Genesis P42 question

[Grandma B]

When I first asked about the consist for the Silver Meteor 97/98, you were all very helpful. Alan had mentioned the NYP to MIA consist ran with two Genesis P42's. After my husband viewed many Amtrak photos online, he noticed that Amtrak uses two diesels on alot of the consists. His question is: Why does Amtrak only use one diesel on some trains and two on others? If there are two, is only the lead diesel under power? If so, why the need for two?

 

[George Harris]

1. Reliabiliy

2. Acceleration

If there are two there, both should be working. It would be absolutely senseless to drag around 100 to 120 tons of useless metal that neither carries people nor provides power.

Amtrak's "state of good repair" maintenance is somewhat of a joke. They do suffer from an unacceptable number of in-service failures. At least with two units, if one quits, the other can, after a fashion, keep the train moving. Several of the host railroads have justifiable complaints about Amtrak, first wanting absolute priority for their trains and then tying up the line with trains going dead on the main line.

 

[had8ley]

1. Reliabiliy2. Acceleration

If there are two there, both should be working. It would be absolutely senseless to drag around 100 to 120 tons of useless metal that neither carries people nor provides power.

Amtrak's "state of good repair" maintenance is somewhat of a joke. They do suffer from an unacceptable number of in-service failures. At least with two units, if one quits, the other can, after a fashion, keep the train moving. Several of the host railroads have justifiable complaints about Amtrak, first wanting absolute priority for their trains and then tying up the line with trains going dead on the main line.

Well George the last time I rode the Crescent the conductor said they had orders to run one unit for HEP and the other to move the train. Don't know how long this has been in effect but it sounded like somebody's idea to save fuel and maybe their job.

 

[BobWeaver]

1. Reliabiliy2. Acceleration

If there are two there, both should be working. It would be absolutely senseless to drag around 100 to 120 tons of useless metal that neither carries people nor provides power.

Amtrak's "state of good repair" maintenance is somewhat of a joke. They do suffer from an unacceptable number of in-service failures. At least with two units, if one quits, the other can, after a fashion, keep the train moving. Several of the host railroads have justifiable complaints about Amtrak, first wanting absolute priority for their trains and then tying up the line with trains going dead on the main line.

Well George the last time I rode the Crescent the conductor said they had orders to run one unit for HEP and the other to move the train. Don't know how long this has been in effect but it sounded like somebody's idea to save fuel and maybe their job.

When I was in Columbia a couple weeks ago watching 91 and 92 make their stops, I noticed that on 92, the lead engine sounded like it almost wasn't even on and was quieter than normal, as if the engine was at a very low rpm. The second unit however, sounded normal. Saturday's 91 was running with 1 unit.

 

[George Harris]

1. Reliabiliy2. Acceleration

If there are two there, both should be working. It would be absolutely senseless to drag around 100 to 120 tons of useless metal that neither carries people nor provides power.

Amtrak's "state of good repair" maintenance is somewhat of a joke. They do suffer from an unacceptable number of in-service failures. At least with two units, if one quits, the other can, after a fashion, keep the train moving. Several of the host railroads have justifiable complaints about Amtrak, first wanting absolute priority for their trains and then tying up the line with trains going dead on the main line.

Well George the last time I rode the Crescent the conductor said they had orders to run one unit for HEP and the other to move the train. Don't know how long this has been in effect but it sounded like somebody's idea to save fuel and maybe their job.

Sounds like something that Amtrak would do. It does save a little fuel and gives the insurance that if the one doing the work conks out that another one is right there. On the other hand, you are hurting yourself on schedule because you are not using the second unit's power to accelerate, and it would probably be cheaper to maintain the engines so that you could run reliably with one. I mean, how many of us tow around a second car so we have a spare if the one we drive breaks down. That is the logic being used when you haul around a second unit just for insurance against breakdowns.

 

[had8ley]

1. Reliabiliy2. Acceleration

If there are two there, both should be working. It would be absolutely senseless to drag around 100 to 120 tons of useless metal that neither carries people nor provides power.

Amtrak's "state of good repair" maintenance is somewhat of a joke. They do suffer from an unacceptable number of in-service failures. At least with two units, if one quits, the other can, after a fashion, keep the train moving. Several of the host railroads have justifiable complaints about Amtrak, first wanting absolute priority for their trains and then tying up the line with trains going dead on the main line.

Well George the last time I rode the Crescent the conductor said they had orders to run one unit for HEP and the other to move the train. Don't know how long this has been in effect but it sounded like somebody's idea to save fuel and maybe their job.

Sounds like something that Amtrak would do. It does save a little fuel and gives the insurance that if the one doing the work conks out that another one is right there. On the other hand, you are hurting yourself on schedule because you are not using the second unit's power to accelerate, and it would probably be cheaper to maintain the engines so that you could run reliably with one. I mean, how many of us tow around a second car so we have a spare if the one we drive breaks down. That is the logic being used when you haul around a second unit just for insurance against breakdowns.

As usual you hit the nail on the head George. The conductor said they lost a minimum of 20 minutes between Meridian and New Orleans and that's only one crew length of a train that runs over 1,000 miles.

 

[wayman]

Well George the last time I rode the Crescent the conductor said they had orders to run one unit for HEP and the other to move the train. Don't know how long this has been in effect but it sounded like somebody's idea to save fuel and maybe their job.

On the SW Chief last week, we slowed to a stop between Las Vegas and Raton and it was announced over the PA (fantastic PA announcements from that crew, they were really good at keeping us informed of everything) that one of the engines had died and the crew were trying to restart it. There was a collective sigh of resignation by the passengers, but no sooner had the sighs died down than we were underway again--about three minutes later. We made it over Raton Pass without incident, and arrived at La Junta thirty minutes EARLY.

During the crew change at La Junta, I walked forward and had a chat with the engineer; I'd assumed, based on had8ley's having said the same thing in an earlier thread (one engine for motive power, one for HEP) that we'd lost motive power, they'd switched the other engine to run both, and that we'd change engines in La Junta or something.

But no, that wasn't it at all. First, what happened: the second engine died completely and they couldn't restart it from the first engine. So they stopped the train, the second engineer got out, ran back to the second engine, climbed in, and restarted it (and stayed with it in case this happened again; thankfully, this worked, and more thankfully, it didn't happen again). Second, how the engines were used: the engineer told me both units ALWAYS provide motive power, and the second provides HEP on top of that (which the first can do if necessary)--not just on the SW Chief at Raton Pass, though in most places it isn't critical that the second unit be functional; if one conks out, the train can continue moving so in that sense having two is a backup system. But both pull the train under all normal circumstances, and in our special Raton Pass steep-grade situation we'd've been waiting a long time for a BNSF loaner if they couldn't restart the second unit. So we were pretty lucky; from La Junta onwards, they didn't really care if the second engine conked out again since we were on flatland or a steady slight downgrade from La Junta all the way into Chicago. (And she didn't die the whole way, though I'm sure they took her to the shops and checked her out in Chicago after we'd detrained. ... at least, I hope they did.)

 

[Dutchrailnut]

The Genersis will deliver motive power at same time as HEP . it can not be seperated.

once you put the engine in isolate the HEP shuts off as well.

The locomotive delivering HEP is down rated to 3750 HP max while in HEP mode due to speed reduction to 900 rpm.

A genesis will normally run between 630 and 1047 rpm.

 

[had8ley]

The Genersis will deliver motive power at same time as HEP . it can not be seperated.once you put the engine in isolate the HEP shuts off as well.

The locomotive delivering HEP is down rated to 3750 HP max while in HEP mode due to speed reduction to 900 rpm.

A genesis will normally run between 630 and 1047 rpm.

Goes to show you how much I don't know about Genesis engines. Do you think the conductor got confused and they had orders to run with one engine? Can you isolate the trailing unit (while it is still running) and get HEP and tractive power without any problems from the second unit ? This might explain the comment he made about the loss of running time. I don't think the loss of 250 HP, while using a unit for HEP, is a big number but 4,000 HP (again, correct me if I'm wrong on the HP rating) is a heavy duty loss when it comes to acceleration. By the way I found a Crescent menu with Genesis engines #800 & 801 on the cover. Thanks for educating a dinosaurus rex.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

MNCR runs 7 car commuter trains with a 3200 hp Genesis, making stops every 2 to 4 miles, I got no problem getting a consist like that upto 60 mph between stops.

Even if on Amtrak one unit provides both HEP and traction the 3750 hp of a Genesis (while running in HEP mode) is still a good 3000 hp for traction only.

or to speak in dinosaur terms two F units of 1500 hp.

Would it help to get second unit(4200hp) on line , sure but it also doubles your maintenance cost.

 

[had8ley]

MNCR runs 7 car commuter trains with a 3200 hp Genesis, making stops every 2 to 4 miles, I got no problem getting a consist like that upto 60 mph between stops.Even if on Amtrak one unit provides both HEP and traction the 3750 hp of a Genesis (while running in HEP mode) is still a good 3000 hp for traction only.

or to speak in dinosaur terms two F units of 1500 hp.

Would it help to get second unit(4200hp) on line , sure but it also doubles your maintenance cost.

Just one question and I'll leave well enough alone. Are you running on level terrain as on the Hudson side or in some hilly territory? (Oh, most of those F units were junque but we had some that lasted from the late forties until the middle 70's; sure looked funny sandwiched in between two SD-40's; especially the B units) I'm still trying to figure if the crews are getting the green light to put the second unit on the line out of Atlanta when they start hitting the mountains. Otherwise, it wouldn't make much sense just to drag around another multi-million dollar engine all the way to NYP.

 

[battalion51]

This is just my thought process here, but it seems like if management really wants to use one engine for HEP and the other for traction (which makes sense) you would want to run the HEP on the Head Unit and the traction on the trailer. This way you can flip the HEP switch from Standby to Normal and use it for traction getting in and out of stations or coming into big hills. Now granted you would have to momentarily bring the HEP down to switch from normal to standby, but it makes more sense operationally. You also would have to deal with louder engine noise on the head end since your engine will always be running at 720 RPM, but it'd be better operationally in my opinion.

As for the SW Chief incident, it seems like those engines were being run elephant style, and in my opinion, the engines should be run back to back when there are two units being operated. But that's just me.

 

[had8ley]

This is just my thought process here, but it seems like if management really wants to use one engine for HEP and the other for traction (which makes sense) you would want to run the HEP on the Head Unit and the traction on the trailer. This way you can flip the HEP switch from Standby to Normal and use it for traction getting in and out of stations or coming into big hills. Now granted you would have to momentarily bring the HEP down to switch from normal to standby, but it makes more sense operationally. You also would have to deal with louder engine noise on the head end since your engine will always be running at 720 RPM, but it'd be better operationally in my opinion.
As for the SW Chief incident, it seems like those engines were being run elephant style, and in my opinion, the engines should be run back to back when there are two units being operated. But that's just me.

Battallion 51;

I'm not sure but on the UP we had to run with the lead unit on line unless it was dead. I never knew if it was a UP rule or a Federal regulation.

 

[AlanB]

This is just my thought process here, but it seems like if management really wants to use one engine for HEP and the other for traction (which makes sense) you would want to run the HEP on the Head Unit and the traction on the trailer. This way you can flip the HEP switch from Standby to Normal and use it for traction getting in and out of stations or coming into big hills. Now granted you would have to momentarily bring the HEP down to switch from normal to standby, but it makes more sense operationally. You also would have to deal with louder engine noise on the head end since your engine will always be running at 720 RPM, but it'd be better operationally in my opinion.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding Dutch here, but I could have sworn that he just said that one can't just use an engine for HEP. If you turn on HEP, then the engine is also going to provide motive power. So if that's true, then Amtrak can't run the head engine with HEP only, while allowing the second engine to provide motive power.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

This is just my thought process here, but it seems like if management really wants to use one engine for HEP and the other for traction (which makes sense) you would want to run the HEP on the Head Unit and the traction on the trailer. This way you can flip the HEP switch from Standby to Normal and use it for traction getting in and out of stations or coming into big hills. Now granted you would have to momentarily bring the HEP down to switch from normal to standby, but it makes more sense operationally. You also would have to deal with louder engine noise on the head end since your engine will always be running at 720 RPM, but it'd be better operationally in my opinion.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding Dutch here, but I could have sworn that he just said that one can't just use an engine for HEP. If you turn on HEP, then the engine is also going to provide motive power. So if that's true, then Amtrak can't run the head engine with HEP only, while allowing the second engine to provide motive power.

Once you set the lead unit to standby the traction control is locked out, even the MU part, so a lead unit can not provide HEP only, as it will no longer control the second unit.

You could set up the second unit for HEP only, but then the engineer no longer has control over that unit as it needs a person in cab to switch it from HEP to passenger run, the savings would be nill however, as dragging a non traction unit around waste more fuel than having both on line.

having two units pull a certain train will use just about same amount of fuel as having one pull the train, you need the same amount of Kw to get the train up to speed, and same Kw to keep it going.

 

[Guest_GP35_*]

Amtrak turnoff 1 unit between Beaumont and New Orleans. Lead engine does traction and HEP while second unit is dead.

Going west, In Beaumont they start the second unit for HEP and lead for traction.

 

[had8ley]

Amtrak turnoff 1 unit between Beaumont and New Orleans. Lead engine does traction and HEP while second unit is dead.Going west, In Beaumont they start the second unit for HEP and lead for traction.

I didn't think that I had totally lost my marbles...

 

[Texas Marbles]

Another reason for multipe units is passenger safety. The odds are pretty good that your train will be hit by somebody going around the gates. If it happens to be an 18 wheeler or a log truck, most of the impact will be absorbed by the locomotives (pity the engineer).

On the Crescent, gasoline tanks on the offending 18 wheelers have exploded several times in recent memory. Always it was the second engine that burned up. Imagine what would have happened if it had been a sleeping car full of passengers instead of a sturdy locomotive!!

I vote for 2 (or more) locomotives on all trains.

 

[AmtrakWPK]

With the Crescent, you've got single-level equipment, so you're running with a baggage car, which would also serve as that buffer, wouldn't it, in lieu of a second engine? Of course, we're back to the other argument, which is that if that single engine craps out, the baggage car ain't gonna pull the train very fast..... :lol:

 

[had8ley]

With the Crescent, you've got single-level equipment, so you're running with a baggage car, which would also serve as that buffer, wouldn't it, in lieu of a second engine? Of course, we're back to the other argument, which is that if that single engine craps out, the baggage car ain't gonna pull the train very fast..... :lol:

Amtrak WPK;

Perhaps you missed the blurb last week where the brake beam fell off the baggage car on the Crescent and wrapped around the wheels. #19 was almost eight hours late into UPT. Those baggage cars are also as old as I am and that's like calling dirt, dirt...

 

[AmtrakWPK]

Yeah, one of the real nail-biters of the whole Amtrak funding thing is that as they fight tooth and nail for operating budget and repairs to the blasted NEC, the LD rolling stock is falling apart a little worse every day, being "maintained" by the two primary tools of the onboard staff - if it moves and shouldn't, they use duct tape. If it doesn't move, but should, then they use WD40. It's almost as bad as the old telephone company installer's motto: "Beat to Fit, Paint to Match." The next thing we'll probably see is pickup-truck-style bumper stickers on all the LD rolling stock that says "Honk if parts fall off." Unless they actually do start ordering some replacement equipment, sooner or later the funding issue for operations becomes moot. Which is scary.

 

[had8ley]

Yeah, one of the real nail-biters of the whole Amtrak funding thing is that as they fight tooth and nail for operating budget and repairs to the blasted NEC, the LD rolling stock is falling apart a little worse every day, being "maintained" by the two primary tools of the onboard staff - if it moves and shouldn't, they use duct tape. If it doesn't move, but should, then they use WD40. It's almost as bad as the old telephone company installer's motto: "Beat to Fit, Paint to Match." The next thing we'll probably see is pickup-truck-style bumper stickers on all the LD rolling stock that says "Honk if parts fall off." Unless they actually do start ordering some replacement equipment, sooner or later the funding issue for operations becomes moot. Which is scary.

You know, all through out my life I have heard the expression "Let's get back to basics." Now that we are having elections in our state that's a very common phrase. My point is this; The Sunset pulled up to a power switch in Houston, this week, and the Conductor, A/C and engineer could not figure out how to line a power switch by hand. Incidentally, this happened in Houston right outside Englewood (SP) yard. Someone smarted off to the dispatcher on the radio and said, "You know this IS a FIRST CLASS TRAIN." Not half a second went by when the dispatcher sternly told Mr. Smarty Pants that it was going to be a very dead (hours of service law) First Class train if three ALLEDGEDLY qualified train crew men could not figure out how to hand line a switch after receiving all the necessary permission.

What finally happened was the train was backed up to another signal to where it could be cross overed without having to hand throw the switch. NOW...back in my braking days if I wasn't running ahead of the engine and putting my switch key in the lock I would be in an investigation in short order and probably had some time off. Todays gang doesn't seem to care and what's worse yet they don't seem to even know, or care, what the "basics" are. It's not just the equipment it's the Einsteins that Amtrak has hired to run it.

Just as a back up~ our sleeper ran out of water on #58 going to Chicago last week. When I woke up the car attendant told me the car was out of water and nobody could use the toilet or the shower. Just about that time the LSA came breezing through on her way to the diner. "Hey guys, you can use our car to take a shower. We have plenty of water." It would not have made anymore work for our attendant but I promise you he did not have a fist full of cash after we backed in and de-trained at CUS well showered to boot.

 

[frj1983]

Yeah, one of the real nail-biters of the whole Amtrak funding thing is that as they fight tooth and nail for operating budget and repairs to the blasted NEC, the LD rolling stock is falling apart a little worse every day, being "maintained" by the two primary tools of the onboard staff - if it moves and shouldn't, they use duct tape. If it doesn't move, but should, then they use WD40. It's almost as bad as the old telephone company installer's motto: "Beat to Fit, Paint to Match." The next thing we'll probably see is pickup-truck-style bumper stickers on all the LD rolling stock that says "Honk if parts fall off." Unless they actually do start ordering some replacement equipment, sooner or later the funding issue for operations becomes moot. Which is scary.

You know, all through out my life I have heard the expression "Let's get back to basics." Now that we are having elections in our state that's a very common phrase. My point is this; The Sunset pulled up to a power switch in Houston, this week, and the Conductor, A/C and engineer could not figure out how to line a power switch by hand. Incidentally, this happened in Houston right outside Englewood (SP) yard. Someone smarted off to the dispatcher on the radio and said, "You know this IS a FIRST CLASS TRAIN." Not half a second went by when the dispatcher sternly told Mr. Smarty Pants that it was going to be a very dead (hours of service law) First Class train if three ALLEDGEDLY qualified train crew men could not figure out how to hand line a switch after receiving all the necessary permission.

What finally happened was the train was backed up to another signal to where it could be cross overed without having to hand throw the switch. NOW...back in my braking days if I wasn't running ahead of the engine and putting my switch key in the lock I would be in an investigation in short order and probably had some time off. Todays gang doesn't seem to care and what's worse yet they don't seem to even know, or care, what the "basics" are. It's not just the equipment it's the Einsteins that Amtrak has hired to run it.

Just as a back up~ our sleeper ran out of water on #58 going to Chicago last week. When I woke up the car attendant told me the car was out of water and nobody could use the toilet or the shower. Just about that time the LSA came breezing through on her way to the diner. "Hey guys, you can use our car to take a shower. We have plenty of water." It would not have made anymore work for our attendant but I promise you he did not have a fist full of cash after we backed in and de-trained at CUS well showered to boot.

I think there are still some Attendants out there, who don't like the idea of "other people" using "our" sleeper. Whether that be people in a roomette or using a shower! I would have given the LSA my tip for that information.

 

[George Harris]

My point is this; The Sunset pulled up to a power switch in Houston, this week, and the Conductor, A/C and engineer could not figure out how to line a power switch by hand. Incidentally, this happened in Houston right outside Englewood (SP) yard. Someone smarted off to the dispatcher on the radio and said, "You know this IS a FIRST CLASS TRAIN." Not half a second went by when the dispatcher sternly told Mr. Smarty Pants that it was going to be a very dead (hours of service law) First Class train if three ALLEDGEDLY qualified train crew men could not figure out how to hand line a switch after receiving all the necessary permission.

You have got to be kidding! This is not an exercise in rocket science. I did not think you would be let loose on an engine without this bit of knowledge. (I am assuming that you mean the nomal Dual Control - power or hand - type machine that has a hand lever, not the power only machine that takes a signal maintainer's key to unlock and then you must crank it.)

 

[AmtrakWPK]

Since we were discussing single vs dual engine usage earlier in this thread, and some of the reasons for using two, I can report that today's (10/19) train 98 apparently had a single engine, which died in Auburndale ( north of WTH, south of KIS) stranding the pax for several hours until a rescue engine could be provided, probably from SFA (Auto-Train - Sanford). Sure makes a nice case for using two engines, doesn't it? We were also stranded once on 98, near Boynton Beach in So. Fla. when the single engine blew it's rectifier stack. Fortunately, while that knocked out motive power, HEP was still operational, so at least we were comfortable, and food service was still functional (except for the microwave, which was blown up by the electrical power spike that happened when the rectifier stack blew, and REALLY smelled up the diner.