Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

HSRR

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by HSRR

  1. It's nothing personal, your grammar is basic. See spot. See spot run. If you are going to "call out" someone for a forum post, you should have better tact and a better sentence structure than a third grader. I'll gladly call out anyone who is an over pretentiousness grammar Nazi that resorts to that because he was wrong. Move on and mature.
  2. If you are going to be nasty, then I will not contribute to the conversation. Maybe you should pay attention to spelling and grammar in your posts. They are far from Pulitzer prize winning. The links I have found are seem to be dead, there are a couple of threads from railroad.net and yahoo that say the same thing and have dead links to the IG report.
  3. The report stopped just short of calling it fraud, but stated that the specs, tests and criteria were seriously flawed. GE could have sued, but GE didn't want that fight right after being sued by NYS for polluting the Hudson. I'm trying to dig up the report, but lord the IG website has no reports from before 2008 and is pretty terrible. The LIRR got the DM30AC for fairly cheap. It's a decent loco, but far from great.
  4. Have to completely forgotten what the Inspector Generals findings on the DM30AC vs P32? All of those claims of the MTA and EMD were proven false. EMD lied and continued to lie about the capabilities of the DM30AC. They were rated at 2,888 hp under electric, but in reality produced 2,400hp when actual hep loads were applied. The DM30AC could never and will never reach max operating speeds (80 mph) under electric only and can't spend much time in electric. Also the acceleration and braking times were fabricated. The LIRR modified the DM30AC to bring it back in line with the specs, but that never panned out correctly, infact it further hindered the DM30AC The IG findings didn't come out until after the DM30AC were delivered, if it would have come out sooner, EMD would not have gotten that contract. Jamaica to Penn is 12 miles at no higher that 40mph. If the EMD's were designed to run on electric solely then the diesel engine wouldn't have to be fired until far east of Jamaica, depending on line. The cannonball should if the DM30AC was up to snuff to run on electric from penn to babylon. The LIRR has shown favoritism to EMD for a long time and it has bite them in the rear end. 12 miles is a lot you might think, but NJT ALP's run at full speed (over 80 mph) on either electric or diesel for more than 30 miles. It could be pantograph vs third rail, but third rail provides more than enough power to motivate a heavy trainset.
  5. The DMs while running from diesel are 3000 hp, running from the third rail the hp is greatly reduced and they can't run on the third rail at high speeds or for a long time. The LIRR modified them and made matters worse.
  6. It comes down to horsepower. LIRR uses EMD DE30AC that produce barely 2,400 horse power when running on the third rail and can't run for long on electric without over heating. Amtrak uses P32ACDM which produce 3,200 hp while running on the third rail. The LIRR EMD's can't pull those longer sets while running on third rail. The shorter sets are also affected by large gaps in the third rail.
  7. You are 100% correct. Keep in mind that the french gov't has its fingers really deep into alstom. I get a distinct impression that The French gov't wants to employ as small foreign work force as possible. Alstom started shuttering rail production facilities right after the first TGV was built. Yes Bombardier is Canadian, The "buy American" requirement really just refers to where the train is built, not where the corporation/company is headquartered. Part of the RFP requirement is that the bidder has to have a functioning High speed Train that is in regular service today. GE doesn't produce a high speed train, it might be able to, but it doesn't have one built already and in service. On the rail side, GE locos are starting to show their age, but GE's diesel engines are work horses that don't break down. GE is completely out of its depth when it comes to electric locomotives and emus at this point. GE hasn't produced an electric locomotive since the late '80s to very early 90s. That's 20 years, that would be a lot of ground to catch up to to competition.
  8. Alstom does not have a rail building facility outside of France (For high Speed Trains). The buy American clause has been on the books for a long time. Alstom could not build the original Acela unless Alstom built a facility (Alstom does have a facility that builds signaling and electrical equipment in New York, but it's no were big enough or equipped to build trains). Alstom has always taken the attitude that it will not set up shop (rail production) anywhere else besides France. Many other countries have a similar clause to "buy American" (buy domestic) (think any country that has a manufacturer of trains) like Spain, (to protect Talgo), South Korea (to protect Hyundai), Japan (to protect Nippon, Hitachi, etc). Look at what Alstom has done in Foreign countries, they are always are the designers never the builders if that country has a specific buy domestic attitude.
  9. There is a buy American requirement. That clause really means physically built in the USA (with the majority of parts originating from the USA too). Most of the Manufacturers have facilities in the USA. Kawasaki has a plant in New York. Nippon Sharyo has a plant in Illinois. Hyundai Rotem has a Plant in Philadelphia. Siemens has a plant in California. The only one that I can think of that might bid and have to build a facility is Alstom (which is why Alstom didn't design AND build the original Acela) Amtrak has applied for a waiver to buy between 1-3 train sets that are foreign built as demos (with the intent to push the FRA into relaxing the EMU restrictions) As far as American Companies, there are Bombardier, GE and EMD. Only Bombardier build HST and they have bowed out. Why should Amtrak be restricted to buying a product from someone that doesn't even produce the product? That doesn't sound like it will end well for Amtrak if that were the case.
  10. Amtrak issued and RFP for the next gen Acela http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/passenger/high-performance/amtrak-rfp-seeks-28-next-gen-hsr-trainsets.html The bids haven't been made public by Amtrak, but some of the manufacturers have come forward as to whether they have bid. Amtrak wants off the shelf High speed train sets that can operate 220mph. The manufacturer must have active rolling stock to bid. Bombardier has bowed out and will not be bidding for the contract I'm glad to see them go. It would have been nice to see what the Zefiro, Bombardier's first in house designed and built HSR, but after the debacle that was the Acela, let someone else (the Chinese) bite that bullet and watch and see how it turns out. http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCAKBN0JM20L20141208 Siemens which won a contract with Amtrak for ACS-64 electric locomotives and several state contracts for diesel loco is likely in the running. I personally don't want Siemens to win. That would give Siemens an almost monopoly in the US rail market. I'm also wary of a single manufacturer, defects tend to crop up (they may not be immediately evident) and Amtrak could end up with another HHP-8/Acela debacle Siemens has no rolling stock with active tilt, which technically Completely unexpected was Hyundai Rotem eagerness to bid. I think Rotem is the only manufacturer that can win the bid either way the FRA leans. Amtrak specifically wants off the shelf train to reduce cost. The FRA still hasn't cleared the EMU high speed trains to operate over 125 mph on shared track. If the FRA doesn't lift this restriction then Amtrak would be forced to go with a HSR with power cars like the current Acela. Rotem rolling stock (the KTX I & II) are very similar to the Acela. The KTX I was designed with Alstom, both have power cars. If The FRA does clear the way for over 125 mph emu operation then Rotem has the KTX III ready. Also it has active tilt on all of their rolling stock which is a necessity on the NEC. The possible unknowns are Nippo and kawasaki, both have plants in the USA, Both have built HSTs. Alstom is really a wild card.
  11. 1) An HST to Alb wouldn't have to run that frequently. The Acela from NYP to WAS runs once an hour (in each direction) and NYP to BOS varies from once an hour to every 2 hrs. Both of those markets are much larger than ALB. Just on that fact I would say every 2 hours is fine. That would be 10-12 extra trains everyday. If Amtrak went with a double decker HST like the TGV Duplex, they could run few trains. I'm not advocating against the expansion of penn station, it is needed more than any other project I can think of. 2/3) After reading into the freight traffic, CSX just leased Amtrak the rails between Poughkeepsie to Albany in September 2014. CSX only runs 5 trains a day. Amtrak is already doing the prep work for adding another track. Metro-north owns the track from Poughkeepsie to yonkers and amtrak owns from yonkers to nyp. The major hurdle of CSX is mostly out of the way, they still need to buy CSX tracks outright, but the lease is much better than the situation before. 5 trains don't seem like a huge headache. Good timing and multiple tracks could sort that out along with 2 hr between HST, it could work out good. Once you go past ALB in any direction freight traffic becomes a massive nightmare and all those things need to be done in regards to freight rerouting.
  12. I was wondering what was taking Proterra so long to get a demo bus to the MTA. The bus is already in production and service in canada and in california.I actually liked the old front end, this new one looks to LFS to me. I'm for what bus works the best either this or BYD. I don't reward mediocrity just because it's made in my country or the color of someone's skin.
  13. Can you please run Amtrak? The rails from NYC to Albany are already upgraded to handle at least 125 mph operation. NYS and Amtrak did the work for the turbo train so that is pretty much done. They would have to electrify the line, I don't think Amtrak wants to deal with the Jettrain or bombardier again (for a while at least) after the issues with the Acela. But if Amtrak wanted to run a jettrain Albany tomorrow, they wouldn't have to do that much work.
  14. I remember the buy nyc clause, but I would assume GE would have just opened up a shop upstate. EMD fit the bill at the time, but the competition now from siemens and GE, I wouldn't assume EMD would get the next contract. I've personally never liked the turboliners. Turbines use 65% of power at idle as compared to WOT (full speed). The economics were never there for the turboliners. That's why Amtrak sacked them, even though they performed decently well, But by the time the retrofit was done, the Acela was not only in production, but out on the track. The Acela is a lot cheaper to run than the turbos and Amtrak wanted no part in running them. Bombardier tried to bring that idea back with the Jettrain a turbine power HST based on the Acela train set. Not one buyer for it and it never went into production (besides the prototype), which could have been used on several Amtrak routes (nyp-alb) and could have been used from Penn to Montauk.
  15. I won't write that off completely. Something like this was on the table for a while when Amtrak was proposing new alignments for a true high speed right of way. I remember that a row through Long island then across the sound to new haven. http://www.businessinsider.com/amtrak-could-build-proposed-18-mile-underwater-tunnel-for-high-speed-rail-service-2012-9 It's off the table now and it would not have gone to babylon or montauk, but the idea of running the acela to long island was there. I actually think it's one of the best alignments of the ones that are proposed. What was the reason that Lirr went with EMD not GE? The only reason I have found was price and LIRR management at the time had/have an affinity for EMD. On the specific topic of Amtrak to Montauk, if they did run trains it would have to be the good ole genesis locos. The Acela or another electric loco would require too much infrastructure work. People may pay more for a more comfortable ride. The ride to Montauk is almost 3 hrs, and it's grueling in the c3 seats. The Canonball is always sold out and STR, maybe Amtrak could help with the load issue. I think the LIRR would run more Cannonballs but they simply don't have enough equipment.
  16. Amtrak doesn't run that many trains per hour maybe 3 or 4 through the north river tunnels. Even with one tube shut down, Amtrak would run fine. It's NJT that would suffer the most. Amtrak could in theory lengthen all their trains except for the acela to help with increased load and any decreased frequency. NJT is running at capacity pretty much at every rush hour with few spare locos or coaches. NJT also runs the majority of trains through the north river tunnels. NJT would have to be busing people in rather than Amtrak.
  17. It couldn't be that hard to want interoperability with a train line they share tracks with. At any time cdot could request mta to take over any of the other lines that cdot runs from new haven or decide to extend service along shore line east. It was a bit short sighted. From my understanding The m8 can't switch from under to over riding in revenue service. I have no idea why.
  18. Those Locomotives need to be replaced anyway, but most of the revenue locos were refurbished fairly recently. By the time ESA and this project get done, it would be time to replace those locomotives, and some of the coaches need to be replaced like yesterday.
  19. Well I found this great little gem in the capital program pdf on Page 10: "In addition, Metro-North will develop specifications for Dual Mode Locomotives and Mulit-level coaches for diesel territory coach and locomotive replacement and ridership growth and potential use for Penn Station access" My interpretation of this is they will use some of these DM locos for service from NHL to Penn to get around incompatible equipment if I'm reading that right. Metro north spent how much to electrifying NHL? It's a step backward. Wouldn't third rail incompatibility still be an issue? Assuming that the new DM locos would be used both on the NHL and other other lines like the Harlem Line. This whole process would have been solved had Metro north bought the m-8's with the ability to handle the different voltages of the nhl and amtrak tracks.
  20. I agree with you on are people going to use it. In the case of red hook, it would be well used. People are sick of riding the b61 that never comes on time and is sooo packed that they have to wait for another bus then transfer to the subway to get to manhattan. A lot people just drive to manhattan via the Brooklyn Battery Park tunnel. I almost bought a house in red hook, but I can't take the commute. If you have an off hours job, forget getting home in less than 2 hours from anywhere north of 14th street. If they build it at metro ave and kent with that massive complex going up, that's a good mile from any train station so it would get used. at n7th street it's 3 blocks from the L so I can't see it than being more than a tourist draw. The height of the span is exactly the same for the 59th street bridge as the brooklyn bridge which is 130ft, and that tram rides higher than the lower roadway. Also as a reference, there was a heliport at E60th street right next to the 59th street bridge until 1997. It was closed not due to safety concerns, but do to noise complains by its rich neighbors. That would make that heliport directly next to the roosevelt island tram.
  21. Bob reffered to height restrictions and boats not being able to pass under, which is false. The helipad is a completely separate issue and is no different than having heliports near any crossing. Move the gondola to where it's supposed to leave from the south street eaport the route it via brooklyn or the western side of battery park. Building techinques have come a long way since 1976. Remember people said that a bridge as large and as long as the brooklyn bridge could never get built. It may take engineering prowess, but it could be done.
  22. The rails on the freight owned tracks that amtrak uses for LD trains can't handle it and the frieght companies are resistant to upgrading them. LD trains will remain slow and with shotty on time performance until amtrak gets its own lines outside of the NEC. That investment alone kills the idea of LD HSR. There are certain corridors where it would have enough ridership where it would work (NYC>Toronto, or Montreal)
  23. If a tram can clear the east river and allow ships to pass under, then why would it be any different for a gondola? I don't see a height restrictions on ship traffic a problem for a cable based system. I should clarify i meant from Battery park to Red hook to Governor's island. Red hook is prime for massive development if transportaion was improved. Taking the b61 to downtown then transfering is not quick at all.
  24. If the span from battery park directly to Governor's island is too long, run it to red hook then to governer's island. I was also continuing to mull it over and the gondola to n7th street is still assinine, but maybe to metropolitain and kent. Right where they are putting in that new condo where the domino's sugar factory was. Both the J/M and L train stops are respectively a mile away. the b32 runs once every 30 minutes and is pretty slow.
  25. I actually think Gondola or a tram would work great in certain spots in nyc. A gondola ride to govenors island or randalls island make sense without the massive expense of building a subway. It could even allow for some development on both of those islands. Gondola to williamsburg 3 blocks from the L train stop is very short sighted and ruins the view for all of those multimillion dollar condos on the water front at n7th street.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.