Jump to content




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

Photo

CUS electrification


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#41 brianpmcdonnell17

brianpmcdonnell17

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 710 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 August 2017 - 07:56 AM

Who told you third rail is cheaper? Besides the fact that Thirdrail would be most offended :) , that is actually not true for mainline electrification in this century. That is why no one does it unless they are forced to by some other factors.
 
Making all locos dual mode is lunacy. Carrying around the extra weight and incurring the extra cost of acquisition and maintenance on all locos so that they can run 3 miles on the other mode out of their 200 to 2,000 mile run is crazy. It is easier and more cost effective to put in all the duct work and exhaust fans necessary to suck out all fumes form the train shed.

Do you know why the LIRR and Metro-North predominantly chose third rail? It seems odd that they are the only commuter rail operators in the US to use it. Also, why do almost all rapid transit railroads use it? Is third rail more efficient when high speeds are not achieved (such as on rapid transit lines)?

Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

Routes Travelled: CL WAS-CHI, Card. CHI-WAS, Caro. CLT-RGH, CS SJC-LAX, Cre. BAL-ATL, EB MSP-CHI, ES NYG/NYP-NFL, LSL BOS-ALB, ML ALB-NYP, NER FBG-RVR+WAS-BOS, PS LAX-ANA, Pen. NYP-PGH, Pie. RGH-CLT, SM ORL-NYP, SS FTL-WAS
New Routes: LSL NYP-CHI, CZ CHI-RIC, CS SJC-SEA, EB SEA-MSP, SS FTL-MIA


#42 Metra Electric Rider

Metra Electric Rider

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 527 posts

Posted 16 August 2017 - 09:06 AM

 

Who told you third rail is cheaper? Besides the fact that Thirdrail would be most offended :) , that is actually not true for mainline electrification in this century. That is why no one does it unless they are forced to by some other factors.
 
Making all locos dual mode is lunacy. Carrying around the extra weight and incurring the extra cost of acquisition and maintenance on all locos so that they can run 3 miles on the other mode out of their 200 to 2,000 mile run is crazy. It is easier and more cost effective to put in all the duct work and exhaust fans necessary to suck out all fumes form the train shed.

Do you know why the LIRR and Metro-North predominantly chose third rail? It seems odd that they are the only commuter rail operators in the US to use it. Also, why do almost all rapid transit railroads use it? Is third rail more efficient when high speeds are not achieved (such as on rapid transit lines)?

Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

 

The southeastern England electrification was also done with third rail, even "main lines." It's been my understanding that once you get over about 100 MPH it becomes problematic and that constant tension catenary which is what high-speed rail uses is superior. I think it was probably done because that was the available and state of the art technology. Heck, there was even a Chicago-NY high speed line planned with third rail at the turn of the last century.

 

When the IC electrified their commuter lines in the 20's it was catenary rather than third rail.


SJ - Norra Stambanan, Nordvästra stambanan, Södra stambanan, Dalabanan

NSB- Bergensbanen, Kongsvingerbanen, Rørosbanen, Dovrebanen, Flåmsbana, Roa–Hønefossbanen

Amtrak - Floridian, San Francisco Zephyr, Southwest Limited, Illini, State House


#43 Hotblack Desiato

Hotblack Desiato

    Lead Service Attendant

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 142 posts

Posted 16 August 2017 - 10:14 AM

 

As most members on here do, I doubt every train will become Viewliner in the near future. Such a move would require a huge car order. In addition, Amtrak would either have to deal with mixed consists or convert entire trains at once as the cars have different floor heights than Superliners. Add this to the potential platform length and height issues and the lack of a sightseer lounge on Western tourist-oriented trains and such a move makes little to no sense.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

While I agree, he did his research. Superliners are the best cars IMHO for passengers but apparantly crews hate them, though I do think it's possible to chop a SSL and make it into a good single level car, putting the cafe where the stairs and wet bar are located.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

 

If a conductor was saying that Amtrak was converting everything to Viewliner, I can assure you he either did no research at all, or his "research" consisted of listening to a drunken lunatic talking in his sleep (or something of comparable credibility), because there is no such plan in the works.  I'm sure *some* crews don't like Superliners, but that doesn't apply to all crews.  For the record, when the first Viewliner diner was introduced a couple decades back, crews didn't like it either.  Anything (other than the existence of stairs) that is really a problem for crews working those cars could be worked out in a revised design, provided they seek appropriate input.

 

Superliners have a major advantage over the standard single-level fleet in that they are ADA compliant without the need for high-level platforms or lifts at every station.  They also have a bit more capacity overall, and so require fewer cars to carry the same number of passengers.

 

It's certainly possible to make a sightseer-lounge-esque single-level car, but there aren't currently any plans to do so with Amtrak's fleet.

 

Sent from my LAPTOP COMPUTER using a web browser



#44 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,309 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 16 August 2017 - 11:16 AM

 

Who told you third rail is cheaper? Besides the fact that Thirdrail would be most offended :) , that is actually not true for mainline electrification in this century. That is why no one does it unless they are forced to by some other factors.
 
Making all locos dual mode is lunacy. Carrying around the extra weight and incurring the extra cost of acquisition and maintenance on all locos so that they can run 3 miles on the other mode out of their 200 to 2,000 mile run is crazy. It is easier and more cost effective to put in all the duct work and exhaust fans necessary to suck out all fumes form the train shed.

Do you know why the LIRR and Metro-North predominantly chose third rail? It seems odd that they are the only commuter rail operators in the US to use it. Also, why do almost all rapid transit railroads use it? Is third rail more efficient when high speeds are not achieved (such as on rapid transit lines)?

Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

There was a point in time when OHE was more expensive to maintain and feed, and there are applications even now where that may be the case. But electrifying CUS is not one of them since it is predominately serving loco hauled trains.

 

If you look at even rapid transit lines of the nature of RER being built today, it is not at all unusual for them to use overhead, even using ceiling rails in tunnels - case in point e.g. the brand spanking new Elizabeth line (Cross Rail) in London. What are today known as People Mover systems which tend to use some variation of third rail, often don't even run on steel rails - e.g. the VAL systems.

 

But that point is moot since Chicago Union Station does not serve any rapid transit line. It serves only main line. Main line loco hauled trains usually have concentrated power feed needs, for which third rails with low voltage requiring extremely high current feeds through third rail shoes, making them uniquely poor choice.


Edited by jis, 16 August 2017 - 01:39 PM.


#45 west point

west point

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,275 posts

Posted 16 August 2017 - 12:52 PM

Over head electric for high level boarding subways may not have been chosen due to the need for slightly higher clearances. So tunnels would need more excavation spoil to meet those clearances. 3000 V overhead AC or DC might have been a great compromise to reduce the number of substations ? Low level boarding such as Chicago seems to be a receipt for disaster using 3rd rail ?

12.5 or 25 kV AC overhead reduces the need for close to station DC 3rd rail substations.

#46 Metra Electric Rider

Metra Electric Rider

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 527 posts

Posted 16 August 2017 - 02:15 PM

Another reason against third rail electrification is that, one assumes anyway(s), is that Metra would probably just want to start electrifying their lines rather than just the station, is that much of Metra's system runs at grade with frequent pedestrian crossings (likely one of the reasons the IC went with catenary - street level running). Ever so often you hear about people being electrocuted at the grade section of the brown line, less so with the yellow, though that has fewer street crossings and far fewer pedestrians. Another is our propensity for heavy snows and very cold weather from time to time.


SJ - Norra Stambanan, Nordvästra stambanan, Södra stambanan, Dalabanan

NSB- Bergensbanen, Kongsvingerbanen, Rørosbanen, Dovrebanen, Flåmsbana, Roa–Hønefossbanen

Amtrak - Floridian, San Francisco Zephyr, Southwest Limited, Illini, State House


#47 neroden

neroden

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,261 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ithaca, NY
  • Interests:Please feel free to moderate my posts

Posted 20 August 2017 - 10:21 AM

Do you know why the LIRR and Metro-North predominantly chose third rail? It seems odd that they are the only commuter rail operators in the US to use it. Also, why do almost all rapid transit railroads use it? Is third rail more efficient when high speeds are not achieved (such as on rapid transit lines)?


History. Those are very very old electrification systems. There were some problems with overhead line electrification (making third rail appear to have some advantages) which were solved by the 1930s.

Rapid transit systems use third rail generally to reduce the tunnel diameter relative to overhead line electrification. For short distances overhead lines lose some of their advantages, and smaller tunnels often save enough money to be worth it. For systems which are not primarily underground, this advantage disappears.

Edited by neroden, 20 August 2017 - 10:22 AM.

--Nathanael--

Please feel free to moderate my posts.

#48 Green Maned Lion

Green Maned Lion

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,856 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ
  • Interests:Sleeping

Posted 21 August 2017 - 06:29 PM

Metro North didn't choose it; they inherited it from New York Central. LIRR IIRC actually electrified some lines under state ownership. Why they maintained third rail for that and modernization periods is a bit of a mystery. It might have something to do with a tightass idiot of a Texan technical planner.
Travelled: Broadway Limited (1), Lake Shore Limited (6), Capitol Limited (7), Empire Builder (1), Southwest Chief (2), Sunset Limited (1), California Zephyr (3), Coast Starlight (2), Silver Meteor (5), Silver Star (5), Silver Palm (2), Crescent (1), Cardinal (4), Auto Train (4), Pennsylvanian (2), Palmetto (1), Acela Express (1), Empire Service (1), Northeast Regional (11), Keystone Service (1) --- Total Miles: 50,144 --- Total Trains: 61
Most important: Keep it Simple, Stupid!
Posted Image
Dream of love, dream of me, for you are my love. I love you.
Avatar and sig were done by my fiance, Corvidophile.

#49 norfolkwesternhenry

norfolkwesternhenry

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 467 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minneapolis, MN
  • Interests:Trains, Boating, Trains, Mountain Biking, Trains, Having Fun, Trains, working on my bikes, Trains, planning my next trip, PV, trains, planning trips for family

Posted 26 August 2017 - 06:53 AM

 

As most members on here do, I doubt every train will become Viewliner in the near future. Such a move would require a huge car order. In addition, Amtrak would either have to deal with mixed consists or convert entire trains at once as the cars have different floor heights than Superliners. Add this to the potential platform length and height issues and the lack of a sightseer lounge on Western tourist-oriented trains and such a move makes little to no sense.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

While I agree, he did his research. Superliners are the best cars IMHO for passengers but apparantly crews hate them, though I do think it's possible to chop a SSL and make it into a good single level car, putting the cafe where the stairs and wet bar are located.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app
 
 
If a conductor was saying that Amtrak was converting everything to Viewliner, I can assure you he either did no research at all, or his "research" consisted of listening to a drunken lunatic talking in his sleep (or something of comparable credibility), because there is no such plan in the works.  I'm sure *some* crews don't like Superliners, but that doesn't apply to all crews.  For the record, when the first Viewliner diner was introduced a couple decades back, crews didn't like it either.  Anything (other than the existence of stairs) that is really a problem for crews working those cars could be worked out in a revised design, provided they seek appropriate input.
 
Superliners have a major advantage over the standard single-level fleet in that they are ADA compliant without the need for high-level platforms or lifts at every station.  They also have a bit more capacity overall, and so require fewer cars to carry the same number of passengers.
 
It's certainly possible to make a sightseer-lounge-esque single-level car, but there aren't currently any plans to do so with Amtrak's fleet.
 
Sent from my LAPTOP COMPUTER using a web browser
While they make sense in a business world, it's much easier to evade the conductor with the bi-level design. I still think everywhere should run Superliners but I know that ain't gonna happen. I love the old Superliner design, my personal favorite Amtrak fleet, but I mean if Amtrak has the rights to the Viewliner design and can build them themselves that makes a lot of sense to standardise the fleet. The was conductor explained it seemed pretty solid and didn't SEEM like he was lying but I don't get why he would be doing that.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

Empire Builder MSP-CHI (2) CHI-MSP (2) MSP-PDX (1) MSP-CBS (5.5 H late) (1) MKE-MSP (1) MSP-SEA (1) Coast Starlate PDX-EMY (1.5H late) (1) California Zephyr DEN-SLC (1H late) (1) Hiawatha CHI-MKE (1) NE Regional WAS-BAL (1) WAS-NYP (1)WIL-WAS (1) PHL-NYP (1) Acela Express BAL-WAS (1) BOS-WAS (1) WAS-WIL (1) Late Shore (Limited service) CHI-BOS (On Time) (1) Capitol Limited WAS-CHI (1) Texas Eagle SAS-CHI (1.5 HR late, 1 HR late) (2) CHI-SAS (1) (55 min early) Wolverine DET-DER-ARB-CHI (35 Min late) (1) Cascades SEA-VAC (1) Cardinal NYP-CHI (1)
Non-Amtrak: VIA: Corridor Service Q.C.-Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto-Windsor (1) Canadian: VAC-Winnipeg 4.5 H late (1) D. C. metro, Montreal Metro, Toronto subway, Portland streetcars, BART, Metra, NYC subway, Boston subway, Twin cities Blue/Green line, SEPTA commuter rail and subway, Staten Island RR


#50 jphjaxfl

jphjaxfl

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,250 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Jacksonville, FL
  • Interests:Rail passenger advocate for modern, reliable passenger trains that will allow for business or leasure travel. I have been riding trains for over 60 years, but I am not advocating going back to what we once had, rather an updated system similar to Europe, Japan, China, India and other nations with great passenger train systems.

Posted 26 August 2017 - 07:50 AM

As most members on here do, I doubt every train will become Viewliner in the near future. Such a move would require a huge car order. In addition, Amtrak would either have to deal with mixed consists or convert entire trains at once as the cars have different floor heights than Superliners. Add this to the potential platform length and height issues and the lack of a sightseer lounge on Western tourist-oriented trains and such a move makes little to no sense.
Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

While I agree, he did his research. Superliners are the best cars IMHO for passengers but apparantly crews hate them, though I do think it's possible to chop a SSL and make it into a good single level car, putting the cafe where the stairs and wet bar are located.
Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app
 
If a conductor was saying that Amtrak was converting everything to Viewliner, I can assure you he either did no research at all, or his "research" consisted of listening to a drunken lunatic talking in his sleep (or something of comparable credibility), because there is no such plan in the works.  I'm sure *some* crews don't like Superliners, but that doesn't apply to all crews.  For the record, when the first Viewliner diner was introduced a couple decades back, crews didn't like it either.  Anything (other than the existence of stairs) that is really a problem for crews working those cars could be worked out in a revised design, provided they seek appropriate input.
 
Superliners have a major advantage over the standard single-level fleet in that they are ADA compliant without the need for high-level platforms or lifts at every station.  They also have a bit more capacity overall, and so require fewer cars to carry the same number of passengers.
 
It's certainly possible to make a sightseer-lounge-esque single-level car, but there aren't currently any plans to do so with Amtrak's fleet.
 
Sent from my LAPTOP COMPUTER using a web browser
While they make sense in a business world, it's much easier to evade the conductor with the bi-level design. I still think everywhere should run Superliners but I know that ain't gonna happen. I love the old Superliner design, my personal favorite Amtrak fleet, but I mean if Amtrak has the rights to the Viewliner design and can build them themselves that makes a lot of sense to standardise the fleet. The was conductor explained it seemed pretty solid and didn't SEEM like he was lying but I don't get why he would be doing that.
Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app
Where is the funding coming from for Amtrak to convert all cars to viewliners? Since Amtrak owns the Viewliner design, why haven't they finished up the the current group of Sleeping cars and Dormitory Baggage cars?

#51 norfolkwesternhenry

norfolkwesternhenry

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 467 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minneapolis, MN
  • Interests:Trains, Boating, Trains, Mountain Biking, Trains, Having Fun, Trains, working on my bikes, Trains, planning my next trip, PV, trains, planning trips for family

Posted 26 August 2017 - 08:14 AM

As most members on here do, I doubt every train will become Viewliner in the near future. Such a move would require a huge car order. In addition, Amtrak would either have to deal with mixed consists or convert entire trains at once as the cars have different floor heights than Superliners. Add this to the potential platform length and height issues and the lack of a sightseer lounge on Western tourist-oriented trains and such a move makes little to no sense.
Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

While I agree, he did his research. Superliners are the best cars IMHO for passengers but apparantly crews hate them, though I do think it's possible to chop a SSL and make it into a good single level car, putting the cafe where the stairs and wet bar are located.
Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app
 
If a conductor was saying that Amtrak was converting everything to Viewliner, I can assure you he either did no research at all, or his "research" consisted of listening to a drunken lunatic talking in his sleep (or something of comparable credibility), because there is no such plan in the works.  I'm sure *some* crews don't like Superliners, but that doesn't apply to all crews.  For the record, when the first Viewliner diner was introduced a couple decades back, crews didn't like it either.  Anything (other than the existence of stairs) that is really a problem for crews working those cars could be worked out in a revised design, provided they seek appropriate input.
 
Superliners have a major advantage over the standard single-level fleet in that they are ADA compliant without the need for high-level platforms or lifts at every station.  They also have a bit more capacity overall, and so require fewer cars to carry the same number of passengers.
 
It's certainly possible to make a sightseer-lounge-esque single-level car, but there aren't currently any plans to do so with Amtrak's fleet.
 
Sent from my LAPTOP COMPUTER using a web browser
While they make sense in a business world, it's much easier to evade the conductor with the bi-level design. I still think everywhere should run Superliners but I know that ain't gonna happen. I love the old Superliner design, my personal favorite Amtrak fleet, but I mean if Amtrak has the rights to the Viewliner design and can build them themselves that makes a lot of sense to standardise the fleet. The was conductor explained it seemed pretty solid and didn't SEEM like he was lying but I don't get why he would be doing that.
Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app
Where is the funding coming from for Amtrak to convert all cars to viewliners? Since Amtrak owns the Viewliner design, why haven't they finished up the the current group of Sleeping cars and Dormitory Baggage cars?
Well the Superliners wil run till the end of their useful life, then rather than replacing them with more Superliners they will replace them with viewliners. Shops aren't efficient and stuff happens, but they'll eventually get done.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app

Empire Builder MSP-CHI (2) CHI-MSP (2) MSP-PDX (1) MSP-CBS (5.5 H late) (1) MKE-MSP (1) MSP-SEA (1) Coast Starlate PDX-EMY (1.5H late) (1) California Zephyr DEN-SLC (1H late) (1) Hiawatha CHI-MKE (1) NE Regional WAS-BAL (1) WAS-NYP (1)WIL-WAS (1) PHL-NYP (1) Acela Express BAL-WAS (1) BOS-WAS (1) WAS-WIL (1) Late Shore (Limited service) CHI-BOS (On Time) (1) Capitol Limited WAS-CHI (1) Texas Eagle SAS-CHI (1.5 HR late, 1 HR late) (2) CHI-SAS (1) (55 min early) Wolverine DET-DER-ARB-CHI (35 Min late) (1) Cascades SEA-VAC (1) Cardinal NYP-CHI (1)
Non-Amtrak: VIA: Corridor Service Q.C.-Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto-Windsor (1) Canadian: VAC-Winnipeg 4.5 H late (1) D. C. metro, Montreal Metro, Toronto subway, Portland streetcars, BART, Metra, NYC subway, Boston subway, Twin cities Blue/Green line, SEPTA commuter rail and subway, Staten Island RR


#52 Ryan

Ryan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,631 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:OTN
  • Interests:a fact checker combined with a ferret

Posted 26 August 2017 - 08:49 AM

You realize that Amtrak isn't building the current order of Viewliners, right?
Posted Image

Disclaimer: Any images or links you see in my post may in fact be invasive advertising or even fraudulent phishing attacks silently injected into my post by our spam based hosting service. If anything looks suspicious or inappropriate or you have any doubt whatsoever then do not click any links (particularly those appearing in green and/or with a double underline) or interact with the spam in any way. You may also want to consider using ad-blocking plugins such as Adblock Plus and/or Ghostery)to help reduce the number and severity of advertising scams directed at you.

#53 Hotblack Desiato

Hotblack Desiato

    Lead Service Attendant

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 142 posts

Posted 27 August 2017 - 08:11 PM

You put a lot of faith in one conductor’s statements. As sure as he may sound about this topic, things like this aren’t secretly told to conductors years in advance of public announcement. There is a lot of misinformation that spreads across front-line employees (of all industries) regarding items on which they really have no access to inside info.

Often, it is just speculation, or hypothetical discussion, that turns into “fact” after passing through a bunch of people’s ears/mouths (see the telephone game for further info). But I assure you, for decisions of this level of importance, as soon as it was officially announced to a large employee group (such as several thousand conductors), it will be announced to the public almost simultaneously. In many cases, I bet interested members of the public would know before most employees.

As already mentioned, Amtrak doesn’t build any equipment. They may own the rights to the Viewliner, but they’re having a hell of a time getting an experienced car manufacturer to build passenger-carrying equipment to that spec. If they can resolve those issues, and secure funding, they could extend the production run and add more cars (and new types, such as coaches or cafes) to the order. If they don’t, and the line shuts down after the current order is complete, then owning the rights to the car won’t do them any good if they don’t have someone who can build it. It would probably be easier/cheaper to go with an already-in-production design than to shop around their blueprints for a 30-year-old design and find someone else that wants to build it.

But regardless of any of the above, the reality remains that no such decision has been announced about the replacement of equipment that still has at least a good decade or more of life left in it. And even if someone in charge today has the personal desire to eventually replace those cars with Viewliners, a lot can happen (including more changes to Amtrak management, changes in the political climate and funding situation, federal regulations regarding equipment safety, etc.) between now and when someone is ready to sign on the dotted line to purchase their replacements.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users