Passenger Trains > Amtrak's Power problems

If all the LD trains went to a tri-weekly schedule, would that take the pressure off and allow for proper maintenance? I'd rather be more assured of better performance, albeit with less train-miles per week, than the current mess. I don't where the money would come from, but another option is to rent power from the host roads and run every LD train with one unit for HEP and motive power coming from the other diesels. There is a gearing problem and many schedules with faster segments would have to be adjusted. But, to paraphrase for a 1920's book entitled, "The Run of the 20th Century Limited," stated that the Century wasn't a particularly fast train, rather a steady, consistent performer. Wouldn't that be an improvement over what we've got?

So how would you address the mismatch in gear ratios between the Amtrak power and the freight railroad power?
Using the freight railroad power limits the train to 70 MPH max.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So how would you address the mismatch in gear
> ratios between the Amtrak power and the freight
> railroad power?
> Using the freight railroad power limits the train
> to 70 MPH max.

Ampower runs just fine at 70.

My answer is to terminate Joe Boardman and find somebody who wants to operate trains OUTSIDE of the NEC. Someone who can plan, organize and direct train service throughout the country; someone who has a vision for service. Then that person will find the right people who can maintain equipment and locomotives needed for daily operations.

Graham Claytor came close to that role, but even he did not do a total overhaul of Chicago & Sunnyside. Money is NOT the issue. Leadership is the issue.

Triweekly is a nonstarter, and would absolutely obliterate the financial performances of the trains. I think the first set of engines to use would be Amtrak's B32 fleet followed by the GP38s. If more were needed, I'd think leasing P40s, F40s, F59s or GP40s (in that order) for a year or so from various commuter lines would be the next most ideal solution. Remember, The Amtrak pool has 35+ additional engines coming soon, so whatever additional engines are needed, they aren't needed long term.

MEKoch hit the nail on the head, without good leadership you're pretty much gonna get the same results like what's been goin' on now!

Personally I think tri-weekly is a bad Idea. I live in Louisville, Ky (Not served by Amtrak) so I have to go to Cincinnati or Indianapolis. Cincinnati is most convenient for me for a couple of reasons (relatives in the area.) If I plan a trip I have to work around the tri-weekly schedule. On some trips I have had to plan an extra day somewhere so that I can arrive in Chicago or Washington on the day that the Cardinal departs those cities. I have talked to people in Cincinnati and they say that the times it serves Cincinnati, 1:15AM and 3:15AM (approximately) is inconvenient but the three days a week service is what they dislike the most. I can agree with that.

Three days a week is a bummer.

John

wa4umr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Personally I think tri-weekly is a bad Idea. I
> live in Louisville, Ky (Not served by Amtrak) so I
> have to go to Cincinnati or Indianapolis.
> Cincinnati is most convenient for me for a couple
> of reasons (relatives in the area.) If I plan a
> trip I have to work around the tri-weekly
> schedule. On some trips I have had to plan an
> extra day somewhere so that I can arrive in
> Chicago or Washington on the day that the Cardinal
> departs those cities. I have talked to people in
> Cincinnati and they say that the times it serves
> Cincinnati, 1:15AM and 3:15AM (approximately) is
> inconvenient but the three days a week service is
> what they dislike the most. I can agree with
> that.
>
> Three days a week is a bummer.
>
> John

So true, triweekly is not good..stops me from taking the Cardinal at times....if it ran daily it would be used much more.

The Twentieth Century Limited was consistent, and it was fast. Sixteen hours or woe to the railroad employee who screwed up.

Amtrak lacks accountability at most levels of its operations. The 95% who try to do a good job under difficult circumstances are overwhelmed by the hard core screw ups in management and labor.

In any organization you need to reward the good guys and fond a way to improve, buy out, or throw out the others.

Posted from Android

were are the 35 extra Amtrak pool engines coming from ???

>were are the 35 extra Amtrak pool engines coming from ???

Siemens.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/15 13:15 by R30A.

R30A Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >were are the 35 extra Amtrak pool engines coming
> from ???
>
> Siemens.


Are you talking about the 35 Illinois issues an Notice of Intent to Award over a year ago? An Notice of Intent to Award means a potential vendor has been identified. A contract still needs to be awarded before the purchase can proceed. Has that contact been awarded? Last info I find is of this intent. And these 35 new Siemens locomotive will be Tier 4 and use Cummins QSK95s for power plants. The one and only freight version of that powertrain was supposed to have been in service by now on Indiana Railroad in an old SD90 platform but was just shipped partially finished to Brookville PA last month. Even if these 35 come to fruition, they would be Illinois' locomotive and may not free up a like number of Amtrak units.

scraphauler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> R30A Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > >were are the 35 extra Amtrak pool engines
> coming
> > from ???
> >
> > Siemens.
>
>
> Are you talking about the 35 Illinois issues an
> Notice of Intent to Award over a year ago? An
> Notice of Intent to Award means a potential vendor
> has been identified. A contract still needs to be
> awarded before the purchase can proceed. Has that
> contact been awarded? Last info I find is of this
> intent. And these 35 new Siemens locomotive will
> be Tier 4 and use Cummins QSK95s for power plants.
> The one and only freight version of that
> powertrain was supposed to have been in service by
> now on Indiana Railroad in an old SD90 platform
> but was just shipped partially finished to
> Brookville PA last month. Even if these 35 come
> to fruition, they would be Illinois' locomotive
> and may not free up a like number of Amtrak units.

Notice to Proceed was 3 weeks short of a year ago. They are to Illinois, California, Washington, Missouri and Michigan, for services currently operating with Amtrak locomotives. (Some of the engines in CA are California owned, so perhaps not all of the 35 engines will free existing Amtrak engines, but most will.)

Good. I had not seen where itovef forward. Have they built one yet. What is status for delivery.

Posted from iPhone

I do not believe any have been completed as of yet, but none were supposed to have.

I would generally not expect things to be on time, but the Siemens ACS64 order seems to be the only current passenger equipment either for Amtrak or for any other agency for that matter to be on time, so I remain hopeful.

I have no idea how going trip-weekly destroys the financial performance. The train doesn't cost anything when it doesn't run and it would allow more time for proper maintenance. Also, likely every train would be sold out. If we want any western long distance service, we may have to accept it with less frequency.

Ridership ends up falling more than capacity does. Furthermore, maintenance costs remain the same, Route associated costs remain the same. ETC.
It is no coincidence that Amtrak's two worst performers are its two triweekly trains. Amtrak itself states that the way they see them potentially improving their cost recovery would be to make them daily.

You can't make new daily trains when you don't have serviceable equipment to use. Today's daily trains don't seem to have the equipment to be operated in an efficient manner on a daily basis. Remember when (or hearing) that when the "Streamliners" were first put into service, they were NOT daily trains. As the equipment became available, they were made daily. Admittedly, this is not a direct comparison, but it illustrates the point that you can't run trains that you don't have [reliable] equipment to use.

glcaddis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can't make new daily trains when you don't
> have serviceable equipment to use. Today's daily
> trains don't seem to have the equipment to be
> operated in an efficient manner on a daily basis.
> Remember when (or hearing) that when the
> "Streamliners" were first put into service, they
> were NOT daily trains. As the equipment became
> available, they were made daily. Admittedly, this
> is not a direct comparison, but it illustrates the
> point that you can't run trains that you don't
> have equipment to use.

I sure hope Amtrak puts the sixth train set it cobbled together for the Empire Builder - amazingly enough - when the time comes to "release it." Course power is now a problem.