By LAURENCE ARNOLD, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The maker of America's fastest train is shopping around a new product that could bring high-speed rail service to areas outside the Northeast.
Bombardier Transportation says its new "JetTrain" locomotive, powered by a jet engine, can reach 150 mph without needing overhead electrical lines like those used by Amtrak's high-speed Acela Express.
Bombardier led the consortium that built Acela Express, which operates in the Boston-New York-Washington corridor — the only electrified intercity corridor in the nation.
Pierre Lortie, president of Montreal-based Bombardier, said Tuesday he is confident the equipment problems that have plagued Acela Express will not hurt sales of the new locomotive.
He said several states are developing high-speed rail, and the company is targeting proposed high-speed lines within California, between Los Angeles and Las Vegas, between Chicago and St. Louis, between Tampa and Orlando in Florida, and between Toronto and Montreal.
Lortie said the company could begin closing deals in the next few months.
Bombardier has worked on the JetTrain for four years in partnership with the U.S. Federal Railroad Administration. Each side has invested about $20 million, Lortie said.
The company says the new locomotive fits American demands because it is environmentally friendly, lightweight — thus causing less wear and tear on tracks — and capable of going into operation without major improvements to rail lines.
"We believe JetTrain high-speed rail is the technology for America because it's better, it's faster and it's sooner," said Lecia Stewart, Bombardier's vice president for high-speed rail for North America.
The locomotive is powered by a Pratt & Whitney jet engine rather than a traditional diesel engine. Bombardier says it is 20 percent lighter than a diesel locomotive and can accelerate twice as quickly. It is also designed to meet stringent U.S. safety standards.
Development of the non-electric locomotive is one piece of an ongoing effort by the Federal Railroad Administration to pave the way for high-speed rail around the nation.
Bombardier showed off its new product at Union Station. The prototype locomotive — cherry red, with an American flag decal and the words "Turbine Powered" on its snub nose — sat at a station platform.
The Federal Railroad Administration did not participate in the event, since it was a commercial product kickoff. But spokesman Warren Flateau said the FRA remains "very much a part of the partnership."
Also not represented at the event was Amtrak, which despite its financial woes remains the only current provider of regularly scheduled intercity passenger rail in the United States. Amtrak says it needs $1.2 billion from the government just to maintain operations for the next year and has shelved expansion plans, including those for high-speed rail.
Lortie acknowledged that Amtrak could be a potential purchaser but said high-speed projects being developed outside Amtrak's oversight are more promising.
He specifically cited Florida, where voters two years ago passed a constitutional amendment requiring construction of a rail network, with trains exceeding 120 mph, by November 2003.
Amtrak and Bombardier are locked in a legal battle over production delays and equipment problems that marred the introduction of Acela Express.
Bombardier, a world leader in manufacturing regional jets and train cars, sued Amtrak in 2000, contending the railroad held up production through shifting demands and bad decisions. It is seeking at least $200 million in damages.
Amtrak blames Bombardier and says that, under its contract, it reserves the right to seek more than $250 million in penalties. On Sept. 30, a judge denied Amtrak's motion to dismiss the case.
Amtrak and Bombardier continue to work together on equipment problems that grounded the Acela Express fleet for part of August. Lortie said the cracking that occurred underneath the high-speed locomotives was "an unfortunate technical issue, but I think it is behind us."
Personally, I think it is worth pursuing, if the operating costs are reasonable, and it doesn't have the noise problems earlier experiments had. It would open up high-speed rail to places where electrification is not practical or cost-effective.
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
A big problem with 150 mph trains is that the tracks have to be able to handle them. That's why the Acela is hardly the high-speed marvel it was supposed to be. For most of its run along the Northeast Corridor, it can't travel any faster than a conventional train.
Jet engines are an idea worth revisting. But since Amtrak isn't likely to get the money to embark on a major track building campaign before the 25th century, we're unlikely to feel that jet stream rippling through our shorts anytime soon.
The new Bombardier unit is powered by a jet-powered TURBINE, not by direct thrust. The jet engine is located inside the locomotive's body. The turbine, I presume, will be used to produce electricity to drive the locomotive. I would guess that there are far fewer moving parts in this design than are found in the typical diesel locomotive of today, so I would think maintenance costs will be substantially less.
Your comments regarding track speeds are certainly correct, but I suspect these locomotives do not have to travel at 150 mph to be a good investment.
No actually, Congress is really to blame for stiffing Amtrak for about $2½ billion a while back...
Incidentally, this locomotive is old news. Bombardier built this "Acela power-car" lookalike in conjunction with the FRA; Amtrak never had an order for this loco. It's just a newer version of the old gas-turbine loco.
Go to http://www.bombardier.com Click on "English." On the next page click on "What's New" at the top, and you will get a list of press releases. The Jet Train is the second one down.
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
------------------
nel dowd
It sound like it will guzzle gas, as most jets do. I really doubt that if it isn't as fuel efficient as todays diesels, which aren't that efficient, it will be a flop. Fuel is perhaps the largest operating expense for any transportation company. If it is more efficient, then it should do well. It is mentioned that it is environmentally friendly, but what does that really mean?
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
Turbines have been proven successful in railroad applications since the 50's. UP had a major turbine program - some of theirs could produce 10,000 horsepower. Because they had fewer moving parts, they were easier to maintain. However, the sheer cost of their fuel consumption (UP's ran on bunker C fuel oil) when compared to diesels made their continued operation impractical. They also had the distinction of being extremely loud, hence the nickname "big blows."
It will be interesting to see whether Bombardier can market this engine as a practical alternative for passenger railroads.
In case anyone is wondering, the output is supposed to be some 5000 hp and the thing burns diesel fuel. This is outdated already, since 12-cylinder diesel prime movers currently exist that have output of 6000 hp. High-speed diesel trains have been tested at speeds of over 150 mph already, with lower horsepower moving the trains overall.
BBD, if anyone ever orders this thing, will insist upon the buyers mating it with Acela coaches—which can only stop at high platforms and not low platforms. This would mean expensive building of high platforms at low platform terminals, plus possibly dedicating platforms to the train.
Since these power cars meet FRA Tier II crashworthiness and emissions specs, expect them to have the same problems as the Acela Express power cars. It has been postulated that excessive weight without enough axles to support it, possibly bad weight distribution, has contributed to said woes...
And oh yes, the FRA is not serious about HSR in the USA whatsoever. If they were, why have they not endeavored to set up federal trust funds that would provide funding for the additional signaling required for operation at speeds like 150 mph, nor even considered building dedicated HSR corridors so that 200 mph would be possible? All obfuscation and wastage of public money. The FRA should be disbanded.
Not to mention that this very thread is off-topic since Amtrak is not ordering this locomotive.
[This message has been edited by irishchieftain (edited 11-06-2003).]
------------------
F40PH #757099-8
March 29, 1976-August 17, 2001
Requisecat in pacis
P42DC #53063
Around 2.5 million miles to go