I rode it. I recommend it. Just about everything about it is well done.
It fit into our wacky Atlanta - NJ - FL - Atlanta vacation plans, saving a vacation day that would have been just one long day of driving and made a family adventure out of it - my teenagers had never ridden in sleeper before.
You drive up, check in at the gate and pull up under a canopy and hand your car over to Amtrak's staff. You check in in the station, get you dinner seating and then have seat. Station is very nice and has free Wifi. The latest you can arrive at the gate is 3PM. The train departs at 4PM.
You board the train about an hour before departure and get free wine and cheese in the lounge car. The train departed a bit early and slowly accelerated up to 70 mph. Two P42s pulling 40-some cars works out to about 2 HP/ton. so this beast acts more like an intermodal train than a passenger train.
CSX's RF&P is in very nice shape. Silk smooth even cruising around curves slightly under-balanced. The rest of CSX's I-95 corridor is not quite so good -although some Auto Train veterans I spoke to said it was worse several years ago. Except for waiting in Richmond for some northbounds, it was pretty much smooth, steady sailing all the way. I don't remember ever being stopped after that (although I was asleep for a good bit of it). We arrived about 45 minutes early at 8:45 and had our car and were on our way by 10AM.
The whole business of loading and unloading and building and spotting the trains was done efficiently. The staff at the terminals and on the train were courteous and efficient, at a minimum. Most also seemed genuinely friendly. The dinner very good. The food was only OK, but I have no idea how much wine I drank, because they never let my glass get below 1/2 full!
The Superliner sleepers seemed in pretty good shape, the ride was well controlled and quiet with no "flat wheel" sounds. The train handling was very good. Never felt a bump or a lurch from the slack.
The only only glitch was the sound on the lounge car video system didn't work. It failed on the trip up and they couldn't get it going during the Lorton layover. They apologized and still put out the cookies for snack. The movie was "Never Say Never". If you are my age, you are thinking "James Bond" - not much audio needed. But, if your are a teen, you'd know this is the Justin Bieber movie (don't ask....). Turns out, not much audio desired!
It's easy to see why this train does reasonably well financially. Equipment and crew utilization is pretty high. The train moves a small mountain of passengers and their cars with only two locomotives and only makes one crew change on the 866 mile trip.
I would not hesitate to use it again if it fit my travel plans even remotely
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Not saying that every passenger train needs to be that underpowered, but there is something to be said about economy-of-scale in running a train that long. I understand that Canada has that one remaining trans-Canadian passenger train, and they also run a very long consist and also emphasize quality-of-service over price.
So how does the Auto Train get away with a pair of P42's on a 40+ car consist? I guess they do without intermediate stops (the automobiles that bring passengers to the Auto Train perform that function), but do the other Amtrak trains were they run two P42's on as little as 8 cars have much more demanding schedules? Or do the Western trains need more power because of mountains and Auto Train is pretty much a water-level route?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
I would think that the lack of grades and intermediate stops would be the main reason for the relative lack of power compared to the other longhaul trains. The schedule isn't that slow but there is less need for rapid acceleration from stops.
I think the lack of grades has a lot to do with it. Amtrak tried running the "Silver" LD trains on the same route with one unit and about a dozen cars a couple years ago. For some reason, they stopped doing it. Heard a rumor that CSX balked over concern about schedule keeping. Might have been one of those "get off my back" kind of things. Can't believe a second unit on a 12 car train would make all that much difference.
Is it a "one locomotive unit on a train risks a road failure and blocking the line" kind of concern?
Paul Milenkovic Is it a "one locomotive unit on a train risks a road failure and blocking the line" kind of concern?
But, if the right guy on RR gets it in his head that that's the reason, well, then it is!
On the subject of long trains and power-Early in May I came out of St Louis on the Texas Eagle at the time when the train was not operating south of St Louis due to flooding. Amtrak had wound up with two train sets in St Louis that they decided to move back to Chicago. I didn't get an actual count, but we had either either 14 or 16 cars (two baggage and the rest Super Liners) pulled by a single P42. Due to track work on the regular route north of St. Louis, the train was routed on the UP's ex C&EI route, so max track speed was less than 79MPH, but generally, the engine wasn't struggling.
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
Running passenger trains for schedule or for tonnage present different challenges to the locomotive. In the relatively flat lands you identify, neither consist would be a real challenge except to maintain a tight schedule wiht 16 cars and a single engine....it would take it a while to accelerate the 16 cars to line speed.
jeaton On the subject of long trains and power-Early in May I came out of St Louis on the Texas Eagle at the time when the train was not operating south of St Louis due to flooding. Amtrak had wound up with two train sets in St Louis that they decided to move back to Chicago. I didn't get an actual count, but we had either either 14 or 16 cars (two baggage and the rest Super Liners) pulled by a single P42. Due to track work on the regular route north of St. Louis, the train was routed on the UP's ex C&EI route, so max track speed was less than 79MPH, but generally, the engine wasn't struggling.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD Running passenger trains for schedule or for tonnage present different challenges to the locomotive. In the relatively flat lands you identify, neither consist would be a real challenge except to maintain a tight schedule wiht 16 cars and a single engine....it would take it a while to accelerate the 16 cars to line speed.
I suspect that Auro Train may go to the present CSX required 50 car limit [ Superliners and auto carriers combined ] when the 110 bi-level order listed in news wire [ for mid-west trains and California ] is delivered. That may free up enough superliners to fill out Auto Train, Then probably Amtrak will either reassign or build 3 -4 NPCUs [ rebuilt from F-40s with a HEP generator ] and place them at the end of the passenger consist to provide HEP power for maybe 8 -10 Superliners forward. As well probably another P-40 or P42 will be added to the front end to provide the necessary HP / ton ratio to allow decent acceleration to track speeds [3 units ]. As is now Auto Train often arrives 30 up to 90 minutes early dependent on how often it has to stop for meets. This is with the normal 2 head end locomotive units.
Nice, I've always wanted to ride it, but since I would not be driving, I don't know what kind of service is available at Lorton or Sanford after I get off the train.
It just sounds like it would be a cool trip and it's a great idea. I have a cousin who lives in FL and she said a lot of "snowbirds" ride it.
I videotaped this train with three locomotives (and flat-spots on the SuperLiners). I think the concern on locomotive count depends on the schedule CSX has planned for the ex-ACL and SCL lines it travels on for that evening. They probably have known-good standards that they enforce at their power desk to keep a busy schedule moving. If the schedule is light they might probably tolerate an Auto Train failure in some cases. After all, it is an overnight *vacation* train.
Thanks for the trip report. The next time we go to Disney and Universal we will absolutely be using the Auto Train!!
Sunnyland Nice, I've always wanted to ride it, but since I would not be driving, I don't know what kind of service is available at Lorton or Sanford after I get off the train. It just sounds like it would be a cool trip and it's a great idea. I have a cousin who lives in FL and she said a lot of "snowbirds" ride it.
Johnny
CSX does not 'directly' control the power that Amtrak puts on any train....that is a Amtrak function. Locomotive failure on ANY train - CSX or Amtrak is not 'tolerated' - it happens and plans are generated on the fly to get the train and the railroad moving again.
Amtrak has their own power standards for their trains just like CSX has their own power standards for their trains.
aegrotatio I videotaped this train with three locomotives (and flat-spots on the SuperLiners). I think the concern on locomotive count depends on the schedule CSX has planned for the ex-ACL and SCL lines it travels on for that evening. They probably have known-good standards that they enforce at their power desk to keep a busy schedule moving. If the schedule is light they might probably tolerate an Auto Train failure in some cases. After all, it is an overnight *vacation* train. Thanks for the trip report. The next time we go to Disney and Universal we will absolutely be using the Auto Train!!
For a long time Amtrak locomotives had a bad habit of breaking down unexpectedly in the middle of nowhere. Maintenance may be a lot better now, I don't know. CSX no doubt rightly feared that their main line would be blocked somewhere with an immobile Amtrak train. Having two units might not be necessary to maintain schedule but is very helpful as insurance against failure of one unit.
Bjorn88 For a long time Amtrak locomotives had a bad habit of breaking down unexpectedly in the middle of nowhere. Maintenance may be a lot better now, I don't know. CSX no doubt rightly feared that their main line would be blocked somewhere with an immobile Amtrak train. Having two units might not be necessary to maintain schedule but is very helpful as insurance against failure of one unit.
Well that is what I have been wondering for some time. How much is Amtrak's assignment of locomotives to protect schedules, and how much of it is insurance against breakdowns? Is the bad habit of Amtrak unit failures anecdotal or is their confirmation that they have or have had reliability problems?
How hard is it to keep a locomotive on the road -- you would think that a Diesel electric locomotive is highly reliable by now, but maybe Amtrak is short maintenance money or replacement of aging locomotives? Maybe the reputation for breakdown was from the early Amtrak with the hand-me-down E-units?
Paul Milenkovic Well that is what I have been wondering for some time. How much is Amtrak's assignment of locomotives to protect schedules, and how much of it is insurance against breakdowns? Is the bad habit of Amtrak unit failures anecdotal or is their confirmation that they have or have had reliability problems?
Paul: I would think it is a matter of reliability. The monthly performance reports that have loco availability consistently show about 15% not available. The last time I rode the CAL Z from denver when it was carrying the mail it had 3 P-42s up front. 2 failed going up the front range so we crept up to the tunnel without HEP. Got to Grand Junction and spoke to conductor about getting UP power from Helper. He thoght there would be no problems as all 3 units got restarted but 2 units failed again going up Helper and we stalled. UP could not push us due to roadrailers on rear but engineer finally got 1 unit restarted and with the 2 we crept into SLC 6 hours late after leaving DEN on time.
The locos have:
1. a lot of miles thus the 15% unavailability
2. DC traction especially bad when going thru snow.
3. Along with DC traction 110 MPH GEARING. AC traction will be able to provide lower speed traction a lot better.
4. Need for certain acceleration curves to make schedule.
There are no orders for diesels yet as specifications are still being written. I will be worried that Amtrak may put new diesels exclusively on some trains before their reliability is established?? The electric motor ACS-64s now on order will address these problems on the NEC only but the AEM-7s are slated to remain on standby status for several years after the deliveries. With extra AEM-7 motors surplus hopefully Amtrak will position them at strategic locations to move any trains that break down?
Amtrak should use the EMD SD70ACE instead of the P42!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.