Jump to content




Photo

January MPR Released. A little later then normal?


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Acela150

Acela150

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,839 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NS Harrisburg Division

Posted 16 March 2017 - 09:51 PM

https://www.amtrak.c...anuary-2017.pdf

 

January MPR's out today. Seems a little later then normal to me. Maybe it's me. I know that it's typically delayed due to the holiday season for November and December. 


These posts are my views and opinions.

Donate your spare time! Be a Volunteer Firefighter!
 
"Mainline 66W Recrew On Board at Abrams ready to head east when you can handle us, Ok 66W, ok on signal indication at Norris, take it to the Falls to wait for the window"

#2 PRR 60

PRR 60

    Engineer

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,547 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 March 2017 - 09:58 AM

For the first time since Amtrak started producing the monthly reports in January, 2004, they do not have a breakout of the long distance sleeper class ridership and revenue.  



#3 lo2e

lo2e

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 320 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maine

Posted 18 March 2017 - 10:03 AM

For what appears to be the first time, the ridership and revenue charts were generated by the "Amtrak Performance Tracking System".  Perhaps there was some glitch that caused delays in reporting the data?  Because of this, it also removes any thruway bus data from the charts.

 

The ridership/revenue charts are also back to not being separated geographically, unfortunately.  I think that was actually helpful to see, for example, all of the Chicago-based corridors in the same vicinity in the chart, likewise with the California ones, etc.

 

Regardless, I do find it odd also that the long distance figures are removed from the report.   :(

 

Not a bad month ridership- or revenue-wise overall, but OTP is another story.  I'll dive a little deeper in a day or two.



#4 Lonestar648

Lonestar648

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,265 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 18 March 2017 - 11:33 AM

Is it coincidence that the LD figures are removed and Trump's budget is cutting the LD routes?


Trains Traveled On:
Texas Eagle                                      Sunset Limited                            California Zephyr                                Southwest Chief                Empire Builder            Capitol Limited           Lake Shore limited (NYP & BOS)      Crescent
Kentucky Cardinal                             Cardinal                                       Pere Marquette                                  Wolverines                        Lincoln Service            Empire Service          Keystone Service                               Acelas
NE Regionals                                    Pioneer                                        Desert Wind                                       Broadway Limited             Three Rivers                Southwest Chief        Coast Starlight                                    Empire Service
 
Amtrak Miles Logged: over 206,000


#5 Philly Amtrak Fan

Philly Amtrak Fan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia Area

Posted 18 March 2017 - 11:59 AM

I still see the LD routes throughout the report (including OTP data which I have never seen on the MPR's before). I did not see sleeper/coach separation as stated above.

 

Honestly if they really want to kill the LD trains they are better off showing data rather than not for justification to kill them. You know when I try to "kill" routes I usually provide data to back me up. You can (and do) question the data chosen (certainly biased in my favor) and certainly I'm going to highlight the weaknesses of said trains and minimize the strengths to justify my argument. But it's a lot better than me just saying let's get rid of said train without backing up my statement. What makes you think whoever wants to kill the LD routes (chances are it's not Trump himself) isn't going to do the same to try to win the court of public opinion? This isn't just Amtrak. Anything the administration wants to kill they're going to spin it as a "waste of taxpayer money" (heck, I've used the same argument). It's human nature.


Trains Traveled:
 
Broadway Limited (CHI-Harrisburg, PA) 
Three Rivers (Harrisburg, PA-CHI, Altoona, PA-CHI, PHL-CHI)
Capitol Limited (CHI-WAS)
Lake Short Limited (NYP-CHI)
Silver Meteor (PHL-ORL)
Southwest Chief (CHI-LAX)
California Zephyr (CHI-SLC, SLC-EMY)
City of New Orleans and/or Illini (CHI-Champaign, IL)

 

Bring back the Broadway Limited (or Three Rivers or any Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philly train)!
 

https://www.facebook...roadwayLimited/

 


#6 niemi24s

niemi24s

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,388 posts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 12:59 PM

I still see the LD routes throughout the report (including OTP data which I have never seen on the MPR's before).

In the past, it has usually been reported on Page E-1 as it is for Jan 2017.



#7 neroden

neroden

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,917 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ithaca, NY
  • Interests:Please feel free to moderate my posts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 02:47 PM

There are several other glitches; the geographical sorting of trains in the revenue/ridership report got broken, but the headers for them are still present.

 

As regards the actual content, everything is quite predictable.  Almost everything is pretty stable, and mostly up a little, in this weakest month of the year.  Empire Builder has higher costs than last year because they have to make OTP payments to BNSF, unlike last year when they didn't.  Cost allocations are clearly being shifted around somewhat, presumably due to the accounting changes.  The Texas Eagle is probably recovering from some disruption last year.

 

The Auto Train is bleeding ridership and revenue.  And this is despite good OTP.  Amtrak really needs to turn their service issues on that train around.


Edited by neroden, 18 March 2017 - 02:48 PM.

--Nathanael--

Please feel free to moderate my posts.

#8 west point

west point

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,013 posts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 07:23 PM

MPR-- Over haul of passenger cars are running ahead of schedule overall Bear up about 5 Amfleets. Beech is total up about 5 with that total including 2 SLs that are behind waiting for parts. Wreck repairs are generally up as well. Could this be Moorman's tightening up maintenance work ?

Even with 2 locos on Acelas the loco delays for Acela is ~ 8 times as much as NER trains. Guess that points out the problems of that technology ( including HHP-8s ) vs. the ACS-64s. And we have some who do not want Acels-2s to replace -1s.

Now Acelas do take more passenger delays than NER. That may be result of heavy loads on Acelas and the ability of NER trains to have more station dwell ?

#9 lo2e

lo2e

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 320 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maine

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:55 AM

MPR-- Over haul of passenger cars are running ahead of schedule overall Bear up about 5 Amfleets. Beech is total up about 5 with that total including 2 SLs that are behind waiting for parts. Wreck repairs are generally up as well. Could this be Moorman's tightening up maintenance work ?

Even with 2 locos on Acelas the loco delays for Acela is ~ 8 times as much as NER trains. Guess that points out the problems of that technology ( including HHP-8s ) vs. the ACS-64s. And we have some who do not want Acels-2s to replace -1s.

Now Acelas do take more passenger delays than NER. That may be result of heavy loads on Acelas and the ability of NER trains to have more station dwell ?

 

Am I remembering correctly that Acela power cars don't do very well in snowy situations?  I seem to vaguely remember something about snow flying into the engine compartment, but perhaps I'm confusing it with a different locomotive.



#10 west point

west point

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,013 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 11:03 AM

Am I remembering correctly that Acela power cars don't do very well in snowy situations?  I seem to vaguely remember something about snow flying into the engine compartment, but perhaps I'm confusing it with a different locomotive.


Have no first hand knowledge but some have posted elsewhere that the locos do ingest snow and cause problems. As well what kind of traction motors do the Acelas have ? Are they DC or AC ? If DC snow ingestion especially powder can cause flash over.

#11 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,383 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 20 March 2017 - 11:08 AM

Have no first hand knowledge but some have posted elsewhere that the locos do ingest snow and cause problems. As well what kind of traction motors do the Acelas have ? Are they DC or AC ? If DC snow ingestion especially powder can cause flash over.

AC AFAIR




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users