Home Open Account Help 429 users online

Passenger Trains > 391 - Charger Failure


Date: 07/30/25 17:00
391 - Charger Failure
Author: sethamtrak

Another charger died on 391 near Champaign. Buses called to take passengers the rest of the way. And buses for 392 in it's entirety. A CN GEVO picked up the train in Champaign and towed it back to 14th street. Screenshot from the Mt Carmel High School railcam. 




Date: 07/30/25 19:42
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: MacBeau

Can someone explain why Amtrak has so many Charger failures and Brightline does not?
—Mac



Date: 07/30/25 20:03
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: Mike6640-2

Because brightline is following the Siemens maintenance 
 and repair procedures, with mechanics trained by Siemens
 and their recommended spare parts on hand at their maintenace facilities.

 Amtrak is not following that.



Date: 07/30/25 23:29
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: mp51w

So Illinois got wise to Amtrak's overcharges for equipment, and went out to buy their own.
Now, they don't want to pay for the Siemens maintenance program for what they purchased?
They're probably back to square one on what it's costing the State to run the service!
Their reputation with the public is going to take a hit with running all these substitute busses!



Date: 07/31/25 02:24
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: coach

 A Crapper engine craps out again.

These engines sure seem to need very frequent maintenace.  An AMTRAK engineer mentioned to me how "these units are ALWAYS failing..this part, then that part, then this, then that...it's endless."  Those were his words.



Date: 07/31/25 03:07
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: DutchDragon

MacBeau Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can someone explain why Amtrak has so many Charger
> failures and Brightline does not?
> —Mac

It's magic.



Date: 07/31/25 03:10
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: joemvcnj

1) BL locos have slower RPM

2) 2 units for a 5 lightweight cars (not very "green", is it)

3) Nightly maintenance for the shop queens. Imagine checking you car engine for fluids every night to see what it drank.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/31/25 04:28 by joemvcnj.



Date: 07/31/25 03:52
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: Englewood

Another reason for a Congressional Hearing.
Why after the performance of the state owned Chargers were long distance versions ordered?
Remember their stellar inaugural performance on the Empire Builder where they couldn't even get out of Chicago?
I am sure NARP could provide congress with all the questions to ask.

Is it gross incompetence at amtrak, supplier negligence, the procurement process, government over-regulation
of the locomotive business, other, all of the above?


Let's get to the bottom of this.
 



Date: 07/31/25 04:27
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: jp1822

And train #391 is running around with a Superliner Diner in its consist for axle count. UGH!



Date: 07/31/25 06:01
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: Typhoon

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 1) BL locos have slower RPM

Maybe that is something Amtrak should look into.  


> 2) 2 units for a 5 lightweight cars (not very
> "green", is it)

Ok, so similar conditions to Amtraks Michigan Service.  Do you also criticize the "greenness" of that?   Seems like a strange stance for an "advocate".  


> 3) Nightly maintenance for the shop queens.
> Imagine checking you car engine for fluids every
> night to see what it drank.

Apples to oranges 



Date: 07/31/25 07:31
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: M-636

BL locos not only have a lower RPM, they have a lower HP rating. They are also operated in pairs, so if one goes down, the other is still working.

Siemens provides 100% of the maintenance for the BL equipment, with partner contracts in place with Cummins.

Illinois and Washington have TSSSA agreements with Siemens, but the weak link is still the poor Siemens supply chain and Amtrak doing the work. Although Seattle does a much better job then Chicago.



Date: 07/31/25 07:40
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: ts1457

M-636 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BL locos not only have a lower RPM, they have a
> lower HP rating. They are also operated in pairs,
> so if one goes down, the other is still working.
>
> Siemens provides 100% of the maintenance for the
> BL equipment, with partner contracts in place with
> Cummins.
>
> Illinois and Washington have TSSSA agreements with
> Siemens, but the weak link is still the poor
> Siemens supply chain and Amtrak doing the work.
> Although Seattle does a much better job then
> Chicago.

Definitely something that rational people would not recommend for a type of locomotive to power a two-night LDT.



Date: 07/31/25 09:32
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: AmtrakMidwest

M-636 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BL locos not only have a lower RPM, they have a
> lower HP rating. They are also operated in pairs,
> so if one goes down, the other is still working.
>
> Siemens provides 100% of the maintenance for the
> BL equipment, with partner contracts in place with
> Cummins.
>
> Illinois and Washington have TSSSA agreements with
> Siemens, but the weak link is still the poor
> Siemens supply chain and Amtrak doing the work.
> Although Seattle does a much better job then
> Chicago.

Since when does Illinois have an agreement? I know they were working towards one recently but there hasn’t been much word on the progress.



Date: 07/31/25 10:13
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: M-636

That I can not answer. The people that I worked with from the Midwest States have either moved on to greener pastures or retired. I do know the Midwest and Cascades are covered by a TSSSA, but the California fleet is not currently covered. Personally I can see no advantage to the TSSSA model unless the manufacturer is performing the work since they then have an incentive to perform, where as at Amtrak it is just another revenue stream with no accountability or tracibility.



Date: 07/31/25 11:07
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: Englewood

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And train #391 is running around with a Superliner
> Diner in its consist for axle count. UGH!

If the entire superliner fleet were reduced by corrosion problems and derailments
to only 10 cars, those 10 cars would be on the Carbondale trains.

Reason for yet another Congressional investigation !  I think I am up to three now!
Can we get Mayor Pete into congress in 2026 ???



Date: 07/31/25 15:11
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: 5150

Englewood Wrote:
> Reason for yet another Congressional investigation
> !  I think I am up to three now!
> Can we get Mayor Pete into congress in 2026 ???

Sure, he's qualified to give TV interviews and talk down to the middle class american....that's about it.
All trains delayed to lenghty pothole repairs....



Date: 08/01/25 17:30
Re: 391 - Charger Failure
Author: KurtBWNews

I'm starting to become really, really tired of stories like these.

IMO, too much emotion-driven management, not enough logic-driven management at Amtrak.

This stuff is not as difficult as apologists make it out to be.  Observe the problem(s), then make relentless application of logic until "good things happen."

If TPTB say, "We need more money", fine.  But first -- show us what you've done with the resources already at your disposal.  If they are incompetent rubes, fire until trains run on time.  I daresay TO posters would do a better job than the current bunch.  It would make for interesting times, that's for certain.



[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.0544 seconds