Abandoned Turbo Train

[jis]

So go check out the publications surrounding the Jet Train. And then remember that we're a decade advanced from even that!

But don't think all of the anti-turbo guys in this forum are presenting the whole picture. It's not nearly such a closed case. I work with turbo technology every day, and it's just astounding to think how much things have advanced in the past ten or twenty years.

I suspect if they are so good one will get built. Until then we'll wait and see.

Mind you no one has said that technology has not advanced and no one has said that aspects of the same technology could not and has not been used to improve operation of diesel engines. The discussion was about whether the Amtrak Turbos should have been rebuilt and redeployed.

The problem there was not just that they were turbine driven. Indeed it was hard to make a case to deploy them even with a small Catepillar diesel engine. They had developed structural problems and they were extremely capacity constrained. All in all it did not make sense to spend money on them. Turbine was but one factor and not the only one.

Could you please provide some concrete citations on how the new technology improves upon the old (specially in the context of rail applications) and how, for example the issue of efficient operation at low rpm (among other things) is handled in the new technology? I am truly curious since I am always a student, but "trust me I am the expert" is not a satisfactory educational methodology.

Also would they be usable in the typical DMU setting in which oil driven engines are being used in modern rail applications, with underfloor Caterpillar or MTU diesel engines in each car, as say in the Virgin Voyagers in the UK? What are the relative energy efficiencies in such operation in frequent start stop operations? What about the relative amount of pollution NOx emission etc? What about noise pollution? Just curious and ready to learn.

 

[Tony]

As has been said by others: The turbo trains were bad ideas when built and did not improve with age. Buying them was the equivalent of buying a car because you liked the paint job.

I though their #1 cause of failure was the expensive upgrades to the NYC to Albany tracks which were never done.

Buying them was like buying an XXL SUV, and then leaving it parked because you can't afford the gas.

 

[Tony]

For information on what the new single level car will look like, go here: www.highspeed-rail.org/Documents/Single%20Level%20Section%2021%20Drawings.pdf

Amtrak is building passenger cars with a built-in cab?????

 

[cirdan]

did anyone happen to notice those pictures are 10 years old... from 2001.... just wondering

sure, I did. That unit has probably been cut up and a long time ago.

It is a pity that not one car was saved for a museum.

 

[cirdan]

The other thing that cirdan forgot to mention either by chance or because s/he did not know is that the first TGV prototype was Turbine driven train. After a few trials, that being the time of the first petroleum crisis, SNCF made a conscious decision to abandon gas turbines for ever and move over to electric power. The future of all the turbos running around at that time was thereby sealed. there never was going to be another new Turbo to be built and introduced by SNCF.

Yes, I did know that. I didn't mention it because the TGV was a different design to the turbotrain and apart from both having turbines, there wasn't too much in common.

I'm not too well versed on the history of the prototype TGV but undersatnd that there were quite a lot of things that were fundamentally different between this and what was finally ordered, with the turbo just being one of them. Also, at that time, the TGV had a rival called the Aerotrain. It was basically a monorial running on a concrete structure and working like a hovercraft, ie supported on a cushion of air and moved by a large propeller. This was also abandoned for much the same reason. It would have guzzled too much fuel. At the time SNCF was criticised for being conservative and favouring the relatively low tech TGV over this futuristic device. In hindsight that decison was a blessing.

 

[GlobalistPotato]

Well, considering how the Turboliners went, I would agree with this one railfan who said that Amtrak should had purchased the Class 43's instead!

 

[jis]

did anyone happen to notice those pictures are 10 years old... from 2001.... just wondering

sure, I did. That unit has probably been cut up and a long time ago.

It is a pity that not one car was saved for a museum.

That one in the picture is one of the RTG sets that was retired after its service in Chicago area and was never rebuilt for deployment in New York. Two RTG sets were rebuilt and deployed in New York and then withdrawn when one of them went up in a spectacular flame fest in Penn Station.

Incidentally an SNCF RTG set has been preserved in a museum in France.

The New York trains that are in issue with respect to the Pataki era rebuilding fiasco were all Rohr RTL units, of which there were 7.

The original RTL sets entered a rebuild program in 1995 at Amerail. But the program was abandoned after I believe one set was converted to what was called RTL II. Then there was the 2000 conversion program to RTL III at Super Steel that ran into all sorts of problems with quality of work, documentation etc. etc. Only three sets were completed, of which two entered into service but had reliability problems and operating cost problems. The third, though completed, never entered service and eventually all three were parked in Bear DE by Gunn (AFAIR). New York finally terminated the rebuild program since Amtrak said there was no way no how they would operate these trains until a long laundry list of issues were resolved, and New York was unable to negotiate an acceptable deal to resolve those issues. And that was the end of the program and Turbo Train operations in the US. Currently I believe Amtrak has the rebuilt units sitting in Bear awaiting disposal and the un-rebuilt units are probably still sitting somewhere in Schenectady awaiting disposal.

Incidentally the main player at the New York end of things at that time was one Joe Boardman who was the Transport Commissioner then of New York State. The whole issue was finally settled and closed eventually during Kummant's regime at Amtrak AFAIR, while Boardman was at FRA. I got to see this whole sordid affair at somewhat close range through my active membership at ESPA the New York State passenger rail advocacy organization.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Amtrak is building passenger cars with a built-in cab?????

I would assume so. Lack of cab cars for various operations is one of the biggest sticks in amtraks operational craw.

 

[AlanB]

The original RTL sets entered a rebuild program in 1995 at Amerail. But the program was abandoned after I believe one set was converted to what was called RTL II.

An old OTOL roster page from 2002 shows only 1 RTL II train set.

The third, though completed, never entered service and eventually all three were parked in Bear DE by Gunn (AFAIR).

You remember correctly, it was David Gunn who saw many of the issues that have been reported and realized that it wasn't in Amtrak's best interests to operate those trains. There were some who believe that he made up those issues to get out of the contract with NY State because Amtrak didn't have the money to do the track upgrades that the contract required of them. I for one don't believe that; but that's not to say that the poor performance of the RTL III's didn't provide a nice excuse for him to break the contract.

Currently I believe Amtrak has the rebuilt units sitting in Bear awaiting disposal and the un-rebuilt units are probably still sitting somewhere in Schenectady awaiting disposal.

Last I heard that was still the situation.

Incidentally the main player at the New York end of things at that time was one Joe Boardman who was the Transport Commissioner then of New York State. The whole issue was finally settled and closed eventually during Kummant's regime at Amtrak AFAIR, while Boardman was at FRA. I got to see this whole sordid affair at somewhat close range through my active membership at ESPA the New York State passenger rail advocacy organization.

And yes, the issue was settled under Kummant with Amtrak looking to sell the 3 sets in their possesion and NY State looking to sell the 4 in their possesion.

 

[jis]

I'm not too well versed on the history of the prototype TGV but undersatnd that there were quite a lot of things that were fundamentally different between this and what was finally ordered, with the turbo just being one of them. Also, at that time, the TGV had a rival called the Aerotrain. It was basically a monorial running on a concrete structure and working like a hovercraft, ie supported on a cushion of air and moved by a large propeller. This was also abandoned for much the same reason. It would have guzzled too much fuel. At the time SNCF was criticised for being conservative and favouring the relatively low tech TGV over this futuristic device. In hindsight that decison was a blessing.

Actually the Aerotrain project did not have as much to do directly with the TGV program as did the Turbine unit. The Turbine driven unit that was prototyped were actually called TGV 001 (and 002). These were Turbine-Electric units. It still holds the world speed record for a turbine driven unit (318kph), contrary to the popular belief in the US that the weird stunt that NYC pulled by mounting two turbojet engines on the roof of an RDC holds the honors (296kph).

TGV 001 and TGV 002 power units even looked very much like the later TGV Sud-Est power units, and both are preserved in museums in France.

TGV 001 Picture

 

[NS VIA Fan]

From October 1973:

 

[George Harris]

Amtrak is building passenger cars with a built-in cab?????

I would assume so. Lack of cab cars for various operations is one of the biggest sticks in amtraks operational craw.

The objective is to be able to operate more push-pull trains on short runs. "Short" is relative. the San Joaquin trains run push pull on a run that is 300 miles one way.

 

[steamtrain6868]

From the looks of that Schedule From Chicago to St. L...It was no faster then driving....

 

[Nickrapak]

I don't have a detailed knowledge of the Turboliner cars themselves, but how difficult would it be to remove all motors and one cab, and run them push-pull with a standard loco and HEP? Even if all of the refurbished cars together could take the place of only a single Regional or two Keystones, it's still that many more cars put in the pool, and that many more possible ticket sales.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

The Turbo liner cars have a much bigger problem, supersteel took out a large air duct and re-designed the HVAC system , it is way under sized and cars have trouble cooling or heating and can only maintain temperatures in moderate days. To correct the problem it would basicly require another total overhaul of cars down to bare shell.

The cars are also not compliant to FRA buff strenght requirements since they were part of a trainset with powercars.

The chance of seeing these trains or cars operate in US are about slim to non-existent.

They are for sale and will be disposed off, even if its via a scrapper.

 

[steamtrain6868]

If I recall the Aerotrain ended up in commuter service in Chicago....Perhaps the same thing could happen here.

 

[Ryan]

Could you please provide some concrete citations on how the new technology improves upon the old (specially in the context of rail applications) and how, for example the issue of efficient operation at low rpm (among other things) is handled in the new technology? I am truly curious since I am always a student, but "trust me I am the expert" is not a satisfactory educational methodology.

I'm still anxiously awaited Vokris' return to enlighten us.

If I recall the Aerotrain ended up in commuter service in Chicago....Perhaps the same thing could happen here.

Perhaps you missed Dutch's post. No way do these tools ever haul a pax in revenue service. It just isn't going to happen.

The Turbo liner cars have a much bigger problem, supersteel took out a large air duct and re-designed the HVAC system , it is way under sized and cars have trouble cooling or heating and can only maintain temperatures in moderate days. To correct the problem it would basicly require another total overhaul of cars down to bare shell.

The cars are also not compliant to FRA buff strenght requirements since they were part of a trainset with powercars.

The chance of seeing these trains or cars operate in US are about slim to non-existent.

They are for sale and will be disposed off, even if its via a scrapper.

 

[Eric S]

If I recall the Aerotrain ended up in commuter service in Chicago....Perhaps the same thing could happen here.

Why would Metra (or any other commuter railroad) want to operate such equipment?

 

[George Harris]

Can we quit beating this dead horse and send the carcass to the glue factory?

It is best to regard the turboliners as a grand experiment from which lessons can be, and hopefully were, learned, but things have moved on to the point that the trainset itself is fit for is a trip to a scrapper, with the possible exception of one to a museum.

Remember, nothing is ever a complete failure. It can always be used as an example of how things should not be done.

 

[VT Hokie]

There is at least one Turbo Train set sitting by the fence at the Bear, DE shops. I saw it about 6 weeks ago when I was down there. I think they are for sale.

Just curious, are they viewable from public property? Just wondering if it might be possible to photograph 'em without tresspassing...

(Looking at the aerial view on bing maps, it looks like the end of Corato Court is as close as you can get to 'em...doesn't look too promising)

 

[NE933]

I think it's reasonable to ask that we remember the circumstances for when the Turboliners were ordered. Amtrak needed something sleek and modern looking right away, and it also has to work well. Amfleets had not been delivered or thought of at the time, so the best decision was to look at the catalog books of what other countries are using, buy a few of them, and hope all goes well. Indeed, besides the Chicago to St. Louis route schedule, a Turbo, one of the Rohr models, prominently appeared on the Summer 1983 National Timetable and several brochures and station posters under the banner: "Maybe your next flight should be on a train".

As for riding them, I remember their acceleration su**ed.

So in searching for the Zen in our seeming fascination of the life of the Turbo's, it served a purpose for it's time, and now it's over.