Amtrak Siemens Charger Locomotive (SC44, ALC42, ALC42E) (2Q 2024)

Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
TML said:
Based on what I've read about the new Siemens Charger locomotives, it seems that the practice of changing between diesel and electric locomotives in places like Albany, New Haven, Philadelphia, and Washington DC will be eliminated for daytime trains but retained for night trains (i.e. Cardinal, Crescent, & Silver Service). Is my understanding of this situation accurate here?
Click to expand...
That is substantially correct. This will happen when all daytime trains are converted to using the articulated Airo sets powered by ALC42Es.
 
jis said:
That is substantially correct. This will happen when all daytime trains are converted to using the articulated Airo sets powered by ALC42Es.
Click to expand...
In terms of this change not being applied to night trains, is the reasoning something along the lines of the following?

"30 minutes is nothing in a journey totaling 20+ hours, so let's not bother."
 
TML said:
In terms of this change not being applied to night trains, is the reasoning something along the lines of the following?

"30 minutes is nothing in a journey totaling 20+ hours, so let's not bother."
Click to expand...
It is more that LD trains travel far and it is silly to send an entire electric engine equipment across the country where they will find no use beyond NEC.

I don't think the time for engine change is not the biggest issue. even for Virginia trains since they are not the fastest thing with most reliable schedules south of Washington DC. But of course when it is possible saving a few minutes is useful. Effectively for most efficient operation scenarios it save 10 to 15 minutes. Those trains will be stopping in Washington DC for at least 10 minutes and maybe 15 either way.
 
It is worth noting that the Airo sets are being used to replace intercity consists, which often use Amfleet Is. Since the night trains use Viewliners as well, or Superliners, Amtrak is not looking to replace those consists with sets that do not provide roomettes, etc., which explains the separate RFP for long distance equipment.
 
A Charger-Amfleet-Charger set is running as KP2022 and headed out of Penn Coach Yard "to Ham for testing".

~7:57PM KP2022 to CETC-5: heading up to Ham for some testing.

8:13PM - KP2022 pulled up on the Schuylkill bridge and is a Charger-Amfleet-Charger set.

I believe it went behind #656 just before 8:20PM.

Somewhere around 8:30PM it sounds like they got a speed sensor issue and they're stopped near North Philadelphia. They just got permission east at 8:37PM.

8:40PM KP2022 is at MP 83.5; test run is cancelled and they're turning around and heading back to Philadelphia.
 
Last edited:
KP2022 Charger-Amfleet-Charger is doing the same thing tonight: "to Ham for testing". Just passed by Torresdale at 8:01PM. Last night it did get up to County but I'm not sure how many round trips it usually does.
 
jis said:
I don't think the time for engine change is not the biggest issue. even for Virginia trains since they are not the fastest thing with most reliable schedules south of Washington DC. But of course when it is possible saving a few minutes is useful. Effectively for most efficient operation scenarios it save 10 to 15 minutes. Those trains will be stopping in Washington DC for at least 10 minutes and maybe 15 either way.
Click to expand...
I think engine changing is not just about time.

It either requires dedicated staff or diverts existing staff from other responsibilities (and a station tends to be at its busiest when an important train is in).

Furthermore, it involves tinkering with things mechanical, which mean things can go wrong. I believe by far the highest proportion of minor damage incidents occur during switching. It's safer and more reliable to leave things as they are.
 
All of that is true. But the question is how much dead weight you want to drag along for thousands of mile. Everything is a tradeoff. More complex things also break more often as there are many additional items that can break. Each railroad has to balance these factors for specific circumstances. There is no one right answer covering all situations. I think Amtrak is striking close to the right balance on this.
 
Also, the pantograph itself and some of the major components are in a Venture coach, not the Charger. Mixing Airo APVs with LD trains is definitely complicated.

Plus, within the expected lifespan of the Airo consists, you could plausibly see electrification for VRE territory, along the S-Line, to Albany, or on other segments near or extending off the NEC and Keystone Corridor. Not having to buy replacement equipment for that future electrification makes it more likely to happen.
 
Acela150 said:
360 & 361 are supposed to be testing over the night three nights. (9/24-9/26)
Click to expand...
Yep, it came by the last two nights. It got to County at 9:09PM last night and I forgot when they came by the night before. I think they're usually finished at or before midnight as Amtrak sometimes takes out track 4 and has other trains use 3.
 
thefirewarde said:
Plus, within the expected lifespan of the Airo consists, you could plausibly see electrification for VRE territory, along the S-Line, to Albany, or on other segments near or extending off the NEC and Keystone Corridor. Not having to buy replacement equipment for that future electrification makes it more likely to happen.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with that hypothisis. If anything, it gives the railroads an excuse to not electrify anything. NJT, LIRR, and MN have bought dual-powered and dual-mode locomotives over the last 25 years and have not electrified anything since the late 1980's and don't seem to be interested in doing so in our life times. Only LIRR is conisdering extending 3rd rail from Ronkonkoma to Yaphank, an extremely foolish priority IMO. LIRR has put a ridiculous price tag of $3 Billion to extend 3rd rail 23 miles of single track to Port Jefferson as an excuse that they can't afford to do it, and they won't.
 
I don't think Virginia would be able to support moving the Amtrak electrification changeover South from DC without dual mode equipment.

Take a hypothetical Fredericksburg line electrification project, ignoring the freight track clearance issue. If Amtrak doesn't have a yard with some electrics, a couple of platforms for a 20+ minute dwell time, etc. Then they're not going to use the Fredericksburg electrification - only VRE and maybe MARTA through service to Alexandria would. Even if Amtrak extended the wires south to Richmond so they could use them, it's still tricky - Richmond isn't really a terminus right now and Virginia wants service to continue south, east, and west.

The only way I see Amtrak using overhead power on the VRE network is if they don't need to change the locomotive out.

The only way I see Virginia putting up overhead wires is if the frequency south of DC in peak periods is if they're setting up a baby Northeast Corridor - at least half hourly peak period service on both Amtrak and VRE, with hourly off peak, figure mid 40s daily trains each way. If only 20-odd daily trains could reasonably run electric, that could be a dealbreaker. This suddenly applies to any branch coming off of the NEC - put up wires where your higher frequency commuter line wants to be, and get bonus Amtrak use. Heck, the potential South Shore Line passenger bypass could use Airo. (Admittedly not the exact same APV as the East Coast, but Airo is Vectron derived and Siemens includes 3kv DC as an option for their multi mode Vectron locomotives.)

I don't see additional major Amtrak electrification projects in the near term. The best candidate routes (DC to Alexandria, Fredericksburg, Richmond, Raleigh in stages, and NYC-Albany) are going to have to be state led projects unless something changes. But not requiring equipment changes for Amtrak is a pretty big deal, I think.
 
Do support further electrification from the present NEC. However, it does not appear that any expansion will happen any time soon. If HSR actually gets started around the NEC then expansion of the electrification will definitely start especially during various service completions for last miles runs.

The big problem will be the expense of needing 25 / 60 hZ transformers instead of just 60 hZ transformers. The question is when do you spend the cost to convert the NEC to 60 hZ to save having to buy the costly dual frequency transformers? As well the extra weight. The freight RRs would probably want to avoid the cost of those transformers.

Now if HSR went into WASH converting it to 60 hZ might be fairly easy. NYP not very easy at all.
 
west point said:
Do support further electrification from the present NEC. However, it does not appear that any expansion will happen any time soon. If HSR actually gets started around the NEC then expansion of the electrification will definitely start especially during various service completions for last miles runs.

The big problem will be the expense of needing 25 / 60 hZ transformers instead of just 60 hZ transformers. The question is when do you spend the cost to convert the NEC to 60 hZ to save having to buy the costly dual frequency transformers? As well the extra weight. The freight RRs would probably want to avoid the cost of those transformers.

Now if HSR went into WASH converting it to 60 hZ might be fairly easy. NYP not very easy at all.
Click to expand...
The Siemens Vectron platform already supports the German/Swiss 15 KV 16.7 Hz electric supply so I assume the NECs 12 KV 25 Hz shouldn't be far off enough to be a problem. So I don't see needing to convert the NEC to 60 Hz being a requirement in the near term.
 
BlackDiamond said:
The Siemens Vectron platform already supports the German/Swiss 15 KV 16.7 Hz electric supply so I assume the NECs 12 KV 25 Hz shouldn't be far off enough to be a problem. So I don't see needing to convert the NEC to 60 Hz being a requirement in the near term.
Click to expand...
Yeah I think this whole bellyaching about 25Hz is a Red Herring. A standard 16.7 Hz transformer commonly available in Europe will also work fine for 25Hz and 60 Hz. That is essentially what will be there in ALC-42Es and ACS-64s.
 
Dutchrailnut said:
apples to oranges, the Vectron is electric locomotive, not related to US Charger. the Dual mode Vectrons are low horsepower last mile locomotives. and can not be compared to the high horsepower Chargers for diesel performance.
Click to expand...
The APV handling the multi frequency part is Vectron derived. It's a non-issue. The Airo consists will be able to use modern 60hz on any new branch, and getting a 25hz and 60hz capable EMU or locomotive for commuter and regional operations is not a significant additional expense with modern solid state electronics. Yes, ideally it would be no expense and everything would be 60hz, but it's so, so much less of a problem now than 40 years ago.
 
A FOIA requesting the difference of costs and weight of a 25 / 60 hZ VS just a 60 hZ is really warranted. Until then only a guess can tell us an uneducated guess. Dragging that extra weight certainly adds to operating costs with some kind of electricity, diesel fuel and wear and tear but maybe only 3% ?

Caltrain's Statler EMUs certainly cannot operate on 25 hZ. MNRR EMUs cannot. There are future proposed commuter rail operations that will only want to work on 60 hZ. MBTA is one & VRE might be another in the future. Why this is important IMO is a very unlikely incident where some EMUs are needed to be borrowed for additional service on the NEC It would be impossible to borrow 60 hZ only equipment,. Suppose one of the Holland, Lincoln tunnels, or GW bridge is closed for some reason then more equipment would be needed.

I certainly did not expect a hurricane, Sandy. Who knows what a Helene in the wrong place might do?
 
thefirewarde said:
Also, the pantograph itself and some of the major components are in a Venture coach, not the Charger. Mixing Airo APVs with LD trains is definitely complicated.

Plus, within the expected lifespan of the Airo consists, you could plausibly see electrification for VRE territory, along the S-Line, to Albany, or on other segments near or extending off the NEC and Keystone Corridor. Not having to buy replacement equipment for that future electrification makes it more likely to happen.
Click to expand...
Currently there are no plans for using ALC42Es on LD trains. The current plan is to retain sufficient number of ACS64s so that LD trains can have engine change at the electrification border stations and run pure electric on electrified territory. LD trains have nothing to do with the ALC42E setup.
west point said:
A FOIA requesting the difference of costs and weight of a 25 / 60 hZ VS just a 60 hZ is really warranted. Until then only a guess can tell us an uneducated guess. Dragging that extra weight certainly adds to operating costs with some kind of electricity, diesel fuel and wear and tear but maybe only 3% ?

Caltrain's Statler EMUs certainly cannot operate on 25 hZ. MNRR EMUs cannot. There are future proposed commuter rail operations that will only want to work on 60 hZ. MBTA is one & VRE might be another in the future. Why this is important IMO is a very unlikely incident where some EMUs are needed to be borrowed for additional service on the NEC It would be impossible to borrow 60 hZ only equipment,. Suppose one of the Holland, Lincoln tunnels, or GW bridge is closed for some reason then more equipment would be needed.

I certainly did not expect a hurricane, Sandy. Who knows what a Helene in the wrong place might do?
Click to expand...
All of that is fine but I think anyone that wants to run 60Hz only equipment should come up with the funding for the conversion. Pragmatically, I am sure none will, and they will figure out a way to work with what is available. The extra effort costs much less than converting the electrification. All FOIAs in the world won't change that fact since this is done in many parts of the world with much lighter equipment than used in the US. All EMUs in Germany operate on 16.7 Hz. So I don;t believe for a moment that 25/60Hz is not doable in EMUs or anything else for that matter.

In any case at present there is neither any plan nor any funding for the conversion, which means that we can safely surmise that this won't happen in the next 25 years. Afterall the ARC Tunnels were first mooted in the '70s and we might get them in another 15 years.

Why would Caltrain want to operate their EMUs on the NEC beats me. If Stadler were asked to produce a 60Hz/25Hz EMUs they will be able to do so just fine. Also MBTA has no reason to worry about 25Hz since they are nowhere near any 25Hz territory and their equipment will not be operating on such.

Anyhow this is getting way off topic for this thread which is about specifically the Siemens locomotives and not about the NEC infrastructure.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top