turbo trains for the new york central 092767

5/10/2018 Turbo Trains for the New York Central 092767 - slidepdf.com

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/turbo-trains-for-the-new-york-central-092767 1/17

)i .-._,_

TURBOTRAlliS9

FOR THE

NEW YORK CENTRAL SYSTEM

September 27, 1967

Reprinted January 25, 1968



) .

III

IV

Figure

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION. . . . . • . • • • . • • . . 1

[J COMPUTER SIMULATION OF TURBOTRAIN~ .

PERFORMANCE ON THE NEW YORK-BUFFALO

ROUTE ...........•.•....•.•••... 2

SOME THOUGHTS ON THE FUTURE OF RAIL

PASSENGER TRANSPORTATION . . . . . . • 4

TURBOTRAIN - NEW HOPE FOR PASSENGER

SERVICE? (~printed from Railway Age, June 19,

1967) 16

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

1 Three-Car TurboTrainQBl- TMT -3 D Specification

Sheet ..........•..••...• 6

2 Spee d Limit Chart 7

3 Simulated TurboTra~ Performance-New York Central

System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8



1. INTRODUCTION

The United Aircraft Corporation, working in close cooperation with the

NewYork Central System, has prepared a computer simulation of the performance

of a three-car TurboTrain between New York City and Buffalo. The results of

this study have shown that~gnificant reductions in travel time can be achieved by

this new gas turbine powered rail vehicle.

The outputs from this simulation, which are contained on graphical and

numerical printouts, have been summarized in Part II. A brief look at the potentialfor TurboTrain'iMloperations in the western part of the New York Central System is

included in Part1II. A reprint from Railway Age, which contains a technical

description of the United Aircraft TurboTrai~ is presented in Part IV.



n, COMPUTERSIMULATIONOF TURBOTRAIN"iM)ERFORMANCE

ONTHENEWYORK-BUFFALOROUTE

The United Aircraft Corporation has developed a computer program far

simulating the performance of railroad equipment over a specified track system.

' l " b e inputs to this program include acceleration and decelerationeharacterfstics _

for the equipment to be used, and physical propertres of the track ~y.nem,under

study (NewYork City to Buffalo).

As requested by the New York Central, this study was based on the performancecharacteristics of a three-car TurboTrain as shown in Figure 1. Track inputs

for elevation, curvature, and superelevatii% were taken from NewYork-Central

track charts and computed to the closest hundredth of a mile. Statu~onr speed

limits, such as those set by local ordinance, and station platform. tunnel, and .

bridge speeds were discussed at a meeting with representatives from the NewYork

and Eastern districts and are listed in Figure 2. Curve speeds were calculated by

1be computer on the basis of a preset safety and ride performance factor which

controlled the speed around each specified curve.

Two computer runs were made, one with stops only at Albany and Syracuse

pdhe other with the.eight stops shown in Figure 4. The results. were printed out

numerfcally and graphically and are summarized in Figures 3 and 4. The numerical

;.tathat are not included in the above figures are the follewtng:

Fuel Consumed 593 Gallons

Time at Continuous Power 2 Hours 8. 4 Minuti?J,~

Time at Idle Power 33.6 Minutes1



The mileages shown in these data are based on mileposts, some ofwhich are

less than one mile apart, thus making the simulation look longer than the actual

mileages- shown on the operating schedule. This is an error of about one-half of one

percent, however, and helps to add a little conservatism to theesttmate.

The travel times shown in Figures 3 and 4 speak for themselves in showing

the tremendous potential for passenger service on this important route. The near'"

equal distances between major cities make this an ideal place for the introduction

of shuttle service on the NewYork Central. Equipment requirementa for this

high-speed shuttle service are shown in Figure 5. These requirements are based

on a simple scheduling of round trips within the three "sub-corridors." It is

conceivable that more sophisticated scheduling could be devised to provide a

shuttle-type schedule with higher equipment utilization by having some or all of the

Q"atns actually travel the complete distance between NewYork and Buffalo. This

might result in an even smaller equipment requirement.

There is little question that with frequent departures, TurboTra~ shuttle

service would be a very competitive mode of transportation in tats area, The

comparative schedules shown in Figure 6 are indicative of the great potential

t9l" increasing rail passenger travel with this new service. To hypotheatze further,

_might even be said that the future of medium-haul intercity puhllc transportatton

_JQDgS to the railroads.

','\"

: o ; i ..



" ,..'

". .• t.

m. SOME THOUGHTS ON THE FUTURE OF RAIL PASSEN.GE~ TRAl-iSroRTATio~

The United Aircraft TurboTrai~. which will be Introduced for. passenger

service on the NewHaven Railroad eaHy in 1968, holds great. po~ntial f9r rail

passenger transportation on the New York Central System, peBi'~Q $peeilic~ly .'

to p;rOyil:lefaster schedules, and greater passenger comfort .onexiStingtrack~ys,te~,

the'TurbOTrai~ will be highly ccrnpetittve in the 100 to 4()Omile ~~. ',~,. "'/''''

This intermediate range of 100 to 400 miles for intercity trips holds the

'greatest potential for future raU passenger travel. On trips under 10.0miles, thedoer-to-door flexibUity of the automobile usually outweighs the speed advantage

of the train, even though tr-affic congestion and parldng probleraa in -the-larger

cities greatly reduce this advantage. For distances greater than 40QIriiles, the

speed and the straight line routes of the airplane more than make upfQr the ground

time requtred between airport and destination or departure point. On the other

panel, an air trip of less than 400 miles often requires more ground time than air

ti~. Thus. in the intermediate range of 100 to 400 miles, railroad travel offers'a

very reasonable and competitive alternative for intercity travel. .

The New York Central System is particularly well endowed with; large :cities

in this travel range. Because of the phenomenal airway and Mgh:wayo.ongr8tiQnin

:NewYork City, the New York-Buffalo corridor probably hol. the greatest potenttal

for high-speed rail service. However, the western part of~e system is avery

ql~~ second.

T~ere are currently 14.metr-opolftan centers in the Gre~tLa~s;""Midwest

.regton with more than half a million people each. Of these' It, 12 a;r~ servedbyWe NewYork Central, This area 15 ~ of the fastest growing~ ~e·tJ. S. ,I n,d , "?.b : y 1~80 metropolitan .populatlons will have tnereased nearly 5 0 % overthe~96p> .

census (see FigtU'e 7'). The map in FiguJ:e 8 and the estimated $C~dill~8in-" .,



Thus it seems reasonable to expect that the past imbalance in governmental

transportation policies may begin to even out, and the railroads may find it easierto compete for passenger business. Based on preliminary calculations, United

Aircraft has estimated that, with high utilization, TurboTrai~ operating costs

will be substantially lower than conventional equipment. With'1lgrowing market,

better schedules and new equipment, the NewYork Central may well look forward

to profitable passenger operations between the big cities on their many medium=

distance routes.



2

1

150

120 MPH

115 Tons

1100 Miles

1600 HP

300 KW

203' 4"

12' 11"

31"

Power-Dome Car (PDC)

Intermediate Car (Non-Powered)

Number of Seats

Top Speed

Weight (Loaded)

Fuel Range

Propulsion

4-400 HP Gas Turbines

Auxiliary Power

Principal Dimensions

Length

Width (Maximum)

Height (Over fume)

Floor Level From Rail



Grand Central Terminal To Buffalo - 437 Miles

City Mile Post Mile Post Speed Limit Remarks

Grand Central 0.74 ---- 0 station Plat forms

0.74 2.72 60 Park Avenue Tunnel

2.72 4.20 60

125th Street 4.20 ---- 0 Stop (Run 2) -4.20 10.00 60

10.00 14.50 12 0

Yonkers 14.50----

0 Stop (Run 2)14.50 . 32.68 12 0

Croton-Harmon 32.68 ---- 0 Stop (Run 2)

32.68 33.50 12 0

33.50 33.70 35 Station Platforms

33.70 43.70 120

43.70 43.70 60 Little Tunnel

43.70 44.40 120

44.40 44.45 60 Middle Tunnel44.45 45.07 12 0

45.07 45.13 60 Fort Montgomery Tunnel

45.13 50.12 120

. 50.12 50.21 60 Tunnel

50.21 142.80 120

142.80 142.94 10

Albany 142.94 ------ 0 Stop (Runs 1 & 2)

142.94 159.85 12 0

Schenectady 159.85 ----- 0 Stop (Run 2)

159.85 159.87 45

159.87 237.15 120

237.15 237.75 60



BUFFAW 151. 5 MILES SYRACUSE

.,. AVG.SPEED 101 MPH •••

1HOUR

29 MIN

(J)_ .xo• • • •e n

A'<D.. . . . •

o. . . . •O J-t\I""'t

o< :in~z

o"z= 1

'"

D~CJ>

."~o

~~lJJ>

~~

IJ)-4

II);I-l'T !

oII\.I

oo:22:mo-l

oC..;

GeT TO BUFFALO - 437 MILES

RUNNING TIME - 4 HOURS 36 MIN

DWELL TIME (2 STOPS) - 4 MIN

TOTAL TRIP TIME - 4 HOURS 40 MIN

AVG. SPEED - 94 MPH

142.6 MILES

AVG. SPEED 98 MPH

1HOUR

40 MIN

ALBANY

•142.9

MILES

AVG.

SPEED

89 MPH

•RANDCENTRAL

TERMINAL

Figure 3 SimulatedTurboTrai~ Performance-New York central System

67-21172



(f)_ .

",e nx:

'<D- -\

o'\

~v--tI. . . .• .

\1<iii

~

~cz'1III0

D~C~"4

!-4

2.(/I

-!

:: 0~-!. "0:: 00

C' )

0zZl ' I 1

C' )

-I

oC-I

~

BUFFALOROCHESTER

SYRACUSE

TRAVEL TIME 1 HR 30 MIN

DWELL TIME 1MIN

TRIP TIME 1 HR 31 MIN

GCT TO BUFFALO - 437 MILES

INTERMEDIA TE TRIP TIMES 4 HR 49 MIN

DWE LL TIME ALBANY

SYRACUSE4MIN

TOTAL TRIP TIME 4 HR 53 MIN

AVG SPEED 89 MPH

SCHENECTADY

TRAVEL TIME 1 HR 30 MI

DWELL TIME 2 MIN


TRA VEL TIME 1 HR 43 MIN

DWELL TIME 3 MIN


GRANDCENTRAL

TERMlNAL

Figure 4 SimulatedTurbOTrai~ Performance-New YorkCentral System

ALBANY

CROTON

.1HARMON

. 1 YONKERS

. 1 125th ST

67-2671



(f).x:

0')

fj)

A

'<D\

o~tl )~~g

~

~c

z= lm0

D~C~"t

iI

•t2

IJ}

-l

II~-1. "0II

0

C')

0zZmoj

oc:-I

I- "0

OOOOoa c000000> 0 LlOOOOOO 0000000

TMT 3D - 150 PASSENGERS

HOURLY

SHUTTLE TURNAROUND TURBOTRAINS,~

SERVICE STOPS TIME REQUIRED -

1. GCT - ALBANY NONE 20 MINUTES 4

2. ALBANY - SYRACUSE 2 28 MINUTES 4

3. SYRACUSE - BUFFALO 1 29 MINUTES 4

(SPARE UNITS BASED AT ALBANY & SYRACUSE) (2)

TWELVE TURBOTRAINS~ PROVIDE HOURLY DEPARTURES BETWEEN PRINCIPAL

CITIES ON NEW YORK - BUFFALO ROUTE .

EACH TRAIN MAKES 3 ROUND TRIPS PER DAY OR APPROXIMATELY 900 MILES

PER DAY.67-2,"

Figure 5 NewYork Central Shuttle Service Equipment Requirements



tJ ).-,:;

0~IJ)

. " "'<D. .. . . . •o'' ', , "C i, )~1" '+

~

:~

~CZ=lm0

D~C">"<0

!-<

2.'"~4II) , 1l

-4"ii

0X i0

o0z,Zff1

o., j

o~

I-

• . . .

"TurboTra~ NYC Rail Bus Air

"

N

E A.,

w L- B 1 Hour 2 Hours 2 Hours 45 - 60 Minutes

y A 46 Minutes 50 Minutes 40 Minutes

0 N 3 stops 3 Stops 1 stop No Stops

B y

K

S

A y

L R 1 Hour 2 Hours 3 Hours 35 - 45 Minutes

B - A 32 Minutes 33 Minutes 10 Minutes

A C 2 stops 2 Stops 2 stops No Stops

N U

Y S

E

SB

YU

RA

F 1 Hour 2 Hours 2 Hours 35 - 45 Minutes- F 31 Minutes 30 Minutes 45 Mimrtes

C -s- .

A 1 Stop 1 > Sto p 1 Stop No StopsuL

S . ! "

0 ,E

Figure 6 Comparative Transportation Schedules



(f)-.A

o. . ,(J )

~

'<D

cz:;mo

,1960 1geO 1%0 1980

- .. . . .--

Total Region 47,100 64,000

Total Metropolitan Areas= 26,937 38,387

Chicago** 6,003 8,053 Syracuse** 383 55 2

Detroit** 3.794 5,986 Flint 352 55 8

St. Louis** 1,860 2,640 Grand Rapids** 328 479

Cleveland ** 1, 840 2,577 Canton 271 408

Pittsburgh ** 1,780 2,135 Davenport- Rock Island- 255 375

Buffalo** 1,163 1,582Moline

Milwaukee 1,144 1,623Utica-Rome ** 233 282

Cincinnati ** 1,102 1,524 Peoria··229 331

Louisville ** 736 1,137 SouthBend**233 346

Indianapolis ** 694 1,024 Lansing**217 368

Columbus** 702 1,147 Fort Wayne**205 301

Rochester** 54 7 723 Erie·*18 5 259

.17 1 259Dayton** 538 908 Rockford

Akron 51 4 747 Madison16 7 293

Toledo** 482 653 Lorain- Elyria **15 2 261

Youngstown** 413 53 9 AnnArbor** 14 4 317

*As defined by Pickard, a metropolitan area contains 250,000 or more people.

**Cities Served By 'TheNewYork Central

OOURCE: Pickard, Jerome P., Metropolitanization of the United States, Research Monograph 2, Urban Land

Institute, Washington, D.C., 1959.

Figure 7 Estimated Population (Thousands) ofMetropolitan Areas in the Great Lakes-Midwest Region



(J).x0" "" t

(f)

"<D.)

(')"

W" " " h, . . ; .

Q<iii

2~CI

~"

D~C">"I,~0

g

~1>~2•f/J..oj

:u

»-I'TI

0:00

o0zZm0..oj

-nc-I

1-'.c u

- - ~ f- - - f I r - ".•/ ',I '~ ) ,

< I II I VI I

~_L __A

I~ a(~OSTON

\ ~i---1'l~UNGSTOWN '~, I 1~1s~~ • , I , ]r"-- - .P

COLUMBUS/: PITTSBURGH . \ I~~

DAYTON ) l__ __ ) 'jNEW YORK

,,'NC'NNAT' r : r/jI.J~ _-_~I J_~'\... J ' l....~~\\,-/y r J \ ~~,\I\ r-: Ij\ 1/ ~ 1

-, rJ ~~!~t/

SYRACUSE

UTICA

ALBANY

.

Figure 8 Mapof NewYork central System

67-2669



rr .U

A

o

"

r-"\',';';

."""1'~

·'·~r'

Q

<Iii;: jz

o"

". . ..

Route ::~;~\tUeage Intermediate Stops Potential Schedule

· · fo~ ~4

!.:

*New York - Albany 142.9 3 1 Hour 46 Minutes

*Albany - Syracuse 142.6 ~ 2 1 Hour 32 Minutes

*Syracuse - Buffalo 151. 5 1 1 Hour 31 Minutes

Boston - Albany 200.4 2 2 Hours 25 Minutes

Buffalo - Cleveland 185.1 1 2 Hours 15 Minutes

Buffalo - Detroit 251.7 0 3 Hours

Chicago - Detroit 283.5 2 3 Hours 25 Minutes

Chicago - Toledo 233.6 0 2 Hours 45 Minutes

Cincinnati -"Cleveland 260.0 2 3 Hours 10 Minutes;;t',r

ClevelaiiI - Toledo 106.6 0 1 Hour 15 Minutes. . .r",~1#

!" .f' -'"

*Based on computer simulation. Other estimates are based on 85 MPH average speed.

Figure 9 Potential Turbo-Trai~ Schedules



U)""') '>- •• .,.

,i- f\

j~

\,,';"\

\.f)');"

'<Cost Per Mile

Expressway (Thousands) Total Miles

Major Deegan $ 8,480 7.5

Cross-Bronx 22,450 5.0

Penn Lincoln 7,500 20.0

Boston Central 41,667 3.0

Congress Street 6,250 8.0

Schuylkill $ 4,705 17.0

SOURCE: The Metropolitan Transportation Problem by Wilfred Owen,

The Brookings Institute, Washington, D. C. 1956.

Figure 10 Examples of Expressway Costs

turbo trains for the new york central 092767

Documents