Broadway Ltd Route being rebuilt

[Seaboard92]

The alternate route seeing the connection to the ex NYC South of the Lake has been cut. The best thing to do would be to operate west from where the line ends (less then half a mile to the ex NYC) to where the C&WI line that the Cardinal uses. Not a big issue.

 

[CoachSlumber]

The Broadway was not discontinued because the old Pennsy line was downgraded/abandoned. Broadway ran for some time on a different routing west of Pittsburgh. It was a financial decision not to run two trains from NY to CHI

 

[PVD]

The Empire Service trains are subsidized by NY state. Extend them into a real LD train and you lose that money. Good luck getting that to fly regardless of the merits of the idea.

 

[dlagrua]

It looks like the NS line runs from PGH to Mansfield OH then across IN If we go back to the map http://allaboardohio.org/2014/12/22/fort-wayne-line-rebirth/ it sure looks like that OLD PRR line connects somewhere after Valpariso to CHI. The reason that I brought up restoration of the Broadway LTD is that you have new track and some stations still standing on the line. Currently Baker Station in downtown Ft Wayne sits completely restored in anticipation of future train service.Signals might need to be upgraded but Amtrak would not need to start from scratch provided they obtain the necessary equipment and trackage rights from NS and CSX..

 

[AutoTrDvr]

Sorry to bump this old thread, but I was searching for a thread ot the fate of the old "Broadway Ltd," (train 40/41) the first Amtrak long distance train I had ever taken cross country, back in the 1980's. I was going to create a "What happened to the BL" thread when I found this one, and I now understand what did happen. Not sure if the effort to restore it for passenger service is still in play, but we'll see.

I can tell you some things about my travel on it. First, I think it was back when Amtrak was still running E9's (I think) as primary movers. There were two. It was also back when there were "Slumbercoaches" for accomodations as well as roomettes. Each Slumbercoach also had a sink/toilet as do Viewliner roomettes. IIRC, the HVAC was steam powered or something of that nature (not sure if the E9's offered full HEP to the cars). They would run the E9's all the way from Chicago to Harrisburg, PA, where they were swapped out for a GG1 that took them the rest of the way to NYP (I/d would get off at Newark Penn). It was the only time I did that (it was for one round trip). After that I took the Lake Shore Ltd. and by then, I had a roomette, and the primary movers were two F40's with full HEP and electric HVAC service They would switch with GG1s at Croton-Harmon..

The route taken at the time on the Broadway Ltd. was: CHI--> Gary Ind -->: Valpraiso In ---> Ft. Wayne In ---> Lima Oh --> Crestline Oh --> Canton Oh ---> Pittsburg, PA --> and then various stops in PA (I think Greensburg, Johnstown, Altoona, Huntington, Lewiston, and then on to Harrisburg). I recall traveling right by "Three Mile island" which was still in the news at the time. It's funny but I recall a more "senior" conductor that was still wearing a PRR conductor uniform (and not Amtrak). Ah well.

Anyway, a rather interesting experience.

 

[railiner]

As you have read in the previous post's, some of that route is now abandoned, although there are several alternate routes available. Probably the closest thing to the old BL, will be if and when they run thru cars from the Pennsylvanian to the Capitol at Pittsburgh. If that does happen, I believe the Pennsylvanian will become the primary train, and the Capitol the 'connection'.

Of course, that will be impacted by the State funding the Pennsylvanian, so not sure...best case scenario, would be if the ran another state funded Pittsburgh-Philly(New York) train.

BTW, GG-1's never ran on the route thru Croton-Harmon. They changed with diesel's at Harrisburg. The Lake Shore ran thru Croton-Harmon, and they switched at Albany-Rensselaer from diesel to dual mode FL-9's for the trip into Grand Central Terminal. In the New York Central era, they changed to electric locomotives at Croton-Harmon.

 

[Anthony V]

I dream of the line from Buffalo to Chicago on the LSL route developing into a busy corridor like frequency...a nice start would be to extend all NYP-BUF trains on to Chicago...

I would give NS some incentive to route more freight trains on the NKP route to make it possible.

I would extend the last NYP-ALB train overnite to BUF, and then on to CHI to offer a nice daylight train to that segment.

A more feasible idea would be to have a daytime CHI-BUF train so Ohio can get daytime service. An additional stop could be made at Dunkirk-Fredonia to serve a mid-sized metropolitan area that currently doesn't have service. This could be the beginning of improved Ohio service.

 

[AutoTrDvr]

As you have read in the previous post's, some of that route is now abandoned, although there are several alternate routes available. Probably the closest thing to the old BL, will be if and when they run thru cars from the Pennsylvanian to the Capitol at Pittsburgh. If that does happen, I believe the Pennsylvanian will become the primary train, and the Capitol the 'connection'.

Of course, that will be impacted by the State funding the Pennsylvanian, so not sure...best case scenario, would be if the ran another state funded Pittsburgh-Philly(New York) train.

BTW, GG-1's never ran on the route thru Croton-Harmon. They changed with diesel's at Harrisburg. The Lake Shore ran thru Croton-Harmon, and they switched at Albany-Rensselaer from diesel to dual mode FL-9's for the trip into Grand Central Terminal. In the New York Central era, they changed to electric locomotives at Croton-Harmon.

i definitely recall stopping at Croton-Harmon to switch to/from F40's to GG1's on the LSL. It was not Albany Renn at that time. This was 1981 (and the LSL originating/terminating at Grand Central not NYP) so the policy could have changed.

 

[cpotisch]

As I understand it, the Empire Corridor has never had catenary, so a GG-1 physically could not have been used on that route. I'm pretty sure they used FL9s.

 

[zephyr17]

cpotisch is right. NYC didn't use catenary, they used third rail. NYC mostly used box cabs for the Croton-Harmon-GCT from what I've seen.

 

[AutoTrDvr]

As I understand it, the Empire Corridor has never had catenary, so a GG-1 physically could not have been used on that route. I'm pretty sure they used FL9s.

cpotisch is right. NYC didn't use catenary, they used third rail. NYC mostly used box cabs for the Croton-Harmon-GCT from what I've seen.

I absolutely concur that it was 'thrid rail' and not catenary. But I just looked at pics of the EMD FL9 (see below):

Come to think of it, it very well could have been an FL9, I just don't remember. I gather then that there were never any GG1s with a 3rd rail rig as opposed (or in addition) to pans? I do recall, when living in the Chicago area, the "Sokie Swift" CTA mass transit train (now the "Yellow Line"). It's an express that runs from Howard St. Station to Dempster Ave. in Skokie. A portion of the route was Catenary and so all the Skokie Swift consists had both 3rd rail and Pans and would switch accordingly en-route. As I understand it, the route is all 3rd rail, now.

Maybe I thought GG1 for the LSL, initially, because the Broadway Ltd. train I had taken the year before was definitely GG1 out ot NYP all the way to Harrisburg, when it swapped for the E9s. And the changeover to F40's for the LSL was definitely at Croton-Harmon. The time was built into the schedule.

 

[railiner]

This is what NYC, and PC used (and perhaps Amtrak for a time), between Grand Central Terminal, and Croton-Harmon, prior to the ex-New Haven FL-9 Dual Mode's...

Image from here....

https://www.google.com/search?q=nyc+p+motor&rlz=1C1CHZL_enUS739US739&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=eY1DuHg1rSnuKM%253A%252CsFETAS5quJs0oM%252C_&usg=AI4_-kTXC_abOQUUYFf1OxiRmzCV9XSFRA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiLv_CEtt_dAhVsc98KHXIjDb0Q9QEwA3oECAUQCA#imgrc=ZOeePYa26oKX7M:

Interestingly, these locomotives originally came equipped with pantograph's when used at the Cleveland Terminal Ry.....

 

[ehbowen]

Interestingly, these locomotives originally came equipped with pantograph's when used at the Cleveland Terminal Ry.....

My understanding is that the pantographs were intended for use if the locomotive stalled out at a gap in the third rail, such as at a switch. There were small sections of electrified rail above the tracks at those points which the pantograph could be raised to engage and get the train moving again. This was not necessary for a dual-mode locomotive like the FL9 as it could temporarily switch to Diesel mode if necessary to clear an inadvertent stall.

 

[cpotisch]

I just don't remember. I gather then that there were never any GG1s with a 3rd rail rig as opposed (or in addition) to pans?

Correct. GG-1s always ran exclusively on catenary.

 

[railiner]

Prior to the complete electrification of the PRR line from New York to Philly and beyond, they ran their DD-1, side-rod driven electric locomotives between Sunnyside Yard, Penn Station, and Manhattan Transfer, which was where the old line to Jersey City diverged. It was about two miles east of Newark, near Harrison.

Here's a look...noticed that they also had pantograph's...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Railroad_class_DD1#/media/FileRR_DD1.jpg

 

[brianpmcdonnell17]

As I understand it, the Empire Corridor has never had catenary, so a GG-1 physically could not have been used on that route. I'm pretty sure they used FL9s.

I do recall, when living in the Chicago area, the "Sokie Swift" CTA mass transit train (now the "Yellow Line"). It's an express that runs from Howard St. Station to Dempster Ave. in Skokie. A portion of the route was Catenary and so all the Skokie Swift consists had both 3rd rail and Pans and would switch accordingly en-route. As I understand it, the route is all 3rd rail, now.

You are correct; the Yellow Line is now entirely third-rail. However, the base of the pantograph structure is still visible on the cars that had them, which are all 3200 series cars that are now deployed on the Brown Line.

 

[jis]

The big difference between the Skokie Swift case and the GG-1 hypothetical third rail case is that in case of the Skokie Swift AFAIR is there was no change in voltage and type of power (DC) between what was delivered via the third rail or the catenary. That would not have been the case with the GG-1 (11kV 25Hz AC for catenary and 750v or so DC for third rail). It was well beyond the technical capability of that age to pack the equipment needed to provide such dual mode capability on a reasonable sized frame of a loco.

 

[railiner]

The big difference between the Skokie Swift case and the GG-1 hypothetical third rail case is that in case of the Skokie Swift AFAIR is there was no change in voltage and type of power (DC) between what was delivered via the third rail or the catenary. That would not have been the case with the GG-1 (11kV 25Hz AC for catenary and 750v or so DC for third rail). It was well beyond the technical capability of that age to pack the equipment needed to provide such dual mode capability on a reasonable sized frame of a loco.

It wasn't too long before the solution to that situation came along....the New Haven "Jets"

https://www.american-rails.com/ep5s.html

 

[jis]

Yup. Small footprint rectifiers was the key technology. Ignitrons barely met that requirement. When Silicon Diode rectifiers became available that was the beginning of the technology revolution that culminated in the amazing solid state power electronics and associated miniaturization that we see today.

 

[west point]

Yup. Small footprint rectifiers was the key technology. Ignitrons barely met that requirement. When Silicon Diode rectifiers became available that was the beginning of the technology revolution that culminated in the amazing solid state power electronics and associated miniaturization that we see today.

good points

Do you have any kind of idea what various electronics weigh and space needed per some HP metric ? That might give us how much space and weight is needed for say a EMU, DMU, or EDMU ?

 

[railiner]

In a "DMU", you don't really need much in the way of electronics....these didn't....

https://www.rapidotrains.com/budd-rdc-master-class/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budd_SPV-2000

 

[cpotisch]

In a "DMU", you don't really need much in the way of electronics....these didn't....

https://www.rapidotrains.com/budd-rdc-master-class/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budd_SPV-2000

True, but I think we all know how the latter car worked out...

 

[jis]

I don't know the details of the miniaturization and haven't seen a comprehensive article on such. But just to give you some sense of it, even in the '90s there was much discussion/argument about whether an engine like the ALP45-DP was technically feasible. The ability to stuff all the power electronics in a small enough space together with the use of small high speed diesel prime mover (two in the case of the ALP45s) is what made it possible, and many naysayers were forced to eat crow when they materialized.

 

[west point]

The main items of electronics was looking for are the rectifier(s) and inverters both traction and HEP. Their weight and space per HP / kW ? We are thinking that since ACS-64s have 2 complete 1000 kW HEP inverters that weight and space required has decreased per watt power density.