The Polar Vortex

[AlanB]

Make staff work over-time, run trains late, but RUN them, load extra provisions. PLAN for disasters and crew changes...

I can't believe that you Jerry, of all people a former Amtrak worker, would write this without realizing that you CANNOT make the operating crew work over-time. And when you have trains running many hours late, you end up with operating crews that aren't rested and cannot be ordered to work. No operating crew; no moving train. Sure, you can order the OBS crews to work; but that still won't get the train moved.

And that's not being an Amtrak apologist; that is the reality of the laws thrust upon Amtrak and every other RR by the FRA.

 

[Fan_Trains]

i was wondering if the extreme cold weather subsides, will Amtrak run the trains again on its normal schedule?

 

[AmtrakBlue]

Why wouldn't they? Sure, they may need a few days to get things back on schedule due to track conditions, thawing out cars & engines & testing the crew (engineers & conductors).

 

[VentureForth]

Make staff work over-time, run trains late, but RUN them, load extra provisions. PLAN for disasters and crew changes...

I can't believe that you Jerry, of all people a former Amtrak worker, would write this without realizing that you CANNOT make the operating crew work over-time. And when you have trains running many hours late, you end up with operating crews that aren't rested and cannot be ordered to work. No operating crew; no moving train. Sure, you can order the OBS crews to work; but that still won't get the train moved.

And that's not being an Amtrak apologist; that is the reality of the laws thrust upon Amtrak and every other RR by the FRA.

It looks like he meant that the OBS work overtime and the operating crews be lined up and ready to be rested and available.

 

[PRR 60]

Overtime means work in excess of 40 hours a week. An operating person can certainly work more than 40 hours a week on a schedule that does not violate the legal hours of service requirements.

 

[rrdude]

Make staff work over-time, run trains late, but RUN them, load extra provisions. PLAN for disasters and crew changes...

I can't believe that you Jerry, of all people a former Amtrak worker, would write this without realizing that you CANNOT make the operating crew work over-time. And when you have trains running many hours late, you end up with operating crews that aren't rested and cannot be ordered to work. No operating crew; no moving train. Sure, you can order the OBS crews to work; but that still won't get the train moved.And that's not being an Amtrak apologist; that is the reality of the laws thrust upon Amtrak and every other RR by the FRA.

Well, I didn't go into detail Alan, I would never suggest that train crews exceed hr limits, but with advance planning, one CAN pre-Position relief crews, RR (pre-Amtrak) usedto do it regularly.

I'd just like to see Amtrak thought of as the "Go-To choice" for bad weather travel, it's one small ABSOLUTE & REAL ADVANTAGE that rail has over air. Why not exploit it?

 

[CHamilton]

I'd just like to see Amtrak thought of as the "Go-To choice" for bad weather travel, it's one small ABSOLUTE & REAL ADVANTAGE that rail has over air. Why not exploit it?

Agreed. Forgive me for repeating myself, but ...

I think that the lesson here is two-sided. Well-built, well-maintained, and plentiful passenger trains, serving a redundant network, can be inherently better at dealing with bad weather than any other form of transportation. But Amtrak has none of those features. They have managed to provide national train service for 40+ years with pitiful resources, and even this week, they have managed to do better in many ways than the airlines, the roads and the buses.

But think what they could have done with a robust system! I'm sure we'll be hearing calls for tax money to be thrown at "infrastructure," meaning air and highways, as a result of this week. It's up to us to make sure that our local, state and national elected officials know that rail is a more effective way of spending those dollars.

 

[June the Coach Rider]

As I said on another thread, this type of extreme cold is not normal. Every other year with the cold that the mid west gets, Amtrak runs their normal schedule. This was an exception that Amtrak could not run.

 

[VentureForth]

But Amtrak could have been better prepared for it.

 

[Anderson]

I'd just like to see Amtrak thought of as the "Go-To choice" for bad weather travel, it's one small ABSOLUTE & REAL ADVANTAGE that rail has over air. Why not exploit it?

Agreed. Forgive me for repeating myself, but ...

I think that the lesson here is two-sided. Well-built, well-maintained, and plentiful passenger trains, serving a redundant network, can be inherently better at dealing with bad weather than any other form of transportation. But Amtrak has none of those features. They have managed to provide national train service for 40+ years with pitiful resources, and even this week, they have managed to do better in many ways than the airlines, the roads and the buses.

But think what they could have done with a robust system! I'm sure we'll be hearing calls for tax money to be thrown at "infrastructure," meaning air and highways, as a result of this week. It's up to us to make sure that our local, state and national elected officials know that rail is a more effective way of spending those dollars.

Added to this, I'd like to see some "contingency operation" agreements such that if the Cap can't be run, the Cardinal gets run daily in lieu. Right now, the Card's the only option between the West Coast and the East Coast south of Canada, full stop: The Crescent can't run because of trackwork, the Cap and LSL are down for the weather, etc. Your only options are the Cardinal, the Canadian, or a Michigan-Ontario shuffle.

 

[Thom Griffin]

Well...I have to correct my previous statement of it usually not being windy when it gets really cold, at least where I live. Last night, in Northwestern Massachusetts, it was -20, and the winds were blowing fiercely. Not a great evening for a swim.

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

I agree with rrdude, run the darn trains.

 

[afigg]

According to a service alert on the Amtrak website, the Northeast routes will be back to a normal schedule on Thursday.

"Amtrak Acela Express, Northeast Regional, Empire, Keystone and other corridor services are expected to resume normal operation on a full schedule effective Thursday, Jan. 9, 2014"

Now we will see when the Midwest corridors and LD trains out of Chicago will be back to a normal schedule.

 

[guest]

But Amtrak could have been better prepared for it.

So could everyone else whose pipes froze, cars broke down, roofs collapsed,etc. So could the government. What's your point?

Everyone knows Amtrak could be better ANYTHING if there was real money behind it.

 

[guest]

The widespread disruptions show forcefully how skeletal and fragile Amtrak's network really is. Amtrak has done a phenomenal job of providing service to most of the country with ridiculously limited resources for 40+ years. But now we need to lobby for the sort of funding that is needed to provide a truly robust passenger rail system.

Yes

 

[Guest]

Let's hope the new locomotives and coaches for the midwest are better able to tolerate the midwest cold. I know these temps are not the normal but equipment should be built to tolerate the worst possible scenario for cold.

 

[AlanB]

Overtime means work in excess of 40 hours a week. An operating person can certainly work more than 40 hours a week on a schedule that does not violate the legal hours of service requirements.

Bill,

Agreed. While I used Jerry's words, I should have been more clear that one cannot force the operating crew to exceed their hours of service and rest periods; which as you note do not preclude the possibility of overtime.

 

[AlanB]

Make staff work over-time, run trains late, but RUN them, load extra provisions. PLAN for disasters and crew changes...

I can't believe that you Jerry, of all people a former Amtrak worker, would write this without realizing that you CANNOT make the operating crew work over-time. And when you have trains running many hours late, you end up with operating crews that aren't rested and cannot be ordered to work. No operating crew; no moving train. Sure, you can order the OBS crews to work; but that still won't get the train moved.And that's not being an Amtrak apologist; that is the reality of the laws thrust upon Amtrak and every other RR by the FRA.

Well, I didn't go into detail Alan, I would never suggest that train crews exceed hr limits, but with advance planning, one CAN pre-Position relief crews, RR (pre-Amtrak) usedto do it regularly.

I'd just like to see Amtrak thought of as the "Go-To choice" for bad weather travel, it's one small ABSOLUTE & REAL ADVANTAGE that rail has over air. Why not exploit it?

Jerry,

RR's (pre-Amtrak) had many, many more crews that does Amtrak. Furthermore, back then passenger service was their pride, so they could & would pull a freight crew from a freight train leaving it sitting in the yard just to get the passenger train over the road first. And the rules on hours of service have been tightened some since then too I believe.

This is not to suggest that Amtrak couldn't try to do a bit better; but they'll never be able to do what used to happen pre-Amtrak.

 

[oldtimer]

Amtrak as a cost saving measure has cut the number of employees on an extra board. These employees would be ready to take over when the normally assigned employees come to the end of their Federally mandated 12 hours of on duty time. In addition to that the retirement of the "baby boomers" has had a great impact on all of Amtrak forces especially mechanical and operating. When you lose an employee with 30+ years of experience and only then you hire someone probably with no railroad experience as Amtrak's pay levels are the lowest among unionized railroads you have suffered a letdown in efficiency and productivity.

Oldtimer

PS Mrs. Oldtimer and I have over 70 years combined experience with Amtrak.

PPS Now both happily retired.

 

[VentureForth]

Oldtimer - I respect your point of view and I appreciate your time in service and your wealth of experience. I don't understand how an extra board would cost a significant amount of money. To me it seems like it's only used when necessary and could, in fact, reduce double and triple overtime. Sure, keeping more employees on the books costs money in benefits, but the extra board is usually the junior crew waiting for the priviledge to serve.

As for being the lowest among unionized workforces in the RR industry - perhaps Class I's, but I don't think shortline railroad employees are getting Amtrak wages. If the pay wasn't as good, why does it appear that many in the freight industry want to work their way to pax service?

And to our anonymous guest - It doesn't have to cost a lot of money to prevent outages. Ever hear the phrase "An ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure?" It's generally much cheaper to prevent damage than to fix damage.

 

[OBS]

Oldtimer - I respect your point of view and I appreciate your time in service and your wealth of experience. I don't understand how an extra board would cost a significant amount of money. To me it seems like it's only used when necessary and could, in fact, reduce double and triple overtime. Sure, keeping more employees on the books costs money in benefits, but the extra board is usually the junior crew waiting for the priviledge to serve.

As for being the lowest among unionized workforces in the RR industry - perhaps Class I's, but I don't think shortline railroad employees are getting Amtrak wages. If the pay wasn't as good, why does it appear that many in the freight industry want to work their way to pax service?

And to our anonymous guest - It doesn't have to cost a lot of money to prevent outages. Ever hear the phrase "An ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure?" It's generally much cheaper to prevent damage than to fix damage.

The reason an extra board costs a significant amount of money is that each extra board employee is a full time employee. Even if they never leave their house to come to work they are guaranteed a salary of a 40 hour work week, plus their benefits. Thus the struggle of keeping an "optimum" level of extra board in all the operating/OBS crafts at Amtrak.

 

[CHamilton]

An interesting article on rail systems that are optimized for cold weather. http://midwesthsr.org/cold-weather-passenger-trains

 

[Guest]

Amtrak as a cost saving measure has cut the number of employees on an extra board. These employees would be ready to take over when the normally assigned employees come to the end of their Federally mandated 12 hours of on duty time.

Part of this is due to the skeletal nature of the network. It makes sense to have substantial extra boards in the busy NEC, or around Los Angeles where Amtrak runs Metrolink under contract, or even in Chicago maybe. But you cannot justify it in North Dakota for one-a-day, and probably not even in western NY for four-a-day.

 

[greatcats]

There probably is a small extra board at each terminal, such as Albuquerque, NM or Shelby, MT, where the crews run in both directions. But with one train in each direction daily, there are not likely to be more than a handful of crew available. They are there to protect sick or personal vacancies and vacations, with some allowance being made for " dogcatcher " service. When the service went down the tubes this past week, they likely just ran out of crews with proper rest and some annulments had to be made.

 

[VentureForth]

In this week's cases, I really would have expected Amtrak to have used a helicopter to fly a crew from Chicago to the disabled trains (only 80 or so miles), and let them parachute in.

Obviously kidding.

Now, I've been shot down on this in the past, but it seems like there would be a way to keep a crew technically at rest ONBOARD the train. I get it on freights that you can't just jump into a 2nd or 3rd loco, stretch a sleeping bag across the floor and be expected to be up and at 'em in 8 hours. But with a transdorm and a diner, I still can't believe that they can't have two to three operating crews ONBOARD that can rotate. I know that the Unions would never go for it, and I know that the FRA would never buy off. But it seems like it could be successful.