# How to spot P40's



## printman2000 (Apr 24, 2009)

I think this has been asked before, but I got no results from the search for P40.

Since there will be P40's back on the road in the near future, I was wondering how I can spot them other than by their number. Anyone know things to look for?


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (Apr 24, 2009)

I noticed that the P40 has less vents on the top like if you look at both from the side the P42 has more vents then the P40 Let me find that pic it got posted here i think yesterday


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (Apr 24, 2009)

I think that this shot helps.







I have a shot of P40 in the new paint working in CT I will post when I get home.


----------



## Ryan (Apr 24, 2009)

This one? 

(I see you found it)

The vents look the same to me.

Yeah, definitely the same - I can't see any differences.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?...0785&nseq=2


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (Apr 24, 2009)

Whoops those are both P40's I just looked at the number with the new paint and just noticed its 832 so its a P40 as well...


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (Apr 24, 2009)

HokieNav said:


> This one?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah that one :lol: :lol: even though turns out that doesn't even show what I wanted


----------



## Ryan (Apr 24, 2009)

(I edited my post to remove the repetition of my really awful photography) 

I linked to a side view of a P42, I'm not seeing any differences.


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (Apr 24, 2009)

HokieNav said:


> (I edited my post to remove the repetition of my really awful photography)
> I linked to a side view of a P42, I'm not seeing any differences.


:lol: Sorry to use your picture Hope you don't mind. And yeah now that I look at it more I am wrong  like thats never happened before :lol: :lol: 

I guess I have to wait and see. Well right off the bat P42 are Numbered no higher then 2XX while P40's are 8XX so thats one way that I know is right


----------



## oldtimer (Apr 24, 2009)

In addition to the numbers isn't there a difference in the rear doors, IE one has a window and the other does not. It has been a long time since I was in one I don't remember which one was which. The mechanicals are very different.


----------



## MattW (Apr 24, 2009)

P40s have a hostler's stand for moving around a yard. It's limited to 10mph, but it's probably useful.


----------



## Acela150 (Apr 24, 2009)

those stands were removed years ago. also another way to tell the diffrence is the doors on the side by the engine conpartment. the p40 has it on the left the p42 on both sides.

stephen


----------



## Dutchrailnut (Apr 24, 2009)

MattW said:


> P40s have a hostler's stand for moving around a yard. It's limited to 10mph, but it's probably useful.


The Hostler stands were blanked years ago, no instruments or buttons left in them.

Yes the P40 has Hostler window, the P42 only has window in rear door.


----------



## Dutchrailnut (Apr 24, 2009)

Acela150 said:


> those stands were removed years ago. also another way to tell the diffrence is the doors on the side by the engine conpartment. the p40 has it on the left the p42 on both sides.
> stephen


If you look at the shot in second or third post you see the P40 has door at both sides as well.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 24, 2009)

Dutchrailnut said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> > those stands were removed years ago. also another way to tell the diffrence is the doors on the side by the engine conpartment. the p40 has it on the left the p42 on both sides.
> ...


He's right.. those engines are nose to nose. The one in the old livery is showing off the right side of the engine (from the Engineer's view) and the one in front of it is showing off the opposite side. So unless they put right doors on half, and left doors on the other half-- there's no way. They may have been refitted or something, it's more logical to have a door on each side anyway.


----------



## battalion51 (Apr 25, 2009)

There is a door on each side. It's hard to tell it's there in the Phase IV scheme, but it's there. The differences between a P-40 and P-42 are almost exclusively mechanical. Pretty much the only way you can tell the difference is if you're sitting the Engineers seat or poking around under the hood.


----------



## Mark (Apr 25, 2009)

From what I've read the refurbished P40s will be assigned to LD service. Any particular reason for that? I mean since they have, (or will be), pretty much been upgraded to P42 specs, (as far as I know), then it shouldn't really matter where there assigned.


----------



## battalion51 (Apr 25, 2009)

Well considering Amtrak doesn't have any P-40's in active service, I don't really see how that's possible. Most of the fleet was mothballed a few years back. Some of the units are still running having been leased by CDOT or by being bought by NJT. But the ones that Amtrak owns are stored serviceable.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 25, 2009)

Mark said:


> From what I've read the refurbished P40s will be assigned to LD service. Any particular reason for that? I mean since they have, (or will be), pretty much been upgraded to P42 specs, (as far as I know), then it shouldn't really matter where there assigned.


They're up to P42 specs? Including fuel consumption and power effciency?


----------



## AlanB (Apr 25, 2009)

battalion51 said:


> Well considering Amtrak doesn't have any P-40's in active service, I don't really see how that's possible. Most of the fleet was mothballed a few years back. Some of the units are still running having been leased by CDOT or by being bought by NJT. But the ones that Amtrak owns are stored serviceable.


And now thanks to the Stimulus package, 15 of them are heading to BG for an overhaul, before being returned to active service.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 25, 2009)

AlanB said:


> battalion51 said:
> 
> 
> > Well considering Amtrak doesn't have any P-40's in active service, I don't really see how that's possible. Most of the fleet was mothballed a few years back. Some of the units are still running having been leased by CDOT or by being bought by NJT. But the ones that Amtrak owns are stored serviceable.
> ...


I didn't know Amtrak was running short on motive-power... are they?


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 25, 2009)

battalion51 said:


> Well considering Amtrak doesn't have any P-40's in active service, I don't really see how that's possible. Most of the fleet was mothballed a few years back. Some of the units are still running having been leased by CDOT or by being bought by NJT. But the ones that Amtrak owns are stored serviceable.


I'm almost positive most of them are actually stored dead.

Oh, and they have plenty of power for their current system. If they plan on adding routes, and I hear they are, they will need more!


----------



## AlanB (Apr 25, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> battalion51 said:
> 
> 
> > Well considering Amtrak doesn't have any P-40's in active service, I don't really see how that's possible. Most of the fleet was mothballed a few years back. Some of the units are still running having been leased by CDOT or by being bought by NJT. But the ones that Amtrak owns are stored serviceable.
> ...


Correct, they are on the books as "stored dead." And for that matter the CDOT units are no leased to CDOT, Amtrak sold them off to CDOT several months back.



Green Maned Lion said:


> ALC_Rail_Writer said:
> 
> 
> > I didn't know Amtrak was running short on motive-power... are they?
> ...


It's not so much that they have a lack of power, but as noted by GML, Amtrak is adding a few routes in Virginia for certain. There is a very serious possibilty of a new short haul route out of Chicago, and of course the possibility of something east of NOL with the study nearing completion. And then there are the extra Superliner cars that will be coming out of BG thanks to the Stimulus that will be increasing consist lengths and perhaps require extra power for certain trains. Finally it will serve to give Amtrak a bit more cushion for when things go wrong and more locos than estimated end up in the shop.

It probably even gives them some extra flexibility on the NEC, should new electric motors be delayed, they could once again go back to swapping locos at Philly, instead of DC.


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Apr 25, 2009)

well if there stored dead they need to get them up and running.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 25, 2009)

It really just seems that Amtrak looses a lot of units in a year-- between wrecks fires and seizures--

Any chance these P40's will come out of BG with their old livery just for kicks? would make some awesome shots...


----------



## Neil_M (Apr 25, 2009)

KISS_ALIVE said:


> well if there stored dead they need to get them up and running.


I am fairly sure they have worked that out by now......


----------



## battalion51 (Apr 25, 2009)

ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> Mark said:
> 
> 
> > From what I've read the refurbished P40s will be assigned to LD service. Any particular reason for that? I mean since they have, (or will be), pretty much been upgraded to P42 specs, (as far as I know), then it shouldn't really matter where there assigned.
> ...


AFAIK there are negligible differences between the two in this regard. The biggest difference between the two is in the braking system. A P-42 works with electronic braking whereas a P-40 has an old school brake system like an F-40. The old brakes work better for long trains like AT, which is part of the reason they had a captive fleet for so many years. Don't be surprised if you see them fight for their fleet of motors back.


----------



## Ryan (Apr 25, 2009)

AlanB said:


> battalion51 said:
> 
> 
> > Well considering Amtrak doesn't have any P-40's in active service, I don't really see how that's possible. Most of the fleet was mothballed a few years back. Some of the units are still running having been leased by CDOT or by being bought by NJT. But the ones that Amtrak owns are stored serviceable.
> ...


Precisely - from a post by Rafi in the thread where I reported the P40's @ Ivy:



Rafi said:


> Thanks for that link, MadMan...
> I also stumbled across this little nugget on page 68-69 (I've added bold to call out main points which may be of interest to some forum members):
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Amtrak839 (Apr 25, 2009)

HokieNav said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > battalion51 said:
> ...



One thing not quite right about the list of engines to be returned to service: 839 will be coming back, not 807. 807 was wrecked in the City of New Orleans derailment in 1999. If you look at my user name, you'll see why I had to point that out.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 25, 2009)

Well I suppose its good that BG is creating work for not just workers, but part manufacturers and shippers and painters and paint makers and such. The only question I have now is...

With these new locos lined up outside the door-- will the rush the Heritage refurbs out of the shop so they can get on the LSL and replace that godforsaken Diner-Lite?


----------



## AlanB (Apr 25, 2009)

ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> It really just seems that Amtrak looses a lot of units in a year-- between wrecks fires and seizures--


They haven't lost that many of them, of the original 207 motors brought, 199 are still active. And of the 9 currently off the active roster, I believe that only about 4 or 5 of them are either considered beyond repair or already scrapped. Sadly one of the best sources for this type of data Goby's trains seems to have bitten the dust.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 25, 2009)

AlanB said:


> ALC_Rail_Writer said:
> 
> 
> > It really just seems that Amtrak looses a lot of units in a year-- between wrecks fires and seizures--
> ...


An omen for the other 199 then?

How many of the 199 are currently being used. What I mean is, how many of them go out onto the road on any given day-- certainly they don't use all 199.

As for the P40s, how many were bought and how many are in the mothballed fleet?


----------



## AlanB (Apr 25, 2009)

ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> How many of the 199 are currently being used. What I mean is, how many of them go out onto the road on any given day-- certainly they don't use all 199.


I honestly don't know just how many they need to have on the road on any given day. If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say between 120 to 150.



ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> As for the P40s, how many were bought and how many are in the mothballed fleet?


There were originally 43 purchased by Amtrak, by 2003 only 38 were still active so I have to assume that there were a few wrecks along the way. Prior to all the P40's being retired, there were still 10 on the active list, with most of the rest having already been mothballed. As Battalion noted, those units were largely used on the Auto Train because the P40's handling better suited that particular train.

With the 10 that have now been sold to CDOT and NJT, that left 28 units in mothballs, of which of course 15 will now get a second lease on life.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 25, 2009)

Amtrak839 said:


> One thing not quite right about the list of engines to be returned to service: 839 will be coming back, not 807. 807 was wrecked in the City of New Orleans derailment in 1999. If you look at my user name, you'll see why I had to point that out.


Something is wrong here, as 839 is not listed as stored dead, which to me would indicate that it's been wrecked and even possibly scrapped. It wasn't one of the 10 that were sold either.

As for 807, it was indeed one of the locos on the City that fateful day, but it was the lead loco and the least damaged loco, despite landing on its side. It was 829 that burned for 90 minutes and led to the fire in the sleeper that killed the 11 people in that accident.

I'm not saying that you're wrong, just that things don't add up here.


----------



## Geoff_S (Apr 25, 2009)

AlanB said:


> ALC_Rail_Writer said:
> 
> 
> > It really just seems that Amtrak looses a lot of units in a year-- between wrecks fires and seizures--
> ...


The gobytrain.us site has been having problems with the supplier of the server space failing to process the renewal payment. A longer term solution is being worked on, with the URL remaining the same but with the data on a new server.

In the meantime a temporary form of the site is now back and running at

a temporary site address

I concur with the rough numbers of P42's that could be beyond repair.

143 and 149 have been dismantled and very little remains of them.

8 may be beyond repair.

3, 7 and 200 may get repaired.

32, 167 and 173 will probably be repaired.

Of those potentially repairable, until this month 78 was the longest out of service (fire in Jun 2006), but that one has just been repaired and is now back in service.

Geoff_S


----------



## AlanB (Apr 25, 2009)

Geoff,

I'm glad to hear that all is not lost, as your site was and is a valuable resource IMHO. Thanks for chiming in to let us know where to find it.

And thanks for the minu update!


----------



## Geoff_S (Apr 25, 2009)

AlanB said:


> Something is wrong here, as 839 is not listed as stored dead, which to me would indicate that it's been wrecked and even possibly scrapped. It wasn't one of the 10 that were sold either.
> As for 807, it was indeed one of the locos on the City that fateful day, but it was the lead loco and the least damaged loco, despite landing on its side. It was 829 that burned for 90 minutes and led to the fire in the sleeper that killed the 11 people in that accident.
> 
> I'm not saying that you're wrong, just that things don't add up here.


800 to 806: Stored Bear/Wilmington DE

807: Scrapped Beech Grove (Wreck Boubonnais IL 16MAR1999)

808: Sold to NJTransit NJT4801

809: Stored Bear/Wilmington DE

810: Sold to NJTransit NJT4802

811: Stored Bear/Wilmington DE

812: Sold to NJTransit NJT4800

813 to 818: Stored Bear/Wilmington DE

819: Scrapped (Wreck Big Bayou Canot 22SEP1993)

820: Sold to NJTransit NJT4803

821: Ivy City, Washington DC (April 2009)

822 to 828: Stored Bear/Wilmington DE

829: Scrapped Beech Grove (Wreck Boubonnais IL 16MAR1999)

830, 831, 837:  Stored Bear/Wilmington DE

Former Auto Train Units (Phase Vb paint)

832: Ivy City Yard, Washington DC (April 2009)

833, 834: Sold to Conn DOT

835: Stored Bear/Wilmington DE

836, 838: Sold to Conn DOT

839: Stored Bear/Wilmington DE

840 to 842: Conn DOT

The Stimulus plan lists 15 for overhaul and return to long distance service: 807*, 814, 815, 816, 817, 818, 821, 822, 823, 824, 830, 831, 832, 835, 837.

* 807 seems to be an error and could really be 839 or one another.

Geoff_S


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Apr 25, 2009)

AlanB said:


> It's not so much that they have a lack of power, but as noted by GML, Amtrak is adding a few routes in Virginia for certain. There is a very serious possibilty of a new short haul route out of Chicago, and of course the possibility of something east of NOL with the study nearing completion. And then there are the extra Superliner cars that will be coming out of BG thanks to the Stimulus that will be increasing consist lengths and perhaps require extra power for certain trains. Finally it will serve to give Amtrak a bit more cushion for when things go wrong and more locos than estimated end up in the shop.
> It probably even gives them some extra flexibility on the NEC, should new electric motors be delayed, they could once again go back to swapping locos at Philly, instead of DC.


The other problem that has been occuring, at least within the last year or two if it isn't still occuring now, is that sometimes the parts of a P42 that are critical to producing HEP will fail while an LD train is out on the road.

Routinely running long distance trains with a single locomotive that has no redundant HEP generating capabilities in places where the nearest other locomotive capable of producing HEP is typically many hours away with rolling stock whose tempature does not stay within the range that is particularily safe for people inside in some weather when HEP is unavailable does not strike me as a very good idea.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 25, 2009)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > It's not so much that they have a lack of power, but as noted by GML, Amtrak is adding a few routes in Virginia for certain. There is a very serious possibilty of a new short haul route out of Chicago, and of course the possibility of something east of NOL with the study nearing completion. And then there are the extra Superliner cars that will be coming out of BG thanks to the Stimulus that will be increasing consist lengths and perhaps require extra power for certain trains. Finally it will serve to give Amtrak a bit more cushion for when things go wrong and more locos than estimated end up in the shop.
> ...


So the idea is trains may get a second (or third unit) or a P42 replaced with a P40 in order to ensure HEP. Why would the P40's be any better at getting HEP anyway, just designed better?


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (Apr 25, 2009)

ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> Joel N. Weber II said:
> 
> 
> > AlanB said:
> ...


I think so because when NJT bought a few P40s they had to change the HEP to work with NJT cars maybe there all like that I have no idea.


----------



## Geoff_S (Apr 25, 2009)

ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> How many of the 199 are currently being used. What I mean is, how many of them go out onto the road on any given day-- certainly they don't use all 199.


The last figures I saw for P42s (a few months back) was that 161 are required for service each day (including protect power) and 29 should be on maintenance at any one time.

Geoff_S


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 25, 2009)

Geoff_S said:


> ALC_Rail_Writer said:
> 
> 
> > How many of the 199 are currently being used. What I mean is, how many of them go out onto the road on any given day-- certainly they don't use all 199.
> ...


Which means that they only have 10 spares. These 15 P40's would come in great handy then, you could keep the 10 P42 spares and integrate the P40's onto the road to solve HEP problems and add cars to the consists as they come out of BG.

Now THIS is stimulus!


----------



## AlanB (Apr 25, 2009)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> The other problem that has been occuring, at least within the last year or two if it isn't still occuring now, is that sometimes the parts of a P42 that are critical to producing HEP will fail while an LD train is out on the road.
> Routinely running long distance trains with a single locomotive that has no redundant HEP generating capabilities in places where the nearest other locomotive capable of producing HEP is typically many hours away with rolling stock whose tempature does not stay within the range that is particularily safe for people inside in some weather when HEP is unavailable does not strike me as a very good idea.


To my knowledge the only LD Amtrak routes that routinely run with only one loco are the City of New Orleans, and the Cardinal. Everything else has at least two, if not three locos on it, so therefore I don't see this as a huge problem and it's very unlikely that the P40's are being reactivated simply to help protect against HEP failures.

The P40's are coming back in part because Amtrak has the money right now to restore them, and because the number of daily trains has increased since they were mothballed and that number is further expected to increase in the coming months.


----------



## printman2000 (Apr 26, 2009)

AlanB said:


> Joel N. Weber II said:
> 
> 
> > The other problem that has been occuring, at least within the last year or two if it isn't still occuring now, is that sometimes the parts of a P42 that are critical to producing HEP will fail while an LD train is out on the road.
> ...


I think the Texas Eagle usually only runs with one as well.


----------



## Amtrak839 (Apr 26, 2009)

Some consider the Palmetto to be a LD train. That also only runs with one unit.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 26, 2009)

Amtrak839 said:


> Some consider the Palmetto to be a LD train. That also only runs with one unit.


I would hesitate to call it an LD train, but that's my opinion. I'd love to see the Silver Palm brought back-- then I'll call it an LD train.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 26, 2009)

Amtrak839 said:


> Some consider the Palmetto to be a LD train. That also only runs with one unit.


That's interesting since last I knew, Amtrak had an agreement with CSX not to send trains south of Richmond with only one engine. CSX and Amtrak came to that agreement after several P42 failures left trains stranded on CSX mains.

I hadn't heard that the restriction had been lifted.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 26, 2009)

AlanB said:


> Amtrak839 said:
> 
> 
> > Some consider the Palmetto to be a LD train. That also only runs with one unit.
> ...





Looks like it--


----------



## AlanB (Apr 26, 2009)

printman2000 said:


> I think the Texas Eagle usually only runs with one as well.


You're right, I forgot about the Eagle.


----------



## Amtrak839 (Apr 26, 2009)

AlanB said:


> Amtrak839 said:
> 
> 
> > Some consider the Palmetto to be a LD train. That also only runs with one unit.
> ...


Interesting. I've railfanned regularly at ALX for more than a year, and have only seen the Palmetto with 2 engines once.


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Apr 27, 2009)

Neil_M said:


> KISS_ALIVE said:
> 
> 
> > well if there stored dead they need to get them up and running.
> ...


doubt it there just now figuring it out sense there getting money,


----------



## battalion51 (Apr 27, 2009)

Alan, the Palmetto definitionally qualifies as a medium distance train, and therefore does not require the second motor like the Silver trains do. The basic rule is if you have to be refueled en route on CSX rails you need a second motor.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 27, 2009)

battalion51 said:


> Alan, the Palmetto definitionally qualifies as a medium distance train, and therefore does not require the second motor like the Silver trains do. The basic rule is if you have to be refueled en route on CSX rails you need a second motor.


Actually I don't recall ever stating that the Palmetto was either a LD or medium distance train. :blink:

But I do have to say that it's an interesting definition that lists the Palmetto as a medium distance train, seeing as how it travels further than the Capitol Limited does.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 27, 2009)

AlanB said:


> battalion51 said:
> 
> 
> > Alan, the Palmetto definitionally qualifies as a medium distance train, and therefore does not require the second motor like the Silver trains do. The basic rule is if you have to be refueled en route on CSX rails you need a second motor.
> ...


Yeah.

I'm actually quite confused as to why the Palmetto doesn't run with a second unit-- the longer they're on the road the more chance there is for something to go wrong with the HEP.

Though the Palmetto doesn't have to climb the same mountains that the CL does between CUM and PGH... the Palm has a pretty flat route.


----------



## battalion51 (Apr 27, 2009)

AlanB said:


> battalion51 said:
> 
> 
> > Alan, the Palmetto definitionally qualifies as a medium distance train, and therefore does not require the second motor like the Silver trains do. The basic rule is if you have to be refueled en route on CSX rails you need a second motor.
> ...


Heavier train with steeper grades to deal with...


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 27, 2009)

battalion51 said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > battalion51 said:
> ...


Alan wasn't talking about the rigors of the route-- merely stating that it would be odd to call the CL a "LD train" and the Palmetto a "medium distance train" when the Palmetto's route is longer than the CL's by about 100 miles. Not length of time... length of route.

"Long distance" only refers to the length of the route in miles rather than in hours-- normally LD trains are sleepers, however in the Palmettos case it actually travels more miles than some LD trains and yet it it's called "medium distance" like the Penny. The words "day train" and "overnight" might be more applicable to help with the ambiguity here.


----------



## Ryan (Apr 27, 2009)

FWIW, 821 and 832 were still sitting in Ivy City this afternoon (I was "asleep on the job" for the train ride in this morning and didn't wake up until the train stopped), so they didn't depart on the Cardinal over the weekend.

If they are headed to BG, wonder what they're waiting for?


----------



## AlanB (Apr 27, 2009)

ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> battalion51 said:
> 
> 
> > AlanB said:
> ...


And just for the record, Amtrak considers the Palmetto a long distance train. It's not lumped in with the State Sponsored/short haul trains, it is clasified as a long distance train in all stats.


----------



## battalion51 (Apr 28, 2009)

I figured it out! The Palmetto may cover more miles over the duration of its ENTIRE trip, but its trip over freight rails is definitely shorter than the CL. The Palmetto has a required engine change each day, whereas the CL doesn't (same goes for the Carolinian).


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (Apr 28, 2009)

HokieNav said:


> FWIW,


Usually pretty good on these things what's FWIW stand for?


----------



## Ryan (Apr 28, 2009)

For what it's worth


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (Apr 28, 2009)

HokieNav said:


> For what it's worth


:lol: Thanks usually I can figure those out on my own but that time I couldn't think of it.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Apr 28, 2009)

battalion51 said:


> I figured it out! The Palmetto may cover more miles over the duration of its ENTIRE trip, but its trip over freight rails is definitely shorter than the CL. The Palmetto has a required engine change each day, whereas the CL doesn't (same goes for the Carolinian).


By George he's got it!


----------

