Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Do passenger trains always have priority over freight trains?

8921 views
19 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Los Alamitos, California
  • 322 posts
Posted by Oakhurst Railroad Engineer on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:55 PM

To summarize your great responses ...

Passenger trains USUALLY have priority, but there are many interesting exceptions!

www.oakhurstrailroad.com

"Oakhurst Railroad" on Facebook

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: US
  • 1,522 posts
Posted by AltonFan on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:59 PM

Livestock trains were given priority because livestock had to be removed from their cars, rested, and fed every 33 hours.

Dan

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:02 PM

I remember my Dad telling the story several times of coming back from basic training in Mineral Wells, Texas to his home in Minneapolis for leave. From Texas to Kansas City they rode in freight cars - I showed him pics of the 50' Pullman troop sleepers made from 50' boxcars, but he said it was 'nothing that nice' - and at one point they got put on a sidetrack. They all got up to see what was coming, since they figured troop trains must get no.1 priority. Ended up the train that rolled by was a stock train !! My Dad loved pointing out that as a soldier he was apparently a step below a hog in rank.

On the flip side, from Kansas City to Minneapolis he rode the streamlined "Rock Island Rocket"...pretty much experiencing the extremes of WW2 rail travel, all in one trip !

 BTW the USRA was WW1 not WW2. Smile

Stix
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: US
  • 1,522 posts
Posted by AltonFan on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 3:48 PM

GP-20

well what about a millitary train? if the military has some train filled with say, ammunition? i would think that during the second world war that passenger trains, unless its filled with soldiers, that the USRA would permit such army trains to pass passenger trains. could that play a factor in deciding whether or not a passenger train goes into a siding?

 As near as I can tell, during WWII, ammunition was shipped as part of regular frieght trains.  The only issue would be making sure the proper safety procedures for handling explosives were followed.

And remember, most war materiel wasn't going directly to the front.  It was going to a seaport for loading onto convoy ships.

And although you didn't mention it, troop trains usually operated as following sections of regularly scheduled passenger trains.

Dan

  • Member since
    March 2010
  • 1 posts
Posted by GP-20 on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 2:14 PM

well what about a millitary train? if the military has some train filled with say, ammunition? i would think that during the second world war that passenger trains, unless its filled with soldiers, that the USRA would permit such army trains to pass passenger trains. could that play a factor in deciding whether or not a passenger train goes into a siding?

  • Member since
    August 2001
  • From: Nebraska
  • 1,280 posts
Posted by RedGrey62 on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 12:14 PM

I believe a relatively recent question on this was in the magazine, it was either Koester or Darnaby (IIRC)was indicating that sometimes freights were given priority because it was easier to get a passenger train moving.  So if there was a long grade, keep the freight going at speed and put the passenger train in the hole for the meet.

Ricky

"...Mother Nature will always punish the incompetent and uninformed." Bill Barney from Thor's Legions
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: US
  • 1,522 posts
Posted by AltonFan on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 10:05 AM

IRONROOSTER

 For mail, weren't there performance requirements in the contracts?  That is the railroad had to deliver within a certain amount of time of receipt or follow a schedule?

Enjoy

Paul

I seem to remember a postal regulation that required that mail be carried in the first section of a paasenger train.

I also seem to remember that "silk trains", which carried live silkworms from Pacific coast ports were given priority over everything else on the route.

 

["I seem to remember."  Sounds funny, I know.  But it's been a while since I read up on this stuff, and in any case, the neurons don't fire quite they way they used to.]

Dan

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:25 AM

IRONROOSTER
For mail, weren't there performance requirements in the contracts?  That is the railroad had to deliver within a certain amount of time of receipt or follow a schedule?

Probably yes, but the requirements were probably looser than you would think.  They could be expressed in days and the railroad probably built in 8-12 hours or more cushion on the committments.  Parcel Post was probably very loose ("...allow 4-6 weeks for delivery..."). 

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
  • 13,757 posts
Posted by cacole on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:23 AM

If you fast forward to modern times, Amtrak is at the mercy of the Union Pacific dispatch center out here in the wild west, and UP freight trains always seem to take priority over passenger trains.  It seems to be a very unusual occurrance if Amtrak is on time.

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 7:55 AM

IRONROOSTER

 For mail, weren't there performance requirements in the contracts?  That is the railroad had to deliver within a certain amount of time of receipt or follow a schedule?

Enjoy

Paul

Ya I think there was. If nothing else, the railroad would be concerned that if it performed poorly, the lucrative mail contract could be shifted to another railroad.

Keep in mind re the main topic that many railroads operated scheduled freight trains that ran on schedules similar to passenger trains. Plus of course railroads worked to keep things running smoothly, so they tried to schedule things as much as possible so trains wouldn't be clogging up the mainline. Mail trains for example often operated at night, so they didn't have to compete with daytime-only trains and commuter trains etc.

Also if a railroad had a hotshot freight that needed to get thru, it could treat it like a second (or third or fourth) section of a top of the line passenger train, so it would be running on basically the same schedule, just a few minutes later.

Stix
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: Culpeper, Va
  • 8,204 posts
Posted by IRONROOSTER on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 7:21 AM

 For mail, weren't there performance requirements in the contracts?  That is the railroad had to deliver within a certain amount of time of receipt or follow a schedule?

Enjoy

Paul

If you're having fun, you're doing it the right way.
  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Boone Iowa
  • 520 posts
Posted by cnwfan51 on Monday, March 22, 2010 7:58 PM

    As stated in the above posts there were trains that did have a higher priority the passenger trains, On Thrusday night out of Omaha many years ago the CGW  CNW and IC rr all ran meat rrains from Omaha to Chicago, and these trains had rights over everything else on the nights they operated,    Thse trains were staged to deliver meat to the Chicago markets on Friday and SaturdaysLarry

larry ackerman
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 23,330 posts
Posted by selector on Monday, March 22, 2010 6:35 PM

Meat trains were also given higher priority over passenger trains.  As stated a few posts above, perhaps in the form of a question, reefers with time-sensitive contents were assigned priority over pretty much anything powered and trailed on the rails.  This is where the Mountain, Berkshire, and Northern classes of steamers really paid for themselves because these trains needed lots of horsepower and speed.

-Crandell

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Monday, March 22, 2010 1:43 PM

wjstix

I'd think so, if the route ahead was blocked due to a derailment or landslide etc. you'd want to get the wreck crew up there first to clear the way for the other trains.

While it has high priority, it is also comparatively rare.  A wrecker train might operate once every couple thousand or more trains.  Lets say a line has 24 trains a day, that's 8760 trains a year.  If they run a wrecker once every other month that means that .07% of the trains are wrecker specials. Very, very rare.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Monday, March 22, 2010 12:54 PM

 

Dave-the-Train

Am I correct on this that US Mail would get priority over Passenger with mail, over passenger...

Generally mail was either hauled in separate mail trains, or by trains there weren't the "top of the line" of the railroad. I'm not aware of anything saying overall that trains with mail had top priority, but since it was to the railroad's benefit to get the mail there on time, making sure a mail train got thru on time would be a top consideration in the mind of any dispatchers...so it's possible you could have a situation where a passenger train might be put in the hole to allow a mail train to go thru, even if the mail train would normally be of lower status/priority than the other train.

One instance of a "freight" train being superior to passenger trains would be the silk trains run in the twenties and thirties, like the Great Northern for example. Since silk was so valuable and fragile, solid silk trains of express reefers would get the right of way over all other trains - even the Oriental Limited or Empire Builder might have to take a siding to clear the way for an eastbound silk train.

Dave-the-Train

In all that would I be right in thinking that a wreck train going to clear the line gets priority over everything?

I'd think so, if the route ahead was blocked due to a derailment or landslide etc. you'd want to get the wreck crew up there first to clear the way for the other trains.

 

Stix
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Monday, March 22, 2010 11:39 AM

Dave-the-Train

Am I correct in thinking that a example of this would be that westbound trains had superiority over eastbound trains (or vice versa) through a length of line or a whole division if that is what the TT stated... which could be over-ridden by TOs?

As grizlump said, a train can be superior by right, class or direction. Class and right were conferred by timetable. Right was conferred by train order. First class trains were superior to 2nd class trains, etc. The timetable specified the superior direction. Extra trains had no superiority by class or direction.

Am I correct on this that US Mail would get priority over Passenger with mail, over passenger

Not necessarily.

... then you would get into Reefers/time and temperature sensitive freight, then unit trains like TOFC, falling through unit trains of autoracks,

Ignoring that TOFC trains and auto trains aren't technically unit trains, the priority is generally the more time sensitive trains toward the top and less time sensitive towards the bottom. But it can vary depending on the location and the immediate circumstances. Priority can vary from day to day, even from hour to hour, from individual train to individual train. A "TOFC" might be hot for only a portion of its route and then a dog for the rest. An auto train carrying parts spotters for production might be hotter than one TOFC train with next day box availability, but not hotter than another TOFC train with a same day box availability. A grain train might be hotter than a doublestack train, an empty coal train might be hotter than an auto parts or stack train.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    November 2008
  • 1,205 posts
Posted by grizlump9 on Monday, March 22, 2010 7:37 AM

 one train is superior to another by right, class, or direction.    right is conferred by train order, class and direction are conferred by timetable authority.  or some such gibberish.  i haven't attended a book or rules class in 20 years.

grizlump

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 2,299 posts
Posted by Dave-the-Train on Monday, March 22, 2010 7:15 AM

dehusman
Superiority is granted by the timetable schedule and concerns how the trains move with respect to each other under timetable and train order rules (TT&TO). 

Am I correct in thinking that a example of this would be that westbound trains had superiority over eastbound trains (or vice versa) through a length of line or a whole division if that is what the TT stated... which could be over-ridden by TOs?

dehusman
Priority is a management decision based on the business conditions or value of the business.

Am I correct on this that US Mail would get priority over Passenger with mail, over passenger... then you would get into Reefers/time and temperature sensitive freight, then unit trains like TOFC, falling through unit trains of autoracks, oil, coal and such to manifest with local freights at the bottom of the pile.  (I realise that I'm somewhat mixing eras here)

In all that would I be right in thinking that a wreck train going to clear the line gets priority over everything?

Thanks

Approve

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Monday, March 22, 2010 6:35 AM

Two things here : superiority and priority.

Superiority is granted by the timetable schedule and concerns how the trains move with respect to each other under timetable and train order rules (TT&TO).  Priority is a management decision based on the business conditions or value of the business.

Up until the late 1980's passenger trains always started superior to freight trains, since passneger trains were first class trains.  After the late 1980's, the railrads mostly did away with TT&TO operation so to a large part superiority went away and it was purely priority.

Passenger trains would have both priority and superiority up through the 1960's.  From the 1960's on, the passenger train's importance dwindled, so there was less incentive to prioritize it and gradually the dispatchers favored freights a little more.  Over the last decade or so the pendulum has begun to swing the other way.

So in the 1920's-1930's it would be less acceptable to delay a passenger train, in the 1970's-1990's it might be a little more acceptable. 

 

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Los Alamitos, California
  • 322 posts
Do passenger trains always have priority over freight trains?
Posted by Oakhurst Railroad Engineer on Monday, March 22, 2010 12:55 AM

Doing some planning for operations.  I was wondering under what conditions freight trains might have scheduling priority over passenger trains?  I would think that passenger trains have priority under almost all cases.  Does the answer change if I said I was modeling the 1920's - 1930's rather than modern times?

 Thanks,

Marty

www.oakhurstrailroad.com

"Oakhurst Railroad" on Facebook

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!