I think Amtrak had a overnite post train from Springfield to Washington, maybe up till 10 years ago. wether it could be classed as high speed , I don't know.
As far as dwell times go , I would imagine heavy service only offered to terminals, and intermediate stations that already have a dwell time over 15 minutes. I would also say that palletization of baggage, as well as parcels , and some way of quickly lifting them into the baggage car would speed up all stops. a cage such as this one,
http://finditemstosell.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/8WSK_post_office_file.jpg
Except that Amtrak is by its charter a passenger railroad and not legally authorized to be a freight railroad.
Do you really thinking in today's world that Amtrak could be a viable option to ups or fed ex which both offer door to door or store to door service. Can't imagine having to drive down town to drop a package off at my friendly Amtrak station which happens to be only open in the wee hours of the morning. The infrastructure no longer exist to support that kind of service. The days of the old red and green rea trucks are gone. The private railroads had their chance to compete and declined. Let it go.
Amtrak could do a Much better job of marketing its existing package service and palletized services. These trains have the existing equipment and stop at stations that are equipped to handle this kind of shipments.
I think they will market it better, once the new baggage cars are in service.
That is what I was suggesting, Amtrak improves its current service, and markets it better. No more than a baggage car load or 2 per train.
Makes sense and won't add any costs to the trains.
ROBERT WILLISONAmtrak could do a Much better job of marketing its existing package service and palletized services. These trains have the existing equipment and stop at stations that are equipped to handle this kind of shipments.
Given the job they do marketing and providing LD service to passengers, I wouldn't get my hopes up.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
zugmann I don't think the freight railroads are going to stand by as Amtrak (or whomever) takes away some of their premium customers (UPS and FedEx)? Plus you have a lot of hurdles: it takes time to load, unload, and inspect freight cars, you have to modify station areas to get the packers in there (those things are big), movement and managing of the intermodal cars, and not to mention speed and oeprating restrictions that may come from hauling said frieght equipment.
I don't think the freight railroads are going to stand by as Amtrak (or whomever) takes away some of their premium customers (UPS and FedEx)?
Plus you have a lot of hurdles: it takes time to load, unload, and inspect freight cars, you have to modify station areas to get the packers in there (those things are big), movement and managing of the intermodal cars, and not to mention speed and oeprating restrictions that may come from hauling said frieght equipment.
This might be railfan conventional wisdom but I think it is not necessarily true....
If the package express is a new market segment they do not currently serve and they cannot serve well by themselves. I honestly do not think they would care.
Right now the railroads cannot serve the premium express market and only serve the slower ground options for FED EX and UPS. An intelligent operator could take advantage of that and the proximity of the Post Offices to rail passenger stations........many with elevators or elevator shafts still extending to the track level........could use Amtrak in some cases to implement overnight or second day service between a lot of cities in the United States.
If they wanted to sweeten the pot, they could offer a cut of the profit to the common carrier for getting the passenger train to the terminals on time. Even better offer up management of the company as a joint effort between USPS, Fed Ex and UPS. With all three involved in management and feeding high priority packages along with potentially a joint share in the profits. Really do not see the railroad industry complaining.
The railroad industry does need this type of think outside the box approach if it is going to continue to expand market share and thrive, IMO. Fast Frieght handling and Fast Freight movement the rail industry in the United States has attempted to handle with UPS and the failed experiment with three day coast to coast intermodal service. They shouldn't just give up and throw in the towel on the idea. They should try it again with overnight service between city pairs and with that...........they could potentially blend it in with Amtrak service.
Also, want to point out another difference here. There is a difference in structure and operation between Fed Ex Ground and regular Fed Ex. So lets say that Schlimm wants to buy a Fed Ex Ground Franchise, pretty easy for him to plunk down the $800k to do that and become a railroad intermodal shipper. Fed Ex Ground is franchised out to private owners. Fed Ex regular with the red "Ex" is not and is a single company. Which trailers do you see predominantly on the railroad intermodal trains. Is it the green "Ex" or the red "Ex"?
Proves my point that the railroads have not necessarily captured back the express package business. They only have a slower market segment of it.
NRPC is still chartered to provide Mail and Express... CFR 49 USC
(a) Acquisition and Operation of Equipment and Facilities.—(1) Amtrak may acquire, operate, maintain, and make contracts for the operation and maintenance of equipment and facilities necessary for intercity and commuter rail passenger transportation, the transportation of mail and express, and auto-ferry transportation.
(c) Miscellaneous Authority.—Amtrak may—
(1) make and carry out appropriate agreements;
(2) transport mail and express and shall use all feasible methods to obtain the bulk mail business of the United States Postal Service;
(a) Actions To Increase Revenues.—Amtrak shall take necessary action to increase its revenues from the transportation of mail and express. To increase its revenues, Amtrak may provide auto-ferry transportation as part of the basic passenger transportation authorized by this part.
Or, we as a country, could realize that passenger rail is a service and will not make a profit.
So fund it with that expectation, and we won't have to toy around with ideas of "express service" which would still be slower than plane or truck.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
zugmann Or, we as a country, could realize that passenger rail is a service and will not make a profit. So fund it with that expectation, and we won't have to toy around with ideas of "express service" which would still be slower than plane or truck.
Exactly!!
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Amtrak has a package service although limited in scope it is tailored to the trains and stations that are equipped to handle the service. I
Amtrak has tried handling mail in the past. It made a substantial investment in mail cars and terminal imorovements. The service was flawed from the beginning with the equipment having bad trucks. Even after those issues were resolved, The service was eventually discontinued and investment wasted. I highly doubt if either the post office or Amtrak will try mail any time soon.
As far as premium package service, Amtrak lacks the infrastructure, equipment, human resources and train frequency to compete with ups,fed ex,or even the post office. It would require a substantial amount of capital which would be better served being directed to other capital straved projects and defer maintainence.
I believe the railroads prefer to be the middle man in the package business, hauling premium priced containers and trailers for package company.
Amtrak was primarily established to relieve the burdens of passenger service from the railroad. Mail, express and auto services are a secondary objective. Amtrak's first attempt at mail was a disaster. It burdened its passengers and wasted precious capital and effort.
Let Amtrak focus on running passenger trains. Like it was said before,long distance trains will never turn a profit. Move on.
ROBERT WILLISON Amtrak has a package service although limited in scope it is tailored to the trains and stations that are equipped to handle the service. I Amtrak has tried handling mail in the past. It made a substantial investment in mail cars and terminal imorovements. The service was flawed from the beginning with the equipment having bad trucks. Even after those issues were resolved, The service was eventually discontinued and investment wasted. I highly doubt if either the post office or Amtrak will try mail any time soon. As far as premium package service, Amtrak lacks the infrastructure, equipment, human resources and train frequency to compete with ups,fed ex,or even the post office. It would require a substantial amount of capital which would be better served being directed to other capital straved projects and defer maintainence. I believe the railroads prefer to be the middle man in the package business, hauling premium priced containers and trailers for package company. Amtrak was primarily established to relieve the burdens of passenger service from the railroad. Mail, express and auto services are a secondary objective. Amtrak's first attempt at mail was a disaster. It burdened its passengers and wasted precious capital and effort. Let Amtrak focus on running passenger trains. Like it was said before,long distance trains will never turn a profit. Move on.
Except that the proposal on the table was not Amtrak going it alone but attempting a cooperative service with one of the package carriers.
Problem is Amtrak only has so much control as a transporter. As the USPS stated in the Trains article it would use MORE RAIL if RAIL was able to help the USPS in it's mission of delivering the mail more beyond mere transport. I think the Trains article made this very clear.
Freight railroads are only providing currently a means to move from point A to point B. Railfans in this Forum are thinking along the same rigid lines. Significant time savings could be achieved via containerization of mail by destination, sorting of mail while in transit (as was done on a RPO) and other means of helping to automate the process more while the mail is in transit vs attempting to do it all at a terminal point. So the USPS put the offer on the table in the trains article (for those of you without a reading comprehension issue). I read it clearly and it said basically "Help us with our mail delivery responsibilities enroute and we will shift more to rail" BUT "without any change, we are happy at the mix right now between rail and truck".
I read that as a challenge not as another opportunity to give up without even trying.
So a smart freight railroad could buy up some museum RPO cars, modernize them for compatibility with intermodal trainis, and offer to sort small UPS packages on one long route, such as Chicago - LA, SF, or Seattle, see how profitable the service is, and then possibly purchase new equipment to provide a UPS-sorting car to each important West Coast destination. The clerks would be railroad employees under UPS supervision at terminals, and would work a standard seven hour day, with clerks changing off at division points and allowed to work up to ten hours ini case of train delays. Seems like a good idea, does not relate to passenger service, just making intermodal service more profitable.
But, if the AAF experiment works, and railroads then become interested in taking over Amtrak, this service would then probably be shifted to the passenger trains. More big ifs.
I may be wrong but I have the article in front of me ( p 6 march 2015 trains magazine ). No where in the article does it mention moving mail on Amtrak. No where does it mention rpo's. It does reference an office of inspector general for the postal service September 2014 report stating it could save 10.8 million annually by moving more mail by rail much like its private sector competition fed ex and ups has embraced the intermodal options. Although my reading comprehension may be poor, I understand this to be trailers on flat cars on freight trains. Trains even provided two nice pictures of intermodal trains in the article.
Nor do I see any mention of a private enterprise concern trying to partner with Amtrak to provide premium package delivery services.
Oddly enough the post office is skeptical if intermodal service could meet thier service standards.
ROBERT WILLISON I may be wrong but I have the article in front of me ( p 6 march 2015 trains magazine ). No where in the article does it mention moving mail on Amtrak. No where does it mention rpo's. It does reference an office of inspector general for the postal service September 2014 report stating it could save 10.8 million annually by moving more mail by rail much like its private sector competition fed ex and ups has embraced the intermodal options. Although my reading comprehension may be poor, I understand this to be trailers on flat cars on freight trains. Trains even provided two nice pictures of intermodal trains in the article. Nor do I see any mention of a private enterprise concern trying to partner with Amtrak to provide premium package delivery services. Oddly enough the post office is skeptical if intermodal service could meet thier service standards.
Your getting all mixed up and there is no reason to get upset here. The proposals were made in this forum to which the railfan community largely poo-poohed the ideas and stated the status quo was just fine. Very clearly in the trains article the USPS said they would be willing to look at shifting more mail to rail if they saw a new proposal beyond the status quo service. Some people picked up on that line (me for one) and saw opportunity. Others just would rather stay in their comfort zone of the status quo.
All I am saying is give innovation and invention a chance here at potentially boosting traffic.......as it has in the past.
daveklepper So a smart freight railroad could buy up some museum RPO cars, modernize them for compatibility with intermodal trainis, and offer to sort small UPS packages on one long route, such as Chicago - LA, SF, or Seattle, see how profitable the service is, and then possibly purchase new equipment to provide a UPS-sorting car to each important West Coast destination. The clerks would be railroad employees under UPS supervision at terminals, and would work a standard seven hour day, with clerks changing off at division points and allowed to work up to ten hours ini case of train delays. Seems like a good idea, does not relate to passenger service, just making intermodal service more profitable. But, if the AAF experiment works, and railroads then become interested in taking over Amtrak, this service would then probably be shifted to the passenger trains. More big ifs.
Ha! Doesn't necessarily mean bringing back the RPO. This is NOT NEW and the USPS has made a proposal like this before and a vendor has stepped up to the plate. Look at EDS and the Postal Buddy Corp of a decade or more ago created to sell stamps and other merchandise via kiosks (Google Postal Buddy and read up on it). EDS provides the software, postal buddy provided the hardware. It rolled out to the public and then flopped for various reasons. It does illustrate this kind of proposal has been made before by the USPS and responded to by outside vendors and partnerships. They reached into the USPS and took over internal USPS procedures and attempted to automate them......then market them back to the public. Very innovative, IMO.
Railroads would be smart to look at areas they could take over from the USPS at their terminals and speed shipments of mail faster to make the USPS more competitive on speed. I think that is where the sweet spot is here. Certainly they can sit on their butts and say..... "we are happy with what we got". That would not be very businessness like, IMHO.
Also, look at the difference between Fed Ex and the USPS. Fed Ex has "Delivery Manager" on which I can login and reroute a package once it is shipped to another destination. USPS has nothing like that and even a hold mail request done via their USPS website takes a full day prior to properly execute. So I am pretty sure there are huge opportunities on the USPS side for improvement.
Instead of dropping RPO, the PO could have installed well-designed automation equipment in the RPO cars to increase the productivity of each mail clerk by a factor of 10 or 20.
When I was an undergraduate at MIT, LPs had just come on the market, and I was quite a hifi nut, which is what got me into acoustics. My phono player had the best cartridge available at the time, a Pickering, whose factory was in Long Island City. The early Pickerings had a soft suspension that could dry out and the sound would suffer. I would pack the cartridge in the original small box, with original cotton, address it and stamp it for 1st class mail, bike or use what is now the Red Line to South Station, and hand it to the mail clerk of an RPO on The Federal at around 10pm, with complete assurance it would be at the Pickering factory the next morning. Three days later I was able to listen to my record collection again, and eventually Pickering did solve the problem with a different material.
daveklepperInstead of dropping RPO, the PO could have installed well-designed automation equipment in the RPO cars to increase the productivity of each mail clerk by a factor of 10 or 20.
Considering the USPS (at least around here) has been moving all sorting duties to larger regional centers (and away from local post offices), it seems to be taking a major step backwards to try to sort in a RPO.
Let's just let the people trains move people.
Well I like the Fed Ex model myself and I ship a lot by Fed Ex. Sat in one of their distribution centers for about two hours waiting on a package that was on a delivery truck. They are extremely efficient. Do you know they have one person running the customer service counter after business hours from 5 p.m. until 9 p.m. it is pretty impressive to sit and watch him/her work. Give it a try some night when you have a lot of spare time on your hands. Trully amazing how much productivity they squeeze out of that one person with a bar code scanner, hand trucks, etc. I was amazed in the two hours of me siitting there that clerk handled almost a full semi-trailer of packages flowing into the place after hours from small and medium businesses. Do you think the USPS could do that with one person? Yeah right
"Amtrak's first attempt at mail was a disaster. It burdened its passengers and wasted precious capital and effort."
The original MHC (at the head end with HEP), using pallet loading with forklifts, were ordered about 1986 (Claytor) and served to the 2003 IRC, following a derailment investigation report, were generally succesful. The NTSB derailment report referenced MHC dynamics, however TOFC/Autorack cars would not perform better (Pg 30) so it was the track... note how the handling of the pallets was performed away from platforms, pallet jack to door, then forklift.
The non-HEP Boxcar and Roadrailer end of train operation seemed to suffer from an under capitalized operation, leading to the terminal delays mentioned, where they could have been put between the power with Locotrol. It probably could have been worked out better with time.
Hey its not an issue of confusion, I have stated in my post that the freight railroads are where they want to be hauling freight on intermodal trains. What the article stated was the inspector general of the po suggested more mail could be handled by rail. The post office officials are more skeptical of it. I think intermodal trains will continue to gain market share from truckers. Thier is on going shortage of truck drivers and fuel prices are bound to rise again.
My personal experience with the road runners was poor. On a typical trip from Albany to Chicago, we left Albany between 45 minutes to an hour late solely because of the yard crew cutting the cars on to the rear of the train. The lake shore would then stop about 3 miles from union station and the cars would be removed further delaying the train. I could rarely count on the lake shore to be on time west bound. Eastbound the same sad story would occur, 3 miles out the train was stopped to cut the cars back in. I always felt sorry for the thru passengers east of Albany, because again the cars would be cut off and time lost in Albany. This was not a one time issue, it happened to me on about 10 round trips on the lake shore
Those trips cost me 800 bucks. I feel that the 300 passengers on board should be a higher priority than freight.
Those trips cost me ad much as 800 bucks in a roomette. I feel I should be a higher priority than mail or a package. Other than that the trips were great.
Oops
V.Payne"Amtrak's first attempt at mail was a disaster. It burdened its passengers and wasted precious capital and effort." The original MHC (at the head end with HEP), using pallet loading with forklifts, were ordered about 1986 (Claytor) and served to the 2003 IRC, following a derailment investigation report, were generally succesful. The FRA derailment report referenced MHC dynamics, however TOFC/Autorack cars would not perform better (Pg 30) so it was the track... note how the handling of the pallets was performed away from platforms, pallet jack to door, then forklift.
If at first you don't succeed. Yeah I will agree that was a disaster. You know they were using a 1940's or 1950's idea and trying to apply it to the 1990's. I think the issue at hand needs a lot more thinking and designing than that.
Actually they were using 1990' ideas in the 1990's. The NYC would never have combined any of its named trains in the 1950's with a string of freight cars at the expense or inconveinence of its passengers.
Amtrak tried to have it both ways and it failed. If Amtrak wants to haul high priority mail, freight or packages, then run a second section of the train, instead of downgrading its primary passenger services by essentially turning thier thier trains into mixed trains. If not then limited their head end business to what can be handled in a baggage car. This is not being closed minded or old fashsion but as what Amtrak has already found out practical.
ROBERT WILLISON Actually they were using 1990' ideas in the 1990's. The NYC would never have combined any of its named trains in the 1950's with a string of freight cars at the expense or inconveinence of its passengers. Amtrak tried to have it both ways and it failed. If Amtrak wants to haul high priority mail, freight or packages, then run a second section of the train, instead of downgrading its primary passenger services by essentially turning thier thier trains into mixed trains. If not then limited their head end business to what can be handled in a baggage car. This is not being closed minded or old fashsion but as what Amtrak has already found out practical.
....And yet high priority packages and mail flys and coexists with passengers on Commercial Airline flights in the cargo hold. I don't see a second plane flying behind my commercial airliner with just mail.
That because the mail is loaded and handled while the passengers are boarding and off loading. You don't see the passenger boarding then taxi away and loading cargo. You may notice that ups and fed have freighter not passenger hauling thier freight not passenger planes. When you overnite a package on ups it either goes on one of thier trucks or on thier planes. Your comparing apples to oranges .
It would be interesting to see how much cargo a typical jet liner can carry.
So I guess you just may see a passenger plane being followed by a fed ex plane. Something to ponder the next time your at your local air port.
Packages co exist on some Amtrak trains now as we all know. This service can certainly be expanded but not at the expense of the high priority passenger as Amtrak tried but did not succeed with its roadrunners.
It still seems there is conflation with the differing operating principles of the MHC vs. Boxcars/Roadrailers. The MHC mail and express seemed to be good finacially.
The pass through HEP electric cables allowed the MHC operation (which is no different that a baggage car) to follow the consist into the station and did not have the delays associated with the later non-HEP cars.
If you want to create a container operation there probably needs to be a thought given to how rapidly you can cut the cars and station operations.
The idea first presented is that containers are removed and placed while passengers are detraining and boarding in the station.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.