| Home | Open Account | Help | 323 users online |
|
Member Login
Discussion
Media SharingHostingLibrarySite Info |
Passenger Trains > #4(21) ?Date: 03/22/17 16:40 #4(21) ? Author: WichitaJct Anyone know why #4 is estimated 4+ hours late into La Junta? Thanks for your help
Date: 03/22/17 16:44 Re: #4(21) ? Author: CarolVoss Have a railfan friend on board and apparently there was track work delays and during the night a BNSF engine was put on the point for some reason, slowing them to 60 mph.
C Carol Voss Bakersfield, CA Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/22/17 18:17 by CarolVoss. Date: 03/22/17 17:58 Re: #4(21) ? Author: The_Chief_Way That's correct. A BNSF unit was required and added at Winslow, we think. Unfortunately, the overspeed
trips at 60 mph and apparently can't be fixed. Current plan is for the freight unit to be removed at LaJunta tonight for the downhill run to Chicago. Hopefuly then it can at least make running time. Date: 03/23/17 03:01 Re: #4(21) ? Author: andersonb109 Instead of the multitude of daily "late" reports, perhaps someone in the know should start an "Amtrak engine craps out" daily report if such information is available.
Date: 03/23/17 07:29 Re: #4(21) ? Author: 1976 The_Chief_Way Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > Current plan is for the freight unit to be removed > at LaJunta tonight > for the downhill run to Chicago. Hopefuly then > it can at least make running time. Great call. Instead of nearly breaking even, the train has lost 2 more hours as a result of that decision. Date: 03/23/17 07:57 Re: #4(21) ? Author: The_Chief_Way Yeppers. The 60mph isue must have been corrected as it was making 70 west of La Junta. Of course you're right about the delay
at La Junta. Should have left the freight motor on and been grateful for 70mph. Change crews and go. Date: 03/23/17 08:00 Re: #4(21) ? Author: 1976 The_Chief_Way Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > Yeppers. The 60mph isue must have been corrected > as it was making 70 west of La Junta. Of course > you're right about the delay > at La Junta. Should have left the freight motor on > and been grateful for 70mph. Change crews and > go. The 60 mph issue was corrected near Winslow. Date: 03/23/17 10:59 Re: #4(21) ? Author: GenePoon The suspected SOGR unit was the AMTK 2. It quit loading; Mechanical contractors enroute got multiple issues patched up.
BNSF provided their 4641 in response to Amtrak's call for help. Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/17 11:03 by GenePoon. Date: 03/23/17 12:19 Re: #4(21) ? Author: drgwmp344 According to Track A Train, Amtk #4 just left Topeka a few minutes ago and is currently running 77 mph toward KCUS.
Date: 03/23/17 14:34 Re: #4(21) ? Author: 1976 Interesting that the train now shows arriving and departing La Junta on time, the place where another poster says the BNSF locomotive was removed. Maybe they're watching and are hiding the delay of removing it (Mutley laugh).
Date: 03/23/17 16:43 Re: #4(21) ? Author: The_Chief_Way Somebody's having fun with us.
Meanwhile, WTF happened to today's train in Northern New Mexico? Date: 03/23/17 18:08 Re: #4(21) ? Author: 1976 The_Chief_Way Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > Somebody's having fun with us. > > Meanwhile, WTF happened to today's train in > Northern New Mexico? There is currently a storm moving through the Southwest so it's a good bet that weather is becoming an issue. Both trains are having a rough time today. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/17 18:08 by 1976. |