May 10th

@Hudson5432 posted:

To clarify, I attended only one of these...….

That would be the driving of the golden spike on May 10, 1869, right?

Good one, John. :-)

Last year 150th Aniv. of first transcon railroad.  And first event with UP 4014.  

@Hudson5432 posted:

I thought that some of you might be interested in the significance of yesterday, May 10th, in RR history.  There are three events, all of which occurred on May 10th:   . . .    The dedication of the Amtrak Genesis P40 at Washington Union Station on May 10th, 1993.

It does not seem like 17 years since they became the Amtrak engines we see everywhere.

Late revision:  Thank you to PRR 1950 for gently reminding me that 2000 minus 1993 is 27 -- not 17.  

Yesterday on the 10th, I caught this Amtrak train. Coast Starlight number 11, southbound at Centralia, WA...

It amazes me they need two locomotives to pull six cars.

Hey Number 90,

I'm a little lost.  Are you saying it took ten years for Amtrak to get all of its Genesis P40s into service?  Or, did you just count wrong and really mean 27 years?  At my age, I'm easily confused!!

Chuck

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

It amazes me they need two locomotives to pull six cars.

I'm not sure, but having ridden this, I think they do a run around at each end so a locomotive does not have to find a place to turn around.  So, only the lead loco is running... or they need a spare in case of a blowout.   BUT, in this photo, it looks like both locos are facing the same direction which does make you wonder, why two.  Could be they are required, or one is in a deadhead move.

@Hartman posted:

BUT, in this photo, it looks like both locos are facing the same direction which does make you wonder, why two.  Could be they are required, or one is in a deadhead move.

Exactly, if they were oriented tail to tail,I might have thought it was to speed the turn-around, but maybe the deadhead move explains it.

@PRR1950 posted:

Hey Number 90,

I'm a little lost.  Are you saying it took ten years for Amtrak to get all of its Genesis P40s into service?  Or, did you just count wrong and really mean 27 years?  At my age, I'm easily confused!!

Chuck

At my age, I'm more confused than you are.  Yes, 27 years.  Thank you.  

I hope the good nuns who taught me to add and subtract were not looking down from above when I posted that number.  But they never missed anything, even when it was done behind their backs, so I have probably also been caught by them.  Again.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Exactly, if they were oriented tail to tail,I might have thought it was to speed the turn-around, but maybe the deadhead move explains it.

Actually, the Coast Starlight usually runs with two engines as the train normally is about twice this length. I doubt there were a dozen passengers onboard, based on the conversation I had with two of the passengers stranded for much of the day there.

The baggage car, normally, is not in trail. I'm with the abbreviated service, that's where they've been sticking it lately.

The original reason for the nose to tail orientation was that the 800kw Head End Power could easily be operated from either unit, and units could even be swapped if one failed and could not limp home.  The HEP was overdesigned to the point that it would even operate with a soft ground, as was quite common in the HEP trainline when Amtrak maintenance did not quite catch up to maintain coaches.  These engines are pretty strong, and the P40's were rated at 4000 gross HP, minus, of course, the HP used to operate the HEP, since the main engine drove the traction alternator and the HEP alternator in the same housing.  The original P40's were road numbers 800-842.  The later P42's, with R/Nos 1-116? (from my memory) were rated at 4250 gross HP.  Their GE FDL engines had electronic fuel injection, and performed even better than the originals, which had a lot of teething problems. 

I was in the San Diego area on a demo, and an Amtrak coast line train with six coaches (from memory) arrived with an Amtrak "pepsi-can" 12 cylinder B32-8.  There was a fuel truck there, and I had a conversation with the driver.  He told me that his job was to refill the diesel from that train.  He also told me that "since Amtrak began running these new locomotives, his revenue had been cut almost in half."  (The former power used on the train was an Amtrak F40.)

These Amtrak Genesis are also very fast.  I heard confidentially from RR sources that Via Rail tested one, perhaps light and with the speed limiting software disabled, and it touched 126 mph.  I also know that an Amtrak Dual-Mode B32 (with AC traction motors) was tested and reached 128 mph at the DOT Pueblo, CO facility.

I don't know what the final verdict from Amtrak will be in regard to these locomotives, but any motive power unit that remains on a roster in quantity for over 27 years, Amtrak capital funding notwithstanding, must be pretty good, in my opinion.