Passenger Trains > 20 and 1/2 hour late 8

The 20 and 1/2 hour late 8 departing Glenview. BNSF 5304 assisting the train since the 314 is non-functional. 

---

You must be a registered subscriber to watch videos. Join Today!

sethamtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The 20 and 1/2 hour late 8 departing Glenview.
> BNSF 5304 assisting the train since the 314 is
> non-functional. 

While not a good day for Siemens it should be noted 5204 replaced another BNSF engine that crapped out. So 314 wasn’t the only engine that had problems on this trip.

Pathetic. Getting to be routine. d

Amtrak pulled it off! Empire Builder #8 arrived at 1:09 p.m., 20:24 late #7 left right on time 1:56 later at 3:05 p.m. Turnaround in under 2 hours.

I'd be surprised if Amtrak turned this equipment that fast. I'm thinking Amtrak pulled together a makeup consist, but I'd love to hear either confirmed. Glad that #7/27 of 11/24 got out on time!!!!

Amtrak had an entire make-up consist ready to go off the yard. Did not look like they used 29 or 59. They must've had a lot of spare cars at the ready. 

7 had the 304 and 186 for power. 

It takes time for a new fleet of locomotives to break in. That is why they are under a service contract with Siemens for the first few years. I often get the feeling that this board is cheering whenever these things have issues. It seems that the Genesis only became a perfect locomotive upon the introduction of the Charger.

sethamtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Amtrak had an entire make-up consist ready to go
> off the yard. Did not look like they used 29 or
> 59. They must've had a lot of spare cars at the
> ready. 
>
> 7 had the 304 and 186 for power. 

That's good to hear that Chicago was able to do a makeup consist, as this could have gotten ugly again for #7/27 of 11/24. They must have hired back some folks that used to work at Amtrak, or read an old manual. Yes a compliment for Amtrak. Good to see this worked out, as it should have with Chicago as a major hub for the LD train sets.   

Paniolo_man Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It takes time for a new fleet of locomotives to
> break in. That is why they are under a service
> contract with Siemens for the first few years. I
> often get the feeling that this board is cheering
> whenever these things have issues. It seems that
> the Genesis only became a perfect locomotive upon
> the introduction of the Charger.

I agree that it's going to take time to break-in the new locomotives. After all, there's not a regular and ongoing line of passenger rail locomotives being produced in the United States. But I do NOT think the service contract between Siemens's and Amtrak is strong enough to deal with new equipment onboarding problems. This goes for the ALC42 locomotives and equipment that Siemen's is providing to Amtrak.......

I'm the last one that will be cheering about ALC42 or Charger issues. Amtrak has these units on trains I use, so it'd be nice to have reliability. VIA Rail rebuilt their F40 locomotives from bottom to top, putting in a lot of modifications along the way. Slice it as one wants, but they seemed to have done this rehab and rebuild upon a fleet of locomotives that had a proven track record. This is the only thing that weights in my mind about Amtrak locomotives. I do think the ALC42s are getting broke in. In matter of fact, I don't think there's been any major breakdowns with the ALC42 units in the last few months on the LD train sets they've been assigned to. Gladly will standard corrected. At the same token - there was a P42 in tow in this consist that was over 20 hours late. Could Amtrak (with the help as needed from BNSF crews etc.) not switch the P42 to the lead? Shouldn't that be able to happen? The ALC 42 broken down in eastern Montana / western North Dakota - east of the mountain terrain. It couldn't have travelled easterly with this relatively flat terrain even with a single locomotive? It's a 9 car consist not including the baggage car, which is largely empty anyway. I realize two operating units is better than one, just a question, not trying to be sarcastic or negative.....

Am reminded of when a westbound F40 VIA Rail locomotive broke down about an hour after leaving Sioux Lookout. The dead F40 (which was at the lead) was dumped at a siding and the train continued on to Winnipeg with just one unit and about 14 cars in tow, including the baggage car, which was pretty full. We were supposed to travel at reduced speeds - no faster than 55 mph or so - but instead we largely kept up to track speed.... A second (replacement) unit was serviced and added at Winnipeg to continue our trip west. Nearly a six hour delay all in after arriving in Winnipeg, but half of the delay was made-up by Jasper, and we ended up arriving about an hour early into Vancouver. This was the pre-2010 Canadian schedule and times.

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> I do think the ALC42s are
> getting broke in. In matter of fact, I don't think
> there's been any major breakdowns with the ALC42
> units in the last few months on the LD train sets
> they've been assigned to. Gladly will standard
> corrected. 


This is the 3rd ALC breakdown this week. 314 broke down on this 8 in the video. Not sure what killed it but 314 is one of the freshest chargers out of acceptance. 

Friday's 7 out of Chicago was a late departure on account of one of three chargers dying in the yard just before boarding time. That would've been the first live ALC42 trio.

304 had issues a week or two ago when it was eastbound on 8 and in that case the P42 actually did push the train to Chicago. I guess they didn't want to play that game again with an already 12 hour late train at that point and just called their friends at BNSF. 
 

I think each inbound LD train, arrives about close to the time.
When the outbound LD train departs Chicago.
I don't think they have enough time. to serve the equipment.
And turn it around in time. For an on time departure 

Jerry Martin
Los Angeles, CA
Central Coast Railroad Festival

jp1822 Wrote:
> Could Amtrak (with the help as needed from BNSF
> crews etc.) not switch the P42 to the lead?
> Shouldn't that be able to happen? 

I think they have to have a passenger locomotive next to the passenger coaches in order to have HEP available.  Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the freight locomotives have a way to pass that power through to the passenger cars.  

John

 

wa4umr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jp1822 Wrote:
> > Could Amtrak (with the help as needed from BNSF
> > crews etc.) not switch the P42 to the lead?
> > Shouldn't that be able to happen? 
>
> I think they have to have a passenger locomotive
> next to the passenger coaches in order to have HEP
> available.  Someone can correct me if I'm wrong,
> but I don't think the freight locomotives have a
> way to pass that power through to the passenger
> cars.  
>
> John
>
Not exactly what I was going for....Yes, passenger locomotive has to be next to the passenger cars in order to have HEP. There's no pass-through on freight loco. In the example I gave VIA Rail had two units in the lead. They ditched the broken unit a siding and continued on with just ONE locomotive to Winnipeg, about a six hour trek from where the broken unit was eventually ditched. If the lead ALC42 broke down, what prevents Amtrak from not swapping the P42 to the lead? From North Dakota to Chicago, it's pretty flat. I realize not ideal, but if Amtrak had to - what's preventing the 9 car train from travelling from say Minot to Chicago with just one operable unit - or at least till it can "hook-up" with a freight locomotive. Just curious. Just questions. If they are heading over a mountain pass or inclined grades, yes, I get it - need two locomotives. But it's not like Amtrak hasn't dabbled with one locomotive leading a LD train set. I am sure the host railroad is none to pleased. Once a freight locomotive is added to provide primary motive power, it's got to be in the lead. 

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wa4umr Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > jp1822 Wrote:
> > > Could Amtrak (with the help as needed from
> BNSF
> > > crews etc.) not switch the P42 to the lead?
> > > Shouldn't that be able to happen? 
> >
> > I think they have to have a passenger
> locomotive
> > next to the passenger coaches in order to have
> HEP
> > available.  Someone can correct me if I'm
> wrong,
> > but I don't think the freight locomotives have
> a
> > way to pass that power through to the passenger
> > cars.  
> >
> > John
> >
> Not exactly what I was going for....Yes, passenger
> locomotive has to be next to the passenger cars in
> order to have HEP. There's no pass-through on
> freight loco. In the example I gave VIA Rail had
> two units in the lead. They ditched the broken
> unit a siding and continued on with just ONE
> locomotive to Winnipeg, about a six hour trek from
> where the broken unit was eventually ditched. If
> the lead ALC42 broke down, what prevents Amtrak
> from not swapping the P42 to the lead? From North
> Dakota to Chicago, it's pretty flat. I realize not
> ideal, but if Amtrak had to - what's preventing
> the 9 car train from travelling from say Minot to
> Chicago with just one operable unit - or at least
> till it can "hook-up" with a freight locomotive.
> Just curious. Just questions. If they are heading
> over a mountain pass or inclined grades, yes, I
> get it - need two locomotives. But it's not like
> Amtrak hasn't dabbled with one locomotive leading
> a LD train set. I am sure the host railroad is
> none to pleased. Once a freight locomotive is
> added to provide primary motive power, it's got to
> be in the lead. 

I doubt Amtrak wants to take the risk of running Minot to Chicago on a single unit. 

sethamtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jp1822 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > wa4umr Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > jp1822 Wrote:
> > > > Could Amtrak (with the help as needed from
> > BNSF
> > > > crews etc.) not switch the P42 to the lead?
> > > > Shouldn't that be able to happen? 
> > >
> > > I think they have to have a passenger
> > locomotive
> > > next to the passenger coaches in order to
> have
> > HEP
> > > available.  Someone can correct me if I'm
> > wrong,
> > > but I don't think the freight locomotives
> have
> > a
> > > way to pass that power through to the
> passenger
> > > cars.  
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > Not exactly what I was going for....Yes,
> passenger
> > locomotive has to be next to the passenger cars
> in
> > order to have HEP. There's no pass-through on
> > freight loco. In the example I gave VIA Rail
> had
> > two units in the lead. They ditched the broken
> > unit a siding and continued on with just ONE
> > locomotive to Winnipeg, about a six hour trek
> from
> > where the broken unit was eventually ditched.
> If
> > the lead ALC42 broke down, what prevents Amtrak
> > from not swapping the P42 to the lead? From
> North
> > Dakota to Chicago, it's pretty flat. I realize
> not
> > ideal, but if Amtrak had to - what's preventing
> > the 9 car train from travelling from say Minot
> to
> > Chicago with just one operable unit - or at
> least
> > till it can "hook-up" with a freight
> locomotive.
> > Just curious. Just questions. If they are
> heading
> > over a mountain pass or inclined grades, yes, I
> > get it - need two locomotives. But it's not
> like
> > Amtrak hasn't dabbled with one locomotive
> leading
> > a LD train set. I am sure the host railroad is
> > none to pleased. Once a freight locomotive is
> > added to provide primary motive power, it's got
> to
> > be in the lead. 
>
> I doubt Amtrak wants to take the risk of running
> Minot to Chicago on a single unit. 

Pretty sure I said as much, that it is not the preferred........

Are the causes of the failures on the Siemens ALC-42's public knowledge?  Could the problems be fixed en route if Siemens technicians were on board?  I know in one case with complex instrumentation, the manufacturer had to have a service engineer in the lab for a week or so to fix the problems as they came up when the instrument was operated.

John
 

The locomotive directly connected to the passenger cars doesn't have to be running, they deliver the chargers behind the lead locomotives.

Posted from Android

sethamtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I doubt Amtrak wants to take the risk of running
> Minot to Chicago on a single unit. 

More like BNSF does not want to run the risk.
 

think passengers were givin a bus option in the twin cities, wonder if everyone evacuated? or the % that stayed if given a choice?

7 & 8 run from Seattle to Spokane over Stevens Pass all Summer with a single locomotive.
27 & 28 run from Portland to Spokane all Summer also with a single locomotive.

Stevens Pass is much more remote and forbidding territory than Minot-Chicago.



sethamtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jp1822 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > wa4umr Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > jp1822 Wrote:
> > > > Could Amtrak (with the help as needed from
> > BNSF
> > > > crews etc.) not switch the P42 to the lead?
> > > > Shouldn't that be able to happen? 
> > >
> > > I think they have to have a passenger
> > locomotive
> > > next to the passenger coaches in order to
> have
> > HEP
> > > available.  Someone can correct me if I'm
> > wrong,
> > > but I don't think the freight locomotives
> have
> > a
> > > way to pass that power through to the
> passenger
> > > cars.  
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > Not exactly what I was going for....Yes,
> passenger
> > locomotive has to be next to the passenger cars
> in
> > order to have HEP. There's no pass-through on
> > freight loco. In the example I gave VIA Rail
> had
> > two units in the lead. They ditched the broken
> > unit a siding and continued on with just ONE
> > locomotive to Winnipeg, about a six hour trek
> from
> > where the broken unit was eventually ditched.
> If
> > the lead ALC42 broke down, what prevents Amtrak
> > from not swapping the P42 to the lead? From
> North
> > Dakota to Chicago, it's pretty flat. I realize
> not
> > ideal, but if Amtrak had to - what's preventing
> > the 9 car train from travelling from say Minot
> to
> > Chicago with just one operable unit - or at
> least
> > till it can "hook-up" with a freight
> locomotive.
> > Just curious. Just questions. If they are
> heading
> > over a mountain pass or inclined grades, yes, I
> > get it - need two locomotives. But it's not
> like
> > Amtrak hasn't dabbled with one locomotive
> leading
> > a LD train set. I am sure the host railroad is
> > none to pleased. Once a freight locomotive is
> > added to provide primary motive power, it's got
> to
> > be in the lead. 
>
> I doubt Amtrak wants to take the risk of running
> Minot to Chicago on a single unit.