As far as work rules are concerned, it would have to start with an Act of Congress. The Railway Labor Act states that union representation is to be organized along craft lines. This has become less of a factor with operating personnel but continues to be an issue with the various non-operating personnel, especially the shopcrafts.
CSSHEGE, yes, it would take an act of Congress to change/repeal the current law but getting money to Amtrak requires Congressional action anyway, so this is no barrier.
When do you suppose you will see 14 union leaders in Washington testifying that our various crafts could be represented efficiently and effectively by two or three (or some number) unions, so most of us serve no useful purpose and should be eliminated?
JT22CW wrote:if modern rail speeds for non-tilt trains were applied to the traditional rail corridors connecting New York City with Chicago, the journey would take approximately 10 hours.
Tell us your schedule
My speculative assertion (in case you misunderstood, that's what it is) is a simple matter of calculation. Let's assume that you can achieve an average speed of 90 mph on a train with four intermediate stops, traveling on the pre-1958 Broadway Limited route (let's cut out Paoli and Englewood for the sake of argument, since they slow down average speeds to a rather large degree and of course since Englewood station's gone, and keep Newark, North Philly, Harrisburg and Fort Wayne); that train is going to make the journey in ten hours, if you divide this average speed by the number of miles of the route. This is assuming conditions of the entire route to be at least up to Northeast Corridor standards (ACSES signaling, Class 7 track at least) and therefore all equipment running at its optimal speeds. Faster average speeds may yet be possible.
(What would a tilt train, limited by our friends at the FRA to a top speed of 150 mph, be capable of, with so few stops? If you could get the overall average speed up to 125 mph and have Class 8 tracks all the way, the train would make the journey in 7 hours 12 minutes.)
JT22CW wrote:where did I say I had a "schedule"?
JT22CW wrote:The Broadway Limited's intermediate stops were increased from six to ten in 1958.
PRR timetables showed a New York-Chicago distance of 907.7 miles. Most of that route would require extensive rebuilding, re-alignment and relocation to even come close to allowing the pipedream of a 10-hour schedule. Consider that speed would be restricted between New York and Newark, through Philadelphia, in the Pittsburgh area and from Gary to Chicago. It would also have to be a dedicated passenger right-of-way.
Consider the experience of BNSF on the Transcon when they ran an experimental "Bullet Train" freight schedule on behalf of UPS. Everything else had to be held until the train passed. The schedule was technically feasible but quite impractical.
daveklepper wrote:Right on, remember you have the mountains between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh to contend with.
The PRR mainline is a pretty good piece of RR, but there probably isn't more than 30 or 40 miles of it between Harrisburgh and Alliance that you could upgrade to 125 mph.
THere are lots and lots of 2+ deg curves before and after the mtns. Harrisburg to Huntington is a good 70-80 mph RR. There might be some short sections where you might be able to wind it out to 90. Huntington to Tyrone is all 30-40 mph. There's a nice, short stretch of tangent from Tyrone to Altoona, but then you're in the mountains. It's a pretty good mtn RR - lots of 50-60 and short spurts of 70-80. Even west of Pittsburgh to Alliance, it's pretty twisty and hilly. Not many places to "stetch your legs." It doesn't really straighten out until Crestline.
If you want 125 mph max (or better), you're pretty much building a new RR from Harrisburg to Alliance. There really isn't much opportunity to straighten curves on the existing ROW - it's just about ALL curves.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Phoebe Vet wrote:There sure are a lot of "glass is half empty" kind of people in here.
No. Just some "curves are not tangents" people.
Below are your max speeds on curves. 4" superelevation is pretty much std practice for frt ROW. Amtrak uses 6" on their ROW. NS has some 5" on 3 deg curves between Atlanta and Charlotte. There's probably more elsewhere in the US. Acela is allowed about 7" of underbalance on curves where the tilt is active.
Much of the RR ROW in the US was built to minimize grades at the expense of curves although it appears that they did try to keep the curves to as broad a std as possible. If you look at the track charts for a line, a lot of the time you'll see that there are few curves over a certain amount, but there are many curves right at that curvature. The NS mainline between Charlotte and Atlanta seems to have been built to a 3 degree standard where as from Charlotte north, it's 2 degrees. On these routes, there are lots and lots of curves right at the limit and not a whole lot of tangent between them.
There are lots of places were in the US were the RR ROW is arrow straight, but the PRR mainline is not one of them.
Now, if you wanted to play "connect the corridor" with a NY to Chicago route and improve running times, there's lots that could be practical to do. You have two corridors: Chicago to Cleveland and NY/Phila to Pittsburgh. You could put a 3rd track back down between Harrisburg and Pittsburg, or even Alliance. Build it with 6" superelevation and buy some tilting coaches and see if you couldn't push the running times down. Where you're now stuck with 40 and 50 mph running, you could push speeds up to 70-80 and some of those broad curves along the Juniata where you're allowed 75 now, you could get rolling at 110. From Harrisburg to Pittsburgh, you might be able to squeeze out a 60-70 mph avg.
From Cleveland to Chicago, there is a lot of tangent, so you could do class 8, 150 mph max on a separate track. You might manage to squeak out a 100 mph avg schedule on that corridor.
But, 125 mph avg on exisiting ROW, NY to Chicago. No.
OTOH, perhaps the glass is full, but only about three ounces full. Has anyone yet mentioned that the proposed NY-CHI HST line would have to be electrified anywhere to the west of Harrisburg? - a. s.
al-in-chgo wrote: Phoebe Vet wrote:There sure are a lot of "glass is half empty" kind of people in here. OTOH, perhaps the glass is full, but only about three ounces full. Has anyone yet mentioned that the proposed NY-CHI HST line would have to be electrified anywhere to the west of Harrisburg? - a. s.
You COULD use the Bombardier 5000 HP JetTrain locomotive....
Now were up to 4 oz!
JT22CW wrote: Tell us your scheduleFor the second time running, where did I say I had a "schedule"? My speculative assertion (in case you misunderstood, that's what it is) is a simple matter of calculation. Let's assume that you can achieve an average speed of 90 mph on a train with four intermediate stops, traveling on the pre-1958 Broadway Limited route (let's cut out Paoli and Englewood for the sake of argument, since they slow down average speeds to a rather large degree and of course since Englewood station's gone, and keep Newark, North Philly, Harrisburg and Fort Wayne); that train is going to make the journey in ten hours, if you divide this average speed by the number of miles of the route. This is assuming conditions of the entire route to be at least up to Northeast Corridor standards (ACSES signaling, Class 7 track at least) and therefore all equipment running at its optimal speeds. Faster average speeds may yet be possible. (What would a tilt train, limited by our friends at the FRA to a top speed of 150 mph, be capable of, with so few stops? If you could get the overall average speed up to 125 mph and have Class 8 tracks all the way, the train would make the journey in 7 hours 12 minutes.)
The problem at Philadelphia is that the North Philly station doesn't have the amenities that 30th Street Station has, which makes 30th Street the prefered station. Add to this that 30th Street is south of Zoo Interlocking, where the east-west line across Pennsylvania connects to the NEC.
The most practical way to overcome this is to complete the original plans the Pennsy had when the Philadelphia improvements were originally proposed. There was originally supposed to be a loop track south of 30th Street Station to allow trains from NYC to Harrisburg (and beyond) to stop at 30th Street, continue south into the loop, then swing back to Zoo Interlocking and head west with minimal delay. Probably because the Pennsy was doing this during the depression, some corners needed to be cut.
By examining the individual problems and proposing practical solutions, the glass may become more than "half full or half empty." Remember, terminal delays can drop the average speed, as easily as a slow order on the mainline.
CSSHEGEWISCH wrote:PRR timetables showed a New York-Chicago distance of 907.7 miles. Most of that route would require extensive rebuilding, re-alignment and relocation to even come close to allowing the pipedream of a 10-hour schedule
Consider that speed would be restricted between New York and Newark, through Philadelphia, in the Pittsburgh area and from Gary to Chicago
It would also have to be a dedicated passenger right-of-way
Consider the experience of BNSF on the Transcon when they ran an experimental "Bullet Train" freight schedule on behalf of UPS. Everything else had to be held until the train passed. The schedule was technically feasible but quite impractical
oltmannd wrote:The PRR mainline is a pretty good piece of RR, but there probably isn't more than 30 or 40 miles of it between Harrisburgh and Alliance that you could upgrade to 125 mph. THere are lots and lots of 2+ deg curves before and after the mtns. Harrisburg to Huntington is a good 70-80 mph RR. There might be some short sections where you might be able to wind it out to 90. Huntington to Tyrone is all 30-40 mph. There's a nice, short stretch of tangent from Tyrone to Altoona, but then you're in the mountains. It's a pretty good mtn RR - lots of 50-60 and short spurts of 70-80. Even west of Pittsburgh to Alliance, it's pretty twisty and hilly. Not many places to "stetch your legs." It doesn't really straighten out until Crestline. If you want 125 mph max (or better), you're pretty much building a new RR from Harrisburg to Alliance. There really isn't much opportunity to straighten curves on the existing ROW - it's just about ALL curves.
Now, if you wanted to play "connect the corridor" with a NY to Chicago route and improve running times, there's lots that could be practical to do. You have two corridors: Chicago to Cleveland and NY/Phila to Pittsburgh. You could put a 3rd track back down between Harrisburg and Pittsburg, or even Alliance. Build it with 6" superelevation and buy some tilting coaches and see if you couldn't push the running times down. Where you're now stuck with 40 and 50 mph running, you could push speeds up to 70-80 and some of those broad curves along the Juniata where you're allowed 75 now, you could get rolling at 110. From Harrisburg to Pittsburgh, you might be able to squeeze out a 60-70 mph avg. From Cleveland to Chicago, there is a lot of tangent, so you could do class 8, 150 mph max on a separate track. You might manage to squeak out a 100 mph avg schedule on that corridor.But 125 mph avg on exisiting ROW, NY to Chicago. No
al-in-chgo wrote:Has anyone yet mentioned that the proposed NY-CHI HST line would have to be electrified anywhere to the west of Harrisburg?
JT22CW wrote: CSSHEGEWISCH wrote:PRR timetables showed a New York-Chicago distance of 907.7 miles. Most of that route would require extensive rebuilding, re-alignment and relocation to even come close to allowing the pipedream of a 10-hour scheduleHow so? The Northeast Corridor wasn't "extensively rebuilt" to become what it presently is. Much of the work was piecemeal. Even rebuilding the former Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne and Chicago for such operation would not be as expensive as one might think.Consider that speed would be restricted between New York and Newark, through Philadelphia, in the Pittsburgh area and from Gary to ChicagoSome of those speed restrictions currently are applied to Acela Express and Regionals, and on the Keystone Service to Harrisburg (which currently operates at a 70-mph average speed from NYP to HAR in spite of the maximum speed between Philly and Harrisburg being 110 mph, and in spite of having to reverse direction at PHL).It would also have to be a dedicated passenger right-of-wayAbsolutely not. These are conventional train speeds we're talking about. The Northeast Corridor is not in any way, shape or form a dedicated passenger right of way.Consider the experience of BNSF on the Transcon when they ran an experimental "Bullet Train" freight schedule on behalf of UPS. Everything else had to be held until the train passed. The schedule was technically feasible but quite impracticalHow impractical? And frankly, I do not see a parallel between that and passenger service. oltmannd wrote:The PRR mainline is a pretty good piece of RR, but there probably isn't more than 30 or 40 miles of it between Harrisburgh and Alliance that you could upgrade to 125 mph.THere are lots and lots of 2+ deg curves before and after the mtns. Harrisburg to Huntington is a good 70-80 mph RR. There might be some short sections where you might be able to wind it out to 90. Huntington to Tyrone is all 30-40 mph. There's a nice, short stretch of tangent from Tyrone to Altoona, but then you're in the mountains. It's a pretty good mtn RR - lots of 50-60 and short spurts of 70-80. Even west of Pittsburgh to Alliance, it's pretty twisty and hilly. Not many places to "stetch your legs." It doesn't really straighten out until Crestline. If you want 125 mph max (or better), you're pretty much building a new RR from Harrisburg to Alliance. There really isn't much opportunity to straighten curves on the existing ROW - it's just about ALL curves.Ever see how curvy the Northeast Corridor is? How about east of Harrisburg, where the upgrades have been implemented and now you got the average speed on the Keystones that I mentioned above? (The curve at Downingtown station is pretty daunting, but that isn't bothering the Amtrak trains any, non-tilt ones to boot.)As for west of Harrisburg, there are generally two tracks missing that I've seen (one missing on Horseshoe Curve IIRC). Typical tactic of ripping out tracks to avoid taxation (originally), which is a sad and unnecessary phenomenon that ought to have been reversed for the most part, but has not been. Restoring of the missing two tracks could result in their being dedicated for passenger operation.The Keystone Corridor between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh (not ending at Harrisburg) is one of the "designated" 110-mph corridors per the FRA. They seem to think that what has been done to its eastern segment can be done to its western segment. (P42DCs can run at 110 mph, for the record.)Now, if you wanted to play "connect the corridor" with a NY to Chicago route and improve running times, there's lots that could be practical to do. You have two corridors: Chicago to Cleveland and NY/Phila to Pittsburgh. You could put a 3rd track back down between Harrisburg and Pittsburg, or even Alliance. Build it with 6" superelevation and buy some tilting coaches and see if you couldn't push the running times down. Where you're now stuck with 40 and 50 mph running, you could push speeds up to 70-80 and some of those broad curves along the Juniata where you're allowed 75 now, you could get rolling at 110. From Harrisburg to Pittsburgh, you might be able to squeeze out a 60-70 mph avg. From Cleveland to Chicago, there is a lot of tangent, so you could do class 8, 150 mph max on a separate track. You might manage to squeak out a 100 mph avg schedule on that corridor.But 125 mph avg on exisiting ROW, NY to Chicago. NoWhy not? Is this not the point of tilt trains? I've already mentioned that Sweden gets up to a 109-mph average speed with the X2000, and the German ICE-T up to 120-mph average speeds. All on railroads that are anything but "dead straight". I think you've got too many station stops in your head again, sir. That's not the focus of Limiteds or intercity rail.The Acela Express' fastest average speed is less than 90 mph on the NEC, currently (between NYP and WAS); but it's limited to 125 mph there. Get as much 150-mph running as possible (consider how many miles out of the corridor you need to do this on), and what do you achieve? Your max speeds on curves don't seem to rule things out on that score. Also, are you aware of the Acela Express' acceleration capabilities?The idea of tilt trains is not for doing 150-mph running on "separate track". Track separation is for getting things up in the true high end, like TGV speeds (186 mph or better). As for the costs thereof, France's TGV Est is costing a mere $23 million per mile, including improvements to terminal stations and the connecting traditional corridors, with an intended 350-km/h (217.5 mph) top speed. (This is the high speed line connecting France with Germany.)BTW, matching the 907.7 miles quoted above with the 78-mph overall average speed stretches my theoretical conventional train on Class 7 track out to a little over 11 hours 40 minutes. Keep chipping away and you'll get back to 16 hours (56-mph overall average speed), if that's what you really want.You trying to get me to add in a conversion of the Trenton Cutoff for high speed? Don't tempt me. al-in-chgo wrote:Has anyone yet mentioned that the proposed NY-CH -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, January 18, 2008 7:30 AM JT22CW wrote: TomDiehl wrote:The problem at Philadelphia is that the North Philly station doesn't have the amenities that 30th Street Station has, which makes 30th Street the prefered station. Add to this that 30th Street is south of Zoo Interlocking, where the east-west line across Pennsylvania connects to the NEC.The most practical way to overcome this is to complete the original plans the Pennsy had when the Philadelphia improvements were originally proposed. There was originally supposed to be a loop track south of 30th Street Station to allow trains from NYC to Harrisburg (and beyond) to stop at 30th Street, continue south into the loop, then swing back to Zoo Interlocking and head west with minimal delay. Probably because the Pennsy was doing this during the depression, some corners needed to be cut.By examining the individual problems and proposing practical solutions, the glass may become more than "half full or half empty." Remember, terminal delays can drop the average speed, as easily as a slow order on the mainline.Funny thing is, 30th Street is regarded by some to not be a "preferred station" even today. It's on the wrong side of the Schuylkill River for such people, who desire a train that goes right into Center City. (Maybe they could get together and rebuild Old Broad for that purpose.)Frankly, I'd skip Philly altogether for trains coming out of New York and I'd institute a separate service between Philly and Chicago. Why slow the train down any further? See my above comment regarding the Trenton Cutoff.30th Street is NOT the prefered station???? i don't know what schedule you're looking at, but North Philly has 12 trains a day in both directions on the Amtrak schedule. 30th Street has 91 northbound and 93 southbound. And that's just the Northeast Corridor Schedule. None of the long distance trains through Philly even mention North Philadelphia Station.Plus 30th street has direct connections to NJ Transit and Septa trains. Septa, by the way, operates the old Pennsy line connecting to Suburban Station, which is one block from Center City Philly. It's a short connecting run of about 5 or 6 blocks, mostly underground. So 30th Street is much closer to Center City business district. Your lack of knowledge of Philadelphia is obvious in your statement about Broad Street Station being rebuilt. Suburban Station improved service to center city by eliminating the "Chinese Wall" and putting the tracks underground below Pennsylvania Avenue (now JFK Blvd) and moved the station one block north and one block west of the old Broad Street Station location. Rebuild a station just to move it one block south and one block east?Skipping Philadelphia altogether is another impractical idea, since Philly is a major population center, business center, and convention center. You're passing up a lot of potential business just to save a few minutes on the schedule. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, January 18, 2008 9:08 AM In case you don't have access to the track charts, I just looked at them.From Duncannon to Altoona, the longest tangent track is 2 miles long. There isn't a five mile stretch without a 2 degree or better curve. There isn't a 10 mile stretch without a 3 degree or better curve. There are long sections where there are 3 and 4 degree curves one after the other.With lots of HP/ton, 6" superelevaton and tilt, there are some sections where you may be able to creep up to 110 mph on the eastern end of the line, say, east of Lewistown, but no sustained running. There are few places where curves can be cost-effectively eased because the RR runs between a river and a hillside. This is a river grade railroad. Not an "airline" like the PRR portion of the NEC and the Harrisburg line.And, it ain't any better west to Alliance OH.This makes the NEC and Harrisburg line look like a drag strip, by comparison. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, January 18, 2008 9:25 AM JT22CW wrote:As for west of Harrisburg, there are generally two tracks missing that I've seen (one missing on Horseshoe Curve IIRC). Typical tactic of ripping out tracks to avoid taxation (originally), which is a sad and unnecessary phenomenon that ought to have been reversed for the most part, but has not been. Restoring of the missing two tracks could result in their being dedicated for passenger operation.Taxes wasn't the reason that the one track was removed from Horseshoe Curve. It had to do with clearances. The center of the curve, where the park is, has such a tight curvature that operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.Track 2 was the one that was removed. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, January 18, 2008 10:38 AM TomDiehl wrote: JT22CW wrote:As for west of Harrisburg, there are generally two tracks missing that I've seen (one missing on Horseshoe Curve IIRC). Typical tactic of ripping out tracks to avoid taxation (originally), which is a sad and unnecessary phenomenon that ought to have been reversed for the most part, but has not been. Restoring of the missing two tracks could result in their being dedicated for passenger operation.Taxes wasn't the reason that the one track was removed from Horseshoe Curve. It had to do with clearances. The center of the curve, where the park is, has such a tight curvature that operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.Track 2 was the one that was removed.That's a new on one me!You would wind up with improved clearances taking one of the inner tracks out, but I never knew of any non-high and wide clearance restrictions on The Curve.A clearance restriction like that would be in the employee timetable. Anybody got a circa 1979 Conrail Pittsburgh Div timetable handy? -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, January 18, 2008 11:03 AM Fact check time!The fastest NYP to Harrisburg schedule is 3:05 for 195 miles. Thats 63 mph, not 70. The fastest Harrisburg to Phila train is 1:35 for 104 miles. That's 66 mph, Which, BTW, is only 5 minutes faster than the Silverliner times on the same line in the late 70's with 80/90 mph max running. (90 west from Lancaster, 80 east). The top speed of Acela trains between NYP and WAS is 135 mph, not 125. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply timz Member sinceFebruary 2005 2,366 posts Posted by timz on Friday, January 18, 2008 1:33 PM TomDiehl wrote:operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.But 85-ft passenger cars were okay? Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, January 18, 2008 1:41 PM timz wrote: TomDiehl wrote:operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.But 85-ft passenger cars were okay?Smells a bit like a Juniata urban legend to me. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply KingConrail76 Member sinceDecember 2007 From: The Gap between Philly and Harrisburg, Pa 245 posts Posted by KingConrail76 on Friday, January 18, 2008 2:52 PM Can someone explain to me how to remove myself from the Email notices of this TWICE HI-JACKED thread. The OP's thread has strayed very far from the WHY's of Class 1 RR's operating Passenger Services to the HOW's of the current Passenger service achieving a quick time to Chicago, and frankly, I've lost interest.Simplest answer to all these ??'s, The Class 1's have no interest, as Passenger Service is a money losing venture. I've UNclicked the "Email" notices button, maybe that will work, but I'll check back for suggestions, so as I do not have to Post to be removed in the future. Steve H. Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, January 18, 2008 10:01 PM oltmannd wrote: timz wrote: TomDiehl wrote:operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.But 85-ft passenger cars were okay?Smells a bit like a Juniata urban legend to me. Now that we've had fun with the urban legend (not that Juniata is urban) and others are getting annoyed with the hijacking........ Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply alphas Member sinceAugust 2006 575 posts Posted by alphas on Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:21 AM North Philadelphia Station is surrounded by one of the worst neighborhoods in Philly. That's the main reason long distance trains quit stopping there. At one point almost no trains stopped there but the Trenton locals are now doing so. Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions. Reply Phoebe Vet Member sinceSeptember 2007 From: Charlotte, NC 6,099 posts Posted by Phoebe Vet on Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:30 AM Customer service?Yea, that's what we need. I was really hoping that when I call Amtrak I could talk to somebody in India......... Dave Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow Reply CSSHEGEWISCH Member sinceMarch 2016 From: Burbank IL (near Clearing) 13,540 posts Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Wednesday, January 23, 2008 10:09 AM alphas wrote: Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions.This sort of solution would justifiably be viewed solely as a union-busting tactic. Restrictions on outsourcing are pretty standard in union contracts in most industries. The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul Reply al-in-chgo Member sinceOctober 2006 From: Chicago, Ill. 2,843 posts Posted by al-in-chgo on Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:40 PM alphas wrote: North Philadelphia Station is surrounded by one of the worst neighborhoods in Philly. That's the main reason long distance trains quit stopping there. At one point almost no trains stopped there but the Trenton locals are now doing so. Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions. Alphas is quite right. North Philadelphia has changed -- and not for the better -- since the days Fat Albert and Weird Harold (gratis Bill Cosby's imagination) ruled the streets back in the Sixties. When Chuck and I were in Philly this past October and asked if any transit points or certain neighborhoods were bad enough to avoid entirely, we got answers along the lines of "Go to North Philadelphia Station only while it's light out, and only if you two stick together", or "Stay out [of the North Philadelphia neighborhood] period." Generally these were well-informed answers by Philly residents who used some mode of SEPTA nearly every day. Alpha has reminded me -- and I'm quite glad he did -- that the reduction in use of N. Philadelphia's (exx-PRR) Amtrak stop is almost total. Also [slight deviation from Class I-ishness, strictly speaking]: IIRC "back in the day" didn't PRR long-distance varnish heading SB from NYC/Penn Station, then to Harrisburg and points west, go directly from the stop at North Philly toward the "Main Line" line itself, without 30th St. Station in the middle? When 30th Street Station became more of a routine way station for WB Keystone line electrified as well as SB NEC, was that the cause or the result of Amtrak's great reduction in the number of its runs that stop at N. Phila? (My current Amtrak System Timetables shows only three to four Keystone runs call at N. Phila. Station each way per day; apparently no NEC trains to or from D.C. ever make a scheduled stop.) Or perhaps better said, when did the attrition of N. Phila. (from a fairly routine Amtrak stop to next-to-nothing) occur, and was it prolonged or swift? (Our perspective over the years having shifted, I suppose most people today would say that any such train that didn't service 30th Street was scheduled to avoid 30th Street or bypass it?) And I'm also wondering how Center City Philadelphians "way back when" used to get from their homes and offices to somewhere they could catch, say, the Broadway Limited bound for Chicago? Did they take what is now the Main Line R-line (SEPTA) to some possible transfer spot like Ardmore or Paoli, or, it being safer in the Fifties and Sixties, were such passengers expected to hike it up to North Philadelphia to catch the westbound LD trains there? I'm just guessing, don't really know. Surely there are people reading this who do. - a. s. ************************ al-in-chgo Reply cordon Member sinceJanuary 2004 From: Frisco, TX 483 posts Posted by cordon on Wednesday, January 23, 2008 11:10 PM alphas wrote:Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions.I believe it is irresponsible to suggest that the federal government should sponsor or encourage outsourcing. Outsourcing almost never results in the same quality service at a lower cost. Any lower costs, if really achieved (i.e., not just on paper) are usually associated with drastically reduced quality and reliability, just what we don't need in the areas of RR maintenance and services, where safety of the public is involved. Furthermore, outsourcing increases (almost doubles - think of two financial management departments, instead of one) administrative overhead of all types and drives profits out of the company to other companies, again hardly what any RR can afford to do today. Finally, in some cases, it drives work and profits outside the U.S. of A. None of us needs that, either.It would be much more productive for the RRs to turn over a new leaf in employee relations and begin to reconcile with their employees. OTOH, the employees (unions) need to recognize that some of their demands, both current and past, are contributing to loss of business and loss of the good will of Congress and other government activities. I feel that the RRs could achieve significant cost reductions and service improvements if they developed a cooperative relationship between management and labor.Getting back to the OP's question, I believe the efficiency of passenger rail would increase dramatically if the RRs treated it as an integral part of RR operations, not as an interference with freight operations or a priority over freight operations. A single management structure, combined with employees that feel OK about their jobs instead of fearing losing them, dedicated to moving traffic (both kinds) quickly and smoothly would improve the costs and benefits of both freight and passenger business sectors, to the advantage of both.The federal government is in the unique position of being able to influence this kind of evolution through regulation and legislation. Would it mean the end of AMTRAK? Well, that is what the OP's question comes to. Maybe the AMTRAK experiment has played out and it is time to move on. This does not mean that passenger rail would be profitable. Even I acknowledge that that is a difficult goal. My point is that smoother and faster rail operations will reduce passenger rail losses and the need for subsidies, as well as increase profits from the freight business. This would be a significant step in the right direction for all RR activities. Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, January 24, 2008 1:58 PM al-in-chgo wrote: alphas wrote: North Philadelphia Station is surrounded by one of the worst neighborhoods in Philly. That's the main reason long distance trains quit stopping there. At one point almost no trains stopped there but the Trenton locals are now doing so. Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions. Alphas is quite right. North Philadelphia has changed -- and not for the better -- since the days Fat Albert and Weird Harold (gratis Bill Cosby's imagination) ruled the streets back in the Sixties. When Chuck and I were in Philly this past October and asked if any transit points or certain neighborhoods were bad enough to avoid entirely, we got answers along the lines of "Go to North Philadelphia Station only while it's light out, and only if you two stick together", or "Stay out [of the North Philadelphia neighborhood] period." Generally these were well-informed answers by Philly residents who used some mode of SEPTA nearly every day. Alpha has reminded me -- and I'm quite glad he did -- that the reduction in use of N. Philadelphia's (exx-PRR) Amtrak stop is almost total. Also [slight deviation from Class I-ishness, strictly speaking]: IIRC "back in the day" didn't PRR long-distance varnish heading SB from NYC/Penn Station, then to Harrisburg and points west, go directly from the stop at North Philly toward the "Main Line" line itself, without 30th St. Station in the middle? When 30th Street Station became more of a routine way station for WB Keystone line electrified as well as SB NEC, was that the cause or the result of Amtrak's great reduction in the number of its runs that stop at N. Phila? (My current Amtrak System Timetables shows only three to four Keystone runs call at N. Phila. Station each way per day; apparently no NEC trains to or from D.C. ever make a scheduled stop.) Or perhaps better said, when did the attrition of N. Phila. (from a fairly routine Amtrak stop to next-to-nothing) occur, and was it prolonged or swift? (Our perspective over the years having shifted, I suppose most people today would say that any such train that didn't service 30th Street was scheduled to avoid 30th Street or bypass it?) And I'm also wondering how Center City Philadelphians "way back when" used to get from their homes and offices to somewhere they could catch, say, the Broadway Limited bound for Chicago? Did they take what is now the Main Line R-line (SEPTA) to some possible transfer spot like Ardmore or Paoli, or, it being safer in the Fifties and Sixties, were such passengers expected to hike it up to North Philadelphia to catch the westbound LD trains there? I'm just guessing, don't really know. Surely there are people reading this who do. - a. s. ************************ The ex-PRR guys I used to work with used to go to Paoli. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply « First«3456789 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
oltmannd wrote:The PRR mainline is a pretty good piece of RR, but there probably isn't more than 30 or 40 miles of it between Harrisburgh and Alliance that you could upgrade to 125 mph.THere are lots and lots of 2+ deg curves before and after the mtns. Harrisburg to Huntington is a good 70-80 mph RR. There might be some short sections where you might be able to wind it out to 90. Huntington to Tyrone is all 30-40 mph. There's a nice, short stretch of tangent from Tyrone to Altoona, but then you're in the mountains. It's a pretty good mtn RR - lots of 50-60 and short spurts of 70-80. Even west of Pittsburgh to Alliance, it's pretty twisty and hilly. Not many places to "stetch your legs." It doesn't really straighten out until Crestline. If you want 125 mph max (or better), you're pretty much building a new RR from Harrisburg to Alliance. There really isn't much opportunity to straighten curves on the existing ROW - it's just about ALL curves.
al-in-chgo wrote:Has anyone yet mentioned that the proposed NY-CH -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, January 18, 2008 7:30 AM JT22CW wrote: TomDiehl wrote:The problem at Philadelphia is that the North Philly station doesn't have the amenities that 30th Street Station has, which makes 30th Street the prefered station. Add to this that 30th Street is south of Zoo Interlocking, where the east-west line across Pennsylvania connects to the NEC.The most practical way to overcome this is to complete the original plans the Pennsy had when the Philadelphia improvements were originally proposed. There was originally supposed to be a loop track south of 30th Street Station to allow trains from NYC to Harrisburg (and beyond) to stop at 30th Street, continue south into the loop, then swing back to Zoo Interlocking and head west with minimal delay. Probably because the Pennsy was doing this during the depression, some corners needed to be cut.By examining the individual problems and proposing practical solutions, the glass may become more than "half full or half empty." Remember, terminal delays can drop the average speed, as easily as a slow order on the mainline.Funny thing is, 30th Street is regarded by some to not be a "preferred station" even today. It's on the wrong side of the Schuylkill River for such people, who desire a train that goes right into Center City. (Maybe they could get together and rebuild Old Broad for that purpose.)Frankly, I'd skip Philly altogether for trains coming out of New York and I'd institute a separate service between Philly and Chicago. Why slow the train down any further? See my above comment regarding the Trenton Cutoff.30th Street is NOT the prefered station???? i don't know what schedule you're looking at, but North Philly has 12 trains a day in both directions on the Amtrak schedule. 30th Street has 91 northbound and 93 southbound. And that's just the Northeast Corridor Schedule. None of the long distance trains through Philly even mention North Philadelphia Station.Plus 30th street has direct connections to NJ Transit and Septa trains. Septa, by the way, operates the old Pennsy line connecting to Suburban Station, which is one block from Center City Philly. It's a short connecting run of about 5 or 6 blocks, mostly underground. So 30th Street is much closer to Center City business district. Your lack of knowledge of Philadelphia is obvious in your statement about Broad Street Station being rebuilt. Suburban Station improved service to center city by eliminating the "Chinese Wall" and putting the tracks underground below Pennsylvania Avenue (now JFK Blvd) and moved the station one block north and one block west of the old Broad Street Station location. Rebuild a station just to move it one block south and one block east?Skipping Philadelphia altogether is another impractical idea, since Philly is a major population center, business center, and convention center. You're passing up a lot of potential business just to save a few minutes on the schedule. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, January 18, 2008 9:08 AM In case you don't have access to the track charts, I just looked at them.From Duncannon to Altoona, the longest tangent track is 2 miles long. There isn't a five mile stretch without a 2 degree or better curve. There isn't a 10 mile stretch without a 3 degree or better curve. There are long sections where there are 3 and 4 degree curves one after the other.With lots of HP/ton, 6" superelevaton and tilt, there are some sections where you may be able to creep up to 110 mph on the eastern end of the line, say, east of Lewistown, but no sustained running. There are few places where curves can be cost-effectively eased because the RR runs between a river and a hillside. This is a river grade railroad. Not an "airline" like the PRR portion of the NEC and the Harrisburg line.And, it ain't any better west to Alliance OH.This makes the NEC and Harrisburg line look like a drag strip, by comparison. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, January 18, 2008 9:25 AM JT22CW wrote:As for west of Harrisburg, there are generally two tracks missing that I've seen (one missing on Horseshoe Curve IIRC). Typical tactic of ripping out tracks to avoid taxation (originally), which is a sad and unnecessary phenomenon that ought to have been reversed for the most part, but has not been. Restoring of the missing two tracks could result in their being dedicated for passenger operation.Taxes wasn't the reason that the one track was removed from Horseshoe Curve. It had to do with clearances. The center of the curve, where the park is, has such a tight curvature that operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.Track 2 was the one that was removed. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, January 18, 2008 10:38 AM TomDiehl wrote: JT22CW wrote:As for west of Harrisburg, there are generally two tracks missing that I've seen (one missing on Horseshoe Curve IIRC). Typical tactic of ripping out tracks to avoid taxation (originally), which is a sad and unnecessary phenomenon that ought to have been reversed for the most part, but has not been. Restoring of the missing two tracks could result in their being dedicated for passenger operation.Taxes wasn't the reason that the one track was removed from Horseshoe Curve. It had to do with clearances. The center of the curve, where the park is, has such a tight curvature that operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.Track 2 was the one that was removed.That's a new on one me!You would wind up with improved clearances taking one of the inner tracks out, but I never knew of any non-high and wide clearance restrictions on The Curve.A clearance restriction like that would be in the employee timetable. Anybody got a circa 1979 Conrail Pittsburgh Div timetable handy? -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, January 18, 2008 11:03 AM Fact check time!The fastest NYP to Harrisburg schedule is 3:05 for 195 miles. Thats 63 mph, not 70. The fastest Harrisburg to Phila train is 1:35 for 104 miles. That's 66 mph, Which, BTW, is only 5 minutes faster than the Silverliner times on the same line in the late 70's with 80/90 mph max running. (90 west from Lancaster, 80 east). The top speed of Acela trains between NYP and WAS is 135 mph, not 125. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply timz Member sinceFebruary 2005 2,366 posts Posted by timz on Friday, January 18, 2008 1:33 PM TomDiehl wrote:operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.But 85-ft passenger cars were okay? Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, January 18, 2008 1:41 PM timz wrote: TomDiehl wrote:operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.But 85-ft passenger cars were okay?Smells a bit like a Juniata urban legend to me. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply KingConrail76 Member sinceDecember 2007 From: The Gap between Philly and Harrisburg, Pa 245 posts Posted by KingConrail76 on Friday, January 18, 2008 2:52 PM Can someone explain to me how to remove myself from the Email notices of this TWICE HI-JACKED thread. The OP's thread has strayed very far from the WHY's of Class 1 RR's operating Passenger Services to the HOW's of the current Passenger service achieving a quick time to Chicago, and frankly, I've lost interest.Simplest answer to all these ??'s, The Class 1's have no interest, as Passenger Service is a money losing venture. I've UNclicked the "Email" notices button, maybe that will work, but I'll check back for suggestions, so as I do not have to Post to be removed in the future. Steve H. Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, January 18, 2008 10:01 PM oltmannd wrote: timz wrote: TomDiehl wrote:operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.But 85-ft passenger cars were okay?Smells a bit like a Juniata urban legend to me. Now that we've had fun with the urban legend (not that Juniata is urban) and others are getting annoyed with the hijacking........ Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply alphas Member sinceAugust 2006 575 posts Posted by alphas on Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:21 AM North Philadelphia Station is surrounded by one of the worst neighborhoods in Philly. That's the main reason long distance trains quit stopping there. At one point almost no trains stopped there but the Trenton locals are now doing so. Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions. Reply Phoebe Vet Member sinceSeptember 2007 From: Charlotte, NC 6,099 posts Posted by Phoebe Vet on Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:30 AM Customer service?Yea, that's what we need. I was really hoping that when I call Amtrak I could talk to somebody in India......... Dave Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow Reply CSSHEGEWISCH Member sinceMarch 2016 From: Burbank IL (near Clearing) 13,540 posts Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Wednesday, January 23, 2008 10:09 AM alphas wrote: Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions.This sort of solution would justifiably be viewed solely as a union-busting tactic. Restrictions on outsourcing are pretty standard in union contracts in most industries. The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul Reply al-in-chgo Member sinceOctober 2006 From: Chicago, Ill. 2,843 posts Posted by al-in-chgo on Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:40 PM alphas wrote: North Philadelphia Station is surrounded by one of the worst neighborhoods in Philly. That's the main reason long distance trains quit stopping there. At one point almost no trains stopped there but the Trenton locals are now doing so. Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions. Alphas is quite right. North Philadelphia has changed -- and not for the better -- since the days Fat Albert and Weird Harold (gratis Bill Cosby's imagination) ruled the streets back in the Sixties. When Chuck and I were in Philly this past October and asked if any transit points or certain neighborhoods were bad enough to avoid entirely, we got answers along the lines of "Go to North Philadelphia Station only while it's light out, and only if you two stick together", or "Stay out [of the North Philadelphia neighborhood] period." Generally these were well-informed answers by Philly residents who used some mode of SEPTA nearly every day. Alpha has reminded me -- and I'm quite glad he did -- that the reduction in use of N. Philadelphia's (exx-PRR) Amtrak stop is almost total. Also [slight deviation from Class I-ishness, strictly speaking]: IIRC "back in the day" didn't PRR long-distance varnish heading SB from NYC/Penn Station, then to Harrisburg and points west, go directly from the stop at North Philly toward the "Main Line" line itself, without 30th St. Station in the middle? When 30th Street Station became more of a routine way station for WB Keystone line electrified as well as SB NEC, was that the cause or the result of Amtrak's great reduction in the number of its runs that stop at N. Phila? (My current Amtrak System Timetables shows only three to four Keystone runs call at N. Phila. Station each way per day; apparently no NEC trains to or from D.C. ever make a scheduled stop.) Or perhaps better said, when did the attrition of N. Phila. (from a fairly routine Amtrak stop to next-to-nothing) occur, and was it prolonged or swift? (Our perspective over the years having shifted, I suppose most people today would say that any such train that didn't service 30th Street was scheduled to avoid 30th Street or bypass it?) And I'm also wondering how Center City Philadelphians "way back when" used to get from their homes and offices to somewhere they could catch, say, the Broadway Limited bound for Chicago? Did they take what is now the Main Line R-line (SEPTA) to some possible transfer spot like Ardmore or Paoli, or, it being safer in the Fifties and Sixties, were such passengers expected to hike it up to North Philadelphia to catch the westbound LD trains there? I'm just guessing, don't really know. Surely there are people reading this who do. - a. s. ************************ al-in-chgo Reply cordon Member sinceJanuary 2004 From: Frisco, TX 483 posts Posted by cordon on Wednesday, January 23, 2008 11:10 PM alphas wrote:Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions.I believe it is irresponsible to suggest that the federal government should sponsor or encourage outsourcing. Outsourcing almost never results in the same quality service at a lower cost. Any lower costs, if really achieved (i.e., not just on paper) are usually associated with drastically reduced quality and reliability, just what we don't need in the areas of RR maintenance and services, where safety of the public is involved. Furthermore, outsourcing increases (almost doubles - think of two financial management departments, instead of one) administrative overhead of all types and drives profits out of the company to other companies, again hardly what any RR can afford to do today. Finally, in some cases, it drives work and profits outside the U.S. of A. None of us needs that, either.It would be much more productive for the RRs to turn over a new leaf in employee relations and begin to reconcile with their employees. OTOH, the employees (unions) need to recognize that some of their demands, both current and past, are contributing to loss of business and loss of the good will of Congress and other government activities. I feel that the RRs could achieve significant cost reductions and service improvements if they developed a cooperative relationship between management and labor.Getting back to the OP's question, I believe the efficiency of passenger rail would increase dramatically if the RRs treated it as an integral part of RR operations, not as an interference with freight operations or a priority over freight operations. A single management structure, combined with employees that feel OK about their jobs instead of fearing losing them, dedicated to moving traffic (both kinds) quickly and smoothly would improve the costs and benefits of both freight and passenger business sectors, to the advantage of both.The federal government is in the unique position of being able to influence this kind of evolution through regulation and legislation. Would it mean the end of AMTRAK? Well, that is what the OP's question comes to. Maybe the AMTRAK experiment has played out and it is time to move on. This does not mean that passenger rail would be profitable. Even I acknowledge that that is a difficult goal. My point is that smoother and faster rail operations will reduce passenger rail losses and the need for subsidies, as well as increase profits from the freight business. This would be a significant step in the right direction for all RR activities. Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, January 24, 2008 1:58 PM al-in-chgo wrote: alphas wrote: North Philadelphia Station is surrounded by one of the worst neighborhoods in Philly. That's the main reason long distance trains quit stopping there. At one point almost no trains stopped there but the Trenton locals are now doing so. Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions. Alphas is quite right. North Philadelphia has changed -- and not for the better -- since the days Fat Albert and Weird Harold (gratis Bill Cosby's imagination) ruled the streets back in the Sixties. When Chuck and I were in Philly this past October and asked if any transit points or certain neighborhoods were bad enough to avoid entirely, we got answers along the lines of "Go to North Philadelphia Station only while it's light out, and only if you two stick together", or "Stay out [of the North Philadelphia neighborhood] period." Generally these were well-informed answers by Philly residents who used some mode of SEPTA nearly every day. Alpha has reminded me -- and I'm quite glad he did -- that the reduction in use of N. Philadelphia's (exx-PRR) Amtrak stop is almost total. Also [slight deviation from Class I-ishness, strictly speaking]: IIRC "back in the day" didn't PRR long-distance varnish heading SB from NYC/Penn Station, then to Harrisburg and points west, go directly from the stop at North Philly toward the "Main Line" line itself, without 30th St. Station in the middle? When 30th Street Station became more of a routine way station for WB Keystone line electrified as well as SB NEC, was that the cause or the result of Amtrak's great reduction in the number of its runs that stop at N. Phila? (My current Amtrak System Timetables shows only three to four Keystone runs call at N. Phila. Station each way per day; apparently no NEC trains to or from D.C. ever make a scheduled stop.) Or perhaps better said, when did the attrition of N. Phila. (from a fairly routine Amtrak stop to next-to-nothing) occur, and was it prolonged or swift? (Our perspective over the years having shifted, I suppose most people today would say that any such train that didn't service 30th Street was scheduled to avoid 30th Street or bypass it?) And I'm also wondering how Center City Philadelphians "way back when" used to get from their homes and offices to somewhere they could catch, say, the Broadway Limited bound for Chicago? Did they take what is now the Main Line R-line (SEPTA) to some possible transfer spot like Ardmore or Paoli, or, it being safer in the Fifties and Sixties, were such passengers expected to hike it up to North Philadelphia to catch the westbound LD trains there? I'm just guessing, don't really know. Surely there are people reading this who do. - a. s. ************************ The ex-PRR guys I used to work with used to go to Paoli. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply « First«3456789 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
JT22CW wrote: TomDiehl wrote:The problem at Philadelphia is that the North Philly station doesn't have the amenities that 30th Street Station has, which makes 30th Street the prefered station. Add to this that 30th Street is south of Zoo Interlocking, where the east-west line across Pennsylvania connects to the NEC.The most practical way to overcome this is to complete the original plans the Pennsy had when the Philadelphia improvements were originally proposed. There was originally supposed to be a loop track south of 30th Street Station to allow trains from NYC to Harrisburg (and beyond) to stop at 30th Street, continue south into the loop, then swing back to Zoo Interlocking and head west with minimal delay. Probably because the Pennsy was doing this during the depression, some corners needed to be cut.By examining the individual problems and proposing practical solutions, the glass may become more than "half full or half empty." Remember, terminal delays can drop the average speed, as easily as a slow order on the mainline.Funny thing is, 30th Street is regarded by some to not be a "preferred station" even today. It's on the wrong side of the Schuylkill River for such people, who desire a train that goes right into Center City. (Maybe they could get together and rebuild Old Broad for that purpose.)Frankly, I'd skip Philly altogether for trains coming out of New York and I'd institute a separate service between Philly and Chicago. Why slow the train down any further? See my above comment regarding the Trenton Cutoff.
TomDiehl wrote:The problem at Philadelphia is that the North Philly station doesn't have the amenities that 30th Street Station has, which makes 30th Street the prefered station. Add to this that 30th Street is south of Zoo Interlocking, where the east-west line across Pennsylvania connects to the NEC.The most practical way to overcome this is to complete the original plans the Pennsy had when the Philadelphia improvements were originally proposed. There was originally supposed to be a loop track south of 30th Street Station to allow trains from NYC to Harrisburg (and beyond) to stop at 30th Street, continue south into the loop, then swing back to Zoo Interlocking and head west with minimal delay. Probably because the Pennsy was doing this during the depression, some corners needed to be cut.By examining the individual problems and proposing practical solutions, the glass may become more than "half full or half empty." Remember, terminal delays can drop the average speed, as easily as a slow order on the mainline.
Funny thing is, 30th Street is regarded by some to not be a "preferred station" even today. It's on the wrong side of the Schuylkill River for such people, who desire a train that goes right into Center City. (Maybe they could get together and rebuild Old Broad for that purpose.)Frankly, I'd skip Philly altogether for trains coming out of New York and I'd institute a separate service between Philly and Chicago. Why slow the train down any further? See my above comment regarding the Trenton Cutoff.
30th Street is NOT the prefered station???? i don't know what schedule you're looking at, but North Philly has 12 trains a day in both directions on the Amtrak schedule. 30th Street has 91 northbound and 93 southbound. And that's just the Northeast Corridor Schedule. None of the long distance trains through Philly even mention North Philadelphia Station.
Plus 30th street has direct connections to NJ Transit and Septa trains. Septa, by the way, operates the old Pennsy line connecting to Suburban Station, which is one block from Center City Philly. It's a short connecting run of about 5 or 6 blocks, mostly underground. So 30th Street is much closer to Center City business district. Your lack of knowledge of Philadelphia is obvious in your statement about Broad Street Station being rebuilt. Suburban Station improved service to center city by eliminating the "Chinese Wall" and putting the tracks underground below Pennsylvania Avenue (now JFK Blvd) and moved the station one block north and one block west of the old Broad Street Station location. Rebuild a station just to move it one block south and one block east?
Skipping Philadelphia altogether is another impractical idea, since Philly is a major population center, business center, and convention center. You're passing up a lot of potential business just to save a few minutes on the schedule.
In case you don't have access to the track charts, I just looked at them.
From Duncannon to Altoona, the longest tangent track is 2 miles long. There isn't a five mile stretch without a 2 degree or better curve. There isn't a 10 mile stretch without a 3 degree or better curve. There are long sections where there are 3 and 4 degree curves one after the other.
With lots of HP/ton, 6" superelevaton and tilt, there are some sections where you may be able to creep up to 110 mph on the eastern end of the line, say, east of Lewistown, but no sustained running.
There are few places where curves can be cost-effectively eased because the RR runs between a river and a hillside. This is a river grade railroad. Not an "airline" like the PRR portion of the NEC and the Harrisburg line.
And, it ain't any better west to Alliance OH.
This makes the NEC and Harrisburg line look like a drag strip, by comparison.
JT22CW wrote:As for west of Harrisburg, there are generally two tracks missing that I've seen (one missing on Horseshoe Curve IIRC). Typical tactic of ripping out tracks to avoid taxation (originally), which is a sad and unnecessary phenomenon that ought to have been reversed for the most part, but has not been. Restoring of the missing two tracks could result in their being dedicated for passenger operation.
Taxes wasn't the reason that the one track was removed from Horseshoe Curve. It had to do with clearances. The center of the curve, where the park is, has such a tight curvature that operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.
Track 2 was the one that was removed.
TomDiehl wrote: JT22CW wrote:As for west of Harrisburg, there are generally two tracks missing that I've seen (one missing on Horseshoe Curve IIRC). Typical tactic of ripping out tracks to avoid taxation (originally), which is a sad and unnecessary phenomenon that ought to have been reversed for the most part, but has not been. Restoring of the missing two tracks could result in their being dedicated for passenger operation.Taxes wasn't the reason that the one track was removed from Horseshoe Curve. It had to do with clearances. The center of the curve, where the park is, has such a tight curvature that operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.Track 2 was the one that was removed.
That's a new on one me!
You would wind up with improved clearances taking one of the inner tracks out, but I never knew of any non-high and wide clearance restrictions on The Curve.
A clearance restriction like that would be in the employee timetable. Anybody got a circa 1979 Conrail Pittsburgh Div timetable handy?
Fact check time!
The fastest NYP to Harrisburg schedule is 3:05 for 195 miles. Thats 63 mph, not 70.
The fastest Harrisburg to Phila train is 1:35 for 104 miles. That's 66 mph, Which, BTW, is only 5 minutes faster than the Silverliner times on the same line in the late 70's with 80/90 mph max running. (90 west from Lancaster, 80 east).
The top speed of Acela trains between NYP and WAS is 135 mph, not 125.
TomDiehl wrote:operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.
timz wrote: TomDiehl wrote:operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.But 85-ft passenger cars were okay?
Smells a bit like a Juniata urban legend to me.
Can someone explain to me how to remove myself from the Email notices of this TWICE HI-JACKED thread. The OP's thread has strayed very far from the WHY's of Class 1 RR's operating Passenger Services to the HOW's of the current Passenger service achieving a quick time to Chicago, and frankly, I've lost interest.
Simplest answer to all these ??'s, The Class 1's have no interest, as Passenger Service is a money losing venture.
I've UNclicked the "Email" notices button, maybe that will work, but I'll check back for suggestions, so as I do not have to Post to be removed in the future.
oltmannd wrote: timz wrote: TomDiehl wrote:operations had to schedule trains through the curve so there wasn't a train on track 1 and 2 or track 2 and 3 (counting track one as the closest to the park/sharpest curve) at the same time as they went through this section. The modern longer cars would sideswipe.But 85-ft passenger cars were okay?Smells a bit like a Juniata urban legend to me.
Now that we've had fun with the urban legend (not that Juniata is urban) and others are getting annoyed with the hijacking........
North Philadelphia Station is surrounded by one of the worst neighborhoods in Philly. That's the main reason long distance trains quit stopping there. At one point almost no trains stopped there but the Trenton locals are now doing so.
Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions.
Customer service?
Yea, that's what we need. I was really hoping that when I call Amtrak I could talk to somebody in India.........
alphas wrote: Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions.
This sort of solution would justifiably be viewed solely as a union-busting tactic. Restrictions on outsourcing are pretty standard in union contracts in most industries.
alphas wrote: North Philadelphia Station is surrounded by one of the worst neighborhoods in Philly. That's the main reason long distance trains quit stopping there. At one point almost no trains stopped there but the Trenton locals are now doing so. Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions.
Alphas is quite right. North Philadelphia has changed -- and not for the better -- since the days Fat Albert and Weird Harold (gratis Bill Cosby's imagination) ruled the streets back in the Sixties. When Chuck and I were in Philly this past October and asked if any transit points or certain neighborhoods were bad enough to avoid entirely, we got answers along the lines of "Go to North Philadelphia Station only while it's light out, and only if you two stick together", or "Stay out [of the North Philadelphia neighborhood] period." Generally these were well-informed answers by Philly residents who used some mode of SEPTA nearly every day.
Alpha has reminded me -- and I'm quite glad he did -- that the reduction in use of N. Philadelphia's (exx-PRR) Amtrak stop is almost total. Also [slight deviation from Class I-ishness, strictly speaking]: IIRC "back in the day" didn't PRR long-distance varnish heading SB from NYC/Penn Station, then to Harrisburg and points west, go directly from the stop at North Philly toward the "Main Line" line itself, without 30th St. Station in the middle? When 30th Street Station became more of a routine way station for WB Keystone line electrified as well as SB NEC, was that the cause or the result of Amtrak's great reduction in the number of its runs that stop at N. Phila? (My current Amtrak System Timetables shows only three to four Keystone runs call at N. Phila. Station each way per day; apparently no NEC trains to or from D.C. ever make a scheduled stop.) Or perhaps better said, when did the attrition of N. Phila. (from a fairly routine Amtrak stop to next-to-nothing) occur, and was it prolonged or swift? (Our perspective over the years having shifted, I suppose most people today would say that any such train that didn't service 30th Street was scheduled to avoid 30th Street or bypass it?) And I'm also wondering how Center City Philadelphians "way back when" used to get from their homes and offices to somewhere they could catch, say, the Broadway Limited bound for Chicago? Did they take what is now the Main Line R-line (SEPTA) to some possible transfer spot like Ardmore or Paoli, or, it being safer in the Fifties and Sixties, were such passengers expected to hike it up to North Philadelphia to catch the westbound LD trains there? I'm just guessing, don't really know. Surely there are people reading this who do. - a. s.
************************
alphas wrote:Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions.
I believe it is irresponsible to suggest that the federal government should sponsor or encourage outsourcing. Outsourcing almost never results in the same quality service at a lower cost. Any lower costs, if really achieved (i.e., not just on paper) are usually associated with drastically reduced quality and reliability, just what we don't need in the areas of RR maintenance and services, where safety of the public is involved. Furthermore, outsourcing increases (almost doubles - think of two financial management departments, instead of one) administrative overhead of all types and drives profits out of the company to other companies, again hardly what any RR can afford to do today. Finally, in some cases, it drives work and profits outside the U.S. of A. None of us needs that, either.
It would be much more productive for the RRs to turn over a new leaf in employee relations and begin to reconcile with their employees. OTOH, the employees (unions) need to recognize that some of their demands, both current and past, are contributing to loss of business and loss of the good will of Congress and other government activities. I feel that the RRs could achieve significant cost reductions and service improvements if they developed a cooperative relationship between management and labor.
Getting back to the OP's question, I believe the efficiency of passenger rail would increase dramatically if the RRs treated it as an integral part of RR operations, not as an interference with freight operations or a priority over freight operations. A single management structure, combined with employees that feel OK about their jobs instead of fearing losing them, dedicated to moving traffic (both kinds) quickly and smoothly would improve the costs and benefits of both freight and passenger business sectors, to the advantage of both.
The federal government is in the unique position of being able to influence this kind of evolution through regulation and legislation. Would it mean the end of AMTRAK? Well, that is what the OP's question comes to. Maybe the AMTRAK experiment has played out and it is time to move on.
This does not mean that passenger rail would be profitable. Even I acknowledge that that is a difficult goal. My point is that smoother and faster rail operations will reduce passenger rail losses and the need for subsidies, as well as increase profits from the freight business. This would be a significant step in the right direction for all RR activities.
al-in-chgo wrote: alphas wrote: North Philadelphia Station is surrounded by one of the worst neighborhoods in Philly. That's the main reason long distance trains quit stopping there. At one point almost no trains stopped there but the Trenton locals are now doing so. Any workable solution to non-commuter passenger rail service will require federal legislation that basically combines most of the involved unions into one or several unions. The legislation also needs to allow Amtrak or whomever operates it to outsource maintenance, repair, and customer services if it can be done cheaper than in-house. None of this is currently going to happen--too much influence in DC by the affected unions. Alphas is quite right. North Philadelphia has changed -- and not for the better -- since the days Fat Albert and Weird Harold (gratis Bill Cosby's imagination) ruled the streets back in the Sixties. When Chuck and I were in Philly this past October and asked if any transit points or certain neighborhoods were bad enough to avoid entirely, we got answers along the lines of "Go to North Philadelphia Station only while it's light out, and only if you two stick together", or "Stay out [of the North Philadelphia neighborhood] period." Generally these were well-informed answers by Philly residents who used some mode of SEPTA nearly every day. Alpha has reminded me -- and I'm quite glad he did -- that the reduction in use of N. Philadelphia's (exx-PRR) Amtrak stop is almost total. Also [slight deviation from Class I-ishness, strictly speaking]: IIRC "back in the day" didn't PRR long-distance varnish heading SB from NYC/Penn Station, then to Harrisburg and points west, go directly from the stop at North Philly toward the "Main Line" line itself, without 30th St. Station in the middle? When 30th Street Station became more of a routine way station for WB Keystone line electrified as well as SB NEC, was that the cause or the result of Amtrak's great reduction in the number of its runs that stop at N. Phila? (My current Amtrak System Timetables shows only three to four Keystone runs call at N. Phila. Station each way per day; apparently no NEC trains to or from D.C. ever make a scheduled stop.) Or perhaps better said, when did the attrition of N. Phila. (from a fairly routine Amtrak stop to next-to-nothing) occur, and was it prolonged or swift? (Our perspective over the years having shifted, I suppose most people today would say that any such train that didn't service 30th Street was scheduled to avoid 30th Street or bypass it?) And I'm also wondering how Center City Philadelphians "way back when" used to get from their homes and offices to somewhere they could catch, say, the Broadway Limited bound for Chicago? Did they take what is now the Main Line R-line (SEPTA) to some possible transfer spot like Ardmore or Paoli, or, it being safer in the Fifties and Sixties, were such passengers expected to hike it up to North Philadelphia to catch the westbound LD trains there? I'm just guessing, don't really know. Surely there are people reading this who do. - a. s. ************************
The ex-PRR guys I used to work with used to go to Paoli.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.