I think all the discussion about reduced manpower, profit motive, etc. being the reasons that passenger trains no longer run in inclement weather misses the main reason.
Passenger trains used to carry the US MAIL and the mail had to go through. "Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds."
The passenger trains used to run regardless of the weather because of the mail contracts coupled with a proud tradition that all railroaders (from Pres. to section hand) shared. Passenger trains were the very symbol of the railroads reliability and dedication to service not the unwanted illegitimate step children that they are today.
Mark
I don't mean to diminish the dedication of today's employees. And yes, getting to work today does revolve around the highway system's avaialblity. My point was that it is just so different a world, upstairs and downstairs as well as away from the railroad. And as is also indicated, the U.S. Mail was a contributing factor, but was part of the 24/7 committment of the railroad to do it's job.
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.
Every year, winter catches Amtrak by surprise.
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2008/12/amtrak-passengers-stranded-at-union-station.html
Our Cascades are apparently not running. I wish there were more details in Boardman's press release. The weather system passing through today is bringing rain, and Northwest snowmelt wll now be a problem for a little while...
I thank our passengers for their patience and in those cases where they don't understand why they are being so badly delayed - I appreciate that, too. I understand that our passengers want to get home to their loved ones for Christmas and the holidays.
I know that winter is not an unusual phenomenon, but this has been an unusually severe and widespread dose of subzero temperatures combined with rare heavy snowfalls in the Pacific Northwest and high winds across the northern tier of states. This confluence of events has played havoc with our train equipment, including frozen water systems and snow-packed locomotives, and it has caused problems on the rail lines themselves.
We will continue to use trains and substitute buses to get people to their destinations where it is feasible and safe. Where there is risk, we will err on the side of caution.
I'm in touch with our operations people throughout the affected areas and will continue to pay close attention until the railroad is back to fully normal operations.
Meanwhile, I apologize for the inconvenience to so many of our customers.
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham
From Amtrak's website:
Temporary disruptions of Amtrak services are posted on this page. These Service Alerts tend to be of limited duration and are the result of unforeseen events, such as severe weather."
As of 1:20 pm CST 12/24/08 there are no Service Alerts posted to this webpage. Absolutely none! However, if you inquire about the scheduled arrival of a specific train that was canceled short of its destination, such as yesterday's westbound Empire Builder, you will get a "service disruption, contact us by telephone message". Another inquiry would reveal that the eastbound Empire Builder is expected to be in Chicago more than 8 hours late.
Amtrak has a slow order when winds get over 60 mph. I found that out on Southwest Chief two years ago. We were going thru Kansas and I'd wake up and notice the train was barely moving or even stopped. I asked my sleeper attendant the next day and he said tornados were in the area and when wind gets too high, Amtrak has to slow down. Possibly because the Superliner double decker cars could flip over more easily.
I know I rode thru some terrible rainstorms years ago with my parents, but I never saw any signs of slowing down, but that was before Amtrak, when the passenger trains were run by the host railroads.
henry6 Paul Milenkovic All of those things require manpower that is not currently employed by the carriers. The manpower that is employed is doing everything within their power to keep the railroad running as it is. No one is saying that the current manpower is not doing their jobs. The original point is that there is nothing intrinsic about railroads that make them all-weather apart from a large number of people going out and doing a lot of hard, hard work. It has already been commented upon that railroads have greatly reduced their staffing levels. It goes beyond manpower. Today's railroads are run comletely different than those of even the 70's and 80's. You have fewer, longer trains for the most part; remotely operated interlockings; no rear end crews and definetly smaller crews; no track gangs assigned to 5-10 mile stretches but larger expanses of line; cost cutting measures of no trains on holidays (double time and a half pay?); limited overtime; the railroad serves the bottom line rather than customers (tell them they can wait if they ask); just like other money men, higher up management (investment bankers, CPA's, etc.) looks at the work as M-F with bankers hours. In some respects they are right: today's modern plant don't need all those people because there is no need to be full operation 24/7 except in very rare instances. Any opportunity to trim operations (i.e. reduce hours of operation, reduce manpower costs), the do so. And if the need arises for greater demand, then it will have to wait until Monday morning or the next time the board meets to be discussed. Yeah, the manpower isn't there, but in too many cases, neither is the railroad company.
Paul Milenkovic All of those things require manpower that is not currently employed by the carriers. The manpower that is employed is doing everything within their power to keep the railroad running as it is. No one is saying that the current manpower is not doing their jobs. The original point is that there is nothing intrinsic about railroads that make them all-weather apart from a large number of people going out and doing a lot of hard, hard work. It has already been commented upon that railroads have greatly reduced their staffing levels.
All of those things require manpower that is not currently employed by the carriers. The manpower that is employed is doing everything within their power to keep the railroad running as it is.
No one is saying that the current manpower is not doing their jobs. The original point is that there is nothing intrinsic about railroads that make them all-weather apart from a large number of people going out and doing a lot of hard, hard work. It has already been commented upon that railroads have greatly reduced their staffing levels.
It goes beyond manpower. Today's railroads are run comletely different than those of even the 70's and 80's. You have fewer, longer trains for the most part; remotely operated interlockings; no rear end crews and definetly smaller crews; no track gangs assigned to 5-10 mile stretches but larger expanses of line; cost cutting measures of no trains on holidays (double time and a half pay?); limited overtime; the railroad serves the bottom line rather than customers (tell them they can wait if they ask); just like other money men, higher up management (investment bankers, CPA's, etc.) looks at the work as M-F with bankers hours. In some respects they are right: today's modern plant don't need all those people because there is no need to be full operation 24/7 except in very rare instances. Any opportunity to trim operations (i.e. reduce hours of operation, reduce manpower costs), the do so. And if the need arises for greater demand, then it will have to wait until Monday morning or the next time the board meets to be discussed. Yeah, the manpower isn't there, but in too many cases, neither is the railroad company.
By the way, I seriously question the notion in some of the postings that railroads are willing to allow a main line to be closed down by weather to save money on the manpower and other resources needed to keep it open. The first priority of any major railroad is to keep the trains running. Whatever resources might be saved by allowing the pipeline to be shut off will be offset many times over by lost revenues and the costs of the recovery once the trains start moving again. You see this philosophy at work in derailments, where the first priority after safety issues are addressed is to get the trains moving again, even if it means pushing the derailed cars down an embankment. The simple fact is that there are sometimes weather conditions that go beyond the ability of mere mortals to deal with. Recall that, in 1949 or thereabouts, when railroads still had armies of employees, the UP mainline was shut down by snow for the better part of week, and the City of San Francisco was stranded for days in the middle of nowhere..
Falcon48 henry6 Paul Milenkovic All of those things require manpower that is not currently employed by the carriers. The manpower that is employed is doing everything within their power to keep the railroad running as it is. No one is saying that the current manpower is not doing their jobs. The original point is that there is nothing intrinsic about railroads that make them all-weather apart from a large number of people going out and doing a lot of hard, hard work. It has already been commented upon that railroads have greatly reduced their staffing levels. It goes beyond manpower. Today's railroads are run comletely different than those of even the 70's and 80's. You have fewer, longer trains for the most part; remotely operated interlockings; no rear end crews and definetly smaller crews; no track gangs assigned to 5-10 mile stretches but larger expanses of line; cost cutting measures of no trains on holidays (double time and a half pay?); limited overtime; the railroad serves the bottom line rather than customers (tell them they can wait if they ask); just like other money men, higher up management (investment bankers, CPA's, etc.) looks at the work as M-F with bankers hours. In some respects they are right: today's modern plant don't need all those people because there is no need to be full operation 24/7 except in very rare instances. Any opportunity to trim operations (i.e. reduce hours of operation, reduce manpower costs), the do so. And if the need arises for greater demand, then it will have to wait until Monday morning or the next time the board meets to be discussed. Yeah, the manpower isn't there, but in too many cases, neither is the railroad company. Isn't there another issue with Amtrak's recent cancellations? As I understand the situation this week, the problem wasn't so much that the trains couldn't get through, but that the weather conditions would delay the trains to the point where the equipment wouldn't be available for their next trips. If that's true (and I'm not positive that it is), then it is more a product of Amtrak's equipment woes than of the host railroad's inability to keep the railroad open. By the way, I seriously question the notion in some of the postings that railroads are willing to allow a main line to be closed down by weather to save money on the manpower and other resources needed to keep it open. The first priority of any major railroad is to keep the trains running. Whatever resources might be saved by allowing the pipeline to be shut off will be offset many times over by lost revenues and the costs of the recovery once the trains start moving again. You see this philosophy at work in derailments, where the first priority after safety issues are addressed is to get the trains moving again, even if it means pushing the derailed cars down an embankment. The simple fact is that there are sometimes weather conditions that go beyond the ability of mere mortals to deal with. Recall that, in 1949 or thereabouts, when railroads still had armies of employees, the UP mainline was shut down by snow for the better part of week, and the City of San Francisco was stranded for days in the middle of nowhere..
Of course there is no one reason for these problems. Amtrak doesn't own the track but have contracted with the "host" railroads so they are at the mercy of the operating philosophies of these roads. But look at the "holiday schedules" put out by NS, CPR, CSX, etc. with the closing of yards, reduction of trains, combining of dispatcher tricks and districts, The whole philosophy of the urgency of the product of transportation is not what it was to the railroad before 1960. And yes, there are problems of not having equipment for return services when a train doesn't achieve its end terminal: unlike the railroads before Amtrak, there aren't yards full of passenger cars and engine houses with spare engines at every division point. Amtrak has never been funded for being what it has achieved. I just hope that I don't have too much faith in Joe Boardman in making some necessary changes in the attitudes of politicians and the businessmen who run the railroads to make Amtrak viable, safe, and reliable transportation.
Falcon48 Isn't there another issue with Amtrak's recent cancellations? As I understand the situation this week, the problem wasn't so much that the trains couldn't get through, but that the weather conditions would delay the trains to the point where the equipment wouldn't be available for their next trips.
Isn't there another issue with Amtrak's recent cancellations? As I understand the situation this week, the problem wasn't so much that the trains couldn't get through, but that the weather conditions would delay the trains to the point where the equipment wouldn't be available for their next trips.
No, that does not make sense. To take a simple example, if a westbound Empire Builder is terminated in the Twin Cities, that equipment is never available for its next scheduled assignment out of Seattle.
Dakguy201 Falcon48 Isn't there another issue with Amtrak's recent cancellations? As I understand the situation this week, the problem wasn't so much that the trains couldn't get through, but that the weather conditions would delay the trains to the point where the equipment wouldn't be available for their next trips. No, that does not make sense. To take a simple example, if a westbound Empire Builder is terminated in the Twin Cities, that equipment is never available for its next scheduled assignment out of Seattle.
henry6 Of course there is no one reason for these problems. Amtrak doesn't own the track but have contracted with the "host" railroads so they are at the mercy of the operating philosophies of these roads. But look at the "holiday schedules" put out by NS, CPR, CSX, etc. with the closing of yards, reduction of trains, combining of dispatcher tricks and districts, The whole philosophy of the urgency of the product of transportation is not what it was to the railroad before 1960. And yes, there are problems of not having equipment for return services when a train doesn't achieve its end terminal: unlike the railroads before Amtrak, there aren't yards full of passenger cars and engine houses with spare engines at every division point. Amtrak has never been funded for being what it has achieved. I just hope that I don't have too much faith in Joe Boardman in making some necessary changes in the attitudes of politicians and the businessmen who run the railroads to make Amtrak viable, safe, and reliable transportation.
The railroads provided the service required by the shippers, holiday or not. Both BNSF and CN maintained service to the pellet plants on the Mesabi Range on Christmas Day since these plants work through the holiday. But if the customer doesn't work on the holiday what reason should the railroad provide a service the customer doesn't need?
In all the rhetoric about devoted workers, self-serving managers, blah, blah, blah, I hardly noticed any mention of the most basic fact...
When it comes to winter weather, good old Mother Nature (red of tooth and claw...) holds all the trump cards. Railroad literature is replete with blizzard-buried passenger trains, avalanches, people stranded in the boondocks freezing to death, or just being rescued in the nick of time by other people who had to plow out, shovel out or even partially rebuild the line to get through.
Fast-forward to the present. A situation that would hardly have rated page five mention half a century ago now gets banner headlines, extended TV news coverage and interviews with mentally deficient travelers who are, "Gonna sue somebody as soon as I see my lawyer." Somehow, it never occurs to them that IT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO CARRY ON REGARDLESS!
Until somebody takes up the science fiction community on a network of high-velocity capsules in underground/underwater tubes transportation in wintertime will remain at the mercy of the weather - whether or not we like it.
Chuck
.
"It does make sense. If the westbound Builder terminates in the Twin Cities, its equipment and personnel are available to cover the next eastbound departure from the Twin Cities, which would otherwise need to be cancelled. If so, this would reflect a decision by Amtrak to protect the Chicago-Minneapolis regional traffic. I'm not, of course, aware of Amtrak's rationale for this particular cancellation. It's possible that the line was entirely blocked somewhere west of the Twin Cities, since this has historically been one of the most difficult main lines to keep in operation in severe winter weather (army of workers or no)."
tomikawaTT
Joined on 02-13-2005
Southwest US
Posts 6,013
Reply Favorites Contact
...
When it comes to winter weather, good old Mother Nature (red of tooth and claw...) holds all the trump cards. Railroad literature is replete with blizzard-buried passenger trains, avalanches, people stranded in the boondocks freezing to death, or just being rescued in the nick of time by other people who had to plow out, shovel out or even partially rebuild the line to get through….
TV news coverage and interviews who are, "Gonna sue somebody as soon as I see my lawyer." Somehow, it never occurs to them that IT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO CARRY ON REGARDLESS!
beaulieu
Joined on 12-29-2001
NW Wisconsin
Posts 1,780
I just don't get it despite eveythiing that's been written about train weather delays.
The manpower no longer may be there; but railroads have spent a lot on switch heaters.
Trains freezing up in Chicago? Who wouldn't make sure the heat was on? Surely there is a carman or hostler at the terminal that checks these things and a supervisor making sure the job was done. HEP was supposed to avoid losing both the yard and the cars like in 1977; and that was on the direct order of Peoples Gas.
It's shameful that a little snow and cold could upset an operation that has been around as long as Amtrak.
[
HarveyK400 IThe manpower no longer may be there; but railroads have spent a lot on switch heaters. Trains freezing up in Chicago? Who wouldn't make sure the heat was on? Surely there is a carman or hostler at the terminal that checks these things and a supervisor making sure the job was done. HEP was supposed to avoid losing both the yard and the cars like in 1977; and that was on the direct order of Peoples Gas.
IThe manpower no longer may be there; but railroads have spent a lot on switch heaters.
You, in effect, have answered your own question: winter weather (anykind of weather for that matter) and train operation is more than an automatic switch heater. Plus today's "people" are clustred at major terminals rather out "along the pike". Yes, cars today operate from HEP whereas yesterday's cars layed up in yards with steam pipes and house power if needed (although HEP may be delivered as house power in some yards).
I also have another thought on "people". Years ago (God! how I hate to say that so often!), say at least before 1960, people had a forehand knowledge or railroads and railroading; it was a major part of life in the US. Kids would come in from the hinterlands to work on the railroad they watched from the hometown property or which the interfaced with at the local depot; the more urban were similarly exposed the the operations of the railroad through town from the morning and evening commuter rush to the local peddler leaving cars on the team track or freight house siding to the mainline varnish and merchandise freights that whoooshed through each daily. Both the rural and urban resident could confront the railroad face to face through the station agent, the local's crew, the tower operator, or the regular crews on the passenger trains. So people came to the railroad with a knowledge of what the railroad was all about. I have often talked with railroaders of today who had no idea what the railroad was until the saw a job listing and signed on. This could also be the difference between today's railroaders and those of yesterday. Not a slap in the face difference (that even I have inferred, I guess) but rather a real difference based on culture and experience.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.