Passenger Trains > Borealis 1333 - Charger Issues

2 hour and 15 min delay out of CUS today due to engine issues with ALC42 313. P42 55 replaced it after train 332 arrived. 

BNSF 5272 from last night led 7 west again, presumably due to no spare engine available to be added for the "3 engine rule". 

What a joke. Don't they enough NPCU's to toss two on the Borealis?

Posted from Android

sethamtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 2 hour and 15 min delay out of CUS today due to
> engine issues with ALC42 313. P42 55 replaced it
> after train 332 arrived. 
>
> BNSF 5272 from last night led 7 west again,
> presumably due to no spare engine available to be
> added for the "3 engine rule". 

They could be returning BNSF 5272 to the terminal they got it from too.

Amtrak seems to be short all kinds of stuff.  I hope that doesn't lead to Amtrak telling Congress "if we could only run the long-distance trains tri-weekly, we could get the equipment issues under control".

CubsFanJohn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What a joke. Don't they enough NPCU's to toss two
> on the Borealis?
>
> Posted from Android

quess they are short on operable ones, looking at beech grove videos, many there, the ski train would ideally have one, but too short  of a supply a conductor said.

Aw give 'em a break, it's only Amtrak's 53rd 1st winter ever.

I hope Miami's snow removal budget is sufficient this year.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/25 01:41 by PumpkinHogger.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sethamtrak Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > 2 hour and 15 min delay out of CUS today due to
> > engine issues with ALC42 313. P42 55 replaced
> it
> > after train 332 arrived. 
> >
> > BNSF 5272 from last night led 7 west again,
> > presumably due to no spare engine available to
> be
> > added for the "3 engine rule". 
>
> They could be returning BNSF 5272 to the terminal
> they got it from too.

Who cares - stick the BNSF unit at the lead as it seems that the BNSF unit with Amtrak units trailing providing HEP can do the job on the Empire Builder route.........That was proven with Empire Builder #7/27 (6). See a post on stats I did. Not saying it can ALWAYS happen this way, but the train with BNSF freight leader was only 44 minutes late into Spokane and average only 45 minutes delay across its route from Chicago to Spokane. Freight units taking charge of brand new "Sieman's ALC42 junk"........ 

jp1822 Wrote:

> Who cares - stick the BNSF unit at the lead as it
> seems that the BNSF unit with Amtrak units
> trailing providing HEP can do the job on the
> Empire Builder route.........That was proven with
> Empire Builder #7/27 (6). See a post on stats I
> did. Not saying it can ALWAYS happen this way, but
> the train with BNSF freight leader was only 44
> minutes late into Spokane and average only 45
> minutes delay across its route from Chicago to
> Spokane. Freight units taking charge of brand new
> "Sieman's ALC42 junk"........ 

So then a max speed of 70 verses 79MPH doesn't make much difference ? 
VIA's procurement for a new LD fleet has separate requests for locos and cars, which means even if they go with Siemens for cars, they are not wedded to Siemens Charger shop queen junk for the 4 day trips, and likely will not. 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/25 07:54 by joemvcnj.

I agree with PHall.  Run #7 and #8 with freight power leading, Chargers trailing.  That way the new power isn't overtaxed.  Sad situation.

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PHall Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > sethamtrak Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > 2 hour and 15 min delay out of CUS today due
> to
> > > engine issues with ALC42 313. P42 55 replaced
> > it
> > > after train 332 arrived. 
> > >
> > > BNSF 5272 from last night led 7 west again,
> > > presumably due to no spare engine available
> to
> > be
> > > added for the "3 engine rule". 
> >
> > They could be returning BNSF 5272 to the
> terminal
> > they got it from too.
>
> Who cares - 

My guess, the BNSF does.  All railroads are power short these days, and even though most of it is their own fault, they probably care about their engines and location.  

There were a few people here defending the CHARGERS, while the rest of them were calling out how bad those things are.  Even AMTRAK engineers I've spoken to directly HATE them, and told me all the reasons why.  

So, there you go.  Those things ARE junk.  Just like the SD-90MAC's were, or the highly touted GenSets, or the Venture cars.....all JUNK.