Amtrak Auto Train Discussion

A couple of thoughts re AutoTrain:

If the S-Line route is reinstated according to current plans, would AutoTrain switch to it or remain on the current route and fueling point? If so, with a presumed increase in train speed, aside from a faster run and reduction in crew hours, what would the likely change Amtrak would seek to make - later departure, earlier arrival, or some of each?

The Auto Train always took the A line, even when the S line was complete north of Raleigh. The S line between Petersburg and Florence is slightly longer and, I understand, hillier than the A line.

Amtrak will likely keep the Auto Train on the A line since the limits on its MAS are the auto racks, and the speed improvements will all be on a (at first) single track line north of Raleigh. Raleigh is ~156 miles on the S line from Richmond, and assuming the auto racks force the MAS of 70 MPH, any potential time savings are going to be at best 24 minutes (if the Auto Train was authorized 110 MPH between Richmond and Raleigh for the full 156 miles, the savings would be just over an hour) and I don't think the extra costs of operating at that speed would be worth it.

Makes sense, thanks @RandallW. I didn’t consider the autorack MAS.

There have been occasions when Auto Train did use the "S" line for whatever reason. However, crew qualifications become a real problem. Engineers operating the train must be qualified for operating the train with freight train braking. So, a pilot has to accompany unless the engineer happens to have qualified on the "S" line.

Possibly there has been an earlier submission of this video, but from what I viewed of it, it certainly appears "reasonable":

https://youtu.be/C16UYeOj62E?si=kGkOyPkYpt9qRiny

But, after twenty four "voyages" - including the rather short lived private sector varietal - I simply became convinced that the only market Auto Train can reasonably serve is East of Syracuse and Harrisburg and South of Boston, anything beyond, such as myself in Chicago, has what economists call "diminishing returns". In my case, use of such results 400 miles of driving saved as well as one hotel night - and no time whatever.

The price of a ride has simply "exploded"; if Amtrak can command over $1K for a "voyage", hey, go for it. But for me, considering the meager savings set forth, my last journey was #52(the day Kobe Bryant was killed), or Jan 26, 2020.

Little-known success: Axios

Little-known rail success: Riders flock to Amtrak's long-distance Auto Train
...By the numbers: Auto Train ridership has outpaced pre-pandemic levels — part of an overall boom for Amtrak ridership in recent years, the transit company said in a statement.

In fiscal year 2019, Auto Train transported around 236,000 passengers, and by fiscal year 2022, that had increased to around 279,000.
...

Stick rail coming out of Lorton?

P40s protecting the Yugos I see. Good idea these new engines are earning a reputation for not being reliable.

Railjunkie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 09, 2024 11:12 pmP40s protecting the Yugos I see. Good idea these new engines are earning a reputation for not being reliable.

Amtrak ran P40s for protection on the first charger runs on other routes. And then they didn't and those first long distance routes to get chargers ran (and still run) "unprotected".

This past January, I did observe at West Palm both #91 and #97 (running on #91's markers) with only the Siemens power.

justalurker66 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2024 1:16 am

Railjunkie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 09, 2024 11:12 pmP40s protecting the Yugos I see. Good idea these new engines are earning a reputation for not being reliable.

Amtrak ran P40s for protection on the first charger runs on other routes. And then they didn't and those first long distance routes to get chargers ran (and still run) "unprotected".

The route has nothing to do with the fact that there are still protect motors on the Auto Train, the Charger has been in service for over two years no need for protect units if you are confident in your equipment. The fact remains these motors currently have less reliability than the P40/42s. The current issue is in the traction department, seems they are burning up generators quicker than Siemens can get the parts to fix them. We have yet to see them in revenue service on the LSL and the shop has already heard of the list of issues with these things. Personally, I have talked with a few engineers who are qualified to run them and as one put it if "you hit a squirrel you are going to kill the engine, over engineered over computerized pieces of junk".

I have been in the cab of one I am not qualified to run them as I have not taken any classes. I would tend to agree with the over engineered over computerized. Also in looking around the locomotive the sight lines are terrible I like to see where I am going especially If I am making switching moves. The angle cocks for the multiple unit hoses, brake pipe, and main res are up underneath the car body, I can see issues with ice and snow in the winter. There is no place for the conductor to ride while making a shove move, cant ride the side of the locomotive, cant ride inside the car body due to the possibility of poisonous gas being released while engine is running. We make plenty of engine changes in Albany.
I am going to with hold judgment on the cab and operating controls as I haven't run one yet, but with everything spread out all over the place like a European electric it is going to take some getting use to. One thing I will say is I will no longer have a window for fresh air as the small window closest to the control stand opens inward over the control stand. Every American locomotive I have ever been on has a sliding window not these.

The original Genesis P40DC and P32AC models had a rear control stand inside the body. Was this not usable?



AMTK #802 showing a more clear view of a P40DC's distinct Hostler's window and rear access door



The rear of a P32AC-DM (notice how there is simply a Hostler's window and the absence of a rear access door, as well as there being distinct ATS gadgets mounted on the trucks).

bostontrainguy wrote: ↑Sun Aug 11, 2024 10:33 am The original Genesis P40DC and P32AC models had a rear control stand inside the body. Was this not usable?



AMTK #802 showing a more clear view of a P40DC's distinct Hostler's window and rear access door



The rear of a P32AC-DM (notice how there is simply a Hostler's window and the absence of a rear access door, as well as there being distinct ATS gadgets mounted on the trucks).

If I remember correctly the only model that had the hostler controls stand was P32acdm and it never really worked. Not only that Amtrak has a special class of engineers in Albany "mechanical facility only". No need for a hostler station.
Most of you have never stood in the back of one of these things, been there done it have multipole T shirts and some hearing loss because of it. Trust me when I say you either want hearing protection which is now pretty much mandatory or be on the ground. The side doors work very well in backing these things up. The 40s and 42s are not quite as loud except for when the compressor kicks on. The rear door is handy if running back to back or when your conductor needs to get something to you.
The "distinct ATS gadgets on the trucks" are actually third rail shoes and have nothing to do with the train control systems.

The Siemens locomotive as seen here:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/513 ... 0332_b.jpg

Has no side doors for the conductor to ride. They can not ride the sides of equipment and with these you can't ride inside the car body due to special instruction. We do have a back up camera which gives a nice view of the knuckle, does mothing to help me back the thing up. In Albany depending on which way you are facing the wye it could be a quarter of a mile of more, but hey technology.