[mdrejhon]

Ok, it appears clearly commuter-optimized.
Here's the proposed MOOSE commuter rail network for Ottawa, at www.letsgomoose.ca

Basically, Ottawa's equivalent of the existing Toronto GO train system.
(And apparently, they do already have a spiffy logo.)

In the past, this would be dismissed and laughed at.

I noticed Wakefield is on the map. There used to be a tourist train running this route until a few years ago. Even resurrecting any now-discontinued Wakefield steam train (which stopped running just a few years ago) as a hybrid commuter & excision line -- would have hugely popular support by residents there. They would probably be quick to rally for concessions from multiple levels of government to help it indirectly off the ground (e.g. $5M corridor repair before trains are able to run again).

And, it does appear they want to add cycle paths and pedestrian paths to the Ottawa-Gatineau rail bridge renovation. This would probably have popular support by Ottawa residents, by taxpayers, and even by the NCC (a crown corporation that administers green space). MOOSE or otherwise, many would be happy to see any level of government fix up this currently-disused rail bridge and put it into useful infrastructure service (trains, pedestrians, cyclists).

Apparently, October 2015, the MOOSE consortium officially launched, and becoming the first rail company (not already operating) in Canada in 125 years to apply for a "certificate of fitness".

Some technical issues. It looks like the MOOSE commuter train wants to share track with the north-south Ottawa LRT, and make commuter-train stops at Bayview, Carleton, and Greensboro. Transport Canada may have something to say about this for now.... but a Bayview-to-Wakefield starter train could easily start up (after track/bridge fixes), to begin with, with no/little interference from freight, and possibly be economically viable.

There were lots of talk about this, even as early as 2012, but it appears they have gone quite a bit further along and momentum is picking up beginning late 2015.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

As not to drown out VIA-related conversation, I started a new Moose Rail thread here: http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/moose-rail-national-capital-region.25806/

 

[dowlingm]

Flexibility to Operate:

• The intent is to specify trainsets for bi-directional operation (Push-Pull).
• VIA Rail intends to contract with one supplier. Bidders who only offer motive power or seated vehicles must partner to offer a complete trainset solution.

Performance:

• Trainsets must be able to operate at speeds of up to 100 mph or 161 km/h on shared Class 5 non-electrified infrastructure, non-grade separated, using diesel power.
• Trainsets must also be able to operate at a maximum of 125 mph or 201 km/h on new dedicated Class 7 infrastructure, non-grade separated, using in diesel mode and electric mode where electrified.
• Transition between modes of power must be seamless with minimum impact on the passenger experience.

Delivery:

• The trainsets must be proven in service or made up of proven elements, and either be in production or quickly be ready for production in order to minimize lead time.

Fleet Size Final:

• quantities remain to be confirmed; however the intent is to replace the current fleet of 40 locomotives and 160 cars with bi-directional trainsets providing equivalent seat capacity currently totalling 2200 Business seats and 7800 Economy seats. An option for additional trainsets could be required, depending on the timing of other initiatives planned by VIA Rail.

• The only one of these that Siemens does not currently offer is dual mode, assuming Brightline rolls out without major issues.
• Bombardier might manage it with an ALP45 variant with a bigger fuel tank and weight savings from not needing a 25Hz transformer core, but don't have a recent unpowered coach order.
• CAF and EMD could go in together but EMD don't have an electric offering, and aside from design licencing CAF haven't built a Viewliner passenger car and have been having enough issues making the ones they are building
• There are other manufacturers who could offer Euro cars but that assumes Transport Canada will change the rules within VIA's time horizon - doesn't seem likely based on the seeming urgency.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I sense another Bombardier delivery boondoggle on the horizon.

 

[steveintoronto]

• The only one of these that Siemens does not currently offer is dual mode, assuming Brightline rolls out without major issues.

I had posted here in haste earlier, and erased it after realizing I may not have got the original RFP wording correctly. But now I read it again, it opens an intriguing possibility. Here is the announcement again:

Flexibility to Operate:

• The intent is to specify trainsets for bi-directional operation (Push-Pull).
• VIA Rail intends to contract with one supplier. Bidders who only offer motive power or seated vehicles must partner to offer a complete trainset solution.

Performance:

• Trainsets must be able to operate at speeds of up to 100 mph or 161 km/h on shared Class 5 non-electrified infrastructure, non-grade separated, using diesel power.
• Trainsets must also be able to operate at a maximum of 125 mph or 201 km/h on new dedicated Class 7 infrastructure, non-grade separated, using in diesel mode and electric mode where electrified.
• Transition between modes of power must be seamless with minimum impact on the passenger experience.

Delivery:

• The trainsets must be proven in service or made up of proven elements, and either be in production or quickly be ready for production in order to minimize lead time.

Fleet Size Final:

• quantities remain to be confirmed; however the intent is to replace the current fleet of 40 locomotives and 160 cars with bi-directional trainsets providing equivalent seat capacity currently totalling 2200 Business seats and 7800 Economy seats. An option for additional trainsets could be required, depending on the timing of other initiatives planned by VIA Rail.

Detailed info from VIA: http://www.viarail.ca/sites/all/files/media/pdfs/About_VIA/INTERCITY_PASSENGER_RAIL.pdf

Note! It doesn't detail the locos specifically as being *dual-mode*. It only stipulates "trainsets" and "bi-directional" and then goes on to state: "either be in production or quickly be ready for production".

This is addressed in an economical way by some US east-coast commuter lines: Diesel loco one end, electric the other. The large draw-back with dual mode locos is cost. It's virtually the price of one diesel + one electric loco.

The present ALPs don't meet Tier 4 in diesel. That may be easy to address, but the point is the newest Siemens Charger diesel does.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_Charger

I've read over what I can find of the the requirements, have yet to see "bimodal loco" in any. I am tired, so please double-check, it opens massively wider possibilities, including reconditioned used electric locos and/or reconditioned diesel with Tier IV compliant prime movers.

 

[drum118]

They need to be careful who to going to suply them as they don't want the SEPTA and Denver mess. Change the rages and you can get Europe equipment that comply with tier 4 now with Siemens & MPI already doing it here.

SEPTA: Serious cracks found in 95 percent of cars inspected so far

 

[steveintoronto]

I sense another Bombardier delivery boondoggle on the horizon.

The concern with Bombardier and late delivery is well founded, but that is for the Cdn assembled ones, not the European made ones, and the ALPs are made in Poland and Germany, to the best of my knowledge.

I tried Googling to find problems with delivery and/or other issues re the ALP45, but could find none, perhaps others could clarify? In the event, I see Urban Sky has 'liked' my prior post on Top and Tailed asymmetric push-pull with electric one end, diesel the other, so any doubts I had of the practicability are somewhat allayed. It would/could make the acquisition cost a lot faster and cheaper. It might also put Wabtec in the picture for a supplier/partner, with a higher-speed version of the MP-40. It uses the same prime mover as the Siemens Charger. Whether it would ride as well is another question, but servicing could be shared with GO even though they settled on a dual prime mover variant...which might even be better for reliability on long-haul. Gearing would have to be taller, obviously. Present top speed of the GO MP-40s is 105mph, albeit governed to below that.

Edit: Anyone have technical details on MU coupling of dissimilar locos top and tail electric one end, diesel other, through the coaches to double traction? This would of course require current xmssn, vis-a-vis Cow and Calf, not just MU signalling, so the traction motors of both locos are run from just one locomotive.

 

[dowlingm]

Anyone have technical details on MU coupling of dissimilar locos top and tail electric one end, diesel other, through the coaches to double traction?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_City_Express_Service - ALP44 on one end and P40DC on the other.

EDIT: while using dissimilar power on both ends is technically feasible, as above, what Siemens could probably offer VIA with a Charger-Viaggio-ACS64 package is an end to end train management system with no caveats about compatibility with other units. But then that limits VIA operational flexibility quite a bit.

 

[steveintoronto]

I think we have the beginnings of further discussion on this. One point I thought to add is that by distributing the considerable weight of a bi-modal to the two ends, as well as increasing traction *if MU traction power can be coupled through the trainset*, the loco axle weight is also reduced (which will reduce the traction per bogie, but increase it overall). I was Googling for the Atlantic City Express example, it was mentioned in a Trains discussion board, but I failed to note the example.

Still digging, more to follow on this.

Quick point to add: The assymetric locomotive ends may be technically practicable, but 'run like hell' if certain coupling characteristics aren't addressed. The bogies might not be stable at 125 mph, for instance.

Still digging...

 

[steveintoronto]

what Siemens could probably offer VIA with a Charger-Viaggio-ACS64 package is an end to end train management system with no caveats about compatibility with other units.

Indeed, this is the approach I was considering, or something closely akin with perhaps some rebuilds but engineered into the entire trainset.

But then that limits VIA operational flexibility quite a bit.

But it also offers other advantages, not the least that if one facet of loco operation fails, the loco at the other end doesn't have to be shopped out too, as a single bimodal loco push-pull trainset would. In the case of a dual prime mover MP40 derivative, *complete* diesel failure is greatly reduced. Like a plane with two engines. Speed will be greatly reduced, but it can make it to the end of the run if need be. From recollection, that MP40 derivative (Tier IV compliant) also had more power, ostensibly enabling, other factors considered, 125 mph running with a taller final ratio.

Late Edit to Add:

ALP45DP:
[...]
Specifications
This locomotive is capable of operating on both electric power through overhead wires and as a diesel locomotive through 2 Caterpillar 3512 diesel locomotive, each rated at 2,100hp.

Under the wires, the ALP-45DP is capable of 5900hp through its 4 Bombardier MITRAC motors. Away from the wires, the ALP-45DP has the same tractive effort and horsepower as the EMD/Alstom PL42AC, producing 4,200hp (at alternator). One of these engines must run at full power in order to deliver HEP to passenger cars while in diesel mode.

Top speed under diesel mode is 100mph, and top speed in electric mode can reach 129mph.

Problems
During initial testing of the AMT units, 1350 derailed on Central Station's tracks, which immediately lead to the removal of all ALP-45DP locomotives from servicing Montreal's Central Station. The cause of the derailment was immediately traced to the heavy weight of the locomotives, although a later report would conclude that the poor condition of the track at Central Station was to blame. All ALP-45DPs currently delivered are now back in service.

http://locomotive.wikia.com/wiki/Bombardier_ALP-45DP

Only "100mph diesel", that means it couldn't meet VIA required performance.

I was doing further digging on the MP40 variant GO 647, but Wabtec have already moved on from that:

MP54 AC Commuter Locomotive

For maximum performance and reliability, MotivePower, Inc. (MPI), a Wabtec company, offers the MP54 AC commuter locomotive. Based on the proven MPXpress® platform and powered by two Tier 4 compliant engines, the locomotive provides up to 5400 HP, making it the most powerful diesel passenger locomotive in North America. The two engine configuration offers built-in redundancy, ideal for customers who typically operate single locomotive trainsets and need maximum reliability. Operational flexibility is also featured with the capability to operate in single engine mode for increased fuel savings. An IGBT based AC traction system is included with individual axle control, brushless AC motors and a synchronous alternator to minimize maintenance impact. This configuration can be offered as new or as a Tier 4 repower to existing MPXpress locomotives.

https://www.wabtec.com/products/5103/mp54-ac-commuter-locomotive

MP54AC
GO Transit was the launch customer for the MP54AC, a higher performance AC traction locomotive that could meet Tier 4 standards in the United States and compete with the EMD F125 and Siemens Charger. To make the prototype, MPI used an existing MP40PH-3C from GO Transit (Unit 647), and replaced the EMD engine with a pair of Cummins 16-cylinder QSK60 engines rated at 2,700 hp each (5,400 hp total), making it the most powerful diesel passenger locomotive in North America. Heavy modifications were made to the body to accommodate extra air intake and exhaust stacks.[9][10] Unit 647 was delivered to GO Transit late 2015 and was seen under testing on December 12, 2015.[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPI_MPXpress#cite_note-11
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPI_MPXpress#MP54AC

Whoa! Curious to know how price compares to a Charger, and note those AC motors. One has to wonder, would a short trailer or passenger coach towed behind as a 25kV AC transformer-tender and m.u. control with pantograph work in a Cow/Calf arrangement? Could Bombardier adapt their present bi-level coaches with a driver cab to suit being in such a trainset if so? The tender would only be added in when necessary, as the xfrmr, by its very nature, is weighty.

Again, servicing could be done in conjunction with Metrolinx.

 

[crs1026]

The bi-modal solution may look more like a British 390 class than an LRC or Charger that has a loco at each end....yes, it will require a "locomotive" car for the diesel, because a diesel power plant is too large and heavy to handle any other way .... however the traction can be under the coaches and not under the loco. The electrical power may not need a 'locomotive' per se, it just needs switchgear to connect to the coaches' traction motors when overhead is available.

It will be interesting to see if the new rolling stock moves to more of a fixed trainset approach rather than a variable, 'built' consist.

I'm told that while VIA has begun to run more two-ended consists to speed turning, the trailing loco is often isolated because a) the horsepower isn't needed on shorter consists and b) the ride quality in the rear coach(es) isn't that pleasant with the tail end unit shoving in the slack.

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

...however the traction can be under the coaches and not under the loco. The electrical power may not need a 'locomotive' per se, it just needs switchgear to connect to the coaches' traction motors when overhead is available.

It will be interesting to see if the new rolling stock moves to more of a fixed trainset approach rather than a variable, 'built' consist.- Paul

It does fit the need as described by VIA's RFP. As you describe would eliminate the need for an electric 'tender' and be able to use off-the-shelf stock, with perhaps a minor addition of traction power coupling to the attached diesel loco when needed. What would be unfortunate for VIA is to be locked into the need to drag around a very heavy loco (which would mandate the Class 7 track, due to axle loading and overall weight) as later, on all electrified lines, the consist could be run just as an EMU.

Of course, for any of these ideas to make sense in the end, we'd need to know cost figures, and delving last night showed none. EMD also have a new competing passenger diesel engine, rated for 125 mph, albeit with tall gearing. California is buying 40 of them. I suspect it is pricey, albeit Siemens has their North Am plant there, so the bidding results might prove revealing.

A concern that can't be discounted is the sizable increase in a bi-modal loco at the rear of the train pushing. We've seen what can happen in the California crash a few years back with even an F59 on the rear pushing. A bi-modal would weigh 50% or so more. The EMUs are probably best in that regard, with no loco attached on the rear.

Edit to Add: [...]The Metrolink locomotive telescoped rearward into the passenger compartment of the first passenger car and caught fire.[6] [...]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chatsworth_train_collision

 

[mdrejhon]

I am not too familiar, but what are the precedents of an EMU with an optional diesel locomotive added to the consist? Any other major rail systems running such a config?

 

[steveintoronto]

I am not too familiar, but what are the precedents of an EMU with an optional diesel locomotive added to the consist? Any other major rail systems running such a config?

It's a good question, but it is done in a number of nations, although mostly just to get an electric consist through an un-electrified section. I checked on the running speed of the former Atlantic City Express, and it is pretty mild, about 60mph on average, although there may have been sections higher. There's very little to find on-line on it. One thing I can't find is running the traction power (for many practical reasons, best it be triple phase AC) through coaches to the other end of the consist to drive from both ends in either diesel or electric mode (one of each either end with one loco prime drive idle)

Running late, Googled some interesting things, but not had time to delve, but have to post this for others to comment on and delve: (BMU is "Bimodal Multiple Unit" )


www.stadlerrail.com
11
Main
characteristics
FLIRT Nordic DMU
and
BMU
05.04.2016
www.stadlerrail.com
11

A bimodal FLIRT Nordic train is a electric FLIRT Nordic train...

... with a power pack to generate the electrical energy
A bimodal FLIRT Nordic train is a electric FLIRT Nordic train...

... with a power pack to generate the electrical energy
[...]
Why
bimodal
trains
?
05.04.2016
www.stadlerrail.com
15

To get direct connections from a regional line to a main station,
often the trains have to drive on non
-
electrified and electrified
lines.

With a bimodal train less emission and noise during driving on
the electrified line

The plan to electrified a line and the need for new trains do not
match.

With a bimodal train from Stadler, after electrification of the
line, the power pack can be removed easily and a fully
-
fledged
EMU remains. http://www.jlt.se/globalassets/doku...nkesmedja/stadler-rail-jkpg-160404_public.pdf

I couldn't get the pics to copy, if some of you computer whizzes can, please do so, it adds a whole new dimension to the discussion.

Class 800 series, for the Intercity Express Programme

Hitachi’s newest AT300 derivative builds upon the great tradition of the iconic British Rail designed HST. Its bimodal functionality enables operation taking power from overhead lines, or on routes where self-power is required.


Technical outline

• Train Configuration: 5 – 12 car
• Speed Range: 125 – 140 mph
• Max Acceleration: 0.75m/s/s
• Nominal Vehicle Length: 26m
• Power Supply: Bi Mode (25kVAC and / or Diesel Operation)
• Door Type / Positions: Sliding Pocket Vehicle / End Doors
• Cab Design: Full Width Cab
• Interior: First and standard class seating, inter vehicle gangway door, USB and power sockets at every seat, table, luggage, toilet and catering facilities, LED Lighting throughout, passenger Wi-Fi provision

Find out more about the Class 800 trains here

If Transport Canada would change the regs, there's all sorts of excellent, tried and trued options.

 

[dowlingm]

Wishing for TC to change the regs seems to me to just invite all kinds of "hey can we have my favourite trainset in VIA colours". VIA themselves in the PDF state:

Trainsets must meet current Transport Canada, Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA), American Public Transportation Association (APTA), Federal Railway Administration (FRA), and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards, notably for people with disabilities and safety requirements.

I am not too familiar, but what are the precedents of an EMU with an optional diesel locomotive added to the consist? Any other major rail systems running such a config?

Can't say I can think of a situation where an EMU interoperates with a diesel locomotive. The differing dynamics of EMU vs locohaul would make mode switching interesting I would think, even if the differing coupling/controls which tend to come up in EMU contexts were overcome.