We will leave recriminations to the other thread. The big question is
“How is a very large equipment shortage going to be solved?”
I plan to take suggestions and incorporate them into this post as the days pass. revisions will be listed by paragraph identification. Rolling stock problems may persist for several years until total US equipment counts meet then exceeds the present numbers due to growth.
A. National situation – Many of the commuter agencies around the country have no spare equipment but I would like someone in the know for each agency to give us a thumbnail. A big problem of any spare equipment is that much equipment will not meet the clearance guage of NYP especially the third rails both for under running and over running. So much of any loaned equipment would need to operate into Hoboken ( again clearance may be a problem ? ) once it is again useable.
B. National situation locos – All will require signal system modifications.
Electric –
B1a. NJ TRASIT – How soon can the stored ALP-44s be returned to service ?
B1b. AMTRAK - Doe not appear at this time to have any spare electrics.
B1c. SEPTA – Unknown
B1d. MARC – Unknown
B1e. Montreal - May have some to spare ?
B1f. Various museum pieces – posters take notice – some units that went to museums may be operable to some completely unserviceable (GG-1s ? ).
B2. Diesel locos. – Most agencies do not have any spares but planned retirements may provide some locos ?.
B2a. AMTRAK – Does have those P-40s sent to Beech Grove for upgrades ( ? ) but is unknown if they will be immediately required for AMTRAK service this winter ?
B2b. CHI – METRA-- appears very short of locos as 2 F-40Cs have been react
NJT uses bilevel cars but those cars are not standard. They were manufactured to NJT specifications in order that they will fit through the tunnels. The bi-levels are NJT’s newest cars and have 4 across seating which is far far better than 5 across. The cars are also lower to the ground. To the extent that any were flooded they must be badly damaged.
If the flooding didn’t reach floor level, the bi-levels will be better off since the “undercar” equipment is mounted higher than on single level equipment - generally at platform height.
If the water only got as high as the journal bearings, then it’s a pretty simple process of swapping wheelsets and cycling through a wheelshop to get the bearings rebuilt. They will generally be okay because they are full of grease. There are lots of wheel shops in the world…lead times should be fairly short.
My thught was that since none of the other agencies bi-levels will fit iinto NYP and possibily not Hoboken (? ) those few single level cars around might be transferred to NJT and other bi-levels to replace the single levels. I was thinking about maybe some of Caltrain’s single levels and SOCAL single levels including the AMFLEET on the west coast ( ? ) Maybe NC DOT, MUSIC CITY, MARC, Hihawathas, etc. There may be some of these single levels that may not meet clearances ? Orphan parts might be a real problem ?
The problem is compounded because the equipment was submerged in salt water not fresh water…its not a matter of just drying out (simply put) but a lot more rewiring and replacement, etc.
The scale of damage to NJT’s equipment is overwhelming. Blue Streak 1 did a great job of listing possible sources. Here are some bits and snatches to consider about a few categories:
Electrics:
B1F: At this point it’s 30 years since anyone ran a GG1. Not going to be easy to find qualified engineers. Also would need HEP power cars or steam heated coaches. PCB transformers were the main reason the GG1s were finally retired - not worth the re-engineering for two or three engines.
B1E: Montreal - I’m guessing they’d let their dual-modes go at a (relative) bargain price since they haven’t been able to use them - nor is it likely they will any time soon with CN balking at even testing them.
B3: Probably the best they could hope for was partial demotoring to get a pool of motors for rebuilding. Some of the photos looked like the water was over the motors - probably into the auxiliaries. It’s unlikely MUs would work in locomotive-hauled service.
B3B: The recent use of VIA cars released some Amfleet I cars from Adirondack service for corridor service. Cross-platform change in Albany was service related, and the use of VIA engines was involved. Some heritage car truck types won’t clear NYP or MNRC third rail - not sure if VIA cars have this issue. As far as I know VIA and Amtrak are HEP compatible, though VIA may be wired ACB like Toronto GO cars (Amtrak being ABC) .
Use of Amfleet cars in NJT service would be as bad as or worse than “Jersey Builder” use of former LD cars in the 70’s and 80’s, since Amfleet loading and unloading is pretty slow. Doubtful if DM diesels are available in sufficient quantity even if Amtrak, MNRC and LIRR all kick in.
D: NJT must have lost a lot of parts in the shop flooding.
Montreal’s problems with putting the duels into service might be helpful for NJT. VIA cars have only publicly mentioned in reference to the Adirondack and not with NJT getting any thing from Amtrak. MNRR and LIRR dual modes probably have different clearance specs than NJT. Non commuter cars are heavier and have less capacity so are more expensive to lug around.
But again, through all you and I and everyone else has said is the silence from NJT which means we officially know nothing but have pieced together rumors, conjecture, feelings, a certain amount of knowledge of what we know about railroads and railroading and NJT to make assumptions against a timetable and some pictures.
On the face of it since the tunnels were designed for single level cars of traditional dimensions it is likely borrowed cars could work. But I am beyond the limits of my own technical competence here.
I also wonder if other systems have cars to spare and if they do if they would be willing to loan or lease them to NJT. Henry suggests that maybe museums could send some cars. If that happened it sure would be an interesting way to ride. I get on the train just to re live rail travel of yesteryear.
Tunnels aren’t the only clearance problems but also station platforms, train sheds, sharpness of curves at certain platforms and train sheds, crossovers, turnouts, etc. and sharpness of curvatures for equipment in general or with certain locomotives. And again, most agencies are down to what they need with very little to spare. Couple that with compatibility of electronics, computers and connections, voltages, height at doors, type of doors, steps, etc, etc., by the time it is figured out and adjusted, the need will probably be gone. 'Tain’t like the old days of steam heat and car’s own batteries…and a knuckle coupler one size fits all.