well the up tracks in texas and missouri might only be 30 mph in areas. and this might not be track conditions as much as the area. on the line i run there is speed restrictions on certain curves. but for most part we run 50-60 mph on the line i run. amtrak trains have many restrictions when meeting and its just a hassel. the best thing for any passenger service is to have its own road
Dallas - Chicago is ~ 1000 miles, while Omaha - Chicago is ~ 500 miles. A high speed train averaging 150 mph between Chicago and Dallas would be out of the question just on the basis of the travel time alone while Chicago-Omaha high speed train service averaging 150 mph might not be practical from the ridership and population density standpoints.
However, Dallas - San Antonio high speed rail service would be practical from both the travel time and the ridership standpoints. In fact just such service was proposed for a Texas triangle which included Houston, Dallas’Ft Worth, Austin and San Antonio, but it never got off the ground.
…Surely a grand plan. I’m glad the Senator liked it…as she is a leader in Transportation if my memory serves me right. In the past she has been rather outspoken on such matters in a positive way.
QM
Hi guys,
I really liked the point that Ed made about the pride that railroaders have in their work and their ability to be on time now. The point about a new line dedicated to passenger service really makes sense too. We need more choices for travel, short and long.
Sooblue
Hi there,
It wasn’t something I as a railfan wanted to see.
Many of the articles I have read lately make a point that the shippers want the RRs to be on time more.
I was wondering if having schedualed passenger service, even if the Gov. had to make it break even, would force more on time freight.
It was pointed out to me that the RRs are doing a pretty good job of being “on time” So now I wonder who is kidding who. Or will the shippers complain no matter what?
If you gave some people a million dollars they would complain that they didn’t get a million and one dollar.
Sooblue
One of the things no one seem to add into the equation is that A:, the TGV is partly owned/subsidised by the french goverment, cost overuns were kept in check, and the europeans already ride trains on “short trips”.
B: most of the cities and stops the TGV make are a whole lot closer together that what the average American realizes, their entire country would just about fit inside Texas, and most of their cities were planned and designed for rail service.
C: with the exception of the northeast corridor, most of the American population is spread out over vast distances, yes, there are dense populations in and around all major cities, but look at how many cities we have, compared to france, and how far apart they are.
The vast majority of Europeans live within a few miles of where they work.
Commutting for them is diffrent that what we are used to.
Add to all of that is the culture diffrences.
Personal mobility has become such a part of our way of life that we no longer even think twice about driving miles to go grocery shopping, or to the movies and dinner. But there, market day is still a big thing, its planned a week in advance, they go and buy everything they need for a week or two. If the town or village where they live has a movie theater, then they go to the movies, if not, its a big deal to get on the train and go to a city which has a theater.
Most Amreicans fill up their gas tank, and dont really bother about the cost, its just a part of our daily life, over there, buying a liter of gas is a pretty good sized investment, its really expensive, automobiles come with a luxury tax, they cost more than we would think, even the compacts, and driving is not as casual as it is here.
And last but not least, railroads and the services they provide are a integral part of the french national goverments transportaion plans and policies, as in most european nations. The french goverment closed or re-routed roads that would have crossed the TGV rightof way, and those they c
Ralph, Your right, the tracks are pretty good, UP and BNSF are spending like mad replacing track, and double or triple tracking heavy traffic corridors. What really happens is the dispatcher “stabs” the Amtrak into a siding, and there it sits untill the moneymaking freights clear. I see and hear it everyday. Officialy, the carriers say they do their part to expidite Amtrak across their division, on the QT, they dont want it there, its in the way, it cost them in delayed freight trains, it never shows up on time, due in part to having been “stabbed” by the last dispatcher it had to deal with, so you cant plan moves around it, you never know when its getting to your patch of the railroad, and the libality of the passengers bother the carriers most, if something happens, well, a boxcar of auto parts isnt going to sue you if it gets derailed, or falls over, but you can bet any passenger hurt in a derailment of a Amtrak train will sue the carrier whos track it happens on.
If any Amtrak engineers or conductors are out there, they will back me up on this. Frieght railroad dont want passenger train on their tras, and will either get them across the division asap to get rid of them, or, most likley, sta***he Amtrak, untill their trains are where they need or want them to be.
Like I said, I see the latter more than I see the former.
Stay Frosty
Ed
Blue,
No one is kidding anyone, we are getting it there on time. What happened is that the way business operate changed, and the railroads were not prepared for it, and had to play a lot of catch up. Before, getting it there was all that mattered, as long as it was close to the advertised, no one really cared. Because business warehoused a large quanity of product, and a day or two diffrence in delivery times made no real impact on their business, when it got there did not matter, as long as it got there. Then, almost overnight, everyone went to “just in time, or just on time” production schedules, because they realized it was cheaper to use the frieghtcars as rolling warehouses, and they planed productions shifts around the deliver time. When railroads couldnt keep up, business went to trucks for this service, after all, it easier for a truck to park for a while, and then drive up to your dock exactly on time, than it is to get a train to your dock on the money. You cant park a train for a few hours, so you can arive right on time, and you cant “speed” in a train to make up a couple of hours either.
Nowadays, General Motors plans pick up truck production around the deliver time of the frames in a rail car. They keep in constant contact with the railroad, and know, down to the half hour, when the train will be spotting their plant. It would take several pages to explain how we “caught up” and some problems still need to be addressed, but a large part is due to the Staggers act of 1985. That allowed railroads to really compete amongest themselves for the first time. After years of being told by the goverment what trains we have to run, and how much we can charge, we can now do away with trains that don’t make money, and we can compete between carriers on prices. Passenger trains wouldnt do anything but get in our way. We dont schedule trains anymore, technology has done away with the need for it, as soon as the train is built and crewed, its gone. Scheduled passenger trains would throw a wrench in the
exactly - I don’t see any of the population of Nebraska really supporting Amtrak right now - of course, this morning Amtrak came through at 4 am -it was due at 2 and a few months ago darn near killed a guy east of town because it went through
an unmarked crossing at about 5 am. It was his inattention that caused the accident; he didn’t expect a train on those tracks at that time (I know this rule has a number in the book somewhere)
Even the light rail line proposed from Lincoln to Omaha - by the time the pols get done with it, there would be no practical reason to use it!
…I have been under the impression that Rail Carriers under the obligation of putting an Amtrak train through a Division were subject to a “fine” if held up unnecessary and by the same reasoning were compensated more if put through better than scheduled…I suppose if this even is true there is no one to follow up on these circumstances and or to inforce it.
I see today where the Bush Administration has the real cure for it all…Just to eliminate all long distance passenger trains…I wouldn’t have expected any less from them.
If they do away with all of them then I think leader Gunn should shut it all down and let someone else figure out how to move people in the large Metro areas.
QM
…I have been under the impression that Rail Carriers under the obligation of putting an Amtrak train through a Division were subject to a “fine” if held up unnecessary and by the same reasoning were compensated more if put through better than scheduled…I suppose if this even is true there is no one to follow up on these circumstances and or to inforce it.
I see today where the Bush Administration has the real cure for it all…Just to eliminate all long distance passenger trains…I wouldn’t have expected any less from them.
If they do away with all of them then I think leader Gunn should shut it all down and let someone else figure out how to move people in the large Metro areas.
QM
…Sorry, one button too many. QM
But what about passenger and freights running on the same tracks of their owners for years upon years?
MOST DEFINITELY - if long distance passenger trains go, there is no way the rest of the country should fund the corridors in Northeast or anywhere else. THEY need to worry about that there.
Good Morning, Ed of Houston, Thanks much for this detailed, informative reply you’ve given on current and recent freight operations. As one who doesn’t earn my keep from the railroads but seek to learn all I can this analysis was very helpful. Keep up your great commentary! Stay safe, Capers.
the passenger service got the ax. My guess is that as we became a 2 car family nation nobody rode the trains. but like i said before with the restrictions on meeting amtrak trains the freight roads dont want them.
I keep hearing about short distances, and have seen in print a number of short distances in which a train can compete with the airlines. Yet, from my experience in Europe, it is not the airlines a train is in competition with, it is the automobile!
Is it 250 miles, 300 miles, 350 miles, 400 miles, 450 miles, or 500 miles? I think it has more to do with the speed of the train than the miles! Keep in mind the northeast corridor Acela runs is 441 miles, much farther than the 250-300 miles a lot of experts suggest a train can compete with the airlines!
In my Rand McNally road atlas chart, the shortest fastest distance (they do not use the shortest distance, but figure in the shortest fastest distance using interstates) is 933 miles. However, if we go through Kansas City in route to Chicago instead of Springfield, it probably is more than 1000 miles.
Nevertheless, 900 miles or 1000 miles, if a train can average 150 mph, the trip will last either 6 hours or 6 hours and 40 minutes. Okay, we will go through Kansas City so it will be 6 hours and 40 minutes. The whole point I am attempting to make is that at an average speed of 60 mph, figuring in some stops to eat, gas, plus the roadside park rest room relief, one cannot average 70 mph by car. But at 60 mph average, it would take 16 hours and 40 minutes to drive 1000 miles by automobile.
Most people do not fly, they drive. If they can drive the distance in one long day, you can bet your house they can ride a train for 6 hours and 40 minutes!
And as far as business is concerned, most businesses write off a whole day for travel. Yes, a whole day, or 8 hours. A day is a day!
I have no doubts. The last two trips to Chicago and back to Dallas on the Texas Eagle I have seen for my own eyes the dispatchers disregard for Amtrak. Both times the train and I sat in the middle of double track, in the former MIssouri Pacific main yards in North Little Rock, Arkansas. Both times for over 2 hours. Double track all the way to Newport and double track all the way past Texarkana, and in the middle of all of this double track, and in the biggest yard of the former MoPac railroad, the Eagle sits for hours. Yes, both times I saw 7 trains pass by.
Obviously, the freight railroads are accepting the funds from the FRA to upgrade a lot of their track Amtrak runs to high speed rail, well, 100-120 mph improvements in the high speed rail corridor program. A program I disapprove.
Yet, I agree with you. Passenger trains should run at 186 mph and be on separate tracks from freight. I am tired of being delayed 2 hours in North Little Rock, Arkansas, by UP dispatchers!
What is the sense of running fast passenger trains 186 mph if the dispatchers are going to put the fast train in the hole?
It would be much better to run the passenger trains on new fast track. That way, the slow freight trains won’t slow the fast train up!
In the last month gasoline has gone up 10 cents a gallon. Although we complain, we pay. While a penny might be noticed, a penny or two is what will build a high speed rail network around America the envy of the world.