Amtrak Roadrailers Going Away

[conrailman]

Amtrak Roadrailers will be gone by Oct.1. They are going to TripleCrown (NS) for their own use. How many Roadrailers does Amtrak have in Service. Will Amtrak make Millions by sale them to the NS. [:)]

[Mookie]

I hate to see that happen - that is the only way I ever got to see any at all!

Mookie

[TH&B]

Well I think it's a shame in one way. Amtark is critisized so much and European trains glorified but, one major critisism I have for passenger trains especialy in Europe compared especialy to intercity buses ((greyhound)) and airlines is that modern passenger trains carry only passengers.

Other modes carry other tarffic as well as passengers to help balance the sheets but a train wich has the potentail of carrying more cargo space and pul car loads somehow almost always carry only passengers.

In the old days passenger trains carryed express and mail and milkvans etc.... wich to me is what a train should do. So in that sense I regret the loss for Amtark to be a good potential example in this way by carrying express and refers and roadrailers.... why not? Too bad.

[Junctionfan]

I don't know why Amtrak and UPS never teamed up for joint roadrailer service. I like triple crown and all but I am concerned on the lack of competition in that field of intermodal service. I think roadrailer is the LTL answer to "next door" service because it is so easy to assemble so I am hoping that it stays that way.

[mudchicken]

Do they have enough high speed boxes to make-up the capacity slack. I know that some of the LTL freight will quit with loss of rubber tired flexibility.

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure how many road-railers we have (that's not my dept.), but, I had once heard that the truckers opposed Amtrak claiming unfair competition since Amtrak is a private corporation that is funded by the gov't. Then, again, the other possible scenario is: Amtrak is no longer interested in having road-railers. They usually limit our speed to 90mph maximum on the northeast corridor where we usually run at 125mph.

[Anonymous]

I'm sure its just another rumor, trains like the Three Rivers are almost all RoadRailers and would hurt if this happened.

[conrailman]

Them Roadrailers was a money pit from the Start when they got them also the BoxCars too. All that money they spend on the Railrailers and BoxCars should have went to buy more Cars? [?]

[Big_Boy_4005]

It doesn't seem like much of a loss for the few that ride the Empire Builder. The NS / UP Triple Crown service from Chicago to the Twin Cities makes a lot more sense, both in terms of schedule and efficency.

[jeaton]

On the face, it would seem that getting a few more bucks by adding some freight to already "bought and paid for" passenger trains would be a worthwhile effort.

Instead of having to go to the goverment there is no doubt that Dave Gunn would rather generate the cash needed by Amtrak from the business. He has a little training and experience in the process of digging through the numbers to get to the truth. For Amtrak, the express business is a looser and that is why Gunn is in the process of getting rid of it. Frankly, I don't think there is anybody that could prove him wrong.

[ericsp]

It seems like I heard on another thread that Amtrak got rid of its reefers. Is Amtrak getting out of the freight business?

[fuzzybroken]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

I don't know why Amtrak and UPS never teamed up for joint roadrailer service. I like triple crown and all but I am concerned on the lack of competition in that field of intermodal service. I think roadrailer is the LTL answer to "next door" service because it is so easy to assemble so I am hoping that it stays that way.

Probably wouldn't work for UPS, but I wouldn't put it past DHL. They're out for all the business they can get from UPS and FedEx!

-Mark
Milwaukee, WI
http://www.geocities.com/fuzzybroken

[fuzzybroken]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ericsp

It seems like I heard on another thread that Amtrak got rid of its reefers. Is Amtrak getting out of the freight business?

You know, that's actually kind of funny!?!

I think that Amtrak needs to re-think its image. Bolder "corporate" image i.e. paint and graphics, streamlined operations, improved marketing, different means of dependence on government. Unfortunately, it's that last item that will cause none of this to happen, but if, somehow, Amtrak could be run like a business and not like an arm of government, those who run it could really make something of it.

[2c],
-Mark
Milwaukee, WI
http://www.geocities.com/fuzzybroken

[MP57313]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 440cuin
So in that sense I regret the loss for Amtrak to be a good potential example in this way by carrying express and refers and roadrailers.... why not?

I heard elsewhere that the switching in or out of reefers or roadrailers mid-route caused noticeable delays to the trains, example SouthWest Chief in Kansas...

[ericsp]

QUOTE: Originally posted by fuzzybroken

QUOTE: Originally posted by ericsp

It seems like I heard on another thread that Amtrak got rid of its reefers. Is Amtrak getting out of the freight business?

You know, that's actually kind of funny!?!

I think that Amtrak needs to re-think its image. Bolder "corporate" image i.e. paint and graphics, streamlined operations, improved marketing, different means of dependence on government. Unfortunately, it's that last item that will cause none of this to happen, but if, somehow, Amtrak could be run like a business and not like an arm of government, those who run it could really make something of it.

[2c],
-Mark
Milwaukee, WI
http://www.geocities.com/fuzzybroken

QUOTE: Originally posted by MP57313
I heard elsewhere that the switching in or out of reefers or roadrailers mid-route caused noticeable delays to the trains, example SouthWest Chief in Kansas...

It just goes to show that government can't do anything right.

[conrailman]

I hope amtrak makes 10 to 30 million off of the sale of them Railrailers to the NS.[8D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ericsp

It seems like I heard on another thread that Amtrak got rid of its reefers. Is Amtrak getting out of the freight business?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the 1971 act that created Amtrak meant to provide continuation of passenger service as the major railroads were filing for Chapter 11 or discontinuing passenger service entirely?

Where in the act or the subsequent reauthorization does it require or allow Amtrak to compete directly with private freight industries?

Wayne

[ericsp]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Muddy Creek

QUOTE: Originally posted by ericsp

It seems like I heard on another thread that Amtrak got rid of its reefers. Is Amtrak getting out of the freight business?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the 1971 act that created Amtrak meant to provide continuation of passenger service as the major railroads were filing for Chapter 11 or discontinuing passenger service entirely?

Where in the act or the subsequent reauthorization does it require or allow Amtrak to compete directly with private freight industries?

Wayne

I have never read it, so I don't know if it does. Weren't some freight railroads fighting to keep Amtrak from hauling freight on their lines a few years ago? I am assuming they lost.

[TH&B]

Wayne you are right but it seems that every passenger railway in the world has an excuse not to haul anything but passengers. All other modes cary anything that fits.
It's a train, and trains have room to cary alot of people and stuff.

[Anonymous]

I know that freight lines were instrumental in urging Congress to create Amtrak but not to compete with them in hauling freight. I understand there is a pretty complex series of agreements between with the private roads, including a sweetheart-deal that was made with Conrail and was subsequently transferred with the sale.

I use Amtrak whenever I can and appreciate that this is a service run by the government. (It's a big player in the Northeastern states.) I'd prefer to see Amtrak polish up its passenger service as it was created for and not undercut the private freight lines. I know that in the reauthorization, Congress mandated that it pay its own way or die. Seems if this burden were placed on the Federal Highway System, every road built with Federal funds would be a toll road, making a profit or being plowed under.

Wayne

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Muddy Creek

QUOTE: Originally posted by ericsp

It seems like I heard on another thread that Amtrak got rid of its reefers. Is Amtrak getting out of the freight business?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the 1971 act that created Amtrak meant to provide continuation of passenger service as the major railroads were filing for Chapter 11 or discontinuing passenger service entirely?

Where in the act or the subsequent reauthorization does it require or allow Amtrak to compete directly with private freight industries?

Wayne

Amtrak got the passenger train franchize from the frt RRs. That included express and and other "head end" business. Whether that included all that Roadrailer and reefer business was debatable and the UP "debated" it quite loudly. The courts sided with Amtrak, but the UP is still fuming - well at least *** Davidson seems to have a very low opinion of Amtrak.

Gunn had Amtrak cut way back on this business for several reasons - among them, it was only marginal interms of revenue and it was shifting focus away from passengers.

[Anonymous]

I just saw both [i[Three Rivers[/i] on Saturday with mostly RoadRailers and Express cars.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by amtrak-tom

I'm not sure how many road-railers we have (that's not my dept.), but, I had once heard that the truckers opposed Amtrak claiming unfair competition since Amtrak is a private corporation that is funded by the gov't. Then, again, the other possible scenario is: Amtrak is no longer interested in having road-railers. They usually limit our speed to 90mph maximum on the northeast corridor where we usually run at 125mph.

That brings up another topic of discussion, what if the railroads could promise delivery of a trailer from dock to dock FASTER than an over-the-road trucker? One way to do this is to arrange it so that some form of TOFC or RoadRailer/RailRunner service can run at the max speed on some of Amtrak's routes such as the Northeast Corridor at 125 mph. If that speed is sustainable over a certain distance, maybe it can make up for terminal time lag. The point is, if the RR's can pull such a thing off, they could actually charge more per trailer than the over the road truckers and still win the time sensitive business.

How hard would it be to upgrade bi-modal equipment to run at those speeds? I know that the RailRunner stuff is rated up to 106 mph. What about incorporating the tilting Talgo technology into the intermediate bogies of RoadRailers and RailRunners to allow them faster than usual operation over standard highball freight lines?

Whether it is Amtrak to perform this work may be a moot point, since most Amtrak trains are burdened with numerous station stops which cut down on the sustainable speed aspects.

Again, trucks are limited to max speeds of 70 mph or so by law (give or take 10 mph either way depending on locale), while rail speeds are only limited by the desire of railroads on how much to spend on track upgrades to meet FRA standards for select speeds. It is theoretically possible for some sections of trackage in North America to be upgraded to 100+ mph speeds for certain freights, while it is unlikely highway speeds will be raised beyond the 70mph range anytime soon if ever.

DWS

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by amtrak-tom

I had once heard that the truckers opposed Amtrak claiming unfair competition since Amtrak is a private corporation that is funded by the gov't.

I can't feel too sorry for the truckers about that, considering how much government subsidy they get in the form of highway tax dollars. On the other hand, being on a train when Roadrailers or express cars were being picked up or dropped off was often a little disconcerting. It always seemed to cause a considerable delay, and there were often eriee moments when headend power was lost during the switching moves. All the while the carhosts were very hush-hush about what was happening.

Scott Lothes
Cleveland, Ohio

[conrailman]

The CN railroad sold most of the 600 Roadrailers to NS. How many Roadrailers does Amtrak have maybe 300 or 400?[?]

[conrailman]

Any more info about the sale Yet?[^][8D]

[Anonymous]

The reason RoadRailers didn't work out on Amtrak is simply that Amtrak couldn't beat standard intermodal freight running times between major terminals. Amtrak is hamstrung by having to stop at every passenger station stop, most of which are blown past by intermodals.

Dave

[Anonymous]

Futuremodal,

Are you sure about that assessment regarding the terminal to terminal times. I think that might be true on BNSF and UP. Where I have heard from railfan friends of mine tell me that they couldn't even chase "junk trains" on the UP and BNSF mains going at 80 MPH on the the parallel US highways and Interstates in rental cars.

But here in the east both NS and CSX seem to loathe to power up their hot intermodals more than 2 HPT and with the typical Amtraker going at 79 MPH and with a HPT ratio of 5 to 10 to get up to track speed quickly. It seems thqt the death of Amtrak Roadrailers is more than terminal to terminal timings. The Three Rivers is still way faster than anything that NS and CSX puts on the east coast to Chicago market.

Correct me if I am wrong.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill

The speed limit for freight in the U.S. is 70 mph with extremely rare exception. Eighty mph would trip the overspeeds on most power. Most trains are limited to 60 mph. Junk trains are usually further limited by equipment such as empty bulkhead flats, etc., to 50 or even 40 mph. I'm not saying your friends didn't pace them at 80 mph, just that I'd need verifiable evidence, such as OS times from the electronic trainsheet from which an average speed between two known points could be calculated.

Where did you hear that RoadRailers failed on Amtrak because they were non-speed competitve? Everyone I've talked with in the intermodal business, and in Amtrak management, said that they didn't work out on Amtrak because they lost money. The equipment and terminal costs, plus incremental fuel and crew costs, were greater than the revenue. I'd like to hear more about this speed problem, because that's new.

Isn't it true that the hotshot intermodal cross country times are faster than Amtrak's, and one can assume this is due to the frequent station stops required by Amtrak. Hotshot freights are only constrained by crew changes, refueling, and general line congestion. Amtrak has to contend with all that and the station stops. So I guess the reasoning is that why run intermodal boxes with Amtrak when you can get faster schedules with the hotshots?

[ericsp]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Colin

Futuremodal,

Are you sure about that assessment regarding the terminal to terminal times. I think that might be true on BNSF and UP. Where I have heard from railfan friends of mine tell me that they couldn't even chase "junk trains" on the UP and BNSF mains going at 80 MPH on the the parallel US highways and Interstates in rental cars.

But here in the east both NS and CSX seem to loathe to power up their hot intermodals more than 2 HPT and with the typical Amtraker going at 79 MPH and with a HPT ratio of 5 to 10 to get up to track speed quickly. It seems thqt the death of Amtrak Roadrailers is more than terminal to terminal timings. The Three Rivers is still way faster than anything that NS and CSX puts on the east coast to Chicago market.

Correct me if I am wrong.

There was only one time I was not able to catch up to a train an the freeway in the "flat" Central Valley. It was an Express Lane train going close to 70 MPH. Unfortunately, the freeway was only two lanes in each direction and clogged with 55 MPH trucks in both lanes. Anytime I have been able to go at the speed limit on the freeway (65 to 70 MPH) I have been able to catch any type of freight train. Although sometimes it might take several miles.