Signals are separately fed and were not affected.
blue streak 1 Henry: Just one possible way to make a bad situation tolerable. I am sure something else is probably being done. One other possibility is to use just one diesel with a cab car attached ?
Henry: Just one possible way to make a bad situation tolerable. I am sure something else is probably being done. One other possibility is to use just one diesel with a cab car attached ?
It appears Amtrak is doing its damndest to make things work with all the equipment, facilities and manpower they have available and in cooperation with MNRR and ConDot. It appears that it is the main feeder from Con Ed at Mt. Vernon east Sub Station failed while the back up or alternate feed is off line for total rehabilitation and rebuild. On Sunday, MNRR and Con Ed installed new but lesser feeder capability which does, however, allow for MNRR to provide up to 50% of normal service rather than the previous 33%. I am still not sure about the ability of the signal, switching, and communication systems at the moment...whether they get supplied separately or are being controlled and operated manually; yes, communication by radio does supercede all the old phone lines they used to use.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
MidlandMikeI know the airport tower would not need a very high powered back-up system, but my point was that an entire airport is like a small city, and would need a lot of back-up, or multiple feeds from the grid.
Richardton Airport does not have any Electricity. It has a wind sock, it has some metal sign thingies to delineate the (grass) runway, and it has an insurance policy. That's it. Maybe a plane lands there once every two or three hears, but it is still a licensed airport. It is on our land, and our business manager is the airport manager, and gets all of the official information that the FAA sends out to airport managers. If you want to land you must first buzz the runway to move the cows aside. Once on the ground you are on your own for ground transportation and for the contracting of a fuel delivery of some sort.
I know that I am pulling your leg, but it was ripe for the pulling. This airport saves the city of Richardton from paying the much higher County Airport Tax, and that is really all it needs to do.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
MidlandMike Do Amtrak diesels and electrics MU with each other?
Do Amtrak diesels and electrics MU with each other?
Sorting through conjecture and a little bit of known fact, augmented by YouTube video segments to verify locomotive consists...
It looks like the favored tool by Amtrak is a pair of P32s or P42s pulling the entire train, supplying HEP as well. HHP8s were specifically equipped so that their controls could be used to operate diesels (on power jumpers from the diesels?). It appears that at least some AEM7s are also so capable. What's not known to me is whether P42s and P32s can control AEM7s or HHP8s, with the necessary controls to raise and lower pantographs. New Haven to New York is less than 100 miles, so fueling could be handled easily at New Haven, where Amtrak already has a diesel shop and platforms equipped for adding and removing locomotives in a hurry.
At least some trains are not affected much. The Vermonter, which runs behind diesels north of New Haven anyway, was only a few minutes late to Vermont stations on Friday. A YouTube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7J060-baOck shows the southbound Vermonter at Stamford CT with a pair of P42s, an AEM7, an HHP8 and the usual Friday six car train of ex-Metroliner cab car, 4 coaches and Amcafe.
Acelas will be running today under wire with a temporary feed, as will some MNCR trains. Regionals will continue to get diesel power until one of the permanent feeders is restored.
BroadwayLion MidlandMikeAnother poster said that PRR built in redundancies to keep their cat system from coming to a halt. I recall the MetroNorth NH line cat was rebuilt to modern 60 Hz standards. Apparently they skipped on back-up systems. There *IS* a redundant circuit. It was taken out of service with the permission of the Railroad for scheduled upgrades. Airport towers to not use a tiny fraction of the power that the Metro North main line consumes. Even house of LION has back-up power. In New Zealand it took FIVE WEEKS to repair a similar (somewhat smaller) cable. ROAR
MidlandMikeAnother poster said that PRR built in redundancies to keep their cat system from coming to a halt. I recall the MetroNorth NH line cat was rebuilt to modern 60 Hz standards. Apparently they skipped on back-up systems.
There *IS* a redundant circuit. It was taken out of service with the permission of the Railroad for scheduled upgrades. Airport towers to not use a tiny fraction of the power that the Metro North main line consumes. Even house of LION has back-up power.
In New Zealand it took FIVE WEEKS to repair a similar (somewhat smaller) cable.
Another poster wondered if one cable was so near capacity, that taking the other off line may have caused the overload. For redundancy, I was thinking along the lines of what other posters have said about jumpers to adjoining power blocks.
I know the airport tower would not need a very high powered back-up system, but my point was that an entire airport is like a small city, and would need a lot of back-up, or multiple feeds from the grid.
blue streak 1 Let us examine a possible way Amtrak is handling this problem. ... 5. Add loco sets to front of electric motors of trains at NYP & New Haven. Keep diesel locos off line with diesels operating the electrics until near dead section. 6. Start diesels, lower electric pans and pull thru dead section. 7. raise electric pans & shut down diesels to save fuel. 8. At NYP & NH remove diesels & position them to pull a train the other way. The above will allow qualified Carmen to quickly remove and add diesels at each location. There may be a need for a couple electrics at NYP to shift the dead diesels ? ?
Let us examine a possible way Amtrak is handling this problem.
...
5. Add loco sets to front of electric motors of trains at NYP & New Haven. Keep diesel locos off line with diesels operating the electrics until near dead section.
6. Start diesels, lower electric pans and pull thru dead section.
7. raise electric pans & shut down diesels to save fuel.
8. At NYP & NH remove diesels & position them to pull a train the other way.
The above will allow qualified Carmen to quickly remove and add diesels at each location. There may be a need for a couple electrics at NYP to shift the dead diesels ? ?
blue streak 1 Let us examine a possible way Amtrak is handling this problem. 1. Move as quickly as possible P -40s & P-42s to the affected area. 2. Maybe remove one P-42 off the lakeshores and NH - Springfield runs. 3. Place several sets of 2 P-42s back to back. 4. fuel to capacity these locos. 5. Add loco sets to front of electric motors of trains at NYP & New Haven. Keep diesel locos off line with diesels operating the electrics until near dead section. 6. Start diesels, lower electric pans and pull thru dead section. 7. raise electric pans & shut down diesels to save fuel. 8. At NYP & NH remove diesels & position them to pull a train the other way. The above will allow qualified Carmen to quickly remove and add diesels at each location. There may be a need for a couple electrics at NYP to shift the dead diesels ? ?
1. Move as quickly as possible P -40s & P-42s to the affected area.
2. Maybe remove one P-42 off the lakeshores and NH - Springfield runs.
3. Place several sets of 2 P-42s back to back.
4. fuel to capacity these locos.
Is this what they are doing or what you think they should be doing?
All of your points are well taken, Paul and I am still trying to work through the confusion. Also, as for alternate feed to the segment. I don't believe it exists from other segments but by direct alternative standby line which at this time is out of service for major rebuilding and refurbishing. This, I think, was what was referenced.
henry6 efftenxrfe Henry6, Grand evening. that my (point) included trolley, LTV. Classic MU commuter, and more. Cos Cob, that you're sensitive and suggest that the NHRR powerplant, poor baby, is a victim of my right and then left coast life. I asked why different circuits with different interrupters could not be permitting power to be fed in from both ends of the circuit? I am sorry, but I don't understand what you are saying. Do you know what Cos Cob was? Do you know the operations of MNRR and Amtrak today versus the operations under NYC and NH of 40 years ago? You seem to know electricity...and so do most of us. So we're not sure of what you are saying or what you mean.
efftenxrfe Henry6, Grand evening. that my (point) included trolley, LTV. Classic MU commuter, and more. Cos Cob, that you're sensitive and suggest that the NHRR powerplant, poor baby, is a victim of my right and then left coast life. I asked why different circuits with different interrupters could not be permitting power to be fed in from both ends of the circuit?
Henry6,
Grand evening. that my (point) included trolley, LTV. Classic MU commuter, and more.
Cos Cob, that you're sensitive and suggest that the NHRR powerplant, poor baby, is a victim of my right and then left coast life.
I asked why different circuits with different interrupters could not be permitting power to be fed in from both ends of the circuit?
I am sorry, but I don't understand what you are saying. Do you know what Cos Cob was? Do you know the operations of MNRR and Amtrak today versus the operations under NYC and NH of 40 years ago? You seem to know electricity...and so do most of us. So we're not sure of what you are saying or what you mean.
The gentleman with whom you are having this discussion, I say gentleman because said person self-identified as a retired railroad locomotive crew member and I am thinking that in-the-day women in that post were rare, not so much today, this gentleman made three points that I think I can explain.
Part of why his response may be confusing to some here on the Forum as he is responding to more than one Forum member, who have been perhaps unnecessarily critical of the rather clear point he was trying to make.
The first point about "trolley, LTV, Classic MU commuter" was to say that our fellow Forum participant with a railroad career is well versed and well informed about the different kinds of electric railways. There were some posts that muddied the waters by suggesting that "efftenxrfe" didn't know what kind of putatively antiquated catenary was in use.
The second remark about "Cos Cob" "and being "a victim of my right and left coast life" was a response to a different Forum colleague who brought up the subject of Cos Cob, deferred maintainence, and how long-time-ago New Haven RR CEO McGinnis was a "corporate pirate" and for all we know also one of the corrupt Lake, McHenry, and DuPage County Republicans serving on the METRA board. I believe the remark "right and then left coast life" was a nod to the politics of corporate pirates and even nastier Republican political figures, who in the fashion of Emmanuel Goldstein (character in George Orwell's novel) are at the root of all deferred maintenance, underfunding of public works, and the recent announcement that for Wisconsin state workers, removal of warts is now regarded as a cosmetic procedure not covered by medical insurance.
As you, Henry6 point out, Cos Cob is ancient history (the power conversion plant, not the neighborhood), and that the affected catenary in question is newly updated 60 Hz line, and not the "ancient stuff" inferior to what they have in Europe and favored by Bad People in corporate boardrooms and in the halls of Congress.
Point number three is that if the affected stretch of catenary had been fed from each end, with the proper circuit breaker at each feed point, this failure and hence this embarrasing-to-the-cause-of-public-passenger-rail outage could have been avoided. You Henry6 admit as much in paraphrasing this entire point in one of your own posts.
In fact, another forum participant confirms that there is another electric feed to the affected catenary, but it was disconnected or maybe never put in place, perhaps in reponse to Corporate Pirates and Republican Legislators, vindicating our esteemed Forum member who worries about such people
So the service outage has nothing to do with McGinnis' mismanagement of the old New Haven RR or that the antiquated catenary on the NEC is not being replaced, but we can fault construction shortcuts (excuse the electricity puns) that perhaps can be laid at the feet of the Bad People rather than oversights and lack of engineering knowledge from our esteemed friends at Amtrak or Metro North. I hope this restores the harmony that David Wardale favors (he speaks of his religious beliefs rooted in Buddhism in connection with his late-day work on steam locomotives).
But everything I just said in a lot of words was said much more succinctly by my esteemed Forum colleague. But as to the patronizing tone ("You seem to know electricity...and so do most of us"), let's try to be more welcoming of new participants, especially people from the railroad industry.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
I don't believe there was a government statute directing that railroads could not own their own power generating systems. Trolley and interurbans were different and they got into the power business because no one else was generating power...then their owners, investors, whatever, found it was more profitable to produce and sell electricity to the public than run trolley cars and thus sold off the transportation part of their business. But I know for sure that the New Haven lines were fed electricity from their owned and operated generating station as Cos Cob, CT. And, as was stated, it fell prey to lack of maintenance and neglect especially under the McGinnis regime to the point it became useless. But is was railroad owned and operated until abandoned and power was purchased from commercial suppliers. The NYC, PRR and DL&W, and I believe the Reading, too, all purchased power from commercial power companies and converted to their specified needs. While they did not have a redundant facility, i.e. separate power supply for the entire systems, they were able to jump across so that a distant power conversion or sub station could actually feed the adjacent blocks. On the PRR, the Wilmington, DE plant could actually feed all the way to Sunnyside Yard in Long Island City if needed...and from a member of the PRR engineering department, it was full and usable power, too. The DL&W segments of about 10 miles each could be jumped to feed adjacent segments. All of this with no phase gaps, no loss of power to the locomotion, no loss of power to the lights of the cars. This is why I can't understand why these systems today are designed so that one 8 mile segment of power loss closes down the whole railroad, that there is no jump system from adjacent segments. Nor why, when it was known that Con Ed was taking a back up feeder off line for an extended length of time that Con Ed and MNRR didn't make an alternative back up plan. I know investor mentality is that redundancies and back up plans are expensive and take from bottom lines, but so does, and maybe even more so, total lack of service, emergency contingencies, and loss of respect and trust.
Sam1 If the wire is de-energized, irrespective of the source, the wire has failed as an energy conduit. It is useless even if is hanging pretty. One of the downsides of an electrified railway (heavy as well as light rail) is a major power failure usually brings the whole system to a halt. DART's light rail system has been shut down on several occasions during the past couple of years because of cat failures. On the other hand, buses and airplanes, which are much more flexible than trains, can frequently work around an impediment. So too can diesel or other powered locomotives as long as they have an alternate route.
If the wire is de-energized, irrespective of the source, the wire has failed as an energy conduit. It is useless even if is hanging pretty.
One of the downsides of an electrified railway (heavy as well as light rail) is a major power failure usually brings the whole system to a halt. DART's light rail system has been shut down on several occasions during the past couple of years because of cat failures.
On the other hand, buses and airplanes, which are much more flexible than trains, can frequently work around an impediment. So too can diesel or other powered locomotives as long as they have an alternate route.
If an airport looses power, I presume there is a back-up for critical systems like the control tower, runway lights, etc. However, is there also back-up for terminals/ticketing/baggage handling/food service/etc. Without that the airport would cease to function.
Another poster said that PRR built in redundancies to keep their cat system from coming to a halt. I recall the MetroNorth NH line cat was rebuilt to modern 60 Hz standards. Apparently they skipped on back-up systems.
Electric powered rail is appropriate for both ATK and commuter lines in Manhattan because of long tunnels.
You are new around here . . .
Henry -- $$ and political ignorance of the consequences if there is a failure of a critical feed. I seem to remember that not long ago The PRR Amtrak feed was compromised but Amtrak worked around the problem with some speed restrictions.
But on another note it does bring up a problem I have asked about in today's modern transportation electrc systems. The DL&W and the PRR both, I know, could jump power between sections so that there was never a really whole system failure like this where one segment kills the whole operation. Why do they design systems like this today when they had created systems without that problem a hundred years ago?
efftenxrfe What we've got here is an electrical circuit's failure to communicate..,..like this...the power feeder apparently is a generater/source to user and back/ground. If the power went around in a circle with (phase breaks) placed frequently, power could enter from either or both ends of the circuit allowing short shuttle moves near the affected portions of failed feeder. Neighbor, right next door, was on the bumping post of a short circuit from the mainline domestic source. Her house was without power during a severe Sierra foothills storm and its aftermath for 5 days after my and other main feeders were fed. Fixing her feed because she was one of 13 on that circuit was lesser priority than circuits with hundreds (of paying, follow the $) victims of the storm. A circuit connected at both ends to grid that can have the damaged portion isolated and the ends of the circuit remaining functioning as out and back circuits..... What part of no (brainer) isn't understood?
What we've got here is an electrical circuit's failure to communicate..,..like this...the power feeder apparently is a generater/source to user and back/ground. If the power went around in a circle with (phase breaks) placed frequently, power could enter from either or both ends of the circuit allowing short shuttle moves near the affected portions of failed feeder.
Neighbor, right next door, was on the bumping post of a short circuit from the mainline domestic source. Her house was without power during a severe Sierra foothills storm and its aftermath for 5 days after my and other main feeders were fed. Fixing her feed because she was one of 13 on that circuit was lesser priority than circuits with hundreds (of paying, follow the $) victims of the storm.
A circuit connected at both ends to grid that can have the damaged portion isolated and the ends of the circuit remaining functioning as out and back circuits.....
What part of no (brainer) isn't understood?
Yeah, we understand that. What's your point? Part one of the discussion is that Con Ed feeder lines failed and cut off the power supply to 8 miles of track for MNRR and Amtrak. Part 2 are comments about Cos Cob generating station built by the New Haven RR and finally owned and operated by MNRR befroe being taken out of service. Your comments don't seem to make sense to either of these conversations.
What we've got here is an electrical circuit's failure to communicate..,..like this...the power feeder apparently is a generater/source to user and then back/ground. If the power went around in a circle with (phase breaks) placed frequently, power could enter from either or both ends of the circuit allowing short shuttle moves near the affected portions of failed feeder.
Neighbor, right next door, was on the bumping post of a short (distance/customer count) circuit from the mainline domestic source. Her house was without power during a severe Sierra foothills storm and its aftermath for 5 days after my and other main feeders were fed. Fixing her feed because she was one of 13 on that circuit was lesser priority than circuits with hundreds (of paying, follow the $) victims of the storm.
For many years the anti-trust law prevented railroads from generating there own juice...Interurbans were seperated from utlitys by a anti-trust law in 1935 which killed hundreds of interurbans... the law was repealed about 2 years ago.
One major reason for Cos Cob's unreliability was the poor management decisions (deferred or no maintenance and modernization) under the Mcginnis regime, a corporate pirate who was convicted later of accepting illegal kickbacks.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Cos Cob was old and overused. It was unreliable. But so what? A new generation generating station would be new. Cos Cob is history. Today is the beginning of the future.
BroadwayLion Ah hem... These are railroads. Transportation companies. They are not energy companies. The railroads used to generate power in the days when no other power was available. Today, for a zillion reasons, it is far better to buy power rather than to make power. And even if they did make power, there could still be issues with cables, generators, and more. ROAR
Ah hem...
These are railroads. Transportation companies. They are not energy companies. The railroads used to generate power in the days when no other power was available. Today, for a zillion reasons, it is far better to buy power rather than to make power.
And even if they did make power, there could still be issues with cables, generators, and more.
Which is why the closed CosCob in the first place.... It was hugely unreliable.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Things evolve, revolve, are cyclical, and ever changing. Miniscule engineering problems and footnotes aside, it may be something to be looked at. In fact, NJT has already begun seeking solutions to power source problems...it is, therefore, not a stretch to invite MNRR, LIRR, SEPTA and Amtrak to the table.
carnej1 I doubt Metro North,Amtrak or any other transit/rail operator in the NYC Metro area would be able to acquire the real estate or get through the permitting process to build a new power plant. As far as buying an existing one there are many utility operators with very deep pockets they would be bidding against.
I doubt Metro North,Amtrak or any other transit/rail operator in the NYC Metro area would be able to acquire the real estate or get through the permitting process to build a new power plant. As far as buying an existing one there are many utility operators with very deep pockets they would be bidding against.
On the contrary, as far as being able to acquire real estate for power plants, I doubt there would be a problem....either use of former power station sites or other industrial sites, especially those already burdened with ground pollution. Look at the NJ Meadows for instance, first to mind is the old Coppers Coke land. And there actually is a lot of underdeveloped, undeveloped, abandoned, or otherwise available land space up and down the east coast (because I am only addressing NYC and possibly Philadelphia areas). And it might actually be a unique opportunity for investors and entrepreneurs: a generating station specifically designed to feed transportation services: MTA, Amtrak, MNRR, NJT, LIRR, LIRR, etc. Or it could be joint venture or consortium of the different users themselves. One venue producing and transmitting specific needs for each operation (I'm not going into the engineering aspects of transmitting different value power to specific locations as there are many solutions and applications, etc. which would be worked out according to the project). One, it could actually operate from several separate venues in part or in whole, with capabilities to feed each other or feed through. Two, it would allow the transportation electric system to be separate from public use and needs giving transportation the ability and freedom to function independent of general public power. It might or might not be part of the grid or grids...both a political as well as engineering issue.
schlimm henry6You are being picky and anal in your criticism. Precisely, the catenary itself, physically, did not fail, MNRR did not fail, nor did Amtrak. Con Ed failed, its power feed failed while its back up system is off line for major overhaul. That tone is pretty rude, henry. What you say is like blaming the manufacturer of the generator on a diesel locomotive when it fails. It still means the system is not working. If Con Ed is unreliable, perhaps Amtrak and MNRR need to return to having their own power source, as the old NH did at Cos Cob?
henry6You are being picky and anal in your criticism. Precisely, the catenary itself, physically, did not fail, MNRR did not fail, nor did Amtrak. Con Ed failed, its power feed failed while its back up system is off line for major overhaul.
That tone is pretty rude, henry. What you say is like blaming the manufacturer of the generator on a diesel locomotive when it fails. It still means the system is not working. If Con Ed is unreliable, perhaps Amtrak and MNRR need to return to having their own power source, as the old NH did at Cos Cob?
But blaming the catenary for not having power instead of Con Ed for not feeding the power are two different pictures. The cat did not fail but the source did. I am being picky and anal, too. But the tone was to denigrate the concept of electric power for railroads as a specific as opposed to other modes of transportation in general.
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.