Equipment order expected in January

[Green Maned Lion]

Well if we're ever going to market expanded electrification to the rest of the US we're going to show what we can do with modern technology.

Battery powered mechanisms of this type are only modern in the sense that many modern things are stupid.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

NS just made a nice little switcher battery powered-- it is, in theory, plausible and negates the need to change engines at NHV.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

NS just made a nice little switcher battery powered-- it is, in theory, plausible and negates the need to change engines at NHV.

Plausibility and sensibility are different, Micah.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Since when are we on a first name basis?

And either way, I'm glad you're the voice of reason around here, I mean-- lord help us if you weren't here Amtrak might actually do something progressive...

 

[GG-1]

And either way, I'm glad you're the voice of reason around here, I mean-- lord help us if you weren't here Amtrak might actually do something progressive...

Aloha

Well I never thought of GML as a voice of reason, But I do frequently enjoy his unique viewpoint's, as you also have, and believe that the eventual compromise will leave us with a much better World

Mahalo

Eric

 

[Neil_M]

Well if we're ever going to market expanded electrification to the rest of the US we're going to show what we can do with modern technology.

Battery powered mechanisms of this type are only modern in the sense that many modern things are stupid.

Depends on your reference point for 'modern'.......

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

NS just made a nice little switcher battery powered-- it is, in theory, plausible and negates the need to change engines at NHV.

I was told by NS employees that they made the switcher to test the possibility of electrifying their main lines and use battery switchers in yards and spurs that can recharge on the mainline under the catenary

.

 

[wrjensen]

NS just made a nice little switcher battery powered-- it is, in theory, plausible and negates the need to change engines at NHV.

Illinois Terminal many yeas ago has switchers in STL that ran off battery, overhead, and third rail.

 

[wayman]

NS just made a nice little switcher battery powered-- it is, in theory, plausible and negates the need to change engines at NHV.

I was told by NS employees that they made the switcher to test the possibility of electrifying their main lines and use battery switchers in yards and spurs that can recharge on the mainline under the catenary

.

Their engineers probably took one look at the huge yards the PRR electrified, with such a complex set of catenary wires, and started crying at the thought of figuring out all the math for the wire tensions :lol: And the finance department took one look at those yards and started crying when they thought of the price of that much copper. The battery powered switchers are a neat idea to work around both of those problems, though I don't know if they'll work out in practice. Building a prototype is the best way to find out, but it's definitely an experiment, not a sign that there will be more of them any time soon.

 

[George Harris]

Obviously Joel, they'll have to encounter the engine change problem at NHV.
I rode the SPG shuttles during NTD and I have to say its a pretty smooth operation.

Was that line electrified Pre-Amtrak to Hartford or Springfield? Would it be cost effective to try and get rid of the engine change and wire the line? It would improve the time from Hartford to NYC.

Aloha

5o years ago there was a power change in New Haven for trains to Hartford and north, and returning to NYC, By the New Haven RR. Have no clue what happened after 1963 and I left for the west coast, on my way to Hawaii.

The line north of New Haven has never been electrified.

Given the tight clearances in most of New England, it is doubtful that New Haven - Springfield - Boston could be electrified without major work to improve clearances. From both a service and a clean air perspective, it would make more sense to electrify the boston area commuter system. Since South Station already has eelctrified tracks (is it all of them or just osome of them?) it would be cheapre to start there rather than with the services that go into North Station.

 

[nferr]

Connecticut is not going to pay to electrify that route. Passengers going beyond New Haven will switch trains. There's no giant need to provide a one train service Springield to south of New Haven. Does anyone realize what it would cost to electrify that route? I live in Connecticut.

 

[afigg]

Connecticut is not going to pay to electrify that route. Passengers going beyond New Haven will switch trains. There's no giant need to provide a one train service Springield to south of New Haven. Does anyone realize what it would cost to electrify that route? I live in Connecticut.

As I recall, in the CT Track 2 application for the ARRA stimulus money, they estimated the cost of electrification from New Haven to Springfield at around $500 million, but it was stated to be a placeholder estimate. I believe CT & Mass were applying for engineering study funding for possible electrification to follow after the major track upgrade projects are done. For only a 63 mile line, $500 million is awfully high on a per mile basis. So electrification is being considered, but would depend on sustained federal funding for HSR and inter-city rail.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

this is just a thought but would it be cheaper to just use 3rd rail power then overhead. that way there's no clearance issues height wise.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

The line north of New Haven has never been electrified.

I could have sworn that I've seen catenary towers on the NHV-SPG line.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

The line north of New Haven has never been electrified.

I could have sworn that I've seen catenary towers on the NHV-SPG line.

There are some, even some of the signal towers are in fact catenary towers. I have a vid of a cabride from a shuttle and there are definitely signs of past electrification. But with the previous owners of the line and Amtrak involved it is very likely they could have just slapped old catenary poles in the ground for the signals rather than buy a signal mast.

 

[AlanB]

this is just a thought but would it be cheaper to just use 3rd rail power then overhead. that way there's no clearance issues height wise.

That would solve the clearance issues, but it would not be cheaper to do. It would be more expensive, as 3rd rail power requires many more substations to provide power. Additionally, now you need to run out and buy equipment that can run on third rail power.

So again while it does solve one problem rather nicely, it creates a few others and therefore I wouldn't expect them to consider it. But who knows? Stranger things have happened.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

they could always slap 3rd rail shoes on the locos and wire them to the computers and generator for traction and hotel power.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

they could always slap 3rd rail shoes on the locos and wire them to the computers and generator for traction and hotel power.

Its not that simple, you need to completely overhaul the current power to make it work, in fact it may not be worth the overhaul-- new units might just be cheaper.

 

[Neil_M]

they could always slap 3rd rail shoes on the locos and wire them to the computers and generator for traction and hotel power.

Wiring the 3rd rail shoes to the computer would be a very bad thing..........

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

they could always slap 3rd rail shoes on the locos and wire them to the computers and generator for traction and hotel power.

Wiring the 3rd rail shoes to the computer would be a very bad thing..........

And boom goes the dynamite.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

they could always slap 3rd rail shoes on the locos and wire them to the computers and generator for traction and hotel power.

Wiring the 3rd rail shoes to the computer would be a very bad thing..........

i don't mean wire directly.instead of just buying new locos that use 3rd rail power just modify the locos to use 3rd rail. cheaper then buying new. amtrak has the p32 locos that use 3rd rail and they could always bring out the turbos fix the a/c and run them as they can use 3rd rail power.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

they could always slap 3rd rail shoes on the locos and wire them to the computers and generator for traction and hotel power.

Wiring the 3rd rail shoes to the computer would be a very bad thing..........

i don't mean wire directly.instead of just buying new locos that use 3rd rail power just modify the locos to use 3rd rail. cheaper then buying new. amtrak has the p32 locos that use 3rd rail and they could always bring out the turbos fix the a/c and run them as they can use 3rd rail power.

The P32s are not botched P42s, they are purpose built movers, they also have a significant reduction in HP-- about a 25% reduction.

And don't bring out the Turbos again... they're dead, they're scrap, they're done.

 

[nferr]

The Metro-North New Haven line cars are already setup to use third rail power OR catenary. They switch to third rail power in Mount Vernon for the run into NYC.

 

[Heading North]

IIRC, the New Haven cars can use third rail OR catenary because third-rail power is illegal in Connecticut?

 

[AlanB]

Hadn't heard that third rail was illegal in CT, but it wouldn't make sense for them to have converted the overhead catenary to third rail as that would have been a huge expense. Not to mention that it would screw up Amtrak totally.

But yes, the New Haven line cars can run on either third rail power or catenary power.