Replying to Diesel on NEC?

Here's a really stupid question: In small electronics, transformers have been giving way to switching power supplies for the last several years, with corresponding weight and size savings and reduced heat output. Is there any such possibility as a switching power supply for the colossal voltages we're talking about here that might someday be used instead of giant transformers on the locomotives? If not, why not? I'm sure there's some obvious answer I'm missing or unaware of, but I'm trying to expand my knowledge here.

I guess even a structural engineer remembers some the electrical stuff that rubbed off after 40 years of working with EE's..

Thanks for confirming things!

Personally, I don't understand how Amtrak/ LIRR/ MNR have had diesel /3rd rail dual mode engines for decades, but an diesel/ catenary dual mode engine is new, untested, and revolutionary.

Well part of it is simply the fact that there isn't a huge demand for such a locomotive. Amtrak doesn't absolutely need one, which leaves only NJT really having a need for such an engine here in the US.

Then, and PRR60 or others may correct me, but it's my understanding that one needs a much bigger transformer to convert 11KV into traction power vs. converting 700V into traction power. And one of the biggest components of a transformer is iron, which is very heavy. Need a bigger transformer? Then you need more iron and more space. An engine has both a space limitation and a weight limitation.

So trying to figure out how to shoehorn both a transformer and a diesel engine into the body of the engine and not going over the weight limits isn't exactly easy. Even the P32 AC-DM's have a smaller diesel engine than the P42 because of the extra room and weight needed for converting third rail power. The P32's have a 12 cylinder engine, while the P40/42's have a 16 cylinder engine.

Yep, that's right.

The 11kV or 25kV catenary voltage is great for transmitting power, but it needs to be reduced (and converted) prior to being applied to the traction motors. To make that happen, the ALP-45DP is carrying a power transformer along for the ride, and power transformers are heavy (particularly those for the 25hz frequency of the old PRR catenary). Typical third rail voltage does not have to be changed, so a transformer is not required for dual mode locomotive that get their electric power from a third rail.

I guess even a structural engineer remembers some the electrical stuff that rubbed off after 40 years of working with EE's..

Personally, I don't understand how Amtrak/ LIRR/ MNR have had diesel /3rd rail dual mode engines for decades, but an diesel/ catenary dual mode engine is new, untested, and revolutionary.

Well part of it is simply the fact that there isn't a huge demand for such a locomotive. Amtrak doesn't absolutely need one, which leaves only NJT really having a need for such an engine here in the US.

Then, and PRR60 or others may correct me, but it's my understanding that one needs a much bigger transformer to convert 11KV into traction power vs. converting 700V into traction power. And one of the biggest components of a transformer is iron, which is very heavy. Need a bigger transformer? Then you need more iron and more space. An engine has both a space limitation and a weight limitation.

So trying to figure out how to shoehorn both a transformer and a diesel engine into the body of the engine and not going over the weight limits isn't exactly easy. Even the P32 AC-DM's have a smaller diesel engine than the P42 because of the extra room and weight needed for converting third rail power. The P32's have a 12 cylinder engine, while the P40/42's have a 16 cylinder engine.

I'm passing through Dave's backyard right now (Kingston, RI) as I type this. How frequently does catenary work happen in RI and CT? I ask because as I was departing South Station this morning, I watched 66 pull in with another P42DC. I understand now that it's common, but doesn't the section south of NY need it more right now since so much effort has been put in north of there?

All of the catenary east/north of New Haven is fairly new, so they are not likely doing much direct work on the existing catenary there. There are a number of projects underway in eastern CT on the Shore Line East route. Niantic River bridge replacement, replacement of a bridge over Rt. 1 in Branford, adding catenary to the passing sidings at the stations so CT can switch SLE service to M-8 equipment in place of diesel locomotives. Don't know when they will start on the 1.5 miles of 3rd track and high level platforms at the Kingston RI station. With little traffic on the SLE line late at night, likely easier and safer to turn the catenary off than to work around live catenary.

CT DOT is replacing the catenary on the New Haven line in western CT with constant tension. But this is a long term project that has been underway since the early 90s and won't be completed until around 2017.

The project to replace the catenary on the 24 mile segment from Morrisville PA to New Brunswick NJ is a separate project and, IIRC, is expected to start next year.

I've heard that 66/67 being pulled by a P42 is quite common, to allow for catenary work all over the NEC.

The problem with NJ Transit's ALP-45D (or one of the problems) is that being super heavy, it has to travel slower over the Portal Bridge. I was told that a train with the old E-60 Electric locomotive would take up 1.75 train slots because of this.
Having those locomotives run into Penn Station would cut down on the number of slots, and the tunnels are already pretty near capacity. But I assume that they will be certified eventually.

Personally, I don't understand how Amtrak/ LIRR/ MNR have had diesel /3rd rail dual mode engines for decades, but an diesel/ catenary dual mode engine is new, untested, and revolutionary.

I'm passing through Dave's backyard right now (Kingston, RI) as I type this. How frequently does catenary work happen in RI and CT? I ask because as I was departing South Station this morning, I watched 66 pull in with another P42DC. I understand now that it's common, but doesn't the section south of NY need it more right now since so much effort has been put in north of there?

Adirondack and Maple Leaf usually because there are only 17 Genesis P32 AC-DM in existence).

No. Amtrak only owns 17 P32 AC-DM's. There are more than 17 in existence however, as Metro North owns & operates 30 P32 AC-DM's I believe.

The Genesis I also believe don't have that much motive power.

The Genesis series I is technically the P40 and its close cousin the P42. The P40 was the first Genesis engine built, followed by the P32 AC-DM about a year later. The P40 originally was built to provide 4,000 HP, while the P42 had 4,200 hence the 40 & 42. The P32 AC-DM because of the need to have transformers to convert the third rail power has a smaller prime mover and only provides 3,200 HP, again why it's a P32.

However, that's still enough power to pull the current day Lake Shore. Perhaps if it were to ever grow to say a 20 car train Amtrak might have a problem using only one P32 AC-DM, but until then it holds its own.

Now that I think more about it, a P32 Dual-Mode Genesis also can't go through the Hudson River tunnels since there's no third rail so it would have to be an electric locomotive.

Actually the North River tunnels (aka Hudson) do have third rail in the tunnels. It ends very quickly after popping up in NJ and doesn't really provide enough time to start up the diesel engine, so they typically aren't used unless there is an emergency situation. Additionally, since as you noted there are only 17 of them in Amtrak's roster, they don't want them roaming outside the Empire corridor.

66/67 is the overnight 'Night Owl' Regional and runs via the electrified Shoreline Route, not Inland route via Hartford and Springfield. Amtrak hasn't run Regionals via the inland route via Springfield all the way to Boston since the last weekend trip was discontinued in 2004.

True, at least in normal, regularly scheduled service. However, there was one weekend (maybe two) a few years ago during a bridge replacement in CT where Amtrak did run a couple of Regional's via the Inland route so as to not totally cut off service to Boston.

Once I tied a rope onto a Genesis powered train whose power went down and had to be Sunnyside Yard'ed, and hauled the whole thing onto the East River Tunnel waiting tracks. Once the green came, the immense power of my mind yet to be officially discovered mixed with the powers of Amtrak and the engines howled alive, glowing with divine energy as we flew threw the tunnels and down the line. It was a sight not to be missed.

Wait....
.
.
.
....what?

Would it correct to guess that like all MU-capable locomotives, an electric (AEM7, HHP8, the under construction ACS64) can be controlled from the cab of a diesel (P40/42 and the like) or vise-versa?

They can as long as the P42 is equipped with controls for the pantograph.

On a similar front, I have to wonder if Bombardier has approached Amtrak at all with their ALP-45DP locomotive?

A senior Amtrak person involved with NEC Capital Program mentioned that they have looked at it and have decided to not look at it any further. BTW, Amtrak is yet to certify them for operation on the NEC. They are waiting for some issues to be resolved first. Amtrak wants something that is considerably lighter, absent which they are happy to just change engines where the catenary ends apparently.