MARC plans to run shorter trains more often

[Tritransit Area]

Where...is this money coming from??  Isn't MARC consistently crying poverty and eliminates service on anything that's not a standard weekday?

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/8930/marc-will-run-more-shorter-trains/

How's their electric engine fleet holding up?  I've heard the HHP-8s are horrendous and the AEM-7s aren't much better.  Perhaps an overhaul is in order to improve the reliability of those engines?

[WayneNYC]

Not suprised MARC's HHP-8s are not doing too well considering that Amtrak's seem to have issues also.  A troublesome AEM-7 definitely suprises me as those things has done an awesome job of holding down the NEC over the years.  If MARC's AEM-7s are not doing well... maybe it's due to maintenance (or lack???).

[WMAveteran]

If MARC had purchased EMU equipment rather than locomotive hauled passenger cars for the Penn Line these issues would not exist because then it could run as many cars as necessary and the only limitation would be the length of the station platform.  The EMU cars could also be pulled by diesel locomotives on other lines if necessary. 

[mrpete]

Amtrak has overhauled MARC's AEM-7's.  But there was an issue with an electronic component that dragged the overhaul out for a couple of years longer than planned. IIRC that component was no longer made but was critical to prevent the loco from shutting down under certain operating conditions.

MARC/MTA has no money for new locomotives anytime soon, especially to replace the HHP8's which have always been dogs. Ideally MARC would piggyback on Amtrak's new order from Siemens but........ Anyway even if the $$$ were in hand today, depending upon the vendor chosen, there wouldn't be anything on the rails until 2013 at the earliest.

And don't forget the dispute between MDOT and MPI over acceptance testing that delayed the MP36's from going into to service for almost a year.

[mrpete]

Also: Regarding the pulling power of the AEM-7s. They were originally engineered to only haul 9-10 single-level coaches not heavy crush-loaded bi-levels. Amtrak double-heads them on longer trains. That was why the HHP8's were built: to haul longer Amfleet and the DC-NYC legs of the Florida and other 14+ car trains from the South.

[rideonrulez]

Where...is this money coming from??  Isn't MARC consistently crying poverty and eliminates service on anything that's not a standard weekday?

They probably got some BRAC money.

[79MetroExtraMD]

Also: Regarding the pulling power of the AEM-7s. They were originally engineered to only haul 9-10 single-level coaches not heavy crush-loaded bi-levels. Amtrak double-heads them on longer trains. That was why the HHP8's were built: to haul longer Amfleet and the DC-NYC legs of the Florida and other 14+ car trains from the South.

I despise the HHP-8s. Just the mere fact that they are always the electrics that break down alot plus I even remember back in the early 2000s when there was so much controversy about them not being put into service as soon as they should have been. 6 million dollar locomotives just sitting around.

[mrpete]

IIRC there will only be three "more" trains created by splitting existing runs. How this will work out remains to be seen as MARCs Penn Line has been experiencing considerable mechanical issues recently requiring some trains to be cancelled. To be fair Amtrak has been having considerable operating problems for the past two months which obviously impacts MARC.

[mrpete]

Regarding EMU's: Not likely. I spoke with a MARC official a few years ago who was adamantly against diesel or electric MU's. MDOT's view is that a train of MU's is a train of locomotives, each more expensive to buy and to maintain than one locomotive and trailer coaches. Loco hauled trains are viewed as more "flexible" to operate and under different conditions.

The MU vs. Loco-hauled argument is very prominent in the industry with each side touting the virtues of their preference. This argument is raging in Europe as well: UK is moving to all MU's even for long distance runs while France (except for suburban services), Spain and Italy are firmly in the loco-hauled camp. Germany is the middle but seem to be moving to MU's.

[79MetroExtraMD]

Regarding EMU's: Not likely. I spoke with a MARC official a few years ago who was adamantly against diesel or electric MU's. MDOT's view is that a train of MU's is a train of locomotives, each more expensive to buy and to maintain than one locomotive and trailer coaches. Loco hauled trains are viewed as more "flexible" to operate and under different conditions.

The MU vs. Loco-hauled argument is very prominent in the industry with each side touting the virtues of their preference. This argument is raging in Europe as well: UK is moving to all MU's even for long distance runs while France (except for suburban services), Spain and Italy are firmly in the loco-hauled camp. Germany is the middle but seem to be moving to MU's.

Plus the only double decker EMUs are the Gallery ones on Metra and I doubt those can fit the B&P and Union tunnels. Also, I think those are mainly for low platforms (they may have trap doors if I'm not mistaken).

[mrpete]

Correct about Metra and also South Shore now has bilevel EMU's. Yes they are for low level platforms. If (A very big IF!!) the funding materializes, Caltrain and GO will electrify with bilevel EMU's.

[79MetroExtraMD]

Correct about Metra and also South Shore now has bilevel EMU's. Yes they are for low level platforms. If (A very big IF!!) the funding materializes, Caltrain and GO will electrify with bilevel EMU's.

Or they could get some electric locs as well. Since Amtrak is looking to retire their AEM7s and HHP-8s when their ACS64 Sprinters come in 2013 onward, Caltrain and GO could possibly get some.