# NJT ALP-45DP first commercial service



## jis (May 31, 2012)

NJT introduced ALP-45DPs to commercial service. See:

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/passenger/commuter-regional/njts-alp-45dp-enters-revenue-service.html?channel=00

You can see a video at:



Fairly quiet in D mode and quite good acceleration with half a dozen or so Comet-Vs as expected.


----------



## RampWidget (May 31, 2012)

jis said:


> NJT introduced ALP-45DPs to commercial service. See:
> 
> http://www.railwayag...html?channel=00
> 
> You can see a video at:


Nice!

It looks even more "European" from the rear. Hadn't seen photo/video of one from that perspective.


----------



## jis (May 31, 2012)

Here's a video of one arriving at Newark Broad Street in E-mode



I rode this train to Lake Hopatcong to experience the performance both in E and D modes. It was quite impressive and it is eerily quiet, even in D-mode.


----------



## AutoTrDvr (Jun 1, 2012)

jis said:


> NJT introduced ALP-45DPs to commercial service. See:
> 
> http://www.railwayag...html?channel=00
> 
> You can see a video at:



Of course they did! I used to commute from the very stop in the video you chose for 12 years! I had to ride GP40's and F40 Cat converts (I miss the old "Screamers"). :mellow:

At first, I was thinking of the ALP44's that had gone into service while I was still commuting on a daily basis. Those cannot go beyond the "Dover" station as that is where the catenary ends. All service must be "D" beyond that point. In essence, the "Erie" rail ran past Dover and in to Lk Hopatcong, terminating (Historically) in Netcong. THe Del, Lackaw, & Western line (catenary) terminated in Dover. Now, that whole line goes all the way to Hackettstown, but still requires "D" mode beyond Dover.


----------



## jis (Jun 2, 2012)

Here is one of ALP45-DP 4504 at the head of NJT 1009 on Thursday changing from E to D mode at MSU. I was on this train that day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKBZllrWZPo


----------



## Ryan (Jun 2, 2012)

Impressive - looks like it has plenty of acceleration, even in D mode.

I love the concept, hopefully it'll prove itself and Amtrak would consider some for Newport News/Lynchburg/Pittsburgh/Springfield service. Of course I'm selfish, as I'd love to eliminate the engine change at WAS to make it faster to come home to BWI from NPN.


----------



## jis (Jun 2, 2012)

Ryan said:


> Impressive - looks like it has plenty of acceleration, even in D mode.
> 
> I love the concept, hopefully it'll prove itself and Amtrak would consider some for Newport News/Lynchburg/Pittsburgh/Springfield service. Of course I'm selfish, as I'd love to eliminate the engine change at WAS to make it faster to come home to BWI from NPN.


I have been told that they can do the changeover on the fly, though at least initially there is no plan to exercise that feature on NJT.


----------



## Acela150 (Jun 3, 2012)

I have to laugh at the title including the word "Exclusive"... Give it about 6 months and theirs going to be thousands of these videos on youtube.

I'm still not a fan of the unit. I think I'll come around in time. I would venture to say just an opinion here that if it were just the diesel unit.. I think it'd be a bit louder. Just a guess.


----------



## Nexis4Jersey (Jun 5, 2012)

There to big , and what a waste of $$$ better spent on replacements for the Arrow 3's.


----------



## jis (Jun 5, 2012)

Nexis4Jersey said:


> There to big , and what a waste of $$$ better spent on replacements for the Arrow 3's.


You cannot respend the $$$ that has already been spent. So at least these dollars spent on the ALP45s are not going to be spent on Arrow replacements or anything else.


----------



## AutoTrDvr (Jun 5, 2012)

jis said:


> Nexis4Jersey said:
> 
> 
> > There to big , and what a waste of $ better spent on replacements for the Arrow 3's.
> ...


And probably not worth replacing the Arrow 3's on very small routes (like the Princeton "Dinky" shuttle).


----------



## jis (Jun 6, 2012)

NJT will replace approximately 170 of the Arrow IIIs. The replacement will be in the form of MLV power cars and trailer cars forming 3 car units with one power car and two trailers (some cab) put together using standard couplers and connectors thus allowing swapping out of defective cars easily and allowing the use of the trailer cars uniformly either in EMU consists or in push-pull consists. This is the scenario being investigated at present. They eventually plan to use EMUs on the mid-zone locals on NEC, of which there will be many more after the Adams turning loop is built. It is also likely that some of these will be deployed on M&E and M&B lines. This is in early stages of development and we will have to wait to see what actually comes out the other end.

As for what will happen to the Princeton Dinky, that is currently up in the air. It could continue as is. It could change over to become an LRT operation. Or it could become a BRT. There is a major hissing contest in progress on the matter at present, among the various snakes involved


----------



## battalion51 (Jun 9, 2012)

The motors could also be a huge advantage for Amtrak even in on corridor service. It could allow for work on substations and catenary to occur without disrupting operations. Granted, you'd probably try to schedule service for weekends since it would shut the Acelas down, but Regionals could still proceed without needing an engine change.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Jun 17, 2012)

The ALP-45DP is a gigantic waste of money serving the limited purpose of eliminating changes at Dover, Long Branch, and Montclair. At $8 million a piece, it isn't worth it.

However, the money is spent, and whining about it isn't going to get it back. What I would like to see is a management that stops trying to put Rolls-Royce's in the yards at MMC without first ensuring they can pay for the fuel to run them. The proposed massive bus cuts, for instance, could easily have been avoided by electing to not buy one of these, and buy an off the shelf diesel passenger unit instead. When NJ Transit can afford to spend money to keep EVERY service running to the maximum reasonable convenience of its riders, we can start talking about nutty capital programs to replace vehicles that aren't in dire need of replacement.

They just placed an order to retire equipment bought in the '90s... and have yet to actually come up with a concrete plan to replace equipment that actually predates NJ Transit itself. This kind of disorderly and incompetent management by Jims Simpson and Weinstein and their even more incompetent underlings has been the cause of much raised blood pressure on my part.


----------



## AlanB (Jun 18, 2012)

Green Maned Lion said:


> The ALP-45DP is a gigantic waste of money serving the limited purpose of eliminating changes at Dover, Long Branch, and Montclair. At $8 million a piece, it isn't worth it.


Well at the time they were ordered, ARC was still in the picture. So the engines would have served far more than Dover, LB, and Montclair. They would have provided service on the Main & Bergen lines directly into Manhattan, as well as the less busy Pascack Valley line.

Yes, in hindsight without ARC the engines are far less useful than they would have been at the time they were ordered.


----------



## jis (Jun 18, 2012)

I think that the brokenness begins with the political and budgetary process which is based on some cherished fantasies. There is this almost religious belief that once capital is provided to purchase equipment the operations will pay for itself, never mind that there is very little evidence in the real world that that is ever the case. This mistaken belief runs deep. Even for constructing bridges and highways the belief among some was that if you collected tools initially to pay off the cost of construction then at some point the tolls could be removed and things would just carry on working with no need for maintenance of any sort.

Anyway this fantasy causes the process to make it easier to get capital funds and difficult to get operating funds. The bureaucrats, the Pavlovian creatures that they are (woof woof... arf arf), adjust to this situation by buying all kinds of fancy trinkets with the relatively easily obtained capital funds while ignoring maintenance and operations. The result is what we behold.

If we could somehow have a rational integrated scheme for funding both construction and operation of all modes of transportation and view that as something akin to providing elevators in buildings than the fantasy of massive profit centers, which none work out to be, we would have a less wasteful and more productive system overall. Transportation is primarily an enabler of commerce, not itself a primary commercial act. Running it efficiently is overall better for the well being of all business.


----------



## AutoTrDvr (Jun 18, 2012)

jis said:


> I think that the brokenness begins with the political and budgetary process which is based on some cherished fantasies...
> 
> If we could somehow have a rational integrated scheme for funding both construction and operation of all modes of transportation and view that as something akin to providing elevators in buildings than the fantasy of massive profit centers, which none work out to be, we would have a less wasteful and more productive system overall. Transportation is primarily an enabler of commerce, not itself a primary commercial act. Running it efficiently is overall better for the well being of all business.


I guess they just never got around to a *complete* merger of the "Erie" and "DLW" railroads - Erie being the diesel side (e.g. Original "Boonton" Line, becoming the Montclair/Boonton Line), and the Delaware, "Lackawanna" & Western, being catenary/electric (Hoboken <--> Gladstone/Dover & Original Montclair Branch). IIRC, the original Erie side terminated not in Hoboken but in Jersey City. You can even see the tunnel to JC from the last bridge before the tunnels that lead to Hoboken Terminal. It's funny... you can still see some of the station platform columns at Hoboken that say "DLW" on them. I do recall watching them build the additional catenary from Bay St. Montclair up to the yard between MSU and Little Falls. Three original Boonton Line stations got closed down in that process (Benson St. Glen Ridge, Rowe St. Bloomfield, and Arlington). The Arlington people got screwed, but at least there were alternative stations for the Bloomfield and Glen Ridge folks.

Lots of things need to be updated. The main switch interlocking (i.e where the old Boonton Line meets the Morris/Essex Line) and thereabouts still has "gas" fired switch heaters, as opposed to electric. You can see the blue flames on a cold winter's night.


----------



## Nexis4Jersey (Jun 29, 2012)

For the price of the 45s they could have electrified the rest of the Boonton line , and Morristown line to Hackettowns....these 45s are nothing more then Boondoggles....switching from the RVL to the NEC or in most cases the PATH takes no more then 2 mins. While the Old Boonton line might never come back as commuter Rail , its future as LRT seems to be looking good. The Kingsland Branch reactivation is being pushed by Lydhurst , Arlington , and Kearny....NJT seems to be taking notice. The old NS orange branch would also become a LRT line along with the Newark Branch.


----------



## jis (Jun 29, 2012)

Electrification is good, but electrifying to Hackettstown would also be a boondoggle. There isn't enough traffic to justify such.

The Kingsland Branch is yet another example of Warrington style political pandering while trying to gussy up numbers to make the ARC proposal meet minimum FTA criteria. An LRT service along it connecting into SEC makes sense. A full blown commuter line with exactly three stops does not. I suspect that proposal will lie in peace for a long long time while more sensible things get built.


----------



## Nexis4Jersey (Jun 29, 2012)

jis said:


> Electrification is good, but electrifying to Hackettstown would also be a boondoggle. There isn't enough traffic to justify such.
> 
> The Kingsland Branch is yet another example of Warrington style political pandering while trying to gussy up numbers to make the ARC proposal meet minimum FTA criteria. An LRT service along it connecting into SEC makes sense. A full blown commuter line with exactly three stops does not. I suspect that proposal will lie in peace for a long long time while more sensible things get built.


I guess to Hackettstown would be a waste , but at least finish up the rest of the Boonton line. As for the Kingsland Branch it was thrown into the kearny and Arlington long term plans , and pushed to NJT...honestly it wouldn't take that much for Service to Hoboken. New York is another story...I think we will need to wait for the Gateway Project to start up before they get serious with that. As for LRT service it would connect into the Kingsland Branch in Kearny...not go to SEC which would be the HBLR. The Kingsland Branch calls for 3 stops , although ridership is looking high due to Kearny's Redevelopments plans surrounding the station and the LRT along the Boonton line....and when i mean high like 15-20,000...mostly shifting form the buses ...but the rest form the high density development planned...


----------



## jis (Jun 29, 2012)

Nexis4Jersey said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > Electrification is good, but electrifying to Hackettstown would also be a boondoggle. There isn't enough traffic to justify such.
> ...


Unless service runs into New York why would anyone abandon a one seat ride on buses to a roundabout two seat ride on trains. Time wise it will work out to about the same unless one is going to downtown, which not where most people go these days. They go to midtown and west side. As for going to Kearny, it would be interesting to see how they unravel the resulting Charlie Foxtrot that will ensue at Kearny interlocking, specially if they have to provide frequency of service on the branch to carry the alleged 15 to 20k people, which of course I do not believe for a moment will actually materialize fortunately. :lol:


----------

