Passenger Trains > Amtrak "HHP-C" (?) 9750 in Philadelphia

I have been seeing some photos across various social media platforms since last night.
An HHP-8 with pantographs removed, numbered 9750, is in the Race St/Penn Coach Yard complex in Philadelphia.
Through information I've gathered from comments, this is this unit's 4th number, and was originally HHP-8 661. It was renumbered to 90691 as part of cab car trials for the Ethan Allen Express earlier this year, and now has been renumbered yet again.
According to some comments, the new designation is HHP-C and they will enter service soon, replacing Metroliner cab cars.
Anyone have any further info?

No further info, but this had been suggested for YEARS!!!! Originally with the AEM7's. Glad the have found some use for these poor lonely HHP8's that barely operated - in general! They should work nicely as cab cars. The 1960s Metroliner cab cars are the oldest operating thing operating on Amtrak property right now, I believe. If there's a coach shortage, maybe Amtrak could just de-cab the, and stick them as tail-end passenger cars so as to gain "quick capacity" that's needed on non-NEC corridor trains......

Has Amtrak bought off the bank liens on them ? 

Here are some comments from about a year ago. https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,5574960

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No further info, but this had been suggested for
> YEARS!!!! Originally with the AEM7's. Glad the
> have found some use for these poor lonely HHP8's
> that barely operated - in general! They should
> work nicely as cab cars. The 1960s Metroliner cab
> cars are the oldest operating thing operating on
> Amtrak property right now, I believe. If there's a
> coach shortage, maybe Amtrak could just de-cab
> the, and stick them as tail-end passenger cars so
> as to gain "quick capacity" that's needed on
> non-NEC corridor trains......

No need to de-cab even - just stick them in as blind trailers. That has been done with several Keystone sets over the years where I have observed a metroliner cab car on each end of the amfleet set. Seemed to work fine.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Has Amtrak bought off the bank liens on them ? 
No clue... however the unit first appeared for cab car testing in DC as 691 nearly a year ago now, so it appears if they're still on lien the bank must be okay with it.

IMHO, the AEM7's would have worked much better as "cab cars"   16 feet shorter asnd 10 tons lighter,

pdt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> IMHO, the AEM7's would have worked much better as
> "cab cars"   16 feet shorter asnd 10 tons lighter,

But not great grade-crossing protection, if they ever run up to Boston or Springfeld. 

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pdt Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > IMHO, the AEM7's would have worked much better
> as
> > "cab cars"   16 feet shorter asnd 10
> tons lighter,
>
> But not great grade-crossing protection, if they
> ever run up to Boston or Springfeld. 

The ole Metroliner cab cars are no better......An AEM7 would likely have held up better! 

pdt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 10 tons lighter,

That was the first thing that came to my mind - why
would they want to tack on all that weight?  What's
wrong with the current cab cars?  Have they worn
out faster that the Budd cars that were not converted
to cab cars?  At least with a Metroliner cab car, you
have that added capacity, too.

/Mitch

 

Mgoldman Wrote:

> That was the first thing that came to my mind -
> why
> would they want to tack on all that weight? 
> What's
> wrong with the current cab cars?  Have they worn
> out faster that the Budd cars that were not
> converted
> to cab cars?  At least with a Metroliner cab car,
> you
> have that added capacity, too.
>

The 5 Metroliner cars that were converted to coaches for Michigan service were retired over 10 years ago. 

How much of that weight could be reduced by removing traction motors, and all the electrical equipment with copper in it?

march_hare Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How much of that weight could be reduced by
> removing traction motors, and all the electrical
> equipment with copper in it?

I would think they would have gutted the HHP8s pretty good so as to create the HHP-C????? Just like the old F40s that were made into cabbages and the like. 

jp1822 Wrote:

> The ole Metroliner cab cars are no better......An
> AEM7 would likely have held up better! 

True, but we have lost 1 or 2 Metroliner cab cars in Connecticut to grade crossing accidents. I don't know how the engineer made out. 
 

HHP-C 9751 is reported to be former Amtrak 692 built new as the 662; and then there were two-9750,9751..Photos??

Several Keystone line Amtrak trains have fun with Ann ACS64 on each end.

Putting "new" cab cars in service would help with locomotive utilization.

Posted from Android

mvrr10 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> HHP-C 9751 is reported to be former Amtrak 692
> built new as the 662; and then there were
> two-9750,9751..Photos??

Is there a date to try them out on the Springfield and Keystone line?