Doomed Train

Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
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.
M

mucomix

Service Attendant
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
114
Location
Lawrence KS
I tend to keep an eye on the SWC and CZ with the status map from train web. I can’t get the link to work tonight but a quick Google search of Amtrak status map will get you there (my typing I’m sure). Anyway from time to time there is a “Doomed” train earlier in the day I thought the following east bound SWC may over take it. The train before and after are running about on schedule. It appears sometimes a train is just doomed. About 6-8 weeks ago I recall the CZ was same as dead trying to get out of Emeryville on the map. I know there can be a number of reasons for delay but I do find it interesting that at times things get so far off schedule.
 
mucomix said:
I tend to keep an eye on the SWC and CZ with the status map from train web. I can’t get the link to work tonight but a quick Google search of Amtrak status map will get you there (my typing I’m sure). Anyway from time to time there is a “Doomed” train earlier in the day I thought the following east bound SWC may over take it. The train before and after are running about on schedule. It appears sometimes a train is just doomed. About 6-8 weeks ago I recall the CZ was same as dead trying to get out of Emeryville on the map. I know there can be a number of reasons for delay but I do find it interesting that at times things get so far off schedule.
Click to expand...
Would a "doomed" train be one that is turned around at some point during its trip because the equipment is needed to go the other way? This would usually mean that passengers have to take a considerable portion of their journey on a bus.
 
DET63 said:
mucomix said:
I tend to keep an eye on the SWC and CZ with the status map from train web. I can’t get the link to work tonight but a quick Google search of Amtrak status map will get you there (my typing I’m sure). Anyway from time to time there is a “Doomed” train earlier in the day I thought the following east bound SWC may over take it. The train before and after are running about on schedule. It appears sometimes a train is just doomed. About 6-8 weeks ago I recall the CZ was same as dead trying to get out of Emeryville on the map. I know there can be a number of reasons for delay but I do find it interesting that at times things get so far off schedule.
Click to expand...
Would a "doomed" train be one that is turned around at some point during its trip because the equipment is needed to go the other way? This would usually mean that passengers have to take a considerable portion of their journey on a bus.
Click to expand...
There should be ample cars in CHI to patch a consist together to make up for the train that isn't turned around.
 
"There should be ample cars in CHI to patch a consist together to make up for the train that isn't turned around."

That's good if the "doomed" train is headed toward CHI. What if it's headed to NOL or the West Coast?
 
It is the east bound out of LA to Chicago. It was running 2 1/2 -3 Hr late into ABQ. Then lost 8 Hr between ABQ and LMY.

Now it looks like it pulled out of Ft Madison IA 15 hr 17 min late on 7/10.
 
Status

4 Southwest Chief Departs Los Angeles, CA

- Union Station (LAX)

6:45 pm

07-JUL-09 6:45 pm

07-JUL-09 Departed: on time.

Arrives Chicago, IL- Union Station (CHI) 3:20 pm

09-JUL-09 (5:58 am)

09-JUL-09 estimated Estimated Arrival Time: 14 hours and 38 minutes late.
 
From what I've been able to uncover, here's what happened as best I can tell:

The trailing engine failed just prior to Needles on July 8. The lead loco pulled the train to Needles where Amtrak tried to repair the trailing engine unsuccessfully. BNSF provided a freight loco there and pulled the train to Albuquerque where the BNSF freight engine was set off. The train continued with just one engine powering for about a mile east of Needles at which point it failed as well. At that point Amtrak added a protect engine stored at ABQ and continued on where it encountered RailRunner delays. Not long after that around Nueve, the engine that blew the capacitor earlier completely shut down, so at that point, the train had 2 dead engines and one working engine (the protect from ABQ). From there, UP sent a rescue freight engine and lashed it onto the front of the train and pulled it onward. From there, I'm not sure how far they went with the UP power, but my understanding is they expected to arrive in Chicago some time around 5:40 AM this morning.

Man, what a trip.

Rafi
 
DET63 said:
Would a "doomed" train be one that is turned around at some point during its trip because the equipment is needed to go the other way? This would usually mean that passengers have to take a considerable portion of their journey on a bus.
Click to expand...
I thought a "doomed" train is one that is running so late, Amtrak just throws up its hands and gives up. Basically a "loco non gratis".

Amtrak knows that all the passengers on boards are upset. They already long missed connections. And there is nothing Amtrak can do to change that or "make it all go away". So why even try?

Julie might attempt to claim that a train that is running 6 hours late can make it all up and arrive on time, but not even FTL travel can do that.
 
I can see where an incident like minor rail damage or other significant delays can make a train turn around, in this case because of equipment failure, they HAD to get the train back to CHI. Now, if I were a sleeper pax with no time issue, I'd be loving it. If I were a coach pax, I'd see if bustitution were a possibility.
 
Rafi said:
...At that point Amtrak added a protect engine stored at ABQ and continued on where it encountered RailRunner delays. Not long after that around Nueve, the engine that blew the capacitor earlier completely shut down, so at that point, the train had 2 dead engines and one working engine (the protect from ABQ). From there, UP sent a rescue freight engine and lashed it onto the front of the train and pulled it onward. From there, I'm not sure how far they went with the UP power, but my understanding is they expected to arrive in Chicago some time around 5:40 AM this morning.

Man, what a trip.

Rafi
Click to expand...
First, NMRX (Rail Runner) disputes Amtrak's assertion that they in any way delayed #4. I believe they feel the opposite: that #4's problems pretty much destroyed their evening rush hour. Despite the problems earlier in the trip, Amtrak pulled the BNSF power from the Chief at ABQ, decided not to add the protect power, and left with just the two original P42's (153 & 146) working - sort of. The units died east of ABQ. Both the Amtrak protect power (#136) and a BNSF (not UP) loco (#5079) were sent out from ABQ to once again rescue #4. From that point east it was the typical issue of crew availability, hours of service, and BNSF pilots that simply beat #4 into the ground. Plus, those two working units were pulling about 250 tons of dead locos in addition to the train. #4, due into Chicago at 3:20pm yesterday (7/9), arrived this morning at 6:46am.

Ironically, I will be on #4 in two weeks. I have plans set up to either fly home from Chicago at 9pm the day of arrival, or I'll bail at Kansas City and fly home from there if the train is running so late that the Chicago connection is at risk. This delay would have killed both plans. If this happens on my train, there may be a second incident of someone jumping from the Chief.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
PRR 60 said:
Rafi said:
...At that point Amtrak added a protect engine stored at ABQ and continued on where it encountered RailRunner delays. Not long after that around Nueve, the engine that blew the capacitor earlier completely shut down, so at that point, the train had 2 dead engines and one working engine (the protect from ABQ). From there, UP sent a rescue freight engine and lashed it onto the front of the train and pulled it onward. From there, I'm not sure how far they went with the UP power, but my understanding is they expected to arrive in Chicago some time around 5:40 AM this morning.

Man, what a trip.

Rafi
Click to expand...
First, NMRX (Rail Runner) disputes Amtrak's assertion that they in any way delayed #4. I believe they feel the opposite: that #4's problems pretty much destroyed their evening rush hour. Despite the problems earlier in the trip, Amtrak pulled the BNSF power from the Chief at ABQ, decided not to add the protect power, and left with just the two original P42's (153 & 146) working - sort of. The units died east of ABQ. Both the Amtrak protect power (#136) and a BNSF (not UP) loco (#5079) were sent out from ABQ to once again rescue #4. From that point east it was the typical issue of crew availability, hours of service, and BNSF pilots that simply beat #4 into the ground. Plus, those two working units were pulling about 250 tons of dead locos in addition to the train. #4, due into Chicago at 3:20pm yesterday (7/9), arrived this morning at 6:46am.

Ironically, I will be on #4 in two weeks. I have plans set up to either fly home from Chicago at 9pm the day of arrival, or I'll bail at Kansas City and fly home from there if the train is running so late that the Chicago connection is at risk. This delay would have killed both plans. If this happens on my train, there may be a second incident of someone jumping from the Chief.
Click to expand...
What a mess.

Well, I'm sure Amtrak and Rail Runner will point fingers both ways, but from Amtrak's perspective, I know they've marked the Rail Runner as delaying them 45". I was surprised to hear it was a UP freight (same number though-5079) coming to the rescue; my assumption was that "UP" was a typo and it sounds like you've got friends who know what was what. Again, I'm just trying to piece together based on a variety of sources. Bottom line: Amtrak had a catastrophic engine failure on that train. In retrospect, looks like they should have added the protect engine in ABQ from the get go and they might have gotten to Chicago without the additional delays.

Rafi
 
Rafi said:
Well, I'm sure Amtrak and Rail Runner will point fingers both ways, but from Amtrak's perspective, I know they've marked the Rail Runner as delaying them 45". I was surprised to hear it was a UP freight (same number though-5079) coming to the rescue; my assumption was that "UP" was a typo and it sounds like you've got friends who know what was what. Again, I'm just trying to piece together based on a variety of sources. Bottom line: Amtrak had a catastrophic engine failure on that train. In retrospect, looks like they should have added the protect engine in ABQ from the get go and they might have gotten to Chicago without the additional delays.
Click to expand...
What was their rationale for not using the protect engine? Given that Amtrak was already down one unit at that point, better safe than sorry, and you've got it right there....
 
wayman said:
Rafi said:
Well, I'm sure Amtrak and Rail Runner will point fingers both ways, but from Amtrak's perspective, I know they've marked the Rail Runner as delaying them 45". I was surprised to hear it was a UP freight (same number though-5079) coming to the rescue; my assumption was that "UP" was a typo and it sounds like you've got friends who know what was what. Again, I'm just trying to piece together based on a variety of sources. Bottom line: Amtrak had a catastrophic engine failure on that train. In retrospect, looks like they should have added the protect engine in ABQ from the get go and they might have gotten to Chicago without the additional delays.
Click to expand...
What was their rationale for not using the protect engine? Given that Amtrak was already down one unit at that point, better safe than sorry, and you've got it right there....
Click to expand...
Probably save themselves from an unneeded dead-head move, and also Murphy's law. Murphy's law says that if they don't put the protect on 4, the engine on it will fail. If they do, nothing will go wrong but the next days train will need the protection power that is now on its way to Chicago.
 
It's bad news when you have more working freight engines in your consist than passenger engines....
 
sechs said:
It's bad news when you have more working freight engines in your consist than passenger engines....
Click to expand...
Can freight engines provide HEP, or does there have to be at least one Amtrak engine to do that?
 
DET63 said:
sechs said:
It's bad news when you have more working freight engines in your consist than passenger engines....
Click to expand...
Can freight engines provide HEP, or does there have to be at least one Amtrak engine to do that?
Click to expand...
No, freight locos do not have HEP. The train I have been on that had to be pulled by a freight, they were able to keep HEP going on one P42 even though they could not put the power to the wheels.
 
Those P-40's being rebuilt with Stimulus money are starting to look more valuable all the time.
 
I would say hand them to new routes, but at this rate, me may need them just to give all the locomotives a breather every now and then!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top