# New MARC Engines To Begin Service



## WhoozOn1st

First three of 26 already on property, expected to begin Penn Line service about May 18.

MARC says new locomotives will boost capacity and reliability


----------



## Ryan

MARC 11 was at WAS for the first time (that I've seen at least) yesterday - these new MP's are some pretty sweet looking locomotives.


----------



## WhoozOn1st

Metrolink is in the middle of receiving an order of this type locomotive (MP 36 or variant thereof, I believe). I haven't personally seen any in service, just at the shops. Metra has 'em, and I think Toronto and the NM Rail Runner as well. Thanks for the MARC pic, HokieNav.


----------



## DET63

Wikipedia article on MP36s and their siblings, the MP40s.


----------



## AlanB

Those attending the NTD events yesterday in DC got to see one of the new locos up close as it was on display. I haven't yet looked to see how my pictures came out, but assuming that it's decent, I'll put up a shot later today.


----------



## WhoozOn1st

MARC's new engines are not yet in regular service, according to the Baltimore Sun.

New MARC locomotives still on hold

"Safety testing for first 3 is 'rigorous,' spokeswoman says"


----------



## WhoozOn1st

The new MARC MP36PH-3C units are STILL not in revenue service, commuters are not pleased, and now the Maryland Transit Administration is saying what the holdup is:

Testing safety dispute idles MARC's new locomotives

"State, builder disagree on what is needed for U.S. approval to operate"

"...the dispute centers around a testing regimen known as FMECA - Failure Modes, Effects, Criticality Analysis. ...[T]he MTA's independent safety office - with the backing of Administrator Paul J. Wiedefeld - contends that additional tests are required to secure Federal Railroad Administration approval to put the locomotives into service, while the manufacturer, MotivePower, believes the tests that have been done are sufficient."


----------



## jis

Unfortunately MPI has not proved to be one of the most reliable locomotive manufacturers.


----------



## Acela150

But you must admit they do sell their product well.

Stephen


----------



## Ryan

jis said:


> Unfortunately MPI has not proved to be one of the most reliable locomotive manufacturers.


Coupled with MARC not proving to be the most reliable transit managers.


----------



## amtrakwolverine

but once they actully due get the locos running correctly there more reliable then the p-42dc


----------



## Green Maned Lion

amtrakwolverine said:


> but once they actully due get the locos running correctly there more reliable then the p-42dc


...

You must be joking. Given the degree of maintenence Amtrak showers on the P42DC, or complete lack thereof, they are exceptionally reliable.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer

amtrakwolverine said:


> but once they actully due get the locos running correctly there more reliable then the p-42dc


You base that on what, exactly?

I'm not saying they won't in a sense, however the P42 has proven itself whereas these units have yet to prove they do more than look neat. And if I know anything about getting into a contract with people, its when they can't seem to get their s*** together-- it probably means they don't have a good product, and its clear that nobody (MARC included) can get the ducks in a row with these units.


----------



## MattW

Ok, then can anyone show where METRA, RailRunner, FrontRunner, Metrolink or one of the other MP36 operators has had substantial troubles with the locomotives? Not only do they look great, but I haven't seen any major problems so far with them...


----------



## ALC Rail Writer

Not saying they won't do badly for a simple commuter engine, what I am saying is that comparing these to a P42 is like comparing an F15 to a Cessna... (exaggeration noted).

In other words, you won't be seeing these things pulling the EB anytime soon...


----------



## ALC Rail Writer

I just watched the Dirty Jobs episode where Mike Rowe did a day at MPI in Boise, claimed the locomotives he was working on were "destined to pull passenger trains in Maryland"...


----------



## amtrakwolverine

well then compare them to the p-32acdm or the p-40dc that metro north and new haven run.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer

Just because you use a P40 for commuter operations doesn't mean it was designed for commuter operations. The P40 can pull the SWC or make a corridor run. Same with the P42... The P42 is a remarkable engine because it can be used virtually anywhere in the country reliably, and for about any passenger run.

Part of it is apples to oranges.


----------



## MattW

Ah yes, the Dirty Jobs episode! I loved it! I'd guess the locomotives soon to be built on the frames he was working on were for MARC as the locomotive he was seen driving was for Minneapolis's Northstar.


----------



## zoltan

I shall be disappointed if these replace the locomotives currently running on the Brunswick and Camden lines before Christmas, when I hope to be around there - does anyone see a likelihood of this?


----------



## Ryan

No, I don't. Even if they start rolling these guys out in any numbers soon, there will likely still be some GP-40's hanging around. Even after the MP36's are in service, MARC will still be operating the GP-39's as well.

Given the competency of MARC management these days, I'll give you even money on the first of these being in service by the first of the year. Several Penn Line trains have been operating shorter than usual for a solid 2 weeks now because the MP36's aren't in service yet, the AEM-7 rebuild process has been dragging on for years with Amtrak seemingly unable to return them to working order, and a handful of the HHP-8's are broke.


----------



## AlanB

HokieNav said:


> Given the competency of MARC management these days, I'll give you even money on the first of these being in service by the first of the year. Several Penn Line trains have been operating shorter than usual for a solid 2 weeks now because the MP36's aren't in service yet, the AEM-7 rebuild process has been dragging on for years with Amtrak seemingly unable to return them to working order, and a handful of the HHP-8's are broke.


Ok, I'm confused. :blink: If they have locos out of service, why wouldn't they be operating longer trains to pick up the slack? :unsure: It would seem to me that having a loco shortage would mean needing to cancel a run or two and therefore you'd need more cars on the remaining trains to pick up the slack.


----------



## amtrakwolverine

i think right now there nothing but a 1/2 million$ 100 ton paper weight each. every other RR that has these locs has them running so whats the problem that marc can't seam to figure out.


----------



## Ryan

AlanB said:


> HokieNav said:
> 
> 
> 
> Given the competency of MARC management these days, I'll give you even money on the first of these being in service by the first of the year. Several Penn Line trains have been operating shorter than usual for a solid 2 weeks now because the MP36's aren't in service yet, the AEM-7 rebuild process has been dragging on for years with Amtrak seemingly unable to return them to working order, and a handful of the HHP-8's are broke.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, I'm confused. :blink: If they have locos out of service, why wouldn't they be operating longer trains to pick up the slack? :unsure: It would seem to me that having a loco shortage would mean needing to cancel a run or two and therefore you'd need more cars on the remaining trains to pick up the slack.
Click to expand...

Some of the longer sets on the Penn Line that are usually carried by electrics are instead having to be hauled by the GP's, which are only rated for 6 cars, rather than the 7 that they usually carry. If MARC had gotten the MP36s in service on time, then the shortage of electrics wouldn't be a problem, since they *should* be able to haul more than 6 cars on the NEC.


----------



## AlanB

HokieNav said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HokieNav said:
> 
> 
> 
> Given the competency of MARC management these days, I'll give you even money on the first of these being in service by the first of the year. Several Penn Line trains have been operating shorter than usual for a solid 2 weeks now because the MP36's aren't in service yet, the AEM-7 rebuild process has been dragging on for years with Amtrak seemingly unable to return them to working order, and a handful of the HHP-8's are broke.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, I'm confused. :blink: If they have locos out of service, why wouldn't they be operating longer trains to pick up the slack? :unsure: It would seem to me that having a loco shortage would mean needing to cancel a run or two and therefore you'd need more cars on the remaining trains to pick up the slack.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some of the longer sets on the Penn Line that are usually carried by electrics are instead having to be hauled by the GP's, which are only rated for 6 cars, rather than the 7 that they usually carry. If MARC had gotten the MP36s in service on time, then the shortage of electrics wouldn't be a problem, since they *should* be able to haul more than 6 cars on the NEC.
Click to expand...

Ah, ok, that makes sense. Thanks!


----------



## Ryan

Update from MARC:



> As part of a program to increase the capacity and reliability of MARC Train service, the Maryland Transit Administration is purchasing 26 new diesel locomotives which will replace existing locomotives that are nearing the end of their service life. The new locomotives are more powerful than those they will replace and meet stringent new emissions requirements. While the first units were delivered to MTA several months ago, none has yet been put into service due to testing required to meet federal and MTA safety and performance standards. Given the level of interest among MARC riders, we thought it would be useful to provide information about this complex situation.
> MARC equipment must comply with a variety of federal requirements before it can be put into service. This includes an analysis of hardware and software used to control or monitor safety functions to ensure it operates as it was intended. This analysis is called a “Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis” or FMECA. The FMECA identifies the consequences of failure of equipment, software or components on the function of an overall system, and classifies each potential failure according to its probability and severity.
> 
> At the same time, MARC equipment must comply with the MTA’s own safety standards. MTA’s safety plan requires that a hazard analysis be part of the design and manufacturing of the equipment, and the FMECA is one of those hazard analyses.
> 
> In its final testing of the new MARC locomotives the MTA concluded that additional documentation of the FMECA is required to comply with federal regulations. This documentation must be prepared by the manufacturer, and MTA and the manufacturer have agreed to an approach to this issue. Today the Board of Public Works approved a change to MTA’s contract with the manufacturer to conduct this additional analysis. The manufacturer has committed to expedite the work, and the schedule calls for the locomotives to be in service by the end of the year.
> 
> At the same time, we are seeking additional guidance from the federal agencies that regulate MARC Train operation. Should they respond in a manner that would allow us to expedite the process of getting the locomotives into service sooner, we will follow that direction.
> 
> MTA understands this process is frustrating to MARC riders waiting for more reliable service, However, given that the performance of these locomotives will impact MARC operations, safety and customer satisfaction for decades to come, it is critically important that we be assured this new equipment meet all federal and MTA standards.
> 
> We appreciate your patience and understanding. Best wishes, and thank you for riding MARC Train.
> 
> Paul J. Wiedefeld
> 
> Administrator
> 
> September 16, 2009 2:55 PM


I don't know what the heck kind of testing that MARC is insisting on that no other transit agency in the nation felt the need for. Hopefully the FRA will tell MARC that the testing to date is sufficient and these guys can get into service.


----------



## WhoozOn1st

From the Baltimore Sun:

Commuters frustrated with crowding on MARC

"The main problem is that six of MARC's 10 electric locomotives are out of commission - forcing the use of less powerful diesel engines that can pull fewer rail cars, said MTA spokeswoman Jawauna Greene. The underlying issue: MARC's entire locomotive fleet is decades old."


----------



## ALC Rail Writer

So the question now becomes who dropped the ball? MARC, MotivePower, the FRA? A combination...


----------



## Ryan

My personal uninformed opinion: Since these locomotives are in service many other places in the country without this becoming an issue, it probably isn't the FRA or MP.  Patrick, that was a great article. The HHP's are apparently back in service, although on my train home last night just as they were releasing the brakes to leave WAS the HHP-8 on the head end dropped offline. After sitting in the dark for about 15 minutes, HEP came back up and we were shortly on our way, so obviously there are still some "issues" to be worked out.


----------



## battalion51

Sorry, I have to resurrect this. If the diesels are only supposed to be hauling short trains, why aren't they being run in tandem? I mean I know pulling 8 cars with one motor ain't fun, but there's no reason you can't couple up some power. Also shouldn't there be some capability for MARC to get a motor or two on loan from Amtrak since Amtrak is responsible for maintaining these things?

As far as the MP engines go, I'm going to guess a large part of this has to do with cab signal issues. To my knowledge this is the first line these motors are going to run on that have cab signals in effect. So you have a whole new bag of issues with things like signal conformity, penalty applications, and other factors that have never had to be accounted for. We ride trains, we know one thing very well, delays happen. :lol:


----------



## AlanB

Rafi may end up correcting some of what I'm saying, but here goes.

First, they don't have enough engines to go around, so running tandom isn't an option.

Next, I believe that Amtrak is only responsible for maintaining the electrics, not the diesels. And Amtrak doesn't have any electrics to spare, even if they were so inclined. They might have some diesels that they could spare soon, with the P40's coming back online.


----------



## Ryan

Alan got it pretty much right, the only thing that I would disagree with is that I don't think that we'll be seeing any of the P40's before the end of the year, so our chances of getting any power out of Amtrak is pretty much nonexistent (although we may be operating off of different definitions of "soon").

As far as the extra testing goes, I don't think that cab signals have much to do with it - if it did, I would think that Mr. Wiedefeld would have mentioned the uniqueness of the cab signals in his letter that I posted above. For me, the million dollar question is "Why is it that every other transit agency that operates these (and MPI) interprets the FRA regs one way and has the locomotives in service and MARC interprets them to mean that this additional testing is needed"?


----------



## AlanB

HokieNav said:


> As far as the extra testing goes, I don't think that cab signals have much to do with it - if it did, I would think that Mr. Wiedefeld would have mentioned the uniqueness of the cab signals in his letter that I posted above. For me, the million dollar question is "Why is it that every other transit agency that operates these (and MPI) interprets the FRA regs one way and has the locomotives in service and MARC interprets them to mean that this additional testing is needed"?


I'll add more fuel to the fire as it were. I agree that it's unlikely to be a cab signals issue. If it was, then MARC could still use these new engines on its other two lines, freeing up existing diesels to work the NEC. Or for that matter, these engines could be placed into service in tandom with engines that do have cab signaling so as to haul longer trains.


----------



## battalion51

@Alan, touche my friend, touche.

But, the one thing I'll argue with there not being enough engines to go around is this, when I was going from BWI-WAS back in August, there was a four car set being pulled by three motors. I will also say that if the engines are needing further testing, that means they don't want them to be used in revenue service, so you can't use them in tandem. Also, I realize this is a very RADICAL thought, but it seems like one of the leasing agencies should have some motors that could be put on the head end to double up power. The MARC engine would have to be a trailer for HEP, but it'd work. The only potential issue would be the restriction to 70 MPH, but that'd be ok over on the Western lines and the Camden line...


----------



## MattW

They definitely were running tandem when I was going BWI-WAS and back in June. Both our inbound and outbound trains on Day 2 used two of their GP40s. Our outbound Day 1 used two GP39s and our inbound that day used an HHP-8. I think all of our trains were 12 Kawasaki Bilevels.

[EDIT] I stand corrected, our outbound day 2 used only one of the GP40s and only had 6 cars. BTW-why aren't the GP40s required to have ditch lights? They run in grade-crossing territory on the non-electrified lines...and even the electrics have ditch lights...


----------



## Ryan

It looks like these guys are finally going to be entering service soon (maybe!?!):

http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1009/666655.html


----------



## WhoozOn1st

HokieNav said:


> It looks like these guys are finally going to be entering service soon (maybe!?!):http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1009/666655.html


MUCH greater detail (and cool photo) from WJLA's source, the Baltimore Sun:

Engine back in MARC service

"The two AEM-7s that went into the shop in 2006 were returned to MARC in October 2008 and January 2009. But those locomotives were soon found to have a puzzling electrical glitch that led to frequent breakdowns. They were returned to the Amtrak repair yard last spring and remained there through the summer alongside two other MARC AEM-7s as technicians struggled to find a fix to the electrical malfunction.

"[Amtrak deputy chief mechanical officer Terry] Schindler said one complication was the difficulty of procuring compatible spare parts for switches that were made during the 1980s. He said Amtrak, which has 20 AEM-7s of its own, had to scout world markets to find a company that would manufacture the parts to its specifications."

Also...

"If the AEM-7s are returned to service as predicted and the delivery of new diesels picks up, MARC could be operating a substantially transformed fleet by late 2010."

Delivery of new diesels picks up!? Much of this thread is about how they're not running the ones they already have!


----------



## Ryan

Yeah, I think that "redelivery" is the word that they meant to use, since apparently they had to be sent off somewhere for the additional testing and are just finding their way back onto the property.


----------



## Duncan

Last week I saw engine 12 used as a secondary engine - unknown line

And today I saw #12 leading it's own set of single level cars - unknown line

I'll try and remember to get a picture next time

Duncan


----------



## Ryan

Camden line, train P845. We should see 10 and 11 very shortly as well.


----------



## Ryan

Here's MARC 12 in service this morning at WAS - this is the first time that I've been on a platform with one, and they really are some nice looking locomotives, hopefully they perform as well as they look!


----------



## acelafan

Ryan said:


> Here's MARC 12 in service this morning at WAS - this is the first time that I've been on a platform with one, and they really are some nice looking locomotives, hopefully they perform as well as they look!


Nice shot, glad to see the new locos are finally getting placed into revenue service.


----------

