Passenger Trains > Hoosier State Performance Week of 8-24-15

Initial Terminal Tolerance: 3 mins
Final Terminal Tolerance: 10 mins

#851

Initial Terminal Delays: 1 late
851(26) Dep: 1 hr, 15 min late.

Final Terminal Performance: 3 late of 4 operated
851(25) Arr: 29 min late.
851(26) Arr: 1 hr, 6 min late.
851(28) Arr: 23 min late.

Note: Amtrak calculates loosing only 2 for OTP, doesn't count 851(26) account did not loose additional 10 mins time after Initial Terminal Delay.

#850

Initial Terminal Delays: 1 late
850(30) Dep: 8 min late.

Final Terminal Performance: 3 late of 4 operated
850(24) Arr: 45 min late.
850(28) Arr: 3 hr, 2 min late.
850(30) Arr: 16 min late.

Note: Amtrak calculates loosing only 2 for OTP, doesn't count 850(30) account did not loose additional 10 mins time after Initial Terminal Delay.

Significant pad is built into this train operation. That would make performance to appear mediocre at best early on in it's new form. Will numbers improve with time or stagnate? Draw your own conclusions...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/15 09:11 by PC1974.

PC1974 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Significant pad is built into this train
> operation. That would make performance to appear
> mediocre at best early on in it's new form. Will
> numbers improve with time or stagnate? Draw your
> own conclusions...

I would say no conclusions can be drawn, and I would avoid the "post hoc" fallacy attributing poor OTP to Iowa Pacific. Who's to say OTP would have been the same (or worse) if Amtrak were stll the sole contractor?

Paul Wilson
Arlington, VA

Unless there are mechanical issues, what difference does it make who the operator of the train is as far as on time performance is? If the train has to be late do to congestion or dispatching issues, I'd much rather spend my late time in a comfortable, well run train than what was provided previously.

I was beat by andersonb109 to answer the question from Dcmcrider.

The fact is I pointed no fingers or placed any blame. I just posting the facts!

The general public don't care who's to blame. They simply want an on-time train.

Dcmcrider Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I would say no conclusions can be drawn, and I
> would avoid the "post hoc" fallacy attributing
> poor OTP to Iowa Pacific. Who's to say OTP would
> have been the same (or worse) if Amtrak were stll
> the sole contractor?


Crew wise it is Amtrak. As far as dispatchers are concerned, it's an Amtrak train.

All that's being proven are that the operational issues which this train (and most other trains throughout the Amtrak system) faces are not something that can be solved by hiring a different contractor.  The only change brought about by hiring Iowa Pacific was the more comfortable cars and food service.  Stop trying to hyper-analyze IPH based upon operational performance, let's look for some CSI numbers, which should tell a much clearer story of how IPH compares to Amtrak.

As with VIA Rail's excellent customer service, one needs an outfit like IP, as opposed to Amtrak, to provide customer service on a dysfunctional host railroad.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/15 16:38 by joemvcnj.

Thanks for the data, but it isn't even a month yet, we started August 2!  Kinda hard to draw a straight line with a one-inch ruler and kinda hard to draw a good conclusion from a few weeks of data.  I think Amtrak crews are doing a super job getting over the road, and the freight railroads are cooperative, following the Chicago Protocol.  Just be patient.

There's no question the train is under watchful eyes, but not necessarily a microscope. There was no micro-analysis of the data. The data was specific, the prior week (one week). And is valuable to use as a comparison going forward. On-time performance is a true measure of train service.

Hyper-analyze and just be patient as responses? I read back over some of the RFP materials and was reminded by Jaanfo's response that some areas are not being addressed. Operationally, it remains an Amtrak train and doesn't benefit from having a new operator.

A good example from the RFP;

Amtrak’s “PRIIA Section 210 FY10 Performance Improvement Plan Cardinal”, on page 16, under the heading, “On-Time Performance (OTP)”, includes the following paragraph:
To improve reliability, Amtrak will explore a temporary reroute of the Cardinal into and out of Chicago. In the long run, and as a result of the CREATE Program for rail infrastructure improvements in Chicago, it is anticipated that the train will take a better and faster route via Englewood, the Norfolk Southern Chicago Line and a future track connection with the former Illinois Central Railroad at Grand Crossing. On an interim basis, however, Amtrak plans to ask Canadian National Railways (CN) for a temporary reroute over the former Grand Trunk Western Railway, the former Illinois Central mainline,
and the St. Charles Air Line into Chicago Union Station. The team believes that the interim simplified route involving only CN would improve reliability compared to multiple handoffs of the train to different dispatchers from different railroads. It might also save a few minutes, albeit not as much as the future route via CREATE.2

Reroute didn't happen. Business as usual.

Another section of the RFP talks about desired improvements.. Text follows...

The future Hoosier State rail service will connect Indianapolis and other Indiana cities to Chicago with additional trains, increased speed between stations, improved on-time performance, increased ridership, and improved on-board amenities.

Increased speed? Operational again, talk to Amtrak. Improved OTP, talk to Amtrak.. Service recovery, talk to IPH...

I guess in retrospect, some up front performance numbers really do spark attention! 850(31) missed tolerance into Indy last night, it's gonna be an uphill battle...

Given what CN does to VIA Rail trains, and the fact that Amtrak is suing them for handling of Carbondale trains, I think it best to not get any more involved with CN.

Hello PC1974

I've been following the progress on Iowa Pacific Holdings' initiative to improve Amtrak's Hoosier State. I've been following the numerouse challenges the train needs to overcome capacity issues on host freight railroads.

I've followed on Google Earth the old route it took from State line Jct. to Indianapolis on the former Monon Railroad (now using the section from Maynard Jct. on the GTW onto the Monon north of Dyer, IN all the way to Crawfordsville, IN. Then it appears to use the former Pennsy? To Indianapolis, but I'm probably wrong.

It looks like the cheapest/ more functional idea would be to rebuild under INDOT/NICTD funds the section from Maynard to the closest point on the South Shore, but no idea who owns that part of the former Monon CSX obviously doesn't want to that specific point.

Do you know of any old maps that show the original routing Monon used to use from Dyer to Dearborn and how Amtrak has been shifting the route over the years due to host railroad abandonments?

Also, I've heard the old Monon has been downgraded to 70mph more or less but CSX keeps it decent for passenger service, like it's other lines. How can IPH push Amtrak and INDOT to improve the Hoosier State's route? I haven't been able to find the specifics on the INDOT-IPH and INDOT-AMTK contract on INDOT's website. Neither is done on the INDOT study made by a third party, beyond adding sidings...

The equipment, no comments. Looks top notch. Classic streamliners with modern candy ammenities, from tablecloths, dome, wifi, power outlets, rebuilt Amtrak Certified Heritage equipment. Best of both worlds. The stations seem to be improving over the years, replacing Amshacks with modern ADA compliant facilites, lighting, park and ride, etc...

So that's why I'm left to ask about the infrastructure and signaling the train traverses through... Do you know where can I find this info? Thank you.

B/R

-Geep

PC1974 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There's no question the train is under watchful
> eyes, but not necessarily a microscope. There was
> no micro-analysis of the data. The data was
> specific, the prior week (one week). And is
> valuable to use as a comparison going forward.
> On-time performance is a true measure of train
> service.
>
> Hyper-analyze and just be patient as responses? I
> read back over some of the RFP materials and was
> reminded by Jaanfo's response that some areas are
> not being addressed. Operationally, it remains an
> Amtrak train and doesn't benefit from having a new
> operator.
>
> A good example from the RFP;
>
> Amtrak’s “PRIIA Section 210 FY10 Performance
> Improvement Plan Cardinal”, on page 16, under
> the heading, “On-Time Performance (OTP)”,
> includes the following paragraph:
> To improve reliability, Amtrak will explore a
> temporary reroute of the Cardinal into and out of
> Chicago. In the long run, and as a result of the
> CREATE Program for rail infrastructure
> improvements in Chicago, it is anticipated that
> the train will take a better and faster route via
> Englewood, the Norfolk Southern Chicago Line and a
> future track connection with the former Illinois
> Central Railroad at Grand Crossing. On an interim
> basis, however, Amtrak plans to ask Canadian
> National Railways (CN) for a temporary reroute
> over the former Grand Trunk Western Railway, the
> former Illinois Central mainline,
> and the St. Charles Air Line into Chicago Union
> Station. The team believes that the interim
> simplified route involving only CN would improve
> reliability compared to multiple handoffs of the
> train to different dispatchers from different
> railroads. It might also save a few minutes,
> albeit not as much as the future route via
> CREATE.2
>
> Reroute didn't happen. Business as usual.
>
> Another section of the RFP talks about desired
> improvements.. Text follows...
>
> The future Hoosier State rail service will connect
> Indianapolis and other Indiana cities to Chicago
> with additional trains, increased speed between
> stations, improved on-time performance, increased
> ridership, and improved on-board amenities.
>
> Increased speed? Operational again, talk to
> Amtrak. Improved OTP, talk to Amtrak.. Service
> recovery, talk to IPH...
>
> I guess in retrospect, some up front performance
> numbers really do spark attention! 850(31) missed
> tolerance into Indy last night, it's gonna be an
> uphill battle...