be surprised if non-deadhead runs could even hit 100 that much, it would just be good to have gear that can run as fast as possible, even for deadheads to keep out of the way of Amtrak.

Even if SLE did have 125mph capable locos and coaches there's still the issue of track speeds which, in spite of some 100-110mph stretches, aren't that high elsewhere and are restricted by curves, drawbridges, etc. making the need for any 125mph equipment pointless. Since Amtrak uses 125-150mph track elsewhere on the NEC (including most of RI and MA) that's another story.

It depends on how fast you want to accelerate. Tonnage wise, even the slowest commuter train is a drop in the bucket compared to the tonnage they were built for in freight. MBTA uses F40s, which are very similar to GP40s, on fairly long trains. MN runs 3200 hp 7-car Maxi Bombs, that's only 200 hp more than the Geeps.

What it lacks in additional horsepower it makes up for in acceleration/deceleration which is really the name of the game in commuter rail operations.

They also run west of hudson some weird GP-40esque things with long trains.

You make a point there. The nature of their particular rebuild might have been that much different that they could pull such consists on their own. Given that they're NJT/MNR engines working rather heavily travelled commuter lines compared to an operation like SLE (as well patronaged as it is) that might have been a factor.

Metra in Chicago runs big trains, as do a number of other commuter agencies around the country, all with 3000-3600 HP locomotives.

More often than not with 2 locos on the point. Even the newer MP36 locos sometimes pair up with an F40.

The P40's are bigger than pretty much anything diesel any other commuter agency uses nationwide, except for the new 4600 HP MBTA locos.

I'm pretty sure the MPI MP36 and MP40 fleets top that in spades

The GP40-2Hs could easily do a 7-car train, but then they wouldn't be able to get out of their own way, just like many commuter trains in the US.

Not sure what you mean by that last bit, but if the 2Hs could do a 7 car consist on their own they would. Either they can't or ConnDOT doesn't want to risk wearing them out like that even for the VERY occasional more than 5 car consist. That's simply too much weight to pull/push AND operate at 80mph for them I suppose. And they've had trouble in the past with not arriving late or breaking down with just 3 cars. MNRs GP35Rs can tow a 7-car Genny consist, but only at a very slow pace.

Also, the SPVs aren't a fair comparison, as they weigh a whole lot more than a normal coach, and added to the whole problem of trains not being about to get out of their own way.

Aside from the mechanical hump (where I believe the apparatus for the brakes were stored) how exactly were they that much heavier? And again the 2011 Sailfest fireworks special required 2 Geeps to bracket the 8 Mafersas.

NHHS should be electrified, but a good second choice would be DMU's that accelerate a lot better than diesel loco-hauled with a lot less fuel (although nothing like EMUs).

Not until Amtrak completes it's high speed rail program on that line and NHHS is fully up and running will electrification even get serious discussion. In 10-20 years who knows. The level of rail traffic has to justify it first.

Of course, there aren't piles of used DMUs sitting around like there are for loco-hauled diesel trains, but the operational costs are a lot lower than loco-hauled.

That is true, but only to a point. A 6 car DMU set isn't exactly as economical as a loco and 6 coaches. Plus they're technically considered locomotives so they're subjected to more frequent maintenance and inspections. This was debated in the MBTA forum as well especially in regards to the Fairmount Line which is a no-brainer for DMUs. I think maybe even the North Station-Lynn-Beverly segment of the Newburyport/Rockport line was thrown into that conversation here on the boards, but there the F40s/GP40MCs and coaches work well.

My thought it, on a line with a lot of capacity like NHHS, if they get even near full capacity with 4 car sets, they should run more trains to offer more flexibility.

That seems to be the plan right now even with the preliminary estimate of 14-17 round trips on weekdays. And even with a few more the 14 rebuilt Geeps and P40s should more than cover the schedule. For all we know it might end up being a coaching stock issue than motive power for NHHS if ridership really takes off.

[chrisf]

Not sure what you mean by that last bit, but if the 2Hs could do a 7 car consist on their own they would. Either they can't or ConnDOT doesn't want to risk wearing them out like that even for the VERY occasional more than 5 car consist. That's simply too much weight to pull/push AND operate at 80mph for them I suppose.

MBTA runs 7-car bilevel trains between Boston and Providence daily, using F40s and GP40s. There's no reason CDOT's GP40s can't do the same.

[NHAirLine]

Not sure if that would work well on such a curved platform with such significant superelevation. And unless I'm mistaken I'm not sure having just a lift fulfills the ADA requirements.

They're already there, so they must be grandfathered.

Two problems. 1) The AEM-7's days are numbered and are not likely to see revenue service anywhere else once Amtrak retires them 2) Most, if not all, of the SLE Mafersa coaches are going to NHHS so in 2016 once it starts up and all M-8s are delivered. Now if New London and Mystic can't be reconfigured to spot even just 1 or 2 M-8s on a high level platform ConnDOT might just set aside 1-3 locos and some Mafersa or maybe even ex-MBTA coaches -if they grab any- for NLC and Westerly service should it start up around the same time.

They easily could see service on SLE if CDOT actually wanted to buy them. And then they could sub out the maintenance to Amtrak, as they already know how to fix the things. If Amtrak is planning on scrapping them, they would be mighty cheap for massive, powerful, electric locomotives. I guess they could build some really awkward mini-highs, but it would just work so much better to have coaches and loco-haul the trains.

And there lies the rub LOL. That's really the dealbreaker here.

And loco-hauled can accelerate just as well as EMU with a short train.

Even if SLE did have 125mph capable locos and coaches there's still the issue of track speeds which, in spite of some 100-110mph stretches, aren't that high elsewhere and are restricted by curves, drawbridges, etc. making the need for any 125mph equipment pointless. Since Amtrak uses 125-150mph track elsewhere on the NEC (including most of RI and MA) that's another story.

There's some 115 and 120 in the SLE route in the Guilford/Branford area. If they can't get up to speed before it's time to slam on the brakes for the next station, oh well, at least they can go as fast as they can...

What it lacks in additional horsepower it makes up for in acceleration/deceleration which is really the name of the game in commuter rail operations.

You make a point there. The nature of their particular rebuild might have been that much different that they could pull such consists on their own. Given that they're NJT/MNR engines working rather heavily travelled commuter lines compared to an operation like SLE (as well patronaged as it is) that might have been a factor.

More often than not with 2 locos on the point. Even the newer MP36 locos sometimes pair up with an F40.

MBTA runs 7-car bilevel trains between Boston and Providence daily, using F40s and GP40s. There's no reason CDOT's GP40s can't do the same.

Yup. Exactly.

I'm pretty sure the MPI MP36 and MP40 fleets top that in spades

Not sure what you mean by that last bit, but if the 2Hs could do a 7 car consist on their own they would. Either they can't or ConnDOT doesn't want to risk wearing them out like that even for the VERY occasional more than 5 car consist. That's simply too much weight to pull/push AND operate at 80mph for them I suppose. And they've had trouble in the past with not arriving late or breaking down with just 3 cars. MNRs GP35Rs can tow a 7-car Genny consist, but only at a very slow pace.

There is no place that they need that many cars. And for an occasional special train, they put two Geep's on, as they probably don't know what the schedule would look like with one, or it would get in Amtrak's way too much.

Aside from the mechanical hump (where I believe the apparatus for the brakes were stored) how exactly were they that much heavier? And again the 2011 Sailfest fireworks special required 2 Geeps to bracket the 8 Mafersas.

They had a ton of extra weight just in the whole design of the car. They were horrible coaches. 8 Mafersas could be moved by one GP-40, it's just a matter of how much a schedule hit you're willing to take when the train can't get out of it's own way coming out of a station, or a speed restriction. One time, one train broke down, and they coupled another train up behind it, and ran two trains with one Geep. Six cars and a dead locomotive with only the pony engine running is probably quite a bit heavier than 7 or 8 cars.

Not until Amtrak completes it's high speed rail program on that line and NHHS is fully up and running will electrification even get serious discussion. In 10-20 years who knows. The level of rail traffic has to justify it first.

As we were discussing before, just the acceleration alone makes it worth it.

That is true, but only to a point. A 6 car DMU set isn't exactly as economical as a loco and 6 coaches. Plus they're technically considered locomotives so they're subjected to more frequent maintenance and inspections. This was debated in the MBTA forum as well especially in regards to the Fairmount Line which is a no-brainer for DMUs. I think maybe even the North Station-Lynn-Beverly segment of the Newburyport/Rockport line was thrown into that conversation here on the boards, but there the F40s/GP40MCs and coaches work well.

4 cars and below they are a no-brainer. 7 and 8 you have to go loco hauled, but I would argue that if you have the traffic levels to support trains that big and heavy, you should electrify. 5-6 cars is tough, that probably tips you over to loco-hauled, although I've only ever seen 3-4 car services and 7-8 car services with diesels and longer with electrics.

That seems to be the plan right now even with the preliminary estimate of 14-17 round trips on weekdays. And even with a few more the 14 rebuilt Geeps and P40s should more than cover the schedule. For all we know it might end up being a coaching stock issue than motive power for NHHS if ridership really takes off.

Coaches are easy to get. There's all sorts of commuter lines selling them off. MBTA and NJT come to mind. Cab cars might be a bit tougher since they need to install ACSES II in them for the PTC mandate...

[lirr42]

Old stations can't simply be 'grandfathered' into ADA regulations. Once you start doing renovations to a station, the station then becomes subject to ADA laws. So touching any station involved with a SLE expansion would require that all new and updated stations be built to ADA specifications.

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

MBTA's putting some/most/(all?) of its GP40MC's up for sale when its new MPI HSP-46 order comes in. And since those just came out of a full top-deck overhaul and HEP rehab program last year they're in arguably the best shape they've ever been in as passenger power. They simply don't want them because they're fleet outliers on what will be a majority HSP-46 + F40PH-2C/F40PHM-2C fleet and parts are getting more scarce.

Wait, isn't MPI getting the MCs as a trade of sorts for some kind an emissions experiment or is that limited to only a few units?

No. The component experiment was part of the Geep rebuild program, but MPI had nothing to do with that. The initial order of 20 HSP-46's was only to replace the 18 ancient F40PH's, with MPI taking the F40's and offering them up to other buyers for rebuild or resale. Now that all the options have been exhausted and it's 40 HSP-46 units, the Geeps are also on the table for re-sale by MPI and they have to hash out what stays and what goes between now and 2015. 2 Geeps got retrofitted in the rebuild program for work duty, so they will stay and displace a couple non-revenue beaters after their revenue days are done. The remaining 23 units are negotiable. But there's more old F40PH's and Geeps than replacement units, so there either has to be a second move for additional new, a used purchase of less ancient power, or some units staying in service. Still will be at least 15 good-condition, inexpensive Geeps coming available. The "MC" mods made in '96 when they were rebuilt from freight engines were bizarre, unorthodox, and gave them miserable MTBF reliability for their first dozen years...but this rebuild finally licked all the lingering issues and they've got top-notch reliability now. They'd probably perform way better on the Springfield Line pulling 3-4 single levels with wide stop spacing than having to chug 7 bi-level behemoths on a Worcester or Providence rush hour run or stopping once every half-mile on the Needham or Fairmount lines.

Two problems. 1) The AEM-7's days are numbered and are not likely to see revenue service anywhere else once Amtrak retires them 2) Most, if not all, of the SLE Mafersa coaches are going to NHHS so in 2016 once it starts up and all M-8s are delivered. Now if New London and Mystic can't be reconfigured to spot even just 1 or 2 M-8s on a high level platform ConnDOT might just set aside 1-3 locos and some Mafersa or maybe even ex-MBTA coaches -if they grab any- for NLC and Westerly service should it start up around the same time.

The AEM-7AC's might get offered up. 5 of them got further rebuild in '06 and are in decent shape. The other 24 were '99-02 conversions. In light-duty commuter rail those things could probably keep going a few more years whereas the AEM-7DC's can't make it to their date with the blowtorch fast enough. But MARC and SEPTA are the only logical targets for them...in limited numbers. SEPTA because its AEM-7DC's are really really really shot and given their funding woes they're facing a choice of band-aiding with slightly less-shot used equipment for the rest of the decade or withdrawing the push-pull fleet entirely. MARC because their DC's are also shot, and they hate and want to scrap their HHP-8 pieces o' crap as badly as Amtrak does. If they're threatening to buy diesels to run the Penn Line, some way way below-cost 7AC's might shut them up about that heresy.


But I can't see anyone who's not already running the DC Toasters with critical need for a emergency reinforcements picking over the AC Toasters in the yard sale. No one else has facilities to maintain them. CDOT has its SLE equipment procurement covered. NJT has more electrics than it knows what to do with with all its mothballed ALP-44's at Port Morris. And I can't see the MBTA taking a flier on them for Providence service even if they were truly bargain-basement steals. Amtrak already fights constantly with them for clogging too much Amtrak yard space with commuter rail equipment. So...clog up more of the limited wired track capacity with more commuter rail equipment? I don't think so.

Of course, there aren't piles of used DMUs sitting around like there are for loco-hauled diesel trains, but the operational costs are a lot lower than loco-hauled.

That is true, but only to a point. A 6 car DMU set isn't exactly as economical as a loco and 6 coaches. Plus they're technically considered locomotives so they're subjected to more frequent maintenance and inspections. This was debated in the MBTA forum as well especially in regards to the Fairmount Line which is a no-brainer for DMUs. I think maybe even the North Station-Lynn-Beverly segment of the Newburyport/Rockport line was thrown into that conversation here on the boards, but there the F40s/GP40MCs and coaches work well.

NHHS has such long stop spacing DMU's are totally wasted on that installation. Much like it would be on any MBTA routes that crosses the I-495 belt out of Boston. The more nimble acceleration makes the most difference when there's a lot of close-packed stations to pull back up from a dead stop. That's a schedule-saver on something with inner-city density like the Fairmount Line in Boston with 8 stops in a dozen miles. Or some curvy branchline where a loco's perpetually trying to recover speed coming off a restriction. NHHS with 13 stops over 60 miles, even stop spacing except for the NH State/NH Union pair, long distances of tangent track, and planned Class 5 or 6 speeds that the CR trains will take some advantage of between these widely-spaced stops the performance difference between DMU and diesel whittles to negligible levels. Especially given that these sets aren't going to exceed 4 cars. Plus...as a slow-and-steady projected ridership grower they're going to want coaches to incrementally take those peak sets from 4 to 5 coaches as-needed rather than having to weigh a very expensive purchase of more DMU's or custom DMU trailers to add any flexibility. Why wait for another 4-year budget cycle and pray that it'll actually get funded when used coaches and cheap diesel beaters are available every day of the week for pennies on the dollar?


And no way should they even THINK about electrifying this thing until they've sunk a couple hundred mil into zapping the Meriden and Wallingford grade crossing clusters. Which itself is going to take decades at the rate CDOT tends to give a damn, since they don't give a damn about helping close any of the ones on the NEC. Solve for the 25 MPH restrictions, traffic snarls, and Darwin Award-nominee drivers before getting 8 steps ahead of onesself buying a Keystone Corridor for Connecticut. Zapping the excruciating slow zones and congestion makes more difference at better-bang-for-buck to commuter service than making the wide-open-and-fast a little bit wider open and faster. They're not even close to putting enough dent in their to-do list on that corridor to be considering wires any time before 2030.

[Backshophoss]

The current SLE equipment will transfer to NHHS service once the M-8's are tested and OK'ed for the 25 kv wire,
the required Hi-level platforms are built at the SLE stations that need them.
CDOT doesn't need Meatballs or Hippos for SLE services

[chrisf]

There's a MASSIVE difference between a SCREAMING GP-40 or P42 (which aren't quite as bad since they aren't turbocharged)

The GE's are indeed turbocharged.

[fl9m2004]

What's the chances of seeing at least one gp40-2 on either 1640-1644 this week?

[Ridgefielder]

First of all, how is Wallingford 25? You can go over grade crossings way faster than that. I forgot the exact rules, but you can do at least 90, and more, IIRC, with the right setups.

It's 25 for the same reason a highway speed limit is lower in a school zone. Amtrak and CDOT presumably would prefer to avoid killing people who may happen to be crossing the tracks in a congested downtown.

A Toaster with 8 Amfleets can easily outrun even CDOT's little 3-car diesel powered trains, with far less noise and pollution. These are simply facts. Arguably, DMUs can get similar performance to electric at a tiny fraction of the price, although I'd debate that while they are great for places that don't make sense to electrify, but are no substitute for a true electric railroad.

If these are facts, they can be expressed in numbers. Show them, please.

You can quantify it in pollution, CO2 emissions, dB of noise, energy imparted by vibration. These are real-world things, not a figment of anyone's imagination. DMUs would be an acceptable solution. Loco-hauled diesel is an outdated model for smaller commuter operations.

Show us the numbers.

Of course the equipment is cheaper when you are running 1972 diesels. However, when diesel fuel is $4/gallon and maintenance on them is expensive, the equation changes. DMU's are $3.7M/car, can they can pull up to two trailer cars. What you are spewing is utter BS. The Colorado railcar DMUs are FULLY compliant with regular Amtrak/FRA coaches. The below video show it running push/pull with NJT gear:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rPNsy7qdbw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I could show you a youtube video of Union Pacific 4-6-6-4 Challenger pulling a double-stack container train over Sherman Hill. That doesn't prove that UP standard, accepted operating practice is to use steam on stack trains. Show us the literature from the manufacturer that says the equipment is compatible with rolling stock currently owned by CDOT.

I forgot about the weird ownership of MNRR/MTA. However, don't we own all the branch operations with a split on the mainline?

No.

DMUs accelerate faster, are quieter, cheaper to run, and use less fuel. Those are all facts, and have nothing to do with aesthetics or personal preference. If we were going by aesthetics, as you erroneously allude to, then we'd get those FL9's at New Haven fixed up, get ACSES II in them, and run them alongside the Geep's.

If you're looking at environmental factors, with diesel push-pull, there would be little effect on overall CO2 emissions if we just cancelled SLE and let everyone drive. As for traditional pollution, I haven't looked at the numbers, but I'd suspect that SLE is worse than cars, especially with newer ULEV and PZEV vehicles out there. Now, if you look at electric for SLE and DMUs for other lines, you see HUGE CO2 and pollution benefits over cars.

Show me the numbers. Then I'll accept this as a statement of fact.

When you look at electrification, the savings are even bigger, as you gain huge efficiencies by using the electric grid instead of a local engine.

Show me the numbers.

[Tadman]

After trying to read through this headache inducing thread, I think it's worth pointing out that site policy says we don't discuss Colorado/Rader/USRailcar with respect to future orders. I'll let the MNCR forum's mods dictate how they want to lay down the law, but I'm pretty sure it's site policy.

[merrick1]

If you don't know for a fact that DMU's are faster (with no trailer coaches, it gets iffy when you add them in, an MBTA study claims one trailer is faster at low speeds, and two is slower all the time), DMU's are quieter, and DMU's use less fuel than diesel locomotives, then are you need to go do some basic research, as you have no place in this discussion until you have a basic set of facts established.

Speaking of the MBTA. The MBTA once owned the largest fleet of DMU's in the United States. Now they own none.

They looked at repowering their RDC's but in the end decided to rebuild some of them into locomotive hauled push-pull coaches.

They also tested new DMU's, I remember a British Leyland Railbus and a FIAT DMU. (I don't know if they tested the SPV) In the end they bought push-pull coaches.

They are considering DMUs for a semi rapid transit service but they are also have new locomotives and push-pull double deck coaches on order.

I would conclude that the people who know DMU's the best don't particularly like them.

[fl9m2004]

Any gp40-'s running around this week on trains 1640-1644

[DutchRailnut]

no

[Tadman]

Brosef, this topic is about GP40-2H on SLE.



Does this look like a DMU to you? IS the NHHS part of the SLE line?

Here's a little tip for you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQJGmjnc ... tu.be&t=8s" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm sure your blog will be a DMU utopia. May I make a suggestion? Order some bar car DMU's. And make the beer free.

[runningwithscalpels]

I also thought DMUs were a forbidden topic of discussion on this forum anyway...

Back to the Geeps plz!