Has there been any word as to how BNSF plans to utilize the Montana Rail Link route beyond the current traffic moving over the line? I could think of several possibilities - -General relief valve for whatever doesn't fit on the old Great Northern main?-directionally-weighted (with the steeper grades on the old NP/MRL route, would running most eastbound grain/oil/ethanol empties this way make sense? - priority oriented? (Intermodal GN, carload NP/MRL)- something else?It's also entirely possible that they might just put up a dartboard in Fort Worth and use THAT to make the calls.
Here's how I see it. I'm thinking BNSF will utilize the MRL to return empty bulk trains back to the Dickinson, and Hettinger Subs and beyond. I'll even say the Sindey Line may get more active by returning MTY shuttles back to the Hi-Line instead of routing them entirely across it. I don't see the Sidney Line handling WB bulk traffic due to the Snowden Bridge across the Missouri which is restricted to 268K GRL.
I also think BNSF will try its best to eliminate helper operations across both Mullan and Bozeman Passes by doing some sort of directional running with MTY's. As Marias Pass with its lower grade can handle the WB Bulk traffic. I do wonder if coal will be routed up the line between Laurel-Shelby though.
I don't see any CHI-MSP-SEA-PTL intermodal traffic being re-routed as it would increase route circuity and you don't want that with intermodal. Carload is not much of an issue when it comes to adding some miles
I think this might also faciltate the return of Amtrak service over the former NP in Montana as well since it will be under BNSF. Far easier to negotiate then with two seperate railroads.
'9500, sounds reasonable - a little bit like Stampede Pass further west.
If they use the two long and widely separated parallel routes (High Line and MRL/NP) for directional running, how will they efficently get crews to a return run?
CMStPnP I think this might also faciltate the return of Amtrak service over the former NP in Montana as well since it will be under BNSF. Far easier to negotiate then with two seperate railroads.
It won't matter. There is a much better chance that the existing long distance trains will perish before Amtrak returns to Southern Montana. The current Superliner fleet is 30 to 40 years old, and there is no plan for refurbishment. Even with potential money from the IIJA, Amtrak hasn't ordered any new long-distance equipment, so realistically, replacement is 7-10 years off. It's unlike the cars currently in use will last that long, and the existing trains will be discontinued. Couple this reality with that Amtrak has no desire for any additional long-distance trains and an infrastructure cost of $1.5 billion to $2 billion this service, and a new train in Southern Montana or anywhere else is unlikely indeed.
--Mark Meyer
Vermontanan2 Even with potential money from the IIJA, Amtrak hasn't ordered any new long-distance equipment, so realistically, replacement is 7-10 years off. It's unlike the cars currently in use will last that long, and the existing trains will be discontinued. ...
We have been hearing this song for the past 50+ years and Congress hasn't let it happen so far.
Minnesota is advocating for a second Amtrak daily frequency between Chicago and St Paul by extending one of the Hiawatha trips. Siemens Venture single-level equipment purchased with IIJA funds would be the most likely option for a second frequency.
As to Empire Builder replacement equipment, the most recent double deck cars constructed for long distance service were the California Cars. Those are getting long in the tooth also.
The future of long distance trains may be single level equipment.
Nevermind, misread something.
MidlandMike We have been hearing this song for the past 50+ years and Congress hasn't let it happen so far.
Actually, we've never heard this before. And that we couldn't've is simple math. Amtrak's Superliners are 30 to 40 years old. It's never happened that there's been equipment Amtrak has been using WITHOUT any replacement cars at least in the works. Even most of the equipment obtained from Amtrak at its inception never was in use this many years, and even then, new cars were being built (such was the case for the Superliners in the late 1970s and early 1980s). With no replacement cars on order, limited manufacturers, lengthy build times likely AND no current refurbishment program, the likelihood that sufficient serviceable equipment will be available to keep the current long distance trains using Superliners for the next decade is unlikely.
As for Congress, they are powerless to fix the problem when the equipment simply does not exist and won't be available many many years in the future.
Congressional end game? No equipment = no Amtrak. Problem solved...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Vermontanan2...With no replacement cars on order, limited manufacturers, lengthy build times likely AND no current refurbishment program, the likelihood that sufficient serviceable equipment will be available to keep the current long distance trains using Superliners for the next decade is unlikely. As for Congress, they are powerless to fix the problem when the equipment simply does not exist and won't be available many many years in the future.
First you assume that a refurbishment program won't be started. Second, that supposedly no one in Congress is aware of the problem. Possibly third, with PTC, they may consider something closer to off-the-shelf foriegn equipment safe enough.
When did the plans to issue RFPs for the bi-level Superliner replacements in 2023 and 2024 change? That's the next announced priority after the Amfleet replacement design, as I recall. We're barely into 2023.
https://www.businessinsider.com/amtrak-unveils-upgraded-long-distance-trains-new-seats-rooms-2021-6
https://media.amtrak.com/2023/01/amtrak-starts-the-process-for-new-overnight-trains/
Overmod We're barely into 2023.
They moved up the start date of the second Chicago to Twin Cites train to 2023 from 2024 with agreement of CP and WisDOT as well.
MidlandMike First you assume that a refurbishment program won't be started. Second, that supposedly no one in Congress is aware of the problem. Possibly third, with PTC, they may consider something closer to off-the-shelf foriegn equipment safe enough.
Assuming that no refurbishment program will start is more logical than assuming one will simply because it is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer that one should have already been done, especially in light of the fact that no new cars have been ordered.
In Amtrak's 2022-2027 "Five Year Plan", they indicate 173 cars are "inactive" as of October, 2021. At the open Amtrak board meeting held in St. Louis on December 1, 2022, Amtrak CEO Gardner responded to an inquiry about returning inactive cars to service: "stored equipment that is no longer commercially viable are essentially donations to the parts supply." This strongly suggests that current intent is not to return these cars to service. In the mean time, Amtrak is already not operating some trains due to lack of equipment and most long-distance trains are operating with fewer cars than pre-Covid.
The eastbound Empire Builder which departed Seattle on January 18 was delayed over 13 hours just west of Spokane due to a service interruption. The train was scheduled to arrive in Chicago at 445 PM January 20 with its equipment standing to protect the westbound counterpart train on January 21. Amtrak has already canceled the outbound westbound trip on January 21, showing it cannot create a makeup set of equipment nor can it expect to turn an inbound set of equipment in less than 10 hours or so.
The only hope for a refurbishment program would be if Amtrak does decide to revive the "inactive" equipment it is currently cannibalizing for parts. Obviously, these cars would need signficant work. Otherwise, a refurbishment program of existing usable equipment is not possible because these cars would need to be taken out of the working pool, and they simply cannot be spared.
There are indeed those in Congress aware of the problem. But the problem should have been addressed even pre-Covid. Too late now.
As Bob Johnston has outlined in his Janauary 19, 2023 article in TRAINS about Amtrak (finally) "seeking carbuilder interest" to replace the equipment on its long-distance trains, there is every reason to believe the actual re-equipping of these trains will be a very long process indeed, especially in light of problems encountered with recent new rolling stock acquisitions.
The question then becomes: Can the existing cars keep going for another 5(a best-case scenario for sure)-to-10 years until the new stuff is available? Unlikely, given their current state of decay. Throw in an unexpected derailment which takes a whole set of equipment out of the mix, and the likelihood of "status quo" for the current system becomes even less.
CMStPnP They moved up the start date of the second Chicago to Twin Cites train to 2023 from 2024 with agreement of CP and WisDOT as well.
Don't hold your breath. Equipment is still a problem, especially considering some trains are still without and many run far from their full complement of cars. And if the CP-KCS merger is approved, perhaps the CP's "We can handle anything" stance will change. Especially since the $53 million or so in track upgrades haven't yet been made.
Vermontanan, I'm traveling and just saw your response. Your original thesis was that Amtrak would never start an ex-NP train because they planned on eliminating long distance trains apparently thru equipment attrition. When they announced their request for equipment proposals, I considered your argument refuted, and am surprised you are continuing your off topic comments.
If Amtrak can start thie service in 2023 then how is it going to get 2 complete train sets..? 10 cars each train set with a 20% spares means that to get 20 COT&S would take 80 days acording to Amtrak CMO. But during that time regular in service cars will come up on their 4 year deadline. With those figures which are very suspect no way service this year. Now maybe completion times of COT&S might change?
MidlandMike Vermontanan, I'm traveling and just saw your response. Your original thesis was that Amtrak would never start an ex-NP train because they planned on eliminating long distance trains apparently thru equipment attrition. When they announced their request for equipment proposals, I considered your argument refuted, and am surprised you are continuing your off topic comments.
You are free to consider whatever you like, but I stand by my position. First of all, Amtrak hasn't ordered any equipment - that's likely more than a year away. Secondly, we don't know how much they are ordering. Will it include any equipment for long-distance route expansion? Then there's the 5-to-10 years of manufacturing the equipment and as I stated earlier referencing Bob Johnston's article, the likelihood that timeline setbacks could result simply based on recent deliveries of locomotives and rolling stock from Siemens.
The primary question still remains: Will the current supply of rolling stock be sufficient to keep the current long-distance service in place until replacement cars are available? Not without an aggressive program to repair and refurbish the cars currently out of service and then refurbish cars currently in use, but Amtrak currently has NO such plans for this necessary work. In the mean time, nearly all long-distance trains are (and have been) running with reduced consists (most notably, the Capitol Limited with only two passenger-carrying cars - one coach and one sleeper). Amtrak's recent "refresh" of some long-distance equipment did little to address the long term mechanical needs of each car. Still, much of the interior of the rolling stock is tired, and reports of electrical and plumbing failures abound. As it stands right now, Amtrak is one major incident away from needing to curtail service should it lose a set of long-distance equipment. Simply assuming that the current fleet - some of which will be 50 years old by the end of this decade - can continue to saunter on indefinitely seems illogical. Major changes need to occur, and Amtrak hasn't demonstrated any proactivity for long-distance services since David Gunn was in charge. Yeah, Amtrak says it's going to order new equipment, but by the time it arrives will Amtrak's long-distance network resemble how it looks now? And if routes are discontinued due to lack of usable equipment, will Amtrak willfully reinstate them?
Then, there's the other realities: Unless there is a complete change in managment at Amtrak, the current leadership has been generally hostile to long-distance trains. This could be debatable, but if it wasn't the case, a refurbishment program would have been ongoing and new car orders placed long ago. Then there's the 2008 PRIIA law which currently restricts long-distance trains to those currently operating, suggesting the law would need to be changed by Congress to include additional routes. Then there's the cost of a train such as the North Coast Hiawatha. Based on the 2009 Amtrak study of that train, cost for new equipment and infrastructure would be $1.5 billion in 2023 dollars. Things have changed since 2009, but the 2009 study neglected to adequately account for station costs or infrastructure, especially in Washington State. Beyond that, the IIJA only guarantees funding for any new service in diminishing numbers for six years. Lest we forget the reason the North Coast Hiawatha was discontinued in 1979: It wasn't part of the basic Amtrak system and throughout the 1970s new long-distance trains were added, increasing the needed operations funding until Congress decided it wouldn't pay to keep all those trains running. At the very least, if you're going to add a route needing upwards of $2 billion in infrastructure and equipment, a dedicated source of funding needs to be made available.
So, lots of hurdles, and a lot needs to change. But in the mean time, the main problem is whether existing equipment can continue in service until new stuff that hasn't even been designed yet is available. No one knows for sure, but the reason that the Empire Builder was the first train to receive new (at the time) Superliners in October of 1979 was because Amtrak deemed the current (at the time) equipment unable to cope with another Northern Tier winter - and most of those cars were less than 30 years old. By the end of this decade, some of the Superliners will be more than half again as old. Again, you can believe what you want to believe, but A LOT needs to change for the current equipment pool to remain viable until the end of this decade. If it doesn't and current trains are discontinued or curtailed because of equipment shortages, the likelihood of new service is all the more remote.
But mostly Amtrak needs to be fixed before any expansion is contemplated. Can't build on a House of Cards.
Vermontanan2It won't matter. There is a much better chance that the existing long distance trains will perish before Amtrak returns to Southern Montana. The current Superliner fleet is 30 to 40 years old, and there is no plan for refurbishment. Even with potential money from the IIJA, Amtrak hasn't ordered any new long-distance equipment, so realistically, replacement is 7-10 years off. It's unlike the cars currently in use will last that long, and the existing trains will be discontinued. Couple this reality with that Amtrak has no desire for any additional long-distance trains and an infrastructure cost of $1.5 billion to $2 billion this service, and a new train in Southern Montana or anywhere else is unlikely indeed. --Mark Meyer
Amtrak just sent out the RFP for replacement of the Superliners all you had to do was Google that. Amtrak made it's plans known point by point on the Long Distance service. If I can find it, you should be able to. They intend to continue Long Distance and they sent out the RFP a year early due to the Biden Infrastruture plan as it was intended to go out in 2024 originally. Restoration of the NP, North Coast Hiawatha route is a mandate for Amtrak to review via our Congress as is the Sunset route. So weather (I put an "a" in there just for you) Amtrak wants it or not it has to study it and report back on the viability of restarting service back to the Congress.
blue streak 1 If Amtrak can start thie service in 2023 then how is it going to get 2 complete train sets..? 10 cars each train set with a 20% spares means that to get 20 COT&S would take 80 days acording to Amtrak CMO. But during that time regular in service cars will come up on their 4 year deadline. With those figures which are very suspect no way service this year. Now maybe completion times of COT&S might change?
When it comes to Chicago to Twin Cities he refuses to read the information put out and makes up his own facts. He is conflating two different rail passenger car pools. Chicago to Milwaukee has two 7 car consists under contractual and dedicated service. State of Wisconsin purchased a third plus 5 cab cars all are to be delivered on time by the end of 2023. I believe MN will draw the fourth trainset from the pool of Midwest cars but I am not sure on the 4th trainset. The dedicated Midwest cars are stenciled "Amtrak Midwest" and are seperate from the National Amtrak Pool. There were some problems in 2022 with retrofits that needed to be made to the Midwest cars before they could enter service but if you Google or view YouTube they are entering service now. So his info is also out of date and so is Trains News Wire. Another reason to read the most current information put out by the PM of the project that deals with Amtrak and CP on a daily basis. All three have an excellent working relationship that spans more than a decade.
CMStPnP I believe MN will draw the fourth trainset from the pool of Midwest cars but I am not sure on the 4th trainset. The dedicated Midwest cars are stenciled "Amtrak Midwest" and are seperate from the National Amtrak Pool.
I believe MN will draw the fourth trainset from the pool of Midwest cars but I am not sure on the 4th trainset. The dedicated Midwest cars are stenciled "Amtrak Midwest" and are seperate from the National Amtrak Pool.
MN is not part of Amtrak Midwest only IL, MI, WI and MO are.
https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2022/08/amtrak-midwests-new-coaches-fitted-with-icomera-connectivity/
"To that end, Amtrak on behalf of the Amtrak Midwest states — Illinois, Michigan, Missouri and Wisconsin "
An "expensive model collector"
Moderator:
PLEASE LOCK THIS TOPIC. IT HAS GOTTEN WAY OFF TOPIC. ANOTHER FORUM MEMBER CAN START ONE ABOUT AMTRAKS' PLANS.
Caldreamer
CMStPnP Amtrak just sent out the RFP for replacement of the Superliners all you had to do was Google that. Amtrak made it's plans known point by point on the Long Distance service. If I can find it, you should be able to. They intend to continue Long Distance and they sent out the RFP a year early due to the Biden Infrastruture plan as it was intended to go out in 2024 originally. Restoration of the NP, North Coast Hiawatha route is a mandate for Amtrak to review via our Congress as is the Sunset route.
Amtrak just sent out the RFP for replacement of the Superliners all you had to do was Google that. Amtrak made it's plans known point by point on the Long Distance service. If I can find it, you should be able to. They intend to continue Long Distance and they sent out the RFP a year early due to the Biden Infrastruture plan as it was intended to go out in 2024 originally. Restoration of the NP, North Coast Hiawatha route is a mandate for Amtrak to review via our Congress as is the Sunset route.
I acknowledged Amtrak was taking steps to seek manufacturers for new long distance equipment as I referenced Bob Johnston's TRAINS article. This, and the IIJA, provide no guarantee of the survival of the long distance trains until then. To quote Amtrak in their press release, "The existing fleet of overnight railcars has been delivered to Amtrak over the course of 40 years—with the first of more than 800 cars entering service in 1979. Most of the equipment in the current fleet will approach the end of its service life after the next decade." Approach the end of their service life AFTER the NEXT decade? The reality is that Amtrak canceled the westbound Empire Builder on January 21 after the corresponding eastbound counterpart train arrived about 12 hours late. They couldn't turn the equipment in 10 hours. When they tried to run the train on January 22, it was delayed in Chicago four hours with a failed lead unit. Same situation for the westbound California Zephyr annulled at origin January 25. Meanwhile, we have the Capitol Limited running with only one coach and one sleeping car, and an Illinois Zephyr with one coach and a baggage car (which along with the lone locomotive satisfies BNSF's requirement of 12 axles). Nearly all the long distance trains are operating with fewer cars than even off-peak pre-Covid. Given this current performance, and the obvious inability to create even a single set of extra long-distance equipment, baring a sea change in maintenance/reburbishment/management, one has to wonder how the current state of affairs can continue for another 7 to 10 years until the new stuff arrives. And that's just for the existing trains. Anything extra - and the operating funds to run them - is a leap of faith even beyond that.
SD60MAC9500 Here's how I see it. I'm thinking BNSF will utilize the MRL to return empty bulk trains back to the Dickinson, and Hettinger Subs and beyond. I'll even say the Sindey Line may get more active by returning MTY shuttles back to the Hi-Line instead of routing them entirely across it. I don't see the Sidney Line handling WB bulk traffic due to the Snowden Bridge across the Missouri which is restricted to 268K GRL.
SD60MAC9500 I also think BNSF will try its best to eliminate helper operations across both Mullan and Bozeman Passes by doing some sort of directional running with MTY's. As Marias Pass with its lower grade can handle the WB Bulk traffic. I do wonder if coal will be routed up the line between Laurel-Shelby though.
SD60MAC9500 I don't see any CHI-MSP-SEA-PTL intermodal traffic being re-routed as it would increase route circuity and you don't want that with intermodal. Carload is not much of an issue when it comes to adding some miles.
@Mark Meyer
Thanks for the clarification on the Sidney Line weight restrictions and Laurel-Shelby route. A former BNSF AVP told me the Snowden Bridge was limited to 268K lbs. GRL.
SD60MAC9500@Mark Meyer Thanks for the clarification on the Sidney Line weight restrictions and Laurel-Shelby route. A former BNSF AVP told me the Snowden Bridge was limited to 268K lbs. GRL.
Considering observations I had with one B&O bridge I was familar with - all they need to do is set the weak bridge on fire and it will be flame strengthened to be able to handle heavier traffic.
There is more to it than that, I understand.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.