Amtrak to get new locomotives

[PVD]

It is not uncommon for companies to offer trial or pilot equipment or modifications to potential customers for the purpose of gathering data in a real world environment. Very often it is used to design something new, and not to offer what is being run. I think people are getting way ahead of themselves on this.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

again after this got out of gate, were is GE announcement ?? were is Railway age or Progressive railroad ?? nope just a notice without a source.

 

[Thirdrail7]

again after this got out of gate, were is GE announcement ?? were is Railway age or Progressive railroad ?? nope just a notice without a source.

We have a source. If I'm following this correctly, someone sent a draft of a potential notice that plainly states that it should not be released until approved to someone else, who then sent it to the OP, who posted it, even though it is not released.it is easy to see what is going on here and the key is last sentence:

"These tests are scheduled to continue through the duration of 2017 and will coincide with future programs involving the testing of new single-level passenger equipment on long-distance trains." (Viewliners?)

peter

Word on the street is they are for Auto Train.

Nice try but it is quite clear that the engines tests are going to coincide with the tests occurring in the LSL Michigan Reroute Rumors & Speculation thread. After all, both threads were started by the same person. It is clearly a matter time until the official press release comes out and ties two threads of third hand information together! Have patience!

 

[A Voice]

again after this got out of gate, were is GE announcement ?? were is Railway age or Progressive railroad ?? nope just a notice without a source.

We have a source. If I'm following this correctly, someone sent a draft of a potential notice that plainly states that it should not be released until approved to someone else, who then sent it to the OP, who posted it, even though it is not released.it is easy to see what is going on here and the key is last sentence:

"These tests are scheduled to continue through the duration of 2017 and will coincide with future programs involving the testing of new single-level passenger equipment on long-distance trains." (Viewliners?)

peter

Word on the street is they are for Auto Train.

Nice try but it is quite clear that the engines tests are going to coincide with the tests occurring in the LSL Michigan Reroute Rumors & Speculation thread. After all, both threads were started by the same person. It is clearly a matter time until the official press release comes out and ties two threads of third hand information together! Have patience!

Thanks Thirdrail. Always helps to hear from a reliable source.

 

[jis]

again after this got out of gate, were is GE announcement ?? were is Railway age or Progressive railroad ?? nope just a notice without a source.

We have a source. If I'm following this correctly, someone sent a draft of a potential notice that plainly states that it should not be released until approved to someone else, who then sent it to the OP, who posted it, even though it is not released.it is easy to see what is going on here and the key is last sentence:

"These tests are scheduled to continue through the duration of 2017 and will coincide with future programs involving the testing of new single-level passenger equipment on long-distance trains." (Viewliners?)

peter

Word on the street is they are for Auto Train.

Nice try but it is quite clear that the engines tests are going to coincide with the tests occurring in the LSL Michigan Reroute Rumors & Speculation thread. After all, both threads were started by the same person. It is clearly a matter time until the official press release comes out and ties two threads of third hand information together! Have patience!

LOL!

 

[PerRock]

The LSL reroute was supposed to be last October (2016), not this October. And was determined to be not worth doing, if you read the report linked.

If I had to guess, they'll be on one of the western trains for the mountain passes. But that's just speculation, it may be that they float around the network.

peter

 

[CREW-DORM#2524]

Word on the street is they are for Auto Train.

Nice try but it is quite clear that the engines tests are going to coincide with the tests occurring in the LSL Michigan Reroute Rumors & Speculation thread. After all, both threads were started by the same person. It is clearly a matter time until the official press release comes out and ties two threads of third hand information together! Have patience!

I'm going off the statement of one of the gentlemen who went to meet with the folks at GE, but you might have a better source...

 

[Karl1459]

The LSL reroute was supposed to be last October (2016), not this October. And was determined to be not worth doing, if you read the report linked.

If I had to guess, they'll be on one of the western trains for the mountain passes. But that's just speculation, it may be that they float around the network.

peter

If real, and an exercise in determining how practical a passenger option to off-shelf freight locomotives I would expect operation on all routes, and if initially successful to operate in adverse conditions.

 

[frequentflyer]

Don't know why this is so hard to believe Amtrak might go this route. The states are relieving a lot of the power issues with locomotive purchases of their own, that will take care most of the corridor services outside the NEC for Amtrak. The released Genesis locomotives are beat up, and new motive power is needed, but Amtrak has no new motive power money. I am not convinced that Amtrak thinks the Siemens is as versatile as the F40 and Genesis was (able to switch between short and long distance trains).

GE might be offering Amtrak a very tempting deal on some slightly modified off the shelf units. If EMD was smart, they would get the SD70ACE T4 into Amtrak hands too. GE has its big financing arm and may take the Genesis in on trade. Amtrak has a CEO that has negotiated with GE before and knows how low GE can go if it wants a deal. New CEO was known for making opportunistic end of production aircrafts buys from Boeing and Airbus at extreme discounts, and has no qualms buying used.

Whether these units are bound for Autotrain or western LD trains, it makes sense.

 

[cirdan]

I would expect the Empire Builder,CZ, and Starlight to have two units, maybe only in peak season. But everyone else to use one unit.I wander if this present CEO thinking, why are we using two thorough breds when one Clydesdale will work.

Maybe I am misindformed but I was under the impression that trains with two units don't do so purely for the extra power but also to meet redundancy requirements of the host railroads.

 

[VT Hokie]

Amtrak sometimes uses P42s on the Northeast Corridor. Would the ES44 meet northeast clearance requirements? I don't believe so, but I'm not 100% sure. (I know freights operate on parts of the NEC obviously, but not all parts.) Anyway, everything is a tradeoff I guess, but that would be some versatility lost in going with a taller locomotive.

 

[MattW]

I get the impression that this wouldn't be for a 1 to 1 fleet replacement. More a bolstering of the fleet where possible (everywhere but the NEC probably) as a cheaper way of relieving the stretched-thin P42 fleet.

 

[Anderson]

Well, since most LD trains do not operate anywhere at 90 mph under diesel power, they can be adequately handled by locomotives that run at 80mph.

I guess the only LD trains that operate over 80mph anywhere on their run under diesel power are the SWC and the LSL. Are there any others?

All other diesel powered trains that run over 80mph are medium distance trains mostly funded by 209 State participation.

I would've gotten to this sooner but the Board Retreat got in the way...

I think 90 MPH makes sense to shoot for in the context of longer-term planning (remember, these locomotive need to last 20-25 years...at least, going by this file on the NS fleet and considering how erratic Congressional funding can be: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-08/documents/smith.pdf). At least in theory PTC should enable 90 MPH on some segments of track, and in particular VA and NC have their plans. There's also various stuff in IL alongside the existing SWC situation as well...and let's also not forget that inevitably one can expect a few of these to end up pinch-hitting when a state wants to add service somewhere and there's not a Charger handy. Finally, I'm not sure how different locomotives behave at the upper end of their speed profiles, but there may be something to be said for that as well (e.g. if a 90 MPH locomotive can get to 79 MPH noticeably faster than an 80 MPH locomotive can, that's a consideration for trains with heavier stopping patterns).

 

[cirdan]

I get the impression that this wouldn't be for a 1 to 1 fleet replacement. More a bolstering of the fleet where possible (everywhere but the NEC probably) as a cheaper way of relieving the stretched-thin P42 fleet.

Isn't the arrival of the Chargers already displacing some P42s off corridor trains, meaning there should be more spare units in the pool by and by..

 

[frequentflyer]

I get the impression that this wouldn't be for a 1 to 1 fleet replacement. More a bolstering of the fleet where possible (everywhere but the NEC probably) as a cheaper way of relieving the stretched-thin P42 fleet.

Isn't the arrival of the Chargers already displacing some P42s off corridor trains, meaning there should be more spare units in the pool by and by..

True, but those P42s are getting up in years and mileage.

 

[west point]

Do not believe this will happen. However ========== For the same HP AC traction has several advantages. No overheating at sustained low speeds although that is not usually a problem except if a multi unit train has a loco failure. AC acceleration and slowing is better. The P-42s diesels have a very slow GE programed acceleration schedule which sometimes limit acceleration of a train. Have seen unconfirmed reports that for 1st 30 seconds of a multi unit train starting the high idle HEP unit actually provides more traction ? If so maybe reason 1 loco shorter state supported trains get to track speed quicker? Some what skeptical.

If the P-42s get rebuilt and with AC traction only if the diesel Prime mover can have a quicker acceleration curve much of that advantage will be lost. The ability of AC motors to better resist snow, dirt, & sand contamination is well known. If these ES units are going to test their diesel acceleration is unknown. Some one who knows ? The inverters do seem to provide full power at idle speeds. Probably the HEP would not require a faster idle diesel as the present new passenger locos do not. ?

Any train running on single track with sidings has more stops and slowing than running on 2 MTs or more. That is the definition of most of Amtrak's trains outside the NEC. Acceleration is very important to maintain schedule. The elimination of any slow section will save 2 and occasionally maybe up to 5 minutes.

 

[Acela150]

Amtrak sometimes uses P42s on the Northeast Corridor. Would the ES44 meet northeast clearance requirements? I don't believe so, but I'm not 100% sure. (I know freights operate on parts of the NEC obviously, but not all parts.) Anyway, everything is a tradeoff I guess, but that would be some versatility lost in going with a taller locomotive.

The NS ET44AC units are cleared for NEC operations. As well as CSX units.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

part on NEC maybe, but going to be tight fit at/near New York .

 

[MattW]

I don't see why they'd be going anywhere near NYP unless Amtrak fits them with a third rail shoe and dual-mode equipment...which I don't see happening at all.

 

[Ryan]

Duel-mode equipment? Dont know what that is, but it sounds like fun.