Amtrak Question?

RailCanon · Unread post by **RailCanon** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:23 pm

For those of us who are very avid Amtrak fans, the following picture, taken in Durand this morning by Chrisracer8903, may come as a surprise.

Is Amtrak starting to retro-fit more units with ITCS???

amtrak1007 · Unread post by **amtrak1007** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 11:16 pm

No AMTK14 isn't ITCS equipped. It must have been subbing on that line for the time being.

ITCS Equipped Loco's
AMTK 026-037
AMTK 126-128

Enjoy...
-amtrak1007

RailCanon · Unread post by **RailCanon** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 11:18 pm

I don't think they can run on that line without the special equipment. Remember back in January when they detoured the Cap and LSL? They used one of the ITCS equipped units on the point of every train for the run through Michigan.

amtrak1007 · Unread post by **amtrak1007** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 11:28 pm

The detoured trains used a ITCS equipped so that they could keep timetable speeds to keep the delays down. If the trains aren't ITCS equipped the train is limited to 79 mph. The same rules would apply on the former ATSF with the ATCS system.

leo28150 · Unread post by **leo28150** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 10:39 am

Look for more 'foreign' engines on our trains as the ITCS has been shut down for 6 weeks for some tweaks and upgrades; I believe our rear unit on 354 late night was #61

GLC 392 · Unread post by **GLC 392** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 11:12 am

i would like to see some of the P32-8 (8-32BWH) come through on 364 and 365.

RailCanon · Unread post by **RailCanon** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 11:31 am

GLC 392 wrote:i would like to see some of the P32-8 (8-32BWH) come through on 364 and 365.

I second that! Man I miss those units... last time I saw one was in 2003.

leo28150 · Unread post by **leo28150** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 1:16 pm

I can tell you NOBODY who has to run them does; these engines are such dogs that we don't use a speedometer, we use a sundial to check our speed...

amtrak1007 · Unread post by **amtrak1007** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 4:25 pm

Ahhh the struggle between performance and practically.

GP30M4216 · Unread post by **GP30M4216** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 12:11 am

Are those reactivated Metroliner coach cars down the line in that Durand photo or just regular Amfleet coaches which are visiting for some reason? I thought I spotted the consist in Kzoo from band rehearsal and from the roof line, I thought I spied those amfleet/metroliner roofs on more than one car.

RailCanon · Unread post by **RailCanon** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 12:14 am

They are plain-jane Amfleet coaches. They've been on the Blue Water for a while now, and hopefully they will remain on the train for the time being.

SDavey · Unread post by **SDavey** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 1:11 am

My question is why not just use the ITCS equipped engines anyways keeping within the speed limits or will they be used system wide during this period?

Is Amtrak going to do some repairs or preventive maintenance to those engines while the system is out of service.

leo28150 · Unread post by **leo28150** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 12:15 pm

We still are using the ITCS engines, they (the enginehouse guys in Chi) just put an engine on the train that was available, not necessarily an ITCS equipped motor--which surprises me that there wasn't an engine available to put on 352 the other day that came out without a rear unit/cab car.

amtrak1007 · Unread post by **amtrak1007** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:24 pm

SDavey wrote:My question is why not just use the ITCS equipped engines anyways keeping within the speed limits or will they be used system wide during this period?

Is Amtrak going to do some repairs or preventive maintenance to those engines while the system is out of service.

The Amtrak fleet is to small to have any units out for anything other than wreck repair. like leo28150 said, somebody in the Chicago diesel house didn't put one on that day. Now if they can take #31 of from 370/371 and give me something else to look at that'd be cool too... anything 30 or 32 maybe?

ns8401 · Unread post by **ns8401** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 3:46 pm

yesterday's 355 had #180 on it

csxt4617 · Unread post by **csxt4617** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:33 pm

There must be more to the ITCS than just being able to run more than 79. If that were the case, they wouldn't need freight units equipped with it for the Niles local (B1G)

Racer · Unread post by **Racer** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 9:47 pm

Hey! That's my photo!

-Chris

leo28150 · Unread post by **leo28150** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:01 am

Cxst, you are correct; the ITCS is tied in with the signal system and crossing signals, along with planned work areas, temporary and permenent speed restrictions. It is like a cab signal territory where as you need a leader equipped with the proper apparatus in order to run. You can run trains in the ITCS territory without the being equipped, but it takes a waiver from the FRA--and I don't think they will just hand them out account you showed up without a ITCS leader KNOWING that you need one.

amtrakjackson · Wed Oct 10, 2007 9:46 pm

Exactly, Lee. You can't just be issued a Rule 556 like in NORAC CSS territory to authorize running without ITCS equipment. In emergency situations, the written waivers can be received from the FRA (by fax), but
under normal conditions they'll say forget it. The FRA takes a dim view of disabling safety and signal appliances, even if they are an "overlay".

RailRoadFan.com

B1G - The Big Train

Amtrak Question?

Amtrak Question?

Metroliners/Amfleets?