Turboliners... What happened?

[Galls]

Any comment that I could make on the "center of the world" illusion that New York has of itself would probably start a flame war.

I fully admit that we are full of ourselves. When I say center of the world, even though BosWash>Cali, it is just self ridicule.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Being a rust belt is what makes it so great.

 

[AlanB]

The plan was to get parts of the line up to 125 MPH, they even put in quad gates in perperation for that IIRC. Currently the line has varrying speeds up to a max of 110 MPH in a few places.

And it won't get any faster without a lot of work to straighten out the curves. Any part over 110 mph would be so short as to be meaningless, In fact, I would not be surprised if the 110 mph segments are almost pointless as well. If they could get more at a consistent 90 mph by getting rid of some of the more crooked areas it would be more worthwhile.

Just for reference:

from: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/media/twgreport.htm

The FRA's rail safety regulations require that crossings be separated or closed where trains operate at speeds above 125 mph (49 CFR 213.347(a)). Additionally, if train operation is projected at FRA track class 7 (111 - 125mph) an application must be made to the FRA for approval of the type of warning/barrier system. The regulation does not specify the type of system, but allows the petitioner to propose a suitable system for FRA review.
In 1998, the FRA issued an Order of Particular Applicability for high-speed rail service on the Northeast Corridor. In the Order, the FRA set a maximum operating speed of 80 mph over any highway-rail crossing where only conventional warning systems are in place and a maximum operating speed of 95 mph where 4-quadrant gates and presence detection are provided and tied into the signal system. Grade crossings are prohibited on the Northeast Corridor if maximum operating speeds exceed 95 mph.

I added the bold. I wonder if New York state even bothered to see what types of warnings the FRA would accept for their supposed 125 mph parts or if, like the rest of this debacle, just decided to do what they wanted to do and thought everybody else would go along with it.

George,

I can't speak as to whether anyone, be it NY State, Amtrak, or CSX ever filed the proper paperwork, or for that matter if they needed to since I'm not sure where the 125 MPH stretches were planned and whether they included crossings. I do know that Amtrak in conjunction with CSX, and dozens of local policemen, did conduct high-speed tests with the first Turboliner-III trainset prior to its entering revenue service. And the train did indeed max out at 125 MPH for a few stretches, but again for all I know it was only doing 110 at the crossings.

I suspect however that complying with the regulations, as in finding the money to comply, probably led to the undoing of reaching the 125 MPH specs. But enough work was done to get at least two or three 110 MPH sections. I don't think that they rack up lots of miles at 110 MPH, if I had to hazard a guess I'd say no more than 10 miles at that rate of speed. There were other areas that were also improved to 90 MPH, however none of that really seems to have helped much as the running times between ALB and NYP have remained constant at 2 hours and 25 minutes. So either they lost time else where on the line between 2000 and today, or Amtrak has added padding.

 

[AlanB]

3 were completed with 1 in conditional service.

Actually two of the three trainsets saw revenue service, even though between them they only covered one run per day. The third set was supposed to allow Amtrak to cover a second run, but then they got the idea of cutting up that third set to add cars to the first two sets, so I don't think that a second run was ever added to the Turboliner's rotation.

Shortly after that decision, was when Amtrak decided to pull all three trainsets from service.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

3 were completed with 1 in conditional service.

Actually two of the three trainsets saw revenue service, even though between them they only covered one run per day. The third set was supposed to allow Amtrak to cover a second run, but then they got the idea of cutting up that third set to add cars to the first two sets, so I don't think that a second run was ever added to the Turboliner's rotation.

Shortly after that decision, was when Amtrak decided to pull all three trainsets from service.

They never added cars to rebuilt sets all 3 are sitting in Beas Del in their 5 car configuration.

The second set only made one trip due to paper screwup in renselear, only one set was conditionaly accepted.

The other two completed sets did not get ok from engineering to be used.

 

[Chris J.]

Gas-turbine engines...? I was figuring the refurbishment would have meant switching to some sort of diesel. No wonder they discontinued them/

The Turbo power cars could never support a diesel and cooling system, the construction is simply to light for such a powerplant.

Could they be converted to run off electric power only (only I guess there'd be nowhere to run them in that case)?

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

Gas-turbine engines...? I was figuring the refurbishment would have meant switching to some sort of diesel. No wonder they discontinued them/

The Turbo power cars could never support a diesel and cooling system, the construction is simply to light for such a powerplant.

Could they be converted to run off electric power only (only I guess there'd be nowhere to run them in that case)?

Take out the turbines, stick a pantograph on them and use them as EMUs on the NEC. Seems like it would be the best solution, shouldn't be too hard since they already have electric equipment. Might want to add some traction motors or replace the existing ones with stronger ones to boost performance.

 

[Sam Damon]

Take out the turbines, stick a pantograph on them and use them as EMUs on the NEC. Seems like it would be the best solution, shouldn't be too hard since they already have electric equipment. Might want to add some traction motors or replace the existing ones with stronger ones to boost performance.

There are problems with this approach as well. First, you're dealing with decades-old equipment (albeit rehabbed). Second, even if one took out the turbines, I'm not sure there would be enough room for the electrical bits required (transformer and IGBT inverters).

Probably the best thing to happen to them would be to send them to museums.

 

[George Harris]

Nothing is ever completely useless. It can always be used as a bad example.

10 miles at 90 mph: 6 minutes 40 seconds

10 miles at 110 mph, 5 minutes 27.3 seconds

However, part of this 10 miles is spent in acceleration and braking so the savings is actually less. So, for every 10 miles that you can raise from 90 mph to 110 mph, you can reduce your schedule by about 1 minute.

 

[AlanB]

Take out the turbines, stick a pantograph on them and use them as EMUs on the NEC. Seems like it would be the best solution, shouldn't be too hard since they already have electric equipment. Might want to add some traction motors or replace the existing ones with stronger ones to boost performance.

There are problems with this approach as well. First, you're dealing with decades-old equipment (albeit rehabbed). Second, even if one took out the turbines, I'm not sure there would be enough room for the electrical bits required (transformer and IGBT inverters).

Probably the best thing to happen to them would be to send them to museums.

They already have electrical bits in them, since they can run on third rail power. They would need some new "bits" to use cat power, in addition to pantographs.

But why go to all that trouble and expense for a trainset that is already past its prime?

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Shame on you Alan. Have you forgotten that the majority of Amtraks fleet is past its prime? :lol:

 

[Dutchrailnut]

The Turbo's have a Hydraulic drive with turbo or traction motor as input, they do not have a electric propulsion system.

So no yhey can not be converted to electric drive, they will be converted to a pile of ruble pretty soon.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

The Turbo's have a Hydraulic drive with turbo or traction motor as input, they do not have a electric propulsion system.So no yhey can not be converted to electric drive, they will be converted to a pile of ruble pretty soon.

They have a secondary electric 3rd rail system to be able to enter Penn-Station in Manhattan, only electrics are allowed to enter the station because there is no system in place to effectively remove diesel fumes from the tunnels.

 

[PRR 60]

The Turbo's have a Hydraulic drive with turbo or traction motor as input, they do not have a electric propulsion system.So no yhey can not be converted to electric drive, they will be converted to a pile of ruble pretty soon.

They have a secondary electric 3rd rail system to be able to enter Penn-Station in Manhattan, only electrics are allowed to enter the station because there is no system in place to effectively remove diesel fumes from the tunnels.

What Dutch is saying is that it is not a direct electric drive in the sense that an electric traction motor moves the train. With the Turboliners the electric motor only provided a means to turn the conventional drive for the short period the train could not use the turbine power. It was in no way a means of powering the train in any real fashion.

Sadly, the Turboliners were an idea whose time never came. It was like those futuristic concept cars at the Auto Show that never seem to actually get built. Except, in this case, they did. It was a dog that used what is essentially jet fuel, and lots of it. So, not only was the train unlike anything else in captivity (a maintenance nightmare), it required fuel that would have been easy to supply at LaGuardia Airport but not so easy at Sunnyside Yard.

Speaking of cars, anyone remember the Chrysler Turbine Car of the 1960's? I do and I saw one at the Auto Show way back then. I wanted one in the worst way. The thing sounded like an F15 taxiing for take off. I fantasized about tooling up and down the local strip in that screaming beauty. Pretty cool to a gullible teenage (gullible and teenager are redundant terms). Fortunately, most teenagers have no money, especially me, so no turbine car.

Here is a neat link:

http://www.turbinecar.com/top.swf

 

[GG-1]

Speaking of cars, anyone remember the Chrysler Turbine Car of the 1960's? I do and I saw one at the Auto Show way back then. I wanted one in the worst way. The thing sounded like an F15 taxiing for take off. I fantasized about tooling up and down the local strip in that screaming beauty. Pretty cool to a gullible teenage (gullible and teenager are redundant terms). Fortunately, most teenagers have no money, especially me, so no turbine car.

Aloha

I sure do, I waited in line over 3 hours to drive one at the NYC Worlds Fair, back then. Total time in car 4 minutes, with a staffer beside me made me feel like driver's ed all over again. Beside the feeling of sitting in a new car for the first time was strange to see the TAC increase to (whatever high number) before car moved and actual acceleration was through transmission. I also entered the drawing to get one of the test cars but no luck so 4 minutes is my total time in a turbine car, dang it.