Amtrak mired in freight delays..

[caravanman]

Chicago Tribune article.. Read by clicking here.

Err, someone noticed it's not Amtrak to blame at last..

Ed B)

 

[the_traveler]

Freight railroads routinely violate a federal law requiring that track preference be given to Amtrak trains

At least some comply very good (like BNSF), but some do not (like UP). (Think EB - which runs on BNSF - vs CZ - which runs it's western half on UP.)

 

[amtrakwolverine]

if the freight railroads violate federal law WHY DON'T THEY GET SUED IN FEDERAL COURT

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

At least some comply very good (like BNSF), but some do not (like UP). (Think EB - which runs on BNSF - vs CZ - which runs it's western half on UP.)

CSX isn't bad- NS is awful on the CL....

 

[sechs]

if the freight railroads violate federal law WHY DON'T THEY GET SUED IN FEDERAL COURT

Who is going to do that? Amtrak?

"Hey, UP, we're suing you for not running trains on time. After that, maybe we could talk about improving the running time of the California Zephyr...."

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Err, someone noticed it's not Amtrak to blame at last..

The right way to solve the problem on the busier routes is dedicated high speed passenger track, and the lack of that is the fault of Congress and/or the American public, not the freight railroads. Using freight track for part of the Lincoln to Chicago route probably makes sense, but it doesn't make so much sense for Boston to Chicago.

On the other hand, there's proably a reasonable argument that we don't have enough freight track capacity for the freight, and we're being penny wise and pound foolish there when we pay for it in the form of highway reconstruction. If there's a good way to structure federal loans for this so that the railroads don't rob the taxpayer, maybe we should pursue that.

It's depressing that trains didn't get mentioned at all in the presidential debate a few hours ago, in spite of the amount of the discussion of energy issues. Why shouldn't the country that Obama described as the greatest country in the world be winning the contest for the largest amount of 300 km/h or faster track per capita?

 

[amtrakwolverine]

if the freight railroads violate federal law WHY DON'T THEY GET SUED IN FEDERAL COURT

Who is going to do that? Amtrak?

"Hey, UP, we're suing you for not running trains on time. After that, maybe we could talk about improving the running time of the California Zephyr...."

why not there breaking the law why not send the president of UP to jail for a few days or fine them x millions of dollars for each hour the train is late. there breaking the law. if we can't break the law and get away with it why should the railroads.

 

[MrFSS]

if the freight railroads violate federal law WHY DON'T THEY GET SUED IN FEDERAL COURT

Who is going to do that? Amtrak?

"Hey, UP, we're suing you for not running trains on time. After that, maybe we could talk about improving the running time of the California Zephyr...."

why not there breaking the law why not send the president of UP to jail for a few days or fine them x millions of dollars for each hour the train is late. there breaking the law. if we can't break the law and get away with it why should the railroads.

George Orwell summed it up nicely in his great novel Animal Farm when he said, "All animal are created equal, some are just more equal than others."

Or, maybe it was Pogo who said it.

 

[Tony]

CSX isn't bad- NS is awful on the CL....

Amtrak execs and CSX execs sat down, and worked out an agreement. I have been riding the Silvers for years, and I noticed quite an improvement starting this year, with the trains running well under that agreement.

I had learned to have lots of contingency plans in place for 98 arriving late. I had plans for being 2 hours late, and up to 8 hours late. Suddenly, back in Feb. of this year, 98 arrived early! For that possibility, I had no plans.

 

[Rail Freak]

"Other key causes of Amtrak delays were track maintenance work or deteriorated tracks that forced trains to slow down, insufficient track capacity and external factors beyond the freight railroads' control, the inspector general found."

Isn't that freight's (track owner's) responsibility,also?

 

[sechs]

why not there breaking the law why not send the president of UP to jail for a few days or fine them x millions of dollars for each hour the train is late. there breaking the law. if we can't break the law and get away with it why should the railroads.

Nobody is going to go to jail for this. The worst that can happen is that the railroad has to pay somebody something. And, whatever that something is, it isn't going to be more than what they made by making the passenger train wait and getting that freight by on time.

You've also missed the point that pissing off the companies that you need to do your business does not help you. Why would the railroads cooperate with Amtrak if it is just going to turn around and sue them?

 

[caravanman]

Some railroads seem to behave like feudal landlords towards their "amtrak clients". I am guessing that they wouldn't need to "get sued" if they DID play fair and follow the rules. The two sides in this deal trade with each other because they are forced to.. Let Amtrak trains which, after all, are carrying live citizens aboard, have reasonable priority over trains carrying non live freight.. Isn't that the rule?

Ed B)

 

[the_traveler]

Let Amtrak trains which, after all, are carrying live citizens aboard, have reasonable priority over trains carrying non live freight.. Isn't that the rule?

Yeah it is, but the freight railroads say "The non-live freight earns more for us than the live citizens do!"

$$$$$$ speak louder than words!

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Yeah it is, but the freight railroads say "The non-live freight earns more for us than the live citizens do!"

I suspect an honest look at the problem would also reveal that getting rid of Amtrak's operation over freight tracks completely and using the track capacity that frees up to move freight off the highways would be good for the environment and good from the perspective of reducing wear and tear on the highways, even if every single long distance Amtrak passenger switched to a single occupancy SUV, because each SUV would probably be replacing a tractor-trailer.

I don't want the Amtrak long distance routes killed, but I'm not sure their existance is an overall win for society if we can't bring ourselves to build more track.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Yeah it is, but the freight railroads say "The non-live freight earns more for us than the live citizens do!"

I suspect an honest look at the problem would also reveal that getting rid of Amtrak's operation over freight tracks completely and using the track capacity that frees up to move freight off the highways would be good for the environment and good from the perspective of reducing wear and tear on the highways, even if every single long distance Amtrak passenger switched to a single occupancy SUV, because each SUV would probably be replacing a tractor-trailer.

I don't want the Amtrak long distance routes killed, but I'm not sure their existance is an overall win for society if we can't bring ourselves to build more track.

On behalf of the Saudis and OPEC- I thank you for your reply.

The content of this ad is brought to you by Gas-Guzzlers Unlimted. GGU- 'Burn baby burn'.

 

[Loren Petrich]

I think that there are two problems here: not enough track capacity and Amtrak's presence not being lucrative enough.

So I hope that the politicians mentioned in that article would look for ways of financing capacity improvements. They are in the Illinois delegation to the US Congress, so they ought to support efforts to fund infrastructure improvements for Amtrak.

And I think that Illinois state politicians may have to do more. Amtrak California has been remarkably successful at getting close to NEC levels of ridership for its California trains, and some other states have also been fairly successful in attracting riders to short-distance trains. And this includes Illinois.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

And I think that Illinois state politicians may have to do more. Amtrak California has been remarkably successful at getting close to NEC levels of ridership for its California trains, and some other states have also been fairly successful in attracting riders to short-distance trains. And this includes Illinois.

We ought to be setting our goals somewhat higher than NEC ridership levels. Don't the airlines still have 50% of the Boston to New York City passengers? If our track was as good as what France or Japan has, we might not even need airplanes for Boston to DC.

 

[Mark]

Lets not forget that the Freight RRs, (most of them before they all merged into their present monopolies), made a deal back around 1970 or so with the US Government. It goes a little something like this: "Hey Uncle Sam we're losing all this money on passenger rail can we please, please, please get out of that line of work so we can concentrate on freight?" Uncle Sam said for several years leading up to the creation of Amtrak, "No, no, no." Then a little later, "Well some of you. Hmmmph, ok all of you but you have to donate equipment, (and other supporting necessities-to buy in), so we can take this over for you. Oh yea and um freight people, you have to give preference to our passenger trains OK?" The freights immediately agreed, "Sure, sure Uncle Sam whatever you want just do this little favor for us." The rest is a history of late Amtrak trains that cost around one quarter of the so called operating 'subsidy'. Its the same old, same old here. Any action to improve Amtrak is through our Senators and Congressmen/women only they can apply the subtle pressure needed to guide the mega freight railroads towards remembering why Amtrak exists in the first place, because they wanted out of the passenger business.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Unless you're proposing to somehow significantly increase the total amount of freight track that's out there, pushing for more passenger trains on freight tracks or better OTP for passenger trains on freight tracks is probably even worse than a zero sum game. And I don't see much interest on the part of either the freight railroads or the American taxpayer in making any significant increase in the amount of freight track happen.

Perhaps we need a program that will allow freight railroads a tax credit for any money invested that increases the total number of track miles they have, and we can then hope that the lost tax dollars will either be recovered from greater freight RR profits later, or reduced highway maintenance costs, or both.

 

[sechs]

Unless you're proposing to somehow significantly increase the total amount of freight track that's out there, pushing for more passenger trains on freight tracks or better OTP for passenger trains on freight tracks is probably even worse than a zero sum game. And I don't see much interest on the part of either the freight railroads or the American taxpayer in making any significant increase in the amount of freight track happen.

Like in Texas, where they are considering spending $$$ to "move" a freight line to make way for commuter rail (among other reasons)?

The fact of the matter is that the number of miles of track has shrunk along with the number of railroads. So, more freight is being stuffed onto fewer lines. And you can't expect a money-losing passenger train to do well, when the railroad is tight on just moving the freight.