The Need for Secondary Options

If there's one thing that became glaringly obvious this week, it's that Amtrak needs to work out some "backup contingencies" if certain parts of the system get blocked. I know that if certain routes/stations get blocked, things get messy, but as an easy example Amtrak could likely have run a "Cardinal Special" daily to WAS with the Cap's equipment, run a spare Empire train late at night, and covered every major connection east of CHI save PGH, CLE, and TOL (with the only overnights being PGH from PHL and past-ALB from NYP or ALB).

I really only realized this when I saw how packed the Cardinal was on the way home, but given that neither CSX nor NS crould deliver on the Cap or LSL, an agreement that "if train X is blocked we get to run train Y" (especially since the Cap and Card share identical turn patterns) would probably be a lifesaver.

They had the same contingency plans as the airlines did:

Cancel.

Anderson said:

If there's one thing that became glaringly obvious this week, it's that Amtrak needs to work out some "backup contingencies" if certain parts of the system get blocked. I know that if certain routes/stations get blocked, things get messy, but as an easy example Amtrak could likely have run a "Cardinal Special" daily to WAS with the Cap's equipment, run a spare Empire train late at night, and covered every major connection east of CHI save PGH, CLE, and TOL (with the only overnights being PGH from PHL and past-ALB from NYP or ALB).

I really only realized this when I saw how packed the Cardinal was on the way home, but given that neither CSX nor NS crould deliver on the Cap or LSL, an agreement that "if train X is blocked we get to run train Y" (especially since the Cap and Card share identical turn patterns) would probably be a lifesaver.

Click to expand...

And where do you expect the qualified crews to come from to run such a route daily? Especially given the likely delays that would be encountered due to the fact that the railroads would have to accommodate such a train on days that they normally don't. I remember back when discussion of a daily Cardinal was occurring during the PRIIA process that the Buckingham Branch basically shuts down while the Cardinal is there, and they use the non-Cardinal days to run most of the freight. That freight will still have to run, which means longer delays for the Cardinal, which means burning more crews with less rest while already running beyond what the route is staffed for (I also recall discussion at the time that it would basically take six months to get enough crews moved over and qualified to accommodate a daily operation, if/once the decision was made to do so).

Your points do have some logic, but " easily done?" For one thing, with the 3 per week schedule of the Cardinal route, it would not necessarily be a simple matter to scare up sufficient numbers of qualified crews. Or have the freight railroad provide pilots, either. I rather liked that the other day when they swiped the consist from the CL to run the Cardinal, robbing Peter to pay Paul. As others have been saying, if the route system was not so skimpy, matters might run better.

Didn't you all know that crew can materialize fully trained instantly on demand?

HAWHAWHAW I'm an old crew dispatcher!

Anderson said:

If there's one thing that became glaringly obvious this week, it's that Amtrak needs to work out some "backup contingencies" if certain parts of the system get blocked. I know that if certain routes/stations get blocked, things get messy, but as an easy example Amtrak could likely have run a "Cardinal Special" daily to WAS with the Cap's equipment, run a spare Empire train late at night, and covered every major connection east of CHI save PGH, CLE, and TOL (with the only overnights being PGH from PHL and past-ALB from NYP or ALB).

I really only realized this when I saw how packed the Cardinal was on the way home, but given that neither CSX nor NS crould deliver on the Cap or LSL, an agreement that "if train X is blocked we get to run train Y" (especially since the Cap and Card share identical turn patterns) would probably be a lifesaver.

Click to expand...

I agree. It would (a) be nice, and (b) make sense.

Echoing what has been posted before:

Host RRs, in most cases I can think of, do not exist to serve passengers. They exist to move freight and make profit (and Amtrak's incentives are hardly profit). Unfortunately, this means that things that seem completely logical to passengers cannot actually be accommodated on their lines. And when they can be, the political, financial, and corporate will simply doesn't exist to accomplish what would seem to be relatively simply feats. (I'm referring to both Amtrak and hosts here.) Even in situations where a line can accommodate more trains, the crewing and staffing of a train, as Trogdor so well explained, is in and of itself a remarkably large obstacle. I'm neglecting myriad other issues that would present as well, but you get the gist.

I may not be Mr. Amtrak, but I've ridden (and heard) enough to know that simple **** isn't always (or usually) possible without moving heaven and earth.

A crew can be qualified on more than one route.

It would be a royal pain, but it can be done.

The current policy of "Cancelled No Alternative Available" is just people giving up, and not trying.

Yes it may be arm chair quarterbacking, but with my background I just see no effort.

To further expound on this topic, yes, various things MIGHT be possible, but are just much too impractical and cumbersome to do on short notice and on a steady basis. You suggest, Just thinking, that crews can be qualified on more than one district. In some cases, yes. Example: In my travels I conversed with one of the conductors who works the Southwest Chief from La Junta, CO to Dodge City, KS, a round trip overnight. The job is based in La Junta. In later conversations with him I learned that he rents a place during his work week in La Junta, but his home is really in Denver. I'd venture to say that man is probably qualified on portions of the California Zephyr route, but for whatever reasons he chooses to work the La Junta assignment. In the case of the Cardinal, if one was to theoretically pull crews off other routes, there may very well be crews from other routes out of Chicago that are qualified to Indianapolis. But from Indianapolis to Huntington, WV, the next crew change point? Not likely at all, I would say. Then imagine transporting these crews from some distant point during major storms - a nightmare. As some of the others have explained, situations like these are more complicated than John Q. Public realizes.

Just-Thinking-51 said:

A crew can be qualified on more than one route.

It would be a royal pain, but it can be done.

The current policy of "Cancelled No Alternative Available" is just people giving up, and not trying.

Yes it may be arm chair quarterbacking, but with my background I just see no effort.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure your background (though armchair quarterbacking seems pretty accurate), but I don't know exactly what you're supposed to "see" here. Do you want a live video feed into CNOC? The access code to the conference calls? The crew scheduling software installed on your computer and a direct link to the company network? A lot happens behind the scenes.

I think the secondary option should be the ability to connect east to west or vice-versa somewhere besides Chicago. I understand New Orleans somewhat offers that ability but that connection is tenuous at best, with at least a one night stay required. What Amtrak needs is a train from the east coast to Kansas City timed to allow connections with the Southwest Chief. That way when everything is fouled up in Chicago there would still be a viable way to move people efficiently across the country. The Chief could short turn in KC when required, connections could be preserved, people could be moved, and the national network wouldn't grind to a halt the next time we get "once-in-a-lifetime" winter weather.

I fully understand that Amtrak doesn't have the money to do this, the tracks aren't in good enough condition to allow speedy and reliable passenger service, and the frieght railroads won't allow it. This is just something that I wish would happen.

Well, there are a couple of options. In this case, I'm assuming that the "ersatz Cardinal" would be run with swapped-out equipment. That solves problem #1.

On to problem #2, access. The solution here is that past IND, you run the Cardinal as a non-stop (passenger-wise) over part or all of the route. It'd require some contingency planning, but nothing says you couldn't run something over a somewhat different routing on those days (such as "with the flow" on the BBRR/CSXT runs in VA) and handle a connecting bus to RVR from wherever-the-heck-works, VA. I'm aware of the complications here.

On the operating crews, when Amtrak does rare mileage runs on the Overland Route or over Tehachapi or Feather River happen?

Finally...I raise this because I see this as the least of several bad options. Cancelling folks out who are already on a trip tends to leave a bad taste in a lot of mouths...I'm lucky to have gotten home, for example, and it can't be cheap to be putting tons of folks up in hotels and/or refunding their money (and/or both).

jis said:

Didn't you all know that crew can materialize fully trained instantly on demand?

Click to expand...

A qualified crew is not required. All you need is a crew and a pilot to guide them over the territory over which they are not qualified.

jb

That pilot has got to come from somewhere.

Anderson said:

Finally...I raise this because I see this as the least of several bad options. Cancelling folks out who are already on a trip tends to leave a bad taste in a lot of mouths...I'm lucky to have gotten home, for example, and it can't be cheap to be putting tons of folks up in hotels and/or refunding their money (and/or both).

Click to expand...

Bad taste is a understatement. How do people going to or from a smaller community deal with a cancelled train. It is easy to catch a bus or airplane when your at Syracuse, NY but what about Glacier National Park?

A few years back the Lake Shore Limited Eastbound was running very late, so they cancelled the train in mid-trip. Kick the passengers off, and deadhead the train set and crew back to New York City. Of courses with no alternative available. The now empty train set was able to make up time heading back to NYC.

Run the darn trains. Stock extra food. Make it happen.

If host railroads don't like to accomodate extra trains at short notice (which I can entirely understand) or having the equipment or crews is an issue, at least having an agreement with a bus company to borrow some buses at short notice might be better than nothing. I understand that in some places Amtrak already has such arrangements, but it doesn't seem to be consistent.

RyanS said:

That pilot has got to come from somewhere.

Click to expand...

But the pilot comes from the host railroad - not from Amtrak. It could be either a conductor or engineer, but usually an engineer, depending upon the host railroad's requirements.

jb

Yes, but that still doesn't mean they're going to be available. I'd imagine trying to get one from BNSF in Montana these days would be pretty much impossible.

RyanS said:

Yes, but that still doesn't mean they're going to be available. I'd imagine trying to get one from BNSF in Montana these days would be pretty much impossible.

Click to expand...

Probably, but the OP was talking about bypassing Chicago by going to St. Louis instead. I'm guessing it would be easier to do that.

In any case, IF the pilots were available, then the suggestion of bypassing Chicago would work. If the pilots aren't available, then nothing is lost.

jb

Edit: Okay, the OP didn't specifically mention the Chicago bypass. I guess I was thinking of his own rubber-tired bypass of Chicago. In any case, Chicago is seemingly the major choke point and the one I was thinking about.

I imagine if the NE routes are in gridlock, the Cardinal route, being open, is seeing a lot more freight traffic as well. If they could spare a pilot, it would be great, but you're talking about three different host railroads, one of which is essentially a ma-paw shortline.

A Chicago bypass seems like one way to avoid the sort of mess we had recently. (Although I have no idea how to get it funded.) The problem areas were relatively close to Chicago, but on every line radiating from Chicago. Metra had a mess on the freight-controlled (UP and BNSF) lines out of Chicago too, and even on the Milwaukee District lines.

Metra did pretty well on the Metra Electric route, which I'm guessing has better infrastructure. Not sure if there's a lesson from that.

1) The obvious answer is more use of the bus bridge. Of course, the snow fouls up the highways just as much as the rails, but once the highways are plowed, any licensed bus driver can drive a bus anywhere. I understand that spinning up large numbers of suitable buses on short notice is not always that easy. (who wants a long trip in a school bus or a transit bus?) Still, it should be possible to keep people from being stranded or towns from being isolated. These weather systems don't just swoop in without warning.

2) This seems to be another argument for publicly owned rail infrastructure. I understand that the freights were not delayed to the same extent as the passenger trains were. This seems to me to be a reversal of what sound public transportation policy should be. The freight can wait -- shippers and freight operators can buy insurance to cover financial losses for delays and pass the costs on to customers, but stranding passengers and leaving numerous small towns isolated seems to me to be perverse. Also, it would be easier for Amtrak to develop a more robust national system if they were dealing with publicly owned track operators instead of the freight railways whose vision is of necessity somewhat limited.

MARC Rider said:

This seems to be another argument for publicly owned rail infrastructure. I understand that the freights were not delayed to the same extent as the passenger trains were. This seems to me to be a reversal of what sound public transportation policy should be. The freight can wait -- shippers and freight operators can buy insurance to cover financial losses for delays and pass the costs on to customers, but stranding passengers and leaving numerous small towns isolated seems to me to be perverse. Also, it would be easier for Amtrak to develop a more robust national system if they were dealing with publicly owned track operators instead of the freight railways whose vision is of necessity somewhat limited.

Click to expand...

Setting aside my absolute opposition to putting the rail infrastructure in public hands (my rants against this have been noted previously in the forum), I really don't see how making the infrastructure public would fix this problem. The cancellations weren't caused by Amtrak not owning tracks. Any track-related delays would have equally delayed the freights as much as passenger trains (not sure why one would think otherwise). Even where freights were running, they did run the risk of getting stuck if a problem arose enroute. It's one thing to have a bunch of goods sitting waiting for open track. It's another thing to have a trainload of passengers stranded in the middle of nowhere.

cirdan said:

If host railroads don't like to accomodate extra trains at short notice (which I can entirely understand) or having the equipment or crews is an issue, at least having an agreement with a bus company to borrow some buses at short notice might be better than nothing. I understand that in some places Amtrak already has such arrangements, but it doesn't seem to be consistent.

Click to expand...

Generally the problem isn't a lack of agreement, Amtrak has the numbers of many bus companies. Generally the problem is the bus companies finding enough buses & drivers to respond to Amtrak's plea for help. It's not like the bus companies just keep a dozen or more buses and drivers sitting around on standby on the off chance that Amtrak has a problem and needs help.

Trogdor said:

I really don't see how making the infrastructure public would fix this problem. The cancellations weren't caused by Amtrak not owning tracks. Any track-related delays would have equally delayed the freights as much as passenger trains (not sure why one would think otherwise). Even where freights were running, they did run the risk of getting stuck if a problem arose enroute. It's one thing to have a bunch of goods sitting waiting for open track. It's another thing to have a trainload of passengers stranded in the middle of nowhere.

Click to expand...

That's the difference, not between public and private ownership, but between passenger and freight. Had the freight companies also owned the passenger service, they would be more responsive to quickly solving the rail problems both from an economic and public blame points of view. Since freight delays are almost always not as big an issue as passenger delays, there is now no incentive to go up and beyond to accommodate passenger service just like there is not much incentive to repair or maintain tracks for passenger speeds. Public ownership is not the only solution. I see some alternatives:

• Public ownership
• Public or third party corporation that defines standards that must be met by railroads hosting Amtrak trains and penalizes railroads that fail to meet requirements. Amtrak retains its current status.
• Railroad operation of passenger trains on their tracks with strict requirements on service standards with penalties. Amtrak becomes just another operator in the NEC. Rolling stock and passenger engines owned by the government or by Amtrak.