Jump to content




Help Support AmtrakTrains.com by donating using the link above or becoming a Supporting Member.

Photo

New Siemens Charger locomotive.


  • Please log in to reply
946 replies to this topic

#41 MattW

MattW

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,687 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:East of Atlanta, GA

Posted 29 October 2015 - 03:38 PM

 

answer is no, the arching of a single unit at speeds over 60 mph would damage locomotive.

That is exactly what I was thinking. They will run on third rail only in tunnels and will fire up their prime mover as soon they are out in daylight.

 

And BTW, I have no idea why this is being discussed in a thread about Chargers, since they are  currently not dual mode, and there is no certainty at all that the final dual mode order from anyone will be based on the Charger, since there are several possible candidates around.

 

At risk of taking us further off topic, didn't the British run locomotives off third rail at greater than 60mph? Did the Eurostar, when it had a section of third rail to traverse, run more than 60mph on third rail?


Forum's official broken record about expanded Georgia passenger service!

#42 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,946 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 29 October 2015 - 03:43 PM

Eurostars ran at 100mph, but they had many collection shoes spread out over 4 cars as I recall. That is what makes the huge difference since the arcing due to gapping is reduced considerably. The big problem was that their current draw was so huge that initially they kept tripping the substation circuit breakers, until they could get them fine tuned to distinguish between a short circuit and a Eurostar. Of course now there are no Eurostar sets left with any third rail equipment in them anymore AFAIK.

 

BTW, even LIRR and MNRR EMUs operate way above 60mph using third rail. The issue is short locomotives running off of third rail with few pickup shoes not too far apart.



#43 Dutchrailnut

Dutchrailnut

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brookfield, Connecticut, USA
  • Interests:Ships, Planes, Trains

Posted 29 October 2015 - 07:05 PM

Running a locomotive trough a gap, be it at a switch or at section switches for third rail is like pulling arc on arc welder.

on arc welder it is about 130 amps at 60 volts, a third rail locomotive does same at 3500 amp and 770 volt.

the arc can jump to wheels, bearings , brake rigging etc 

 

jis is correct the Metro-North MU cars run at 80 mph in third rail territory and are restricted by time table for 100 mph but each pair is 170 foot long is only about 2000 hp and has 4 shoes on each side.

quite a difference from a 65 foot locomotive at 3200 hp.



#44 Dutchrailnut

Dutchrailnut

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brookfield, Connecticut, USA
  • Interests:Ships, Planes, Trains

Posted 29 October 2015 - 07:12 PM

and let me add that the cars take a huge beating too, they were designed for continuous HEP, but on third rail electric each gap the HEP shuts off and has to cycle back on, the cars were never designed for that.

imagine shutting the HVAC system down and back on 20 times in 10 minutes leaving from platform to straight rail in tunnel.

you can imagine the failure rate of AC systems.



#45 cirdan

cirdan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,950 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 October 2015 - 03:51 AM

Eurostars ran at 100mph, but they had many collection shoes spread out over 4 cars as I recall. That is what makes the huge difference since the arcing due to gapping is reduced considerably. The big problem was that their current draw was so huge that initially they kept tripping the substation circuit breakers, until they could get them fine tuned to distinguish between a short circuit and a Eurostar. Of course now there are no Eurostar sets left with any third rail equipment in them anymore AFAIK.
 
BTW, even LIRR and MNRR EMUs operate way above 60mph using third rail. The issue is short locomotives running off of third rail with few pickup shoes not too far apart.


It wasn't just Eurostars. The 4REPs that were built specifically for the Waterloo to Bournemouth service could do 100mph as could the Wessex 442s that replaced them (actually the motors were recycled into the newer trains, the class 73 locomotives incidentally also use the same motor type). I don't know how theys handled arcing but think that once away from the major junctions and into high speed territorry, you tended to get very long sections of conductor rail so there wouldn't have been many instanncesof arcing while at high speed. Also, drivers were trained not to draw heavy current while traversing gaps.

If I remember correctly, the 4REPs lighting ran off battery, so this wouldn't have been afected by gaps. They had diners in those trains too (hence the R in REP, REP = restaurant & electro-pneumatic brake), and am not sure how these were powered. They didn't have HVAC, but the 442s do.

Edited by cirdan, 30 October 2015 - 03:58 AM.


#46 Eric S

Eric S

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,330 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milwaukee

Posted 06 November 2015 - 08:01 PM

I think this is new, but perhaps I've just overlooked or forgotten it - but it appears that California and Illinois have added on to the Charger order with CA ordering 14 more and IL ordering 12 more. International Railway Journal is reporting such in an article dated Friday, November 16, 2015 http://www.railjourn...tric-locos.html


Edited by Eric S, 06 November 2015 - 08:01 PM.


#47 Dutchrailnut

Dutchrailnut

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brookfield, Connecticut, USA
  • Interests:Ships, Planes, Trains

Posted 06 November 2015 - 08:05 PM

sure seems the Charger is outselling the F125 by 4 to 1 maybe 5 to 1.



#48 neroden

neroden

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,144 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ithaca, NY
  • Interests:Please feel free to moderate my posts

Posted 06 November 2015 - 09:56 PM

Siemens has the absolute best reputation worldwide among railway rolling stock & locomotive builders at the moment. (I'm sure fortunes will change over time.) I'm not surprised they're selling a lot right now.

I just noticed something interesting. MARC is ordering Siemens Chargers to run underneath Amtrak's wires on the NEC. This puts them in an *interesting position*. If they manage to get Amtrak to offer them a better deal on electricity costs and maintenance, they can switch to electric and *they have a market to sell the Chargers to*, because Amtrak can certainly use more of them. If they'd picked a different diesel loco, like the ones they already have, there wouldn't be much of a resale market because nobody wants to maintain something which is nothing like the rest of their fleet..

California's order was basically expected: they had not ordered close to enough for planned expansion. This gets them up to enough to replace everything and allow for planned expanded service.

The Illinois order is more interesting. The original plan was to replace the motive power for every single corridor out of Chicago and it seemed like enough but with no spares. But this is a very significant additional number, which should not only cover spares and the Moline and Rockford services, but leave extras. I can't think of any more service expansions planned in Illinois which would need more locomotives -- is Illinois planning to lease some of these to Michigan for their proposed service expansions?

The order is now up to 66 including 8 for MARC, or 58 without.

This is a substantial addition to Amtrak motive power. I think the Dash-8s will probably be removed from service, or they might continue a strange life as very-fuel-hungry switchers. I'm not sure how many Chargers will replace F59PHIs (which will probably be retired) versus how many Chargers will replace P42s in the corridors (allowing more P42s to run in long-distance service). I guess this is basically a question of how many F59PHIs will be retired. F59PHIs are currently used mostly in California and Washington State and both states are ordering lots of Chargers. The F59PHIs might all be retired, in which case the order so far wouldn't actually free up very many P42s. But on the other hand Amtrak still has to run F59PHIs because of North Carolina, so California might keep a bunch around....

Edited by neroden, 06 November 2015 - 10:21 PM.

--Nathanael--

Please feel free to moderate my posts.

#49 Eric S

Eric S

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,330 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milwaukee

Posted 06 November 2015 - 10:12 PM

Total shot in the dark guess here, but did the original Midwest portion of the order include locomotives for the Hiawatha? Not that anywhere near 12 locomotives are needed for that service, but that *could* explain a few of them. (Although Hiawatha costs are usually a 75% WI/25% IL split, so...)



#50 Eric S

Eric S

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,330 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milwaukee

Posted 06 November 2015 - 10:18 PM

Here's another article, this one from the Sacramento Bee: http://www.sacbee.co...le43452282.html

 

And a link to the Caltrans press release: http://www.dot.ca.go...015/15pr114.htm

 

The CA units are expected to enter service between July 2018 and February 2019.

 

A quick google search did not turn up an IDOT press release.



#51 afigg

afigg

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,876 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 06 November 2015 - 11:41 PM

The Illinois order is more interesting. The original plan was to replace the motive power for every single corridor out of Chicago and it seemed like enough but with no spares. But this is a very significant additional number, which should not only cover spares and the Moline and Rockford services, but leave extras. I can't think of any more service expansions planned in Illinois which would need more locomotives -- is Illinois planning to lease some of these to Michigan for their proposed service expansions?

The order is now up to 66 including 8 for MARC, or 58 without.

This is a substantial addition to Amtrak motive power. I think the Dash-8s will probably be removed from service, or they might continue a strange life as very-fuel-hungry switchers. I'm not sure how many Chargers will replace F59PHIs (which will probably be retired) versus how many Chargers will replace P42s in the corridors (allowing more P42s to run in long-distance service). I guess this is basically a question of how many F59PHIs will be retired. F59PHIs are currently used mostly in California and Washington State and both states are ordering lots of Chargers. The F59PHIs might all be retired, in which case the order so far wouldn't actually free up very many P42s. But on the other hand Amtrak still has to run F59PHIs because of North Carolina, so California might keep a bunch around....

The Illinois option order of 12 Chargers was stated in the September status report by the Next Gen equipment pool committee. So that is not new info. But the 12 units are not necessarily going to Illinois corridor services. IL DOT is acting as the buyer for the Midwest joint consortium for the Chargers and Nippon-Sharyo bi-level cars, so the 12 additional locomotives are presumably going to the joint equipment pool. Don't know whether the 3 states in the consortium are paying for part or all the costs for the 12 units or if federal funds are paying for them.

 

As for the F59PHIs, why would Amtrak retire them? The F59s were delivered in 1998, so they are younger than some of the P-42s. I doubt that California or Washington State would keep any F59s around once they have all the new Chargers in service. The states will own the Chargers, so they don;t have to pay Amtrak capital equipment costs. The F59s might end up on the east coast as corridor diesels for the Virginia Regionals, maybe the Vermonter and the Downeaster.

 

The interesting thing is that according to the recently posted Capital Investment Plan for FY2016-FY2020 for state corridors services by the 514 Capital Equipment Subcommittee, 5 out of the 21 F59PHIs are not in a state of good repair and are scheduled for overhauls in FY16 and FY17 to return to service. The states (CA?) are paying for the overhauls, but I wonder if the overhaul plans might change with the order for additional Chargers. BTW, the Capital Investment Plan for FY16-FY20 posted on the subcommittee website has a very detailed breakdown of what the states and Amtrak expect to spend for equipment maintenance and capital charges over the next 5 years. 



#52 Fan Railer

Fan Railer

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 862 posts

Posted 07 November 2015 - 02:38 AM

Unless my math is wrong, based on the numbers, California (with the option) is only getting 20 Chargers to replace 21 F59PHIs; I presume they're going to continue borrowing Amtrak locomotives for the foreseeable future?



#53 afigg

afigg

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,876 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 07 November 2015 - 10:13 AM

Unless my math is wrong, based on the numbers, California (with the option) is only getting 20 Chargers to replace 21 F59PHIs; I presume they're going to continue borrowing Amtrak locomotives for the foreseeable future?

The 21 F59PHIs are used in both CA and the Cascades corridor. I think 15 are used in CA. CA got 6 Chargers in the baseline order to expand service, the option order for 14 presumably replaces the 15 California F-59PHis. And not all of those 15 may be in service, if 5 out of 21 total are waiting on overhauls.

 

The breakdown of the baseline order is 21 for the Mid-West Coalition, 5 + 3 options for Washington State, 6 for California. So the Midwest Coalition buying 12 additional Chargers will make for 33 locomotives for the IL, MI. MO corridor services. BTW, we do have a long running thread on what became the Siemens Charger contract: RFP released for 35 Next Gen Locomotives for those looking for more info.

 

Edit: Checked and Washington State is buying 8 Siemens Chargers, so the state is exercising the baseline option for 3 units. (Rail - Amtrak Cascades New Locomotives)


Edited by afigg, 07 November 2015 - 11:11 AM.


#54 Andrew

Andrew

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 358 posts

Posted 07 November 2015 - 10:48 AM

It would seem strange if the F59PHI locomotives get retired--they would only be around 20 years old!

 

These new Chargers are supposed to have a minimum service life of 25 years, and possibly 30 years with good maintenance. 



#55 Eric S

Eric S

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,330 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milwaukee

Posted 07 November 2015 - 11:26 AM

Did we ever break down how many locomotives are needed for the existing Midwest corridor services? I looked through the other thread that afigg linked to and didn't see anything - perhaps it was in a thread about the bilevel cars?

 

Would this be accurate for the current number of trainsets used?

 

2 CHI-CDL

1 CHI-GRR

2 CHI-MKE*

3 CHI-PNT

1 CHI-PTH

2 CHI-QCY

4 CHI-STL

2 KCY-STL

 

17 trainsets

 

I would imagine the CHI-PNT and CHI-STL trainsets will use 2 locomotives, one on each end, as they see or will see the longest stretches of 110mph running. So that is now accounting for 24 locomotives. Perhaps a second loco for the CHI-PTH trainset as it too runs at 110mph? So 25?

 

Now, the Hiawatha. There have been rumors and rumblings that WI might join in the bilevel car order but so far there's been nothing announced. So, I'm assuming for now that it will continue to run with Amfleet/Horizon equipment. But perhaps it will receive new locomotives. Will the cabbages be replaced by a second locomotive, instead of some sort of cab car? Just idle thoughts for now, but that could account for up to 27 locomotives, if my math and guesses are correct.

 

Anyway, please correct anything here that I've missed or misstated.



#56 PerRock

PerRock

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,653 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ann Arbor, MI
  • Interests:Passenger Rail, Auran Trainz, Traveling, Graphic Design

Posted 07 November 2015 - 11:35 AM

 

The Illinois order is more interesting. The original plan was to replace the motive power for every single corridor out of Chicago and it seemed like enough but with no spares. But this is a very significant additional number, which should not only cover spares and the Moline and Rockford services, but leave extras. I can't think of any more service expansions planned in Illinois which would need more locomotives -- is Illinois planning to lease some of these to Michigan for their proposed service expansions?

The order is now up to 66 including 8 for MARC, or 58 without.

This is a substantial addition to Amtrak motive power. I think the Dash-8s will probably be removed from service, or they might continue a strange life as very-fuel-hungry switchers. I'm not sure how many Chargers will replace F59PHIs (which will probably be retired) versus how many Chargers will replace P42s in the corridors (allowing more P42s to run in long-distance service). I guess this is basically a question of how many F59PHIs will be retired. F59PHIs are currently used mostly in California and Washington State and both states are ordering lots of Chargers. The F59PHIs might all be retired, in which case the order so far wouldn't actually free up very many P42s. But on the other hand Amtrak still has to run F59PHIs because of North Carolina, so California might keep a bunch around....

The Illinois option order of 12 Chargers was stated in the September status report by the Next Gen equipment pool committee. So that is not new info. But the 12 units are not necessarily going to Illinois corridor services. IL DOT is acting as the buyer for the Midwest joint consortium for the Chargers and Nippon-Sharyo bi-level cars, so the 12 additional locomotives are presumably going to the joint equipment pool. Don't know whether the 3 states in the consortium are paying for part or all the costs for the 12 units or if federal funds are paying for them.

 

As for the F59PHIs, why would Amtrak retire them? The F59s were delivered in 1998, so they are younger than some of the P-42s. I doubt that California or Washington State would keep any F59s around once they have all the new Chargers in service. The states will own the Chargers, so they don;t have to pay Amtrak capital equipment costs. The F59s might end up on the east coast as corridor diesels for the Virginia Regionals, maybe the Vermonter and the Downeaster.

 

The interesting thing is that according to the recently posted Capital Investment Plan for FY2016-FY2020 for state corridors services by the 514 Capital Equipment Subcommittee, 5 out of the 21 F59PHIs are not in a state of good repair and are scheduled for overhauls in FY16 and FY17 to return to service. The states (CA?) are paying for the overhauls, but I wonder if the overhaul plans might change with the order for additional Chargers. BTW, the Capital Investment Plan for FY16-FY20 posted on the subcommittee website has a very detailed breakdown of what the states and Amtrak expect to spend for equipment maintenance and capital charges over the next 5 years. 

 

 

I'm not certain about the California F59PHIs*, but some of the Cascades F59PHIs are owned by WADOT, not Amtrak so WA would have to sell them to Amtrak in order for them to show up somewhere else. My guess is that they'll be sold off to other agencies.

 

*I think all the California ones are owned by CA, but someone else will have to verify that.

 

peter


Given the choice; I fly Amtrak.
 
http://www.amtraktrainz.com

#57 A Voice

A Voice

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 743 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2015 - 12:12 PM

 

 

The Illinois order is more interesting. The original plan was to replace the motive power for every single corridor out of Chicago and it seemed like enough but with no spares. But this is a very significant additional number, which should not only cover spares and the Moline and Rockford services, but leave extras. I can't think of any more service expansions planned in Illinois which would need more locomotives -- is Illinois planning to lease some of these to Michigan for their proposed service expansions?

The order is now up to 66 including 8 for MARC, or 58 without.

This is a substantial addition to Amtrak motive power. I think the Dash-8s will probably be removed from service, or they might continue a strange life as very-fuel-hungry switchers. I'm not sure how many Chargers will replace F59PHIs (which will probably be retired) versus how many Chargers will replace P42s in the corridors (allowing more P42s to run in long-distance service). I guess this is basically a question of how many F59PHIs will be retired. F59PHIs are currently used mostly in California and Washington State and both states are ordering lots of Chargers. The F59PHIs might all be retired, in which case the order so far wouldn't actually free up very many P42s. But on the other hand Amtrak still has to run F59PHIs because of North Carolina, so California might keep a bunch around....

The Illinois option order of 12 Chargers was stated in the September status report by the Next Gen equipment pool committee. So that is not new info. But the 12 units are not necessarily going to Illinois corridor services. IL DOT is acting as the buyer for the Midwest joint consortium for the Chargers and Nippon-Sharyo bi-level cars, so the 12 additional locomotives are presumably going to the joint equipment pool. Don't know whether the 3 states in the consortium are paying for part or all the costs for the 12 units or if federal funds are paying for them.

 

As for the F59PHIs, why would Amtrak retire them? The F59s were delivered in 1998, so they are younger than some of the P-42s. I doubt that California or Washington State would keep any F59s around once they have all the new Chargers in service. The states will own the Chargers, so they don;t have to pay Amtrak capital equipment costs. The F59s might end up on the east coast as corridor diesels for the Virginia Regionals, maybe the Vermonter and the Downeaster.

 

The interesting thing is that according to the recently posted Capital Investment Plan for FY2016-FY2020 for state corridors services by the 514 Capital Equipment Subcommittee, 5 out of the 21 F59PHIs are not in a state of good repair and are scheduled for overhauls in FY16 and FY17 to return to service. The states (CA?) are paying for the overhauls, but I wonder if the overhaul plans might change with the order for additional Chargers. BTW, the Capital Investment Plan for FY16-FY20 posted on the subcommittee website has a very detailed breakdown of what the states and Amtrak expect to spend for equipment maintenance and capital charges over the next 5 years. 

 

 

I'm not certain about the California F59PHIs*, but some of the Cascades F59PHIs are owned by WADOT, not Amtrak so WA would have to sell them to Amtrak in order for them to show up somewhere else. My guess is that they'll be sold off to other agencies.

 

*I think all the California ones are owned by CA, but someone else will have to verify that.

 

peter

 

 

According to the On-Track-On-Line Roster, 44 F59 locomotives are listed; Of these, eight belong to North Carolina (not all F59PHI) and fifteen to Caltrans.  Amtrak shows as having 21 F59PHI units, which should include any units used in Washington state (though state ownership is not described).  



#58 west point

west point

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,195 posts

Posted 07 November 2015 - 12:26 PM

On page 23 of the Amtrak FY 2016 budget request shows both NC and California owning F-59s but not any for Washington state.



#59 neroden

neroden

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,144 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ithaca, NY
  • Interests:Please feel free to moderate my posts

Posted 07 November 2015 - 12:29 PM

Did we ever break down how many locomotives are needed for the existing Midwest corridor services? I looked through the other thread that afigg linked to and didn't see anything - perhaps it was in a thread about the bilevel cars?
 
Would this be accurate for the current number of trainsets used?

I'm not sure (maybe an insider would know better, hint hint) but I was also coming up with numbers in the range of 17-20, which means that 33 for the Midwest is a lot of extras.

I'm pretty sure Amtrak intends to run all the corridor trains with only one locomotive; they're specified to be powerful enough and anything else would be waste.

Add 2 for the planned Moline-Chicago service, 1 for the planned Rockford-Chicago service (or 2 for Dubuque), and 2 for planned increases in Chicago-St. Louis frequency, and 33 is still a lot of extras.
Add 1 for planned second Grand Rapids frequency and 3 for additional planned Chicago-Detroit frequencies, and now you're getting into the right range.
Michigan is also talking about Grand Rapids-Lansing-Dearborn, which would add another 1 or 2.

So I think Illinois *has* to be buying on behalf of Michigan.

----

F59PHI or F59PH are used routinely by Amtrak in three places right now:
-- California: some are owned by California, some not
-- Washington State: *all* will be replaced by Chargers
-- North Carolina: they own theirs

Other agencies using F59PHI or F59PH are Metrolink, Coaster, Sounder, TRE, AMT (Montreal), West Coast Express (Vancouver), and GO Transit, which is phasing them out.

If any F59PHIs are kept by or for Amtrak, I'd bet they're going to be kept in California, where Metrolink and Coaster use them extensively, or in North Carolina. Does Amtrak really want to keep parts and maintenance expertise in Chicago or Beech Grove or Bear or Hialeah for an oddball fleet of 21 engines which they currently don't service? I think they don't. Amtrak has relatively little EMD equipment now and it seems unlikely that keeping spare parts and maintenance for them is cost-effective for Amtrak; selling them to an agency which still uses lots of them would make more sense. (Amtrak's remaining EMD equipment consists of F59PHIs, ancient switchers from 1947-1976 which are due for replacement anyway, and three GP38-H3.)

The thing which has been most confusing me lately is California's plans. I'm assuming they'll retire their two Dash-8s, but I'm not sure what they're planning to do with their F59PHIs. They could replace all of them, replace some of them, or replace none of them. They could sell excess to Metrolink or Coaster.

Edited by neroden, 07 November 2015 - 12:51 PM.

--Nathanael--

Please feel free to moderate my posts.

#60 Eric S

Eric S

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,330 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milwaukee

Posted 07 November 2015 - 12:36 PM

 

Did we ever break down how many locomotives are needed for the existing Midwest corridor services? I looked through the other thread that afigg linked to and didn't see anything - perhaps it was in a thread about the bilevel cars?
 
Would this be accurate for the current number of trainsets used?

I'm not sure, but I was also coming up with numbers in the range of 17-20, which means that 33 is a lot of extras.

I'm pretty sure Amtrak intends to run all the corridor trains with only one locomotive; they're specified to be powerful enough.

 

 

Ah, yes, forgot that the intention was NOT to run with two locomotives. So, still around 17 trainsets/locomotives for existing services. Perhaps 2 more for Moline, assuming that happens. And maybe another 1 for Rockford if that ever happens. Still, like you said, in the 17-20ish range.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users