Trains.com

Article from retired NH engineer

15797 views
387 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Calgary
  • 2,044 posts
Posted by cx500 on Saturday, December 1, 2018 6:04 PM

243129
Are those facts or your opinion?
 

Just my opinion, based on the facts provided in your recent references.  It is also backed up by the time frame, and Volker's actual local knowledge of the area.  Note that your reference provides no evidence to support your opinion.  Your original Washington Post columnist also mentioned nothing about railroad reconstruction, just generalities about the Marshall Plan.

Several cities in England also suffered major bomb damage.  The railways were very quickly restored to operation after each night's raid, often the next day, since they were critical for moving war materiel and troops.  More permanent repairs would be completed soon after.  A British magazine ran a series of short articles entitled "War Report" about 15 years ago illustrating this.  I'm certain Germany would have been no different.  Craters could be backfilled and track rebuilt very quickly; bridges might take a little longer but usually escaped direct hits.

By the start of the Marshall Plan the European railroads would already have been back in operation for several years, using the historic alignments.  In the immediate aftermath of the war there was no obvious reason to change what had served them satisfactorily for many decades, and in any case there were not the resources to do otherwise.  The Allied Forces would also be needing the rail network restored to operation ASAP since they were vital to supply the occupying troops.  Perhaps the Marshall Plan may have helped modernise by electrification of some main lines to replace worn out steam locomotives.  But at the time the historic alignments continued to be more than adequate.

  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 1,836 posts
Posted by 243129 on Saturday, December 1, 2018 5:49 PM

Backshop

 

 
243129

I allowed many railroad enthusiasts to ride the head end with me and they have rewarded me by sending pictures of trains I have operated.

 

 

 

Wouldn't that have been against the rules?

 

 

Yes it was.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,547 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Saturday, December 1, 2018 5:42 PM

243129

I allowed many railroad enthusiasts to ride the head end with me and they have rewarded me by sending pictures of trains I have operated.

 

Any photos showing you in the cab?

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,550 posts
Posted by Backshop on Saturday, December 1, 2018 5:08 PM

243129

I allowed many railroad enthusiasts to ride the head end with me and they have rewarded me by sending pictures of trains I have operated.

 

Wouldn't that have been against the rules?

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,547 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Saturday, December 1, 2018 4:22 PM

You appear to be dodging the question which was very specific.  I wonder why?   

So using the criteria I listed before, please compare/contrast operating a GG1, AEM-7 and Acela.

  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 1,836 posts
Posted by 243129 on Saturday, December 1, 2018 3:11 PM

I allowed many railroad enthusiasts to ride the head end with me and they have rewarded me by sending pictures of trains I have operated.

  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 1,836 posts
Posted by 243129 on Saturday, December 1, 2018 2:49 PM

charlie hebdo
My question was very specific: "Your experience in operating...acceleration, braking, ride, comfort and convenience of controls" [on the various motive power and their cabs]. In other words, compare/contrast using those criteria for the equipment you had experience with.

Here I will give you a chance to be specific-er.

Over the course of my career I have operated many, many kinds of motive power that the New Haven/Penn Central/Conrail/Metro North/Amtrak had on it's roster. Alco,EMD,Fairbanks Morse,GE,Westinghouse, Turbo Train,Acela, LRC, Bombardier,Budd, electric MU and more. Pick one or...

 

  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 1,836 posts
Posted by 243129 on Saturday, December 1, 2018 2:39 PM

cx500
Interesting articles, and you will note that the Marshall Plan only got underway three (3) years after the war in Europe ended. Throughout the war bomb damage would have been quickly repaired by patching together the existing alignment to restore the railroad to a basic level of functioning. After the war the level of chaos referenced in the article means there would have not been the luxury of developing completely new alignments "through the rubble", where no doubt some urban rebuilding was already underway.

Are those facts or your opinion?

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Calgary
  • 2,044 posts
Posted by cx500 on Friday, November 30, 2018 7:53 PM

243129

Interesting articles, and you will note that the Marshall Plan only got underway three (3) years after the war in Europe ended.  Throughout the war bomb damage would have been quickly repaired by patching together the existing alignment to restore the railroad to a basic level of functioning.  After the war the level of chaos referenced in the article means there would have not been the luxury of developing completely new alignments "through the rubble", where no doubt some urban rebuilding was already underway.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,547 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Friday, November 30, 2018 12:39 PM

243129

 

 
charlie hebdo
"almost 50 years of use"??

 

That paragraph was in reference to the GG-1. Below is the edited version without the grammatical errors.

"GG-1 did not possess the necessary acceleration to compete with Acela, AEM-7 or ACS-64s,  however, they did run in excess of 100mph in passenger service even after almost 50 years of use in passenger and freight service, something today's 'state of the art' creations cannot equal."

 

 
charlie hebdo
I was asking about your experience in operating all of them, not top speed: acceleration, braking, ride, comfort and convenience of controls.

 

If you ask a specific question you will receive a specific answer.

 

My question was very specific:  

"Your experience in operating...acceleration, braking, ride, comfort and convenience of controls" [on the various motive power and their cabs]. In other words, compare/contrast using those criteria for the equipment you had experience with.

  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 1,836 posts
Posted by 243129 on Friday, November 30, 2018 9:53 AM

charlie hebdo
"almost 50 years of use"??

That paragraph was in reference to the GG-1. Below is the edited version without the grammatical errors.

"GG-1 did not possess the necessary acceleration to compete with Acela, AEM-7 or ACS-64s,  however, they did run in excess of 100mph in passenger service even after almost 50 years of use in passenger and freight service, something today's 'state of the art' creations cannot equal."

charlie hebdo
I was asking about your experience in operating all of them, not top speed: acceleration, braking, ride, comfort and convenience of controls.

If you ask a specific question you will receive a specific answer.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,547 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Thursday, November 29, 2018 12:22 PM

243129

 

 
charlie hebdo
Please compare your experiences as an engineer handling Acela, NE Regional locomotive-hauled train, GG-1's, etc.

 

 

 

An " NE Regional locomotive-hauled train" with the same consist and same number of station stops, with an experienced engineer can equal or come within five minutes of the Acela running time NHV-BOS

GG-1 did not possess the necessary acceleration to compete with Acela, AEM-7 or ACS-64s were  however they did run in excess of 100mph in passenger service even after almost 50 years of use in passenger and freight service, something today's 'state of the art' creations cannot equal.

 

"almost 50 years of use"??

AEM-7s were built between 1978-1988, so 30-40 years of service.

ACS-64s were not introduced until 2012 through 2015. 

I was asking about your experience in operating all of them, not top speed: acceleration, braking, ride, comfort and convenience of controls.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 24,937 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, November 27, 2018 6:14 PM

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 1,836 posts
Posted by 243129 on Monday, November 26, 2018 3:19 PM

charlie hebdo
Please compare your experiences as an engineer handling Acela, NE Regional locomotive-hauled train, GG-1's, etc.

 

An " NE Regional locomotive-hauled train" with the same consist and same number of station stops, with an experienced engineer can equal or come within five minutes of the Acela running time NHV-BOS

GG-1 did not possess the necessary acceleration to compete with Acela, AEM-7 or ACS-64 however they did run in excess of 100mph in passenger service even after almost 50 years of use in passenger and freight service, something today's 'state of the art' creations cannot equal.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,547 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Monday, November 26, 2018 2:18 PM

243129

 

 
charlie hebdo
Additionally I can’t imagine your Congress giving money for any NEC track improvements when there is no high-speed train on the property. Regards, Volker"

 

Why would you want a high-speed train on the property when you cannot attain high speed with it?

 

Please compare your experiences as an engineer handling Acela, NE Regional locomotive-hauled train, GG-1's, etc.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 24,937 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 6:40 PM

Overmod
 
charlie hebdo
Some say a lot of ridiculous things. 

Pins didn't lie.

I have no problem with Mr. Pins and his statement, but I don't lobby regulatory authorities.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,547 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 4:29 PM

Overmod

 

 
charlie hebdo
Some say a lot of ridiculous things.

 

Pins didn't lie.

 

Just to clarify matters.  I was not referring to Pins' blog post.  I was referring to some other poster(s) remarks about that pesky 79mph speed limit.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,347 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 12:27 PM

charlie hebdo
Some say a lot of ridiculous things.

Pins didn't lie.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,547 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 8:14 AM

Backshop

Did anyone here read the first reply to the "Southern Railway Finally Comes Home" blog post?  Some would say it couldn't have happened.

 

Some say a lot of ridiculous things.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,550 posts
Posted by Backshop on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 6:41 AM

Did anyone here read the first reply to the "Southern Railway Finally Comes Home" blog post?  Some would say it couldn't have happened.

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,518 posts
Posted by zugmann on Friday, November 9, 2018 8:52 PM

Wow.

  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.

  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 1,836 posts
Posted by 243129 on Friday, November 9, 2018 8:49 PM

Did you happen to notice the conjunction 'or' and what followed?

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,518 posts
Posted by zugmann on Friday, November 9, 2018 8:42 PM

243129
In my post of November 7 I state: Dependable, frequent and timely service with new conventional equipment replete with the bells and whistles that Acela offers can be had for a fraction of the cost of this wasteful HSR program.

ANd on November 2nd you said:

243129
That is correct. The money could be well spent upgrading Amfleet or purchasing new conventional equipment.

(Emphasis mine - zug)

  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,827 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Friday, November 9, 2018 5:57 PM

One reason to get the HSR equipment is the state of repair of the 100+ Year old track, unde grade, rickety bridges, no undercutting.  HSR trains built for higher 220 speeds shoud ride much better at the 125 MPH speeds or 150 speeds.  

  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 1,836 posts
Posted by 243129 on Friday, November 9, 2018 4:46 PM

Overmod
But against this we probably have to balance something else. The 2.4B got fully approved, allocated, and spent. We probably couldn't expect Amtrak to order something that 'costs less' and not give up the difference, or worse, to try banking the difference in some kind of rainy-day fund, or throwing it into the pit of unfunded ROW improvement. We all know how budgets get used in government,

Sad isn't it? A waste of taxpayer dollars.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,347 posts
Posted by Overmod on Friday, November 9, 2018 4:38 PM

243129
Dependable, frequent and timely service with new conventional equipment replete with the bells and whistles that Acela offers can be had for a fraction of the cost of this wasteful HSR program.

And there is more:

Dependable, frequent, and timely service with new Tier-2-compatible equipment, replete with the bells and whistles that Acela can offer, could have been had for a fraction of the cost of this HSR order...

More expensive than pure rebuild, yes.  More expensive than conventional-to-PRIIA-and-eat-the-speed-difference, yes ... but qualified by the very assumption made in the original article and posts.  "HSR" enough to satisfy Chuckie and the other evil dolls, probably. 

But against this we probably have to balance something else.  The 2.4B got fully approved, allocated, and spent.  We probably couldn't expect Amtrak to order something that 'costs less' and not give up the difference, or worse, to try banking the difference in some kind of rainy-day fund, or throwing it into the pit of unfunded ROW improvement.  We all know how budgets get used in government, and at least we'll have Avelia Liberties to run even if they never go as fast as designed.

  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 1,836 posts
Posted by 243129 on Friday, November 9, 2018 4:02 PM

Overmod

 

 
zugmann
Still think it beats refurbishing Amfleets for the umpteenth time.

 

Well, sure as h-e-double toothpicks not the way anyone in the Amtrak constellation of suppliers would know how to do it.

I remember very well how poorly the first generation of Amfleet cars ran, from the relatively unconstrained lateral compliance through the bouncing-like-a-basketball performance through crossovers to the intolerable giggling-like-a-schoolgirl noise from the plastic trim fits in the interior panels. 

Now all those things are apparently 'new again' as recently as a week ago.  I tremble to think what would happen to a 125mph truck improvement program, let alone some rational 150mph program ... or faster. 

That doesn't rule out development of a practical alternative 160mph-peak trainset, perhaps even a Tier 2 lite setup.  But it certainly makes the idea of refurbished Amfleet per se a harder thing to justify as a practical thing...

... and we're still waiting for the analysis of the Cayce incident...

 

In my post of November 7 I state:

Dependable, frequent and timely service with new conventional equipment replete with the bells and whistles that Acela offers can be had for a fraction of the cost of this wasteful HSR program.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,347 posts
Posted by Overmod on Friday, November 9, 2018 12:58 PM

zugmann
Still think it beats refurbishing Amfleets for the umpteenth time.

Well, sure as h-e-double toothpicks not the way anyone in the Amtrak constellation of suppliers would know how to do it.

I remember very well how poorly the first generation of Amfleet cars ran, from the relatively unconstrained lateral compliance through the bouncing-like-a-basketball performance through crossovers to the intolerable giggling-like-a-schoolgirl noise from the plastic trim fits in the interior panels. 

Now all those things are apparently 'new again' as recently as a week ago.  I tremble to think what would happen to a 125mph truck improvement program, let alone some rational 150mph program ... or faster. 

That doesn't rule out development of a practical alternative 160mph-peak trainset, perhaps even a Tier 2 lite setup.  But it certainly makes the idea of refurbished Amfleet per se a harder thing to justify as a practical thing...

... and we're still waiting for the analysis of the Cayce incident...

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,518 posts
Posted by zugmann on Friday, November 9, 2018 12:35 PM

243129
I consider them, the high-speed trainsets an unnecessary, egregious waste of taxpayer dollars which are being foisted upon an uninformed public.

Still think it beats refurbishing amfleets for the umpteenth time.

  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy