Acela Regional starts Jan 31, 2000
Ron Newman
up the new Amtrak Northeast Timetable. People at the station
told me that it will take effect on Monday, January 31, 2000.
The schedule shows two Acela Regional trains in each direction
Monday through Friday, and just one on Saturdays and Sundays.
Surprisingly, I see nothing on either www.amtrak.com or www.acela.com
about this.
Here are the schedules. The times between NYC and Boston South Station
are either 3:55 or 3:59.
Train No. #131 #133
Days Mo-Fr Daily
Boston South Sta. 6:15A 5:00P
Boston Back Bay 6:20A 5:05P
Route 128 MA 6:30A 5:14P
Providence RI 6:55A 5:36P
Kingston RI 5:57P
New London CT 7:45A 6:29P
Ar New Haven CT 8:33A 7:21P
Lv New Haven CT 8:35A 7:25P
Stamford CT 8:11P
Ar NYC Penn Sta 10:10A 8:59P
Lv NYC Penn Sta 10:25A 9:30P
Newark NJ 10:39A 9:44P
Metropark NJ 10:53A 9:57P
Trenton NJ 11:17A 10:19P
Ar Phil 30th St 11:44A 10:46P
Lv Phil 30th St 11:47A 10:48P
Wilmington DE 12:09P 11:10P
Balt Penn Sta 12:55P 11:55P
BWI Airport Sta 12:08A
New Carrolton MD 1:18P 12:22A
Washington DC 1:35P 12:40A
Train No. #130 #132
Days Mo-Fr Daily
Washington DC 5:00A 1:10P
New Carrolton MD 5:10A 1:20P
BWI Airport Sta 5:24A 1:35P
Balt Penn Sta 5:38A 1:49P
Aberdeen MD 5:59A
Wilmington DE 6:25A 2:37P
Ar Phil 30th St 6:44A 2:57P
Lv Phil 30th St 6:47A 3:00P
North Philadelphia 6:54A
Trenton NJ 3:29P
Metropark NJ 3:50P
Newark NJ 7:51A 4:07P
Ar NYC Penn Sta 8:06A 4:30P
Lv NYC Penn Sta 8:35A 4:55P
Stamford CT 9:27A
Ar New Haven CT 10:12A 6:24P
Lv New Haven CT 10:14A 6:26P
New London CT 10:59A 7:12P
Kingston RI 11:31A 7:45P
Providence RI 11:52A 8:06P
Route 128 MA 12:18P 8:39P
Boston Back Bay 12:28P 8:49P
Boston South Sta 12:34P 8:54P
--
Ron Newman rne...@thecia.net
http://www2.thecia.net/users/rnewman/
kenneth lin
"Ron Newman" <rne...@thecia.net> wrote in message
news:rnewman-2701...@ppp39-153.thecia.net...
> I stopped at Boston South Station last night and picked
> up the new Amtrak Northeast Timetable. People at the station
> told me that it will take effect on Monday, January 31, 2000.
>
> The schedule shows two Acela Regional trains in each direction
> Monday through Friday, and just one on Saturdays and Sundays.
> Surprisingly, I see nothing on either www.amtrak.com or www.acela.com
> about this.
Not surprising. As a website providing any semblance of useful information,
Acela.com is a waste of time.
Rare are the updates. Certainly no mention of any Acela Express updates.
The email sign up generated 1 or 2 messages from Amtrak; that's it.
As a member of their Executive Privilages Program (their frequent traveler
program), news on that front has been completely silent. Rather than
serving as a potent brand loyalty tool, there is nothing but silence
directed at their most frequent NEC rail customers.
By contrast, the Delta and USAir continually bombard me with information on
the latest improvements to their Air Shuttles; I expect DL and US to
increase that bombardment with special Air Shuttle offers once Acela Express
starts up.
Kenneth Lin
wep...@bcmp.med.harvard.edu
153.thecia.net>,
rne...@thecia.net (Ron Newman) wrote:
> I stopped at Boston South Station last night and picked
> up the new Amtrak Northeast Timetable. People at the station
> told me that it will take effect on Monday, January 31, 2000.
>
> The schedule shows two Acela Regional trains in each direction
> Monday through Friday, and just one on Saturdays and Sundays.
> Surprisingly, I see nothing on either www.amtrak.com or www.acela.com
> about this.
>
Ron,
Could you post the Saturday and Sunday
schedule also?
Thanks,
Karen Wepsic
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
dc...@mindspring.com
> I stopped at Boston South Station last night and picked
> up the new Amtrak Northeast Timetable. People at the station
> told me that it will take effect on Monday, January 31, 2000.
>
> The schedule shows two Acela Regional trains in each direction
> Monday through Friday, and just one on Saturdays and Sundays.
> Surprisingly, I see nothing on either www.amtrak.com or www.acela.com
> about this.
Someone else has already pointed out how useless the entire Acela website
is. Buried inside the pre-ARC press release on the www.amtrak.com site
(which touted beating business plan targets) is an announcement for the
Acela Regional startup.
The trains have been showing up on the reservations site since Tuesday--
they show up with "Acela Regional" underneath the train numbers (I've
never seen text under the train number for any other routes Amtrak
operates), though the hyperlink for that text doesn't do anything on my
browser.
- David
dpel...@my-deja.com
Will they still be changing crews at New Haven?
Can they really do a crew change in two minutes?
Or can they schedule crews such that some subset of all trains
don't require any new personnel at New Haven?
Dan
Kurt Hackenberg
>The times between NYC and Boston South Station are either 3:55 or
>3:59.
So, still nobody's talking about the three-hour trips? Too bad.
Merritt D. Mullen
You are about a year too soon. This is Acela Regional service, not Acela
Express. And when Acela Express starts (maybe in June) it is not expected
that the initial service will make NYC-Boston in 3 hours. That will happen
as the bugs are worked out, maybe by the end of the year.
Merritt
Ron Newman
wep...@bcmp.med.harvard.edu stated...
> Could you post the Saturday and Sunday
>schedule also?
I did. Look at the "Days" row at the top of each table.
--
Ron Newman rne...@thecia.net
http://www2.thecia.net/users/rnewman/home.html
Ron Newman
k...@world.std.com stated...
>
>rne...@thecia.net (Ron Newman) writes:
>
>>The times between NYC and Boston South Station are either 3:55 or
>>3:59.
>
>So, still nobody's talking about the three-hour trips? Too bad.
That's Acela Express, still to come. This is just Acela Regional,
the first all-electric service to Boston. It has many more stops
than Acela Express will.
Ron Newman
dpel...@my-deja.com stated...
>
>In article <rnewman-2701...@ppp39-153.thecia.net>,
> rne...@thecia.net (Ron Newman) wrote:
>> Ar New Haven CT 8:33A 7:21P
>> Lv New Haven CT 8:35A 7:25P
>
>Will they still be changing crews at New Haven?
Would they need to, since this is now an all-electric train
that doesn't require an engine change?
Bob Scheurle
<Kenne...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>> Surprisingly, I see nothing on either www.amtrak.com or www.acela.com
>> about this.
>
>Acela.com is a waste of time.
>Rare are the updates. Certainly no mention of any Acela Express updates.
>The email sign up generated 1 or 2 messages from Amtrak; that's it.
>
>As a member of their Executive Privilages Program (their frequent traveler
>program), news on that front has been completely silent. Rather than
>serving as a potent brand loyalty tool, there is nothing but silence
>directed at their most frequent NEC rail customers.
But it's all part of Amtrak's brilliant marketing plan. Those folks are
geniuses, and we mere mortals just don't understand brilliant marketing.
At least that's what some people on this newsgroup would have us believe.
>By contrast, the Delta and USAir continually bombard me with information on
>the latest improvements to their Air Shuttles; I expect DL and US to
>increase that bombardment with special Air Shuttle offers once Acela Express
>starts up.
--
Bob Scheurle | "There's nobody getting
sche...@z-eclipse-z.net | rich writing software."
rsch...@z-avionics-z.itt.com | -- Bill Gates, March 1980
http://www.eclipse.net/~scheurle |
Joe Versaggi
> >the latest improvements to their Air Shuttles; I expect DL and US to
> >increase that bombardment with special Air Shuttle offers once Acela Express
> >starts up.
> --
> Bob Scheurle | "There's nobody getting
But of course, they'll have so many more seats to fill now that they've
fattened their bottom line with 16-1/2 inch wide seats.
The Worrier King
wrote:
>rne...@thecia.net (Ron Newman) writes:
>
>>The times between NYC and Boston South Station are either 3:55 or
>>3:59.
>
>So, still nobody's talking about the three-hour trips? Too bad.
This is Acela REGIONAL, not Acela EXPRESS. The wires aren't even
finished in the Route 128 (oops, I mean "University Park") area, so
the "American Flyer" trainsets are nowhere near ready to debut on the
Boston - NYP run yet.
I have noticed Acela painted Amcans, in the consists of Northeast
Direct trains, for the last month, so the Jan 31 "Acela" schedules may
be covered initially by diesel hauled Amfleet trains, painted in the
Acela scheme.
Brian E Clough
R.I.P. Conrail 1976 - 1999
Ron Newman
>>>3:59.
>>
>>So, still nobody's talking about the three-hour trips? Too bad.
>
>This is Acela REGIONAL, not Acela EXPRESS. The wires aren't even
>finished in the Route 128 (oops, I mean "University Park") area, so
>the "American Flyer" trainsets are nowhere near ready to debut on the
>Boston - NYP run yet.
How are they going to run even Acela Regional without finished wire?
The only "University Park" I know of is an office park next to
MIT in Cambridge. What university is anywhere near Route 128 Station?
Ron Newman
>I have noticed Acela painted Amcans, in the consists of Northeast
>Direct trains, for the last month, so the Jan 31 "Acela" schedules may
>be covered initially by diesel hauled Amfleet trains, painted in the
>Acela scheme.
Not with a 2 minute stop at New Haven, they can't.
jhay
> I stopped at Boston South Station last night and picked
> up the new Amtrak Northeast Timetable. People at the station
> told me that it will take effect on Monday, January 31, 2000.
>
> The schedule shows two Acela Regional trains in each direction
> Monday through Friday, and just one on Saturdays and Sundays.
> Surprisingly, I see nothing on either www.amtrak.com or www.acela.com
> about this.
You have to go to
http://reservations.amtrak.com/novus/process-form?home&arrival and choose
an origin of BOS (all those codes will work as well as the actual names)
and destination of NYP or vice versa, or somewhere in between, on any date
after 1/30, and then select any time. Then it gives you the day's complete
schedule for trains between those 2 points.
JH
--
Never look a GIF horse in the mouth. You'll bang your nose on your monitor
screen if you try.
Merritt D. Mullen
wrote on 1/27/2000 5:30 PM:
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2000 20:15:57 -0500, in article
>>>> The times between NYC and Boston South Station are either 3:55 or
>>>> 3:59.
>>>
>>> So, still nobody's talking about the three-hour trips? Too bad.
>>
>> This is Acela REGIONAL, not Acela EXPRESS. The wires aren't even
>> finished in the Route 128 (oops, I mean "University Park") area, so
>> the "American Flyer" trainsets are nowhere near ready to debut on the
>> Boston - NYP run yet.
>
> How are they going to run even Acela Regional without finished wire?
At least one track is finished and the service starting 31 January will be
all-electric. There will be some track switching until the electrical
system is complete over both tracks. At that time, I would expect the
schedule to be a bit faster and more all-electric runs added. Of course,
once Amtrak has enough electric locos, all runs will be electric.
Merritt D. Mullen
CrowT...@biteme.com wrote on 1/27/2000 5:15 PM:
> I have noticed Acela painted Amcans, in the consists of Northeast
> Direct trains, for the last month, so the Jan 31 "Acela" schedules may
> be covered initially by diesel hauled Amfleet trains, painted in the
> Acela scheme.
No, no. The new 31 January (this coming Monday) Acela Regional service is
all-electric DC to Boston.
Merritt
Merritt D. Mullen
1/27/2000 5:41 PM:
> Will these trains be using existing equipment or the new stuff?
Acela Regional runs will use refurbished existing equipment. The "new
stuff" is Acela Express and will probably start limited service about June.
Merritt
lwin
Kurt Hackenberg
>That's Acela Express, still to come. This is just Acela Regional,
>the first all-electric service to Boston.
>This is Acela REGIONAL, not Acela EXPRESS.
>This is Acela Regional service, not Acela Express.
Yeah, guys, I know that. I was asking . . .
>And when Acela Express starts (maybe in June) it is not expected
>that the initial service will make NYC-Boston in 3 hours. That will happen
>as the bugs are worked out, maybe by the end of the year.
Fooey.
Weren't the three-hour Express, not Regional, trips supposed to start
about now, until several months ago? Have they solved the "wheel
hunt" problem?
John Engleman
know absolutely nothing about any new trains or new timetable beginning
next week. No new timetables to be found anywhere in the station.
John Albert
<< How are they going to run even Acela Regional without finished wire?
>>
There is "complete wire", but not on both tracks yet.
In fact, I believe that #12 is coming up from Washington *tonight* and
running right through to Boston with an AEM-7. This may be the first
all-electric "revenue trip". That's what I heard at work this
afternoon...
- John
Ken Pogran
>
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2000 20:33:07 GMT, in article <86qa23$pmv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> dpel...@my-deja.com stated...
> >
> >In article <rnewman-2701...@ppp39-153.thecia.net>,
> > rne...@thecia.net (Ron Newman) wrote:
> >> Ar New Haven CT 8:33A 7:21P
> >> Lv New Haven CT 8:35A 7:25P
> >
> >Will they still be changing crews at New Haven?
>
> Would they need to, since this is now an all-electric train
> that doesn't require an engine change?
>
running there was a crew change in NH, even though the Turbo ran
straight through from Boston to Penn Station. (Rode in the front unit
just behind the "cab" once; what a blast!)
Ken
John McLachlan
> >3:59.
>
The only talking is complaing from rail buffs that we HAD 4 hours service
in the 30's using I4's and heavyweight coaches, so 4 hours bos-nyc is no
big deal to them. :-)
--
remove nospam for correct e-mail replies...
John McLachlan
Draper Laboratory
Cambridge, MA 02139-3563
jmcla...@draper.com
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/johnmc
-----------------------------------
Imagine a whole pack of penguins; ready to explore your brain
John McLachlan
> >Direct trains, for the last month, so the Jan 31 "Acela" schedules may
> >be covered initially by diesel hauled Amfleet trains, painted in the
> >Acela scheme.
>
Sure they can. Disconnest the diesel and make it run away. Then turn
the AEM7 on... the delay in NH is waiting for the NEW engine, not
getting rid of the current one...
John McLachlan
>
> Would they need to, since this is now an all-electric train
> that doesn't require an engine change?
I thoguht the cre change was they were in MN territory, and wanted
'locals' to run on the NH-NYP segment...
- J
Rick Miller
> Will they still be changing crews at New Haven?
>
> Can they really do a crew change in two minutes?
Don't know about New Haven, but here in Milwaukee, I've seen CP freight crews change while the
train was still moving, though at walking speed.
Merritt D. Mullen
1/28/2000 6:19 AM:
> I suspect they will, due to union rules. Back when the Turbotrain was
> running there was a crew change in NH, even though the Turbo ran
> straight through from Boston to Penn Station.
I don't know if there is to be a crew change in New Haven or not (I hope
not, for Amtrak's efficiency), but the "union rules" that existed back in
the days of the Turbotrain are a lot different than the labor contracts in
place today, so I don't think the Turbotrain precedent is necessarily valid.
Merritt
Merritt D. Mullen
jmcla...@nospam.draper.com wrote on 1/28/2000 7:35 AM:
> The only talking is complaing from rail buffs that we HAD 4 hours service
> in the 30's using I4's and heavyweight coaches, so 4 hours bos-nyc is no
> big deal to them. :-)
True, but this is just the first step to three-hour service, which IS a big
deal.
Merritt
Merritt D. Mullen
>>> Will they still be changing crews at New Haven?
>>
>> Would they need to, since this is now an all-electric train
>> that doesn't require an engine change?
>
> I thoguht the cre change was they were in MN territory, and wanted
> 'locals' to run on the NH-NYP segment...
Well, they are Amtrak (not MN) employees in any case. Seems inefficient to
have crew change on at 3-hour run. They probably do change in NY City for
the continuation to DC, however.
Merritt
HaRRy
<mmu...@ridgecrest.ca.us> wrote in misc.transport.rail.americas:
»The "new stuff" is Acela Express and will probably start limited service about June.
Or later. Look for it to be a little later.
Regards, HaRRy, San Diego
--
http://communities.prodigy.net/trains/
Expect a train on any track, at any time, in any direction!
(To e-mail reply change no.spam to home dot com)
HaRRy
misc.transport.rail.americas:
Right, #12 departed WAS at 3:17am and arrived BOS at 1:18pm, using AEM-7's 937
and 933. F40 316 was added in New Haven as a protect engine, but the train ran
electric all the way. The consist was: 1433, 44640, 21629, 82004, 21053,
21651, 20013, 1453, 1519, 1427.
HAL
"Ken Pogran" <pog...@bbn.com> wrote in message
news:3891A566...@bbn.com...
> I suspect they will, due to union rules. Back when the Turbotrain was
> running there was a crew change in NH, even though the Turbo ran
> straight through from Boston to Penn Station. (Rode in the front unit
> just behind the "cab" once; what a blast!)
There are no union rules that there has to be a crew change in New Haven.
The New Haven crew change can be eliminated. The crews will have to be
qualified for the whole New York to Boston territory to do that. Maybe John
Albert can answer the question as to whether the train and engine crews have
been qualified yet for the whole territory.
nasa...@my-deja.com
rail...@no.spam wrote:
> »The "new stuff" is Acela Express and will probably start limited service about June.
>
> Or later. Look for it to be a little later.
So, December 1999 became Spring 2000, now Summer 2000?
What's taking Bombardier so long at this point anyway? I'd assume
they're being subjected fines as per their contract, but I'm wondering
why the wheel hunting issue has yet to be solved. Unless they're
starting to think of a whole new truck design, or something else has
popped up...
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
nasa...@my-deja.com
rail...@no.spam wrote:
> Right, #12 departed WAS at 3:17am and arrived BOS at 1:18pm, using AEM-7's 937
> and 933. F40 316 was added in New Haven as a protect engine, but the train ran
> electric all the way. The consist was: 1433, 44640, 21629, 82004, 21053,
> 21651, 20013, 1453, 1519, 1427.
I also heard this train was 60 some odd minutes late - perhaps due to a
speed restriction from the engine addition at NHV, not to mention the
engine add itself?
But I can't fault Amtrak for adding a diesel on as a protect engine at
New Haven. I'd assume that the diesel will not be on #131 when it
starts running this monday Monday.
Actually, I've been trying to see if I could get to boston and take it
to New Haven, but a 6am departure and monday classes are a bit of an
obsticle still :(
Anyway, it'll be nice if everything runs smoothly. Interesting side
note, the local CBS affiliate here reported that Acela service would be
starting monday with not only a 3 hour running time, but "One of the
fastest trains in the world" Well, I guess it is if your list is long
enough :)
Question - How many of the AEM-7s have gotten the 25kv mod, and how
exactly do they test this out to make sure it's working? Do they have to
run the locomotive up to New Haven, or can they do it at the shops?
And finally, is there any word on if they run any better on 25kv?
John Albert
<< Right, #12 departed WAS at 3:17am and arrived BOS at 1:18pm, using
AEM-7's 937 and 933. F40 316 was added in New Haven as a protect
engine, but the train ran electric all the way. >>
Well, it "ran electric" until they ran it under a stretch of wire that
wasn't energized (grin).
Guess that's why it was a little late.
Cheers!
- John
John Albert
<< I suspect they will, due to union rules. Back when the Turbotrain was
running there was a crew change in NH, even though the Turbo ran
straight through from Boston to Penn Station. (Rode in the front unit
just behind the "cab" once; what a blast!) >>
Nope - union rules don't have anything to do with it. Indeed, since
the original October, 1982 agreement between the Amtrak and the
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, Amtrak has had the right to "run
through" an existing crew base if they wanted to.
All the 130-numbered trains will "run through" with an engineer (and
perhaps a train crew as well) from Boston to New York or from New York
to Boston...
Cheers!
- John
HAL
"Merritt D. Mullen" <mmu...@ridgecrest.ca.us> wrote in message
news:B4B66B08.83C9%mmu...@ridgecrest.ca.us...
> No, no. The new 31 January (this coming Monday) Acela Regional service is
> all-electric DC to Boston.
Also on January 31, trains that have a consist of all Amfleets, speeds are
raised to 125 mph. 125mph is no longer limited to Metroliners. The new
schedule of some Northeast Direct trains, for example 93/99, is based on
this change.
Bob Scheurle
>Anyway, it'll be nice if everything runs smoothly. Interesting side
>note, the local CBS affiliate here reported that Acela service would be
>starting monday with not only a 3 hour running time, but "One of the
>fastest trains in the world" Well, I guess it is if your list is long
>enough :)
That's exactly why I've been saying Amtrak should not use the Acela name
for the non-high-speed, 25 year-old trains. It just creates confusion,
and dilutes the value of the name for the high-speed service.
--
Bob Scheurle | "There's nobody getting
sche...@z-eclipse-z.net | rich writing software."
rsch...@z-avionics-z.itt.com | -- Bill Gates, March 1980
http://www.eclipse.net/~scheurle |
The Worrier King
The original target date was "Summer 1999". That appeared on posters
around Canton, MA, the previous fall. Also there was a November 1999
prediction, sometime in mid '99.
The Worrier King
I worry when I see my subjects bow down to The Worrier King.
-- Warren Zevon
Access Systems
: In article <j0649s84goq7erdar...@4ax.com>,
: rail...@no.spam wrote:
: > Right, #12 departed WAS at 3:17am and arrived BOS at 1:18pm, using AEM-7's 937
: Question - How many of the AEM-7s have gotten the 25kv mod, and how
they all came from the factory with it.
some parts of NJ Transit are 25kv,
: And finally, is there any word on if they run any better on 25kv?
word I've heard is "no difference" to speak of
Bob
nasa...@my-deja.com
acce...@smart.net (Access Systems) wrote:
> they all came from the factory with it.
> some parts of NJ Transit are 25kv,
Yeah, I know they *came* from the factory for 25k, but I heard that this
feature was dissconnected /not maintained (Have amtrak unts ever run
25kv before this?), thus they needed to at minnimum check it out before
putting them into service. I know NJT is 25k, but I'm not aware of any
amtrak lines that cross 25kv portions of NJT...
kenneth lin
"Bob Scheurle" <sche...@z-eclipse-z.net> wrote in message
news:iul59s4s1rft0t6g0...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2000 02:33:31 GMT, nasa...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >Anyway, it'll be nice if everything runs smoothly. Interesting side
> >note, the local CBS affiliate here reported that Acela service would be
> >starting monday with not only a 3 hour running time, but "One of the
> >fastest trains in the world" Well, I guess it is if your list is long
> >enough :)
>
> That's exactly why I've been saying Amtrak should not use the Acela name
> for the non-high-speed, 25 year-old trains. It just creates confusion,
> and dilutes the value of the name for the high-speed service.
Agreed. It will only become more confusing when the Clockers become Acela
Commuter.
Kenneth Lin
MP24.5
The delay to #12 was prior to New Haven. The diesel was added during the
switch move to remove the Springfield section cars.
The train actually made up 1/2 hour on the schedule between New haven and
Boston. It was still limited to 100 mph, the top speed for F40s. Beginning
Monday the all-electric trains will reach top speeds of 110 between New
Haven and Boston.
MP 24.5
John Albert wrote in message <389284...@mciworld.com>...
>HaRRy wrote:
><< Right, #12 departed WAS at 3:17am and arrived BOS at 1:18pm, using
MP24.5
Reportedly the crews will be working through, BOS-NYP.
(previous comment)
Daniel Salomon
: Also on January 31, trains that have a consist of all Amfleets, speeds are
: raised to 125 mph. 125mph is no longer limited to Metroliners. The new
: schedule of some Northeast Direct trains, for example 93/99, is based on
: this change.
Why didn't they do this sooner?
-Dan
Merritt D. Mullen
sche...@z-eclipse-z.net wrote on 1/29/2000 4:13 AM:
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2000 02:33:31 GMT, nasa...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> Anyway, it'll be nice if everything runs smoothly. Interesting side
>> note, the local CBS affiliate here reported that Acela service would be
>> starting monday with not only a 3 hour running time, but "One of the
>> fastest trains in the world" Well, I guess it is if your list is long
>> enough :)
>
> That's exactly why I've been saying Amtrak should not use the Acela name
> for the non-high-speed, 25 year-old trains. It just creates confusion,
> and dilutes the value of the name for the high-speed service.
Talking about confused reporting, nobody confuses rail transportation
reporting as badly as the Los Angeles Times. They recently had an article
on the new Pacific Surfliner (currently San Diegan) service where they
talked about the new "faster" engines that would be used (I had pictures in
my mind of the faster locomotives leaving their trains behind). Of course,
not only are the Pacific Surfliner engines not any faster than the current
San Diegan engines, in many cases the current San Diegan engines ARE the new
Pacific Surfliner engines (the engines were delivered first).
They also talked about how the new trains would be capable of 125 mph
speeds, but would be limited by the tracks (true), but went on to imply that
"high-speed Talgo trains" are already running in the Northwest and that such
high-speed service should someday come to Southern California. Of course,
those "high-speed" trains in the Northwest are limited to a top speed of 79
mph, whereas the San Diegans have always operated at a top speed of 90 mph.
I wrote a letter to the editor pointing out the factual errors and incorrect
implications of the story, but that didn't keep them from publishing a
letter from a reader saying how pleased she was to read in the LA Times how
"high-speed" trains were coming to Southern California this Spring and how
she was looking forward to riding them. So not only did they publish a
misleading article, but they compounded their error by publishing a letter
that just further propagated the misinformation.
Merritt
asterix
No.12 left New Haven 1 hour and 15 minutes late and arrived Boston 58
minutes late.
Jaap
asterix
no 12 was 1 hour 15 minutes late leaving New Haven only 58 in Boston
can't wait till you get qualified on new equipment
Jaap
MP24.5
Until September, 1998, the law wouldn't allow it. Once the law permitted it
there was a lot of work to do first, including studying the economics of
increased maintance on track and vehicles. Also, note that the consists have
to have just Amfleet cars. Most of the trains to Boston had atleast one mail
car, which is limited to 110 mph. So, Amtrak also had to work out a
restructuring of mail service, and get it OK'd by the Post Office.
MP 24.5
Daniel Salomon wrote in message <86vjbp$h5p$3...@news.fas.harvard.edu>...
Joe Versaggi
>
> Until September, 1998, the law wouldn't allow it. Once the law permitted it
> there was a lot of work to do first, including studying the economics of
> increased maintance on track and vehicles. Also, note that the consists have
> to have just Amfleet cars. Most of the trains to Boston had atleast one mail
> car, which is limited to 110 mph. So, Amtrak also had to work out a
> restructuring of mail service, and get it OK'd by the Post Office.
>
Bob Scheurle
>Until September, 1998, the law wouldn't allow it.
Then how was it that the Colonial was operating at 128 mph as it
approached the three Conrail engines that fouled the tracks in Maryland?
>Once the law permitted it
>there was a lot of work to do first, including studying the economics of
>increased maintance on track and vehicles. Also, note that the consists have
>to have just Amfleet cars. Most of the trains to Boston had atleast one mail
>car, which is limited to 110 mph. So, Amtrak also had to work out a
>restructuring of mail service, and get it OK'd by the Post Office.
>
>MP 24.5
>
>Daniel Salomon wrote in message <86vjbp$h5p$3...@news.fas.harvard.edu>...
>>HAL <h...@invalid.com.remove_nospam> wrote:
>>: Also on January 31, trains that have a consist of all Amfleets, speeds
>are
>>: raised to 125 mph. 125mph is no longer limited to Metroliners. The new
>>: schedule of some Northeast Direct trains, for example 93/99, is based on
>>: this change.
>>
>>Why didn't they do this sooner?
>>
>>-Dan
>
--
jhay
> In article <86v3g4$cri$1...@news.smart.net>,
> acce...@smart.net (Access Systems) wrote:
>
> > they all came from the factory with it.
> > some parts of NJ Transit are 25kv,
>
> Yeah, I know they *came* from the factory for 25k, but I heard that this
> feature was dissconnected /not maintained (Have amtrak unts ever run
> 25kv before this?), thus they needed to at minnimum check it out before
> putting them into service.
They (and SEPTA's and MARC's) came fully equipped for 25 (and 11, 12.5 and
"auto"), but since that voltage wasn't used then, a jumper wire was
installed underneath the switch in the cab to bypass that setting lest it
get set to that level by accident. According to those who know, removing
this jumper takes <= 5 minutes.
HaRRy
<mmu...@ridgecrest.ca.us> wrote in misc.transport.rail.americas:
»Talking about confused reporting, nobody confuses rail transportation
»reporting as badly as the Los Angeles Times.
There are many occasions when I'm glad I don't get the L.A. Times. But on the
other hand, most newspapers seem to be about as ignorant of railroad matters as
good ol' George.
OBTW, while I'm thinking about it, after some off-line discussions and so on,
I've changed my mind and am now in agreement with many people here that calling
everything running in the Northeast (or nearly so) "Acela something-or-other"
is a mistake. I still like the name Acela, but I agree it should be the brand
for the Express trains only -- or at least they should have some unique, not
otherwise used, brand name for the high-speed trains. The current plan is
confusing -- confusing even for rail travel fans, so massively confusing for
most passengers, I suspect.
(See guys, it's easy to admit your wrong, when you are. And good for ones
mental balance. Y'all should try it some time. <g>)
HaRRy
misc.transport.rail.americas:
»
»Until September, 1998, the law wouldn't allow it. Once the law permitted it
»there was a lot of work to do first, including studying the economics of
»increased maintance on track and vehicles. Also, note that the consists have
»to have just Amfleet cars. Most of the trains to Boston had atleast one mail
»car, which is limited to 110 mph. So, Amtrak also had to work out a
»restructuring of mail service, and get it OK'd by the Post Office.
»
»MP 24.5
»
»Daniel Salomon wrote in message <86vjbp$h5p$3...@news.fas.harvard.edu>...
»>HAL <h...@invalid.com.remove_nospam> wrote:
»>: Also on January 31, trains that have a consist of all Amfleets, speeds
»are
»>: raised to 125 mph. 125mph is no longer limited to Metroliners. The new
»>: schedule of some Northeast Direct trains, for example 93/99, is based on
»>: this change.
»>
»>Why didn't they do this sooner?
»>
»>-Dan
»
As usual, when something looks like it should have obviously been changed long
ago, a bit of investigating uncovers good, cogent reasons why it could not have
been.
HaRRy
misc.transport.rail.americas:
»So, December 1999 became Spring 2000, now Summer 2000?
Okay, okay. The marketeers and engineers (civil, mechanical, software, etc.)
never talk to each other in any other industry, so why should Amtrak be
different?
John Albert
<< Then how was it that the Colonial was operating at 128 mph as it
approached the three Conrail engines that fouled the tracks in Maryland?
>>
Because the "110mph restriction" for trains other than "Metroliners"
was imposed *after* the wreck at Chase, MD...
- John
Joe Versaggi
Actually, there was a speed restriction in effect even then, and that
train was speeding, because there was a Congressional Heritage coach in
the consist.
Jonathan White
>
> Ron wrote:
> << How are they going to run even Acela Regional without finished wire?
> >>
>
> There is "complete wire", but not on both tracks yet.
> In fact, I believe that #12 is coming up from Washington *tonight* and
> running right through to Boston with an AEM-7. This may be the first
> all-electric "revenue trip". That's what I heard at work this
> afternoon...
They did indeed do that... two AEM-7s and an F40 tucked behind them just
in case. Don't think they needed the F40...
--
Jonathan N. White
jwhi...@sprynet.com
http://home.sprynet.com/~jwhite07/index.htm
It's hard to be nostalgic when you can't remember anything.
Bob Scheurle
<JOEM...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>John Albert wrote:
>>
>> Bob wrote:
>> << Then how was it that the Colonial was operating at 128 mph as it
>> approached the three Conrail engines that fouled the tracks in Maryland?
>>
>> Because the "110mph restriction" for trains other than "Metroliners"
>> was imposed *after* the wreck at Chase, MD...
>
>train was speeding, because there was a Congressional Heritage coach in
>the consist.
Yes, but if it didn't have Heritage coach, the Colonial would have been
allowed to go 125 mph. So the question is why did Amtrak restrict
non-Metroliner train to slower speeds? They should have been operating
at 125 mph the whole time.
MP24.5
The Colonial should not have been operating that fast. Sadly, it would
appear the crew made a mistake. There was an MHC or heritage car in the
consist which should have limited the speed of the train to 110 mph. (So
I've been told by folks who had the sad task of cleaning up the mess).
Amtrak then imposed a limit of 110 on all trains (it had to do SOMETHING
quickly to satisfy the feds), and subsequently obtained a waiver for
"Metroliner" service to operate at 125 mph. The waiver was superceeded by
the regulations I mentioned previously.
MP 24.5
Bob Scheurle wrote in message ...
>On Sat, 29 Jan 2000 20:07:42 -0500, "MP24.5" <nect...@nec.net> wrote:
>>Until September, 1998, the law wouldn't allow it.
>
nasa...@my-deja.com
Bob Scheurle <sche...@z-eclipse-z.net> wrote:
> Yes, but if it didn't have Heritage coach, the Colonial would have been
> allowed to go 125 mph. So the question is why did Amtrak restrict
> non-Metroliner train to slower speeds? They should have been operating
> at 125 mph the whole time.
Because then the NeD would be almost as fast as the Metroliner, most
people wouldn't want to pay through the nose for the Metroliner then.
About all it'd have to sell itself is a slightly faster speed, and the
lack of annoying kds (worth it right there for some...).
Besides, it's cheaper to maintain the car when it only goes 80 instead
of 125. And it was a knee-jerk reaction to an accident - you expect it
to make sense?
nasa...@my-deja.com
jh...@erols.com wrote:
> nasa...@my-deja.com wrote:
> They (and SEPTA's and MARC's) came fully equipped for 25 (and 11, 12.5 and
> "auto"), but since that voltage wasn't used then, a jumper wire was
> installed underneath the switch in the cab to bypass that setting lest it
> get set to that level by accident.
Ok, that makes plenty of sense. Better do that than possibly toast the
main transformer and other goodies in there.
Does Amtrak have a way of testing the 25kv mode in the shop (and the
12.5 for that matter) to see if the locomotive will, in fact, function
at that voltage, or do they simply assume if it works on 11k, it'll work
on 25 and 12.5? What's the big difference besides a tap change. I'd
assume something with the way the thyristors are controlled but I'm at a
loss beyond that...
> According to those who know, removing
> this jumper takes <= 5 minutes.
Cool :)
John Albert
<< Actually, there was a speed restriction in effect even then, and that
train was speeding, because there was a Congressional Heritage coach in
the consist >>
OK, good point, I'd forgotten that.
Back before "Chase", though, one would have suspected that Amtrak
didn't even *own* a radar gun (at least, I never heard of them going
after anyone)...
BTW, the maximum speed on the Shoreline between New Haven and Boston
is still 110mph (and only up in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, not in
Connecticut)...
- John
HAL
"John Albert" <j.al...@mciworld.com> wrote in message
news:3894B1...@mciworld.com...
> OK, good point, I'd forgotten that.
> Back before "Chase", though, one would have suspected that Amtrak
> didn't even *own* a radar gun (at least, I never heard of them going
> after anyone)...
"Before Chase" speeds and equipment restrictions were more like guides than
literally enforced. New York to Washington. If a train was late it was
routine to make up time by speeding. Some engineers would run the train at
135mph to make up time. Chase changed all that.
John Albert
<< So the question is why did Amtrak restrict non-Metroliner train to
slower speeds? They should have been operating at 125 mph the whole
time. >>
Because... why pay the premium Metroliner fare, when the "cheaper
train" can get you there almost just as quickly....????
- John
Bob Scheurle
wrote:
>Also on January 31, trains that have a consist of all Amfleets, speeds are
>raised to 125 mph. 125mph is no longer limited to Metroliners. The new
>schedule of some Northeast Direct trains, for example 93/99, is based on
>this change.
But not 125 mph to Boston. From the Boston Globe: "At first, Acela
Regional trains will travel 110 miles per hour, but will hit 125 over
some stretches once a new cab signal system is added in a few months."
dave pierson
> In article <3893C172...@erols.com>,
> jh...@erols.com wrote:
> > nasa...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > They (and SEPTA's and MARC's) came fully equipped for 25 (and 11, 12.5 and
> > "auto"), but since that voltage wasn't used then, a jumper wire was
> > installed underneath the switch in the cab to bypass that setting lest it
> > get set to that level by accident.
> Ok, that makes plenty of sense. Better do that than possibly toast the
> main transformer and other goodies in there.
Errrr.
25kv mode would be 'safe' at 11/12.5kv. (more or less. Shouldn't
be run that way, but voltages would be low...)
> Does Amtrak have a way of testing the 25kv mode in the shop
Dunno. Its simple (within the context of such things... 8)>>)
AND when the AEM-7s were first brought on the property, years
ago, they ran life tests on one, under wire, both voltages, including
changeover, at Pueblo...
> (and the 12.5 for that matter) to see if the locomotive will,
IS there a change over from 11kv to 12.5 (John? Jaap?)
> in fact, function at that voltage,
Concept tested as above, years ago. I Assume they will,
in some fashion, test each one...
> or do they simply assume if it works on 11k, it'll work on 25 and 12.5?
> What's the big difference besides a tap change.
I'm a pedant (look it UP...), I'd not call it a tap change.
It's series parallel change.
> I'd assume something with the way the thyristors are controlled but I'm at a
> loss beyond that...
I'd wager Several Cookies that a number of 'oil' (whatver thet put in)
switches switch the primaries from series to parallel (25 to 11/12.5)
--
thanks
dave pierson |the facts, as accurately as i can manage,
Smart Modular Technology |the opinions, my own.
334 South St |
Shrewsbury, Mass |pie...@mail.dec.com
"He has read everything, and, to his credit, written nothing." A J
Raffles
"Internet: net of a million lies..." after Vernor Vinge
HAL
> Because... why pay the premium Metroliner fare, when the "cheaper
> train" can get you there almost just as quickly....????
That sounds logical but in fact a lot of people are willing to pay a premium
fare if the service is marketed as premium. Northeast Direct Business Class
sells quite well.
John Albert
<< "Before Chase" speeds and equipment restrictions were more like
guides than literally enforced. New York to Washington. If a train was
late it was routine to make up time by speeding. Some engineers would
HAL, right you are.
It's just not worth it anymore. I don't care whether the train's on
time, ahead of time, ten minutes late, or two HOURS late - I run it the
same way, normal speed or a bit less, like the book says.
If you're a passenger on my train, forget it, I ain't "makin' up time"
for you. We'll "get there when we get there"...
Just one more reason why I don't want anything to do with the new
Acela trains. The guys (and a few ladies) running those things are going
to be under TREMENDOUS pressure to try to meet a schedule that will be
difficult - if not impossible - to live up to, even on days when things
are going normally. On days with a few "problems" cropping up and down
the line, it's going to be worse. Jobs like that will give you too many
gray hairs before your time.
Speaking of "problems that crop up and down the line", here's one. Got
a train the other day on which the brakes just didn't respond "quite
right". They'd be "slow to come on", and would "drag" when you released
them. They worked, just not "as they should".
Perhaps other enginemen here would recognize this, perhaps not -
unless you'd actually had a train that "felt like it" before. So, when I
got to Stamford, I walked back to between the engine and the first car.
The angle cock was only about 1/2 open, if that much. May have been
like that all the way up from D.C...
I shut the HEP off, climbed down, and opened it all the way. The train
ran a lot better after that (grin)....
Cheers!
- John
(AMT/ex-CR/CSX - but not NS (or Acela) - engineman)
Silas Warner
>
> Bob asked:
> << So the question is why did Amtrak restrict non-Metroliner train to
> slower speeds? They should have been operating at 125 mph the whole
> time. >>
>
> train" can get you there almost just as quickly....????
When I lived and worked in Baltimore, before 1980, "regular" NEC
trains were scheduled between Washington and New York 11 minutes
slower than Metroliners. (The Metroliners took 2:59, the regular
trains took 2:10.) Naturally, on pleasure trips to NYC, I took
the regular train. But when going to NYC on business, I was not
allowed to take the regular train, but could only make reservations
on the Metroliner at about double the price. This was because all
corporate travel departments in the Northeast had a fixed policy
that only Metroliner travel could be put on a corporate expense
account.
This policy was apparently a modification of a policy implemented
by the FASB in the 1960s that completely outlawed train travel
on expense accounts. The Department of Commerce (this being
before the Department of Transportaion) pressured the FASB to
modify the rule to "airplanes and Metroliners only."
>From my observations of Metroliners when I got back to Balrtimore,
the policy hadn't changed in the 1990s.
Silas Warner
Ariel Iris
miuntes past New haven for 2 hours+ dur to a ripped wire, I got to
taking to a conductor at one of the doors and she said that they will be
dropping the crew change in New Haven whith teh new trains. P.S. those
cars get stuffy and hot VERY FAST with no air circulation, even in late
nov. weather
"MP24.5" wrote:
> Reportedly the crews will be working through, BOS-NYP.
>
> (previous comment)
> >>
> >>Will they still be changing crews at New Haven?
MP24.5
Bob, you are right. There is an "Order of Particular Applicability" which
discusses the Advance Civil Speed Enforcement System (ACSES), and
requirements for operating trains in revenue service without it.
South of New York, no ACSES, top speed 125 mph.
East of New Haven, no ACSES, top speed 110 mph.
MP 24.5
Bob Scheurle wrote in message
<4boa9s00gh1kep8jq...@4ax.com>...
>On Sat, 29 Jan 2000 06:11:01 -0500, "HAL" <h...@invalid.com.remove_nospam>
>
MP24.5
Ariel, I think you meant to say, "Yes they will," since you later said the
conductor mentioned "they will be dropping the crew change in New Haven?"
MP 24.5
Ariel Iris wrote in message <38966959...@bu.edu>...
Ron Newman
> It's just not worth it anymore. I don't care whether the train's on
> time, ahead of time, ten minutes late, or two HOURS late - I run it the
> same way, normal speed or a bit less, like the book says.
> If you're a passenger on my train, forget it, I ain't "makin' up time"
> for you. We'll "get there when we get there"...
That's an unfortunate attitude. I'd always like to see engineers
try to make up time, and it would be a good thing if regulations were
loosened to encourage this.
--
Ron Newman rne...@thecia.net
http://www2.thecia.net/users/rnewman/
asterix
it is no use to try and speed the recorder on locomotive and dispatcher 's
CP recorders give the exact speed of the locomotive. so railroad can hang
you.
and if railroad lets you speed say 5-10 mph the lawyers and media will
prosecute you if you did speed.
so why jeopardize ones job and family wellbeing just because someone wants
to see the train on time ?????
Jaap van Dorp
Engineer BLE div 127
Ron Newman wrote in message ...
Ron Newman
<ast...@ct1.nai.net> wrote:
> loosened ?? the FRA is trying to better enforce it
> it is no use to try and speed the recorder on locomotive and dispatcher 's
> CP recorders give the exact speed of the locomotive. so railroad can hang
> you.
> and if railroad lets you speed say 5-10 mph the lawyers and media will
> prosecute you if you did speed.
That's why the regulations should be loosened, so that this doesn't happen.
asterix
Ron Newman wrote in message ...