|
|
| LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why (576872) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
| (576872) | |
LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 07:56:45 2008 Gentlemen, I wil offer my words about the topic to those who will listen. This is with some experience on the subject locomotives, first and second hand.Why the MTA and LIRR would allow LIRR to purchase an UNPROVEN machine and INSIST that they have something DIFFERENT that they (LIRR design engineers) developed to THEIR specifications is beyond me. (REMEMBER THEY DIDNT EVEN GET THE AIR HORN ISSUE RIGHT UNTIL MUCH LATER) GENESIS has proven iteself before the EMD DE/DM was even thought of. The LIRR should have left the locomotive design to professionals that do it for a living. REMEMBER that EMD had sent a few (?) techs to live in NY to help get the bugs out. I believe the tech or techs were here WAY BEYOND the required length of stay. I think there was a trailer set up in Morris Park. SO a good part of the blame can be placed with LIRR engineering and management and MTA for allowing this albatross to fly. Thanks for listening ! |
|
|
| (576912) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 09:27:46 2008, in response to LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 07:56:45 2008. Actually, that's just what I said in the other thread about the DM-DE30's. Not to absolve the manufacturer from this either, but the MTA is also partly to blame for this complete boondoggle. Why they would insist on some specially manufactured units instead of off the shelf proven engines is beyond me. |
|
|
| (576915) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Tue Feb 26 09:32:12 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 09:27:46 2008. However, is there such a thing as an off-the-shelf passenger locomotive these days? I really doubt it. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (576922) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 09:47:19 2008, in response to LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 07:56:45 2008. GENESIS has proven iteself before the EMD DE/DM was even thought of.True, but it depends on what you accept as proof. For example, the MDBF on MNR's Genesis locomotives that's been recently reported was: July 2007 -- 35K miles 12-month average as of July 2007 -- 27k miles So it's reasonable to think that LIRR was aiming to exceed the performance of the Genesis locomotives, which on an absolute scale don't seem so reliable, although they're something like twice as reliable by these measures as LIRR's DE/DM30s. So I think something like that was the motivation for LIRR. By contrast LIRR has been reporting MDBFs lately for its M7s of between 250-300k miles. Even in retrospect, I can't say that LIRR's motivation was misplaced, although obviously lemons were produced. But I don't fault LIRR for aiming higher, only for failing to execute, and for even failing to meet the goal they were trying to exceed. |
|
|
| (576923) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 09:52:43 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 09:27:46 2008. BINGO !!! |
|
|
| (576924) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 09:53:45 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by AMoreira81 on Tue Feb 26 09:32:12 2008. Not totally , I agree. Since MTA is the parent to stepchildren LIRR and MNCR, could they not just say, GENESIS ? |
|
|
| (576926) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 09:56:16 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 09:47:19 2008. So what is the answer? Convert DMs to DEs??? Or use them as straight TUNNEL MOTORS like th DD-1s? Change at Jamaica? |
|
|
| (576928) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 10:09:12 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by AMoreira81 on Tue Feb 26 09:32:12 2008. They could have bought Genesis for the LIRR. The bugs were worked out on Amtrak...and they also bought them for Metro North. |
|
|
| (576930) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 10:18:55 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 09:56:16 2008. So what is the answer?You'll have to get some smarter and more experienced folks than me to answer that! But with the Socrates disclaimer that my wisdom lies in knowing that I know very little, let me spout off like a fool. Short-term, I think they should try to use plain old cookie cutter scientific method to identify correlations of problems with various phenomena. Use sensors and all of that to help. Then with this data, maybe the engineers can try to reason their way to experiments that try to narrow the problems down to causes. And then try to eliminate one or more events in the causal chain from happening. Of course, that assumes that the things aren't total lemons at the physical level itself. If the locomotives are physically defective - let's say that they were delivered using sub-standard materials in the circuitry or body or both, then fixing that problem might require replacing large parts of the locomotives. But officially, it's not really known what the problem or problems are, just what the symptoms are. In line with what Train Dude said in dialogue with me here, I also think that outsiders who haven't studied this particular puzzle should be brought in. New eyes, new brains, maybe new ideas. What's really distressing is that it's reported by LIRR that between 30-50% of DM30 failures can't be explained. So far as speculation for when there's a decision coming on what to do next, I've read that the EMD consultant has 2 years left on his/her contract. I can't imagine if the reliability doesn't increase that they'll be renewing it. There are also people from Siemens visiting regularly too. Apparently LIRR's Morris Park shops are also in need of an upgrade, since they lack the facilities to more quickly repair the l0comotive problems that can be identified. Convert DMs to DEs??? That's definitely not the solution. The DE30 MDBF was at a high point in 2006, reported at 23.5k miles, but for 2007 thru July it was down to 18K miles. Theoretically, you could just isolate the locomotives as much as possible, e.g., change at Babylon/Huntington/Ronkonkoma/Mineola/Jamaica but if you don't improve the reliability, you're still not satisfying the ridership. I think they have to try the scientific approach as have some people who can detect materials defects check out that front too. Long term, they've got to decide what LIRR's priorities are, e.g., 'we want to electrify the entire Montauk Line plus Central Branch', 'we want to operate lots more dual mode service', 'we want to electrify third rail style to Yaphank', 'we want to electrify using AC catenary to Wading River, etc.' Then we can talk about how to get those things down. |
|
|
| (576931) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 10:26:28 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 09:53:45 2008. Since MTA is the parent to stepchildren LIRR and MNCR, could they not just say, GENESIS ?While I think that MTA should refuse to pay for what their entities want they think it unwise, I do think that MTA has to defer to the expertise at the railroads generally. MTA administers the bureaucracy, so the relevant expertise probably sits with the railroads. About the only thing that might've smelled fishy so far has been raised by Selkirk, and that's that the manufacturer didn't have the track record of a Bombardier or Kawasaki (or in earlier times, Budd), etc. I don't know that the choice should've killed the deal, but in retrospect, maybe there should have been more attention paid. Maybe there's a good reason for sticking with the usual suspects for orders. (It'll be interesting to see how this Silverliner V order by SEPTA works out). |
|
|
| (576932) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 10:27:39 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 10:26:28 2008. While I think that MTA should refuse to pay for what their entities want they think it unwise...Should read: While I think that MTA should refuse to pay for what their entities want WHEN they think it unwise... |
|
|
| (576946) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 10:57:27 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 10:09:12 2008. My point exactly ! |
|
|
| (576950) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 26 11:08:04 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 09:47:19 2008. The problem, so succinctly articulated by our good friend in Selkirk: you could not build a good locomotive AND line Al D'Amato's pocket with the same money at the same time. Something had to give, and it sure as hell wasn't Al.ROAR |
|
|
| (576952) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 11:11:57 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 26 11:08:04 2008. WOW !!! |
|
|
| (576953) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:12:10 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 09:27:46 2008. What the LIRR should have done is allowed the experts to design a locomotive to their specifications, not build one they designed themselves. The government doesnt design weapons systems, defense contractors do. |
|
|
| (576956) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 11:16:48 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:12:10 2008. EXACTLY !!! |
|
|
| (576957) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:20:07 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by AMoreira81 on Tue Feb 26 09:32:12 2008. No. NJT uses three unique locomotives (ALP-44/46, PL42). However, all three are based on proven European designs. |
|
|
| (576958) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:21:38 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 09:53:45 2008. From what I've heard, the Genesis would not fit on some LIRR lines. And the Genesis back in 1996 (when the DE/DM contracts were issued) was a problem child in it's own right. |
|
|
| (576961) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:29:28 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 10:26:28 2008. EMD was/is a reputable locomotive manufacturer. At the time the DE/DM contract was issued they were in the process of manufacturing the F59PHI (which sorta looks like a DE/DM) which has a fairly good track record with Amtrak and some commuter rail services on the west coast. The emphasis on WHERE these engines were to be built was stupid. Better to have reliable engines built in Wyoming than crap built here in NY state. |
|
|
| (576964) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:34:11 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 09:47:19 2008. I think the problem with the DE/DM's is compounded by LIRR's lackluster record for maintenance. Just about everything that Metro North has in it's fleet outperforms their LIRR counterparts. |
|
|
| (576965) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:36:32 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 09:56:16 2008. The obvious answer would be to buy surplus proven engines (NJT's retired some GP40's) to use on non-Manhattan runs. Unfortunatley the C-3's are incompatible electrically with every other engine out there except the DE/DM. Another brilliant move by the Long Island Fail Road. |
|
|
| (576969) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 11:42:28 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:21:38 2008. And the Genesis back in 1996 (when the DE/DM contracts were issued) was a problem child in it's own right.Even the Genesis a decade later from July 2006-July 2007 was only 27k miles for MDBF on MNR. (Source: LIRR Sept. 27, 2007 Assessment, p. 18). That's only 5-10k miles better than the DE30s, and roughly 12-14k miles better than the DM30s. Hardly a smashing success. SO I really can't fault LIRR for aiming higher, especially if the reliability of the Genesis locomotives was even worse a decade ago. |
|
|
| (576972) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 11:48:07 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:34:11 2008. Just about everything that Metro North has in it's fleet outperforms their LIRR counterparts.While that seems quite true with respect to M7s versus M7As, the MDBFs for the DE/DM30s versus Genesis locomotives aren't that far apart. Check out the latest figures I've seen in the Sept. 21st, 2007 Assessment (I think I earlier said Sept. 27, but that's in error) by LIRR ('Nelson Report'), which is available here from LIRR's website. |
|
|
| (576991) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 12:26:22 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:20:07 2008. There lies the difference. |
|
|
| (576992) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 12:29:12 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:34:11 2008. That may be true, but you can't blame the LIRR for the maintenance of the DM-DE30's. They were problems from day one. In the first year or so, they were spontaniously going on fire. Then they had cracks somewhere. They all had to be sent out and repaired under warrantee. The only thing the LIRR has to be blamed for in this disaster is that they even ordered them. |
|
|
| (576996) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 12:38:03 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 12:29:12 2008. The LIRR could use all of these engine woes to push for more electrification. It's time to end any NIMBY objections to electrification east of Babylon and Huntington. The bulk of the diesel passangers would then be using MU's, making this issue a lot more moot. |
|
|
| (577005) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 26 12:49:19 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:36:32 2008. The type of coupler can be modified on any locomotive so that they can operate with the C3 cars.ROAR |
|
|
| (577011) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 13:11:33 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 12:38:03 2008. Perhaps. Currently, Electrification to Yaphank is in the Capital Plans. Last year they scrapped all plans to further electrification along the Port Jeff line. |
|
|
| (577012) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 13:12:20 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 26 12:49:19 2008. Perhaps, but a lot of the electronic equipment in the cars is based on those couplers and connections |
|
|
| (577013) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 13:16:10 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 09:56:16 2008. The DE's are not much better than DM's, they both have poor performance. |
|
|
| (577015) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 13:24:42 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 13:11:33 2008. They need to dust off the Port Jeff plans, and this time, fight to win. That means eminant domain and punishing service cuts on the Port Jeffy. Heck, threaten to abandon it. |
|
|
| (577019) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 13:26:38 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 13:16:10 2008. Yeah, but if DM's become DE's, they'll have one less point of potential failure.I don't think the LIRR could afford to replace all the DE/DM's at the same time. A gradual replacement over time, starting with some new, BETTER dual modes is more realistic. |
|
|
| (577020) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 13:27:55 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 26 12:49:19 2008. It's a totally unecessary complication. |
|
|
| (577034) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 14:28:35 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 13:24:42 2008. .... punishing service cuts on the Port Jeffy. Heck, threaten to abandon it.That doesn't solve anything. The "NIMBY's" are not the people that ride the Port Jeff Line. Abandoning the line is probably just what those protesting the electrification would want, and finally, all that would do would bring the remainder of those that don't already travel to stations along the already overburdened Ronkonkoma Branch, which certainly can't handle much more than it does already. |
|
|
| (577035) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 14:33:02 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 14:28:35 2008. True, but playing hardball will incite the majority to defeat the minority blocking electrification. Trust me, if the LIRR threatens to abandon the Port Jefferson line, panic will ensue.Time to take heed of Herm Edwards' infamouns statement: "you play to WIN the game". |
|
|
| (577039) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 14:38:14 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 14:33:02 2008. I don't disagree, but I am sure people will call it a bluff. |
|
|
| (577041) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 14:45:42 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 14:38:14 2008. Cut service. Heck, rip up a piece of track.I'd end the 2 direct runs to Penn Station right now to start things off. |
|
|
| (577044) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Tue Feb 26 14:50:55 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by AMoreira81 on Tue Feb 26 09:32:12 2008. MPI? |
|
|
| (577049) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Tue Feb 26 15:17:44 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 10:09:12 2008. However, would the Gennies have fit through Jamaica station? |
|
|
| (577058) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Feb 26 15:58:39 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Feb 26 12:49:19 2008. It's not a coupler problem. The C3s and DE/DM30ACs use a 36 pin MU connector while the rest of the US uses a 27 pin MU plug. Unless there is some way of rewiring some C3s to work with both or developing some sort of adaptor you'd be stuck doing pull-only service with conductors and engineers using hand or lantern signals to communicate. |
|
|
| (577068) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Tue Feb 26 16:12:23 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:29:28 2008. The manufacturing plant has some but not much to do with this. The design is the issue but even more so, it really comes down to the fact that EMD did not put in the effort necessary to make this unit work. This is what I find to be kind of disappointing about this whole project.The main technical problem with the DM is that EMD didn't design it to the reality of the third rail power supply on the LIRR. Consequently, there's a lot more wear and tear than expected. Throw in crappy EM2000 software, poor wiring (largely a manufacturing issue, but EMD specs this so it would be a problem no matter where it was built) and not so good maintainence and you get what you got... |
|
|
| (577091) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Feb 26 16:47:10 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 14:45:42 2008. Still won't be effecting the people it needs to be. Most of the people riding the LIRR are the ones that would love to see it electrified. It's the ones that don't or live along the tracks that are the NIMBY's. They are also the ones that would love it if they "cut service"... |
|
|
| (577095) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Feb 26 16:53:45 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 09:47:19 2008. Ok, a difference of all of a few thousand miles in MDBF. Someone want to tell us again why "m0ar dual modes" is a magic bullet to cure all that ails the LIRR? How much you want to bet you give them brand new GEVO Genesii and the damn things have the exact same numbers as the DM30ACs? Christ, even the "good" dual modes suck when compared to other units. |
|
|
| (577098) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Tue Feb 26 17:11:27 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by WillD on Tue Feb 26 16:53:45 2008. You remind me of the old(?) saying;"Those that can't do, teach. Those that can't teach, teach gym." when is your next volleyball class? |
|
|
| (577184) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 21:23:39 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by AMoreira81 on Tue Feb 26 15:17:44 2008. After Airtrain and the renovations, probably not through tracks 2 and 7 would be my rough guess.Didn't LIRR once want to run some leased Amtrak locomotives on the Cannonball, but it wouldn't clear at some points, so it didn't happen? |
|
|
| (577187) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Johnnytrains on Tue Feb 26 21:27:28 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 21:23:39 2008. I figured out the solution. Bring back the K-4s and G-5s and run the DMs as Tunnel motors. Change at Jamaica to steam. That worked pretty well for....Hmmm 1913 - 1955 ??? |
|
|
| (577196) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Feb 26 21:44:57 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Jace on Tue Feb 26 16:12:23 2008. The main technical problem with the DM is that EMD didn't design it to the reality of the third rail power supply on the LIRR. Consequently, there's a lot more wear and tear than expected.Can you clarify on this? What's the (bad?) reality of the third rail power supply? Beside which, DM30s are running off Amtrak's third rail supply in the East River Tunnels and at NYP. (Not sure whether that's the same supply as LIRR's, but Amtrak does the maintenance of the third rail for sure, since LIRR complains about Amtrak's maintenance). |
|
|
| (577201) | |
Re: clearance thru Jamaica? |
|
|
Posted by timz2 on Tue Feb 26 21:53:53 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by AMoreira81 on Tue Feb 26 15:17:44 2008. "would the Gennies have fit through Jamaica station?"I suspect a P32 will fit anywhere a bilevel car will fit. Lessee-- P32s are allowed thru the Hudson River tunnels, and LIRR bilevels aren't, are they? |
|
|
| (577213) | |
Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Tue Feb 26 22:14:03 2008, in response to Re: LIRR DE/DMS Some reasons why, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Feb 26 11:21:38 2008. The Genesis fits everywhee but ESA, its way lower than a DE/DM. |
|
|
| (577220) | |
Re: clearance thru Jamaica? |
|
|
Posted by d to e to jamaica on Tue Feb 26 22:28:23 2008, in response to Re: clearance thru Jamaica?, posted by timz2 on Tue Feb 26 21:53:53 2008. What ws the MDBF for the FL9's when they were on loan to the LIRR from MN before the DE/DM's came? Just curious if they were better or worse? |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
