turbo trains

[AlanB]

I think it is a political no-win to keep $70 million worth of newly rebuilt high speed trainsets in storage. New York seems interested in using the Turbos for the express New York - Albany train. What else could be holding up the service?

Well only NY State is interested in using the Turboliners for the express train, Amtrak isn't interested in using them for the service. There is no benefit to them over just using a P32-ACDM and some Amfleets, but there are many reasons for not using the Turbos.

As for what's holding up the implimentation of the new express service, it's mainly the still on-going lawsuit between NY State and Amtrak.

Let's not forget something here, that being that NY State gets an aweful lot of Amtrak service for free. In fact there is no other state in the Union that has an many Amtrak trains running that only serve that state, yet pays so little to help keep those trains running. NY State helps to support the Adirondack and nothing else. Yet it gets dozens of Empire State trains, the daily Maple Leaf, and the daily Ethan Allen, without contrubuting one dime.

Now granted fares are higher on these trains, in large part because there is no help from the State of NY. But again, no other state has so many trains essentially running for free! :angry: And as a New York resident, I can complain about this. Even if those trains never run again, NY still hasn't paid their due for the amount of Amtrak service that it gets for free.

Starting in October of last year Illinios just started paying Amtrak a little over $24 Million each year to run 16 daily trains. NY State for close to 20 years has been getting over 24 trains each day and is only helping to pay for 2!

To allow these trainsets to simply waste away after all of the money spent on them is unacceptable, and borderline criminal, imo. New York taxpayers should not allow another dime to go toward the state's high speed rail program until a use is found for the equipment that taxpayers already bought.

Well while I'll admit that it is a waste of money, the problem is that it was a waste of money from the beginning. Yet a few politician's wanted it to look like they were doing something, and create some jobs for NY residents in the process. The whole plan was ill conceived from the beginning and made with the worst Amtrak President so far IMHO, Mr. George "Glidepath" Warrington.

On the other hand, if a fox breaks into the hen house, do you shoot the chickens for letting him in? :unsure:

Personally I'd shoot the fox, or maybe the dog who was supposed to be guarding the hen house, not the chickens.

If NY taxpayers don't allow more money to go towards high-speed rail work, just because NY got burned on the Turboliners, then they are only penalizing themselves. What NY taxpayers need to be doing is to hold accountable the legislators that led us down the not so prime rose path. And of course they should be making sure that future monies are properly spent. But not trying to continue to improve things just because Amtrak took away 3 of our toys, makes no sense.

The Hudson line can still stand considerable improvements. Right now much of the line can't handle speeds over 79MPH. Yes there are a few 90 MPH stretches and maybe even one stretch higher, but much of the line is slower than it needs to be. The P32-ACDM's are capable of operating at 110 MPH, and the Amfleets also can handle that speed. So if NY State pays CSX to upgrade those tracks, NY State can have higher speed rail service even without the Turboliners.

NY State could also pay CSX to put back the second track between ALB and SDY, which would greatly improve service and eliminate a huge bottleneck. They don't need the Turbos for that either.

 

[VT Hokie]

Well only NY State is interested in using the Turboliners for the express train, Amtrak isn't interested in using them for the service. There is no benefit to them over just using a P32-ACDM and some Amfleets, but there are many reasons for not using the Turbos.

I disagree. Having ridden both the old, worn out Amfleets on the Empire Corridor and the refurbished Turboliners, I'd say there is a benefit to running the Turboliners. They are certainly nicer, ride more smoothly than Amfleet cars, and I'd be willing to pay more to ride aboard them. I don't know if New York plans on charging a premium fare for the express train, but if so, it needs decent equipment.

 

[jamesontheroad]

There are so many legal, political and technical problems with the Turboliners that the time has probably come to move on and look towards the next generation of trains that will replace current Amfleets. We don't know when that will be, but since it's going to take a long time to design, develop and implement them, it would make much more sense to invest in them rather than trying to save the Turboliners.

Bottom line: listen to your gran and remember that it's best not to throw good money after bad.

This 'next generation' is some way off, but it could, for instance, be based on or around Bombardier's JetTrain concept. This is, incidentally, reportedly being considered by Bombardier as a contender for the long term replacement of Britain's thirty year old Intercity 125 fleet, which was announced by Parliament earlier this year. That might be the closest to the the spirit of the Turbotrain living on.

*j* :blink:

 

[Penn Central]

Well only NY State is interested in using the Turboliners for the express train, Amtrak isn't interested in using them for the service. There is no benefit to them over just using a P32-ACDM and some Amfleets, but there are many reasons for not using the Turbos.

There are only 18 P32-ACDM's that have to handle all trains coming into Penn Station from the north. There's barely enough as it is, and sometimes an AEM-7 has to push trains out of Penn Station for a P42 to pick up because there's no P32 available. The advantage to using the Turboliners wuld be that it would free up P32's to be used elswhere, or to be able to eliminate the engine change at Albany for trains such as the Ethan Allen Express. Of course, it would be cheaper to simply order more P32's, but New York doesn't seem interested in that .

 

[had8ley]

Well only NY State is interested in using the Turboliners for the express train, Amtrak isn't interested in using them for the service. There is no benefit to them over just using a P32-ACDM and some Amfleets, but there are many reasons for not using the Turbos.

I disagree. Having ridden both the old, worn out Amfleets on the Empire Corridor and the refurbished Turboliners, I'd say there is a benefit to running the Turboliners. They are certainly nicer, ride more smoothly than Amfleet cars, and I'd be willing to pay more to ride aboard them. I don't know if New York plans on charging a premium fare for the express train, but if so, it needs decent equipment.

I have to agree with the ride. The business class was in the power car and you had to walk to the cafe car but oh, what a smooth ride. I was also amazed at how quiet the engine was as I walked up to the cab. It put a GM prime mover to shame. There won't be any hearing claims from someone running Turboliners. And again, the view from the cab of the Hudson was unobstructed and just breathe taking going down river in the dead of winter.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

First NY gets very little for free if you realize NY paid for 18 P32acdm's and those are only to be used in NY.

Second With NY state maintaining most of Hudson line and lower part of New Haven line its Amtrak that gets a bargain , they are charged nearly nothing for those services.

The Turbo's will never run again, and last I hear was both sides dropped all legal action pertaining to the Turbo's, cause a lot of dust would be kicked up on both sides, and politicians don't want dust.

 

[AlanB]

Well only NY State is interested in using the Turboliners for the express train, Amtrak isn't interested in using them for the service. There is no benefit to them over just using a P32-ACDM and some Amfleets, but there are many reasons for not using the Turbos.

There are only 18 P32-ACDM's that have to handle all trains coming into Penn Station from the north. There's barely enough as it is, and sometimes an AEM-7 has to push trains out of Penn Station for a P42 to pick up because there's no P32 available. The advantage to using the Turboliners wuld be that it would free up P32's to be used elswhere, or to be able to eliminate the engine change at Albany for trains such as the Ethan Allen Express. Of course, it would be cheaper to simply order more P32's, but New York doesn't seem interested in that .

First, AFAIK there is no catenary in the Empire connection tunnel, only third rail. So a push by a 7 would be a big problem.

Second, Amtrak keeps no P42's at Sunnyside, so one would have to be deadheaded either from Philly or Albany to pick up any train even if an AEM-7 could shove the train out of Penn.

Third, if there were a shortage of P32's then Amtrak would ensure that every train hitting ALB and continuing north or west of there would have the P32 cut off and replaced with a P42. That however isn't happening. P32's are being found all along the Empire corridor out to Niagara Falls and I even seen reports that they've been found in Toronto at the head end of the Leaf.

 

[AlanB]

First NY gets very little for free if you realize NY paid for 18 P32acdm's and those are only to be used in NY.Second With NY state maintaining most of Hudson line and lower part of New Haven line its Amtrak that gets a bargain , they are charged nearly nothing for those services.

And California still pays 3 or 4 times what NY is paying by allowing the passage of a few Amtrak trains on Metro North tracks. And even then NY State isn't paying the full costs of operating those lines either. The riding public is probably paying 50% of those costs and many of those riders are from CT. There's even some NYC monies that get mixed up into that equation too. Now if MN was maintaining their tracks to allow Amtrak higher speeds than MN trains are capable of, then I might be more inclined to agree that NY was making a bigger contribution to Amtrak. But they aren't and there is far more wear and tear created by the many, many more MN trains than by a few Amtrak trains.

And the cost's of 18 P32's is nothing when compared to 30 years of Amtrak service, maintaining those P32's, staffing the trains, buying the fuel, maintaining stations, and so on. And that's just for Empire Service. Throw Penn into the mix and the number of riders on the NEC, and what NY gets for free is stunning.

Now that said I will grant that NY State does spend a considerable amount of money running the MTA, after all it is the largest transportation organization in the US. But if Amtrak were to cut all NY orientated service, NY State would be paying a lot more to keep things running than they put into the MTA right now.

On the other hand, California owns more than half the Amtrak cars and engines, pays for major upgrades to the tracks, and then still pays Amtrak to run the trains. It simply doesn't compare to NY IMHO.

The Turbo's will never run again, and last I hear was both sides dropped all legal action pertaining to the Turbo's, cause a lot of dust would be kicked up on both sides, and politicians don't want dust.

Hmm, I hadn't heard that the suit had been dropped. Do you have any details when this happened? Or what resolution was worked out?

 

[AlanB]

Well only NY State is interested in using the Turboliners for the express train, Amtrak isn't interested in using them for the service. There is no benefit to them over just using a P32-ACDM and some Amfleets, but there are many reasons for not using the Turbos.

I disagree. Having ridden both the old, worn out Amfleets on the Empire Corridor and the refurbished Turboliners, I'd say there is a benefit to running the Turboliners. They are certainly nicer, ride more smoothly than Amfleet cars, and I'd be willing to pay more to ride aboard them. I don't know if New York plans on charging a premium fare for the express train, but if so, it needs decent equipment.

That might be one benefit, but there are also many refurbished Amfleets out on the rails now.

And believe it or not, there are actually many people who hated the Turboliners. Prior to Amtrak's removing them from service, there were several articles in the local press where people were complaining about the Turbos. Some even adjusted their travel schedules to avoid riding in a Turbo.

But the fuel costs to run them were much higher than a P32, they required different parts and tools to work on, and then there were the issues with the A/C, lack of parts, lack of manuals, and a host of other problems.

By the way, one other thought, part of the reason that it cost $70M was because the first company that NY State hired to rebuild them, went out of business in the middle of the first two sets. By the time they resolved that problem, costs had gone up and some things had to be redone I understand.

While it was perhaps a novel idea, the entire Turboliner deal was a bad deal for both Amtrak and NY State right from the start. And sadly things only went downhill from there.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

Allan CT does not come into mix as their part of new haven line does not start to just east of Port Chester.

NYS pays all incremental cost for maintaining track from CP75 to Buffalo for passenger speeds.

NYS by way of MTA pays for trackage dispatching and signaling from CP12 to CP75 and CP216 to port chester, no money involved from riding public.

The state of California owns loco's and cars but no track and has no other capital expenditures other than maintaining the locomotives and cars..

You claim NY gets things for free they do not thats all I am saying.

btw the Empire tunnel has catenary and third rain in it, the catenary extends to the wye at about 46th street.

When there is shortage of P32acdm's Amtrak will run P42's down on trains and the sunny side yard crew will catch the train at the wye with an electric motor.

 

[AlanB]

Allan CT does not come into mix as their part of new haven line does not start to just east of Port Chester.

I agree, I wasn't saying that the State of CT helps to maintain NY's tracks. I am however suggesting that MN evaluates the wear and tear of all those MN trains from New Haven carrying CT commuters, on NY's State's tracks and adding something to the fares collected from those CT commuters. I could be wrong, but I can't imagine that NY is willing to pay for all that wear and tear on its tracks for a line that probably 60% to 70% of the ridership comes from CT.

NYS pays all incremental cost for maintaining track from CP75 to Buffalo for passenger speeds.

That I wasn't aware of, in fact I don't think that I've ever heard anyone even suggest that. Interesting!

NYS by way of MTA pays for trackage dispatching and signaling from CP12 to CP75 and CP216 to port chester, no money involved from riding public.

Yes, but NY State would be maintaining that for MN no matter whether Amtrak was running trains or not. Therefore I personally don't count that as supporting Amtrak, unless as I mentioned above, they are supporting higher speeds than MN trains can run at.

As for money from the riding public, are you suggesting that the MTA does such a good job at keeping their books that they actually seperate the monies collected from fares from the monies sent by the State, and absolutely only ever use those State funds only to maintain the tracks. I for one can't imagine why anyone would do that, much less be required to do that. After all, the point of collecting fares on the trains is to help offset the costs of running those trains. That includes all costs, labor, operating, and capital.

The state of California owns loco's and cars but no track and has no other capital expenditures other than maintaining the locomotives and cars..

The State of California has spent millions of dollars upgrading the tracks owned by the freight Co's. For example over the last 7 years, the State of Cali has spent $72M just for upgrading the tracks used by trains on the Capital Corridor. And Cali's contribution to the direct operation of Capital Corridor trains has averaged about $23M each year for the past six years. And that's just for the Capitol Corridor's 28 daily trains, many more millions have been spent on the San Joaquins and the Surfliner routes, both for operations and for improvements.

You claim NY gets things for free they do not thats all I am saying.

I'm not claiming that NY get's everything for free, but IMHO they get far too much Amtrak service for free, especially by comparison to other states. And especially in light of the recent trend to get the states to pay for as much Amtrak service as possible.

btw the Empire tunnel has catenary and third rain in it, the catenary extends to the wye at about 46th street.When there is shortage of P32acdm's Amtrak will run P42's down on trains and the sunny side yard crew will catch the train at the wye with an electric motor.

Thanks for that. I wasn't aware that there was cat in that tunnel.

 

[VT Hokie]

That might be one benefit, but there are also many refurbished Amfleets out on the rails now.

Which are okay, but still not as nice as the RTL-III's imho.

And believe it or not, there are actually many people who hated the Turboliners. Prior to Amtrak's removing them from service, there were several articles in the local press where people were complaining about the Turbos. Some even adjusted their travel schedules to avoid riding in a Turbo.

That's surprising to me. Of course, I only traveled aboard the RTL-III during spring and fall, so I guess I never got to test the air conditioning. Heck, I'd pay a couple grand just to ride aboard the Turboliner one last time!

I agree that if New York wants to run the Turboliners, it should step up to the plate and cover the costs of doing so. Amtrak is obviously willing to operate oddball/non-standard equipment for state supported services. Just look at the Piedmont's Heritage cars and dedicated diesel fleet (GP-40's and F59PHI's as I recall), or the 5 Talgo sets in the Pacific Northwest.

 

[had8ley]

And believe it or not, there are actually many people who hated the Turboliners. Prior to Amtrak's removing them from service, there were several articles in the local press where people were complaining about the Turbos. Some even adjusted their travel schedules to avoid riding in a Turbo.

That's surprising to me. Of course, I only traveled aboard the RTL-III during spring and fall, so I guess I never got to test the air conditioning. Heck, I'd pay a couple grand just to ride aboard the Turboliner one last time!

I agree that if New York wants to run the Turboliners, it should step up to the plate and cover the costs of doing so. Amtrak is obviously willing to operate oddball/non-standard equipment for state supported services. Just look at the Piedmont's Heritage cars and dedicated diesel fleet (GP-40's and F59PHI's as I recall), or the 5 Talgo sets in the Pacific Northwest.

I actually sat for over two hours in the old Albany station snack bar JUST TO CATCH a Turbo. People in New York find some strange things to complain about...maybe that's why I left years ago. With a kazillion people in the Metro area I'm sure there are some who would not like ice cream too.

 

[AlanB]

And believe it or not, there are actually many people who hated the Turboliners. Prior to Amtrak's removing them from service, there were several articles in the local press where people were complaining about the Turbos. Some even adjusted their travel schedules to avoid riding in a Turbo.

That's surprising to me. Of course, I only traveled aboard the RTL-III during spring and fall, so I guess I never got to test the air conditioning. Heck, I'd pay a couple grand just to ride aboard the Turboliner one last time!

While the link within the topic is now broken, you can find one topic about the complaints here. Note: The story is actually still on the Albany Times Union's website, one can find it by searching for it. However, like many newspapers, they will charge you $2 just to read the whole thing. :angry:

 

[AlanB]

I actually sat for over two hours in the old Albany station snack bar JUST TO CATCH a Turbo. People in New York find some strange things to complain about...maybe that's why I left years ago. With a kazillion people in the Metro area I'm sure there are some who would not like ice cream too.

Oh, no doubt you could find some who wouldn't like ice cream. Weird people. :lol: :lol:

There are plenty who are complaining about the new M7 cars used by both Metro North and the LIRR. Personally I happen to like the cars and consider them a major improvement over the M1 and M3 cars on those two roads. I'm speaking in terms of passenger specific things, not mechanically.

Sadly I never got around to riding in the Turboliner III cars. I kept saying, "yeah, next week or next month." Figuring that they weren't going anywhere for a while. Boy was I wrong! :angry:

I would have loved to have gotten at least one ride, just for the experience.

 

[AmtrakWPK]

Figuring that they weren't going anywhere for a while. - Boy was I wrong!

Well, I dunno. You ended up being right - they're certainly not going anywhere NOW :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[PerRock]

The only way i could possibly see them EVER coming into service is if AMTK and NYSDOT dropped the old deal and wrote up a new one. but the way things are between the two i doubt if that'll happen.

peter

 

[VT Hokie]

While the link within the topic is now broken, you can find one topic about the complaints here. Note: The story is actually still on the Albany Times Union's website, one can find it by searching for it. However, like many newspapers, they will charge you $2 just to read the whole thing. :angry:

I just registered and paid the $2 to read the archived article. Basically, the author felt the aisles were too narrow (they may be narrower than those on Amfleets, but I don't remember it being unusually tight), and he didn't like the fact that the seats were fixed with some seats facing backwards. Much like NJ Transit's new bilevel cars, half the seats in the RTL-III coaches faced one direction, and half faced each other. Not a big deal to me, personally.

Thirdly, the author didn't like the way the seats reclined, and said that there was less room than in Amfleet coaches. The RTL-III seats sort of swiveled on a fixed support vs. having the seatback rotate backward. Again, I don't think that's a big deal at all for a 2 hour run. I would not, however, advocate using the Turbos on a long run like the Adirondack.

Finally, he stated that the coaches swayed too much. This simply doesn't jive with my experience. From what I can recall, the ride quality was better than that of Amfleet coaches. Some of the track could maybe use some work, but I think the ride quality on the Turboliners was decent.

 

[VT Hokie]

Here's a glimpse of what the interior looked like:

My brother aboard the RTL-III

Table at center of coach

 

[toddinde]

Maybe this is another example of the old saying, "Love is blind."

Yes, these things are fast. But, so far as I know, the record for speed on rails in North America is held by the jet powered RDC experiment done by New York Central.

My impression has been that these are very maintenance intensive pieces of equipment.

Electrification or lack thereof is a straw man. Diesel power does not require electrification either, and there are some very fast diesel trainsets out there. Aside from not having to carry around the generator of the electricity for the traction motors, the major benefit of electrification is that the source of the power can be, and should be anthing but oil.

And yes, these things are voracious fuel hogs.

Concerning the Turbos used on St. Louis to Chicago, and on to Milwaukee for a while: It was what happened when one of these things hit a garbage truck that had a lot to do with the ending of any exemption allowing the UIC hook and screw coupling. When the train compressed on impact, several of the hooks popped off, cars separated and crashed into each other.

George

 

[toddinde]

Actually, they were not maintenance intensive. They used a lot of fuel and were inflexible. I think Amtrak never figured out how to use them properly, and yield management would have solved the flexibility issue. They were nice trains. I had many cab rides in them between Chicago and Milwaukee.

 

[AG1]

toddinde, for your information, you replied to a 2007 thread.