|
|
| SEPTA ACS-64 question (1358530) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (1358530) | |
SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by kp5308 on Sat Jul 4 08:24:29 2015 SEPTA announced in May that the present locomotive fleet is going to get the heave ho by 2018, leaving me to wonder if the Reading side can handle the power load as presently configured. The question I have is how much more energy efficient are the Sprinters compared to the Toasters? |
|
|
| (1358543) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Sat Jul 4 13:17:27 2015, in response to SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by kp5308 on Sat Jul 4 08:24:29 2015. Power is power and electrics have been pretty efficient for years so there could be a supply issue if SEPTA's traffic begins to draw more amps because they are pulling longer/heavier trains.SEPTA is in the process of re-doing all their old substations so that might fix the problem. Still, given its maximum speeds and station spacing, investing in new push-pulls is one reason Harrisburg was so loathe to give money to fund SEPTA in the first place. |
|
|
| (1358549) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Sat Jul 4 14:20:18 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by Jersey Mike on Sat Jul 4 13:17:27 2015. Continuing Mike's points,Electrics on AC railroads have always been high efficiency. Comparing the power put out to the rail with that drawn in by the pan for traction, I would guess we've gone from GG1 95% to AEM-7 96% to ACS-64 96.5%. Transformers, motors and gears are all high efficiency compared to steam, gas and turbine engines so the room for improvement is limited. The trick is in comparing the whole system from oil well to the rail, then the combustion efficiency of the Utility power plant would bring electric railroads back to just being a great runner within the same ball park, maybe 40-60% system total. Substation capacity limits are mainly tied to train weight, frequency, speed and perhaps most importantly the acceleration rate programmed into the MU's. Locomotives are no worse because they are no more than handling 7 MUs at 1000hp each. So unless SEPTA changes their schedules the electric load won't change. The extensive substation trouble that LIRR had with M1's in the 60-70's was all to do with higher acceleration rates, Bill |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1358727) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-86 question |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Jul 6 08:07:41 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by Bill West on Sat Jul 4 14:20:18 2015. The new push-pull trains are likely to be longer and/or heavier than the current fleet which would increase power consumption. Also at 500-600hp a car, a 6-car train of MU's would draw less power at peak load than an 8600hp electric. |
|
|
| (1358728) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-86 question |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Jul 6 08:56:27 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-86 question, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Jul 6 08:07:41 2015. even power rates on Electric locomotives can be restricted to match power availability . |
|
|
| (1358736) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-86 question |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Jul 6 09:49:34 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-86 question, posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Jul 6 08:56:27 2015. Usually the voltage drop does that on its own. |
|
|
| (1358759) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-86 question |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Mon Jul 6 14:54:59 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-86 question, posted by Jersey Mike on Mon Jul 6 09:49:34 2015. at 500-600hp a car, a 6-car train of MU's would draw less power at peak load than an 8600hp electricOkay but the engineer on an 8600hp loco hauling 6 coaches with the same schedule as the MUs shouldn't notch out to more than 3600hp or he will arrive early. (Increase slightly for loco weight, reduce slightly for lighter car weight). Applying the full 8600hp is a change in acceleration rate, so a change in schedule and would make the basis for comparing electric loads unequal. Regarding the substation rebuild, SEPTA could: -install bigger transformers with circuit breakers having higher load current ratings and run heavier conductors throughout or -install transformers with lower impedance and substation/car circuit breakers having higher short circuit interrupting ratings (to handle the resulting higher fault currents. Transformer impedances run 5 to 10%, one divided by the impedance, times the rated current defines the maximum short circuit current. A 1000 amp 10% transformer can deliver 10,000 amps into a short). The trade off for accepting the higher fault currents is that the lower impedance gives a lower voltage drop. Both are costly but if they just stick to renewal and don't add in one of these then there will be no change in the limiting voltage drops and thus the system capacity will stay the same. We're back to: if the ACS-64's are given the same assignments as the AEM-7s then there will be no change in electric load; if the trains/schedules change the electric load will change but, for newer schedules within the AEM-7's ability, which locomotive won't be the difference. Bill |
|
|
| (1358767) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-86 question |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Mon Jul 6 16:43:08 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-86 question, posted by Bill West on Mon Jul 6 14:54:59 2015. With the EMU's you also have the weight of power conversion equipment on a per car basis, rather than just at the loco. It would be interesting to compare the weight of 6 emu's to a loco and 5 regular and one cab car. The amount of electrical energy required is going to be closely tied to how much work is being done. There will be some differences in electrical efficiency with newer technology, and the ACS is supposed to be a little better at regen but overall, imo, Bill spells it out pretty clearly |
|
|
| (1358774) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Mon Jul 6 18:27:47 2015, in response to SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by kp5308 on Sat Jul 4 08:24:29 2015. why do they use locomotives when they have a fleet of EMU's anyway? |
|
|
| (1358787) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by kp5308 on Mon Jul 6 19:41:05 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by orange blossom special on Mon Jul 6 18:27:47 2015. why do they use locomotives when they have a fleet of EMU's anyway?SEPTA needs the push pull fleet to cover the morning & evening rush hour schedule. You won't see a push pull set on the weekends except for crew training or a (rare) fan trip. |
|
|
| (1358788) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by Kawasaki LRV Series 100 on Mon Jul 6 19:45:45 2015, in response to SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by kp5308 on Sat Jul 4 08:24:29 2015. A rendition:
|
|
|
| (1358795) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by kp5308 on Mon Jul 6 20:13:28 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by Kawasaki LRV Series 100 on Mon Jul 6 19:45:45 2015. I like it! |
|
|
| (1358832) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Jul 7 07:28:14 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by orange blossom special on Mon Jul 6 18:27:47 2015. They don't, but since the government is paying for it why turn down free money? |
|
|
| (1358852) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Tue Jul 7 15:05:56 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by Jersey Mike on Tue Jul 7 07:28:14 2015. As best I can tell from Wikipedia's roster and timeline, equipment bought in 1987 permitted the retirement of the Siverliner I's and the last Blueliners in 1990. That purchase happened to be electric locos and coaches. The choice between them and EMU's could have been a matter of what seemed best at the time. Now when the locos need replacing the choice of staying with locos or going to all EMU's has likely become funding driven as Mike suggests. Politically selling replacement of the locos might have been simpler than having to include replacing the coaches in order to pitch going to EMU's. Maybe somebody could quickly estimate the cost of adding 45-50 Silverliner V's to replace the existing coaches versus the 8 of the ACS-64's that are replacement for the existing locos. I can already see that selling replacement of the coaches in a separate proposal 10 years down the road would be politically easier.This is what you get when a business is heavily subsidized and politically driven. Transit doesn't even act as if capital costs are part of financing an operation any more, they judge their performance as if the capital is delivered by a fairy godmother instead of the people they are presenting their performance report to. They cease to make decisions the way the directors of successful private companies facing capital improvement requests would. There the staff would be pressed to present against a background of what else would be needed in the future. Future Railfan historians are going to need more political knowledge than technical. Bill |
|
|
| (1358868) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Jul 7 17:15:10 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by Bill West on Tue Jul 7 15:05:56 2015. Worth remembering that not only all Silverliners, but the A/C rehab of RDG cars to "Blueliners" was public capital, not investment by either PRR (nearly bankrupt) or RDG officially bankrupt over halfa century ago. It would be fun to own one of the City of Philadelphia ownership plates from one of the Budd or StL cars. |
|
|
| (1358870) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by Fulton Frank on Tue Jul 7 17:48:55 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by kp5308 on Mon Jul 6 20:13:28 2015. Looks like it's wearing a blue thong up front. |
|
|
| (1358878) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jul 7 21:03:45 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by orange blossom special on Mon Jul 6 18:27:47 2015. They can't run the Bombardier trailer cars mixed in with the EMUs. |
|
|
| (1358897) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by R36 #9346 on Wed Jul 8 01:16:55 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jul 7 21:03:45 2015. Which leads to the root question: Why do they have trailers in the first place, when the entire system is under the wire? |
|
|
| (1358928) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Jul 8 10:39:58 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by Bill West on Tue Jul 7 15:05:56 2015. If you saw the Denver order the unit cost for SL-V's almost DOUBLED. SEPTA got a sweetheart deal for taking on the risk of using a first time supplier like Rotem. Not only was the unit cost low, Rotem built their factory in South Philly. Today, with additional SL-Vs selling for full price, using existing production lines offer the best value.My assertion was that rebuilding the ALP-44's and using NJT Comet III coaches was probably the best value of all. |
|
|
| (1358960) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by Bill West on Wed Jul 8 15:04:29 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Jul 8 10:39:58 2015. No, I haven't followed Denver. You're right, prices like that make more EMUs a dead idea.Bill |
|
|
| (1358968) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Wed Jul 8 16:00:00 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Jul 8 10:39:58 2015. That's interesting that the Denver SL-V's cost double, and Septa got that deal for taking risk. On 03/24/2012,I attended a DVARP meeting at Temple Univ. -Center City. After the meting was over they bused about 40 of us down to the Hyundai-Rotem plant in South Phila. We toured the pant and saw the tail end of the Septa order cars, which we all know were very late. The impression I got from the plant tour was the company was very efficient & had good quality control practices. We still have mixed feeling about Hyundai-Rotem. |
|
|
| (1358999) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Jul 8 20:12:11 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by R36 #9346 on Wed Jul 8 01:16:55 2015. Because electric locomotives and push pull cars should provide a more cost effective operation (both capital and operation expenditure) in instances where the acceleration of an EMU is not required. |
|
|
| (1359003) | |
Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Jul 8 20:51:16 2015, in response to Re: SEPTA ACS-64 question, posted by Jersey Mike on Wed Jul 8 10:39:58 2015. Multilevels aren't exactly a steal. I worked out a short while back that a 6 car ML set hauled by an ACS-64 would cost just about twice a Silverliner V set. So it really comes out a wash assuming SEPTA pays Denver's price.Rebuilding is a scam. It's an upfront cost of half the unit price to get another quarter the lifetime out of the rolling stock. And because there are so many unknowns, the manufacturer doing the rebuild will demand and get change orders that greatly inflate the cost to the point where they may as well buy new. Rebuilding is a great deal for the manufacturers and may be beloved by rail fans but it sucks for the agency. |
|
|
