Passenger Trains > Texas Eagle runs out of fuel, arrives Chicago 4'41" Late

Train 22 (17) ran out of fuel near San Marcos Texas and encountered a 6 hour delay. The engine was refueled and arrived in Chicago 2/18 a mere 4'41" late.

I live in South Austin, TX, just north of San Marcos.
This is completely un called for.  Before departing San Antonio, that is one of the first thing of many that the crew should check.
I don't think it is that hard.
Interesting to run our of fuel a short distance from your starting/departure location, probably 45 to 50 miles if that.

Pat
South Austin, TX

something like this should be totally avoidable, shouldn't it?

​There must be more to the story.  Nobody could be this stupid.

sptno Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I live in South Austin, TX, just north of San
> Marcos.
> This is completely un called for.  Before
> departing San Antonio, that is one of the first
> thing of many that the crew should check.
> I don't think it is that hard.
> Interesting to run our of fuel a short distance
> from your starting/departure location, probably 45
> to 50 miles if that.
>
> Pat
> South Austin, TX

Easy turbo. There are plenty of unreliable locomotive fuel gauge sensors out there including in the main engine compartments themselves. Don't be so quick to blame the crew(s).

Posted from iPhone

       People run out of fuel in their cars every day and there doesn't seem to be a large coalition of people that want to whack them with a stick. Before you decide to jump the crew so harshly maybe you should find out why they ran out of fuel. And the 'crew' is NOT the gentlemen that fuel or don't fuel the power.

Even if the gauges were bad, shouldn't the loco be filled up at point of origin?  Did anyone think to check that the fuel truck showed up. Sure motorists run out of fuel all the time. They are equally as stupid. I've been driving for 60 years and it has yet to happen to me. Nothing less than a full refund to the unfortunate "never agains" should be acceptable. 

Can you confirm that there was no fuel aboard the engine? 6 hours to refuel ?

There's some bogus info here.  22(17) ran fine up to somewhere like Hope, Arkansas. There it 
took a big delay. 4 hrs 41" late into CHI.

Today's 22 (19) was reported to have a fuel problem in South Texas, but the delay was something 
like 1 hr 45min .



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/17 10:59 by The_Chief_Way.

"Ran out of fuel" was from an official Amtrak source.  But so close to initial terminal?

Where is the accountability?  I know, a fish rots from the head, and that head has been gone for a few months, so maybe the non-rot has yet to trickle down.  Eight years of poor leadership can leave a long-lasting legacy.  

We can still hope...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/17 12:14 by GenePoon.

This is unacceptable, and naturally there are people on here trying to defend Amtrak. This is 100% Amtrak's fault, be it mechanical or the engineer/conductor. All the passenger knows is that they ran out of fuel just outside the starting point, likely resulting in never agains. 

Actually last time I checked the Eagle isn't fueled in San Antonio (Unless under extreme circumstances). The Sunset is fueled at the Kirby fueling pads on the main Sunset line about 8 miles east of the depot. There isn't a fuel truck that shows up to fuel it at the depot, it's fueled in Ft. Worth on the way south as #21 and then refueled when headed north as #22. It sounds like there was a bad fuel sensor and not enough was put on at Ft. Worth.

I have haerd of freight trains running out of fuel (or almost), but when it happens to Amtrak it is hard to hide.

I guess there could be many factors, including inaccurate fuel gauges. About 3 years ago, a local freight working in my area almost succumbed to it. Two units, the second had run out of fuel and shut down. They noticed something was amiss when they were switching and were unsuccessful at pulling a heavy cut of cars. That's when they fould the second unit had completely run out of fuel and they soon found that the lead unit was critically low. They had to drop what they were doing and make an immediate break the 10 or so miles back to the yard. No trains were delayed, other than the switching having to be put off, so it was not big news. I heard a bit later that the very experienced engineer was very embarrased by the incident as it had never happened to him before. I have photos of the train making a run for it, but never had a desire to make light of the incident.

Gary



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/17 13:13 by SN711.

On one of the previous threads about Amtrak running out of fuel near the initial starting point, the concern was raised that the sight gauges are often useless. The engineer has no way of determining whether the locomotive has enough, or any, fuel.  It's not a new problem, it's been that way forever.

On those threads, it also came out there's no "fuel ticket" given to the engineer.  On a commercial or military plane, the pilot is given a fuel ticket indicating the fuel pumped, so she can complete her weight and balance.  There's apparently no similar process at Amtrak to give the engineer a ticket certifying that I, Fred, pumped 2000 gallons of diesel into P40 813, and 1700 gallons into P40 830. Fill in the fuel contractor for an en route topping off.

For private pilots, you can watch the truck pump Jet-A 100LL etc into your plane. You sign the ticket, and get a copy. Then, you climb up and use your turkey baster to verify the fuel level in your tanks., absence of water, etc.

Maybe a dipstick should be included in the grip of each engineer, and a visual reading made before setting off?

Except apparently Amtrak is 'that stupid'.  What a sorry excuse for a passenger railroad.

ronald321 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> something like this should be totally avoidable,
> shouldn't it?
>
> ​There must be more to the story.  Nobody could
> be this stupid.

Could the tank or a hose have been leaking fuel ?

Not if the engineer or mechanical signed the card on the locomotive in San Antonio.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Could the tank or a hose have been leaking fuel ?

Posted from Android

p40s and 42s have a digital readout outside by the tank and inside on the computer screen  right in front of the engineer.. but did thay work right and give the right reading. ???

I have been wondering for a long time why diesel
locomotives have no fuel gauges in their cabs.  That
never made sense to me.  I, too, was wondering why
some sort of dipstick couldn't be used.  And why on
earth isn't some sort of paperwork required before any
Amtrak train is allowed to leave its origin, or any place
where they normally take on fuel?  Preventing a train
from running out of fuel should be very easy.  The fact
that it is not is very sad, and the fact that locomoptive
fuel gauges are too often unreliable is completley
unacceptable.  Again -- it should not be beyond our 
current technology to make very reliable fuel gauges
for diesel locomotives.  And why not have dipsticks for
double-checking when needed?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/17 23:57 by Margaret_SP_fan.

dcfbalcoS1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>        People run out of fuel in their cars
> every day and there doesn't seem to be a large
> coalition of people that want to whack them with a
> stick. Before you decide to jump the crew so
> harshly maybe you should find out why they ran out
> of fuel. And the 'crew' is NOT the gentlemen that
> fuel or don't fuel the power.


Last time I checked, I nor anyone else is paying hundreds of dollars to get somewhere in my car. So if i run out of gas, I inconvenience myself, nobody else.

Posted from Android

PacNWZ12 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sptno Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I live in South Austin, TX, just north of San
> > Marcos.
> > This is completely un called for.  Before
> > departing San Antonio, that is one of the first
> > thing of many that the crew should check.
> > I don't think it is that hard.
> > Interesting to run our of fuel a short distance
> > from your starting/departure location, probably
> 45
> > to 50 miles if that.
> >
> > Pat
> > South Austin, TX
>
> Easy turbo. There are plenty of unreliable
> locomotive fuel gauge sensors out there including
> in the main engine compartments themselves. Don't
> be so quick to blame the crew(s).
>
> Posted from iPhone

I'm not a trainman, but for three years I was the Engineer Officer of two diesel-electric submarines. I know my stuff about the care and feeding of diesel engines.

I surmise that when the northbound Texas Eagle departs San Antonio it has its own power, that is, NOT power that's been switched from the eastbound Sunset Limited.

If that's the case, it's unconscionable that this train could've departed when it was almost running on fumes.

Unreliable gauges shouldn't be tolerated. They should be fixed or replaced.  "State of Good Repair," huh?

Isn't there a glass sight gauge and/or a dip stick as a back up?  Isn't there a fueling record kept? Every fueling should be recorded -- when, where, and how much? 

None of this is complicated or hard to do.

Fritz in HSV, AL

P.S.  The passengers must've been positively THRILLED when they learned why they were stopped.

navy5717th Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PacNWZ12 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > sptno Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I live in South Austin, TX, just north of San
> > > Marcos.
> > > This is completely un called for.  Before
> > > departing San Antonio, that is one of the
> first
> > > thing of many that the crew should check.
> > > I don't think it is that hard.
> > > Interesting to run our of fuel a short
> distance
> > > from your starting/departure location,
> probably
> > 45
> > > to 50 miles if that.
> > >
> > > Pat
> > > South Austin, TX
> >
> > Easy turbo. There are plenty of unreliable
> > locomotive fuel gauge sensors out there
> including
> > in the main engine compartments themselves.
> Don't
> > be so quick to blame the crew(s).
> >
> > Posted from iPhone
>
> I'm not a trainman, but for three years I was the
> Engineer Officer of two diesel-electric
> submarines. I know my stuff about the care and
> feeding of diesel engines.

Fritz, I bet you never ran out of fuel!

I was in Naval Aviation (for those who don't know the U.S. Navy has airplanes, lot's of them). Funny thing is in all the years I was flying we never ran out of gas (good thing). Perhaps Amtrak should check with the Navy to learn how to not run out of fuel?
   

Ret. Navy Chief Bob Jensen
Manteno, IL