|
|
| e-mail Response From Amtrak (1524347) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (1524347) | |
e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Sep 17 15:11:38 2019 I posed the question about the first generation Acela trainsets and would they be reassigned elsewhere.This was the response I received : Thank you for your recent inquiry. We appreciate your enthusiasm about Amtrak travel. We are working diligently to improve the services we offer to our customers and hope that many will share your interest in train travel. Your email has been documented in our customer database. Amtrak’s high-speed passenger service, Acela, expects to receive its second generation of cars within the next two years. The current Acela trains, put into service in 2000, will be retired because their reliance on electric power makes them unusable on routes outside the Northeast Corridor. Once again, thank you for writing. |
|
|
| (1524357) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Sep 17 16:36:48 2019, in response to e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Sep 17 15:11:38 2019. Umm...why not place them in service on the regional lines?Doesn't make sense to me, retiring twenty two year old trains..? |
|
|
| (1524359) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Sep 17 17:18:28 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Edwards! on Tue Sep 17 16:36:48 2019. Maybe NJT can use them for Trenton service?? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1524360) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by The Silence on Tue Sep 17 17:31:18 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Edwards! on Tue Sep 17 16:36:48 2019. I call it a "Spanos."Doing something pointless and possibly self defeating, simply because you can. (named after Dean Spanos, the owner of the Chargers, and the events before, during and after the team's move to LA) |
|
|
| (1524362) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Sep 17 17:36:45 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Edwards! on Tue Sep 17 16:36:48 2019. Most Regional train cycles encounter low level platform stops. They are expensive, maintenance headaches that are increasingly difficult to keep running very reliably. |
|
|
| (1524366) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Sep 17 17:47:17 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Sep 17 17:18:28 2019. You can't be serious ? |
|
|
| (1524370) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Pragmatist on Tue Sep 17 18:12:30 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Joe V on Tue Sep 17 17:36:45 2019. You are right. They can only run to high platforms, and they are expensive and increasingly difficult to maintain. |
|
|
| (1524371) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Tue Sep 17 18:16:10 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Pragmatist on Tue Sep 17 18:12:30 2019. NJT would need a lot of new repair pits . |
|
|
| (1524372) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Sep 17 18:18:23 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Joe V on Tue Sep 17 17:47:17 2019. I can't???'splain why not |
|
|
| (1524378) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Sep 17 18:34:16 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Sep 17 18:18:23 2019. Expensive to operate and low capacity -304 seats per train.NJT has plenty of rolling stock as it is. |
|
|
| (1524379) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Sep 17 18:35:22 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Dutchrailnut on Tue Sep 17 18:16:10 2019. And unique maintenance requirements. They have parts issues with them as with the HHP-8's. |
|
|
| (1524380) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Pragmatist on Tue Sep 17 18:37:56 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Dutchrailnut on Tue Sep 17 18:16:10 2019. I'm not sure why this is even in question. I don't think their fate was ever really in doubt. |
|
|
| (1524381) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Sep 17 18:45:14 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Pragmatist on Tue Sep 17 18:37:56 2019. They'll be sent back to the Canadian Banks that own them, and then probably turned into razor blades.People will carry on and on about these as they did the RTG and RTL Turboliners. |
|
|
| (1524382) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Sep 17 18:45:15 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Pragmatist on Tue Sep 17 18:37:56 2019. They'll be sent back to the Canadian Banks that own them, and then probably turned into razor blades.People will carry on and on about these as they did the RTG and RTL Turboliners. |
|
|
| (1524384) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by DieselBusFan on Tue Sep 17 19:34:00 2019, in response to e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Sep 17 15:11:38 2019. Earlier this year I went to the NJT meetings in Atlantic City when the AC Line was shut down. They were well-attended. But to the point...one person suggested simply to run the PATCO trains all the way to AC. So maybe use the Acela trains on the AC Line. Just get a good running start around North Phila! I don't know about the return trip though. |
|
|
| (1524385) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by r33/r36 mainline on Tue Sep 17 19:43:43 2019, in response to e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Sep 17 15:11:38 2019. Wow, get your last rides on the original Acela trainsets while you can!Can't belive I'm already saying that, first train to come and go in my lifetime, I remember when these trains were on new and Transit Transit show did a story about these cars. Rode one for the first time a year or two ago, I enjoyed it. |
|
|
| (1524386) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by r33/r36 mainline on Tue Sep 17 19:46:41 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by r33/r36 mainline on Tue Sep 17 19:43:43 2019. Technically the M6 Metro North MU's came and went during my lifetime (Born in 91) but I don't remember those being new so that don't count lol |
|
|
| (1524387) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Alan Follett on Tue Sep 17 19:59:37 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by r33/r36 mainline on Tue Sep 17 19:46:41 2019. I must be...old? Nah, that couldn't be it...but I remember a whole lot of things coming and going during my lifetime: Metroliners; three generations of Turbotrains; the Aerotrain; Santa Fe Hi-Levels and, as far as that goes, the whole generation of postwar streamliners; Slumbercoaches; AutoTrain Corporation; CTA 6000's, 2000's, 2200's, and 2400's; the BC Rail Tumbler Ridge electrification...and the list goes on.Alan Follett South San Francisco, CA |
|
|
| (1524388) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Alan Follett on Tue Sep 17 20:11:33 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Edwards! on Tue Sep 17 16:36:48 2019. Well, as Amtrak's response said, the major obstacle to any reassignment is the fact that they're electric. The only other line where they could conceivably operate in their present form is the Keystone Corridor, and even there Amtrak would either need to build more high-level platforms, or convert the Acela I sets somehow to serve low-level platforms. And they don't seem very well suited to a short-haul, semi-commuter route with frequent stops.For operation on the national system, there would be the same platform problem, plus the need to replace the power cars with diesels. It does seem a shame to scrap relatively young equipment, but the alternatives don't appear to be cost-effective. Alan Follett South San Francisco, CA |
|
|
| (1524395) | |
Re: E-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Sep 17 21:09:19 2019, in response to e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Sep 17 15:11:38 2019. Well, that's a rubbish reply, isn't it.They can't even stop at all stations on the NEC, but besides that, a non-electric "power car" could be placed on them. |
|
|
| (1524397) | |
Re: E-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Sep 17 21:15:54 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Alan Follett on Tue Sep 17 20:11:33 2019. It does seem a shame to scrap relatively young equipment. . . such as SDP40Fs after 14 years (although not all scrapped; the ones converted to freight units didn't last much longer), P30CHs after 17 years (all scrapped) and even Amtrak's F40PHs after a quarter-century. |
|
|
| (1524398) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Alan Follett on Tue Sep 17 21:49:33 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Alan Follett on Tue Sep 17 20:11:33 2019. I hope at least one set can find a home in a museum.Alan Follett South San Francisco, CA |
|
|
| (1524403) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by George Foelschow on Wed Sep 18 01:09:28 2019, in response to e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Sep 17 15:11:38 2019. I'm surprised that no one has figured out that we need more rail lines under wire. Diesel locomotives spew toxic poison into the atmosphere. If electricity is generated without using fossil fuel in whatever form, it is totally free of pollution. Climate change is here; our planet's future is at stake. |
|
|
| (1524404) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Alan Follett on Wed Sep 18 01:50:17 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by George Foelschow on Wed Sep 18 01:09:28 2019. Perhaps the most promising line for future passenger electrification is some or all of the Pacific Surfliner route, a fairly high-density corridor with both Amtrak and commuter services, and particular local air-quality concerns.Alan Follett South San Francisco, CA |
|
|
| (1524406) | |
Re: E-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Sep 18 06:08:43 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Alan Follett on Wed Sep 18 01:50:17 2019. Not for old Acelas though. |
|
|
| (1524413) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Lou from Brooklyn on Wed Sep 18 08:23:23 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Sep 17 18:18:23 2019. And don't call him Shirley |
|
|
| (1524422) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Wed Sep 18 10:29:20 2019, in response to e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Sep 17 15:11:38 2019. It amuses me when government agencies seem to give actual answers to questions and no foreign corporation can answer even a simple thing. |
|
|
| (1524426) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Sep 18 10:40:43 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by George Foelschow on Wed Sep 18 01:09:28 2019. The Planet's Future is NOT at stake. It is *YOUR* future that is at stake. And there is nothing that we can do about that. Build all of the wind towers and solar panels you like, you will NEVER replace fossil fuels.We can do this or that, but China, India and Africa cannot at least not soon enough to make a difference. The first microbes on this planet extinguished themselves because of their waste product. That product was OXYGEN! Now we breathe oxygen and exhale (guess what) CARBON DIOXIDE! And we and our food still provide flatulance. (Methane) More trees are the best answer, and an immediate stop the the deforestation of Brazil and other rain forests. There is the answer, Blowing in the Wind! ROAR |
|
|
| (1524427) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Sep 18 10:56:14 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Sep 18 10:40:43 2019. We can do this or that, but China, India and Africa cannot at least not soon enough to make a difference.China and India can, and are doing as much proportionately as we are. Africa is unimportant; they don't produce enough CO2 to make a difference to the world. |
|
|
| (1524428) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Wed Sep 18 11:17:43 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by George Foelschow on Wed Sep 18 01:09:28 2019. Two issues. What power source will be free from pollution? Science is saying that green energy is more toxic than fossil fuels now. Dams, but you kill fish and change the landscape. And Nuclear is a no-no. Remember, you can get a tidal wave inland evidently (don't ask, no one's answered my queries on this either).Diesel, however, is apparently one of the most powerful sources of energy on earth per its size per pound. And it's a lot cleaner than it used to be. I think the real question here is, not that we're not converting rail lines to electric for whatever reason, it's not we're NOT building ANYTHING. Where is my commuter rail lines at? That could be electric easily. Go anywhere in the country, all you hear about is 45 year old HSR plans and commuter lines. Putting people from our backwards rest-stops on the highways to a decent diesel train is still cleaner than the do nothing option. |
|
|
| (1524429) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Wed Sep 18 11:20:37 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Joe V on Tue Sep 17 18:35:22 2019. I hear this excuse a lot on these forums. But I wonder.If they are given in good working order, how long do they last until they completely fall apart? Why can't things be run into the ground? Just look at the third world, and you don't even have to get to that level. |
|
|
| (1524432) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Sep 18 12:20:33 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by r33/r36 mainline on Tue Sep 17 19:46:41 2019. And it's a shame they only lasted for a very short time. |
|
|
| (1524433) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Sep 18 12:46:32 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by George Foelschow on Wed Sep 18 01:09:28 2019. not to mention selling them to Caltrain at scrap prices I would becurious tosee the MDBF ##. |
|
|
| (1524436) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Sep 18 12:58:34 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Edwards! on Tue Sep 17 16:36:48 2019. Should be possible to do a diesel swap out; so the question is where should the high level platforms be built.In the vague comments about maintenance, what are the issues--individual car HVAC? power unit issues? And as electrics how many low level platforms remain in service on the CDOT line of MNR? Here is the fleet for the East Bronx to Penn service, cheap. Given Amtrak's sorry record with structurally sound Budd carbodies, I don't buy that they are worn out. |
|
|
| (1524439) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Sep 18 13:25:01 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Wed Sep 18 11:17:43 2019. um, "green is toxic???" surely the DHW collectors on my roof, copper tubes in an aluminum and glass box, is not a toxic product anym ore than the copper plumbing pipes in the house, aluminum venetianblinds. and glass window panes.as to toxicity in PV, I am not well enough informed to agree or dispute. we KNOW that the subways we all presumably love would not be possible without electricity, so finding cleaner and more efficient ways to generate ?(and regenerate) is critical. |
|
|
| (1524442) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Sep 18 13:45:53 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Sep 18 12:58:34 2019. again 334 seats on commuter train ?? that's less than 3 commuter coaches? no diesels are not option as the Acela cars have non standard and non standard height couplers, the Tilt system needs input from the power cars. and NO MN has no low level platforms anywhere in Electric territory. |
|
|
| (1524446) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Wed Sep 18 15:26:17 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Sep 18 13:25:01 2019. What it takes to mine and make all that stuff is toxic and destructive at such a large scale as people wish they existed at. Look for old russian mines to get an idea of the scale.Wind turbines are nasty at the end of their cycles, however the most important thing But there was groundbreaking shameful news the other day, that you won't hear about. SF6 is worse than CO2. I exhale CO2, not SF6 btw. and so on. This perfect energy source is a political myth. Stuff on your roof is awesome. Government programs? Not so much. |
|
|
| (1524460) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Sep 18 17:48:02 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Wed Sep 18 11:20:37 2019. Spare parts is an issue. |
|
|
| (1524461) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Wed Sep 18 17:50:11 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Sep 18 12:58:34 2019. Amtrak's record of dealing with structurally sound carbodies?As in keeping them for multiple decades longer than anyone else would? |
|
|
| (1524462) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Sep 18 17:50:12 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Alan Follett on Tue Sep 17 20:11:33 2019. Amtrak would no doubt demand huge lease payments from Penn DOT and Penn DOT does not need a new maintenance headache. |
|
|
| (1524478) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Wed Sep 18 19:15:54 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Lou from Brooklyn on Wed Sep 18 08:23:23 2019. Roger, Roger.:) |
|
|
| (1524479) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Sep 18 19:56:58 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Sep 18 13:45:53 2019. the high level platforms are in place, and certainly the forthcoming ones on Bronx East/Hell Gate to Penn will match. as to capacity, cutting the pitch would increase available seating. As precedent, PRR rebuilt LD sleepers for NEC service with some seats having no windows.I don't think the first few months of Bronx East will be 1000 rider sardine trips, but being wrong would actually be nice. Another option, de luxe express Stamford, New Rochelle, Jamaica for transfer to Air Train to JFK. Again, not likely 1000 pax routes, but a useful service. |
|
|
| (1524480) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Sep 18 20:01:09 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by R30A on Wed Sep 18 17:50:11 2019. fact. Budd mid 50s cars are still in service on the Canadian. On average they are maybe 6 years older than the average "heritage cars" which Amtrak scrapped. |
|
|
| (1524481) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Sep 18 20:09:33 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Orange Blossom Special on Wed Sep 18 15:26:17 2019. not quite understanding your text. SF6? my chem class was in 1961, please translate. As to copper, aluminum, glass for the DHW panels, so, no alum beer cans? I doubt it., No, copper wire for buildings, not. we have lots of silica sand to make glass. What am I missing here?As to government programs, that is how civilization has been since government invented itself. Government programs gave us RRs--the B&O was granted a waiver of MD state taxes as long as they kept the name Baltimore in the company title, and maintained HQ in the city. |
|
|
| (1524499) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Sep 18 23:11:56 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Sep 18 13:45:53 2019. Wouldn't be useful to have them operate on the LIRR. No third rail pick up. |
|
|
| (1524514) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Pragmatist on Thu Sep 19 07:48:47 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Sep 18 20:09:33 2019. SF6 is a very powerful greenhouse gas, perhaps the most powerful. It has some industrial applications, and it is used in high voltage electrical apparatus. Because it is produced in such small quantities, it is generally not considered to be anywhere near the threat of methane or CO2. Estimated at 0.20 percent of the contribution to problem. |
|
|
| (1524524) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by MorningsideHeightsM100 on Thu Sep 19 09:23:41 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by DieselBusFan on Tue Sep 17 19:34:00 2019. You'd need to electrify the line. |
|
|
| (1524527) | |
Re: E-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 19 09:59:53 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by MorningsideHeightsM100 on Thu Sep 19 09:23:41 2019. Not if you dieselize the power cars. (It is doable.)But what's the use if NJT won't increase the frequency? |
|
|
| (1524528) | |
Re: E-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 19 10:00:19 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by DieselBusFan on Tue Sep 17 19:34:00 2019. one person suggested simply to run the PATCO trains all the way to ACThat's hilarious. (PATCO outside Camden is built on the former PRSL line.) |
|
|
| (1524546) | |
Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 19 12:36:22 2019, in response to Re: e-mail Response From Amtrak, posted by Pragmatist on Thu Sep 19 07:48:47 2019. SF6 is a very powerful greenhouse gas, perhaps the most powerfulNo it isn't. H2O is the most powerful greenhouse gas. Why do you think greenhouses are hot? |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
