Regional New England Rail (Amtrak & State DOT & NEC)

stick n move said:
They look damn good in the wild imo:

20210125-DJI_0805-Niles-Michigan-St.-Joseph-River-Marc-Glucksman2.jpg

Web-idtx-4004-exterior-8-26-20-ap.jpg

6719.1596129440.jpg

Amtrak-Venture-Coach-Chicago-Luke-Malin-via-Facebook.jpg

https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/intercity/watch-siemens-midwest-amtrak-ventures/
Click to expand...

WOW!!!! I wonder if Amtrak will ever think about replacing their decades-old Amfleet cars & diesel locomotives that run along the Regional Northeast Corridor & the Eastern Seaboard to Florida past Washington, DC with these beautiful brand spanking new shiny babies!! :)
 
Last edited:
Question; Why are the new Acela trains only using one of their pantographs to connect with the overhead catenary wire instead of both of them? I thought that the power car in the front pulls while the one in the back pushes the train along. Like with the old Acelas.
 
Last edited:
Jahvon09 said:
Question; Why are the new Acela trains only using one of their pantographs to connect with the overhead catenary wire instead of both of them? I thought that the power car in the front pulls while the one in the back pushes the train. Like with the old Acelas.
Click to expand...
Aveilas run rear-pans-up, and there's cabling throughout the set to power up both power cars at once even though only one of them is touching the wire. This is typical to how most HSR trains operate. The rear pan is so that if the pantograph gets snagged on the wire (which is a common problem on HSR lines) the wire falls down well clear of the train.

The Acela I's run front-pans-up all of the time because they have reliability issues powering the whole set through rear-car contact. And they frequently run both pans up because the power cars fleet-wide have so many old-age reliability problems.
 
I vaguely recall that running both-pans-up can cause oscillation problems in the wire at certain speeds.
 
Doesn't seem to be a problem with the older Acelas. Are the new ones using more power? :unsure:
 
Jahvon09 said:
Doesn't seem to be a problem with the older Acelas. Are the new ones using more power? :unsure:
Click to expand...
It is a problem with the older Acelas. They're not supposed to require 2 pantographs up, but they're so unreliable at sustaining a power draw that 2-pans-up is frequently used as a crutch.

The new ones have no such issue. They can retain an even power draw across the whole set with only the rear pantograph up. It's a much better setup, much less punishing on the overhead and the power cars, much closer to world best practice.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
It is a problem with the older Acelas. They're not supposed to require 2 pantographs up, but they're so unreliable at sustaining a power draw that 2-pans-up is frequently used as a crutch.

The new ones have no such issue. They can retain an even power draw across the whole set with only the rear pantograph up. It's a much better setup, much less punishing on the overhead and the power cars, much closer to world best practice.
Click to expand...

Now the older Acelas seem to run a little slower than the new Acelas, which gain up to 165 mph in some areas! That's almost at 170 mph!! :eek:
 
ceo said:
That's kind of exactly what they're doing here.
Click to expand...
It was said 2 years ago that Amtrak was in the process of procuring new rail cars to replace their decades-old Amfleets & Superliners. This is probably after they are done getting the new Acelas on the tracks for their Boston to Washington service. :)
 
Jahvon09 said:
Now the older Acelas seem to run a little slower than the new Acelas, which gain up to 165 mph in some areas! That's almost at 170 mph!! :eek:
Click to expand...

The A1's have a design speed of 170. They've been tested at 170 in non-revenue service. They were supposed to be uprated to 165 in revenue service, but that was postponed until the new fleet because of reliability issues. They're not "slower" per se; they're "too unreliable" to run at full-throttle. The power cars' current collection problems had a little something to do with that. Front-pans-up is generally less forgiving on the hardware than rear-pans-up, and both-pans-up really really beats the snot out of both the overhead and the electronics at speeds >125 MPH. But the A1's tilt mechanisms are such a godawful P.O.S. hodgepodge design that's aging in such dog years they have to run the pantograph setup ass-backwards vs. best-practices to overcompensate for the poor electrical contact. Can't get those things retired fast enough.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Aveilas run rear-pans-up, and there's cabling throughout the set to power up both power cars at once even though only one of them is touching the wire. This is typical to how most HSR trains operate. The rear pan is so that if the pantograph gets snagged on the wire (which is a common problem on HSR lines) the wire falls down well clear of the train.

The Acela I's run front-pans-up all of the time because they have reliability issues powering the whole set through rear-car contact. And they frequently run both pans up because the power cars fleet-wide have so many old-age reliability problems.
Click to expand...

Like an old 747 that can't hold it's own water!! :eek:
 
Last edited:
F-Line to Dudley said:
Yes...aerodynamics with bi-levels. There are no bi's on corridor routes in the Midwest. On Caltrans a majority of the routes are bi-level.
Click to expand...
Pics to illustrate:

Caltrans Charger hauling bi-level Cali Cars on the Capitol Corridor:
1024px-Capitol_Corridor_leaving_Suisun_City_station_(1)%2C_November_2019.jpg

The roof fin is a precise match for the Cali Cars/Surfliner/Superliner car height (16'2"). Had Nippon-Sharyo not effed up the Midwest bi-level order to contract cancellation, the Midwest Chargers probably would've gotten the same fin. With only single-levels to haul, however, it's anti-aerodynamic to have the fin at all in front of the much shorter Ventures/Viewliners/Amfleets/Horizons.


Cap Corridor train hauled by a similar-height Genesis:
Southbound_Capitol_Corridor_passing_through_Alviso%2C_July_2016.jpg

Oof. That's enough wind resistance right there to negatively impact acceleration and probably make sitting in the upper level of the first car a seasick experience in high headwinds.


Cap Corridor train hauled by the now-retired F59PHI locos:
Capitol_Corridor_Pinole.jpg

Same roof height so it's all pretty aerodynamic. The F59's and Cali cars were procured within a couple years of each other in the early-90's. Reason why you almost never see F59's on the East Coast is that, much like the Superliner form factor, they're simply too tall to fit in a lot of low-clearance spots around here.


Note that the national order of ALC-42 Chargers don't have the roof fins, even though an outright majority of long-distance schedules are Superliner-equipped. This is because the single-level Viewliner baggage cars are by-practice stacked to the front of the train right behind the loco, with the first bi-level car always set much further back in any LD consist configuration. The airflow is better-dispersed by that point 2-3 cars back so the flat face of the first bi-level isn't such a performance impediment. And if you ever needed a roof fin in the first place for that setup, the baggage car right in front of the first bi-level would be the one that needs it not the leading loco.
 
Last edited:
Amtrak IS planning to replace the old Amfleet cars at some point & time, but it hasn't said when.
 
Jahvon09 said:
Amtrak IS planning to replace the old Amfleet cars at some point & time, but it hasn't said when.
Click to expand...

Yes...they....have.

AMTK.jpg


That's what we've been talking about for 2 whole pages now.

Why are you spamming this topic with the same feigned ignorance over and over and over again??? Are you expecting that action will result in a different timetable than what has been confirmed over and over and over and over?
 
Note that Amfleet I (and Horizons, that we don’t see on the NEC) are the “Corridor”mainstays and replacing them in the Siemens order means new trains on State Supported (MA, CT, VT, ME) routes

Long Distance fleet is being separately replanned and consists of Amfleet II (1980 era single levels) Viewliners (2015 era single level sleepers) and the ancient and recent western double decker Superliners.
 
Yes I believe it belongs here. Particularly since it really uses segments that we have discussed as part of a New England centric network.

I know that ArchBoston has in fact discussed every single sub element of this plan:
  • HSR (or Amtrak)via LIRR
  • Trans Sound tunnels
  • HSR NHV to SPG (including electrification and a new bridge)
  • HSR Hartford Providence Cutoff
so I wouldn’t expect particularly new answers and you might Google research on the site to know what we’ve already thought
 
As I read Vtrans website about the Ethan Allan Express extension to Burlington (via Middlebury), they seem like they'll be ready in early 2022:
Phase 1-Realignment of the tracks to the east, removal of the platform canopy at Union Station and stormwater and utility work - Completed, Fall 2020
Phase 2-Construction of the new platform at Union Station;... - Ongoing, Spring and Summer 2021
Phase 3- Reconstruction of the railroad crossings at King Street and Maple Street; Vermont Rail Systems railyard to accommodate the overnighting of the Ethan Allen Express train -
Planned for late Summer through early Winter, 2021
Phase 4a- Realignment of LaValley Lane, south of Maple Street, to install new tracks for the Ethan Allen Express - Planned for Fall 2021
Phase 4b-Final work in Vermont Rail Systems railyard to accommodate the overnighting of the Ethan Allen Express - Planned for Fall through early Winter, 2021
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top