blue streak 1 AG: Its not so much a matter of upgrading the Cat from wilmington to DC that is important is of easing some curves and adding one or two tracks. The amount of commuting over that line was never this much except WWII and the ancilary consequence of adding the two tracks would be new CAT.
AG: Its not so much a matter of upgrading the Cat from wilmington to DC that is important is of easing some curves and adding one or two tracks. The amount of commuting over that line was never this much except WWII and the ancilary consequence of adding the two tracks would be new CAT.
Agree, but it's not just the commuting. The intercity corridor traffic is much higher than PRR days. Metro DC is huge compared to 40-50 years ago.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I don't think it's worth upgrading the catenary between Wilmington and DC. Those sections already run 135 mph. Is it worth it for the extra 15 mph? I think Amtrak already made the right decision.
I agree that Amfleet coaches are great, and they could last forever. But I think they should have been replaced five times over and PERMANENTLY assigned to a civil defense fleet. I was going to make a comment about window size in my above reference to Amfleet vs. commuter coaches. (Wife called me, so I hit "post" and looked later...) I found a web page about NJT's fleet, and not only are the windows big but their fleet has been rejuvenated five times at least in the past 33 years.
Because of the aged infrastructure's limited capacity, and lack of expansion, Amfleet will suffice. They are beautiful cars -- I was thrilled to ride them when they first appeared. I sat in my Amcoach, in a comfortable reclining Amchair. (The long-distance Amfleet Amcoaches had removable Amrests). A nearby Amcafe served fresh Amsandwiches, and the bathrooms offered gracious Amenities (such as Ampax Ampons). I digress--it is a shame that companies such as Pullman Standard and Amerail have disappeared from the landscape, and their is no pride nor serendipity in the names we give our trains.
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham
Maglev I don't think Amtrak ever filled the void left by elimination of the Clocker NYP- PHIL trains, so I can understand the capacity limitations on that route. And even five-across seating in a new commuter train feels better than Amfleet cars that are a third of a century old. The "Acelas" should have been prototypes for an entire new fleet... On the vacation when we took the Acela BOS - WAS, we rode the overnight train WAS-BOS. Rain was falling and the coach was leaking; amazingly, other passengers seemed accustomed to having water fall on their heads and did not change seats. The train ran late for most of the route, but has a "padded" schedule and so we actually waited about 20 minutes in Providence before slipping into our on-time position among the Boston commuter trains. I rode Amtrak's "Night Owl" in 1974 WAS-BOS. The smoking car was a genuine Penn Central roach coach with linoleum tile floor, and I got sick off the sandwich I bought in the lounge car.
I don't think Amtrak ever filled the void left by elimination of the Clocker NYP- PHIL trains, so I can understand the capacity limitations on that route. And even five-across seating in a new commuter train feels better than Amfleet cars that are a third of a century old. The "Acelas" should have been prototypes for an entire new fleet...
On the vacation when we took the Acela BOS - WAS, we rode the overnight train WAS-BOS. Rain was falling and the coach was leaking; amazingly, other passengers seemed accustomed to having water fall on their heads and did not change seats. The train ran late for most of the route, but has a "padded" schedule and so we actually waited about 20 minutes in Providence before slipping into our on-time position among the Boston commuter trains.
I rode Amtrak's "Night Owl" in 1974 WAS-BOS. The smoking car was a genuine Penn Central roach coach with linoleum tile floor, and I got sick off the sandwich I bought in the lounge car.
A few comments:
The clockers were money losers. They filled up at Trenton and PJ on the way north every morning, so they were actually glorified NJ commuter trains. This made for low load factors. The equipment generally made 1 turn a day for a 180 mile RT. Not great utilization.
Amfleet: the Capstone program puts a new "peel and stick" interior in the cars. The are very nice when done. There are still some non-Capstone Amfleet cars running around. They can be a bit grubby. Water dripping inside passenger cars is rarely roof leaks. It's usually clogged AC condensate run off. It usually drips at the ends of the cars where the evaporators are. Amfleet cars are good, solid all stainless construction. They can be rebuilt indefinitely. They will be around as long their economics hold up - which will likely be many more years.
Amtrak food in 1974: I aways went for the tuna sandwiches.
Well, maybe Amtrak should put some more trains on the Philly to NY/Penn route if it would prefer its D.C. to NYC trains to fill up as opposed to people going less than half that distance (Phila. - NYC).
We took Amtrak from Newark down to Phiadelphia about this time a year ago. It was a Saturday afternoon and we paid the second-highest fares that were in effect that day. It would have cost about the same for the two of us to take a cab that distance (provided cabs are allowed to do interstate runs).
The train was just an ordinary Regional, but ir was stuffy and in need of a good fabric scrubdown. Most of the NJT trains we had been riding the preceding few days felt "deluxe" by comparison.
The nice thing about the NEC is that there are frequent trains and people use them. The drawback is that the line is just congested enough that IMHO Amtrak takes some of its riders a little for granted. If we did it again, we'd probably try to take NJT to Trenton and connect with SEPTA. - a.s
Mario: The energy used in braking and re acceleration is probably significant. Another factor is the operational and maintenance costs of the braking. Passwnger car dybamic wear on parts. Brake shoe wear if brakes used along with truck hunting if the braking is not exactly even on each axel.. Wheel brake disks wear.Wheel wear both rail contact and flange wear whenever there is hunting. Ballast shifting due to longitudinal braking and acceleration. Extra rail wear when slowing and speeding up. Misalignment problems with switches when changing speeds. Locomotive wheel wear from constant acceleration and brakiing. I don't believe that these items are ever taken into account when figuring all costs and benefits of upgrading. Bet mudchicken knows of more items.
Dave: I forgot to mention the other bridges from Wash - Wilmington. Brandywine creek, Bush River, and the Susquehanna River swing bridge. Anyone know how often it is opened?
I'm seeing some interesting answers.
A far as the underframe structure is concerned, even in lines of a certain age, it normally holds itself remarkably well. From what I have seen, problems normally arise when infiltrations happen. In terms of track and catenary modernization, maybe one of the good option would have been, especially for the New York to Boston line, new alignments in order to avoid certain spots that even today are the origin for speed restrictions With this, much better times would be achieved, by sustaining a higher speed, and less energy would be used in both accelerating and braking efforts,opening the door for less operational expense and a bigger, more intense utilization of trainsets. Off course one knows tthat what Amtrak deed was the possible job, with the budget and local constraints, wich makes it terrfic considering these last two points. But maybe it would be interresting to analise all the costs of operations, especially the ones related with energy used in braking and acceleratongs efforts. Tipycally, in a line with numerous speed differences, braking energy might account for 40 to 50% of total consumed.
And I agree that New York to Washington needs a facelift, in order to get the whle line upgrade to today's standards of equipment. Judging by what is being said here, it will be worth the investment, especially if the existing alignement is a good one, allowing for almost off the shelf 150 mph.
But such speed raisings, despite its positiveness, always bring , as it was referred, some capacity problems, retated with the multispeed factor (i.e. much different tains operating at different speeds) : If I had some operational data, such as track diagrams, mileposts, effective distances, minimum block freeing times, grades and traffic needs, I could preform some sort of schedule study ( I can do one but only based on public schedules).
And since we speak about the NEC, I've heard in the past some rumours about going South of Washington, notably a project concerning the construction of two main tracks for passenger trains between Washington and Richmond. Anything else more than intentions ?
DMUinCT: Those close clearances on the NYNH&H portiions of the NE corridor came from a decision by NH not to go with wider track spacing. I feel that this is one thing that should be addressed if there is an infrastructure improvement plan is instituted to help out the economy. Remember PRR NEC from NYC to WASH does not have these clearance problems (better forethought).
DaveKelpper: You are absolutely right about replacing the PRR style catenary with constant tension for higher speed operation. The Washington - Baltimore - Wilmington line certainly can be speeded up but MARC would probably need all electric motors to enable this speed up. There would be a need to triple and eventually add a fourth track and add a new B&P tunnel west of the Baltimore station and an additional bridge at Gunpow. Remember that train capacity of any line is reduced when various trains speeds are different. One location you failed to mention is Trenton - Newark. This line has good geometry except for the Edison - Menlo Park S curves. These two speed ups would not get the route to two hours but maybe to the 2:29 once promised. and maybe 2:10
For some reason AMTRAK has not done any repairing or upgrading of the present PRR cat. Ex: When the new Newark Airport Station (EWR) was built The two to three miles of relocated, expanded clearance, and new track did not have constant tensioning installed but instead had the old PRR style installed. In contrast NJ Transit in concert with the airport project installed a storage/passing siding at the beginning of the diversion point of the Raritan Valley line from the NEC and installed constant tension cat approximately (?) 1-1/2 miles on both tracks. This was donew even though there had to be some adjustments at the joining of the rebuilt PRR cat. I have not observed whether the new Secaucus Junction station has PRR or constant tension cat installed there. Anyone know? I also hope the new Portal Bridge will have new constant tension installed.
I was not serious about my suggestion to widen passenger cars*, but I definitely believe trains have a place in our national transportation network. Much travel that was one considered "inter" city is now "intra" city (for example, between Santa Barbara and San Diego), yet we rely on "Inter" state highways for automoblile routes and Amtrak to run trains.
The "Metroliner" name was a classic. "Acela" is not only nonsense, but it sounds like where you put your furnace, or worse, a body part I should not mention. I think the adoption of a stupid name is all part of the way Amtrak is sabotaged...
The idea of catering trans-continental trains to tourists is viable if there is open access to rails. Relieving train operators from right-of-way financial obligations would put train operators on the same level as, say, hotels; which do not directly pay for the streets and highways used for access, nor do they bear all costs of the police which keep those streets safe. Why do we expect railroads to pay for rails and dispatching?
*(But one comment on catenary, clearance, and comfort -- it's scary being around and inside Superliners at Washington Union Station! They just barely fit under the wires... on the other hand, how many other nations truly have double - stack clearance?)
DMU is my initials, nothing to do with the self-powered trains with the same letters.
"Acela" is a contraction of Acceleration and Excellence.
The "Metroliners" ended up locomotive hauled, Amfleet Car equipped, trains topping out at 125 mph. The ran only between Washington and New York with one train a day going on to New Haven.
As for Amtrak's place in long distance travel, I, personally, do not think it has a place. "Long Haul" trains are for Tourists and they should pay the cost. If you want to go somewhere in the USA, you will not want to spend 20 hours on a Train between New York and Chicago when you can fly it in 2 hours. More than 4 days to cross the country by Train???
Much of the United States, depending on traffic, is double, tripple and four track lines, most was first built in the 1800s. Trains were smaller, narrower then! Standards for train width and hight was developed then to allow interchange between the hundreds of railroads that then existed. Today, even the Acela has clearence problems in curves that restrict the amount of "Tilt". Even The Canton Viaduct in Canton MA (built 1835) had to be widen so two Acela Trains could pass each other.
Don U. TCA 73-5735
There really ought be catenary replacement NY-Washington as soon as possible. The place to begin is Wilmington - Washington where there are places that can economically be upgraded to 150 mph running. You have to credit Metro North and ConnDot for replacing the catenary. Of course they had to do so, otherwise commuters would have been even more angry over frequent delays do to problems. At least now they have a reliable system, even if too slow for Amtrak.
Well, DMU in Ct -- I rode DMU trains in England and Scotland, and some of their schedules rivaled our Acela. And who came up with that name "Acela" anyway? Whatever happened to Metroliners? Poor Amtrak...
Americans just hate to admit how much they spend on transportation, and so we have no policy of making transportation safe, comfortable, economical, and fast. And so we miss out on the magic of trains: it is possible to travel while casually viewing the scenery (not white-knuckle clutching a steering wheel); it is possible to move about when you want during a trip; it is even possible to have comfort and sometimes PRIVACY as you cross our nation.
(On the issue of privacy, I advocate either a return to open sections or widening of passenger cars, because Amtrak's economy berths are just TOO NARROW. Forget romance on the rails. Even deluxe rooms have a narrower bed than open sections!)
I agree with most of what is said, but remember:
We are a country of 300 million people, a large part of which live on, or near, the east and west coasts. Try to tell the taxpayers in the center of the country and the west coast that the east coast needs more money for passenger trains. We have States that haven't had a passenger train in 30 years.
The track itself has, for the most part, been replaced with European standards rails, ties and ballast. The track is installed on a 150 year old Right-of-Way!!! Little open country between Boston and Washington, most "station stops" are, on average, 50 miles apart. The taking of land for a new Right-of-Way is not politically possible at this time.
You leave Washington heading to New York, most of the way your running under 75 year old Catenary. North from New York toward Boston, it gets worse. You are running for 56 of the miles toward New Haven on tracks owned by the Metro North Commuter Railroad and maintained at 90mph. From New Haven to Boston the Track and Catenary is new and perfect. But, starting in Stamford CT. all the way to Westerly R.I. you are crossing 100 year old Draw Bridges every few miles (speed restrictions), and, oh yes, you have a half dozen Grade Crossings between New London CT. and Westerly R.I. The number of curves north of New York, if added up would take you in circles.
Amtrak does well with what they have and think ahead what may be possible.
It is not to be a 'bad speaker' about track quality, and I have never been in the US to sample that alive, but friends of mine who have been, and have a lot of experience riding european trains (that I have), and it seems that riding quality in the NEC is still some notches under its european counterparts, and Acelas seem to be very similar in terms of suspension to other european contemporary trains: For what I know, riding quality has much to do with the way track is layered, with the typical nowadays being monoblock prestressed ties, elastic fastenings (from Pandrol, Vossloh, or Nabla, in TGV lines), heavy rail (in Europe 60 kilograms per metre, 120 pounds), and above all a pretty manicured and levelled to the milimeter balast overlay. Off course pneumatic suspension helps a lot, and its a plus to have a smooth 'The Water Level you Can Sleep' (lierally ) feeling when riding such trains. But there might be other things influencing riding quality. For instance, if a line is renovated, in material terms, but the underplatform isn't subjected to the same treatment, ther might be some unwanted surprises, such as rough spots on a shiny new track.
A I was writing this, I have just rememberd that some european trains that were tested in the past in the US didn't like much of the track they had under their weels. One case in particular came to my mind. When Amtrak was searching for new electrics to replace te GG1 fleet, french and swedish prototypes were tested. The swedish Rc4 ended up as the winner, not only because it was technologically more advanced, and more resistant to rough track. The french engine, actually SNCf's CC21001, known in the US as X715 (i think), with its complicated swiss watch maintenance prone connections between axles and traction motors, wich demand a very, very well maintaned track - the norm in france - and it's more conventional internal arquitecture, ended up being the looser.
Post Scriptum : An amendement concerning the french engine I was talking, with corrections to what I state before. Sometimes memory might betray us
http://www.amtrakhistoricalsociety.com/x996.html
I rode first class from Boston to Washington a few years ago -- it was sure better than flying or driving, but not fast or comfortable as the trains I rode in England 15 years ago.
Although the Acela can go 150 mph, their average speed for the whole run works out to less than half that. The trains I rode in England were mostly diesel (then called Intercity 125's, because their top speed was 125 mph) and they spent a lot of time going 100 mph. I remember pacing a heavy 747 taking off from Heathrow for a long distance... The 225 trains (which went 225 kph max) were very impressive in terms of speed, especially when passing a train going the other way...
I was disappointed in the comfort on the Acela. The tray table sloped, so eventually a beverage slid into my lap (fortunately, there is no checked luggage service so my suitcase was nearby with dry pants...). The 225 trains in England were classic with their chrome decor and refined in terms of comfort. The seats folded UP to make it more convenient for eating; a welcome adjustment on a trip where food is more important than sleep. On a fast train, you don't have time to sleep!
Maybe someday America will build more than a couple dozen high-speen trains. Can you imagine that the Japanese had an initial order in the late 1960's for 1,550 trains?
“Things of quality have no fear of time.”
The Acela operates on high platforms only as do most Bullet Trains. This gives a rugged step free frame. For emergency use, two collapsible ladders are stored in each vestibule behind the door on the left side. A metal "bridge" is stored in the Food Service Car that reaches to a train on an adjacent track to evacuate the train.
Did you notice in the interior photo, the overhead lights are in groups of 4, except in the center where there are 2. That's the "soft area" no heavy steel, a Fireman's Axe can chop through it. Every Window, every, has the pull gasket handles to allow window removal in an accident. Every wheel bearing is monitored in both the Locomotive and the Conductors Station in the Food Service Car, also is the pressure in each car's "Air Springs.
Very Safe
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Paul,
I took the photo at the request of Amtrak but did not have a signed release from the employee pictured, or any other employee, for publication. The signature photo in the upper left of my postings is of me in the cab of the Acela during the photo shoot, I've done two. The train was between runs in the station at the time. The seats are not narrow, but have higher than normal backs.
The reason for that shot was to show the RED Emergency Light Strips running down each side of the carpet and the Secure Overhead Cargo Bins. The safety of the 20 Acelas exceed any other train in the U.S., maybe the world.
?? Short run New York to Philly, still 23% faster than the Regional. Pricing is set to be below Air Fare. Plug in your Laptop at your seat, they have 115 volt outlets. One car is a "Quiet Car", no cell phone use.
Paul Milenkovic wrote: Do you suppose you have the aspect ratio wrong on that photo?These Business Class seats (3-across) look mighty narrow. And what is with the Cops-TV-innocent-bystander face? A person could ask permission of another person in taking a photo.
Do you suppose you have the aspect ratio wrong on that photo?
These Business Class seats (3-across) look mighty narrow. And what is with the Cops-TV-innocent-bystander face? A person could ask permission of another person in taking a photo.
Business class seating on the Acela is four across. First class seating is three across. The picture in the post above appears to be from one of the first class cars. Otherwise, the picture of the car shown looks like the business class car that I rode to New York.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
ACELA
My first encounter with 30th Street Station was in in 1959 at the impressionable age of 7. The view from close-up outside was one of those "Oh Wow" moments, once inside, it was simply a ""jaw dropping" expierence. The vastness & elegance of the main hall has left a lasting impression on me. I can remember one of the station agents high above the crowd on a catwalk,which surrounded the arrivals & departures board above the central information counter, manually undating train names, times & platform assignments. The individual imformation boards above the wooden escalators to the platforms were also manually changed by the assigned boarding agents. Aside from a good updating and a sprucing-up, 30th Street has essentially remained unchanged since it was opened in 1934. If this building is not on the National Historic Register, it should be! It's a shame that "First Impressions of Philadelphia" for travellers from the west came from commuter stations at Paoli & North Philadelphia.
John
You're correct! The PRR's east/west fleet stopped at North Philadelphia. I should have remembered that; I took the train from Altoona to New York and vice versa hundreds of times. However, the trains to and from Florida stopped at 30th Street. Also, the Pittsburgh Night Express began its run to Pittsburgh from 30th Street whilst the Philadelphia Night Express terminated its run at 30th Street.
The sign over the entrance to Suburban Station brought back fond memories. It reads, Pennsylvania Railroad. That's class.
Also, SEPTA has a nice museum and gift shop in downtown Philadelphia. It is worth a look see.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.