# Amtrak Siemens Charger locomotive (SC44, ALC42, ALC42E)



## randomguy65

It looks like Siemens has released what the Charger will look like in a model. They did the same thing with the ACS-64.

See here: http://www.mainlinediesels.net/imgs/SiemensCharger_Profile_BottomLeft.jpg

They also did the same thing with the ACS-64: http://www.railcolor.net/imgs/content/model_siemens_acs2.jpg

Side note: EMD has also revealed the final look of the new F125. See here: http://www.progressrail.com/cda/files/4546792/7/2-sidersENG_LTR_proof_rev5RevH_Screen.pdf


----------



## Caesar La Rock

Those Chargers look handsome. Hopefully the Cummins powerplant will be reliable.


----------



## ayezee

Personally I think the F125 looks way better but if they both run well for years that's all that matters.


----------



## Andrew

ayezee said:


> Personally I think the F125 looks way better but if they both run well for years that's all that matters.


I wonder which locomotive (the F125 or Charger) will the MTA choose to replace their locomotives for their Metro North and Long Island Rail Road Services...


----------



## PVD

Will either or both be interested in building some of them as dual modes? Both the LIRR and the MNRR use them. I am aware that 2 different 3rd rail systems are in place, and most of us aren't big DM fans, but the reality is a batch of them will end up being bought anyway. If you add on the Amtrak Empire fleet, the quantities get up there.


----------



## SubwayNut

Do any of these fit into the New York City tunnels.

The F40s and F59PHIs certainly don't.


----------



## Andrew

SubwayNut said:


> Do any of these fit into the New York City tunnels.
> 
> The F40s and F59PHIs certainly don't.


The Charger definitely does and I believe the F125 does, with a 14 foot seven inch height.

However, the F125 would not be allowed to go through the new East Side Access tunnels due to the 13 foot, six inch height clearance requirement in the 63rd street tunnel segment.

When is Amtrak likely to replace their DM locomotives?


----------



## PerRock

It's my understanding that the Chargers are shorter in height then even the P42s.

peter


----------



## PVD

I'm pretty sure the Amtrak ones are 1998-2001 deliveries, I'm sure someone will correct that as necessary. The first ones would be getting close using 20 years for a passenger diesel, but with major rebuilds they can go on a lot longer. I think MNRR has been overhauling theirs.


----------



## PVD

If the 63rd street tube is 13-6 the locomotive won't matter because the c-3 cars they pull are 14+, which means only the m7 and m9 (eventually) will be heading there.


----------



## Alexandria Nick

Those are some goofy trucks on the F125. Are they completely new? I'm not familiar with those turning up anywhere else.


----------



## afigg

Andrew said:


> The Charger definitely does and I believe the F125 does, with a 14 foot seven inch height.
> 
> ....
> 
> When is Amtrak likely to replace their DM locomotives?


It would probably be the state of NY that would buy the P-32 replacements, not Amtrak. On the Amtrak system, only the NYP-ALB corridor needs diesels with a 3rd rail shoe. If NY owns the locomotives, they won't have to pay an annual capital charge to Amtrak.

The PRIIA vehicle specifications webpage has a draft spec for a Dual Mode (DC 3rd rail) locomotive. When the times come for NY to buy P-32 replacements, I would expect both Siemens and EMD will submit bids with modified versions of their passenger locomotives. There is even a discussion document on that page about tje maximum speed requirement for a dual mode locomotive for the Empire Corridor, Which concludes that the maximum operating speed for the dual mode with a 3rd rail shoe on the Empire corridor is 110 mph, so the spec can back off the 125 mph requirement. So the state of NY, Amtrak, the FRA, and the PRIIA committee have been busy writing a detailed spec for a P-32 replacement.

BTW, we have a long thread here on the RFP and placement of the order for 35 Siemens Charger diesel locomotives. It has not posted to for months, because there has been little to no news about the Siemens Charger diesels recently. Siemens is presumably busy assembling the first test and pre-production units. BTW, a discussion about replacing the P-32s should have its own thread, because those might not be built by Siemens if EMD or even Bombardier lands the order.


----------



## jis

When we say P32 here we mostly mean P32ACDMs and not the P32-8WH s which a pure diesel-electrics and not dual mode, which Amtrak has several of (5xx series).

The replacement for P32-8WHs would simply be the Chargers or F125s depending on what Amtrak chooses to get.

P32ACDM is an open issue.

For Amtrak one could argue that it should consider getting a larger number of catenary dual modes enabling use south of Washington DC at least in Virignia service. But Amtrak so far has been quite reluctant to even consider such.

MNRR and LIRR of course do not need anything other than third rail dual mode and they could actually get them with the new transition third rail shoes which can work on both third rail types in the NY area.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Andrew said:


> ayezee said:
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I think the F125 looks way better but if they both run well for years that's all that matters.
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder which locomotive (the F125 or Charger) will the MTA choose to replace their locomotives for their Metro North and Long Island Rail Road Services...
Click to expand...

well the EMD F125 exceeds max height by one inch , the max allowable height for both GCT and NYP is 14' 6 ".


----------



## George K

PerRock said:


> It's my understanding that the Chargers are shorter in height then even the P42s.
> 
> peter


http://w3.usa.siemens.com/mobility/us/en/interurban-mobility/rail-solutions/high-speed-and-intercity-trains/Documents/Charger%20DE_Locomotive_DataSheet_LR.pdf

12.5 feet high.

The P42 is 14 feet 4 inches according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GE_Genesis

The F125 is 14 feet 7 inches: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_F125


----------



## neroden

Catenary dual-modes would make a lot more sense than third-rail dual-modes. Any future longer-distance electrification will use catenary. Third-rail dual-modes are kind of dumb, so let's hope Siemens wins a bit for a catenary dual-mode.


----------



## Ryan

Unless New York is going to replace their third rail with catenary, someone is going to need to build a dual mode with a shoe, no matter how dumb it is.


----------



## jis

Ryan said:


> Unless New York is going to replace their third rail with catenary, someone is going to need to build a dual mode with a shoe, no matter how dumb it is.


Right. Grand Central will not get catenary anytime soon if ever.


----------



## PVD

Nor is the Long Island Railroad.


----------



## jis

Yes, but LIRR can live with overhead dual mode to get to Penn Station. They do not absolutely positively need a third rail dual mode, unlike MNRR in Grand Central.

LIRR cannot get into ESA with loco hauled C3s at all due to clearance issues, so that is moot.


----------



## Andrew

It would be interesting to see if Metro North uses a Charger Dual Mode in the future, and the Long Island Rail Road chooses a catenary Dual Mode.


----------



## afigg

neroden said:


> Catenary dual-modes would make a lot more sense than third-rail dual-modes. Any future longer-distance electrification will use catenary. Third-rail dual-modes are kind of dumb, so let's hope Siemens wins a bit for a catenary dual-mode.


I don't see what is "dumb" about a locomotive that has to work with the legacy systems in the NYC region. As already posted, LIRR and MNRR are not about to ditch their 3rd rail systems.

For the record, the specifications for the Dual Mode diesel locomotive with a 3rd rail pickup call for the following requirements


Sustained 110 mph capability in diesel-electric mode and sustained 80 mph in electric mode (Nominal 700 VDC 3rd rail).
For operation in corridor service (routes up to 600 miles in length) without refueling or other servicing.
Interoperable with existing single level or multi-level vehicles in mixed consist to be specified by the purchaser and the following Amtrak vehicles: Amfleet, Viewliner, Long Distance Single-Level Car, Horizon etc., including existing motive power of purchaser.
Montreal: The locomotive must meet the requirements which will allow the operation of the locomotive in diesel mode at Montreal Central Station. This operation mode means the diesel engine has low RPMs (thus creating less emissions and noise) when generating only HEP for the train.

Standardization


Dual mode (Nominal 700 VDC 3rd rail electric and diesel-electric) locomotive shall provide for standardization of components with those used in the PRIIA Diesel-Electric Passenger Locomotive (Specification 305-005) to the maximum extent practicable;
Consider providing a common platform for potential future locomotives using straight diesel-electric propulsion and electric power provided by an overhead catenary system. Any future dual mode diesel-electric/AC catenary locomotive shall provide for standardization of components with those used in the PRIIA Diesel-Electric Passenger Locomotive (Specification 305-005) and any PRIIA Dual Mode (DC 3rd Rail) Passenger Locomotive Specification developed from this Requirements Document, to the maximum extent practicable.
The locomotive shall have the ability to draw power from the under-running 3rd rail when in Metro-North Railroad territory and from the over-running 3rd rail when in Amtrak or Long Island Rail Road territory.
So, how about the ultimate Swiss army knife eastern corridor service locomotive: 110 mph in diesel mode, 125 mph from 25/60 HZ overhead catenary, and 80 mph on under and over-running 3rd rail shoes? And do all this without being a massively heavy locomotive nor overly expensive to operate.


----------



## neroden

afigg said:


> For the record, the specifications for the Dual Mode diesel locomotive with a 3rd rail pickup call for the following requirements
> 
> 
> Sustained 110 mph capability in diesel-electric mode and sustained 80 mph in electric mode (Nominal 700 VDC 3rd rail).


Gross. Should do 125 in electric mode, but will never happen with a third rail shoe... sounds like Metro-North is writing the specs, based on keeping its stupid, unique-in-world, energy-wasting, speed-limit-creating electrification.



afigg said:


> So, how about the ultimate Swiss army knife eastern corridor service locomotive: 110 mph in diesel mode, 125 mph from 25/60 HZ overhead catenary, and 80 mph on under and over-running 3rd rail shoes? And do all this without being a massively heavy locomotive nor overly expensive to operate.


Great idea, but that's not being specced, it's just being suggested at something to "consider", while running off the legacy systems is being specced, so you know what you'll get. :-( I repeat, this is gross and backward-looking "planning".


----------



## jis

Where exactly is it going to run at 125 with third rail power?

Instead it should be able to run at 125mph under diesel power.


----------



## MattW

Has anything ever even run at 125mph on [ground] third-rail anywhere in the world?


----------



## jis

AFAIK 100mph is the highest as in Eurostar in sections between Waterloo and Ashford, and it brought the power supply system to its knees with the amperage it drew from the third rail.


----------



## PRR 60

jis said:


> AFAIK 100mph is the highest as in Eurostar in sections between Waterloo and Ashford, and it brought the power supply system to its knees with the amperage it drew from the third rail.


Does Eurostar still operate any service out of Waterloo? I thought all Eurostar was moved to St. Pancras International and is now under catenary all the way.


----------



## jis

Eurostar does not operate to Waterloo anymore. The third rail equipment has been removed from all Eurostar sets long back.

But when they ran under third rail power, they did run at 100mph. Indeed I had traveled on them and timed them back then at such speed.between Tonbridge and Ashford International.


----------



## PVD

Design rating for the M7 was 100 mph, but expected service max is 80.


----------



## cirdan

jis said:


> AFAIK 100mph is the highest as in Eurostar in sections between Waterloo and Ashford, and it brought the power supply system to its knees with the amperage it drew from the third rail.


Speeds in excess of 100mph have also been run on the Waterloo to Bournemouth line. I think they did 110mph on a trial once.

Third rail is actually inherently more stable at speed than catenary as the third rail has less propensity to deform or propagate waves.

The problem though is that the third rail cannot be coninuous (due to switches etc). Whereas this is not a problem from the feed point of view (you just have a live rail on the other side) it is a dynamic problem. In order to maintain sound electrical contact, the collection shoe on the train is spring loaded and presses downwards. When there is no rail, the shoe is thus actially lower than where the rail surface would otherwise be. So every time a section of conductor rail starts there is a mighty bang as the shoe strikes the rail. To cushion the bang, the first section of rail is arranged on a slope so contact and pressure are built up gradually. But the higehr the speed, the longer this transitional ramp needs to be.


----------



## PVD

Or ramp the transition from the bottom for the MNRR contrarians.


----------



## jis

Could you please parse that pithy statement to help the less intelligent amongst us understand what you are trying to say ?


----------



## Ryan

My guess is under running vs over running third rail, but I can't keep track of who uses what.


----------



## PVD

Being able to live with it, and wanting to are entirely different stories with the LIRR. I'm pretty sure there is catenary coming out of Penn to the West Side track, but not as far as the third rail extends. If they extended it they could also use a catenary dual mode, but what makes sense to us doesn't always cut it for a bunch of reasons. Some good, some bad. Conceptually, a subfleet of Amtrak catenary dual modes would be able to serve both Empire Service, and South of DC but current offerings (ALP45-DP) are not fast enough for future 110 mph diesel running on Empire Service, and they are questionable for 125 mph electric on the corridor.


----------



## Andrew

Is it true that Metro North plans to operate future dual-mode locomotives in electric mode all of the way as far north as Croton-Harmon?


----------



## Ryan

Perhaps.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

answer is no, the arching of a single unit at speeds over 60 mph would damage locomotive.


----------



## neroden

Rrrrrrgh. We all know the Empire Corridor needs to be electrified with overhead eventually. If we lived in a real country with a functioning government, they'd be working on long term planning for it.

But honestly, we don't. The dysfunction in our country's governments has been reaching crippling levels.


----------



## jis

Dutchrailnut said:


> answer is no, the arching of a single unit at speeds over 60 mph would damage locomotive.


That is exactly what I was thinking. They will run on third rail only in tunnels and will fire up their prime mover as soon they are out in daylight.

And BTW, I have no idea why this is being discussed in a thread about Chargers, since they are currently not dual mode, and there is no certainty at all that the final dual mode order from anyone will be based on the Charger, since there are several possible candidates around.


----------



## Andrew

Bombardier ALP-45DP will probably be a candidate.


----------



## MattW

jis said:


> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> 
> answer is no, the arching of a single unit at speeds over 60 mph would damage locomotive.
> 
> 
> 
> That is exactly what I was thinking. They will run on third rail only in tunnels and will fire up their prime mover as soon they are out in daylight.
> 
> And BTW, I have no idea why this is being discussed in a thread about Chargers, since they are currently not dual mode, and there is no certainty at all that the final dual mode order from anyone will be based on the Charger, since there are several possible candidates around.
Click to expand...

At risk of taking us further off topic, didn't the British run locomotives off third rail at greater than 60mph? Did the Eurostar, when it had a section of third rail to traverse, run more than 60mph on third rail?


----------



## jis

Eurostars ran at 100mph, but they had many collection shoes spread out over 4 cars as I recall. That is what makes the huge difference since the arcing due to gapping is reduced considerably. The big problem was that their current draw was so huge that initially they kept tripping the substation circuit breakers, until they could get them fine tuned to distinguish between a short circuit and a Eurostar. Of course now there are no Eurostar sets left with any third rail equipment in them anymore AFAIK.

BTW, even LIRR and MNRR EMUs operate way above 60mph using third rail. The issue is short locomotives running off of third rail with few pickup shoes not too far apart.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Running a locomotive trough a gap, be it at a switch or at section switches for third rail is like pulling arc on arc welder.

on arc welder it is about 130 amps at 60 volts, a third rail locomotive does same at 3500 amp and 770 volt.

the arc can jump to wheels, bearings , brake rigging etc

jis is correct the Metro-North MU cars run at 80 mph in third rail territory and are restricted by time table for 100 mph but each pair is 170 foot long is only about 2000 hp and has 4 shoes on each side.

quite a difference from a 65 foot locomotive at 3200 hp.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

and let me add that the cars take a huge beating too, they were designed for continuous HEP, but on third rail electric each gap the HEP shuts off and has to cycle back on, the cars were never designed for that.

imagine shutting the HVAC system down and back on 20 times in 10 minutes leaving from platform to straight rail in tunnel.

you can imagine the failure rate of AC systems.


----------



## cirdan

jis said:


> Eurostars ran at 100mph, but they had many collection shoes spread out over 4 cars as I recall. That is what makes the huge difference since the arcing due to gapping is reduced considerably. The big problem was that their current draw was so huge that initially they kept tripping the substation circuit breakers, until they could get them fine tuned to distinguish between a short circuit and a Eurostar. Of course now there are no Eurostar sets left with any third rail equipment in them anymore AFAIK.
> 
> BTW, even LIRR and MNRR EMUs operate way above 60mph using third rail. The issue is short locomotives running off of third rail with few pickup shoes not too far apart.


It wasn't just Eurostars. The 4REPs that were built specifically for the Waterloo to Bournemouth service could do 100mph as could the Wessex 442s that replaced them (actually the motors were recycled into the newer trains, the class 73 locomotives incidentally also use the same motor type). I don't know how theys handled arcing but think that once away from the major junctions and into high speed territorry, you tended to get very long sections of conductor rail so there wouldn't have been many instanncesof arcing while at high speed. Also, drivers were trained not to draw heavy current while traversing gaps.

If I remember correctly, the 4REPs lighting ran off battery, so this wouldn't have been afected by gaps. They had diners in those trains too (hence the R in REP, REP = restaurant & electro-pneumatic brake), and am not sure how these were powered. They didn't have HVAC, but the 442s do.


----------



## Eric S

I think this is new, but perhaps I've just overlooked or forgotten it - but it appears that California and Illinois have added on to the Charger order with CA ordering 14 more and IL ordering 12 more. International Railway Journal is reporting such in an article dated Friday, November 16, 2015 http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/locomotives/us-states-purchase-new-diesel-electric-locos.html


----------



## Dutchrailnut

sure seems the Charger is outselling the F125 by 4 to 1 maybe 5 to 1.


----------



## neroden

Siemens has the absolute best reputation worldwide among railway rolling stock & locomotive builders at the moment. (I'm sure fortunes will change over time.) I'm not surprised they're selling a lot right now.

I just noticed something interesting. MARC is ordering Siemens Chargers to run underneath Amtrak's wires on the NEC. This puts them in an *interesting position*. If they manage to get Amtrak to offer them a better deal on electricity costs and maintenance, they can switch to electric and *they have a market to sell the Chargers to*, because Amtrak can certainly use more of them. If they'd picked a different diesel loco, like the ones they already have, there wouldn't be much of a resale market because nobody wants to maintain something which is nothing like the rest of their fleet..

California's order was basically expected: they had not ordered close to enough for planned expansion. This gets them up to enough to replace everything and allow for planned expanded service.

The Illinois order is more interesting. The original plan was to replace the motive power for every single corridor out of Chicago and it seemed like enough but with no spares. But this is a very significant additional number, which should not only cover spares and the Moline and Rockford services, but leave extras. I can't think of any more service expansions planned in Illinois which would need more locomotives -- is Illinois planning to lease some of these to Michigan for their proposed service expansions?

The order is now up to 66 including 8 for MARC, or 58 without.

This is a substantial addition to Amtrak motive power. I think the Dash-8s will probably be removed from service, or they might continue a strange life as very-fuel-hungry switchers. I'm not sure how many Chargers will replace F59PHIs (which will probably be retired) versus how many Chargers will replace P42s in the corridors (allowing more P42s to run in long-distance service). I guess this is basically a question of how many F59PHIs will be retired. F59PHIs are currently used mostly in California and Washington State and both states are ordering lots of Chargers. The F59PHIs might all be retired, in which case the order so far wouldn't actually free up very many P42s. But on the other hand Amtrak still has to run F59PHIs because of North Carolina, so California might keep a bunch around....


----------



## Eric S

Total shot in the dark guess here, but did the original Midwest portion of the order include locomotives for the Hiawatha? Not that anywhere near 12 locomotives are needed for that service, but that *could* explain a few of them. (Although Hiawatha costs are usually a 75% WI/25% IL split, so...)


----------



## Eric S

Here's another article, this one from the Sacramento Bee: http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/article43452282.html

And a link to the Caltrans press release: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/paffairs/news/pressrel/2015/15pr114.htm

The CA units are expected to enter service between July 2018 and February 2019.

A quick google search did not turn up an IDOT press release.


----------



## afigg

neroden said:


> The Illinois order is more interesting. The original plan was to replace the motive power for every single corridor out of Chicago and it seemed like enough but with no spares. But this is a very significant additional number, which should not only cover spares and the Moline and Rockford services, but leave extras. I can't think of any more service expansions planned in Illinois which would need more locomotives -- is Illinois planning to lease some of these to Michigan for their proposed service expansions?
> 
> The order is now up to 66 including 8 for MARC, or 58 without.
> 
> This is a substantial addition to Amtrak motive power. I think the Dash-8s will probably be removed from service, or they might continue a strange life as very-fuel-hungry switchers. I'm not sure how many Chargers will replace F59PHIs (which will probably be retired) versus how many Chargers will replace P42s in the corridors (allowing more P42s to run in long-distance service). I guess this is basically a question of how many F59PHIs will be retired. F59PHIs are currently used mostly in California and Washington State and both states are ordering lots of Chargers. The F59PHIs might all be retired, in which case the order so far wouldn't actually free up very many P42s. But on the other hand Amtrak still has to run F59PHIs because of North Carolina, so California might keep a bunch around....


The Illinois option order of 12 Chargers was stated in the September status report by the Next Gen equipment pool committee. So that is not new info. But the 12 units are not necessarily going to Illinois corridor services. IL DOT is acting as the buyer for the Midwest joint consortium for the Chargers and Nippon-Sharyo bi-level cars, so the 12 additional locomotives are presumably going to the joint equipment pool. Don't know whether the 3 states in the consortium are paying for part or all the costs for the 12 units or if federal funds are paying for them.

As for the F59PHIs, why would Amtrak retire them? The F59s were delivered in 1998, so they are younger than some of the P-42s. I doubt that California or Washington State would keep any F59s around once they have all the new Chargers in service. The states will own the Chargers, so they don;t have to pay Amtrak capital equipment costs. The F59s might end up on the east coast as corridor diesels for the Virginia Regionals, maybe the Vermonter and the Downeaster.

The interesting thing is that according to the recently posted Capital Investment Plan for FY2016-FY2020 for state corridors services by the 514 Capital Equipment Subcommittee, 5 out of the 21 F59PHIs are not in a state of good repair and are scheduled for overhauls in FY16 and FY17 to return to service. The states (CA?) are paying for the overhauls, but I wonder if the overhaul plans might change with the order for additional Chargers. BTW, the Capital Investment Plan for FY16-FY20 posted on the subcommittee website has a very detailed breakdown of what the states and Amtrak expect to spend for equipment maintenance and capital charges over the next 5 years.


----------



## Fan Railer

Unless my math is wrong, based on the numbers, California (with the option) is only getting 20 Chargers to replace 21 F59PHIs; I presume they're going to continue borrowing Amtrak locomotives for the foreseeable future?


----------



## afigg

Fan Railer said:


> Unless my math is wrong, based on the numbers, California (with the option) is only getting 20 Chargers to replace 21 F59PHIs; I presume they're going to continue borrowing Amtrak locomotives for the foreseeable future?


The 21 F59PHIs are used in both CA and the Cascades corridor. I think 15 are used in CA. CA got 6 Chargers in the baseline order to expand service, the option order for 14 presumably replaces the 15 California F-59PHis. And not all of those 15 may be in service, if 5 out of 21 total are waiting on overhauls.

The breakdown of the baseline order is 21 for the Mid-West Coalition, 5 + 3 options for Washington State, 6 for California. So the Midwest Coalition buying 12 additional Chargers will make for 33 locomotives for the IL, MI. MO corridor services. BTW, we do have a long running thread on what became the Siemens Charger contract: RFP released for 35 Next Gen Locomotives for those looking for more info.

Edit: Checked and Washington State is buying 8 Siemens Chargers, so the state is exercising the baseline option for 3 units. (Rail - Amtrak Cascades New Locomotives)


----------



## Andrew

It would seem strange if the F59PHI locomotives get retired--they would only be around 20 years old!

These new Chargers are supposed to have a minimum service life of 25 years, and possibly 30 years with good maintenance.


----------



## Eric S

Did we ever break down how many locomotives are needed for the existing Midwest corridor services? I looked through the other thread that afigg linked to and didn't see anything - perhaps it was in a thread about the bilevel cars?

Would this be accurate for the current number of trainsets used?

2 CHI-CDL

1 CHI-GRR

2 CHI-MKE*

3 CHI-PNT

1 CHI-PTH

2 CHI-QCY

4 CHI-STL

2 KCY-STL

17 trainsets

I would imagine the CHI-PNT and CHI-STL trainsets will use 2 locomotives, one on each end, as they see or will see the longest stretches of 110mph running. So that is now accounting for 24 locomotives. Perhaps a second loco for the CHI-PTH trainset as it too runs at 110mph? So 25?

Now, the Hiawatha. There have been rumors and rumblings that WI might join in the bilevel car order but so far there's been nothing announced. So, I'm assuming for now that it will continue to run with Amfleet/Horizon equipment. But perhaps it will receive new locomotives. Will the cabbages be replaced by a second locomotive, instead of some sort of cab car? Just idle thoughts for now, but that could account for up to 27 locomotives, if my math and guesses are correct.

Anyway, please correct anything here that I've missed or misstated.


----------



## PerRock

afigg said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Illinois order is more interesting. The original plan was to replace the motive power for every single corridor out of Chicago and it seemed like enough but with no spares. But this is a very significant additional number, which should not only cover spares and the Moline and Rockford services, but leave extras. I can't think of any more service expansions planned in Illinois which would need more locomotives -- is Illinois planning to lease some of these to Michigan for their proposed service expansions?
> 
> The order is now up to 66 including 8 for MARC, or 58 without.
> 
> This is a substantial addition to Amtrak motive power. I think the Dash-8s will probably be removed from service, or they might continue a strange life as very-fuel-hungry switchers. I'm not sure how many Chargers will replace F59PHIs (which will probably be retired) versus how many Chargers will replace P42s in the corridors (allowing more P42s to run in long-distance service). I guess this is basically a question of how many F59PHIs will be retired. F59PHIs are currently used mostly in California and Washington State and both states are ordering lots of Chargers. The F59PHIs might all be retired, in which case the order so far wouldn't actually free up very many P42s. But on the other hand Amtrak still has to run F59PHIs because of North Carolina, so California might keep a bunch around....
> 
> 
> 
> The Illinois option order of 12 Chargers was stated in the September status report by the Next Gen equipment pool committee. So that is not new info. But the 12 units are not necessarily going to Illinois corridor services. IL DOT is acting as the buyer for the Midwest joint consortium for the Chargers and Nippon-Sharyo bi-level cars, so the 12 additional locomotives are presumably going to the joint equipment pool. Don't know whether the 3 states in the consortium are paying for part or all the costs for the 12 units or if federal funds are paying for them.
> 
> As for the F59PHIs, why would Amtrak retire them? The F59s were delivered in 1998, so they are younger than some of the P-42s. I doubt that California or Washington State would keep any F59s around once they have all the new Chargers in service. The states will own the Chargers, so they don;t have to pay Amtrak capital equipment costs. The F59s might end up on the east coast as corridor diesels for the Virginia Regionals, maybe the Vermonter and the Downeaster.
> 
> The interesting thing is that according to the recently posted Capital Investment Plan for FY2016-FY2020 for state corridors services by the 514 Capital Equipment Subcommittee, 5 out of the 21 F59PHIs are not in a state of good repair and are scheduled for overhauls in FY16 and FY17 to return to service. The states (CA?) are paying for the overhauls, but I wonder if the overhaul plans might change with the order for additional Chargers. BTW, the Capital Investment Plan for FY16-FY20 posted on the subcommittee website has a very detailed breakdown of what the states and Amtrak expect to spend for equipment maintenance and capital charges over the next 5 years.
Click to expand...

I'm not certain about the California F59PHIs*, but some of the Cascades F59PHIs are owned by WADOT, not Amtrak so WA would have to sell them to Amtrak in order for them to show up somewhere else. My guess is that they'll be sold off to other agencies.

*I think all the California ones are owned by CA, but someone else will have to verify that.

peter


----------



## A Voice

PerRock said:


> afigg said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Illinois order is more interesting. The original plan was to replace the motive power for every single corridor out of Chicago and it seemed like enough but with no spares. But this is a very significant additional number, which should not only cover spares and the Moline and Rockford services, but leave extras. I can't think of any more service expansions planned in Illinois which would need more locomotives -- is Illinois planning to lease some of these to Michigan for their proposed service expansions?
> 
> The order is now up to 66 including 8 for MARC, or 58 without.
> 
> This is a substantial addition to Amtrak motive power. I think the Dash-8s will probably be removed from service, or they might continue a strange life as very-fuel-hungry switchers. I'm not sure how many Chargers will replace F59PHIs (which will probably be retired) versus how many Chargers will replace P42s in the corridors (allowing more P42s to run in long-distance service). I guess this is basically a question of how many F59PHIs will be retired. F59PHIs are currently used mostly in California and Washington State and both states are ordering lots of Chargers. The F59PHIs might all be retired, in which case the order so far wouldn't actually free up very many P42s. But on the other hand Amtrak still has to run F59PHIs because of North Carolina, so California might keep a bunch around....
> 
> 
> 
> The Illinois option order of 12 Chargers was stated in the September status report by the Next Gen equipment pool committee. So that is not new info. But the 12 units are not necessarily going to Illinois corridor services. IL DOT is acting as the buyer for the Midwest joint consortium for the Chargers and Nippon-Sharyo bi-level cars, so the 12 additional locomotives are presumably going to the joint equipment pool. Don't know whether the 3 states in the consortium are paying for part or all the costs for the 12 units or if federal funds are paying for them.
> 
> As for the F59PHIs, why would Amtrak retire them? The F59s were delivered in 1998, so they are younger than some of the P-42s. I doubt that California or Washington State would keep any F59s around once they have all the new Chargers in service. The states will own the Chargers, so they don;t have to pay Amtrak capital equipment costs. The F59s might end up on the east coast as corridor diesels for the Virginia Regionals, maybe the Vermonter and the Downeaster.
> 
> The interesting thing is that according to the recently posted Capital Investment Plan for FY2016-FY2020 for state corridors services by the 514 Capital Equipment Subcommittee, 5 out of the 21 F59PHIs are not in a state of good repair and are scheduled for overhauls in FY16 and FY17 to return to service. The states (CA?) are paying for the overhauls, but I wonder if the overhaul plans might change with the order for additional Chargers. BTW, the Capital Investment Plan for FY16-FY20 posted on the subcommittee website has a very detailed breakdown of what the states and Amtrak expect to spend for equipment maintenance and capital charges over the next 5 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm not certain about the California F59PHIs*, but some of the Cascades F59PHIs are owned by WADOT, not Amtrak so WA would have to sell them to Amtrak in order for them to show up somewhere else. My guess is that they'll be sold off to other agencies.
> 
> *I think all the California ones are owned by CA, but someone else will have to verify that.
> 
> peter
Click to expand...

According to the On-Track-On-Line Roster, 44 F59 locomotives are listed; Of these, eight belong to North Carolina (not all F59PHI) and fifteen to Caltrans. Amtrak shows as having 21 F59PHI units, which should include any units used in Washington state (though state ownership is not described).


----------



## west point

On page 23 of the Amtrak FY 2016 budget request shows both NC and California owning F-59s but not any for Washington state.


----------



## neroden

Eric S said:


> Did we ever break down how many locomotives are needed for the existing Midwest corridor services? I looked through the other thread that afigg linked to and didn't see anything - perhaps it was in a thread about the bilevel cars?
> 
> Would this be accurate for the current number of trainsets used?


I'm not sure (maybe an insider would know better, hint hint) but I was also coming up with numbers in the range of 17-20, which means that 33 for the Midwest is a lot of extras.
I'm pretty sure Amtrak intends to run all the corridor trains with only one locomotive; they're specified to be powerful enough and anything else would be waste.

Add 2 for the planned Moline-Chicago service, 1 for the planned Rockford-Chicago service (or 2 for Dubuque), and 2 for planned increases in Chicago-St. Louis frequency, and 33 is still a lot of extras.

Add 1 for planned second Grand Rapids frequency and 3 for additional planned Chicago-Detroit frequencies, and now you're getting into the right range.

Michigan is also talking about Grand Rapids-Lansing-Dearborn, which would add another 1 or 2.

So I think Illinois *has* to be buying on behalf of Michigan.

----

F59PHI or F59PH are used routinely by Amtrak in three places right now:

-- California: some are owned by California, some not

-- Washington State: *all* will be replaced by Chargers

-- North Carolina: they own theirs

Other agencies using F59PHI or F59PH are Metrolink, Coaster, Sounder, TRE, AMT (Montreal), West Coast Express (Vancouver), and GO Transit, which is phasing them out.

If any F59PHIs are kept by or for Amtrak, I'd bet they're going to be kept in California, where Metrolink and Coaster use them extensively, or in North Carolina. Does Amtrak really want to keep parts and maintenance expertise in Chicago or Beech Grove or Bear or Hialeah for an oddball fleet of 21 engines which they currently don't service? I think they don't. Amtrak has relatively little EMD equipment now and it seems unlikely that keeping spare parts and maintenance for them is cost-effective for Amtrak; selling them to an agency which still uses lots of them would make more sense. (Amtrak's remaining EMD equipment consists of F59PHIs, ancient switchers from 1947-1976 which are due for replacement anyway, and three GP38-H3.)

The thing which has been most confusing me lately is California's plans. I'm assuming they'll retire their two Dash-8s, but I'm not sure what they're planning to do with their F59PHIs. They could replace all of them, replace some of them, or replace none of them. They could sell excess to Metrolink or Coaster.


----------



## Eric S

neroden said:


> Eric S said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did we ever break down how many locomotives are needed for the existing Midwest corridor services? I looked through the other thread that afigg linked to and didn't see anything - perhaps it was in a thread about the bilevel cars?
> 
> Would this be accurate for the current number of trainsets used?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure, but I was also coming up with numbers in the range of 17-20, which means that 33 is a lot of extras.
> I'm pretty sure Amtrak intends to run all the corridor trains with only one locomotive; they're specified to be powerful enough.
Click to expand...

Ah, yes, forgot that the intention was NOT to run with two locomotives. So, still around 17 trainsets/locomotives for existing services. Perhaps 2 more for Moline, assuming that happens. And maybe another 1 for Rockford if that ever happens. Still, like you said, in the 17-20ish range.


----------



## CHamilton

west point said:


> On page 23 of the Amtrak FY 2016 budget request shows both NC and California owning F-59s but not any for Washington state.


AFAICT, Washington state does not own any of the current locomotives. They do own two Talgo trainsets, as does Oregon, and some of the F59s have been painted in Cascades livery at one time or another, but those locos are often seen in California.


----------



## neroden

Thanks to Afigg linking to this:

http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Pages/514-Subcommittee.aspx

We now know the planned fate of the F59PHIs. California will continue leasing them, for Surfliner service *only*. (I bet they end up being maintained at the Metrolink shops, though the report doesn't say that.)

So, in California, they have 6 Chargers for "expansion" and 15 Chargers to replace all Amtrak-leased units on the Capitol Corridor and San Joaquin, as well as to replace California's Dash-8s (I seem to recall something about replacing those two oddballs). That sounds plausible. It means they'll have an oversized fleet of F59PHIs for the Surfliner, but perhaps the result will be that the worst will be condemned and used for parts.

The odd part of the plan is that Amtrak apparently intends to continue using Dash-8s in long-distance service in 2020. Hmmm.


----------



## Scuba_Steve

neroden said:


> Thanks to Afigg linking to this:
> 
> http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Pages/514-Subcommittee.aspx
> 
> We now know the planned fate of the F59PHIs. California will continue leasing them, for Surfliner service *only*. (I bet they end up being maintained at the Metrolink shops, though the report doesn't say that.)
> 
> So, in California, they have 6 Chargers for "expansion" and 15 Chargers to replace all Amtrak-leased units on the Capitol Corridor and San Joaquin, as well as to replace California's Dash-8s (I seem to recall something about replacing those two oddballs). That sounds plausible. It means they'll have an oversized fleet of F59PHIs for the Surfliner, but perhaps the result will be that the worst will be condemned and used for parts.
> 
> The odd part of the plan is that Amtrak apparently intends to continue using Dash-8s in long-distance service in 2020. Hmmm.


So if I read that correctly, the Chargers will stay in Northern California, and the Surfliner will just get more F59PHIs?


----------



## Paulus

The Caltrans announcement said that the purchase was for the Surfliner, and I know LOSSAN was interested in replacing them. I've emailed LOSSAN's managing director for confirmation and clarification.


----------



## neroden

Caltrans is ordering enough Chargers to supply all of Northern California and *some* of the Surfliner. I don't think they're ordering enough to supply all of Northern California and *all* of the Surfliner, which would indicate that some F59PHIs would remain in service.

But I could be wrong.

The F59PHIs are really undesirable for Amtrak's national network (horsepower too low) and the substantial parts incompatibilty with everything else Amtrak runs makes it undesirable to spread them around to different maintenance bases. They have no place in Washington State (getting Chargers), Chicago (getting Chargers), New York (needs dual-modes), or Pennsylvania (mostly electric), which means the only places a group of them could be centered to support multiple regional services would be WAS for Virginia services, or California; they're currently not used in WAS, so that seems unlikely. If they stop being used on California services, I'd expect them to be sold (maybe to Metrolink, which is now replacing cab cars with extra locomotives and could therefore use more locomotives).


----------



## afigg

neroden said:


> Caltrans is ordering enough Chargers to supply all of Northern California and *some* of the Surfliner. I don't think they're ordering enough to supply all of Northern California and *all* of the Surfliner, which would indicate that some F59PHIs would remain in service.


I think that the lead time on the Capital Investment Plan has to be taken into account when reading it. The document is dated October 27, but with multiple states submitting their plans and a large subcommittee (22 members) that has to assemble and agree to it, the budget and cost plans & numbers have to be generated months in advance. In fact, on page 9 (and 10), it describes the annual schedule for updates and states "States will submit their Fleet and Service Plan tables to Amtrak by January 15th of each year." Then Amtrak provides draft updates by March 31 and so on.
The announcement of the California order of 14 units was made just several days ago. So I think the FY2018 to FY2020 F59 LCPM cost numbers for the Surfliner (Los Angeles) don't reflect the order for the 14 additional Chargers as they can't properly budget for them until the contract is finalized. The state will presumably be paying for F59s through FY019 as the Caltrans press release states "These 14 locomotives are expected to be delivered and put into service between July 2018 and Feb. 2019."

So by mid-2019, Amtrak will have 21 F-59PHIs to figure out what to do with.


----------



## PerRock

neroden said:


> Other agencies using F59PHI or F59PH are Metrolink, Coaster, Sounder, TRE, AMT (Montreal), West Coast Express (Vancouver), and GO Transit, which is phasing them out.


Metra owns 3 F59PHs so they're now on that list as well. I don't know too much about the Metra ones, except one was recently spotted wearing the newer paint scheme. I believe they're ex-Metrolink, possibly ex-GO (conflicting reports) & were owned by a leasing company in Canada.

peter

Photo


----------



## neroden

afigg said:


> So by mid-2019, Amtrak will have 21 F-59PHIs to figure out what to do with.


...and, if they're really replacing them completely, California will have 15 F-59PHIs to figure out what to do with. (If they're keeping any F59PHIs, I'd assume they'd keep their own first.) I'm still not clear on exactly what California is planning.

Meanwhile, Illinois will have enough Chargers to lease to pretty much anyone in the region (Indiana, for example?)


----------



## Paulus

Received email confirmation from LOSSAN today that all 14 Chargers will be for LOSSAN, replacing almost all of the 15 F59s currently used.


----------



## jis

Here is what the AAF Brightline Chargers will look like.... photo as provided by AAF to Gannet, IRJ and several other press outlets, and published by Gannet in a US News and World Report article and by IRJ and several others:


----------



## Palmetto

They are apparently going to use several other colors on their equipment besides the yellow we see here.


----------



## jis

I am more curious about the shape of the nose than the color schemes. This shape differs significantly from the earlier pictures of Chargers that we have seen which appear to resemble the Sprinters a lot more. This nose resembles the Acelas more than the Sprinters.


----------



## PerRock

I'll have to go digging when I get home (or someone else can) but I remember reading that the AAF chargers are getting a more HSR-style nose then the other Chargers.

peter


----------



## jis

PerRock said:


> I'll have to go digging when I get home (or someone else can) but I remember reading that the AAF chargers are getting a more HSR-style nose then the other Chargers.
> 
> peter


That is what I recall reading too. So apparently that is quite true. Actually, I think it is more than just the nose. I think the body is shaped to match the Viaggio car shape too, so the whole thing looks like an integrated train set rather than locomotives and random cars put together into a train.


----------



## Fan Railer

Better breakdown of the Charger order:

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/more-siemens-charger-diesel-locomotives-ordered.html


----------



## cirdan

jis said:


> I am more curious about the shape of the nose than the color schemes. This shape differs significantly from the earlier pictures of Chargers that we have seen which appear to resemble the Sprinters a lot more. This nose resembles the Acelas more than the Sprinters.


I guess the outer shell of the nose cone is plastic anyway and customizing that to what the customer wants is much easier now than in the past.


----------



## cirdan

Seeing the Brightline train is supposedly based on the Railjet concept, it would be appropriate to compare to this ....

(a ca car, and I know AAF won't have that, but the comparison is interesting anyway)


----------



## jis

RailJet is push pull using standard EuroSprinter locomotive at one end with no specific integration between the consist and the locomotive to give it a articulated train look and feel. I think what Siemens is peddling to AAF is significantly different from RailJet. The only common thing is the basic passenger car design - the Viaggio Comfort.

The fact that RailJets are capable of 140mph operation suggests that the Viaggio cars are designed for something like 140-160mph operation, and could potentially be adapted for use on other corridors supporting such speeds.


----------



## Andrew

Will the Chargers have outward facing cameras?


----------



## CCC1007

Almost certainly


----------



## seat38a

Paulus said:


> Received email confirmation from LOSSAN today that all 14 Chargers will be for LOSSAN, replacing almost all of the 15 F59s currently used.


And it also says in this article the order is for the Surfliners: http://www.masstransitmag.com/press_release/12135837/caltrans-orders-14-diesel-electric-locomotives-for-amtrak-pacific-surfliner-route


----------



## neroden

I am sooo confused by California's plans.

Washington is simple: they're replacing all locomotives on the Cascades.

Missouri is simple: they're replacing all locomotives on the River Runner.

Illinois is fairly straightforward too: 12 for Chicago-St. Louis; 2 each for Carbondale, Quincy, Milwaukee, Grand Rapids, Port Huron, 3 Wolverines, 2 Quad Cities, 1 Rockland or as a spare. So they're replacing everything too.

But California! California's ordered 14 for the Surfliner and 6 for "unknown". I don't know how many they use right now, but it seems obvious they're keeping some of their old locomotives. Which ones? Where will they be used?


----------



## seat38a

neroden said:


> I am sooo confused by California's plans.
> 
> Washington is simple: they're replacing all locomotives on the Cascades.
> 
> Missouri is simple: they're replacing all locomotives on the River Runner.
> 
> Illinois is fairly straightforward too: 12 for Chicago-St. Louis; 2 each for Carbondale, Quincy, Milwaukee, Grand Rapids, Port Huron, 3 Wolverines, 2 Quad Cities, 1 Rockland or as a spare. So they're replacing everything too.
> 
> But California! California's ordered 14 for the Surfliner and 6 for "unknown". I don't know how many they use right now, but it seems obvious they're keeping some of their old locomotives. Which ones? Where will they be used?


The NorCal Locomotives are owned by the State. Surfliner locomotives are owned by Amtrak. If anything, it looks like their priority is replacing the leased once first before replacing the ones the State already owns outright. There is always the good talk about Tier 4 compliant etc etc, but the reality seems to be that they are trying to offload the ones they pay Amtrak for. BTW the ones owned by California carry the CDTX mark according to Wikipedia. I found this picture from my last trip on the San Joaquin



DSC01949 by B H, on Flickr


----------



## neroden

OK. California owns 15 F59PHIs and 2 P32-8s. Amtrak owns 21 F59PHIs and 18 P32-8s.

Washington is replacing 8, Missouri is replacing 2, Illinois is replacing 4 on Lincoln Service, & Illinois is replacing 13 on other services, not counting the locomotives for expanded service; so that probably allows Amtrak to retire 27 locomotives.

California is buying 14 locomotives for Surfliner service and 6 for "unknown". If their priority is replacing Amtrak leased units, this should displace all remaining leased Amtrak-owned units -- and leave a bunch of additional locomotives, but not enough to replace their whole fleet. Expansion plans aren't going to require more than a couple of locomotives. Which California-owned locomotives is California going to retire? I'm guessing the P32-8s, but I've heard no word...


----------



## blondninja

There's supposed to be a new line added to the coachella valley to replace the through way buses to Palm Springs. That will require new engines and cars I'd think. They plan two trains a day in each direction.


----------



## keelhauled

I should certainly hope Amtrak doesn't leap to retiring locomotives. I would much rather see them use the freed-up power to allow for major overhauls/preventative maintenance of the P42 fleet.


----------



## PerRock

neroden said:


> OK. California owns 15 F59PHIs and 2 P32-8s. Amtrak owns 21 F59PHIs and 18 P32-8s.
> 
> Washington is replacing 8, Missouri is replacing 2, Illinois is replacing 4 on Lincoln Service, & Illinois is replacing 13 on other services, not counting the locomotives for expanded service; so that probably allows Amtrak to retire 27 locomotives.
> 
> California is buying 14 locomotives for Surfliner service and 6 for "unknown". If their priority is replacing Amtrak leased units, this should displace all remaining leased Amtrak-owned units -- and leave a bunch of additional locomotives, but not enough to replace their whole fleet. Expansion plans aren't going to require more than a couple of locomotives. Which California-owned locomotives is California going to retire? I'm guessing the P32-8s, but I've heard no word...


It's not a straight forward replace. All the Amtrak F59PHIs are used on the west coast. So the 15 Midwestern Chargers will be replacing P42s. Those P42s probably won't be retired but distributed elsewhere in the system.

While the B32s aren't that well loved for revenue runs, they are decently liked for yard service (which is what most are used for anyways) the P42s. Full-cowled/cabbed units are less useful for yard work (harder to reverse, harder to jump on/off, etc)


----------



## jis

A few B32s are used in main line duty out east on the Pennsylvanina and occasionally on the Silvers too.


----------



## afigg

blondninja said:


> There's supposed to be a new line added to the coachella valley to replace the through way buses to Palm Springs. That will require new engines and cars I'd think. They plan two trains a day in each direction.


The proposed Coachella Valley corridor service is still in the Service Development plan study phase. Then it has to go through the EIS and record of decision phase followed by funding and agreements with UP. Until then, Caltrans is not likely to commit funds nor make official plans for allocating and purchasing rolling stock including locomotives for the service. Given that the Siemens plant is in Sacramento, shouldn't be politically difficult to obtain state funding to order more Chargers when they are needed for new and expanded California services.


----------



## afigg

keelhauled said:


> I should certainly hope Amtrak doesn't leap to retiring locomotives. I would much rather see them use the freed-up power to allow for major overhauls/preventative maintenance of the P42 fleet.


I seriously doubt that Amtrak will retire any P-42s (that have not been too badly damaged to be repaired) until they get new replacements (within Amtrak's owned fleet). Older locomotives, some of the P-40s and P-32-8s are likely to be retired first, but only when there are enough Chargers for the state corridors to fix the current locomotive fleet shortages.


----------



## blondninja

There are multiple options for the coachella route and equipment shortages are one of the issues. There is also the option to run down the bnsf route via Fullerton rather than Pomona but then yes over to up trackage by Colton. Having more equipment makes one of the issues not so much of an issue. I assume old Surfline cars could go to this route. I spoke to some people at the last railroad days in Fullerton as they staffed a booth there.


----------



## blondninja

Also the numbers are always reported as good for the Fullerton to Palm Springs/Indio Amtrak bus, which is basically a test to see about the viability of service to that region.


----------



## PVD

If I recall, the P 32-8 gives up a fair amount of traction power when providing HEP while the F 59PHI has a separate genset for HEP, as well as being geared for 110 max instead of 100, which might matter if a unit were to be relocated to some of the areas where 110 mph running occurs. Many of those areas will now see the Chargers as their primary, but not neccessarily exclusive power. The F 59 might be a better fit for a "Sub"


----------



## Paulus

neroden said:


> But California! California's ordered 14 for the Surfliner and 6 for "unknown". I don't know how many they use right now, but it seems obvious they're keeping some of their old locomotives. Which ones? Where will they be used?


The six unknown are replacing existing Amtrak locomotives in the Oakland pool for the Capitol Corridor and San Joaquins. Not sure exactly how many are leased. Don't forget that there are also substantial increases planned for the San Joaquins and Capitol Corridor (more frequencies and extensions).


----------



## blondninja

True, and then there's the oft rumored Coast Daylight.


----------



## seat38a

Paulus said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> But California! California's ordered 14 for the Surfliner and 6 for "unknown". I don't know how many they use right now, but it seems obvious they're keeping some of their old locomotives. Which ones? Where will they be used?
> 
> 
> 
> The six unknown are replacing existing Amtrak locomotives in the Oakland pool for the Capitol Corridor and San Joaquins. Not sure exactly how many are leased. Don't forget that there are also substantial increases planned for the San Joaquins and Capitol Corridor (more frequencies and extensions).
Click to expand...

These are probably candidates for replacement. San Joaquin at Bakersfield. Also don't the Comet Consists run with leased locomotives as well?



DSC01944 by B H, on Flickr


----------



## neroden

PerRock said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK. California owns 15 F59PHIs and 2 P32-8s. Amtrak owns 21 F59PHIs and 18 P32-8s.
> 
> Washington is replacing 8, Missouri is replacing 2, Illinois is replacing 4 on Lincoln Service, & Illinois is replacing 13 on other services, not counting the locomotives for expanded service; so that probably allows Amtrak to retire 27 locomotives.
> 
> California is buying 14 locomotives for Surfliner service and 6 for "unknown". If their priority is replacing Amtrak leased units, this should displace all remaining leased Amtrak-owned units -- and leave a bunch of additional locomotives, but not enough to replace their whole fleet. Expansion plans aren't going to require more than a couple of locomotives. Which California-owned locomotives is California going to retire? I'm guessing the P32-8s, but I've heard no word...
> 
> 
> 
> It's not a straight forward replace. All the Amtrak F59PHIs are used on the west coast. So the 15 Midwestern Chargers will be replacing P42s. Those P42s probably won't be retired but distributed elsewhere in the system.
> 
> While the B32s aren't that well loved for revenue runs, they are decently liked for yard service (which is what most are used for anyways) the P42s. Full-cowled/cabbed units are less useful for yard work (harder to reverse, harder to jump on/off, etc)
Click to expand...

OK, I'm starting to figure this out. So with Cascades currently running 8 F59PHIs, California is running 13 F59PHIs owned by Amtrak, 15 F59PHIs owned by California, and 2 P32-8s owned by California. The other P32-8s, owned by Amtrak, are probably relegated to yard service or will be soon, and may be retired if there are enough P40s and P42s available for backup.

So California is buying 14 Chargers for the Surfliner; this replaces all 13 F59PHIs owned by Amtrak and adds 1. (For this calculation, it doesn't really matter whether the Amtrak-owned F59PHIs are running on the Surfliner or on the northern services, so I assumed for simiplicity that they were running on the Surfliner.) I'm not sure how many locos Surfliner uses as a whole, but 14 seems close to correct.

Meanwhile California is buying 6 Chargers for the northern services (Capitol Corridor & San Joaquin), which currently run various leased locomotives, 15 California-owned F59PHIs, and sometimes the P32-8s. I'm not sure how many California uses here, but it looks like 8 on the San Joaquins and 12 or so on the Capitol Corridor, maybe less, which adds up to about 20. So the 6 Chargers should replace P42s leased from Amtrak, because adding them to 15 California-owned F59PHIs gets you to 21. There don't really seem to be any for expansion.

So it looks like California will keep operating all or most of the California-owned F59PHIs on the northern services. Which means that Oakland will be stuck maintaining F59PHIs for California after Amtrak has stopped using them. Curious.

It's not clear to me what happens to the California owned P32-8s, but it seems like they probably won't be used in regular revenue service. Relegated to yard service? Does California really have a use for them? While running HEP they have relatively poor power and California wouldn't want to use them on the Surfliner. Apparently they're sometimes used on the Capitol Corridor, but that doesn't seem very desirable either.

----

Anyway, if we assume that Amtrak has no further interest in its displaced F59PHIs (apart from possibly leasing them to states), and that the P32-8s are already not used in routine revenue service any more, this also allows us to figure out how many P42s are "freed up" to provide spares and relief for the trains which will continue to run P42s. The answer is 2 from Missouri, 4 from Lincoln Service, 13 from other Illinois, and 5 or 6 from northern California service. So about 25. This should help with the ability to keep the P42 fleet running reliably... for a few more years.


----------



## PVD

With the power problems of tis year, I'm not so sure the displaced F59PHI won't be around for a while. Does anyone have MDBF or maintenace cost data that would make them signifigantly worse than the P40s or 42s to have around? Two questions for the tech folks out there... Can they MU with the P42 or P40? Can the separate genset run for HEP with the prime mover shut down? A lot of trains go out with one unit and really could use a second for reliability.


----------



## CCC1007

They mu with p42's every time they are sent to beech grove. No problem there.


----------



## neroden

It would be interesting to MU the F59PHIs with the P42s and use the F59PHIs as HEP generators.

But there really is the issue of keeping parts and training current for "oddball" units, and these are Amtrak's last EMD locomotives apart from the switchers.

I would expect them to remain concentrated at a small number of maintenance sites. California was ideal because they're used by Metrolink and Coaster as well as the northern California Amtrak services. NCDOT uses F59s for the Piedmont, so the Carolinian might be a possibility. Beech Grove has to maintain everything, so the Cardinal might be a possibility too. I suppose the Coast Starlight or the California Zephyr is possible, but they don't really have as much power as is desired.


----------



## west point

The rating of the F59 HEP may be a problem. Remember the new Amtrak requirement for HEP is 1000 Kw. on the ACS-64. Only the P-40s assigned to Auto Train can provide enough HEP ( unknown ) for that train. Any one know F59's ? Also some of the F-40s had a lower rating than P-40, p-42, SDP-40s


----------



## CCC1007

I think it's about 800 kW


----------



## seat38a

west point said:


> The rating of the F59 HEP may be a problem. Remember the new Amtrak requirement for HEP is 1000 Kw. on the ACS-64. Only the P-40s assigned to Auto Train can provide enough HEP ( unknown ) for that train. Any one know F59's ? Also some of the F-40s had a lower rating than P-40, p-42, SDP-40s


They do get used on the LD trains when needed so they must be able to handle it.

http://www.trainweb.org/mattstrains/pics/pics/AMTRAK/AMTK_115_3.jpg


----------



## PerRock

This is from an 2012 PRIIA document about specifications on acquiring "next generation locomotives" I don't know if anything has changed.



> The locomotive shall be equipped with an inverter—type Head End Power (HEP) source which shall produce 480VAC, 3-phase, 60 Hz electric power for heating, lighting and other hotel power needs of connected passenger cars. The HEP power source shall be capable of producing 600kW at 480V, 60 Hz with a 100% duty cycle.


But the document seems to indicate, and I don't really understand what I'm reading (ya I'll link it) but I believe there is limitations in the system on the cars for exceeding these limits.

here is the doc: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Fx8XPB2w_JY89kxJX00-0_XAzE1-Nt0yFdIUP8x18PR8m0MOO3Ccj9iPbPy3

peter


----------



## PVD

I thought the new diesels got bumped to 800kw. Anyway, the difference with the F59 is that it has a separate genset, so the HEP is not subtracted from the traction power.


----------



## afigg

I would have thought Siemens would have been further along than this, but they have installed the Cummins engine into the first Charger locomotive.

Railway Age: Siemens Chargers coming to life. Excerpt:



> Siemens reached a production milestone at its Sacramento, Calif., manufacturing plant with installation of the first Cummins QSK95 diesel engine and traction alternator into the carbody of a new higher-speed diesel-electric Charger locomotive.
> 
> The 21-ton power unit, the first diesel engine to be installed at the Sacramento plant, was successfully lowered into the locomotive by overhead crane.
> 
> Siemens is manufacturing 69 Chargers for the Departments of Transportation in Illinois, California, Michigan, Missouri, Washington and Maryland, and for Brightline, the privately owned and operated express passenger rail service to be offered by Florida East Coast Industries subsidiary All Aboard Florida that will connect Miami and Orlando. Siemens is also building Brightline passenger coaches in Sacramento.


There is a link on the Railway Age page to a video on the Siemens site of the engine being lowered into the locomotive frame. So, yes, there is a video of what the Chargers frame will look like.


----------



## Caesar La Rock

Soon we will see how these locomotives perform with Cummins engines.


----------



## Fan Railer

afigg said:


> I would have thought Siemens would have been further along than this, but they have installed the Cummins engine into the first Charger locomotive.
> 
> Railway Age: Siemens Chargers coming to life. Excerpt:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Siemens reached a production milestone at its Sacramento, Calif., manufacturing plant with installation of the first Cummins QSK95 diesel engine and traction alternator into the carbody of a new higher-speed diesel-electric Charger locomotive.
> 
> The 21-ton power unit, the first diesel engine to be installed at the Sacramento plant, was successfully lowered into the locomotive by overhead crane.
> 
> Siemens is manufacturing 69 Chargers for the Departments of Transportation in Illinois, California, Michigan, Missouri, Washington and Maryland, and for Brightline, the privately owned and operated express passenger rail service to be offered by Florida East Coast Industries subsidiary All Aboard Florida that will connect Miami and Orlando. Siemens is also building Brightline passenger coaches in Sacramento.
> 
> 
> 
> There is a link on the Railway Age page to a video on the Siemens site of the engine being lowered into the locomotive frame. So, yes, there is a video of what the Chargers frame will look like.
Click to expand...

Well, as you can see in the video, that's on facebook if any of you are looking lol, there is still an ACS unit in the factory (which I presume to be 670, fresh off the production line). So it makes sense that they only just recently dropped the first prime mover into the first Charger.


----------



## Acela150

Caesar La Rock said:


> Soon we will see how these locomotives perform with Cummins engines.


Granted this is a totally different use. But the few fire trucks we have at my fire company they all have Cummins. They're a bad mother! In a good way!!


----------



## bretton88

Siemens has put up a preview video of the Charger locomotives that they're building for the midwest states and Florida. It looks pretty good.

http://news.usa.siemens.biz/blog/siemens-installs-first-cummins-engine-new-diesel-electric-charger-locomotive?stc=uscg101550


----------



## keelhauled

An update was posted on the Chargers, with some rather nice photographs and new (to my knowledge) renderings of the various paint schemes (which are all terribly bland IMO). Siemens has eleven locomotives in production, two of which are in final assembly. Testing will apparently begin in June, with the first deliveries to the Midwest states in December, followed by California in February 2017 and Washington state in March 2017.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

keelhauled said:


> An update was posted on the Chargers . . .


The promised update on the Chargers is not what's linked. It's gone missing.

However, the link did take us to some great info on the bi-level cars, thanks.


----------



## keelhauled

WoodyinNYC said:


> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> 
> An update was posted on the Chargers, with some rather nice photographs and new (to my knowledge) renderings of the various paint schemes (which are all terribly bland IMO). Siemens has eleven locomotives in production, two of which are in final assembly. Testing will apparently begin in June, with the first deliveries to the Midwest states in December, followed by California in February 2017 and Washington state in March 2017.
> 
> 
> 
> The promised update on the Chargers is *not what's linked*. It's gone missing.
> However, the link did take us to some great info on the bi-level cars, thanks.
Click to expand...

Fixed.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Sorry, I still go to the bi-levels, not the locomotives.


----------



## keelhauled

WoodyinNYC said:


> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> 
> An update was posted on the Chargers, with some rather nice photographs and new (to my knowledge) renderings of the various paint schemes (which are all terribly bland IMO). Siemens has eleven locomotives in production, two of which are in final assembly. Testing will apparently begin in June, with the first deliveries to the Midwest states in December, followed by California in February 2017 and Washington state in March 2017.
> 
> 
> 
> The promised update on the Chargers is not what's linked. It's gone missing.
> However, the link did take us to some great info on the bi-level cars, thanks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fixed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, I still go to the bi-levels, not the locomotives.
Click to expand...

Where are you clicking? My initial post or a quoted one? I edited my comment with the new link, but that won't translate through the forum's quoting mechanism. In any case, here it is again: http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/NGEC%20305_Presentation_Multi%20State_21616-update.pdf


----------



## WoodyinNYC

keelhauled said:


> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> 
> . . . on the Chargers, with some rather nice photographs . . .
> 
> 
> 
> The promised update on the Chargers is not what's linked. It's gone missing.
> However, the link did take us to some great info on the bi-level cars, thanks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fixed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, I still go to the bi-levels, not the locomotives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where are you clicking? My initial post or a quoted one? I edited my comment with the new link, but that won't translate through the forum's quoting mechanism. In any case, here it is again: http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/NGEC%20305_Presentation_Multi%20State_21616-update.pdf
Click to expand...

OK. Now I got it. Thanks.

Ima gonna try to edit out my posts that now can only spread confusion. LOL.

.


----------



## Blackwolf

I am able to see the locomotive update just fine.

Interesting to note: Looks like the white rooftop strobes are coming back? I'm actually not complaining, since the white strobes just scream "PASSENGER TRAIN" to me since Amtrak used to be the only trains with them growing up. A handfull of the CDTX F-59PH locomotives used on the Capitol Corridor route have the strobe still.

I am somewhat surprised that the CalTrans units are not being painted in the current livery. But, they will be the only Chargers with a transition piece that lines the back of the locomotive up with the rooflines of the cars behind it.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

corrected link http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/NGEC%20305_Presentation_Multi%20State_21616-update.pdf


----------



## Ryan

That's the same link that's been posted three times now, but thanks.


----------



## Caesar La Rock

They look nice and seeing a return to strobes makes things interesting. Speaking of strobes, I wonder why Amtrak removed the strobes on the P40s?


----------



## jis

So that locomotive which got the prime mover looks like one destined for Caltrans from the color of the exterior around the cab.


----------



## 9900

That is initially what I thought as well. But if one looks closely....you can see the blue curves back down toward the center of the locomotive, right above the door; where as the caltrain continues back aways past the door. This looks like a mid-west unit


----------



## Dutchrailnut

strobes are no longer a requirement with ditch light rule and only a extra maintenance expense.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Correct on first unit being a IDOT unit , not Caltrans, in link it has deliveries schedule after two units go to Pueblo.


----------



## fulham

With these new Chargers coming on-line, Amtrak should have an additional 33 P-42's available in Chicago (who knows what shape they are in), but what about the Amtrak engines in California and Washington state? CalTrans has 20 Chargers on order and WasDOT has 8. Will this free up an additional 28 Amtrak engines for LD service? I know both CalTrans and WasDOT have some of there own engines, will any of these be retired or are they looking at the Chargers as a way to get rid of any P42's they are leasing from Amtrak?


----------



## neroden

The Washington locomotives will be freed up. California is adding to its fleet.


----------



## Paulus

neroden said:


> The Washington locomotives will be freed up. California is adding to its fleet.


It'll free up all but one of the locomotives leased for the Surfliner.


----------



## cirdan

Ryan said:


> That's the same link that's been posted three times now, but thanks.


it works fine for me


----------



## jis

Dutchrailnut said:


> Correct on first unit being a IDOT unit , not Caltrans, *in link* it has deliveries schedule after two units go to Pueblo.


Which link? Thanks.


----------



## PRR 60

jis said:


> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct on first unit being a IDOT unit , not Caltrans, *in link* it has deliveries schedule after two units go to Pueblo.
> 
> 
> 
> Which link? Thanks.
Click to expand...

NGEC Slideshow, Slide 2


----------



## afigg

fulham said:


> With these new Chargers coming on-line, Amtrak should have an additional 33 P-42's available in Chicago (who knows what shape they are in), but what about the Amtrak engines in California and Washington state? CalTrans has 20 Chargers on order and WasDOT has 8. Will this free up an additional 28 Amtrak engines for LD service? I know both CalTrans and WasDOT have some of there own engines, will any of these be retired or are they looking at the Chargers as a way to get rid of any P42's they are leasing from Amtrak?


The Charger order of 33 locomotives for the Midwest is significantly more than the IL, MI, MO corridors are currently using. Don't know exactly how many P-42s might be freed up in the Midwest for use elsewhere, but it is not 33 of them. The additional locomotives will be available for expanded service frequencies and probably will be used on the 110 mph corridors to put 2 locomotives on each trainset for better acceleration.

As discussed earlier in this thread, the locomotives that will be freed up in California are F-59PHIs. With the Chargers becoming the main locomotive for the Midwest and West coast corridor services, if Amtrak decides to keep their F-59PHIs, might see them get moved east for use on some of the eastern corridor services. Probably won't be enough Chargers in revenue service until late 2017 or 2018 for the F-59s to start getting freed up.


----------



## jis

PRR 60 said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct on first unit being a IDOT unit , not Caltrans, *in link* it has deliveries schedule after two units go to Pueblo.
> 
> 
> 
> Which link? Thanks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> NGEC Slideshow, Slide 2
Click to expand...

Thanks.
So I suppose by May 2017 or so they will also sneak in some of the initial 10 AAF units too, if AAF is to start service in second half of 2017.



afigg said:


> As discussed earlier in this thread, the locomotives that will be freed up in California are F-59PHIs. With the Chargers becoming the main locomotive for the Midwest and West coast corridor services, if Amtrak decides to keep their F-59PHIs, might see them get moved east for use on some of the eastern corridor services. Probably won't be enough Chargers in revenue service until late 2017 or 2018 for the F-59s to start getting freed up.


Maybe Virginia will see a bunch of F59PHIs


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

MARC is getting Chargers to replace its electric locomotives. There are 10 electric locos on MARC's roster, but it's only getting 8 Chargers. Why would 8 Chargers be enough to replace those 10 locos? If it were 10 or more Chargers, that'd definitely be a different story.


----------



## CCC1007

The Chargers will be used in conjunction with the Motive power built locomotives therefore the maintenance spares can come from the existing pool of locomotives.


----------



## Ryan

MARC hasn't had 10 operational motors in approximately forever.


----------



## neroden

It sounds like Amtrak has quite a while to exercise its options on the Charger order... but hopefully Amtrak will shake up money to do so sometime in 2017, to keep the production line going and alleviate the pending shortage of P42s.


----------



## cirdan

neroden said:


> It sounds like Amtrak has quite a while to exercise its options on the Charger order... but hopefully Amtrak will shake up money to do so sometime in 2017, to keep the production line going and alleviate the pending shortage of P42s.


Maybe if they go back to leasing rather than buying outright, this would circumvent the challange of rasing cash upfront. I believe Siemens actually owns a loco leasing business so that shouldn't be a problem. I know in the long run leasing is far more coytl than buying, but difficult times can call for extraordinary measures.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Caesar La Rock said:


> They look nice and seeing a return to strobes makes things interesting. Speaking of strobes, I wonder why Amtrak removed the strobes on the P40s?


That's a good question. I've been wondering the same thing myself.

I do know for one thing, people complain of dizziness from them. Sometimes, people have even had seizures from them. It's strange, but true.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

In the renderings, why the heck does the CalTrans loco have a sloped fin on the back of its roof but the others don't?


----------



## CCC1007

Maybe they asked for it.

The strobes on school buses don't cause seizures, so why would the strobes on a locomotive if they had a similar frequency?


----------



## PRR 60

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> In the renderings, why the heck does the CalTrans loco have a sloped fin on the back of its roof but the others don't?


It transitions the visual profile from the locomotive to the high-level California Cars, prevents locomotive exhaust from blowing against and through the front door of the first passenger car, and reduces wind drag. Since some of the other states will also be pulling high level cars (eventually), I have no idea why they don't have a similar feature. Perhaps it's something that can be easily retrofitted in the future.


----------



## cirdan

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> In the renderings, why the heck does the CalTrans loco have a sloped fin on the back of its roof but the others don't?


I'm guessing the artist made a coloring error and that's really the front of the first car.

Another detail that surprises me is that the coolant grilles seem to be missing off the side of the Brightline variant.


----------



## cirdan

cirdan said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> In the renderings, why the heck does the CalTrans loco have a sloped fin on the back of its roof but the others don't?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm guessing the artist made a coloring error and that's really the front of the first car.
Click to expand...

oops, I now see I am mistaken. That thing really is there.


----------



## jis

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> In the renderings, why the heck does the CalTrans loco have a sloped fin on the back of its roof but the others don't?


The California locos will always operate with 16" tall cars. Such is not the case for the others perhaps, though I suspect that at least the IDOT ones will mostly do so too. But if they have a significant chance of operating with single level cars too it probably does not make sense to put that structure on the roof.

Clearly MARC will not need it since half their passenger car fleet is only 14'6" tall.

And of course AAF won't need it because the AAF engines are of more or less the same shape as the Viaggio cars. I do wonder if the actual monocoque body of the AAF units will be a different cross section and design than the State units. The Viaggio sets that operate in Austria do not have dedicated engines. But Siemens does advertize integrated consists of Viaggio plus engine and possibly cab cars that look very integrated. It would be interesting to see how closely integrated the engines are with the cars in the Viaggio consists. This slideset has very little on it beyond just a mention of it on slide 4 with a stock marketing picture that has been used in all AAF literature.

So it talks of six customers on slide 3. I presume the six customers are Illinois, Missouri, Michigan, California, Washington and Maryland?

I guess within the next three years only the Maryland and AAF units will see actual 125mph operation.


----------



## Ryan

Has MD said anything about 125 mph operation?

After the MP-36's never got certified over 90, my hopes were set pretty low.

Edit: in an attempt to answer my own question, I started reading old MARC Riders Advisory Council meeting minutes and found that they did test and approve the MP-36s for 100 MPH back in 2013.


----------



## jis

Well, OK. I am not sure about Maryland. But AAF most certainly will.


----------



## PerRock

I thought Oregon was the other state in the multi-state procurement. They do now own 2 Talgo sets, so it would make sense for them to get Chargers to go with the sets.

peter


----------



## Ryan

jis said:


> Well, OK. I am not sure about Maryland. But AAF most certainly will.


It's quite possible, since the testing is going to have to be done for AAF, perhaps MD will get aboard.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

CCC1007 said:


> Maybe they asked for it.
> 
> The strobes on school buses don't cause seizures, so why would the strobes on a locomotive if they had a similar frequency?


Good question. I wish I knew.


----------



## CCC1007

Strobing light is only a problem at certain frequencies, so if these known frequencies are avoided, there will be no problems.


----------



## cirdan

jis said:


> Well, OK. I am not sure about Maryland. But AAF most certainly will.


But most likely not in the initial segment.


----------



## jis

cirdan said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, OK. I am not sure about Maryland. But AAF most certainly will.
> 
> 
> 
> But most likely not in the initial segment.
Click to expand...

Never in the initial segment. The planned speed on it it 80-90mph. Anything above 100mph is all in the West Palm Beach to Orlando section. That's why I said three years out.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

I would really like to see a rendering of this loco in Amtrak Phase V paint.

I'd also like to see them with Amtrak California paint as well as Amtrak Cascades paint.


----------



## CCC1007

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I would really like to see a rendering of this loco in Amtrak Phase V paint.
> 
> I'd also like to see them with Amtrak California paint as well as Amtrak Cascades paint.


Those last two are very unlikely, as their colors have already been designed and are much simpler than the existing schemes on the F59PHI locomotives.


----------



## jis

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I would really like to see a rendering of this loco in Amtrak Phase V paint.
> 
> I'd also like to see them with Amtrak California paint as well as Amtrak Cascades paint.


Get a copy of Photoshop and go for it!  Show us what you'd like to see, that is presumably different from the published liveries.


----------



## R30A

> I'd also like to see them with Amtrak California paint as well as Amtrak Cascades paint.


They are already there. You have commented on them!


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

R30A said:


> I'd also like to see them with Amtrak California paint as well as Amtrak Cascades paint.
> 
> 
> 
> They are already there. You have commented on them!
Click to expand...

What?

Where are they?


----------



## CCC1007

There the blue and green locomotives


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

CCC1007 said:


> There the blue and green locomotives


That's a paint scheme for those two DOT's.

I meant like Amtrak California paint and Amtrak Cascades paint, just like what you see on the F59PHI's.


----------



## CCC1007

That is not the paint scheme that will be applied to them.


----------



## jis

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There the blue and green locomotives
> 
> 
> 
> That's a paint scheme for those two DOT's.
> 
> I meant like Amtrak California paint and Amtrak Cascades paint, just like what you see on the F59PHI's.
Click to expand...

The CalDOT paint scheme *is* the California paint scheme for the Chargers. The WSDOT paint scheme *is* the Cascade paint scheme for the Chargers. If you wish to see some other scheme you will have to create them for yourself using Photoshop.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

The _Cascades_' colors on the WSDOT Charger would be more obvious if the rendering attached the locomotive to a Talgo train. The Talgos are low, the cars are small, the trains are long, and the livery has a very distinctive earth-tone green color scheme. Apparently the illustrator was given a photo of bi-level cars and told, 'One size fits all, so go with this'.

The new Chargers will match the Talgo livery. (The locos used now look like standard-issue Amtrak locomotives, because they are.)

The refreshed appearance of the _Cascades_ will help to deliver the message that the service has been upgraded (more daily departures, much more reliably on time, a bit faster, and some shiny new equipment).

And many folks here who yearn for matching consists on Amtrak's trains will love the consistent look of the new _Cascades_ consists.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Are the Chargers going to have cooling fans on the roof like you see on the Genesis locos?

Also, I know a majority of them will have 3rd Gen K5LA's, but does anyone know if any of them will get equipped with a different horn?


----------



## jis

WoodyinNYC said:


> The _Cascades_' colors on the WSDOT Charger would be more obvious if the rendering attached the locomotive to a Talgo train. The Talgos are low, the cars are small, the trains are long, and the livery has a very distinctive earth-tone green color scheme. Apparently the illustrator was given a photo of bi-level cars and told, 'One size fits all, so go with this'.
> 
> The new Chargers will match the Talgo livery. (The locos used now look like standard-issue Amtrak locomotives, because they are.)
> 
> The refreshed appearance of the _Cascades_ will help to deliver the message that the service has been upgraded (more daily departures, much more reliably on time, a bit faster, and some shiny new equipment).
> 
> And many folks here who yearn for matching consists on Amtrak's trains will love the consistent look of the new _Cascades_ consists.


Yeah, it really does not cost that much to re-vynil a piece of equipment these days. My old company HP loves it, since they get to provide the ink and printers to print out the patterns on the vinyl


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Ryan said:


> Has MD said anything about 125 mph operation?
> 
> After the MP-36's never got certified over 90, my hopes were set pretty low.
> 
> Edit: in an attempt to answer my own question, I started reading old MARC Riders Advisory Council meeting minutes and found that they did test and approve the MP-36s for 100 MPH back in 2013.


They are to operate at 125 MPH on the Penn Line, the one that runs the Northeast Corridor.


----------



## Caesar La Rock

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Are the Chargers going to have cooling fans on the roof like you see on the Genesis locos?
> 
> Also, I know a majority of them will have 3rd Gen K5LA's, but does anyone know if any of them will get equipped with a different horn?


They will most likely have K5LAs. It's unlikely they will pull an Amtrak and have some new horn developed like the P01235 was. Then again, weird stuff happens.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Caesar La Rock said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are the Chargers going to have cooling fans on the roof like you see on the Genesis locos?
> 
> Also, I know a majority of them will have 3rd Gen K5LA's, but does anyone know if any of them will get equipped with a different horn?
> 
> 
> 
> They will most likely have K5LAs. It's unlikely they will pull an Amtrak and have some new horn developed like the P01235 was. Then again, weird stuff happens.
Click to expand...

It'd definitely sound nice with a New Cast P5A like the ones you hear on Metra! As a matter of fact, P horns actually use less air than K horns.


----------



## CCC1007

They don't care about the air consumption of the horn, as their compressors have such huge capacity for their braking system. The horn is so small as to be insignificant.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

that would be braking systems ?


----------



## CCC1007

Yep, I'm a cs major, not an English major.


----------



## battalion51

Don't forget the Main Reservoir which keeps many things running on the train as well...


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

I really am surprised that the Chargers are going to be fitted with strobe beacons! I never thought anymore locos would come from the factory with strobes again! And if they are no longer a requirement by FRA, I wonder why the Chargers are getting them?


----------



## CCC1007

An optional feature is a surprise to you? :/


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

CCC1007 said:


> An optional feature is a surprise to you? :/


Well, I was surprised to see a newer loco come from the factory with strobe beacons, not really what you see on locos nowadays. I also thought ditch lights were more maintainable than strobes. And also, you know what else I'd be surprised to see the Chargers with?


----------



## CCC1007

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> An optional feature is a surprise to you? :/
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I was surprised to see a newer loco come from the factory with strobe beacons, not really what you see on locos nowadays. I also thought ditch lights were more maintainable than strobes. And also, you know what else I'd be surprised to see the Chargers with?
Click to expand...

Please answer your own question


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

CCC1007 said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> An optional feature is a surprise to you? :/
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I was surprised to see a newer loco come from the factory with strobe beacons, not really what you see on locos nowadays. I also thought ditch lights were more maintainable than strobes. And also, you know what else I'd be surprised to see the Chargers with?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Please answer your own question
Click to expand...

Gyralites


----------



## Ryan

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has MD said anything about 125 mph operation?
> 
> After the MP-36's never got certified over 90, my hopes were set pretty low.
> 
> Edit: in an attempt to answer my own question, I started reading old MARC Riders Advisory Council meeting minutes and found that they did test and approve the MP-36s for 100 MPH back in 2013.
> 
> 
> 
> They are to operate at 125 MPH on the Penn Line, the one that runs the Northeast Corridor.
Click to expand...

Riding it daily, I'm well aware of the Penn Line.

What I asked, is what MD has had to say about if they would do that.

Do you actually have a source for your statement, or is it just more wishful thinking/assumptions?


----------



## Paulus

jis said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There the blue and green locomotives
> 
> 
> 
> That's a paint scheme for those two DOT's.
> I meant like Amtrak California paint and Amtrak Cascades paint, just like what you see on the F59PHI's.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The CalDOT paint scheme *is* the California paint scheme for the Chargers. The WSDOT paint scheme *is* the Cascade paint scheme for the Chargers. If you wish to see some other scheme you will have to create them for yourself using Photoshop.
Click to expand...

Eh, I suspect most of the California Chargers will have a different paint scheme to go along with the regular Surfliner scheme.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Ryan said:


> Has MD said anything about 125 mph operation?
> 
> After the MP-36's never got certified over 90, my hopes were set pretty low.
> 
> Edit: in an attempt to answer my own question, I started reading old MARC Riders Advisory Council meeting minutes and found that they did test and approve the MP-36s for 100 MPH back in 2013.



The MP-36's are not approved for 100mph on Amtrak territory. They are only approved for 90mph.


----------



## west point

So for only 90 MPH MARC trains what is going to happen on the Penn line ?. Many delayed MARC trains that will have to wait until Amtrak leaves in front with enough time before next Amtrak ? What happens when there are 2 Amtrak trains too close to fit in a MARC ? Delays of 20 - 35 minutes ? Or MARC could pay for the 2 extra local tracks that would be needed ? Just a few more dollars than buying ACS-64s ?


----------



## jis

There is not as much traffic as would cause serious disruption yet. Mixing 90mph commuter trains with 125mph express trains is not as huge a problem (yet) specially at the south end given that it is triple track most of the way between Baltimore and DC. And where it is not, it is slated for triple tracking, and some quad tracking is already planned for. So bottom line not a huge problem in the immediate future.


----------



## Ryan

Thirdrail7 said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has MD said anything about 125 mph operation?
> 
> After the MP-36's never got certified over 90, my hopes were set pretty low.
> 
> Edit: in an attempt to answer my own question, I started reading old MARC Riders Advisory Council meeting minutes and found that they did test and approve the MP-36s for 100 MPH back in 2013.
> 
> 
> 
> The MP-36's are not approved for 100mph on Amtrak territory. They are only approved for 90mph.
Click to expand...

Either way, it seems to be academic. The few times I've put the GPS on to check it out, they have trouble getting up over 80, theirs rate of acceleration at those speeds is painfully slow.


----------



## Thirdrail7

jis said:


> There is not as much traffic as would cause serious disruption yet. Mixing 90mph commuter trains with 125mph express trains is not as huge a problem (yet) specially at the south end given that it is triple track most of the way between Baltimore and DC. And where it is not, it is slated for triple tracking, and some quad tracking is already planned for. So bottom line not a huge problem in the immediate future.


This is not true, as indicated by Ryan's comment below:



Ryan said:


> Either way, it seems to be academic. The few times I've put the GPS on to check it out, they have trouble getting up over 80, theirs rate of acceleration at those speeds is painfully slow.


This is huge problem. It is extremely noticeable when a MARC train has diesel. When they have electrics, they tend to stay out of the way. With a diesel, they lag which causes the trains to bunch up. Even in the three track territory particularly when an Amtrak makes BWI and is on the outer track or when the southbound trains are all confined to 3 track during the afternoon rush.

We won't even get into the two track territory.

Hopefully, these new units will be able to master the undulating territory between WAS-BAL while maintaining track speed between the long stops and accelerating quickly between the close stops.


----------



## Ryan

To be fair to Jishnu, the problem is they're not 90 MPH commuters. If MD could conjure those up, I'm sure it would be less of a problem than the sluggish MP36 led trains are these days.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

If the locos are to be operated at 90 MPH or 110 MPH on certain trains they'll be operating on, what's the point in building them for 125 MPH?

I'd really like to see some lines that are almost all 125 MPH operation.


----------



## CCC1007

The reason is for commonality and for potential increased speed in the lifespan of the locomotive.


----------



## cirdan

CCC1007 said:


> The reason is for commonality and for potential increased speed in the lifespan of the locomotive.


Absolutely. With locomotives having an expected lifespan of 20 to 30 years, I would very much hope there will be plenty more opportunity for 125mph running in the 2030s and 2040s than there is today.


----------



## west point

125 MPH operation also has to be considered for any diesel loco operation on the NEC ?


----------



## jis

west point said:


> 125 MPH operation also has to be considered for any diesel loco operation on the NEC ?


The Chargers being ordered by MARC are 125mph capable. That is what started this subthread about NEC speeds.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Just because the renderings have strobe beacons, are they really going to have strobe beacons?


----------



## PerRock

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Just because the renderings have strobe beacons, are they really going to have strobe beacons?


Ask Siemens, they're the only ones that are going to truly know little details like that at this stage. We only know what is publicly available, which is the same information that you can find out on your own.


----------



## PRR 60

The strobes are a customer-specified option. It is up to each state DOT whether they want them or not.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Get a load of this!

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/siemens-shows-first-complete-charger-locomotive.html


----------



## jis

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Get a load of this!
> 
> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/siemens-shows-first-complete-charger-locomotive.html


So what do you suppose the answer to your "strobe beacon" question is?


----------



## afigg

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Get a load of this!
> 
> http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/siemens-shows-first-complete-charger-locomotive.html


For those who have not followed the link, it has a photo of the first completed Charger locomotive. If Siemens is still on the schedule shown in the February viewgraph presentation, two locomotives will go to the Pueblo facility for testing in June. If they get moved to Denver on the CZ, I think we can expect many videos to be posted.


----------



## west point

Anyone know if the Chargers have to meet the same 800,000# test as passenger cars ?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

the crush load is 1 000 000 Lbs on both cars and engines, but don't worry Budd exceeded that demand over 30 years ago .

here is better side view of Charger.

http://mainlinediesels.net/index.php?nav=1000001&file=siem_3280001_51&action=image#title


----------



## keelhauled

The compression test was completed by February, according to a presentation at the NGEC's annual meeting.


----------



## George K

I thought it looked "sleeker" than the GE P42. Turns out, it's almost 2 feet shorter!

Would this be a long-term replacement for the P42s?


----------



## CCC1007

George K said:


> I thought it looked "sleeker" than the GE P42. Turns out, it's almost 2 feet shorter!
> 
> Would this be a long-term replacement for the P42s?


Considering that there is a 225 unit option for long distance variants, with larger fuel tanks, it is likely iff there is money. (Iff means if and only if for those that have not seen that before.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

The charger is also much lower than Gennies, 12 foot something vs 14'6".


----------



## Caesar La Rock

George K said:


> I thought it looked "sleeker" than the GE P42. Turns out, it's almost 2 feet shorter!
> 
> Would this be a long-term replacement for the P42s?


The ACS-64 seemed bigger when I stood next to it, but that's just me. The ACS and Chargers are the same height I think.


----------



## Fan Railer

Charger height: 12'6''


----------



## jis

Talk about miniaturization even in locomotives!


----------



## PVD

Well, it is a touch longer than a P42.....I .have to admit that for a 25 year old design, I still see a freshly painted Genesis as a decent looking machine.....


----------



## Paulus

Delivery schedule has slipped 2-3 weeks


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Paulus said:


> Delivery schedule has slipped 2-3 weeks


Thanks for finding the info. Wow.

Lots of stuff. Chargers, 3rd rail locomotives, etc. About the bi-level cars, at the bottom, it's still not looking so good.

But c'mon, Paulus,  , it's a public document, owned by the taxpayers like you n me, and not subject to the constraint of Fair Use. So let's go for it:

(Edited to cut stuff I couldn't understand or seemed boring to me, LOL)

Section 305 Next Generation Corridor Equipment Pool Committee (NGEC)

Monthly Activities Report: March 31, 2016

Submitted by: Steven J Hewitt, Manager, S305 NGEC Support Services

Public law 110-432 required Amtrak to:

…establish a Next Generation Corridor Equipment Pool Committee, comprised of representatives of Amtrak, the Federal Railroad Administration, host freight railroad companies, passenger railroad equipment manufacturers, interested States, and, as appropriate, other passenger railroad operators.

“The purpose of the Committee shall be to design, develop specifications for, and procure standardized next-generation corridor equipment.

(b) Functions – the Committee may –

1) Determine the number of different types of equipment required, taking into account variations in operational needs and corridor infrastructure.

2) Establish a pool of equipment to be used on corridor routes funded by participating states; and

3) Subject agreements between Amtrak and States, utilize services provided by Amtrak to design, maintain and remanufacture equipment.”

Executive Board

Chair: Eric Curtit, Missouri DOT

Vice Chair: Mario Bergeron, Amtrak

Secretary: Ray Hessinger, NYSDOT

Treasurer: Darrell Smith, Amtrak

The Executive Board holds bi-weekly conference calls – Tuesday’s at 11:30am Eastern

During the month of March, 2016, the Executive Board met twice –via conference call - on the 1st, and on the 15th. DC.

*Key decisions and action items *from the month of March, 2016 included:

• 514 Subcommittee update: . . .

• Bi-Level Car Procurement status as of March 15: The technical review team met to go through the elements of “Car Shell Model 2”. The official Design Review is anticipated for the end of May 2016, for consideration of acceptance. The production schedule is being updated. Overall, progress is being made. Caltrans is working closely with IDOT and the FRA on the funding issues.

• Diesel-electric Locomotive Procurement status as of March 15, 2016: The multi-state locomotive procurement continues to progress well and, although the timeline has showed some slippage, the overall schedule for delivery of the last locomotive is still within the ARRA funding window. IDOT is monitoring the situation closely with weekly meetings with Siemens focused on schedule.

• GAO Study: . . .

• Adoption of the Dual Mode Locomotive (DC 3rd Rail) specification – The Dual Mode (DC 3rd Rail) Locomotive specification PRIIA 305-011 is in final form with the initial release date and signature page having been completed. The spec can be accessed via the website following the NGEC procedures described therein.

• Finance and Administrative subcommittee update: The Finance & Administrative Sub-committee is continuing to work through the next steps for future funding options, and is doing a bit of a re-evaluation based on the NGEC’s actual spend rate as provided for this past year at the Annual Meeting (about half of what was planned). . . .

• Mid-West States – Section 6 progress report: The states are still working to finalize their agreements – the Mid-West Intercity Passenger Rail Commission (MWIPRC) has approved the ownership agreements to allow the states to own the vehicle jointly. The group is working on taking the necessary steps to own and operate the vehicles in the Mid-West. The Fleet Management Plan is being updated and the Fleet Manager procurement is still being worked on.

• Two page educational/outreach document: . . .

. . .

Diesel- Electric Locomotive procurement update as of 3-24-16 (provided by IDOT):

• All previous invoices . . .

JPEs are reviewing Siemens’ revised schedule, which now indicates a 2 to 3-week schedule slip for the first 11 locomotives. The overall schedule for delivery of the last locomotive is still within the ARRA funding window. IDOT is monitoring schedule closely with weekly meetings with Siemens focused on schedule.

· All of the supplier’s factory FAIs are complete. The remaining FAIs will take place at Siemens’ factory in Sacramento. At the time when the locomotive-complete FAI is scheduled in early June, it is planned that the FRA sample car inspection can also take place.

· The next monthly QA review is planned for April 13th at Siemens factory in Sacramento.

· All carbody compression and structural tests have been successfully completed and the tested carbody is now in paint prep.

· The first two of 15 DCRs have been sent . . . The Diesel Electric DCRs are tracking parallel to the edits for the Dual Mode Locomotive Specification.

· The test plan for 125 mph testing on the North East Corridor is being prepared and will be submitted to FRA by MARC . . .

· Each JPE has had kick-off meetings with Siemens and Amtrak for commissioning of the locomotives, as working out details for pre-revenue test plans.

. . .

· The locomotive weight was reported in February 2016, at 271,924 lbs (+/-). Based on actual component weights, the locomotive weight has varied little in the last six months. The calculated P2 force is within specified limits. Weight is being closely monitored, each month.

• Bi-Level Car Procurement Update provided by Caltrans, as of 3-24-16:

One FAI is scheduled for 4- 7/8 - 16 in Rochelle, Illinois.

The manufacturer has made some progress on the car shell re-design.

The next web update meeting on the car shell re-design will take place on 4-4-16.

The next face to face meeting may take place in Sacramento, CA on 4-25-16.

The next version of the revised production schedule is anticipated for mid-April.

The next QA and maintenance readiness meeting will take place in Rochelle, Illinois on 4-7-16.

. . .


----------



## Steve4031

Thank you for the updates. This is better than simply nothing. Those charger locomotives will be interesting to ride behind.


----------



## Ryan

> The test plan for 125 mph testing on the North East Corridor is being prepared and will be submitted to FRA by MARC, with IDOT/JPE will send letter of concurrence.


HUZZAH!!!!


----------



## west point

Two very important points in the report/

1 Plans for 125 MPH tests by MARC on the NEC. Between Wash - Baltimore or north of Trenton which can provide track rated higher speed for the FRA requirement of testing at speeds above final rated speeds. Can we assume that will be after testing at the TTC ( Pueblo ) ?

2. The building of a 3rd rail dual mode loco. That unit would only be needed on the Empire corridor Albany - NYP. So Amtrak must be planning to replace its DMs sometime in the near future once the 3rd rail Charger proves itself ? As well 125 rated speeds on those portions of the Empire corridor that Amtrak may increase speeds to. That certainly does not preclude some agency from installing a third rail section in say a terminal station but that seems highly unlikely..

3. One has to wonder if Siemens also plans a dual mode CAT loco very similar to Chargers and ACS-64s ? Maybe a future replacement to the NJT ALP-45DMs ?


----------



## PVD

There are 2 common versions of the 3rd rail P32AC-DM the AMTK Empire Service ones use over, the MNRR are under (running). No 3rd rail Charger has been ordered or built, MN has been rebuilding theirs, and it is not likely the Amtrak ones are going anywhere until NY State kicks in the money. 3rd rail Charger can't prove itself, it doesn't exist. LIRR (over) has a bunch of EMD DM's also, they are almost 20 years old (97-98) also.


----------



## jis

west point said:


> Two very important points in the report/
> 
> 1 Plans for 125 MPH tests by MARC on the NEC. Between Wash - Baltimore or north of Trenton which can provide track rated higher speed for the FRA requirement of testing at speeds above final rated speeds. Can we assume that will be after testing at the TTC ( Pueblo ) ?
> 
> 2. The building of a 3rd rail dual mode loco. That unit would only be needed on the Empire corridor Albany - NYP. So Amtrak must be planning to replace its DMs sometime in the near future once the 3rd rail Charger proves itself ? As well 125 rated speeds on those portions of the Empire corridor that Amtrak may increase speeds to. That certainly does not preclude some agency from installing a third rail section in say a terminal station but that seems highly unlikely..
> 
> 3. One has to wonder if Siemens also plans a dual mode CAT loco very similar to Chargers and ACS-64s ? Maybe a future replacement to the NJT ALP-45DMs ?


The NGEC report says nothing about anyone funding to build a dual mode yet. All that it says is the specification is being completed. We are a few years away from anyone actually building one, and it is not a given that Siemens will necessarily get the order from that procurement process. They might, but it is yet to be seen.

The NGEC was tasked to produce specifications for single level, bi-level and diesel locomotive specifications for use by Amtrak and possibly whoever else wants to, so as to be able to pool orders to gain critical mass. This has happened with the Regional bi-level order and likely happening with the diesel order too.


----------



## afigg

west point said:


> 2. The building of a 3rd rail dual mode loco. That unit would only be needed on the Empire corridor Albany - NYP. So Amtrak must be planning to replace its DMs sometime in the near future once the 3rd rail Charger proves itself ? As well 125 rated speeds on those portions of the Empire corridor that Amtrak may increase speeds to. That certainly does not preclude some agency from installing a third rail section in say a terminal station but that seems highly unlikely..


The Dual Mode (DC 3rd Rail) Locomotive specification document has been available in draft form in a sequential series of revisions for years. We have discussed the specification and reports before. First, this would be a NYS DOT purchase as they are the lead agency on the Dual Mode specification. There are statements buried in the lengthy activities reports that NYS DOT plans to start the RFP process after the Dual Mode specification is finalized, but that could be years. The state has to budget for the locomotive order first.

These would not be 125 mph locomotives. The specification calls for 110 mph max speeds in diesel mode, 80 mph in 3rd rail mode. The earlier drafts called for 125 mph max speeds, but the committee changed the requirement to 110 mph after feedback from the manufacturers on weight and car length issues for the 3rd rail DC gear and energy storage system.

Finally, the Dual Mode (DC 3rd rail) locomotive order would be a new bid, so EMD and possibly Motive Power would be submitting bids. Siemens presumably has the edge in getting the contract, but since this is NY State, politics could be the deciding factor in who gets the contract (whenever that happens).


----------



## neroden

I am disappointed that they're making a DC 3rd rail dual mode spec, and are not making an AC overhead dual mode spec. DC 3rd rail dual mode is primarily of use to Metro North, and nobody else. Amtrak could use either, but would have more use for an AC overhead design.

Thoughtless.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

The 3th rail capable diesel will be joint order for Amtrak, LIRR and MN and last two have no use for AC capable diesel.

to make a AC propulsion diesel int a 3th rail capable one does not require much. but to build a AC capable one your lugging a lot of heavy equipment for the diesel ride.


----------



## afigg

neroden said:


> I am disappointed that they're making a DC 3rd rail dual mode spec, and are not making an AC overhead dual mode spec. DC 3rd rail dual mode is primarily of use to Metro North, and nobody else. Amtrak could use either, but would have more use for an AC overhead design.
> 
> Thoughtless.


The pending final Dual Mode DC 3rd Rail locomotive spec and subsequent RFP has been discussed in this thread before; see page 2 for example. It is generally off-topic for the Siemens Charger contract and delivery. if the subject is going to keep coming up (lather, rinse, repeat) and it will once the final spec and requirements are posted, we should have a separate Dual Mode DC 3rd Rail thread on it. With links to the AASHTO NGEC documents page(s).


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

afigg said:


> west point said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2. The building of a 3rd rail dual mode loco. That unit would only be needed on the Empire corridor Albany - NYP. So Amtrak must be planning to replace its DMs sometime in the near future once the 3rd rail Charger proves itself ? As well 125 rated speeds on those portions of the Empire corridor that Amtrak may increase speeds to. That certainly does not preclude some agency from installing a third rail section in say a terminal station but that seems highly unlikely..
> 
> 
> 
> The Dual Mode (DC 3rd Rail) Locomotive specification document has been available in draft form in a sequential series of revisions for years. We have discussed the specification and reports before. First, this would be a NYS DOT purchase as they are the lead agency on the Dual Mode specification. There are statements buried in the lengthy activities reports that NYS DOT plans to start the RFP process after the Dual Mode specification is finalized, but that could be years. The state has to budget for the locomotive order first.
> 
> These would not be 125 mph locomotives. The specification calls for 110 mph max speeds in diesel mode, 80 mph in 3rd rail mode. The earlier drafts called for 125 mph max speeds, but the committee changed the requirement to 110 mph after feedback from the manufacturers on weight and car length issues for the 3rd rail DC gear and energy storage system.
> 
> Finally, the Dual Mode (DC 3rd rail) locomotive order would be a new bid, so EMD and possibly Motive Power would be submitting bids. Siemens presumably has the edge in getting the contract, but since this is NY State, politics could be the deciding factor in who gets the contract (whenever that happens).
Click to expand...

Why not 125 MPH?


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

For anyone that does loco repaints on the computer, or maybe photoshop, could someone do a rendering of it in Amtrak Phase V paint, as well as Phase IIIb paint?


----------



## PVD

No where in the territory that the 3rd rail DM locos operate is likely to be 125 mph track anywhere in the forseeable future.


----------



## Ryan

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Why not 125 MPH?


From the part you quoted: "feedback from the manufacturers on weight and car length issues for the 3rd rail DC gear and energy storage system."


----------



## afigg

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> afigg said:
> 
> 
> 
> These would not be 125 mph locomotives. The specification calls for 110 mph max speeds in diesel mode, 80 mph in 3rd rail mode. The earlier drafts called for 125 mph max speeds, but the committee changed the requirement to 110 mph after feedback from the manufacturers on weight and car length issues for the 3rd rail DC gear and energy storage system.
> 
> Finally, the Dual Mode (DC 3rd rail) locomotive order would be a new bid, so EMD and possibly Motive Power would be submitting bids. Siemens presumably has the edge in getting the contract, but since this is NY State, politics could be the deciding factor in who gets the contract (whenever that happens).
> 
> 
> 
> Why not 125 MPH?
Click to expand...

More detailed answers to your question can be found in the Dual Mode specification and requirement related documents on this NGEC Documents/Specifications page. Look for the discussion points for 125 vs 110 mph document under the Dual Mode requirements. Further info about the technical issues raised by Siemens for the Dual Mode loco is in the activities report available elsewhere on the NGEC pages.

Edit: Section A.4 in the Dual Mode requirement Revision A document discusses the weight issues and the P2 force limits on the rail at 125 mph with the information provided by all 4 potential locomotive builders.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Ryan said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not 125 MPH?
> 
> 
> 
> From the part you quoted: "feedback from the manufacturers on weight and car length issues for the 3rd rail DC gear and energy storage system."
Click to expand...

Oh, I see. So weight is one of the main problems.


----------



## CCC1007

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not 125 MPH?
> 
> 
> 
> From the part you quoted: "feedback from the manufacturers on weight and car length issues for the 3rd rail DC gear and energy storage system."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, I see. So weight is one of the main problems.
Click to expand...

Weight is one of the biggest considerations in the design of any vehicle, as having too much on the wheels can lead to restrictions of where that vehicle can be used. A good example is the Airbus A380-800 design process as this aircraft was forced to cut almost 30% of its original weight once the configuration was set. If the weight was not cut, it would have cracked the taxiways and runways wherever it went.


----------



## jis

Yeah. They had to either cut weight or put in even more wheels and undercarriages thus increasing the weight even more. Of course the other reason to cut weight is to reduce weight penalty on fuel burn rate too.


----------



## MikefromCrete

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not 125 MPH?
> 
> 
> 
> From the part you quoted: "feedback from the manufacturers on weight and car length issues for the 3rd rail DC gear and energy storage system."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, I see. So weight is one of the main problems.
Click to expand...

Plus, of course, that they don't NEED to run 125 mph on the short run out of NYP. There's what one to three miles of third rail going out of Penn Station.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

1 mile for Amtrak at max 30 mph

5 miles for mn at 60 mph

LIRR might be about 70 upto jamaica


----------



## PVD

Those would be the third rail requirements (LIRR might be 80, don't remember for sure) but the 125 referred to max speed under diesel. 110 still satisfies all present and forseeable future needs. Nothing in this area is going to 125 that will be served by these locos.


----------



## tp49

IIRC, MAS on the LIRR when carrying passengers is 80 but I believe it's higher if no passengers are on board. 110 seems reasonable for the LIRR's needs.


----------



## neroden

Ah, well, if they ever upgrade speeds on the Empire Corridor, they'll put up catenary *and* buy new locomotives. These dual-modes are basically an LIRR order, I guess.


----------



## afigg

PVD said:


> Those would be the third rail requirements (LIRR might be 80, don't remember for sure) but the 125 referred to max speed under diesel. 110 still satisfies all present and forseeable future needs. Nothing in this area is going to 125 that will be served by these locos.


The max operating speed over all the various Empire corridor, Adirondack, Ethan Allen routes, MNRR, LIRR segments are spelled out in this document on the NGEC page link: Existing and Projected Maximum Authorized Speeds for State-Supported Passenger Service in New York State.

Again, NY State DOT is looking to purchase Dual Mode locomotives which can operate over the Empire Corridor, Adirondack, Ethan Allen, and MNRR & LIRR territory (but not through the East Side Access 63rd street tunnel). This is all laid out in those documents. Too late to start a separate thread on this I guess.


----------



## PVD

Thanks for posting, that "covers a lot of ground" Save some time by eliminating the change on a couple of trains. I didn't see the mention of the possible upgrade of the CSX segment West to Buffalo to allow for 110 mph ops, but that would be within these capabilities anyway.


----------



## PVD

Funny thing about the LIRR, even if you had a lower profile loco that could clear the 63rd st tunnel, they don't have any non powered passenger cars for them to pull that would clear the height. Don't expect that to change anytime soon.


----------



## jis

neroden said:


> Ah, well, if they ever upgrade speeds on the Empire Corridor, they'll put up catenary *and* buy new locomotives. These dual-modes are basically an LIRR order, I guess.


LIRR does not really use too many dual modes in dual mode. Relatively few trains go into Penn Station with dual mode + C3s. Most outer zone diesels run to Jamaica or Hunterspoint Avenue only. There are a few token rush hour trains that run through to Penn Station.

The dual modes are actually mostly for Metro North.


----------



## PVD

They bought 25 and currently operate 23. I think some of them switch over approaching Jamaica and run into HP on 3rd rail. They bought 20 straight diesel, but that became 21 when the electrical cabinet got fried on one of the DMs. 25 units is a decent size fleet, larger than the Amtrak group on Empire Service.


----------



## jis

Yes, but ask them how many of them ever run in electric mode in commercial service and the answer might surprise you. Of course part of the problem is that they have miserable MDBF in e-mode too. If they were more reliable they would be used more.

But the fundamental difference between LIRR and MNRR is that LIRR has Jamaica. MNRR does not have an equivalent. So MNRR trains have to basically get into Grand Central and hence require dual mode unless they are short turned far away, like in Stamford, Croton Harmon or White Plains/Southeast. For LIRR it is just an added luxury to avoid a change in Jamaica which a significant proportion of LIRR passengers already do for other reasons. It is not as critical for LIRR to run outer zone trains all the way into Penn Station.


----------



## PVD

They try not to switch if they can avoid it, from what I remember they have had issues with them crapping out. That was why the ones going through Jamaica switch early, that way if they died, they wouldn't clog Jamaica. They don't like to talk much about that whole acquisition, it didn't really go well in a bunch of ways. I do agree with you that they are likely to try and reduce their DM fleet in the future, they don't use them as originally planned, and they have been troublesome. As to the future, MN would be the largest user, Amtrak maybe 20 (17? of the original 18 sill running) even if LIRR dropped to 10 it could still be 60 units which is a decent build.


----------



## Fan Railer

Running in E-mode on the LIRR DMs is also relatively rough. Every time the locomotive gaps, the computer immediately activates the dynamic/regen brake circuit to keep the HEP trainline energized. This makes negotiating interlocks quite an experience.


----------



## afigg

Saw this report at Railway Age: Cummins receives Tier 4 certification for QSK95. Excerpt:



> Cummins Inc. has received Tier 4 Locomotive certification for its QSK95, making it the first single prime power engine certified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the company announced April 4, 2016.
> 
> At 4,400 hp (3,281 kW), the QSK95 achieves the highest output of any 16-cylinder high-speed diesel, and is capable of a top speed of 125 mph (201 km/hr) as a prime mover. Combining Cummins latest-generation Modular Common Rail Fuel System (MCRS) with quad-turbocharging, the QSK95 delivers reduced noise and excellent response in a smaller footprint than that of medium-speed diesels traditionally used in locomotives. Integrated Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) after treatment makes the QSK95 capable of achieving the ultra-low- emissions required at Tier 4.


So the Cummins engine used in the Siemens Charger is now certified. Wonder if this certification was needed before the first 2 Chargers could be sent out for testing?


----------



## sechs

Actual question. Are these things going to have the same insanely bright LED lights as the ACS-64?


----------



## jis

sechs said:


> Actual question. Are these things going to have the same insanely bright LED lights as the ACS-64?


Most likely. Don't see why they would go with a different set of parts inventory for the lights from those used in the Sprinters.


----------



## PerRock

sechs said:


> Actual question. Are these things going to have the same insanely bright LED lights as the ACS-64?


Won't actually know until we see some night-running of them. But I would presume that they would as it would make sense to keep as many parts as possible standard.

peter


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Anyone know where and when the Chargers will start testing?


----------



## CCC1007

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Anyone know where and when the Chargers will start testing?


I would guess that the first two would be sent to pueblo, Colorado for type testing at the fra facility in the area, just like the sprinters did.


----------



## afigg

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Anyone know where and when the Chargers will start testing?


In the February, 2016 meeting viewgraph presentation linked to earlier in this thread, two Chargers were scheduled to go to the FRA test facility, the TTCI, in Pueblo, Colorado in June.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

afigg said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone know where and when the Chargers will start testing?
> 
> 
> 
> In the February, 2016 meeting viewgraph presentation linked to earlier in this thread, two Chargers were scheduled to go to the FRA test facility, the TTCI, in Pueblo, Colorado in June.
Click to expand...

Awesome! I can't wait to see them rolling!

And also, I know they are slightly heavier than the EMD F125's, they generate 4400 HP with 16 cylinders, while the F125's generate 4700 HP with 20 cylinders, but one question: Why is it that the F125's are to have a tractive effort of 315 kN, but the Chargers will only have a tractive effort of 290 kN? This means the Chargers won't be able to accelerate as many cars as the F125's.

One F125 will be able to accelerate 10 or 20 bi-levels up to 125 MPH, but one Charger will only accelerate 5 (4 coaches + 1 cab car) up to 125 MPH. I also read somewhere very long ago that two Chargers would be needed to pull 8 bi-levels.


----------



## jis

I wonder if this open to all, photo posted on Facebook by Brightline is reachable by those with no login access to Facebook. I could get to see it from Chrome without logging in to Facebook, so I thought I'd give it a try here.

Can one of you please check and let me know?

Anyway, if you can see a photo by clicking on the link below, it shows the nose structure for the Brightline Chargers taking shape at Siemens, and gives you a clear idea about how different the Brightline units will look.

https://www.facebook.com/GoBrightline/photos/a.1484552041850660.1073741827.1484550728517458/1530454213927109/?type=3&theater



CSXfoamer1997 said:


> One F125 will be able to accelerate 10 or 20 bi-levels up to 125 MPH, but one Charger will only accelerate 5 (4 coaches + 1 cab car) up to 125 MPH. I also read somewhere very long ago that two Chargers would be needed to pull 8 bi-levels.


That bit about the incredible prowess of the F125 is a bit of EMD fantasy (well actually a claim that even they have not made). A difference of 400HP does not make that much of a difference. Read the whole report on it.in the objection filed by EMD. Lets not keep propagating such myths.


----------



## John Bobinyec

jis,

I can see the picture without logging on to facebook.

jb


----------



## jis

John, Thanks. So I will let it stay in place then. If you couldn't, I would have probably removed it.


----------



## John Bobinyec

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> This means the Chargers won't be able to accelerate as many cars as the F125's.


Forgive the physics lesson, but that's what I majored in as an undergraduate.

Of course the Chargers will be able to accelerate as many cars as the F125's - but it'll just take a different time period to do it in.

jb


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

John Bobinyec said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This means the Chargers won't be able to accelerate as many cars as the F125's.
> 
> 
> 
> Forgive the physics lesson, but that's what I majored in as an undergraduate.
> 
> Of course the Chargers will be able to accelerate as many cars as the F125's - but it'll just take a different time period to do it in.
> 
> jb
Click to expand...

Right, that's what I mean. And the question is, why were they built that way?


----------



## CCC1007

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> John Bobinyec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This means the Chargers won't be able to accelerate as many cars as the F125's.
> 
> 
> 
> Forgive the physics lesson, but that's what I majored in as an undergraduate.
> Of course the Chargers will be able to accelerate as many cars as the F125's - but it'll just take a different time period to do it in.
> 
> jb
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Right, that's what I mean. And the question is, why were they built that way?
Click to expand...

They were SPECKED that way because Siemens wanted to actually deliver what they promised, and it would seem that EMD was using Indian specks to base their locomotive off of, as that is where they pull that long of a train of double deckers. Neither locomotive has had trials yet, so they have no idea if they are actually going to work the way they are supposed to.


----------



## jis

I don't think even India really has any train that has even 15 bilevels on it, let alone 20. And even those are way lighter than the typical American Superliner sized bilevels. The 20 to 26 car trains that you see are of Indian single level cars which are only 65' (ICF) or 75' (LHB) long, not the standard US style 85 footers either. The Indian bi-levels are also 75 footers since they are built using standard LHB jigs.


----------



## CCC1007

jis said:


> I don't think even India really has any train that has even 15 bilevels on it, let alone 20. And even those are way lighter than the typical American Superliner sized bilevels. The 20 to 26 car trains that you see are of Indian single level cars which are only 65' (ICF) or 75' (LHB) long, not the standard US style 85 footers either. The Indian bi-levels are also 75 footers since they are built using standard LHB jigs.


Doesn't India use generators in the brake vans to provide electricity to the train as well, therefore not needing HEP?


----------



## jis

CCC1007 said:


> Doesn't India use generators in the brake vans to provide electricity to the train as well, therefore not needing HEP?


it is complicated, as most things in India are. 

There is a relatively small set of prestige higher speed trains (Rajdhanis, Durontos, Shatabdis and a few others) that use EOG (End On Generation). There are an even smaller set of new WAP-5 and WAP-7 class electric engines that are HEP capable. But at present even those trains that get a HEP capable engine for their run still carry the EOG equipment since in India, as soon as a train arrives at a location, quite often the engine decouples and goes its own way. So at that point the EOG is cranked up to keep the train powered. Typically at the passenger platform there is no provision for providing shore power to the train.

Most trains in India do not have EOG. They consist of self generating coaches which generate their own power through axle driven alternators. This even includes fully A/C coaches, which carry a huge bank of batteries under the floor to keep them powered through extended halts. Which means, when they are in motion they actually draw more power than is needed to just power the basic load, from the locomotive. They draw extra power to charge up the batteries. So net net, it is hard to tell whether they actually place more load on the engine than if they were just using HEP.

As I said, it is complicated.

And this is even before we go into the issue of two types of couplers and two types of brakes and all that.


----------



## Fan Railer

We already had this inane discussion about tractive effort on the other thread... why bring it up here again?


----------



## west point

Axel generators will rob the HP from locos just as HEP will.


----------



## jis

west point said:


> Axel generators will rob the HP from locos just as HEP will.


True. But what adds to the complication is that in a typical 24 car self-generating consist there may be at most 6 or 7 A/C cars. The rest have relatively low power load for just the lights and fans. So net net, the load on the locomotive on these trains for providing hotel power may be lower than on a typical 20 car fully A/C EOG train powered through loco HEP facility.


----------



## west point

Axel generators are DC because of the variable train speeds. Basically much less efficient especially with the need of heavy batteries. Air Conditioning argument is flawed for on an average the same number of AC compressors will be running on a train with the same number of train cars. DC motors heavier and less efficient. DC lighting will require Converters for LED just as AC power, What about inverters to convert DC to AC for constant frequency requirements ?.


----------



## jis

The axle generators used in standard Indian Railways equipment is alternator + rectifier packs. So no, they are not DC, bu the output is to a DC bus that feeds the batteries and the alternator to supply standard AC at 50Hz to the hotel load. No DC lighting or fans anywhere anymore.

I guess you failed to comprehend what I wrote regarding A/C cars. Typically the self generating trains do not have more than 5 or 6 A/C cars. The rest are non-A/C with just light and fan load. So the overall load for those trains is much less than for trains that have all A/C cars. I know sitting here the concept of non-A/C cars may be hard to comprehend. but most of the rolling stock used by Indian Railways, and indeed used by most of the customers of Indian Railways are not air-conditioned.

The fully A/C trains, that is those that have all cars air-conditioned use EOG/HEP (usually mostly EOG not related to the locomotive), and do not use axle generated power.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

With the Chargers being fitted with strobe beacons, why not put them on the Sprinters?

Oh, and BTW, what's the red strobe for?


----------



## CCC1007

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> With the Chargers being fitted with strobe beacons, why not put them on the Sprinters?
> 
> Oh, and BTW, what's the red strobe for?


If I remember correctly the red one is used only in the event that the emergency brakes are active, at least that was what the red one meant on older locomotives.


----------



## frequentflyer

The red light is when the locomotive is pushing and is the last car in the consist.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

frequentflyer said:


> The red light is when the locomotive is pushing and is the last car in the consist.


I thought that was what the red marker lights just immediately below the ditch lights were for. I was referring to the one on top of the roof.


----------



## Hal

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> The red light is when the locomotive is pushing and is the last car in the consist.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought that was what the red marker lights just immediately below the ditch lights were for. I was referring to the one on top of the roof.
Click to expand...

A red strobe light on a locomotive that is strobing means the locomotive has had an emergency application of the brakes.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Hal said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> The red light is when the locomotive is pushing and is the last car in the consist.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought that was what the red marker lights just immediately below the ditch lights were for. I was referring to the one on top of the roof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A red strobe light on a locomotive that is strobing means the locomotive has had an emergency application of the brakes.
Click to expand...

Oh


----------



## Alex M.

In seeing renditions of the locomotives being built for the Brightline service, it seems that there is space under the front of the units before the lead truck. Will there be something there to deflect objects so that there will not be a derailment?


----------



## jis

Yes.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Also, with the Brightline units being fitted with nose cones, will they be short enough to make room for the enclosed knuckle couplers?


----------



## cirdan

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Also, with the Brightline units being fitted with nose cones, will they be short enough to make room for the enclosed knuckle couplers?


I'm just conjecturing here, but I expect the couplers will be retractable and thus hidden when not in use.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

cirdan said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, with the Brightline units being fitted with nose cones, will they be short enough to make room for the enclosed knuckle couplers?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just conjecturing here, but I expect the couplers will be retractable and thus hidden when not in use.
Click to expand...

Right. That's what I meant, when I said enclosed knuckle couplers.


----------



## Thirdrail7

The testing group has begun turning their attention to these units now that work on the ACSs is almost complete. You may see this engine on the raceway by the fall!


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

PerRock said:


> I thought Oregon was the other state in the multi-state procurement. They do now own 2 Talgo sets, so it would make sense for them to get Chargers to go with the sets.
> 
> peter


Speaking of... I wonder why the baggage car on the new Talgo 8's don't have the fins like the original Talgo sets?


----------



## CCC1007

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought Oregon was the other state in the multi-state procurement. They do now own 2 Talgo sets, so it would make sense for them to get Chargers to go with the sets.
> 
> peter
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of... I wonder why the baggage car on the new Talgo 8's don't have the fins like the original Talgo sets?
Click to expand...

Simple, they didn't ask for them.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Also, I haven't seen any most recent videos of them, not even on the Siemens YouTube channel.

And I wonder if anyone will snap pictures of the cab?


----------



## CCC1007

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Also, I haven't seen any most recent videos of them, not even on the Siemens YouTube channel.
> 
> And I wonder if anyone will snap pictures of the cab?


I've already seen a photo of the cab, nothing special stood out to me.


----------



## jis

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> And I wonder if anyone will snap pictures of the cab?


Here you go. Take a look at the cover photo in this PDF document, albeit the AAF version. But I don;t believe there is any significant difference in the cab other than different PTC systems possibly.

https://w3.usa.siemens.com/mobility/us/en/interurban-mobility/rail-solutions/high-speed-and-intercity-trains/Documents/Charger%20DE_Locomotive_DataSheet_LR.pdf


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Hal said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> The red light is when the locomotive is pushing and is the last car in the consist.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought that was what the red marker lights just immediately below the ditch lights were for. I was referring to the one on top of the roof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A red strobe light on a locomotive that is strobing means the locomotive has had an emergency application of the brakes.
Click to expand...

And one other question, how come they would need a flashing red strobe if the e-brakes are activated?


----------



## CCC1007

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Hal said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> The red light is when the locomotive is pushing and is the last car in the consist.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought that was what the red marker lights just immediately below the ditch lights were for. I was referring to the one on top of the roof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A red strobe light on a locomotive that is strobing means the locomotive has had an emergency application of the brakes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And one other question, how come they would need a flashing red strobe if the e-brakes are activated?
Click to expand...

indicates to emergency services which train is in trouble.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

it indicates train in emergency and possibly fouling adjacent track to other trains.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Dutchrailnut said:


> it indicates train in emergency and possibly fouling adjacent track to other trains.


Would a red gyralite perhaps help better? Strobes flash every 2 seconds or so, whereas gyralites shine from side to side.


----------



## PVD

Remeber folks, marker lights and emergency lights are usually not the same, they both have an important purpose.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

PVD said:


> Remeber folks, marker lights and emergency lights are usually not the same, they both have an important purpose.


You're exactly correct!


----------



## John Bobinyec

PVD said:


> Remeber folks, marker lights and emergency lights are usually not the same, they both have an important purpose.


Markers, including FREDs, red lights, a red lantern and a ref flag indicate that the train is complete. It's necessary for a way-freight who is sitting in the clear to know if a passing train is complete before it comes out onto the main. If the passing train has left the rear end of its train up the railroad somewhere, then the front end can go down the railroad, do some work, and then run back up the same track in order to pick up the rest of its train.

jb


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Would a red gyralite perhaps help better? Strobes flash every 2 seconds or so, whereas gyralites shine from side to side.


Strobes flash at multi speeds. True strobes are on the way out as LED light do a much better job (brighter), with much lower voltage, and multi patterns and colors. Interesting that what was said about strobes replace the incandescence light bulb a few years back.


----------



## John Bobinyec

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> 
> it indicates train in emergency and possibly fouling adjacent track to other trains.
> 
> 
> 
> Would a red gyralite perhaps help better? Strobes flash every 2 seconds or so, whereas gyralites shine from side to side.
Click to expand...

No one in their right mind would advocate using a light that has a mechanical drive in it. It's just more delicate parts, subject to the weather, to break. That's why they stopped being used on trains years ago.

jb


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

John Bobinyec said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> 
> it indicates train in emergency and possibly fouling adjacent track to other trains.
> 
> 
> 
> Would a red gyralite perhaps help better? Strobes flash every 2 seconds or so, whereas gyralites shine from side to side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one in their right mind would advocate using a light that has a mechanical drive in it. It's just more delicate parts, subject to the weather, to break. That's why they stopped being used on trains years ago.
> 
> jb
Click to expand...

I thought Metra still purchases locos new with gyralights. The last known loco to be purchased with a gyra was the Metra MP36PH-3S's, which was back in... 2004 maybe?


----------



## John Bobinyec

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> John Bobinyec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> 
> it indicates train in emergency and possibly fouling adjacent track to other trains.
> 
> 
> 
> Would a red gyralite perhaps help better? Strobes flash every 2 seconds or so, whereas gyralites shine from side to side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one in their right mind would advocate using a light that has a mechanical drive in it. It's just more delicate parts, subject to the weather, to break. That's why they stopped being used on trains years ago.
> 
> jb
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I thought Metra still purchases locos new with gyralights. The last known loco to be purchased with a gyra was the Metra MP36PH-3S's, which was back in... 2004 maybe?
Click to expand...

So 12 years ago. Sounds like they've gone the way of the dodo bird to me.

jb


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

As far as the very first one, have any others been complete yet? The ones for Brightline are starting to take shape!


----------



## CCC1007

Yes, the photos in this thread are of the first complete locomotive.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

CCC1007 said:


> Yes, the photos in this thread are of the first complete locomotive.


Yeah, I know that, but that wasn't my question. I asked, have any others besides the first one been complete as of now?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the photos in this thread are of the first complete locomotive.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I know that, but that wasn't my question. I asked, have any others besides the first one been complete as of now?
Click to expand...

Probably not since they're not scheduled to go for testing till June. My guess is the 2nd one is still being built.

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/65029-new-siemens-charger-locomotive/?p=657425


----------



## afigg

There are updates on the Siemens production in the Next Gen Section 305 Executive board meeting minutes for April 12 and 26 which are available as word documents on this webpage.

In the April 26 meeting minutes:



> JPEs received Siemens’ revised schedule and conduct weekly conference calls. Although some delay for the first 11 locomotives and a 6-day delay for the balance of the production, the overall schedule for delivery of the last locomotive is still within the ARRA funding window.
> 
> ...
> 
> The diesel engine for locomotive #1 was started 4/18 and functional tests for locomotive sub-systems for unit #1 continue. JPE subject matter experts are witnessing the tests.
> 
> ....
> 
> The test plan for 125 mph testing on the North East Corridor was submitted to FRA by MARC. IDOT/JPE will send letter of concurrence.


So the engine for unit #1 has been fired up. Some small slippage in the production, but nothing major. Sadly, that can't be said for Nippon-Sharyo for which there are some ominous notes in the April 12 minutes on how many cars might be able to be built, but that is for the bi-level corridor car thread.


----------



## neroden

It may be time to for Amtrak, the states, and the Next Gen Equipment Committee to talk to the Obama administration about reprogramming some of the ARRA funds. If there's enough slack time in the Siemens schedule, and not enough in the Nippon-Sharyo schedule, it would make sense to transfer funds which can't be used on the bilevels to buying more locomotives. Amtrak could certainly use them.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

neroden said:


> It may be time to for Amtrak, the states, and the Next Gen Equipment Committee to talk to the Obama administration about reprogramming some of the ARRA funds.


Or buy 20 or 30 more Viewliner II sleepers or some bag cars or bag-dorms.

But I'm not sure if Siemens or CAF could get any more cars or locomotives at all built by September of next year.

Where could anybody spend the money on infrastructure? Doubletracking many more miles CHI-StL? As far as I know there's absolutely nothing shovel ready anywhere. Maybe, maybe another stretch of CAHSR?


----------



## MikefromCrete

I think we're forgetting that Amtrak has nothing to do with the N-S coach order or the Siemens diesel locomotive order. The money wasn't designated for Amtrak, it was designated for the states and I don't think the states would want to give up their money to hand it over to Amtrak for sleepers and baggage cars.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

MikefromCrete said:


> I think we're forgetting that Amtrak has nothing to do with the N-S coach order or the Siemens diesel locomotive order. The money wasn't designated for Amtrak, it was designated for the states and I don't think the states would want to give up their money to hand it over to Amtrak for sleepers and baggage cars.


I think you are forgetting that there's a deadline on the stimulus money: Spend it by September 2017 or it reverts to the Treasury, for Congress to dispose. No way will these states get to keep the money to use on highways or whatever.

Plan A is for the states to beg Congress to extend the deadline and allow the funds to be used to pay for the delayed order.

In November we'll have a better feel for how that might go. Then Plan B thru Plan Z could get fast action. Or not.


----------



## MikefromCrete

I think there's a much better chance for the money to be put in escrow or some other trick that will keep it for the state-supported equipment than it will be for Amtrak to get its hands on any cash. Deadlines for government projects are always flexible.


----------



## neroden

The only thing which appears to be shovel-ready is the Siemens factory. If they're on schedule to deliver early enough, it might be the best place to move the money -- more Sprinters will *definitely* get used.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Are the strobes the 200BC strobes that you saw on the F40PH's, E60's, and AEM-7's?


----------



## jis

neroden said:


> The only thing which appears to be shovel-ready is the Siemens factory. If they're on schedule to deliver early enough, it might be the best place to move the money -- more Sprinters will *definitely* get used.


Talking to folks in the know, I get the impression that Siemens production lines are currently fully committed through mid-2018. They are currently running about four weeks behind schedule according to latest sem-rumors. So yeah, you can get more Sprinters or Chargers sometime in 2018, not before that. That of course is kind of useless for funds that revert back to the treasury end of September 2017.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Welp, besides the first complete Charger for one of the State DOT's, the Brightline ones are beginning to take shape! The first train is to be delivered by this fall!


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Welp, Brightline has just unveiled its first loco!


----------



## AmtrakBlue

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Welp, Brightline has just unveiled its first loco!


Being discussed here: http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/48373-fec-update/?p=666368


----------



## Fan Railer

Siemens Charger related news: QSK95 test bed loco now in service. If anything I hear the fans more than the actual diesel, so the jury's still out on this one:


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Fan Railer said:


> Siemens Charger related news: QSK95 test bed loco now in service. If anything I hear the fans more than the actual diesel, so the jury's still out on this one:


Nice!


----------



## jis

According to a usually reliable source posting on Trainorders, Amtrak picked up two Siemens Chargers at the Siemens plant in Sacramento to tow them to Oakland. They are IDTX 4601 and 4602. They will be ferried to Denver by CZ in a few days. I suppose they will show up at Pueblo for initial testing.

And so it begins....


----------



## afigg

jis said:


> According to a usually reliable source posting on Trainorders, Amtrak picked up two Siemens Chargers at the Siemens plant in Sacramento to tow them to Oakland. They are IDTX 4601 and 4602. They will be ferried to Denver by CZ in a few days. I suppose they will show up at Pueblo for initial testing.
> 
> And so it begins....


Good. At least one builder is staying close to on schedule. Now we wait for the first photos and videos of the 2 Chargers out in the wild to get posted.


----------



## TheMalahat

sorry posted link in wrong thread!


----------



## warrenwarner

PVD said:


> I'm pretty sure the Amtrak ones are 1998-2001 deliveries, I'm sure someone will correct that as necessary. The first ones would be getting close using 20 years for a passenger diesel, but with major rebuilds they can go on a lot longer. I think MNRR has been overhauling theirs.


Do you have any more information about how MNRR is overhauling their locomotives?? thank you


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Last P32acdm is now at paint shop in Altoona Pa, the overhaul of all units was at Erie.


----------



## Fan Railer

Charger locos depart Florin for Pueblo:


----------



## R30A

So we have a model number now!
"SC-44"


----------



## frequentflyer

Trying to imagine in phase three paint........


----------



## Steve4031

I like.!!


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Fan Railer said:


> Charger locos depart Florin for Pueblo:


Very sweet, indeed!


----------



## PerRock

A very nice collection of photos have been posted in the NEC Facebook Group, if your a member: https://www.facebook.com/groups/7860063780/permalink/10154280623693781/

peter


----------



## afigg

According to trainorders, the two Chargers are on the eastbound CZ with a total of four P-42s. Think they have enough horsepower for the train?


----------



## Thirdrail7

afigg said:


> According to trainorders, the two Chargers are on the eastbound CZ with a total of four P-42s. Think they have enough horsepower for the train?


That is because they are going to be cut at DEN and need power to get them to the test facility.


----------



## Agent

Video of Amtrak #6(18) from YouTube user Gary Perazzo.


----------



## west point

4 P-42s may seem overpowered but the train trackers show that #6 has been early almost everywhere. The video shows all 4 powering up


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

I wonder if the Chargers have cooling fans on the roof like the P42's?


----------



## George K

Just looked at the Wikipedia article on the Charger. It says:



> The Illinois Department of Transportation, in conjunction with its counterparts in California, Michigan, Missouri and Washington, purchased 32 locomotives for corridor service operated by Amtrak in March 2014. Included in this $225 million order are options for an additional 75 corridor-configured locomotives and 150 locomotives configured for long distance service,with the long distance locomotive being fitted with a larger 2,200 US gallons (8,300 l; 1,800 imp gal) fuel tank as opposed to the 1,800 US gallons (6,800 l; 1,500 imp gal) tank on the corridor locomotive.[


Is the only difference between corridor and those designated for long distance the size of the fuel tank? How much more range does 400 gallons give?


----------



## CCC1007

George K said:


> Just looked at the Wikipedia article on the Charger. It says:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Illinois Department of Transportation, in conjunction with its counterparts in California, Michigan, Missouri and Washington, purchased 32 locomotives for corridor service operated by Amtrak in March 2014. Included in this $225 million order are options for an additional 75 corridor-configured locomotives and 150 locomotives configured for long distance service,with the long distance locomotive being fitted with a larger 2,200 US gallons (8,300 l; 1,800 imp gal) fuel tank as opposed to the 1,800 US gallons (6,800 l; 1,500 imp gal) tank on the corridor locomotive.[
> 
> 
> 
> Is the only difference between corridor and those designated for long distance the size of the fuel tank? How much more range does 400 gallons give?
Click to expand...

~2 hours additional range at full throttle, if consumption is similar to that of the p42.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

George K said:


> Just looked at the Wikipedia article on the Charger. It says:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Illinois Department of Transportation, in conjunction with its counterparts in California, Michigan, Missouri and Washington, purchased 32 locomotives for corridor service operated by Amtrak in March 2014. Included in this $225 million order are options for an additional 75 corridor-configured locomotives and 150 locomotives configured for long distance service,with the long distance locomotive being fitted with a larger 2,200 US gallons (8,300 l; 1,800 imp gal) fuel tank as opposed to the 1,800 US gallons (6,800 l; 1,500 imp gal) tank on the corridor locomotive.[
> 
> 
> 
> Is the only difference between corridor and those designated for long distance the size of the fuel tank? How much more range does 400 gallons give?
Click to expand...

Probably 100 to 300 more miles with their fuel efficiency.


----------



## neroden

They should be a *lot* more efficient than the P42s. You lose some from the emissions controls, but you gain a lot more from the other technological improvements which have been made since 1992.

-- regenerative braking

-- AC motors

-- solid-state technology instead of alternators


----------



## Fan Railer

Agent said:


> Video of Amtrak #6(18) from YouTube user Gary Perazzo.


LMAO brings me back to the EMD F series days......


----------



## Agent

Here's another video of Amtrak #6(18). It was taken in Colorado by YouTube user Metra 160.


----------



## afigg

Agent said:


> Here's another video of Amtrak #6(18). It was taken in Colorado by YouTube user Metra 160.


Thanks for the video link. The video title is "Rare Amtrak 6 with Siemens Charger Engines". That won't be the case, if Amtrak is used to haul all the Mid-West SC-44 Chargers to Chicago over the next several years. May be "rare" to have 2 Chargers on one #6, but a Charger getting moved on #6 could be a routine sight. Amtrak may end up also moving the MARC locomotives east on #6 and #30 since they now have a lot of experience in moving locomotives from the Siemens Sacramento plant.

Also leads to the thought on whether the Coast Starlight would be used to move Chargers to Washington State. Which also raises the question of how the Siemens trainsets will get to Brightline in Florida?


----------



## jis

I am waiting to see whether AAF/FEC will contract with Amtrak or with the freight railroads to move their Chargers and Viaggios. Should start happening sometime later this year.


----------



## west point

With the heat wave the TTC will see how well the chargers will do in hot and high conditions. Do engines cool properly ?


----------



## Northwest Railfan

I sent an email to WSDOT and they confirmed the Chargers will be moved on the Coast Starlight, and delivery is expected late this year.


----------



## cirdan

jis said:


> I am waiting to see whether AAF/FEC will contract with Amtrak or with the freight railroads to move their Chargers and Viaggios. Should start happening sometime later this year.


Stupid question here, but seeing FEC is a freight railroad, and are presumably already able to send and receive freight cars between their own system and any railroad-served location in the US, can't they just expedite their equipment by way of whatever railroads would expedite a regular freight car doing the same trip?


----------



## PVD

Even if it is possible, it may be less expensive and quicker if arranged it with Amtrak. It may even be easier to arrange. Getting scheduled freight across the country might well be slower and more expensive. A quicker delivery on freight service might be arranged but at what cost?


----------



## bretton88

PVD said:


> Even if it is possible, it may be less expensive and quicker if arranged it with Amtrak. It may even be easier to arrange. Getting scheduled freight across the country might well be slower and more expensive. A quicker delivery on freight service might be arranged but at what cost?


Amtrak may not want the liability of carrying another entities locomotives. However freight companies have insurance policies in place for hauling those kind of things. Another option is to load them in Oakland and ship them by boat via the Panama canal and lift them in Miami.


----------



## cirdan

PVD said:


> Even if it is possible, it may be less expensive and quicker if arranged it with Amtrak. It may even be easier to arrange. Getting scheduled freight across the country might well be slower and more expensive. A quicker delivery on freight service might be arranged but at what cost?


It's a pretty sad state of affairs if a freight railroad can't get freight delivered by rail ...

How are the rest of rail freight customers supposed to get anything shipped?


----------



## PVD

I'm sure they can get them delivered that way, it just might not be the best way.


----------



## jis

As I said, I am just waiting to see what they do. It is possibly likely that they will move them through UP and CSX. Even Amtrak has moved much equipment by freight trains in the past.

They will have not only engines but passenger cars to move.

A detail though is that AAF is a different company from FECR (which is the railroad owned by the the Fortress Group). AAF, which is buying the equipment is a subsidiary of FECI which is owned by the Fortress Group. So AAF is not a freight railroad, and indeed it by itself cannot operate anything outside Florida, since they are not an interstate entity. So whatever is done will be done under contract with someone or the other.


----------



## Agent

Railway Age reports the first two Chargers have arrived at the test track.


----------



## chakk

I photographed these babies in Denver Union Station on 24 June.


----------



## chakk

And here's both of them aqueezed into one frame at DUS on 24 June 2016.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Agent said:


> Railway Age reports the first two Chargers have arrived at the test track.


They have not arrived at the test track. They have merely arrived in Colorado to be moved to the test facility.


----------



## Ryan

Which is technically what the article says.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

So what happen to the four Amtrak engines that brought the two new Chargers to Denver?

Two should of gone onto Chicago, but why are there pictures with the Chargers with out any Amtrak power?

State of good repair?

Did someone fail to order the train to drop off the two extra Amtrak engines off with the Chargers at Denver?

Just thinking again, it a great picture with out the Amtrak engines block the view, but...


----------



## Thirdrail7

The 2 extra diesels returned to EMY as scheduled and have been released into their pool.. A set of diesels and a rider car will return to Den to ferry the equipment to the test facility when ready...which is soon.


----------



## frequentflyer

The pics of the Chargers look good, easy to imagine them in phase three paint when and if that day ever happens.


----------



## Northeastern292

afigg said:


> fulham said:
> 
> 
> 
> With these new Chargers coming on-line, Amtrak should have an additional 33 P-42's available in Chicago (who knows what shape they are in), but what about the Amtrak engines in California and Washington state? CalTrans has 20 Chargers on order and WasDOT has 8. Will this free up an additional 28 Amtrak engines for LD service? I know both CalTrans and WasDOT have some of there own engines, will any of these be retired or are they looking at the Chargers as a way to get rid of any P42's they are leasing from Amtrak?
> 
> 
> 
> The Charger order of 33 locomotives for the Midwest is significantly more than the IL, MI, MO corridors are currently using. Don't know exactly how many P-42s might be freed up in the Midwest for use elsewhere, but it is not 33 of them. The additional locomotives will be available for expanded service frequencies and probably will be used on the 110 mph corridors to put 2 locomotives on each trainset for better acceleration.
> 
> As discussed earlier in this thread, the locomotives that will be freed up in California are F-59PHIs. With the Chargers becoming the main locomotive for the Midwest and West coast corridor services, if Amtrak decides to keep their F-59PHIs, might see them get moved east for use on some of the eastern corridor services. Probably won't be enough Chargers in revenue service until late 2017 or 2018 for the F-59s to start getting freed up.
Click to expand...

Since the Chargers are now in testing, I thought I'd bring back the discussion about the order itself from the dead.

First, discussion needs to be present to consider Amtrak to not scrap ANY locomotives the Chargers are replacing.

Second, for each Charger that comes online, Amtrak should send the P42s, F59s and B32s through overhauls. I think we've all seen (or even experienced) a BNSF, CSX, NS or UP loco pulling a LD train. That must not make the Class I's happy when they have to pull a disabled Amtrak train.


----------



## chakk

I do remember the E8's pulling B&O's Capitol Limited and UP E9's pulling the City of Everywhere.


----------



## west point

Remember E units had 2 prime mover diesels in each unit. So if one failed still had some power. At the end of SOU RR Crescent days there were 4 E units on the train north of ATL. ~ 12.000 HP


----------



## Agent

Facebook post showing Amtrak #6(27) departed today with four engines and an extra heritage baggage car on the end (reportedly with some flat spots).


----------



## Thirdrail7

Agent said:


> Facebook post showing Amtrak #6(27) departed today with four engines and an extra heritage baggage car on the end (reportedly with some flat spots).


That's their ride.


----------



## chakk

west point said:


> Remember E units had 2 prime mover diesels in each unit. So if one failed still had some power. At the end of SOU RR Crescent days there were 4 E units on the train north of ATL. ~ 12.000 HP


Not quite 12k HP. The last E units had 2400 HP, so four of them could deliver 9600 HP. But those on Southern may have been E8s instead of E9s. The E8s had 2250 HP in each unit.


----------



## grahamru

Northeastern292 said:


> afigg said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fulham said:
> 
> 
> 
> With these new Chargers coming on-line, Amtrak should have an additional 33 P-42's available in Chicago (who knows what shape they are in), but what about the Amtrak engines in California and Washington state? CalTrans has 20 Chargers on order and WasDOT has 8. Will this free up an additional 28 Amtrak engines for LD service? I know both CalTrans and WasDOT have some of there own engines, will any of these be retired or are they looking at the Chargers as a way to get rid of any P42's they are leasing from Amtrak?
> 
> 
> 
> The Charger order of 33 locomotives for the Midwest is significantly more than the IL, MI, MO corridors are currently using. Don't know exactly how many P-42s might be freed up in the Midwest for use elsewhere, but it is not 33 of them. The additional locomotives will be available for expanded service frequencies and probably will be used on the 110 mph corridors to put 2 locomotives on each trainset for better acceleration.
> As discussed earlier in this thread, the locomotives that will be freed up in California are F-59PHIs. With the Chargers becoming the main locomotive for the Midwest and West coast corridor services, if Amtrak decides to keep their F-59PHIs, might see them get moved east for use on some of the eastern corridor services. Probably won't be enough Chargers in revenue service until late 2017 or 2018 for the F-59s to start getting freed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the Chargers are now in testing, I thought I'd bring back the discussion about the order itself from the dead.
> 
> First, discussion needs to be present to consider Amtrak to not scrap ANY locomotives the Chargers are replacing.
> 
> Second, for each Charger that comes online, Amtrak should send the P42s, F59s and B32s through overhauls. I think we've all seen (or even experienced) a BNSF, CSX, NS or UP loco pulling a LD train. That must not make the Class I's happy when they have to pull a disabled Amtrak train.
Click to expand...

Service reliability and costs to maintain equipment should drive what is retained and rehabilitated (or not). Other factors would include effiency as well as environmental compliance. Some decisions are not vested with Amtrak, as some the locomotives are owned by CalTrans. Sadly, rehabilitation can only go so far and some equipment is at the end of serviceable condition.


----------



## KnightRail

Look for passenger cars from one of the states that has ordered Chargers to be heading west to the test track.


----------



## Acela150

KnightRail said:


> Look for passenger cars from one of the states that has ordered Chargers to be heading west to the test track.


Saysssssssss???


----------



## Ryan

The Internet!!!

Which is never wrong!!!


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Acela150 said:


> KnightRail said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look for passenger cars from one of the states that has ordered Chargers to be heading west to the test track.
> 
> 
> 
> Saysssssssss???
Click to expand...

Hmm, I could be wrong  but I think KnightRail has good sources of info.


----------



## afigg

KnightRail said:


> Look for passenger cars from one of the states that has ordered Chargers to be heading west to the test track.


The only new (intercity) passenger cars that are likely to be close to heading to the FRA Pueblo test facility would be the Siemens single level cars being built for Brightline (formerly All Aboard Florida). Brightline is a private entity buying rolling stock for the Miami to Orlando route; it is not one of the states acquiring Chargers nor N-S bi-level corridor cars. Whether the Siemens coach cars would be shipped to Pueblo along with the first of the Brightline Chargers, don't know.


----------



## Karl1459

KnightRail said:


> Look for passenger cars from one of the states that has ordered Chargers to be heading west to the test track.


I am just speculating here, but testing compatibility and ride dynamics with the actual cars to be operated behind these locos might be one of the later check offs on the testing list. Perhaps due diligence to avoid another SDP40F debacle.


----------



## Thirdrail7

afigg said:


> KnightRail said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look for passenger cars from one of the states that has ordered Chargers to be heading west to the test track.
> 
> 
> 
> The only new (intercity) passenger cars that are likely to be close to heading to the FRA Pueblo test facility would be the Siemens single level cars being built for Brightline (formerly All Aboard Florida). Brightline is a private entity buying rolling stock for the Miami to Orlando route; it is not one of the states acquiring Chargers nor N-S bi-level corridor cars. Whether the Siemens coach cars would be shipped to Pueblo along with the first of the Brightline Chargers, don't know.
Click to expand...

I'm just playing Devil's Advocate (see he doesn't seem available for comment at this time) but I don't see anything about in KnightRail's post stating the equipment belongs to an intercity carrier.

I believe there is a commuter service that has a vested interest in these 125 mph engines.


----------



## CCC1007

Karl1459 said:


> KnightRail said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look for passenger cars from one of the states that has ordered Chargers to be heading west to the test track.
> 
> 
> 
> I am just speculating here, but testing compatibility and ride dynamics with the actual cars to be operated behind these locos might be one of the later check offs on the testing list. Perhaps due diligence to avoid another SDP40F debacle.
Click to expand...

So it could be California cars, horizon fleet cars, and MARC equipment in pueblo for testing?


----------



## afigg

Karl1459 said:


> KnightRail said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look for passenger cars from one of the states that has ordered Chargers to be heading west to the test track.
> 
> 
> 
> I am just speculating here, but testing compatibility and ride dynamics with the actual cars to be operated behind these locos might be one of the later check offs on the testing list. Perhaps due diligence to avoid another SDP40F debacle.
Click to expand...

On further consideration, you have a point. Rather than new cars, could be a few Horizons or Amfleets headed to Pueblo to be pulled by the 2 Chargers for the testing. They have to verify that the SC-44s can pull a consist of X cars up to 125 mph. Not a big deal as Amfleets went to Pueblo for the ACS-64 testing a couple of years ago. Still, the Brightline Chargers and coach cars will also presumably be heading to the Pueblo test facility sometime in the next month or two for testing as well.


----------



## Ryan

Thirdrail7 said:


> I believe there is a commuter service that has a vested interest in these 125 mph engines.


That reminds me I forgot to share this...


----------



## A Voice

Ryan said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe there is a commuter service that has a vested interest in these 125 mph engines.
> 
> 
> 
> That reminds me I forgot to share this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screen Shot 2016-07-07 at 9.53.04 PM.png
Click to expand...

I thought MARC was committed to an all-diesel operation. By "not getting rid of the HHP-8"s" I assume they are only referring to the short term until the new diesel locomotives are delivered?


----------



## PVD

there was a posting on a different site that 4 MARC multilevels were heading to Chicago on the CL. Would anyone be surprised if they went out on the CZ to Denver, and then down to Pueblo?


----------



## Ryan

A Voice said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe there is a commuter service that has a vested interest in these 125 mph engines.
> 
> 
> 
> That reminds me I forgot to share this...
> 
> 
> 
> Screen Shot 2016-07-07 at 9.53.04 PM.png
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I thought MARC was committed to an all-diesel operation. By "not getting rid of the HHP-8"s" I assume they are only referring to the short term until the new diesel locomotives are delivered?
Click to expand...

That's what I thought as well. It appears that may have changed.


----------



## KnightRail

PVD said:


> ... that 4 MARC multilevels were heading to Chicago on the CL. Would anyone be surprised if they went out on the CZ to Denver, and then down to Pueblo?


That would be an astute inference


----------



## Thirdrail7

KnightRail said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... that 4 MARC multilevels were heading to Chicago on the CL. Would anyone be surprised if they went out on the CZ to Denver, and then down to Pueblo?
> 
> 
> 
> That would be an astute inference
Click to expand...


I'm kind of glad I don't play volleyball with this group. Talk about missing easy set ups. :help:


----------



## Agent

I saw Amtrak #5(10) come through Agency, Iowa this evening with four MARC bi-level cars and not one, but two heritage baggage cars. As expected, AMTK 1714 was on the end with the commuter cars. I was surprised to see AMTK 1710 up front in revenue service. Anyway, the cars the Chargers will be tested with are MARC 7802, 7833, 7834, and 7804.


----------



## frequentflyer

Agent said:


> I saw Amtrak #5(10) come through Agency, Iowa this evening with four MARC bi-level cars and not one, but two heritage baggage cars. As expected, AMTK 1714 was on the end with the commuter cars. I was surprised to see AMTK 1710 up front in revenue service. Anyway, the cars the Chargers will be tested with are MARC 7802, 7833, 7834, and 7804.


Was that at 79mph?


----------



## Agent

frequentflyer said:


> Was that at 79mph?


Should be that or pretty close to it.


----------



## Agent

This video from YouTube user Sky Rider show Amtrak #6(10) with four units. I'm guessing two will be used for the move to Pueblo.


----------



## Ryan

Agent said:


> Anyway, the cars the Chargers will be tested with are MARC 7802, 7833, 7834, and 7804.


Interesting choice of cars, all trailers (no cab cars, which is a functionality I would want to test). 2 original MARC cars (780x), and 2 ex-VRE cars (783x). All 125 certified K-cars, not the soon to be 125 MPH MLVs.


----------



## Acela150

Ryan said:


> Agent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, the cars the Chargers will be tested with are MARC 7802, 7833, 7834, and 7804.
> 
> 
> 
> (no cab cars, which is a functionality I would want to test).
Click to expand...

Ryan, let's be honest.. You're right. But God forbid they think of that.. :wacko:


----------



## PVD

I guess if it is deemed safe to operate, and at certain speeds, acceptance for local conditions (push-pull ops, specific signalling systems) would be done by the purchaser/operator.Probably not part of the DOT tests, but certainly important.


----------



## Karl1459

Ryan said:


> Agent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, the cars the Chargers will be tested with are MARC 7802, 7833, 7834, and 7804.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting choice of cars, all trailers (no cab cars, which is a functionality I would want to test). 2 original MARC cars (780x), and 2 ex-VRE cars (783x). All 125 certified K-cars, not the soon to be 125 MPH MLVs.
Click to expand...

The relevant testing is likely how the cars track in relation to the locomotive. Pushing (and pulling) with control in the locomotive should provide the data. The only thing relevant to a cab car is how well the controls work and this is likely an industry standard. Even then a cab car may be available at DOT Pueblo.


----------



## afigg

I saw a couple of days ago that the NGEC Executive Board had posted July 19 meeting minutes and was going to write about it, but they also just posted the August 2 draft minutes. There is actual news in the minutes on the testing of the 2 units at the Pueblo facility.

Excerpts from the August 2 minutes:



> · The first two pilot locomotives were being at TTCI for vehicle/track dynamic interaction. The tests are concluded with successful results.
> · The locomotives were also tested for AAR Chapter XI track interaction protocol. The tests are concluded with successful results.
> · JPEs hope for Siemens to test PTC, while at Pueblo. Legal issues for one-day use of the Data Radio and the communications software (the “Image”) continue to be a difficulty. Assistance from Amtrak is needed to facilitate use of the “Image” for this one-day test in Pueblo.
> · *The four MARC cars have arrived at TTCI for locomotive propulsion tests. Initial tests up to 130 mph have been successfully completed.*
> .....
> · The test plan for 125 mph testing on the North East Corridor was approved by FRA, as submitted by (Maryland MARC Train Service) MARC. MARC/Amtrak are reported processing the test agreement.
> · *Siemens targets shipping locomotive #4 to Baltimore, next Friday 8/5.*
> · Each JPE are working out details for pre-revenue test plans, with Amtrak.
> .....
> The locomotive weight was reported in June 2016, at 270,725 lbs (+/-). Based on actual component weights, the locomotive weight has varied little in the last six months. The calculated P2 force is within specified limits.
> 
> Eric Curtit thanked John Oimoen for the “good news” and added “we all appreciate it.”


Yes, it is nice to have good news on successful equipment tests and the shipment to the east coast of a unit for testing on the NEC.


----------



## west point

If that was just one SC-44 that pulled 4 MARC cars that would stop any speculation they cannot meet the 125 on Amtrak territory. Find that somewhat overwhelming.


----------



## KnightRail

afigg said:


> Excerpts from the August 2 minutes:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> · *Siemens targets shipping locomotive #4 to Baltimore, next Friday 8/5.*
Click to expand...

4604 should be third out on the Zephyr originating Saturday 8/6


----------



## Fan Railer

Here it is, thanks to Agent:


----------



## Agent

Fan Railer said:


> Here it is, thanks to Agent:



I would have posted that sooner, but I got distracted by Olympics coverage.

Anyway, while I was there I spoke with a man from Siemens that was going along with this unit to the Northeast. You can hear part of the conversation in the middle of the video. Some of the things he said was that this engine belongs to Illinois, that it's the fourth Charger, and the sixth one is currently in Sacramento.


----------



## Fan Railer

Do you have any idea if it left Chicago immediately on the today's Capitol Limited (8/8)? Or is it leaving on tomorrow's Cap (8/9)?


----------



## afigg

Fan Railer said:


> Do you have any idea if it left Chicago immediately on the today's Capitol Limited (8/8)? Or is it leaving on tomorrow's Cap (8/9)?


IIRC, the ACS-64s typically spent a night in Chicago before being sent eastward on the next day's CL or, on a few occasions, the Cardinal. If the SC-44 is moved on the NEC by an ACS-64, hopefully someone will get a photo or video of it.


----------



## Agent

Fan Railer said:


> Do you have any idea if it left Chicago immediately on the today's Capitol Limited (8/8)? Or is it leaving on tomorrow's Cap (8/9)?


I doubt it left today. I'm not aware of any Sprinter leaving the same day it arrived in Chicago. #6(06) was running two and a half hours late too.


----------



## Fan Railer

Thanks guys.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

4th charger shipped for NEC testing, in this video it starts with a long distance shot, it clearly shows the height difference between Genesis at 14'6" and Charger at 12'6"


----------



## PerRock

Fan Railer said:


> Do you have any idea if it left Chicago immediately on the today's Capitol Limited (8/8)? Or is it leaving on tomorrow's Cap (8/9)?


Why would it go east on the CL? The Chargers are owned by the midwest states & will be in revenue service there.

peter


----------



## PVD

Isn't MARC getting some? Those would operate on portions of the NEC.


----------



## OBS

The engine probably has to put an appearance in at Wash. DC for political purposes....


----------



## CCC1007

It isn't being delivered at this time, just going to the corridor for testing.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

PerRock said:


> Fan Railer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any idea if it left Chicago immediately on the today's Capitol Limited (8/8)? Or is it leaving on tomorrow's Cap (8/9)?
> 
> 
> 
> Why would it go east on the CL? The Chargers are owned by the midwest states & will be in revenue service there.
> 
> peter
Click to expand...

right now their owned by Siemens , their not owned by any agency till their formally accepted.


----------



## afigg

PerRock said:


> Why would it go east on the CL? The Chargers are owned by the midwest states & will be in revenue service there.
> 
> peter


Read back a page to my post #376 in this thread with excerpts from the most recent NGEC executive board meeting minutes. MARC is purchasing 8 Chargers and has received approval from the FRA for testing on the NEC for speeds up to 125 mph. The Chargers at the Pueblo test facility have been run up to 130 mph, but that is test track, not the NEC with all its constraints.


----------



## R30A

Dutchrailnut said:


> 4th charger shipped for NEC testing, in this video it starts with a long distance shot, it clearly shows the height difference between Genesis at 14'6" and Charger at 12'6"


It clearly shows the lack of a major height difference, and that the height of the SC-44 is substantially higher than 12' 6". It shows that the SC-44 is equal to or taller in height than the roughly 14' Viewliner baggage behind it.


----------



## JohannFarley

R30A said:


> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> 
> 4th charger shipped for NEC testing, in this video it starts with a long distance shot, it clearly shows the height difference between Genesis at 14'6" and Charger at 12'6"
> 
> 
> 
> It clearly shows the lack of a major height difference, and that the height of the SC-44 is substantially higher than 12' 6". It shows that the SC-44 is equal to or taller in height than the roughly 14' Viewliner baggage behind it.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'd have to agree that it seems to be at least 14' tall if not a little more. That close up shot shows that it isn't that big of a difference.


----------



## jis

R30A said:


> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> 
> 4th charger shipped for NEC testing, in this video it starts with a long distance shot, it clearly shows the height difference between Genesis at 14'6" and Charger at 12'6"
> 
> 
> 
> It clearly shows the lack of a major height difference, and that the height of the SC-44 is substantially higher than 12' 6". It shows that the SC-44 is equal to or taller in height than the roughly 14' Viewliner baggage behind it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it looks like it is 14'4" tall just like the P42s.

This image shows this very clearly....

https://scontent.ftpa1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13925742_1039709436084039_987268846580454813_o.jpg


----------



## JohannFarley

I'm wondering why the wikipedia page taken from the specs says 12.6'? Is that only above the wheels? That would make it seem correct then based on how it looks.


----------



## jis

JohannFarley said:


> I'm wondering why the wikipedia page taken from the specs says 12.6'? Is that only above the wheels? That would make it seem correct then based on how it looks.


I speculate that when the Spec was originally put together for distribution to the public domain, it was assumed that the same car body as the Sprinter was going to be used. That changed somewhere on the way since you don't require all that tall insulator hardware on the roof in a diesel engine, and you do require more space inside the carbody. The updated spec sheet was never shared publicly.


----------



## PerRock

afigg said:


> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would it go east on the CL? The Chargers are owned by the midwest states & will be in revenue service there.
> 
> peter
> 
> 
> 
> Read back a page to my post #376 in this thread with excerpts from the most recent NGEC executive board meeting minutes. MARC is purchasing 8 Chargers and has received approval from the FRA for testing on the NEC for speeds up to 125 mph. The Chargers at the Pueblo test facility have been run up to 130 mph, but that is test track, not the NEC with all its constraints.
Click to expand...

In the video posted they say that #4604 belongs to the State of IL, not MARC. It's also plainly in the Midwest paint scheme, not MARCs.

peter


----------



## jis

PerRock said:


> In the video posted they say that #4604 belongs to the State of IL, not MARC. It's also plainly in the Midwest paint scheme, not MARCs.


I think irrespective of who this locomotive will eventually belong to it is being used as a testbed for validation and certification for operation on the NEC at upto 125mp as required eventually for use by MARC on the NEC. None of these locomotives belong to anyone other than Siemens until they are accepted as delivered by the eventual recipients. Until they are delivered Siemens has quite a bit of discretion about what tests it wants to carry out with them I'd suppose.


----------



## MikefromCrete

Nobody said it wasn't an Illinois locomotive. Testing on the NEC will see if the locomotives can maintain the 125 mph needed by MARC. The locomotive is still Siemens' property, it hasn't been delivered yet.


----------



## R30A

jis said:


> JohannFarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm wondering why the wikipedia page taken from the specs says 12.6'? Is that only above the wheels? That would make it seem correct then based on how it looks.
> 
> 
> 
> I speculate that when the Spec was originally put together for distribution to the public domain, it was assumed that the same car body as the Sprinter was going to be used. That changed somewhere on the way since you don't require all that tall insulator hardware on the roof in a diesel engine, and you do require more space inside the carbody. The updated spec sheet was never shared publicly.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the same height as the european versions?

The Sprinter has the same height specification confusion that the Charger has. Claims to be 12' 6" while it is in reality roughly 14'


----------



## jis

Yeah, maybe the 12'6" came from the European units, though none appear to have the height documented in Wiki.

The edge of the roof line of the Sprinter appears to be about the same height as the top of Amfleets, which is 12'8". Then there is the beveled hump over the cabs at each end which appear to stick upto about 14'. The flat roof on which the HV electrical switchgear and the pantos are mounted appear to be something like 12'6" to 12'8" from photos. So maybe that is what the 12'6" is referring to, the height from rail top to the top of the monococque body.

Again just speculating.


----------



## fulham

When these units are delivered to Illinois, I wonder if there will be any change regarding maintenance procedures in Chicago? Since the states will own these engines and not Amtrak will the states have more say over how they are to be maintained? Amtrak's Chicago maintenance facility does not have the best reputation, but I don't know what other options would be available. Don't know if the RCM program that has worked with the Acela's could be put in place. Could be interesting.


----------



## jis

I don't know what deal the states have with Siemens. AAF has Siemens as the maintenance contractor for their entire trainsets including the locomotives.


----------



## Steve4031

What is the RCM program? How is it different?


----------



## jis

Steve4031 said:


> What is the RCM program? How is it different?


Reliability Centered Maintenance. See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability-centered_maintenance

Suffice it to say that without RCM there would be no Extended Twin OPerations across the vast oceans, which enables the use of twin engine planes like the 757, 767, 777, 787 and A350 and A330 on intercontinental flights.

Amtrak uses RCM on the Acelas, but for some mystifying reason they started and then stopped using RCM on the rest of their locomotive fleet.


----------



## afigg

jis said:


> I don't know what deal the states have with Siemens. AAF has Siemens as the maintenance contractor for their entire trainsets including the locomotives.


Amtrak will maintain the Mid-West equipment. That has been discussed in the minutes of the NGEC executive committee. Excerpts from one of the June minutes:



> Progress Report: Mid-West States – Tim Hoeffner, Michigan DOT:
> 
> Tim Hoeffner provided the following update:
> 
> Proposals for Fleet Manager have been received and are under review.
> 
> The Mid-West group is having ongoing discussions with Mario Bergeron and his team about maintenance of the fleet, especially the locomotives.
> 
> The group is working on detailed by-laws for the Mid-West states which will build off of the MOU that is currently in place.
> 
> Jennifer Bastian, IDOT, added that the lease and operating agreement with Amtrak Mechanical is being finalized.


There is content in other NGEC documents about defining a maintenance standard and plan that will presumably apply to the Amtrak maintenance contract. Whether that would include RCM or similar approach, don't know. IIRC, there have been references to California reaching an agreement with Amtrak for the maintenance of the new equipment as well.


----------



## Steve4031

Thank you for the explanation of RCM. I can see the difference in the number of reported engine failures on the routes out of Chicago.


----------



## Fan Railer

UBER MEGA FOAM:


----------



## Steve4031

NICE!!!!


----------



## Palmetto

Steve4031 said:


> NICE!!!!


Except the flashers on the crossing apparatus don't seem to be working!


----------



## Dutchrailnut

hard to tell from that angle, specially if LED lights are used.

the lights on crossing arms are working when viewed in youtube full screen mode


----------



## jis

afigg said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know what deal the states have with Siemens. AAF has Siemens as the maintenance contractor for their entire trainsets including the locomotives.
> 
> 
> 
> Amtrak will maintain the Mid-West equipment. That has been discussed in the minutes of the NGEC executive committee. Excerpts from one of the June minutes:
Click to expand...

Poor souls. They have my utmost sympathies....


----------



## Agent

Here's another video of the nice consist on the _Capitol Limited_. This was filmed this morning by YouTube user jackmp294.5TM in West Newton, Pennsylvania.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Nice view from that front porch! Thanks for sharing!


----------



## norfolkwesternhenry

I want that porch! I don't care if trains run through there every 5 min!


----------



## afigg

Another video, but this one from the Pueblo test facility including inside shots of the control panel while running at 108 to 109 mph: A ride in Siemens' new diesel-electric Charger locomotive.


----------



## frequentflyer

That's a big blind spot on the engineer's right.


----------



## jis

Typically on trains engineers do not need to look left and right before changing lanes


----------



## Fan Railer

B-roll footage from testing @ TTCI. Sounds like a giant Dodge Ram if you ask me xD

http://siemensusa.synapticdigital.com/US/SIEMENS-USA/siemens-clean-diesel-electric-charger-locomotives-progressing-through-demanding-testing-program/s/5f57a187-2cb9-4338-819b-6e0ac660be60

Also, 4604 on the Cap @ Harpers and WAS:


----------



## west point

Looking at the walk by of the SC-44 there is a third new some kind of MU connection next to the train control and loco control 27 point connectors. It is smaller and yellow in color. Some one who can look at it and tell us its labeling will be appreciated.


----------



## Northwest Railfan

west point said:


> Looking at the walk by of the SC-44 there is a third new some kind of MU connection next to the train control and loco control 27 point connectors. It is smaller and yellow in color. Some one who can look at it and tell us its labeling will be appreciated.


Could it be something to do with PTC?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

no, PTC is not something that is train lined only active PTC would be on lead locomotive.

It may be a digital train line like some of NJT trains are using, maybe JIS has better info on that.


----------



## jis

Dutchrailnut said:


> no, PTC is not something that is train lined only active PTC would be on lead locomotive.
> 
> It may be a digital train line like some of NJT trains are using, maybe JIS has better info on that.


I have been scratching my head about this one. Actually even some older Amtrak equipment has a third connector, and I have never quite figured out for what. I guess time to ask some of our Amtrak NEC denizens if they know.


----------



## PVD

Two of the most knpwledgeable and respected people on this board (JIS and Dutchrailnut) are not familiar with it. Can't be a game breaker. Maybe a port for connecting some type of maintenance data device?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

One of Amtrak tech's guesses its a data bus for trouble shooting car computers and destination signs, simmular to NJT Data bus used on Comet V and MLV cars.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Dutchrailnut said:


> One of Amtrak tech's guesses its a data bus for trouble shooting car computers and destination signs, simmular to NJT Data bus used on Comet V and MLV cars.


Somebody should go stick their finger(s) in it and see if they get a charge out of the Charger. :giggle:


----------



## George K

AmtrakBlue said:


> Somebody should go stick their finger(s) in it and see if they get a charge out of the Charger. :giggle:


That would be revolting.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

ok were now at stage of stupid comments....


----------



## Fan Railer

lol my B for not zooming in on the MU cables =P


----------



## Acela150

Ok so for those wondering about that third port.

Getting a look at it from a few different angles in the Fan Railer video it appears to be a port where should the batteries die on the locomotive mechanical can come out and attempt to "jump it". Usually from another unit. Many freight units have this port or the "F" end and "B" end.


----------



## Fan Railer

At about 15 seconds here, you can see the labeling for the cable ports. I can make out MU control and Comm, but not the third one:


----------



## JohannFarley

It looks like it either says DTL or OTL.


----------



## TinCan782

From USA Today...August 10...

_Railfan fantasy: Riding nation's newest locomotive_

http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/destinations/2016/08/10/siemens-charger-locomotive-testing/88374206/


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Fan Railer said:


> At about 15 seconds here, you can see the labeling for the cable ports. I can make out MU control and Comm, but not the third one:


DTL would be Digital or Data train line.


----------



## VT Hokie

I say take one of these and put them on one end of a Rohr Turboliner trainset, with the power car acting as a cab control push-pull unit on the other end. I mean, Amtrak still has the three sitting in Bear, DE doing nothing for the taxpayers at the moment. Maybe not such a crazy idea...see the photo approx. 2/3 of the way down this page:

https://www.farrail.com/pages/touren-engl/Railways-in-Iran-2016.php


----------



## NSC1109

Just watched the video showing the testing of the Chargers...I really hope they get a new horn. That thing sounds hideous


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Is that electronic sign on the front going to be used by Amtrak to show destination as is done on busses? I have always wondered why on Amfleets they do not use the interior electronic signs to announce stops. Last month when I was on train 20 ATL-CLT the interior sign in one coach car had a rotating message with the normal restroom location, plus Amtrak website URL, and a couple other things.


----------



## Fan Railer

NSC1109 said:


> Just watched the video showing the testing of the Chargers...I really hope they get a new horn. That thing sounds hideous


It's a standard K5LA. Same one used on the Sprinters and all other new passenger locomotives in the last decade. It's not changing any time soon.


----------



## jis

I'd say last several decades. And actually a lot of us really like it too as a quick search through the archives of AU will show no doubt.  Most fortunately it is unlikely to change.


----------



## NSC1109

Fan Railer said:


> NSC1109 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just watched the video showing the testing of the Chargers...I really hope they get a new horn. That thing sounds hideous
> 
> 
> 
> It's a standard K5LA. Same one used on the Sprinters and all other new passenger locomotives in the last decade. It's not changing any time soon.
Click to expand...

That was a K5? In that case I'm more than okay with it. From the video it sounded like some digital crap that was put on. I guess maybe the engineer didn't fully sound the horn..?


----------



## Caesar La Rock

Amtrak had the P5As on the F40s, P30CHs, and Turboliners. P01235 for the E60s. The second order of F40s was the start of the K5LA era on Amtrak, although all P5 horns (including the P01235) survived into the early 2000s I believe.

The SDP40Fs had the unique Leslie SL4Ts, which had the same fate as the locomotives themselves, not lasting long. I do know some F40s did get SL4Ts, IDK which ones though. I don't see any new horn coming into the picture for Amtrak for a while.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Caesar La Rock said:


> Amtrak had the P5As on the F40s, P30CHs, and Turboliners. P01235 for the E60s. The second order of F40s was the start of the K5LA era on Amtrak, although all P5 horns (including the P01235) survived into the early 2000s I believe.
> 
> The SDP40Fs had the unique Leslie SL4Ts, which had the same fate as the locomotives themselves, not lasting long. I do know some F40s did get SL4Ts, IDK which ones though. I don't see any new horn coming into the picture for Amtrak for a while.


It would be nice to hear a New Cast P5A on a Charger for a change. Lol

But I kinda like the new K5LA's.


----------



## Thirdrail7

I'm sure this has been answered before but I'm curious as to why this thread is in the Amtrak forum considering various states placed the order.


----------



## PVD

The only thing I can think of is that most of them will be operated and maintained by Amtrak.


----------



## NSC1109

http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/NGEC%20305_Presentation_Multi%20State_21616-update.pdf

Not sure how I feel about the Michigan/Illinois/Missouri scheme...I know that these are going to be owned by the states and operated/maintained by Amtrak, but I feel like there should be some sort of clear "Amtrak" marking along with a road number on them...maybe they just weren't applied on the rendering?


----------



## jis

I suspect it will be upto the owning states to decide what markings they want to put on their locomotives. Of course what ever they decide on has to be compliant with FRA requirements.

I am sure the road identification AAR markings on these will not be AMTK, but things like IDTX for Illinois etc.and the numbering series will also be decided by the owners and not by Amtrak.

The MARC ones will of course have Maryland identity and markings, and not Amtrak ones.

I wonder if the one Tier IV locomotive that just got funded for ACE will just be an add on order to the California pool of SC-44s, and what livery they will get.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Is the Lincoln Service equipment going to be owned by Illinois, Missouri, or a mix of both?


----------



## jis

Lincoln Service I believe is exclusively Illinois. River Runner is Missouri.


----------



## afigg

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Is the Lincoln Service equipment going to be owned by Illinois, Missouri, or a mix of both?


The Mid-West equipment - the SC-44s and the Nippon-Sharyo bilevels - will be jointly owned by a consortium set up by the 3 states (MI, IL, MO). I expect they set up the consortium so WI, MN, IN, Iowa can join in (or buy in) if or when they decide to do so.


----------



## Fan Railer

Heads-up, IDTX 4604 is to be put on MARC 679 DHD tomorrow, 8/30 so it can be moved from Martin to WAS. It is planned to leave about 30 ahead of the scheduled 14:55 departure time from Martin so that there is ample time to cut 4604 off the consist at WAS. That would put it through BAL @ 14:47 and in WAS around 15:27. Happy hunting to those who are in the area and can come out to get it.


----------



## Acela150

But I'm so lazy... LOL!!


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Fan Railer said:


> Heads-up, IDTX 4604 is to be put on MARC 679 DHD tomorrow, 8/30 so it can be moved from Martin to WAS. It is planned to leave about 30 ahead of the scheduled 14:55 departure time from Martin so that there is ample time to cut 4604 off the consist at WAS. That would put it through BAL @ 14:47 and in WAS around 15:27. Happy hunting to those who are in the area and can come out to get it.


Why not have it lead so they can test it on the spot?


----------



## Fan Railer

Move never happened; last min issues. And no, that's not how testing works.


----------



## mgl1978

The new Charger Locomotive at Ivy City on 9/4/16.


----------



## Fan Railer

4604 is in Philly as of 9/7/16 for testing along the corridor.


----------



## jis

The first Charger for AAF ran under its own power and completed initial tests in Sacramento.

http://gobrightline.com/brightlines-first-locomotive-completes-initial-testing-siemens-rail-manufacturing-hub/


----------



## afigg

The NGEC Executive Committee has posted a draft of the minutes of the August 30 meeting, which has positive news on the testing of the Chargers. An extended exceprt:



> · The first two pilot locomotives were tested at TTCI, with instrumented wheel sets, for vehicle/track dynamic interaction. The tests are concluded with successful results.
> · The locomotives were also tested for AAR Chapter XI track interaction protocol, also using the instrumented wheel sets. The tests are concluded with successful results.
> · *The four MARC cars have arrived at TTCI for locomotive propulsion tests. Initial tests up to 130 mph have been successfully completed.*
> · Road Braking tests have been successfully completed at TTCI.
> · The EMC/EMI tests are now being conducted and are going well.
> · *Locomotive propulsion tests are now also underway at TTCI with good results. Track speeds of 127 MPH have been routinely achieved, while acceleration, trip times, and fuel consumption performance have been found to be a bit better than estimated.*
> · The test plan for 125 mph testing on the North East Corridor was approved by FRA, as submitted by (Maryland MARC Train Service) MARC. MARC/Amtrak are reported processing the test agreement.
> *· Siemens shipped locomotive #4 to Baltimore on Friday 8/5. The locomotive and the instrumented wheel sets are now in Baltimore and testing is set to begin on 9/9.*
> · Each JPE are working out details for pre-revenue test plans, with Amtrak.
> · All fifteen (15 ea.) DCRs have been distributed to the locomotive sub-team leaders for review.
> · The locomotive weight was reported for locomotive # 4604, at a bit less than 267, 000 lbs (+/-). This is a little bit better than previously estimated. The calculated P2 force is within specified limits.
> 
> John added that the testing has been going very well and *they are looking forward to achieving the goal of getting the “Charger” locomotive into revenue service in early 2017.*


The boldface text is my addition. So the Chargers at the Pueblo test facility have done a little better for acceleration and fuel consumption than predicted and have hit 127 mph routinely. With the delays in the CAF and Nippon-Sharyo contracts, at least the Chargers are coming along with no serious issues.


----------



## DSS&A

Hi,

I saw locomotive 4604 at the Philadelphia 30th Street Station at noon today when I boarded a train there. The 4604 was on one end of a train parked at the station with a small number of people in and around the train.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Cab picture by Emily Moser, http://railpictures.net/photo/588450


----------



## jis

Dutchrailnut said:


> Cab picture by Emily Moser, http://railpictures.net/photo/588450


I hope all that exposed cabling is temporarily installed for test purposes?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

your hope is confirmed.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

jis said:


> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cab picture by Emily Moser, http://railpictures.net/photo/588450
> 
> 
> 
> I hope all that exposed cabling is temporarily installed for test purposes?
Click to expand...

And the duct tape around the window (nothing says quality like duct tape and coat hangers - along with chewing gum and caulk, maybe with some mirror tile added for good effect).


----------



## jis

It appears that there may be some orange cabling passing around/through the window and the duct tape is associated with that. I did not see that in other pictures of the cab without the instrumentation cabling in it.


----------



## west point

That cab is definitely blue flagged !


----------



## Thirdrail7

The buffs were out on full force last night and we thank them for showing up. While I usually wait for them to display their own work, most of them are probably still asleep so I'm doing some of it for them!

Special kudos for these intrepid individuals who stay out in the wee hours of the night to capture these images that will last. I wish some of them were around years ago.

Unfortunately, we also have to slap one around and to no ones surprise, it is Fanrailer! I have a special message for you, buddy:


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Looks like the ASC 64 is powering train , gauging sparking of pantographs.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Thirdrail7 said:


> This time, though he did a rare Fanrailer fumble!
> 
> He deleted some of the footage by mistake!!!!!! He was perfectly positioned at County to watch the acceleration and somehow, the dog ate his homework!!!!! AAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGH!! Our closing pitcher gave up the walk off home run!!!!
> 
> Anyway, we'll just have to see if the newly promoted Admiral Grice did a better job!!!
> 
> In the meantime, thank you for all of your efforts Fanrailer. The passing where someone was kind, thoughtful and considerate enough to blink the headlight on the rear was indeed the first 130mph test. Enjoy his video and take a bow Fanrailer but when you do, don't bend too far, knock over your monster set up AND DELETE THE FOOTAGE!!!!



It looks like Fanrailer came through in the end!



They were MU'd.


----------



## Blackwolf

Having the interior engine room lights turned on during this night-time running just looks FREAKY. I suspect that won't be normal procedure during revenue service, but that giant square of light on the side of the locomotive is surreal.

And it is of no surprise that the Charger and the Sprinter both sound very alike, minus the scream of the turbo for that Cummins engine. Don't they share the same traction motors?


----------



## Fan Railer

I must credit Jose Rendon for saving my sorry ass xD  He's the reason that Jersey Ave clip was salvaged.


----------



## Fan Railer

Blackwolf said:


> Having the interior engine room lights turned on during this night-time running just looks FREAKY. I suspect that won't be normal procedure during revenue service, but that giant square of light on the side of the locomotive is surreal.
> 
> And it is of no surprise that the Charger and the Sprinter both sound very alike, minus the scream of the turbo for that Cummins engine. Don't they share the same traction motors?


The trucks are the same design, but probably reinforced for the additional weight. The traction gear should be similar if not identical. The whole mechanical idea of the Charger is that it is a Sprinter with a diesel powerplant in place of the overhead equipment.


----------



## mgl1978

New Charger at Ivy City


----------



## Thirdrail7

That unit hasn't been in Ivy CIty in days. It is actually scheduled to depart PHL for BOS around 9am today.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Thirdrail7 said:


> That unit hasn't been in Ivy CIty in days. It is actually scheduled to depart PHL for BOS around 9am today.


Newbie didn't say 'when' -- he only said 'where'. LOL.

Good news info from both of you. Thanks.


----------



## Fan Railer




----------



## Agent

Here's a video taken today by YouTube user DpLfilms in Mansfield, Massachusetts. 4604 is on the second train at 0:51.


----------



## jis

A nice article in USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/destinations/2016/08/10/siemens-charger-locomotive-testing/88374206/


----------



## cirdan

mgl1978 said:


> New Charger at Ivy City


Great picture.

I didn't realize how much longer a Sprinter is than a Charger.


----------



## jis

cirdan said:


> mgl1978 said:
> 
> 
> 
> New Charger at Ivy City
> 
> 
> 
> Great picture.
> 
> I didn't realize how much longer a Sprinter is than a Charger.
Click to expand...

Did you mean to say "how much longer a Charger is than a Sprinter"? It is about 5 feet longer in the Midwest/California form of it. In the AAF form it is a bit more for the shrouding in the front.

Charger: 71'6"

Sprinter: 66'8"


----------



## Fan Railer

Grice has finished his compilation with a little joke at the end lol:


----------



## west point

The video of the test train at Elizabeth really shows the "S" curve that slows trains and would save 1 - 2 minutes if it could be eliminated and Amtrak be able to do 160 the whole way without slowing.


----------



## jis

Elizabeth S-Curve is not the only bad curve in NJ. There is the series of curves from Metropark to Metuchen, though about 30-40mph faster than the Elizabeth curve. And there is even a curve in the middle of the NBK - TRE speedway which keeps the speed down to 135-140 for part of the way. So forget about 160 all the way between Newark and Trenton. Won;t happen without finding significant bits of new ROW in a fully built up area - translates to mucho dinero.


----------



## west point

JIS agree mucho dinero but one slow section eliminated at a time. And there is also the need for constant tension CAT to get reliable HSR during very cold or very hot days. But NWK - TRE has least cost potential to reduce travel times. But let us not forget North PHL - TRE with is several curves including the 188 interlocking.


----------



## jis

Yup there are plenty of curves everywhere on the NEC due to various historical oddities on how the whole thing came together.


----------



## Thirdrail7

The S curve in Elizabeth are 80-85mph curves for the current tilting train. Who knows what the next generation train will yield? Even if the speed doesn't change, since that is faster than most trains in the country can travel, I'm not sure I'd exactly call that slow.


----------



## Fan Railer




----------



## jis

Thirdrail7 said:


> The S curve in Elizabeth are 80-85mph curves for the current tilting train. Who knows what the next generation train will yield? Even if the speed doesn't change, since that is faster than most trains in the country can travel, I'm not sure I'd exactly call that slow.


Yup. what the next gen will yield will also depend on whether FRA will allow additional underbalance beyond what it allows now. He was suggesting that somehow "removing" the S curve would give us a clear 160mph run presumably from Newark to Trenton. That certainly won;t be the case. Actually even after the HSR work is finished between NBK and TRE, the whole segment between County and Ham won't be 160mph, let alone dreams of Newark to Trenton.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

jis said:


> Yup there are plenty of curves everywhere on the NEC due to various historical oddities on how the whole thing came together.


Oh, so it's a Heritage Railway?


----------



## jis

Metra Electric Rider said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yup there are plenty of curves everywhere on the NEC due to various historical oddities on how the whole thing came together.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, so it's a Heritage Railway?
Click to expand...

It was stitched together from multiple short railroads built using various charters, some for toll roads, some opposed vociferously by toll roads causing weird routing, some others and when they came up against each other one bought the other and jogged their tracks around to meet up. Some of those were straightened out over time. Others weren't. The history of the coming together of what is NEC today is quite fascinating. The whole story of how PRR found its way into Washington DC working around a ban from the Govt. of Maryland is a fascinating one in and of itself.


----------



## neroden

Thirdrail7 said:


> The S curve in Elizabeth are 80-85mph curves for the current tilting train. Who knows what the next generation train will yield? Even if the speed doesn't change, since that is faster than most trains in the country can travel, I'm not sure I'd exactly call that slow.


I think the implementation of PTC is about to change the "faster than most trains in the country can travel". The troglodyte freight companies may still want to refuse to raise their speed limits, but when they already have the expensive parts of the signal system in place and the track is already Class 5, the necessary payments to get them to tweak the signal system to allow for 90 mph are gonna be a lot lower than before...


----------



## Thirdrail7

neroden said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The S curve in Elizabeth are 80-85mph curves for the current tilting train. Who knows what the next generation train will yield? Even if the speed doesn't change, since that is faster than most trains in the country can travel, I'm not sure I'd exactly call that slow.
> 
> 
> 
> I think the implementation of PTC is about to change the "faster than most trains in the country can travel". The troglodyte freight companies may still want to refuse to raise their speed limits, but when they already have the expensive parts of the signal system in place and the track is already Class 5, the necessary payments to get them to tweak the signal system to allow for 90 mph are gonna be a lot lower than before...
Click to expand...


I have a quick off-topic question for anyone that chooses to answer. Are there any freight trains that operate above 70mph? I suppose there are some that may operate up to 79mph but I don't know of any on the east coast.


----------



## neroden

Thirdrail7 said:


> I have a quick off-topic question for anyone that chooses to answer. Are there any freight trains that operate above 70mph? I suppose there are some that may operate up to 79mph but I don't know of any on the east coast.


I believe not in the US at this time. There is intermittent discussion among the western roads of raising speeds for intermodals, where time is money, but the "low-hanging fruit" is still in intermodal yard operations, which are much slower than they should be.


----------



## A Voice

Thirdrail7 said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The S curve in Elizabeth are 80-85mph curves for the current tilting train. Who knows what the next generation train will yield? Even if the speed doesn't change, since that is faster than most trains in the country can travel, I'm not sure I'd exactly call that slow.
> 
> 
> 
> I think the implementation of PTC is about to change the "faster than most trains in the country can travel". The troglodyte freight companies may still want to refuse to raise their speed limits, but when they already have the expensive parts of the signal system in place and the track is already Class 5, the necessary payments to get them to tweak the signal system to allow for 90 mph are gonna be a lot lower than before...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have a quick off-topic question for anyone that chooses to answer. Are there any freight trains that operate above 70mph? I suppose there are some that may operate up to 79mph but I don't know of any on the east coast.
Click to expand...




neroden said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have a quick off-topic question for anyone that chooses to answer. Are there any freight trains that operate above 70mph? I suppose there are some that may operate up to 79mph but I don't know of any on the east coast.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe not in the US at this time. There is intermittent discussion among the western roads of raising speeds for intermodals, where time is money, but the "low-hanging fruit" is still in intermodal yard operations, which are much slower than they should be.
Click to expand...

I may be way off here because I'm working off memory, but didn't Union Pacific have a rule a few years back authorizing certain intermodal equipment to run 79 mph? Of course, things may have changed (or I could be totally wrong...), and merely having the authorization doesn't mean it actually happens, but I seem to remember something along those lines.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

A Voice said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The S curve in Elizabeth are 80-85mph curves for the current tilting train. Who knows what the next generation train will yield?
> 
> 
> 
> I think the implementation of PTC is about to change the "faster than most trains in the country can travel". ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have a quick off-topic question for anyone that chooses to answer. Are there any freight trains that operate above 70mph? I suppose there are some that may operate up to 79mph but I don't know of any on the east coast.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe not in the US at this time.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Starting about this time next year, a couple hundred miles of upgraded track between St Louis and Joliet will be carrying Lincoln service passenger trains at up to 110 mph. Union Pacific trains will operate over the same tracks, which UP owns.

I don't know nuthin, but from my sense of how the world works, I'd expect UP to begin running some of its freights on this 110-mph capacity route at something faster than 70 or even 79 mph, *just because they can*. LOL. (There may good operating reasons to go fast to keep out of the way of the passenger trains as well.)

It would be nice if UP learned to *like* to have its trains going fast on tracks shared with fast passenger trains. The upgraded Lincoln route could turn out to be a real gamechanger!


----------



## Fan Railer

Gotta also remember that a lot of the newer freight motors are either governed @ 70 or 75. The last time a freight motor was sold with a top speed higher than that, AFAIK, it was the SD90MAC (80 MPH).


----------



## Caesar La Rock

Union Pacific's DDA40Xs operated at 90mph along with the fast forty SD40-2s (Units in the 8000s) many years ago. I don't know if today's freight cars or freight locomotives can be geared to travel that fast, but UP did pull it off.


----------



## Seaboard92

Doesn't the BNSF transcon have a 90 mph speed limit.


----------



## railiner

Caesar La Rock said:


> Union Pacific's DDA40Xs operated at 90mph along with the fast forty SD40-2s (Units in the 8000s) many years ago. I don't know if today's freight cars or freight locomotives can be geared to travel that fast, but UP did pull it off.


I recall when the UP added those units to help the SFZ between Denver and Ogden. Wyoming was 90 MPH, cab-signaled territory for the Zephyr....


----------



## jis

By the time I rode the SFZ in the late '70s 90mph speed for it were mostly sweet memory and of theoretical interest.


----------



## Eric S

Seaboard92 said:


> Doesn't the BNSF transcon have a 90 mph speed limit.


In places, yes. For Amtrak. To the best of my knowledge, though, no BNSF trains operate faster than 70mph.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

I thought I'd heard or read that the FEC ran freight fairly fast - was that just "fast for freight"?

I remember seeing a video from Austria of an express freight passing an express higher speed train somewhere near Salzberg (or between there and Vienna).


----------



## Fan Railer

Probably just "fast for freight. The majority of freight territory is limited to 55 MPH on straightaways.

Back to Charger related news, it seems like the MARC guys will get play around with it for a few days before it gets sent back to Chicago. Here is the move yesterday to get it from BOS back to WAS @ RTE:


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

Fan Railer said:


> Probably just "fast for freight. The majority of freight territory is limited to 55 MPH on straightaways.


Thanks that sounds more reasonable, I think I also remember the other part of their calculus was they carried a lot of limestone, hence heavy duty ties and ballast iirc.


----------



## Karl1459

IIRC there was a time (in the 1980's) I was driving on I-80 in Nebraska near Julesburg with traffic moving a wee bit over the speed limit (about 75) and the UP freights were going a wee bit faster...


----------



## jis

Metra Electric Rider said:


> Fan Railer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Probably just "fast for freight. The majority of freight territory is limited to 55 MPH on straightaways.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks that sounds more reasonable, I think I also remember the other part of their calculus was they carried a lot of limestone, hence heavy duty ties and ballast iirc.
Click to expand...

They do carry limestone, but I am yet to see one of those trains here in Melbourne. What I see here is just a parade of TOFC/COFC/intermodals and an occasional manifest.


----------



## railiner

Eric S said:


> Seaboard92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't the BNSF transcon have a 90 mph speed limit.
> 
> 
> 
> In places, yes. For Amtrak. To the best of my knowledge, though, no BNSF trains operate faster than 70mph.
Click to expand...

Years ago, the premier AT&SF freight train was the all TOFC/COFC "Super C", which IIRC, ran nonstop (except for fueling and crew changes), between their Chicago and Los Angeles yards via Raton Pass. I believe its top speed was 70 MPH ( not sure).

I believe they charged extra tariff, for containers or trailers carried on that train...


----------



## railiner

Upon further research, I read on Wikipedia and Trainorder's, that the Super C was authorized to "operate at passenger train speeds"


----------



## MikefromCrete

neroden said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have a quick off-topic question for anyone that chooses to answer. Are there any freight trains that operate above 70mph? I suppose there are some that may operate up to 79mph but I don't know of any on the east coast.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe not in the US at this time. There is intermittent discussion among the western roads of raising speeds for intermodals, where time is money, but the "low-hanging fruit" is still in intermodal yard operations, which are much slower than they should be.
Click to expand...



Several railroads, especially CSX and NS, are actually planning to reduce speeds on their secondary main lines in order to save money on maintenance. Seems like a totally bad idea to me, but that's what rail execs are thinking in order to placate Wall Street about failing revenue due to the steep decline in coal traffic, as well as just about every other commodity.


----------



## MattW

MikefromCrete said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have a quick off-topic question for anyone that chooses to answer. Are there any freight trains that operate above 70mph? I suppose there are some that may operate up to 79mph but I don't know of any on the east coast.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe not in the US at this time. There is intermittent discussion among the western roads of raising speeds for intermodals, where time is money, but the "low-hanging fruit" is still in intermodal yard operations, which are much slower than they should be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Several railroads, especially CSX and NS, are actually planning to reduce speeds on their secondary main lines in order to save money on maintenance. Seems like a totally bad idea to me, but that's what rail execs are thinking in order to placate Wall Street about failing revenue due to the steep decline in coal traffic, as well as just about every other commodity.
Click to expand...

CSX just did that to the Georgia Subdivision portion of the ex-Georgia Railroad.  Earlier this year it went from a 50mph railroad with two daily intermodals Atlanta-Savannah to a 25mph railroad with just a few locals, and two through freights.


----------



## neroden

MikefromCrete said:


> Several railroads, especially CSX and NS, are actually planning to reduce speeds on their secondary main lines in order to save money on maintenance. Seems like a totally bad idea to me, but that's what rail execs are thinking in order to placate Wall Street about failing revenue due to the steep decline in coal traffic, as well as just about every other commodity.


CSX is fundamentally run by incompetents and has been for an extraordinary number of decades. They may end up declaring bankruptcy. Which would be a good time for the states to buy up the passenger lines. Start planning now.

NS shouldn't be making these mistakes, but they were always a "coal road" and are probably having trouble making the transition.

It's rather worth noting that the STB came out with its "revenue adequacy" numbers, determining which railroads are covering their costs of capital (for 2015, for US operations only). Of the class Is: BNSF, UP, CN, and CP are doing so. CSX, NS, and KCS are flunking. This is probably OK for KCS, which has become a sort of tail on a giant Mexican operation which is probably covering its cost of capital. Not so for CSX and NS.

(I should clarify that it makes perfect sense to scrap lines whose existence is entirely coal-based, since the coal business is dying. It's reducing speeds on *other* lines which makes no sense, and CSX seems to be doing this because they're run by incompetents.)

I'm a little suspicious that, the way the eastern freight railroads are going, we may be headed for Conrail 2. Should never have privatized Conrail.


----------



## neroden

Metra Electric Rider said:


> I thought I'd heard or read that the FEC ran freight fairly fast - was that just "fast for freight"?


I could be wrong because this is a hazy memory. But IIRC, *top* speeds weren't much higher than anyone else, but they had few speed restrictions, their dispatching meant the trains weren't stopping for signals or meets often, and they had efficient yard operations, so their *average* speeds were really high.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

neroden said:


> Metra Electric Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought I'd heard or read that the FEC ran freight fairly fast - was that just "fast for freight"?
> 
> 
> 
> I could be wrong because this is a hazy memory. But IIRC, *top* speeds weren't much higher than anyone else, but they had few speed restrictions, their dispatching meant the trains weren't stopping for signals or meets often, and they had efficient yard operations, so their *average* speeds were really high.
Click to expand...

In my own hazy memory, of 'I read it somewhere', is that FEC keeps its tracks in very good state of repair compared with other freight operators, contributing to higher average speeds.


----------



## jis

FEC certainly has its tracks in very good shape around here in Melbourne. All concrete ties and CWR, with very well groomed and maintained ballast base. Much better than anything I have seen on CSX which tends to skimp on ballast.


----------



## Thirdrail7

neroden said:


> . Should never have privatized Conrail.


----------



## jis

Unfortunately, the way the 3R law was crafted, just like Amtrak was supposed to become profitable so was Conrail. Under L Stanley Crane (another ex-Southern man) with not inconsiderable help from the Staggers Act, it actually did, and then there was much pressure on the Hill to get rid of it and get it off the government's books, and so they did.


----------



## KnightRail

Time for 4601, 4602, and the MARC coaches to change scenery. Their escort is arriving in the mile high to retrieve.


----------



## neroden

jis said:


> Unfortunately, the way the 3R law was crafted, just like Amtrak was supposed to become profitable so was Conrail. Under L Stanley Crane (another ex-Southern man) with not inconsiderable help from the Staggers Act, it actually did, and then there was much pressure on the Hill to get rid of it and get it off the government's books, and so they did.


"Lemon socialism". We can't have the government making a profit! Vital to put those profits in the hands of privateers! Force the government to be funded off the backs of taxpayers!

Sane countries like Norway are perfectly happy to let the government run profitable operations (in their case, their oil fields).


----------



## Fan Railer

KnightRail said:


> Time for 4601, 4602, and the MARC coaches to change scenery. Their escort is arriving in the mile high to retrieve.


Headed to Chicago, presumably? MARC coaches continuing on back to DC?


----------



## Thirdrail7

Fan Railer said:


> Headed to Chicago, presumably?










Fan Railer said:


> MARC coaches continuing on back to DC?


----------



## Shawn Ryu

Saw pictures of them at NYP. Aren't diesel locomotives not allowed in NYP?


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Shawn Ryu said:


> Saw pictures of them at NYP. Aren't diesel locomotives not allowed in NYP?


It was likely being powered by an attached electric locomotive at least until it got through the NYP approach tunnels.


----------



## Fan Railer

Thirdrail7 said:


> Fan Railer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Headed to Chicago, presumably?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fan Railer said:
> 
> 
> 
> MARC coaches continuing on back to DC?
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I'll never get enough of your sense of humor lol. Thanks 



brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Shawn Ryu said:
> 
> 
> 
> Saw pictures of them at NYP. Aren't diesel locomotives not allowed in NYP?
> 
> 
> 
> It was likely being powered by an atttached electric locomotive at least until it got through the NYP approach tunnels.
Click to expand...

The diesel was running straight through NYP. Technically there is an ordinance that prohibits diesel prime movers from running underground in NYC, but there are times when exceptions are made for various reasons under various conditions, as I understand it. At any rate, the Cummins diesel is EPA Tier IV compliant, and therefore emits far less in terms of exhaust particulates than the Tier 0 P42s.


----------



## PVD

NYC Transit has a good number of diesel work motors.


----------



## Fan Railer

The Subway system uses diesel work motors as a safety measure and a necessity. Third rail power is turned off in work zones, so you wouldn't be able to get electric equipment through the area on its own power anyway, and with diesel only power, you don't have to worry about accidentally bridging dead sections on third rail.


----------



## neroden

Fan Railer said:


> The Subway system uses diesel work motors as a safety measure and a necessity. Third rail power is turned off in work zones, so you wouldn't be able to get electric equipment through the area on its own power anyway, and with diesel only power, you don't have to worry about accidentally bridging dead sections on third rail.


I believe London uses battery locomotives for the same purpose.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground_battery-electric_locomotives

(Though London does use diesels too.)

This is definitely a better idea. Given the air quality problems in tunnels, it would be much healthier for the maintenance workers.


----------



## Fan Railer

Considering NYCT just ordered 28 brand new work diesels, I doubt anyone is thinking of battery electrics down in procurement lol. Likewise, any such proposal for procurement of battery electrics would be met with stiff skepticism and opposition from within.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Battery electrics have huge problem, gas, the explosive kind , not something any one wants in tunnels


----------



## RailRide

Fan Railer said:


> Considering NYCT just ordered 28 brand new work diesels, I doubt anyone is thinking of battery electrics down in procurement lol. Likewise, any such proposal for procurement of battery electrics would be met with stiff skepticism and opposition from within.


Is this the R156 order, or in addition to it?

---PCJ


----------



## Fan Railer

It's the R156 order.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Fan Railer said:


> The diesel was running straight through NYP. Technically there is an ordinance that prohibits diesel prime movers from running underground in NYC, but there are times when exceptions are made for various reasons under various conditions, as I understand it. At any rate, the Cummins diesel is EPA Tier IV compliant, and therefore emits far less in terms of exhaust particulates than the Tier 0 P42s.



People always say this. Here is the part of the rule that is relevant:

*5. Diesel and Turbine engines in passenger service not capable of drawing propulsion*

*power from 3rd rail must be hauled by electric engines between east portal of the East*

*River Tunnels, west portal of the North River Tunnels and north portal of the Empire*

*Tunnel. (Diesel and Turbine engines may be idling while being hauled). They may*

*operate independent of third rail power only when authorized by the Dispatcher at*

*PSCC.*

*EXCEPTION: This instruction does not apply to diesel powered Sperry Cars, or*

*other track maintenance equipment equipped with proper exhaust attachments.*


----------



## Dutchrailnut

note how it says " in passenger service" a test train is not ;-)


----------



## jis

And isn't this just a railroad regulation rather than a state or city statute? I thought the only statutory requirement was that no steam engines shall be operated in the Park Avenue tunnels or some such. Or am I remembering it wrongly?


----------



## neroden

Dutchrailnut said:


> Battery electrics have huge problem, gas, the explosive kind , not something any one wants in tunnels


No, they don't. Your information is out of date (actually a couple of decades out of date). That only applies to certain types of batteries -- now *obsolete* types of batteries. Certainly, railroad equipment has a tendency to use decades-out-of-date obsolete equipment (look at the signalling in the NYC subway, and when did BNSF remove its semaphores?) but if you bought new battery-electric locomotives this would be a non-issue.


----------



## neroden

Fan Railer said:


> Considering NYCT just ordered 28 brand new work diesels, I doubt anyone is thinking of battery electrics down in procurement lol. Likewise, any such proposal for procurement of battery electrics would be met with stiff skepticism and opposition from within.


NYCT management are troglodytes who had to be dragged kicking and screaming into ordering open-gangway cars years after they became standard worldwide. And I may have mentioned this earlier, but they still have to be sued on a regular basis just to get them to comply with the ADA, something which is not true of any other agency in the country -- they still seem to think it's the 1980s.

This is a *problem*. The fact that they are not considering battery electrics is more a sign that the management is overly conservative than anything else.


----------



## railiner

Or they're worried about lithium batteries burning

...Boeing 787

...Samsung Galaxy 7

Etc


----------



## ScouseAndy

Dutchrailnut said:


> Battery electrics have huge problem, gas, the explosive kind , not something any one wants in tunnels


Very true - I've lost count of the number of times LU battery locos have blown up under the streets of London killing 1000's,


----------



## PVD

Lead Acid batteries may be old technology, but they are still in very common use. Where weight is not the determining factor, they are still widely used. The battery electric locomotives in London still use L/A batteries. Proper maintenance of the batteries and charging equipment and diligence of proper charging cycles and ventilation keeps the risk very low.


----------



## railiner

jis said:


> Unfortunately, the way the 3R law was crafted, just like Amtrak was supposed to become profitable so was Conrail. Under L Stanley Crane (another ex-Southern man) with not inconsiderable help from the Staggers Act, it actually did, and then there was much pressure on the Hill to get rid of it and get it off the government's books, and so they did.


I am glad they did...I went "all-in" during Conrail's IPO 

I was sorry to see CR split up the way it was.

Ed Jordan and Richard Spence did a great job, followed by Stanley Crane.

As the bumper stickers said:

"Let Conrail Be Conrail!"

That's a big "10-4"....


----------



## railiner

PVD said:


> Lead Acid batteries may be old technology, but they are still in very common use. Where weight is not the determining factor, they are still widely used. The battery electric locomotives in London still use L/A batteries. Proper maintenance of the batteries and charging equipment and diligence of proper charging cycles and ventilation keeps the risk very low.


I am not sure if they still have any around, but when I was at NYP, until 1994, they still had some ancient 'Yale' electric baggage trucks in use, that must have been around since the station opened in 1910!

You may have seen them...the operator ran them standing on some treadle's up front, and steered the beast by means of a tiller. Took a lot of strength...those trucks weighed about three tons, empty, and had no power steering. They were built like a tank, and woe to anything that got in their way...


----------



## Ryan

Dutchrailnut said:


> Battery electrics have huge problem, gas, the explosive kind , not something any one wants in tunnels


When charging.

Charge them outside the tunnel, and you're fine.


----------



## Agent

I caught Amtrak #6(02) with the four MARC coaches that were used for the Charger tests making its station stop in Ottumwa, Iowa today. This Chicago-bound _California Zephyr_ was running over three hours and forty minutes late.


----------



## fulham

Has Siemens only released 2 units for testing and these are the 2 that are shown in the above video heading back to Sacramento...correct? Does anyone know what the next step will be and when the units will be tested out of Chicago? The units tested in Pueblo and on the NEC so what is the plan going forward? I don't remember the electrics heading back to Sacramento once they finished testing on the NEC but I could be wrong.


----------



## PVD

The units that ran on the NEC are not the units destined for MARC.


----------



## jis

They are most likely going to show up in Chicago next, which is where they are destined to.


----------



## Thirdrail7

fulham said:


> Has Siemens only released 2 units for testing and these are the 2 that are shown in the above video heading back to Sacramento...correct? Does anyone know what the next step will be and when the units will be tested out of Chicago? The units tested in Pueblo and on the NEC so what is the plan going forward? I don't remember the electrics heading back to Sacramento once they finished testing on the NEC but I could be wrong.


They obviously released more than two since the one that tested on the NEC is not part of the group that went to Pueblo.


----------



## west point

may have returned to Siemens to correct flaws found at Pueblo ? Or maybe Siemens modifications not originally planned that doing at Siemens guarantees conformity ?


----------



## Fan Railer

So far, we've seen 4601, 4602, and 4604. Is there a 4600? And I'm guessing 4603 never left the Siemens plant.


----------



## Steve4031

4600 has got to be assigned to the Chicago to honor the1985 bears 46 defense.


----------



## Acela150

I'm sure they numbered the IDTX units in the 4600's for that reason...... Not..


----------



## Steve4031

Lol


----------



## Fan Railer

Slightly OT, but guess a few of us spoke too soon on the NYC battery thingy:

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/locomotives/new-york-city-transit-seeks-dual-mode-locomotives.html?channel=528


----------



## Thirdrail7

fulham said:


> Has Siemens only released 2 units for testing and these are the 2 that are shown in the above video heading back to Sacramento...correct? Does anyone know what the next step will be and when the units will be tested out of Chicago? The units tested in Pueblo and on the NEC so what is the plan going forward? I don't remember the electrics heading back to Sacramento once they finished testing on the NEC but I could be wrong.




Two more are supposedly headed for Pueblo in the next week or two.


----------



## afigg

Updates on the Siemmens Charger production from the October 11, 2016 draft minutes of the NGEC executive committee. The key info is that IDOT #4608 is ready to ship, so production is moving along.

There is a lengthy section on issues that have arisen with insurance and indemnification for the Chargers and presumably the NS Bi-levels that have to be resolved. An excerpt from that section:



> The primary difficulty has to do with the fact that the equipment owner is not the operating entity and this has created a series of unforeseen issues such as insurance, warrantees and the like. Tim mentioned that somewhere in or related to the specification, the NGEC may be wise to make some sort of documentation that will make the process better and not prone to the pitfalls that this procurement has fallen into.
> 
> Mario Bergeron re-enforced what Tim had said agreeing that the issues are complex, but he emphasized “Amtrak is committed to make it happen in a timely matter.” There are a number of complexities “but we will get it all figured out.”
> 
> Mike Jenkins, Oregon DOT mentioned that as the equipment is being readied to roll out the prohibitive insurance requirements make the transition difficult. He has seen this before outside of the PRIIA effort with regard to a sudden awareness of “oh we didn’t know you were going to run them on our tracks” and indemnification and insurance became a problem. These issues “take away from a perfect specification process developed by the NGEC.”



Updates on the production and testing:



> · Testing of the first two pilot locomotives is complete at TTCI. All tests have been successful and the locomotives are en-route back to Siemens’ Sacramento factory.
> · The four MARC cars were used at TTCI for locomotive propulsion tests for the revenue simulation Test and should also be en-route back to Maryland.
> · Vehicle Qualification Testing on the North East Corridor, is also complete. All testing went well with no issues noted. During the testing, nearly 1,000 failure-free miles were accumulated on locomotive 4604.
> · IDOT 4608 is ready to ship from Siemens and will be released as soon as IDOT and Amtrak are ready.


----------



## jis

In parallel apparently at least two AAF units are getting shipped out later this month or early next month, together with at least four cars.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

afigg said:


> Updates on the Siemmens Charger production from the October 11, 2016 draft minutes of the NGEC executive committee. The key info is that IDOT #4608 is ready to ship, so production is moving along.
> 
> There is a lengthy section on issues that have arisen with insurance and indemnification for the Chargers and presumably the NS Bi-levels that have to be resolved. An excerpt from that section:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The primary difficulty has to do with the fact that the equipment owner is not the operating entity and this has created a series of unforeseen issues such as insurance, warrantees and the like. Tim mentioned that somewhere in or related to the specification, the NGEC may be wise to make some sort of documentation that will make the process better and not prone to the pitfalls that this procurement has fallen into.
> 
> Mario Bergeron re-enforced what Tim had said agreeing that the issues are complex, but he emphasized “Amtrak is committed to make it happen in a timely matter.” There are a number of complexities “but we will get it all figured out.”
> 
> Mike Jenkins, Oregon DOT mentioned that as the equipment is being readied to roll out the prohibitive insurance requirements make the transition difficult. He has seen this before outside of the PRIIA effort with regard to a sudden awareness of “oh we didn’t know you were going to run them on our tracks” and indemnification and insurance became a problem. These issues “take away from a perfect specification process developed by the NGEC.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Updates on the production and testing:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> · Testing of the first two pilot locomotives is complete at TTCI. All tests have been successful and the locomotives are en-route back to Siemens’ Sacramento factory.
> 
> · The four MARC cars were used at TTCI for locomotive propulsion tests for the revenue simulation Test and should also be en-route back to Maryland.
> 
> · Vehicle Qualification Testing on the North East Corridor, is also complete. All testing went well with no issues noted. During the testing, nearly 1,000 failure-free miles were accumulated on locomotive 4604.
> 
> · IDOT 4608 is ready to ship from Siemens and will be released as soon as IDOT and Amtrak are ready.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Could you post the link to NGEC executive committee update from Oct 11? I couldn't find it.


----------



## afigg

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Could you post the link to NGEC executive committee update from Oct 11? I couldn't find it.


Link to the AASHTO Section 305 NGEC Executive Committee webpage. The meeting minutes are linked Word documents down the page. I have had to download the meeting minutes documents to read them.


----------



## PVD

http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/305%20Exec%20Brd%20minutes%20-10-11-16%20DRAFT.doc

pretty certain this is what you are looking for, apologies in advance if it isn't


----------



## fulham

How could this group (NGEC) not understand that the operating entity would not be the equipment owner? Hasn't it been that way in California for quite a while? Amtrak runs the Capitol Corridor, Surfliner, San Joaquin, etc. but the equipment is owned by the state. Someone in that group should have know that various states are purchasing the equipment but that Amtrak would be the operator. All the meetings, reports, etc. from insiders in the industry and they still get caught off guard regarding how Amtrak operates.


----------



## PRR 60

_From the minutes:_



> Mario Bergeron [Amtrak CMO] re-enforced what Tim had said agreeing that the issues are complex, but he emphasized “Amtrak is committed to make it happen in a timely matter.” There are a number of complexities “but we will get it all figured out.”


There is the kiss of death. The dreaded "we'll make it happen" statement from Amtrak. If I had gotten 10 cents every time I heard that same statement from someone at Amtrak, and then had things delayed for months when no one could make anything happen, I could have retired much earlier.


----------



## jis

Also Amtrak is but one party in this multi-party circus, and not always the most confused participant of the lot either. The CMO's statement is at best aspirational since he really does not have anywhere near significant control over the situation all by himself. At best he can try to make Amtrak's side of the participation trouble free. Even that has proved to be too much to ask for at times. Look at the frickin' fiasco that the NEC HSR work in NJ has devolved into as an example.


----------



## Fan Railer

jis said:


> In parallel apparently at least two AAF units are getting shipped out later this month or early next month, together with at least four cars.


How are those getting to Florida? Amtrak? What routing would those take?


----------



## jis

Amtrak. Route unknown. Since the cars do not have AAR couplers, the entire train set will have to be delivered in a single piece. Route unknown. Maybe Thirdrail knows.


----------



## gatelouse

Two Chargers are on today's 6(25) out of EMY.


----------



## StanJazz

Which Chargers are on 6(25)? Illinois or AAF?


----------



## jis

AFAICT AAF Chargers cannot hookup anything with AAR couplers to its rear end, unless they have some kind of a transition doo-hicky to insert into the drawbar and lock into place that has an AAR coupler at its other end.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

couplers can always be changed out temporary for AAR couplers , and send the specialty couplers by truck, same truck can take the two AAR couplers back for next shipment like cars.


----------



## gatelouse

Ok, had a chance to take a walk. 4608 and 4609.


----------



## Thirdrail7

The plan is being finalized but the projected route is through CHI-WAS-FLA.



jis said:


> Amtrak. Route unknown. Since the cars do not have AAR couplers, the entire train set will have to be delivered in a single piece. Route unknown. Maybe Thirdrail knows.





StanJazz said:


> Which Chargers are on 6(25)? Illinois or AAF?


Two more should come out in the next week or so. I don't know how to tell if they belong to Illinois or AAF but in any event, these additional units are heading to Pueblo.


----------



## gatelouse

gatelouse said:


> Ok, had a chance to take a walk. 4608 and 4609.


Per announcement on board 6(25), we'll be cutting cars in Denver. Seems that 4608 and 4609 are indeed heading to Pueblo. 
I figure we'll also lose a couple of the 4 Amtrak engines leading the train in front of 4608 and 4609.


----------



## gatelouse

gatelouse said:


> Ok, had a chance to take a walk. 4608 and 4609.


Per announcement on board 6(25), we'll be cutting cars in Denver. Seems that 4608 and 4609 are indeed heading to Pueblo. 
I figure we'll also lose a couple of the 4 Amtrak engines leading the train in front of 4608 and 4609.


----------



## chrsjrcj

I'm guessing the AAF equipment would use the FEC from Jacksonville to WPB?

By the way, I drove past the repair facility last week (no pics). Looks quite nice, with multiple tracks laid out. Can't wait to see the equipment!


----------



## cirdan

chrsjrcj said:


> I'm guessing the AAF equipment would use the FEC from Jacksonville to WPB?


If Amtrak is doing the move, won't it be more likely they'll be using tracks over which they have access rights and on which their staff have route knowledge?


----------



## jis

It is not easy to get to FEC WPB from Amtrak route, at WPB, but it can be done. Going from JAX to FEC WPB over FEC would probably be the easiest and most obvious way. In effect it could be handed over to FEC at JAX.


----------



## PerRock

gatelouse said:


> gatelouse said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, had a chance to take a walk. 4608 and 4609.
> 
> 
> 
> Per announcement on board 6(25), we'll be cutting cars in Denver. Seems that 4608 and 4609 are indeed heading to Pueblo.
> I figure we'll also lose a couple of the 4 Amtrak engines leading the train in front of 4608 and 4609.
Click to expand...

gatehouse, can you update if the Chargers were in fact cut out in Denver, or if it was something else?

peter


----------



## KnightRail

PerRock,

Two P42s, two Chargers, one heritage bag, all cut for movement to Pueblo


----------



## gatelouse

KnightRail said:


> PerRock,
> 
> Two P42s, two Chargers, one heritage bag, all cut for movement to Pueblo


KnightRail is precisely right. These were cut and dropped on the adjacent track at DEN. 
All this extra equipment made for quite the train through the canyons!


----------



## Fan Railer

So what are the details about 08 and 09 going to Pueblo? Some testing with the first two units that was unresolved?


----------



## Fan Railer

Caltrans Charger with streamline rear cowl spotted @ siemens plant. Unknown photo source, credit is attributed to original photographer.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Fan Railer said:


> So what are the details about 08 and 09 going to Pueblo? Some testing with the first two units that was unresolved?


I don't know the details but two more are scheduled to go to Pueblo on 6(10).


----------



## west point

It may be that each loco has to demonstrate its 125 MPH capability ? Only Pueblo and the Amtrak NEC has track capable of the 125 + 12.5 ( 138 ) MPH speeds. We know each ACS-64 had to demonstrate those speeds before entering revenue service. If California sends its locos to Pueblo we may have a possible answer.


----------



## afigg

Fan Railer said:


> So what are the details about 08 and 09 going to Pueblo? Some testing with the first two units that was unresolved?


The answer is in the November 8 meeting minutes of the NGEC executive committee. Excerpt from the status update section for the Charger Procurement:



> Locomotive 4604 is stored at MARC after the successful completion for Vehicle Qualification Testing on the North-East Corridor.
> 
>  IDOT 4608 & 4609 have been shipped to TTCI at Pueblo, CO for 500-mile burn-in testing. The locomotives will next ship to Chicago, when IDOT and Amtrak are ready.
> 
>  IDOT will now send a locomotive to WSDOT for 238.111(b) testing on the Cascades route. WSDOT will conduct the 238.111(b) test. Other JPEs are working with Amtrak for 238.111(a) test plans.


----------



## PerRock

afigg said:


> Fan Railer said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what are the details about 08 and 09 going to Pueblo? Some testing with the first two units that was unresolved?
> 
> 
> 
> The answer is in the November 8 meeting minutes of the NGEC executive committee. Excerpt from the status update section for the Charger Procurement:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Locomotive 4604 is stored at MARC after the successful completion for Vehicle Qualification Testing on the North-East Corridor.
> 
>  IDOT 4608 & 4609 have been shipped to TTCI at Pueblo, CO for 500-mile burn-in testing. The locomotives will next ship to Chicago, when IDOT and Amtrak are ready.
> 
>  IDOT will now send a locomotive to WSDOT for 238.111(b) testing on the Cascades route. WSDOT will conduct the 238.111(b) test. Other JPEs are working with Amtrak for 238.111(a) test plans.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

The unit going to WSDOT is 4603.

peter


----------



## Thirdrail7

PerRock said:


> afigg said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fan Railer said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what are the details about 08 and 09 going to Pueblo? Some testing with the first two units that was unresolved?
> 
> 
> 
> The answer is in the November 8 meeting minutes of the NGEC executive committee. Excerpt from the status update section for the Charger Procurement:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Locomotive 4604 is stored at MARC after the successful completion for Vehicle Qualification Testing on the North-East Corridor.
> 
>  IDOT 4608 & 4609 have been shipped to TTCI at Pueblo, CO for 500-mile burn-in testing. The locomotives will next ship to Chicago, when IDOT and Amtrak are ready.
> 
>  IDOT will now send a locomotive to WSDOT for 238.111(b) testing on the Cascades route. WSDOT will conduct the 238.111(b) test. Other JPEs are working with Amtrak for 238.111(a) test plans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The unit going to WSDOT is 4603.
> 
> peter
Click to expand...



Sooooooo, if that is the case...why are the 4605 and 4606 currently on the way to Pueblo with the 4610 preparing to head there as well?


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Will the Cascades locos be painted in Washington DOT paint or the Amtrak Cascades paint scheme?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

the unit heading to cascades service is a IDOT unit only to be used for testing, it will not be owned by Washington DOT


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Dutchrailnut said:


> the unit heading to cascades service is a IDOT unit only to be used for testing, it will not be owned by Washington DOT


I know that, but that wasn't my question.


----------



## PerRock

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> 
> the unit heading to cascades service is a IDOT unit only to be used for testing, it will not be owned by Washington DOT
> 
> 
> 
> I know that, but that wasn't my question.
Click to expand...

Right now that one unit #4603 which is going to WSDOT will be painted in the IDOT paint scheme; as it's an IDOT unit.

In other news apparently 4605 & 4606 are arriving in Chicago today.

peter


----------



## A Voice

PerRock said:


> In other news apparently 4605 & 4606 are arriving in Chicago today.
> 
> peter


Wait, I thought those two units were, as reported above, headed to Pueblo? Is this confirmed?


----------



## Thirdrail7

A Voice said:


> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> In other news apparently 4605 & 4606 are arriving in Chicago today.
> 
> peter
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, I thought those two units were, as reported above, headed to Pueblo? Is this confirmed?
Click to expand...


I seriously hope those units are not headed to Chicago. They were supposed to be cut at Denver yesterday along with the leaders which were going back to 5.

Edit: the cut and split have been made. They are NOT heading to CHI. The power tracking has been confirmed....unless they forgot to bring the SC44's with them.


----------



## PerRock

Thirdrail7 said:


> A Voice said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> In other news apparently 4605 & 4606 are arriving in Chicago today.
> 
> peter
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, I thought those two units were, as reported above, headed to Pueblo? Is this confirmed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I seriously hope those units are not headed to Chicago. They were supposed to be cut at Denver yesterday along with the leaders which were going back to 5.
> 
> Edit: the cut and split have been made. They are NOT heading to CHI. The power tracking has been confirmed....unless they forgot to bring the SC44's with them.
Click to expand...

Just reporting what I've been told, apparently there are railfans heading trackside specifically to catch them going thru Chicago. I'll see if I can't find out where they got that information.

peter

Edit: apparently this is from TO. I'm not finding it there, but I'm also not a paid member.


----------



## chrsjrcj

Any news on the Brightline locos? We're almost halfway through the month now.


----------



## Agent

I can also confirm Amtrak #6(10) doesn't have Chargers on it now.


----------



## KnightRail

IDTX4601 Siemens (CA), previously Pueblo, CO

IDTX4602 Siemens (CA), previously Pueblo, CO

IDTX4603 Siemens (CA)

IDTX4604 MARC facility at Martin State Airport, MD

IDTX4605 Pueblo, CO

IDTX4606 Pueblo, CO

IDTX4607 Siemens (CA)

IDTX4608 Pueblo, CO

IDTX4609 Pueblo, CO

IDTX4610 Siemens (CA)

Update your scorecards accordingly


----------



## Thirdrail7

KnightRail said:


> IDTX4610 Siemens (CA)
> 
> Update your scorecards accordingly



Not for long!! h34r:


----------



## neroden

Query: is there a 4600, or did they start with 4601?


----------



## kneemeister

Its



neroden said:


> Query: is there a 4600, or did they start with 4601?


Well I would think you start counting from one, not zero


----------



## WoodyinNYC

KnightRail said:


> IDTX4601 Siemens (CA), previously Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4602 Siemens (CA), previously Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4603 Siemens (CA)
> 
> IDTX4604 MARC facility at Martin State Airport, MD
> 
> IDTX4605 Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4606 Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4607 Siemens (CA)
> 
> IDTX4608 Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4609 Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4610 Siemens (CA)
> 
> Update your scorecards accordingly


This is starting to look like a usable number!


----------



## PVD

Are they production numbers or fleet numbers> Very often transit fleet vehicle number ranges (by type) are started at the 0 mark. Ports on circuit cards are often numbered starting at zero also, but not always. (Like in Nortel where line cards that were 0-15 and trunks that were 1-16) We used to joke about that in classes- all cards start with 0 except when they don't. Not starting at 1 is much more common than one might expect.


----------



## A Voice

kneemeister said:


> Its
> 
> 
> 
> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> Query: is there a 4600, or did they start with 4601?
> 
> 
> 
> Well I would think you start counting from one, not zero
Click to expand...

The ACS-64 locomotives start with 600, not 601. The F40PH (200), SDP40F (500), P30CH (700), and the AEM-7 (900) all did as well.

But I don't know if there is a 4600 in this case.


----------



## PRR 60

Planned Sprinter numbers:


Illinois - 4601-4633
California - 2101-2106
Washington - 1400-1407

OTOL Amtrak Roster


----------



## CCC1007

PRR 60 said:


> Planned Sprinter numbers:
> 
> 
> Illinois - 4601-4633
> California - 2101-2106
> Wisconsin - 1400-1407
> OTOL Amtrak Roster


Wisconsin?


----------



## PRR 60

CCC1007 said:


> PRR 60 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Planned Sprinter numbers:
> 
> 
> Illinois - 4601-4633
> California - 2101-2106
> Wisconsin - 1400-1407
> OTOL Amtrak Roster
> 
> 
> 
> Wisconsin?
Click to expand...

Oops. Watching NFL, half saw "WSDOT," and brain spit out Wisconsin. Game over, brain fully engaged - now Washington.


----------



## afigg

PRR 60 said:


> Planned Sprinter numbers:
> 
> 
> Illinois - 4601-4633
> California - 2101-2106
> Wisconsin - 1400-1407


WSDOT is Washington State DOT, not Wisconsin. So, IL and CA opted to start from xxx1 while WA opted to started from xxx0. Oh, a start from Zero versus One indexing issue!


----------



## AmtrakBlue

afigg said:


> PRR 60 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Planned Sprinter numbers:
> 
> 
> Illinois - 4601-4633
> California - 2101-2106
> Wisconsin - 1400-1407
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WSDOT is Washington State DOT, not Wisconsin. So, IL and CA opted to start from xxx1 while WA opted to started from xxx0. Oh, a start from Zero versus One indexing issue!
Click to expand...

Those computer geeks in Washington prefer 0-based algorithms, right Charlie?


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

I think the NCDOT should purchase SC-44's to replace the old F59's. Those might not last for long. Besides, the SC-44's would run faster and be more environmental friendly than those older ones.


----------



## A Voice

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I think the NCDOT should purchase SC-44's to replace the old F59's. Those might not last for long. Besides, the SC-44's would run faster and be more environmental friendly than those older ones.


The F59PHI is capable of 110 mph. Just where does North Carolina have track where the trains can even come close to that, let alone faster? There's no need for a 125 mph locomotive.


----------



## jis

And money really does not grow on trees


----------



## Paulus

A Voice said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the NCDOT should purchase SC-44's to replace the old F59's. Those might not last for long. Besides, the SC-44's would run faster and be more environmental friendly than those older ones.
> 
> 
> 
> The F59PHI is capable of 110 mph. Just where does North Carolina have track where the trains can even come close to that, let alone faster? There's no need for a 125 mph locomotive.
Click to expand...

One presumes the SEHSR corridor eventually and the F59s are due for replacement in the next few years.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Is there a series for the MARC units?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

the MARC units won't be build till 2017.


----------



## keelhauled

Paulus said:


> A Voice said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the NCDOT should purchase SC-44's to replace the old F59's. Those might not last for long. Besides, the SC-44's would run faster and be more environmental friendly than those older ones.
> 
> 
> 
> The F59PHI is capable of 110 mph. Just where does North Carolina have track where the trains can even come close to that, let alone faster? There's no need for a 125 mph locomotive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One presumes the SEHSR corridor eventually and the F59s are due for replacement in the next few years.
Click to expand...

By the time SEHSR comes to fruition whatever replaces the F59s will probably be hitting retirement age themselves...in any case NCDOT seems to be happy buying the occasional used locomotive, I tend to doubt that will change.


----------



## neroden

KnightRail said:


> IDTX4601 Siemens (CA), previously Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4602 Siemens (CA), previously Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4603 Siemens (CA)
> 
> IDTX4604 MARC facility at Martin State Airport, MD
> 
> IDTX4605 Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4606 Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4607 Siemens (CA)
> 
> IDTX4608 Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4609 Pueblo, CO
> 
> IDTX4610 Siemens (CA)
> 
> Update your scorecards accordingly


Fascinating. First, it looks like Illinois gets all its locos first. It looks like Illinois has decided to do all the burn-in testing at Pueblo so I guess they'll all go to Pueblo first. 4601 and 4602 are presumably receiving mods (being the earliest two)? We know 4603 is going to Washington for what appears to be systems integration testing, which 4604 already did on the NEC. I assume that California will do its integration testing on IDTX units as well. Once that's all done, it looks like Illinois is going to get a bulk delivery of more than 10 locomotives at once. I wonder which route they'll put them on first? (Why I am asking? It'll be Chicago-St. Louis, won't it?)


----------



## Palmetto

Logically, yes. The St. Louis trains will probably get them first. Then there's the trains on the old IC. Are they still good for 90 MPH going down to Southern Illinois?


----------



## CraigDK

Just remember that the Illinois units are not exclusive to IL only, they are just as likely to show up on another Midwest line first. If ten or a dozen units show up at once, they will probably spread out rapidly.


----------



## Steve4031

Hopefully they go into service soon. Got two trips to Stl lined up.


----------



## jis

Palmetto said:


> Then there's the trains on the old IC. Are they still good for 90 MPH going down to Southern Illinois?


AFAIK, the answer is no.


----------



## afigg

neroden said:


> Fascinating. First, it looks like Illinois gets all its locos first. It looks like Illinois has decided to do all the burn-in testing at Pueblo so I guess they'll all go to Pueblo first. 4601 and 4602 are presumably receiving mods (being the earliest two)? We know 4603 is going to Washington for what appears to be systems integration testing, which 4604 already did on the NEC. I assume that California will do its integration testing on IDTX units as well. Once that's all done, it looks like Illinois is going to get a bulk delivery of more than 10 locomotives at once. I wonder which route they'll put them on first? (Why I am asking? It'll be Chicago-St. Louis, won't it?)


Remember, IDOT is only acting as the coordinating agency for the Midwest 3 state consortium which collectively will own the SC-44s (and the N-S bi-levels). So Michigan and Missouri have a voice in who gets the new shiny locomotives first. I expect the states have agreed to a deployment schedule by now. With two high profile 110 mph corridors, my guess is that the SC-44s will be deployed to the Lincoln and Wolverine services first with a lot of publicity. As to which would go first, yes, probably CHI-STL followed shortly by a revenue service run on a Wolverine train.


----------



## west point

There might be one reason for NC DOT to get the Chargers. Once the "S" line is rebuilt from Petersburg - Raleigh that route may be 125 MPH capable. NC will probably provide some of the loco power for the route. It is planned to be rebuilt with no grade crossings Norlina - Petersburg.


----------



## kbmiflyer

I am hoping that the CHI-STL route gets them first.

On a side note, I rode BNL - CHI and back this week. For both trips, we only went just over 100 mph on the Pontiac to Dwight section. Has the speed limit slowed down? We did not get close to 110. I also noted that the trains were running locomotives on each end, but they seem to be only running one locomotive now.

Of course, after going 100 mph from Dwight to Pontiac, we were sent to the Pontiac siding to wait for a late northbound train that was just leaving Bloomington. Not sure why the Lexington siding wasn't available, but we ended up going from 5 minutes late leaving Pontiac to 25 minutes late into Bloomington after sitting on a siding for 20 minutes. I am still curious how high speed rail along with increase freight traffic is going to to work on a line that is primarily single track from Joliet to Alton.


----------



## Northwest Railfan

Surprised no one posted about it, but IDOT 4611 is almost to Seattle on #14 now. I'm hoping to catch a test train when they start running.


----------



## Fan Railer

PerRock said:


> afigg said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fan Railer said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what are the details about 08 and 09 going to Pueblo? Some testing with the first two units that was unresolved?
> 
> 
> 
> The answer is in the November 8 meeting minutes of the NGEC executive committee. Excerpt from the status update section for the Charger Procurement:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Locomotive 4604 is stored at MARC after the successful completion for Vehicle Qualification Testing on the North-East Corridor.
> 
>  IDOT 4608 & 4609 have been shipped to TTCI at Pueblo, CO for 500-mile burn-in testing. The locomotives will next ship to Chicago, when IDOT and Amtrak are ready.
> 
>  IDOT will now send a locomotive to WSDOT for 238.111(b) testing on the Cascades route. WSDOT will conduct the 238.111(b) test. Other JPEs are working with Amtrak for 238.111(a) test plans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The unit going to WSDOT is 4603.
> 
> peter
Click to expand...

So did the unit number for the WSDOT test loco change from 03 to 11? Or are they sending both units up to WSDOT?


----------



## Northwest Railfan

I believe they are only sending 4611.


----------



## Northwest Railfan

I believe they are only sending 4611. I was surprised as well.


----------



## Thirdrail7

The 4610 is preparing to ship to Pueblo.


----------



## Agent

I found a video by YouTube user Little Red Diesel Productions of 4611 going north on the _Coast Starlight_.


----------



## Fan Railer

Nice. Anyone know the testing schedule for 4611?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

UP symbol SFLNO-08

UP 4418
SIIX 101 Charger SC-44
SIIX 201 Coach
SIIX 431 Coach
SIIX 432 Coach
SIIX 401 Coach
SIIX 102 Charger SC-44


----------



## Fan Railer

We still expecting this to go via DC?


----------



## jis

No


----------



## jis

Routing is Colton - Sunset Route - New Orleans -CSX - Jacksonville - FEC - West Palm Beach.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

UP Sunset Route to NOL, then CSX to Florida.

Viewing opportunities:

Scheduled Arrival Yuma, AZ 12/09/16 14:55
Scheduled Departure Yuma, AZ 12/09/16 15:55
Scheduled Arrival Tucson, AZ 12/10/16 00:55
Scheduled Departure Tucson, AZ 12/10/16 02:00
Scheduled Arrival Santerrt, NM 12/10/16 10:50
Scheduled Departure Santerrt, NM 12/10/16 12:40
Scheduled Arrival Alpine, TX 12/11/16 00:20
Scheduled Departure Alpine, TX 12/11/16 01:20
Scheduled Arrival Delrio, TX 12/11/16 09:20
Scheduled Departure Delrio, TX 12/11/16 10:20
Scheduled Arrival Kirby, TX 12/11/16 19:20
Scheduled Departure Kirby, TX 12/11/16 21:05
Scheduled Arrival Dyersdale, TX 12/12/16 07:05
Scheduled Departure Dyersdale, TX 12/12/16 08:05
Scheduled Arrival Beaumont, TX 12/12/16 11:15
Scheduled Departure Beaumont, TX 12/12/16 11:50
Scheduled Arrival Livonia, LA 12/12/16 19:35
Scheduled Departure Livonia, LA 12/12/16 20:35
Scheduled Arrival Neworlean, LA 12/13/16 05:25


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Dutchrailnut said:


>


 The progress is looking good! I can't wait to see them in high speed action!


----------



## KnightRail

Thirdrail7 said:


> The 4610 is preparing to ship to Pueblo.


Your item is anticipated to leave it's origin facility and will be in transit to a sorting facility on December 10, 2016 at 9:10 am Tracking number 6-10DEC2016 Service: Ground


----------



## AmtrakBlue

KnightRail said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 4610 is preparing to ship to Pueblo.
> 
> 
> 
> Your item is anticipated to leave it's origin facility and will be in transit to a sorting facility on December 10, 2016 at 9:10 am Tracking number 6-10DEC2016 Service: Ground
Click to expand...

 :wub:


----------



## Ryan

I would have sprung for the two day airmail at least.


----------



## neroden

jis said:


> Routing is Colton - Sunset Route - New Orleans -CSX - Jacksonville - FEC - West Palm Beach.


So CSX does know how to move passenger trains from New Orleans to Jacksonville on the existing tracks.  We knew they were just being recalcitrant.


----------



## jis

neroden said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Routing is Colton - Sunset Route - New Orleans -CSX - Jacksonville - FEC - West Palm Beach.
> 
> 
> 
> So CSX does know how to move passenger trains from New Orleans to Jacksonville on the existing tracks.  We knew they were just being recalcitrant.
Click to expand...

We have known that all along. Didn't they run the Amtrak special from New Orleans to Jacksonville, even actually carrying passengers? This move of the consist is not really a passenger move. It is just the move of six pieces of unoccupied equipment which is not much different from moving some pieces of freight equipment.


----------



## Karl1459

Ryan said:


> I would have sprung for the two day airmail at least.


----------



## west point

jis said:


> It is just the move of six pieces of unoccupied equipment which is not much different from moving some pieces of freight equipment.


sorry but there are one or more riders on the ferry movement.

1. Someone to maintain at least one Sprinter running to provide HEP.

2. Another ( maybe same person to verify no problem with any of the equipment breaking.

3. Note that after the UP led train cleared the siding the orange open door lights came on for riders to pass thru then went to green shortly after noting doors closed.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

think the lights you see was green (brake release) and orange (brake's applied), the door lights would be red.


----------



## A Voice

west point said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is just the move of six pieces of unoccupied equipment which is not much different from moving some pieces of freight equipment.
> 
> 
> 
> sorry but there are one or more riders on the ferry movement.1. Someone to maintain at least one Sprinter running to provide HEP.
> 
> 2. Another ( maybe same person to verify no problem with any of the equipment breaking.
> 
> 3. Note that after the UP led train cleared the siding the orange open door lights came on for riders to pass thru then went to green shortly after noting doors closed.
Click to expand...

 Why would the trainset need HEP for a ferry move?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

to avoid flat wheels, the slip/slide system needs power plus a life set keeps riff raff away 

Also the freight units do not have a Main reservoir hookup under coupler, and car suspension needs air for airbags.


----------



## jis

west point said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is just the move of six pieces of unoccupied equipment which is not much different from moving some pieces of freight equipment.
> 
> 
> 
> sorry but there are one or more riders on the ferry movement.
> 
> 1. Someone to maintain at least one Sprinter running to provide HEP.
> 
> 2. Another ( maybe same person to verify no problem with any of the equipment breaking.
> 
> 3. Note that after the UP led train cleared the siding the orange open door lights came on for riders to pass thru then went to green shortly after noting doors closed.
Click to expand...

Rider is fine as said rider is railroad staff. The important thing is "no passengers".


----------



## Thirdrail7

If nothing changes, the 4603, 4607 are coming out of the factory and heading to Pueblo this weekend. Additionally, the 2101 and 2102 are coming out of the factory and being held for testing in California.


----------



## Steve4031

When might we see one in Illinois?


----------



## Thirdrail7

Steve4031 said:


> When might we see one in Illinois?



You might have seen one already. Didn't the 4604 pass through Illinois on its way to Maryland? :giggle: :hi: ^_^


----------



## afigg

Thirdrail7 said:


> Steve4031 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When might we see one in Illinois?
> 
> 
> 
> You might have seen one already. Didn't the 4604 pass through Illinois on its way to Maryland? :giggle: :hi: ^_^
Click to expand...

Besides IDX 4604, haven't some of the Midwest bound Chargers been moved to Chicago after completing their 500 mile testing at the Pueblo facility?

The question is when will the first batch of the Midwest Chargers be ready to start revenue service? Have not read any news on that.


----------



## Steve4031

I've read that some have passed through. Forgot that some were here. After GF's 12 hour ride on 303 last weekend I'm sure she would love to see a charger on the point when we dp Stl New Year's Day on 306.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

afigg said:


> Steve4031 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When might we see one in Illinois?
> 
> 
> 
> . . .
> 
> The question is when will the first batch of the Midwest Chargers be ready to start revenue service?
Click to expand...

Obviously, the original plan would have been a simultaneous launch of the higher-speed Lincoln service on the Billion dollar upgraded tracks St Louis-Chicago with a faster schedule "about an hour less", more frequencies, and the new locomotives -- and bi-level cars cleared for a higher top speed. Alas, Nippon Sharyo's crush test FAIL ruined that plan. So the inaugural runs won't get quite the big bang publicity they were hoping for.

I'd still expect the Chargers to go into service all at once, hauling Horizons, with the one or two or three added frequencies on the new higher-speed tracks. That should happen before the Stimulus spending deadline, roughly June 30, 2017 (or maybe Sept 30 in the worst case).

Or, they could do it like the new Viewliner diners, and put one into service as soon as they get it.


----------



## PVD

I don't believe there is a speed issue with the Horizons.


----------



## jis

PVD said:


> I don't believe there is a speed issue with the Horizons.


Yeah. There shouldn't be. They are good for 125mph.


----------



## west point

Speculation:: Once the Chargers are approved for revenue service there may be a period where a train will have both a charger and a P-42 on the train to protect for loco failures ?. Might even see the trains with loco on each end ? No matter what day to day service may show problems. Plus if they start this winter season any snow problems can be mitigated.


----------



## Agent

afigg said:


> Besides IDX 4604, haven't some of the Midwest bound Chargers been moved to Chicago after completing their 500 mile testing at the Pueblo facility?
> 
> The question is when will the first batch of the Midwest Chargers be ready to start revenue service? Have not read any news on that.


4604 is the only Charger I've seen come through on the _California Zephyr_.


----------



## 9900

CDTX 2101 and 2102 came into Oakland yard yesterday


----------



## WoodyinNYC

jis said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe there is a speed issue with the Horizons.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah. There shouldn't be. They are good for 125mph.
Click to expand...

Thanks! I feel better already. 

So the big problem from the bi-level delays is the capacity crunch. Those cars will carry about 30% more riders than the Horizons, and the added equipment will allow one or two or three more frequencies. Not to mention that new cars can attract and hold more riders.

I'm counting on this route to be Exhibit A in arguing to save Amtrak and invest in more infrastructure before the haters in Congress can doom it.

With faster schedules, new stations, and new locomotives, the _Lincoln_ service should rebound from the 549,000 riders in FY 2016 to at least the 633,000 that Amtrak had budgeted for the year. In fact, it should quickly rebound to more than 700,000 riders, which iirc was the level before the construction on the upgrades began. That work ruined the OTP and caused many bustitutions over the past few years.

It will get back to normal, get to better than the old normal. When the new higher capacity Nippon Sharyo bi-level cars finally arrive, ridership in the following fiscal years should near 1,000,000.

_Lincoln_ service isn't the only one, but is the most conspicuous of the Stimulus projects. The others are mainly _Cascades_ Seattle-Portland, _Wolverines_ Chicago-Kalamazoo-Ann Arbor-Detroit, and the _Piedmont_ route Raleigh-Charlotte. All will kick in during 2017.

When Amtrak can boast added capacity, faster schedules, increasing ridership, rising revenues, lower operating deficits, better OTP, etc., that should make it not a good time to slash away at the system. But we'll see.


----------



## KnightRail

Player: Team:

2101 Athletics

2102 Athletics

4601 Back to minor league, previously Rockies

4602 Back to minor league, previously Rockies

4603 Trading to Rockies now

4604 Orioles

4605 Rockies

4606 Rockies

4607 Trading to Rockies now

4608 Rockies

4609 Rockies

4610 Rockies

4611 Mariners

Update your scorecards accordingly


----------



## A Voice

KnightRail said:


> Player: Team:
> 
> 2101 Athletics
> 
> 2102 Athletics
> 
> 4601 Back to minor league, previously Rockies
> 
> 4602 Back to minor league, previously Rockies
> 
> 4603 Trading to Rockies now
> 
> 4604 Orioles
> 
> 4605 Rockies
> 
> 4606 Rockies
> 
> 4607 Trading to Rockies now
> 
> 4608 Rockies
> 
> 4609 Rockies
> 
> 4610 Rockies
> 
> 4611 Mariners
> 
> Update your scorecards accordingly


Umm.....anyone care to translate?

I assume 'Rockies' refers to Pueblo (Colorado has mountains), but I'm at a loss for some.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

A Voice said:


> KnightRail said:
> 
> 
> 
> Player: Team:
> 
> 2101 Athletics
> 
> 2102 Athletics
> 
> 4601 Back to minor league, previously Rockies
> 
> 4602 Back to minor league, previously Rockies
> 
> 4603 Trading to Rockies now
> 
> 4604 Orioles
> 
> 4605 Rockies
> 
> 4606 Rockies
> 
> 4607 Trading to Rockies now
> 
> 4608 Rockies
> 
> 4609 Rockies
> 
> 4610 Rockies
> 
> 4611 Mariners
> 
> Update your scorecards accordingly
> 
> 
> 
> Umm.....anyone care to translate?
> 
> I assume 'Rockies' refers to Pueblo (Colorado has mountains), but I'm at a loss for some.
Click to expand...

Athletics - Oakland

Minor League I take to be Siemens

Orioles - MARC

Mariners - WSDOT


----------



## KnightRail

A Voice said:


> Umm.....anyone care to translate?
> 
> I assume 'Rockies' refers to Pueblo (Colorado has mountains), but I'm at a loss for some.


If people want a detailed list as such it needs to be somewhat encrypted. As Céline Dion would put it, "that's the way it is"


afigg said:


> Besides IDX 4604, haven't some of the Midwest bound Chargers been moved to Chicago after completing their 500 mile testing at the Pueblo facility?


Nope, none with the Cubs or White Sox


----------



## neroden

Big news here is that some of the ones intended for California have been manufactured. I thought they'd make all the Midwest ones first, based on ARRA money rules, but apparently not. I can't remember how much of the money for each state's order had the ARRA deadline of 2017.


----------



## neroden

WoodyinNYC said:


> _Lincoln_ service isn't the only one, but is the most conspicuous of the Stimulus projects.


I expect Lincoln Service to have continued construction disruptions, thank you IDOT for ass-backwards planning.



> The others are mainly _Cascades_ Seattle-Portland


Timing is working out nicely for these: the entire suite of upgrade projects, regardless of funding source, will come into service in 2017. 2018 should see a boom in riders *and* lower operating costs...



> _Wolverines_ Chicago-Kalamazoo-Ann Arbor-Detroit


Likewise, the full suite of planned speed improvements should be finished here by the end of 2017. Also, QLine (M-1 rail) will have opened. We should see a solid rise in passengers, although the continuing deterioration of Michigan's economy and loss of population will probably counteract that somewhat.
(Though the bottlenecks from Chicago to Detroit, across CN in Battle Creek, and on CN from just south of Detroit to Pontiac will still create unreliability.)



> and the _Piedmont_ route Raleigh-Charlotte. All will kick in during 2017.


The Piedmont improvements seem to be mostly done already. Raleigh Union Station should open late 2017, which will definitely help there.
Charlotte unfortunately lost out on the money and will have to wait some years to move its train station to downtown, which is still planned. With the under-construction streetcar extention, when it eventually does move downtown it'll be connected to the local urban rail system, though. So that's an improvement we can expect in the future (2020 or 2022 maybe?) -- when the station finally *does* move it should have a real boom in ridership thanks to the connectivity.

These aren't the only routes which should see increased ridership in 2018.

Over here on the Empire Corridor, the improvements to Albany-Rensselaer are almost finished, Niagara Falls has actually opened, the Albany-Schenectady double-tracking should be done next year, Rochester should open next year, but Schenectady is delayed. Schenectady has been split into two contracts. The plan is to open a temporary station before the end of 2016. The first contract will then do the heavy work on putting in a new high-level platform, elevator shaft, drainage, etc. now (along with asbestos and lead removal and demolition of the existing building), worrying about the new station building later.

Springfield, MA Union Station building should open in 2017, platform at an unknown date -- hopefully in 2018, since they're bidding now. The Hartford Line should also open in 2018, with Berlin, Meriden, and Wallingford stations opening in 2017.


----------



## jis

Looks like Florida Rail Passenger Coalition is talking to AAF to have their next meeting in the Miami Central building, with a visit to the new train set possibly thrown in. This should be sometime early next year, and something to look forward to for use down here in Florida.

Crew familiarization with the new equipment apparently has already started in Palm Beach shops of AAF.


----------



## cirdan

jis said:


> Looks like Florida Rail Passenger Coalition is talking to AAF to have their next meeting in the Miami Central building, with a visit to the new train set possibly thrown in. This should be sometime early next year, and something to look forward to for use down here in Florida.


Is the building going to be sufficiently finished by then to be able to host a meeting?


----------



## afigg

neroden said:


> Big news here is that some of the ones intended for California have been manufactured. I thought they'd make all the Midwest ones first, based on ARRA money rules, but apparently not. I can't remember how much of the money for each state's order had the ARRA deadline of 2017.


Some of the equipment purchase funding for CA is ARRA stimulus money, so the deadline presumably applies to a portion of their Charger deliveries as well. Same goes for the corridor bi-level cars, but how the FRA and states are getting around the deadline for the bi-levels is a different thread topic.

So the Midwest Chargers are starting to pile up at the Pueblo facility. Checking the minutes of recent NGEC executive committee meetings, it says after noting 4608 & 4609 have been shipped to Pueblo for 500 mile burn-in testing: "The locomotives will next ship to Chicago, when IDOT and Amtrak are ready." So IDOT and Amtrak are not yet ready to take delivery of the Chargers. Waiting on building and equipping of a maintenance facility, training of maintenance crews, allocating storage tracks and space, or contractual & liability agreements not signed off on yet?


----------



## jis

cirdan said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like Florida Rail Passenger Coalition is talking to AAF to have their next meeting in the Miami Central building, with a visit to the new train set possibly thrown in. This should be sometime early next year, and something to look forward to for use down here in Florida.
> 
> 
> 
> Is the building going to be sufficiently finished by then to be able to host a meeting?
Click to expand...

Our contact at AAF says so. I suppose at least some parts will have already obtained certificate of occupancy by then, even if the whole thing is not done.


----------



## west point

afigg said:


> "The locomotives will next ship to Chicago, when IDOT and Amtrak are ready." So IDOT and Amtrak are not yet ready to take delivery of the Chargers. Waiting on building and equipping of a maintenance facility, training of maintenance crews, allocating storage tracks and space, or contractual & liability agreements not signed off on yet?


The Chargers to CHI cannot happen soon enough. Once they free up some P-42s then maybe LD routes can become more schedule reliable ?


----------



## Steve4031

I think those p42s would need some maintenance too. With some surplus they could do a more comprehensive servicing more often.


----------



## Thirdrail7

The 4604 has departed Martins and is currently sitting in WAS. There was a great picture of the three classes of diesels (that was sent to me privately) in the facility. Perhaps it will appear on Facebook and someone can post it.

Ryan, this is your moment to shine. Hopefully, it will be on 30 track when you arrive. Otherwise, it will be in Ivy City. Get a picture while you can.


----------



## Ryan

Thirdrail7 said:


> The 4604 has departed Martins and is currently sitting in WAS. There was a great picture of the three classes of diesels (that was sent to me privately) in the facility. Perhaps it will appear on Facebook and someone can post it.


That sounds like an awesome shot.



Thirdrail7 said:


> Ryan, this is your moment to shine. Hopefully, it will be on 30 track when you arrive. Otherwise, it will be in Ivy City. Get a picture while you can.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Thirdrail7 said:


> The 4604 has departed Martins and is currently sitting in WAS. There was a great picture of the three classes of diesels (that was sent to me privately) in the facility. Perhaps it will appear on Facebook and someone can post it.
> 
> Ryan, this is your moment to shine. Hopefully, it will be on 30 track when you arrive. Otherwise, it will be in Ivy City. Get a picture while you can.


Is this the picture? Posted by GP on FB's NEC FB group


----------



## KnightRail

29(21)


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

The Charger locomotive was the 3rd loco in a Superliner consist at Ivy City today, as I saw from train 91. The arriving 30 was in the station, so I assume it was the consist of 29 (21).

Also, regarding Raleigh Union Station construction, a sign in the current station's waiting area stated that the opening is planned for early 2018.


----------



## jis

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> The Charger locomotive was the 3rd loco in a Superliner consist at Ivy City today, as I saw from train 91. The arriving 30 was in the station, so I assume it was the consist of 29 (21).
> 
> Also, regarding Raleigh Union Station construction, a sign in the current station's waiting area stated that the opening is planned for early 2018.


Yep. I saw that sign and several postrs on some details of the new station when I was in Raleigh a couple of months back on a random trip for a day to Raleigh from Kissimmee.


----------



## Agent

Video from a web camera shows Amtrak #29(21) at Chesterton, Indiana with the SC-44. The _Capitol Limited _also had a _Winter Park Express_ wrap ad on its last car.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inX-KHyvht8


----------



## Maglev

> Siamese Charger


Is that their new nickname?


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Maglev said:


> Siamese Charger
> 
> 
> 
> Is that their new nickname?
Click to expand...

Probably a typo.


----------



## Ryan




----------



## afigg

Updates and interesting items from the NGEC January 3, 2017 board meeting draft minutes available on the board webpage.



> There have been and continue to be many challenges related to a variety of issues including testing, storage agreements etc. It is a tough process with three states, Amtrak and Siemens working together. There are more issues than initially expected and more agreements necessary than initially expected. John described the process as challenging with a lot of lessons learned.
> 
> The JPEs meet twice a week with Siemens and Amtrak. An action log has been developed on all actions and agreements.
> 
> There are some concerns with the schedule, but the parties are working hard to make sure that “we meet the ARRA deadline”.
> 
> Overall, it is a time-consuming process, but the effort has been collaborative with all parties getting along well together throughout.
> 
> Locomotive 4604 which has been at MARC – testing has been a success and it is due in Chicago possibly as soon as today.
> 
> 500 mile tests on 8 locomotives are continuing and going well at TTCI.
> 
> One locomotive has been sent to WSDOT (thank you to Ron Pate and Jason Biggs, WSDOT, for their help on is)
> to do 238 111B testing on the Cascades.


How many years in advance did they have to get all the legal and contractual issues settled prior to the delivery of the first batch of locomotives?

Further down in the minutes, there is this potential legal issue that could throw a major road block into some states buying the Siemens locomotives.



> Allan Paul, NCDOT, raised the following issue for discussion among the Board members:
> 
> NCDOT has been in discussions with Siemens “to tag onto the Diesel-Electric Locomotive order, but recently were informed that Siemens has signed a contract with Iran to build 30 locomotives. NCDOT has previously enacted legislation – the Iran Divestment Act – that prohibits the state from doing business with a company that has a contract with Iran.
> 
> Allan asked if other states have similar legislation, and if so, is there a way forward?
> 
> Ray Hessinger reported that NYSDOT has similar legislation, but, although the state intends to procure Dual Mode (DC 3rd Rail) Locomotives along with Metro North, they have not encountered this issue yet as they are too early in the process.
> 
> Steve Keck commented that California has similar legislation – but the issue of Siemens having a contract with Iran is “new to me”.
> 
> Jason Biggs said that he is not aware of Washington State having such a provision in law, but will look into it.
> 
> John Oimoen, IDOT, echoed what Jason stated and added that he, too, will look into it.
> 
> Eric Curtit stated that Missouri has made several attempts to pass similar legislation, but it has not happened yet.
> 
> Allan Paul suggested that “someone from the NGEC contact Siemens for confirmation that they have signed a contract with Iran.” Allan said he has learned about the contract from the North Carolina Auditors office and would like to get further confirmation.
> 
> Eric Curtit stated that he and Steve Hewitt will reach out to Siemens.
> 
> Allan will provide Steve and Eric with a scanned copy of the information he received internally at NCDOT.
> 
> Steve Hewitt will send all Board members a copy of the NC legislation.


Boeing is in the process of seeking to sell passenger jets to Iran. Are the states with similar anti-Iran legistlation going to stop doing any business with Boeing or any of Boeing's suppliers?


----------



## A Voice

afigg said:


> Updates and interesting items from the NGEC January 3, 2017 board meeting draft minutes available on the board webpage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There have been and continue to be many challenges related to a variety of issues including testing, storage agreements etc. It is a tough process with three states, Amtrak and Siemens working together. There are more issues than initially expected and more agreements necessary than initially expected. John described the process as challenging with a lot of lessons learned.
> 
> The JPEs meet twice a week with Siemens and Amtrak. An action log has been developed on all actions and agreements.
> 
> There are some concerns with the schedule, but the parties are working hard to make sure that “we meet the ARRA deadline”.
> 
> Overall, it is a time-consuming process, but the effort has been collaborative with all parties getting along well together throughout.
> 
> Locomotive 4604 which has been at MARC – testing has been a success and it is due in Chicago possibly as soon as today.
> 
> 500 mile tests on 8 locomotives are continuing and going well at TTCI.
> 
> One locomotive has been sent to WSDOT (thank you to Ron Pate and Jason Biggs, WSDOT, for their help on is)
> 
> to do 238 111B testing on the Cascades.
> 
> 
> 
> How many years in advance did they have to get all the legal and contractual issues settled prior to the delivery of the first batch of locomotives?
> 
> Further down in the minutes, there is this potential legal issue that could throw a major road block into some states buying the Siemens locomotives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Allan Paul, NCDOT, raised the following issue for discussion among the Board members:
> 
> NCDOT has been in discussions with Siemens “to tag onto the Diesel-Electric Locomotive order, but recently were informed that Siemens has signed a contract with Iran to build 30 locomotives. NCDOT has previously enacted legislation – the Iran Divestment Act – that prohibits the state from doing business with a company that has a contract with Iran.
> 
> Allan asked if other states have similar legislation, and if so, is there a way forward?
> 
> Ray Hessinger reported that NYSDOT has similar legislation, but, although the state intends to procure Dual Mode (DC 3rd Rail) Locomotives along with Metro North, they have not encountered this issue yet as they are too early in the process.
> 
> Steve Keck commented that California has similar legislation – but the issue of Siemens having a contract with Iran is “new to me”.
> 
> Jason Biggs said that he is not aware of Washington State having such a provision in law, but will look into it.
> 
> John Oimoen, IDOT, echoed what Jason stated and added that he, too, will look into it.
> 
> Eric Curtit stated that Missouri has made several attempts to pass similar legislation, but it has not happened yet.
> 
> Allan Paul suggested that “someone from the NGEC contact Siemens for confirmation that they have signed a contract with Iran.” Allan said he has learned about the contract from the North Carolina Auditors office and would like to get further confirmation.
> 
> Eric Curtit stated that he and Steve Hewitt will reach out to Siemens.
> 
> Allan will provide Steve and Eric with a scanned copy of the information he received internally at NCDOT.
> 
> Steve Hewitt will send all Board members a copy of the NC legislation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Boeing is in the process of seeking to sell passenger jets to Iran. Are the states with similar anti-Iran legistlation going to stop doing any business with Boeing or any of Boeing's suppliers?
Click to expand...

What I am immediately curious about, and must admit I don't know the answer to, is just what sanctions remain in place at the federal level (there was recent legislation). There could well be further changes with the incoming administration.


----------



## Thirdrail7

afigg said:


> How many years in advance did they have to get all the legal and contractual issues settled prior to the delivery of the first batch of locomotives?


Did we really expect a consortium of states to work well together and think in advance?

The real question is why are we surprised?


----------



## jis

afigg said:


> Allan Paul, NCDOT, raised the following issue for discussion among the Board members:
> 
> NCDOT has been in discussions with Siemens “to tag onto the Diesel-Electric Locomotive order, but recently were informed that Siemens has signed a contract with Iran to build 30 locomotives. NCDOT has previously enacted legislation – the Iran Divestment Act – that prohibits the state from doing business with a company that has a contract with Iran.
> 
> Allan asked if other states have similar legislation, and if so, is there a way forward?
> 
> Ray Hessinger reported that NYSDOT has similar legislation, but, although the state intends to procure Dual Mode (DC 3rd Rail) Locomotives along with Metro North, they have not encountered this issue yet as they are too early in the process.
> 
> Steve Keck commented that California has similar legislation – but the issue of Siemens having a contract with Iran is “new to me”.
> 
> Jason Biggs said that he is not aware of Washington State having such a provision in law, but will look into it.
> 
> John Oimoen, IDOT, echoed what Jason stated and added that he, too, will look into it.
> 
> Eric Curtit stated that Missouri has made several attempts to pass similar legislation, but it has not happened yet.
> 
> Allan Paul suggested that “someone from the NGEC contact Siemens for confirmation that they have signed a contract with Iran.” Allan said he has learned about the contract from the North Carolina Auditors office and would like to get further confirmation.
> 
> Eric Curtit stated that he and Steve Hewitt will reach out to Siemens.
> 
> Allan will provide Steve and Eric with a scanned copy of the information he received internally at NCDOT.
> 
> Steve Hewitt will send all Board members a copy of the NC legislation.
> 
> 
> 
> Boeing is in the process of seeking to sell passenger jets to Iran. Are the states with similar anti-Iran legistlation going to stop doing any business with Boeing or any of Boeing's suppliers?
Click to expand...

It would be really fascinating if South Carolina or Washington has such a law. I am sure Airbus must be most delighted since Iran is in the process of placing large civilian aircraft orders. I am sure Putin will advise Trump to block Boeing from doing business so that Illyushin can get a toehold in that market, provided they can beat Airbus.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

seems like poor attempt by someone to promote the still not functioning/approvedEMD units


----------



## neroden

Oh Good god. Maybe NYS can simply repeal the stupid anti-Iran law? It's time to talk to Cuomo and the legislative leaders. This stupid law isn't the sort of thing anyone in NY government should actually care about, it's just posturing.

California can probably get it repealed on request.

Didn't we normalize relations with Iran on the federal level? Time to do so on the state level too.


----------



## MattW

neroden said:


> Oh Good god. Maybe NYS can simply repeal the stupid anti-Iran law? It's time to talk to Cuomo and the legislative leaders. This stupid law isn't the sort of thing anyone in NY government should actually care about, it's just posturing.
> 
> California can probably get it repealed on request.
> 
> Didn't we normalize relations with Iran on the federal level? Time to do so on the state level too.


Uh, I think you're thinking about Cuba. As far as I know anyways, relations with Iran are the same as they have been for years. But yes, to hold back a public works project just because some huge multi-national company sells random stuff (not even stuff like arms) to Iran, is silly.


----------



## grover5995

Eric S said:


> Total shot in the dark guess here, but did the original Midwest portion of the order include locomotives for the Hiawatha? Not that anywhere near 12 locomotives are needed for that service, but that *could* explain a few of them. (Although Hiawatha costs are usually a 75% WI/25% IL split, so...)


At this time, discussions are underway between IL and WI to expand number of trains on the Hiawatha Corridor. However there is very little extra AMTRAK equipment available at this time, and no discussion of new replacements. There is also a traffic study that strongly supports a 2nd train between Chicago and Minneapolis, but there would likely need to be all new equipment. Perhaps Siemens could build a few extra Brightline train sets for the Midwest.


----------



## west point

grover5995 said:


> . Perhaps Siemens could build a few extra Brightline train sets for the Midwest.


Sorry the Brightline cars are high platform only. Will require designing and adding traps and probably a squeeze test ?

Another possible problem is at present Brightline cars do not have standard tight lock couplers but are semi permanently coupled much like Acelas


----------



## Dutchrailnut

as long as coupler pocket is at right height, it would be no problem to put regular type CF couplers in.

And pretty sure brightliners are not under High speed FRA rules so side sills could be modified for low entrance.


----------



## afigg

grover5995 said:


> At this time, discussions are underway between IL and WI to expand number of trains on the Hiawatha Corridor. However there is very little extra AMTRAK equipment available at this time, and no discussion of new replacements. There is also a traffic study that strongly supports a 2nd train between Chicago and Minneapolis, but there would likely need to be all new equipment. Perhaps Siemens could build a few extra Brightline train sets for the Midwest.


Provided that the Nippon-Sharyo bi-level contract order does not fall apart, the new bi-level cars should start entry into revenue service sometime in 2018. The bi-level cars will free up Horizons for the Hiawatha service if IL and WI decide to pursue adding additional daily trains on that corridor. WI could also order bi-level cars if they were to spend state funds on the order - or land some federal funding to pay for part of an rolling stock order if it can be had. Or buy Chargers to join the Midwest locomotive equipment pool. But any such action by WI would likely have to wait until Wisconsin has a new Governor. Looking it up, Gov. Walker is not term limited. Oh well.

Anyway, this is a Charger locomotive thread, not a coach car equipment thread, so let's keep on topic.


----------



## afigg

Perhaps my January 9 post above was overly optimistic on the N-S bi-levels. But this is the Siemens Charger thread and there are positive developments in the NGEC January 31, 2017 draft minutes that obviously just posted. Excerpts:



> Mid-West States Section 6 progress report:
> 
> The group continues to work on contract related needs for Receival of the new equipment.
> 
> Work on associated agreements with Amtrak is ongoing.
> 
> The Charger (4604) has arrived in Chicago.





> Status Update: Diesel-Electric Locomotive Procurement
> 
> · JPEs continue to work with Siemens on schedule and conduct weekly conference calls.
> 
> · As of now, successful 500-mile conditional acceptance tests have been completed on IDOT units: 4601, 4602, 4604, 4605, 4606, 4608, 4609 & 4610. Locomotives 4603 & 4607 are at TTCI and were tested last week. The first WSDOT locomotives are being prepared to ship to Pueblo.
> 
> · After 500-mile testing is complete, all locomotives will next ship to Chicago, when IDOT and Amtrak agreements are in place.
> 
> · Maintenance demonstrations are going well at Siemens and are about 50% complete, this week.
> 
> · IDOT and Amtrak agreed and signed agreements this past week for storage, testing and commissioning the locomotives.
> 
> · IDOT locomotive 4611 has been sent to WSDOT for 238.111(b) and WSDOT required 213.345 testing on the Cascades route. WSDOT will conduct the 238.111(b) test. Other JPEs are working with Amtrak for 238.111(a) test plans.
> 
> · JPEs are working with Siemens for Wi-Tronix application, as required by Amtrak. The first unit is currently being installed. Siemens progress looks good so far.


----------



## Steve4031

Maybe we will see some Chargers in march on the Lincoln service.


----------



## Steve4031

Maybe we will see some Chargers in march on the Lincoln service.


----------



## neroden

Good news. Siemens seems reliable. They do *not* appear to make a "Superliner style" low boarding coach, however, so if the N-S order falls through, I think it's back to Alstom..


----------



## MattW

We're assuming Alstom can do it. From what I gather reading over the NSo thread, they could have probably pulled it off without the requirement for the 20klb weight reduction. Can Alstom do any better with such a constraint?


----------



## jis

MattW said:


> We're assuming Alstom can do it. From what I gather reading over the NSo thread, they could have probably pulled it off without the requirement for the 20klb weight reduction. Can Alstom do any better with such a constraint?


It is conceivable that it is more likely that someone who has already built such cars meeting the 800klb requirement is better positioned to figure out where to shed the 20klb from than someone starting with a clean slate. But of course we will never know for sure until the proverbial fat lady sings, now would we?


----------



## PerRock

neroden said:


> Good news. Siemens seems reliable. They do *not* appear to make a "Superliner style" low boarding coach, however, so if the N-S order falls through, I think it's back to Alstom..


Siemens has the Viaggio Twin design. It's not that widely used, I think SBB is the only operator & they're using the older model. http://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility/global/en/urban-mobility/rail-solutions/passenger-coaches/pages/passenger-coaches.aspx

peter


----------



## sitzplatz17

PerRock said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good news. Siemens seems reliable. They do *not* appear to make a "Superliner style" low boarding coach, however, so if the N-S order falls through, I think it's back to Alstom..
> 
> 
> 
> Siemens has the Viaggio Twin design. It's not that widely used, I think SBB is the only operator & they're using the older model. http://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility/global/en/urban-mobility/rail-solutions/passenger-coaches/pages/passenger-coaches.aspx
> 
> peter
Click to expand...

Interesting. I wonder how difficult it would be to modify the Viaggio Twins to comply with US regulations.

Siemens seems to have been doing an excellent job delivering equipment on time and within specifications.

(At least compared to CAF and N-S!)

Looking at the ACS-64 for the NEC, Brightline in FL, and Chargers they seem to consistently provide a workable and reliable product.

Leave it to the German's to get it right!

(Is my German-heritage bias coming through at all?  )

But seriously, it would be nice to see Siemens rewarded for their consistency and reliability. I was kind of bummed when they lost out on the new Acela bid so maybe this is a chance to reward them.


----------



## neroden

PerRock said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good news. Siemens seems reliable. They do *not* appear to make a "Superliner style" low boarding coach, however, so if the N-S order falls through, I think it's back to Alstom..
> 
> 
> 
> Siemens has the Viaggio Twin design. It's not that widely used, I think SBB is the only operator & they're using the older model. http://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility/global/en/urban-mobility/rail-solutions/passenger-coaches/pages/passenger-coaches.aspx
> 
> peter
Click to expand...

Yeah, but that's like the Bombardiers used in Toronto on GO Transit, it's a trilevel with walking between cars on the middle level. Rather different design from the Superliner design. I mean, yeah, they could use it as a basis, but they'd have to do a near complete redesign.


----------



## DSS&A

Hi, I saw a Charger locomotive in the Amtrak yard in Chicago on February 2nd. It was on the track closest to the river coupled to five private varnish passenger cars.


----------



## Fan Railer

http://wsdotblog.blogspot.com/2017/02/washington-conducting-national-test.html



> You just might catch a sneak peek of Amtrak Cascades' future this month as we test a new state-of-the-art locomotive along our route.
> 
> We've been selected to conduct the national certification testing of the new Siemens Charger locomotives. That means one of the sleek, high-tech machines will be traveling up and down the Amtrak Cascades corridor a couple of different times this month.
> 
> We're buying eight of the Charger locomotives as part of a multi-state procurement and these tests will certify the locomotives for use across the nation. Just as importantly, this work moves us one step closer to using the new locomotives on our Amtrak Cascades passenger train routes. (We, along with the Oregon Department of Transportation run the Amtrak Cascades service).


----------



## Gemuser

PerRock said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good news. Siemens seems reliable. They do *not* appear to make a "Superliner style" low boarding coach, however, so if the N-S order falls through, I think it's back to Alstom..
> 
> 
> 
> Siemens has the Viaggio Twin design. It's not that widely used, I think SBB is the only operator & they're using the older model. http://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility/global/en/urban-mobility/rail-solutions/passenger-coaches/pages/passenger-coaches.aspx
> 
> peter
Click to expand...

SZD also. This is a brilliant car design, better [from a passenger perspective] than anything currently running in North America [superliners, Viewliners, Acella, Amfleet I & II, Bi-levels [east, central & west]. I rode them for 1000 km last January [2016] no mean feat in such a small country. They are comfortable, accessible, smooth riding & plenty of facilities. You could do a lot worse!


----------



## Fan Railer

4611 ran it's first test run on the 18th. Photo credits to Steve:


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

How fast did it reach while testing on the Cascades?


----------



## CCC1007

~80 MPH


----------



## jis

Yup. There are no new speed records that are likely to be set during Cascades testing since the service operates at 79mph.


----------



## Fan Railer

Heavy duty foam alert. Thanks to P71Railfan for this gem:


----------



## Fan Railer

WSDOT Charger unveiled:


----------



## Blackwolf




----------



## KnightRail

WSDOT said:


> ...Our first two new locomotives just left the Siemens USA factory in Sacramento! The two new Amtrak Cascades locomotives are on their way to Colorado for 500 miles of burn-in on the test track...


They arent necessarily taking the same rails to get to get to the test track this time.


----------



## Acela150

I'll be honest. I'm a bit disappointed in the paint job. But eh who cares.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Why did they paint it with WSDOT rather than just Amtrak Cascades? They'll only be used on the Cascades anyway.

And as for the California ones, why were they painted in Caltrans rather then just the San Joaquin paint scheme?


----------



## Acela150

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Why did they paint it with WSDOT rather than just Amtrak Cascades? They'll only be used on the Cascades anyway.
> 
> And as for the California ones, why were they painted in Caltrans rather then just the San Joaquin paint scheme?


Because the states of Washington and California are paying for them. Makes logical sense to me.


----------



## seat38a

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Why did they paint it with WSDOT rather than just Amtrak Cascades? They'll only be used on the Cascades anyway.
> 
> And as for the California ones, why were they painted in Caltrans rather then just the San Joaquin paint scheme?


San Joaquin does not have a special paint scheme. Its all standard Amtrak CA colors and decals.


----------



## Eric S

Looks like there is a large WSDOT logo and a somewhat smaller ODOT logo, in addition to the Cascades logo and paint scheme - Cascades are funded by OR and WA, so makes sense to me.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Fan Railer said:


> Heavy duty foam alert. Thanks to P71Railfan for this gem:


Thanks to you for bringing this video to our attention, and thanks to P71Railfan for a well put together clip.

I don't think of myself as a foamer at all, but I'm glad to get a good look at the new locomotive in this clip.


----------



## CHamilton

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/siemens-rolls-out-first-cascades-charger-locomotive.html

More photos on the Amtrak Cascades Facebook page

https://www.facebook.com/pg/AmtrakCascades/photos/


----------



## KnightRail

Tonight's Southwest Chief might be more like the Southwest Cascades with two VIPs along for a ride.


----------



## Agent

Here's a couple videos from Tuesday showing the _Cascades_ Chargers going south on the _Coast Starlight_.

At Oceano, California by Coastline Railroad Videos:


----------



## Fan Railer

Nice; super cool lol.


----------



## Agent

Here's a video from Saturday by the Clear Signal Trains YouTube channel showing the two Chargers on the eastbound _Southwest Chief_.


----------



## railiner

Think there's enough power on that train? To make it over Raton?


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

railiner said:


> Think there's enough power on that train? To make it over Raton?


I'd say more than enough! Maybe overpowered! Lol


----------



## west point

Believe the 2 P-42 behind Chargers are pointed wrong way so they can lead Chargers to test center.


----------



## Acela150

west point said:


> Believe the 2 P-42 behind Chargers are pointed wrong way so they can lead Chargers to test center.


Close. But no cigar. The lead units are a back to back set. Meaning those units will take the chargers to TTCI and the elephant style units which at the time are 5 and 6 in the consist will take the train to Chi town. So all they'll have to do is chop off the two leaders and the chargers.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha

What was that chasing right after the SWC?


----------



## CCC1007

BNSF inspection train, there are three main lines there, so my guess is it was on the center track.


----------



## Ryan

It was definitely on one of the two further tracks out.


----------



## Fan Railer

http://www.railpictures.net/photo/610031/


----------



## PerRock

Is it just me or is the Blue & Yellow on the Caltrans Charger different then the colors used on the cars?

peter


----------



## Scuba_Steve

I recall a while ago a poster on here said that he confirmed with LOSSAN that the majority of the F59phi's on the Surfliner would be replaced by Chargers. We're now seeing Chargers coming out in California paint and not Surfliner paint. So, was that not true? Or will we also see Chargers in Surfliner paint?


----------



## Steve4031

Would like to see some in Illinois with some kind of paint . . .


----------



## MattW

It may be lost in the jumble of this thread, but is there a projected revenue date for any charger?


----------



## Acela150

Negative.


----------



## jis

July on Brightline mini-inauguration between Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach. September all the way to Miami.


----------



## Train2104

I can barely read the black numbering on the blue paint! Surely that must run afoul of some rule...

Also interesting that they're Caltrans branded and not Amtrak California branded.


----------



## bcanedy

The Chargers for the Pacific Surfliners were an add on to the original order. They will be delivered later in the production run.


----------



## Agent

Video from yesterday by YouTube user MobileRailSpotterRxR showing Caltrans Charger CDTX 2105 in Sacramento being delivered.


----------



## Agent

This video was taken yesterday by YouTube user Caltrain927 in Oakland, California. Starting at the 6:53 mark, it shows a test run with CDTX 2101 on one end and CDTX 2103 on the other.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

sure seems those Chargers are neighbour friendly noise wise


----------



## chrsjrcj

Those lights are BRIGHT.


----------



## MattW

Ok, does anyone know what the ditch light frequency is? To be clear, I don't mean the flickering when each light is on, I mean how often they alternate. And what is the bell repetition frequency? The OCD in me hates it that they aren't synchronized, but the physicist in me will help the OCD in me if he knows what the relationship is.


----------



## Acela150

chrsjrcj said:


> Those lights are BRIGHT.


I can testify to that on the Sprinters.


----------



## Agent

Video from yesterday by YouTube user MobileRailSpotterRxR of _Cascades _Chargers 1402 and 1403 after being picked up by Amtrak in Sacramento.


----------



## CraigDK

The NGEC web-page has been updated with the meeting minutes for 3/28/17. It states that 9 chargers where conditionally accepted on the 28th. They also seem to suggest progress on the various agreements between the states and Amtrak on the contracts related to their use.

And a question, what is the Wi-Tronix application that they are referring to?


----------



## PVD

Wi Tronix markets equipment that provides capabilities of remote monitoring of maintenance parameters of locomotives. Probably that. They also make event recorders, but that would be mandatory equipment not an optional install by the folks responsible for maintaining a fleet.


----------



## CraigDK

https://procurement.amtrak.com/irj/portal/anonymous?NavigationTarget=navurl://c14b70706495ce1dac9a981cc142f8cc

It looks like Amtrak wants to compare the option for the 150 LD version of the Charger with proposals from other manufacturers as they put out a request for information for 150 locomotives for long-distance service.


----------



## Agent

This video uploaded today by YouTube user ThePinkController shows 1402 and 1403 on a _Coast Starlight_ (date and location not stated). There also happens to be a couple private cars on the end.


----------



## Acela150

CraigDK said:


> https://procurement.amtrak.com/irj/portal/anonymous?NavigationTarget=navurl://c14b70706495ce1dac9a981cc142f8cc
> 
> It looks like Amtrak wants to compare the option for the 150 LD version of the Charger with proposals from other manufacturers as they put out a request for information for 150 locomotives for long-distance service.


I think what will happen is Amtrak will see how reliable or unreliable these units are with the Illinois, Washington State, and Caltrans units. IF they have a good reliability rate then I can see them ordering the Chargers for LD service. A bonus is that they are capable of 125 mph. While the GE units are only good for 110. Which on the shoreline trains to Boston could make a difference should a diesel need to be added.


----------



## PVD

The Amtrak RFI is only calling for 110.


----------



## CraigDK

Acela150 said:


> I think what will happen is Amtrak will see how reliable or unreliable these units are with the Illinois, Washington State, and Caltrans units. IF they have a good reliability rate then I can see them ordering the Chargers for LD service. A bonus is that they are capable of 125 mph. While the GE units are only good for 110. Which on the shoreline trains to Boston could make a difference should a diesel need to be added.


My question, although I am assuming the answer is not public knowledge, is how long can they wait before having to chose whether or not to exercise the option for the Chargers?

Certainly they would like to see how they perform in day to day operation first if possible. If they do work well, then it becomes a choice between something that has proven itself verses something else.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Acela150 said:


> CraigDK said:
> 
> 
> 
> https://procurement.amtrak.com/irj/portal/anonymous?NavigationTarget=navurl://c14b70706495ce1dac9a981cc142f8cc
> 
> It looks like Amtrak wants to compare the option for the 150 LD version of the Charger with proposals from other manufacturers as they put out a request for information for 150 locomotives for long-distance service.
> 
> 
> 
> I think what will happen is Amtrak will see how reliable or unreliable these units are with the Illinois, Washington State, and Caltrans units. IF they have a good reliability rate then I can see them ordering the Chargers for LD service. A bonus is that they are capable of 125 mph. While the GE units are only good for 110. Which on the shoreline trains to Boston could make a difference should a diesel need to be added.
Click to expand...

And hopefully cleaner. If they are cleaner, at least they won't be "diseasel" locomotives. Lol

And speaking of the P42's vs SC-44's, I wonder how fast one SC-44 can accelerate a certain number of cars to 125 MPH?


----------



## Acela150

For those who are subscribers to Trains Magazine, there is a brief article about the Chargers. Deliveries are currently being held off as Amtrak and the States are in the process of Finalizing insurance deals. It's believed to be done by the end of spring.


----------



## Steve4031

My god this country is slow. Nothing is done with any efficiency.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Steve4031 said:


> My god this country is slow. Nothing is done with any efficiency.


First we kill all the lawyers, then the Nimbys!


----------



## CCC1007

Bob Dylan said:


> Steve4031 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My god this country is slow. Nothing is done with any efficiency.
> 
> 
> 
> First we kill all the lawyers, then the Nimbys!
Click to expand...

Consider for a moment the fact that 70% of the worlds lawyers live in the United States...


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Acela150 said:


> ... Trains Magazine ... [reports] the Charger deliveries are being held off as Amtrak and the States are ... Finalizing insurance deals ... to be done by the end of spring.


This hang-up may explain why nobody has announced the post-delivery schedules for the big Stimulus-funded projects. We've heard that the _Cascades_ will add an early morning train and an end-of-day train Seattle-Portland, trying to capture business riders. The _Piedmonts_ will do something similar Raleigh-Charlotte. The _Lincoln Service_ St Louis-CHI, the showpiece project, will add an unknown number of frequencies (probably 3, maybe 4). Michigan is doubtless eager to add one or more _Wolverines_ frequencies Detroit-CHI, but with the route 'South of the Lake' thru Indiana still a mess, who knows if they can, and nothing has been announced.

(In the East, largely unaffected by the new diesels, other projects still have us hanging. Considerable work around Albany (new station tracks n platforms, double-tracking, better signaling, etc) could take minutes out of the schedules for the _Lake Shore Ltd, Adirondack, Ethan Allen, Maple Leaf, and Empire Corridor_ trains. Or maybe not. Maybe it will be enuff to see big gains in On Time Performance. Then the New Haven-Hartford-Springfield _Shuttle_ may be FY2010 funds, not from the Stimulus, with the project aiming to finish in January, or at least early next year.)

The Stimulus projects have a deadline this year, less than 6 months from now, with the end of this Fiscal Year 2016. But a practical *deadline is less than 3 months from now*, to allow time to complete invoicing, paying, and other paper shuffling.

I thought we'd be seeing new timetables announced, already, but nothing yet. So maybe they are waiting to be sure they have the new locomotives ready before they announce any schedule changes.


----------



## Ziv

It would be a good start.



CCC1007 said:


> Bob Dylan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steve4031 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My god this country is slow. Nothing is done with any efficiency.
> 
> 
> 
> First we kill all the lawyers, then the Nimbys!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Consider for a moment the fact that 70% of the worlds lawyers live in the United States...
Click to expand...


----------



## Steve4031

Exactly.


----------



## Agent

This video was uploaded Tuesday by YouTube user Fan2La. It shows 1402 and 1403 on an eastbound _Southwest Chief_.


----------



## Karl1459

WoodyinNYC said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... Trains Magazine ... [reports] the Charger deliveries are being held off as Amtrak and the States are ... Finalizing insurance deals ... to be done by the end of spring.
> 
> 
> 
> This hang-up may explain why nobody has announced the post-delivery schedules for the big Stimulus-funded projects. We've heard that the _Cascades_ will add an early morning train and an end-of-day train Seattle-Portland, trying to capture business riders. The _Piedmonts_ will do something similar Raleigh-Charlotte. The _Lincoln Service_ St Louis-CHI, the showpiece project, will add an unknown number of frequencies (probably 3, maybe 4). Michigan is doubtless eager to add one or more _Wolverines_ frequencies Detroit-CHI, but with the route 'South of the Lake' thru Indiana still a mess, who knows if they can, and nothing has been announced.
> 
> (In the East, largely unaffected by the new diesels, other projects still have us hanging. Considerable work around Albany (new station tracks n platforms, double-tracking, better signaling, etc) could take minutes out of the schedules for the _Lake Shore Ltd, Adirondack, Ethan Allen, Maple Leaf, and Empire Corridor_ trains. Or maybe not. Maybe it will be enuff to see big gains in On Time Performance. Then the New Haven-Hartford-Springfield _Shuttle_ may be FY2010 funds, not from the Stimulus, with the project aiming to finish in January, or at least early next year.)
> 
> The Stimulus projects have a deadline this year, less than 6 months from now, with the end of this Fiscal Year 2016. But a practical *deadline is less than 3 months from now*, to allow time to complete invoicing, paying, and other paper shuffling.
> 
> I thought we'd be seeing new timetables announced, already, but nothing yet. So maybe they are waiting to be sure they have the new locomotives ready before they announce any schedule changes.
Click to expand...

The other fly in the soup as far as the Cascades are concerned is the "Point Defiance Bypass". This is most likely the defining issue for additional Cascade trains. https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/rail/pnwrc_ptdefiance/. This is currently "scheduled" for completion in November 2017, I don't expect to see new schedules until all parties are confident that adequate locomotives with trains, crews hired and trained, the Tacoma Freighthouse station, and the bypass are all in place and working. IMHO if everything falls in place new schedules will be early 2018.


----------



## rickycourtney

Karl1459 said:


> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... Trains Magazine ... [reports] the Charger deliveries are being held off as Amtrak and the States are ... Finalizing insurance deals ... to be done by the end of spring.
> 
> 
> 
> This hang-up may explain why nobody has announced the post-delivery schedules for the big Stimulus-funded projects. We've heard that the _Cascades_ will add an early morning train and an end-of-day train Seattle-Portland, trying to capture business riders. The _Piedmonts_ will do something similar Raleigh-Charlotte. The _Lincoln Service_ St Louis-CHI, the showpiece project, will add an unknown number of frequencies (probably 3, maybe 4). Michigan is doubtless eager to add one or more _Wolverines_ frequencies Detroit-CHI, but with the route 'South of the Lake' thru Indiana still a mess, who knows if they can, and nothing has been announced.
> (In the East, largely unaffected by the new diesels, other projects still have us hanging. Considerable work around Albany (new station tracks n platforms, double-tracking, better signaling, etc) could take minutes out of the schedules for the _Lake Shore Ltd, Adirondack, Ethan Allen, Maple Leaf, and Empire Corridor_ trains. Or maybe not. Maybe it will be enuff to see big gains in On Time Performance. Then the New Haven-Hartford-Springfield _Shuttle_ may be FY2010 funds, not from the Stimulus, with the project aiming to finish in January, or at least early next year.)
> 
> The Stimulus projects have a deadline this year, less than 6 months from now, with the end of this Fiscal Year 2016. But a practical *deadline is less than 3 months from now*, to allow time to complete invoicing, paying, and other paper shuffling.
> 
> I thought we'd be seeing new timetables announced, already, but nothing yet. So maybe they are waiting to be sure they have the new locomotives ready before they announce any schedule changes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The other fly in the soup as far as the Cascades are concerned is the "Point Defiance Bypass". This is most likely the defining issue for additional Cascade trains. https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/rail/pnwrc_ptdefiance/. This is currently "scheduled" for completion in November 2017, I don't expect to see new schedules until all parties are confident that adequate locomotives with trains, crews hired and trained, the Tacoma Freighthouse station, and the bypass are all in place and working. IMHO if everything falls in place new schedules will be early 2018.
Click to expand...

Actually many here in Washington believe the additional Cascades trains will be added on September 23, 2017. That's when all the local transit agencies here in Western WA change their schedules, including the Sounder commuter train (which will be also adding two round trips at the same time). The bypass is completed and testing of the tracks is done, station construction at Tacoma's Freighthouse Square is coming along nicely (even if it's not finished, the platform is still open and functioning during construction) and there there is already enough trainsets and locomotives in the fleet to run the service.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Karl1459 said:


> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... Trains Magazine ... [reports] the Charger deliveries are being held off as Amtrak and the States are ... Finalizing insurance deals ... done by the end of spring.
> 
> 
> 
> This hang-up may explain why nobody has announced the post-delivery schedules for the big Stimulus-funded projects. ...
> 
> The Stimulus projects have a deadline this year, less than 6 months from now, with the end of this Fiscal Year 2016. But a practical *deadline is less than 3 months from now*, to allow time to complete invoicing, paying, and other paper shuffling.
> 
> I thought we'd be seeing new timetables announced, already, but nothing yet. So maybe they are waiting to be sure they have the new locomotives ready before they announce any schedule changes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... the "Point Defiance Bypass" ... currently "scheduled" for completion in November 2017, I don't expect to see new schedules until all parties are confident that adequate locomotives with trains, crews hired and trained, the Tacoma Freighthouse station, and the bypass are all in place and working. IMHO if everything falls in place new schedules will be early 2018.
Click to expand...

IIUC WADOT signed a contract with the feds to do this and this and that, to spend the grant by the date set, AND to add two additional frequencies Seattle-Portland. I expect to see two more Talgo frequencies running by the end of the Fiscal Year 2017, i.e. September 30. Nobody wants to jeopardize the grants, for fear the crazies in D.C. would love to cancel them!


----------



## Agent

YouTube user MobileRailSpotterRxR uploaded this video today of _Cascades _Chargers 1404 and 1405 after leaving the Siemens factory in Sacramento.


----------



## Agent

This video from Saturday by YouTube user jreichel1 shows 1404 and 1405 on the southbound _Coast Starlight_ at San Leandro, California.


----------



## John Bredin

Bob Dylan said:


> My god this country is slow. Nothing is done with any efficiency.


First we kill all the lawyers, then the Nimbys!


----------



## A Voice

John Bredin said:


> Bob Dylan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steve4031 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My god this country is slow. Nothing is done with any efficiency.
> 
> 
> 
> First we kill all the lawyers, then the Nimbys!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just like a plumber makes a lot of money when someone else clogs the toilet, the lawyers didn't make the Charger project into a mess but are just cleaning it up.  It's generally considered bad form to shoot the messenger garbage man.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but if lawyers did plumbing it would take them hundreds of hours of research and dozens of permits and documents filed over a period of months or years, when all that was wrong was the water valve was turned off. 

Seriously, though, the Charger project isn't really a mess; There are some details to work out, which in fact are probably more difficult and complex than they should be, but compared to some other passenger rail projects of late (a rail car design which crushes like a tin can.....when has design by committee ever gone wrong before.....) the locomotive end has been fairly smooth.


----------



## jis

As have most passenger cars not designed by committees. Afterall, the Commuter and Heavy Rail Operators have been putting on line hundreds of passenger cars on line with nary a problem.


----------



## Fan Railer

So a Caltrans Charger was sent to the RR museum in Sacramento for a day. Wonder what that was about.


----------



## Sactobob

Fan Railer said:


> So a Caltrans Charger was sent to the RR museum in Sacramento for a day. Wonder what that was about.


Probably as background for a dinner meeting and speakers as part of a two-day "California Passenger Rail Summit" meeting.


----------



## jis

Meanwhile Brightline already has 4 and will get 4 more Chargers in a couple of weeks, all doing live test runs in preparation for service inauguration this summer.


----------



## west point

Someone who has the time it would be interesting to list actual dates of each Charger leaving Sacramento so we might get an idea of the delivery intervals. As well we may need to factor in the delivery of Brightline cars.


----------



## KnightRail

Fan Railer said:


> So a Caltrans Charger was sent to the RR museum in Sacramento for a day. Wonder what that was about.


An ACS-64 also made a trip there back when those were being delivered. Not much more than a manufacturer marketing and showcasing their product at a relevant venue.


----------



## KnightRail

IDTX4611 made its non-revenue testing debut today making a run from Chicago to Milwaukee and back. The consist included Amfleet I, II, and horizon equipment along with P42 #57.


----------



## Agent

Video of IDTX 4611's test train (at 0:39 and 2:49) by YouTube user A-Train4014 Productions.


----------



## Steve4031

Great to see some in the Midwest.


----------



## KnightRail

Testing continued last night with an overnight round trip to Carbondale, IL. Same consist as the Milwaukee trip.


----------



## Agent

Official Caltrans video featuring the previously-mentioned appearance of a Charger at the California State Railroad Museum.


----------



## KnightRail

Should be double the charge and on to Quincy tomorrow.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Agent said:


> Official Caltrans video featuring the previously-mentioned appearance of a Charger at the California State Railroad Museum.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1zhp2gConQ


Tested @ 135 mph, certified for 125 mph. Sounds good to me.


----------



## Agent

Another video of the Charger display at the California State Railroad Museum by YouTube user Copper Cruz which includes a look in the cab.


----------



## PerRock

From Railroadfan.com the following trains will have the Charger on them:



> AMTRAK Train.....#954 Chicago to Pontiac, Monday, May 1, 2017. Depart Chicago at 10:00 AM Central Time. Arrives Pontiac, 5:45 PM Eastern Time.
> AMTRAK Train.....#959 Pontiac to Chicago, Tuesday, May 2, 2017. Depart Pontiac at 8:00 AM Eastern Time. Arrives Chicago 1:25 PM Central Time.
> 
> AMTRAK Train.....#960 Chicago to Port Huron, Wednesday, May 3, 2017. Depart Chicago at 10:00 AM Central Time. Arrives Port Huron 5:38 PM Eastern Time.
> AMTRAK Train.....#963 Port Huron to Chicago, Thursday, May 4, 2017. Depart Port Huron at 7:45 AM Eastern Time. Arrives Chicago 1:10 PM Central Time.


I plan on being trackside today & will try and grab some pics. It's not believed to be leading.

peter


----------



## Agent

Here's a couple videos of testing from the past several days. The first one from YouTube user Scott Nauert shows the 4611 leading its test train in Missouri on April 25.


----------



## Agent

Video from yesterday by YouTube user jchwayz shows the westbound _Empire Builder_ at Winona, Minnesota with _Cascades_ Chargers 1400 and 1403.


----------



## CraigDK

Nice video.

The westbound_ Empire Builder_? I know they are sending them to Pueblo for testing and burn in. Are they then being sent to Chicago before heading back to Seattle?


----------



## CCC1007

CraigDK said:


> Nice video.
> 
> The westbound_ Empire Builder_? I know they are sending them to Pueblo for testing and burn in. Are they then being sent to Chicago before heading back to Seattle?


Due to the problem on the coast starlight, the first batch went the long way to Seattle...


----------



## CraigDK

CCC1007 said:


> CraigDK said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice video.
> 
> The westbound_ Empire Builder_? I know they are sending them to Pueblo for testing and burn in. Are they then being sent to Chicago before heading back to Seattle?
> 
> 
> 
> Due to the problem on the coast starlight, the first batch went the long way to Seattle...
Click to expand...

Got it, somehow I didn't make that connection in my mind.

Reading the latest section 305 meeting notes, it sounds like the Chargers, at least those that have been delivered, will probably be in service before the summer ends.


----------



## George K

I saw them at Chicago Union Station yesterday, at about 10:30. I'm headed back that way this evening - try to get a shot of them as I go by if they're still there.


----------



## rickycourtney

Several Siemens Chargers related developments here in Seattle...

The first two locomotives are now in Seattle. On Monday I spotted them parked at the end of the Sounder storage tracks at the Holgate Street Yard. They now appear to have moved inside the Amtrak maintenance building.




WSDOT is holding a "rollout event" for the Chargers this Sunday, May 21st at 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on the platform of King Street Station. There will be the standard speeches from elected officials, commemorative giveaways, opportunities to take photos in front of the train, and informational displays about the locomotives. What there won't be are cab tours. WSDOT says due to "safety restrictions," no one will be allowed on/in the locomotives.

Here's a link to the Facebook post detailing the event.

Also interesting, WSDOT has launched a new ad campaign for the Cascades... and the Chargers are the new "face of the service" on billboards around Seattle.

Here's a tweet showing one of the billboards.


----------



## Thirdrail7

WS1402 and WS1404 are making their was home from Pueblo. 3(20) should intercept them in ABQ.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

rickycourtney said:


> The first two locomotives are now in Seattle. ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 18491680_10158642694560576_9080415708183823986_o.jpg
> 
> WSDOT is holding a "rollout event" for the Chargers this Sunday, May 21st at 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on the platform of King Street Station. There will be the standard speeches from elected officials, commemorative giveaways, opportunities to take photos in front of the train, and informational displays about the locomotives. ...
> 
> Here's a link to the Facebook post detailing the event.


Hope the Rollout Event goes well today -- a big crowd, plenty of reporters and TV cameras, happy politicians.

The goal here is to get another 20 or 30 minutes or so out of the run time to Portland. That's gonna need another Stimulus-sized pile of money and much political support to happen. But the new locomotives are a solid step.


----------



## Palmetto

The ceremony is on Facebook. Small crowd from the looks of it. The toast was done with cider.


----------



## George K

Palmetto said:


> The toast was done with cider.


Philistines!


----------



## Palmetto

George K said:


> Palmetto said:
> 
> 
> 
> The toast was done with cider.
> 
> 
> 
> Philistines!
Click to expand...


----------



## swc34

Just a couple shots I took of SC-44 1402 & 1404 while they wait to join #3 which is only looking to be 30 minutes tardy today.


----------



## Agent

Video of the Roll-out Event at King Street Station by Evergreen Railfan Productions. Also, here's a news article about the event.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Agent said:


> Video of the Roll-out Event at King Street Station by Evergreen Railfan Productions. Also, here's a news article about the event.


Thanks. I needed to see the sign reading, "Two additional round trips between Seattle & Portland coming fall of 2017," confirming that delayed start up.

I'd been hoping that at least one of the main corridor upgrades paid for by the Stimulus would start new timetables sooner, like, July, when all the work is supposed to have finished. Just wishing to have a simple success story to brag about while Congress is considering Amtrak's future funding. But I guess WSDOT doesn't feel the same urgency.


----------



## Northwest Railfan

Here's a video I put together of the rollout. Seemed to have a decent crowd, but the locomotives themselves appeared to not be running.

https://youtu.be/DSml1gFa4mQ


----------



## rickycourtney

WoodyinNYC said:


> Thanks. I needed to see the sign reading, "Two additional round trips between Seattle & Portland coming fall of 2017," confirming that delayed start up.
> 
> I'd been hoping that at least one of the main corridor upgrades paid for by the Stimulus would start new timetables sooner, like, July, when all the work is supposed to have finished. Just wishing to have a simple success story to brag about while Congress is considering Amtrak's future funding. But I guess WSDOT doesn't feel the same urgency.


I don't know if I'd say the startup is "delayed."

Here's the situation... Sounder, the commuter rail service, is also adding two round trips between Seattle and Lakewood this fall.

All of the transit authorities in this region do their service shakeups on the same day, twice a year. The next shakeup will take place September 23rd.

That's when the new Sounder runs will be added and slots can be opened up for the Cascades trips without having to do special supplemental timetables for Sounder.


----------



## Karl1459

rickycourtney said:


> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks. I needed to see the sign reading, "Two additional round trips between Seattle & Portland coming fall of 2017," confirming that delayed start up.
> 
> I'd been hoping that at least one of the main corridor upgrades paid for by the Stimulus would start new timetables sooner, like, July, when all the work is supposed to have finished. Just wishing to have a simple success story to brag about while Congress is considering Amtrak's future funding. But I guess WSDOT doesn't feel the same urgency.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if I'd say the startup is "delayed."
> 
> Here's the situation... Sounder, the commuter rail service, is also adding two round trips between Seattle and Lakewood this fall.
> 
> All of the transit authorities in this region do their service shakeups on the same day, twice a year. The next shakeup will take place September 23rd.
> 
> That's when the new Sounder runs will be added and slots can be opened up for the Cascades trips without having to do special supplemental timetables for Sounder.
Click to expand...

Good info.

Amtrak is currently listing jobs for a/c and engineers out of Portland. Service increase or replace attrition? We will see. Is there time to qualify crews Nisqually to Tacoma (Freighthouse)?

Is (or will be) Tacoma (Freighthouse) ready for Amtrak by Sept 23?

Is (or will be) track from Lakewood to Nisqually ready by Sept 23?

While Sept 23 might be the golden date (taking the pessimistic-realist view) I still think it will be somewhat later.


----------



## CCC1007

Karl1459 said:


> rickycourtney said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks. I needed to see the sign reading, "Two additional round trips between Seattle & Portland coming fall of 2017," confirming that delayed start up.
> 
> I'd been hoping that at least one of the main corridor upgrades paid for by the Stimulus would start new timetables sooner, like, July, when all the work is supposed to have finished. Just wishing to have a simple success story to brag about while Congress is considering Amtrak's future funding. But I guess WSDOT doesn't feel the same urgency.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if I'd say the startup is "delayed."
> Here's the situation... Sounder, the commuter rail service, is also adding two round trips between Seattle and Lakewood this fall.
> 
> All of the transit authorities in this region do their service shakeups on the same day, twice a year. The next shakeup will take place September 23rd.
> 
> That's when the new Sounder runs will be added and slots can be opened up for the Cascades trips without having to do special supplemental timetables for Sounder.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good info.
> 
> Amtrak is currently listing jobs for a/c and engineers out of Portland. Service increase or replace attrition? We will see. Is there time to qualify crews Nisqually to Tacoma (Freighthouse)?
> 
> Is (or will be) Tacoma (Freighthouse) ready for Amtrak by Sept 23?
> 
> Is (or will be) track from Lakewood to Nisqually ready by Sept 23?
> 
> While Sept 23 might be the golden date (taking the pessimistic-realist view) I still think it will be somewhat later.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the track is being tested at this time, and that it should be ready for service sooner than later.


----------



## Agent

Video from today by Castro's Railfans Videos shows Chargers CDTX 2106 and 2104 trailing on an Amtrak California train at Auburn, California.


----------



## rickycourtney

Karl1459 said:


> Is there time to qualify crews Nisqually to Tacoma (Freighthouse)?
> 
> Is (or will be) Tacoma (Freighthouse) ready for Amtrak by Sept 23?
> 
> Is (or will be) track from Lakewood to Nisqually ready by Sept 23?
> 
> While Sept 23 might be the golden date (taking the pessimistic-realist view) I still think it will be somewhat later.


Track construction from Lakewood to Nisqually is finished and has already been tested using Amtrak equipment traveling at full speeds.
Construction on the new Tacoma station at Freighthouse Square appears to me to be progressing on schedule. The walls are up and the windows have been installed. (WSDOT has a construction camera so you can check the progress: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/Rail/pnwrc_PtDefiance/constructioncam/default.htm )

As to getting crews qualified... I don't know. I'm not sure how long that process normally takes. With the new locomotives coming online, Amtrak should be able to lash together a special train to get crews qualified on both the Chargers and the new territory.

As to the startup date, I tend to be pessimistic when it comes to Amtrak and projects being done on time... but I think good progress is being made. If no major problems arise and nobody drags their heels... the trains should be able to start running Sept 23rd.

That said, the schedule shakeup is set in stone. Even if Amtrak/WSDOT aren't ready... the new slots will be ready for them, and the current train schedule may need to be tweaked to accommodate their revised slots.


----------



## Thirdrail7

It looks like two more Chargers are emerging from the factory and heading to Pueblo. Two of Washington's units are also being released from Pueblo and heading home.


----------



## CCC1007

Thirdrail7 said:


> It looks like two more Chargers are emerging from the factory and heading to Pueblo. Two of Washington's units are also being released from Pueblo and heading home.


So that would make six in the pacific northwestern?


----------



## west point

Thirdrail7 said:


> It looks like two more Chargers are emerging from the factory and heading to Pueblo.
> 
> /quote]
> 
> All the other builders for passenger equipment in the USA should be held to account as to why they cannot be on schedule as Siemens is.


----------



## Agent

Video from Thursday by MobileRailSpotterRxR shows Chargers 4612 and 4613 in West Sacramento after having left the Siemens factory.


----------



## swc34

New SC-44 4612 & 4613 arrived into ABQ on #4 today so they may head up to Pubelo.


----------



## Thirdrail7

CCC1007 said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It looks like two more Chargers are emerging from the factory and heading to Pueblo. Two of Washington's units are also being released from Pueblo and heading home.
> 
> 
> 
> So that would make six in the pacific northwestern?
Click to expand...

When they arrive, there should be 6 in in the Pacific Northwest and 2 in Pueblo.


----------



## west point

100 Chargers out the door ? When was first one out the door ?


----------



## KnightRail

west point said:


> 100 Chargers out the door ?


100 Total Locomotives. This includes Chargers+Sprinters.


----------



## jis

Don't forget that there are eight Chargers already in Florida with two more to come in the near future.


----------



## Thirdrail7

It looks there are some units ready to return from Pueblo. Additionally, two more units are almost ready at the factory. Maybe they SHOULD take over the CAF project.


----------



## Fan Railer

Thirdrail7 said:


> It looks there are some units ready to return from Pueblo. Additionally, two more units are almost ready at the factory. Maybe they SHOULD take over the CAF project.


lmfao just how behind schedule IS that contract?


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Thirdrail7 said:


> It looks there are some units ready to return from Pueblo. Additionally, two more units are almost ready at the factory. Maybe they SHOULD take over the CAF project.


Yeah; it would be even better if they took over the NS project. At least CAF is making progress.


----------



## Acela150

I'm curious as to what the penalty is for the delayed delivery is. With the Septa Silverliner V contract it was well documented what the penalty was.


----------



## west point

A Thought ----- Charger locos in Florida, Pueblo, LAX, Oakland, SEA and soon WASH. How has Siemens had enough technical reps to caver all those locations ? Either very reliable or ???


----------



## Green Maned Lion

The problem is most contracts limit the penalty to a maximum, and once you reach that, generally they lose all sense of urgency.


----------



## Agent

Amtrak #6(29) had four new Chargers on their way to the test track at Pueblo, Colorado. YouTube user RailBuffs filmed one of the Chargers setting off a hot box detector west of Denver and the four being taken off the _Zephyr_ at Denver Union Station. It was reported elsewhere that the return trip from the test track would bring out some Chargers too.


----------



## Agent

Chargers IDTX(?) 4612 and 4613 are the third and fourth units on Amtrak #6(01). This Chicago-bound _California Zephyr_ was four hours and thirteen minutes late at Agency.


----------



## seat38a

Just got back from trip to San Francisco. On July 1, a Charger Engine was part of the consist on San Joaquin 711. I was able to get up close and film it with my new GoPro. Here are some still I took from the video. With the bright light on inside and still dark outside, I was able to see the Diesel inside really clearly. A Genesis was the lead engine on our train and the Charger the second.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

seat38a said:


> Just got back from trip to San Francisco. On July 1, a Charger Engine was part of the consist on San Joaquin 711. I was able to get up close and film it with my new GoPro. Here are some still I took from the video. With the bright light on inside and still dark outside, I was able to see the Diesel inside really clearly. A Genesis was the lead engine on our train and the Charger the second.


Nice pics, thanks.

At first look at these engines, I didn't like the lighted side panels with the big X in the frame.

I've grown to like the design a lot. A unique emblem of power and strength on a locomotive seems quite appropriate. It's visible in the darkness, as well, blazing with light and newness setting it apart from all other locomotives (which newbies like me can't tell one from another even in daylight  ).

It's strong, fresh, and modern, if 'modern' isn't an obsolete term. LOL.


----------



## KnightRail

What is stopping that engine room from becoming totally encased in snow and ice when operating the Chicago state-supported routes in the winter?


----------



## RPC

KnightRail said:


> What is stopping that engine room from becoming totally encased in snow and ice when operating the Chicago state-supported routes in the winter?


If you look at seat38a's second picture, you'll realize you're actually looking into a passageway. The inner wall of the passageway is the air intakes for the engine and radiators. The passageway may be a pretty unpleasant place in winter, but the engine room proper is not directly exposed to the elements.


----------



## Blackwolf

Looks to me like a door is between the radiator area and the engine room. That door is open here, maybe to facilitate the movement of someone to monitor the locomotive while still testing things. I imagine that the door will be shut under future normal operation (and the interior lights shut off too.)


----------



## KnightRail

Yes it may be a passageway but like you say, those are air intakes. What are those air intakes going to do, injest snow like a super sized vacuum. We shall see how they perform in servere winter conditions. Not even the Sprinters have been put through a prolonged intense winter yet, they've gotten by rather easy these past couple winter seasons.


----------



## jis

Close cousins of the Sprinter have been running in Finland for the last couple of winters with no problems. Of course we do know that that American exceptionalism dictates that the snow and the laws of Physics are different in the US from the rest of the Universe. So we'll just have to wait and see.  More seriously, there could be differences that make the US version more vulnerable. The Finnish version has actually undergone some additional winterization for operation at utpo -40C and heavier than usual snow falls. Somewhat older version have been operating in the Alps and Poland for several years now. So even if there is a problem, solutions to such are well known.


----------



## Bob Dylan

This!


----------



## MiniMax

I rode the Eurostar recently. The average speed is 186 mph.


----------



## CCC1007

MiniMax said:


> I rode the Eurostar recently. The average speed is 186 mph.


False, the average speed cannot be the maximum authorized speed of the route.


----------



## A Voice

Per today's AASHTO meeting minutes, Siemens Charger IDOT 4612 is expected in revenue service this week on the Chicago-Milwaukee route.

Still nothing on the defunct Nippon-Sharyo order, of course.


----------



## amtrakpass

If it is kosher to partially copy the meeting minutes that were mentioned it is looking good for the engines but no info on the coaches

c) All Caltrans locomotives have been delivered to Oakland. They have completed all testing, and are in revenue service.

d) IDOT and Siemens have signed final acceptance on IDOT units: 4603- 4611. Units 4612, 4613 have been signed for conditional acceptance, final is in progress.

f) IDOT Locomotives 4604, 4611, 4612 & 4613 are in Chicago and the pre-revenue testing and track geometry testing has been completed on the applicable Midwest corridors. The 110 MPH 238.111a testing on the Michigan and Chicago to St. Louis corridors will be run at a later date due to IETMS/PTC implementation and ITCS software development. 4612 & 4613 are ready for revenue service. 4604 & 4611 will be ready after the 92-day maintenance is performed. The plan is to go into revenue service in the Midwest next week.

f) IDOT locomotives 4614 & 4615 have completed burn-in testing at TTCI and will ship to Chicago today. Locomotives 4616 & 4617 are completing burn-in tests this week and locomotives 4618 & 4619 will begin burn-in tests next.

e) All WSDOT Locomotives have been delivered and have competed pre-revenue testing and are being readied for revenue service.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

amtrakpass said:


> If it is kosher to partially copy the meeting minutes [?]


Kosher to kopy? Sure. The public records of public agencies belong to the people. And in most cases when posted on the Internet, it is by legislative requirement (e.g. Open Meetings laws, etc.).

Of course, privately published material is owed considerable respect.

However, often articles, even in serious publications, are based largely or totally on company-issued "press releases". In that case, try to track down the underlying press release to copy and paste. A "press release" is not covered by copyright; it's purpose is to spread certain information, so spread it.

btw Thanks for posting the nitty gritty for this informative update on the Chargers.


----------



## Thirdrail7

amtrakpass said:


> 4612 & 4613 are ready for revenue service. 4604 & 4611 will be ready after the 92-day maintenance is performed. The plan is to go into revenue service in the Midwest next week.


4613 should make its revenue maiden voyage in Hiawatha Service today.


----------



## amtrakpass

Thanks for the heads up. Charger 4613 was indeed on hiawatha 332 this morning. Veterans cabbage unit was in the lead. 4613 and regular p-42 on the rear. Should head back to Milwaukee on 333 shortly i would guess


----------



## Agent

Video by Bob Cox from yesterday showing the eastbound _Southwest Chief_ at La Plata, Missouri with four Chargers. They were the 4616, 4617, 4618, and 4619.


----------



## jis

Seemed to be quite a collection of stuff being dead headed on that train!


----------



## Steve4031

Interesting that the California car is on the end.


----------



## MattW

jis said:


> Close cousins of the Sprinter have been running in Finland for the last couple of winters with no problems. Of course we do know that that American exceptionalism dictates that the snow and the laws of Physics are different in the US from the rest of the Universe. So we'll just have to wait and see.  More seriously, there could be differences that make the US version more vulnerable. The Finnish version has actually undergone some additional winterization for operation at utpo -40C and heavier than usual snow falls. Somewhat older version have been operating in the Alps and Poland for several years now. So even if there is a problem, solutions to such are well known.


But do those close cousins have the same design intake/vents as the one in question?


----------



## jis

You did not bother to read what I wrote in its entirety did you? If you did you would have discovered that I do mention the possibility that they might be more vulnerable.


----------



## Ziv

If they are supposedly running close cousins to the Charger in "Finland", I doubt that it actually happened! Everyone knows that there is no real country called Finland. It is a fabrication of the Russians and the Japanese. Helsinki is actually located in East Sweden. You flew into the airport there, how are you supposed to know where you actually are?

Take a look at the map at the link...

https://www.quora.com/Is-Finland-a-real-country

I mean, you can't get more legit than Quora!





jis said:


> Close cousins of the Sprinter have been running in Finland for the last couple of winters with no problems. Of course we do know that that American exceptionalism dictates that the snow and the laws of Physics are different in the US from the rest of the Universe. So we'll just have to wait and see.  More seriously, there could be differences that make the US version more vulnerable. The Finnish version has actually undergone some additional winterization for operation at utpo -40C and heavier than usual snow falls. Somewhat older version have been operating in the Alps and Poland for several years now. So even if there is a problem, solutions to such are well known.


----------



## Agent

MobileRailSpotterRxR filmed SC-44s 4622 and 4623 being delivered in Sacramento yesterday.


----------



## far_call

4622 and 4623 spotted in Oakland heading south on #11 today.


----------



## Steve4031

Here is 4613 in union station. I saw it when I got off of 392. It was on 304 from Stl. There was one p42 on the south end of the train and on the north end a p42 led with the charger behind it elephant style.

The front of the charger had a light display like you see on the front of s bus or commuter train with the word "Chicago". This would be visible to pax when the Chargers are leading.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Steve4031 said:


> ImageUploadedByAmtrak Forum1501388564.417374.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> ImageUploadedByAmtrak Forum1501388579.739074.jpg
> 
> Here is 4613 in union station. I saw it when I got off of 392. It was on 304 from Stl. There was one p42 on the south end of the train and on the north end a p42 led with the charger behind it elephant style.
> 
> The front of the charger had a light display like you see on the front of s bus or commuter train with the word "Chicago". This would be visible to pax when the Chargers are leading.


I have long thought that the display board is an interesting and often ignored feature of the Chargers. Not that it is a huge deal, but it is a helpful addition that likely cost relatively little.
I do wish they would have added something to the paint scheme, however. I like the colors but the sides are empty and there is no logo or lettering for either the states or Amtrak.

The front left corner of that locomotive also looks a little beat up already, considering it's young age.


----------



## Thirdrail7

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> I do wish they would have added something to the paint scheme, however. I like the colors but the sides are empty and there is no logo or lettering for either the states or Amtrak.



Then perhaps you should keep a sharp watch for the 4611, which may be the first of many to fit your bill. It is floating around Chicago somewhere and there is be a picture or two that may interest you. h34r: Knowing this board, it will probably give you something to complain about. ^_^


----------



## Hotblack Desiato

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> The front left corner of that locomotive also looks a little beat up already, considering it's young age.


There's nothing wrong with it. What you might think are dents/scratches are just light reflections around the curved corner of the locomotive.


----------



## DSS&A

I have seen a new Charger double-heading with a GE today and three days last week on one of the Hiawatha train sets.


----------



## Thirdrail7

DSS&A said:


> I have seen a new Charger double-heading with a today and three days last week on one of the Hiawatha train sets.


As mentioned above, the Chargers are entering revenue service albeit in trail status. California has 6 of them approved for revenue service (with 3 of them in use today) and Illinois has 4 of them in revenue service today. You should see them quite a bit.


----------



## DSS&A

Hi,

Thanks for the information. Hopefully their performance will be good enough for them to unleashed to run solo soon.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Thirdrail7 said:


> brianpmcdonnell17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do wish they would have added something to the paint scheme, however. I like the colors but the sides are empty and there is no logo or lettering for either the states or Amtrak.
> 
> 
> 
> Then perhaps you should keep a sharp watch for the 4611, which may be the first of many to fit your bill. It is floating around Chicago somewhere and there is be a picture or two that may interest you. h34r: Knowing this board, it will probably give you something to complain about. ^_^
Click to expand...

Do you happen to know where those pictures are? I have looked everywhere I could think of and could not find any photos or videos of 4611 since May.


----------



## frequentflyer

The question is with the freed up Genesis what happens to them? Rebuilt? Well deserved rest?


----------



## Acela150

Thirdrail7 said:


> DSS&A said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have seen a new Charger double-heading with a today and three days last week on one of the Hiawatha train sets.
> 
> 
> 
> As mentioned above, the Chargers are entering revenue service albeit in trail status. California has 6 of them approved for revenue service (with 3 of them in use today) and Illinois has 4 of them in revenue service today. You should see them quite a bit.
Click to expand...

Any particular reason for trail only status for now? I'm guessing to ensure no breakdowns?


----------



## DSS&A

Hi,

The 4613 and a Genesis were on the one of the Hiawatha train sets today along with the "Veterans" painted cabbage no. 90208.


----------



## Ngotwalt

Last I heard, the Chargers need forward facing cameras installed, until then, they aren't allowed to lead.

Nick


----------



## Dutchrailnut

all pictures I have seen as of late do show the camera already installed.

https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3715/32873449805_9b93389912_b.jpg


----------



## west point

Dutchrailnut said:


> all pictures I have seen as of late do show the camera already installed.
> 
> https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3715/32873449805_9b93389912_b.jpg


Have asked this before. look at the front of the SC-44. Outside of the blue MU connections on the front of the loco is another type of connection receptacle. May be some kind of fiber optic connection ? Any one have an idea of the function ?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

that might be digital trainline, as of now only NJT and I believe brightline uses it instead of old style MU cables.

http://photos.nerail.org/photos/2004/04/01/2004040122452731483.jpg


----------



## Acela150

Ngotwalt said:


> Last I heard, the Chargers need forward facing cameras installed, until then, they aren't allowed to lead.
> 
> Nick


I think you mean Inward Facing... No further comment.



Dutchrailnut said:


> all pictures I have seen as of late do show the camera already installed.
> 
> https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3715/32873449805_9b93389912_b.jpg


Yeah it's there. As I mentioned above I think he means in the Inward Facing.



Dutchrailnut said:


> that might be digital trainline, as of now only NJT and I believe brightline uses it instead of old style MU cables.
> 
> http://photos.nerail.org/photos/2004/04/01/2004040122452731483.jpg


Dutch, what is a "Digital Trainline"? I've never heard of such a thing. I'm used to the traditional MU connections.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

The digital trainline is kind of network cable, it does not only does MU and Com, but it networks each car and each locomotive computer.

currently not many cars have it but Comet 5 and brightliner coaches do, even MUing a locomotive would only require small cable , and no longer the two 27 point jumpers.

Camera's are not a FRA requirement, it may be Amtrak rule, but silly to leave a 6 million $$ locomotive at sideline.


----------



## Thirdrail7

They came out of the factory equipped with inward and outward cameras. That isn't the hold up although it ultimately involves monitoring.



brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> brianpmcdonnell17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do wish they would have added something to the paint scheme, however. I like the colors but the sides are empty and there is no logo or lettering for either the states or Amtrak.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then perhaps you should keep a sharp watch for the 4611, which may be the first of many to fit your bill. It is floating around Chicago somewhere and there is be a picture or two that may interest you. h34r: Knowing this board, it will probably give you something to complain about. ^_^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you happen to know where those pictures are? I have looked everywhere I could think of and could not find any photos or videos of 4611 since May.
Click to expand...

The state and the facility sent them out. Since nothing remains a secret, I'm willing to bet pictures will appear. After all, the engine is probably outside somewhere.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Thirdrail7 said:


> They came out of the factory equipped with inward and outward cameras. That isn't the hold up although it ultimately involves monitoring.
> 
> 
> 
> brianpmcdonnell17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> brianpmcdonnell17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do wish they would have added something to the paint scheme, however. I like the colors but the sides are empty and there is no logo or lettering for either the states or Amtrak.
> 
> 
> 
> Then perhaps you should keep a sharp watch for the 4611, which may be the first of many to fit your bill. It is floating around Chicago somewhere and there is be a picture or two that may interest you. h34r: Knowing this board, it will probably give you something to complain about. ^_^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you happen to know where those pictures are? I have looked everywhere I could think of and could not find any photos or videos of 4611 since May.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The state and the facility sent them out. Since nothing remains a secret, I'm willing to bet pictures will appear. After all, the engine is probably outside somewhere.
Click to expand...

A picture finally appeared on Facebook today. There is a blue Amtrak logo on the sides with the words Amtrak Midwest beside it in blue on the gray background. On the front where the background is blue, the same logo and lettering is present in white. It is nothing flashy, but I personally believe it looks very good. Since it appears the locomotives are going to be painted in general Midwest lettering, will they be rotated through Illinois, Michigan, and Missouri regardless of the owner?
Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## WoodyinNYC

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> A picture finally appeared on Facebook today. ... Since it appears the locomotives are going to be painted in general Midwest lettering, will they be rotated through Illinois, Michigan, and Missouri regardless of the owner?


iirc, the plan is eventually have some run-thru trains from the _Lincoln Service_ to the _Wolverine_ line, that is, a one-seat ride St Louis-Detroit. This move probably awaits completion of the South of the Lake segment CHI-Porter, IN as well as upgrading CHI-Joliet to 110-mph.

Those projects would require another wave of Stimulus-level appropriations, making it very hard to predict when that could happen in view of the growing chaos in D.C.

And without more slots for the Wolverines and Lincoln trains, as well as for Missouri's River Runner, seems the present slots to not fit any potential run-thru trains.


----------



## Thirdrail7

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> A picture finally appeared on Facebook today. There is a blue Amtrak logo on the sides with the words Amtrak Midwest beside it in blue on the gray background. On the front where the background is blue, the same logo and lettering is present in white. It is nothing flashy, but I personally believe it looks very good. Since it appears the locomotives are going to be painted in general Midwest lettering, will they be rotated through Illinois, Michigan, and Missouri regardless of the owner?
> Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app



Soooo, are you going to post it here for those that have don't access or include the link for those that do have access?


----------



## George K

Photo by Robert Mueller:


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Thirdrail7 said:


> brianpmcdonnell17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> A picture finally appeared on Facebook today. There is a blue Amtrak logo on the sides with the words Amtrak Midwest beside it in blue on the gray background. On the front where the background is blue, the same logo and lettering is present in white. It is nothing flashy, but I personally believe it looks very good. Since it appears the locomotives are going to be painted in general Midwest lettering, will they be rotated through Illinois, Michigan, and Missouri regardless of the owner?
> 
> Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app
> 
> 
> 
> Soooo, are you going to post it here for those that have don't access or include the link for those that do have access?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't know the rules for sharing someone else's photos from a private Facebook group. It appears another poster has shared on here.


----------



## Ryan

Private groups are just that.


----------



## Ngotwalt

Thirdrail7 said:


> They came out of the factory equipped with inward and outward cameras. That isn't the hold up although it ultimately involves monitoring.


Thanks for the correction. I hope they get it worked out. Anything that involves Amtrak having more capacity (including motive power capacity) is something that I and most people on this forum are all for, so I get excited about these being in service and able to lead.

Cheers,

Nick


----------



## west point

The two loco trains brings up some speculation.

1. Checking ability of the Chargers to operate with the P-42s

2. Charger HEP plays nice with rest of equipment.

3. Then have Charger provide traction with P-42 idling.

4. Have Charger lead.

5. May be some number of miles for charger to break in ?


----------



## Acela150

George K said:


> Photo by Robert Mueller:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20664889_10156458744913835_3228826500986243988_n.jpg


Looks much better then just the word Siemens written in big green letters. I think it looks good.


----------



## frequentflyer

Now if we could just have some "new" cars to go with the "new" locomotives.


----------



## Fan Railer

As I understand it, there was a battery fire on one of the IDOT locomotives last night on 342 (15). As per Siemens, all Charger locomotives are to be grounded until further notice.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Fan Railer said:


> As I understand it, there was a battery fire on one of the IDOT locomotives last night on 342 (15). As per Siemens, all Charger locomotives are to be grounded until further notice.


Wuh-oh! I certainly hope that won't be a constant problem!


----------



## Fan Railer

It shouldn't be unlike Boeing's 787 battery issue. It'll be resolved quickly and things will move on.


----------



## KnightRail

a post in New Siemens Charger locomotive


----------



## Fan Railer

KnightRail said:


> Fan Railer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...As per Siemens, all Charger locomotives are to be grounded until further notice.
> 
> 
> 
> Might want to check your info.
Click to expand...

You have a better source? Feel free to share it


----------



## Ryan

He’s probably not interested in getting fired.


----------



## KnightRail

Fan Railer said:


> KnightRail said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fan Railer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...As per Siemens, all Charger locomotives are to be grounded until further notice.
> 
> 
> 
> Might want to check your info.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have a better source? Feel free to share it
Click to expand...

You know, you're right. It's very likely that Siemens wants them to stay grounded. It's very unlikely that Siemens wants to see them go airborne.


----------



## CraigDK

Acela150 said:


> George K said:
> 
> 
> 
> Photo by Robert Mueller:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20664889_10156458744913835_3228826500986243988_n.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> Looks much better then just the word Siemens written in big green letters. I think it looks good.
Click to expand...

I have to agree that it looks good. I have only two very minor things that I am not sure about; it seems busy on the nose with both the name and emblem and the transition of the stripes (and blue dots) at the back end.


----------



## CraigDK

A couple of bits from the latest AASHTO 305 board meeting on the Chargers. It was released on the day of the battery incident, but earlier in the day.

1. The Wi-tronix system appeared to be the reason that held up the Chargers from being lead units. They estimate that will take only a week or two to work through that (I would assume they can still do that while solving the battery thing). Although there is some additional testing that will need to be done on the lines to St Louis and Detroit lines.

2. They jinxed themselves by saying there hadn't been any issues to date with the units.

3. The Midwest states and Caltrains now have lease agreements in place with Amtrak, Washington State is still working on theirs...

4. Several of the Midwest Chargers are in storage in CO until some of the P42s are moved out of Chicago.

So there is that, and the battery thing.


----------



## Acela150

For those who aren't familiar with "Wi-tronix". It is a system that detects cell signals and data use. I'll reserve further comment.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Wi-tronics is recording and transmission system of engine and operator data,

http://www2.wi-tronix.com/


----------



## PVD

They do manufacture a detection system that is available railroads for the purpose of detecting the presence of cell or data device usage. I don't believe that is what is in play here, and it is the maintenance and operational data capture and record transmission system we are dealing with.


----------



## seat38a

CraigDK said:


> A couple of bits from the latest AASHTO 305 board meeting on the Chargers. It was released on the day of the battery incident, but earlier in the day.
> 
> 1. The Wi-tronix system appeared to be the reason that held up the Chargers from being lead units. They estimate that will take only a week or two to work through that (I would assume they can still do that while solving the battery thing). Although there is some additional testing that will need to be done on the lines to St Louis and Detroit lines.
> 
> 2. They jinxed themselves by saying there hadn't been any issues to date with the units.
> 
> 3. The Midwest states and Caltrains now have lease agreements in place with Amtrak, Washington State is still working on theirs...
> 
> 4. Several of the Midwest Chargers are in storage in CO until some of the P42s are moved out of Chicago.
> 
> So there is that, and the battery thing.


There is no State department in California called "Caltrains" its Caltrans.


----------



## CraigDK

seat38a said:


> CraigDK said:
> 
> 
> 
> A couple of bits from the latest AASHTO 305 board meeting on the Chargers. It was released on the day of the battery incident, but earlier in the day.
> 
> 1. The Wi-tronix system appeared to be the reason that held up the Chargers from being lead units. They estimate that will take only a week or two to work through that (I would assume they can still do that while solving the battery thing). Although there is some additional testing that will need to be done on the lines to St Louis and Detroit lines.
> 
> 2. They jinxed themselves by saying there hadn't been any issues to date with the units.
> 
> 3. The Midwest states and Caltrains now have lease agreements in place with Amtrak, Washington State is still working on theirs...
> 
> 4. Several of the Midwest Chargers are in storage in CO until some of the P42s are moved out of Chicago.
> 
> So there is that, and the battery thing.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no State department in California called "Caltrains" its Caltrans.
Click to expand...

Oops! :blush: I should have caught that one....


----------



## PVD

It's an easy mistake to miss because there is a Caltrain. Just not in that context.


----------



## Thirdrail7

PVD said:


> They do manufacture a detection system that is available railroads for the purpose of detecting the presence of cell or data device usage. I don't believe that is what is in play here, and it is the maintenance and operational data capture and record transmission system we are dealing with.


Indeed. Don't leave port without it.



> Wi-Tracker™
> 
> The Wi-Tracker is the asset tracking system integrated within the Wi-PU to give you accurate asset locations and status.
> 
> Track your assets and view live operations information straight from the source. Wi-Tracker utilizes GPS and GeoFencing technology to provide you with the precise location and status of your assets. Follow your fleets with mapping, status summaries, historical details and distances traveled tools on the Wi-Tronix website.*Pair Wi-Tracker with emergency alerts to keep your operations running smoothly. **With alerts ranging from emergency-brake applications to throttle position and engine-running status**, you’ll be able to rest easy knowing that your fleet is fully monitored.*





> Wi-DownloadER™
> 
> Just because your assets are thousands of miles away doesn't mean your data should be.
> 
> Wi-DownloadER is the fleet-wide event recorder download platform that downloads your Event Recorder, DVR, and other system information and sends it to you in real time. *Monitor the health of your DVR systems, get video and still image snapshots, and access historical records instantly.**Use the secure website hosted by Wi-Tronix to access your downloads from anywhere in the world. Get customizable alerts based on administrative security permissions so you are always in touch with what's happening.*





> Wi-FuelSensor™
> 
> The Wi-FuelSensor gives you the power of accurate fuel readings and helpful alerts so you can get the most out of your fuel. With the addition of Wi-NAV to your fuel sensor, get improved readings of fuel even when the asset is tilted.
> 
> Using ultrasonic technology, the Wi-FuelSensor reads your asset’s fuel tank levels in real time and *gives you alerts based on your specific requirements** Receive notifications of sudden fuel drops for timely detection of fuel theft, excess idle alerts to reduce fuel usage,** and even know if the current tank level is enough to get to the destination with May Not Have Enough Fuel alerts.*


----------



## Thirdrail7

Fan Railer said:


> As I understand it, there was a battery fire on one of the IDOT locomotives last night on 342 (15). As per Siemens, all Charger locomotives are to be grounded until further notice.








And ready to lead.


----------



## DSS&A

Hi Thirdrail7,

Thanks for the update. Your information is always appreciated!! I'll keep an eye out for solo performances.


----------



## Thirdrail7

DSS&A said:


> Hi Thirdrail7,
> 
> Thanks for the update. Your information is always appreciated!! I'll keep an eye out for solo performances.


Then, you probably want to keep your eye on the Milwaukee service today and tomorrow. h34r:


----------



## twropr

Another forum shows that #4620 brought Hiawatha train #330 from Milwaukee into Chicago, and that the Charger went out on #333 back to MKE.

Andy


----------



## stappend

Video got posted.


----------



## Agent

Video posted by MobileRailSpotterRxR on Thursday shows IDTX 4626 and 4627 in Sacramento after they left the factory.


----------



## Thirdrail7

California has released some of their units for solo operation. Some new leaders in the Midwest will emerge tomorrow. Washington doesn't have any in service at this time.


----------



## GiantsFan

Saw a couple Capitol Corridor trains Friday... They were double heading behind F59PHI locomotives.


----------



## Acela150

Thirdrail7 said:


> California has released some of their units for solo operation. Some new leaders in the Midwest will emerge tomorrow. Washington doesn't have any in service at this time.


I believe that is due to leasing not being set in stone?


----------



## CraigDK

Acela150 said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> California has released some of their units for solo operation. Some new leaders in the Midwest will emerge tomorrow. Washington doesn't have any in service at this time.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe that is due to leasing not being set in stone?
Click to expand...

According to the latest 305 meeting notes, Washington had not finalized their agreement with Amtrak.


----------



## CraigDK

Is the current breakdown on numbers from this order still 32 for the Midwest, 6 for California, 8 for Washington, and 8 for MARC? Or did I miss some more options that where picked up?


----------



## wdscott

I saw two this morning in the yard in Los Angeles.


----------



## neroden

Washington isn't in a huge hurry to finalize that lease. They only need the new locos for their schedule when they finish the Tacoma Trestle sometime later this year. Expect it to be finalized before the new schedule and the reroute are implemented, though.


----------



## PRR 60

neroden said:


> Washington isn't in a huge hurry to finalize that lease. They only need the new locos for their schedule when they finish the Tacoma Trestle sometime later this year. Expect it to be finalized before the new schedule and the reroute are implemented, though.


There is another incentive to get the state-owned locomotives in service. When that happens, they can stop lease payments to Amtrak for the Amtrak-owned power. Thinking of it that way, Amtrak has a major incentive to delay finalizing the leases.


----------



## jis

PRR 60 said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> Washington isn't in a huge hurry to finalize that lease. They only need the new locos for their schedule when they finish the Tacoma Trestle sometime later this year. Expect it to be finalized before the new schedule and the reroute are implemented, though.
> 
> 
> 
> There is another incentive to get the state-owned locomotives in service. When that happens, they can stop lease payments to Amtrak for the Amtrak-owned power. Thinking of it that way, Amtrak has a major incentive to delay finalizing the leases.
Click to expand...

OTOH, Amtrak desperately needs those locomotives so that it can relieve some pressure and catch up on preventive maintenance on its P42 fleet to keep its MDBF from sinking further from the borderline unacceptable level to a totally unacceptable one.


----------



## neroden

Amtrak has been known for striking hard bargains recently. I would expect that Amtrak is delaying the agreement with Washington State by bargaining. Washington is not in a hurry until later this year: as noted previously, they only need the locos when the Tacoma Trestle is finished (a project for which they have been unable to give a date -- any news from locals?)


----------



## CHamilton

neroden said:


> Amtrak has been known for striking hard bargains recently. I would expect that Amtrak is delaying the agreement with Washington State by bargaining. Washington is not in a hurry until later this year: as noted previously, they only need the locos when the Tacoma Trestle is finished (a project for which they have been unable to give a date -- any news from locals?)


Rumors are saying December.


----------



## neroden

Thanks for the rumor, Charlie.

I've been thinking of figuring out how to schedule a trip to the PacNW where I take the old route one way and the new route the other way. Not trivial when the date of changeover hasn't been announced! 

It's looking like I definitely won't make it to the Gathering; I'll be busy overseeing house construction at the time, and I don't want to go away during that (in case the builders use substandard materials and bury it in the walls while I'm gone).


----------



## Thirdrail7

If all goes according to plan, a few more Chargers will enter revenue service and lead on another midwest route. If you know the character below, you'll know where to find them tomorrow.


----------



## MisterUptempo

Thirdrail7 said:


> If all goes according to plan, a few more Chargers will enter revenue service and lead on another midwest route. If you know the character below, you'll know where to find them tomorrow.


Wait.

So they finally started a route that goes to (Oscar) Madison? Did Scott Walker finally give in? Exciting times. :giggle:


----------



## Steve4031

Quincy. Carl sanburg or illinois zephyr.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

You could also make an argument for Los Angeles since that is where the show was based. God I miss Jack Klugman. The entertainers of today are pale in comparison.


----------



## west point

Sounder has announced 2 more Round trips to Lakewood starting late September. That seems to indicate the only hold up for the bypass route for Amtrak is the Freight house station ?


----------



## PaulM

MisterUptempo said:


> So they finally started a route that goes to (Oscar) Madison? Did Scott Walker finally give in? Exciting times. :giggle:


Does the Lincoln Service pass through Madison, Il?


----------



## MisterUptempo

PaulM said:


> MisterUptempo said:
> 
> 
> 
> So they finally started a route that goes to (Oscar) Madison? Did Scott Walker finally give in? Exciting times. :giggle:
> 
> 
> 
> Does the Lincoln Service pass through Madison, Il?
Click to expand...

When did Jack Klugman ever portray Lincoln?


----------



## PaulM

Steve4031 said:


> Quincy. Carl sanburg or illinois zephyr.


The Quincy newspaper lifted a short article from somewhere regarding the new engines, saying they would be used for trains between Chicago and Wisconsin (Hiawathas) and Missouri (Lincoln Service). No mention of Quincy or Carbindale, although it did say there would be another batch coming out in December.

It also touted their higher reliability (I would hope so) and speed, enabling reduced trip times (possibly confusing the engine speed with infrastructure improvement between Chicago and St. Louis).


----------



## rickycourtney

west point said:


> Sounder has announced 2 more Round trips to Lakewood starting late September. That seems to indicate the only hold up for the bypass route for Amtrak is the Freight house station ?


No it’s the trestle.Coast Starlight can’t serve Tacoma Dome Station (Freighthouse Square) without double spotting until the trestle is finished. (The platform might also be too short for Cascades, but I’m not 100% sure.)


----------



## neroden

rickycourtney said:


> west point said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sounder has announced 2 more Round trips to Lakewood starting late September. That seems to indicate the only hold up for the bypass route for Amtrak is the Freight house station ?
> 
> 
> 
> No it’s the trestle.Coast Starlight can’t serve Tacoma Dome Station (Freighthouse Square) without double spotting until the trestle is finished. (The platform might also be too short for Cascades, but I’m not 100% sure.)
Click to expand...

In addition, the existing single-tracking is apparently good enough for the Sounder schedule, but not for the Sounder schedule + the Amtrak schedule, particularly with the Coast Starlight possibly arriving late. The second platform will let Cascades or Sounder get around an out-of-slot Coast Starlight which is doing its work at Tacoma...


----------



## Agent

Another pair of Chargers was released yesterday. This video by MobileRailSpotterRxR shows IDTX 4628 and IDTX 4629 in Sacramento. Two Amtrak California Dash 8s were the power this time.


----------



## DSS&A

Charger 4620 was the solo locomotive leading the 8:30am Chicago to Hiawatha train today with cabbage 90221 on the other end of the coaches.


----------



## me_little_me

Agent said:


> Another pair of Chargers was released yesterday. This video by MobileRailSpotterRxR shows IDTX 4628 and IDTX 4629 in Sacramento. Two Amtrak California Dash 8s were the power this time.


I loved those vehicles going through while the lights were flashing! Should send that on to the local police.


----------



## Hotblack Desiato

DSS&A said:


> Charger 4620 was the solo locomotive leading the 8:30am Chicago to Hiawatha train today with cabbage 90221 on the other end of the coaches.


I rode that consist on Sunday. The charger made quite a bit of noise/vibration in the station before departure from CHI, but once on the move I barely heard a thing.


----------



## Agent

Here's a video of the _Hiawatha _train set with IDTX 4620 leading and cabbage 90221 on the end taken by NorthbrookRailfannerProductions on Monday.


----------



## DSS&A

Hi,

Charger 4620 was the solo locomotive leading one of the Chicago to Hiawatha train on Monday Sept. 18th with cabbage 90221 on the other end of the coaches. A P42 was in charge of the other Hiawatha train. The Charge was noticeably quieter when it passed by compared to the P42, F40ph and the CP freight with GE locos (lol)!!!!


----------



## west point

Wonder how long the P-42s will be kept as standby power at CHI and California.? It may be Amtrak will dispatch the most reliable onto LD trains now and hope for the best on the SD trips ? Of course some wired for the various PTCs will need to stay around ?


----------



## DSS&A

Hi,

P42 no. 53 leading (with Charger 4619 in the trailing position) brought a northbound 5-car Lincoln Service train into Chicago today Sept. 19th. 4620 was again operating solo on a Hiawatha train along with cabbage 90221.


----------



## DSS&A

Hi, how does one post photos to this page?


----------



## PerRock

DSS&A said:


> Hi, how does one post photos to this page?


Upload them to a host, I use http://hostthenpost.org/but there are others out there. Then post the URL to the picture.

peter


----------



## PaulM

PerRock said:


> Upload them to a host, I use http://hostthenpost.org/but there are others out there. Then post the URL to the picture.


A rhetorical question: why can't you upload them from your desktop?


----------



## DSS&A

Thanks for the help. Here are a few photos.


----------



## DSS&A

http://hostthenpost.org/uploads/2e843e9687deb1222c7aa2eee6a4b1ea.jpg






http://hostthenpost.org/uploads/9503b58c23dc60efe11550b8a1df7c2d.jpg


----------



## PerRock

PaulM said:


> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Upload them to a host, I use http://hostthenpost.org/but there are others out there. Then post the URL to the picture.
> 
> 
> 
> A rhetorical question: why can't you upload them from your desktop?
Click to expand...

Anything shared on the internet has to be uploaded to a server one way or another (ok not entirely true*, but for the majority of us, it is) Some forums allow you to directly attach/upload images to your posts, however this is fairly uncommon as it puts a lot of load on the forum's servers. I have no idea if AU has this option, I cannot find it.

peter

*If you wanted to not upload the pictures but share them, you'd have to essentially turn your computer into a web-facing server. Doing so isn't advised unless you know what your doing; as it opens up your computer to attacks.


----------



## frequentflyer

Trying to hard to imagine this locomotive in the rumored forth coming Phase 3 striping..............will be interesting how Siemens make it fit.


----------



## PerRock

frequentflyer said:


> Trying to hard to imagine this locomotive in the rumored forth coming Phase 3 striping..............will be interesting how Siemens make it fit.


Doubt it will happen. The Midwest Corridor trains are transitioning to being similar to the other state-supported services, like the California trains, with their own unique branding. We're getting new cars (hopefully), see the Nippon Shayro thread, which will be painted to match the Chargers.

peter


----------



## AG1

DSS&A said:


> Hi, how does one post photos to this page?


If you click on "More Reply Options ", on the Post page, you are given the option to "Attach Files" then "Choose File" then "Attach This File" from files on your computer, without a hosting site.


----------



## Ryan

PerRock said:


> DSS&A said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, how does one post photos to this page?
> 
> 
> 
> Upload them to a host, I use http://hostthenpost.org/but there are others out there. Then post the URL to the picture.
> 
> peter
Click to expand...

HTP purges images after 30 days of nonuse. Nothing quite so awesome as loading a thread full of


----------



## Green Maned Lion

I didn't know you were so Brent, Ryan.


----------



## frequentflyer

PerRock said:


> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trying to hard to imagine this locomotive in the rumored forth coming Phase 3 striping..............will be interesting how Siemens make it fit.
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt it will happen. The Midwest Corridor trains are transitioning to being similar to the other state-supported services, like the California trains, with their own unique branding. We're getting new cars (hopefully), see the Nippon Shayro thread, which will be painted to match the Chargers.
> 
> peter
Click to expand...

I meant the 150 units Amtrak will order for long distance use.


----------



## George K

Ryan said:


> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> HTP purges images after 30 days of nonuse.
Click to expand...

I use http://postimages.org. No expiration, unless you ask for it. Works great, and the price is right.


----------



## Acela150

frequentflyer said:


> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trying to hard to imagine this locomotive in the rumored forth coming Phase 3 striping..............will be interesting how Siemens make it fit.
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt it will happen. The Midwest Corridor trains are transitioning to being similar to the other state-supported services, like the California trains, with their own unique branding. We're getting new cars (hopefully), see the Nippon Shayro thread, which will be painted to match the Chargers.
> 
> peter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I meant the 150 units Amtrak will order for long distance use.
Click to expand...

Just stop there.. No one has publicly stated that Amtrak is looking for replacements for the P42's. The most that's been talked about is rebuilding them which IMO would be a mistake. It would make much more sense Financially, Timeliness, and Operationally to buy new units. Whether it's the Chargers or the Progress Rail F125, or let's say that GE comes out with a Passenger unit for Amtrak.

My point is you're starting a rumor that has no truth, and I want to shut it down before folks start spreading it like wildfire.


----------



## frequentflyer

Acela150 said:


> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trying to hard to imagine this locomotive in the rumored forth coming Phase 3 striping..............will be interesting how Siemens make it fit.
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt it will happen. The Midwest Corridor trains are transitioning to being similar to the other state-supported services, like the California trains, with their own unique branding. We're getting new cars (hopefully), see the Nippon Shayro thread, which will be painted to match the Chargers.
> 
> peter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I meant the 150 units Amtrak will order for long distance use.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just stop there.. No one has publicly stated that Amtrak is looking for replacements for the P42's. The most that's been talked about is rebuilding them which IMO would be a mistake. It would make much more sense Financially, Timeliness, and Operationally to buy new units. Whether it's the Chargers or the Progress Rail F125, or let's say that GE comes out with a Passenger unit for Amtrak.
> 
> My point is you're starting a rumor that has no truth, and I want to shut it down before folks start spreading it like wildfire.
Click to expand...

Amtrak put an option with Siemens ( not with GE, not with EMD )to buy 150 units on the end of the state's Charger order. That's not a rumor, that is a fact. Now whether Amtrak has the funding to actually move on that option and purchase is up to debate.

https://www.siemens.com/press/pi/ICRL201403009e


----------



## Green Maned Lion

You are both wrong and right. The purchase or negotiation of an option is essentially Amtrak reserving a place on Siemens line at a specified price. That means they are or were considering the possibility of purchasing them- so I'm sure several Amtrak managers were (or are) literally "talking" about it. But so far as I know, they have not made any moves at all beyond that point, and using the future definite pronoun of "will" is wildly inappropriate. The political situation wherein these machines were ordered were way different than the current one, and I will be mildly surprised if Amtrak does make such a purchase, albeit pleasantly.


----------



## A Voice

frequentflyer said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trying to hard to imagine this locomotive in the rumored forth coming Phase 3 striping..............will be interesting how Siemens make it fit.
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt it will happen. The Midwest Corridor trains are transitioning to being similar to the other state-supported services, like the California trains, with their own unique branding. We're getting new cars (hopefully), see the Nippon Shayro thread, which will be painted to match the Chargers.
> 
> peter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I meant the 150 units Amtrak will order for long distance use.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just stop there.. No one has publicly stated that Amtrak is looking for replacements for the P42's. The most that's been talked about is rebuilding them which IMO would be a mistake. It would make much more sense Financially, Timeliness, and Operationally to buy new units. Whether it's the Chargers or the Progress Rail F125, or let's say that GE comes out with a Passenger unit for Amtrak.
> 
> My point is you're starting a rumor that has no truth, and I want to shut it down before folks start spreading it like wildfire.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Amtrak put an option with Siemens ( not with GE, not with EMD )to buy 150 units on the end of the state's Charger order. That's not a rumor, that is a fact. Now whether Amtrak has the funding to actually move on that option and purchase is up to debate.
> 
> https://www.siemens.com/press/pi/ICRL201403009e
> 
> You are right and I was wrong, the option is for 225 units.
Click to expand...

The existence of the options for 150 long-distance variants of the SC-44 doesn't necessarily mean it will ever happen - even if Amtrak had the funding; They could just as easily select a locomotive design from EMD, General Electric, or even someone else. Or, per more recent rumors, rebuild the existing Genesis units (which would avoid having to deal with a tier-4 design and the Chargers' requirement for urea aftertreatment). Amtrak did issue an RFI for new locomotives some months ago.

The total of '225 options' in the Siemens announcement includes 75 "regional" units of the type currently being delivered to the Midwest states and others; The balance is for the LD version, none of which have been ordered thus far, nor may ever be. Some of the 75 state options have already been exercised, however.


----------



## MikefromCrete

This dispute hinders on Frequent Flyer's statement "I mean the 150 units Amtrak will order for long distance use." While there is an option for those locomotives, Amtrak may or may not order such units. A correct statement would be "I mean the 150 units Amtrak MAY order for long distance use." Indeed, Amtrak may end up with those 150 Chargers, or they may order some other kind of locomotive or they may rebuild the existing Genesis units. We just don't know yet. Amtrak hasn't made a decision yet (as far as we know).


----------



## jis

frequentflyer said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trying to hard to imagine this locomotive in the rumored forth coming Phase 3 striping..............will be interesting how Siemens make it fit.
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt it will happen. The Midwest Corridor trains are transitioning to being similar to the other state-supported services, like the California trains, with their own unique branding. We're getting new cars (hopefully), see the Nippon Shayro thread, which will be painted to match the Chargers.
> 
> peter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I meant the 150 units Amtrak will order for long distance use.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just stop there.. No one has publicly stated that Amtrak is looking for replacements for the P42's. The most that's been talked about is rebuilding them which IMO would be a mistake. It would make much more sense Financially, Timeliness, and Operationally to buy new units. Whether it's the Chargers or the Progress Rail F125, or let's say that GE comes out with a Passenger unit for Amtrak.
> 
> My point is you're starting a rumor that has no truth, and I want to shut it down before folks start spreading it like wildfire.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Amtrak put an option with Siemens ( not with GE, not with EMD )to buy 150 units on the end of the state's Charger order. That's not a rumor, that is a fact. Now whether Amtrak has the funding to actually move on that option and purchase is up to debate.
> https://www.siemens.com/press/pi/ICRL201403009e
Click to expand...

It should be noted though that there is no mention of Amtrak anywhere in connection with the aforementioned option, except as speculative joining the dots around here.  The options appear as part of the State's order. It is possible that they may assign them to Amtrak or let them lapse or assign them to Metra and SunRail for all we know or do whatever else they please with them. 

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## frequentflyer

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/more-siemens-charger-diesel-locomotives-ordered.html



frequentflyer said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trying to hard to imagine this locomotive in the rumored forth coming Phase 3 striping..............will be interesting how Siemens make it fit.
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt it will happen. The Midwest Corridor trains are transitioning to being similar to the other state-supported services, like the California trains, with their own unique branding. We're getting new cars (hopefully), see the Nippon Shayro thread, which will be painted to match the Chargers.
> 
> peter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I meant the 150 units Amtrak will order for long distance use.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just stop there.. No one has publicly stated that Amtrak is looking for replacements for the P42's. The most that's been talked about is rebuilding them which IMO would be a mistake. It would make much more sense Financially, Timeliness, and Operationally to buy new units. Whether it's the Chargers or the Progress Rail F125, or let's say that GE comes out with a Passenger unit for Amtrak.
> 
> My point is you're starting a rumor that has no truth, and I want to shut it down before folks start spreading it like wildfire.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Amtrak put an option with Siemens ( not with GE, not with EMD )to buy 150 units on the end of the state's Charger order. That's not a rumor, that is a fact. Now whether Amtrak has the funding to actually move on that option and purchase is up to debate.
> 
> https://www.siemens.com/press/pi/ICRL201403009e
Click to expand...

It should be noted though that there is no mention of Amtrak anywhere in connection with the aforementioned option, except as speculative joining the dots around here.  The options appear as part of the State's order. It is possible that they may assign them to Amtrak or let them lapse or assign them to Metra and SunRail for all we know or do whatever else they please with them.


Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

You are right, who needs larger fuel tanks on a corridor locomotive?


----------



## frequentflyer

MikefromCrete said:


> This dispute hinders on Frequent Flyer's statement "I mean the 150 units Amtrak will order for long distance use." While there is an option for those locomotives, Amtrak may or may not order such units. A correct statement would be "I mean the 150 units Amtrak MAY order for long distance use." Indeed, Amtrak may end up with those 150 Chargers, or they may order some other kind of locomotive or they may rebuild the existing Genesis units. We just don't know yet. Amtrak hasn't made a decision yet (as far as we know).


:huh: "may", or "will" doesn't matter if there is no money and there is isn't as of right now, so NO, there is not a eminent order coming. I will take it a step farther, Amtrak is about to get a CEO that lead Delta to be an economic powerhouse. One of the ways he did it was by keeping CAPEX low, no new shiny planes. He kept the "paid for "50 year old DC9s flying and scoured the globe for used and cheaper MD88s and MD90s. It wasn't till near the end of his tenure that bargained, and I mean bargained hard for new aircraft. Making opportunistic end of line deals on 737s and A320s (both are switching to a newer series that have mor fuel efficient engines). With that stated, I fully expect the new CEO to look at refurbishing of the Genesis, and yes, it would allow Amtrak to work around the new Tier 4 engine rules. Its what the freight railroads are doing, rebuilding older locomotives with updated electronics.

Amtrak is presently looking at refurbing the Genies.

https://www.ltk.com/work/amtraks-locomotives

But Amtrak is a quasi political entity, and photo ops with shiny new Tier 4 locomotives goes further than photo ops with refurbished locomotives coming from Beach Grove.

Or as you stated go with EMD or GE. Amtrak may go ape and order the troubled prone EMD F125, or GE EVO locomotive with HEP added for LD services since the corridor stuff will be served by the Chargers.

All we know there are options for 150 locomotives from Siemens and for some reason the "states" want larger fuel tanks on this "option"..........hmmmmm.


----------



## PVD

Airplane purchases are very sensitive to fuel prices, and cost of money. They are part of the equation with the increased maintenance cost of older aircraft. Delta went as far as buying a fuel refinery to help protect it against fuel costs. When fuel costs are higher, more efficient planes start to look better.


----------



## PVD

There are lots of choices in between. Combining a rebuild of the best of the remaining fleet with a purchase of new units is always a possibility. The future of displaced 59PHI as potential rebuilds has yet to be determined.


----------



## neroden

Politically speaking, "working around" the Tier 4 rules is really unwise. Looks really bad.

The overall trend socially has been *quite* anti-diesel, and running ancient locomotives which don't comply with modern standards is not a good look.

There may be a need for some life extension of the Genesis locomotives but I wouldn't try to extend them past, say, 2022, unless they're already a lot better than they were required to be. Any large rebuild of them seems likely to be a poor use of money.

There is a strong possibility that diesel emissions regulations could get stricter around then. It's clear that the rules were not meant to allow high-emission Tier 0 locomotives to operate indefinitely except in museum service. It's at the very least likely that any rebuild will be deemed a remanufacture and will require meeting the "new" Tier 0 standards.

I think it's more likely that the entire array of standards will be tightened up around that time. The mass evasion of the new manufacture emissions rule by the freight railroads by doing extensive rebuilding is likely to lead to a more aggressive regulation on emissions in rebuilt locomotives; it's the sort of evasion which Congress tends to be unforgiving about. If the Genesis locomotives don't meet current Tier 2 standards, I'd say there's very high odds they'll be forced to do so around 2022.

I really think it would be better to get some Chargers, which seem to be very good.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Diesel is the best internal combustion engine there is. The NOx debacle is a read herring perpetuated by big oil.


----------



## twropr

I heard that only one Charger is operating in Hiawatha Service and two are testing as trailing units CHI-St. Louis.

Anyone know what the issues are?

Andy


----------



## PerRock

Last I heard it was getting the PTC systems set up. They were delivered without PTC (I believe part of the agreement) so Amtrak has to set them up.

peter


----------



## Agent

Chargers have started to lead on the _Capitol Corridor_ albeit with another engine behind them. Here's a video by Sky Rider from this past Thursday of CDTX 2106 leading train #527.


----------



## west point

Very wise that the Chargers are being backed up by P-42s. Any problems might show up before the P-42s are assigned elsewhere. Who decided this scenario is to be commended. Could be state or Amtrak ? The Chargers are also being proven their capability to work with both older locos and with the cab cars probably some trips operate with both locos on line ? Once a Charger is fully broken in the broken in it may be dispatched along with a new one to verify a new one is not going to have a unexpected problem.

Hopefully enough P-42s will be released by winter to make more locos available for the expected winter problems.


----------



## jis

This is standard practice when new equipment is introduced. nothing new.


----------



## jis

Had my first run on a train pulled by an SC-44 today (Carl Sandberg #381(4) Nov 4, 2017). My first impression is that the engine loads rapidly and acceleration is swift. It was quite an enjoyable ride CHI - GBB.

OTOH, the SC-44 on 380(4) Illinois Zephyr failed this morning. When we met it, it was being led by a CP freight unit hooked on ahead of the SC-44 which was apparently only delivering HEP to the train. It is possible that it was providing traction too and the issue was failure of some mandatory other equipment couldn’t tell for sure.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Agent

A Charger led a train to Carbondale, Illinois for the first time on Thursday. Here's IDTX 4614 leading Amtrak #392 at Centralia by TrainManBrodie.


----------



## PRR 60

jis said:


> Had my first run on a train pulled by an SC-44 today (Carl Sandberg #381(4) Nov 4, 2017). My first impression is that the engine loads rapidly and acceleration is swift. It was quite an enjoyable ride CHI - GBB.
> 
> OTOH, the SC-44 on 380(4) Illinois Zephyr failed this morning. When we met it, it was being led by a CP freight unit hooked on ahead of the SC-44 which was apparently only delivering HEP to the train. It is possible that it was providing traction too and the issue was failure of some mandatory other equipment couldn’t tell for sure.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


From another site's info (Trainorders), the problem was reportedly a malfunctioning horn. In the grand scheme of things, not a big deal.


----------



## Steve4031

Great video. I’ll probably get my first charger run going chi-Stl day after thanksgiving on 301.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

jis said:


> Had my first run on a train pulled by an SC-44 today (Carl Sandberg #381(4) Nov 4, 2017). My first impression is that the engine loads rapidly and acceleration is swift. It was quite an enjoyable ride CHI - GBB.
> 
> OTOH, the SC-44 on 380(4) Illinois Zephyr failed this morning. When we met it, it was being led by a CP freight unit hooked on ahead of the SC-44 which was apparently only delivering HEP to the train. It is possible that it was providing traction too and the issue was failure of some mandatory other equipment couldn’t tell for sure.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


For a 5-, 6-, or more car train, how fast do you supposed the SC-44's accelerated? Like, oh say, to 70 or 79 MPH?


----------



## jis

Didn’t measure but it felt almost like an ACS-64 at least the initial acceleration. Talked to someone from Amtrak about it and he speculated that full deployment will enable them to reduce some running times in the time table, which I though is good news.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## DSS&A

Press Release of Chargers on the Capitol Corridor trains:

https://www.capitolcorridor.org/blogs/get_on_board/make-way-chargers-coming/


----------



## Agent

Yesterday, MobileRailSpotterRxR posted a video of IDTX 4632, 4633, and 4602 getting pulled through Sacramento after leaving the Siemens factory.


----------



## DSS&A

Amtrak and Illinois Dept. of Transportation had an unveiling of the Charger locomotives at in the yard at West Quincy, MO. using the Carl Sandburg train equipment.

http://www.whig.com/20171114/amtrak-touts-new-locomotives-for-local-passengers#//


----------



## railiner

DSS&A said:


> Amtrak and Illinois Dept. of Transportation had an unveiling of the Charger locomotives at in the yard at West Quincy, MO. using the Carl Sandburg train equipment.
> 
> http://www.whig.com/20171114/amtrak-touts-new-locomotives-for-local-passengers#//


I find the IDOT rep's comment that "better" acceleration and deceleration will provide a "smoother ride" interesting...unless he is referring to "jerkiness", I don't see how faster acceleration and deceleration can possibly yield a smoother ride, (especially if one happens to be standing)....its probably all just 'hype' talk....






I've got to wonder how the "ghosts of LaGrange" feel about this interloper passing thru their 'domain'?





Probably no worse than when the Genesis loco's bumped the F40's....


----------



## Agent

It looked like there was a Charger on Amtrak #6(16).


----------



## PaulM

DSS&A said:


> Amtrak and Illinois Dept. of Transportation had an unveiling of the Charger locomotives at in the yard at West Quincy, MO. using the Carl Sandburg train equipment.
> 
> http://www.whig.com/20171114/amtrak-touts-new-locomotives-for-local-passengers#//


Overall, not a bad article - for the Whig.

It touted positive train control without mentioning the engine is only half, maybe less, of the equation.

It neglected to the mention the most important feature, the freeing up of engines for LD service, hopefully reducing the dead in the water episodes.


----------



## Thirdrail7

PaulM said:


> It neglected to the mention the most important feature, the freeing up of engines for LD service, hopefully reducing the dead in the water episodes.



I'm not sure IDOT cares about freeing up engines for LD service.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

No, but its all IDiOTs ever think about.


----------



## seat38a

Green Maned Lion said:


> No, but its all IDiOTs ever think about.


----------



## Thirdrail7

I believe the WS Chargers will make their revenue debut this week.


----------



## tim49424

Agent said:


> A Charger led a train to Carbondale, Illinois for the first time on Thursday. Here's IDTX 4614 leading Amtrak #392 at Centralia by TrainManBrodie.


I just saw one leading #372 into Holland, MI, an extra train for Thanksgiving. It’ll be trailing back to Chicago on #373.

Sent from my iPad using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Thirdrail7

There's a charger pulling a Hiawatha with a dome car. Does anyone have any pictures?


----------



## tim49424

tim49424 said:


> A Charger led a train to Carbondale, Illinois for the first time on Thursday. Here's IDTX 4614 leading Amtrak #392 at Centralia by TrainManBrodie.


I’m beginning to think it’s now part of the regular equipment on the Pere Marquette....I saw it again tonight on #370, the regular running of the route!

Sent from my iPad using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Acela150

The fact the Chargers have strobe lights and the Sprinters don't is poppycock.


----------



## AKA

Green Maned Lion said:


> No, but its all IDiOTs ever think about.


Good one,


----------



## Agent

A photo on Facebook shows Amtrak #393 at Carbondale, Illinois with CN 8890 leading "due to a problem with the SC-44."


----------



## jis

Please don’t tell me it was a broken horn again [emoji57]

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Thirdrail7

jis said:


> Please don’t tell me it was a broken horn again [emoji57]
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


Definitely not!



At any rate, as Acela 150 stated: they have strobes. Therefore, they are cool...even when towed!


----------



## tim49424

Train #372, Holland, Michigan, November 26, 2017, 2:11 PM

Sent from my iPad using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Fan Railer

First two MARC Chargers en-route to East Coast.


----------



## Acela150

Fan Railer said:


> First two MARC Chargers en-route to East Coast.


Three. Along with a Septic sprinter.


----------



## daybeers

Fan Railer said:


> First two MARC Chargers en-route to East Coast.


Yay!


----------



## Agent

From a post on Trainorders about this special train:



> The special move is to run as the SFLES 01 on the UP. Routing shows to be Florin - Roseville - Sparks - Elko - Salt Lake City - Grand Junction - Denver - Salina - Kansas City - E St Louis.


----------



## PaulM

Recently, when I left Santa Fe to catch the east bound Chief 30 minutes away at Lamy, train status said that it had arrived in Albuquerque, the preceding station, 47 minutes early, and that it was expected in Lamy on time.

Turns out it departed 34 minutes late from ABQ, for a total dwell time of 1:02. The cause apparently was picking up two Chargers. Now I understand why it would take over an hour




to attach the engines; but why ABQ and not La Junta. I assume they were coming from testing at Pueblo, which is much closer to La Junta. What does ABQ have that La Junta doesn't?


----------



## west point

Carmen for brake check ?


----------



## Thirdrail7

PaulM said:


> Turns out it departed 34 minutes late from ABQ, for a total dwell time of 1:02. The cause apparently was picking up two Chargers. Now I understand why it would take over an hour
> 
> 
> 
> to attach the engines; but why ABQ and not La Junta. I assume they were coming from testing at Pueblo, which is much closer to La Junta. *What does ABQ have that La Junta doesn't?*


Mechanical forces, fuel, storage, a crew base, 18 more minutes in dwell time than LAJ......


----------



## frequentflyer

PaulM said:


> Recently, when I left Santa Fe to catch the east bound Chief 30 minutes away at Lamy, train status said that it had arrived in Albuquerque, the preceding station, 47 minutes early, and that it was expected in Lamy on time.
> 
> *Turns out it departed 34 minutes late from ABQ, for a total dwell time of 1:02. The cause apparently was picking up two Chargers. Now I understand why it would take over an hour
> 
> 
> 
> to attach the engines*; but why ABQ and not La Junta. I assume they were coming from testing at Pueblo, which is much closer to La Junta. What does ABQ have that La Junta doesn't?


I don't, somebody please clue me in why it takes an hour to attach two locomotives


----------



## Ryan

They did more than just attach the engines while stopped.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

frequentflyer said:


> PaulM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Recently, when I left Santa Fe to catch the east bound Chief 30 minutes away at Lamy, train status said that it had arrived in Albuquerque, the preceding station, 47 minutes early, and that it was expected in Lamy on time.
> 
> *Turns out it departed 34 minutes late from ABQ, for a total dwell time of 1:02. The cause apparently was picking up two Chargers. Now I understand why it would take over an hour
> 
> 
> 
> to attach the engines*; but why ABQ and not La Junta. I assume they were coming from testing at Pueblo, which is much closer to La Junta. What does ABQ have that La Junta doesn't?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't, somebody please clue me in why it takes an hour to attach two locomotives
Click to expand...

They allow 28 mins - per the schedule - for servicing the train.It takes time to couple cars/engines. Get the engines onto the same track as the train - that can take time based on where the engines were stored in relation to the track where the SWC is stopped. Then there’s the careful coupling, connecting the cables, testing the brakes/air hoses, etc.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Dutchrailnut

plus all steps to take for blue light protection.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Dutchrailnut said:


> plus all steps to take for blue light protection.


Yep. I knew I didn’t include everything and was thinking about the safety aspects too.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Thirdrail7

There is another thing that was left out. These engines that are being picked up aren't just "being attached." They are dead in tow engines that aren't being used. As such, they must be buried in the engine consist which typically involves separating the inbound power from the train, using them to retrieve the dead units, making them up (mu'ing them), then coupling back to the train.

Once that is completed, THEN you can perform your calendar inspection on the ENTIRE train.


----------



## PaulM

Hey! I said i understood the engine change time; but what about ABQ vs. LAJ?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

it was answered one has mechanical dept, other has not


----------



## AmtrakBlue

frequentflyer said:


> I don't, somebody please clue me in why it takes an hour to attach two locomotives


Paul, we were responding to this post, not yours.


----------



## Thirdrail7

PaulM said:


> Hey! I said i understood the engine change time; but what about ABQ vs. LAJ?


To repeat:



Thirdrail7 said:


> PaulM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Turns out it departed 34 minutes late from ABQ, for a total dwell time of 1:02. The cause apparently was picking up two Chargers. Now I understand why it would take over an hour
> 
> 
> 
> to attach the engines; but why ABQ and not La Junta. I assume they were coming from testing at Pueblo, which is much closer to La Junta. *What does ABQ have that La Junta doesn't?*
> 
> 
> 
> Mechanical forces, fuel, storage, a crew base, 18 more minutes in dwell time than LAJ......
Click to expand...


----------



## daybeers

New video showing the UP SFLES 01 on its way to Kansas City with three MARC Chargers and a SEPTA ACS-64:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJK6lCfmJIQ

Also, can anyone tell me how to embed videos on here? I tried searching the help page here and on google using site:discuss.amtraktrains.com, but found nothing helpful. Thanks!


----------



## Acela150

Videos normally embed themselves.


----------



## Northwest Railfan

Two of the WSDOT units, 1400 and 1404, are out of service after incidents this week. 1404 hit a car, and 1400 was damaged by a trespasser in the Amtrak Seattle coach yard.


----------



## Scuba_Steve

Northwest Railfan said:


> Two of the WSDOT units, 1400 and 1404, are out of service after incidents this week. 1404 hit a car, and 1400 was damaged by a trespasser in the Amtrak Seattle coach yard.


I heard the trespasser tried to (or did) set a fire to 1400. Anyone have more info?

And does anyone know the extent of damage to the two units?


----------



## twropr

MARC 80-81-82 were delivered to the commuter rr at Riverside Yd (Baltimore) on the 9th. Plans are to test them first on the Brunswick and Camden lines.

Let us know if you see any of these Chargers on a test run.

Andy


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

WSDOT #1402 was wrecked this morning when it derailed while hauling Amtrak Cascades #501 on an inaugural run on the new Cascades route. Sadly, 9 passengers were killed and 77 passengers and car motorists sustained injuries. It seems like it's irreparable, but at least the design of it saved the engineer's life, thanks to Siemens!

My thoughts and prayers go to those affected by the accident, as well as the friends and families of those that were killed.


----------



## west point

Appears that Charger went straight off the rails. Maybe a broken wheel flange on the high side ( right side ) of loco ?


----------



## CCC1007

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> WSDOT #1402 was wrecked this morning when it derailed while hauling Amtrak Cascades #501 on an inaugural run on the new Cascades route. Sadly, 9 passengers were killed and 77 passengers and car motorists sustained injuries. It seems like it's irreparable, but at least the design of it saved the engineer's life, thanks to Siemens!
> 
> My thoughts and prayers go to those affected by the accident, as well as the friends and families of those that were killed.


What indications do you see that indicate to you that it is totaled?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## A Voice

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> WSDOT #1402 was wrecked this morning when it derailed while hauling Amtrak Cascades #501 on an inaugural run on the new Cascades route. Sadly, 9 passengers were killed and 77 passengers and car motorists sustained injuries. It seems like it's irreparable, but at least the design of it saved the engineer's life, thanks to Siemens!


Are you suggesting the SC-44 fared better than an EMD or General Electric unit - such as the trailing P-42 - would have? How do you know this?


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

A Voice said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WSDOT #1402 was wrecked this morning when it derailed while hauling Amtrak Cascades #501 on an inaugural run on the new Cascades route. Sadly, 9 passengers were killed and 77 passengers and car motorists sustained injuries. It seems like it's irreparable, but at least the design of it saved the engineer's life, thanks to Siemens!
> 
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting the SC-44 fared better than an EMD or General Electric unit - such as the trailing P-42 - would have? How do you know this?
Click to expand...

Fared better... what exactly do you mean?


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

CCC1007 said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WSDOT #1402 was wrecked this morning when it derailed while hauling Amtrak Cascades #501 on an inaugural run on the new Cascades route. Sadly, 9 passengers were killed and 77 passengers and car motorists sustained injuries. It seems like it's irreparable, but at least the design of it saved the engineer's life, thanks to Siemens!
> 
> My thoughts and prayers go to those affected by the accident, as well as the friends and families of those that were killed.
> 
> 
> 
> What indications do you see that indicate to you that it is totaled?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Click to expand...

I didn't indicate that it was irreparable. I just said it SEEMS irreparable.


----------



## djexel

CCC1007 said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WSDOT #1402 was wrecked this morning when it derailed while hauling Amtrak Cascades #501 on an inaugural run on the new Cascades route. Sadly, 9 passengers were killed and 77 passengers and car motorists sustained injuries. It seems like it's irreparable, but at least the design of it saved the engineer's life, thanks to Siemens!
> 
> My thoughts and prayers go to those affected by the accident, as well as the friends and families of those that were killed.
> 
> 
> 
> What indications do you see that indicate to you that it is totaled?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Click to expand...

When looking at this why would you think it’s salvageable? Just curious.




Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## CCC1007

djexel said:


> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WSDOT #1402 was wrecked this morning when it derailed while hauling Amtrak Cascades #501 on an inaugural run on the new Cascades route. Sadly, 9 passengers were killed and 77 passengers and car motorists sustained injuries. It seems like it's irreparable, but at least the design of it saved the engineer's life, thanks to Siemens!
> 
> My thoughts and prayers go to those affected by the accident, as well as the friends and families of those that were killed.
> 
> 
> 
> What indications do you see that indicate to you that it is totaled?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When looking at this why would you think it’s salvageable? Just curious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMG_5104.jpg
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Click to expand...

I would say it held up admirably well for a locomotive that visited a highway almost 20 feet lower than the track it was planned to be on. The mechanics will have to do a thorough inspection and replace what they can, and if not then pull all components that can be used again and scrap the rest.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## AmtrakBlue

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> WSDOT #1402 was wrecked this morning when it derailed while hauling Amtrak Cascades #501 on an inaugural run on the new Cascades route. Sadly, 9 passengers were killed and 77 passengers and car motorists sustained injuries. It seems like it's irreparable, but at least the design of it saved the engineer's life, thanks to Siemens!
> 
> My thoughts and prayers go to those affected by the accident, as well as the friends and families of those that were killed.


Where are you hearing 9 were killed. Initial reports said 6 but thats been downgraded to 3.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Ryan

If only there were a thread where we could discuss the derailment....


----------



## jebr

Ryan said:


> If only there were a thread where we could discuss the derailment....


Agreed. All discussion of the derailment needs to go that-a-way.

Let's keep this thread about the Charger locomotives more generally.


----------



## Fan Railer

MARC testing their Siemens Chargers:


----------



## Ryan

There's a thread for that.....

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/72141-marc-charger-testing-week-of-15-jan/


----------



## CraigDK

A power-point presentation from last weeks NCEG meeting on the Chargers.

I found it interesting that the remaining 186 options are available up to 2021.


----------



## jis

What I found interesting, in addition to the mix of semi permanent coupled pairs and regular coupling cars in the Midwest configurations, is the multiple mention of PRIIA compliant cars. Considering that the PRIIA specs had to be changed to comply with what these cars happened to be, that was an interesting twist.


----------



## PRR 60

jis said:


> What I found interesting, in addition to the mix of semi permanent coupled pairs and regular coupling cars in the Midwest configurations, is the multiple mention of PRIIA compliant cars. Considering that the PRIIA specs had to be changed to comply with what these cars happened to be, that was an interesting twist.


I thought that was hilarious.


----------



## George K

Perhaps slightly off-topic.

I live in the western suburbs of Chicago, along the BNSF "raceway." I've seen a lot of the Siemens locomotives blow through my town in the last months, and they look nice.

A couple of observations:

1) They seem quieter than the P42s that used to run the route.

2) The horn sounds distinctly different from what I've heard in the past. I've been told the horn is the same K5LA as on other locomotives, but it just sounds different to me. Am I wrong?


----------



## frequentflyer

I read somewhere that California is sending the Charger to operate from LA-SD. So does that mean the Pacific Coast liners is getting rebranded to a single California rail entity?


----------



## Acela150

George K said:


> Perhaps slightly off-topic.
> 
> I live in the western suburbs of Chicago, along the BNSF "raceway." I've seen a lot of the Siemens locomotives blow through my town in the last months, and they look nice.
> 
> A couple of observations:
> 
> 1) They seem quieter than the P42s that used to run the route.
> 
> 2) The horn sounds distinctly different from what I've heard in the past. I've been told the horn is the same K5LA as on other locomotives, but it just sounds different to me. Am I wrong?


They are quieter now. Diesels have come a long ways in that way.

It is indeed a K5LA. It is a different generation though. Which explains the sound difference.


----------



## Agent

YouTube user Sky Rider caught the newly-released CDTX 2107 and 2108 getting moved to Oakland today.


----------



## Thirdrail7

There are still quite a few that are making their way from Pueblo. You should be able to catch some of them soon.


----------



## sitzplatz17

Not 100% Amtrak related but I didn’t see a thread for the MARC chargers. Spotted one of them hanging out at WAS a couple minutes ago.(apologies for the bad photo quality)

Any idea when these will be in revenue service? Perhaps they already are?


----------



## Ryan

They have been for a few weeks. There was a thread in the commuter rail section.


----------



## DSS&A

California's Altamont Corridor Express is buying four Chargers along with an option to purchase four additional locomotives in the future.

https://www.progressiverailroading.com/supplier_spotlight/news/Rail-supplier-news-from-Siemens-TRAC-WSP-ENSCO-and-Trackmobile-April-27--54531


----------



## Blackwolf

Looks like the Charger is the new standard for North American passenger locomotives.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

With no real effort made by American builders are you surprised ??

EMD has been lacking customer support on its F 125 , in about same poor way they supported the LIRR DE/DM series.


----------



## Ryan

I didn’t realize that the people building the Chargers in California weren’t American.


----------



## jis

Vastly larger number of EMD locomotives are now manufactured outside the US and indeed outside North America, either under license or in joint ventures involving EMD.

For example the diesel passenger workhorse of Indian Railways (WDP-4 and derivatives) is manufactured in India under license, together with a series of derivative designs. 100s of them are built each year. In addition EMD also has a joint venture factory for manufacturing a different class of freight locomotives.


----------



## Agent

Yesterday, YouTube user Sky Rider filmed P42s AMTK 3 and 130 pulling the newly-released Chargers CDTX 2109 and 2110.


----------



## Pere Flyer

Agent said:


> Yesterday, YouTube user Sky Rider filmed P42s AMTK 3 and 130 pulling the newly-released Chargers CDTX 2109 and 2110.


What type of livery do those Chargers have?


----------



## Blackwolf

Pere Flyer said:


> Yesterday, YouTube user Sky Rider filmed P42s AMTK 3 and 130 pulling the newly-released Chargers CDTX 2109 and 2110.


CalTrans. (AKA California State trains.)


----------



## Pere Flyer

Blackwolf said:


> Pere Flyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday, YouTube user Sky Rider filmed P42s AMTK 3 and 130 pulling the newly-released Chargers CDTX 2109 and 2110.
> 
> 
> 
> What type of livery do those Chargers have?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> CalTrans. (AKA California State trains.)
Click to expand...

Thanks. The sides are sparsely painted compared to other Charger units.


----------



## railiner

Perhaps they will have decals added later?


----------



## jis

railiner said:


> Perhaps they will have decals added later?


May even be easy to apply/remove route specific ones - Surfliner, Capitol and San Joaquin.


----------



## TiBike

Maybe not for long




:

https://yescalifornia.org/



Ryan said:


> I didn’t realize that the people building the Chargers in California weren’t American.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Ryan said:


> I didn’t realize that the people building the Chargers in California weren’t American.


yes American workers working for a German builder.


----------



## jis

Dutchrailnut said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t realize that the people building the Chargers in California weren’t American.
> 
> 
> 
> yes American workers working for a German builder.
Click to expand...

Actually an American subsidiary of a German company, if one wants to pick nits



All those that are employed however, are American.

Even the American loco builders don't do as well in America anymore as they do outside America. And unbeknownst to the relatively insular American, American loco builders actually build and sell hundreds of passenger diesels either in subsidiaries or via license to partners all over the world. It is just that American don't run enough passenger trains to make it worth their while to deal with the complexities of the American environment anymore. The greater profits are elsewhere.

This incidentally, has been true for quite a while. Alco engines have lived on for decades though offshore manufacture and deployment literally in many hundred if not thousand way after Alco and MLW ceased to do anything in America.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Dutchrailnut said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t realize that the people building the Chargers in California weren’t American.
> 
> 
> 
> yes American workers working for a German builder.
Click to expand...

And how many Germans work for American companies in Germany?


----------



## jrud

Dutchrailnut said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t realize that the people building the Chargers in California weren’t American.
> 
> 
> 
> yes American workers working for a German builder.
Click to expand...

As a note. I read that a large percentage of the people working for Stadler in Utah had been brought in from Poland. Another Stadler plant is in Poland. Reading about the Siemens plant in California it appears to be mostly local workers. Maybe Stadler will change over Time.


----------



## jis

Stadler though is a Swiss company.


----------



## railiner

When foreign owned companies first set up production in the States, they will bring top management, as well as some middle and lower supervisor's over as well, to get the plant started, train American worker's in the Company culture etc., and over time, let American's grow into the higher ranks. This way they can insure quality control is up to their standards...

That is how the car manufacturer's did this. Sometimes, they also have to bring over skilled laborer's in some position's, due to a shortage of those skills over here....


----------



## PVD

My niece went to work for a German company, that decided to take a different course. They recruited heavily in the US for supervisory and most management positions and shipped them over to Europe for training after 3 months of company paid German language training in Arlington, VA. Germany had issues with the large numbers of highly compensated foreign workers (yes it was meant for then to train to come back here, I get it, but the German Gov't didn't). They ended up doing 6 months at company operations in Ireland and England where obviously the German language school was not something they needed.. This is a retail giant, not manufacturing, a bit different.


----------



## cirdan

jis said:


> Vastly larger number of EMD locomotives are now manufactured outside the US and indeed outside North America, either under license or in joint ventures involving EMD.
> 
> For example the diesel passenger workhorse of Indian Railways (WDP-4 and derivatives) is manufactured in India under license, together with a series of derivative designs. 100s of them are built each year. In addition EMD also has a joint venture factory for manufacturing a different class of freight locomotives.


In these days of globalization and global supply chains, there are doubtlessly myriad parts and components in those locomotives from other countries, or themselves made under license from manufacturers in other countries. For example the Indians have made a lot of progress in things like turbochargers and generators over this last decade or so and the US versions of those locomotives may well include parts made under license or with at least royalties baing payed to Indian companies. So when these designs are in turn licensed to Indian manufacturers, there are complex two-way payments of licenses going on-.


----------



## seat38a

Saw two Chargers parked at the Amtrak Depot Los Angeles. I'm guessing these are 2 of 14 that were ordered for the Surfliners.


----------



## frequentflyer

seat38a said:


> Saw two Chargers parked at the Amtrak Depot Los Angeles. I'm guessing these are 2 of 14 that were ordered for the Surfliners.


Thanks for the pic, I forgot the F59s are getting phased out too. Wonder if the "Surf" is getting a branding or livery change.


----------



## keelhauled

There was a picture I saw of a Charger with Surfliner lettering. As I recall it also had the Amtrak logo, which I thought was interesting. It had seemed like CADOT was branding their equipment as Caltrans and removing Antrak imagery.


----------



## seat38a

keelhauled said:


> There was a picture I saw of a Charger with Surfliner lettering. As I recall it also had the Amtrak logo, which I thought was interesting. It had seemed like CADOT was branding their equipment as Caltrans and removing Antrak imagery.


The State owned EMD engines have always had Caltrans branding on them. None of the SoCal engines are State owned. The State Owned engines are primarily based in NorCal which is where you will see them the most.


----------



## keelhauled

Here we are. The original poster of this image said "courtesy Siemens," so I assume it's a publicity photo.


----------



## cpotisch

keelhauled said:


> Here we are. The original poster of this image said "courtesy Siemens," so I assume it's a publicity photo.


Yay! Finally! I've always had a soft spot for the F59PHIs, but that is a worthy replacement.


----------



## sitzplatz17

keelhauled said:


> Here we are. The original poster of this image said "courtesy Siemens," so I assume it's a publicity photo.


So far this would be my favorite Charger livery. None of them have been great, but I'm looking forward to seeing these locos paired with the rest of the Surfliner equipment.


----------



## cpotisch

I gotta say, I get the point of the spoiler, but it is ugly as hell.


----------



## bcanedy

cpotisch said:


> I gotta say, I get the point of the spoiler, but it is ugly as hell.


My friends and I had a similar conversation last week that any locomotive looks a little funky when not attached to its train.


----------



## seat38a

Hmmmm I'm wondering if those two CalTrans Chargers that I saw were brought down to SoCal for testing and training for the eventual arrival of the Surfliner painted engines. The NorCal trains don't have any real separate brand identity other than the the names San Joaquins/Capitol Corridor but the SoCal train does.


----------



## DSS&A

Charger at 70mph leading a Hiawatha leaving Chicago (photo taken from my 70mph commuter train).


----------



## Pere Flyer

Man, I cannot get enough of that “Amtrak Midwest” livery. Looks sleek and classy and makes me proud to be a Midwesterner.


----------



## cpotisch

Pere Flyer said:


> Man, I cannot get enough of that “Amtrak Midwest” livery. Looks sleek and classy and makes me proud to be a Midwesterner.


I like the livery, but I don't love the Charger itself. My main quips are the (seemingly) tiny windows, and the fact that the front suddenly drops away and recedes a bit. If it didn't look like the front end had gone through a mandoline, I'd be all for it.


----------



## Agent

Video by MichaelLovesTrains from June 8 of three Chargers on a test run to San Diego. Test train clips begin at 3:00.


----------



## jis

My favorite Charger livery ...


----------



## cpotisch

jis said:


> My favorite Charger livery ...


I'm personally not too in love with the Brightline _livery _(though it's grown on me a bit), but I absolutely love the shape of the SCB-40. Sleek and simple - it reminds me of the Thalys and Eurostar locomotives.


----------



## frequentflyer

cpotisch said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> My favorite Charger livery ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm personally not too in love with the Brightline _livery _(though it's grown on me a bit), but I absolutely love the shape of the SCB-40. Sleek and simple - it reminds me of the Thalys and Eurostar locomotives.
Click to expand...

Would look lovely in Phase 3 livery. Its a shame that nose wouldn't make it a month out on Amtrak's system.


----------



## cpotisch

frequentflyer said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> My favorite Charger livery ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm personally not too in love with the Brightline _livery _(though it's grown on me a bit), but I absolutely love the shape of the SCB-40. Sleek and simple - it reminds me of the Thalys and Eurostar locomotives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Would look lovely in Phase 3 livery. Its a shame that nose wouldn't make it a month out on Amtrak's system.
Click to expand...

It's also about 400 horsepower less powerful than the SC-44, which wouldn't be ideal for hauling 10+ car bi-level trains.


----------



## jis

That 400HP derating specified by Brightline was to reduce cost of maintenance and extend engine life. It makes sense for them since they intend to use two units with 10 car single level trains.


----------



## west point

Brightline does need that extra HP on an essentially flat track. Wonder if the HP can be temporarily increased in case of one loco failing ?


----------



## keelhauled

Very much doubt that Cummins would let the customer have that kind of control over the ECU.


----------



## PerRock

It's just a aerodynamic bolt on nose. All someone would have to do is unbolt the existing "nose" and bolt on the Brightline one. There's a picture somewhere of one of the Brightline engines being built & it has the same front end as the Amtrak ones.

peter


----------



## frequentflyer

PerRock said:


> It's just a aerodynamic bolt on nose. All someone would have to do is unbolt the existing "nose" and bolt on the Brightline one. There's a picture somewhere of one of the Brightline engines being built & it has the same front end as the Amtrak ones.
> 
> peter


The Genesis had a bolt on nose too so that it could be changed quickly after grade accidents.


----------



## jis

west point said:


> Brightline does need that extra HP on an essentially flat track. Wonder if the HP can be temporarily increased in case of one loco failing ?


It is a short railroad. It would be no problem for a train to complete its trip only slightly behind schedule with a single engine and 400 extra hp won’t make that much of a difference.


----------



## cpotisch

west point said:


> Brightline does need that extra HP on an essentially flat track. Wonder if the HP can be temporarily increased in case of one loco failing ?


I feel like an extra 400 hp wouldn't make much difference, especially since it's only pulling 10 single level cars, on a 1 hour 15 minute (eventually 3 hour) route. It runs a little slower, gets to the end of the line, and has the engine fixed/replaced.

EDIT: Just saw *jis*'s post. I guess great minds think alike.


----------



## bcanedy

Does the connection between the Brightline Chargers and passenger cars use a conventional coupler or is it a drawbar making it more time consuming to disconnect?


----------



## jis

Their intention is to keep the consists together when they are out on the road, and make any changes, including loco substitution, only at maintenance facilities, except I guess when things like derailment or collision recovery is involved.


----------



## chrsjrcj

bcanedy said:


> Does the connection between the Brightline Chargers and passenger cars use a conventional coupler or is it a drawbar making it more time consuming to disconnect?


It's the same as between the passenger cars.

The only standard coupler is on the front of the loco, hidden behind the nosecone.


----------



## frequentflyer

chrsjrcj said:


> bcanedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does the connection between the Brightline Chargers and passenger cars use a conventional coupler or is it a drawbar making it more time consuming to disconnect?
> 
> 
> 
> It's the same as between the passenger cars.
> 
> The only standard coupler is on the front of the loco, hidden behind the nosecone.
Click to expand...

What proprietary couple does Siemens have and why? What are its advantages?


----------



## chrsjrcj

Brightline went with the semi-permanent sets, not Siemens.

Why Brightline did it? I don't know. But for what it's worth, their Chief Mechanical Officer (Tom Rutkowski) worked on the Acela at one point. That might have played a roll.

Aren't a couple of the new single level cars for California semi-permanently coupled too?


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

chrsjrcj said:


> Brightline went with the semi-permanent sets, not Siemens.
> 
> Why Brightline did it? I don't know. But for what it's worth, their Chief Mechanical Officer (Tom Rutkowski) worked on the Acela at one point. That might have played a roll.
> 
> Aren't a couple of the new single level cars for California semi-permanently coupled too?


I don't know the specifications of the California cars, but the Midwest ones are set up so that certain cars are permanently attached to each other.


----------



## chrsjrcj

Ok, maybe it was the Midwest cars. Could not remember off the top of my head.


----------



## Eric S

IIRC, (many? all? of) the Midwest cars are essentially married pairs, like many rapid transit cars, while the California cars are semi-permanently coupled (6 or 7 car?) trainsets.


----------



## chrsjrcj

Eric S said:


> IIRC, (many? all? of) the Midwest cars are essentially married pairs, like many rapid transit cars, while the California cars are semi-permanently coupled (6 or 7 car?) trainsets.


Right. I found the PowerPoint presentation http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/NGEC_annual%20meeting%202018_CALIDOT%20presentation.pptx that shows it.

So I guess both are getting semi-permanently coupled cars, in some capacity.


----------



## cirdan

jis said:


> Their intention is to keep the consists together when they are out on the road, and make any changes, including loco substitution, only at maintenance facilities, except I guess when things like derailment or collision recovery is involved.


How would that work in practice?

Would rescue / wrecking crews be instructed in how to unbolt the permanent couplers?

Or is there even some trick for an easy release?

Or would they just saw them through and let the workshop guys work out how to take it from there?

At one railroad museum where I volunteered a long long time ago, we were rescuing a steam loco from another museum who had dumped it outseide and basicalyl let it rot.

We had a contractor in to lift the engine with a crane or place it on a flatbed truck.

Unfortuantely, they were in a hurry, and rather than consult with the museum guys on how best to separate the tender, they just cut through the drawbar without asking, causing a lot of unnecessary damage.


----------



## jis

I suppose they will use the same or similar process to what is specified for Acela Is.

Acela IIs are going to be even more interesting since their articulation will be using shared trucks (Jacobs bogies) like the TGVs, but then the French have been running their TGV network for decades now without any problem, including dealing with the full speed (186mph) derailment of a TGV Reseau set near Picardie TGV station on the LGV Nord Europa.caused by the collapse of part of the track into an old unknown trench dating back to the First World War. It apparently turns out that taking a train apart in the filed is such an uncommon thing that the exceptions, which are few and far between, can be handled as needed.

In case of Brightline the entire railroad is adjacent to a road and it should not take more that an hour (or at most two) or so to get a mechanical guy to wherever needed on the line from one of the two maintenance sites anyway.


----------



## jrud

chrsjrcj said:


> Eric S said:
> 
> 
> 
> IIRC, (many? all? of) the Midwest cars are essentially married pairs, like many rapid transit cars, while the California cars are semi-permanently coupled (6 or 7 car?) trainsets.
> 
> 
> 
> Right. I found the PowerPoint presentation http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/NGEC_annual%20meeting%202018_CALIDOT%20presentation.pptx that shows it.
> 
> So I guess both are getting semi-permanently coupled cars, in some capacity.
Click to expand...

The seven car California trainsets do have standard couplers for attaching the locomotives. There are also standard couplers on the cab car end. At least this allows locomotives to be standard. 
Remembering videos of their cousins the Austrian Railjets, I think the Railjets also swap locomotives relatively easily.


----------



## Thirdrail7

cirdan said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Their intention is to keep the consists together when they are out on the road, and make any changes, including loco substitution, only at maintenance facilities, except I guess when things like derailment or collision recovery is involved.
> 
> 
> 
> How would that work in practice?
> 
> Would rescue / wrecking crews be instructed in how to unbolt the permanent couplers?
> 
> Or is there even some trick for an easy release?
> 
> Or would they just saw them through and let the workshop guys work out how to take it from there?
Click to expand...

All of the above except we've been known to couple through the nose if necessary.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

at any derailment you have railroad people present, not just contractors . so people with knowledge of equipment are there to instruct/advise.


----------



## jrud

Free access to the article will go away soon. But there is a Siemens drawing of a Caltrans Charger without the rear wedge coupled to the new single level cars. It is only a drawing but it looks plausible. http://railcolornews.com/2018/07/12/us-calidot-new-single-level-cars-from-siemens-for-caltrans-and-idot/


----------



## DSS&A

Surfliner Chargers to work side-by-side with Chargers on Coaster trains. Five Chargers have been purchased for Coaster commuter train service along with an option for a few more.

https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/locomotives/san-diego-siemens-chargers/


----------



## NSC1109

DSS&A said:


> Surfliner Chargers to work side-by-side with Chargers on Coaster trains. Five Chargers have been purchased for Coaster commuter train service along with an option for a few more.
> 
> https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/locomotives/san-diego-siemens-chargers/


Slick looking locomotive. Didn’t know they were a part of the CalTrans and IDOT order.


----------



## DSS&A

The Locomotive purchase contract that has Illinois Department of Transportation as the lead agency included an initial purchase for IDOT, Caltran, Missouri, Michigan, Washington and Wisconsin for corridor intercity trains. The contract also had options for about 70 additional locomotives. MARC and now the agency operating Coaster trains have been allowed to purchase some of the option locomotives.


----------



## cpotisch

DSS&A said:


> Surfliner Chargers to work side-by-side with Chargers on Coaster trains. Five Chargers have been purchased for Coaster commuter train service along with an option for a few more.
> 
> https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/locomotives/san-diego-siemens-chargers/


Wait, so Amtrak and Coaster are effectively cross honoring locomotives?


----------



## bcanedy

There are some rules for bidding on government contracts that allows government agencies to piggyback on other orders to get a more competitive price. Since there are currently unused options on the Siemens contract, other agencies like North County Transit District that operate Coaster can use those options instead of going out to bid on their own.


----------



## PVD

When that contract was done, they included options for both (75) commuter/corridor and (150) long distance versions...There has always been speculation about Amtrak and the LD options.


----------



## NSC1109

PVD said:


> When that contract was done, they included options for both (75) commuter/corridor and (150) long distance versions...There has always been speculation about Amtrak and the LD options.


I’m willing to bet it’s more than speculation at this point. Amtrak’s new locomotive RFP is closed and they’ve expressed a desire to issue the contract soon. That being said, Siemens is the only company with an active production line that’s actually turning out a good product. Yes, the F125 is also available, but look at the sales. Absolutely dismal. GE just sold their transportation division to Wabtec, and the HSP46 or whatever it’s called is reportedly a nightmare mechanically.


----------



## cpotisch

NSC1109 said:


> and the HSP46 or whatever it’s called is reportedly a nightmare mechanically.


And also incredibly ugly!


----------



## keelhauled

The HSP46 doesn't meet Tier 4 standards. Assuming MPI responds to the RFP they would probably offer the MP54, which is currently in production for GO Transit.


----------



## PVD

HSP 46 is not rated to 125 mph, and it has too small a max HEP output as well as not meeting t-4. The 54 is interesting, because it has twin engines, but it would also need a speed rating upgrade, as well as a slightly larger HEP capacity. It may also be too tall in its current form to meet Amtrak requirements.


----------



## Acela150

NSC1109 said:


> DSS&A said:
> 
> 
> 
> Surfliner Chargers to work side-by-side with Chargers on Coaster trains. Five Chargers have been purchased for Coaster commuter train service along with an option for a few more.
> 
> https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/locomotives/san-diego-siemens-chargers/
> 
> 
> 
> Slick looking locomotive. Didn’t know they were a part of the CalTrans and IDOT order.
Click to expand...

Really? Where have you been? Under a rock?


----------



## cpotisch

NSC1109 said:


> Slick looking locomotive. Didn’t know they were a part of the CalTrans and IDOT order.


The Chargers have been a pretty crucial part of CalTrans plan to modernize equipment pretty much from its inception. The F59PHIs and of course the P42s are all approaching the end of their service life and the Chargers are going to replace them.


----------



## Acela150

Marc has been adding Marc logos on the nose of their chargers slowly. It looks way better then when they arrived.

http://railpictures.net/photo/663978/

Photo Credit to my good friend Matt Donnelly.


----------



## cpotisch

Acela150 said:


> Marc has been adding Marc logos on the nose of their chargers slowly. It looks way better then when they arrived.
> 
> http://railpictures.net/photo/663978/
> 
> Photo Credit to my good friend Matt Donnelly.


Oh wow. Way better. Looking at some "before and after" pics now, the Chargers looked pretty weird initially. Surprising how big a difference a little thing like that can make.


----------



## NSC1109

Acela150 said:


> NSC1109 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DSS&A said:
> 
> 
> 
> Surfliner Chargers to work side-by-side with Chargers on Coaster trains. Five Chargers have been purchased for Coaster commuter train service along with an option for a few more.
> 
> https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/locomotives/san-diego-siemens-chargers/
> 
> 
> 
> Slick looking locomotive. Didn’t know they were a part of the CalTrans and IDOT order.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really? Where have you been? Under a rock?
Click to expand...

I knew about the engine, I didn’t know that Coaster had taken up some of the options for their own operations.


----------



## Acela150

cpotisch said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Marc has been adding Marc logos on the nose of their chargers slowly. It looks way better then when they arrived.
> 
> http://railpictures.net/photo/663978/
> 
> Photo Credit to my good friend Matt Donnelly.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wow. Way better. Looking at some "before and after" pics now, the Chargers looked pretty weird initially. Surprising how big a difference a little thing like that can make.
Click to expand...

It was definitely odd to say the least. But the one thing that’s for sure was it needed something. And the Marc logo is perfect for it.


----------



## Acela150

NSC1109 said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NSC1109 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DSS&A said:
> 
> 
> 
> Surfliner Chargers to work side-by-side with Chargers on Coaster trains. Five Chargers have been purchased for Coaster commuter train service along with an option for a few more.
> 
> https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/locomotives/san-diego-siemens-chargers/
> 
> 
> 
> Slick looking locomotive. Didn’t know they were a part of the CalTrans and IDOT order.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really? Where have you been? Under a rock?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I knew about the engine, I didn’t know that Coaster had taken up some of the options for their own operations.
Click to expand...

They just recently placed the order. That’s all. A few commuter agencies are doing the same.


----------



## railiner

keelhauled said:


> The HSP46 doesn't meet Tier 4 standards. Assuming MPI responds to the RFP they would probably offer the MP54, which is currently in production for GO Transit.


Did you say, "MP54"?

To me, THIS is an MP54....





https://www.google.com/search?q=prr+mp54&rlz=1C1CHZL_enUS739US739&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=p1eAcEBbasQMuM%253A%252C3Ul3x2RXM138hM%252C_&usg=__qRPPcNdyFT4tsYMqVH6yuijzSdQ%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjI6Jfmr6HcAhXvct8KHa0UDTMQ9QEIQDAC#imgrc=p1eAcEBbasQMuM:


----------



## cpotisch

railiner said:


> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> 
> The HSP46 doesn't meet Tier 4 standards. Assuming MPI responds to the RFP they would probably offer the MP54, which is currently in production for GO Transit.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you say, "MP54"?
> 
> To me, this is an MP-54....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.google.com/search?q=prr+mp54&rlz=1C1CHZL_enUS739US739&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=p1eAcEBbasQMuM%253A%252C3Ul3x2RXM138hM%252C_&usg=__qRPPcNdyFT4tsYMqVH6yuijzSdQ%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjI6Jfmr6HcAhXvct8KHa0UDTMQ9QEIQDAC#imgrc=p1eAcEBbasQMuM:
Click to expand...

This is actually an MP54:


----------



## railiner

No, that's an "MP-54"...I corrected my post to read "MP54"....


----------



## jrud

Acela150 said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Marc has been adding Marc logos on the nose of their chargers slowly. It looks way better then when they arrived.
> 
> http://railpictures.net/photo/663978/
> 
> Photo Credit to my good friend Matt Donnelly.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wow. Way better. Looking at some "before and after" pics now, the Chargers looked pretty weird initially. Surprising how big a difference a little thing like that can make.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was definitely odd to say the least. But the one thing that’s for sure was it needed something. And the Marc logo is perfect for it.
Click to expand...

IMHO - The MARC Chargers look just fine IRL. The silver really pops. When coupled to an MP36, they do look smaller. However, they also look more modern. MARC has said that they are reliable and will share the higher speed duties with refurbished HHP-8s north of Baltimore. The logo is a nice addition, but the MP36s have always had them. Maybe just an oversight?


----------



## cpotisch

As I've said before, I'm still not totally sold on the Charger look. The front window looks too small, and I don't like how the nose looks like it was chopped off. It just doesn't look quite right.


----------



## jrud

cpotisch said:


> As I've said before, I'm still not totally sold on the Charger look. The front window looks too small, and I don't like how the nose looks like it was chopped off. It just doesn't look quite right.


Judging looks is always so personal. I remember standing as a small boy watching the New York Central steam locomotives at the old Elyria, Ohio passenger station. To this day, the NYC look is still my favorite. But I know it is just because I saw it first.


----------



## Seaboard92

jrud said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> As I've said before, I'm still not totally sold on the Charger look. The front window looks too small, and I don't like how the nose looks like it was chopped off. It just doesn't look quite right.
> 
> 
> 
> Judging looks is always so personal. I remember standing as a small boy watching the New York Central steam locomotives at the old Elyria, Ohio passenger station. To this day, the NYC look is still my favorite. But I know it is just because I saw it first.
Click to expand...

I'll be honest I've only ever seen a Mohawk I was attempting to restore once and I love the NYC look as well. But I think the Hudson is the epitome of a steam locomotives. Partially due to Lionel.


----------



## jrud

I watched very closely as MARC Charger 87 went by my Green line Metro Rail train today. The Charger was pushing a train south on the Camden Line toward DC as I headed north. I could see the MARC on the nose but you had to look carefully. This change will improve pictures from the front but appears to have a relatively small effect on the overall look. I like the Chargers in MARC silver-orange-blue better than any other current color scheme. I’m looking forward to the dynamic Coaster livery and wondering if ACE will take advantage of its unique colors. Amtrak standard blue and silver could be okay with the right pattern, if Amtrak buys Chargers for the non-state routes.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

jrud said:


> I watched very closely as MARC Charger 87 went by my Green line Metro Rail train today. The Charger was pushing a train south on the Camden Line toward DC as I headed north. I could see the MARC on the nose but you had to look carefully. This change will improve pictures from the front but appears to have a relatively small effect on the overall look. I like the Chargers in MARC silver-orange-blue better than any other current color scheme. I’m looking forward to the dynamic Coaster livery and wondering if ACE will take advantage of its unique colors. Amtrak standard blue and silver could be okay with the right pattern, if Amtrak buys Chargers for the non-state routes.


Or, perhaps, if they could afford it, Phase IIIb.

That makes me wonder. Will anyone ever do a rendering of the Charger in regular Amtrak Phase V or maybe even Phase IIIb paint?


----------



## seat38a

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> jrud said:
> 
> 
> 
> I watched very closely as MARC Charger 87 went by my Green line Metro Rail train today. The Charger was pushing a train south on the Camden Line toward DC as I headed north. I could see the MARC on the nose but you had to look carefully. This change will improve pictures from the front but appears to have a relatively small effect on the overall look. I like the Chargers in MARC silver-orange-blue better than any other current color scheme. I’m looking forward to the dynamic Coaster livery and wondering if ACE will take advantage of its unique colors. Amtrak standard blue and silver could be okay with the right pattern, if Amtrak buys Chargers for the non-state routes.
> 
> 
> 
> Or, perhaps, if they could afford it, Phase IIIb.
> 
> That makes me wonder. Will anyone ever do a rendering of the Charger in regular Amtrak Phase V or maybe even Phase IIIb paint?
Click to expand...

Amtrak bought none for themselves so probably not. I doubt the State owners are willing to shell out money to paint them in livery that has nothing to do with them.


----------



## MattW

jrud said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Marc has been adding Marc logos on the nose of their chargers slowly. It looks way better then when they arrived.
> 
> http://railpictures.net/photo/663978/
> 
> Photo Credit to my good friend Matt Donnelly.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wow. Way better. Looking at some "before and after" pics now, the Chargers looked pretty weird initially. Surprising how big a difference a little thing like that can make.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was definitely odd to say the least. But the one thing that’s for sure was it needed something. And the Marc logo is perfect for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> IMHO - The MARC Chargers look just fine IRL. The silver really pops. When coupled to an MP36, they do look smaller. However, they also look more modern. MARC has said that they are reliable and will share the higher speed duties with refurbished HHP-8s north of Baltimore. The logo is a nice addition, but the MP36s have always had them. Maybe just an oversight?
Click to expand...

I really hope they keep the hippos captive to certain trains, otherwise, either the Charger-hauled trains will all be late, or the hippo-hauled trains will be early and have to sit, or simply be run at a lower speed than they're capable of.


----------



## Acela150

MattW said:


> jrud said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Marc has been adding Marc logos on the nose of their chargers slowly. It looks way better then when they arrived.
> 
> http://railpictures.net/photo/663978/
> 
> Photo Credit to my good friend Matt Donnelly.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wow. Way better. Looking at some "before and after" pics now, the Chargers looked pretty weird initially. Surprising how big a difference a little thing like that can make.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was definitely odd to say the least. But the one thing that’s for sure was it needed something. And the Marc logo is perfect for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> IMHO - The MARC Chargers look just fine IRL. The silver really pops. When coupled to an MP36, they do look smaller. However, they also look more modern. MARC has said that they are reliable and will share the higher speed duties with refurbished HHP-8s north of Baltimore. The logo is a nice addition, but the MP36s have always had them. Maybe just an oversight?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I really hope they keep the hippos captive to certain trains, otherwise, either the Charger-hauled trains will all be late, or the hippo-hauled trains will be early and have to sit, or simply be run at a lower speed than they're capable of.
Click to expand...

Why would the charger trains be late? They're rated for 125 mph. If anything the MP36 unit would make trains late, and they already do. The MP36 units are painfully slow to accelerate to high speeds. They aren't really made for service along the NEC.


----------



## Ryan

^^^ What he said.

Chargers are going to help solve the problem that MARC has had for years with diesel trains on the Penn Line.


----------



## jrud

Acela150 said:


> MattW said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jrud said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Marc has been adding Marc logos on the nose of their chargers slowly. It looks way better then when they arrived.
> 
> http://railpictures.net/photo/663978/
> 
> Photo Credit to my good friend Matt Donnelly.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wow. Way better. Looking at some "before and after" pics now, the Chargers looked pretty weird initially. Surprising how big a difference a little thing like that can make.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was definitely odd to say the least. But the one thing that’s for sure was it needed something. And the Marc logo is perfect for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> IMHO - The MARC Chargers look just fine IRL. The silver really pops. When coupled to an MP36, they do look smaller. However, they also look more modern. MARC has said that they are reliable and will share the higher speed duties with refurbished HHP-8s north of Baltimore. The logo is a nice addition, but the MP36s have always had them. Maybe just an oversight?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I really hope they keep the hippos captive to certain trains, otherwise, either the Charger-hauled trains will all be late, or the hippo-hauled trains will be early and have to sit, or simply be run at a lower speed than they're capable of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would the charger trains be late? They're rated for 125 mph. If anything the MP36 unit would make trains late, and they already do. The MP36 units are painfully slow to accelerate to high speeds. They aren't really made for service along the NEC.
Click to expand...

There is some discussion of this subject at two separate places in the poorly edited MRAC April minutes at https://mta.maryland.gov/sites/default/files/MARCRAC_Minutes_20178-04-19.pdf . Remember that MARC’s HHP-8s are being refurbished. 
I also guess that Siemens could have done some renderings in typical Amtrak paint schemes to try and sell the long distance options. But the public probably won’t see those for a while, if ever. Train simulator renderings might exist.


----------



## frequentflyer

Siemens is the odds on favorite to replace the Genesis. There is an unidentified customer that has options for Chargers with larger fuel tanks.

It was rumored that Amtrak was going back to Phase 3 livery and we that with the VL II order. Now whether the livery plans change with Anderson at the helm remains to be seen. Amtrak may debut a new livery that willl grace the new Chargers.


----------



## NSC1109

frequentflyer said:


> Siemens is the odds on favorite to replace the Genesis. There is an unidentified customer that has options for Chargers with larger fuel tanks.
> 
> It was rumored that Amtrak was going back to Phase 3 livery and we that with the VL II order. Now whether the livery plans change with Anderson at the helm remains to be seen. Amtrak may debut a new livery that willl grace the new Chargers.


I would certainly hope that Amtrak continues with the Phase III scheme on the long distance Services. They’ve already started the Amtrak America brand, might as well finish it out, and give the corridor services the Vb on new equipment.


----------



## jrud

frequentflyer said:


> Siemens is the odds on favorite to replace the Genesis. There is an unidentified customer that has options for Chargers with larger fuel tanks.


If it works like the corridor locomotives, there are 150 long distance options available to essentially anyone associated with a government in the USA. Is this different or is it someone who may exercise the existing options? Also, does anyone know when the ability to exercise the current options expires? I know that they aren’t available forever, but I have been unable to find the date.


----------



## west point

About the options. Who is the controlling agency for the options ? Midwest coalition ? To dole out the options is any money involved ? Maybe just the amount that the controlling agency paid for each option ? Any dates known for each option's expiration ?


----------



## jrud

As a note on the Charger nose shape. I thought that the lower section had a reverse slope and curve to discourage anything the locomotive hit from riding up the front and entering the engineer’s cab. It may not be conventional but safety trumps looks. You see this reverse slope on various modern locomotives including the British Classes 68/88 and many Alstom European locomotives.


----------



## MattW

Acela150 said:


> MattW said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jrud said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Marc has been adding Marc logos on the nose of their chargers slowly. It looks way better then when they arrived.
> 
> http://railpictures.net/photo/663978/
> 
> Photo Credit to my good friend Matt Donnelly.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wow. Way better. Looking at some "before and after" pics now, the Chargers looked pretty weird initially. Surprising how big a difference a little thing like that can make.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was definitely odd to say the least. But the one thing that’s for sure was it needed something. And the Marc logo is perfect for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> IMHO - The MARC Chargers look just fine IRL. The silver really pops. When coupled to an MP36, they do look smaller. However, they also look more modern. MARC has said that they are reliable and will share the higher speed duties with refurbished HHP-8s north of Baltimore. The logo is a nice addition, but the MP36s have always had them. Maybe just an oversight?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I really hope they keep the hippos captive to certain trains, otherwise, either the Charger-hauled trains will all be late, or the hippo-hauled trains will be early and have to sit, or simply be run at a lower speed than they're capable of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would the charger trains be late? They're rated for 125 mph. If anything the MP36 unit would make trains late, and they already do. The MP36 units are painfully slow to accelerate to high speeds. They aren't really made for service along the NEC.
Click to expand...




Ryan said:


> ^^^ What he said.
> 
> Chargers are going to help solve the problem that MARC has had for years with diesel trains on the Penn Line.


Because they're still diesels, each with half the horsepower rating of an HHP-8.


----------



## cpotisch

MattW said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MattW said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jrud said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Marc has been adding Marc logos on the nose of their chargers slowly. It looks way better then when they arrived.
> 
> http://railpictures.net/photo/663978/
> 
> Photo Credit to my good friend Matt Donnelly.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wow. Way better. Looking at some "before and after" pics now, the Chargers looked pretty weird initially. Surprising how big a difference a little thing like that can make.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was definitely odd to say the least. But the one thing that’s for sure was it needed something. And the Marc logo is perfect for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> IMHO - The MARC Chargers look just fine IRL. The silver really pops. When coupled to an MP36, they do look smaller. However, they also look more modern. MARC has said that they are reliable and will share the higher speed duties with refurbished HHP-8s north of Baltimore. The logo is a nice addition, but the MP36s have always had them. Maybe just an oversight?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I really hope they keep the hippos captive to certain trains, otherwise, either the Charger-hauled trains will all be late, or the hippo-hauled trains will be early and have to sit, or simply be run at a lower speed than they're capable of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would the charger trains be late? They're rated for 125 mph. If anything the MP36 unit would make trains late, and they already do. The MP36 units are painfully slow to accelerate to high speeds. They aren't really made for service along the NEC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> ^^^ What he said.
> 
> Chargers are going to help solve the problem that MARC has had for years with diesel trains on the Penn Line.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because they're still diesels, each with half the horsepower rating of an HHP-8.
Click to expand...

But isn't it that even for the horsepower it has, the MP36s are relatively slow to accelerate?


----------



## PVD

Raw power availability does not always translate directly.... different motors have different characteristics, and things such as gearing, adhesion and available tractive effort factor in. Also, how much power is lost (if any) to HEP load. The electrics (as a group) will generally accelerate a comparable load faster. Hopefully, someone like JIS will step in, he has an excellent manner in breaking it down into more clearly understood concepts. Control systems factor in also.


----------



## Acela150

MattW said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MattW said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jrud said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Marc has been adding Marc logos on the nose of their chargers slowly. It looks way better then when they arrived.
> 
> http://railpictures.net/photo/663978/
> 
> Photo Credit to my good friend Matt Donnelly.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wow. Way better. Looking at some "before and after" pics now, the Chargers looked pretty weird initially. Surprising how big a difference a little thing like that can make.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was definitely odd to say the least. But the one thing that’s for sure was it needed something. And the Marc logo is perfect for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> IMHO - The MARC Chargers look just fine IRL. The silver really pops. When coupled to an MP36, they do look smaller. However, they also look more modern. MARC has said that they are reliable and will share the higher speed duties with refurbished HHP-8s north of Baltimore. The logo is a nice addition, but the MP36s have always had them. Maybe just an oversight?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I really hope they keep the hippos captive to certain trains, otherwise, either the Charger-hauled trains will all be late, or the hippo-hauled trains will be early and have to sit, or simply be run at a lower speed than they're capable of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would the charger trains be late? They're rated for 125 mph. If anything the MP36 unit would make trains late, and they already do. The MP36 units are painfully slow to accelerate to high speeds. They aren't really made for service along the NEC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> ^^^ What he said.
> 
> Chargers are going to help solve the problem that MARC has had for years with diesel trains on the Penn Line.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because they're still diesels, each with half the horsepower rating of an HHP-8.
Click to expand...

And they’ve been tested at 125 MPH on the NEC. Your point in baseless.


----------



## PVD

It isn't just an equation of maximum speed rating, it is very important to look at how long it takes to get to a given speed while hauling a given load. This is especially important in operations where stations may not be that far apart. acceleration rates (regardless of available power) are tempered by consideration of passenger comfort and adhesion...


----------



## jis

PVD said:


> Raw power availability does not always translate directly.... different motors have different characteristics, and things such as gearing, adhesion and available tractive effort factor in. Also, how much power is lost (if any) to HEP load. The electrics (as a group) will generally accelerate a comparable load faster. Hopefully, someone like JIS will step in, he has an excellent manner in breaking it down into more clearly understood concepts. Control systems factor in also.


See http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/75858.aspx for a quick refresher of the Physics. It should be then obvious how they relate. If it is not, ping me, and we can go over it.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Acela150 said:


> MattW said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would the charger trains be late? They're rated for 125 mph. If anything the MP36 unit would make trains late, and they already do. The MP36 units are painfully slow to accelerate to high speeds. They aren't really made for service along the NEC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> ^^^ What he said.
> 
> Chargers are going to help solve the problem that MARC has had for years with diesel trains on the Penn Line.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because they're still diesels, each with half the horsepower rating of an HHP-8.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And theyve been tested at 125 MPH on the NEC. Your point in baseless.
Click to expand...

 I think you're missing MattW's point. While they will perform better than your typical diesel, they would be hard pressed to accelerate faster than the HHP's and that is the key to commuter service. It is a sprint, not a marathon.


----------



## jrud

Acela150 said:


> MattW said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MattW said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jrud said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Marc has been adding Marc logos on the nose of their chargers slowly. It looks way better then when they arrived.
> 
> http://railpictures.net/photo/663978/
> 
> Photo Credit to my good friend Matt Donnelly.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wow. Way better. Looking at some "before and after" pics now, the Chargers looked pretty weird initially. Surprising how big a difference a little thing like that can make.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was definitely odd to say the least. But the one thing that’s for sure was it needed something. And the Marc logo is perfect for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> IMHO - The MARC Chargers look just fine IRL. The silver really pops. When coupled to an MP36, they do look smaller. However, they also look more modern. MARC has said that they are reliable and will share the higher speed duties with refurbished HHP-8s north of Baltimore. The logo is a nice addition, but the MP36s have always had them. Maybe just an oversight?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I really hope they keep the hippos captive to certain trains, otherwise, either the Charger-hauled trains will all be late, or the hippo-hauled trains will be early and have to sit, or simply be run at a lower speed than they're capable of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would the charger trains be late? They're rated for 125 mph. If anything the MP36 unit would make trains late, and they already do. The MP36 units are painfully slow to accelerate to high speeds. They aren't really made for service along the NEC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> ^^^ What he said.
> 
> Chargers are going to help solve the problem that MARC has had for years with diesel trains on the Penn Line.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because they're still diesels, each with half the horsepower rating of an HHP-8.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And they’ve been tested at 125 MPH on the NEC. Your point in baseless.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately it is not only top speed that determines a train’s time between stations. It is also how quickly the train can get up to its top speed or the maximum speed allowed for the track. A higher horsepower locomotive will get up to speed quicker. Its average speed will be higher even if it’s maximum speed is the same. Higher average speed means shorter times between stations. Closer stations make acceleration more important. 
8,000 hp > 4400 hp. An HHP-8 (or ACS-64) can really haul out of a station. The MARC Rider Advisory Council minutes say that MARC is going to use Chargers and refurbished HHP-8 on the higher speed sections north of Baltimore (a stretch with fewer stops). http://perryvillemd.vt-s.net/sites/perryvillemd/files/file/file/marc-train-map.gif


----------



## MikefromCrete

All well and good, except the HHP-8's will spend more time in the shop than on the road.


----------



## cpotisch

Does it seem like MARC might be ordering ACS-64s anytime soon? Because I imagine owning HHP-8s for this long has involved some significant maintenance costs.


----------



## PVD

At one point it was thought that MARC would go all diesel, that obviously changed since they rebuilt the HHP-8. points to ponder: How reliable will the rebuilt HHP-8 be? Will they prove costly or difficult to maintain? If so, do you go back to the diesel plan eliminating the electrics, or replacing them with new electrics, and if so, do you have the money to do it?


----------



## cpotisch

What specifically are they rebuilding or replacing?


----------



## PVD

They rebuilt the HHP-8 and retired the last few AEM-7 Original plan was replacement of all electrics, but that evolved.


----------



## jis

I understand that the rebuild involves a complete replacement of the power pack and drive system. IOW replacement of the guts.


----------



## cpotisch

jis said:


> I understand that the rebuild involves a complete replacement of the power pack and drive system. IOW replacement of the guts.


Wasn't one of the main issues with the HHPs that the trucks were cracking? Are they (or could they) replace those?


----------



## PVD

That was back in 2002 and also affected Acela service. They were removed from service for repairs, and since we are 16 years out from that, I'd say that got fixed. There were a myriad of other issues that continued that were not in the "life safety" category, but certainly made them a less than favorite motor.


----------



## cpotisch

PVD said:


> That was back in 2002 and also affected Acela service.


Acela Express? But they never used HHP-8s. Or are you referring to the idiotic and short lived Acela Regional and/or Acela Commuter?


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

cpotisch said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was back in 2002 and also affected Acela service.
> 
> 
> 
> Acela Express? But they never used HHP-8s. Or are you referring to the idiotic and short lived Acela Regional and/or Acela Commuter?
Click to expand...

The problem was present in both HHP-8s and Acela Express trainsets.


----------



## PVD

No, I'm referring to the same issue being present in both types.


----------



## cpotisch

Thanks. Didn’t know that the Acela trainsets has some of the same issues.


----------



## Ryan

If you look at the two of them next to each other, you'll note more than a little bit of similarity on the outside. That similarity extends to the inside bits as well. Take an HHP-8, chop off a cab, and you essentially have an Acela powerhead.


----------



## jis

cpotisch said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> I understand that the rebuild involves a complete replacement of the power pack and drive system. IOW replacement of the guts.
> 
> 
> 
> Wasn't one of the main issues with the HHPs that the trucks were cracking? Are they (or could they) replace those?
Click to expand...

No crack on trucks. Crack was in the Yaw Damper Bracket that attaches the side Yaw Damper to the body frame, and that was fixed then by replacing them with more robust Yaw Damper Brackets as I recall. That is now a non-issue.
Cracks in trucks was in P42s due the use of an improper short cut procedure for maintenance by Beech Grove.


----------



## cpotisch

jis said:


> Cracks in trucks was in P42s due the use of an improper short cut procedure for maintenance by Beech Grove.


This is getting sort of off-topic but what was that shortcut maneuver?


----------



## jis

cpotisch said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cracks in trucks was in P42s due the use of an improper short cut procedure for maintenance by Beech Grove.
> 
> 
> 
> This is getting sort of off-topic but what was that shortcut maneuver?
Click to expand...

Something to do with improperly replacing wheels. Don’t remember the details.


----------



## PVD

Mechanical departments are criticized when it takes a long time to perform certain tasks, but the quest to find a faster or easier way to do something often has unintended consequences. Think CF6 engine replacement on the DC-10.


----------



## west point

Was there something about Amtrak would no longer service the HHPs after a certain date ( July 1 ? ). That does not seem correct date since Amtrak still has to maintain their HHPs until the Amtrak lease expires ?


----------



## jis

I believe MARC now has a direct contract with Alstom as part of the rebuild deal.


----------



## cpotisch

jis said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cracks in trucks was in P42s due the use of an improper short cut procedure for maintenance by Beech Grove.
> 
> 
> 
> This is getting sort of off-topic but what was that shortcut maneuver?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Something to do with improperly replacing wheels. Don’t remember the details.
Click to expand...

Oh. I thought you were saying that when the locomotives were literally being moved and/or shunted around the yard, that they were wearing out the trucks or something. Thanks though!


----------



## jrud

jis said:


> I understand that the rebuild involves a complete replacement of the power pack and drive system. IOW replacement of the guts.


What they are doing to the HHP-8s is reported on in these minutes under Old Business. https://mta.maryland.gov/sites/default/files/MARCRAC_Minutes_2017-11-15.pdf .
FWIW. I’m pretty sure that when MARC announced the Charger purchase they said that the older electric locomotives were being retired, but the fate of the HHP-8s was still being considered. Somehow the press reported that all the electric locomotives were being replaced and that has been considered MARC’s original plan ever since. I wish I could find the link to that old announcement.

As a rumor, I have also read that the HHP-8s may be getting a free refurbishment by Bombardier. Supposedly, if they can get the MARC ones to work right, all the AMTRAK HHP-8s that came off lease will suddenly have value. Bombardier can refurb them for sale/lease.


----------



## PVD

Actually, some of the press reported it almost exactly as you recall, this from the Baltimore Sun:

"Shepard said four of MARC's electric locomotives are 27 years old, near the end of their useful life, while six are 15 years old and do not have a good record for reliability. He said the older models will be scrapped as soon as there are diesels to replace them. The newer models will be evaluated to determine whether they can still be useful."

That was a reference to the AEM-7 and the HHP-8 plan at the time of the announcement of the proposed Charger purchase


----------



## jis

My only source was a conversation with MARC’s CMO office over a year back. I have no idea what has happened since then. At that time Alstom was doing a POC on one of the Hippos and it was about to go out for testing.


----------



## jrud

PVD said:


> Actually, some of the press reported it almost exactly as you recall, this from the Baltimore Sun:
> 
> "Shepard said four of MARC's electric locomotives are 27 years old, near the end of their useful life, while six are 15 years old and do not have a good record for reliability. He said the older models will be scrapped as soon as there are diesels to replace them. The newer models will be evaluated to determine whether they can still be useful."
> 
> That was a reference to the AEM-7 and the HHP-8 plan at the time of the announcement of the proposed Charger purchase


Thanks. I thought it was the Sun. Then Railway Age and others reported that all the electric locomotives were going. https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/commuterregional/marc-replacing-electric-locomotive-fleet-with-high-speed-diesels/ . That reference made it into Wikipedia and history was altered.


----------



## west point

We first read of MARC getting rid of all electrics found it puzzling. To run MARC schedules on 2 and 3 track mains seemed impossible without electrics and said so. MARC trains especially locals are often held especially at WASH Union station until all faster Amtrak trains have left pulled by faster Acelas and ACS-64s .That is especially true for MARC locals. Less so for Baltimore express trains. We felt that the only way for MARC diesel trains to maintain required Amtrak schedules would be for 2 Chargers to pull each train,

Now if the HHPs can be made reliable maybe MARC might buy some of the Amtrak units as well ? If one of the many CAT failures that occur MARC would then have the extra diesels to run on the Penn line when travel times are not important.

Another factor may be MARC needing to add more passenger cars due to overcrowding. MARC does not have the extra equipment yet but from reports some crush hour trains on Penn line need 12 cars now.


----------



## jrud

west point said:


> We first read of MARC getting rid of all electrics found it puzzling. To run MARC schedules on 2 and 3 track mains seemed impossible without electrics and said so. MARC trains especially locals are often held especially at WASH Union station until all faster Amtrak trains have left pulled by faster Acelas and ACS-64s .That is especially true for MARC locals. Less so for Baltimore express trains. We felt that the only way for MARC diesel trains to maintain required Amtrak schedules would be for 2 Chargers to pull each train,
> 
> Now if the HHPs can be made reliable maybe MARC might buy some of the Amtrak units as well ? If one of the many CAT failures that occur MARC would then have the extra diesels to run on the Penn line when travel times are not important.
> 
> Another factor may be MARC needing to add more passenger cars due to overcrowding. MARC does not have the extra equipment yet but from reports some crush hour trains on Penn line need 12 cars now.


My recent personal experience is all watching Camden line trains that parallel the Metro Rail line I take from Greenbelt. There are no 12 car trains for sure. Four car single level trains at times but more cars (5?) and multilevel cars at other times. MP36s and Chargers seemed to be used almost randomly.
I should mention that GP39H-2s are sometimes (but not often) used. And, I even see the sole GP40WH-2 every once in a while.

My train is passing a double stack container train crossing the Potomac river heading north on the parallel Long Bridge now. Time to think about getting off.


----------



## Ryan

The Camden line is very, very different than the Penn line. Penn Line ridership is roughly 4x the Camden line. More frequent service. All day service, longer trains.


----------



## jrud

Ryan said:


> The Camden line is very, very different than the Penn line. Penn Line ridership is roughly 4x the Camden line. More frequent service. All day service, longer trains.


Yeah. You just have to watch Penn line videos to know it is a different world. You probably don’t see the GP40WH-2 on the Penn line except in a dire emergency.


----------



## PVD

Supposedly, it is only around for work and rescue duty, but we all know never say never......


----------



## jrud

PVD said:


> Supposedly, it is only around for work and rescue duty, but we all know never say never......


I saw it as the lead locomotive on what seemed to be a scheduled Camden Line train on May 10th ahead of an MP36 with multilevel cars. Possibly officially a “rescue.” I’ve got a blurry picture to remind me.


----------



## NSC1109

Per TRAINS, July 2018:

The Michigan Services (specifically Wolverine and Blue Water) won’t be seeing the Charger soon. Delays in coordinating Siemens’ and Wabtec’s PTC software have prevented tests from being done. Once the component needed is installed, tests can begin. This means that P42s will be on MI services for the foreseeable future with replacement dates no earlier than Fall 2018.

Additionally, delays have jammed up the Lincoln Service as well, restraining the service to 79 MPH due to the fact that the Chargers were delivered with PTC screens but not cab signals. After trackwork along the line is completed and the new PTC-compliant system is up and running, 110 MPH should return to the service.


----------



## iplaybass

railiner said:


> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> 
> The HSP46 doesn't meet Tier 4 standards. Assuming MPI responds to the RFP they would probably offer the MP54, which is currently in production for GO Transit.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you say, "MP54"?
> To me, THIS is an MP54....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.google.com/search?q=prr+mp54&rlz=1C1CHZL_enUS739US739&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=p1eAcEBbasQMuM%253A%252C3Ul3x2RXM138hM%252C_&usg=__qRPPcNdyFT4tsYMqVH6yuijzSdQ%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjI6Jfmr6HcAhXvct8KHa0UDTMQ9QEIQDAC#imgrc=p1eAcEBbasQMuM:
Click to expand...

I did Penn Station to North Philadelphia on a holiday extra composed of 12 of these. We missed our intended train. Warned my grandmother to wait another 30 minutes for one of the DC trains. Ignored because I was 6, it took nearly 4 hours to go the 86 miles. Literally EVERY stop between New York and Philly, passed by 4 express trains, no bathrooms.
It was the last time my family didn't take my train advice. [emoji16]


----------



## sitzplatz17

One of the MARC Chargers didn’t do too well this morning on the Penn line. Aside from all the other issues this a.m. due to weather it seems that it died about 1000 feet after leaving WAS and had to back to the station.

By the sound of it they had a technician try and get it working but no luck.


----------



## jrud

A fair number of cars for a diesel on the NEC. http://www.railpictures.net/photo/665091/


----------



## jrud

NSC1109 said:


> Per TRAINS, July 2018:
> 
> The Michigan Services (specifically Wolverine and Blue Water) won’t be seeing the Charger soon. Delays in coordinating Siemens’ and Wabtec’s PTC software have prevented tests from being done. Once the component needed is installed, tests can begin. This means that P42s will be on MI services for the foreseeable future with replacement dates no earlier than Fall 2018.
> 
> Additionally, delays have jammed up the Lincoln Service as well, restraining the service to 79 MPH due to the fact that the Chargers were delivered with PTC screens but not cab signals. After trackwork along the line is completed and the new PTC-compliant system is up and running, 110 MPH should return to the service.


Interoperability appears to have only recently been acknowledged as a major PTC headache. It has now been added to the FRA PTC Dashboard (https://www.fra.dot.gov/app/ptc) and is the subject of various meetings. https://www.railwayage.com/cs/ptc/rssi-ptc-forum-interoperability-the-final-hurdle/


----------



## SubwayNut

Chargers are definitely running on the Pere Marquette. I have photos of them (somewhere).


----------



## NSC1109

SubwayNut said:


> Chargers are definitely running on the Pere Marquette. I have photos of them (somewhere).


I did say specifically the Wolverine and Blue Water. We’ll probably bid farewell to the ITCS P42s in October or November, in time for the Thanksgiving travel season, if there aren’t more delays.


----------



## MEA707

Anyone know what was the fate of 1402, the wrecked Charger from the derailment last year?


----------



## Acela150

MEA707 said:


> Anyone know what was the fate of 1402, the wrecked Charger from the derailment last year?


No.


----------



## bcanedy

Another F59PHI left on the Southwest Chief last night, likely going to its new home in Chicago. Any updates on when the new Pacific Surfliner Chargers will enter service?


----------



## jis

They have been hanging out in the Amtrak roundhouse there in LA for quite a while now, Saw them several months back when I passed by there on the last of my several trips to the LA area this year.


----------



## KnightRail

Chargers 2107 & 2108 are on 14(31) today headed to Oakland


----------



## seat38a

bcanedy said:


> Another F59PHI left on the Southwest Chief last night, likely going to its new home in Chicago. Any updates on when the new Pacific Surfliner Chargers will enter service?


According to the conductor in July, not for a while. She said getting PTC up and running is priority one right now.


----------



## NSC1109

MEA707 said:


> Anyone know what was the fate of 1402, the wrecked Charger from the derailment last year?


If I remember correctly, 1402 is going to be rebuilt at some point.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

A Surfliner F59 is on the consist of today's #30 out of Chicago.


----------



## NSC1109

The NGEC August minutes are out. The only update for the Chargers is that the FRA has accepted the Section 6 plan. Here's the link to that plan:

http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/Midwest%20Section%206%20Plan%20021518%20r0%20%282%29.ppt


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

NSC1109 said:


> MEA707 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone know what was the fate of 1402, the wrecked Charger from the derailment last year?
> 
> 
> 
> If I remember correctly, 1402 is going to be rebuilt at some point.
Click to expand...

I know it's said it was wrecked, but I don't know if that means done for or just wreck damage. Other rumors say it will be repaired.


----------



## jis

I don't know how the costs will work out. I suppose if repairing it costs almost as much as building a new one, would the detail of whether it was repaired or replaced matter?


----------



## Acela150

jis said:


> I don't know how the costs will work out. I suppose if repairing it costs almost as much as building a new one, would the detail of whether it was repaired or replaced matter?


To certain folks yes.



Me? I could care less!


----------



## west point

Building a replacement might be faster and maybe some components from wreck can be reused ? That would decrease replacement costs /


----------



## MEA707

Where did the wreck go? Was it sent back to Siemens in Sacramento?


----------



## CCC1007

MEA707 said:


> Where did the wreck go? Was it sent back to Siemens in Sacramento?


Unless it has moved, it is at joint base Lewis-McChord for examination by the NTSB.


----------



## Acela150

west point said:


> Building a replacement might be faster and maybe some components from wreck can be reused ? That would decrease replacement costs /





MEA707 said:


> Where did the wreck go? Was it sent back to Siemens in Sacramento?


See Jishnu...


----------



## cpotisch

MEA707 said:


> Where did the wreck go? Was it sent back to Siemens in Sacramento?





jis said:


> They have been hanging out in the Amtrak roundhouse there in LA for quite a while now, Saw them several months back when I passed by there on the last of my several trips to the LA area this year.


----------



## Northwest Railfan

It's likely the 1402 was likely scrapped. I can't imagine Amtrak or WSDOT would go through the effort of moving it all the way to Sacramento. The Talgo set was also scrapped and removed from the storage area at JBLM.

Also relevant to this thread, WDTX 1405 suffered some sort of issue yesterday and was lead by a Union Pacific freight engine on 500.


----------



## frequentflyer

Interesting that Amtrak in its potential locomotive orders states it wants a longer unit, rumored to be for a larger HEP unit in comparison to the Chargers produced now. I wander if Amtrak goes with Siemens will Amtrak spec a different look or nose for their units.


----------



## CCC1007

frequentflyer said:


> Interesting that Amtrak in its potential locomotive orders states it wants a longer unit, rumored to be for a larger HEP unit in comparison to the Chargers produced now. I wander if Amtrak goes with Siemens will Amtrak spec a different look or nose for their units.


I would laugh if amtrak chose to use a nose very similar to a P42...


----------



## west point

frequentflyer said:


> Interesting that Amtrak in its potential locomotive orders states it wants a longer unit, rumored to be for a larger HEP unit in comparison to the Chargers produced now. I wander if Amtrak goes with Siemens will Amtrak spec a different look or nose for their units.


Where are there specifications for the various chargers already produced ? Thought all were ordered with the 1000 kW capacity for ease of interoperability with various agencies ? The 680 kW is listed as standard. However all Chargers have the same HEP inverters that are installed in the ACS-64s ( 2 in thoses units ) Maybe that is a derating limit installed at customer's request. aWe blieve that 680 kW would be at least sufficient for 13 cars requiring HEP Amtrak train superliner. 14 with baggage. Probably a 16 car single level ?


----------



## cpotisch

west point said:


> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that Amtrak in its potential locomotive orders states it wants a longer unit, rumored to be for a larger HEP unit in comparison to the Chargers produced now. I wander if Amtrak goes with Siemens will Amtrak spec a different look or nose for their units.
> 
> 
> 
> Where are there specifications for the various chargers already produced ? Thought all were ordered with the 1000 kW capacity for ease of interoperability with various agencies ? The 680 kW is listed as standard. However all Chargers have the same HEP inverters that are installed in the ACS-64s ( 2 in thoses units ) Maybe that is a derating limit installed at customer's request. aWe blieve that 680 kW would be at least sufficient for 13 cars requiring HEP Amtrak train superliner. 14 with baggage. Probably a 16 car single level ?
Click to expand...

As I understand it, mechanically, there are only two kinds of Chargers, the SC-44 and the SCB-40. From what I've read, the latter is just an SC-44 fitted with a special nose and tuned down to have 4000 hp instead of 4400 hp. Beyond that, it looks like they're all the same.


----------



## jis

The question still remains, has anyone seen a real specification of what has actually been delivered? I am sure it is around somewhere, but I have not seen it. Absent that, it is all hearsay.


----------



## frequentflyer

CCC1007 said:


> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that Amtrak in its potential locomotive orders states it wants a longer unit, rumored to be for a larger HEP unit in comparison to the Chargers produced now. I wander if Amtrak goes with Siemens will Amtrak spec a different look or nose for their units.
> 
> 
> 
> I would laugh if amtrak chose to use a nose very similar to a P42...
Click to expand...

Funny, I was thinking the same thing.


----------



## jrud

frequentflyer said:


> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that Amtrak in its potential locomotive orders states it wants a longer unit, rumored to be for a larger HEP unit in comparison to the Chargers produced now. I wander if Amtrak goes with Siemens will Amtrak spec a different look or nose for their units.
> 
> 
> 
> I would laugh if amtrak chose to use a nose very similar to a P42...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Funny, I was thinking the same thing.
Click to expand...

Both the Chargers and P42s are designed for maximum machinery length by placing the cab forward. And both seem to be discouraging anything that is hit from riding up and entering the cab by reverse or vertical slope on the lower part. One just looks like a Siemens locomotive and the other, well, doesn’t. Siemens will almost certainly do anything you pay them to do. But any Charger based locomotive will still look smaller than the current Amtrak locomotives, side by side. 
BTW. For increased confusion, this says both 800 and 600 kw for HEP. http://miprc.org/Portals/7/pdfs/Siemens_Charger_locomotives_Ward_MIPRC2016AnnMtg.pdf?ver=2016-10-10-131934-007


----------



## PVD

There is a design minimum requirement to meet NGEC/PRIAA, but larger size units are available. Different types of users will have different requirements.- previous example: SEPTA no toilet, Amtrak, yes toilet Remember, in an HEP setup unless the power is coming from a separate source like a genset or power car, it reduces what is available for traction.


----------



## GiantsFan

Saw two Pacific Surfliner chargers on the southbound coast starlight today going through San Jose


----------



## cpotisch

GiantsFan said:


> Saw two Pacific Surfliner chargers on the southbound coast starlight today going through San Jose


Wait, were you on the Coast Starlight or were the locomotives on the Starlight (deadheading)?


----------



## Acela150

cpotisch said:


> GiantsFan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Saw two Pacific Surfliner chargers on the southbound coast starlight today going through San Jose
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, were you on the Coast Starlight or were the locomotives on the Starlight (deadheading)?
Click to expand...

The post says he saw them going through San Jose. Which to me implies the units were going to LAX as the units would have been added in Oakland.


----------



## bcanedy

There appear to be 6 Pacific Surfliner Chargers in LA now.


----------



## GiantsFan

Acela150 said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GiantsFan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Saw two Pacific Surfliner chargers on the southbound coast starlight today going through San Jose
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, were you on the Coast Starlight or were the locomotives on the Starlight (deadheading)?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The post says he saw them going through San Jose. Which to me implies the units were going to LAX as the units would have been added in Oakland.
Click to expand...

Correct. Saw them roll by


----------



## NSC1109

From Amtrak’s PacSurf account on Instagram


----------



## cpotisch

NSC1109 said:


> From Amtrak’s PacSurf account on Instagram
> 
> 
> 
> IMG_0816.JPG


It's a shame that they figured they'd only show part of the name on one side of the locomotive, instead of getting an actual picture that actually shows the loco.


----------



## bcanedy

https://www.instagram.com/p/BoZgcovFvG_/?utm_source=ig_share_sheet&igshid=9u7cjb3t1evp

This is the actual post.


----------



## NSC1109

cpotisch said:


> NSC1109 said:
> 
> 
> 
> From Amtrak’s PacSurf account on Instagram
> 
> 
> 
> IMG_0816.JPG
> 
> 
> 
> It's a shame that they figured they'd only show part of the name on one side of the locomotive, instead of getting an actual picture that actually shows the loco.
Click to expand...

It's one of those "bounce" posts that moves back and forth repeatedly. I had to screenshot it on my phone.


----------



## cpotisch

NSC1109 said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NSC1109 said:
> 
> 
> 
> From Amtrak’s PacSurf account on Instagram
> 
> 
> 
> IMG_0816.JPG
> 
> 
> 
> It's a shame that they figured they'd only show part of the name on one side of the locomotive, instead of getting an actual picture that actually shows the loco.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's one of those "bounce" posts that moves back and forth repeatedly. I had to screenshot it on my phone.
Click to expand...

Got it.


----------



## Acela150

Yesterday I was in Perryville, MD. The afternoon MARC train had a Charger on it. I was talking with the engineer about his thoughts on the Chargers. He said they’re very nice once you get used to them.


----------



## daybeers

Acela150 said:


> Yesterday I was in Perryville, MD. The afternoon MARC train had a Charger on it. I was talking with the engineer about his thoughts on the Chargers. He said they’re very nice once you get used to them.


How was the acceleration?


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

daybeers said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I was in Perryville, MD. The afternoon MARC train had a Charger on it. I was talking with the engineer about his thoughts on the Chargers. He said theyre very nice once you get used to them.
> 
> 
> 
> How was the acceleration?
Click to expand...

I only have experience with the Amtrak Midwest Chargers, but in my experience they seem to have significantly better acceleration than P42s.


----------



## Acela150

daybeers said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I was in Perryville, MD. The afternoon MARC train had a Charger on it. I was talking with the engineer about his thoughts on the Chargers. He said they’re very nice once you get used to them.
> 
> 
> 
> How was the acceleration?
Click to expand...

Did not ride. Was there railfanning.


----------



## cpotisch

Acela150 said:


> daybeers said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I was in Perryville, MD. The afternoon MARC train had a Charger on it. I was talking with the engineer about his thoughts on the Chargers. He said they’re very nice once you get used to them.
> 
> 
> 
> How was the acceleration?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did not ride. Was there railfanning.
Click to expand...

I think he might have been asking if that engineer mentioned the acceleration. Not if you experience it.


----------



## jis

daybeers said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I was in Perryville, MD. The afternoon MARC train had a Charger on it. I was talking with the engineer about his thoughts on the Chargers. He said they’re very nice once you get used to them.
> 
> 
> 
> How was the acceleration?
Click to expand...

They are reputed to be very quick loaders.

At least on the Carl Sandburg they accelerated almost like an AEM-7 was pulling the train. The Brightlines, which are grossly overpowered, accelerate like a bat out of hell. Very impressive acceleration on those, and the Brightline engines are down-rated to 4,000HP.


----------



## cpotisch

jis said:


> daybeers said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I was in Perryville, MD. The afternoon MARC train had a Charger on it. I was talking with the engineer about his thoughts on the Chargers. He said they’re very nice once you get used to them.
> 
> 
> 
> How was the acceleration?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are reputed to be very quick loaders.
> 
> At least on the Carl Sandburg they accelerated almost like an AEM-7 was pulling the train. The Brightlines, which are grossly overpowered, accelerate like a bat out of hell. Very impressive acceleration on those, and the Brightline engines are down-rated to 4,000HP.
Click to expand...

The Brightline Chargers are downrated to 4000 but there are two of them on every train. I guess it's not particularly surprising that a four car single-level train pulled by two brand new locos with a combined 8000 horsepower is going to result in some serious pick up. I imagine that the engineers are not going to "floor it" in normal service though, right?


----------



## jis

High HP does not necessarily equal great acceleration. It is quickly available tractive effort (torque) that results in such. You can have all the HP in the world and yet be a dog of a locomotive when it comes to acceleration. The P42s are somewhat of an example of that because they are relatively slow loaders.

And yes, I did mention that the Birghtlines are overpowered, so you are merely restating what I said about power. But your statement about the relationship between power and acceleration (torque) is somewhat misleading.


----------



## cpotisch

jis said:


> And yes, I did mention that the Birghtlines are overpowered, so you are merely restating what I said about power. But your statement about the relationship between power and acceleration (torque) is somewhat misleading.


I know that you said that. I was primarily asking about how much power they use in normal service.


----------



## jis

They jokingly say they never go over notch four.


----------



## Acela150

jis said:


> They jokingly say they never go over notch four.


Bag that I’ll hit notch 8 and won’t be late. [emoji23]


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Some of us may be wondering. I've actually wondered this. Are the Chargers just standard diesel locomotives, or are they hybrid locomotives?


----------



## Acela150

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Some of us may be wondering. I've actually wondered this. Are the Chargers just standard diesel locomotives, or are they hybrid locomotives?


Why would it be a hybrid? Locomotives aren’t cars.


----------



## Ryan

Question is flawed.

Technically all “standard diesel locomotives” are series hybrids.


----------



## railiner

Wouldn't it only be a 'hybrid', if it could move under battery power alone, with the prime mover off, for short distances? At least that's how hybrid car's operate....


----------



## Ryan

While that is how hybrid cars work, that isn’t required to be considered a hybrid.


----------



## cpotisch

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Some of us may be wondering. I've actually wondered this. Are the Chargers just standard diesel locomotives, or are they hybrid locomotives?


If by hybrid you mean diesel-electric (where a diesel prime mover generates electricity for the electric traction motors), then yes, it is. If you mean to say dual-mode (where the traction motors can either get electricity from the prime mover OR from an outside source such as catenary or third-rail), then no it's not.


----------



## jis

Can you provide any citation supporting that distinction?

Would it be a hybrid if the motor got power from a diesel prime mover or battery (instead of external source) for example? If not why not and how does that differ from a hybrid car?


----------



## cpotisch

jis said:


> Can you provide any citation supporting that distinction?
> 
> Would it be a hybrid if the motor got power from a diesel prime mover or battery (instead of external source) for example? If not why not and how does that differ from a hybrid car?


Sorry, you talking to me or Ryan?


----------



## jis

You


----------



## cpotisch

jis said:


> You


I see. Well I'm probably misunderstanding, but I don't think I need a citation to say that the Charger is a standard diesel-electric and (currently) not a dual-mode.


----------



## railiner

So in this instance, "Hybrid" means driving thru a combination of means...diesel engine turning a generator to power the traction motors?

What would a diesel engine turning a hydraulic transmission to drive the wheels be, a non-hybrid? I don't see much difference. Now if the locomotive could run on battery power alone for a short distance, or a "parallel" combination of the engine running the generator, boosted by the battery for extra short term power, that...would be a hybrid....JMO.


----------



## PerRock

Normally a "Hybrid Locomotive" means that the locomotive can use 2 different power sources to power the motors. Usually that is a diesel engine & a battery bank, but could also be a 3rd rail instead of the batteries. On bigger locomotives, the batteries supplement the diesel engine, but on smaller switchers they can sometimes run just on battery power.

peter


----------



## jis

Railiner I agree with your assessment that when electricity is used merely as a transmission mechanism connecting a single source of power to the wheels it probable would not be considered “hybrid”. When its source of power is more than a single one that is when it becomes “hybrid”. Just my way of thinking about it which appears to have consistent basis to me. But I am open to convincing of changing my thinking.


----------



## PVD

There is reason in that thinking., but focusing on series, rather than parallel or series parallel, I can also see that side of it. since all power is distributed as electricity to the traction motors not through a power splitting arrangement. At least in transportation, I've generally heard that referenced as (almost all locos) D-E, often on cars, trucks, and buses, add batteries get DE Hybrid (available in both series and parallel, as in BAE vs Allison drives for buses) delete diesel, get B-E (like a Proterra)


----------



## keelhauled

In the rail industry, hybrid locomotive most commonly is used in reference to the Green Goat switching locomotives that used a small diesel to charge a battery bank, which drove the traction motors. GE also built a testbed Evolution series locomotive that they called a hybrid, but it only used batteries (charged by dynamic braking) to boost power to the traction motors; it couldn't operate on batteries alone. There have probably been various other one-off experiments.

The Green Goats had some issues with self-combustion and general unreliability, and simpler genset locomotives became favored for low-emissions switching jobs. GE's hybrid was never built commercially, since they have met every emissions requirement with the GEVO engine alone. Supposedly there is still design work happening for an updated version, though.

In Europe, CRRC recently sold several Green Goat style hybrids to Deutsche Bahn, though they aren't going to enter service for a few years.

The Charger is no more a hybrid than the P42 is, which is to say in an extremely literal interpretation it is but not in any typical usage of the term. It's the same design as a P42 except the engine says Cummins instead of GE.


----------



## gswager

Are Chargers more fuel efficient than P42s if pulling the same numbers of cars and tonnages? If so, how much efficient?


----------



## Acela150

gswager said:


> Are Chargers more fuel efficient than P42s if pulling the same numbers of cars and tonnages? If so, how much efficient?


Since they are Tier 4 compliant I’ll venture to say they are slightly better. Maybe a half mile to a mile.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

When I said "hybrid", I meant like half diesel half hybrid-battery. A similar example is a hybrid car.

And again, I was not referring to dual mode.

So, the answers I'm getting now, is that they're standard diesel locomotives (non-hybrid), right?


----------



## Acela150

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> When I said "hybrid", I meant like half diesel half hybrid-battery. A similar example is a hybrid car.
> 
> And again, I was not referring to dual mode.
> 
> So, the answers I'm getting now, is that they're standard diesel locomotives (non-hybrid), right?


No they're not. You're likely to find something like that working in a yard. AKA a genset unit. They're not meant for Road Use.


----------



## railiner

Here's a pretty good explanation of how my Prius "Synergy Drive" works, from this British site....

http://blog.toyota.co.uk/how-does-toyota-hybrid-synergy-drive-work


----------



## keelhauled

Acela150 said:


> gswager said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are Chargers more fuel efficient than P42s if pulling the same numbers of cars and tonnages? If so, how much efficient?
> 
> 
> 
> Since they are Tier 4 compliant Ill venture to say they are slightly better. Maybe a half mile to a mile.
Click to expand...

The Tier standards haven't got anything to do with fuel efficiency, they're all about exhaust emissions, and while I can't speak for the QSK95 vs the FDL in particular, Tier 4 diesels actually tend to be somewhat less fuel efficient than their immediate predecessors.


----------



## PVD

We are getting a bit hung up on terminology in terms of technical vs actual. A Charger is what most folks would refer to as a standard road diesel. In actuality, it is diesel-electric, since the diesel is used to generate electricity for traction power, and in the case of passenger use, HEP. Genset units have a separate engine driving the generator that is producing HEP. An F-59PHI would be an example of a passenger road diesel in the genset category. Switching/yard work presents opportunities for different methods, speed is not the requirement that it is in road service, diesel-electric, and diesel-hydraulic (think transmission) are pretty common. You don't need HEP for most yard, work, and switching work


----------



## DSS&A

bcanedy said:


> Another F59PHI left on the Southwest Chief last night, likely going to its new home in Chicago. Any updates on when the new Pacific Surfliner Chargers will enter service?


I just saw three Cascades F59PHI locomotives in the Metra Western Avenue yard in Chicago this evening. The locomotive numbers are 467, 468 and 470.


----------



## NSC1109

I’ve got it on good authority that Chargers are entering service on the Michigan Line VERY soon. Post gets cut off when I try to attach it on my phone so I’m gonna try again on my laptop when I get home.


----------



## DSS&A

Hi,

I took this photo of a Charger pulling a Hiawatha past the last two remaining EMD F40C locomotives at Western Avenue yard in Chicago. I also noticed yesterday that former Amtrak F59PHI #450 and #454 are now at this yard as of October 24th.

On October 26th, F59PHI #463 arrived in Chicago coupled ahead of the baggage car and behind two GE locomotives on the eastbound Empire Builder.


----------



## me_little_me

And I thought Saluda Grade was steep!


----------



## DSS&A

I saw the eastbound Empire Builder arriving in Chicago today. F59PHI #469 was coupled between the 2nd and 3rd GE loco that were in charge of the train.


----------



## frequentflyer

[SIZE=9pt]- [/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]-         [/SIZE]*[SIZE=9pt]Charger Updates from States and Amtrak – In October, [/SIZE]*[SIZE=9pt]Chairman Curtit requested summary updates on the Chargers now that they have been placed in service.*  [/SIZE]*

*[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]*

*[SIZE=9pt]Updates provided on 10-23-18:[/SIZE]*

*[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]*

[SIZE=9pt]a.      [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]Illinois/Mid-West States:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]

*[SIZE=9pt]Jennifer Bastian reported that the overall equipment delivery and performance of the new Charger Locomotives has been the best she has seen.  [/SIZE]She noted that it is her understanding that it has exceeded Amtrak’s expectations.  *

[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]Operationally, it has been a good procurement.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]One area of concern, however, is warrantee support and parts availability.  [/SIZE]The Mid-West states are working with Siemens to correct this situation.

[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]b.      [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]California:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]Kyle Gradinger agreed with Jennifer that the procurement has been a good one operationally.  [/SIZE]Caltrans’ concerns are similar to those noted by IDOT – warrantee support – and parts availability. Overall, Kyle commented, - “operationally, when they are running, they work great”.  He added that engineers enjoy the cab and the acceleration is great – “overall we are very happy with the operation.”

*[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]*

*[SIZE=9pt]Kyle did mention that there are some glitches with the design of the snow plow – noting that California doesn’t need a snow plow and it is ultimately used for shopping carts and tumble weed which can be problematic under the current design.[/SIZE]*

[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]c.      [/SIZE][SIZE=9pt]Amtrak:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]Charlie King, Amtrak, echoed the comments made by California and IDOT and noted that Amtrak is measuring the information closely and looking at availability of parts and overall warranty support.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]Charlie added that “we need robust part support from Siemens and technical support as well…we need to partner with Siemens and need a good and tight relationship between the states and Siemens and Amtrak, the states and Siemens.”[/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]      [/SIZE]


----------



## jrud

A very short corroboration from the October MARC Riders Advisory Council Minutes: “Initial reports are that the Chargers (newest locomotives) are working well and are quiet.”


----------



## nti1094

Hahahahahaha.... tumbleweeds and shopping carts!

Any idea just how and why tumbleweeds are an issue with the plow? Also just what kind of design differences are there for primarily handling snow as opposed to any general debris?

I always figured it was all good as long as the plow doesn’t totally fail like that junk metrolink got from Hyundai-Rotem. Except in that one in a million circumstance like the Bourbonnais CONO tragedy, a plow should never fail.


----------



## nti1094

keelhauled said:


> The Tier standards haven't got anything to do with fuel efficiency, they're all about exhaust emissions, and while I can't speak for the QSK95 vs the FDL in particular, Tier 4 diesels actually tend to be somewhat less fuel efficient than their immediate predecessors.


I have heard that they are a little better than genesis locomotives and that it has a lot to do with choices made in emissions management that offloaded some of the hit in efficiency, mainly the after exhaust treatment of urea to almost eliminate NOX emissions. It was a design choice that made the engine more efficient and less complex, at the slight additional cost of frequent light maintenance (refilling the urea reserve tank) I’m sure that cycle is about as frequent as refilling sand, so it can’t be that bad. I wonder if they will just let an engine go out of it isn’t done or is it bad-ordered? From my understanding it’s not mechanically required to operate, it’s an after treatment. I guess that depends on local air quality regulations.

Just for reference the genesis locomotive use about 2.2 gallons of fuel for one mile on average across the amtrak system. It’s in their detailed monthly reports, and since until recently their fleet was homogenous a pretty good average. The p-32DM’s only drop their overrunning shoe a few hundred feet from Penn Station (all of MNCR territory is under running) the electric pickup has a negligible benefit to overall efficiency. If I remember from seeing them, the NJT dual modes actually power down the prime mover when switching to the pantograph.

I should also add that, although I think they are all gone by now, the P-42 is 4250 HP, the first Genesis locos (P-40) 250 HP less... And P-32DM 3,200 in all diesel mode.

I have heard the F-40’s gulped a third to half more in fuel. They were older and things improve, and also in providing HEP they had to run at a constant high RPM whereas the Genesis locos throttle down. That alone save a lot of fuel. As much as the Genesis made for more quiet running, I noticed at Hanford a couple of days ago as the train pulled at accelerating rapidly you could barely hear it as more than a gently idling engine as it passed me while pushing the train south towards bakersfield. I would even say it was more pleasant than the sci-fi like noise you get from

inverters and rectifiers and other electrical

noise on some electric motors now days. (yes despite amtrak’s own press, electric engines are “motors” and not “locomotives.” Those are very specific terms and not interchangeable. Even more specifically, old timers call themselves “motormen” not “engineers.”)


----------



## railiner

I don't know about locomotives using urea DEF, but in buses, if the urea tank runs dry, even if there is plenty of fuel, the engine computer will "de-rate" the engine to a safe-home mode, until the DEF is refilled....


----------



## Blackwolf

railiner said:


> I don't know about locomotives using urea DEF, but in buses, if the urea tank runs dry, even if there is plenty of fuel, the engine computer will "de-rate" the engine to a safe-home mode, until the DEF is refilled....


That is a setting placed into the ECM, and can be removed (though, the legality of doing so is dubious for non-exempt vehicles). Our most recent fire engines have DEF, something our department steered away from as long as possible for similar reasons as the railroad industry. In the event of the DEF running out during an incident, the engine going into limp mode would potentially be a very bad thing. As a result, that function is deactivated, and the engine won't derate. If they can do it for us, so to can a locomotive.

My guess is they won't, though.


----------



## PVD

In an application such as locomotive there is no good reason to run out of DEF. Of course there is no good reason to run out of fuel either, and that occasionally happens.  I guess a tank or pipe leak is not impossible, but lets put that on the rare occurrence shelf.


----------



## keelhauled

The exact consequences for running out of DEF seem to vary based on manufacturer, but all engines will go into limp mode (with a few rare exceptions that I am sure locomotives don't qualify for).  Some I have run can just be refilled and primed, while others require a manufacturers' representative to perform the software reset.  The Cummins engines I run now fall into the latter category, but I have no idea if that design is consistent throughout their portfolio.


----------



## cpotisch

nti1094 said:


> I should also add that, although I think they are all gone by now, the P-42 is 4250 HP, the first Genesis locos (P-40) 250 HP less... And P-32DM 3,200 in all diesel mode.


Amtrak still runs a bunch of P40s which were refurbished and upgraded to P42 spec (from 4,000 to 4,250 horsepower) through the 2011 Amtrak stimulus package. So there used to be a horsepower deficit, but that’s no longer the case for the units that are still running.


----------



## cpotisch

Blackwolf said:


> That is a setting placed into the ECM, and can be removed (though, the legality of doing so is dubious for non-exempt vehicles). Our most recent fire engines have DEF, something our department steered away from as long as possible for similar reasons as the railroad industry. In the event of the DEF running out during an incident, the engine going into limp mode would potentially be a very bad thing. As a result, that function is deactivated, and the engine won't derate. If they can do it for us, so to can a locomotive.
> 
> My guess is they won't, though.


What’s DEF?


----------



## PVD

Diesel exhaust fluid,  (urea and water)  used with selective catalytic reduction to achieve Tier 4 emissions requirements, in particular Nitrogen Oxide. Newer diesels  will have a separate tank for it. Look at a new truck and you will see a fill marked "DEF ONLY" in addition to the diesel fill.


----------



## Acela150

cpotisch said:


> Amtrak still runs a bunch of P40s which were refurbished and upgraded to P42 spec (from 4,000 to 4,250 horsepower) through the 2011 Amtrak stimulus package. So there used to be a horsepower deficit, but that’s no longer the case for the units that are still running.


While you're correct about the spec upgrade. The real major difference between the two is the braking systems. I can't recall what the difference is off the top of my head.


----------



## jrud

The new Via Chargers are reported to be 4000 hp like the “streamlined” Brightline SCB-40 locomotives and not 4400 hp like the other SC-44 Chargers. And, they probably will have their own unique front style. SCV-40? Also, they appear to have a revised snowplow. No tumbleweeds in Canada.


----------



## cpotisch

Acela150 said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Amtrak still runs a bunch of P40s which were refurbished and upgraded to P42 spec (from 4,000 to 4,250 horsepower) through the 2011 Amtrak stimulus package. So there used to be a horsepower deficit, but that’s no longer the case for the units that are still running.
> 
> 
> 
> While you're correct about the spec upgrade. The real major difference between the two is the braking systems. I can't recall what the difference is off the top of my head.
Click to expand...

Found this on Wikipedia, but can you translate it into terms easily understood by a naïve 16 year-old?  ^_^



> By 2007, New Jersey Transit had upgraded their P40DC units with updated prime movers to match the 4,250 horsepower (3,170 kW) of the successor P42DC. This was done by readjusting the position of the lay shafts within the prime mover.
> 
> Amtrak has returned 15 of their P40DC units to service as part of a project funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The first of the units were returned to service in March 2010 after being overhauled at the Beech Grove Shops. They were upgraded like NJT's units had been a few years before to have 4,250 hp (3,170 kW) and match the P42DC's maximum speed of 110 mph (177 km/h). They also received updated cab signaling systems. *The upgraded locomotives still have mechanical air brakes, which makes them most suitable for trains that only require a single locomotive. This differs from the electronic air brakes on the P42DC and P32AC-DM.* They also feature a builder's plate indicating that they were rebuilt under the auspices of the TIGER stimulus program.


----------



## Thirdrail7

It means that is has pneumatic controls  to control the brake functions  instead of electronic controls, like the newer equipment.


----------



## Acela150

Thirdrail7 said:


> It means that is has pneumatic controls  to control the brake functions  instead of electronic controls, like the newer equipment.


Thank ya!


----------



## GiantsFan

Not sure if this is the right thread, but spotted a pacific surfliner charger in Oakland! (In the yard). 

Woukd it be up here for service?


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

With the P42's reaching their age, and many of the State Corridors ordering SC-44's, would there likely be any chance of Virginia placing an order of SC-44's for NE Regional service?


----------



## Ryan

They don’t provide locomotives now, so I see no reason for them to buy some out of the goodness of their hearts. 

If they’re compelled to start providing motive power, maybe?


----------



## jis

I think NY State will acquire dual modes, possibly based on the SC-44 base, either via Amtrak Empire or via MTA or both before acquiring any pure diesels.


----------



## cpotisch

jis said:


> I think NY State will acquire dual modes, possibly based on the SC-44 base, either via Amtrak Empire or via MTA or both before acquiring any pure diesels.


You think they’ll try for a catenary dual mode?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

no simply cause  FRA does not like third rail and catenary at same time .


----------



## cpotisch

Dutchrailnut said:


> no simply cause  FRA does not like third rail and catenary at same time .


I’m saying a diesel/catenary dual mode, not third rail.


----------



## PVD

NY uses 3rd rail and diesel dual modes on LIRR, MNRR, and pays a hefty chunk of the tab for the ones Amtrak uses. Not holding my breath waiting for that to change.  I can't recall any Cat/3rd rail combos for locos, only EMU's like MNRR/NH branch. That doesn't mean they don't exist, but I'm drawing a blank....


----------



## Acela150

Dutchrailnut said:


> no simply cause  FRA does not like third rail and catenary at same time .


I think you read a little to much into this cause even I picked up what he was hinting at. 



cpotisch said:


> I’m saying a diesel/catenary dual mode, not third rail.


I don’t think it’s likely. I can only think of one Railroad that does a power change “on the fly” from Third Rail to Overhead. That’s Metro North on their New Haven Line. Which occurs near Pelham. I’m also not entirely sure how much overhead there is outside of the Empire Connection Tunnel.


----------



## John Santos

Acela150 said:


> I think you read a little to much into this cause even I picked up what he was hinting at.
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t think it’s likely. I can only think of one Railroad that does a power change “on the fly” from Third Rail to Overhead. That’s Metro North on their New Haven Line. Which occurs near Pelham. I’m also not entirely sure how much overhead there is outside of the Empire Connection Tunnel.


The MBTA Blue Line subway uses 3rd rail underground and overhead catenary power above ground.  I've never noticed it stop to switch power source but maybe if it's quick enough and does it at a station, passengers wouldn't typically notice.  The Blue Line is standard-gauge heavy rail, but uses narrower cars than most because the original tunnel under Boston Harbor was built for streetcars and later converted to heavy rail.  Also it has extremely tight curves in the turnaround loop at the end, which forces the use of shorter cars (48').


----------



## west point

AFAIR the MBTA uses the same DC voltage 3rd rail and overhead.  Now as to if the power source is connected to both at the change over point some one will have to  answer.


----------



## cpotisch

John Santos said:


> The MBTA Blue Line subway uses 3rd rail underground and overhead catenary power above ground.  I've never noticed it stop to switch power source but maybe if it's quick enough and does it at a station, passengers wouldn't typically notice.  The Blue Line is standard-gauge heavy rail, but uses narrower cars than most because the original tunnel under Boston Harbor was built for streetcars and later converted to heavy rail.  Also it has extremely tight curves in the turnaround loop at the end, which forces the use of shorter cars (48').


Metro-North's New Haven line also switches between third rail or catenary, and does so while on the move (though the train gets a lot louder when running on CAT, so it's an easily detectable).

I was asking about a diesel/catenary dual mode because I know that the Empire Connection tunnels are equipped with catenary as well, and that third rail has some serious limitations stemming from the limited amount of power it can provide (doesn't the HVAC system have to be cycled on and off when a P32 is running on electric or something?).


----------



## Thirdrail7

cpotisch said:


> (doesn't the HVAC system have to be cycled on and﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿ o﻿﻿﻿﻿f﻿﻿f﻿ w﻿hen a P﻿32 is r﻿unning on electri﻿c ﻿or something?). ﻿﻿﻿﻿


No.


----------



## jis

west point said:


> AFAIR the MBTA uses the same DC voltage 3rd rail and overhead.  Now as to if the power source is connected to both at the change over point some one will have to  answer.


As mentioned by other, MNRR has transition between DC third rail and 12kV AC OHE in Pelham. The controls are set up such that it is impossible to simultaneously remain connected to both sources.

In Chicago Skokie Swift used to have a transition from third rail to overhead en route. That has all been converted to third rail now AFAIR.

There are numerous places in Europe where transition from one system to another happens on the fly, specially between lower voltage DC and high voltage AC systems, and thousands such take place every day with no mishap.

Examples of lines with far higher frequency service than anywhere in New York where this happens are:

London Thameslink from Southern Third Rail to 25kV catenary. Happens at a station, and this is now in Automatic Train Operation territory.

In the past Eurostar trains transition between 3rd rail and 25kV at Dollands Moor when they ran to Waterloo. Several Eurostars managed to loose a pantograph when the operator was not quick enough to retract it before passing under the first road overpass heading towards London from Dollands Moor.

Paris RER B - all trains transition from 25kV AC to 3kV DC catenary, exactly where I forget, but it is somewhere between Gare du Nord and Chatelet Le Halles AFAIR. Basically south of Paris electrification is low voltage DC (except the LGVs) and north is 25kV AC. Every train that crosses from one side to another goes through a voltage transition.


----------



## cpotisch

Thirdrail7 said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> (doesn't the HVAC system have to be cycled on and﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿ o﻿﻿﻿﻿f﻿﻿f﻿ w﻿hen a P﻿32 is r﻿unning on electri﻿c ﻿or something?). ﻿﻿﻿﻿
> 
> 
> 
> ﻿ No.
Click to expand...

This is what I was thinking of:



Dutchrailnut said:


> and let me add that the cars take a huge beating too, they were designed for continuous HEP, but on third rail electric each gap the HEP shuts off and has to cycle back on, the cars were never designed for that.
> 
> imagine shutting the HVAC system down and back on 20 times in 10 minutes leaving from platform to straight rail in tunnel.
> 
> you can imagine the failure rate of AC systems.


Can you explain what I'm misunderstanding here? Thanks!


----------



## Ryan

There are gaps in the third rail that the train has to coast through.  Each time it does that, power to the train is lost. When the power is lost, the HVAC shuts off, because there is no power to run it.

Go down into your basement and flip the breaker on and off for your whole house a few times, a couple of times a day and see how well systems designed to be powered continuously behave when power is repeatedly cycled.

(it won't end well)

((don't actually do that, it'll make your parents mad))

((if you do, don't tell them I told you to)))


----------



## cocojacoby

John Santos said:


> The MBTA Blue Line subway uses 3rd rail underground and overhead catenary power above ground.  I've never noticed it stop to switch power source but maybe if it's quick enough and does it at a station, passengers wouldn't typically notice.


The MBTA Blue Line changes from third rail to catenary at the airport station while stopped.  Used to do it underground at Maverick before third rail was extended.


----------



## PVD

It is not uncommon in AC systems for the mfr to warn against power cycling too quickly. what I was saying earlier, as regarding the MNRR, that is an EMU set, not a separate engine/motor. I couldn't think of a US application like that being  DM engine  cat/rail electric pulled.   P32-DM are only spec'd to 60mph electric, can't see why that should present a power issue on a single track stretch...


----------



## neroden

Ryan said:


> They don’t provide locomotives now, so I see no reason for them to buy some out of the goodness of their hearts.
> 
> If they’re compelled to start providing motive power, maybe?


Amtrak's charges for using Amtrak locomotives are rumored to be well higher thanthe costs of buying and running your own...


----------



## neroden

Ryan said:


> There are gaps in the third rail that the train has to coast through.  Each time it does that, power to the train is lost. When the power is lost, the HVAC shuts off, because there is no power to run it.
> 
> Go down into your basement and flip the breaker on and off for your whole house a few times, a couple of times a day and see how well systems designed to be powered continuously behave when power is repeatedly cycled.
> 
> (it won't end well)
> 
> ((don't actually do that, it'll make your parents mad))
> 
> ((if you do, don't tell them I told you to)))


Modern trains should have batteries to buffer the gap.  It does not take much.


----------



## Ryan

I was explaining the world as it is, not as it should be to answer the young man's question.


----------



## DSS&A

The Chicago Transit Authority  Skokie Swift change from 3rd Rail to overhead wire operation was onheritated when the CTA took over a short portion of the abandoned Chicago North Shore &  Milwaukee RR in the mid-1960s. CNS&M ended operations in January 1963.

CNS&M used trolley poles and operated at speeds up to 90mph under trolley wire.  The change to raise and lower the trolley poles was done at speed.  A friend of mine knew a few CNS&M conductors and they told him they had to stand between the cars to raise and lower the poles.  Even after years of experience,  they said it was a challenge to raise the poles at night in a rain or snowstorm at speed!  The transition between 3rd rail and overhead wire happened at Crawford Avenue in Skokie, Il.

Here's a link to an article with photos of the Electroliners operating in both 3rd rail and overhead territories. 

https://www.cruiselinehistory.com/the-electroliner-90-miles-per-hour-from-milwaukee-to-chicago/


----------



## Thirdrail7

neroden said:


> Modern trains should have batteries to buffer the gap.  It does not take much.


They do have batteries to buffer the gap. However, the batteries aren't for the energy sucking, high powered HVAC system.


----------



## DSS&A

The electronic sign on the nose of the Charger loco is great for knowing what train you are looking at.   The Feb 28th Illinois Zephyr had three superliners instead of single-level coaches.


----------



## jrud

Lots of Charger info at http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Pages/2019-Annual-Meeting-.aspx


----------



## Acela150

jrud said:


> Lots of Charger info at http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Pages/2019-Annual-Meeting-.aspx


Some good info all around in that link.


----------



## PerRock

For those who don't want to weed thru the pdfs; here are some extracted images:

Side views of all the Chargers

A new render of the Amtrak Charger, the ALC-42

ALC-42 spec sheet #1

ALC-42 spec sheet #2

peter


----------



## cpotisch

How'd they settle on the name "ALC-42"? The A and the 42 are obvious, but what's the LC?


----------



## PerRock

My guess is Amtrak Long Charger 42... since it's the long distance variant.

peter


----------



## Acela150

PerRock said:


> My guess is Amtrak Long Charger 42... since it's the long distance variant.
> 
> peter


Stop. Stop. Stop. That's how bad info gets spread.


----------



## jis

Acela150 said:


> Stop. Stop. Stop. That's how bad info gets spread.


People who actually bothered to take the time to read the slides would have found that the title of the slide that presents the Amtrak Charger specs is

" [SIZE=39.3973px]Amtrak Long[/SIZE][SIZE=39.397333333333336px]-[/SIZE][SIZE=39.3973px]distance Charger (ALC42)[/SIZE] "

If that does not explain where the ALC comes from I have no idea what could be a more convincing argument.

So Peter is really not that far off in what he said - Amtrak appears to think it is "Amtrak Long-distance Charger - 4,200 HP continuous rating" in short ALC42.

If Siemens follows their own convention used so far, they might dub it as SCA-42 (Siemens Charger Amtrak - 4200HP) or maybe SCL-42 (L for long-distance), in line with SC-44 and SCB-40.


----------



## frequentflyer

So is the "bolt on nose", the same that nose that the Canada Rail unit uses?


----------



## jis

frequentflyer said:


> So is the "bolt on nose", the same that nose that the Canada Rail unit uses?


Good question. I have no clue. The artists rendition pictures look different from the VIA ones at least at first blush.


----------



## Acela150

jis said:


> People who actually bothered to take the time to read the slides would have found that the title of the slide that presents the Amtrak Charger specs is
> 
> " [SIZE=39.3973px]Amtrak Long[/SIZE][SIZE=39.397333333333336px]-[/SIZE][SIZE=39.3973px]distance Charger (ALC42)[/SIZE] "
> 
> If that does not explain where the ALC comes from I have no idea what could be a more convincing argument.
> 
> So Peter is really not that far off in what he said - Amtrak appears to think it is "Amtrak Long-distance Charger - 4,200 HP continuous rating" in short ALC42.
> 
> If Siemens follows their own convention used so far, they might dub it as SCA-42 (Siemens Charger Amtrak - 4200HP) or maybe SCL-42 (L for long-distance), in line with SC-44 and SCB-40.


I read the slides at least twice. I just didn't see that. 



frequentflyer said:


> So is the "bolt on nose", the same that nose that the Canada Rail unit uses?


I'm going to guess it's similar to what is on the P40/42's. Simply cause that's what they refer to them as. "Bolt on noses".


----------



## cpotisch

Acela150 said:


> I read the slides at least twice. I just didn't see that.


Yep, sometimes people read through stuff thoroughly and still don't notice certain aspects or get a bit confused by it. It happens.


----------



## frequentflyer

jis said:


> Good question. I have no clue. The artists rendition pictures look different from the VIA ones at least at first blush.


http://americantrainz.com/personal/New-US-Trains/ALC 42.jpg

Not seeing the bolt on nose.

The Siemens units with bolt on noses are Via and Virgin (Brightline).


----------



## Acela150

frequentflyer said:


> http://americantrainz.com/personal/New-US-Trains/ALC 42.jpg
> Not seeing the bolt on nose.
> The Siemens units with bolt on noses are Via and Virgin (Brightline).


I wouldn’t look to much into the Bolt On Nose in that rendering.


----------



## Josh M

It looks like they're either testing the Chargers or starting to deploy them on the Wolverine. I pass the Pontiac, MI station on the way home every night, and this evening 355 had a Charger on both ends. They hadn't backed into the station for boarding yet and most of the cars were behind trees and buildings further south with only the locomotives easily visible on either side of those, and I couldn't see if there was also a P42 inserted behind the Charger at the forward end. One of the Chargers had been sitting just north of the station for several days now, so I figured something might be up in the near future. Sadly couldn't stop to get any pictures today.


----------



## NSC1109

Josh M said:


> It looks like they're either testing the Chargers or starting to deploy them on the Wolverine. I pass the Pontiac, MI station on the way home every night, and this evening 355 had a Charger on both ends. They hadn't backed into the station for boarding yet and most of the cars were behind trees and buildings further south with only the locomotives easily visible on either side of those, and I couldn't see if there was also a P42 inserted behind the Charger at the forward end. One of the Chargers had been sitting just north of the station for several days now, so I figured something might be up in the near future. Sadly couldn't stop to get any pictures today.



Chargers have been deployed on 350/355. 364/365 are rumored to be next in line.

Well so far the rollout for the flagship MI services hasn’t gone well. 350 is now over an hour late because they were held in NBU for some reason.


----------



## Josh M

NSC1109 said:


> Chargers have been deployed on 350/355. 364/365 are rumored to be next in line.
> 
> Well so far the rollout for the flagship MI services hasn’t gone well. 350 is now over an hour late because they were held in NBU for some reason.



Up to an hour and 41 minutes now. Ouch. Hopefully they get the kinks ironed out quickly, then get them on the rest of the Wolverines and the Blue Water. I'm taking 353 in mid-August.


----------



## NSC1109

Josh M said:


> Up to an hour and 41 minutes now. Ouch. Hopefully they get the kinks ironed out quickly, then get them on the rest of the Wolverines and the Blue Water. I'm taking 353 in mid-August.











350 today. Wish it wasn’t pouring but oh well.


----------



## cocojacoby

I hope they do go with a better looking bolt-on nose like the VIA design.


----------



## Acela150

Josh M said:


> Up to an hour and 41 minutes now. Ouch. Hopefully they get the kinks ironed out quickly, then get them on the rest of the Wolverines and the Blue Water. I'm taking 353 in mid-August.



If it relates to the PTC, it's sadly a common issue right now and no railroad is immune to PTC issues. Amtrak went the right way on the NEC by installing ACSES. No computer to load etc.


----------



## NSC1109

Acela150 said:


> If it relates to the PTC, it's sadly a common issue right now and no railroad is immune to PTC issues. Amtrak went the right way on the NEC by installing ACSES. No computer to load etc.



Part of it might be PTC, I know Amtrak MoW was doing some work between NBU and NLS that day too which didn’t help. 

Normally it’s the drawbridge near 502 on the Chicago Line that causes the delays.


----------



## west point

The picture of the New Acela-2s brings up a question. Noticed that the front coupler shown was a pin and socket type coupler. Hopefully this will not mean that a -2 can only be towed at 10 MPH or less as the -1s are limit speeds. Either there should be a "H" coupler adapter stowed on each end of the -2s or Amtrak will need adapter couplers on all motors and locos assigned to the NEC? First option IMHO is better as any freight loco will be able to attach to a broken down Acela-2.

Amtrak needs every decision to allow for the greatest ability to maintain schedule not only for a broken down train but to not delay all other trains in a broken down train. This applies to all type of equipment on the NEC including commuter rail equipment.


----------



## Acela150

NSC1109 said:


> Part of it might be PTC, I know Amtrak MoW was doing some work between NBU and NLS that day too which didn’t help.
> 
> Normally it’s the drawbridge near 502 on the Chicago Line that causes the delays.



MOW will do some damage if need be. 



west point said:


> The picture of the New Acela-2s brings up a question. Noticed that the front coupler shown was a pin and socket type coupler. Hopefully this will not mean that a -2 can only be towed at 10 MPH or less as the -1s are limit speeds. Either there should be a "H" coupler adapter stowed on each end of the -2s or Amtrak will need adapter couplers on all motors and locos assigned to the NEC? First option IMHO is better as any freight loco will be able to attach to a broken down Acela-2.
> 
> Amtrak needs every decision to allow for the greatest ability to maintain schedule not only for a broken down train but to not delay all other trains in a broken down train. This applies to all type of equipment on the NEC including commuter rail equipment.



While IMO the above post belongs in the New Acela thread I'll try to provide some insight. 

The new HST's are extremely European. e.g. 50/50 seating, centered engineers console, etc. Part of the European design is the stlye of coupler shown. In Europe it's very common to see two trainsets coupled together and in service.


----------



## jis

I am certain they will carry an adapter in each power head. 

I saw a remarkable us of Scharfenberg Couplers on a pair of Siemens new ICE sets this morning in Amsterdam Centraal. ICE 105 to Basel SBB was scheduled to be a pair of ICE sets. I took it to Frankfurt am Main Flughafen. 

The storage yard at Amsterdam apparently cannot store two ICE sets coupled together in a single storage track. So they simply brought the train into the platform in two pieces, hitched them together, loaded them and off they went. The joining of the two sets took less than a couple of minutes involving a couple of button pushes and a brake test. Even the clamshells that cover the couplers can be opened and closed remotely with the push of a button!


----------



## NSC1109

Amtrak 364/365 (Blue Water) is now equipped with Chargers. This was my first chance to spend any significant time around one and I was impressed. General public probably didn’t even notice.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

tread drift much ? from Chargers to New Acela ?? ***.


----------



## Acela150

Dutchrailnut said:


> tread drift much ? from Chargers to New Acela ?? ***.


----------



## Agent

This video of the first _Wolverine_ with Chargers was posted by Michigan Central Lines on Saturday. It shows Amtrak #355 at Ann Arbor with IDTX 4612 up front and IDTX 4630 on the rear.



Huron & Eastern Railfan posted this video on Sunday of Amtrak #364 at Durand led by IDTX 4614.


----------



## jiml

They're nice-looking units. I can't help hoping VIA backtracks on the yellow and black to go with something more aesthetically pleasing.


----------



## NSC1109

jiml said:


> They're nice-looking units. I can't help hoping VIA backtracks on the yellow and black to go with something more aesthetically pleasing.



I think Amtrak would be doing themselves a disservice by basing their Chargers on the VIA Chargers...I like the MI ones, modern, sleek, and functional. The VIA ones look weird. 

Frankly I also wish that Amtrak creates a livery similar to that of the Midwest version but under the "Amtrak America" brand like the new Viewliners. Bit of joke that it came to be on the new cars but is apparently not being looked at for the new power...not having a unified brand makes the company look disorganized.


----------



## KnightRail

Southwest Chief #3 departing Chicago today:
202, IDTX4617, IDTX4618, 69004...


----------



## NSC1109

KnightRail said:


> Southwest Chief #3 departing Chicago today:
> 202, IDTX4617, IDTX4618, 69004...



Two Chargers on a LD train? Is Amtrak testing them on LD service?


----------



## neroden

NSC1109 said:


> Bit of joke that it came to be on the new cars but is apparently not being looked at for the new power...not having a unified brand makes the company look disorganized.



Since the company is disorganized, that seems like it's truth in advertising, right?


----------



## NSC1109

neroden said:


> Since the company is disorganized, that seems like it's truth in advertising, right?



I mean, you’re not wrong


----------



## Acela150

NSC1109 said:


> Two Chargers on a LD train? Is Amtrak testing them on LD service?



Yes. Remember that they ordered several Chargers for LD Service.


----------



## NSC1109

Acela150 said:


> Yes. Remember that they ordered several Chargers for LD Service.



Yes I remember that order. I just didn’t think that they would be testing the Chargers on LD service this early.


----------



## Agent

Here's a video by Caleb Pollock of the Charger test train in a snowstorm at Spanish Fork Canyon in Utah.


----------



## jis

NSC1109 said:


> Yes I remember that order. I just didn’t think that they would be testing the Chargers on LD service this early.


Amtrak is trying to avoid a separate certification process for the ALC-42s, by doing the necessary LD tests using SC-44s. Apparently FRA has designated what tests must be carried out for them to consider such. Hence the tests.


----------



## neroden

Makes sense, it'll get the ALC-42s into service faster if they're "pre-certified".


----------



## rickycourtney

jis said:


> Amtrak is trying to avoid a separate certification process for the ALC-42s, by doing the necessary LD tests using SC-44s. Apparently FRA has designated what tests must be carried out for them to consider such. Hence the tests.


Interesting, I hadn’t thought about that before.

I had guessed the point of the tests was so Amtrak and Siemens discovering any weaknesses with the Charger locomotives on long distance routes before construction begins on the ALC-42s.


----------



## Tom in PA

Love the 2020 version of the Mars Oscillating headlight. Used to see the Mars lighting up the sky back in 1948 when the Tennessean roared northbound by Forest Hill, TN when I was a kid


----------



## railiner

jis said:


> Amtrak is trying to avoid a separate certification process for the ALC-42s, by doing the necessary LD tests using SC-44s. Apparently FRA has designated what tests must be carried out for them to consider such. Hence the tests.


Oops...hope it is nothing like the Boeing 'Max' experience....
Just kidding, people...I know it is not comparable...


----------



## railiner

Tom in PA said:


> Love the 2020 version of the Mars Oscillating headlight. Used to see the Mars lighting up the sky back in 1948 when the Tennessean roared northbound by Forest Hill, TN when I was a kid


Nothing can compare to the 'Mars Light'...
I used to get hypnotizied, sitting in the RF seat in dome cars, as their figure '8' pattern swept across the Nebraska landscape riding the Zephyr's...and several other trains around the country.


----------



## frequentflyer

What was the reason for the Mars light?


----------



## railiner

frequentflyer said:


> What was the reason for the Mars light?


Same as the current 'ditch lights'...to attract the attention of driver's approaching grade crossings...


----------



## Rover




----------



## jiml

Mike Armstrong shoots good video.


----------



## Night Ranger

jiml said:


> Mike Armstrong shoots good video.



He certainly does.


----------



## Agent

There is a report that today's westbound _California Zephyr_ out of Chicago, Amtrak #5(18), has two Chargers and a P42 for power.


----------



## west point

Will Amtrak use their usual refueling spots or will the smaller Charger tanks require additional stops for fuel >


----------



## daybeers

west point said:


> Will Amtrak use their usual refueling spots or will the smaller Charger tanks require additional stops for fuel >


The long-distance version of the Charger has a larger fuel tank, but I would still be interested in the answer to this question.


----------



## Thirdrail7

It has the IDOT engines 28 and 32 but it isn't likely they'll stop anywhere extra. They aren't all online at the same time.


----------



## west point

Correct these SC-44s are the small tank commuter variety. Will need more refueling than regular P-42s.


----------



## F900ElCapitan

Agent said:


> There is a report that today's westbound _California Zephyr_ out of Chicago, Amtrak #5(18), has two Chargers and a P42 for power.



It does, I watched it on the Galesburg webcam.


----------



## west point

Is one of the Chargers providing HEP for the test or has HEP being provided by the P-42 ?


----------



## Agent

Here's a video by Mike Jensen from yesterday of Amtrak #5(18) with the two Chargers stopping at Fort Morgan, Colorado. There's also a video on Facebook of the train passing Rifle, Colorado.


----------



## BBoy

Nice ....I hope these Siemens Sprinter engines have finely tuned K5LA horns like the F-40's and not the second generation hybrid K5LA horns....


----------



## Ryan

Sadly, this trip didn't go well:

https://www.kolotv.com/content/news...-vs-cement-truck-crash-on-I-80-568047281.html

Screen grab from the embedded video shows a Charger with a smashed windshield from a cement truck:



(has it's own thread here: https://discuss.amtraktrains.com/th...in-crash-with-concrete-truck-near-reno.77052/)


----------



## Agent

Here's a video by allaboardnv that shows how the train got moving again with a Union Pacific engine, UP 8817, in the lead. The video includes a close-up shot of the lead Charger at the Reno station.


----------



## Agent

Both Chargers are returning eastward on Amtrak #6(21). MobileRailSpotterRxR caught this _California Zephyr_ today at Sacramento, California. P42 AMTK 14 is leading now. The front of the damaged SC-44 has been covered up.


----------



## F900ElCapitan

Agent said:


> Both Chargers are returning eastward on Amtrak #6(21). MobileRailSpotterRxR caught this _California Zephyr_ today at Sacramento, California. P42 AMTK 14 is leading now. The front of the damaged SC-44 has been covered up.



Interesting! I would think dedication to the test would dictate turning the Chargers and still having 14 in reserve. Then again, this raises another question...why didn’t they just rearrange the engines after the incident to make 14 the leader and not attach the UP engine?


----------



## Agent

I believe it was probably faster overall to just attach the UP engine to the front of the train.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

F900ElCapitan said:


> Interesting! I would think dedication to the test would dictate turning the Chargers and still having 14 in reserve. Then again, this raises another question...why didn’t they just rearrange the engines after the incident to make 14 the leader and not attach the UP engine?


Since it occurred on single track, there may not have been a siding nearby to facilitate a swap. Even on double track, where the next switch is located would need to be taken into consideration.


----------



## west point

We might suspect that the HEP connections were damaged on the Charger ? That would have precluded placing the P-42 on front until repairs completed at Emeryville ?


----------



## jis

I am actually surprised that the front coupler brake pipes of the front SC-44 were working just fine so as to be able to attach the rescue locomotive. The collision was a glancing blow to the rear of the truck or something like that I suppose.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

jis said:


> I am actually surprised that the front coupler brake pipes of the front SC-44 were working just fine so as to be able to attach the rescue locomotive. The collision was a glancing blow to the rear of the truck or something like that I suppose.


Maybe they used a large bungee cord.


----------



## bretton88

Don't the Chargers use Urea? How is Amtrak going to handle urea refills en route?


----------



## west point

Here Urea or Diesel exhaust fuel (DEF) is delivered to our large gasoline stations by a dedicated tanker trailer. Have not observed any truck or trailer carrying DEF and Diesel in separate compartments. If any observer has seen a truck so equipped then that distributor will get contract. Or distributor will supply two trucks ?A 5000 gallon truck for diesel and 1000 for DEF should be enough except for any route that has 3 locos ( EB in winter )


----------



## Agent

Here's a couple videos from yesterday of Amtrak #6(21) with the two Chargers. Carter Rose caught it east of Lincoln, Nebraska.



Metra BNSF Rails filmed it near the end of its journey at Riverside, Illinois.


----------



## west point

Noticed that outbound @5 only one Charger had internal light on. Returning @6 both Chargers internal light on. Ideas ?


----------



## PaulM

The videos appeared to show 4 cars before the diner. Would there be 3 sleepers in addition to the transdorm in the dead of Winter?


----------



## F900ElCapitan

PaulM said:


> The videos appeared to show 4 cars before the diner. Would there be 3 sleepers in addition to the transdorm in the dead of Winter?


Yep, along with an extra baggage car. My thoughts are they added these cars for weight to “stress” the engines a little more on the trip. When 5 was outbound in Galesburg, the first (forward) sleeper didn’t open it’s door, thus I believe it was deadheading.


----------



## Agent

Here's a video by jca1995 of the southbound _Auto Train_, Amtrak #53(02), with the Charger IDTX 4632 in between two P40DCs.



Here's another video of this train by M. R. Newton.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Agent said:


> Here's a video by jca1995 of the southbound _Auto Train_, Amtrak #53(02), with the Charger IDTX 4632 in between two P40DCs.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's another video of this train by M. R. Newton.



I wonder why it was sandwiched rather than in the lead? One would think they'd put it in the lead for testing.


----------



## jrud

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I wonder why it was sandwiched rather than in the lead? One would think they'd put it in the lead for testing.



It’s been a while, but I think they used a similar phased approach when they were testing/introducing MARC Chargers on trains with paying passengers. First, they had a Charger as a trailing unit behind a MP36PH-3C. Then leading a MP36PH-3C. Finally, the Charger was trusted by itself. That allowed them to work out any problems systematically with lower initial risk. They were less cautious with pure test trains without paying passengers.


----------



## west point

My take on testing chargers is different. Only run them leading a little as possible. Instead let a P-40 or P-42 lead and take the next 20 vehicle crossing accidents. Let us save the Chargers as much as possible.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Most crews outside their normal territory are not qualified on the engines so they tend not to operate them in lead in foreign crew bases.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Well, this is interesting! But I can't tell whether it's the official scheme for the ALC-42's or if it's just a prototype scheme.



http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/Annual%20Meetings/2020/Amtrak%20Procurement%20presentation%20NGEC%20%281%29.pdf


----------



## Acela150

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Well, this is interesting! But I can't tell whether it's the official scheme for the ALC-42's or if it's just a prototype scheme.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/Annual%20Meetings/2020/Amtrak%20Procurement%20presentation%20NGEC%20%281%29.pdf



I believe it's not the final paint job.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Acela150 said:


> I believe it's not the final paint job.


I wouldn't think so either. I would think they'll be painted with the standard Phase V scheme.


----------



## rickycourtney

WSDOT has a blog post that, in part, talks about their replacement Charger locomotive:


> A new Charger locomotive will be delivered to Seattle by September to replace the one lost in the 2017 derailment. It's being paid for with insurance proceeds from Amtrak. Locomotive 1408 was manufactured at the Siemens facility in Sacramento – the same site all our other locomotives were crafted – and is now at the Transportation Technology Center test site in Pueblo, Colorado. It will be moved to Washington once testing is completed.


It's very interesting that they're sending a previously tested and approved locomotive model to TTCI for testing. I guess that could mean they made changes on this version of the Charger... or WSDOT is just being extremely cautious.


----------



## KnightRail

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I wouldn't think so either. I would think they'll be painted with the standard Phase V scheme.



Phase V/Phase VI/Phase IVb days are said to be numbered. Weight has been put behind a new phase. Just have to wait for now.


----------



## KnightRail

rickycourtney said:


> WSDOT has a blog post that, in part, talks about their replacement Charger locomotive:
> 
> It's very interesting that they're sending a previously tested and approved locomotive model to TTCI for testing. I guess that could mean they made changes on this version of the Charger... or WSDOT is just being extremely cautious.



More so for burn in and getting initial hours of run time logged. Just like all the Midwest chargers went to TTCI for that reason as part of the delivery and acceptance process.


----------



## NSC1109

KnightRail said:


> Phase V/Phase VI/Phase IVb days are said to be numbered. Weight has been put behind a new phase. Just have to wait for now.



Might I ask for your source? I'd love to check it out for myself and see what they've got cooking.


----------



## Acela150

NSC1109 said:


> Might I ask for your source? I'd love to check it out for myself and see what they've got cooking.



It's reliable info.


----------



## NSC1109

Acela150 said:


> It's reliable info.



I figured as much, I’m hoping to get a glimpse of what’s coming, if such a thing exists publicly right now.


----------



## Acela150

NSC1109 said:


> if such a thing exists publicly right now.



It doesn't. If it did, you'd know.


----------



## me_little_me

Acela150 said:


> It doesn't. If it did, you'd know.


It's not this color, is it?


----------



## Acela150

me_little_me said:


> It's not this color, is it?



Close.. It says "Delta" on it.  To soon?


----------



## NSC1109

Acela150 said:


> It doesn't. If it did, you'd know.



Fair enough!


----------



## jis

Amtrak Press Release on its plans for the ALC-42, with information on planned livery and deployment timeline. Seems pretty clear that the ALC-42 will be the replacement for the total P4x (except the ACDMs of course) fleet over time.









Amtrak Prepares for New Diesel Locomotive Fleet - Amtrak Media


Amtrak today released renderings and other information about the first of the diesel-electric locomotives that will replace the current fleet on the National Network, including all long distance and many state-sponsored routes.




media.amtrak.com





The livery is said to be interim, until a final new livery is announced for the new fleet of passenger cars and locomotives.


----------



## frequentflyer

Hmm different from VIA,the state's and Brightline locomotives


----------



## frequentflyer

Anyone else getting the "pointless" arrow vibe near the rear of the locomotive?


----------



## NSC1109

jis said:


> Amtrak Press Release on its plans for the ALC-42, with information on planned livery and deployment timeline. Seems pretty clear that the ALC-42 will be the replacement for the total P4x (except the ACDMs of course) fleet over time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amtrak Prepares for New Diesel Locomotive Fleet - Amtrak Media
> 
> 
> Amtrak today released renderings and other information about the first of the diesel-electric locomotives that will replace the current fleet on the National Network, including all long distance and many state-sponsored routes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> media.amtrak.com



I just saw it.

Oh my god.

Im usually pretty open to new stuff but my
god this is abhorrent. Go back to the battleship grey. At least it isn’t the whole fleet.


----------



## jis

NSC1109 said:


> I just saw it.
> 
> Oh my god.
> 
> Im usually pretty open to new stuff but my
> god this is abhorrent. Go back to the battleship grey. At least it isn’t the whole fleet.


Note that this is interim livery pending the conversion to a more standardized fleet livery that is to be revealed, apparently soon.


----------



## Ryan

I can dig it. I like the subtle nod to the pointless arrow.


----------



## NSC1109

jis said:


> Note that this is interim livery pending the conversion to a more standardized fleet livery that is to be revealed, apparently soon.



Yeah I read that. Thank goodness. At the same time, I don’t get why they’re going to do this and then repaint them. Are these vinyl or wraps or something, or is this actual paint? How expensive is it to paint a locomotive?


----------



## jis

It depends on how many will actually see this livery. If it is just a 2020 thing and they expect to have the more permanent Phase VI by early to mid 2021 maybe it makes some sense. Also it depends on how different the new Phase VI is from this. So I don't think there is enough info there to make a reasonable determination this way or that.

Now if all this is indicative of a more solid commitment to daily LD service on all existing routes and more, I could even live with Battleship Grey


----------



## Bob Dylan

jis said:


> It depends on how many will actually see this livery. If it is just a 2020 thing and they expect to have the more permanent Phase VI by early to mid 2021 maybe it makes some sense. Also it depends on how different the new Phase VI is from this. So I don't think there is enough info there to make a reasonable determination this way or that.
> 
> Now if all this is indicative of a more solid commitment to daily LD service on all existing routes and more, I could even live with Battleship Grey


The New York Central did a great job with Grey,especially on the 20th Century Ltd.


----------



## jis

Bob Dylan said:


> The New York Central did a great job with Grey!


I did not particularly like that either. But fortunately I was many thousand miles away from it.


----------



## John Bobinyec

Something like engine 184 would be nice - gray/silver with blue and red accents.

The scheme they have unveiled, even as a temporary livery, is too gaudy.

jb


----------



## rickycourtney

Personally, I really like this livery. It's a nice blend of the "pointless arrow" and the Acela blue.

These things are always subjective, and no livery will make everyone happy.

According to the press release, five locomotives will be painted in this livery, one will be painted in a special 50th Anniversary livery, and the remaining 69 locomotives will be in a new, yet to be released Phase VII scheme.

My guess is that Amtrak is still designing the Phase VII scheme "by committee" and Siemens couldn't wait any longer to get the first six locomotives into the paint shop.


----------



## jiml

rickycourtney said:


> Personally, I really like this livery. It's a nice blend of the "pointless arrow" and the Acela blue.
> 
> These things are always subjective, and no livery will make everyone happy.
> 
> According to the press release, five locomotives will be painted in this livery, one will be painted in a special 50th Anniversary livery, and the remaining 69 locomotives will be in a new, yet to be released Phase VII scheme.
> 
> My guess is that Amtrak is still designing the Phase VII scheme "by committee" and Siemens couldn't wait any longer to get the first six locomotives into the paint shop.


It certainly makes the statement that many have called for in the other thread focused on mismatched paint schemes.


----------



## Crowbar_k

View attachment 18355


I don't know about the livery. What do you think? 









[US / Expert] Amtrak reveals the final design of its long-distance Charger


It is time to learn a new abbreviation: ALC-42. It stands for Amtrak Long-distance Charger, 4,200-horsepower. Railcolor has brought the stories of the 75 locomotives ordered, as well as them being …




railcolornews.com


----------



## Crowbar_k

Looks like they are paying homage to the original Amtrak logo.


----------



## NSC1109

Crowbar_k said:


> View attachment 18355
> 
> 
> I don't know about the livery. What do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [US / Expert] Amtrak reveals the final design of its long-distance Charger
> 
> 
> It is time to learn a new abbreviation: ALC-42. It stands for Amtrak Long-distance Charger, 4,200-horsepower. Railcolor has brought the stories of the 75 locomotives ordered, as well as them being …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> railcolornews.com



Ain’t great. Ain’t horrible. Not my top 10 but it’s also not phase II so....


----------



## PaTrainFan

I am not technically inclined when it comes to motive power, but I always wondered about what appears to be an open panel on each side of the engine. Would the weather not breach the key parts of the body?


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Well, the first ALC-42 has been completed, but still has yet to be painted!


----------



## rickycourtney

A photo of the partially completed ALC-42 was included in Amtrak's presentation to the NGEC Annual Meeting.


----------



## frequentflyer

No doubt these will have teething problems, they are having them now in the midwest. But so did the Genesis, and have been on the road for 25 years or more.


----------



## railiner

frequentflyer said:


> No doubt these will have teething problems, they are having them now in the midwest. But so did the Genesis, and have been on the road for 25 years or more.


Seems like almost all of Amtrak's 'new' locomotives had 'teething' problems from the SDP-40F to P-30CH to E-60, etc....
The ones that seemed to have the least were the F-40PH and AEM-7's....


----------



## jiml

If these have only minor variations from those running successfully in other parts of the country, I'm not sure much of the "teething" hasn't already happened. At least it shouldn't be as extreme as breaking in a completely new model - the problem in the past. Training is likely the biggest hurdle.


----------



## MARC Rider

railiner said:


> Seems like almost all of Amtrak's 'new' locomotives had 'teething' problems from the SDP-40F to P-30CH to E-60, etc....
> The ones that seemed to have the least were the F-40PH and AEM-7's....


The rollout of the ACS-64 was pretty smooth, at least from the perspective of a frequent passenger. On the other hand, the HHP-8's, oy.


----------



## Cal

I am not a huge fan of that livery, I don't know. Maybe it'll grow on me

I'm just going to miss the P42s..


----------



## Acela150

Cal said:


> I am not a huge fan of that livery, I don't know. Maybe it'll grow on me


It's not the final livery. 


jiml said:


> I'm not sure much of the "teething" hasn't already happened.


I'm actually going to disagree with you here slightly.

There are multiple PTC and ATC systems that will be combined for the first time on these units. In the Midwest, Northwest, and California they don't use them. MARC's are the only Chargers that are close to what Amtrak is getting.


----------



## Cal

Acela150 said:


> It's not the final livery.


Hmm, alrighty


----------



## Dutchrailnut

somehow that rear end is not going to do well with single level cars.


----------



## jiml

Dutchrailnut said:


> somehow that rear end is not going to do well with single level cars.



Why not?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

jiml said:


> Why not?
> 
> View attachment 20987


look at the picture of Amtrak charger door is about 3 feet higher than single level floor


----------



## jis

Dutchrailnut said:


> look at the picture of Amtrak charger door is about 3 feet higher than single level floor View attachment 20990


While that is quite true, it is also quite moot, since one is not supposed to walk through the engine compartment while the prime mover is operational under normal circumstances. I was told by the Brightline CMO that the door is there only for emergency egress, not for general use to bring breakfast to the Engineer  (hey that is what he said, don;t blame me). Of course that is just speaking of a single operators. Others may have other ideas.


----------



## Cal

jis said:


> While that is quite true, it is also quite moot, since one is not supposed to walk through the engine compartment while the prime mover is operational under normal circumstances. I was told by the Brightline CMO that the door is there only for emergency egress, not for general use to bring breakfast to the Engineer  (hey that is what he said, don;t blame me). Of course that is just speaking of a single operators. Others may have other ideas.


I was thinking this as well. I mean, have you ever seen the conductor go from the baggage car into the engine? What about the F40s? I don't think you could go between them and the cars either. And where the F59s are leading a single set?


----------



## Duane Witte

If I'm not mistaken the only Amtrak locomotive with a nose door is the P32BWH. So you would not be able to travel between cars and lead loco anyway if multiple units are being used.


----------



## jis

Duane Witte said:


> If I'm not mistaken the only Amtrak locomotive with a nose door is the P32BWH. So you would not be able to travel between cars and lead loco anyway if multiple units are being used.


Didn't they retrofit a tiny nose door into several of the P32AC-DMs to allow them to operate as a staffed unit through the Park Avenue tunnels too? Or was that idea canned?


----------



## Trogdor

jis said:


> Didn't they retrofit a tiny nose door into several of the P32AC-DMs to allow them to operate as a staffed unit through the Park Avenue tunnels too? Or was that idea canned?



They did, but it’s more of an escape hatch than a door.


----------



## Duane Witte

jis said:


> Didn't they retrofit a tiny nose door into several of the P32AC-DMs to allow them to operate as a staffed unit through the Park Avenue tunnels too? Or was that idea canned?


Yeah I believe they did install a small escape hatch in the nose of some. I had forgotten about those but that would definitely not be for casual access between locomotives


----------



## jiml

Cal said:


> I was thinking this as well. I mean, have you ever seen the conductor go from the baggage car into the engine? What about the F40s? I don't think you could go between them and the cars either.


The engineers on VIA have been known to pick up coffee from the BC galley behind the locomotive. Whether this is strictly permitted or not who knows? VIA uses F40's and P42's.


----------



## Cal

jiml said:


> The engineers on VIA have been known to pick up coffee from the BC galley behind the locomotive. Whether this is strictly permitted or not who knows? VIA uses F40's and P42's.


Well, wow! I stand corrected.


----------



## jis

jiml said:


> The engineers on VIA have been known to pick up coffee from the BC galley behind the locomotive. Whether this is strictly permitted or not who knows? VIA uses F40's and P42's.


VIA is an entirely different matter. Canadian rules can be quite different from American ones. For example the Renn fleet would probably never have gotten approved for operation in the US.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

keep in mind that it requires a cdr to bring train orders to Engineer, unless Engineer can take those orders when train is stopped, so the argument that no one can move trough engine compartment might not be 100% true


----------



## jis

Dutchrailnut said:


> keep in mind that it requires a cdr to bring train orders to Engineer, unless Engineer can take those orders when train is stopped, so the argument that no one can move trough engine compartment might not be 100% true


Them is the rule by which Brightline operated according to the guy I talked to at the Brightline maintenance facility in West Palm Beach year before last during the FECRS annual convention. I have no idea what Brightline might do when they start up again post-COVID, or for that matter any other outfit will do. Maybe they will scramble up/down the difference in floor height. It is not rocket science anyway. Of course when a train is double headed all bets are off anyway, which might be the case often on LD trains.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Brightline is not Amtrak and railroad I worked for did have exclusions for moving trough engine compartment


----------



## OBS

On trains I worked, the Conductor routinely went to the engine to assist the engineer when they were issued special instructions. Also, when we had two engineers, one would routinely come back to get coffee and use a "real" restroom....


----------



## Dutchrailnut




----------



## rickycourtney

Pretty cool photos posted to Twitter of the equipment in production at the Siemens plant in Sacramento.


The general consensus is that the locomotive on the top right in several shades of grey is a Charger SCB-40 for VIA. IMHO, it's definitely the coolest looking of the bunch.


----------



## LookingGlassTie

I'm gonna miss the P42s also, because I began traveling on Amtrak during the time of their use.


----------



## Cal

LookingGlassTie said:


> I'm gonna miss the P42s also, because I began traveling on Amtrak during the time of their use.


Me too. The chargers look too European for my taste, oh well.


----------



## Pipp

I don't know for sure, but I don't think the Chargers need any Urea treatment(one of their major selling points). I gonna miss the Genesis too, but they couldn't last foerver. Their ages are showing.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

running Genesis test trains now I feel frigginn old ... just sayinnn.


----------



## frequentflyer

Funny, I remember the rail fans gnashing of teeth when the Genesis showed up, stating they would not last as long as the great EMD F40. They were wrong, the Genesis lasted much longer.


----------



## PVD

Pipp said:


> I don't know for sure, but I don't think the Chargers need any Urea treatment(one of their major selling points). I gonna miss the Genesis too, but they couldn't last foerver. Their ages are showing.


they show a DEF tank in the specs, so I would say they likely do......in the list of differences between the corridor models and the Amtrak LD versions larger fuel and DEF tanks and a bigger sand box are main items...


----------



## Cal

frequentflyer said:


> Funny, I remember the rail fans gnashing of teeth when the Genesis showed up, stating they would not last as long as the great EMD F40. They were wrong, the Genesis lasted much longer.


I wonder how they feel now..


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

rickycourtney said:


> Pretty cool photos posted to Twitter of the equipment in production at the Siemens plant in Sacramento.
> 
> 
> The general consensus is that the locomotive on the top right in several shades of grey is a Charger SCB-40 for VIA. IMHO, it's definitely the coolest looking of the bunch.



I just noticed that it looks like the ALC-42's will not be fitted with strobes.


----------



## Cal

Is the one in the top right an ALC-42 with a different nose cone?


----------



## TheMalahat

Cal said:


> Is the one in the top right an ALC-42 with a different nose cone?



SC44, but basically yes. The 42 is an Amtrak specific long distance model.


----------



## Cal

TheMalahat said:


> SC44, but basically yes. The 42 is an Amtrak specific long distance model.


Yea, I know about that. I just didn't know they were getting a different nose cone for some SC44s... Thanks!


----------



## PVD

bolt on noses on Amtrak make mild crossing accident repairs much easier amongst other things


----------



## TheMalahat

PVD said:


> bolt on noses on Amtrak make mild crossing accident repairs much easier amongst other things



Well, at least it's supposed to 

Amtrak had been reporting back to States that they haven't actually been able to repair Chargers in a timely manner after collisions because of a lack of parts supply from Siemens. Perhaps time to buy a few extra noses like a celebrity and store them awaiting the inevitable use. Source: AASHTO - High Speed Rail - Section 305 Committee

Luckily for Via the statistical risk of an at grade collision is a lot lower.


----------



## MARC Rider

Pipp said:


> I don't know for sure, but I don't think the Chargers need any Urea treatment(one of their major selling points). I gonna miss the Genesis too, but they couldn't last foerver. Their ages are showing.


I think that nearly all heavy-duty diesel engines on the market today use SCR to meet tier IV, which means they'll be using urea, or "DEF". (SGR is "Selective Catalytic Reduction," and exhaust aftertreatment process.) It's possible to design an engine without SCR that meets tier IV standards, it's trickier, requiring tweaking the timing and using exhaust gas recirculation (EGR). If you remember the lousy performance of cars during the early 1970s before they started using catalytic converters, that was because EGR was the primary emission control system.

Both SCR and EGR mainly reduce NOx, but use of EGR to meet the NOx standards increases particulate emissions, and reduces fuel economy. All of the engines now have particulate filters to deal with that, but if the engine generates more soot, the particulate filter will have to be "regenerated" (i.e., the soot burned off) more often, which, of course, messes up the fuel economy. Thus, most long-haul trucks being built use engines with SCR. I'm not sure which manufacturers use it and which don't, and google isn't being very helpful at finding out. I have no idea whether any locomotive manufacturers are using Tier IV EGR engines or not.

I do know with the trucks, at least, these new emission systems can be tricky and require careful maintenance. Once, a bunch of us from work went out to a truck repair place in Maryland to talk up "clean diesel", and the owner was complaining about how the emissions systems are so complicated and hard to work on. We were sympathetic, but our group wasn't the one who made the rules, so we couldn't help him out. On the other hand, why should he complain, it was bringing more business to his shop.  Another time, I was testing a couple of trucks out in Pecos, Texas, and one of them started having problems with the emissions system. We ended up having to drive the bum truck to a dealer 2 1/2 hours away in Midland, Texas, and basically, that particular truck was out of commission for the entire two weeks I was stuck out in the desert. Fortunately, we had two trucks remaining, so were were able to get some work done. This was back in 2015, it's possible that with experience, the systems are more reliable now. It might be interesting, though, to find out what percentage of "mechanical issues" with the Chargers have to do with the emissions system.


----------



## railiner

MARC Rider said:


> I think that nearly all heavy-duty diesel engines on the market today use SCR to meet tier IV, which means they'll be using urea, or "DEF". (SGR is "Selective Catalytic Reduction," and exhaust aftertreatment process.) It's possible to design an engine without SCR that meets tier IV standards, it's trickier, requiring tweaking the timing and using exhaust gas recirculation (EGR). If you remember the lousy performance of cars during the early 1970s before they started using catalytic converters, that was because EGR was the primary emission control system.
> 
> Both SCR and EGR mainly reduce NOx, but use of EGR to meet the NOx standards increases particulate emissions, and reduces fuel economy. All of the engines now have particulate filters to deal with that, but if the engine generates more soot, the particulate filter will have to be "regenerated" (i.e., the soot burned off) more often, which, of course, messes up the fuel economy. Thus, most long-haul trucks being built use engines with SCR. I'm not sure which manufacturers use it and which don't, and google isn't being very helpful at finding out. I have no idea whether any locomotive manufacturers are using Tier IV EGR engines or not.
> 
> I do know with the trucks, at least, these new emission systems can be tricky and require careful maintenance. Once, a bunch of us from work went out to a truck repair place in Maryland to talk up "clean diesel", and the owner was complaining about how the emissions systems are so complicated and hard to work on. We were sympathetic, but our group wasn't the one who made the rules, so we couldn't help him out. On the other hand, why should he complain, it was bringing more business to his shop.  Another time, I was testing a couple of trucks out in Pecos, Texas, and one of them started having problems with the emissions system. We ended up having to drive the bum truck to a dealer 2 1/2 hours away in Midland, Texas, and basically, that particular truck was out of commission for the entire two weeks I was stuck out in the desert. Fortunately, we had two trucks remaining, so were were able to get some work done. This was back in 2015, it's possible that with experience, the systems are more reliable now. It might be interesting, though, to find out what percentage of "mechanical issues" with the Chargers have to do with the emissions system.


Excellent explanation. Thanks for posting. I had to deal with these issues with buses over the last decade before I retired. I can't begin to tell you (you already know), about the grief these complicated exhaust systems caused...at first, with "forced regeneration" (always at the worst times!), and later with issues of running low on DEF. Both maladies would cause the engines to "derate" into "limp home mode"....or worse...


----------



## railiner

A side issue for at least one bus model, the Prevost H3-45, was that the additional equipment required for the complicated exhaust system, which was not there when the model was first engineered, took away some cabin space. Whereas the last row of seats originally were alongside the restroom, they now had to be moved forward about 20" or so, to leave room for additional components between the rear cabin wall and the rear outside panel.


----------



## jis

Pipp said:


> I don't know for sure, but I don't think the Chargers need any Urea treatment(one of their major selling points). I gonna miss the Genesis too, but they couldn't last foerver. Their ages are showing.


The Chargers do need Urea.


----------



## me_little_me

jis said:


> The Chargers do need Urea.


It's always available onboard. It just has to have the pipes run from the passenger toilets and have a filter installed.


----------



## Agent

Video by Adam Ghimenti from yesterday showing four Chargers, including the Amtrak ALC-42, outside the Siemens facility at Sacramento.


----------



## frequentflyer

Is this the new livery or the special livery thats on the first 20 or so locomotives?


----------



## Pipp

PVD said:


> they show a DEF tank in the specs, so I would say they likely do......in the list of differences between the corridor models and the Amtrak LD versions larger fuel and DEF tanks and a bigger sand box are main items...


Oh...ok thanks guys for letting me know. I thought I heard somewhere that they didn't need Urea, especially compared to the F125 locomotive that Metrolink purchased. Where the Chargers are concerned: I think it would of been better if the extended the front windsheilds all the way towards edges. For better visibility.


----------



## NSC1109

frequentflyer said:


> Is this the new livery or the special livery thats on the first 20 or so locomotives?



it’s the special one, phase VI hasn’t been released yet.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Well, they've now officially revealed the schemes of the ALC-42's! This ought to be interesting!


----------



## Cal

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Well, they've now officially revealed the schemes of the ALC-42's! This ought to be interesting!



A thread was started about this earlier


----------



## jis

frequentflyer said:


> Is this the new livery or the special livery thats on the first 20 or so locomotives?


That most likely is 300 which will come in the standard livery for this class. 301 will be the special black day 1 livery.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

jis said:


> That most likely is 300 which will come in the standard livery for this class. 301 will be the special midnight blue livery.


Actually 301 will be the black "Day 1" livery. The "mignight blue" livery is being applied to a P42.


----------



## jis

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Actually 301 will be the black "Day 1" livery. The "mignight blue" livery is being applied to a P42.


Oh right. My brain fart. Corrected.


----------



## PerRock

Amtrak stated ages ago, that the first few Chargers that rolled off the line would have a temporary paint scheme applied to them... this is what you're seeing (It's missing the red, which I presume will be a sticker)

peter


----------



## west point

I am opposed to dark colors on trains. Winter conditions the cars radiate heat more to the outside making it feel colder inside and summer conditions the sun can do a real heat it up job. Ask persons who experienced dome cars in the summer. Turn off the HEP and the cars loose comfortable temps quicker. It applies to airplanes also as I have experienced it first hand..


----------



## railiner

I like best, stainless steel on trains. And polished aluminum on planes. Unfortunately the newer aircraft with composite skin, must be painted...
The Burlington at one time even had stainless steel on their locomotives, the unique E-5's to match their Zephyr consists...


----------



## jiml

railiner said:


> And polished aluminum on planes.


There was nothing quite like a row of shiny AA planes back in the day.


----------



## PVD

Boeing & MD used to do a pretty good job of "matching" the aluminum for appearance, Airbus was not as interested in that, and the A-300s that AA put into service sort of ended it for them. The Fokker 100 was partial, but I'm not sure too many people noticed them....


----------



## Chris I

PVD said:


> Boeing & MD used to do a pretty good job of "matching" the aluminum for appearance, Airbus was not as interested in that, and the A-300s that AA put into service sort of ended it for them. The Fokker 100 was partial, but I'm not sure too many people noticed them....


That was due to composite structures used in the A300 series. They wouldn't have been able to achieve a full polished aluminum look.

Both the 787 and A350 have fully composite fuselage, so I don't think we'll ever see the polished aluminum look again.


----------



## jis

west point said:


> I am opposed to dark colors on trains. Winter conditions the cars radiate heat more to the outside making it feel colder inside and summer conditions the sun can do a real heat it up job. Ask persons who experienced dome cars in the summer. Turn off the HEP and the cars loose comfortable temps quicker. It applies to airplanes also as I have experienced it first hand..


What? You managed to hitch a ride on Hugh Heffner's black plane?


----------



## PVD

Airbus also had the challenge of fabricating sections in multiple locations and assembling them at another point so even the aluminum sections would be a daunting challenge...A-300 composite use was predominantly in the tail fin, but it would have looked bad if left bare with only the tail painted..


----------



## railiner

jiml said:


> There was nothing quite like a row of shiny AA planes back in the day.


Loved them...especially in the “Astrojet” scheme


----------



## jiml

PVD said:


> Boeing & MD used to do a pretty good job of "matching" the aluminum for appearance, Airbus was not as interested in that, and the A-300s that AA put into service sort of ended it for them. The Fokker 100 was partial, but I'm not sure too many people noticed them....


I actually liked the little Fokkers.  Only 8 F seats, but if you nailed an upgrade you had a good chance of a hot meal, unlike other similar size planes which had only a cold galley.

Also, in 2 million miles of flying, my only touch, then take-off again due to "traffic" on the runway. They could climb... fast!


----------



## jiml

railiner said:


> Loved them...especially in the “Astrojet” scheme


This one?


----------



## PVD

I never saw an AA Fokker that way, only in mostly polished aluminum with painted tail and engine nacelles. Only flew on once, and on an Alleghany F-28 it predecessor once. Both better than the BAC-111 I rode once or twice. Anyway, we should get back to the real topic, or move this, we are drifting (and I am guilty)


----------



## jis

Welcome to the airliners.net branch of AU 

We could call it the "Rails to the Sky Forum"


----------



## frequentflyer

jis said:


> *Welcome to the airliners.net branch of AU*
> 
> We could call it the "Rails to the Sky Forum"



Good one JIS..........Good one.   

Did not know Anet was so popular.


----------



## frequentflyer

PVD said:


> Airbus also had the challenge of fabricating sections in multiple locations and assembling them at another point so even the aluminum sections would be a daunting challenge...A-300 composite use was predominantly in the tail fin, but it would have looked bad if left bare with only the tail painted..



Eventually AA found a way for the A300 to have a metallic finish.


----------



## rickycourtney

After so many years of Amtrak's second "rainbow era" with Phase V locomotives, Phase III Viewliner II cars, and Phase VI Superliners and Amfleet... I'm hoping that Phase VII will be a return to a more consistent look.


----------



## Cal

rickycourtney said:


> After so many years of Amtrak's second "rainbow era" with Phase V locomotives, Phase III Viewliner II cars, and Phase VI Superliners and Amfleet... I'm hoping that Phase VII will be a return to a more consistent look.


Me too!

And currently, on the Surfline, there are some trains with three different car liveries!

The Surfliner car, California (Capitol Corridor) car, and superliner. And you will sometimes see a p42 on it as well. It's so irritating to me!


----------



## railiner

jiml said:


> This one?


Not bad but I liked the original better...


https://www.marxwildwest.com/airports/actual%20american%20airlines%20707.jpg


----------



## railiner

rickycourtney said:


> After so many years of Amtrak's second "rainbow era" with Phase V locomotives, Phase III Viewliner II cars, and Phase VI Superliners and Amfleet... I'm hoping that Phase VII will be a return to a more consistent look.


I agree...and especially dislike all the individual state schemes. If they are Amtrak, they should all be in uniform Amtrak scheme. If another agency operates them, then they should not be in Amtrak scheme...


----------



## Cal

railiner said:


> I agree...and especially dislike all the individual state schemes. If they are Amtrak, they should all be in uniform Amtrak scheme. If another agency operates them, then they should not be in Amtrak scheme...


Personally, I like the unique schemes! It gives them identity I guess.


----------



## railiner

Cal said:


> Personally, I like the unique schemes! It gives them identity I guess.


I am sure most railfans would agree with your view...part of the hobby is spotting all the differences great and small in equipment. If all were identical, it would be boring to some...


----------



## rickycourtney

railiner said:


> I agree...and especially dislike all the individual state schemes. If they are Amtrak, they should all be in uniform Amtrak scheme. If another agency operates them, then they should not be in Amtrak scheme...


I disagree with you on this one. The states are paying the money to purchase the equipment and operate the trains... and they are entitled to paint them however they want. I don't blame most of them for wanting to have a brand unique from Amtrak's national network. Heck, even Amtrak has a unique brand for Acela to distance it from the equipment used on the national network.


----------



## jiml

Not that there's a poll or anything, but I really like the dark blue one. Classy.


----------



## jis

rickycourtney said:


> I disagree with you on this one. The states are paying the money to purchase the equipment and operate the trains... and they are entitled to paint them however they want. I don't blame most of them for wanting to have a brand unique from Amtrak's national network. Heck, even Amtrak has a unique brand for Acela to distance it from the equipment used on the national network.


I agree with you. Just because Amtrak is contracted to run a service does not make it an Amtrak service. Different liveries for different service is standard practice all over the world even when run by the same outfit. It is mostly done for differential branding identities.


----------



## Cal

jis said:


> I agree with you. Just because Amtrak is contracted to run a service does not make it an Amtrak service. Different liveries for different service is standard practice all over the world even when run by the same outfit. It is mostly done for differential branding identities.


And I wonder how many people have already gotten on a corridor train instead of an LD train by accident WITH different liveries, surely it would increase if they looked identical


----------



## jis

Cal said:


> And I wonder how many people have already gotten on a corridor train instead of an LD train by accident WITH different liveries, surely it would increase if they looked identical


Usually it is harder to get on an LD train by accident. 

But legitimate problems that exist in station along the NEC is among Acela, Regional and Commuter Service. Those would probably be much more severe if everything had the same livery.

I have seen such issues arise at stations like Metropark where due to local dispatching variance on a particular day trains might come in in different order from normal, confusing people. Acela conductors have to announce repeatedly, and Regional ones a little less so in order to keep passengers with invalid tickets on those trains from getting on. During inbound commute hours it gets tough when the platform is jam packed with NJT riders and an Acela appears out of sequence. Some small amount of misboardings happen from time to time, but in general they are rare.


----------



## Bob Dylan

jis said:


> Usually it is harder to get on an LD train by accident.
> 
> But legitimate problems that exist in station along the NEC is among Acela, Regional and Commuter Service. Those would probably be much more severe if everything had the same livery.
> 
> I have seen such issues arise at stations like Metropark where due to local dispatching variance on a particular day trains might come in in different order from normal, confusing people. Acela conductors have to announce repeatedly, and Regional ones a little less so in order to keep passengers with invalid tickets on those trains from getting on. During inbound commute hours it gets tough when the platform is jam packed with NJT riders and an Acela appears out of sequence. Some small amount of misboardings happen from time to time, but in general they are rare.


This is a sad comment on people in the NE( especially Jerseyites), the fact that they cant tell an Acela or other Amtrak Train from a NJT one is sad!


----------



## railiner

jis said:


> Usually it is harder to get on an LD train by accident.
> 
> But legitimate problems that exist in station along the NEC is among Acela, Regional and Commuter Service. Those would probably be much more severe if everything had the same livery.
> 
> I have seen such issues arise at stations like Metropark where due to local dispatching variance on a particular day trains might come in in different order from normal, confusing people. Acela conductors have to announce repeatedly, and Regional ones a little less so in order to keep passengers with invalid tickets on those trains from getting on. During inbound commute hours it gets tough when the platform is jam packed with NJT riders and an Acela appears out of sequence. Some small amount of misboardings happen from time to time, but in general they are rare.


Okay, I see your point, there. There should be a clear difference in cases like that, to help prevent that. Commuter rail should have no Amtrak reference at all.
But services like the San Joaquins or the San Diego trains, or the North Carolina trains are not commuter trains, but really part of the Amtrak national network, and their livery should reflect that. Those trains are sold by, staffed by, and managed by Amtrak, and their livery should reflect that. If the state agency owns the equipment used, they should limit any markings to something like an equipment trust plate, like railroads used to in places. If the state agency wants to take over their operation, then let them, and remove all references to Amtrak. JMHO...


----------



## Cal

railiner said:


> Okay, I see your point, there. There should be a clear difference in cases like that, to help prevent that. Commuter rail should have no Amtrak reference at all.
> But services like the San Joaquins or the San Diego trains, or the North Carolina trains are not commuter trains, but really part of the Amtrak national network, and their livery should reflect that.


I think they do, they all clearly state Amtrak, but have nice liveries that match their regions to give them identity. 

And on the point to getting on the wrong train, whenever Surfliner 785 comes into Fullerton, they have to announce that it's not the Southwest Chief, as it comes in just a few minutes before train 4 and was usually (Not sure about now) on the same track as the Chief. 

I've also seen numerous people being confused whether or not a train is theirs or not, mainly confusing the Surfliner with Metrolink.


----------



## jis

railiner said:


> Okay, I see your point, there. There should be a clear difference in cases like that, to help prevent that. Commuter rail should have no Amtrak reference at all.
> But services like the San Joaquins or the San Diego trains, or the North Carolina trains are not commuter trains, but really part of the Amtrak national network, and their livery should reflect that. Those trains are sold by, staffed by, and managed by Amtrak, and their livery should reflect that. If the state agency owns the equipment used, they should limit any markings to something like an equipment trust plate, like railroads used to in places. If the state agency wants to take over their operation, then let them, and remove all references to Amtrak. JMHO...


Sorry. Amtrak California trains are not national network trains. That is a fact, not an opinion.

As for livery I just disagree with your entire thesis. But of course we are each entitled to our opinions.


----------



## jis

Bob Dylan said:


> This is a sad comment on people in the NE( especially Jerseyites), the fact that they cant tell an Acela or other Amtrak Train from a NJT one is sad!


Usually it is some visitor from places like Texas who are befuddled by things like trains that are the ones that make those mistakes. Not the locals


----------



## Cal

jis said:


> Usually it is some visitor from places like Texas who are befuddled by things like trains that are the ones that make those mistakes. Not the locals


And new commuters ;D


----------



## Ryan

railiner said:


> Okay, I see your point, there. There should be a clear difference in cases like that, to help prevent that. Commuter rail should have no Amtrak reference at all.
> But services like the San Joaquins or the San Diego trains, or the North Carolina trains are not commuter trains, but really part of the Amtrak national network, and their livery should reflect that. Those trains are sold by, staffed by, and managed by Amtrak, and their livery should reflect that. If the state agency owns the equipment used, they should limit any markings to something like an equipment trust plate, like railroads used to in places. If the state agency wants to take over their operation, then let them, and remove all references to Amtrak. JMHO...


This is an unusual windmill to tilt at. If the states pay for the rolling stock, they have the right to paint it in whatever scheme they please regardless of where one books the tickets. It is vastly preferable to have them bookable through Amtrak's website where travelers can easily book trains for a journey mixed between state service and national trains. Discouraging that through silly requirements about paint schemes to satisfy railfans isn't going to happen.


----------



## PVD

Of course, one would hope they can put their heads together and come up with plans that work well for everyone. NYS paid for the new paint on the P32-DM fleet used for Empire Service, ADK, Ethan Allen, and the Leaf, and it looks pretty good. I realize that they do also pull the LSL NYP-ALB, but it wouldn't make much sense to segregate units for that.


----------



## railiner

Ryan said:


> This is an unusual windmill to tilt at. If the states pay for the rolling stock, they have the right to paint it in whatever scheme they please regardless of where one books the tickets. It is vastly preferable to have them bookable through Amtrak's website where travelers can easily book trains for a journey mixed between state service and national trains. Discouraging that through silly requirements about paint schemes to satisfy railfans isn't going to happen.


Good point. "Money talks ". If Amtrak doesn't care, why should I?


----------



## adamj023

randomguy65 said:


> It looks like Siemens has released what the Charger will look like in a model. They did the same thing with the ACS-64.
> 
> See here: http://www.mainlinediesels.net/imgs/SiemensCharger_Profile_BottomLeft.jpg
> 
> They also did the same thing with the ACS-64: http://www.railcolor.net/imgs/content/model_siemens_acs2.jpg
> 
> Side note: EMD has also revealed the final look of the new F125. See here: http://www.progressrail.com/cda/files/4546792/7/2-sidersENG_LTR_proof_rev5RevH_Screen.pdf



Does anyone know when this year the new locomotives will start to arrive and which routes they will go on first?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

not sure if this was posted : [US] Amtrak celebrates 50th birthday with special (Charger) designs


----------



## Cal

Dutchrailnut said:


> not sure if this was posted : [US] Amtrak celebrates 50th birthday with special (Charger) designs


Already been posted, and we have another thread on it too


----------



## jis

railiner said:


> Good point. "Money talks ". If Amtrak doesn't care, why should I?


Suffice it to say it is not Amtrak's money that is being used to paint State's cars and engines. Sometimes even Amtrak's engines are painted using state funds, like the P32ACDMs of Empire Service. 

BTW, I think the whole Acela Regional branding attempt, including the few Amtubes that were painted in that livery was a fiasco from the getgo and simply confused everyone. So it was good when they reverted back to Phase IV from that and of course they removed all paint (almost) from the AEM-7s leaving them bare metal for the remainder of their working life. Painting a fluted side is a pain in the behind anyway.


----------



## adamj023

The GE P-42 have held up a lot better than the AEM-7’s which were failing before being replaced. The P-42 should be kept on hand as spares and for potential service increases for added train cars and/or additional frequency. As for livery, it doesn’t impact me. Though there are some livery’s that I have seen that are ugly and are used on brands I wouldn’t use anyways like Spirit Airlines Yellow planes. The Amtrak livery designs are all decent and the new livery is no exception.


----------



## west point

Adam - like the idea of keeping P-42s. But a big that is "IF" spare parts and trucks especially can be had to keep them running without cannibalizing's the fleet.


----------



## jiml

There's a railway not far away that may have some P42's available for parts starting sometime next year. Just sayin'...


----------



## me_little_me

west point said:


> Adam - like the idea of keeping P-42s. But a big that is "IF" spare parts and trucks especially can be had to keep them running without cannibalizing's the fleet.


They can scrap them or extend the life of many of them using the cannibalized engines. I'd vote for the latter. Still leaves a lot of available engines for increasing the number of routes, reducing the number of Charge spares needed, and going back to running specials.


----------



## NSC1109

jis said:


> I agree with you. Just because Amtrak is contracted to run a service does not make it an Amtrak service. Different liveries for different service is standard practice all over the world even when run by the same outfit. It is mostly done for differential branding identities.



I disagree...if Amtrak is contracted to run a service and it says AMTRAK and it’s marketed as AMTRAK then its an Amtrak service.

You don’t see regional airlines operating their jets in their own paint normally because there are branding standards. The times you do are for aircraft to float between contracts to pick up extra demand.


----------



## rickycourtney

NSC1109 said:


> I disagree...if Amtrak is contracted to run a service and it says AMTRAK and it’s marketed as AMTRAK then its an Amtrak service.
> 
> You don’t see regional airlines operating their jets in their own paint normally because there are branding standards. The times you do are for aircraft to float between contracts to pick up extra demand.


That’s an imperfect comparison.

Try this one...
When Delta pays SkyWest to operate a route... SkyWest is happy to brand it how Delta wants.
When a state pays Amtrak to operate a route... Amtrak should be happy to brand it how the state wants... especially when the state buys the equipment.


----------



## adamj023

The P-42 are approaching over 30 years of service. The new locomotives will probably be required by Government regulations due to safety and environmental reasons not to mention the new cars will be more reliable and cost less to maintain so the P-42 will probably be phased out. But before that time when there is a mix of P-42 and new Locomotives they could use them to test service additions to see if they make sense rather than immediately phase them out. I have taken Amtrak trains when a headlight was cracked and we had to wait for a replacement locomotive though I don’t know if it was a P-42 or the earlier version at the time. But hopefully the new locomotives will be a lot easier to service and headlamps could be easily replaced in route by the crew as they schedule a place to stop the train. They should keep routine parts on hand such as windshield wipers, headlamps and the like so they can easily be serviced. The specifications for the Siemens indicate it should be easier to service and maintain.

The ones before the GE were the EMD apparently and I definitely remember those as well. I think when I had used Amtrak they were the EMD’s mostly and the GE were more reliable but hopefully Siemens will be even better. The new locomotives should have a ton of improvements from safety to environmental and everything else.

They say the P-42 will stay on the NEC routes. I guess that is for non electrified sections so it seems like they will need replacements for those eventually.


----------



## jis

rickycourtney said:


> That’s an imperfect comparison.
> 
> Try this one...
> When Delta pays SkyWest to operate a route... SkyWest is happy to brand it how Delta wants.
> When a state pays Amtrak to operate a route... Amtrak should be happy to brand it how the state wants... especially when the state buys the equipment.


That is indeed the way it has worked in the past and will continue in the future.

Amtrak has never had a problem painting state owned equipment in whatever livery the states want (Amtrak California, Cascade Talgos etc.), including equipment on long term lease from Amtrak that are for dedicated use on the state funded state service e.g. Superliners long term leased for use on Amtrak California service, Empire Corridor P32ACDMs. That is not going to change no matter how many convoluted arguments show up here at AU. Money talks and well you know the rest


----------



## Devil's Advocate

frequentflyer said:


> Eventually AA found a way for the A300 to have a metallic finish.


The composite surfaces were simply painted gray. AA's A300s performed well as a niche sub-fleet catering to the South American market ferrying larger/heavier luggage than the rest of the network. Then questionable training and excessive rudder correction resulted in a major crash and a new fleet structure. Or at least that's how I remember it.



NSC1109 said:


> I disagree...if Amtrak is contracted to run a service and it says AMTRAK and it’s marketed as AMTRAK then its an Amtrak service. You don’t see regional airlines operating their jets in their own paint normally because there are branding standards. The times you do are for aircraft to float between contracts to pick up extra demand.


A negotiated contract determines what liveries are possible rather than some circular logic puzzle.


----------



## frequentflyer

American was not happy with the grey and polished the metal themselves, so the story goes. Airbus did not want to do it.


----------



## jiml

Paint was my recollection as well:


----------



## Ziv

I worked in the hospitality industry in a few different locations, but one of the stranger ones was at the Hyatt Regency Miami. We had people from Brazil mostly, but some other South American countries that would check in with one very light but large soft side suitcase. And 3 days later when they checked out they would have the large suitcase completely full of newly purchased clothes and items. Plus they had filled a medium and small soft side suitcase that had been nested inside the larger one full too. It was like Russian Matryoshka dolls, one inside the other, but now they were filled chockablock full of clothes. And car parts. And lawn sprinklers. And blenders. And, yes, one day, a kitchen sink. Well actually, it was a bathroom vanity sink, but kitchen sounded better.


Devil's Advocate said:


> The composite surfaces were simply painted gray. AA's A300s performed well as a niche sub-fleet catering to the South American market ferrying larger/heavier luggage than the rest of the network.
> ....


----------



## jiml

Ziv said:


> I worked in the hospitality industry in a few different locations, but one of the stranger ones was at the Hyatt Regency Miami. We had people from Brazil mostly, but some other South American countries that would check in with one very light but large soft side suitcase. And 3 days later when they checked out they would have the large suitcase completely full of newly purchased clothes and items. Plus they had filled a medium and small soft side suitcase that had been nested inside the larger one full too. It was like Russian Matryoshka dolls, one inside the other, but now they were filled chockablock full of clothes. And car parts. And lawn sprinklers. And blenders. And, yes, one day, a kitchen sink. Well actually, it was a bathroom vanity sink, but kitchen sounded better.


I'm laughing at your post. Without getting into too much of a tangent this is how many Canadians travelled to the US not that many years ago. I may have even been guilty. Possibly not as extreme as your example, but trust me - there are reasons.


----------



## railiner

Ziv said:


> I worked in the hospitality industry in a few different locations, but one of the stranger ones was at the Hyatt Regency Miami. We had people from Brazil mostly, but some other South American countries that would check in with one very light but large soft side suitcase. And 3 days later when they checked out they would have the large suitcase completely full of newly purchased clothes and items. Plus they had filled a medium and small soft side suitcase that had been nested inside the larger one full too. It was like Russian Matryoshka dolls, one inside the other, but now they were filled chockablock full of clothes. And car parts. And lawn sprinklers. And blenders. And, yes, one day, a kitchen sink. Well actually, it was a bathroom vanity sink, but kitchen sounded better.


It was like that at the old AA terminal at JFK, too. It got so bad, that AA installed these large shrink wrap machines for passengers to reinforce their overpacked baggage, prior to checking them. That was prior to 9-11, and TSA inspection...
During the busier times of year, AA placed an embargo on checking excessive baggage, even for extra fees, to certain Caribbean destinations...


----------



## west point

The A-300 series had a large difference between Max zero weight and max landing weights . That allowed for the reserve fuel margins needed for South American operation especially in inclement weather at destination and alternate(s). Then all you had to worry about was can you add enough fuel for enroute from origin to destination but not exceed max take off weight.


----------



## Duane Witte

Looks like they finished the paint on #300


----------



## west point

Much more of an European look


----------



## Cal

Finally back on topic!


----------



## Bob Dylan

jiml said:


> I'm laughing at your post. Without getting into too much of a tangent this is how many Canadians travelled to the US not that many years ago. I may have even been guilty. Possibly not as extreme as your example, but trust me - there are reasons.


Yep, they're called Duties and Taxes!


----------



## rickycourtney

Just my opinion... but this Phase VI paint scheme looks gorgeous.


----------



## frequentflyer

Duane Witte said:


> Looks like they finished the paint on #300




Ok, I think I get it now, Phase IV.........errrrr..........Phase VI is mostly blue with then red stripe cheatline on cars, so a locomotive with mostly blue with a little bit of red, is the same thing. Hence, the locomotive is in Phase IV...........arggghhh..........I mean Phase VI.

Looking forward to Phase VII when it debuts fleet wide which will probably be when the Siemens mega coach order is announced.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Duane Witte said:


> Looks like they finished the paint on #300



She looks great in her shiny fresh paint!


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

I've heard before that the Chargers don't perform very well in cold weather. What exactly is wrong with them in cold weather? And whatever the problems are, could it be a design flaw or something?


----------



## jis

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I've heard before that the Chargers don't perform very well in cold weather. What exactly is wrong with them in cold weather? Could it be a design flaw or something?


Must be something


----------



## frequentflyer

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I've heard before that the Chargers don't perform very well in cold weather. What exactly is wrong with them in cold weather? And whatever the problems are, could it be a design flaw or something?



Teething problems, you can't simulate everything on a computer. The Genesis have been around for almost thirty years and they had plenty of teething problems when they debuted.


----------



## NSC1109

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I've heard before that the Chargers don't perform very well in cold weather. What exactly is wrong with them in cold weather? And whatever the problems are, could it be a design flaw or something?



frequentflyer hit it right on the head. Any new piece of equipment is gonna have teething issues. That’s why the Navy does shakedown cruises with new ships and after refits: to find and repair defects.


----------



## MikeM

adamj023 said:


> The P-42 are approaching over 30 years of service. The new locomotives will probably be required by Government regulations due to safety and environmental reasons not to mention the new cars will be more reliable and cost less to maintain so the P-42 will probably be phased out. But before that time when there is a mix of P-42 and new Locomotives they could use them to test service additions to see if they make sense rather than immediately phase them out. I have taken Amtrak trains when a headlight was cracked and we had to wait for a replacement locomotive though I don’t know if it was a P-42 or the earlier version at the time. But hopefully the new locomotives will be a lot easier to service and headlamps could be easily replaced in route by the crew as they schedule a place to stop the train. They should keep routine parts on hand such as windshield wipers, headlamps and the like so they can easily be serviced. The specifications for the Siemens indicate it should be easier to service and maintain.
> 
> The ones before the GE were the EMD apparently and I definitely remember those as well. I think when I had used Amtrak they were the EMD’s mostly and the GE were more reliable but hopefully Siemens will be even better. The new locomotives should have a ton of improvements from safety to environmental and everything else.
> 
> They say the P-42 will stay on the NEC routes. I guess that is for non electrified sections so it seems like they will need replacements for those eventually.



I'd love to see Amtrak retain some surge capacity of older equipment that could be pulled into service with new routes, seasonal expansion (think Christmas and Thanksgiving, sporting events, etc), much as the legacy railroads used to do in the pre-amtrak years. Older equipment that is fully depreciated could be stored in a decent climate, maybe even in a pole barn at the main shops, and pulled out for service as required. Less frequent use would prolong it's life and being paid for makes it a cheap expansion option for intermittent use.


----------



## rickycourtney

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I've heard before that the Chargers don't perform very well in cold weather. What exactly is wrong with them in cold weather? And whatever the problems are, could it be a design flaw or something?


You also have to ask... how much is the Amtrak Chicago yards noted shoddy maintenance practices at play?

Even the best equipment, treated poorly, will malfunction more often.

I’ll just note that while the SoCal, NorCal, and Washington Chargers have also had some teething issues... they’ve had nowhere as many issues as the Midwest locos.

So it’s the weather, or the yard, and my money is on the latter.


----------



## frequentflyer

I believe the Chargers have wireless diagnostics that sends info back home to Siemens maintenance computers. Siemens would know if regular maintenance is not being done. Wasn't Siemens setting up shop in Chicago to handle maintenance? Thought it was part of the contract.


----------



## jis

frequentflyer said:


> I believe the Chargers have wireless diagnostics that sends info back home to Siemens maintenance computers. Siemens would know if regular maintenance is not being done. Wasn't Siemens setting up shop in Chicago to handle maintenance? Thought it was part of the contract.


I was under the impression that Amtrak Midwest chose not to contract maintenance to Siemens and opted to do it in house, so that they could impart their Chicago magic inverse Midas touch more completely


----------



## frequentflyer

jis said:


> I was under the impression that Amtrak Midwest chose not to contract maintenance to Siemens and opted to do it in house, so that they could impart their Chicago magic inverse Midas touch more completely


Sad if true.☹ Most transportation industries are moving to this model.


----------



## rickycourtney

frequentflyer said:


> I believe the Chargers have wireless diagnostics that sends info back home to Siemens maintenance computers. Siemens would know if regular maintenance is not being done. Wasn't Siemens setting up shop in Chicago to handle maintenance? Thought it was part of the contract.


The states have a “Technical Support and Spares Supply Agreement” (TSSSA) with Siemens.

The states pay a fixed fee and Siemens provides onsite experts who offer guidance and support to Amtrak’s staff mechanics (if they take it, I suppose) and all necessary spare parts.


----------



## Bob Dylan

rickycourtney said:


> The states have a “Technical Support and Spares Supply Agreement” (TSSSA) with Siemens.
> 
> The states pay a fixed fee and Siemens provides onsite experts who offer guidance and support to Amtrak’s staff mechanics (if they take it, I suppose) and all necessary spare parts.


Sounds like the "Geek Squad" @ Best Buy!


----------



## rickycourtney

New photos of AMTK 600 in the Phase VI livery and AMTK 601 in the Day One livery.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

So, comparing the Siemens ALC-42 to the GE P42DC...
- P42DC: 4,200 HP DC powered, 268,000 lbs, slow loading
- ALC-42: 4,200 HP, AC powered, 264,000 lbs, fast loading

A typical long-distance train uses 2 P42DC's, but is there likely a chance that only one ALC-42 can do the job compared to 2 P42DC's?


----------



## jis

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> So, comparing the Siemens ALC-42 to the GE P42DC...
> - P42DC: 4,200 HP DC powered, 268,000 lbs, slow loading
> - ALC-42: 4,200 HP, AC powered, 264,000 lbs, fast loading
> 
> A typical long-distance train uses 2 P42DC's, but is there likely a chance that only one ALC-42 can do the job compared to 2 P42DC's?


What is your definition of a typical long distance train? I know a few that operate regularly with one P42. There have even been cases where even thought the train has two P42s actually only one is normally operating, to save fuel.


----------



## jiml

A single 4200hp locomotive should be able to pull around 10 passenger cars on level track. Add in some mountains or other uneven terrain, plus unreliability issues, and having an extra is a sensible decision.


----------



## Duane Witte

jiml said:


> A single 4200hp locomotive should be able to pull around 10 passenger cars on level track. Add in some mountains or other uneven terrain, plus unreliability issues, and having an extra is a sensible decision.


However that 4200 hp drops to 3200 to 3400 when HEP is turned on. So they definitely need 2 in the mountains and probably on level track to keep schedule. Out west at least


----------



## Cal

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> So, comparing the Siemens ALC-42 to the GE P42DC...
> - P42DC: 4,200 HP DC powered, 268,000 lbs, slow loading
> - ALC-42: 4,200 HP, AC powered, 264,000 lbs, fast loading
> 
> A typical long-distance train uses 2 P42DC's, but is there likely a chance that only one ALC-42 can do the job compared to 2 P42DC's?


For some routes, sure. Some already only use one. However as others have said, having an extra in case of a breakdown is a good idea. And some host railroads require two engines in case of a breakdown.


----------



## Seaboard92

Some rail lines also have restrictions on power. For instance the Columbia Subdivision of CSX Columbia-Savannah on the Silver Star requires two units for anything over 10 cars. And it's not even that hilly of a line.


----------



## rickycourtney

Also, when you're hundreds of miles away from the nearest maintenance shop, it's good to bring along a spare engine.


----------



## west point

Palmetto can run with one loco even though it has more cars than the Crescent which needs 2 locos due to hills and dales..


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

As of right now, one ALC-42 has been painted for Amtrak's 50th anniversary. But since the P42's will be retired in years to come, will Amtrak likely paint any more ALC-42's in Heritage/Special schemes to replace the old ones?


----------



## Acela150

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> As of right now, one ALC-42 has been painted for Amtrak's 50th anniversary. But since the P42's will be retired in years to come, will Amtrak likely paint any more ALC-42's in Heritage/Special schemes to replace the old ones?



Let's walk before we run.... 

You're worried about paint jobs of locomotives that are still being built. Let them get into service first.


----------



## Ryan

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> As of right now, one ALC-42 has been painted for Amtrak's 50th anniversary. But since the P42's will be retired in years to come, will Amtrak likely paint any more ALC-42's in Heritage/Special schemes to replace the old ones?


Username checks out.


----------



## west point

No paint jobs for awhile due to fire at Beech.


----------



## PerRock

west point said:


> No paint jobs for awhile due to fire at Beech.



Chargers will get painted at the Siemens facility in Sacramento, not BG. Additionally one of the NEC shops (Bear?) has a paint booth... Hialeah might as well.

peter


----------



## Irelandvegas65

I have read a bunch of pages here and , honestly, my question is simple. Will the new ALC-42 be in service soon? Yes I am a lazy Newbie here and was just wondering because my first grand rail journey is Early October Empire to Coast to Zephyr with three two night stays along the way. What does it matter to be pulled by new engines? probably nothing but maybe they are quieter and heck, Locomotives are just COOL! 

compliments to the massive knowledge base I keep finding here on the forum! 

Thanks in Advance


----------



## Cal

Irelandvegas65 said:


> I have read a bunch of pages here and , honestly, my question is simple. Will the new ALC-42 be in service soon? Yes I am a lazy Newbie here and was just wondering because my first grand rail journey is Early October Empire to Coast to Zephyr with three two night stays along the way. What does it matter to be pulled by new engines? probably nothing but maybe they are quieter and heck, Locomotives are just COOL!
> 
> compliments to the massive knowledge base I keep finding here on the forum!
> 
> Thanks in Advance


They won't be in service this year. If they are, I doubt it'll be those routes. 

What does it matter? Well truly, it doesn't make much of a difference to the regular traveler. However to railfans, it makes a lot of difference. It will simply be sad to see the P42's (current engines) be replaced, as we've all gotten used to seeing them haul our trains over the years.


----------



## me_little_me

Cal said:


> It will simply be sad to see the P42's (current engines) be replaced, as we've all gotten used to seeing them haul our trains over the years.


Sure! Until one fails! Then it's not fun at all.


----------



## JontyMort

Will there be a Charger variant with 750V dc capability? The P32AC-DMs will have to remain, at least for a while.


----------



## jis

JontyMort said:


> Will there be a Charger variant with 750V dc capability? The P32AC-DMs will have to remain, at least for a while.


MTA is the lead agency on finalizing the design of that. I am sure Amtrak will just add on to MTA's order when the time comes.


----------



## Irelandvegas65

Cal said:


> They won't be in service this year. If they are, I doubt it'll be those routes.
> 
> What does it matter? Well truly, it doesn't make much of a difference to the regular traveler. However to railfans, it makes a lot of difference. It will simply be sad to see the P42's (current engines) be replaced, as we've all gotten used to seeing them haul our trains over the years.


I was stating "why does it matter" meaning my question, in case anyone wondered why I would ask that. I suspect they will be a big difference from a technical standpoint, fuel and , I am guessing noise. 
I am excited, but sad I won't get to ride behind one this fall.......... Thanks Cal1


----------



## railiner

jis said:


> MTA is the lead agency on finalizing the design of that. I am sure Amtrak will just add on to MTA's order when the time comes.


Including a nose door, this time?


----------



## Acela150

railiner said:


> Including a nose door, this time?



Actually the escape hatch will be built into the windshield on the "firemen's side".


----------



## railiner

Acela150 said:


> Actually the escape hatch will be built into the windshield on the "firemen's side".


That'll work....


----------



## Dutchrailnut

yes, if there is steps on that nose and if there is not a control console to climb over. 
a fuel fire in tunnel escalades in very short time .


----------



## Seaboard92

me_little_me said:


> Sure! Until one fails! Then it's not fun at all.



It's funny one time a railfan was asking me in advance what type of locomotive we would have on a trip in advance. And I told him but he didn't like the answer. My response was "All that matters to me is we get from point A to Point B on time. If it can manage that it's a good locomotive." He never asked me again.


----------



## JontyMort

railiner said:


> That'll work....


Bond: Ejector seat? You’re joking.
Q: I never joke about my work, 007.


----------



## neroden

Seaboard92 said:


> It's funny one time a railfan was asking me in advance what type of locomotive we would have on a trip in advance. And I told him but he didn't like the answer. My response was "All that matters to me is we get from point A to Point B on time. If it can manage that it's a good locomotive." He never asked me again.


There are fans who care about the motive power. I am not one of them.

Then there are fans who care about the rolling stock (is that a Viewliner I or a Viewliner II?). I admit, I am one of them.


----------



## neroden

I feel like noting that the change from P42s (or in California, F59PHIs, or in NY, P32AC-DMs) to Chargers will be a major change in emissions. It's going straight from Tier Zero to Tier Four all in one go. Prior to the Chargers Amtrak was running only unrenovated Tier Zero equipment. The P42s were actually somewhat better than the Tier Zero standards, but still, going all the way to Tier Four is a huge jump.

From dieselnet, I have line haul standards for tier 0 not-remanufactured:


HC*CONOxPM

1.05.09.50.60

And average emissions back in 1997:

0.51.513.50.34

P42s were probably a bit better than that. But here are the Tier Four standards:

0.14f1.51.3f0.03

Most noticeable to passengers is the drop in PM (particulate matter), followed by the drop in HC (not-fully-combusted hydrocarbons). In short, the exhaust smoke from the Chargers should be a lot less smelly and irritating.


----------



## railiner

neroden said:


> I feel like noting that the change from P42s (or in California, F59PHIs, or in NY, P32AC-DMs) to Chargers will be a major change in emissions. It's going straight from Tier Zero to Tier Four all in one go. Prior to the Chargers Amtrak was running only unrenovated Tier Zero equipment. The P42s were actually somewhat better than the Tier Zero standards, but still, going all the way to Tier Four is a huge jump.
> 
> From dieselnet, I have line haul standards for tier 0 not-remanufactured:
> 
> 
> HC*CONOxPM
> 
> 1.05.09.50.60
> 
> And average emissions back in 1997:
> 
> 0.51.513.50.34
> 
> P42s were probably a bit better than that. But here are the Tier Four standards:
> 
> 0.14f1.51.3f0.03
> 
> Most noticeable to passengers is the drop in PM (particulate matter), followed by the drop in HC (not-fully-combusted hydrocarbons). In short, the exhaust smoke from the Chargers should be a lot less smelly and irritating.


That would have been very helpful for visibility, in the days of Vista-domes...


----------



## Cal

neroden said:


> There are fans who care about the motive power. I am not one of them.
> 
> Then there are fans who care about the rolling stock (is that a Viewliner I or a Viewliner II?). I admit, I am one of them.


I care about both, but more the rolling stock


----------



## Dutchrailnut

railiner said:


> That would have been very helpful for visibility, in the days of Vista-domes...


actually the stuff you see is not the stuff that pollutes.


----------



## railiner

Dutchrailnut said:


> actually the stuff you see is not the stuff that pollutes.


The particulates stuck to the front dome glass, hence 'polluted' vision, until they were washed at Denver and Portola on the old CZ....


----------



## MARC Rider

neroden said:


> I feel like noting that the change from P42s (or in California, F59PHIs, or in NY, P32AC-DMs) to Chargers will be a major change in emissions. It's going straight from Tier Zero to Tier Four all in one go. Prior to the Chargers Amtrak was running only unrenovated Tier Zero equipment. The P42s were actually somewhat better than the Tier Zero standards, but still, going all the way to Tier Four is a huge jump.
> 
> From dieselnet, I have line haul standards for tier 0 not-remanufactured:
> 
> 
> HC*CONOxPM
> 
> 1.05.09.50.60
> 
> And average emissions back in 1997:
> 
> 0.51.513.50.34
> 
> P42s were probably a bit better than that. But here are the Tier Four standards:
> 
> 0.14f1.51.3f0.03
> 
> Most noticeable to passengers is the drop in PM (particulate matter), followed by the drop in HC (not-fully-combusted hydrocarbons). In short, the exhaust smoke from the Chargers should be a lot less smelly and irritating.


Presumably, these standards are grams per brake horsepower-hr for the engine running a test cycle on a dynamometer, not grams per mile from the locomotive running on the tracks.


----------



## Acela150

First ALC unit shipped out this morning to Oakland for the NEC.


----------



## Asher

Amtrak]SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Siemens is putting the finishing touches on Amtrak’s first ALC-42 locomotive, with its departure scheduled for this weekend. The first locomotive, AMTK No. 300, will be hauled in the consist of Amtrak’s _California Zephyr_ departing Emeryville on June 12, a source close to the railroad tells Trains News Wire. After arriving in Chicago on Monday the unit will be set out for a media even scheduled on Tuesday at Amtrak’s facility just south of downtown. The unit is then scheduled to continue east from Chicago on the _Capitol Limited_ departing June 16.


----------



## PerRock

Hmmm do I want to drive to Toledo on the 16th...?

peter


----------



## BCL

Saw a few of the Amtrak California Chargers today. One was pulling Capitol Corridor while the other was in the Oakland yard.


----------



## Way2Kewl

Bright shiny #300 EMY>CHI making its way... just left Truckee


----------



## frequentflyer

Have to watch it on the Galesburg Cam on Monday


----------



## jiml

That's the cool paint scheme too.


----------



## BCL

BCL said:


> Saw a few of the Amtrak California Chargers today. One was pulling Capitol Corridor while the other was in the Oakland yard.


Strike that. It was pulling a San Joaquin. I saw it leaving Emeryville, then parked at Jack London. I took a photo of it, and it was definitely pulling the single level cars that only the San Joaquins use around here.


----------



## Agent

Two videos of AMTK 300 leaving California on Amtrak #6(12) from yesterday. One by John's Junction Railroad Videos shows the _Zephyr _stopping at Martinez, California.




This one from Adam Ghimenti shows the train at its stop at Davis, California.


----------



## Cal

I actually like them more than I thought I would, they look great.


----------



## jiml

The dark blue was the best of the "teaser" colors they posted a few months back.


----------



## NSC1109

Apparently the paint isn’t symmetrical on either side. The navy blue and red arrow is father back on the fireman’s side. Was hoping it was just a render error because it drives my OCD crazy but I guess not.

This isn’t the final livery either, they’re still working on that.


----------



## PerRock

Well now you've ruined those for me... 

peter


----------



## Agent

Two more videos from AMTK 300's second day of traveling on the _California Zephyr_. This one by Quinton Murdock is from Palisade, Colorado.



Ryan Vince posted a drone video of the train descending the grade west of Denver.


----------



## frequentflyer

NSC1109 said:


> Apparently the paint isn’t symmetrical on either side. The navy blue and red arrow is father back on the fireman’s side. Was hoping it was just a render error because it drives my OCD crazy but I guess not.
> 
> This isn’t the final livery either, they’re still working on that.


Strange, I wander why, poor QC in the paint dept.


----------



## NSC1109

frequentflyer said:


> Strange, I wander why, poor QC in the paint dept.


I don’t know if I’d say it’s poor QC since that’s exactly what they looked like in the official renderings. I’d say whoever designed the livery screwed it up. Can’t blame Siemens, they were just doing their job.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

NSC1109 said:


> Apparently the paint isn’t symmetrical on either side. The navy blue and red arrow is father back on the fireman’s side. Was hoping it was just a render error because it drives my OCD crazy but I guess not.
> 
> This isn’t the final livery either, they’re still working on that.


I'm looking at two pictures on FB. Each one showing a different side. My guess is the paint job is different due to some "things" on the engineer's side at the back. The fireman's side just has some ?ladder rungs? at the back which don't take up as much room. Don't shoot me - I'm only making a guess. I have no idea why they didn't paint over the one "thing" that is in the way.

But who's going to notice. You can only see one side of the train as it passes by you.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

big deal?? its only a temporary paint job


----------



## Cal

Dutchrailnut said:


> big deal?? its only a temporary paint job


I thought that this is the special livery for the first few Alc-42s and the rest will have the standard one


----------



## Agent

I took some photos of 300 during #6(12)'s stop at Ottumwa, Iowa.













On this last picture, you can see the model designation of ALC-42 on the left, but on the card on the right directly below the Siemens logo it says, "Siemens Charger SC-44".


----------



## Agent

Amtrak itself has post a video about the 300's journey to the Northeast Corridor.



And to add one track-side video from today, here's Thunderbolt1996 Productions' shot of the train going through Pacific Junction, Iowa.


----------



## neroden

There's a weird echo of the "pointless arrow" in that paint job. I don't suppose anyone is committed enough to revert Amtrak's logo to the more famous version though!


----------



## TheMalahat

Dutchrailnut said:


> big deal?? its only a temporary paint job



Temporary paint scheme it will likely wear for over a decade, though. How Amtrak settled on two paint schemes for one order of locomotives for the same service is beyond me. They get a free pass for the anniversary one (although, unpopular opinion: I think the fleet would look better without all these special one-off paint jobs).


----------



## cirdan

neroden said:


> Most noticeable to passengers is the drop in PM (particulate matter), followed by the drop in HC (not-fully-combusted hydrocarbons). In short, the exhaust smoke from the Chargers should be a lot less smelly and irritating.



A decade or two of bad maintenance will bring them back to the usual standard


----------



## Cal

TheMalahat said:


> They get a free pass for the anniversary one (although, unpopular opinion: I think the fleet would look better without all these special one-off paint jobs).


I think it would as well, however I do like the HU's and what they represent. It does irritate me that they decided to order the VII's in Phase III.


----------



## Agent

AMTK 300 made it onto the _Capitol Limited_ to continue eastward. Hello Railfan posted a video of it near Meyersdale, Pennsylvania.



WV trains appears to be one of many that caught it at Shenandoah Junction, West Virginia.


----------



## neroden

cirdan said:


> A decade or two of bad maintenance will bring them back to the usual standard


Doubt it. The EPA checks up on them; there are standards for operation, not merely for manufacturing.


----------



## jis

AmtrakBlue said:


> I'm looking at two pictures on FB. Each one showing a different side. My guess is the paint job is different due to some "things" on the engineer's side at the back. The fireman's side just has some ?ladder rungs? at the back which don't take up as much room. Don't shoot me - I'm only making a guess. I have no idea why they didn't paint over the one "thing" that is in the way.
> 
> But who's going to notice. You can only see one side of the train as it passes by you.


We could ask our friend Matt Donnelly on FB who was involved in designing these paint schemes and see what he says.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

jis said:


> We could ask our friend Matt Donnelly on FB who was involved in designing these paint schemes and see what he says.


And I was right 

From Matt: "because we didn’t want it to be chopped by a vent. The charger has different locations for vents on each side."


----------



## jis

AmtrakBlue said:


> And I was right
> 
> From Matt: "because we didn’t want it to be chopped by a vent. The charger has different locations for vents on each side."


Shucks! I thought it was done deliberately to see how many OCDs could be triggered.


----------



## MisterUptempo

jis said:


> Shucks! I thought it was done deliberately to see how many OCDs could be triggered.


Two birds. One stone.


----------



## PaulM

Agent said:


> AMTK 300 made it onto the _Capitol Limited_ to continue eastward.


A pretty sad consist: no SSL, no transition sleeper, no baggage car, no second engine. Sleepers right behind the sole engine.


----------



## Bob Dylan

PaulM said:


> A pretty sad consist: no SSL, no transition sleeper, no baggage car, no second engine. Sleepers right behind the sole engine.


Texas Eagle is an Orphan also!


----------



## me_little_me

PaulM said:


> A pretty sad consist: no SSL, no transition sleeper, no baggage car, no second engine. Sleepers right behind the sole engine.


Wait until high season. Never mind!


----------



## frequentflyer




----------



## Agent

The next part of the behind the scenes looks by CoasterFan2105 following the video posted above. This one is about the construction process at the Siemens factory.


----------



## Agent

AMTK 301 is on the move on Amtrak #6(17). BayAreaTrains2008 filmed this train at the Richmond, California station.



ThunderRailfanAndAviation caught this eastbound _California Zephyr _near Sacramento.


----------



## Agent

#6(17) has not had a quick journey. Sunday it lost a few hours from a "disabled freight train" in Colorado. Monday morning it had mechanical problems in Nebraska. I read it was the lead locomotive breaking down. An engine from BNSF was added to the front. Daniel Gresham caught the train arriving nine hours late at Omaha.



#6 was over eleven hours late leaving Ottumwa, Iowa when I saw it. It was held about an hour just east of Albia, Iowa at Maxon to meet #5(19).


----------



## Agent

AMTK 301 made it onto Amtrak #30. This eastbound _Capitol Limited _ was caught by L-Train RailProductions in Chesterton, Indiana.



IDragon auz posted this video today of #30 at Meyersdale, Pennsylvania.


----------



## Agent

Couple of side notes about 301's trip on the _Zephyr_. At the 0:50 second mark on this first video, a person is seen getting out of the cab of 301 with a vest that has the Charger name and image on its back.



The YouTube channel Grounded Life Travel was onboard the train carrying 301. There's only a few scenes with the 301, including one at 11:04 where the engineers are quoted as saying it was on its way to Delaware to have its paint job finished. Still, I thought the passengers' perspective on what happens on a very late train was unique.


----------



## TML

Back when Amtrak introduced GE Genesis locomotives to replace their EMD F40PH locomotives in the 1990s, it retained F40PHs for the Maple Leaf because that train was operated by VIA Rail crews in Canada, and since VIA Rail didn't have their own GE Genesis locomotives before 2001, their crews weren't capable of operating such locomotives back then. With these new Siemen Charger locomotives, could Amtrak run into a similar problem if/when they try to assign such locomotives to the Maple Leaf (when service to Canada is restored)?


----------



## Cal

TML said:


> Back when Amtrak introduced GE Genesis locomotives to replace their EMD F40PH locomotives in the 1990s, it retained F40PHs for the Maple Leaf because that train was operated by VIA Rail crews in Canada, and since VIA Rail didn't have their own GE Genesis locomotives before 2001, their crews weren't capable of operating such locomotives back then. With these new Siemen Charger locomotives, could Amtrak run into a similar problem if/when they try to assign such locomotives to the Maple Leaf (when service to Canada is restored)?


VIA Rail is getting Chargers and Venture sets too, or something similar. It's likely that there will be a period similar, as I doubt they will be delivered to each company and put on each route at the same time.


----------



## jiml

TML said:


> Back when Amtrak introduced GE Genesis locomotives to replace their EMD F40PH locomotives in the 1990s, it retained F40PHs for the Maple Leaf because that train was operated by VIA Rail crews in Canada, and since VIA Rail didn't have their own GE Genesis locomotives before 2001, their crews weren't capable of operating such locomotives back then. With these new Siemen Charger locomotives, could Amtrak run into a similar problem if/when they try to assign such locomotives to the Maple Leaf (when service to Canada is restored)?


Also frequently on the Maple Leaf during the transition was the GP40TC fleet which Amtrak acquired from GO Transit. Most of these remain in work service with Amtrak after rebuilding and renumbering.


----------



## Acela150

Some extremely limited testing began last night on 300. It was sandwiched between a few cars and had sprinters on each end.


----------



## Cal

Acela150 said:


> Some extremely limited testing began last night on 300. It was sandwiched between a few cars and had sprinters on each end.


Where?


----------



## Acela150

I'm not entirely sure of the specifics. But someone got it at Newark, DE.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Cal said:


> Where?


Heard it was between Ragan & Davis interlockings, though I saw a video of it go further south, so I think it may have been “turning” at ?Bacon?

Ragan & Davis are between Wilm & Newark DE stations & I think Bacon is the next one south of Newark. Wilmington Shops is just north of Wilm station.


----------



## Acela150

AmtrakBlue said:


> Heard it was between Ragan & Davis interlockings, though I saw a video of it go further south, so I think it may have been “turning” at ?Bacon?
> 
> Ragan & Davis are between Wilm & Newark DE stations & I think Bacon is the next one south of Newark. Wilmington Shops is just north of Wilm station.



I'm not 100% sure, but I believe that you're correct Betty.


----------



## Agent

_Trains_ magazine is reporting that 300 and 301 are one the move for testing in Michigan.


----------



## west point

Michigan only place to test 110 MPH and PTC ??


----------



## jis

west point said:


> Michigan only place to test 110 MPH and PTC ??


NEC has PTC. It is called ACSES. Michigan Line’s is called ITCS. I am not sure where there is operational I-ETMS at 110mph today, other than on the bits of NEC where I-ETMS is installed in addition to ACSES. I am not sure 110mph is allowed under I-ETMS there though since they are for only freight train us limited to 70-80mph. By this time next year there will be quite a bit of it on FECR, but not vanilla I-ETMS.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Agent said:


> _Trains_ magazine is reporting that 300 and 301 are one the move for testing in Michigan.


They did leave Wilmington yesterday heading south to DC. There are a few pictures on FB of the move.


----------



## NSC1109

AmtrakBlue said:


> They did leave Wilmington yesterday heading south to DC. There are a few pictures on FB of the move.



_Capitol Limited_ to Chicago, then probably a 9xx symbol to the yard in New Buffalo or potentially even Gearhart Yard in Kalamazoo. I wouldn’t expect a deadhead move on the back of a revenue train.


----------



## Agent

Video posted by Sky Rider today shows Amtrak #6(05) in California with Chargers 302 and 303.


----------



## Acela150

300 & 301 are back in DC as of this afternoon. They came east on Train 30(4).


----------



## lordsigma

jis said:


> NEC has PTC. It is called ACSES. Michigan Line’s is called ITCS. I am not sure where there is operational I-ETMS at 110mph today, other than on the bits of NEC where I-ETMS is installed in addition to ACSES. I am not sure 110mph is allowed under I-ETMS there though since they are for only freight train us limited to 70-80mph. By this time next year there will be quite a bit of it on FECR, but not vanilla I-ETMS.


IETMS also used by MARC on NEC. NEC has its own special software module in IETMS as it has to work with a 9-aspect cab signal system.


----------



## Agent

I saw AMTK 303 and 302 on Amtrak #6(05) running just over three hours late out of Ottumwa, Iowa.


----------



## Agent

AMTK 305 and 304 were on Amtrak #6(07) yesterday on their way to Chicago.


----------



## Agent

Video from yesterday by RailDog Productions shows the westbound _Empire Builder_ at Milwaukee with AMTK 300 on the end. Reports elsewhere say the Charger was dropped off at St. Paul for crew familiarization.


----------



## west point

P-42 #126 really smoking up.


----------



## rs9

My interest in these locomotives is related to their environmental benefits. I understand they meet both the Tier IV EPA and California CARB standards. Could anyone describe in layman's terms what this means here?

I also have tried to determine how much fuel savings (and thus carbon emissions) the long distance Chargers will provide as they replace the current fleet of locomotives. The number I've found is about 10% fuel savings, but I would be curious if anyone has any other data to share here. Thanks to any who can offer input.


----------



## PVD

Emission Standards: USA: Locomotives







dieselnet.com


----------



## neroden

rs9 said:


> My interest in these locomotives is related to their environmental benefits. I understand they meet both the Tier IV EPA and California CARB standards. Could anyone describe in layman's terms what this means here?



The P42s are "Tier 0" if I remember correctly, which is really bad.

"Pre-Tier" locomotives date from before 1973 and are worse, but "Tier 0" is the second-worst.

The P42s were introduced in 1996 and the Tier regulations went into effect in 1997, and were never remanufactured to my knowledge, so I believe the P42s are in the "unremanufactured Tier 0" category for locomotives made from 1973 to 2001.

"Tier 4" is a huge jump in standards. I'm not sure it can be described in layman's terms, but you can read the actual numerical limits on emissions here:






Emission Standards: USA: Locomotives







dieselnet.com





For example: 
- hydrocarbons limit goes from 1.00 to 0.14
- carbon monoxide limit goes from 5.0 to 1.5
- nitrogen oxides limit goes from 9.5 to 1.3
- particulate matter limit goes from 0.60 to 0.03

So, the pollution limits are being reduced by a factor of 5, 10, or 20 (depending on the pollutant).



> I also have tried to determine how much fuel savings (and thus carbon emissions) the long distance Chargers will provide as they replace the current fleet of locomotives. The number I've found is about 10% fuel savings, but I would be curious if anyone has any other data to share here. Thanks to any who can offer input.


----------



## daybeers

Yeah I'm really excited for more Chargers to roll out so we can scrap the loud, slow, unreliable, belching P42s.


----------



## John819

P42 (and P32) - Examples of what happened to General Electric when it became essentially a financing company.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

John819 said:


> P42 (and P32) - Examples of what happened to General Electric when it became essentially a financing company.


yet no other American company faked interest in making a locomotive for Amtrak or others , go figure


----------



## MARC Rider

neroden said:


> The P42s are "Tier 0" if I remember correctly, which is really bad.
> 
> "Pre-Tier" locomotives date from before 1973 and are worse, but "Tier 0" is the second-worst.
> 
> The P42s were introduced in 1996 and the Tier regulations went into effect in 1997, and were never remanufactured to my knowledge, so I believe the P42s are in the "unremanufactured Tier 0" category for locomotives made from 1973 to 2001.
> 
> "Tier 4" is a huge jump in standards. I'm not sure it can be described in layman's terms, but you can read the actual numerical limits on emissions here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Emission Standards: USA: Locomotives
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dieselnet.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For example:
> - hydrocarbons limit goes from 1.00 to 0.14
> - carbon monoxide limit goes from 5.0 to 1.5
> - nitrogen oxides limit goes from 9.5 to 1.3
> - particulate matter limit goes from 0.60 to 0.03
> 
> So, the pollution limits are being reduced by a factor of 5, 10, or 20 (depending on the pollutant).


Many years ago, when I was on a Capitol Limited that was stuck at South Bend, they let us off to walk the platform, and I did see the builder's plate for the P42, and to indicated that it was "Tier 0."

It should also be pointed out that, unlike passenger cars, EPA regulates emissions from locomotives (and other heavy-duty vehicles) on the basis of the emissions from the engines, not the vehicles. The test involves putting the engine on a dynamometer and running a load and duty cycle that is allegedly representative of the vehicle use. The results (and standards) are given in "grams per brake horsepower hour." Any attempt to relate that to more useful measures, like "grams per mile" is done by making a lot of assumptions and is strictly for planning purposes. I'm not even sure if there's any published data on fuel economy and emissions of actual trains in revenue service. I did once see a poster at the TRB meeting with some data collected from the Piedmont service. As expected, speed, grade, and acceleration all have a lot to do with the actual performance of the train on the road.


----------



## jis

ALC42 to be deployed in commercial service on the Empire Builder paired with a P42.









Amtrak’s New Chargers Will Debut on ‘Empire Builder’


Amtrak recently sent an ALC-42 west on the Empire Builder route to familiarize crews before the locomotives are put into service.




railfan.com


----------



## me_little_me

jis said:


> ALC42 to be deployed in commercial service on the Empire Builder paired with a P42.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amtrak’s New Chargers Will Debut on ‘Empire Builder’
> 
> 
> Amtrak recently sent an ALC-42 west on the Empire Builder route to familiarize crews before the locomotives are put into service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> railfan.com


From the article: 


> Amtrak officials said the locomotives will become the “new face” of passenger railroading in America.


Sounds wonderful. Amtrak needs to get rid of the old face of passenger railroading in America. Those old faces are not P42s. Those old faces are the board and executives of Amtrak. Soon to follow the P42s.


----------



## jis

me_little_me said:


> From the article:
> 
> Sounds wonderful. Amtrak needs to get rid of the old face of passenger railroading in America. Those old faces are not P42s. Those old faces are the board and executives of Amtrak. Soon to follow the P42s.


One would fervently hope so, at least from this corner of mine.


----------



## Amtrak709

I agree. We could keep the P42, the P40, the F40, and the P30CH (and add the new Chargers) if it would represent a return to the administrative values that were prevalent in the period that those older locomotives represent, sic, W. Graham Claytor Jr. et al.


----------



## jis

One curious thing I saw in the Section 503 Report is that the Chargers are being delivered to Wilmington! I wonder if this means that Wilmington will be their maintenance base.Considering that the electrical side of those are pretty much the same as Sprinters, there may be some logic to it.


----------



## PVD

Might be easier for Siemens tech support to be centralized


----------



## neroden

For California Chargers, Siemens is right there in Sacramento. It makes sense to have a maintenance base further east. Chicago Maintenance has a pretty bad long-term reputation, so I would've picked one of the east coast bases too...


----------



## Amtrak Apple

I'll have to go down and see it once it gets further west!


----------



## daybeers

Heard a rumor on another site that the first revenue service of an ALC-42 would be the eastbound Empire Builder leaving Chicago today, #7(8). That's 2:15 PM Central.


----------



## Cal

From Instagram.


----------



## Cal

daybeers said:


> Heard a rumor on another site that the first revenue service of an ALC-42 would be the eastbound Empire Builder leaving Chicago today, #7(8). That's 2:15 PM Central.


Todays consist for 7. (Mods, if you want to delete my other thread I made you can).


----------



## HammerJack

apparently PTC didn’t load, and a P42 ended up leading


----------



## Trogdor

Train 7 was about 40 minutes late leaving Chicago today with P42 #84 in the lead, followed by two ALC42s and another P42. The original lead locomotive, #301, suffered a PTC failure on departure and so 84 had to be tacked onto the front.


----------



## jis

Trogdor said:


> Train 7 was about 40 minutes late leaving Chicago today with P42 #84 in the lead, followed by two ALC42s and another P42. The original lead locomotive, #301, suffered a PTC failure on departure and so 84 had to be tacked onto the front.


It won;t have any problem climbing Marias Pass at the highest allowed speed with that much power available, I suppose.

Does the entire lashup go to Seattle? Or does a part of it go to Portland?


----------



## Cal

jis said:


> Does the entire lashup go to Seattle? Or does a part of it go to Portland?


Well on my Builder in October of 2020 going eastbound, our engine from Portland became the lead from SPK to CHI.


----------



## Agent

A couple videos of today's Amtrak #7(08):

Windy City Rails caught the _Empire Builder_ as it was leaving Chicago.



Fan Railer captured the train at Glenview.


----------



## Cal

Is 161, for lack of a better term, on? I don't hear it at all?


----------



## daybeers

iiiiiinteresting!


> In a event at Chicago Union Station, Amtrak Vice President and Chief Mechanical Officer George Hull used the operating debut of the two long-distance Charger diesels to announce the company’s board of directors has authorized exercising the option to add 50 more to the 2018 production order of 75 now rolling out of Siemens Sacramento, Calif., production facility.


----------



## NSC1109

Trogdor said:


> Train 7 was about 40 minutes late leaving Chicago today with P42 #84 in the lead, followed by two ALC42s and another P42. The original lead locomotive, #301, suffered a PTC failure on departure and so 84 had to be tacked onto the front.



seems about right for the railroad…


----------



## joelkfla

daybeers said:


> In a event at Chicago Union Station, Amtrak Vice President and Chief Mechanical Officer George Hull used the operating debut of the two long-distance Charger diesels to announce the company’s board of directors has authorized exercising the option to add 50 more to the 2018 production order of 75 now rolling out of Siemens Sacramento, Calif., production facility.


Was this before or after the PTC failed?


----------



## daybeers

joelkfla said:


> Was this before or after the PTC failed?


 I'm not sure, probably before.

Amtrak has posted a new article on the Media site about the order. Nothing new there aside from some nice pictures, but I thought this excerpt about funding was interesting


> Amtrak is paying for the new locomotives and supplemental multiyear maintenance support with about $850 million in funding set aside when the order was placed in 2019. The new locomotives will primarily replace the Amtrak P40 and P42 locomotives, some of which have been in service for more than 25 years on some state-sponsored routes but primarily on the Long Distance portion of the Amtrak National Network.


----------



## PeeweeTM

I don't know the Siemens Charger and I don't no what failed with "PTC".
But I do know the "Siemens reset":
Turn it off an on again.
The Siemens locomotives I know sometimes have trouble starting up in one go, but even when they need a second try, after that they are very stable. Most of the troubles/malfunctions I have with locomotives, have one thing in common: me...


----------



## Acela150

jis said:


> Does the entire lashup go to Seattle? Or does a part of it go to Portland?



Normal operations are that the engine that leads out of CHI will be the leader of the train to PDX and the trailing unit will lead the train to SEA.


----------



## Cal

Apparently the SSL was taken off ln the first day of the first run due to a fire? Can anyone confirm?


----------



## TinCan782

Cal said:


> Apparently the SSL was taken off ln the first day of the first run due to a fire? Can anyone confirm?


Read that in a couple of Facebook groups.


----------



## Acela150

Cal said:


> Apparently the SSL was taken off ln the first day of the first run due to a fire? Can anyone confirm?



The lounge was set out at MKE. I'm not sure why, but it was for sure set out at MKE.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Cal said:


> Apparently the SSL was taken off ln the first day of the first run due to a fire? Can anyone confirm?


Yes, it had an electrical issue. Someone at Glenview said he saw some smoke. Guess they "deadheaded" it to MKE to drop off.


----------



## jis

MODERATOR'S NOTE: Gentle nudge back to Chargers and away from toasted SSLs.


----------



## alpha3

jis said:


> MODERATOR'S NOTE: Gentle nudge back to Chargers and away from toasted SSLs.


 LOL. Love the humor!


----------



## Agent

Video posted by Bus 26 shows the eastbound _Empire Builder _departing Edmonds, Washington with the Charger pair. 302 is leading this time instead of 301.



There are reports that this Amtrak #8(12) later hit an empty truck near Sultan, Washington.


----------



## Duane Witte

Agent said:


> Video posted by Bus 26 shows the eastbound _Empire Builder _departing Edmonds, Washington with the Charger pair. 302 is leading this time instead of 301.
> 
> 
> 
> There are reports that this Amtrak #8(12) later hit an empty truck near Sultan, Washington.



There are pictures on Facebook of 302 with a pickup wrapped around the front end. No one in the truck at time of impact. No reported injuries


----------



## Cal

Duane Witte said:


> There are pictures on Facebook of 302 with a pickup wrapped around the front end. No one in the truck at time of impact. No reported injuries


Amtrak is having a great rollout of the alc-42.


----------



## neroden

Should have ordered them with cowcatchers to protect from damage when striking road vehicles.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Agent said:


> Video posted by Bus 26 shows the eastbound _Empire Builder _departing Edmonds, Washington with the Charger pair. 302 is leading this time instead of 301.
> 
> 
> 
> There are reports that this Amtrak #8(12) later hit an empty truck near Sultan, Washington.











Amtrak train smashes into pickup truck in Sultan


The truck was pulling a boat when it got stuck on the tracks, the Snohomish County Sheriff’s Office said.




www.kiro7.com


----------



## jiml

Agent said:


> Video posted by Bus 26 shows the eastbound _Empire Builder _departing Edmonds, Washington with the Charger pair. 302 is leading this time instead of 301.
> 
> 
> 
> There are reports that this Amtrak #8(12) later hit an empty truck near Sultan, Washington.



That's one nice-looking train. Even the P42 paint looks good.


----------



## Exvalley

Are they on the eastbound EB that is over 8 hours late today?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Exvalley said:


> Are they on the eastbound EB that is over 8 hours late today?


Yes. It was late leaving Seattle because they had to swap positions for 301 & 302. Then it hit a pick-up truck in Washington. 302 was not damaged much so it continued leading to Spokane. Instead of putting the Portland engine on the front, as is the usual case, they put it behind the 3 Seattle engines. 302 continues to lead.


----------



## Agent

Video posted today by David Ronken shows #8(12) with its four engines at Elk River, Minnesota.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

Agent said:


> Video posted today by David Ronken shows #8(12) with its four engines at Elk River, Minnesota.



That's a proper station there! Nice to see it.


----------



## Cal

Agent said:


> Video posted today by David Ronken shows #8(12) with its four engines at Elk River, Minnesota.



Interesting to see a transdorm used as the Portland sleeper....


----------



## Bob Dylan

Cal said:


> Interesting to see a transdorm used as the Portland sleeper....


Hence no Bedrooms, just Roomettes.


----------



## HammerJack

Cal said:


> Interesting to see a transdorm used as the Portland sleeper....



28 had the Lounge, Coach, Sleeper; Dorm. There are bedrooms in the Sleeper.


----------



## tgstubbs1

The new locomotives look sharp. I can't help but wonder why they use mostly black, which doesn't help its visibility? 

Aren't the new Brightline trains more visible, to reduce collisions with Florida drivers?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

tgstubbs1 said:


> The new locomotives look sharp. I can't help but wonder why they use mostly black, which doesn't help its visibility?
> 
> Aren't the new Brightline trains more visible, to reduce collisions with Florida drivers?


Those are special livery's to celebrate Amtrak's 50th anniversary.


----------



## tgstubbs1

AmtrakBlue said:


> Those are special livery's to celebrate Amtrak's 50th anniversary.


I found a photo from 1971 showing a locomotive 4316 with similar colors.


----------



## jis

tgstubbs1 said:


> I found a photo from 1971 showing a locomotive 4316 with similar colors.


Yes, that was a unique locomotive striping back in '71. I think the black in that mainly came from the PC Black. I don't believe any other locomotive was painted that way. The designer of the special liveries on these new locomotives today, specifically mentioned that locomotive in '71 as the inspiration for this one.


----------



## tgstubbs1

It is very similar.


----------



## jis

tgstubbs1 said:


> It is very similar.
> View attachment 27175


I am told that 4316 was the first locomotive to be painted in any Amtrak livery after A-Day, but I don't have any way of verifying that.


----------



## alpha3

tgstubbs1 said:


> Aren't the new Brightline trains more visible, to reduce collisions with Florida drivers?


Ha. Nothing will reduce collisions with _current _Florida drivers


----------



## Cal

tgstubbs1 said:


> The new locomotives look sharp. I can't help but wonder why they use mostly black, which doesn't help its visibility?
> 
> Aren't the new Brightline trains more visible, to reduce collisions with Florida drivers?


Only the day one livery is mostly back and that’s a special livery


----------



## PaTrainFan

tgstubbs1 said:


> It is very similar.
> View attachment 27175



Off topic, but I am so pleased they dropped Railpax in favor of Amtrak. Came down to the wire. Whew.


----------



## Burns651

jis said:


> I am told that 4316 was the first locomotive to be painted in any Amtrak livery after A-Day, but I don't have any way of verifying that.


Several websites claim 4316 hurriedly had its PC black power washed, and given the Amtrak logo for PR photos at Chicago Union Station on 5/1/71. The closest I can find to a primary source for that is the 1972 Kalmbach book "Journey to Amtrak." This text and surrounding photos seem to imply that it did happen very early on. I think I have the Trains magazine issue that would have mentioned that, but I have it stored elsewhere at the moment. Also, I haven't seen any evidence that the silver and red nose Phase I scheme was applied before 1972.


----------



## Agent

"Let's try that again."

Video posted today by SantaFe669 shows AMTK 300 and AMTK 301 with P42 AMTK 53 leading Amtrak #7(20) at Rondout, Illinois. To quote the video description on the _Empire Builder_ engines, "...so far no issues plagued either charger. [sic] Even making up lost time out of Glenview."


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Why can't these testing-in-production trains come with four locos (two old, two new) so they can simply drop any dead weight and keep moving?


----------



## Burns651

Devil's Advocate said:


> Why can't these testing-in-production trains come with four locos (two old, two new) so they can simply drop any dead weight and keep moving?


But was this a test, or an attempt to make a routine run?


----------



## jis

Devil's Advocate said:


> Why can't these testing-in-production trains come with four locos (two old, two new) so they can simply drop any dead weight and keep moving?


They should. This was a botched job, which appears to come more naturally to the management of Amtrak these days than ever before.


----------



## west point

Remember 3 locos on the EB in winter. Both ALCs failed? Siemens should hold its head in shame.


----------



## Cal

west point said:


> Remember 3 locos on the EB in winter. Both ALCs failed? Siemens should hold its head in shame.


From what I heard one was a PTC issue. The other also could be a teething issue.


----------



## jis

MODERATOR'S NOTES: A number of posts focused on service disruption on the Empire Builder have been moved to a thread on that subject reserving this thread for Siemens Chargers:





__





Empire Builder service disruption in Montana (2/22/22)


Spoke too soon, LOL. Currently Empire Builder #7 is stopped between Grand Forks and Minot. Per an Amtrak agent, both Chargers died. Down to one P42. BNSF loaning an engine to get them west.




www.amtraktrains.com


----------



## frequentflyer

I am old enough to remember the Genesis teething problems in the beginning of their careers. Lets see, how long ago was that? Almost 30 years ago (that in itself is another problem for another thread). But this, I had my doubts about Siemens for diesel locomotives, but what do I know? I am just railfan wandering why not go with GE/Wabtec like the freight railroads that want, know and need dependability. I thought Amtrak learned NOT buying off the shelf. Wait till the Siemens "hybrid" units hit the road in the NEC and east coast.

It's ironic when the Genesis debuted many stated it would not last as long as the F40s. They lasted LONGER by 10 years. Now it could be Siemens get the software fixed ( Genesis had the same problem in the beginning) and these new locomotives have a long career (hopefully not past 20 years). But there is a big difference designing a locomotive for corridor work and throwing it on a 2000 mile run. It worked in the past because the F40 was GP40, the Genesis is a fancy DASH 8, the Siemens.........ugh......hmm.......


----------



## TheMalahat

Ha! I was thinking the exact same thing. I don't pay for a TrainOrders membership, but if you do the posts are surely still there from when the Genesis were coming online and many were calling them over-computerized junk that wouldn't succeed. Now that's unthinkable as they've been a reliable mainstay of Amtrak. 

I'm sure the Chargers will be fine. Notwithstanding issues that seem to permeate Amtrak's Midwest operations, Chargers seem to be doing just fine. 

Via's tentative winter testing has been going very well. Hopefully that continues.


----------



## Agent

Video from yesterday by James Mihalek shows the eastbound _Empire Builder_ leaving St. Cloud, Minnesota with five locomotives leading it: BNSF 7301, AMTK 300, AMTK 301, AMTK 53, and AMTK 139.



Also from yesterday, video posted by Adam Ghimenti shows Amtrak #6(24) at Sacramento with new Chargers 306 and 307 behind the usual P42s.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

Since the Chargers aren't leading, I wonder if they are having PTC issues with the new units.


----------



## Ryan

They're being delivered from the factory, they aren't in service yet.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Ryan said:


> They're being delivered from the factory, they aren't in service yet.


He might be referring to the first video where a BNSF engine is leading.


----------



## jis

AmtrakMaineiac said:


> Since the Chargers aren't leading, I wonder if they are having PTC issues with the new units.


This was discussed in a recent RPA Board Meeting. Yes, they are having PTC teething problems. Interestingly the IDOT and MARC Chargers had similar issue, which leaves one wondering why the same fixes applied to them did not work on these new ones. But we did not have any further information. More interestingly, even P42s have similar PTC issues though less frequently. All of them happen in various I-ETMS territories. Whether similar issues exist in freight railroads of course we don't know.

At the RPA Council Meeting last weekend of March there will be an Amtrak Equipment Expert who is scheduled to spend an hour or two explainign what is going on with this and other forward looking Amtrak equipment issues and plans. At that point we may come to know more about this.


----------



## Agent

#6(24) was running two and a half hours late across Iowa until the station stop in Ottumwa when there was a problem with the PTC. Eventually they rebooted it and got moving again. I caught it three hours and thirteen minutes late at Agency, Iowa.


----------



## Duane Witte

jis said:


> Whether similar issues exist in freight railroads of course we don't know.


From listening to the transcon scanner feed I can tell you that yes the freight railroads have PTC issues or at least BNSF does.


----------



## jis

Duane Witte said:


> From listening to the transcon scanner feed I can tell you that yes the freight railroads have PTC issues or at least BNSF does.


Good to know.

Also worth noting that the PTC problem that delayed #6 was on a P42, and not on any of those two rearward facing Chargers, since not being a head locomotive they would not have had anything to do with PTC, unless of course somehow it was impossible to turn the PTC system off on them, which is extremely unlikely


----------



## west point

It did not appear that the EB's ALC were not operating. However, would they need to be at least at idle to prevent freezing?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

both Genesis and ALC44 have heaters for coolant fed of HEP trainline.


----------



## neroden

Duane Witte said:


> From listening to the transcon scanner feed I can tell you that yes the freight railroads have PTC issues or at least BNSF does.


Results of using a really stupid PTC design. Frankly I expect within my lifetime the whole thing will have to be replaced with ETCS/ERTMS or the Chinese equivalent, which is now a worldwide standard except for the "we had to be different" US.


----------



## Acela150

300 and 301 are going to try again on today's Number 7.


----------



## Agent

Video by SantaFe669 shows Amtrak #7(06) at Lake Forest, Illinois. They're starting with four engines this time; AMTK 300, 301, 150, and 25. There's also a bag-sleeper combine as the first car.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Keep in mind with new Locomotives the biggest failure is link between seat and throttle .


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

I kind of wonder why it is that unlike most of the SC-44's, the ALC-42's were not fitted with strobes?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

FRA pretty much rules , strobes or Ditch lights , they do prefer Ditchlights , Amtrak may not want to spend money on both.


----------



## Acela150

Dutchrailnut said:


> Keep in mind with new Locomotives the biggest failure is link between seat and throttle .



If you're saying it's the engineers, I can tell you that the throttle jockeys aren't the issue with the Chargers thus far.


----------



## west point

Since the V=2 baggage dorm is first car could it be for maintenance personnel to bed down. Especially Siemens techs with their magic laptops?


----------



## jis

Acela150 said:


> If you're saying it's the engineers, I can tell you that the throttle jockeys aren't the issue with the Chargers thus far.


Unless one consider PTC as an integral part of the "throttle jockey complex"


----------



## AmtrakBlue

west point said:


> Since the V=2 baggage dorm is first car could it be for maintenance personnel to bed down. Especially Siemens techs with their magic laptops?


Yes, the bag-dorm has Siemens techs riding with them in case there are any issues.


----------



## frequentflyer

How long has the Siemens locomotives have been running in the midwest, California and Florida? How much data has been collected so far? What's new that the Siemen techs have not seen?

http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/9.b. NGEC Annual Mtg 02252022 Ruppert.pdf

Siemens is selling Amtrak longer Maintenance intervals with the ALC42..........................Oh oh.

And going to Page 8 in the Powerpoint will show the battery/locomotive configuration, that is....................interesting............


----------



## Dutchrailnut

they can show anything in presentation but unless that power car is permanently coupled no power above 74 volt can be trainlined between the two units.


----------



## jis

Dutchrailnut said:


> they can show anything in presentation but unless that power car is permanently coupled no power above 74 volt can be trainlined between the two units.


Power car will be permanently (well actually semi-permanently) coupled like everything else in the train sets. So there should be no problem having a power bus bar connecting the two.


----------



## NSC1109

frequentflyer said:


> How long has the Siemens locomotives have been running in the midwest, California and Florida? How much data has been collected so far? What's new that the Siemen techs have not seen?
> 
> http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/9.b. NGEC Annual Mtg 02252022 Ruppert.pdf
> 
> Siemens is selling Amtrak longer Maintenance intervals with the ALC42..........................Oh oh.
> 
> And going to Page 8 in the Powerpoint will show the battery/locomotive configuration, that is....................interesting............



what the heck paint livery is that?


----------



## jis

NSC1109 said:


> what the heck paint livery is that?


Probably just a random illustrative one. It has been present in the Siemens materials on wheelchair lifts since back in 2021 when the Amfleet replacement order was announced by Siemens and Amtrak.


----------



## NSC1109

jis said:


> Probably just a random illustrative one. It has been present in the Siemens materials on wheelchair lifts since back in 2021 when the Amfleet replacement order was announced by Siemens and Amtrak.



it would be attractive as a one off “going green” thing, but not as the phase VII livery


----------



## jis

NSC1109 said:


> it would be attractive as a one off “going green” thing, but not as the phase VII livery


I suspect they just copied it from some European material. These liveries shown on some of these slides should not be taken too seriously. These things can change easily.


----------



## Agent

Amtrak #7(06) seems to have had a fairly good trip. It arrived six minutes early in Seattle today.

walstib373 posted this video of the _Empire Builder _going to and from the wye in Seattle.


----------



## Amtrak25

Headed east, over 4 hours late after on-time Seattle departure, but due to a stuck freight train. (terrible coincidence)


----------



## Agent

Video posted by amantastic today shows the eastbound _Empire Builder _headed for Chicago today at Maple Springs, Minnesota with five engines. They were Charger AMTK 300, Charger AMTK 301, P42 AMTK 136, Dash 8 AMTK 506, and P42 AMTK 11. Two builders and three models.


----------



## neroden

jis said:


> Power car will be permanently (well actually semi-permanently) coupled like everything else in the train sets. So there should be no problem having a power bus bar connecting the two.


I'm gonna say that layout looks a lot like what I was predicting some years ago for locomotive-hauled trains with a battery mode. Trains *do* have the advantage that you can always make them longer and more articulated if you need to fit more equipment; tender cars were used in the days of coal.


----------



## Agent

Video from MG Rail Videos shows Amtrak #7(30) has 301 leading and two P42s behind it as it passes Morton Grove. There's also a FRA car on the end of the train making one of its regular trips I'd guess.


----------



## Amtrak25

Would they let the Siemens troubleshoot crew bunk in the FRA car since the VL-II bag-dorm is not present ?


----------



## Agent

Amtrak25 said:


> Would they let the Siemens troubleshoot crew bunk in the FRA car since the VL-II bag-dorm is not present ?



I don't know if there is a Siemens crew this time. I only heard there was one the one run there was a bag-dorm with the train.


----------



## Agent

Adam Ghimenti posted a video of a special Amtrak move picking up two more Chargers from the factory today. They are AMTK 308 and 309 with the latter being in the new paint scheme.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

308 and 309


----------



## Ryan

There's an echo in here.


----------



## Agent

AMTK 309 and 308 are heading east on the _California Zephyr_. The two are third and fourth out behind the usual P42s.

ChaseFan No. 9 caught Amtrak #6(14) in Sacramento.



Roseville Sacramento Railfan filmed it leaving the Roseville station.


----------



## jrud

Some nice still photos of Charger AMTK 309 in Phase VII from Amtrak Media. Note that one page incorrectly says Phase VI.









Amtrak Unveils New Look on National Network Locomotives - Amtrak Media


WASHINGTON – The first Amtrak locomotive to carry a new paint scheme is traveling from California to Delaware, giving the public a glimpse of a new look as it makes its way to more Amtrak trains in the years to come.




media.amtrak.com













Image Gallery of Amtrak Phase VI Livery on Unit 309 - Amtrak Media







media.amtrak.com


----------



## piemadd

Ooh nice! I'm going to catch it in LaGrange as it comes into Chicago tomorrow!


----------



## Agent

I caught Amtrak #6(14) as it made its station stop in Ottumwa, Iowa this morning.


----------



## Cal

Agent said:


> I caught Amtrak #6(14) as it made its station stop in Ottumwa, Iowa this morning.
> 
> View attachment 28121
> 
> 
> View attachment 28122
> 
> 
> View attachment 28123
> 
> 
> View attachment 28124


Nice!

Bit off topic, but are you ever going to touch your YouTube channel again? I quite like(d) your videos.


----------



## billosborn

Apparently, after arriving in Chicago on the Zephyr, the will go out on the Capitol Limited en route to Wilmington,, Delaware for certification. Does anyone know:
1) How long the certification process takes, i.e. how soon they would be sent out into the main network? 301 and 302 went into service on the EB in February, curious what the time frame was/is between manufacture and final certification.

2) How many per month are being completed at Siemen's factory in Sacramento?

I know they will be used on the LD routes, and I am taking CZ in late August. It would be nice to have those snazzy looking engines on our trip. I know they were ordered because they are both ecologically beneficial and fuel-efficeint, but it's like when you get a new car and it has that "new car" smell - those paint jobs are brand new!


----------



## Cal

billosborn said:


> I know they will be used on the LD routes, and I am taking CZ in late August. It would be nice to have those snazzy looking engines on our trip. I know they were ordered because they are both ecologically beneficial and fuel-efficeint, but it's like when you get a new car and it has that "new car" smell - those paint jobs are brand new!


I personally am on the contrary. I'm sad to see the P42's go, as they are what I grew up with. I hope that when my next trip comes up, that the P42's are pulling my trains, just so I can hear their wonderful horns and their sound. I will definitely miss them, especially the horn (I don't love the new Charger horns),.


----------



## billosborn

billosborn said:


> Apparently, after arriving in Chicago on the Zephyr, the will go out on the Capitol Limited en route to Wilmington,, Delaware for certification.


308 and 309 were on the Eastbound Capitol LImited last night, spotted on webcam at Elkhart around 11.30pm. So, after arrival in Washington DC, they should be in WIlmington soon.


----------



## piemadd

I caught them in LaGrange, IL on Saturday. I was going to wake up early sunday to catch the Capitol Limited on its way out of Chicago, but slept in unfortunately.


----------



## Agent

Cal said:


> Nice!
> 
> Bit off topic, but are you ever going to touch your YouTube channel again? I quite like(d) your videos.



I don't know when, but I want my next video to be something special. I've already filmed the needed parts, but I ran into a wall getting what I want from the video editors I've tried and getting the time to try and figure an editor out.

---

308 and 309 on Amtrak #30 were caught by Chicago Line RailfanProductions in a video posted yesterday.



They were also filmed today at Point of Rocks by Shortline614.


----------



## Cal

Agent said:


> I don't know when, but I want my next video to be something special. I've already filmed the needed parts, but I ran into a wall getting what I want from the video editors I've tried and getting the time to try and figure an editor out.


Ah okay. I hope you get it figured out soon.


----------



## cirdan

Agent said:


> I caught Amtrak #6(14) as it made its station stop in Ottumwa, Iowa this morning.
> 
> View attachment 28121
> 
> 
> View attachment 28122
> 
> 
> View attachment 28123
> 
> 
> View attachment 28124



dumb question here, but why is the American flag below the cab window mirror-pictured?


----------



## cirdan

Can chargers and P42s work in multiple control / multiple unit or are the chargers being towed dead?


----------



## Trogdor

cirdan said:


> dumb question here, but why is the American flag below the cab window mirror-pictured?



A flag flying on a flag pole will be mounted with the blue (stars) towards the flagpole. When moving forward, the flag will fly with that part leading, and stripes trailing.

When an image of a flag is painted/affixed to the surface of a moving vehicle, it must be positioned such that the blue is leading when that vehicle is moving “forward.” Hence the appearance of it being mirrored.

You will find this on the right side of any (properly positioned) moving vehicle, be it a train, bus, airplane, etc.



cirdan said:


> Can chargers and P42s work in multiple control / multiple unit or are the chargers being towed dead?



They can be MUed. I don’t think any LD Chargers have operated standalone in revenue service yet. All have operated with P42s in a multiple-unit configuration.


----------



## cirdan

Trogdor said:


> A flag flying on a flag pole will be mounted with the blue (stars) towards the flagpole. When moving forward, the flag will fly with that part leading, and stripes trailing.
> 
> When an image of a flag is painted/affixed to the surface of a moving vehicle, it must be positioned such that the blue is leading when that vehicle is moving “forward.” Hence the appearance of it being mirrored.
> 
> You will find this on the right side of any (properly positioned) moving vehicle, be it a train, bus, airplane, etc.



Thanks for the expalantion. That makes sense.

I guess it makes more sense on buses, airplanes etc though that typically always move in the same direction, versus trains that can move in both directions equally.


----------



## PerRock

cirdan said:


> Thanks for the expalantion. That makes sense.
> 
> I guess it makes more sense on buses, airplanes etc though that typically always move in the same direction, versus trains that can move in both directions equally.



The blue field should always be on the "front" end of a vehicle.


----------



## mfastx

Are they not going to repaint 308 to match 309?


----------



## PerRock

308 is the "old" (although completely new) paint scheme. 309 is the "new" paint scheme.


----------



## Cal

Trogdor said:


> They can be MUed. I don’t think any LD Chargers have operated standalone in revenue service yet. All have operated with P42s in a multiple-unit configuration.


They have at least on 8 between Spokane and Seattle. I've seen it with only one Charger at the front. 


mfastx said:


> Are they not going to repaint 308 to match 309?


Nope, 300-308 are in a special livery. The rest will now be in the livery that 309 is in, the new normal.


----------



## Rambling Robert

Trogdor said:


> A flag flying on a flag pole will be mounted with the blue (stars) towards the flagpole. When moving forward, the flag will fly with that part leading, and stripes trailing.
> 
> When an image of a flag is painted/affixed to the surface of a moving vehicle, it must be positioned such that the blue is leading when that vehicle is moving “forward.” Hence the appearance of it being mirrored.
> 
> You will find this on the right side of any (properly positioned) moving vehicle, be it a train, bus, airplane, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> They can be MUed. I don’t think any LD Chargers have operated standalone in revenue service yet. All have operated with P42s in a multiple-unit configuration.



The flag code of the United States apparently does not have guidelines for painting the flag in “mirrored form” foe moving trains, planes, ships, etc.. I think in this case it’s more a matter of choice on how the locomotive was painted.

The word “must” is not used within the U.S. Flag Code but the word “should” does appear a lot - like the field of blue “should” appear on the viewers left. If that locomotive was turned around the flag would look odd to me “flying backwards”. But I think it looks cool as in the photo.

The U.S. Flag Code is not enforceable, hence using the word “should” and not “must”.



https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/[email protected]/chapter1&edition=prelim


----------



## piemadd

Trogdor said:


> A flag flying on a flag pole will be mounted with the blue (stars) towards the flagpole. When moving forward, the flag will fly with that part leading, and stripes trailing.
> 
> When an image of a flag is painted/affixed to the surface of a moving vehicle, it must be positioned such that the blue is leading when that vehicle is moving “forward.” Hence the appearance of it being mirrored.
> 
> You will find this on the right side of any (properly positioned) moving vehicle, be it a train, bus, airplane, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> They can be MUed. I don’t think any LD Chargers have operated standalone in revenue service yet. All have operated with P42s in a multiple-unit configuration.



We're probably going to see them running standalone soon. I've seen 301 and 302 run together with a P42 on the Empire Builder, but when they switch over to only using 2 engine trains again my best guess is that we should see standalone service.


----------



## piemadd

cirdan said:


> Can chargers and P42s work in multiple control / multiple unit or are the chargers being towed dead?



They can MU but right now they are being towed dead as they haven't been accepted by Amtrak yet. That is why they're in Wilmington, DE now.


----------



## billosborn

300 and 302 (along with 301) have been in service for over a month. This morning, 300 and 302 passed the Skykomish Virtual Railfan webcam at about 8:55 AM., They were pulling the Seattle portion of the Empire Builder, with no P42's along. Looks like they took off the "training wheels".


----------



## Cal

billosborn said:


> 300 and 302 (along with 301) have been in service for over a month. This morning, 300 and 302 passed the Skykomish Virtual Railfan webcam at about 8:55 AM., They were pulling the Seattle portion of the Empire Builder, with no P42's along. Looks like they took off the "training wheels".


They've been running solo for a good amount of time already. Seem to be doing well.


----------



## cirdan

PerRock said:


> 308 is the "old" (although completely new) paint scheme. 309 is the "new" paint scheme.



I wonder if we will be seeing any P42s repainted to this scheme, or whether at this late stage in their life it's not considered worth the effort.


----------



## jis

cirdan said:


> I wonder if we will be seeing any P42s repainted to this scheme, or whether at this late stage in their life it's not considered worth the effort.


One of our friends who is one of the chief designers of the new paint schemes has not alluded to any further plans to repaint any P42s. All the new paint schemes discussed have been about ALCs.

What I am curious about now is what livery will be applied to the ITCs. Will it be some variation on the theme of Phase VII or something else?


----------



## lordsigma

Trogdor said:


> A flag flying on a flag pole will be mounted with the blue (stars) towards the flagpole. When moving forward, the flag will fly with that part leading, and stripes trailing.
> 
> When an image of a flag is painted/affixed to the surface of a moving vehicle, it must be positioned such that the blue is leading when that vehicle is moving “forward.” Hence the appearance of it being mirrored.
> 
> You will find this on the right side of any (properly positioned) moving vehicle, be it a train, bus, airplane, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> They can be MUed. I don’t think any LD Chargers have operated standalone in revenue service yet. All have operated with P42s in a multiple-unit configuration.


They have operated standalone on the Seattle section of the Builder west of Spokane during the recent 3 unit operation (the lone P42 led the Portland cars.) When they first put them on the Builder they carried a second P42 that I believe would go with the Chargers on the Seattle section which has now been removed and I believe the chargers are now considered to be good - I think the only reason the one P42 remains is due to being in a 3 engine operating period. I would expect when they drop back to 2 engines for warm season the two chargers will go alone.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

I wonder why Amtrak would want to use an Auxiliary Power Car rather than simply just a locomotive with 2 or 3 different power modes?


----------



## CCC1007

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I wonder why Amtrak would want to use an Auxiliary Power Car rather than simply just a locomotive with 2 or 3 different power modes?


Probably to have a simpler (Read: Cheaper) locomotive.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Also, with Amtrak ordering a good number of trainsets to replace the Amfleet I's and a majority of the ACS-64's, I wonder a few things...

- What locomotive(s) will they use for the Lake Shore Limited since diesel power is banned in New York Penn?

- What will they replace the Amfleet II's with for the single-level long-distance trains?

- Could they possibly replace the Viewliner II's with straight Siemens Venture cars specifically designed for long-distance?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Also, with Amtrak ordering a good number of trainsets to replace the Amfleet I's and a majority of the ACS-64's, I wonder a few things...
> 
> - What locomotive(s) will they use for the Lake Shore Limited since diesel power is banned in New York Penn?
> 
> - What will they replace the Amfleet II's with for the single-level long-distance trains?
> 
> - Could they possibly replace the Viewliner II's with straight Siemens Venture cars specifically designed for long-distance?


Diesel power is not banned in New York Penn.
Why would they replace VLIIs which are new?


----------



## lordsigma

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I wonder why Amtrak would want to use an Auxiliary Power Car rather than simply just a locomotive with 2 or 3 different power modes?


Probably so that the locomotives themselves aren't captive anywhere on the system and can be moved between trainsets and it makes for commonality of components. Could also be related to acceleration requirements for the corridor. The NEC APVs will have a supplemental powered truck in addition to powering the traction motors on the Charger. The two combined will provide the required acceleration. Trying to fit diesel propulsion and everything related to catenary propulsion into the Charger with enough acceleration to match the all electric Sprinters may simply not be feasible.


----------



## Cal

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Also, with Amtrak ordering a good number of trainsets to replace the Amfleet I's and a majority of the ACS-64's, I wonder a few things...
> 
> - What locomotive(s) will they use for the Lake Shore Limited since diesel power is banned in New York Penn?
> 
> - What will they replace the Amfleet II's with for the single-level long-distance trains?
> 
> - Could they possibly replace the Viewliner II's with straight Siemens Venture cars specifically designed for long-distance?


-Modified chargers that have battery capabilities; I believe they will run normally when out and with battery power when entering/exiting NYP. 

-No idea, the order for the ICT's are for intercity trains only. LD replacements won't be ordered for a few years AFAIK. 

-I'm not sure why they wouldn't be able to. They won't though (at least not anytime soon), whatever replaced VI's and Amfleets will operate with VII's. Many on here have speculated a venture-type car though.


----------



## Agent

Video taken today by SantaFe669 at Roudout, Illinois shows AMTK 303 leading the westbound _Empire Builder_. Video description says this is the first revenue run for 303.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

The Dual modes planned for NY include units for MN, CDOT, LIRR and NY empire service the battery mode is only used if train is stuck in third rail gap . Each unit has 4200 hp in diesel and 4200 in third rail mode no units will be owned by Amtrak .


----------



## west point

Dutchrailnut said:


> The Dual modes planned for NY include units for MN, CDOT, LIRR and NY empire service the battery mode is only used if train is stuck in third rail gap . Each unit has 4200 hp in diesel and 4200 in third rail mode no units will be owned by Amtrak .



Figures of third rail draw on just 2 shoes each side seems to make 4200 HP on third rail impossible. Now a mixture of 2100 third rail and 2199 battery seems more likely.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

west point said:


> Figures of third rail draw on just 2 shoes each side seems to make 4200 HP on third rail impossible. Now a mixture of 2100 third rail and 2199 battery seems more likely.


4200 HP is about 5000 Amps at 600 VDC. Is that possible with 2 shoes? I could not find any figures on max current draw for 3rd rail shoes.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

they will have 4 shoes on each side.


----------



## west point

I remember riding subways that had major arcs when a car would gap. Those cars had what a max of 700 HP?


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

The original Eurostar E300 trainsets were configured with third rail shoes to run to Waterloo on the London Chatham and Dover 750 VDC line until HS1 was completed to St. Pancras in 2007. Under third rail power they developed 4300 HP or 3.4MW with a 90 MPH top speed on the conventional rail network.


----------



## west point

AmtrakMaineiac said:


> The original Eurostar E300 trainsets were configured with third rail shoes to run to Waterloo on the London Chatham and Dover 750 VDC line until HS1 was completed to St. Pancras in 2007. Under third rail power they developed 4300 HP or 3.4MW with a 90 MPH top speed on the conventional rail network.


How many shoes?


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

Unable to find number of shoes, but I suspect 2 on each power unit for a total of 4.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

the Siemens dual modes will have two shoes at each side of each truck also they have gap anticipation were arcing is minimized. with 3phase propulsion the entire thinking is a whole lot different. 
The old Eurostar power cars had 4 shoes on each side.


----------



## piemadd

Per the released docs on the metro north ALC-42s, they will have 4 shoes on each side for 8 shoes total, though we can anticipate that only 4 will be used most of the time. Also note that with 3rd rail power enabled, these dual mode units tend to have a lower speed and horsepower.

Source: http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Docum...ilroad Siemens NGEC 2021 - Final.pdf


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

lordsigma said:


> Probably so that the locomotives themselves aren't captive anywhere on the system and can be moved between trainsets and it makes for commonality of components. Could also be related to acceleration requirements for the corridor. The NEC APVs will have a supplemental powered truck in addition to powering the traction motors on the Charger. The two combined will provide the required acceleration. Trying to fit diesel propulsion and everything related to catenary propulsion into the Charger with enough acceleration to match the all electric Sprinters may simply not be feasible.


Hmm. Good point. Possibly faster acceleration with less wheelslip.


----------



## cirdan

AmtrakMaineiac said:


> Unable to find number of shoes, but I suspect 2 on each power unit for a total of 4.



From memory there were two pairs per power car and per side.

The class 92 also has two pairs per side.


----------



## cirdan

AmtrakMaineiac said:


> 4200 HP is about 5000 Amps at 600 VDC. Is that possible with 2 shoes? I could not find any figures on max current draw for 3rd rail shoes.



5000 Amps sounds extremely high to me.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

cirdan said:


> 5000 Amps sounds extremely high to me.


4200 hp = 3133200 Watts. Divide 3133200 by 600 volts to get amps 5222 to be exact


----------



## Dutchrailnut

actual third rail voltage on MN is close to 770 volt but can drop as low as 525


----------



## cirdan

AmtrakMaineiac said:


> 4200 hp = 3133200 Watts. Divide 3133200 by 600 volts to get amps 5222 to be exact


I mean 5000 amps sounds extremely high for the contact area between shoe and rail.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

we are talking about 4 contact area's of about 16 square inches each .


----------



## west point

Dutchrailnut said:


> we are talking about 4 contact area's of about 16 square inches each .


What about gaps? All our NY City subway riders will tell you about gapping for just 300 HP per car


----------



## Dutchrailnut

as I said before both Genesis and Charger have gap anticipation software, reducing traction when contact is getting lost on leading shoes. 
with AC traction its a different game, as power is not interrupted as abrupt as with DC traction.


----------



## cirdan

I don't know about the US locomotives, but in Britain, dual power locomotives were typically restricted to lower power when on third rail. For example both the Class 92 and first generation Eurostars could only reach full power when drawing AC from the catenary. The DC third rail restricted the power to something like two thirds (speaking from memory so please don't quote me on that figure). For EMUs this restriction was never a problem as they had distributed power gear and the dual system units could AFAIK always achieve the same performance on DC as on AC.

The DC-only locomotives (classes 70 and 71) had an on-board "booster" unit which was basically a flywheel to store energy. At times of peak power draw they would draw power from both third rail and from the flywheel at the same time, so limiting the peak amount of juice that had to come out of the third rail at any moment. The same flywheel also helped with gapping and even running shorter distances away from the third rail. They could also startup the flywheel by plugging into a ground supply which was useful for staring them up in the morning when they had been parked away from the third rail (most locomotive sheds were not electrified for safety reasons). The running lines were all electrified with only EMUs in mind and so in places there were/are longer gaps in the third rail that would have been too long for a locomotive. Some freight yards had DC catenary on account of the danger posed by the third rail to ground staff. Both classes had pantographs for this purpose.

On the newer classes 73 and 74 (the 74s were actually rebuilt 71s) they didn't fit a flywheel, but used a diesel engine instead. But this was quite small and although the engine could technically run any distance away from the electrified line, the effectively moderate power on diesel meant this only happened rarely. Recently some 73 have been upgraded with more powerful diesel engines and are being used on sleeper trains in Scotland, far away from any DC electrification.

I understand that in the 1980s when Class 73s were inroduced on the Gatwick Express as replacement for EMUs, they had trouble because the frequent gaps on the Brighton line led to the diesel engines being started up and shut down continuously which lead to overheating and failures and even at least one nasty fire. I think they fixed that by tinkering with the software and also trained the drivers to better anticipate the gaps.


----------



## Agent

AMTK 310 and 311 have been released from the factory and are traveling east on Amtrak #6(27). Railyard Films caught them at Roseville, California.



Kevin Standlee filmed this _California Zephyr_ at Fernley, Nevada.


----------



## west point

It may be at least another year but sooner or later we will see 2 active chargers pulling 2 to be delivered. I can imagine the fans falling all over themselves getting that 4 charger consist.


----------



## billosborn

The previous two, 308 and 309 were released from the factory in Mid April - I looks like the factory is finishing two engines every month and a half or so. I know the earliest ones are in service on the Empire Builder, hope to see more of them on the Western LD trains.


----------



## Cal

I kind of wish my CONO trip in July will have them, but at the same time I don’t. I’m miss the beautiful horns on the P42s


----------



## Agent

I caught the eastbound _California Zephyr_ with 310 and 311 today running three hours late out of Ottumwa, Iowa.


----------



## newbryford

Hi All.
I've been to the US many times on work/vacation, but I've just done my first trip to the US whilst making an effort to have a reasonable amount of time to go watch things on rails.
I've had look through here and can't find any pics of the ACE SC-44s, so I thought I'd share one from my trip.
#3111 at San Jose Diridon on 18 May 2022, about to shove one of the afternoon/evening trains to Stockton - probably train ACE06.
Nice clean lines and an uncluttered livery, complete with a matching - I believe - newly repainted bi-level set.


----------



## Agent

Yesterday, the two newest Chargers left Chicago on the eastbound _Capitol Limited_. Chicago Line RailfanProductions posted a video of this Amtrak #30.



And RailfanKaleb1309 caught a video of it today.


----------



## Acela150

310 and 311 passed the training center in Wilmington promptly at 1pm today (June 1st) and are in the shops as of 4pm.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Acela150 said:


> 310 and 311 passed the training center in Wilmington promptly at 1pm today (June 1st) and are in the shops as of 4pm.


I'm sure they were in the shops by 1:30 pm.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

oy vey


----------



## Acela150

AmtrakBlue said:


> I'm sure they were in the shops by 1:30 pm.



Most likely.  


Dutchrailnut said:


> oy vey



Thank you for the useless commentary as always dutch....


----------



## GiantsFan

Cal said:


> I kind of wish my CONO trip in July will have them, but at the same time I don’t. I’m miss the beautiful horns on the P42s



What horns do they have?


----------



## Cal

GiantsFan said:


> What horns do they have?


Both the P42's and ALC-42s have K5LA's as it's Amtraks main type of horn. However the ALC-42's have a different version (I'm not sure what the difference is) that I find inferior to the P42 horns. 

P42 Horns: 

ALC42 horns:


----------



## billosborn

The Skykomish webcam captured the #301 ALC-42 pulling the Eastbound Seattle portion of the EB on 6/11. Does anyone else have current info on where other ALC=42's are currently in service (i.e not including the ones that are being transported to Wilmington)


----------



## Cal

billosborn said:


> The Skykomish webcam captured the #301 ALC-42 pulling the Eastbound Seattle portion of the EB on 6/11. Does anyone else have current info on where other ALC=42's are currently in service (i.e not including the ones that are being transported to Wilmington)


It's been on the Builder for a few months now. I think I heard that the next train to be equipped with them is the CONO but I'm not entirely sure. Other than the Builder they're not in revenue service.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Cal said:


> I kind of wish my CONO trip in July will have them, but at the same time I don’t. I’m miss the beautiful horns on the P42s


You might get your wish. 307 just left WAS on #19 heading to NOL. I'm guessing another one will head down tomorrow. 2 or 4 of the new engines left the Wilmington shops yesterday for WAS...to be dispersed. (and I missed both moves  ) I think NOL maintenance people have already been familiarized withe the new engines, so maybe they'll go into service soon.


----------



## billosborn

Simple Railways just posted a video of his trip from Seattle on the EB. He was hoping to see an ALC-42 and he was rewarded - As always, he has chapter links in the description. You can click on "A Charger in the mountains" to see #300 pulling the train, and a closeup walk-around of the charger at the Whitefish, MT stop.


----------



## joelkfla

billosborn said:


> Simple Railways just posted a video of his trip from Seattle on the EB. He was hoping to see an ALC-42 and he was rewarded - As always, he has chapter links in the description. You can click on "A Charger in the mountains" to see #300 pulling the train, and a closeup walk-around of the charger at the Whitefish, MT stop.


In fact, he broke the trip into 2 segments, and got an ALC-42 on both trains, while he noted that neither westbound train that he passed had one.


----------



## jis

joelkfla said:


> In fact, he broke the trip into 2 segments, and got an ALC-42 on both trains, while he noted that neither westbound train that he passed had one.


For all EB runs to have ALC42s I suppose there have to be at least 10 or 12 ALC42s in circulation. So not surprising that he saw a few without ALC42s.


----------



## jis

Amtrak has exercised 50 options for more ALC-42s









For Amtrak, 50 More Siemens ALC-42s - Railway Age


Amtrak has exercised an option with Siemens Mobility for an additional 50 ALC-42 (“Amtrak Long-Distance Charger, 4,200 HP”) diesel-electric locomotives, bringing the total contract value to $2 billion, including supplemental multiyear maintenance support. The amount also includes about $850...




www.railwayage.com


----------



## Cal

jis said:


> Amtrak has exercised 50 options for more ALC-42s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For Amtrak, 50 More Siemens ALC-42s - Railway Age
> 
> 
> Amtrak has exercised an option with Siemens Mobility for an additional 50 ALC-42 (“Amtrak Long-Distance Charger, 4,200 HP”) diesel-electric locomotives, bringing the total contract value to $2 billion, including supplemental multiyear maintenance support. The amount also includes about $850...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.railwayage.com


How much will that bring the total up to?


----------



## jis

Cal said:


> How much will that bring the total up to?


75 + 50 = 125, numbered 300 to 424.


----------



## PVD

jis said:


> 75 + 50 = 125, numbered 300 to 424.


I think some casual observers get confused by the fact that a batch of state-owned units are designated for Amtrak operated corridor service. Those are separate (and slightly different) from the ones that will be owned by Amtrak.


----------



## KnightRail

Bob Johnston of Trains dot com on February 8, 2022 reported the ordering of the additional 50 units so either someone spoke out of turn back in February or everyone has been under a rock for the past four plus months.


----------



## jis

PVD said:


> I think some casual observers get confused by the fact that a batch of state-owned units are designated for Amtrak operated corridor service. Those are separate (and slightly different) from the ones that will be owned by Amtrak.


The state units are SC-44s


KnightRail said:


> Bob Johnston of Trains dot com on February 8, 2022 reported the ordering of the additional 50 units so either someone spoke out of turn back in February or everyone has been under a rock for the past four plus months.


IIRC he said that exercise of the options was imminent, and the actual option exercise and actual placement of the order happened more recently.

But to be sure I will ask him when I talk to him next within the next few days.


----------



## Cal

jis said:


> 75 + 50 = 125, numbered 300 to 424.


There were originally 207 P42DC's (plus a handful of P40s), does that mean some LD trains will be going from two engines to one? I know routes previously served by P42's now have SC-44's but even then I feel like it'd make sense for them to have to get more to replace all the P42s.


----------



## PaTrainFan

So, does everybody feel better about Amtrak's commitment to the long distance network?


----------



## PVD

jis said:


> The state units are SC-44s
> 
> IIRC he said that exercise of the options was imminent, and the actual option exercise and actual placement of the order happened more recently.
> 
> But to be sure I will ask him when I talk to him next within the next few days.


That's why I mentioned casual observers, they tend to lump them together as "Chargers"


----------



## Ryan

Casual observers have no idea what the locomotives are other than perhaps "that one looks new".


----------



## daybeers

PaTrainFan said:


> So, does everybody feel better about Amtrak's commitment to the long distance network?


If the Siemens techs and Amtrak maintenance can get the Chargers and Sprinters to not break down nearly every day (look at the NECAlerts account), I would say yes.


----------



## CCC1007

Cal said:


> There were originally 207 P42DC's (plus a handful of P40s), does that mean some LD trains will be going from two engines to one? I know routes previously served by P42's now have SC-44's but even then I feel like it'd make sense for them to have to get more to replace all the P42s.


It would be a good idea to remember that some of those p42’s were ordered to allow long trains of mail and express traffic to have up to 5 locomotives, depending on terrain and traffic.

125 (or 175 if the rest of the options get exercised) new locomotives should be enough for the LD network as it is today.


----------



## west point

CCC1007 said:


> 125 (or 175 if the rest of the options get exercised) new locomotives should be enough for the LD network as it is today.


175 to cover incidents. That still leaves P-42s for new services. The ALC-42Es will probably work the NEC and thru routes onto non electrified routes.


----------



## MARC Rider

west point said:


> 175 to cover incidents. That still leaves P-42s for new services. The ALC-42Es will probably work the NEC and thru routes onto non electrified routes.


The NEC through routes onto non-electrified routes will be serviced by the new Siemens Dual-mode intercity train sets. Unless the reference is to the Cardinal, Crescent, and the Silvers, which will continue to need diesel locomotives south of Washington.


----------



## west point

Sorry did not clarify. As I read it the ALC-42Es will be used on regional trains to or thru Richmond and Roanoke. Regular diesels for LD trains. Carolinian ?? Maybe yes maybe no. Since NC is going to buy some venture cars will wait and see on that on.


----------



## rickycourtney

Cal said:


> There were originally 207 P42DC's (plus a handful of P40s), does that mean some LD trains will be going from two engines to one? I know routes previously served by P42's now have SC-44's but even then I feel like it'd make sense for them to have to get more to replace all the P42s.


Amtrak has purchased 125 ALC-42 locomotives for long-distance services, and they're purchasing 65 ALC-42E locomotives for use on Northeast Corridor services (with an option to buy 10 more). Plus, Amtrak Midwest, which previously used the national fleet of locomotives, purchased 33 SC-44 locomotives. 

That's 223 locomotives, 233 if the option order is exercised.


west point said:


> Sorry did not clarify. As I read it the ALC-42Es will be used on regional trains to or thru Richmond and Roanoke. Regular diesels for LD trains. Carolinian ?? Maybe yes maybe no. Since NC is going to buy some venture cars will wait and see on that on.


The ALC-42E + Venture trainsets will be used on the _Northeast Regional_ including the Virginia and Springfield services plus the _Adirondack_, _Carolinian_, _Downeaster_, _Empire Service_, _Ethan Allen Express, Keystone Service, Maple Leaf,_ _Palmetto_, _Pennsylvanian_ and _Vermonter_.


----------



## frequentflyer

west point said:


> 175 to cover incidents. That still leaves P-42s for new services. The ALC-42Es will probably work the NEC and thru routes onto non electrified routes.


Pretty sure the plan is to retire the P42s. After 30 years of hard service, and millions of miles of 80 mph running, the Genesis will go down in Amtrak history as one of the best locomotives they had, besting the famed F40s.

The ALCs not making much news is good since they are running on the EB and soon the City of New Orleans.


----------



## edwardjtracey

As a regular _Vermonter_ rider down the Connecticut River Valley: the arrival of the ALC-42E (to avoid the time-consuming engine swap at New Haven) cannot come soon enough.


----------



## Cal

frequentflyer said:


> City of New Orleans.


When will they be deployed?


----------



## west point

As they beccome available passing all acceptance points. 

Note: As more ALC-42s come into service many of those first locos will point out problems. Amtrak will require those in service problems to be completely cleared in any ALC-42 that Siemens delivers to Amtrak for acceptance. Wilmington will be very hard on Siemens requiring Siemens to fix all these problems. Those items may slow more ALCs entering service.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Cal said:


> When will they be deployed?


Two were released from Wilmington a couple of weeks ago. One went down to New Orleans via the Crescent and one went to Chicago via the Capitol Limited.


----------



## Agent

There might be another train on soon-to-have-Chargers list. Amtrak #5(04) has AMTK 305 third out. I read a report it is to be dropped off at Lincoln, Nebraska for crew familiarization. This westbound _California Zephyr_ was three hours late out of Chicago due to "mechanical issues," so it was night by the time I caught it in Iowa.


----------



## Pal2Pluto

We were on Zephyr to Denver on Sunday. Had to stop three times for the engine to reset the computers. We were to get on to go to Sacramento this morning. Got a call that it will be more than 5.5hrs late.


----------



## daybeers

Pal2Pluto said:


> Had to stop three times for the engine to reset the computers


Amtrak has been having issues with all of their Siemens models apparently. The Siemens techs don't know how to fix them because they were hired here and not from Germany, allegedly. Seems to be mostly software issues. Take a look at Amtrak's NEC Alerts twitter account and see that while the time of delay is much less, the NEC is having nearly as much frequency of equipment origination and mechanical issues as the rest of the network nearly every day.


----------



## Synthguy1

Heading home tomorrow 7-7-22, from Glenwood Springs CO to Galesburg Illinois. Got a very early phone call from Amtrak saying that the train was delayed due to service operations. Right now they say 3.5 hrs late. Could this be problems with the new engines causing a strain on availability for the older P42?


----------



## Agent

Agent said:


> There might be another train on soon-to-have-Chargers list. Amtrak #5(04) has AMTK 305 third out. I read a report it is to be dropped off at Lincoln, Nebraska for crew familiarization.



I should add that 305 has been photographed dropped off at Denver Union Station, not Lincoln.


----------



## Agent

A light power move, Amtrak #960, went from Sacramento to Oakland today with new Charger AMTK 312. Adam Ghimenti caught the move at the Sacramento station.


----------



## billosborn

Thanks to Greylake Trains Youtube channel, ALC-42 #310 and 311 look to be on their way to Wilmington from the factory in Sacramento, courtesy of California Zephyr #6.


----------



## west point

What is interesting. Is the pole line with all wire UP or local utility?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

billosborn said:


> Thanks to Greylake Trains Youtube channel, ALC-42 #310 and 311 look to be on their way to Wilmington from the factory in Sacramento, courtesy of California Zephyr #6.



They’ve been in Wilmington since late May/early June. Look back a couple of pages and you’ll see a video when they left the plant.


----------



## Agent

AMTK 305 is heading back east already on Amtrak #6(05). The train was over five hours late out of Ottumwa, Iowa.


----------



## Agent

In a bit of a first today, there were multiple _California Zephyrs_ traveling with a Charger in the consist. In addition to #6(05) with 305, Amtrak #6(07) departed today with AMTK 312 behind the Genesis engines. YouTube user Sam The Railfanner filmed this train getting on the move after a stop at Dixon, California.


----------



## Cal

It has been deployed on the CONO!!


----------



## Agent

I caught Amtrak #6(07) with AMTK 312 running nine hours and forty-eight minutes late out of Ottumwa, Iowa.


----------



## Agent

Now AMTK 301 is heading west on Amtrak #5(12). The word going around is again this is for crew familiarization.


----------



## billosborn

Agent said:


> Now AMTK 301 is heading west on Amtrak #5(12). The word going around is again this is for crew familiarization.
> 
> View attachment 28848


I believe your assumption is correct - When this train arrived at Fort Morgan Colorado, 301 was no longer on the train. Mike, who videos every arrival there, surmised that it was dropped off at Omaha or Lincoln, Nebraska. Another charger had been rumored to be dropped off for crew familiarization a few weeks back in Nebraska, but that unit continued on to California (possibly for warranty work at Siemens? )


----------



## AmtrakBlue

billosborn said:


> I believe your assumption is correct - When this train arrived at Fort Morgan Colorado, 301 was no longer on the train. Mike, who videos every arrival there, surmised that it was dropped off at Omaha or Lincoln, Nebraska. Another charger had been rumored to be dropped off for crew familiarization a few weeks back in Nebraska, but that unit continued on to California (possibly for warranty work at Siemens? )


I think the other one you're referring to ended up in Denver.


----------



## Steve4031

Cal said:


> It has been deployed on the CONO!!



I’m riding 59 tomorrow. Hoping it has a charge.


----------



## IndyLions

I’m on 58 today Champaign to Chicago. We’ll see what locomotive we have…


----------



## Thunderfoamer

One of the Chargers was on Train 27 Thursday as it came out of the Columbia River Gorge. The train was over seven hours late when I photographed it at Washougal, Washington. Ironically, train 27 came through town at almost the exact same time of day that train 28 usually does.


----------



## Agent

AMTK 301, which had been in Denver for crew familiarization, has been picked up by Amtrak #5(23) today and is now traveling westward again. Also, 40th anniversary heritage unit AMTK 184 is leading the train. Michael DeMarco filmed this _California Zephyr_ near Fraser, Colorado.


----------



## saxpower

During a recent trip traveling through Chicago, I saw a number of the new locomotives hooked to trains at Union Stations, which appeared to be waiting for passengers (and which had a mix of the Venture and Amfleet/Horizon cars)


----------



## Cal

saxpower said:


> During a recent trip traveling through Chicago, I saw a number of the new locomotives hooked to trains at Union Stations, which appeared to be waiting for passengers (and which had a mix of the Venture and Amfleet/Horizon cars)


The SC-44 Chargers for the midwest services have been in service for a few years.


----------



## TRA_Thom

Rode the CONO yesterday and #304 was pulling us. I was amazed at how quiet they are when idling at stations.


----------



## west point

TRA_Thom said:


> Rode the CONO yesterday and #304 was pulling us. I was amazed at how quiet they are when idling at stations.


Was it just 304 or a P-42 second? Picture seems to appear just 304. Someone when Siemens leading and P-42 second compare idling noise.


----------



## TRA_Thom

west point said:


> Was it just 304 or a P-42 second? Picture seems to appear just 304. Someone when Siemens leading and P-42 second compare idling noise.


It was just the Charger. I’ve been on plenty of trains with a P42, I think if the two were coupled together all you would hear is the P42.


----------



## Agent

AMTK 309 is behind two P42s on Amtrak #5(18).


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Just saw a post on FB that 313 & 314 will be heading east on 6(19)


----------



## Agent

Found a video recorded yesterday by Railbros Studios taken at Vacaville, California of the light power move with AMTK 313 and 314 after having left the factory. AMTK 301 led the move, which I think makes this the first time a Charger has been used on the move to get new Chargers.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

still bogles my mind that Amtrak sends engines to tow new FRA compliant engines , run figgin things on their own power pretty sure Siemens has them 100% on spec leaving factory


----------



## Agent

AmtrakBlue said:


> Just saw a post on FB that 313 & 314 will be heading east on 6(19)



Looks like #6(19) left without those two. Bit of a shame as they would have been traveling with 184 leading. Video by Adam Ghimenti.


----------



## Touchdowntom9

Love the new engines but really wish they used the same nose on these trains as VIA rail is using. Those new VIA chargers are the best looking non-bullet trains I’ve come across.


----------



## Cal

Touchdowntom9 said:


> Love the new engines but really wish they used the same nose on these trains as VIA rail is using. Those new VIA chargers are the best looking non-bullet trains I’ve come across.


Agreed, Amtrak's noses are not great.


----------



## Agent

Well, I think we can see why they waited a bit to send the next two Chargers east on the _California Zephyr_. Amtrak #6(24) has departed with new ALC-42s 313 and 314 as well as Chargers 301 and 309 pulling the train. This marks the first all-Charger consist for the _Zephyr_ and it's a quartet. There's also an Amfleet in the train behind the baggage car.

Sky Rider caught this #6 at Hercules, California (second train in video).



Adam Ghimenti filmed the train at Sacramento.


----------



## briangannon

I’m on that train right now. It also has an extra sleeper (four total including the transition sleeper). There appear to be some Siemens folks on board.


----------



## west point

Ten cars plus 2 dead heading locos. If Siemens personnel on board maybe testing how well the 2 ALCs are doing with esentially a 12 - 13 car load behind the 2 ALCs. Would 2 locos = weight of three SLs?


----------



## Agent

My catch of Amtrak #6(24) with AMTK 301 leading first of four Chargers running over four hours late out of Ottumwa, Iowa.


----------



## briangannon

Being four hours late was annoying (and they had to repair a busted air hose after leaving Ottumwa) but it was a good trip otherwise. Can confirm Siemens and Amtrak folks were onboard the entire time. Crew was the best I’ve ever had and they didn’t run out of anything except the lemon cake.


----------



## daybeers

briangannon said:


> Being four hours late was annoying (and they had to repair a busted air hose after leaving Ottumwa) but it was a good trip otherwise. Can confirm Siemens and Amtrak folks were onboard the entire time. Crew was the best I’ve ever had and they didn’t run out of anything except the lemon cake.


Chargers looking sharp in that shot!


----------



## Agent

AMTK 309 got turned right around to stay in service on the _California Zephyr_, although it's trailing a P42 now. As reported elsewhere, one of the locomotives of Amtrak #5(27) had engine trouble. So, the train was an hour and a half late when I caught it coming though Iowa just before dusk. Seems like it was broad daylight at this time just a week ago.


----------



## Agent

Going back to Friday, this video by Bobby Harvey Video Productions starts with some personnel looking over the ALC-42s during the stop at Omaha.



Yesterday, Chicago Line RailfanProductions caught 313 and 314 continuing eastward on the _Capitol Limited_ through Chesterton, Indiana.


----------



## Touchdowntom9

I may be missing something so please correct me where I am wrong, but it appears Amtrak is replacing the Sprinters (~6700HP) for trains that have around half of that (4200 or 4400HP). Given how young the Sprinters are, can someone tell me why they are doing this? Wouldn't this result in a train with much less performance as a result? Someone please help me out with what I am missing.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Touchdowntom9 said:


> I may be missing something so please correct me where I am wrong, but it appears Amtrak is replacing the Sprinters (~6700HP) for trains that have around half of that (4200 or 4400HP). Given how young the Sprinters are, can someone tell me why they are doing this? Wouldn't this result in a train with much less performance as a result? Someone please help me out with what I am missing.


?? This thread is about the Chargers. The Sprinters (ACS-64) are on the NEC.


----------



## Touchdowntom9

AmtrakBlue said:


> ?? This thread is about the Chargers. The Sprinters (ACS-64) are on the NEC.


Yes, this thread is about the Chargers, which are being purchased to replace the Sprinters on the NEC (as well as other Amtrak locomotives). I'm asking about the Chargers having only ~4200HP and how effective they will be able to do the job of the Sprinters, which had much more HP.


----------



## Agent

The Chargers are replacing the Genesis P42DCs and P40DCs, not the Sprinters.


----------



## PVD

There has been some talk of a future Siemens design (not these) set up to do dual cat and diesel running on the corridor for the trains that go beyond the wire to avoid the engine change. That is certainly not what these units are destined for.


----------



## jis

AmtrakBlue said:


> ?? This thread is about the Chargers. The Sprinters (ACS-64) are on the NEC.


I think he is talking about the ALC42Es which are Chargers with a Panto and HV electric gear plus a powered truck on an attached trailer. It is quite possible that in the E-mode they may produce more HP than in the D mode. I am not sure about those details since it has been a bit fuzzy. 

65 have been ordered for the extended NEC with options for ten more as part of the ITC order for replacing the Amfleet Is.


----------



## west point

"IF" The ALC-Es meet proposed designs then they may be able to have more acceleration than een a sprinter. But there are a lot of ifs.
1. They have the same truck, traction motors, and gear ratio.
2. The trailing passenger car has a powered truck . What the effective HP will be is unknown at this time.
3. Additional HP of the ALC-E and powered passenger car may end up applying more HP for acceleration than just a Sprinter.
4. How traction power is provided to the passenger car truck will detemine total train HP. 
5. when in diesel mode if passenger car trailer can use battery power for acceleration then the total HP for acceleration can allow for quicker time to max track speed.
6. Recharging battery can come when running at track speed not needing full traction power from diesel. Also regeneration braking to charge battery. 
7. If train set lays over at a station off cat power a short section of Cat could keep battery fully charged for leaving station after layover. Also could allow diesel to be shut down exccept maybe start up when diesel gets close to freezing. Connection at these station(s) might work with 480 volt HEP connections but amp draw might be higher than desired. Nott having to plug in HEP connections would seem to be quicker . Also engineer not having to go thru procedures to switch the HEP lines speeds up things if llocal CAT is vailable..

EDIT" As we can see there an awful lot of ifs to make this concept to work.


----------



## jrud

I’m sorry that this is complex, but I’m not going to play around with access to copyright presentations.

At Conference Modern Rolling stock there is a report from Austria earlier this year. There is a Zip file of all the presentations in PDF form. One of the presentations (18-Latour) is entitled Siemens Dual Mode Locomotiven. It’s not in English, but includes info on the 3rd rail, diesel-battery and diesel-pantograph Charger locomotives (in addition to non-USA locomotives). The diagram for the pantograph version pretty clearly shows four traction motors on the coach! There is also a very cool graph showing the train resistance versus locomotive “pull” of the different versions in various modes including the resulting top speeds.

There is a list of all the papers with English translated titles at https://www.schienenfahrzeugtagung.at/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Kurzfassungsheft_2022.pdf


----------



## jis

Thanks @jrud . That is exactly the sort of thing I need to get my teeth into. This will keep me busy for a bit once I get back to the ranch on the first of Sept, since reading German will be a much slower process than reading English


----------



## TransitTyrant

west point said:


> "IF" The ALC-Es meet proposed designs then they may be able to have more acceleration than een a sprinter. But there are a lot of ifs.
> 1. They have the same truck, traction motors, and gear ratio.
> 2. The trailing passenger car has a powered truck . What the effective HP will be is unknown at this time.
> 3. Additional HP of the ALC-E and powered passenger car may end up applying more HP for acceleration than just a Sprinter.
> 4. How traction power is provided to the passenger car truck will detemine total train HP.
> 5. when in diesel mode if passenger car trailer can use battery power for acceleration then the total HP for acceleration can allow for quicker time to max track speed.
> 6. Recharging battery can come when running at track speed not needing full traction power from diesel. Also regeneration braking to charge battery.
> 7. If train set lays over at a station off cat power a short section of Cat could keep battery fully charged for leaving station after layover. Also could allow diesel to be shut down exccept maybe start up when diesel gets close to freezing. Connection at these station(s) might work with 480 volt HEP connections but amp draw might be higher than desired. Nott having to plug in HEP connections would seem to be quicker . Also engineer not having to go thru procedures to switch the HEP lines speeds up things if llocal CAT is vailable..
> 
> EDIT" As we can see there an awful lot of ifs to make this concept to


Do we know if the the non electric/diesel version of the trainsets will even have that extra powered truck?


----------



## west point

TransitTyrant said:


> Do we know if the the non electric/diesel version of the trainsets will even have that extra powered truck?


probably not since the non version will be used behind any type of loco in the inventory when they are in service.


----------



## jrud

jis said:


> Thanks @jrud . That is exactly the sort of thing I need to get my teeth into. This will keep me busy for a bit once I get back to the ranch on the first of Sept, since reading German will be a much slower process than reading English


I hope you enjoy it. The simplified electrical diagrams for the three versions are (thankfully) in English. It has been 5 decades plus since I studied German. So, any English is appreciated.

The diagrams show a standardized “DC Link Connection” with the core diesel-electric equipment on one side and the special 3rd rail, pantograph, and battery electronics on the other.


----------



## jis

jrud said:


> I hope you enjoy it. The simplified electrical diagrams for the three versions are (thankfully) in English. It has been 5 decades plus since I studied German. So, any English is appreciated.
> 
> The diagrams show a standardized “DC Link Connection” with the core diesel-electric equipment on one side and the special 3rd rail, pantograph, and battery electronics on the other.


That is in line with what I had guessed would be the case. Without that architecture it is very difficult to cleanly engineer what they have proposed to deliver. Incidentally that is also similar to the architecture used in Traxx and engines like the NJT ALP45DP.


----------



## John819

Technical question for the ALC42E. Electric powered engines usually don't have notches; diesel powered engines do. Which is the setup for the dual power?


----------



## jrud

jis said:


> That is in line with what I had guessed would be the case. Without that architecture it is very difficult to cleanly engineer what they have proposed to deliver. Incidentally that is also similar to the architecture used in Traxx and engines like the NJT ALP45DP.


I was skimming the later sections of the presentation and noticed a few zero emission proposals. These included fairly well defined catenary/battery and 3rd rail/battery Chargers plus a more vaguely defined hydrogen fuel cell locomotive.


----------



## John819

I understand that a hydrogen / fuel cell powered train has just started operating in Germany.


----------



## jrud

This proposal was unusual as rather than a hydrogen fuel cell multiple unit, like most of the existing trains I can think of in Europe and Japan, it looked like a Charger locomotive.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

Am I reading this thread right/correctly and people are talking about coaches having motors too, in conjunction with dual mode power?


----------



## PeeweeTM

John819 said:


> Technical question for the ALC42E. Electric powered engines usually don't have notches; diesel powered engines do. Which is the setup for the dual power?


Modern diesels don't need notches; it's just that for compatibility with all the old units in multiple traction in de USA notches are still needed.
In Europe I don't know modern diesels with notches, but they cannot run multiple with older types.

Old electric engines had notches. In the 30 to 60 range I'd guess. Either to run through the resistors on DC or change tabs on the transformator on AC that I know of.

Oh, and if you want to be very precise, modern diesels do have notches, but that has to do with "stuff" (electronics, software etc, I dont know) so you still have limited notches. As in 254 or 255 for example on a BR203, if I counted correctly.


----------



## jis

Metra Electric Rider said:


> Am I reading this thread right/correctly and people are talking about coaches having motors too, in conjunction with dual mode power?


Yes you are reading it correctly. That is what the ICTs on the NEC will be powered by.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

"In August 2019, the FRA awarded NCDOT up to $76.9 million to purchase 13 new coaches, allowing the replacement of some older cars and an expansion to four daily round trips. On May 22, 2020, Senator Thom Tillis announced that NCDOT will receive an $80 million dollar grant to order 13 additional new railcars (for an overall total of 26 new railcars) and 6 new locomotives to replace the remainder of the current fleet."

Is there a possibility of the NCDOT making a purchase of Chargers and Ventures for the Piedmont?


----------



## west point

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> Is there a possibility of the NCDOT making a purchase of Chargers and Ventures for the Piedmont?



Too many possibilities of changing political winds to know. There may be some idea once the november election results are known . That may be way in the future past November what with the many election result challenges being probable. 





t


----------



## jrud

jis said:


> Yes you are reading it correctly. That is what the ICTs on the NEC will be powered by.


Just to add a few details. A Charger ALC-42E can be attached directly to a special coach with a pantograph and traction motors (an Auxiliary Power Vehicle - APV). When operating under catenary on electric power only, traction motors on the APV are working in addition to the traction motors on the Charger. BTW, there is also a battery version of the APV that doesn’t have traction motors.


----------



## Touchdowntom9

jrud said:


> Just to add a few details. A Charger ALC-42E can be attached directly to a special coach with a pantograph and traction motors (an Auxiliary Power Vehicle - APV). When operating under catenary on electric power only, traction motors on the APV are working in addition to the traction motors on the Charger. BTW, there is also a battery version of the APV that doesn’t have traction motors.


Will these be used across the NEC or strictly on the empire route for Amtrak?


----------



## jis

Touchdowntom9 said:


> Will these be used across the NEC or strictly on the empire route for Amtrak?


The battery ones I understand will be for Empire Corridor. The panto ones will be used all over extended NEC, i.e. NEC plus Virginia plus a few additional medium distance trains that operate as extension of NEC service thus eliminating the loco change for them in Washington DC, Philly etc.


----------



## jrud

I don’t know if this was mentioned elsewhere, but the German language presentation I discussed earlier appears to show top speeds for various electric versions on a graph. Too my best ability to read the graph:

- Electric only - catenary =124 mph
- Electric only - 3rd rail = 79 mph
- Electric only - battery = 59 mph

The 3rd rail speed is using a resistance curve from MN. The other two use an Amtrak supplied curve.


----------



## jis

Battery power is intended for use only in the Penn Station tunnels, i.e. from somewhere between CP Empire and A interlocking on the west to F interlocking in the east in Sunnyside.

The HV portions is entirely contained in the Pantograph Car. The power connection between the Charger main unit and the Pantograph Car is at the DC Link level.

Incidentally, the MNRR 3rd rail dual mode, which becomes available a year before the ALC-42E is called M42-DMC. It looks really sleek. I think those MNRR trains will look sharp. Now if they would get a bunch of cab cars with a matching cab profile for the other end of the train!


----------



## Dutchrailnut

so MN qualifications will state " Run DMC "   "


----------



## Agent

AMTK 309, which went west a week ago in service on Amtrak #5(27), came back today as the third unit on #6(01). I couldn't tell if it was still running or deadheading.


----------



## GDRRiley

west point said:


> Ten cars plus 2 dead heading locos. If Siemens personnel on board maybe testing how well the 2 ALCs are doing with esentially a 12 - 13 car load behind the 2 ALCs. Would 2 locos = weight of three SLs?


its inbetween. 2 locos are 520,000lbs vs 600,000 for 4 superliners or 450,000lbs for 3
the real test for a pair will be on the auto Train


CSXfoamer1997 said:


> "In August 2019, the FRA awarded NCDOT up to $76.9 million to purchase 13 new coaches, allowing the replacement of some older cars and an expansion to four daily round trips. On May 22, 2020, Senator Thom Tillis announced that NCDOT will receive an $80 million dollar grant to order 13 additional new railcars (for an overall total of 26 new railcars) and 6 new locomotives to replace the remainder of the current fleet."
> 
> Is there a possibility of the NCDOT making a purchase of Chargers and Ventures for the Piedmont?


Thats the only cars and locos that make sense. now 26 cars and 6 locos ends up being a bit weird.
5 5car sets with a spare loco and car? if they go that way hopefully they get cab cars and semi fixed sets between coaches.


west point said:


> Too many possibilities of changing political winds to know. There may be some idea once the november election results are known . That may be way in the future past November what with the many election result challenges being probable.


Unless they wanted to change the loco thats the only high floor coach in production right now. I doubt they get F125 given the mess they've been and MP54AC seem unlikely 


Hopefully as amtrak isn't trying to squeeze a dual mode into a normal loco these end up more reliable then the dual modes we've seen before. Still feels wrong to buy dual modes instead of pushing wires farther as there is quite a few routes that would be easy to get wire on.


----------



## Touchdowntom9

GDRRiley said:


> its inbetween. 2 locos are 520,000lbs vs 600,000 for 4 superliners or 450,000lbs for 3
> the real test for a pair will be on the auto Train
> 
> Thats the only cars and locos that make sense. now 26 cars and 6 locos ends up being a bit weird.
> 5 5car sets with a spare loco and car? if they go that way hopefully they get cab cars and semi fixed sets between coaches.
> 
> Unless they wanted to change the loco thats the only high floor coach in production right now. I doubt they get F125 given the mess they've been and MP54AC seem unlikely
> 
> 
> Hopefully as amtrak isn't trying to squeeze a dual mode into a normal loco these end up more reliable then the dual modes we've seen before. Still feels wrong to buy dual modes instead of pushing wires farther as there is quite a few routes that would be easy to get wire on.


I understand your point, but I think if you only have so many dollars to spend, putting them to use for other capital projects across the US and further down the NEC into areas like Virginia would see a bigger ROI for Amtrak than pushing the wires further, since they would still need a ton of diesel locos even if the wires went further.


----------



## GDRRiley

Touchdowntom9 said:


> I understand your point, but I think if you only have so many dollars to spend, putting them to use for other capital projects across the US and further down the NEC into areas like Virginia would see a bigger ROI for Amtrak than pushing the wires further, since they would still need a ton of diesel locos even if the wires went further.


Electrify routes won't be expensive if we got a rolling program running and the crews went from line to line doing it. 5M per mile for a double tracked line is total doable here. Almost all the cost is in training people and the engineering side, materials represent just 7% of the cost right now in the UK.

while we don't know pricing I'd suspect each dual mode is going to end up being millions more and we know it will take away 16-20 seats.


----------



## west point

GDRRiley said:


> Almost all the cost is in training people and the engineering side, materials represent just 7% of the cost right now in the UK.



Engineering is a very big cost. First you have to locate all utilities so you do not pot hole into any utility. Then you have to eliminate any overhead utiity The present best practice is to have any overhead utilities burried under ROW inserted into casings.. Remember the NEC got shut down when a car hit a utility pole and 7400 V lines fell on the CAT.

Then you have the costs of substations and high voltage service to substations.

I hope that the Siemens ALC-42Es prove out. If they do just needed locations can have CAT installed. Testing them on the Vermonter and HAR < PGH service can really proved their capabilities.


----------



## GDRRiley

west point said:


> Engineering is a very big cost. First you have to locate all utilities so you do not pot hole into any utility. Then you have to eliminate any overhead utiity The present best practice is to have any overhead utilities burried under ROW inserted into casings.. Remember the NEC got shut down when a car hit a utility pole and 7400 V lines fell on the CAT.


you don't need to eliminate all overhead utility stuff, is it better to sure but there are cases where burrying whatever is there is far more expensive than just accepting the risk


west point said:


> Then you have the costs of substations and high voltage service to substations.


substations especially 25kv 50/60hz really aren't that expensive as they are a standard used for lots of equipment. HV service to them is 100% location based which is why in some ways I quite like the PRR style of just bring the HV lines with you above the OCS.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

It might be worthwhile to have a separate thread on the comparison of electrification vs dual modes, to compare the costs and the pros and cons.


----------



## Agent

Video by Adam Ghimenti taken on Friday in West Sacramento shows three new Chargers on Amtrak #6(30). They are AMTK 315, 317, and 316. Also, that's a _Winter Park Express_ wrap ad on the last car.


----------



## Agent

I caught Amtrak #6(30) leaving the Ottumwa, Iowa station just before noon today (Sunday) with P40 824, P42 4, ALC-42 315, ALC-42 317, and ALC-42 316.


----------



## Agent

The three newest Chargers left Chicago last night on Amtrak #30(04). Chicago Line RailfanProductions caught this eastbound _Capitol Limited_ at Chesterton, Indiana.



Today, this train was filmed by DMV Area Railfan at the Rockville, Maryland station.


----------



## west point

The ALC42Es make a lot of sense. Ex. An alc42E starts in BOD or NYP. After leaving WASH Ehrtr the CAT stops runs to Norfolk on diesel. A short piece of CAR or aybe a 489 car allows dieel to shut down for the layover. Enroute the RVR might have a short section of CAT to get best aceleration of of the station and saving brakes arriving by regeration. That is if RVR gets the planned ownership of the station tracks not CSX.


----------



## sitzplatz17

west point said:


> The ALC42Es make a lot of sense. Ex. An alc42E starts in BOD or NYP. After leaving WASH Ehrtr the CAT stops runs to Norfolk on diesel. A short piece of CAR or aybe a 489 car allows dieel to shut down for the layover. Enroute the RVR might have a short section of CAT to get best aceleration of of the station and saving brakes arriving by regeration. That is if RVR gets the planned ownership of the station tracks not CSX.


Agreed, I think the ALC42Es will be a great solution for the next 20-30 years while (if?) electrification gains ground. Ideally Virginia would take over a good chunk of the WAS-RVR route and even build out the future SEHSR alignment and look to electrify. As you open more electrified routes, you simply change where the switchover point is without having to worry about engine storage or shunting. Theoretically you could electrify in small phases. E.g. WAS to ALX, then ALX to LOR, etc etc etc. since it doesn't really matter where you lower the panto and switch to diesel. 

Would love to see this kind of methodology out here on the Cascades. Electrify SEA-TAC an SEA-Everett and have some ALC42Es run electric on those portions and switch Sounder to electric too. A person can dream... 
But if the ALC42Es prove themselves it could be a great stopgap for a lot of places.


----------



## Pipp

Is Amtrak currently still running the chargers on the California Zephyr or has that stopped?


----------



## Agent

There are not currently any Chargers on the _California Zephyr_.


----------



## Agent

Brand new Chargers AMTK 318 and 319 are on the move on Amtrak #6(03). Sky Rider filmed this eastbound _California Zephyr _yesterday.



Adam Ghimenti also filmed this train at West Sacramento.


----------



## Agent

I caught #6(03) in Ottumwa, Iowa this morning. The train was only thirteen minutes late out of the station.


----------



## GreysonGrey247

Agent said:


> I caught #6(03) in Ottumwa, Iowa this morning. The train was only thirteen minutes late out of the station.
> 
> View attachment 30292
> 
> 
> View attachment 30293
> 
> 
> View attachment 30294


I was on that train exact train, bedroom, Glenwood Springs, CO to Osceola, IA. We sat outside Granby for 30 minutes and almost an hour at Denver. Made up for it in the night apparently. Fellow passenger said we were going over 80 mph according to an app he had. It was a very bumpy night, even the crew was talking about getting no sleep.


----------



## jis

MODERATOR'S NOTE: About a dozen post on the topic of electrification of freight railroads has been moved to its own thread at:






Electrification of freight railroads in the US - pros and cons


The ALC42Es make a lot of sense. Ex. An alc42E starts in BOD or NYP. After leaving WASH Ehrtr the CAT stops runs to Norfolk on diesel. A short piece of CAR or aybe a 489 car allows dieel to shut down for the layover. Enroute the RVR might have a short section of CAT to get best aceleration...




www.amtraktrains.com





Please continue discussion of generic issues in electrification of freight railroads in the US in that thread, and leave this thread for discussion of the design, production and deployment of Siemens Chargers of various sorts.


----------



## Touchdowntom9

Would anyone know a reason why Amtrak Chargers have a nose cone that has hoses and ports exposed compared to say the VIA rail Charger (which looks absolutely fantastic)? I heard it is because they like to use to Locos back to back to pull trains, but why wouldnt they just have a loco on the front and back of the train like brightline (or the rest of the world for that matter)?


----------



## GDRRiley

Touchdowntom9 said:


> Would anyone know a reason why Amtrak Chargers have a nose cone that has hoses and ports exposed compared to say the VIA rail Charger (which looks absolutely fantastic)? I heard it is because they like to use to Locos back to back to pull trains, but why wouldnt they just have a loco on the front and back of the train like brightline (or the rest of the world for that matter)?


Amtrak outside of a few corridor routes does not top and tail locos as most coaches are not setup for MU control

I'm not sure why amtrak and the states went with the ugly default nose design for the SC44. the ALC42 looks a lot better


----------



## Touchdowntom9

GDRRiley said:


> Amtrak outside of a few corridor routes does not top and tail locos as most coaches are not setup for MU control
> 
> I'm not sure why amtrak and the states went with the ugly default nose design for the SC44. the ALC42 looks a lot better


I assume you mean the view liners etc, because the Venture cars shouldn’t have any problem top and tailing right?


----------



## Trogdor

GDRRiley said:


> Amtrak outside of a few corridor routes does not top and tail locos as most coaches are not setup for MU control
> 
> I'm not sure why amtrak and the states went with the ugly default nose design for the SC44. the ALC42 looks a lot better



I’m pretty sure all coaches used in corridor service (and a handful of LD coaches) have MU capability.


----------



## jis

Trogdor said:


> I’m pretty sure all coaches used in corridor service (and a handful of LD coaches) have MU capability.


Indeed, most if not all Amfleet Is, and Horizon cars are train lined. Any bi-level equipment that are used in push pull mode trains are also train lined. These include some Superliners too.


----------



## edwardjtracey

Is there any update on the development of the new ALC42-E (dual eletric/diesel) locomotives? 

Will be so glad to leave the change-of-engines at New Haven, Connecticut behind ... when they are rolled-out.


----------



## Touchdowntom9

edwardjtracey said:


> Is there any update on the development of the new ALC42-E (dual eletric/diesel) locomotives?
> 
> Will be so glad to leave the change-of-engines at New Haven, Connecticut behind ... when they are rolled-out.


From what I can tell, they are nearly identical to the standard Siemens diesel charger ordered by Amtrak--the differences are found in the first coach behind the locomotive where they have the ability to draw power and have 2 additional traction motors. I think that is a big selling point so that they have a unified fleet in the northeast outside of the Acela for reducing maintenance costs.


----------



## Touchdowntom9

edwardjtracey said:


> Is there any update on the development of the new ALC42-E (dual electric/diesel) locomotives?
> 
> Will be so glad to leave the change-of-engines at New Haven, Connecticut behind ... when they are rolled-out.


We spend a half a billion $ to save a 100 seconds of travel time in NJ for the Acela, but dollars to donuts we can save 10-15 minutes by using a dual mode vs an engine switch for pennies on the dollar in situations like the above mentioned in New Haven. Amtrak really has to grab that low hanging fruit wherever possible in addition to those massive projects


----------



## GDRRiley

Touchdowntom9 said:


> We spend a half a billion $ to save a 100 seconds of travel time in NJ for the Acela, but dollars to donuts we can save 10-15 minutes by using a dual mode vs an engine switch for pennies on the dollar in situations like the above mentioned in New Haven. Amtrak really has to grab that low hanging fruit wherever possible in addition to those massive projects


low hanging fruit would be continued expansion of electrification on routes the states own and modernizing the existing system.
Combine that with 1 orgnaization doing all timetable work on the NEC which would increase capacity some. 



edwardjtracey said:


> Is there any update on the development of the new ALC42-E (dual eletric/diesel) locomotives?
> 
> Will be so glad to leave the change-of-engines at New Haven, Connecticut behind ... when they are rolled-out.


Nothing public. if I understand right they still don't have the exact configuration finallized and that wont happen till mid 2023


----------



## west point

GDRRiley said:


> low hanging fruit would be continued expansion of electrification on routes the states own and modernizing the existing system.
> Combine that with 1 orgnaization doing all timetable work on the NEC which would increase capacity some.
> 
> 
> Nothing public. if I understand right they still don't have the exact configuration finallized and that wont happen till mid 2023



These train sets may have some high performance specfications. What the planned max operating high speed will have a big effect on many operations. If somewhat higher than 125 then the powered axels and wheel size will need to bigger than the present ACS-64s. Leave that for upscaling the below.

For operating at 125 then the same axel configuration as ACS-64s may be appropriate. 1600 HP per axel with short time ratings higher. Preliminary specs has the first car behind the loco with a front powered truck. If same truck as the ALCs then same wheel arrangement will provide another 3200 HP on the train set. That will give great acceleration and addition traction capacity to add more cars to some train sets up to train revenue cars lengths of about 1200 feet per train set. 

NNow if only a part above comes about the quicker accelerations will help both under wire and on diesel. Understand that new inverters may be coming that are somewhat lighter in weight,

I am sure the above is only a WAG and not a SWAG.


----------



## jis

The first car that carries the pantograph and HV transformer has both trucks powered.


----------



## GDRRiley

jis said:


> The first car that carries the pantograph and HV transformer has both trucks powered.


got a link to that? every bit of info I've seen has only the first truck powered


west point said:


> These train sets may have some high performance specfications. What the planned max operating high speed will have a big effect on many operations. If somewhat higher than 125 then the powered axels and wheel size will need to bigger than the present ACS-64s. Leave that for upscaling the below.


Which an EMU could beat and even a high performance electric would ACS-64 aren't slouches and if amtrak wanted a more modern one there are electric locos with 9MW of power.


west point said:


> For operating at 125 then the same axel configuration as ACS-64s may be appropriate. 1600 HP per axel with short time ratings higher. Preliminary specs has the first car behind the loco with a front powered truck. If same truck as the ALCs then same wheel arrangement will provide another 3200 HP on the train set. That will give great acceleration and addition traction capacity to add more cars to some train sets up to train revenue cars lengths of about 1200 feet per train set.


they are chargers first so I'd expect the same ~1000hp per axle. giving a total of ~6000hp under the 6800HP continuous and 8600HP peak of an ACS-64


----------



## jis

GDRRiley said:


> got a link to that? every bit of info I've seen has only the first truck powered


Truth be told, I don't know whether the design will be implemented fully. I do not have the design document, which was published in a paper at a technical conference in Europe, in a form that I can link to, so I will just copy one relevant diagram as fair use, which shows the design electrical schematic which provides for both trucks to be powered.

Interestingly in the APV each truck is powered by a single inverter whereas on the main loco each axle is powered by a separate inverter.


----------



## GDRRiley

jis said:


> Truth be told, I don't know whether the design will be implemented fully. I do not have the design document, which was published in a paper at a technical conference in Germany, in a form that I can link to, so I will just copy one relevant diagram as fair use, which shows the design electrical schematic which provides for both trucks to be powered.
> 
> Interestingly in the APV each truck is powered by a single inverter whereas on the main loco each axle is powered by a separate inverter.


I figuring no one knows for sure outside of some amtrak staff but thats really interesting


----------



## jis

GDRRiley said:


> low hanging fruit would be continued expansion of electrification on routes the states own and modernizing the existing system.
> Combine that with 1 orgnaization doing all timetable work on the NEC which would increase capacity some.


I have recently heard that ConnDOT wants to fund the electrification of the Springfield line. That would eliminate power mode change at New Haven.

Of course dual modes will still be useful to run the proposed Inland Route service between New York and Boston.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

ConnDOT has no money , not even to finish existing work so I doubt it.


----------



## lordsigma

jis said:


> I have recently heard that ConnDOT wants to fund the electrification of the Springfield line. That would eliminate power mode change at New Haven.
> 
> Of course dual modes will still be useful to run the proposed Inland Route service between New York and Boston.



I’ve heard talk of that too - I suspect it will be well after the ICTs enter service so I’m sure we’ll get a few years of switching to diesel at NHV with them.


----------



## GDRRiley

Dutchrailnut said:


> ConnDOT has no money , not even to finish existing work so I doubt it.


fed money most likely 


lordsigma said:


> I’ve heard talk of that too - I suspect it will be well after the ICTs enter service so I’m sure we’ll get a few years of switching to diesel at NHV with them.


if they don't pull a caltrain they could have wires up pretty quick (and mattering on the environmental review needed)


----------



## John819

According to ConnDOT, they have federal funding for the project. They want to electrify ALL rail lines (passenger and freight) in CT.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

jis said:


> I have recently heard that ConnDOT wants to fund the electrification of the Springfield line. That would eliminate power mode change at New Haven.
> 
> Of course dual modes will still be useful to run the proposed Inland Route service between New York and Boston.


Of course you would still need to change mode at Springfield for the Vermonter and the service to Northampton and Holyoke.

Perhaps if the Commonwealth of MA proceeds with its plans to beef up service to Springfield we might someday see electrification from Boston to Springfield, especially if the MBTA also decides to electrify the Worcester commuter service.


----------



## lordsigma

AmtrakMaineiac said:


> Of course you would still need to change mode at Springfield for the Vermonter and the service to Northampton and Holyoke.
> 
> Perhaps if the Commonwealth of MA proceeds with its plans to beef up service to Springfield we might someday see electrification from Boston to Springfield, especially if the MBTA also decides to electrify the Worcester commuter service.


Exactly - even if they electrify to Springfield they'd still need to change to diesel at Springfield to go north and likely east when they eventually send service to Boston.


----------



## John819

I would expect that if we have expanded electrification it would start in the northeast and the mid-Atlantic regions.


----------



## jis

MODERATORS'S NOTE: A number of posts about the NEC High Speed Porject in NJ have been moved to a pre-existing thread on that subject since those have little to do with Siemens locomotives.






Increasing speed limits on the NEC


Recent trip from NYP to BOS on Acela, I had forgotten how SLOW this and other trains actually go between New Haven and New Rochelle, YET we still came in to New Haven TEN MINUTES under the advertised on the schedule - during rush hour. I’m not sure if we ever hit 70 mph - it was stop and go the...




www.amtraktrains.com





Please post any further material on the NEC high speed infrastructure and related projects on that thread and reserve this thread for continuing discussion of Siemens Charger locomotives.

Thank you for your understanding, cooperation and participation.


----------



## lordsigma

I wonder how the new engines are doing emissions wise which I know was one of the big goals. Hopefully they are achieving the desired decrease in GHG and particulate emissions. I know there are certain railfans who hate the new units and cheering every time one has an issue (and probably will hate whatever new rolling stock Amtrak orders and say they should have just rebuilt the Superliners) but I for one think the emissions reduction is a worthwhile goal.


----------



## keelhauled

lordsigma said:


> I wonder how the new engines are doing emissions wise which I know was one of the big goals. Hopefully they are achieving the desired decrease in GHG and particulate emissions. I know there are certain railfans who hate the new units and cheering every time one has an issue (and probably will hate whatever new rolling stock Amtrak orders and say they should have just rebuilt the Superliners) but I for one think the emissions reduction is a worthwhile goal.


It's not really a spectrum on emissions engines, either the computer is happy or it shuts the engine down. The relevant metric for comparison is more like percentage of out of service units sidelined for aftertreatment faults.


----------



## PVD

There are limits placed on shell design based on whether it is monocoque or body on frame.


----------



## Paniolo Man

Based on past deliveries, shouldn't we be seeing a couple new chargers about now?


----------



## Agent

Amtrak #6(22) left Emeryville, California today with new ALC-42s 322 and 320. It was filmed leaving the Emeryville station this morning by trainandaviationspotter.



This eastbound _California Zephyr_ was then later filmed by Sky Rider at Hercules.


----------



## Septa9739

Does that mean somethings wrong with 321?


----------



## jiml

Gotta love what appears to be duct tape on the front of 138.


----------



## rickycourtney

jiml said:


> Gotta love what appears to be duct tape on the front of 138.


Just the kind of top notch maintenance we’ve come to expect from Amtrak! (Especially from the Chicago yard.)


----------



## Touchdowntom9

rickycourtney said:


> Just the kind of top notch maintenance we’ve come to expect from Amtrak! (Especially from the Chicago yard.)


Sorry but can you explain the Chicago Yard comment? Has that Amtrak team there been terrible in the past and if so what’s the assumed reason for that?


----------



## Bob Dylan

Touchdowntom9 said:


> Sorry but can you explain the Chicago Yard comment? Has that Amtrak team there been terrible in the past and if so what’s the assumed reason for that?


There's a Long History of Less than Quality Maintainence by the Chicago Yards!

Google will give you many options to read up on what Amtrak is getting out of the Yard and Shops in the Windy City!


----------



## ClintonAndrews

PaTrainFan said:


> I am not technically inclined when it comes to motive power, but I always wondered about what appears to be an open panel on each side of the engine. Would the weather not breach the key parts of the body?


In one of the news reports about Amtrak winter weather problems, the discussion turned to the Acela trainsets. These operate with a locomotive at both ends of the train. According to an Amtrak source, the lead locomotive kicks up such a cloud of snow that it is, in fact, sucked into the open area of the trailing locomotive, melts to water and shorts out components, rendering the trailing locomotive inoperative and slowing down the trainset.
In Michigan, the Wolverines (350-355) have been having mechanical issues: 11 hours late one day, 12 hours late the next. Many cancellations on 12/27 & 12/28. These locomotives are less than five years old. Siemens has some explaining to do.


----------



## joelkfla

ClintonAndrews said:


> n Michigan, the Wolverines (350-355) have been having mechanical issues: 11 hours late one day, 12 hours late the next. Many cancellations on 12/27 & 12/28. These locomotives are less than five years old. Siemens has some explaining to do.


To wit:


----------



## TransitTyrant

ClintonAndrews said:


> In one of the news reports about Amtrak winter weather problems, the discussion turned to the Acela trainsets. These operate with a locomotive at both ends of the train. According to an Amtrak source, the lead locomotive kicks up such a cloud of snow that it is, in fact, sucked into the open area of the trailing locomotive, melts to water and shorts out components, rendering the trailing locomotive inoperative and slowing down the trainset.
> In Michigan, the Wolverines (350-355) have been having mechanical issues: 11 hours late one day, 12 hours late the next. Many cancellations on 12/27 & 12/28. These locomotives are less than five years old. Siemens has some explaining to do.


They do have an issue with sucking up snow, mainly because the air intake is underneath, in front of the rear axle. The state owned locomotives have much smaller dynamic brake resistors which short out easier. The oldest units are actually 7 years old and due for a quarter life overhaul starting this year. A number of fixes have supposedly been identified so hopefully that will be enough. 

One issue that has come up multiple years in the yearly review by the NGEC has been lack of spare parts. The Siemens subcontractor issue has shown itself aswell with the Venture cars. Several of those subcontractors are rumored to be out of business thanks to the pandemic too.


----------

