Meaning that the railroads would somehow remain in the passenger business. Don't ask how, just give ideas.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Not sure what you are really asking but the C&O Yellowbellys were rebuilt to pull "The Chessie" which never happened and were used on other routes and trains. The #490 is the only one left and is entombed in the B&O Museum in Baltimore.
The decline of passenger service was a societal rather than a technological issue.
The diesel (and electric) locomotives that have been built over the years would have done just fine if passengers weren't wooed away by the automobile and airlines.
Rusty
Come to Southern California and enjoy a trip by auto. We are approaching gridlock at mid-day on major highways, and one glitch stops it cold. As for the airlines, I have free travel almost anywhere by showing an ID, and I want nothing to do with them. Amtrak is always full for months in advance, but we are planning an Amtrak coast to coast soon.
Amtrak has problems - if the awful happens and Amtrak hits something at a grade crossing, even with no injuries the train stops for several hours. We should not let that happen for minor incidents. Amtrak often slows to 15 mph for reasons not obvious to passengers. For me it is not a big deal except for connections, but for others it can be a major pain.
What we need (opinion) is a subsidized rail system that operates at track speeds, has priority over freight trains, and has the capacity to handle last minute first class travelers. That would include the option to not get off at 3 AM in the middle of dangerous urban areas. Like Europe, or China?
Motive power? If it isn't steam, a GG1, or a PA, I could care less - they are all pretty much as ugly as new cars.
Did I say "Opinion"?
bob2 posted:
What we need (opinion) is a subsidized rail system that operates at track speeds, has priority over freight trains, and has the capacity to handle last minute first class travelers.
Just who pays for THAT? The taxes in the U.S. are choking the citizens and business now.
That would include the option to not get off at 3 AM in the middle of dangerous urban areas. Like Europe, or China?
Both of those systems are government funded and maintained.
Motive power? If it isn't steam, a GG1, or a PA, I could care less - they are all pretty much as ugly as new cars.
Did I say "Opinion"?
It seemed to me that the real question is, "What would passenger locomotives be like if railroads had continued to have passenger service as it was before 1960?"
Passenger locomotives would probably have continued to develop in the same way that they have for Amtrak and for commuter railroads. The one difference I can envision is that certain railroads might have chosen to increase the use of steam generator cars or HEP cars, and done away with that equipment on the locomotive, thereby allowing them to have a fleet of dual-service locomotives with high speed gear ratios and eliminating having a relatively small pool of passenger locomotives to manage. I guess there would be a need for a few boiler geeps (or HEP geeps) for secondary 4-car trains, but the main line trains could have been handled by dual service engines. Of course, there would be other problems with accessing the power or steam car while moving, but there are ways to work around that, depending on variables. It could have been done, and the separate passenger pool headache could have gone away.
What we need (opinion) is a subsidized rail system that operates at track speeds, has priority over freight trains, and has the capacity to handle last minute first class travelers.
Amtrak is subsidized. It got 1.375 BILLION in 2015, and similar amounts in previous years.
As far as last minute travelers go: I don't remember the last time I was on an airplane that wasn't full. So how do airlines handle last minute travelers?
Well the EMD F40PH has been serving the Chicagoland commuter railroad Metra for over 40 years now! 
Give ideas? Look at Japan, Germany, France, China.................
Gerry
Google search "High Speed Rail Image"....
Acela is as close as you'll get in this country.
I rode the Shinkansen in Japan back in the 80's. I'm still trying to crank my slacked lower jaw back into position!!
What a ride, what a ride, what a ride!!! From the setting of your watch by its arrival/departure, to the standing single file on the platform lines precisely indicating door positions, to the ear-popping as you bolted through dozens of tunnels at ~130 mph, to the gentle banking on curves, to the total lack of rail joint rhythm,....etc., etc., etc.. Awesome. And I'm sure it's no less phenomenal for the later versions of their trains, the new China, European trains.
Sure, it'd be nice around here.....if anyone could survive the never-ending litigation wars for the Eminent Domain, noise abatement, urban/rural station locations to be served, taxation/bond issues, etc., etc., blah, blah.......a windfall of opportunity for the legal profession and special interest groups. After all, it's The American Way.
Number 90 posted:It seemed to me that the real question is, "What would passenger locomotives be like if railroads had continued to have passenger service as it was before 1960?"
Passenger locomotives would probably have continued to develop in the same way that they have for Amtrak and for commuter railroads. The one difference I can envision is that certain railroads might have chosen to increase the use of steam generator cars or HEP cars, and done away with that equipment on the locomotive, thereby allowing them to have a fleet of dual-service locomotives with high speed gear ratios and eliminating having a relatively small pool of passenger locomotives to manage. I guess there would be a need for a few boiler geeps (or HEP geeps) for secondary 4-car trains, but the main line trains could have been handled by dual service engines. Of course, there would be other problems with accessing the power or steam car while moving, but there are ways to work around that, depending on variables. It could have been done, and the separate passenger pool headache could have gone away.
What Tom said.
It makes so much more sense to utilize proved off the shelf technology and deal with the hotel side of a passenger train as a separate part. Regearing an off the shelf product for passenger speeds is much easier than coming up with a customized design that is only built in the 100's of units vs. 1000's of units of GE or EMD product.
In the late 60's the railroads were already using dual purpose power. EL had the U34CH that pulled freight when not needed for transit services. CNJ did the same with their GP40Ps and some of those 3600 series locomotives are still running at 48 years of age. SP had the SD40P and SD45P units for the same purpose. Santa Fe had their U28CG, U30CG and FP45 based on proven designs with a different hood over it. The F40PH is so reliable because it was essentially a GP40-2 on the inside. The -40 series of EMDs are far and away the most reliable design EMD ever did prior and after. While Amtrak may not be running them, several former Amtrak locomotives are still providing excellent services to new users in both freight and passenger service.
I personally think the Siemens Chargers are very modern good looking passenger locomotives (a minority opinion to be sure), however every transit agency now seems to have their own custom built locomotives. That is costly and seems wasteful. Additionally it often seems these small run locomotives have a shorter service life.
Number 90 posted:645 posted:Number 90 posted:“These F40PHs have been in commuter service longer than any other locomotive type in North America,” said Metra CEO/Executive Director Don Orseno. “Their longevity is both a tribute to the excellence of our maintenance program and a commentary on the need to provide public transportation systems with a level of capital funding that allows us to continually renew our assets.”
Well, Mr. Orseno, I think a little bit of the success came from the good design by EMD and from its reliable 645 diesel engine, durable Blomberg trucks, and the service after sale. When you are busy patting yourself on the back, you can't offer a handshake to the Engineers at EMD who designed the F40PH or the shop craft employees who built the locomotives with quality fit and finish.
While I agree having a well designed locomotive increases the odds of longevity the most important criteria is if the user does proper maintenance on same. The best designed mechanical product (train, car, plane) will not serve well if not maintained properly.
Wasn't taking anything away from Metra's good maintenance. They get credit for good maintenance. EMD was not mentioned. The locomotive was also well-designed and well-built by many at EMD who put their best effort into it. That was my point.
Metra is political and so was his statement. That was actually more my point.
Wow you really should have read the entire article...
"The fact that this locomotive and its contemporaries continue to perform the same service for which they were built four decades ago is a testament to those who designed, constructed, operate and maintain them."
And...
"EMD, or the Electro-Motive Division of General Motors in LaGrange, Ill., developed the F40PH for passenger service. More than 500 of these locomotives were produced for the North American market. Metra would ultimately acquire 118 F40PH locomotives in various configurations, making it the world’s largest fleet of this locomotive type. The Metra system currently operates 149 locomotives with 28 being the original F40PH models."
And...
"One Metra employee has been with the F40PHs from the beginning. Bill Badurski, who currently oversees capital projects in Metra’s Mechanical Department, spent part of his early career at EMD. He served as EMD’s training center instructor, teaching railroads that had purchased the F40PHs how to maintain them.
“Forty years later, I am now charged with keeping these same units running for the foreseeable future,” Badurski said. “It’s pretty amazing when you think about how many miles of service these engines have seen.”
I surrender.
Casey Jones2 posted:Number 90 posted:645 posted:Number 90 posted:“These F40PHs have been in commuter service longer than any other locomotive type in North America,” said Metra CEO/Executive Director Don Orseno. “Their longevity is both a tribute to the excellence of our maintenance program and a commentary on the need to provide public transportation systems with a level of capital funding that allows us to continually renew our assets.”
Well, Mr. Orseno, I think a little bit of the success came from the good design by EMD and from its reliable 645 diesel engine, durable Blomberg trucks, and the service after sale. When you are busy patting yourself on the back, you can't offer a handshake to the Engineers at EMD who designed the F40PH or the shop craft employees who built the locomotives with quality fit and finish.
While I agree having a well designed locomotive increases the odds of longevity the most important criteria is if the user does proper maintenance on same. The best designed mechanical product (train, car, plane) will not serve well if not maintained properly.
Wasn't taking anything away from Metra's good maintenance. They get credit for good maintenance. EMD was not mentioned. The locomotive was also well-designed and well-built by many at EMD who put their best effort into it. That was my point.
Metra is political and so was his statement. That was actually more my point.
Wow you really should have read the entire article...
"The fact that this locomotive and its contemporaries continue to perform the same service for which they were built four decades ago is a testament to those who designed, constructed, operate and maintain them."
And...
"EMD, or the Electro-Motive Division of General Motors in LaGrange, Ill., developed the F40PH for passenger service. More than 500 of these locomotives were produced for the North American market. Metra would ultimately acquire 118 F40PH locomotives in various configurations, making it the world’s largest fleet of this locomotive type. The Metra system currently operates 149 locomotives with 28 being the original F40PH models."
And...
"One Metra employee has been with the F40PHs from the beginning. Bill Badurski, who currently oversees capital projects in Metra’s Mechanical Department, spent part of his early career at EMD. He served as EMD’s training center instructor, teaching railroads that had purchased the F40PHs how to maintain them.
“Forty years later, I am now charged with keeping these same units running for the foreseeable future,” Badurski said. “It’s pretty amazing when you think about how many miles of service these engines have seen.”
Casey, you do understand that Tom was commenting on Don Orseno's quoted statement, and not what the copywriter wrote in the rest of the article about EMD, right?
I think the answer was that had passenger service survived it would have needed to evolve. Passenger train service is alive and well, in the form of commuter rail in many major metropolitan areas, and they use a variety of different motive power, outside 3rd rail, electric locomotives, overhead power on powered rail cars, diesels of various kinds, and this works because they are relatively slow speed operations.
Long distance rail died in part because of slow speeds, when you can fly to Chicago in 3.5 hours, why would you take a train that takes 21? If trains had survived after 1960, rather than being dumped by the railroads who didn't have the will or the money to compete with airlines (cars did take some ridership from trains, but cars are not effective long distance travel vehicles either, unless it is for leisure travel), they wouldn't be running diesels, they would be running the kind of high speed trains they have in China, which can compete with airlines, a high speed train is a much quicker trip if you factor in the pain of getting to the airport, getting through security and so forth.
I doubt very much, despite the fact that high speed train service could help alleviate problems with air travel in some heavily travelled corridors, that it will ever happen, the airline industry has too much power, and far too many see cars and planes as 'freedom' while trains are somehow 'limiting' *shrug*. One of the ironies of rail service in this country is that the people who complain most about the subsidies Amtrak gets are people who are the primary cause of it needing subsidies,like the post office the big revenue drainer for Amtrak is having to serve low ridership/low density areas.
I thought SP only had the SDP45. GN had the 40 and the 45. However SP did have a few GP40-2P's.
Hot Water posted:bob2 posted:
What we need (opinion) is a subsidized rail system that operates at track speeds, has priority over freight trains, and has the capacity to handle last minute first class travelers.
Just who pays for THAT? The taxes in the U.S. are choking the citizens and business now.
That would include the option to not get off at 3 AM in the middle of dangerous urban areas. Like Europe, or China?
Both of those systems are government funded and maintained.
Motive power? If it isn't steam, a GG1, or a PA, I could care less - they are all pretty much as ugly as new cars.
Did I say "Opinion"?
Horsemeat! Taxes in the U.S. are irrelevent. They have become a social weapon to choose economic winners and losers and no more. We are more productive than any other nation and have low unemployment and growth that does not push inflation with the current taxes.
I would raise fees on trucks, might get some of them off the hiways and could use the cash for other transportation needs
