It wandered a bit, but I think you should find most of the information here: http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/741/t/225924.aspx?sort=ASC&pi332=1
The problems were mostly computer problems, which were unanticipated.
You'd find more detail at a place that's oriented less towards general discussion. For instance, these have seen a lot of discussion at the Railroad.net forums over the years including posts from individuals that operate and maintain them that have chimed in.
Even if they had been excellent performers which they clearly haven't been, as a casual guess only, I suspect they'd of enjoyed a short lifespan just the same. There's a lot to be said for commonality and at only 15 units strong (And apparently relatively little is identical between them and Acela power units), such a small fleet would've been a tempting target anyways for elimination right now.
Sort of like what did in a fair bit of minority makes back in earlier decades on freight lines. For every fairly unsuccessful design, perfectly fine locomotives still went to scrap early just for the sake of simplification of parts inventories, training of mechanical forces, etc.
Let us hope we are now getting something better designed and more reliable.
Possibly over-engineered? I'm always of the opinion that you can't get in trouble following the KISS rule. Look at the old electrics, the GG1's, the New Havens "Flat Bottoms", the Lackawanna's New Jersey MU's and others that ran for decades. All built as simple and bullet proof as possible.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.