MidlandMike Lithonia Operator It appears to me that (CSX) is overwhelming AMTK with data, CSX and NS refused to provide Amtrak with the data before the hearing. Lithonia Operator But my general impression is that CSX is focused on data, and AMTK is focused on "we simply have the right to do this." Amtrak has been waiting for years for the data. If CSX's data was so compeling, why didn't they provide it a long time ago. CSX had their chance, so now Amtrak might as well say they have the right to do this.
Lithonia Operator It appears to me that (CSX) is overwhelming AMTK with data,
CSX and NS refused to provide Amtrak with the data before the hearing.
Lithonia Operator But my general impression is that CSX is focused on data, and AMTK is focused on "we simply have the right to do this."
Amtrak has been waiting for years for the data. If CSX's data was so compeling, why didn't they provide it a long time ago. CSX had their chance, so now Amtrak might as well say they have the right to do this.
Proprietary Information.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
York1Will the states meet it? I think Louisiana and Mississippi will, but will Alabama? I haven't looked at this lately, so has Alabama offered any money recently?
Alabama does not believe in rail transit anything or I should drop the rail and just say transit anything and include bus transit. So don't hold your breath on waiting for Alabama to step up. Montgomery has one of the crappiest bus transit systems in the United States I was told by an Aunt that used to live there. Any attempts to fix it fall on deaf ears. NPR did a segment on it a while ago...
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5038225
CMStPnPCSX should set a reasonable price or be like CP, reasonable price with a few freebies thrown in and Amtrak and the states should meet it.
Will the states meet it? I think Louisiana and Mississippi will, but will Alabama? I haven't looked at this lately, so has Alabama offered any money recently?
York1 John
blue streak 1 Any amount charged to Amtrak should have the improvements made for the Sunset be a reduction of the amount for service now.
Any amount charged to Amtrak should have the improvements made for the Sunset be a reduction of the amount for service now.
I think the WisDOT, MnDOT, IlDOT, model is the one to follow here and would resolve this issue outside of the STB. In my view Amtrak attempted to obtain the ability to decide if an additional train would cost any money or not. CSX is partly to blame for whipping up opposition as well as attempting to block via exorbitant charges. This suit is a waste of money in my view.
CSX should set a reasonable price or be like CP, reasonable price with a few freebies thrown in and Amtrak and the states should meet it. This is after all CSX private property and they are basically negotiating a lease of track time.
PNWRMNM blue streak 1 CSX and the other Class-1s have implemented the PSR metric that is causing all this fight. Streak, The cause of this fight is that ATK wants CSX to provide capacity for its trains FOR FREE. That is theft, pure and simple. Before ATK came up with this idea, they did routinely pay for capital investments required to enable the carriers to handle passenger trains, which must suffer no delays remember, without degrading the quality of the underlying freight service. ATK has chosen to ignore the part of the law that says they must pay the marginal cost of their service. This is a crucial fight that the freight carriers MUST win if they are to avoid spending massive amounts of their money to support the Fed's 12 inch to the foot model railroad. Mac
blue streak 1 CSX and the other Class-1s have implemented the PSR metric that is causing all this fight.
CSX and the other Class-1s have implemented the PSR metric that is causing all this fight.
Streak,
The cause of this fight is that ATK wants CSX to provide capacity for its trains FOR FREE. That is theft, pure and simple.
Before ATK came up with this idea, they did routinely pay for capital investments required to enable the carriers to handle passenger trains, which must suffer no delays remember, without degrading the quality of the underlying freight service.
ATK has chosen to ignore the part of the law that says they must pay the marginal cost of their service.
This is a crucial fight that the freight carriers MUST win if they are to avoid spending massive amounts of their money to support the Fed's 12 inch to the foot model railroad.
Mac
My impression is that Amtrak is prepared to pay something. They just don't agree that the amount of new infrastructure needed (estimated at $440mil) is as great as CSX says it is. They seem to think that CSX is trying to get the taxpayers to pay for some infrastructure that CSX will need in the future anyway, regardless of any Amtrak trains.
I personally don't know if CSX is exaggerating what's needed or not. Part of what the STB is doing is drilling down on this point. At times the chairman does seem skeptical of CSX's claims. But perhaps when I have not been watching he has been equally skeptical of some Amtrak claims.
Still in training.
BaltACDSeveral of the drawbridges require the bridge operator to get a MofW Authority to move on track from a road crossing on land to the bridge operators location and return.
I don't understand this either. You can pick anyone from a number of YouTube videos of automated lift bridges with no human interaction (Chicago, Duluth, etc). Some of those bridges are very light traffic. Why is CSX doing this manually with a bridge tender? Also, never understood why bridges do not have bridge strike detection if they are on a river with barge traffic. We are not talking huge expense or high technology there either. That whole Amtrak incident / fatal derailment could have been prevented with just a little money spent on safety.
CSX's NO&M subdivision is single track CTC operation with 11 drawbridges between New Orleans and Mobile. Several of the drawbridges require the bridge operator to get a MofW Authority to move on track from a road crossing on land to the bridge operators location and return. One of the sidings can ONLY be accessed by rail. The entire subdivision - track & signals - was rebuilt out of face subsequent to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 - this was done at the expense of CSX and its insurers.
blue streak 1No more CSX having to fleet trains in one direction at a time. Would be nice if that was nation wide but that should be for another day and thread.
When I was a kid, Milwaukee Road did directional running on their Twin Cities mainline and the CTC signals mostly faced East on their Westbound main and mostly West on the Eastbound main. They had ample crossovers for reverse CTC and I never understood why they never upgraded the signalling.
When Soo took over reverse CTC was a priority item on their list as was removing main #2 as mostly unnecessary to support 24-30 trains a day. But then Soo never closed some of the short mainline gaps in CTC, which I never understood either......especially closing the no brainer gap through Milwaukees Intermodal station. Was it worth saving $5 million or whatever they charged Amtrak to close that short gap to run with the gap for 15-20 years?
Directional running makes no operational sense to me. Double track or fix the signalling to be reverse CTC, with adequate passing siding length is my vote as well. Stop the nationwide nonsense!!!
blue streak 1 CWill this mean more T&E crews? Yes
CWill this mean more T&E crews? Yes
Which the railroads, and many other industries, are struggling to get. So with fewer crews available, smaller trains will leave traffic behind, delaying more products.
An "expensive model collector"
CSX and the other Class-1s have implemented the PSR metric that is causing all this fight. CSX does not want to be the first to change their operating plans.
I Have no idea if STB can order this but----. Order CSX to dispatch no train that cannot fit into every siding for any moving 20 - 25 mile section. That is for the whole route during Amtrak times that Amtrak proposed schedule or any other time slot in the future.
That would allow for any freight interferrence to be minimal. Also more important the freight trains would then be quicker providing quicker shipper service. No more CSX having to fleet trains in one direction at a time. Would be nice if that was nation wide but that should be for another day and thread.
Have Amtrak dispatch both Mobile and Crescent departures from NOL at the same time nose to tail. That would mean NS would only have 2 trains in one slot departing. Getting Crescent back to earlier times would help the whole Crescent route for better times.
One item is order CN not to block their crossing over CSX near Mobile.
Now for the present NS train blockages in NOL: Order all RRs dthat use that segment to implement trackage rights for crews to clear beyond this nightmare location. That will mean qualifying crews for whatever tracks needed to implement this plan.
Will this mean more T&E crews? Yes but this whole PSR mess is starting to take a toll. Now we have UP trying to limit number of cars for each shipper. customer that is sending cars on UP. Wonder what RR is next?
The CSX CADS is one hell of a real time data generator about the operations of any track segment on CSX's property.
One of my contentions when I was working was that CADS and the data it was generating was in reality a Black Hole where all the data entered - never to be seen again. I suspect CSX is using this data in their case - data that Amtrak has no counter for.
I've looked in on the hearing/trial sporadically. It appears to me that SCX is overwhelming AMTK with data, and that CSX's legal team is superior to AMTK's. I want this passenger service to happen, but I'm not sure I'd put any money on Amtrak succeeding.
Since I've only watched now and then, my impressions are subject to random luck re when I watch. But my general impression is that CSX is focused on data, and AMTK is focused on "we simply have the right to do this."
I hope to catch more of AMTK's case; maybe their witnesses will be stonger than I'm expecting. But so far it seems like AMTK is outgunned.
However, if the STB rules that the service can start soon, they will be encoding the AMTK view of what the laws say on the broader issue of access and priority. A pro-AMTK decision would set an important precedent.
It can at times be amusing watching the board members, and AMTK's lawyers, simply trying to understand railroad operations. The level of detail in CSX's case is impressive. Not sure it's always accurate or significant, but I think some members don't ask many questions because they just don't comprehend what they're hearing.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.