ACS-64 Heads Up

[Fan Railer]

Is there a noticeable change in acceleration with the new locomotives? Going from 5100 to 6400 max kilowatts and from 4300 to 5000 kW continuous (ACS-64 vs. AEM-7's) it seems like you might be able to feel the difference leaving the station. Or do the engineers not use anywhere near full power so the acceleration stays about the same?

Typically, engineers do not use full throttle coming out of stations unless the train is significantly late and there is not enough padding left in the schedule to help it make up time. Otherwise, leaving a station on 2/3 - 3/4 throttle is plenty sufficient to keep the schedule.

Especially with the new, more powerful locomotives, leaving stations constantly on full throttle would put the train ahead of schedule by an amount that would disrupt scheduling and potentially cause conflicts further down the line, given the fact that there are still older, less powerful and slower locomotives operating along the line during this time.

In addition, applying full throttle while the consist is stationary may or may not generate wheel slip. So in order to avoid such an occurrence, you typically would not apply full throttle coming out of a stop unless you knew the tracks were nice and dry, and you weren't coming out of a station that was curved (curved track generates more resistance and increases chances wheel slip during high tractive effort applications).

Also, there are many stations from which the Regional departs where there are speed restrictions in the immediate vicinity of the station, so there would be no point in pushing to full throttle right out of the station.

Normally, full throttle would be used when accelerating out of a speed restriction (from say 30 or 45 mph to full line speed of 100+ mph).

 

[Anderson]

Thanks to both Nathanael and Woody for responding.

I am still a bit confused by " This gives me a federal operating support level of $1 million in 2018, and I think I've estimated conservatively. "

A million? Or a billion? Because being negative by a million after years of $2.6Bn in payments is pretty much breaking even in my book. A billion is still a lot of money. Albeit in a good cause. A billion a year to support Amtrak would be and is worthwhile, I just want to be able to link to info that supports my statement that it is worthwhile when I post about Amtrak.

Thanks!

It's $1m that he's referring to. As a rule, the operating subsidy has been under $600m. Amtrak would still be getting a billion or so for capital stuff (track upkeep, bridge replacements, etc.).

 

[Fan Railer]

From walterrich; 600 on her return journey today, lashed up to 159.

 

[Acela150]

This is off-topic, but does anyone know what those 100 signs are on the wire? My first guess would be speed limit, but I thought there were no permanent speed signs on the NEC.

That's a sspeed sign, the curve south of Halthrope station is 100mph on all 3 tracks.

But since now there are five classes of trains on the NEC with potentially different speed limits, I assume that this is the speed limit for what is essentially the Amtrak Regional type train?
Is it true that these were originally installed to help managers substituting for striking engineers to be able to operate at proper speed during a PRR strike? And they have stayed put since then?

Of course these days I suppose one gets to read the actual speed limit that applies that specific train on the Cab Signal/ACSES display unit?

Jishnu IINM the speed for curves are Civil limits.. Not displayed in the Cab. But most engineers have run the NEC so much that they know the limits of each curve and section. But with HST's, HHP's, AEM-7's AC and DC and then the new ACS-64 on top of that It's going to be a while before anything major happens with those signs. They are for Regional's or LD trains. One instance is the Curve south of Croydon is I think 105mph for Regional trains and HST's can take the curve at 120mph.

 

[Anderson]

One other thing: The key with getting the "operating subsidy" to zero is that it takes a lot of clubs out of the hands of the Micas of the world. As soon as that disappears, a lot of the language putting strings on Amtrak's operations also start vanishing, while Amtrak can start connecting almost all of their funding to visible projects.

 

[afigg]

Look at it this way: Total price, $466 million. Call it $480 for round numbers. Assume 20-year loan repayment, makes it $24 million yearly payment. But "They'll pay for themselves in about 6 years." So that's $80 million per year total savings (the $15 million savings on the electric bill is one part of that) to "pay for itself". That's $80 million a year real savings, minus $24 million loan repayment, gives free cash flow of $56 million a year! Am I right?

Ok, I think I managed to clean the multiple layers of format codes out of the last paragraph. Deleted the rest to save the trouble of untangling it. WoodyinNYC, please check how you are formatting your posts. The text gets wrapped and it is hard to follow at times.
Let's not get too carried away with how the ACS-64s and, for that matter, the 130 Viewliner IIs are going to do wonders to the operating margins. Amtrak took out a $562.9 million RRIF loan to pay for the ACS-64s, spare parts, facility improvements at a 4.04% interest under a 25 year lease agreement. Amtrak is also paying a 4.424% credit risk premium on amounts advanced under the RRIF loan and they have taken out substantial advances, presumably for progress payments. The crefit risk premiums can be reimbursed when the loan is paid off, so Amtrak may get those payments back someday. The specifics of the RRIF loan are discussed in great detail in the FY12 financial statement.

The FY13 Five Year financial plan shows RRIF loan repayments of $29.1 million in FY15 and growing to $37.1 million in FY17. Keep in mind, Amtrak is replacing AEM-7s which were paid for and 15 HHP-8s which are still under lease with 70 ACS-64s with a $562.9 million debt load. If all goes to plan, the ACS-64s will reduce maintenance and operating costs which will help the books, but I suspect your numbers are way too optimistic.

The 70 ACS-64s and 130 Viewliner IIs represent less than 10% of Amtrack total fleet. The new equipment will help reduce maintenance costs, but the rest of the (aging) fleet will still be there. If Congress does not provide Amtrak with direct funding to buy new rolling stock, Amtrak will have to take on debt to pay for the Acela IIs and after that, more debt to begin replacement of the P-42s. The Amfleets and Superliners can keep going and going if they have to, but the diesel locomotives can't. But the total Amtrak financial picture in the coming years is getting well off-topic from the ACS-64s.

 

[jis]

Jishnu IINM the speed for curves are Civil limits.. Not displayed in the Cab. But most engineers have run the NEC so much that they know the limits of each curve and section. But with HST's, HHP's, AEM-7's AC and DC and then the new ACS-64 on top of that It's going to be a while before anything major happens with those signs. They are for Regional's or LD trains. One instance is the Curve south of Croydon is I think 105mph for Regional trains and HST's can take the curve at 120mph.

But civil limits are displayed in cab. That is the whole point of ACSES. Also civil limits, specially on curves do depend on train class. So those limits posted cannot possibly be for say both Acelas and Regionals.

Edit: Added the quote of the original message which this is a response to.

 

[Acela150]

But civil limits are displayed in cab. That is the whole point of ACSES. Also civil limits, specially on curves do depend on train class. So those limits posted cannot possibly be for say both Acelas and Regionals.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

That's my fault. I forgot that ACSES displayed civil limits.. But limits on AE, NER's, and any LD train or one with a baggage car follow different speeds.

Acela Trainsets with the Tilt Activated are listed as train type "A"

Regionals and Acela sets with the Tilt Disabled are train type "B"

LD trains I believe are listed under "C & D"

Freight is type "E"

That's just from memory of reading the Employee Timetable. When I'm home in 10 days I'll try to remember to look at C and D train types to clear this up more.. They're different but not by much.

I should also add that with the new electrics new cab signals are being installed. When I rode 171 last month Toaster 904 had the new type of Cab Signal. Which surprised me a bit as it's a new Cab Signal in a unit that will shortly be retired... But I would guess that they're installed for engineers to get used to as that's what they will be looking at in the new units.

Old Cab Signal:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3689748

New Cab Signal:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3689784

 

[jis]

I believe no Amtrak engine (or cab car) leading a train with inoperative ACSES is allowed to depart a terminal. So there is no choice but to have the ACSES PDUs if one has to run at all on the NEC. This has been the case in NEC North for quite a while. It became mandatory in NEC South sometime in 2012 or 2013 AFAIR.

 

[SarahZ]

The video is great. The lights look brighter than usual, though. Are they LED, or is it just the composition of the video? (Or is it just because the locos are so new and shiny?)

 

[PerRock]

But civil limits are displayed in cab. That is the whole point of ACSES. Also civil limits, specially on curves do depend on train class. So those limits posted cannot possibly be for say both Acelas and Regionals.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

That's my fault. I forgot that ACSES displayed civil limits.. But limits on AE, NER's, and any LD train or one with a baggage car follow different speeds.

Acela Trainsets with the Tilt Activated are listed as train type "A"

Regionals and Acela sets with the Tilt Disabled are train type "B"

LD trains I believe are listed under "C & D"

Freight is type "E"

That's just from memory of reading the Employee Timetable. When I'm home in 10 days I'll try to remember to look at C and D train types to clear this up more.. They're different but not by much.

I should also add that with the new electrics new cab signals are being installed. When I rode 171 last month Toaster 904 had the new type of Cab Signal. Which surprised me a bit as it's a new Cab Signal in a unit that will shortly be retired... But I would guess that they're installed for engineers to get used to as that's what they will be looking at in the new units.

Old Cab Signal:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3689748

New Cab Signal:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3689784

Do the freight trains running on the NEC have cab signals as well?

peter

 

[jis]

Do the freight trains running on the NEC have cab signals as well?

peter

Yes.

But then again freight trains have cab signals on way more than just the NEC. They have them on the RF&P/CSX, they have it on the UP overland route and at all sorts of other places.

See a comprehensive list at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse_code_cab_signaling

 

[Nathanael]

The video is great. The lights look brighter than usual, though. Are they LED, or is it just the composition of the video? (Or is it just because the locos are so new and shiny?)

They are LEDs, and commercial LEDs tend to be *very* bright when new. That could be it.

 

[Nathanael]

Thanks to both Nathanael and Woody for responding.

I am still a bit confused by " This gives me a federal operating support level of $1 million in 2018, and I think I've estimated conservatively. "

A million? Or a billion? Because being negative by a million after years of $2.6Bn in payments is pretty much breaking even in my book. A billion is still a lot of money. Albeit in a good cause. A billion a year to support Amtrak would be and is worthwhile, I just want to be able to link to info that supports my statement that it is worthwhile when I post about Amtrak.

Thanks!

How shall I summarize it?

*Running the trains*, as a whole, should come pretty close to breaking even. (When the state funding is included as revenue.)

But Amtrak will still need a billion each year to replace & upgrade old equipment (including 100-year-old bridges, 50-year-old transformers, old non-ADA-compliant platforms, etc), and to pay old debts.

Is that clear?

 

[afigg]

...

- It's hard to assess the value of new stations in a dozen different locations (Denver, Miami, St. Paul, Grand Rapids, Dearborn, Troy, Rochester, Schenectady, etc.), but with the better local-transit integration, I have to expect that this is worth maybe 1% in revenue on the affected LD routes -- call it another $1.5 million

- Removal of the worst Chicago bottleneck (Englewood) has to be worth 1% in revenue on the affected LD routes (should be more, but don't underestimate the ability of Class Is to delay trains) -- call that another $500K

This gives me a federal operating support level of $1 million in 2018, and I think I've estimated conservatively.

Amtrak could be making an "operating profit" in 2018 based purely on what we already know about, before the Acela IIs arrive. Amtrak would still need large amounts of capital funding, of course, and some debt service funding, and a large recurring allocation of sort-of-capital funding to keep up with depreciation (which is very roughly estimated as $600-700 million / year in the balance sheets).

...

On the other hand, it also assumes roughly stable wages & benefits (none of the "Bush gives the unions more than they asked for" nonsense), and stable On Time Performance (which we are NOT seeing right now). The ARRA projects are mostly supposed to improve OTP, and should do so, but given the general degeneration this year to date, there seem to be deeper problems at work here.

While Amtrak will generate increased revenue, expenses will go up as well. Wages & benefits, fuel costs, capital costs (interest rates will eventually go back to a more normal level as the economy grows), inflation, etc.
I agree that with the funds and track, station projects and rolling stock acquisitions and state funded projects that are underway or in the pipeline that Amtrak will see a wave of improvements over the next 4 years through 2017-2018. The small wave of rebuilt/new stations with local rail transit connections will help to grow intercity passenger rail services over time. The problem is that except for the TIGER grant program and modest annual funding to Amtrak, the surge in federal funding from 2008-2010 has dried up. It will be a fight to get the federal capital funds needed just for the NEC, let alone the rest of the system over the next 2-3 years or longer.

To get this discussion back to the ACS-64s, I ran a simplistic calculation for the $562.9M RRIF loan with a 4.04% interest rate over 25 years. Ignoring fees, extra charges, credit risk premiums, the effect of a quarterly payment schedule, loan payments would be ~$35.8 million a year. Which works out to $895 million in total payments over 25 years, so that is the nominal total cost in current year dollars for the ACS-64s. Provided that the lease is not paid off early which with normal inflation might make sense to do in 10-15 years.

 

[jis]

Also keep in mind that while we have been focused on PRIIA 209, we have been ignoring PRIIA 212. When the PRIIA 212 issues are fully addressed by the NEC Commission it is very likely that the Commuter Agencies will be paying considerably more to Amtrak for trackage and power charges on the NEC. Though I will admit, at the present time it is somewhat hard to figure out its effect overall. But in general, the capital maintenance grants needed for the NEC should go down significantly. This should allow greater focus on capital asset replacement/rehab grants.

 

[Nathanael]

(interest rates will eventually go back to a more normal level as the economy grows), inflation, etc.

Those won't happen before 2018. I follow the macroeconomy as part of the way I make my living. We're going to be in a zero-interest-rate near-deflationary environment well into 2018. (Barring a very dramatic political change in which someone like Bernie Sanders becomes President -- which seems unlikely.)
Economic historians have compared this to the "Long Depression" of 1873-79 and the lack of recovery after it.

Anyway, enough depressing off-topic economic commentary...

 

[Anderson]

Nathanael, on 09 Feb 2014 - 12:59 PM, said:

afigg, on 09 Feb 2014 - 12:02 PM, saidinterest rates will eventually go back to a more normal level as the economy grows), inflation, etc.

Those won't happen before 2018. I follow the macroeconomy as part of the way I make my living. We're going to be in a zero-interest-rate near-deflationary environment well into 2018. (Barring a very dramatic political change in which someone like Bernie Sanders becomes President -- which seems unlikely.)
Economic historians have compared this to the "Long Depression" of 1873-79 and the lack of recovery after it.

Anyway, enough depressing off-topic economic commentary...

Just because the Fed sits on rates doesn't mean they'll actually stay where the Fed wants them. If inflation starts running 4-5%, there's a real risk that banks start forcing up loan rates and the like, since that's likely to trigger at least some capital flight into the equity markets...not to mention possible overseas capital flight in search of better rates. But I digress...

It's hard to make accurate guesses at a lot of these factors, but I can definitely see a scenario where Amtrak's operating grant can drop to $0 by 2020 or so with the Acela IIs. Whether it can do so before the Acela IIs come into play is a good question. I'd point out that you seem to have neglected to mention the effect of the multi-state bilevel cars, which are likely to trigger knock-on effects elsewhere in the system...but in a few cases you might also be over-estimating some effects (i.e. the state payments...IIRC, Amtrak is still planning for $75-90m/yr in net costs there).

 

[Empire Service]

This was taken today (2/9/14)

 

[HAL]

This is off-topic, but does anyone know what those 100 signs are on the wire? My first guess would be speed limit, but I thought there were no permanent speed signs on the NEC.

That's a sspeed sign, the curve south of Halthrope station is 100mph on all 3 tracks.

But since now there are five classes of trains on the NEC with potentially different speed limits, I assume that this is the speed limit for what is essentially the Amtrak Regional type train?
Is it true that these were originally installed to help managers substituting for striking engineers to be able to operate at proper speed during a PRR strike? And they have stayed put since then?

Of course these days I suppose one gets to read the actual speed limit that applies that specific train on the Cab Signal/ACSES display unit?

Yes, those signs were posted so managers could run the trains during a strike. Yes, that is the speed that applies to a regional train or long distance train. The speed for an Acela with tilt is 120 on 2 and 3 track. Yes, speed limit will be displayed on ACSES display.

 

[jacorbett70]

Number 605 has been in the 30th Street yard lately:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jacorbett70/12417697765/

 

[HAL]

But civil limits are displayed in cab. That is the whole point of ACSES. Also civil limits, specially on curves do depend on train class. So those limits posted cannot possibly be for say both Acelas and Regionals.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

That's my fault. I forgot that ACSES displayed civil limits.. But limits on AE, NER's, and any LD train or one with a baggage car follow different speeds.

Acela Trainsets with the Tilt Activated are listed as train type "A"

Regionals and Acela sets with the Tilt Disabled are train type "B"

LD trains I believe are listed under "C & D"

Freight is type "E"

That's just from memory of reading the Employee Timetable. When I'm home in 10 days I'll try to remember to look at C and D train types to clear this up more.. They're different but not by much.

I should also add that with the new electrics new cab signals are being installed. When I rode 171 last month Toaster 904 had the new type of Cab Signal. Which surprised me a bit as it's a new Cab Signal in a unit that will shortly be retired... But I would guess that they're installed for engineers to get used to as that's what they will be looking at in the new units.

Old Cab Signal:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3689748

New Cab Signal:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3689784

A is Acela with tilt. B is Acela without tilt, Regionals. C is all other trains (like commuter trains), D is trains with Baggage cars

 

[ronkstevens]

Number 605 has been in the 30th Street yard lately:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jacorbett70/12417697765/

It's amazing how old and tired the AEM7's look next to the shiny and new loco's

 

[edjbox]

But civil limits are displayed in cab. That is the whole point of ACSES. Also civil limits, specially on curves do depend on train class. So those limits posted cannot possibly be for say both Acelas and Regionals.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

That's my fault. I forgot that ACSES displayed civil limits.. But limits on AE, NER's, and any LD train or one with a baggage car follow different speeds.

Acela Trainsets with the Tilt Activated are listed as train type "A"

Regionals and Acela sets with the Tilt Disabled are train type "B"

LD trains I believe are listed under "C & D"

Freight is type "E"

That's just from memory of reading the Employee Timetable. When I'm home in 10 days I'll try to remember to look at C and D train types to clear this up more.. They're different but not by much.

I should also add that with the new electrics new cab signals are being installed. When I rode 171 last month Toaster 904 had the new type of Cab Signal. Which surprised me a bit as it's a new Cab Signal in a unit that will shortly be retired... But I would guess that they're installed for engineers to get used to as that's what they will be looking at in the new units.

Old Cab Signal:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3689748

New Cab Signal:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3689784

A is Acela with tilt. B is Acela without tilt, Regionals. C is all other trains (like commuter trains), D is trains with Baggage cars

Which Acelas don't have tilt? Why would it be disabled?

 

[Ryan]

All of the Acelas have tilt. It would be disabled if it were broken. It's also disabled in Metro North country because the tracks are too close together.