Passenger Trains > Amtrak official gets an eyefull

Central Division Superintendent Mo Savoy was aboard Train 353 on Sunday
and experienced firsthand what the paying passengers experience
every day:

* Train 353 of 09/28/2014.
* Wolverine
* +---------------- Station code
* | +----------- Schedule Arrival Day
* | | +-------- Schedule Arrival time
* | | | +----- Schedule Departure Day
* | | | | +-- Schedule Departure Time
* | | | | | +------------- Actual Arrival Time
* | | | | | | +------- Actual Departure Time
* | | | | | | | +- Comments
* V V V V V V V V
* PNT * * 1 1035A * 1035A Departed: on time.
* BMM * * 1 1049A * 1049A Departed: on time.
* ROY * * 1 1057A * 1057A Departed: on time.
* DET 1 1117A 1 1120A 1118A 1124A Departed: 4 minutes late.
* DER * * 1 1143A * 1148A Departed: 5 minutes late.
* ARB * * 1 1217P * 1226P Departed: 9 minutes late.
* JXN * * 1 1258P * 107P Departed: 9 minutes late.
* ALI * * 1 121P * 155P Departed: 34 minutes late.
* BTL * * 1 154P * 229P Departed: 35 minutes late.
* KAL * * 1 225P * 304P Departed: 39 minutes late.
* NLS * * 1 258P * 339P Departed: 41 minutes late.
* NBU * * 1 328P * 359P Departed: 31 minutes late.
HMI * * 1 320P CT
* CHI 1 408P * * 708P * Arrived: 3 hours late.

It's too bad some high ranking executives from the Norfolk Southern weren't on board. Then, maybe, Amtrak won't have to sue them to get their attention.

Having Amtrak management on board these horribly delayed trains won't help--they already know the freight railroads are screwing them.

Joe

Good for him to see this firsthand... putting yourself out there is the first step in truly having some empathy for passengers and employees, alike.
I occasionally ride this train back from my sister's place in KAL, and have experienced some delay, but nothing like the current NS fiasco.
What is going on back there? Is this due to the CREATE project tying up traffic, or just routine freight delay because of sheer volume?

Trying to force 3 downgraded or abandoned east coast-Chicago routes worth of traffic onto one double track route, in a nutshell. (Erie, PRR, NYC Michigan Central).


IC_2024 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Good for him to see this firsthand... putting
> yourself out there is the first step in truly
> having some empathy for passengers and employees,
> alike.
> I occasionally ride this train back from my
> sister's place in KAL, and have experienced some
> delay, but nothing like the current NS fiasco.
> What is going on back there? Is this due to the
> CREATE project tying up traffic, or just routine
> freight delay because of sheer volume?

Sort of.

NS also has the single-track ex-Nickle Plate which it's using.

Economically, if a railroad can lower the capacity on a line for 10 or 15 years, they've come out on top in terms of lower taxes and lower maintenance, especially if they can abandon the line (as in EL or Wabash) and get rid of property taxes altogether. If, in a few years, traffic spikes (as with oil trains) and the railroad's not ready for it, it's short-term pain to add infrastructure or work through it, but the railroad generally comes out ahead by abandoning a line.

Sad, but true.

All the cost being invested by Michigan and Amtrak on this route won't mean a thing if they can't get the trains over the line between Porter and Chicago. I flew Detroit to Midway in little more time than the train was late two weeks ago.

I find it interesting how many people jump on the bandwagon as to how the freight railroads are screwing Amtrak. I don't seem to recall Amtrak having to pay the overhead for maintaining the line. If Amtrak contributed as much to the bottomline as a double stack or a coal load then they would have a leg to stand on. They are a guest forced upon the true money makers through the politicians and the legacy contract that put Amtrak in place...

Perhaps if Amtrak were run like a business rather than an oversized Lionel set, they might have an argument.

If you can't afford it, don't play with it..

That's my two kroner for the day.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/29/14 15:09 by YukonYeti.

The problem with your argument, Yukon Yeti, is that the double-stack customers, the ones like UPS who pay the really big top-dollar to NS and CSX and BNSF, are getting screwed, too. From what I've read on TO, BNSF is trucking UPS trailers at its own expense. I'm guessing that NS is doing the same thing. It isn't going to want to lose the UPS business. So because of the increased traffic and the congestion, all the freight customers are getting screwed, too.

But if you're a bulk customer, or if you have don't have the clout that UPS does, what do you do? What are your options? There aren't really competing railroads anymore to a lot of locations. You can't get a lot of truckers because there's a nationwide shortage of truck drivers. And chemicals and trainloads of coal and oil can't move by truck, anyway.

It will be interesting to see what CSX and NS executives get for bonuses this year. I'm guessing it'll continue to be in the millions.

Remember the executive mantra (and Board member mantra, too, since they tend to be executives who sit on each others' Boards), "You have to pay for quality."

< If Amtrak contributed as much to the bottomline as a double stack or a coal load then they would have a leg to stand on. >

Yes they do have a leg to stand on, and that leg is called a LEGAL CONTRACT, for which NS is now in breach of it.

Amtrak should immediately embargo NS operations on the NEC until NS abides abides by the law.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> (snip)
>
> Amtrak should immediately embargo NS operations on
> the NEC until NS abides abides by the law.

That would have major ramifications for the Delaware City refinery, and for the Baltimore freight trains.

But it would also have the potential to shoot Amtrak in the foot, as well. NS payments for access are a significant part of the NEC's revenue. Since Joe Biden was involved in the deal and concessions to get the refinery started, I'm sure he'd be unhappy about this, too.

If Amtrak chose to unilaterally violate its contract with NS, that wouldn't strengthen its argument over the Elkhart situation. I doubt Amtrak could prove a legal case that it is singled out for disproportionate treatment by NS. Absent that, it's just bluster.

(I'm still waiting to see if NS offers to pay for an Amtrak detour over the South Shore. That could solve a number of issues in one stroke.)

That's not how the law works. Suppose parties A and B enter into two contracts (#1 and #2) about separate things and that neither contract has a clause that refers to the other. If A breaches contract #1, B does not have a green light to breach contract #2 as retribution. In fact, that's exactly what A would want B to do, because B's right to recover damages from A as a result of the first breach would certainly be postponed and perhaps be eliminated.

And given Amtrak's dependence on NS in other parts of the country, as well as the uncertainty of the pending Supreme Court case, I very much doubt that anyone at Amtrak wants to start nuclear war with NS... which in some respects is a law firm that happens to operate a railroad.

As for (allegedly) premium-priced intermodal traffic, no railroad would want to tick off its best customers -- especially if the customers can switch to another railroad. But when the economy is good, the expenses of over-the-road trucking go up too because of supply and demand. So does highway congestion.

I am surprised passengers have not taken matters into their own hands, which sometimes happens when commuter trains get stuck for several hours: they all have devices and know where they are, they call a cab, open the doors, get out, and walk the tracks to a grade-crossing. With manual doors and 2 or 3 conductors, they wouldn't be able to stop it. Containing people for 11 hours to cover 100 miles can bring reckless behavior and mob mentality.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> < If Amtrak contributed as much to the bottomline
> as a double stack or a coal load then they would
> have a leg to stand on. >
>
> Yes they do have a leg to stand on, and that leg
> is called a LEGAL CONTRACT, for which NS is now in
> breach of it.
>

Do you have a link to the contract, since you know the NS is in breach of it?

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am surprised passengers have not taken matters
> into their own hands, which sometimes happens when
> commuter trains get stuck for several hours: they
> all have devices and know where they are, they
> call a cab, open the doors, get out, and walk the
> tracks to a grade-crossing. With manual doors and
> 2 or 3 conductors, they wouldn't be able to stop
> it. Containing people for 11 hours to cover 100
> miles can bring reckless behavior and mob
> mentality.


That says a lot about you.

To me, it utterly ridiculous when train fans think it's perfectly OK for the freight railroads to offer Amtrak the lousy service they do.

And, to consider Amtrak passenger trains as "guests" (i.e. an intruder) on freight railroad property is simply warped thinking.

Amtrak is in reality a "shipper" like any other; paying the freight roads to move their "cargo"--which happens to be human.

Also, it's nuts to say that Amtrak doesn't pay "enough"--the railroads negotiated and AGREED to the rates they charge Amtrak.

Joe

floridajoe2001 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To me, it utterly ridiculous when train fans think
> it's perfectly OK for the freight railroads to
> offer Amtrak the lousy service they do.
>
> And, to consider Amtrak passenger trains as
> "guests" (i.e. an intruder) on freight railroad
> property is simply warped thinking.
>
> Amtrak is in reality a "shipper" like any other;
> paying the freight roads to move their
> "cargo"--which happens to be human.
>
> Also, it's nuts to say that Amtrak doesn't pay
> "enough"--the railroads negotiated and AGREED to
> the rates they charge Amtrak.
>
> Joe


Could you elaborate a little about the railroads negotiated and AGREED to the rates they charge Amtrak?

I thought that the rates for original routes were set by the Congressional / regulatory actions establishing Amtrak, and fall far below what current shippers are charged for (equally bad) service. That's often mentioned as one reason why Amtrak hasn't expanded to many new routes since 1971.

Yes, Amtrak is the customer and has a negotiate rate in place for NS to handle them. Likewise I am a NS customer, and have negotiated rates in place for them to handle my traffic. NS's operational meltdown is costing Amtrak hours. It is costing me DAYS. If you ask me and other NS shippers, Amtrak IS getting the best service NS can offer. Thanks goodness Amtrak has some people in its rank that understand that railroads in general in this country are F'ed up right now and are not going off half cocked like children throwing temper tantrums demanding the big bad freight roads quit "illegally" delaying them



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/29/14 18:31 by scraphauler.

The South Shore re-route makes very good sense! Yes, I would propose an immediate cut over at South Bend, IN (Bendix)and run thru to Chicago, (The Air Line). CREATE or TIGER funding, not my forte?? To assist the South Shore {NICD) with double tracking, bridge replacement, signal upgrades, but most of all,....as quick as it could be built, a fair amount of passenger service congestion between South Bend, IN & Chicago could be eliminated and assisting both Amtrak & the South Shore (NICD). Might even throw Michigan into the mix! Easier said than done! But,....with multiple agencies & NS,....well you don't know till you ask!

To: Lakawanna484

I hope I won't put you to sleep; but try to think of Amtrak payments to the railroads this way:

When you fly, the person next to you may have paid more than you did. In fact, there are probably 20 different fares, all using the same aircraft. Would you expect the airline to say: "hey, you in 3C; you're not paying as much as these other guys; so, this gives me the right to give you lousy service; and you don't "deserve: to arrive on time .

Yet, some people feel the NS is perfectly correct in delaying Amtrak trains simply because they don't pay as much as someone else.

Just like in the airline business; freight railroads have thousands of freight rates--some low; some high. On a stack train, for example, a container may be paying more that one 20 cars back; yet, all have a right to on time service. Amtrak is just another "freight rate" the railroad charge, for basically doing very little.

Amtrak rates SHOULD be lower than freight rates because the freight railroads don't have to do very much. They don't supply locomotives (forget rescue engines); they don't supply crews; they don't supply freight yards; or lifting cranes; no fuel to pay for; no insurance to carry. In fact, handling Amtrak trains are as close to "cost free" as the freight railroads can get.

I'll stop here. Hope this explains why Amtrak is also a "shipper"; among thousands of shippers; all paying many different rates; yet, All are entitled to on time handling.

Joe

PS: The exact figure Amtrak pays the railroads is proprietary (i.e. secret). Neither Amtrak nor the railroads report this in their Annual Reports. I've tried to find it; but it's just not reported.

NS will have the expanded Bellevue yard open in a few months. They are hiring more people. This takes time but obviously the company is aware of service issues and working toward resolving them.