| Railway Preservation News https://www.rypn.org/forums/ |
|
| ALP-44's and HHP-8's https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=38626 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Reading T1 2124 [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
Not to go off on another AEM-7 tangent, but something to consider is that according to some sources (wikipedia) the ACS-64's will in addition to replacing AEM-7's replace Amtrak's Acela style Bombardier HHP-8's. In 2018 when Septa takes delivery of theirs they plan on replacing (and presumably scrapping) their single AEM-7 clone, ALP-44. When the time comes it would be wise to make sure there is a slot open somewhere for an example of each of these. |
|
| Author: | robertjohndavis [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
I wonder about this. There's no doubt in my mind that an AEM7 deserved preservation, and I would suggest an Acela train set would. Beyond that for current NEC equipment, I am not so sure. I haven't heard any clamoring for a set of those awful-to-ride-in but ancient Jersey Arrows that are hitting the scrap heap. Given the much mourned lack of a decent set of MP54's preserved, it is somewhat ironic there's no love for those awful Arrows. As much as I dislike commuting in them, they put in a solid career. The youngest are 38 years old. What's that, 4X the HHP-8? Rob |
|
| Author: | baldwin [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
That ALP-44 was so unreliable when it was new that the passengers knew it by sight. When a train came into a station with it many people wouldn't get on the train because it broke down so much and left them stranded. It is a one of a kind though. |
|
| Author: | NH0401 [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 7:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
HHP-8's are leased and will probably go right into the shredder when the lease expires. I doubt the mfr. wants anything further to do with them. They are DOGS. Dave |
|
| Author: | CPR4000 [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
Amtrak's HHP-8's have all been retired for months . . . they were the FIRST of the older motors to go. MARC still has a couple, but I'm not sure if they're still running. As far as ALP44's go, the NJ Transit fleet has been sitting on the former Lackawanna Cutoff in western New Jersey for several years. Plenty of museum fodder there. |
|
| Author: | usaf_andrew [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
I believe I saw that one of the AEM-7s has already made it to the RR Museum of PA. |
|
| Author: | Reading T1 2124 [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
NH0401 wrote: HHP-8's are leased and will probably go right into the shredder when the lease expires. I doubt the mfr. wants anything further to do with them. They are DOGS. I was clearly unaware of that. Who were they leased from? Dave usaf_andrew wrote: I believe I saw that one of the AEM-7s has already made it to the RR Museum of PA. http://www.rrmuseumpa.org/media/AEM7%20 ... %20915.pdf This pretty much says it all. |
|
| Author: | robertjohndavis [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 9:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
Reading T1 2124 wrote: I was clearly unaware of that. Who were they leased from? As an NEC regular, experience would lead me to guess Satan. ;-) |
|
| Author: | Alexander D. Mitchell IV [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 10:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
Let's point out: AMTRAK'S HHP-8's have been "mothballed" at their Bear, Del. shops since November 2014. The lease from Bombardier has not expired, but when it does it is expected that title will be handed back to Bombardier, who will then do as they wish with them--which is likely to be scrapping, although other options exist. MARC (Maryland Rail Commuter) still "owns" and runs six HHP-8's and a scattering of AEM7's (three?); they have recently been using at least one borrowed Amtrak AEM7 for short-term duty on MARC commuter trains. (A theoretically "retired" MARC GP40WH-2 or two is also floating around the system between Wilmington and DC as a "protect" engine for the Corridor.) If the URHS of NJ is still alive and well, a Jersey Arrow set is their "responsibility" for preservation. |
|
| Author: | robertjohndavis [ Fri Oct 02, 2015 6:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
This question may take the thread into the ditch, but hopefully not. RYPN is home to a good number of SPF's and NEC historians. What, in your opinion, was the greatest failure in design of all the motors and rolling stock created primarily for use on the NEC (and for sake of argument, we'll include the NH electirified zones and modern day BOS-WUS NEC)? I have my top three. What are yours? Rob |
|
| Author: | NH0401 [ Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
The MDBF for the HHP-8's was LESS than the un-rebuilt AEM-7's Dave |
|
| Author: | Overmod [ Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ALP-44's and HHP-8's |
To get the party started and warm things up for the experts: Almost hands-down at the top of the list are the PRR L5 family, about which it is difficult to say anything good. I loved the HHP-8,and still do, but they are a great overripe tomato of a design, and not a good success in their intended niche, let alone a logical step up from AEM-7s. (I loved the rebuilt FL-9 Starships too, even though just about anyone who had something to do with them said bad things ... and then there is the Budd SPV-2000, designed for railroads by automotive engineers and it showed.) Which brings us to ... Necroliners. Like a little object course largely at Government expense in how not to design 150mph trains. I liked them, but would NOT have wanted to maintain them, let alone pay to maintain them. They seem to have had a much more fruitful life as cab cars than self-powered vehicles. Somewhere there needs to be a place for EP-5s in freight service - a pyromaniac railfan's dream. Sure, there are reasons for that; sure, it was mechanical abuse to use a passenger design that way with Penn-Central-grade maintenance. I am not going to comment on the 'lightweight trains of the Fifties' in Corridor service, as these were largely self-correcting in a short time. Not much to be said for the RP-210, at least that can be said on a family-friendly forum; the Speed Merchants weren't so bad but their train was a joke; the Roger Williams was the one thing less likely than SPV-2000s to run as a 100mph motor train. Aerotrain doesn't really count as a train. An argument could be made that the rigid-frame electrics (the P5s and the R1) were fundamental dogs ... not on the epic scale of the L5, but how many electrics do you know of that derail blind center drivers? Or require the 20th-Century equivalent of Beaumont Egg for all the frame cracking? Not in the top five, however. There might have to be an honorable mention of some sort for the very early NH and PRR designs with the wretched lateral track abuse (see the alternatives in the design 'competition' that resulted in the DD1, for example). But these pale beside the aforementioned fiascos... |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|