Rutgers Tube

I caught 1594 out last night. I forget the car number, but the bathroom door handle assembly was fouled (probably from being slammed and jammed) and the latch wouldn't catch, thereby rendering the sliding bolt and the occupancy indicator useless. With a train full of morons (yeah, I'm judgmental), the lock has its merits. Between that, the black shoe streaks all over the lower few feet of the walls and the seat backs from people throwing their feet all over the damn place and the abandoned debris that I've seen accumulate now that the trains are older than, like, an hour, I'm just really disappointed at how riders abuse the equipment. The fare-paying sloths who pissed and moaned for the longest at how the existing equipment was crap are the same classless loudmouths who always and always leave their trash on and under the seats of the old trains. Human beings, or at least Americans, particularly the disrespectful, self-righteous @ssh0les that have infested this region. I didn't expect these trains to remain so spotless for all that long, and I've been vocal about how people were going to ruin the new cars with their sloth. Now, if I ruled the world, I'd cancel the rest of the order and issue a press release to tell people to stop leaving their shhhhhhit and poop all over the place. The new cars are already turning into back alley dumpers.

As a sign that things are truly changing... Several weeks ago I was aboard the 1570 (6:29 pm GCT-NHV), an eight-car consist of M8's, waiting for it to depart from 109 Track. About ten minutes before it departed, the 1577 (4:24 pm NHV-GCT) arrived on 108 Track, another eight-car consist of M8's and nothing but. After a brutal winter, Hell has begun to thaw. :cool:

Speaking of the Bombs, weren't a few of the CDOT-owned Shoreliners in the 6200 #'s outfitted as bar/cafe cars at one point?

Good point, and there have been a few times this past winter in which the head car on my 1503 train was a bar car, due to equipment shortages. However, considering that said train departs New Haven at 4:12 am and arrives at GCT at 5:47 am, food and beverages were not being vended. To be honest, I'm not sure I've ever seen a bar car with food and beverage service at the head of a consist in excess of six cars. That's not to say that it never happens, but generally a bar car at the head end seems to be more of an equipment move or to provide extra equipment during times of excess equipment shortages.

From a fiscal point of view, yes. It's a huge source of revenue for MNR, and Metro-North is one of the last, possibly THE last commuter railroad in the US to still offer an open bar car service. Here's a question for Truckie: Are bar cars a hot topic for customer service reps to respond to for whatever reason, and did C.S. receive a lot of "We want our bar cars!" last year before it was announced that some of the new M8 cars would become bar/cafe cars? Here's a question for Homeball: I generally see bar cars placed in the middle of a consist, whenever possible. Is this for ease of access from both ends of the train, or to minimize inebriated passengers from passing between cars by usually having the bar car platform, or for ease of car-cuts at short platforms, or am I completely off with my observation?

The second consist should enter passenger service by the middle of this week. I've seen two separate trains in test runs during the past week: six cars on one, eight on another. I believe that the eight-long trainset began its test phase first, so I'm guessing that's the one that we'll see. I'm don't know that for certain though. Have fun.

I can't confirm anything definite for this weekend, and even the last few days have seen some variance in the assigned runs. A source informed me that this first M8 consist will be bounced throughout the schedule to experience different runs, times, passenger loads, weather conditions (I don't think that they'd run in anything too extreme) and I'm guessing with different qualified crews so as to break them in and to thoroughly test their capabilities under real-world conditions. That seems to make sense given that even passenger demographics can have an impact on the rest of the order to an extent. There's a chance that a second consist may enter passenger service sometime next week. I'm not sure of the number of cars or what it's schedule will be when it does carry passengers, whether it's next week or further into the future. The snow hasn't really been a factor during the past few weeks, which has helped the testing process move along swimmingly. Metro-North and CDOT are making some great strides in rolling these cars out, and I'm guessing that we may also see the 25 kV testing out east of New Haven ensue sometime this spring or early summer. That should make for some interesting pictures, since it's not all that often that Metro-North EMU's run under their own propulsion east of CP 274 CHAPEL.

Can we get back to the actual topic of the M8's and start a separate Cannonball thread to discuss that altogether unrelated topic?

Multi-level MU + Overpass = Peeled potato

Thank you. Disregarding self-promotion, that's the primary reason that I started the M2/M4/M6 status thread. People have been drooling over the M8's like a dog staring at a steak and complaining about the older New Haven equipment. As soon as the Boneyard starts filling up with M2's, watch for the tides to turn and the pictures to be posted.

I know, and engineers are looking at having less authority over train movement as a result of it.

Thanks. All of those responses make sense, since they all come down to not spending money until it becomes warranted and necessary. Any feedback from the NHL employees who have operated and qualified on the equipment? I've heard and read of MN and LI engineers, mainly those who have been around for a while, who have admitted to disliking the M7's for a number of reasons. And I believe that you meant that the ACSES on the BL20GH does, in fact, conform to NORAC aspects. Given the current role and that those locomotives are playing for MN, something that I don't foresee changing during the future other than the possibility of shuttle service on the Danbury Branch, why was ACSES capability even ordered?

Thank you for following up on that. I'm aware that neither of the 25 kV/60 Hz and ACSES testing had yet to begin, which makes sense considering that the neither of those are currently used on the New Haven Line, the only trackage that the M8's have been promised and are absolutely certain to serve. Homeball: Any idea when Amtrak plans on expanding use of ACSES throughout the entire NEC, and if Metro-North will adopt that system, and do you know if current freight trains use ACSES in MN territory? Also, have you heard of any advances beyond "plans" and "talks" for the third rail extension?

You'd go far as a White House spokesman.

This topic has already been addressed in this thread and others and has been discussed on other forum sites as well, ad nauseam. I'm going to attempt to clarify this so as to avoid any further confusion based on my knowledge and understanding, as conveyed from reputable sources. Without really delving into the in's and out's and if's and it's and why's and why not's, the M8's will be equipped for operation on ALL of the following systems: 1. Metro-North's 12.5 kVAC/60 Hz overhead catenary and 650 VDC under-running third rail; 2. Amtrak's NEC Shore Line 25 kVAC/60 Hz overhead catenary east of New Haven where SLE operates (CDOT is a 65% owner of the M8 order and there has been increased demand for augmented and expanded SLE service' However, there have not been any promises about the M8's in SLE service. Additionally, plans have called for the ACSES and 25 kV testing to be performed on this trackage); 3. LIRR's 750 VDC over-running third rail. While the LIRR and Metro-North systems do possess differences in clearance between the third and running rails, it is my understanding that the M8's will be equipped with a very unique variable-position third rail shoe. All changes between power delivery systems can be performed by the locomotive engineer EN ROUTE, ON THE FLY. The M8's will NOT be able to operate on Amtrak's NEC NY Terminal District over the Hell Gate between just east of HAROLD and just east of GATE, which is powered by an overhead catenary system of 12 kVAC/25 Hz. I'll abandon the topic of the M8's to address these a few other FAQ's about issues that have been discussed numerous times: Plans to install a third rail system between HAROLD and GATE have been in the works for a while, but I don't believe that the funding stage has even been reached yet. When (and if) third rail installation through this 1.2-mile (it may be 1.4 mi) stretch occurs, it would most likely be over-running, since it would be tied into the LIRR system at HAROLD. Personally, I cannot see any reason at all that would necessitate M8 equipment to need to run on LIRR trackage other than Connecticut sinking into the ocean and New York State buying the cars off of eBay. CDOT and NYSDOT never have nor ever will have any mutual goals of taxpayers' interests and benefits, and these cars aren't like a video game that you bring over your boy's house and let him borrow from you while you borrow the porn flick that he found buried deep in the bottom drawer of his father's bureau, and it's not as if CDOT will ever bring 60 M8's over Penn's or Jay's houses and say "Okay, I'll let you borrow these until next Friday, but I need them back before my mom notices." Outside of Penn Station, there is no reason for Metro-North to offer service into LIRR territory, and there really won't be any reason once the ESA project has been completed. NH-NYP service was a reality during the New Haven Railroad days, as the FL-9's had dual-collection third rail shoes. Metro-North service into Penn is entirely dependent upon the results of ESA in order to justify and efficiently respond to an increase in the already massive rail volume and associated issues that Penn already sees (though part-time NJT reroutes should provide some relief). Last year's "Train to the Game" program showed that limited, off-peak service is possible, given the right scheduling, equipment and employee qualifying. You'd know better than I would, but I've read and been told many times that the two main reasons that the M8's cannot operate using the current 12 kV/25 Hz catenary system between GATE and HAROLD are the 25 Hz transformers not being installed due to weight issues and lack of space and the change to a 25 kV/60 Hz system being a lot more costly than installing a third rail. I did hear something about NEC-operational compatibility as an option that was ordered for a some of the M8's, but this was a long time ago, and I've since heard only third rail talk. Please correct me if I'm wrong here. Thanks.