LIRR proposes double track 18 miles Ronkonkoma to Farmingdale

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

"The Double Track Project will improve service and reliability on the
LIRR’s Ronkonkoma Branch, spur economic activity, provide hundreds of
construction jobs and improve LIRR service to Long Island MacArthur
Airport. Ridership on the LIRR’s Ronkonkoma Branch has doubled over
the last 25 years, growing in popularity since the line was
electrified in 1988."

project details:
http://www.mta.info/lirr/doubletrack/index.htm

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

What is the nearest LIRR station to MacArthur Airport, Ronkonkoma?

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---

[Steven M. O'Neill]

houn...@yahoo.co.uk <houn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>On 17/01/2013 18:01, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> "The Double Track Project will improve service and reliability on the
>> LIRR�s Ronkonkoma Branch, spur economic activity, provide hundreds of
>> construction jobs and improve LIRR service to Long Island MacArthur
>> Airport. Ridership on the LIRR�s Ronkonkoma Branch has doubled over
>> the last 25 years, growing in popularity since the line was
>> electrified in 1988."
>>
>> project details:
>> http://www.mta.info/lirr/doubletrack/index.htm
>
>What is the nearest LIRR station to MacArthur Airport, Ronkonkoma?

If I put it into tripplanner.mta.info it tells me:

There is no stop within walking distance of destination,
Please select one of the stations and submit again.

Description Distance
(miles)
Ronkonkoma Station 1.38
Sayville Station 3.45
Oakdale Station 3.63
Patchogue Station 4.72
Great River Station 5.03
Central Islip Station 5.10
Medford Station 5.48
Islip Station 6.86
Smithtown Station 7.08
SAINT JAMES STATION 7.25

-smo (I can walk 1.38 miles, but not with too much luggage)

--
Steven O'Neill ste...@panix.com
Brooklyn, NY http://www.panix.com/~steveo

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 17, 5:46 pm, "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> > project details:
> >http://www.mta.info/lirr/doubletrack/index.htm
>
> What is the nearest LIRR station to MacArthur Airport, Ronkonkoma?

There are maps at the above link.

[Jimmy]

ste...@panix.com (Steven M. O'Neill) wrote:

> hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >What is the nearest LIRR station to MacArthur Airport, Ronkonkoma?
>
> If I put it into tripplanner.mta.info it tells me:
>

>     Ronkonkoma Station    1.38

>
> -smo (I can walk 1.38 miles, but not with too much luggage)

The trip planner is wrong. It's actually a little over 4 miles by
road from the LIRR Ronkonkoma station to the Macarthur Airport
terminal.

Jimmy

[conklin]

"Jimmy" <JimmyG...@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:170dbf26-9f2c-4cf2...@n8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...

===============google alert====

I looked at the video. It seems to be that the "branch" they are talking
about is really the old mainline to Greenport. Why do they call all their
lines "branches" these days? Any reason? I recall as a kid watching the
train at about 10 AM in Mattituck coming from NYC where they would throw out
the newspapers onto the platform from the baggage car. One of my more
distant reltives was killed in Greenport by the LIRR. Every night they
always used the same track, so he walked on a side track. It was bad
weather. He ignored the whistle. That night they used the side track.
People from Greenport (like my aunt) called NYC, especially Brooklyn, as
"the other end." (of the island, right?).

[John Levine]

>> Ronkonkoma Station 1.38
>>
>> -smo (I can walk 1.38 miles, but not with too much luggage)
>
>The trip planner is wrong. It's actually a little over 4 miles by
>road from the LIRR Ronkonkoma station to the Macarthur Airport
>terminal.

The trip planner is right if you're a pigeon. The station is just
north of the airport, but the terminal is on the south side of the
airport, and it's about 3 miles around by the shortest road route,
4 miles by the fastest road route.






--
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 18, 9:26 pm, John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote:

> The trip planner is right if you're a pigeon.  The station is just
> north of the airport, but the terminal is on the south side of the
> airport, and it's about 3 miles around by the shortest road route,
> 4 miles by the fastest road route.

Interesting bug.

I wonder how other trip planners work with airports or other large
parcels of property which occupy a large portion of ground and have an
entrance that could be a great distance from a border.

If the airport had a bus route serving the terminal, it probably would
handle it properly.

I presume trip planners know one can't walk across a body of water.

[Jimmy]

John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote:
> >> Ronkonkoma Station 1.38
>
> >> -smo (I can walk 1.38 miles, but not with too much luggage)
>
> >The trip planner is wrong.  It's actually a little over 4 miles by
> >road from the LIRR Ronkonkoma station to the Macarthur Airport
> >terminal.
>
> The trip planner is right if you're a pigeon.  The station is just
> north of the airport, but the terminal is on the south side of the
> airport, and it's about 3 miles around by the shortest road route,
> 4 miles by the fastest road route.

You're right, it's 3 miles. I realized right after I posted that I
should have used Google Maps' walking directions, not driving, to get
the shortest road route.

Jimmy

[John Levine]

>> The trip planner is right if you're a pigeon. �The station is just
>> north of the airport, but the terminal is on the south side of the
>> airport, and it's about 3 miles around by the shortest road route,
>> 4 miles by the fastest road route.
>
>Interesting bug.
>
>I wonder how other trip planners work with airports or other large
>parcels of property which occupy a large portion of ground and have an
>entrance that could be a great distance from a border.

Correctly. It's like any other place with roads leading to it, they
figure out the distance by road.

[Jimmy]

"conklin" <nilknoc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> I looked at the video.  It seems to be that the "branch" they are talking
> about is really the old mainline to Greenport.  Why do they call all their
> lines "branches" these days?  Any reason?

I don't know why they use the term "branch". But it makes sense that
they call it Ronkonkoma rather than Greenport, since Greenport gets so
little service these days that the line barely exists past Ronkonkoma.

But plenty of people live out there. If any line ever called for a
single-employee DMU shuttle...

Jimmy

[Steven M. O'Neill]

Curious, thanks. I looked at it on the map, and the 1.38 seemed
reasonable. Google maps says if you walk around to the west of
the runways, it's 2.9 miles walking to the terminal entrance.

http://www.flylima.com/groundtransportation says there's "an
inexpensive 10-minute shuttle" from the RR station. They don't
say how much it is or what the schedule is though.

Okay, it's every 30 minutes for $5.
http://mta.info/lirr/Travel/MacArthur.htm

Which also says that taxis will take you for $5

There's also a county bus for $1.50.

(Now the next question is where do the flights go...?)

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 19, 5:30 pm, ste...@panix.com (Steven M. O'Neill) wrote:

> There's also a county bus for $1.50.

Why wouldn't the county bus show up on the trip planner?

[Jimmy]

hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> I wonder how other trip planners work with airports or other large
> parcels of property which occupy a large portion of ground and have an
> entrance that could be a great distance from a border.

Rail lines themselves sometimes serve as barriers. I know of rail
stations that only have entrances on one side of the tracks, even
though there are streets on the other side.

> If the airport had a bus route serving the terminal, it probably would
> handle it properly.

The last time I checked, there was a taxi company that would take you
from the LIRR to the airport for $5 per person, sharing the car with
whoever else is going. That's a good deal if you're travelling alone,
but pretty bad if you're in a group.

> I presume trip planners know one can't walk across a body of water.

Either they're following the road network or they aren't. Going as
the crow flies but taking into account some barriers but not others
makes no sense.

Jimmy

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

I thought FRA requires all passenger trains to have a conductor, however.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacArthur_Airport

The Airlines and Destinations section of that article will answer your
question.

[Steven M. O'Neill]

Thinking of taking a trip to Philadelphia. Might be cheaper
than Amtrak!

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 21-Jan-13 14:25, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 19/01/2013 06:19, Jimmy wrote:
>> I don't know why they use the term "branch". But it makes sense
>> that they call it Ronkonkoma rather than Greenport, since Greenport
>> gets so little service these days that the line barely exists past
>> Ronkonkoma.
>>
>> But plenty of people live out there. If any line ever called for
>> a single-employee DMU shuttle...
>

> I thought FRA requires all passenger trains to have a conductor,
> however.

That's come up numerous times, but AFAIK nobody has ever cited a
specific regulation that requires it.

The two obstacles to OPTO that _have_ been identified are the FRA brake
test requirement, which requires a second rules-qualified person at the
far end of the train, and BLET work rules.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 21/01/2013 21:01, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 21-Jan-13 14:25, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 19/01/2013 06:19, Jimmy wrote:
>>> I don't know why they use the term "branch". But it makes sense
>>> that they call it Ronkonkoma rather than Greenport, since Greenport
>>> gets so little service these days that the line barely exists past
>>> Ronkonkoma.
>>>
>>> But plenty of people live out there. If any line ever called for
>>> a single-employee DMU shuttle...
>>
>> I thought FRA requires all passenger trains to have a conductor,
>> however.
>
> That's come up numerous times, but AFAIK nobody has ever cited a
> specific regulation that requires it.
>
> The two obstacles to OPTO that _have_ been identified are the FRA brake
> test requirement, which requires a second rules-qualified person at the
> far end of the train, and BLET work rules.
>
> S
>

I've been on FL-9s deadheading to Stamford and the engineer made it very
clear that the train could not budge an inch without a conductor present
in the cab.

[conklin]

<houn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:kdkgrb$i50$1...@dont-email.me...

I can see it now: Megabus drivers refusing to budge an inch without a
conductor present. What about a fireman too?

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 21-Jan-13 16:52, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 21/01/2013 21:01, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> On 21-Jan-13 14:25, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>> I thought FRA requires all passenger trains to have a conductor,
>>> however.
>>
>> That's come up numerous times, but AFAIK nobody has ever cited a
>> specific regulation that requires it.
>>
>> The two obstacles to OPTO that _have_ been identified are the FRA
>> brake test requirement, which requires a second rules-qualified
>> person at the far end of the train, and BLET work rules.
>

> I've been on FL-9s deadheading to Stamford and the engineer made it
> very clear that the train could not budge an inch without a conductor
> present in the cab.

That is the practical effect, but the question is _why_?

[Glen Labah]

In article <kdktt9$pgh$1...@dont-email.me>,

Stephen Sprunk <ste...@sprunk.org> wrote:

> On 21-Jan-13 16:52, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> > I've been on FL-9s deadheading to Stamford and the engineer made it
> > very clear that the train could not budge an inch without a conductor
> > present in the cab.

I've been on many Amtrak Cascades trains where it is very obvious the
only person in the cab is the engineer. They do have a conductor, but
in the train - never in the cab.

Of course, the LA Metrolink engineer that ran a signal and crashed into
a UP freight while texting was also in the cab alone....

The state public utility commission(s) might also have some say in what
can or can't be done.

> That is the practical effect, but the question is _why_?

A lot of crews really do like to have the signal indications repeated
over the radio. It might even help accident investigations.

However, I think all that is union regulations rather than FRA
regulations. There was a freight railroad near here that was operating
tourist service on its line for a while as a for-profit addition to its
freight service. They operated that train with one person only,
collecting tickets before leaving the station and then operating the
train. They only hauled one semi-open car with a roof behind a GE 25
tonner at 10 mph, so the person operating could look back from time to
time to make sure that nobody was doing anything stupid.

--
Please note this e-mail address is a pit of spam due to e-mail address
harvesters on Usenet. Response time to e-mail sent here is slow.

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 21-Jan-13 21:23, Glen Labah wrote:
>> On 21-Jan-13 16:52, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>> I've been on FL-9s deadheading to Stamford and the engineer made
>>> it very clear that the train could not budge an inch without a
>>> conductor present in the cab.
>
> I've been on many Amtrak Cascades trains where it is very obvious the
> only person in the cab is the engineer. They do have a conductor,
> but in the train - never in the cab.
>
> Of course, the LA Metrolink engineer that ran a signal and crashed
> into a UP freight while texting was also in the cab alone....

That's standard for commuter rail: the engineer is alone in the cab,
while the conductor is in the passenger compartment checking tickets and
chatting with passengers--nothing related to operating the train.

Still, if you suggest replacing conductors with fare inspectors (or
transit cops) who will do the exact same thing, BLET goes apeshit about
"safety", but it's really about losing dues from members in make-work
jobs, just as it once was with firemen and with brakemen before that.

If conductors were actually required to sit in the cab and visually
verify signals, as with freight trains, their position might make sense,
but that is clearly not the case for commuter rail.

[John Levine]

>Thinking of taking a trip to Philadelphia. Might be cheaper
>than Amtrak!

Probably not. The cheapest advance purchase fare is $263 RT on US
Airways (Southwest doesn't fly that route any more.)

If you buy reasonably far ahead, Amtrak is $72 RT from Penn Station,
or even for tomorrow, $102. Add in a $32.50 peak RT from Ronkonkoma
to Penn, and it's still a lot less.

Yes, you can pay $161 for a one way Acela for tomorrow, but you'd pay
$534 for the corresponding plane ticket.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 22/01/2013 02:35, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 21-Jan-13 16:52, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 21/01/2013 21:01, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>>> On 21-Jan-13 14:25, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>> I thought FRA requires all passenger trains to have a conductor,
>>>> however.
>>>
>>> That's come up numerous times, but AFAIK nobody has ever cited a
>>> specific regulation that requires it.
>>>
>>> The two obstacles to OPTO that _have_ been identified are the FRA
>>> brake test requirement, which requires a second rules-qualified
>>> person at the far end of the train, and BLET work rules.
>>
>> I've been on FL-9s deadheading to Stamford and the engineer made it
>> very clear that the train could not budge an inch without a conductor
>> present in the cab.
>
> That is the practical effect, but the question is _why_?
>
> S
>

To help with signals, if necessary, to help with shunting or any reverse
movements as well as to step in and assist in some way if the engineer
keels forward, while his foot is still on the deadman petal and the
train is moving at speed?

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 22/01/2013 03:23, Glen Labah wrote:
> In article <kdktt9$pgh$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Stephen Sprunk <ste...@sprunk.org> wrote:
>
>> On 21-Jan-13 16:52, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
>>> I've been on FL-9s deadheading to Stamford and the engineer made it
>>> very clear that the train could not budge an inch without a conductor
>>> present in the cab.
>
>
> I've been on many Amtrak Cascades trains where it is very obvious the
> only person in the cab is the engineer. They do have a conductor, but
> in the train - never in the cab.

The engineer is normally alone, unless somebody chooses to be in the cab
with him. I was referring to an FL-9 hauled deadhead that was making its
way further east on the New Haven Line.

> A lot of crews really do like to have the signal indications repeated
> over the radio. It might even help accident investigations.

How is it that the signals are repeated over the radios?

> However, I think all that is union regulations rather than FRA
> regulations. There was a freight railroad near here that was operating
> tourist service on its line for a while as a for-profit addition to its
> freight service. They operated that train with one person only,
> collecting tickets before leaving the station and then operating the
> train. They only hauled one semi-open car with a roof behind a GE 25
> tonner at 10 mph, so the person operating could look back from time to
> time to make sure that nobody was doing anything stupid.

Which freight line was that -- West Shore, Southern Tier?

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 22/01/2013 03:41, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 21-Jan-13 21:23, Glen Labah wrote:
>>> On 21-Jan-13 16:52, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>> I've been on FL-9s deadheading to Stamford and the engineer made
>>>> it very clear that the train could not budge an inch without a
>>>> conductor present in the cab.
>>
>> I've been on many Amtrak Cascades trains where it is very obvious the
>> only person in the cab is the engineer. They do have a conductor,
>> but in the train - never in the cab.
>>
>> Of course, the LA Metrolink engineer that ran a signal and crashed
>> into a UP freight while texting was also in the cab alone....
>
> That's standard for commuter rail: the engineer is alone in the cab,
> while the conductor is in the passenger compartment checking tickets and
> chatting with passengers--nothing related to operating the train.
>
> Still, if you suggest replacing conductors with fare inspectors (or
> transit cops) who will do the exact same thing, BLET goes apeshit about
> "safety", but it's really about losing dues from members in make-work
> jobs, just as it once was with firemen and with brakemen before that.

I always thought the fireman position was the best way of learning to
drive. When did the FRA do away with firemen, BTW, 1983?

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 22, 4:26 pm, "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> I always thought the fireman position was the best way of learning to
> drive. When did the FRA do away with firemen, BTW, 1983?

It has nothing to do with the FRA. It was negotiated with unions.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

Fair enough. Can you confirm, however, that the fireman's position was
eliminated in 1983?

[James Robinson]

There were four groups that determined whether firemen were still
required on trains: The federal government, the state governments, the
unions, and management.

The first major change that allowed firemen to be eliminated happened in
1963, when the federal government forced the railroad industry into
binding arbitration to avert a strike, and the arbitrator determined
that firemen were no longer necessary.

The problem then was how to eliminate them under the railroads'
agreements, and the full crew laws mandated by the states. (Alabama, for
example, required a crew of 6 on trains on the major railroads)

A number of railroads simply stopped hiring new firemen, and allowed the
number to decrease with attrition. They also challenged the states full
crew laws in court, as a disruption of interstate commerce.

Overall, it took about 20 years before railroad agreements finally
eliminated the fireman position, but there weren't many left by then,
and they still had to keep the remaining employees performing other
duties, or pay them a huge severence.

Here is an article (PDF) that provides a legal summary of the general
issue of featherbedding, which the firemen were the most visible
example:

http://www.law.du.edu/documents/transportation-law-journal/past-issues/v08/featherbedding.pdf

Note that while all of this was going on, the shopcraft employees were
being laid off with minimal severance as fast as they could close out
the steam shops. There was a fair amount of resentment between the
unions as to why some employees were so well protected, and others
just got the bum's rush out the door.

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 22-Jan-13 15:25, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 22/01/2013 03:23, Glen Labah wrote:
>> A lot of crews really do like to have the signal indications repeated
>> over the radio. It might even help accident investigations.
>
> How is it that the signals are repeated over the radios?

If the conductor _is_ in the cab, the engineer calls out the signal
indications he sees, and the conductor is supposed to look at the signal
himself and see if he agrees with what the engineer said.

If the conductor _is not_ in the cab, the engineer calls the signal to
him over the radio, and the conductor simply repeats it back. He does
_not_ open a door and stick his head out to verify that what the
engineer said is actually correct, so this practice is of dubious safety
value.

The investigative value (distinct from safety value) is that a recording
of the crew calling out the signals they _think_ they see can be
compared with the logs from the signal system.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 23/01/2013 00:19, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 22-Jan-13 15:25, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 22/01/2013 03:23, Glen Labah wrote:
>>> A lot of crews really do like to have the signal indications repeated
>>> over the radio. It might even help accident investigations.
>>
>> How is it that the signals are repeated over the radios?
>
> If the conductor _is_ in the cab, the engineer calls out the signal
> indications he sees, and the conductor is supposed to look at the signal
> himself and see if he agrees with what the engineer said.
>
> If the conductor _is not_ in the cab, the engineer calls the signal to
> him over the radio, and the conductor simply repeats it back. He does
> _not_ open a door and stick his head out to verify that what the
> engineer said is actually correct, so this practice is of dubious safety
> value.
>
> The investigative value (distinct from safety value) is that a recording
> of the crew calling out the signals they _think_ they see can be
> compared with the logs from the signal system.
>
> S
>

Where exactly does this happen? Because I never saw or heard of such
things on diesel-hauled trains either on the LIRR or on Metro-North.

[Jym Dyer]

>> Thinking of taking a trip to Philadelphia. Might be
>> cheaper than Amtrak!

> If you buy reasonably far ahead, Amtrak is $72 RT from Penn
> Station, or even for tomorrow, $102. Add in a $32.50 peak
> RT from Ronkonkoma to Penn, and it's still a lot less.

=v= NJ Transit from NYC Penn Station to Trenton = $15.50,
SEPTA from Trenton to Philadelphia = $11.75. (Bikes free.)
<_Jym_>

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

Any chance of doing a single ticket from NYC Penn Station to 30th Street
via NJT and SEPTA? Or would there simply be too much interagency
squabbling?

[Jimmy]

"hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Any chance of doing a single ticket from NYC Penn Station to 30th Street
> via NJT and SEPTA? Or would there simply be too much interagency
> squabbling?

Through tickets have been available for decades, maybe even
continuously since Penn Central days. You get a separate piece of
paper for each leg, but you buy them in one transaction.

The last time I checked, NJT's agents and machines sold through
tickets, while SEPTA didn't. But there were NJT machines at 30th
Street Station in Philly.

Jimmy

[Jimmy]

Jimmy <JimmyGeldb...@mailinator.com> wrote:
> Through tickets have been available for decades, maybe even
> continuously since Penn Central days.  You get a separate piece of
> paper for each leg, but you buy them in one transaction.
>
> The last time I checked, NJT's agents and machines sold through
> tickets, while SEPTA didn't.  But there were NJT machines at 30th
> Street Station in Philly.

Ok, it looks like they overcame that bureaucratic obstacle.
http://www.septa.org/fares/ticket/joint.html says SEPTA agents sell
tickets at the three Center City Philly stations.

I guess that means the other staffed SEPTA ticket offices don't sell
NJT tickets, including the ones on the Trenton line.

Jimmy

[John Levine]

>I guess that means the other staffed SEPTA ticket offices don't sell
>NJT tickets, including the ones on the Trenton line.

That's right, but there's ticket machines on the platform at Trenton
which makes it somewhat less of a problem.

I believe that the through SEPTA+NJT ticket costs the same as the two
separate tickets, so there's only a convenience factor to buying them
together.

[Michael Finfer]

This happens everywhere in the US in signaled territory not equipped
with cab signals.

Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 23, 4:57 pm, Jym Dyer <j...@econet.org> wrote:

> =v= NJ Transit from NYC Penn Station to Trenton = $15.50,
> SEPTA from Trenton to Philadelphia = $11.75.  (Bikes free.)

Yes, the NJT/SEPTA routing is much cheaper than Amtrak between NYC and
Phila, but it requires a change of trains in Trenton and the
connection not guaranteed. Also, the trains make numerous local stops
along the way and the seats aren't as comfortable as Amtrak.

(Note you can buy a combined ticket to Phila from NJT machines. )

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 23, 6:38 pm, John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote:

> I believe that the through SEPTA+NJT ticket costs the same as the two
> separate tickets, so there's only a convenience factor to buying them
> together.

Note that the SEPTA fare will vary depending on the distance. For
instance, just going to say Levittown is cheaper than downtown Phila,
and going beyond downtown Phila (say to Chestnut Hill) is slightly
more expensive.

FWIW, SEPTA offers free service to Amtrak riders (with ticket receipt)
from 30th St to Market East.

For commuters, there are joint monthly tickets available by mail which
are slightly cheaper than two separate monthly tickets. I think the
SEPTA portion would be good on the transit side of SEPTA, too, not
sure about the NJT portion, though that may be good on NJT buses, too.

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 23, 5:58 pm, Jimmy <JimmyGeldb...@mailinator.com> wrote:
> "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > Any chance of doing a single ticket from NYC Penn Station to 30th Street
> > via NJT and SEPTA? Or would there simply be too much interagency
> > squabbling?
>
> Through tickets have been available for decades, maybe even
> continuously since Penn Central days.  You get a separate piece of
> paper for each leg, but you buy them in one transaction.

Ironically, there were a few _through_ local trains back in Penn
Central days. A train of Budd cars would originate in Penna Station
and head out to Trenton and right on to Suburban Station. Most locals
required a change at Trenton, though.

Also, back in PC/early Amk days the fare was the same between two
stations regardless of through or local train (not counting major
trains). Back then many NJT locals terminated at Jersey Avenue.
Passengers from Trenton and Princeton Jct usually took a clocker.
Today, while there are many more locals than the past, they also run
much slower.

[Steven M. O'Neill]

Have done it many times. Can rent a car at 30th for about $30
(or at least you could 7 or 8 years ago).

[Glen Labah]

In article <kdn03g$n2v$1...@dont-email.me>,

This thread is cross-posted to misc.transport.rail.americas. It was a
short line freight railroad near Portland, Oregon. They operate the
northern remains of the Portland Traction Company lines. It's about 6
miles long and runs from East Portland Junction on the UP to a small
industrial area in Milwaukie, OR.

[Phil Kane]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 20:48:26 -0800, Glen Labah <gl4...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>> Which freight line was that -- West Shore, Southern Tier?
>
>
>This thread is cross-posted to misc.transport.rail.americas. It was a
>short line freight railroad near Portland, Oregon. They operate the
>northern remains of the Portland Traction Company lines. It's about 6
>miles long and runs from East Portland Junction on the UP to a small
>industrial area in Milwaukie, OR.

Dick Samuels' Oregon Pacific ?

Phil Kane - Beaverton, OR
PNW CP HALL MP 29.9 - OE District

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

I did not see that on the upper Hudson Line, which was not cab signalled
the first time that I was there. I also did not see that on the Harlem
Line north of NW before they electrified that section up to what is now
Southeast. In the two respective cases, I was in the cab and I saw crews
carrying mobile radios, which they used only to clear the train to depart.

On the LIRR, I did not see crews carrying radios on either the Greenport
or Montauk branches. Instead, in each case, they used hand signals to
clear the train.

Do they even have waysides on the Montauk Branch east of Bay Shore or
Patchogue, BTW? What about on the Greenport Branch?

Wouldn't that jam up the airwaves in any event?

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

Good to know. Many thanks.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 24/01/2013 02:23, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Jan 23, 5:58 pm, Jimmy <JimmyGeldb...@mailinator.com> wrote:
>> "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Any chance of doing a single ticket from NYC Penn Station to 30th Street
>>> via NJT and SEPTA? Or would there simply be too much interagency
>>> squabbling?
>>
>> Through tickets have been available for decades, maybe even
>> continuously since Penn Central days. You get a separate piece of
>> paper for each leg, but you buy them in one transaction.
>
> Ironically, there were a few _through_ local trains back in Penn
> Central days.

I've heard about that.

Any prospect of reintroducing Clockers without Amtrak involvement? You
would really just need to change crews at Trenton.

> A train of Budd cars would originate in Penna Station
> and head out to Trenton and right on to Suburban Station.

Do you mean RDCs, when you say Budd cars? How would they have gotten
through the North River Tunnels as I understood that no diesel is
allowed through there?

Are were you referring to the West Trenton Line up to Newark Penn?
Still, I didn't think that any diesel movements were allowed between
30th Street and Market East.

[Jimmy]

"hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Any prospect of reintroducing Clockers without Amtrak involvement? You
> would really just need to change crews at Trenton.

Amtrak ran Clockers until 2005. But you needed to pay Amtrak fares,
unless you had a NJT monthly ticket. Most passengers from NYC got off
in Princeton Junction or Trenton, so there wasn't much point in
running them through to Philadelphia.

> > A train of Budd cars would originate in Penna Station
> > and head out to Trenton and right on to Suburban Station.
>
> Do you mean RDCs, when you say Budd cars? How would they have gotten
> through the North River Tunnels as I understood that no diesel is
> allowed through there?

Budd made plenty of EMUs: Silverliners, Metroliners, M1s, ...

Jimmy

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 25/01/2013 00:05, Jimmy wrote:
> "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Any prospect of reintroducing Clockers without Amtrak involvement? You
>> would really just need to change crews at Trenton.
>
> Amtrak ran Clockers until 2005. But you needed to pay Amtrak fares,
> unless you had a NJT monthly ticket. Most passengers from NYC got off
> in Princeton Junction or Trenton, so there wasn't much point in
> running them through to Philadelphia.

Without Amtrak involvement, I said. A joint project between NJT and SEPTA.

>>> A train of Budd cars would originate in Penna Station
>>> and head out to Trenton and right on to Suburban Station.
>>
>> Do you mean RDCs, when you say Budd cars? How would they have gotten
>> through the North River Tunnels as I understood that no diesel is
>> allowed through there?
>
> Budd made plenty of EMUs: Silverliners, Metroliners, M1s, ...
>

Yes, they did. I stand corrected.

[John Levine]

>>>> A train of Budd cars would originate in Penna Station
>>>> and head out to Trenton and right on to Suburban Station.

The current schedules are synchronized fairly well at Trenton, with
many transfers 10 minutes or less. Through trains wouldn't save much
time, so I'm not sure why you think they'd have much more patronage
than the current setup.

SEPTA trains don't normally go north of Trenton, and NJT don't
normally go south of the Morrisville yard. Are there any
compatibility problems with NJT equipment in the tunnel in Phila, or
SEPTA in Penn Station?

[Glen Labah]

In article <ehj1g897dpi4oji9u...@4ax.com>,

Phil Kane <Phil...@nov.shmovz.ka.pop> wrote:

> Dick Samuels' Oregon Pacific ?

At that time he was calling it East Portland Traction Company. His wife
was the one that actually operated the excursion trains. At first it
was just a GE 25 tonner and a flat car* with a roof, bench seats and
railings on the sides. In oder to keep the expense down they got one of
those wireless throttles so that she could run the train push-pull from
the end of the flat car, without having to add a bunch of MU controls,
cables and all that to the flat car.

They got the hull of an old wooden caboose from one of the logging lines
that was closing up shop in the mid-1990s. They added it to a flat car
and made some modifications to it so that it could also hold excursion
passengers. Thus, the wireless throttle again helped in allowing her to
operate from either the flat car or the caboose / flat car, depending on
passenger loads.

But, in any event, they were operating passenger service with one person
on the train only, virtually 100% of the time. They did it long enough
that I doubt very much that they were violating FRA regulations, but
then they are only a 10 mph railroad. There's some stuff that can be
exempted at low speeds.


* = I've been told that it was actually the frame from an old tank car
with a platform built on it.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 25/01/2013 02:35, John Levine wrote:
>>>>> A train of Budd cars would originate in Penna Station
>>>>> and head out to Trenton and right on to Suburban Station.
>
> The current schedules are synchronized fairly well at Trenton, with
> many transfers 10 minutes or less. Through trains wouldn't save much
> time, so I'm not sure why you think they'd have much more patronage
> than the current setup.
>
> SEPTA trains don't normally go north of Trenton, and NJT don't
> normally go south of the Morrisville yard. Are there any
> compatibility problems with NJT equipment in the tunnel in Phila, or
> SEPTA in Penn Station?
>

I don't think so, actually. I think the problem is further north with
M-series trains entering the Harlem River (a.k.a. Hell Gate) branch
under the wire.

Have any SEPTA EMUS ever ventured north?

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 24, 9:35 pm, John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote:

> >>>> A train of Budd cars would originate in Penna Station
> >>>> and head out to Trenton and right on to Suburban Station.
>
> The current schedules are synchronized fairly well at Trenton, with
> many transfers 10 minutes or less.  Through trains wouldn't save much
> time, so I'm not sure why you think they'd have much more patronage
> than the current setup.

Sometimes connections are missed if trains are late. The connection
can not wait.

A through train that made limited stops on both segments would be more
attractive than the present locals. Ironically, SEPTA has closed some
stations on its Trenton line while NJT has added several. Also, NJT
trains keep getting slower.

I can't help but wonder how many people just end up driving all or
part of the distance due to the poor train service between Phila and
NYC. A passenger has a choice of a fast comfortable but extremely
expensive ride on Amtrak, or a slow cramped ride on two crowded
commuter trains.

> SEPTA trains don't normally go north of Trenton, and NJT don't
> normally go south of the Morrisville yard.  Are there any
> compatibility problems with NJT equipment in the tunnel in Phila, or
> SEPTA in Penn Station?

Since it's all Amtrak territory, I'm pretty sure all SEPTA and NJT
rolling stock can easily run on either line. Indeed, during
Thanksgiving, Amk borrows commuter equipment from both carrier to run
as extra sections.

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 24, 6:16 pm, "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> > Ironically, there were a few _through_ local trains back in Penn
> > Central days.
>
> I've heard about that.
>
> Any prospect of reintroducing Clockers without Amtrak involvement? You
> would really just need to change crews at Trenton.

Very doubtful. As mentioned, most NJT passengers leave the train by
Trenton and only a handful go on to Philadelphia. Running a twelve
car train when four cars will do is wasteful.

> > A train of Budd cars would originate in Penna Station
> > and head out to Trenton and right on to Suburban Station.
>
> Do you mean RDCs, when you say Budd cars? How would they have gotten
> through the North River Tunnels as I understood that no diesel is
> allowed through there?

No, Budd Silverliners MUs (along with St. Louis Silverliners).

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 24, 7:05 pm, Jimmy <JimmyGeldb...@mailinator.com> wrote:

> Budd made plenty of EMUs: Silverliners, Metroliners, M1s, ...

While the SEPTA Budd Silverlines have been retired from revenue
service, there is plenty of Budd equipment still in revenue service:

--Metroliner MUs (converted to coaches and push-pull cabs).

--PATCO trains (fleet being rebuilt)

--NYCTA R-32s

--Amfleet

--Baltimore/Miami subway cars

Budd built L and commuter cars for Chicago, I don't know if they're
still in service.

Some Budd built diners may still be in use on Amtrak.

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 25, 3:24 am, "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

>Have any SEPTA EMUS ever ventured north?

SEPTA (Penn Central) MUs have certainly gone as far as New York City,
Harrisburg, and Washington DC on many occasions.

Before the New Haven line electrification was rebuilt, a SEPTA MU (11
Kv, 25 Hz) could've ventured as far north as New Haven. GG1s and
Metroliner MUs did so in scheduled service. However, I don't know if
any MUs ever did so.

However, ancient New Haven MUs ended up in Philadelphia, and
reportedly ran a few times in Phila commuter service (not very well).


I do not know if any of SEPTA's newest Silverliner Vs have ever
ventured beyond SEPTA territory.

[Jishnu Mukerji]

On 1/25/2013 11:04 AM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:> On Jan 24, 6:16 pm,

"hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>>> Ironically, there were a few _through_ local trains back in Penn
>>> Central days.
>>
>> I've heard about that.
>>
>> Any prospect of reintroducing Clockers without Amtrak involvement? You
>> would really just need to change crews at Trenton.
>
> Very doubtful. As mentioned, most NJT passengers leave the train by
> Trenton and only a handful go on to Philadelphia. Running a twelve
> car train when four cars will do is wasteful.

I agree. only way this will happen is if ever NJT and SEPTA get
equipment that can be split /joined quickly and they actually agree to
do such split/join at Trenton. At present it would seem that there a
greater probability of the Sun rising in the West than this coming to pass.

/J

[Jishnu Mukerji]

What does the Hell Gate Line have to do with Harlem River? The Hell Gate
Bridge crosses the East River. Metro North crosses and runs along the
Harlem River.

The MNRR M2s could run to Penn Station if they ever got around to it.
M8s cannot run to Penn Station since they are not capable of running
under 25Hz. They can run upto Gate interlocking just short of Harold,
where the 60Hz electrification ends and 25Hz begins. I believe NJT
Arrows could run all the way to New Haven if they wanted to since they
can run under 25 and 60Hz without requiring any shop change.

At present there is a plan to have them use dual third rail shoes to get
them into Penn Station from Gate interlocking for use in the proposed
MNRR Penn Station access from the New Haven Line.

/J

[Clark F Morris]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:21:31 -0500, Jishnu Mukerji
<jis...@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:

>> much snipped

>
>The MNRR M2s could run to Penn Station if they ever got around to it.
>M8s cannot run to Penn Station since they are not capable of running
>under 25Hz. They can run upto Gate interlocking just short of Harold,
>where the 60Hz electrification ends and 25Hz begins. I believe NJT
>Arrows could run all the way to New Haven if they wanted to since they
>can run under 25 and 60Hz without requiring any shop change.
>
>At present there is a plan to have them use dual third rail shoes to get
>them into Penn Station from Gate interlocking for use in the proposed
>MNRR Penn Station access from the New Haven Line.

How hard would it be to convert the corridor to 25KV 60 HZ? Penn
Station Neark to Hell Gate to 12KV 60 Hz? Is the latter feasible
given the loads? Is there any equipment left on the corridor that is
25 HZ only?

Clark Morris
>
>/J

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 25, 2:27 pm, Clark F Morris <cfmpub...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:

> How hard would it be to convert the corridor to 25KV 60 HZ?

That's two conversions--one changing the frequency from 25Hz to 60Hz,
and the other changing the voltage from 11,000 to 25,000.

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 25-Jan-13 13:27, Clark F Morris wrote:
> How hard would it be to convert the corridor to 25KV 60 HZ?

From a technical standpoint, it's straightforward, with the possible
exception of the tunnels to/from NYP due to clearance issues.

The main problem is funding, as usual.

> Penn Station Neark to Hell Gate to 12KV 60 Hz?

Going from 25Hz to 60Hz is a piece of cake. 11kV vs 12.5kV is a
complete non-issue.

However, Amtrak seemingly refuses to consider 12.5kV 60Hz as a
transition step, and they also insist on switching to constant-tension
catenary at the same time. Of course, they don't have anywhere near
enough money to do that, so nothing gets done at all--and they keep
wasting money maintaining the current mess.

> Is the latter feasible given the loads?

The loads aren't the problem; if anything, the loads would be much
easier to handle on 60Hz, since substations could tie into the 60Hz grid
rather than needing Amtrak's antiquated 25Hz distribution network.

> Is there any equipment left on the corridor that is
> 25 HZ only?

No, but I don't recall offhand if all of it is frequency-agile; some may
still require a shop change. Ditto for voltage agility.

Agility, i.e. the ability to move from one system to the other across a
phase break, is critical to making such a transition. Flash cuts don't
work well in a system this size, even if you did somehow come up with
enough money to actually do it all in one go.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

I doubt it -- union rules and qualification issues, I'm sure.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 25/01/2013 18:21, Jishnu Mukerji wrote:
> On 1/25/2013 3:24 AM, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 25/01/2013 02:35, John Levine wrote:
>>>>>>> A train of Budd cars would originate in Penna Station
>>>>>>> and head out to Trenton and right on to Suburban Station.
>>>
>>> The current schedules are synchronized fairly well at Trenton, with
>>> many transfers 10 minutes or less. Through trains wouldn't save much
>>> time, so I'm not sure why you think they'd have much more patronage
>>> than the current setup.
>>>
>>> SEPTA trains don't normally go north of Trenton, and NJT don't
>>> normally go south of the Morrisville yard. Are there any
>>> compatibility problems with NJT equipment in the tunnel in Phila, or
>>> SEPTA in Penn Station?
>>>
>>
>> I don't think so, actually. I think the problem is further north with
>> M-series trains entering the Harlem River (a.k.a. Hell Gate) branch
>> under the wire.
>
> What does the Hell Gate Line have to do with Harlem River? The Hell Gate
> Bridge crosses the East River. Metro North crosses and runs along the
> Harlem River.

I omitted one word. The Hell Gate Line is the Harlem River Branch.

> The MNRR M2s could run to Penn Station if they ever got around to it.
> M8s cannot run to Penn Station since they are not capable of running
> under 25Hz.

I've heard that M2/4/6s are not capable of running into Penn Station,
mainly because of the cycle change, whereas the M8s can.

Besides that, however, the main issue has always been 3rd rail shoe
compatibility.

They can run upto Gate interlocking just short of Harold,
> where the 60Hz electrification ends and 25Hz begins. I believe NJT
> Arrows could run all the way to New Haven if they wanted to since they
> can run under 25 and 60Hz without requiring any shop change.
>
> At present there is a plan to have them use dual third rail shoes to get
> them into Penn Station from Gate interlocking for use in the proposed
> MNRR Penn Station access from the New Haven Line.

Has anybody at MNRR ever considered acquiring electric locomotives, the
type of which NJT and SEPTA have, to allow service into Penn over the
Hell Gate without having to worry about shoes?

(One of those locomotives would look look in MNRR or CDOT livery.)

I have heard talk for years now about MNRR or the MTA accessing Penn
station either via the Hell Gate or even the West Side Line. But it
seems as ever to be only talk or rumours.

Are they actually looking at taking some concrete steps towards this
over a specified time?

I would think that completing East Side Access is priority No. 1 in
diversifying rail lines in the New York, in any event.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 25/01/2013 18:21, Jishnu Mukerji wrote:

I thought that the cycle change was between 25Hz and 60Hz was not far
from CP 216, BTW.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

What do you mean when you that they borrow commuter equipment, coaches
or electric locomotives?

You don't mean EMUs, surely?

[Jishnu Mukerji]

On 1/25/2013 5:01 PM, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:> On 25/01/2013 18:21,

Trust me, it is at CP gate, 60Hz was extended from CP216 (ex CP Shell)
to CP gate when the catenary was rebuilt on the Hell Gate Line within
the last decade.

Also BTW, MNRR M2s actually ran on the New haven Line before it was
converted to 60Hz. So they can certainly run under 25Hz.

/J

[Jishnu Mukerji]

On 1/25/2013 5:04 PM, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
> What do you mean when you that they borrow commuter equipment, coaches
> or electric locomotives?
>
> You don't mean EMUs, surely?

Amtrak usually borrows a couple of 12 car Arrow III EMU consist from NJT
for running extras between New York and Washington DC.

They also borrow a push pull set or two from MARC usually. They may
borrow some stuff from SEPTA for New York - Philly extras but I don't
recall off the top of my head whether they are push pull sets or EMUs,
or when they did so last.

/J

[John Levine]

>Has anybody at MNRR ever considered acquiring electric locomotives, the
>type of which NJT and SEPTA have, to allow service into Penn over the
>Hell Gate without having to worry about shoes?

I doubt it. Since the New Haven line is electrified all the way to
Boston, and has been electrified to New Haven for about a century,
commuter service to New Haven is all MUs. When I was in college in
New Haven in the 1970s they brought in the new M2s, and I'm fairly
sure the antique New Haven equipment they replaced were MUs also.

The Hudson and Harlem line need locos since they're only partially
electrified and there is (as far as I know) no such thing as a
diesel/electric MU.

[Clark F Morris]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 15:22:10 -0600, Stephen Sprunk
<ste...@sprunk.org> wrote:

>On 25-Jan-13 13:27, Clark F Morris wrote:
>> How hard would it be to convert the corridor to 25KV 60 HZ?
>
>From a technical standpoint, it's straightforward, with the possible
>exception of the tunnels to/from NYP due to clearance issues.
>
>The main problem is funding, as usual.
>
>> Penn Station Neark to Hell Gate to 12KV 60 Hz?
>
>Going from 25Hz to 60Hz is a piece of cake. 11kV vs 12.5kV is a
>complete non-issue.
>
>However, Amtrak seemingly refuses to consider 12.5kV 60Hz as a
>transition step, and they also insist on switching to constant-tension
>catenary at the same time. Of course, they don't have anywhere near
>enough money to do that, so nothing gets done at all--and they keep
>wasting money maintaining the current mess.
>
>> Is the latter feasible given the loads?
>
>The loads aren't the problem; if anything, the loads would be much
>easier to handle on 60Hz, since substations could tie into the 60Hz grid
>rather than needing Amtrak's antiquated 25Hz distribution network.
>
>> Is there any equipment left on the corridor that is
>> 25 HZ only?
>
>No, but I don't recall offhand if all of it is frequency-agile; some may
>still require a shop change. Ditto for voltage agility.

All of the Amtrak locomotives can handle 12 KV 25 HZ and both 60 HZ
voltages including Acela as can all of the NJT locomotives. NJT
locomotives encounter all 3 on the Long Branch run. NJT EMUs can and
do handle 25 HZ and 60HZ on the Matawan runs. A shop switch is needed
between 12 KV and 25 KV. I would assume the MARC locomotives can
handle all voltages and frequencies but don't know. I also would
assume the Silverliner Vs can handle all voltages and frequencies on
the fly but don't know. The Silverliner IV equipment probably can
only handle 12 KV and probably either 25 or 60 HZ. If I understand
Harry Rappaport's presentation to the New York division of the
Electric Railroaders many years ago. The ex-PRR electrification had
no phase breaks and is a unitary system. Amtrak may have introduced
phase breaks. The reason I am interested in whether it would be easy
to convert at least Trenton to Hell Gate to 25 KV or even just Newark
to Hell Gate to 12KV 60 Hz is the greater flexibility (the latter
change would all New Haven Equipment to go to Penn Station New York
and maybe Secaucus giving greater flexibility. The former change
would allow all NJT equipment to serve Penn Station, New York.

Clark Morris

[Clark F Morris]

I suspect the M4 and M6 equipment can also handle 25 HZ leaving only
the M8 as 60 cycle only. I also think that the M8 is the first with
25 KV capability from other postings.

On the SEPTA side what are the capabilities? My guess is that the
Silverliner IV equipment is 12KV only with probable ability to handle
60 HZ. I can't tell about the Silverliner V.

Clark Morris
>
>/J

[Clark F Morris]

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 00:09:51 +0000 (UTC), John Levine <jo...@iecc.com>
wrote:

>>Has anybody at MNRR ever considered acquiring electric locomotives, the
>>type of which NJT and SEPTA have, to allow service into Penn over the
>>Hell Gate without having to worry about shoes?
>
>I doubt it. Since the New Haven line is electrified all the way to
>Boston, and has been electrified to New Haven for about a century,
>commuter service to New Haven is all MUs. When I was in college in
>New Haven in the 1970s they brought in the new M2s, and I'm fairly
>sure the antique New Haven equipment they replaced were MUs also.

The FL9s and their Genesis successors have been used for through
trains from the non-electrified Danbury and Waterbury lines. It
actually MIGHT make sense to have some locomotive hauled double deck
equipment for the service to New Haven and beyond.

Clark Morris

[David Lesher]

Clark F Morris <cfmp...@ns.sympatico.ca> writes:

>>Going from 25Hz to 60Hz is a piece of cake. 11kV vs 12.5kV is a
>>complete non-issue.
>>
>>However, Amtrak seemingly refuses to consider 12.5kV 60Hz as a
>>transition step, and they also insist on switching to constant-tension
>>catenary at the same time. Of course, they don't have anywhere near
>>enough money to do that, so nothing gets done at all--and they keep
>>wasting money maintaining the current mess.

I concur that 25->60 is not hard, but even a piece of cake takes
money and engineering. A major issue is that most everything on
the power system belongs in the Smithsonian, not the NE Corridor.

I agree they are wanting the whole pie, when half a one would
pay major dividends. They just pissed away some unearthly amount
of money on rebuilding the mid-line rotary converters.

>>The loads aren't the problem; if anything, the loads would be much
>>easier to handle on 60Hz, since substations could tie into the 60Hz grid
>>rather than needing Amtrak's antiquated 25Hz distribution network.

I'm not buying into that. No POCO wants Amtrak's transient peak loads
on their backs. The 138KV network does mean those few power sources
handle the whole length. But moving it to 60 Hz makes sense.

That peak-load issue is what got me thinking of DC transmission
and cats. In the 600-750VDC world, a line's traction power
stations are usually just paralleled, spreading the load. During
a major DC blackout ~20 years ago, the suburban WMATA stations
were able to keep all the lines going, albeit at slower speeds.

Plus they could raise the cat voltage from 11KVAC to ~15KVDC
without needing more clearance/bigger insulators.

>>> Is there any equipment left on the corridor that is
>>> 25 HZ only?
>>
>>No, but I don't recall offhand if all of it is
>>frequency-agile; some may still require a shop change. Ditto
>>for voltage agility.

Even if there was some small percentage of antique 25Hz-only
rolling stock left, it would pay to retire it.

--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

[Glen Labah]

In article <kdvinf$ohb$1...@reader1.panix.com>,

David Lesher <wb8...@panix.com> wrote:

> Clark F Morris <cfmp...@ns.sympatico.ca> writes:

> >>> Is there any equipment left on the corridor that is
> >>> 25 HZ only?
> >>
> >>No, but I don't recall offhand if all of it is
> >>frequency-agile; some may still require a shop change. Ditto
> >>for voltage agility.
>
> Even if there was some small percentage of antique 25Hz-only
> rolling stock left, it would pay to retire it.

SEPTA may still have some 25 hz stuff in service, as every once in a
while I see their purchasing department put out requests for quote for
specialized 25 hz equipment. It seems like several months ago they
issued one for something along the lines of 10x of very low horsepower
25hz motors. I don't remember exactly what the horsepower was but I
remember thinking that they were probably electrical equipment cooling
fans or something like that.

However, those may have been a stopgap measure to keep the last of the
Silverliner II and III operating during those last few months of their
lives. Supposedly those have all been retired now, as of June 2012.

[Jishnu Mukerji]

On 1/25/2013 8:10 PM, Clark F Morris wrote:> The reason I am interested

in whether it would be easy
> to convert at least Trenton to Hell Gate to 25 KV or even just Newark
> to Hell Gate to 12KV 60 Hz

Currently it is 60Hz from CP216 to CP Gate, and then it is 25Hz through
Penn station and south/west.

There is zero chance of that getting converted to 60Hz in the next
decade or two since they just put in new 25Hz. static converters to
boost power supply from the Sunnyside feed.

In addition as part of the HSR funded upgrade in New Jersey, the
capacity of the Metuchen Converter station is being upgraded to increase
its capacity by 33% by adding a third converter, and a new 25Hz
substation is being added in the vicinity of Hamilton. Whether the new
Metuchen converter will be a static converter or a rotary is being
studied at present. Equipment will most likely come from Europe, since
the Germans seem to be the experts at doing such things these days, and
no one in US apparently remembers how to build such things anymore. :)
Juuuust kidding.

BTW, the largest converter station at present is the new static
converter station at Richmond I am told.

> is the greater flexibility (the latter
> change would all New Haven Equipment to go to Penn Station New York
> and maybe Secaucus giving greater flexibility.

At present it will be easier to purchase equipment that can operate
under both 25Hz and 60Hz to maintain the ability to operate anywhere
rather than getting Amtrak to change the system. Just reflecting reality
as I see it. Of course y'all can spend all your spare energy yelling and
screaming about it, but it won't change a thing.

> The former change
> would allow all NJT equipment to serve Penn Station, New York.

What is stopping NJT equipment from serving Penn Station? The remaining
Arrow IIIs are around for only 5 or so more years, and besides if NJT
really wanted they could install the automatic tap changing gear in them
tomorrow. The transformers in them are capable of taking on such
capability. It is NJT's decision not to have installed them.

/J

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 26/01/2013 00:09, John Levine wrote:
>> Has anybody at MNRR ever considered acquiring electric locomotives, the
>> type of which NJT and SEPTA have, to allow service into Penn over the
>> Hell Gate without having to worry about shoes?
>
> I doubt it. Since the New Haven line is electrified all the way to
> Boston, and has been electrified to New Haven for about a century,
> commuter service to New Haven is all MUs.

As is the case with commuter service on NJT and SEPTA, yet they still
have electric locomotives to haul trains. Furthermore, an electric
locomotive would solve any compatibility issues for service into Penn
station off the New Haven Lines.

> When I was in college in
> New Haven in the 1970s they brought in the new M2s, and I'm fairly
> sure the antique New Haven equipment they replaced were MUs also.

The M2s were brought in in the early 1970s, to replace the 4400s, a.k.a.
washboards. Those were running until 1983, when they were relegated to
service on the New Caanan branch.

> The Hudson and Harlem line need locos since they're only partially
> electrified and there is (as far as I know) no such thing as a
> diesel/electric MU.
>

There are dual mode locomtives, however.

[Jishnu Mukerji]

On 1/26/2013 9:27 AM, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 26/01/2013 00:09, John Levine wrote:
>>> Has anybody at MNRR ever considered acquiring electric locomotives, the
>>> type of which NJT and SEPTA have, to allow service into Penn over the
>>> Hell Gate without having to worry about shoes?
>>
>> I doubt it. Since the New Haven line is electrified all the way to
>> Boston, and has been electrified to New Haven for about a century,
>> commuter service to New Haven is all MUs.
>
> As is the case with commuter service on NJT and SEPTA, yet they still
> have electric locomotives to haul trains. Furthermore, an electric
> locomotive would solve any compatibility issues for service into Penn
> station off the New Haven Lines.

The NJT Arrow IIIs can run all the way to New Haven if someone wanted to
do that. The football special from new haven to Secaucus and beyond use
NJT push-pull equipment powered by ALP-46s. To make that happen MNRR
took the trouble of installing the necessary power management
transponders on their track allowing ALP-46s to be used in push mode.

The problem of running from new Haven to Penn Station or beyond is not
one of lack or non-existence of capable equipment. It is mostly
institutional and organizational.

>> When I was in college in
>> New Haven in the 1970s they brought in the new M2s, and I'm fairly
>> sure the antique New Haven equipment they replaced were MUs also.
>
> The M2s were brought in in the early 1970s, to replace the 4400s, a.k.a.
> washboards. Those were running until 1983, when they were relegated to
> service on the New Caanan branch.
>
>> The Hudson and Harlem line need locos since they're only partially
>> electrified and there is (as far as I know) no such thing as a
>> diesel/electric MU.
>>
>
> There are dual mode locomtives, however.

Interestingly Shore Line East, the ConnDOT service from Stamford to New
London uses pure diesels (P40s purchased/leased from Amtrak). The last
tranche of M8s are capable of operating under 25kV and are targeted for
use on this service. The diesel push-pull equipment then will be
cascaded to the New Haven - Hartford - Springfield ConnDOT commuter
service that is slated to start after the track upgrades are completed.

Speaking of Diesel/Electric dual-mode, such DEMUs have been speced out
by NJT but were never ordered. The ALP45-DPs were ordered instead, which
probably was not the brightest thing to do, but that is a separate
subject. Currently the debate that is ongoing at NJT is whether new EMUs
should be single level or bi-level, like the MLVs, with an apparent
preference leaning towards bi-level at present. It is almost certain
that new EMUs will be ordered within the next 5 years to replace the
Arrow IIIs which have started developing body frame problems that are
hard to fix cheaply.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 26/01/2013 17:26, Jishnu Mukerji wrote:
> On 1/26/2013 9:27 AM, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 26/01/2013 00:09, John Levine wrote:
>>>> Has anybody at MNRR ever considered acquiring electric locomotives, the
>>>> type of which NJT and SEPTA have, to allow service into Penn over the
>>>> Hell Gate without having to worry about shoes?
>>>
>>> I doubt it. Since the New Haven line is electrified all the way to
>>> Boston, and has been electrified to New Haven for about a century,
>>> commuter service to New Haven is all MUs.
>>
>> As is the case with commuter service on NJT and SEPTA, yet they still
>> have electric locomotives to haul trains. Furthermore, an electric
>> locomotive would solve any compatibility issues for service into Penn
>> station off the New Haven Lines.
>
> The NJT Arrow IIIs can run all the way to New Haven if someone wanted to
> do that. The football special from new haven to Secaucus and beyond use
> NJT push-pull equipment powered by ALP-46s.

How often do the football specials run at this point, BTW? It's only
during football season, obviously, but how often in that time frame?

Same question with the baseball specials to Yankee Stadium.

> To make that happen MNRR
> took the trouble of installing the necessary power management
> transponders on their track allowing ALP-46s to be used in push mode.

I have also heard that MNRR allowed the football specials as a bit of
their own experiment to see generally about the feasibility of running
trains down to Penn Station.

> The problem of running from new Haven to Penn Station or beyond is not
> one of lack or non-existence of capable equipment. It is mostly
> institutional and organizational.

Political will, in so many words.

>
>>> When I was in college in
>>> New Haven in the 1970s they brought in the new M2s, and I'm fairly
>>> sure the antique New Haven equipment they replaced were MUs also.
>>
>> The M2s were brought in in the early 1970s, to replace the 4400s, a.k.a.
>> washboards. Those were running until 1983, when they were relegated to
>> service on the New Caanan branch.
>>
>>> The Hudson and Harlem line need locos since they're only partially
>>> electrified and there is (as far as I know) no such thing as a
>>> diesel/electric MU.
>>>
>>
>> There are dual mode locomtives, however.
>
> Interestingly Shore Line East, the ConnDOT service from Stamford to New
> London uses pure diesels (P40s purchased/leased from Amtrak). The last
> tranche of M8s are capable of operating under 25kV and are targeted for
> use on this service.

Perhaps that is why I have heard that the M8s are capable of running on
the Harlem River Branch.

When are the M8s due to start operating north of State Street, then?

> The diesel push-pull equipment then will be
> cascaded to the New Haven - Hartford - Springfield ConnDOT commuter
> service that is slated to start after the track upgrades are completed.

I thought that Amtrak was running New Haven to Springfield via Hartford.

What about service beyond Waterbury to Hartford, by the way? CDOT is
thinking about that one, I have read.

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 25-Jan-13 21:31, David Lesher wrote:
> Clark F Morris <cfmp...@ns.sympatico.ca> writes:

Clark didn't write the quotes below; I did.

>>> Going from 25Hz to 60Hz is a piece of cake. 11kV vs 12.5kV is a
>>> complete non-issue.
>>>
>>> However, Amtrak seemingly refuses to consider 12.5kV 60Hz as a
>>> transition step, and they also insist on switching to
>>> constant-tension catenary at the same time. Of course, they
>>> don't have anywhere near enough money to do that, so nothing gets
>>> done at all--and they keep wasting money maintaining the current
>>> mess.
>
> I concur that 25->60 is not hard, but even a piece of cake takes
> money and engineering. A major issue is that most everything on the
> power system belongs in the Smithsonian, not the NE Corridor.

Ironically, it'd probably get more funding if it were in the Smithsonian.

> I agree they are wanting the whole pie, when half a one would pay
> major dividends. They just pissed away some unearthly amount of money
> on rebuilding the mid-line rotary converters.

To be fair, Amtrak has installed 230MW of static converters since 1992,
both replacing 78MW of rotary converter capacity and increasing total
system capacity by 152MW. Out of 354MW total today, only 98MW comes
from rotary converters.

One could argue that money would have been better spent converting to
60Hz, but IIRC NJT's fleet wasn't frequency-agile until recently, and
AFAIK SEPTA's fleet still isn't.

>>> The loads aren't the problem; if anything, the loads would be
>>> much easier to handle on 60Hz, since substations could tie into
>>> the 60Hz grid rather than needing Amtrak's antiquated 25Hz
>>> distribution network.
>
> I'm not buying into that. No POCO wants Amtrak's transient peak
> loads on their backs.

The bigger problem is phase loading, but even then Amtrak and its
tenants have enough trains moving at any given time that it shouldn't be
a serious problem--or at least any more serious than it already is via
the frequency converters.

> Plus they could raise the cat voltage from 11KVAC to ~15KVDC without
> needing more clearance/bigger insulators.

Um, no. Arc distance goes _up_ as frequency goes down, and DC = 0Hz.

Also, the clearances that PRR used are far larger than were necessary
for 11kV 25Hz; there's a decent chance Amtrak could upgrade to 25kV 60Hz
within the existing clearances.

(The Brits initially used 6.25kV 50Hz in tunnels and under bridges based
on doubling the clearance they had used for 3kVDC but, after doing some
real-world testing, found they could safely increase to the full 25kV
50Hz. That's a significant difference per kV.)

>>>> Is there any equipment left on the corridor that is 25 HZ
>>>> only?
>>>
>>> No, but I don't recall offhand if all of it is frequency-agile;
>>> some may still require a shop change. Ditto for voltage
>>> agility.
>
> Even if there was some small percentage of antique 25Hz-only rolling
> stock left, it would pay to retire it.

And where would the money come from to replace it?

It's not Amtrak's fleet that's the problem, and federal law prohibits
Amtrak spending _any_ money on commuter rail, even if they had the money
to do so--and they don't.

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 25-Jan-13 21:05, Clark F Morris wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 18:05:16 -0500, Jishnu Mukerji
> <jis...@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
>> On 1/25/2013 5:01 PM, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>> I thought that the cycle change was between 25Hz and 60Hz was not far
>>> from CP 216, BTW.
>>
>> Trust me, it is at CP gate, 60Hz was extended from CP216 (ex CP Shell)
>> to CP gate when the catenary was rebuilt on the Hell Gate Line within
>> the last decade.
>>
>> Also BTW, MNRR M2s actually ran on the New haven Line before it was
>> converted to 60Hz. So they can certainly run under 25Hz.
>
> I suspect the M4 and M6 equipment can also handle 25 HZ leaving only
> the M8 as 60 cycle only. I also think that the M8 is the first with
> 25 KV capability from other postings.

True, but the M8's Wikipedia page says that the voltage can be changed
"by the engineer", implying that it's not automatic like Amtrak and NJT
equipment are. If human intervention is really required, I see a lot of
burned-out M8 cars in MNRR's future.

> On the SEPTA side what are the capabilities? My guess is that the
> Silverliner IV equipment is 12KV only with probable ability to handle
> 60 HZ.

That's what I'd guess too, but I hope someone here has something more
authoritative than that.

> I can't tell about the Silverliner V.

Rotem's brochure for the SL5 says "11.5kV 25Hz, 2.5kV 60Hz, 25kV 60Hz".
I presume the middle figure is a typo and should read 12.5kV.

[David Lesher]

Stephen Sprunk <ste...@sprunk.org> writes:


>> I agree they are wanting the whole pie, when half a one would
>> pay major dividends. They just pissed away some unearthly
>> amount of money on rebuilding the mid-line rotary converters.

>To be fair, Amtrak has installed 230MW of static converters
>since 1992, both replacing 78MW of rotary converter capacity
>and increasing total system capacity by 152MW. Out of 354MW
>total today, only 98MW comes from rotary converters.

Found a link:

///
Rehabilitation of the Lamokin frequency converters in Chester,
Pennsylvania - $63 million. Using $63 million in Recovery
Act funding, Amtrak will entirely rebuild three rotary
frequency converters, which form a key element of the power
supply system for the Northeast Corridor, located in Chester,
Pennsylvania. Known as the ?Lamokin Converters,? they were
placed in service in the 1920's as part of the Pennsylvania
Railroad's electrification of its mainline between Philadelphia
and Wilmington, Delaware (on what has since become Amtrak's
Northeast Corridor (NEC)). Since that time, the three 16
megawatt motor-generator sets located at the site have been
in continuous use to convert commercial electric power, which
operates at 60 Hertz alternating current, to the 25 Hertz
alternating current that powers Amtrak and commuter trains along
the NEC south of New York City.

After over 80 years of continuous use, the Lamokin frequency
converters are in dire need of major rehabilitation to ensure
their future reliability. As demonstrated by the power outages
that crippled Amtrak and commuter rail service in the Northeast
on several occasions in 2006 (the causes of which were traced to
frequency converting equipment), the reliable supply of electric
power is essential to the NEC remaining one of the county's most
energy-efficient examples of transportation infrastructure.
Through this project, the three rotary converters will be
entirely rebuilt with rewound motor coils, new stator coils,
and new collector rings, allowing them to continue to serve
passengers on the NEC for generations to come. Amtrak estimates
that the project will result in 504 person-years of work for
those directly employed in the rehabilitation of the frequency
converters.
\\\
<http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,1895139>
<http://wikimapia.org/5848700/Amtrak-PRR-Lamokin-Rotary-Frequency-Converter>

They did this because rotary converters do have a major advantage
over solid-state ones. Solid-state inverters tend to create harmonics;
rotary machines not only don't, but they eat the harmonics the static
ones create.

[Michael Finfer]

On 1/24/2013 6:00 PM, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 24/01/2013 01:49, Michael Finfer wrote:
>> On 1/23/2013 4:37 PM, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>> On 23/01/2013 00:19, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>>>> On 22-Jan-13 15:25, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>> On 22/01/2013 03:23, Glen Labah wrote:
>>>>>> A lot of crews really do like to have the signal indications repeated
>>>>>> over the radio. It might even help accident investigations.
>>>>>
>>>>> How is it that the signals are repeated over the radios?
>>>>
>>>> If the conductor _is_ in the cab, the engineer calls out the signal
>>>> indications he sees, and the conductor is supposed to look at the
>>>> signal
>>>> himself and see if he agrees with what the engineer said.
>>>>
>>>> If the conductor _is not_ in the cab, the engineer calls the signal to
>>>> him over the radio, and the conductor simply repeats it back. He does
>>>> _not_ open a door and stick his head out to verify that what the
>>>> engineer said is actually correct, so this practice is of dubious
>>>> safety
>>>> value.
>>>>
>>>> The investigative value (distinct from safety value) is that a
>>>> recording
>>>> of the crew calling out the signals they _think_ they see can be
>>>> compared with the logs from the signal system.
>>>>
>>>> S
>>>>
>>> Where exactly does this happen? Because I never saw or heard of such
>>> things on diesel-hauled trains either on the LIRR or on Metro-North.
>>
>> This happens everywhere in the US in signaled territory not equipped
>> with cab signals.
>>
>> Michael Finfer
>> Bridgewater, NJ
>
> I did not see that on the upper Hudson Line, which was not cab signalled
> the first time that I was there. I also did not see that on the Harlem
> Line north of NW before they electrified that section up to what is now
> Southeast. In the two respective cases, I was in the cab and I saw crews
> carrying mobile radios, which they used only to clear the train to depart.
>
> On the LIRR, I did not see crews carrying radios on either the Greenport
> or Montauk branches. Instead, in each case, they used hand signals to
> clear the train.
>
> Do they even have waysides on the Montauk Branch east of Bay Shore or
> Patchogue, BTW? What about on the Greenport Branch?
>
> Wouldn't that jam up the airwaves in any event?

This began after the Metrolink/UP wreck on the railroads that weren't
already doing it.

Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ

[Michael Finfer]

On 1/23/2013 9:19 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Jan 23, 6:38 pm, John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote:
>
>> I believe that the through SEPTA+NJT ticket costs the same as the two
>> separate tickets, so there's only a convenience factor to buying them
>> together.
>
> Note that the SEPTA fare will vary depending on the distance. For
> instance, just going to say Levittown is cheaper than downtown Phila,
> and going beyond downtown Phila (say to Chestnut Hill) is slightly
> more expensive.
>
> FWIW, SEPTA offers free service to Amtrak riders (with ticket receipt)
> from 30th St to Market East.
>
> For commuters, there are joint monthly tickets available by mail which
> are slightly cheaper than two separate monthly tickets. I think the
> SEPTA portion would be good on the transit side of SEPTA, too, not
> sure about the NJT portion, though that may be good on NJT buses, too.
>

NJT monthly/weekly tickets are good on buses; the number of bus fare
zones for which they are valid are on each ticket, varying by price.
Rail monthly/weekly tickets that are more expensive than light rail
tickets are also good on all of the light rail lines.

Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 27-Jan-13 16:39, David Lesher wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk <ste...@sprunk.org> writes:
>
>>> I agree they are wanting the whole pie, when half a one would
>>> pay major dividends. They just pissed away some unearthly
>>> amount of money on rebuilding the mid-line rotary converters.
>>
>> To be fair, Amtrak has installed 230MW of static converters
>> since 1992, both replacing 78MW of rotary converter capacity
>> and increasing total system capacity by 152MW. Out of 354MW
>> total today, only 98MW comes from rotary converters.
>
> Found a link:
>
> ///
> Rehabilitation of the Lamokin frequency converters in Chester,

> Pennsylvania - $63 million. ...

>
> They did this because rotary converters do have a major advantage
> over solid-state ones. Solid-state inverters tend to create harmonics;
> rotary machines not only don't, but they eat the harmonics the static
> ones create.

Large motors also perform power factor correction as a side effect.
Most such loads disappeared from the Rust Belt as manufacturing jobs
were shipped overseas, so Amtrak's contribution saves grid operators
from having to do as much themselves.

[David Lesher]

Stephen Sprunk <ste...@sprunk.org> writes:

>> I'm not buying into that. No POCO wants Amtrak's transient peak
>> loads on their backs.

>The bigger problem is phase loading, but even then Amtrak and its
>tenants have enough trains moving at any given time that it shouldn't be
>a serious problem--or at least any more serious than it already is via
>the frequency converters.

The PRR system uses dedicated power supplied to the converters
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak's_25_Hz_Traction_Power_System#Power_sources>
and then carried along the 138KV system to the substations. Moving
to local power at the ~55 substations would be an issue.

>> Plus they could raise the cat voltage from 11KVAC to ~15KVDC without
>> needing more clearance/bigger insulators.

>Um, no. Arc distance goes _up_ as frequency goes down, and DC = 0Hz.

You miss the point. The insulator length/distance needed is a
function of peak voltage, while useful power is of RMS. For AC,
there's a 1.4 factor between. With DC, RMS==peak. That's one of
the advantages of HVDC transmission over AC.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HVDC#Overhead_line_systems>

>Also, the clearances that PRR used are far larger than were

>necessary for 11KV 25Hz; there's a decent chance Amtrak could
>upgrade to 25KV 60Hz within the existing clearances.

That could be true, but I'm not assuming same.

>> Even if there was some small percentage of antique 25Hz-only
>> rolling stock left, it would pay to retire it.

>And where would the money come from to replace it?

>It's not Amtrak's fleet that's the problem, and federal law
>prohibits Amtrak spending _any_ money on commuter rail, even if
>they had the money to do so--and they don't.

I've been told elsewhere this is zero revenue equipment
requiring 25Hz. Less certain was the issue of work motors.

[Glen Labah]

In article <ke2tl6$g7u$1...@dont-email.me>,

Stephen Sprunk <ste...@sprunk.org> wrote:

> Also, the clearances that PRR used are far larger than were necessary
> for 11kV 25Hz; there's a decent chance Amtrak could upgrade to 25kV 60Hz
> within the existing clearances.

AMT in Montreal converted to 25kV 60 hz, and up until 1995 they were
using 3,000v DC.

Sure, the arc distance is greater with DC, but still 3,000 <<< 11,000.

Their tunnel height is also very limited - 14.5 feet / 4 meters. I'm
not sure how that compares with Amtrak Plate A clearances but I think
its pretty close.

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 27-Jan-13 23:11, Glen Labah wrote:
> In article <ke2tl6$g7u$1...@dont-email.me>, Stephen Sprunk
> <ste...@sprunk.org> wrote:
>> Also, the clearances that PRR used are far larger than were
>> necessary for 11kV 25Hz; there's a decent chance Amtrak could
>> upgrade to 25kV 60Hz within the existing clearances.
>
> AMT in Montreal converted to 25kV 60 hz, and up until 1995 they were
> using 3,000v DC.
>
> Sure, the arc distance is greater with DC, but still 3,000 <<<
> 11,000.
>
> Their tunnel height is also very limited - 14.5 feet / 4 meters. I'm
> not sure how that compares with Amtrak Plate A clearances but I
> think its pretty close.

See the very next paragraph from that message:

>> (The Brits initially used 6.25kV 50Hz in tunnels and under bridges
>> based on doubling the clearance they had used for 3kVDC but, after
>> doing some real-world testing, found they could safely increase to
>> the full 25kV 50Hz. That's a significant difference per kV.)

I'd guess that British tunnels are smaller than Canadian ones.

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 27-Jan-13 17:15, David Lesher wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk <ste...@sprunk.org> writes:
>
>>> I'm not buying into that. No POCO wants Amtrak's transient peak
>>> loads on their backs.
>>
>> The bigger problem is phase loading, but even then Amtrak and its
>> tenants have enough trains moving at any given time that it
>> shouldn't be a serious problem--or at least any more serious than
>> it already is via the frequency converters.
>
> The PRR system uses dedicated power supplied to the converters
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak's_25_Hz_Traction_Power_System#Power_sources>
> and then carried along the 138KV system to the substations. Moving
> to local power at the ~55 substations would be an issue.

Possibly. OTOH, I think the autotransformer design (as used between New
Haven and Boston, and elsewhere around the world) means the segments
between grid substations would be longer than they are today. Ditto if
they could upgrade to 25kV at the same time.

But, yes, either way Amtrak would be drawing power from a greater number
of locations than they do today. Depending on how the grid is set up
and where the power comes from, that might be a good thing or a bad thing.

The bigger problem for the grid operator, I suspect, would be the
potential for uneven phase loading, but there are enough trains
operating on the NEC that one would expect roughly equal loading on all
phases from all locations. As more sections switched over, the more
even it would get.

>>> Plus they could raise the cat voltage from 11KVAC to ~15KVDC
>>> without needing more clearance/bigger insulators.
>>
>> Um, no. Arc distance goes _up_ as frequency goes down, and DC =
>> 0Hz.
>
> You miss the point. The insulator length/distance needed is a
> function of peak voltage,

... and of frequency. AC doesn't spend much time at peak voltage,
whereas DC is always at peak voltage.

> while useful power is of RMS. For AC, there's a 1.4 factor between.
> With DC, RMS==peak. That's one of the advantages of HVDC
> transmission over AC.
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HVDC#Overhead_line_systems>

If it's so wonderful, then why does the map on that page show it only
used for undersea links between countries that probably don't want their
AC grids synchronized in the first place?

Yes, there are a few isolated HVDC lines in other places, but they're
all long-haul point-to-point links from large-scale generators in remote
locations, not anything that resembles a railroad power distribution system.

>>> Even if there was some small percentage of antique 25Hz-only
>>> rolling stock left, it would pay to retire it.
>>
>> And where would the money come from to replace it?
>>
>> It's not Amtrak's fleet that's the problem, and federal law
>> prohibits Amtrak spending _any_ money on commuter rail, even if
>> they had the money to do so--and they don't.
>
> I've been told elsewhere this is zero revenue equipment
> requiring 25Hz.

The latest generation of equipment at each carrier seems to be
frequency-agile, but there's still a lot of older stuff out there.
Every time this topic comes up, someone points out _some_ piece of
equipment still in use that isn't.

The status on voltage agility is even worse; most equipment out there
still needs a shop change, if it can even handle both voltages at all.

> Less certain was the issue of work motors.

There's a lot of wayside equipment (signals, switches, etc.) that may
still be 25Hz-only, though Amtrak has been replacing it with modern
dual-frequency equipment as it wears out.

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 25, 4:22 pm, Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org> wrote:

> > How hard would it be to convert the corridor to 25KV 60 HZ?
>
> From a technical standpoint, it's straightforward, with the possible
> exception of the tunnels to/from NYP due to clearance issues.

Well, since almost all trains have to pass through the NYC tunnels,
it's an important issue. Further, there may be bridges elsewhere that
have tight clearance, as well as the Baltimore tunnels.

Presently, Amtrak does not operate to Suburban Station, but it may
resume so in the future (as it did in the past).

> The main problem is funding, as usual.

How much would it roughly cost for a 25 Kv changeover, include all
changes, if needed, to rolling stock, commuter carrier trains,
substations, signals, etc.? Would there be any extended track or
power outages?

> Going from 25Hz to 60Hz is a piece of cake.  11kV vs 12.5kV is a
> complete non-issue.
>
> However, Amtrak seemingly refuses to consider 12.5kV 60Hz as a
> transition step, and they also insist on switching to constant-tension
> catenary at the same time.  Of course, they don't have anywhere near
> enough money to do that, so nothing gets done at all--and they keep
> wasting money maintaining the current mess.

What would the rough total cost be for a full conversion to 60Hz using
the current voltage? What is involved?

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 25, 4:47 pm, "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> > I do not know if any of SEPTA's newest Silverliner Vs have ever
> > ventured beyond SEPTA territory.
>
> I doubt it -- union rules and qualification issues, I'm sure.-

There are long standing provisions to handle that sort of thing.
Union rules and qualification are not reasons the cars haven't
ventured beyond SEPTA territory.

Basically, there hasn't been a need for them elsewhere, yet. But
perhaps next Thanksgiving Amk will lease them as they have other
trains. (Though SEPTA trains don't have restrooms which are necessary
in longer service.)

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 25, 5:04 pm, "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> > Since it's all Amtrak territory, I'm pretty sure all SEPTA and NJT
> > rolling stock can easily run on either line.  Indeed, during
> > Thanksgiving, Amk borrows commuter equipment from both carrier to run
> > as extra sections.
>
> What do you mean when you that they borrow commuter equipment, coaches
> or electric locomotives?
>

> You don't mean EMUs, surely?-

Yes, during Thanksgiving, Amtrak often borrows a set of SEPTA
Silverliner IV MUs for NEC extra sections. I would think NJT Arrows
would be a better choice since they have bathroom and reversible
seats, but NJT is very busy during the holiday and may need the trains
for itself.

Amtrak also often borrows MARC equipment.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 28/01/2013 19:36, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Jan 25, 5:04 pm, "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>> Since it's all Amtrak territory, I'm pretty sure all SEPTA and NJT
>>> rolling stock can easily run on either line. Indeed, during
>>> Thanksgiving, Amk borrows commuter equipment from both carrier to run
>>> as extra sections.
>>
>> What do you mean when you that they borrow commuter equipment, coaches
>> or electric locomotives?
>>
>> You don't mean EMUs, surely?-
>
> Yes, during Thanksgiving, Amtrak often borrows a set of SEPTA

> Silverliner IV MUs for NEC extra sections.~

And Amtrak crews run these trains or do they reach an agreement to with
SEPTA to have them operate the train?

Or is it that an Amtrak locomotive hauls the trains?

> I would think NJT Arrows
> would be a better choice since they have bathroom and reversible
> seats, but NJT is very busy during the holiday and may need the trains
> for itself.
>
> Amtrak also often borrows MARC equipment.

Doesn't this create confusion for the passengers to see a SEPTA train
rolling in, though?

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 27, 5:58 pm, Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org> wrote:

> Large motors also perform power factor correction as a side effect.
> Most such loads disappeared from the Rust Belt as manufacturing jobs
> were shipped overseas, so Amtrak's contribution saves grid operators
> from having to do as much themselves.

I can't help but suspect the power grid operators will charge Amtrak
for any additional power monitoring work or upgrades needed if Amtrak
upgrades its own system. Those costs could be substantial, such as a
marked increase in traction power cost.

Those costs possibly could make the conversion less attractive than it
otherwise seems.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

On 28/01/2013 19:30, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Jan 25, 4:22 pm, Stephen Sprunk <step...@sprunk.org> wrote:
>
>>> How hard would it be to convert the corridor to 25KV 60 HZ?
>>
>> From a technical standpoint, it's straightforward, with the possible
>> exception of the tunnels to/from NYP due to clearance issues.
>
> Well, since almost all trains have to pass through the NYC tunnels,
> it's an important issue. Further, there may be bridges elsewhere that
> have tight clearance, as well as the Baltimore tunnels.
>
> Presently, Amtrak does not operate to Suburban Station, but it may
> resume so in the future (as it did in the past).

When did Amtrak operate to Suburban and when did it cease such service?

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

How far south have SEPTA EMUs gone whilst in revenue service?

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 28, 2:43 pm, "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> Doesn't this create confusion for the passengers to see a SEPTA train
> rolling in, though?

To the typical passenger, especially holiday travellers, a train is a
train. All trains today are gray metal and to the untrained eye, all
look alike. Passengers go by loudspeaker announcements, gate and
platform signs, and greetings by conductors.

[houn...@yahoo.co.uk]

Mistakes happen with trains rolling in and announcements, however.

[Phil Kane]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:54:29 -0800 (PST), hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

>To the typical passenger, especially holiday travellers, a train is a
>train. All trains today are gray metal and to the untrained eye, all
>look alike. Passengers go by loudspeaker announcements, gate and
>platform signs, and greetings by conductors.

My three year old grandson already can identify the differences
between the various train and transit lines in San Francisco. What is
even more amazing is that I see him only once or twice a year and
neither of his parents are railfans.

There's hope for the future.

Phil Kane - Beaverton, OR
PNW CP HALL MP 29.9 - OE District

[Jishnu Mukerji]

On 1/28/2013 3:06 PM, houn...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:> On 28/01/2013 19:54,

Yeah, at Metropark inexperienced first time NJT riders routinely try to
get onto Acelas or vice versa. the riders have no clue what the train is
supposed to look like. They just want to get on and be on their way.
Some hear announcements and others don't even bother, and have to be
then hauled off at the next station. Even if the right color trains were
running the right service passengers screw up, at least on the NEC.

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 28, 2:52 pm, "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> How far south have SEPTA EMUs gone whilst in revenue service?-

Probably Washington DC.

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Jan 28, 2:51 pm, "hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk" <hounsl...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> > Presently, Amtrak does not operate to Suburban Station, but it may
> > resume so in the future (as it did in the past).
>
> When did Amtrak operate to Suburban and when did it cease such service?

Harrisburg service used to originate in Suburban Station. Some years
ago Amtrak moved it to 30th Street. Maybe when they switched using
SEPTA MUs to locomotive hauled trains.