Passenger Trains > Could Amtrak a CSX Crew to run Amtrak 40??

Could Amtrak have CSX  Crew to run Amtrak 40 last night, instead of wait all night in D.C. for 12 plus hours on that train. Amtrak leave  D.C. at 9:45 A.M. Sunday July 5, 2026.

IINM, even if the train had a CSX leader an Amtral enginer or conductor trained in the mysteries of regulatong HEP would be requred.   Decades ago Class 1 operating personnel were the norm, but for reasons not obvious to me Amtrak and they sought separate crews.   

The head-end crew of LD trains ONLY I think should be crewed by the host railroad. Instead of conductors, you have the VIA Rail "Service Manager" model. Service Manager stays with OBS throughout the journey terminal to terminal. Two engineers would likely not be optional, but a requirement. Would NOT work for corridor trains, but I do feel it could work with Amtrak's LD trains and cut out the extraneous costs of maintaining crew bases etc.

The host RR will upcharge this for sure, but there would also have to be a commitment by the host RR to crew and get the train over the road. However, they could be better motivated to keep the train moving over "their" railroad than sitting stopped to block potential traffic. So the incentive could be fluidity. This is not a knee jerk comment, have thought and commented on this for at least a decade. There was a time and reason for separate crews. But the freight railroad scene that Amtrak faced in the early 1980s (when separate crews emerged) is vastly different than what exists today in "mega merger world." 

jp1822 is correct again.

A CSX crew would not only be unfamiliar with HEP, the braking is different.
Blended brake and graduated release.

amtrak took over the off corridor crews in the 1980's because amtrak thought the railroads were screwing them and
amtrak could do better.

Why should CSX short themselves of crews ?

Open access fans should take note of this.  The number of fly by night, shoestring operators waiting to make a killing by
running their own trains will make crew shortages a constant problem.

Obviously, the monday morning quarterbacks have no idea what's going on on many freight railroads. Both CSX and NS regularly run out of rested crews and are always short of crews. Freight trains regularly outlaw...and sit waiting for their recrew...often with outlawed crews on them, waiting for their taxi. 

Amtrak moved to hired their own operating crews to save a fortune in the late 1980's - it's the reason everyone thinks Graham Claytor was so great. Freight railroads also didn't want the responsibility of staffing passenger trains.
The 40 incident is an anomaly caused by repeated weather events, derailments, trespasser incidents, and general dismal handling of the train by CSX, which has been rampant over the past couple of weeks.

As a freight engineer I can tell you I can put application in at Amtrak. and with my years of experience will get an interview....if I want to work in passenger service.....I don't. As for the braking....it's a nothing burger. You learn what you need to learn when you get the job. Same for HEP....it has it's peculiarities, but it can be learned. I have run F40PH's too...I did not have any issues. 
 

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The head-end crew of LD trains ONLY I think should
> be crewed by the host railroad. Instead of
> conductors, you have the VIA Rail "Service
> Manager" model. Service Manager stays with OBS
> throughout the journey terminal to terminal. Two
> engineers would likely not be optional, but a
> requirement. Would NOT work for corridor trains,
> but I do feel it could work with Amtrak's LD
> trains and cut out the extraneous costs of
> maintaining crew bases etc.
>
> The host RR will upcharge this for sure, but there
> would also have to be a commitment by the host RR
> to crew and get the train over the road. However,
> they could be better motivated to keep the train
> moving over "their" railroad than sitting stopped
> to block potential traffic. So the incentive could
> be fluidity. This is not a knee jerk comment, have
> thought and commented on this for at least a
> decade. There was a time and reason for separate
> crews. But the freight railroad scene that Amtrak
> faced in the early 1980s (when separate crews
> emerged) is vastly different than what exists
> today in "mega merger world." 

It wouldn’t be two engineers, it would be an engineer and a conductor both in the cab, just like their freight trains, and they would be trying to reduce that to one engineer alone, just like they’re trying to do with their freight trains.

As others have pointed out, host railroads are often short of crews themselves, so this likely wouldn’t solve the problem, in fact it might make things worse in the current climate of PSR.

Because the Class 1s and Amtrak are both union, it’s likely that these jobs would first be offered to current Amtrak T&E employees, who would then become employees of whichever host railroad their jobs worked over and have prior rights for the passenger jobs, while current class 1 employees had prior rights for freight jobs.

Labor laws in the US are different from Canada, you can’t (yet) just eliminate the craft of Conductor from select passenger jobs (but thank you so much for advocating taking work away from my coworkers and I).