New equipment for Amtrak

[Joel N. Weber II]

It occurs to me to wonder if another good option for baggage/something cars might be baggage/generator, since offloading generation from the P42s would improve overall energy efficiency and allow single P42 long distance trains to have redundant sources of HEP. Though if that were done, keeping exhaust from the generator out of Superliners might be a bit of a concern. And if the all the major freight tracks were electrified, I'm not sure if the diesel generators would still be considered useful.

 

[had8ley]

It occurs to me to wonder if another good option for baggage/something cars might be baggage/generator, since offloading generation from the P42s would improve overall energy efficiency and allow single P42 long distance trains to have redundant sources of HEP. Though if that were done, keeping exhaust from the generator out of Superliners might be a bit of a concern. And if the all the major freight tracks were electrified, I'm not sure if the diesel generators would still be considered useful.

I've posted my concern for diesel exhaust on this Forum in the past and no one seems to have found the same problem. Class 1 business car specials usually carry a generator car, I think the Denver Ski Train used to and the Alaska RR carries one. Might not be a bad idea after all.

 

[AlanB]

As it stands right now with 1 crew dorm, 4 sleepers, 2 deluxe sleepers, 3 diners, 2 cafes, and 5 to 6 coaches, they are basically maxing out the HEP system. Now granted that a normal LD might not have 3 dining cars, but still there isn't too much wiggle room there. If I had to guess I'd say that 20 cars is about the max that the HEP system can handle under the current circumstances.

Couldn't they simply stick a generator car or P42 at the back of the string of passenger cars, and divide the passenger cars roughly in half and feed the front half from one of the locomotives at the front of the train, and the back half of the passenger cars from the generator car or P42 at the back of the string of passenger cars? Granted if they wanted to get traction power from a P42 at the back they'd need to run MU cables through all the passenger cars, but if you don't care about efficiency, I think you could just tow a P42 that was doing nothing but powering the passenger cars towards the back.

I'm far from an expert on these things, but my understanding is that they can't do that. Reason, the crew in engine must be in control of the entire HEP system under FRA regs. They wouldn't be in control and able to turn off the HEP from a generator car at the rear of the train.

 

[AlanB]

It occurs to me to wonder if another good option for baggage/something cars might be baggage/generator, since offloading generation from the P42s would improve overall energy efficiency and allow single P42 long distance trains to have redundant sources of HEP. Though if that were done, keeping exhaust from the generator out of Superliners might be a bit of a concern. And if the all the major freight tracks were electrified, I'm not sure if the diesel generators would still be considered useful.

And now you've got more engines to maintain, more fuel and storage of same that is needed, and probably a potential safety hazard.

Not to mention the exhaust problem, although that's usually less of an issue if one has a trans/dorm at the head end.

 

[MattW]

As it stands right now with 1 crew dorm, 4 sleepers, 2 deluxe sleepers, 3 diners, 2 cafes, and 5 to 6 coaches, they are basically maxing out the HEP system. Now granted that a normal LD might not have 3 dining cars, but still there isn't too much wiggle room there. If I had to guess I'd say that 20 cars is about the max that the HEP system can handle under the current circumstances.

Couldn't they simply stick a generator car or P42 at the back of the string of passenger cars, and divide the passenger cars roughly in half and feed the front half from one of the locomotives at the front of the train, and the back half of the passenger cars from the generator car or P42 at the back of the string of passenger cars? Granted if they wanted to get traction power from a P42 at the back they'd need to run MU cables through all the passenger cars, but if you don't care about efficiency, I think you could just tow a P42 that was doing nothing but powering the passenger cars towards the back.

I'm far from an expert on these things, but my understanding is that they can't do that. Reason, the crew in engine must be in control of the entire HEP system under FRA regs. They wouldn't be in control and able to turn off the HEP from a generator car at the rear of the train.

Then how can the Great smokey Mountains Railroad do it? When I rode it, they had a generator car that was just behind the locomotives from Bryson-Nantahala then on the end of the train fron Nantahala to Bryson. Or did they get special premission?

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

As it stands right now with 1 crew dorm, 4 sleepers, 2 deluxe sleepers, 3 diners, 2 cafes, and 5 to 6 coaches, they are basically maxing out the HEP system. Now granted that a normal LD might not have 3 dining cars, but still there isn't too much wiggle room there. If I had to guess I'd say that 20 cars is about the max that the HEP system can handle under the current circumstances.

Couldn't they simply stick a generator car or P42 at the back of the string of passenger cars, and divide the passenger cars roughly in half and feed the front half from one of the locomotives at the front of the train, and the back half of the passenger cars from the generator car or P42 at the back of the string of passenger cars? Granted if they wanted to get traction power from a P42 at the back they'd need to run MU cables through all the passenger cars, but if you don't care about efficiency, I think you could just tow a P42 that was doing nothing but powering the passenger cars towards the back.

I'm far from an expert on these things, but my understanding is that they can't do that. Reason, the crew in engine must be in control of the entire HEP system under FRA regs. They wouldn't be in control and able to turn off the HEP from a generator car at the rear of the train.

If that sort of control is needed, it might not be too hard to build some special connectors that would go between the two cars that form the boundary between the frount HEP system and the back HEP system, and basically would make the back HEP system think there was a disconnected cable somewhere (which I think would cause the rear HEP source to shut down) if power on the front HEP system was lost. Assuming my vague understanding of how the control system for HEP works is correct, anyway (I believe there are some control lines that are basically designed to prevent turning on the power to the coaches if any of the cables aren't plugged in).

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

It occurs to me to wonder if another good option for baggage/something cars might be baggage/generator, since offloading generation from the P42s would improve overall energy efficiency and allow single P42 long distance trains to have redundant sources of HEP. Though if that were done, keeping exhaust from the generator out of Superliners might be a bit of a concern. And if the all the major freight tracks were electrified, I'm not sure if the diesel generators would still be considered useful.

And now you've got more engines to maintain, more fuel and storage of same that is needed, and probably a potential safety hazard.

Not to mention the exhaust problem, although that's usually less of an issue if one has a trans/dorm at the head end.

Where along the length of a P42 is the exhaust? If you had a baggage/generator car, you could put the generator exhaust at one end of that car and try to get the crews who assemble the trainsets to put the generator at the front end of the car, which would probably help some (assuming the baggage car is right behind the locomotives, anyway, which I think is typically true everywhere except the New York City section of the Lake Shore Limited).

If your options for making sure you don't have passengers stuck for hours in cars with no HVAC even if one P42 breaks are to either run two P42s, or run one P42 with a generator car, I really doubt that second P42 is any bargin in fuel storage and maintenance compared to the generator car.

And total fuel consumption per train ought to go down with the generator car, given that the P42 won't be stuck at 1800/3600 RPM.

 

[SUNSETLIMITED01]

With regard to trains that are 30 cars long, we won't be seeing them either unless Amtrak not only gets new equipment, but also performs a major overhaul on the various electrical systems in the Superliner cars. Under the current conditions the one train that Amtrak might actually wish to make longer, the Auto Train and they probably have the equipment to do it, they can't make it much longer than it already is. And I'm not counting the auto carriers, I'm just talking passenger cars.
As it stands right now with 1 crew dorm, 4 sleepers, 2 deluxe sleepers, 3 diners, 2 cafes, and 5 to 6 coaches, they are basically maxing out the HEP system. Now granted that a normal LD might not have 3 dining cars, but still there isn't too much wiggle room there. If I had to guess I'd say that 20 cars is about the max that the HEP system can handle under the current circumstances.

There is a youtube video of the Auto train back in 1994 with 22 passenger cars behind it(not counting autoracks).

 

[AlanB]

With regard to trains that are 30 cars long, we won't be seeing them either unless Amtrak not only gets new equipment, but also performs a major overhaul on the various electrical systems in the Superliner cars. Under the current conditions the one train that Amtrak might actually wish to make longer, the Auto Train and they probably have the equipment to do it, they can't make it much longer than it already is. And I'm not counting the auto carriers, I'm just talking passenger cars.
As it stands right now with 1 crew dorm, 4 sleepers, 2 deluxe sleepers, 3 diners, 2 cafes, and 5 to 6 coaches, they are basically maxing out the HEP system. Now granted that a normal LD might not have 3 dining cars, but still there isn't too much wiggle room there. If I had to guess I'd say that 20 cars is about the max that the HEP system can handle under the current circumstances.

There is a youtube video of the Auto train back in 1994 with 22 passenger cars behind it(not counting autoracks).

Was that a video of a Superliner equiped AT or was it a single level consist, as Bombardier was still delivering the Superliner II's through 1995. I don't recall when the AT was converted over to SL-II.

 

[AlanB]

Where along the length of a P42 is the exhaust? If you had a baggage/generator car, you could put the generator exhaust at one end of that car and try to get the crews who assemble the trainsets to put the generator at the front end of the car, which would probably help some (assuming the baggage car is right behind the locomotives, anyway, which I think is typically true everywhere except the New York City section of the Lake Shore Limited).
If your options for making sure you don't have passengers stuck for hours in cars with no HVAC even if one P42 breaks are to either run two P42s, or run one P42 with a generator car, I really doubt that second P42 is any bargin in fuel storage and maintenance compared to the generator car.

And total fuel consumption per train ought to go down with the generator car, given that the P42 won't be stuck at 1800/3600 RPM.

I never sat and measured, but it looks to me to be about the middle of the engine. However Amtrak usually tries not to position diesels next to the station when possible. Any arriving train is moved out pretty quickly to keep the exhaust out of CUS for example. Placing a generator car on the rear of the train would park the exhaust right by the doors to the station for potentially an hour or more on some occasions.

And while you're right a second P42 isn't a bargin when compared to a generator car, it is when you consider the other factors. Things like Amtrak already owns them and doesn't need to waste money building generator cars and training people to use and maintain them, as well as stocking parts for them. And then there is the fact that just about any train pulling that many cars is going to need a second, and maybe even a third or fourth, engine to get over the road. And even on a flat road with fewer cars, the second P42 still helps with acceleration and that is important.

Finally if we're gonna start spending money on building new cars, they might as well be new Superliner III's with better AC systems and 480 power cables that can carry a heavier power load, rather than jumping through hoops to divide the train into two seperate HEP systems with a generator car. And as for the dead P42 issue, hopefully the next loco fleet will go with the F59 setup for HEP.

 

[AlanB]

As it stands right now with 1 crew dorm, 4 sleepers, 2 deluxe sleepers, 3 diners, 2 cafes, and 5 to 6 coaches, they are basically maxing out the HEP system. Now granted that a normal LD might not have 3 dining cars, but still there isn't too much wiggle room there. If I had to guess I'd say that 20 cars is about the max that the HEP system can handle under the current circumstances.

Couldn't they simply stick a generator car or P42 at the back of the string of passenger cars, and divide the passenger cars roughly in half and feed the front half from one of the locomotives at the front of the train, and the back half of the passenger cars from the generator car or P42 at the back of the string of passenger cars? Granted if they wanted to get traction power from a P42 at the back they'd need to run MU cables through all the passenger cars, but if you don't care about efficiency, I think you could just tow a P42 that was doing nothing but powering the passenger cars towards the back.

I'm far from an expert on these things, but my understanding is that they can't do that. Reason, the crew in engine must be in control of the entire HEP system under FRA regs. They wouldn't be in control and able to turn off the HEP from a generator car at the rear of the train.

Then how can the Great smokey Mountains Railroad do it? When I rode it, they had a generator car that was just behind the locomotives from Bryson-Nantahala then on the end of the train fron Nantahala to Bryson. Or did they get special premission?

I honestly don't know and as I said, I'm far from an expert on this. But I'm guessing that either tourist RR's have different regs than Amtrak, or perhaps they got an exemption, or perhaps they have a crew member on duty in the generator car.

 

[lrdc9_metroplitan_sub]

Desert Wind consists of 1 P42s, a Trans/Dorm, a sleeper, a Cross Country Cafe, a coach/bag, and a coach. For this we need 10 P42s, 5 Trans/Dorms, 5 Sleepers, 5 CCCs, 5 coaches, and 5 coach/baggage cars.

Not to question what GML says but . . . I have always held the opinion that LV, NV may be better served by bus. The region that train travels is sparsly populated and it seem there would not be sufficient demand to justify a daily train. 3x a week maybe . . . but daily, I think not.

The table of primary census areas says that the greater Las Vegas area has about 1.88 million people. That somehow is failing to strike me as sparsely populated.

Yes, Las Vegas is not a cow town. That was not my point. The point was that theremainder of the route is barely dotted with tiny towns. 3 major cities and nothing else. The route would be used, but to serve commun tites with no air service where trains would be more useful I belive resources could be devoted in better ways.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

And as for the dead P42 issue, hopefully the next loco fleet will go with the F59 setup for HEP.

I'm hoping the next locomotive fleet will be all catenary/third rail.

 

[wrjensen]

After traveling out of WAS lately I have wondered if you could create new sleeper and Diners out Kawasaki cars like the ones on the MARC. They have no problem with the Cantary or high platforms, I am not sure if the would fit under the tunnels leading to NYP. The cars would allow for the creation of larger bi level dinners and sleepers which could be used with the Amfleet coaches and cafes.

 

[AlanB]

After traveling out of WAS lately I have wondered if you could create new sleeper and Diners out Kawasaki cars like the ones on the MARC. They have no problem with the Cantary or high platforms, I am not sure if the would fit under the tunnels leading to NYP. The cars would allow for the creation of larger bi level dinners and sleepers which could be used with the Amfleet coaches and cafes.

First, no, the Kawasaki cars that were built for MARC will not fit into the Hudson River tunnels. Only the specially designed NJT multi-level cars fit into the Hudson River tunnels.

And while either car might work well as a dining car, they won't make for good sleepers, unless Amtrak changes the design of the sleeper rooms. Namely, dropping the upper bunk. There's barely any room right now between the ceiling and the upper bunk on a Superliner sleeper. Drop 3.25 inches and even someone like me, 5'11" and 160 lbs will start having problems fitting into the upper bunk. I'm not sure just how much shorter the NJT multi-level car is, but we can't afford to loose any more height and still keep the upper bunks.