Federeal on fire

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.

battalion51

Engineer
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
7,193
Location
USA
The following is a quote from the Trains.com newswire:

WASHINGTON, D.C. - A locomotive fire on Amtrak’s Washington, D.C. to Boston train No. 66 about 20 miles east of New Haven, Conn., disrupted service on part of the Northeast Corridor Friday.
Engine No. 651, an HHP-8 electric with an eight-car train, lost power at Madison, Conn. at 5:42 a.m. when a voltage-sensing transformer on its roof caught fire. The crew of Connecticut Department of Transportation (CDOT) local train No. 1627 pulled alongside to assist in extinguishing the small blaze. Amtrak dispatched AEM7 electric locomotive No. 938 from New Haven to take over the crippled train, which arrived in Boston 3 hours late.

The incident caused three other Amtrak trains to be from 5 to 38 minutes late and impacted seven CDOT trains.
That's a shame, mostly because I rode behind 651 back in June. :(
Amtrak%20HHP-8%20Locomotive%20651-R%20End.jpg
 
Nice shot, sorry to hear. Could the wires could be playing some role in this. We're losing electrics left and right here it's a shame. I'm glad nobody was injured though.

Click Here for the article, even though the whole thing was quoted already.
 
Oops my bad. :huh: I didn't realize that it was the same story, I think the newswire gave a little more detail though than the New Haven register did.
 
Of course one now has to wonder who got the story wrong, Amtrak's Dan Stessel or Trains.com. :unsure:

However someone must be wrong, since the Trains.com story is claiming that it was an HHP-8 that burned up. Dan is claiming that it was a "toaster", which is of course slang for an AEM-7.
 
Well, someone has bad information.

First Trains Newswire says:

“Engine No. 651, an HHP-8 electric with an eight-car train, lost power at Madison, Conn. at 5:42 a.m. when a voltage-sensing transformer on its roof caught fire.”

Then Amtrak spokesman Dan Stessel provides this info to the New Haven Register:

Stessel said Friday’s incident highlights a growing problem of antiquated equipment. The type of engine that caught fire Friday "looks like a toaster on rails," he said. It was built in the 1970s or 1980s and needs to be replaced or rebuilt every 10 years, he said.

The HHP’s are brand new. They are not victims of budget driven deferred maintenance. They are not “toasters on rails”: the AEM-7's (one of which came to the rescue). So, once again it appears the Amtrak PR people in DC have no idea what is going on out on the tracks. Of course, this is the same Dan Stessel who told the Boston Globe in March that Acela had an 80% on-time record and was running just fine. Consider the source.
 
AlanB said:
Of course one now has to wonder who got the story wrong, Amtrak's Dan Stessel or Trains.com.   :unsure:
However someone must be wrong, since the Trains.com story is claiming that it was an HHP-8 that burned up.  Dan is claiming that it was a "toaster", which is of course slang for an AEM-7.
You beat me to the punch, Alan.
 
I know we hate to reopen a can of worms here, but I thought this was worthy of it. The 651 is back in service and was seen today in Philly haulin what looks to be an Acela Regional. Good to hear! Cleck here to see the shot on Railpictures.net
 
I still am not positive #651 was the victim here. Trains may have messed up in saying #651 was the locomotive that caught on fire, where it really may have been the rescue engine. I would more so believe that it was an AEM-7 that caught fire as it is far more common. While it is hard to tell who's story is actually true (Trains or Stressel's) it would seem to me that it was an AEM-7 buring toast again.
 
I'll see if I can't get at the maintenece records on both the 938 and the 651 and see if we can resolve this once and for all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top