n012944 When I work a desk that has Amtrak, I tell the trains, you are going in the hole for Amtrak. For the most part, the "big picture" is not that had to figure out for the crews.
When I work a desk that has Amtrak, I tell the trains, you are going in the hole for Amtrak. For the most part, the "big picture" is not that had to figure out for the crews.
I appreciate your observation. Having grown up in Altoona, I knew many engineers, fireman, conductors, etc. Most of them were the fathers of my friends. Some of them were friends of my father, and they frequently showed up at the house for a beer or two with my dad.
All up the PRR employees that I knew were smart, capable, knowledgeable, and friendly. Most of them knew a great deal about the PRR and, more importantly, at least from my perspective, they took great pride in their role on the PRR. They were more than willing to share insights with a young whipper snapper who had a hundred questions for them.
Whether they worked the Middle Division or the Pittsburgh Division, they knew the railroad like the backs of their hands. They knew where the problems were, why they were there, and how to deal with them. Even more impressive, many of them were PRR stockholders, and they had a pretty good idea of the financial health of the company.
The notion that railroad crews don't know what is going on up and down the line, at least their portion of it, probably more often than not is wrong.
An "expensive model collector"
BaltACD I am sick and tired of the 'thread appropriate police' - threads go where the posters take them - when they get tired of responding the thread falls off the front page into oblivion. If one doesn't like where a thread has gone - leave the thread alone! Internet forums 101!
I am sick and tired of the 'thread appropriate police' - threads go where the posters take them - when they get tired of responding the thread falls off the front page into oblivion. If one doesn't like where a thread has gone - leave the thread alone! Internet forums 101!
But think about all the awesomely over-moderated sites out there that everyone loves.
yeah, I can't think of one, either.
And semi-on topic: nearby where I work, it's usually Amtrak that delays the freight trains from working. So it works both ways.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
If I think the discussion is wide of the presenting subject, I will say so! If you don't like it, don't pay any attention to my comments. By the way, who gave you the authority to tell me what to do?
In the case of the discussion about what will replace coal, the monitor got 14 comments re: the direction the discussion was taking, which was irrelevant to the presenting topic, and he rightly locked it.
I did not recommend that the discussion be locked. I did not recommend that this discussion be shut down. I recommended that the what will replace coal discussion get back to the presenting topic. I noted that it was time to end this discussion because of the wildly speculative comments that totally missed the mark.
Goodnight!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
dakotafred Sam1 Time to end this discussion. There she goes again. Whilst Sam may have been an accountant, she was obviously born to be a traffic cop.
Sam1 Time to end this discussion.
Time to end this discussion.
VerMontanan Actually, Sam, it was only "Crystal Clear" to you and the train crew. Unfortunately, neither of you had the standing to make the judgment. Yes, the freight train met train 21 there, but mere fact that the meet was so long suggests that there were other factors involved. Yes it could have just have been a "bad meet", but given that we know train 21 was severely delayed between Temple and Taylor (and not by the freight train at Granger), there were certainly other things to consider. You also do not know that "Amtrak's prescence acerbated the traffic control issue for UP." For example, the freight train could have been staked out there for 21 and other trains, too, by plan. The reality is that such "drive by" anecdotal observations are meaningless. And, as any dispatcher will tell you (including myself who did it for 17 years), there are many train crews out there who only think they know the "Crystal Clear" reasons they're delayed, and your average dispatcher will choose to only convey basic information to the crews. Not only does it limit questions, but moreover, they often just don't have the time for anything more. I agree that freight trains are delayed by Amtrak, and vice versa, but random observations without benefit of the big picture as observed by the train dispatcher are of no value.
Actually, Sam, it was only "Crystal Clear" to you and the train crew. Unfortunately, neither of you had the standing to make the judgment. Yes, the freight train met train 21 there, but mere fact that the meet was so long suggests that there were other factors involved. Yes it could have just have been a "bad meet", but given that we know train 21 was severely delayed between Temple and Taylor (and not by the freight train at Granger), there were certainly other things to consider. You also do not know that "Amtrak's prescence acerbated the traffic control issue for UP." For example, the freight train could have been staked out there for 21 and other trains, too, by plan.
The reality is that such "drive by" anecdotal observations are meaningless. And, as any dispatcher will tell you (including myself who did it for 17 years), there are many train crews out there who only think they know the "Crystal Clear" reasons they're delayed, and your average dispatcher will choose to only convey basic information to the crews. Not only does it limit questions, but moreover, they often just don't have the time for anything more.
I agree that freight trains are delayed by Amtrak, and vice versa, but random observations without benefit of the big picture as observed by the train dispatcher are of no value.
How long ago were you a dispatcher? Where do you live?
What do you know about Texas or the events of the day in question? How do you know what the conductor knew and did not know? How do you know whether what he told me was valid or invalid?
You accuse me of speculating? And then speculate about what the crew did or did not know! I am an novice compared to the speculations you have just proffered.
I never cease to be amazed at people who live hundreds or thousands of miles from Texas and know more about what goes on here than the people on the ground.
As I tried to make clear, I did not speculate on the reasons for Amtrak's delay. And I did not imply that it was Amtrak's fault.
Mark Meyer
henry6I would think it was the railroad's choice to operate its trains the way they did that day...if an Amtrak train was side tracked, would Amtrak get compensated for its fuel, overtime, and customer's tickets? No, probably not. Nobody wants to be the bad guy but everybody is...from Congress to the car cleaners....
You have a good point. If Amtrak is delayed because of freight traffic congestion or a slow order, it will have incremental costs, i.e. fuel, labor, passenger delay (hotels, meals, fare reimbursements), etc., that will not be covered by the freight railways.
Amtrak will be able to recapture some of its delay costs through reduced on-time performance incentives, i.e. it won't pay the railroads as much because of the failure to keep its passenger trains on time. How it comes out in the wash is unknown.
Between FY09 and FY13 Amtrak's payments to the freight railroads for hosting its trains declined from $136.5 million to $110 million. Amtrak does not give the reason for the decrease in the monies paid to the freight carriers. Presumably some of it may be due to a failure to keep Amtrak's trains on time.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Sam,
While I have not read the carrier's contracts with ATK I am 99% sure ATK would not pay for the freight train delay they impose. Not marginal fuel as in your case, not car hire, not loco capital cost, not cost of recrews.
I have figured before that ATK is paying 5-10% of what they should be based on railroad costs to produce a train mile of output. ATK is a giant leech on the freight carriers. ATK should either pay it way or be killed.
I would also note that ATK has same problem with the commuters on NEC that freights have with ATK, the commuters are not paying any where near market price for the capacity they consume.
Mac McCulloch
VerMontanan My conclusion is completely logical in line with your specifically asking "will Amtrak reimburse them for the cost of the wasted fuel?" Why did you state Amtrak, instead of the myriad other entities that could be responsible for the train being there? And how do you know it was "wasted fuel?" The train could have been positioned to this siding as a planned event to stage the train for maintenance of way outage or some other event.
My conclusion is completely logical in line with your specifically asking "will Amtrak reimburse them for the cost of the wasted fuel?" Why did you state Amtrak, instead of the myriad other entities that could be responsible for the train being there? And how do you know it was "wasted fuel?" The train could have been positioned to this siding as a planned event to stage the train for maintenance of way outage or some other event.
The conductor told me that his train was waiting for Number 21. His statement was crystal clear. As subsequent facts showed, the train was waiting for Amtrak's Texas Eagle. Had Amtrak not been on the rails, it would not have been a factor.
Irrespective of the cause of the delay, Amtrak's presence acerbated the traffic control issue for the UP. At a minimum, it was responsible for the incremental fuel burn incurred by the stopped freight train to the extent that it exceeded the fuel burn that would have occurred had Amtrak not been in the picture. According, your attribution of motive to my question is unwarranted.
As noted subsequently, Amtrak is not the cause of the congestion on the nation's investor owned railroads. But it acerbates the problem.
The bigger cost (fuel) would have been crew costs, particularly if the train had died.
Ed
VerMontanan Sam: You didn't specifically speculate on why Amtrak was late, but you did suggest that the reason for the freight train's delay as due to Amtrak when you stated, " They were idling for more than two hours. How much fuel would they have consumed during that period? And will Amtrak reimburse them for the cost of the wasted fuel?" Asking if Amtrak would reimburse UP for the cost of the "wasted fuel" clearly suggests that you speculated that Amtrak was the culprit, when in reality, you don't know this for sure.
Sam:
You didn't specifically speculate on why Amtrak was late, but you did suggest that the reason for the freight train's delay as due to Amtrak when you stated, " They were idling for more than two hours. How much fuel would they have consumed during that period? And will Amtrak reimburse them for the cost of the wasted fuel?"
Asking if Amtrak would reimburse UP for the cost of the "wasted fuel" clearly suggests that you speculated that Amtrak was the culprit, when in reality, you don't know this for sure.
I did not speculate as to the reason for the delay. I made no reference to the cause of the delay. Your conclusion is unwarranted.
Eddie Sand The switch from two tracks to four on the Eastern trunk lines at the turn of the Twentieth Century was necessary because of a great disparity in speeds -- passengers moved at around 60 MPH, freight at 20. The evolution of "fast freight" after 1930 reduced the difference somewhat, and that, combined with fewer and longer trains due to the Diesel, allowed the NYC to pursue the first great shrinkage of a main line, in the late 50s -- an idea so successful that the "long sidings" first envisioned ended up used to store unneeded RailBoxes in the early 1980's/ Nearly thirty years were to pass before B&o and PRR followed the NYc's example, although Pennsy did slim the Middle Divy (Harrisburg-Altoona) down to three tracks, with the middle track usually bi-directionally signaled.
The switch from two tracks to four on the Eastern trunk lines at the turn of the Twentieth Century was necessary because of a great disparity in speeds -- passengers moved at around 60 MPH, freight at 20. The evolution of "fast freight" after 1930 reduced the difference somewhat, and that, combined with fewer and longer trains due to the Diesel, allowed the NYC to pursue the first great shrinkage of a main line, in the late 50s -- an idea so successful that the "long sidings" first envisioned ended up used to store unneeded RailBoxes in the early 1980's/ Nearly thirty years were to pass before B&o and PRR followed the NYc's example, although Pennsy did slim the Middle Divy (Harrisburg-Altoona) down to three tracks, with the middle track usually bi-directionally signaled.
B&O undertook significant plant rationalization actions starting with the end of passenger service East of Baltimore in 1958 - in the 1959-1961 era, Philadelphia-Baltimore was converted to single track CTC from Current of Traffic double track with directional passing sidings. The Old Main Line was converted to single track CTC. In the 1961-1964 era from roughly Defiance, OH to Pine Jct., IN was converted to alternating single-double track form of CTC wherein the double track segments were about 8 miles long but without any intermediate crossovers. There were numerous other plant rationalization projects that happened during the early 60's.
VerMontanan With regard to Sam's question about the freight train at Granger: Such anecdotal observations are meaningless and this is a prime example. Since he posted this on 06/20, the day of the observation, this would have been train 21-19. The Dixieland site posts these departure times for train 21-19: * FTW 2 125P 2 210P 136P 210P Departed: on time. * CBR * * 2 252P * 313P Departed: 21 minutes late. * MCG * * 2 400P * 429P Departed: 29 minutes late. * TPL * * 2 443P * 509P Departed: 26 minutes late. * TAY * * 2 536P * 707P Departed: 1 hour and 31 minutes late. The train was late off BNSF at Temple being delivered to UP as it was, and then was delayed over an hour between Temple and Taylor. So, was it Amtrak's fault that the freight train waited? We don't know, but most likely, not. Since the freight took the siding at Granger at 430 PM, about the time 21 was leaving McGregor, this appears to not be a very good meet to start with. But we don't know why the freight was put in the hole at Granger. Do BNSF and UP have inadequate communication to convey that 21 was late and that the freight should have been advanced? Or, were all the other places the freight train could have gone already occupied? Then there is the issue of the delay for train 21-19 itself south of Temple. Was there Amtrak equipment failure between Temple and Taylor, or was it UP equipment failure or congestion that delayed Amtrak that correspondingly delayed the freight train? The bottom line is that if you're not sitting in the dispatcher's chair, you don't have standing to be able to accurately speculate.
With regard to Sam's question about the freight train at Granger: Such anecdotal observations are meaningless and this is a prime example. Since he posted this on 06/20, the day of the observation, this would have been train 21-19. The Dixieland site posts these departure times for train 21-19:
* FTW 2 125P 2 210P 136P 210P Departed: on time. * CBR * * 2 252P * 313P Departed: 21 minutes late. * MCG * * 2 400P * 429P Departed: 29 minutes late. * TPL * * 2 443P * 509P Departed: 26 minutes late. * TAY * * 2 536P * 707P Departed: 1 hour and 31 minutes late.
The train was late off BNSF at Temple being delivered to UP as it was, and then was delayed over an hour between Temple and Taylor. So, was it Amtrak's fault that the freight train waited? We don't know, but most likely, not.
Since the freight took the siding at Granger at 430 PM, about the time 21 was leaving McGregor, this appears to not be a very good meet to start with. But we don't know why the freight was put in the hole at Granger. Do BNSF and UP have inadequate communication to convey that 21 was late and that the freight should have been advanced? Or, were all the other places the freight train could have gone already occupied?
Then there is the issue of the delay for train 21-19 itself south of Temple. Was there Amtrak equipment failure between Temple and Taylor, or was it UP equipment failure or congestion that delayed Amtrak that correspondingly delayed the freight train?
The bottom line is that if you're not sitting in the dispatcher's chair, you don't have standing to be able to accurately speculate.
Actually, I did not speculate why Amtrak 21 - not 19 - was late. I was told, as per my original post, by the conductor on the freight train that it was placed on the siding at Granger to wait on Number 21. I don't have any reason to believe that the conductor was not being truthful with me.
When the Eagle carries through cars to LAX, it is Number 21/421.
My primary question was how many gallons of fuel would the engines have burned whilst stopped for what turned out to be at least two hours or more.
Any speculation about the additional delay impacting Number 21 between Temple and Taylor is just that: pure speculation. That is why I did not speculate as to the reason for the delay of Number 21. It could have been freight train congestion or a slow order or a breakdown in a freight train or a breakdown in Number 21. Amtrak is the cause of delays on occasion, although its contribution is relatively low.
The biggest factors impacting the on-time performance of the Texas Eagle in FY13 were slow orders, freight train interference, and passenger train interference. Passenger train interference would not have been a factor in this case.
Amtrak's long distance trains are not the primary factor for the congestion on the nation's investor owned railroads. But they acerbate it! This morning I rode Number 22/422 from San Antonio to Austin. Between San Marcos and Austin we passed three or four UP trains that were stopped on a siding. Presumably, Number 22/422 was either the primary or secondary cause.
Su things might get very interesting if the FRA decides that slower speeds are the primary (or only) safety measure immediately employable for this issue,
I suspect that, as with just about any major capital expenditure that can't be moved once it's completed, the Federal government will have to be involved for a number of reasons -- uncertainties over the effects of PANAMAX and the possibility of more passenger/commuter conflicts being the big ones. And a fair amount of time is going to pass before the picture clears.
dehusman Jim200 Why did they have to remove the sidings? Are other carriers also doing this? This is certainly going to cause problems and more delay, especially for Amtrak, who has to do a fair amount of passing. Amtrak's website states and it is my experience, that the host railroads are causing most of the late performance. In double track, it is a not a very easy thing to operate train against the flow on the other track, so sidings are quicker and easier. In double track a train operating against the flow operates at a reduced speed compared to a train operating with the flow. In CTC a train can operate on either track at maximum speed, the only speed reduction is the speed of the crossovers. Yes, in double track territory a train that is running on the wrong main (against the current of traffic for that main) is, in effect, running in dark territory for the track is not signaled for its direction of movement--therefore its speed is limited to 59 (passenger) or 49 (freight) mph. I have seen, and assisted in, a movement wherein a freight backed over onto the wrong main to let a passenger train pass it and then moved back to the right main once the passenger train was by. Most of the sidings were installed in 1930's and were hand thrown switches. They are typically too short to use for modern trains. Many of them were center sidings, which have certain problems in themselves. For freight service the sidings are obsolete and unnecessary. If AMTK wants to add capacity for its trains, then it can pay for part or all of it. AMTK doesn't typically have the money to do much improvement. They have lengthened sidings and added track capacity in several areas and have had corresponding increases in performance. Of course the delays are the "fault" of the host railroads. If you ride Amtrak they announce over the PA system to the passengers that any delays are caused by the host railroad. Amtrak only lists the delays by the railroad on which the delays occurred. Delays are broken down by percent and percent of percent. They never really tell you how much the delays are. For example on the Empire service 6.4 % of the delay was due to "Passengers" and 48.4% of that was on the CSX. Please explain how delays loading and unloading passengers and baggage are a CSX delay not an AMTK delay. Many of the delays for things not in the railroad's control (weather caused events) are not counted due to force majeure and not shown in the causes. Delays caused by Amtrak meeting Amtrak are also listed as "train interference"
Jim200 Why did they have to remove the sidings? Are other carriers also doing this? This is certainly going to cause problems and more delay, especially for Amtrak, who has to do a fair amount of passing. Amtrak's website states and it is my experience, that the host railroads are causing most of the late performance.
Why did they have to remove the sidings? Are other carriers also doing this? This is certainly going to cause problems and more delay, especially for Amtrak, who has to do a fair amount of passing. Amtrak's website states and it is my experience, that the host railroads are causing most of the late performance.
In double track, it is a not a very easy thing to operate train against the flow on the other track, so sidings are quicker and easier. In double track a train operating against the flow operates at a reduced speed compared to a train operating with the flow. In CTC a train can operate on either track at maximum speed, the only speed reduction is the speed of the crossovers.
Yes, in double track territory a train that is running on the wrong main (against the current of traffic for that main) is, in effect, running in dark territory for the track is not signaled for its direction of movement--therefore its speed is limited to 59 (passenger) or 49 (freight) mph. I have seen, and assisted in, a movement wherein a freight backed over onto the wrong main to let a passenger train pass it and then moved back to the right main once the passenger train was by.
Most of the sidings were installed in 1930's and were hand thrown switches. They are typically too short to use for modern trains. Many of them were center sidings, which have certain problems in themselves.
For freight service the sidings are obsolete and unnecessary. If AMTK wants to add capacity for its trains, then it can pay for part or all of it. AMTK doesn't typically have the money to do much improvement. They have lengthened sidings and added track capacity in several areas and have had corresponding increases in performance.
Of course the delays are the "fault" of the host railroads. If you ride Amtrak they announce over the PA system to the passengers that any delays are caused by the host railroad. Amtrak only lists the delays by the railroad on which the delays occurred. Delays are broken down by percent and percent of percent. They never really tell you how much the delays are. For example on the Empire service 6.4 % of the delay was due to "Passengers" and 48.4% of that was on the CSX. Please explain how delays loading and unloading passengers and baggage are a CSX delay not an AMTK delay. Many of the delays for things not in the railroad's control (weather caused events) are not counted due to force majeure and not shown in the causes. Delays caused by Amtrak meeting Amtrak are also listed as "train interference"
Johnny
blue streak 1 If the FRA initiates oil train speed limits passing sidings are going to be needed to just allow high priority freight trains to pass the oil trains.
If the FRA initiates oil train speed limits passing sidings are going to be needed to just allow high priority freight trains to pass the oil trains.
Why? On some Class 1's the oil trains were already restricted to the speeds the oil trains (actually all Key trains) before the FRA ruling. Effectively the railroads were complying the FRA's safety requirements before the requirements were created. The new restriction is 40 mph through the urban areas and I doubt there is right of way to build sidings in an urban area.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Jim200 BALTACD wrote: "The implementation of CTC on prior double track territories (at least on my carrier) has forced a change in the prior dispatching philosophy as in the day of Current of Traffic signaling there were directional passing sidings at strategic locations, allowing a freight train being overtaken to 'duck in the clear' and then follow the overtaking train(s) without affecting opposing movements. With the installation of CTC, in most cases, those sidings have been removed or otherwise rendered unusable for that purpose; to get one train around others moving in the same direction opposing movements will in some way be affected." Why did they have to remove the sidings? Are other carriers also doing this? This is certainly going to cause problems and more delay, especially for Amtrak, who has to do a fair amount of passing. Amtrak's website states and it is my experience, that the host railroads are causing most of the late performance.
BALTACD wrote:
"The implementation of CTC on prior double track territories (at least on my carrier) has forced a change in the prior dispatching philosophy as in the day of Current of Traffic signaling there were directional passing sidings at strategic locations, allowing a freight train being overtaken to 'duck in the clear' and then follow the overtaking train(s) without affecting opposing movements.
With the installation of CTC, in most cases, those sidings have been removed or otherwise rendered unusable for that purpose; to get one train around others moving in the same direction opposing movements will in some way be affected."
Sam1 Thanks to everyone for your helpful responses. I was in Granger for approximately an hour and a half. I was close to the engines, and none of them were shutdown. It may have been due to the fact that the UP dispatcher did not know when Amtrak would show. I called Julie, Amtrak's automated train status site, amongst others, for an update on Number 21. At first it was 19 minutes late, then it was 35 minutes late, then it was 55 minutes late, and finally it was more than an hour late. If the UP dispatcher had to deal with the changing meet times for Number 21, he would have had a difficult time, I presume, in telling the freight train crew when they could expect a clearance. After an hour and a half, I gave it up and retreated to my favorite Mexican restaurant in Taylor for a pint and some good TexMex.
Thanks to everyone for your helpful responses.
I was in Granger for approximately an hour and a half. I was close to the engines, and none of them were shutdown. It may have been due to the fact that the UP dispatcher did not know when Amtrak would show.
I called Julie, Amtrak's automated train status site, amongst others, for an update on Number 21. At first it was 19 minutes late, then it was 35 minutes late, then it was 55 minutes late, and finally it was more than an hour late. If the UP dispatcher had to deal with the changing meet times for Number 21, he would have had a difficult time, I presume, in telling the freight train crew when they could expect a clearance.
After an hour and a half, I gave it up and retreated to my favorite Mexican restaurant in Taylor for a pint and some good TexMex.
My carrier is NOT UP. I have no idea what UP's rules are regarding this happening.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.