Jump to content
lordsigma

Checked baggage being cut from Boston Section of Lake Shore?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, lordsigma said:


I wonder if they will once again eliminate
The “Boston section” and instead run a shuttle train between Boston and Albany.

Considering the 448/449 'shuttle' train they ran BOS-ALB while they were extending the platforms at ALB and putting in the 4th track was without sleeper for a good portion of the time, they ran bag, BC/Cafe, and 1 or 2 coaches.  In Jan, Feb, and March, there was only 1 coach!  The single coach is the norm during the winter, shuttle and  'regular' train.  Except for people going to Florida during the winter, Amtrak and airline business drops off noticeably.  Given the apparent regional-trains-only mentality of Anderson, I guess I wouldn't be surprised if a 'stripped down' shuttle of a BC/Cafe and 1-2 coaches is the future of 448/449. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Max HP for generation of HEP on a standard P42 at a full 800KW is closer to 1100 leaving around 3100 for traction. P32 DM were able to pull at reasonable speed,  and they are 1000 HP less total. but it does take a while to get to speed. They got to 90 mph+. Single engine/no redundancy is a real issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A permanent shuttle would mean the shuttle train would likely legally require state support.

Edited by PVD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PVD said:

Max HP for generation of HEP on a standard P42 at a full 800KW is closer to 1100 leaving around 3100 for traction. P32 DM were able to pull at reasonable speed,  and they are 1000 HP less total. but it does take a while to get to speed. They got to 90 mph+. Single engine/no redundancy is a real issue.

No. With HEP mode off, the full 4250 HP is achieved at 1047 RPM on the prime mover. In HEP mode, the prime mover runs at a constant 900 RPM, so a maximum of only 3540 HP could theoretically be available for traction with 0 KW HEP load. With a full 800KW load, max available for traction becomes 2525 HP. A 13 car Lake Shore would be a pretty hefty load.

The dual modes have 12 cylinder prime movers that are capable of 3200 HP with HEP off. With HEP on, this drops to about 2700 no load and 1800 full load. This may seem low especially considering that they need to run 110 mph, and it does take a while to get up there, but they can do it with an Empire Service or one of the medium distance trains (all 5 to 6 Amfleets, low HEP load). They struggle to get up past 100 mph with the Lake Shore, and that is only 8 cars. They do load faster than the P42s and their AC traction motors can handle that better from a standing start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I overlooked the the 900 rpm  constant and subtracted down from max. That would be a slow mover with a decent HEP load. I've been on a long LSL with a DM just above 90, it does take a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just finished my trip on the LSL from Boston to Chicago.  I was the only sleeper passenger from Boston to Springfield and there were only 4 people total the entire trip.  In both directions, the train was over 2 hours late arriving. Considering this seems to be a chronic problem, Amtrak is probably thinking more than just eliminating the baggage car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd write immediately; this is a sneak move on the part of the idiot in charge of Amtrak, so don't wait for an official announcement.  Write to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Coscia, and suitable members of Congress simultaneously.  Explain how you use baggage service
 
For example, my girlfriend generally ships her wheelchair in checked baggage.  Without checked baggage, they'll just have to find a place to put it in the passenger compartments of the train; that's an ADA accomodation, no choice on Amtrak's part.  Hope they have room, because they have to kick out paying passengers and remove seats to make the space if they don't.  Just federal law there, they have no choice.
Are you talking about if she's in coach or sleepers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2018 at 11:51 AM, cpotisch said:

Can one P42 really pull a 13 or so car train?

I dug up this post I made prior to you joining the board, so enjoy the video  Cpotish:

 

On 11/7/2015 at 4:25 PM, Thirdrail7 said:

 

 

Sure, and I have seen 11 coaches, 2 sleepers, 2 cafes with an AEM-7 in the middle being pulled and powered by an AEM-7DC. For the record, they were rated for 10 cars on HEP.

 

A better example is this move:

 

 

 

So, it can be done. That doesn't mean it is a good practice. Adding more cars means you will burn more fuel as the diesel spends more time, notched out.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2018 at 7:11 AM, neroden said:

I'd write immediately; this is a sneak move on the part of the idiot in charge of Amtrak, so don't wait for an official announcement.  Write to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Coscia, and suitable members of Congress simultaneously.  Explain how you use baggage service

For example, my girlfriend generally ships her wheelchair in checked baggage.  Without checked baggage, they'll just have to find a place to put it in the passenger compartments of the train; that's an ADA accomodation, no choice on Amtrak's part.  Hope they have room, because they have to kick out paying passengers and remove seats to make the space if they don't.  Just federal law there, they have no choice.

Oooooh.....I'm willing to bet Amtrak has an idea of where they can put extra things if the need arises, considering there is typically quite a bit of space available on this leg of the trip. :ph34r:

4 hours ago, TamarackTom said:

I was the only sleeper passenger from Boston to Springfield

:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Thirdrail7 said:

I dug up this post I made prior to you joining the board, so enjoy the video  Cpotish:

Thank you muchly, and I surrender. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Thirdrail7 said:

I dug up this post I made prior to you joining the board, so enjoy the video  Cpotish:

 

 

 

20 hours ago, Amtrak706 said:

No. With HEP mode off, the full 4250 HP is achieved at 1047 RPM on the prime mover. In HEP mode, the prime mover runs at a constant 900 RPM, so a maximum of only 3540 HP could theoretically be available for traction with 0 KW HEP load. With a full 800KW load, max available for traction becomes 2525 HP. A 13 car Lake Shore would be a pretty hefty load.

The dual modes have 12 cylinder prime movers that are capable of 3200 HP with HEP off. With HEP on, this drops to about 2700 no load and 1800 full load. This may seem low especially considering that they need to run 110 mph, and it does take a while to get up there, but they can do it with an Empire Service or one of the medium distance trains (all 5 to 6 Amfleets, low HEP load). They struggle to get up past 100 mph with the Lake Shore, and that is only 8 cars. They do load faster than the P42s and their AC traction motors can handle that better from a standing start.

Thirdrail, would you say my post concerning the different horsepower and RPM ratings is accurate? I am always interested in more information when I can get it.

Edited by Amtrak706
added quote from post of mine I am referring to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have drafted a letter that I will likely be sending to my local congressman about this matter. I am currently in a holding pattern just waiting to see if there is any additional information over the next few days before I send it. In the interest of civility, anyone interested in seeing/discussing it please PM me. I know there are differing viewpoints on AU about these sorts of things so I don't want to push it on anyone that may not be interested or that may disagree with my viewpoint on the issue. Thanks to everyone who has responded to this for the insights and interesting discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lordsigma said:

I have drafted a letter that I will likely be sending to my local congressman about this matter. I am currently in a holding pattern just waiting to see if there is any additional information over the next few days before I send it. In the interest of civility, anyone interested in seeing/discussing it please PM me. I know there are differing viewpoints on AU about these sorts of things so I don't want to push it on anyone that may not be interested or that may disagree with my viewpoint on the issue. Thanks to everyone who has responded to this for the insights and interesting discussion.

Sent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe P32s have more available since with the HEP, the RPMs initially climb to 800 for a short time before the separate inverter (either 3 or 5 but I believe it is 3) takes over the HEP.

 

I could be wrong because all I care about is the train moving...preferably with HEP.

 

Edited by Thirdrail7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was mentioned that by removing a car from the consist, it enabled that train to run with only one engine.

I notice that in India, trains often run with 20 coaches and one engine, sometimes diesel, sometimes electric loco's.

I thought that the two loco's on Amtrak trains were to have backup if one failed, rather than for motive power?

 

Ed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, caravanman said:

It was mentioned that by removing a car from the consist, it enabled that train to run with only one engine.

I notice that in India, trains often run with 20 coaches and one engine, sometimes diesel, sometimes electric loco's.

I thought that the two loco's on Amtrak trains were to have backup if one failed, rather than for motive power?

 

Ed.S

Depends on the train weight and track profile. On lines with 2-3% grades such as the Southwest Chief and California Zephyr, the additional loco(s) are a necessity if the train is to maintain the advertised schedule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ehbowen said:

Depends on the train weight and track profile. On lines with 2-3% grades such as the Southwest Chief and California Zephyr, the additional loco(s) are a necessity if the train is to maintain the advertised schedule.

We're talking about a present-day 4-5 car train #448/449 already down to one coach for the winter (probably put back for the holiday season, though), and potentially dropping the baggage car as well.  That leaves it at 2 or 3 cars, total.  One locomotive should have absolutely no problems whatsoever regardless of grade over the Berkshire Mountains in Western MA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bratkinson said:

We're talking about a present-day 4-5 car train #448/449 already down to one coach for the winter (probably put back for the holiday season, though), and potentially dropping the baggage car as well.  That leaves it at 2 or 3 cars, total.  One locomotive should have absolutely no problems whatsoever regardless of grade over the Berkshire Mountains in Western MA.

We are talking about whether it would be possible to use a single locomotive west of Albany, where the LSL typically runs with 12 or more cars. Of course a single P42 can handle the Boston section alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Massachusetts is talking about frequent service from Boston to Springfield, and indeed Pittsfield.  If anyone in Amtrak management thinks they can end the Boston-Albany run, they are sorely mistaken; the Senators from Massachusetts have proven quite capable of putting restrictions on Amtrak in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cpotisch said:

We are talking about whether it would be possible to use a single locomotive west of Albany, where the LSL typically runs with 12 or more cars. Of course a single P42 can handle the Boston section alone.

It all depends on what schedule ones wants it to run to. If the schedule is relaxed a little, there is no reason that a single P42 could not handle even 15 cars. All you get is slower acceleration, and possibly lower sustained speed. But it should be able to run faster than typical freight trains on that route anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We are talking about whether it would be possible to use a single locomotive west of Albany, where the LSL typically runs with 12 or more cars. Of course a single P42 can handle the Boston section alone.
Yes, from Albany south a dual-mode locomotive is required for the electrified trackage in NYC. Since two P42s are required west of Albany, and they'll have to be turned and fueled after their run, why not send them back to Boston together so that they can be serviced together?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ehbowen said:
6 hours ago, cpotisch said:

 

Since two P42s are required west of Albany, and they'll have to be turned and fueled after their run, why not send them back to Boston together so that they can be serviced together?

That is the point, ehbowen. The terrain west of Albany doesn’t necessarily require two diesels. 

They actually cut it down to one diesel last summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, caravanman said:

I thought that the two loco's on Amtrak trains were to have backup if one failed, rather than for motive power?

I'm not aware of cases were Amtrak, of its own free will, ran backup engines. There are certainly cases where the host railroad insists upon it.

When the Pioneer and Desert Wind were still running, Union Pacific used to have a rule that all trains must have two engines in winter, and the Pioneer ran with 2 F40s pulling 3 or 4 Superliners when it had to (and dropped the extra unit the instant UP allowed them to in the spring.)

It will vary run-by-run whether the 2nd engine is added for acceleration, or for grades, or for some other reason. My memory of F40s is that  a single unit occasionally pulled as many as 9 single-levels, and 6ish Superliners. 

The combined CZ/Wind/Pioneer was limited by grades in Colorado, and started carrying a 3rd F40 when it started carrying a 2nd dining car. This was, far as I know, the only train Amtrak ever ran that routinely required 3 units. In the 1990ish timeframe, the summer consist looked like bag-bag-transdorm-CZ sleeper sleeper coach coach diner lounge; Pioneer coach, sleeper; Desert Wind coach sleeper, diner. Running that 2nd diner through to Chicago started between 1988 and 1990. When the Pioneer started going through Wyoming, there was no longer a need for the 3rd engine between Denver and Salt Lake - I can't help wondering if that was a factor in Amtrak's willingness to split in Denver. It wasn't to improve CZ timekeeping by switching it twice, and wasn't because of Idaho's or Wyoming's enthusiastic political support...heh.

CZ always ran with 2 engines west of Salt Lake, even when it was just bag-trans-sleeper-coach-coach-diner-lounge, while the Builder ran with 1 west of Spokane, same consist minus the lounge.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Siegmund said:

I'm not aware of cases were Amtrak, of its own free will, ran backup engines. There are certainly cases where the host railroad insists upon it.

When the Pioneer and Desert Wind were still running, Union Pacific used to have a rule that all trains must have two engines in winter, and the Pioneer ran with 2 F40s pulling 3 or 4 Superliners when it had to (and dropped the extra unit the instant UP allowed them to in the spring.)

It will vary run-by-run whether the 2nd engine is added for acceleration, or for grades, or for some other reason. My memory of F40s is that  a single unit occasionally pulled as many as 9 single-levels, and 6ish Superliners. 

The combined CZ/Wind/Pioneer was limited by grades in Colorado, and started carrying a 3rd F40 when it started carrying a 2nd dining car. This was, far as I know, the only train Amtrak ever ran that routinely required 3 units. In the 1990ish timeframe, the summer consist looked like bag-bag-transdorm-CZ sleeper sleeper coach coach diner lounge; Pioneer coach, sleeper; Desert Wind coach sleeper, diner. Running that 2nd diner through to Chicago started between 1988 and 1990. When the Pioneer started going through Wyoming, there was no longer a need for the 3rd engine between Denver and Salt Lake - I can't help wondering if that was a factor in Amtrak's willingness to split in Denver. It wasn't to improve CZ timekeeping by switching it twice, and wasn't because of Idaho's or Wyoming's enthusiastic political support...heh.

CZ always ran with 2 engines west of Salt Lake, even when it was just bag-trans-sleeper-coach-coach-diner-lounge, while the Builder ran with 1 west of Spokane, same consist minus the lounge.

 

 

The EB runs (at least in the past) with 3 engines east of SPK. Where do they get the 3rd engine in that case? And when the EB runs with only 2 engines east of SPK, where do the third engine (either one of the SEA engine or the PDX engine) go to? And how do the switching work at SPK (I've seen the ALB switching, but slept thru the SPK switching)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×