Delay to 92(13)

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

John Bobinyec

Conductor
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
1,746
92 left Miami 3H 25M late and according to Amtrak Alerts, it was due to mechanical troubles. It now has only one engine. What were the details of the delay? It shouldn't take 3.5 hours to set out an engine.

jb
 

Qapla

OBS Chief
Joined
Jul 15, 2019
Messages
926
If it ran all the way with only one engine I guess that could explain why it was 4 hrs and 52 min late at Petersburg, Va ... although, since the engine swap at DC it seems to making up some of that time.
 

daybeers

OBS Chief
Joined
Jan 6, 2016
Messages
697
If it ran all the way with only one engine I guess that could explain why it was 4 hrs and 52 min late at Petersburg, Va ... although, since the engine swap at DC it seems to making up some of that time.
Would one engine really affect the running time all that much?
 

railiner

Conductor
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,861
Wow...that sounds like a repeat of my trip on 98 on 12 July...left Miami over 3 hours late due to swapping out a diner. And we also left with one engine, until we reached Sanford, where they picked up a second one. We also lost more time due to losing our 'slot' with meets. We arrived NYP 4 hours and 56 minutes late...
 

Qapla

OBS Chief
Joined
Jul 15, 2019
Messages
926
Would one engine really affect the running time all that much?
I'm not really sure but it doesn't seem like they would normally run with two if running with one works just as efficiently as running with two - so, I would think that only having one could impact on their ability to make up lost time ... also, like @railiner said, starting out that late could have had an impact of fitting back into an open slot on the track schedule
 

railiner

Conductor
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,861
Having a second engine, could marginally save time accelerating from stops, or speed restrictions, with a heavy train. Wouldn't make any difference in top speed, especially in flat country like in Florida.
 

west point

Conductor
Joined
Jun 9, 2015
Messages
2,111
At the present the reliability of P-42s is abysmal. A second engine should be along to protect any train's passengers for HEP and traction. If you follow Amtrak delays you will find at least one loco failing almost every day. Usually when failures out west in mountainous regions when one P-42 fails a freight unit is added. Another reason for freight units is for the example of SWC today since transcon is blocked by a BNSF derailment.. The train was reversed and both Amtrak units then were facing the wrong direction when put on the rear of the train. No wye available for the reverse with another hour delay if later in trip wye possible that could take an hour delay with no HEP for passengers. So BNSF provided a freight unit to lead.

Now in predicted snow along a route a third P-42 may be added especially the Empire Builder. The DC traction motors of P-42 often fail when snow ingested.
 

jiml

Conductor
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
1,131
Now in predicted snow along a route a third P-42 may be added especially the Empire Builder. The DC traction motors of P-42 often fail when snow ingested.
This is one of the reasons VIA rebuilt their F-40's and you'll rarely see a P-42 outside of basic corridor service in winter.
 

Seaboard92

Conductor
Joined
Dec 31, 2014
Messages
3,471
You never see a P42 out of the Windsor-Quebec City corridor anyway. I want to say something with CN claiming the locomotives weigh too much and would wear the rail down. But that doesn’t really make sense either. I’m shocked they haven’t tested them on the Ocean in the summer.
 

John Bobinyec

Conductor
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
1,746
Getting back to the original post ....

My wife was on that train. It was raining hard in Savannah and she heard the engineer say something to the effect that "this was the only engine they could find that works, but they didn't put sand in it." So it sounds like there are a lot of crippled engines in Hialeah.

jb
 

jiml

Conductor
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
1,131
You never see a P42 out of the Windsor-Quebec City corridor anyway. I want to say something with CN claiming the locomotives weigh too much and would wear the rail down. But that doesn’t really make sense either. I’m shocked they haven’t tested them on the Ocean in the summer.
It's infrequent, but I'm pretty sure I've seen a picture of one as second unit on a long-distance Budd consist in the past. Whether it was a test or last-minute substitution I have no idea. In the meantime, they do occasionally venture outside the corridor - like to Albany, as shown in this 2011 shot from Canadian Railway Observations:

amtrakviapeterwarwick.jpg
 
Top