Amtrak Siemens Charger locomotive (SC44, ALC42, ALC42E) (2015 - 1Q 2024)

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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Building a replacement might be faster and maybe some components from wreck can be reused ? That would decrease replacement costs /

Where did the wreck go? Was it sent back to Siemens in Sacramento?
See Jishnu...
default_laugh.png
 
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.
 
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.
 
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...
 
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 ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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 ?
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.
 
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...
Funny, I was thinking the same thing.
 
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...
Funny, I was thinking the same thing.
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
 
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.
 
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)?
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.
 
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?
 
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?
I only have experience with the Amtrak Midwest Chargers, but in my experience they seem to have significantly better acceleration than P42s.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top