I've noticed the Lakeshore Limited is now running with one locomotive. While it makes for a clean appearance to the train, I can't help but wonder how Amtrak deals with potential breakdowns as well as maintaining track speed with a train that has normally had two locomotives. Does anyone know what considerations Amtrak makes when assigning locomotives to trains?
Many Amtrak trains operate with a single unit. It depends on the number of cars and the grades to be encountered. The Texas Eagle routinely runs with one unit.
josephr33 I've noticed the Lakeshore Limited is now running with one locomotive. While it makes for a clean appearance to the train, I can't help but wonder how Amtrak deals with potential breakdowns as well as maintaining track speed with a train that has normally had two locomotives. Does anyone know what considerations Amtrak makes when assigning locomotives to trains?
How many cars does the LSL usually have? Fewer now? Maybe a newer, more powerful locomotive now?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Assuming a single unit can provide the necessary HP, the point is and always has been: What if it fails?
Covering that remote possibility is a poor excuse for running fuel through a redundant unit day after day. We never heard of it in steam days.
Lack of operative locos most likely. It is getting bad for Amtrak and lack of operative locos. sn
Its wasn't uncommon to see one locomotive and e or f hauling a newly budd built streamliner of 6 or 7 cars.
dakotafredAssuming a single unit can provide the necessary HP, the point is and always has been: What if it fails? Covering that remote possibility is a poor excuse for running fuel through a redundant unit day after day. We never heard of it in steam days.
Loss of propulsion is minor compared to the threat of losing operable HEP.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
Well, the new baggage cars are definitely lighter and the brakes do not stick.........lol.
Double units will probably return with through operation of the Boston section.
It certainly appears lack of operatable locos is causing this. Yesterday's Starlight had one 500 series loco out of Seattle.
dakotafred Assuming a single unit can provide the necessary HP, the point is and always has been: What if it fails? Covering that remote possibility is a poor excuse for running fuel through a redundant unit day after day. We never heard of it in steam days.
But in steam days, weren't there service facilities and helpers to be found every hundred or so miles?
Insufficient "available" locomotives sounds like a maintenace problem.
Or it may be that Amtrak maintenance has improved to the point where reliability is sufficient to avoid wasting fuel.
Lots of early streamliners had only one unit up front, or being an articlyated train, were permanently attached ot only one.
Exactly what I said Dave, no need for two units if they are reliable. The early streamliners were delivered to be operated with a single unit, and this is when diesel fuel was cheap.
Of course it could be that locomotive maintenance and thus reliabilty have suddenly improved, but we still hear plenty of anecdotes here of major delays because of locomotive failures. Perhaps someone can check Amtrak stats?
daveklepperLots of early streamliners had only one unit up front, or being an articulated train, were permanently attached ot only one.
But let's not forget that lots of early streamliners had chain falls over the engines and riding maintainers who could and did, for example, change out power assemblies on the road, sometimes with the train moving at speed. Preston Cook has some fascinating stories about this, and I'm sure there are still others around who can tell many a tale about how much, and how often, the magic had to be wielded.
If we had this level ... or let's settle for Metroliner level, for an earlier Amtrak experience ... it might be possible to relieve some of the engine failures. We need to be very careful to differentiate 'failures' of propulsion from failures of HEP, too, as even the early streamliners with trainlined power used dedicated generation, not a tap from the traction alternator...
daveklepperLots of early streamliners had only one unit up front,
But remember Dave, an E unit had two prime movers and PRR's also had two steam generators so they could limp along if one died.
Electroliner 1935 daveklepper But remember Dave, an E unit had two prime movers and PRR's also had two steam generators so they could limp along if one died.
daveklepper But remember Dave, an E unit had two prime movers and PRR's also had two steam generators so they could limp along if one died.
When locomotives fail - it is not always the prime mover that gives up the ghost - electrical issues do in more locomotives than mechanical issues - from my 26 years of observation as a Chief Dispatcher.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Don't charge your cell phone, you're making the train late lol. Wonder how late that Coast Starlight with one engine was into LA.
Of courfse, your points are valid. And I do remember the Southerner or the Tennesian coming into Charlottesseville Unions Station with a Green and Goldl Pacific ahead of the E-6. Not rouotine by any means, but it did occur. Some statistics would help. How did the Rock fair with itws single TA's?
Most of the Chicago suburban operations maintained a pretty good record of reliability and punctuality with single E's or F's on trains of up to eight gallery coaches.
Times change. Amtrak P-42 diesels are 4200 hp; E-8s were 2250 hp; F-7s only 1500 hp. One would think one engine would suffice on most Amtrak trains, which are usually shorter than most passenger trains in the 50s-60s. So what gives?
Dragoman dakotafred Assuming a single unit can provide the necessary HP, the point is and always has been: What if it fails? Covering that remote possibility is a poor excuse for running fuel through a redundant unit day after day. We never heard of it in steam days. But in steam days, weren't there service facilities and helpers to be found every hundred or so miles?
Certainly, sometimes every 50 miles or even less, depending on the 'road and traffic density. It was also a policy to have locomotives stationed along the way as "protection power," that is to be ready to rescue a train stranded due to engine failure.
BaltACDWhen locomotives fail - it is not always the prime mover that gives up the ghost - electrical issues do in more locomotives than mechanical issues - from my 26 years of observation as a Chief Dispatcher.
26 years is after the end of the E unit era. Since then almost all locomotives are single prime mover. In general, reliability has increased greatly. There is also real time telemetry where units are monitored real time and can be diagnosed from the HQ. Sounds good but I do not know what the statistics show for failures. Any one know how GE's & Progress units Mean time between failures is?
CSSHEGEWISCHMost of the Chicago suburban operations maintained a pretty good record of reliability and punctuality with single E's or F's on trains of up to eight gallery coaches.
One evening, I came home from work on a BNSF Metra train and got off at Belmont. An inbound scoot was sitting in the station and not moving. I watched for a while and finally crossed over and inquired as to the issue. Turned out that the unit had been in dynamic braking for its station stop and would not come out and load to contine its trip eastward. It had to wait for the next (scheduled one hour later) scoot to push it into the city. And as a side, I learned that they had to operate whith the engineer in the west cab car to operate the throttle while the lead cab car engineer operated the brakes as the MU conections (so I was told and observed) did not mate. Cab car at buffer level, Diesel nose at a higher level. I had a similar occurance about thiry years before on a C&NW west line trip into Chicago where my train had to wait for a later train to push us in. When it happens, it is no fun but you are not hundreds of miles from help.
schlimmHow many cars does the LSL usually have? Fewer now? Maybe a newer, more powerful locomotive now?
Typical consist is:
NYC - 1 baggage, 4 coach, 1 diner, 2 viewliner sleepers; (7) +
BOS 1 coach, 1 viewliner sleeper, 1 lounge, 1 baggage. (4)
Total of 11 cars.
Where are you seeing the LSL, It normally used one unit on each section East of Albany/Rensselaer and two west thereof.
schlimm Times change. Amtrak P-42 diesels are 4200 hp; E-8s were 2250 hp;
Times change. Amtrak P-42 diesels are 4200 hp; E-8s were 2250 hp;
While true, those figures only tell part of the story. A single P42 will not be providing anywhere near 4200 hp for traction. The HEP generator requires quite a bit of power, and it varies according to load. Horsepower for traction is as low as 2500 hp with a full HEP load. Not really all that much more than an E8.
An "expensive model collector"
n012944 schlimm Times change. Amtrak P-42 diesels are 4200 hp; E-8s were 2250 hp; While true, those figures only tell part of the story. A single P42 will not be providing anywhere near 4200 hp for traction. The HEP generator requires quite a bit of power, and it varies according to load. Horsepower for traction is as low as 2500 hp with a full HEP load. Not really all that much more than an E8.
You need all that extra power for passengers to recharge their laptops and cellphones:)
on Metra F 40s have only 3300 hp and haul 8 bi-levels that carry many passengers. Only some have a separate engine for HEP.
schlimm on Metra F 40s have only 3300 hp and haul 8 bi-levels that carry many passengers.
on Metra F 40s have only 3300 hp and haul 8 bi-levels that carry many passengers.
on an essentially flat railroad, remember a 1% grade increases resistance by about 300%, so you couldn't expect similar performance everywhere.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.