Proposed EB Winter Timetable

Given the abysmal (20-50%) OTP of the Empire Builder in the winter, it would seem prudent to build some additional time into the schedule to allow for unavoidable delays (snow removal, low-temperature speed restrictions, frozen couplers/brake lines) while still enabling the train to arrive at most stations on schedule. For example, this January #7 arrived Seattle <30 minutes late on 11 days, from 0:30 to 3:30 late on 9 days, and over 3:30 late on 3 days. (The remaining eight days were service disruptions with no data available, mostly due to mudslides causing termination at Spokane or Everett.) Thus lengthening the schedule could have increased OTP from an abysmal 48% to a more acceptable 87% (ignoring disruption days; with them these would be 35% and 65%).

Here's a possible abbreviated timetable. #7/27S and #8/28S is the current "summer" schedule, while #7/27W and #8/28W would be a possible winter schedule, in operation from Nov. 1 until March 31.

Station #7/27S #7/27W #8/28S #8/28W

CHI 215P 215P 355P 1000P

MKE 355P 355P 215P 815P

MSP 1115P 1145P 750A 120P

FAR 335A 435A 313A 813A

MOT 906A 1006A 942P 215A

HAV 304P 430P 132P 600P

WFH 916P 1116P 746A 1146A

SPK 215A 445A 130A 500A

SEA 1025A 215P 440P 800P

PDX 1010A 200P 445P 800P

Pros:

Better winter OTP

Maintain connection from 27 to 11 in Portland

Better connection window 14 to 28 in Portland

Cascades/Columbia River in daylight on 7/27

More mountains (Kootenai River, Flathead Tunnel) in daylight on #8

Better departure time for Fargo on #8

Similar afternoon-evening schedules CHI-MSP and MSP-CHI

#28 leaves PDX after dinner: fewer complaints about lack of a diner until Spokane

Cons:

No same-day connection from #8 to eastern LD trains (but this is so frequently missed that it ought not to be guaranteed in the winter anyway)

Shorter service window in Chicago (which Amtrak could solve with more night-shift workers, presumably cheaper than a sixth trainset)

Wee hours #8 departure from Minot

All in all, I think there are more advantages than disadvantages, and Amtrak riders are less concerned about total travel time (if they wanted to go fast they would fly) and more interested in predictability and making connections. It would work even better with a second daily MSP-CHI and CHI-MSP train, as the morning departure from MSP would reliably make it to CHI in time to make connections with eastern trains.

Mark

anir dendroica said:

Cons:

No same-day connection from #8 to eastern LD trains (but this is so frequently missed that it ought not to be guaranteed in the winter anyway)

Click to expand...

This reason right here far outweighs any other pro. Cutting off your connections means cutting off your passengers, meaning passengers will choose another mode of travel meaning far less revenue.

I'm just taking a SWAG at this, but I believe over half of Amtrak's LD passengers connect to other trains.

I actually did think that Amtrak should make a Winter timetable for the EB; I just haven't put as much thought into it as you have.

Yeah saxman. The Chicago Hub connections are critical for Amtrak's system. Without them, there wouldn't be as much ridership as there is now.

The areas that get affected the most tend to be up in the northern sections of the route, through MT and ND and such. That's where the padding should go. Keep times for connections to the CS in the PacNW and the Eastern LD trains in CHI.

"Fargo arrival times? Fargo be damned!"

Good ideas, which I have some quibbles about.

One problem (which might be insoluble) is that you haven't lengthened the dwell time in Seattle/Portland. A late 7/27 makes for a really late 8/28.

Has anyone complained about the cold dinner out of Portland on 28? The cold breakfast into Portland on 27, sure, but I really like the Portland dinner.

Naturally I wouldn't like the winter timing of the Minot stop, but I usually don't travel between mid-January and Memorial Day.

The fact that over 1/3 of the trips arrived on time suggests that the delays are not "unavoidable" as you say.

Really, this winter was very bad for the Empire Builder (and the entire midwest/northern plains states, for that matter). We haven't seen something like this in decades. While it's difficult to say if this is the new normal (global warming makes that a possibility) or just a fluke, I'm not sure it makes sense to suddenly sound the alarms just yet, and break important connections on the route for half the year.

Scheduling around the weather, in advance, tends to be a futile exercise.

Trogdor said:

While it's difficult to say if this is the new normal (global warming makes that a possibility) or just a fluke

Click to expand...

Global WARMING means COLDER weather and MORE snow? I'd hate see what Global cooling would bring!

Most people think that this is something new that never happened before. This is a cycle that occurs every few hundred thousand years. I really find it interesting that 30 years, many of the scientist that were claiming Global Cooling (because we had some cold years) are now supporting Global Warming! Make up your mind!

Seriously? I can't believe people still think that global warming automatically means *everything* is hotter. It means the average temperature is higher, but this also means much more extreme weather on BOTH ends of the temperature spectrum.

That's what people have been saying. For years. It's too bad some people have intentionally ignored that fact.

IMHO this needs to be referred to Amtrak's Department of Psychic Schsduling with orders to have all the data in place for 2011 and 2012 by July 32nd.

JAChooChoo said:

IMHO this needs to be referred to Amtrak's Department of Psychic Schsduling with orders to have all the data in place for 2011 and 2012 by July 32nd.

Click to expand...

All employees of DPS have been laid off - and nobody saw it coming!

Trogdor said:

Seriously? I can't believe people still think that global warming automatically means *everything* is hotter. It means the average temperature is higher, but this also means much more extreme weather on BOTH ends of the temperature spectrum.

That's what people have been saying. For years. It's too bad some people have intentionally ignored that fact.

Click to expand...

The proper term is "climate change.""Global warming" is misleading for reasons stated above.