Empire Builder stopped

[JayPea]

I'm scheduled to take the EB from Spokane to Seattle on the 21st, the CS to Portland on the 24th, and back to Spokane on the 24th on the EB. The window for the EB to start up is narrowing considerably. The EB I'd be on departs Chicago the 19th. In the event the EB is still not running by the 19th, I'm going to cancel my Amtrak reservations, rather than being bustituted to and fro, and just take the Thruway bus to and from Seattle, forgetting about Portland, because there's no way to take a Thruway bus from Portland to my hometown. Not only does the Thruway bus make a stop in my town, but the stop is literally right outside my front door. And it leaves at a decent hour, 7:30 AM. The idea of staying up all hours, driving an hour to Spokane, paying for parking, and drag my fat carcass on to a bus at 2:15 AM does not appeal to me. Now, staying up all hours, driving an hour to Spokane, paying for parking, and dragging my fat carcass on a train at 2:15 AM is different; it's FUN!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: If I'm going to be taking a crappy bus anyway, might as well make it easy and catch it right outside my door. I will then get to haggle, no doubt, with AGR about getting my points (the buses are 8000 series and I seem to remember a post about someone being told 8000 series buses are not eligible for points, though that isn't true), but that's the way it goes sometimes. I'm going on a Victoria Clipper whalewatching cruise on the 22nd, with nonrefundable boat tickets, and I can't change my vacation dates, so I go when I go. I feel for those folks who have lost homes and valuables in the flooding; my possibly riding a bus instead of a train is of no consequence in comparison to those folks. And it certainly pales in comparison to those who have had EB trips planned, months in advance, only to see those get changed or cancelled altogether.

 

[saxman]

Except that these cancellations are not due to Devils Lake flooding.

 

[anir dendroica]

Except that these cancellations are not due to Devils Lake flooding.

They are, actually. The recent record rainfall and flooding in Montana and western North Dakota gives Amtrak a way to blame Mother Nature for a situation that they have seen coming for the past 10 years. Aside from flooding in the basement of the Minot station and various soft-track slow orders, most of the route has been unaffected by flooding. BNSF trains continue to roll. The trouble spot is a two-mile stretch of track near Church's Ferry that, due to the relentless rise of Devils Lake, has become a causeway with the top of the rail barely a foot above water. Throw in 50 mph winds, and five-foot waves are swamping the track and washing away the ballast. BNSF has been dumping ballast at a fevered pace to keep the line open, but it seems they may be giving up.

Amtrak and BNSF have been playing a game of political chicken over paying the cost of raising the track (estimated at $75 million), and so far neither entity has committed to pay for it.

"Guest_Rider" mentioned that the EB starting on the 14th has several "enroute bustitutions." I'm guessing that means they will be running on the Surrey Cutoff, with bus service to Rugby, Devils Lake, and Grand Forks. If that is the case, I would wager that 1) the service restoration date will not be pushed back farther, and 2) the reroute may be permanent this time. If anyone talks to an Amtrak agent, I'd like to hear if the train will be bypassing Devils Lake.

I'm on the EB PDX-MSP June 25, still optimistic that I will have a train to ride.

Mark

 

[JayPea]

"Guest_Rider" mentioned that the EB starting on the 14th has several "enroute bustitutions." I'm guessing that means they will be running on the Surrey Cutoff, with bus service to Rugby, Devils Lake, and Grand Forks. If that is the case, I would wager that 1) the service restoration date will not be pushed back farther, and 2) the reroute may be permanent this time. If anyone talks to an Amtrak agent, I'd like to hear if the train will be bypassing Devils Lake.

I'm on the EB PDX-MSP June 25, still optimistic that I will have a train to ride.

Mark

I hope that's right. I'd much rather get to Seattle by train than bus. One way or another, I'll be in Seattle on the 21st regardless.

 

[Amtrak George]

Not a good situation: Amtrak should not keep cancelling the train just because it can't run on time. Most of us would accept a late train rather than no train. Why not simply notify passengers that train 7 will run late due to slow traffic on the Surrey Cutoff detour; and that due to late arrival in Seattle of number 7, train 8 will be leaving, say, four hours after timetable departure from Seattle and that there will be no guaranteed connections to East Coast trains in Chicago until the situation normalizes; and if someone is unhappy they can have a refund.

 

[anir dendroica]

http://www.kfyrtv.com/News_Stories.asp?news=49833

6/9/2011

Amtrak service continues to be temporarily suspended west of St. Paul, Minn., due to a BNSF Railway Co. track closure between Devils Lake and Rugby, N.D. This suspension includes the daily originations of the trains from Portland, Seattle and Chicago through Monday, June 13.

Amtrak Empire Builder service will be maintained daily with trains between Chicago and St. Paul. Between Spokane, Wash., and both Portland, Ore., and Seattle, trains and/or chartered motorcoaches will be provided. On June 10 & 13, Train 28 will operate as far east as Whitefish, Mont., arriving there on the mornings of June 11 & 14, with Train 27 departing those evenings westbound to Portland/Seattle via Spokane. Alternate transportation in both directions will be provided for stations between Whitefish and East Glacier Park, Mont., on June 11 & 14.

No other Amtrak service is available for these days in Minnesota (except Winona, Red Wing & St. Paul), in North Dakota, Montana and Idaho.

 

[Joaninha]

FYI just read article in June 6 issue of Business Week on EB status, quoting Amtrak rep saying that disruption in service is due to backlog of freight trains that were delayed by flooding that floodedtracks are no longer the problem. Very different spin from that which Amtrak gives to customers like myself who are being stranded en route

Newest Amtrak site msg is ambiguous.....sad to see they don't come out and say service cancelled only some local news outlets are doing so. And now at 10:30 am EDT still no call from Amtrak telling us status of our reservation

Letter writing time when home in Seattle of course

BTW I shared this forum with a number of interested passengers of train 49

Cheers from Toledo

 

[colobok]

Amtrak Empire Builder service will be maintained daily with trains between Chicago and St. Paul. Between Spokane, Wash., and both Portland, Ore., and Seattle, trains and/or chartered motorcoaches will be provided. On June 10 & 13, Train 28 will operate as far east as Whitefish, Mont., arriving there on the mornings of June 11 & 14, with Train 27 departing those evenings westbound to Portland/Seattle via Spokane. Alternate transportation in both directions will be provided for stations between Whitefish and East Glacier Park, Mont., on June 11 & 14.

Interesting... If they can run trains to Whitefish on June 10 & 13 then why they couldn't do this on other days???

How flooding in ND can affect service between Spokane and Whitefish???

We have a trip on EB scheduled in July, but I am already worried...

 

[EB_OBS]

Amtrak Empire Builder service will be maintained daily with trains between Chicago and St. Paul. Between Spokane, Wash., and both Portland, Ore., and Seattle, trains and/or chartered motorcoaches will be provided. On June 10 & 13, Train 28 will operate as far east as Whitefish, Mont., arriving there on the mornings of June 11 & 14, with Train 27 departing those evenings westbound to Portland/Seattle via Spokane. Alternate transportation in both directions will be provided for stations between Whitefish and East Glacier Park, Mont., on June 11 & 14.

Interesting... If they can run trains to Whitefish on June 10 & 13 then why they couldn't do this on other days???

How flooding in ND can affect service between Spokane and Whitefish???

We have a trip on EB scheduled in July, but I am already worried...

Because the majority of passengers are going thru all the way to MSP, Chicago and beyond. Without those passengers aboard, the train is mostly empty. With cancelled trains and a group or two going to Whitefish and Glacier Park, it's feasible to run a train and turn it in Whitefish, just not every single day.

 

[colobok]

Because the majority of passengers are going thru all the way to MSP, Chicago and beyond. Without those passengers aboard, the train is mostly empty. With cancelled trains and a group or two going to Whitefish and Glacier Park, it's feasible to run a train and turn it in Whitefish, just not every single day.

REALLY??? So let's say if I am a passanger who booked a trip to Whitefish on June 5 - Amtrak doesn't have any responsibility to take me to the destination point only because they "think" not many people will go to Whitefish on that day??? Using this logic they may cancel any train at any point whenever they want. I thought we pay Amtrak from Gov.budget to move people, not to cancel trains simply because they don't have desire to run.

Plus I checked ridership numbers:

Whitefish - 66k passengers per year - 183 per day - say at least 250 per day in the summertime

3 stations in Glacier Park - 30k passengers per year - 82 per day (mostly in summertime) - so say about 150 per day in the summertime

So you are saying Amtrak doesn't want to run few more stops only because they think 400 passengers is too low number to run the train and they prefer to leave people stranded???

 

[EB_OBS]

Because the majority of passengers are going thru all the way to MSP, Chicago and beyond. Without those passengers aboard, the train is mostly empty. With cancelled trains and a group or two going to Whitefish and Glacier Park, it's feasible to run a train and turn it in Whitefish, just not every single day.

REALLY??? So let's say if I am a passanger who booked a trip to Whitefish on June 5 - Amtrak doesn't have any responsibility to take me to the destination point only because they "think" not many people will go to Whitefish on that day??? Using this logic they may cancel any train at any point whenever they want. I thought we pay Amtrak from Gov.budget to move people, not to cancel trains simply because they don't have desire to run.

Plus I checked ridership numbers:

Whitefish - 66k passengers per year - 183 per day - say at least 250 per day in the summertime

3 stations in Glacier Park - 30k passengers per year - 82 per day (mostly in summertime) - so say about 150 per day in the summertime

So you are saying Amtrak doesn't want to run few more stops only because they think 400 passengers is too low number to run the train and they prefer to leave people stranded???

You can check ridership numbers. The people making these decisions are looking at the actual daily train manifests. The train cannot get through the entire route. That's beyond Amtrak's control. Running a train consist out part way and turning it around mid-route in Montana or North Dakota is not done as routine.

The BNSF has to allow Amtrak to park a train somewhere during the day for it to sit and wait for a departure in the reverse direction. Again, that's not Amtrak's call. With the amount of freight congestion clogging up the Highline right now, I imagine they've said no. Additionally, there are only two stations in Montana that the train can be serviced, albeit incompletely, on a daily basis.

The flooding, track closures and resulting freight congestion is effecting a lot of northern and western North Dakota as well as some of eastern Montana. It's not possible to run a bus bridge for 700 miles between Havre, MT and Fargo, ND every day. Just as some passenger would rather get to their destination no matter how, there are equal number of passengers who don't want to sit on a bus for 700 miles.

 

[EB_OBS]

So you are saying Amtrak doesn't want to run few more stops only because they think 400 passengers is too low number to run the train and they prefer to leave people stranded???

Not daily, thus the two scheduled runs to Whitefish, MT with continuing on motor coach service to Glacier Park, and BTW, 400 passengers is a full train. I can assure you, if 400 passengers were bound for only as far as Whitefish and/or Glacier Park, then Amtrak would run the train there somehow. I know the people I work for. They are just as disappointed and frustrated by the situation as you. There are also now a lot of people who've not worked for almost two weeks. Add that to the amount of missed trips in April. Believe me, Amtrak employees want to be running a train to wherever we can.

 

[anir dendroica]

Grand Forks Herald article:

http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/206279/

Devils Lake Basin flooding continues to plague passenger rail serviceWith Amtrak’s Empire Builder suspended passenger rail service through North Dakota entering its second consecutive weekend because of flooding in the Devils Lake Basin, a meeting is planned in Washington next week to discuss the threatened line’s future.

 

[AlanB]

REALLY??? So let's say if I am a passanger who booked a trip to Whitefish on June 5 - Amtrak doesn't have any responsibility to take me to the destination point only because they "think" not many people will go to Whitefish on that day???

As EB OBS pointed out, Amtrak doesn't "think", they know exactly how many people are schedueled to Whitefish on any given day. That info is readily available to them in ARROW.

Plus I checked ridership numbers:Whitefish - 66k passengers per year - 183 per day - say at least 250 per day in the summertime

3 stations in Glacier Park - 30k passengers per year - 82 per day (mostly in summertime) - so say about 150 per day in the summertime

So you are saying Amtrak doesn't want to run few more stops only because they think 400 passengers is too low number to run the train and they prefer to leave people stranded???

You're forgetting that probably half, if not more of those 400 people are coming from the Chicago side. They're not all coming from the western end of the run. Additionally those numbers are both boardings and alightings. If people can't get there, then they're not leaving from there when their trip is over. So that further reduces the number of people that would be riding the stub train from Seattle/Portland.

On a good day, barring a group, I'd be surprised if the stub train were carrying more than 50 to 60 people into those stops and maybe the same back out. It probably doesn't pay to run the train for that.

 

[The Crazy Vacationer]

I just talked to a ticket agent at MSP (I walked in), and he said the EB is now cancelled through Wednesday.

 

[The Chief]

The Grand Forks Herald reported that the state's congressional delegation, governor and local officials will meet with the administrator of the FRA and Amtrak's CEO Joe Boardman Wednesday 15 June, concerned that Amtrak's service suspension through North Dakota is entering its second consecutive weekend.

 

[colobok]

You're forgetting that probably half, if not more of those 400 people are coming from the Chicago side. They're not all coming from the western end of the run. Additionally those numbers are both boardings and alightings. If people can't get there, then they're not leaving from there when their trip is over. So that further reduces the number of people that would be riding the stub train from Seattle/Portland.

On a good day, barring a group, I'd be surprised if the stub train were carrying more than 50 to 60 people into those stops and maybe the same back out. It probably doesn't pay to run the train for that.

Ok, I agree to reduce that number in half, so let's say 200 passengers per day bought tickets to and from Whitefish/Glacier on the western segment. Is flooding in ND an excuse for not providing service to those passengers???

"It probably doesn't pay to run the train for that." - We all know that running Amtrak on almost every route doesn't pay for that. So can we shut down all routes now?

I am not asking to turn train in ND, I don't know if they can do it (although I think they can), but they definitely can turn the train in Whitefish because they run it on other days. So what is the problem to go to Whitefish every day? "It doesn't pay" is a very lame argument, it reminds me of Sunset East.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

I checked the EB from chi to sea and it shows sold out till wed. Is that due to flooding and other issues. What happened to the backup route BNSF offered amtrak to use?

 

[AlanB]

You're forgetting that probably half, if not more of those 400 people are coming from the Chicago side. They're not all coming from the western end of the run. Additionally those numbers are both boardings and alightings. If people can't get there, then they're not leaving from there when their trip is over. So that further reduces the number of people that would be riding the stub train from Seattle/Portland.

On a good day, barring a group, I'd be surprised if the stub train were carrying more than 50 to 60 people into those stops and maybe the same back out. It probably doesn't pay to run the train for that.

Ok, I agree to reduce that number in half, so let's say 200 passengers per day bought tickets to and from Whitefish/Glacier on the western segment. Is flooding in ND an excuse for not providing service to those passengers???

"It probably doesn't pay to run the train for that." - We all know that running Amtrak on almost every route doesn't pay for that. So can we shut down all routes now?

I am not asking to turn train in ND, I don't know if they can do it (although I think they can), but they definitely can turn the train in Whitefish because they run it on other days. So what is the problem to go to Whitefish every day? "It doesn't pay" is a very lame argument, it reminds me of Sunset East.

First, let's remember that this is all hypothetical. I was just pointing out that 400 was definately wrong. We don't really know how many people would be on that train. It could be that only 1/4th come from the west to that area and the rest come from the east.

Next, there is a difference between losing 50% which is probably the average for the LD's and loosing 80% or even 90%. Remember, we're talking coach only. No sleeper revenue.

Then there are the added costs to Amtrak now, cleaning the train in a place where it never happens. So you have to get people out there to do that and put them up overnight. You've got to put the crew up overnight and you're not doing it under long term contracts like Amtrak would normally do, so that means higher than normal costs. You've got to arrange refueling and of course you've got to get BNSF to agree to run the train and potentially tie up some siding while it overnights in the area.

 

[colobok]

First, let's remember that this is all hypothetical. I was just pointing out that 400 was definately wrong. We don't really know how many people would be on that train. It could be that only 1/4th come from the west to that area and the rest come from the east.

Next, there is a difference between losing 50% which is probably the average for the LD's and loosing 80% or even 90%. Remember, we're talking coach only. No sleeper revenue.

Then there are the added costs to Amtrak now, cleaning the train in a place where it never happens. So you have to get people out there to do that and put them up overnight. You've got to put the crew up overnight and you're not doing it under long term contracts like Amtrak would normally do, so that means higher than normal costs. You've got to arrange refueling and of course you've got to get BNSF to agree to run the train and potentially tie up some siding while it overnights in the area.

400 was based on ridership numbers. You are right, that half of them were coming from the east, but 200 remains.

Please tell me how running few more stops may lead from 50% loss to 80-90% loss???

And what overnight stay are you talking about? EB arrives to Whitefish from the west early in the morning and departs in the evening, so no overnight stay.

By the way - Spokane (where they terminate EB on other days) is where overnight stay IS required.

 

[AlanB]

400 was based on ridership numbers. You are right, that half of them were coming from the east, but 200 remains.

We don't know that. There is nothing in the info provided by Amtrak that allows us to draw any conclusions on where riders to those stations originate, nor is there any data available to us that suggests where those boarding from those stops are headed.

Amtrak probably knows, or at least could quickly figure it out. But we have no knowledge of where those people are coming/going to.

Please tell me how running few more stops may lead from 50% loss to 80-90% loss???

Those extra expenses of running the trains for several hours more and associated with dealing with turning the train there.

And what overnight stay are you talking about? EB arrives to Whitefish from the west early in the morning and departs in the evening, so no overnight stay.

I suspect that Amtrak under the contracts would be required to overnight the OBS crews there. And certainly the operating crews must overnight there.

By the way - Spokane (where they terminate EB on other days) is where overnight stay IS required.

Spokane however would have more ridership and the facilities for servicing the trains already exist there.

 

[colobok]

400 was based on ridership numbers. You are right, that half of them were coming from the east, but 200 remains.

We don't know that. There is nothing in the info provided by Amtrak that allows us to draw any conclusions on where riders to those stations originate, nor is there any data available to us that suggests where those boarding from those stops are headed.

Amtrak probably knows, or at least could quickly figure it out. But we have no knowledge of where those people are coming/going to.

Please tell me how running few more stops may lead from 50% loss to 80-90% loss???

Those extra expenses of running the trains for several hours more and associated with dealing with turning the train there.

Ok, using this logic Amtrak may terminate any train at any point, for example they may terminate Silvers in Orlando if they think "not enough" people bought tickets all the way to Miami, right?

And what overnight stay are you talking about? EB arrives to Whitefish from the west early in the morning and departs in the evening, so no overnight stay.

I suspect that Amtrak under the contracts would be required to overnight the OBS crews there. And certainly the operating crews must overnight there.

I don't get that. If train arrives to Whitefish in the morning and goes back to SEA in the evening - how will they overnight? Will they stay to overnight in Whitefish when train goes back without crew???

 

[AlanB]

400 was based on ridership numbers. You are right, that half of them were coming from the east, but 200 remains.

We don't know that. There is nothing in the info provided by Amtrak that allows us to draw any conclusions on where riders to those stations originate, nor is there any data available to us that suggests where those boarding from those stops are headed.

Amtrak probably knows, or at least could quickly figure it out. But we have no knowledge of where those people are coming/going to.

Please tell me how running few more stops may lead from 50% loss to 80-90% loss???

Those extra expenses of running the trains for several hours more and associated with dealing with turning the train there.

Ok, using this logic Amtrak may terminate any train at any point, for example they may terminate Silvers in Orlando if they think "not enough" people bought tickets all the way to Miami, right?

No, the difference is that this situation is part of a larger service disruption that prevents the train from running as normal. What you're describing here is an arbitrary decision to just decide that they shouldn't run to Miami one day. Miami and the rest of the east coast also has many, many more passengers than do the 3 stops in Montana that we're discussing.

And what overnight stay are you talking about? EB arrives to Whitefish from the west early in the morning and departs in the evening, so no overnight stay.

I suspect that Amtrak under the contracts would be required to overnight the OBS crews there. And certainly the operating crews must overnight there.

I don't get that. If train arrives to Whitefish in the morning and goes back to SEA in the evening - how will they overnight? Will they stay to overnight in Whitefish when train goes back without crew???

The train arrives into Whitefish and goes back on the same day. The crew does not. The operating crew will max out on hours before they can bring the train back to Spokane. In fact, the operating crew will max out on hours before its even time to start the run back to Spokane. Therefore Amtrak has to drive one crew out in advance, find room in the limited hotel space in that area during its peak season to put up an engineer and 2 conductors each in their own private rooms.

When the train arrives, that operating crew gets off and goes to the hotel, while the crew in the hotel heads for the train to take it back. This isn't negotiable either, as this isn't union rules, these are FRA rules.

And again, while I'm not 100% sure, I strongly suspect that the same thing will need to happen with the OBS crew, meaning still more hotel rooms that must be found and paid for. There is a chance that Amtrak could just send the OBS crew straight back, but I suspect not. Especially with the nearly 12 hour layover. Even if Amtrak can send them right back the same day, with that much down time Amtrak will still have to provide daytime hotel rooms for the crew to rest in.

Especially since there are no sleepers being run in the consist. And I also believe that Amtrak can't just add a sleeper either, as I think that union rules will demand on the ground time for such a layover. Perhaps EB OBS can speak more to the requirements that Amtrak would be facing for the OBS crews were Amtrak to operate this daily to Whitefish.

 

[mwmnp]

I just wanted to add that, with regard to ridership statistics, NARP has in the past released more detailed information than that which can be found on Amtrak's own website. Here is the PDF that details ridership at Whitefish during FY 2010.

As the data show, the most frequent city pair for Whitefish was Seattle, followed by Portland. This includes both passengers boarding or alighting at those two stations as well as passengers connecting to or from other Amtrak services there. Spokane came in at fourth most frequent, while Everett was ranked eighth. The other five cities listed are all east of Whitefish. Unfortunately, the table that breaks down ridership into 100 mile intervals of distance in relationship to the station isn't all that useful in this case, since three of the most frequent city pairs fit into the 500-599 mile interval and two pairs each fit into the 200-299 and 600-699 mile intervals. What can be said, however, is that nearly a third (31.7%, to be exact) of passengers definitely came from, or went to, stations east of Whitefish, as this is the percentage of passengers traveling 700 or more miles to or from the station on just the Empire Builder. The farthest Empire Builder station to the west of Whitefish is Portland at 630 miles.

The rest of the Amtrak information released by NARP can be found at this website.

 

[colobok]

No, the difference is that this situation is part of a larger service disruption that prevents the train from running as normal. What you're describing here is an arbitrary decision to just decide that they shouldn't run to Miami one day. Miami and the rest of the east coast also has many, many more passengers than do the 3 stops in Montana that we're discussing.

Service disruption in ND doesn't prevent the train from running in Montana, so it's not an excuse. Also you can change Miami to any other destination.

For example everybody knows that Crescent has more passengers between Atlanta and NYC than to NOL, so can they cancel train to NOL if "not enough riders" bought tickets beyond Atlanta?

The train arrives into Whitefish and goes back on the same day. The crew does not. The operating crew will max out on hours before they can bring the train back to Spokane. In fact, the operating crew will max out on hours before its even time to start the run back to Spokane. Therefore Amtrak has to drive one crew out in advance, find room in the limited hotel space in that area during its peak season to put up an engineer and 2 conductors each in their own private rooms.

When the train arrives, that operating crew gets off and goes to the hotel, while the crew in the hotel heads for the train to take it back. This isn't negotiable either, as this isn't union rules, these are FRA rules.

And again, while I'm not 100% sure, I strongly suspect that the same thing will need to happen with the OBS crew, meaning still more hotel rooms that must be found and paid for. There is a chance that Amtrak could just send the OBS crew straight back, but I suspect not. Especially with the nearly 12 hour layover. Even if Amtrak can send them right back the same day, with that much down time Amtrak will still have to provide daytime hotel rooms for the crew to rest in.

Especially since there are no sleepers being run in the consist. And I also believe that Amtrak can't just add a sleeper either, as I think that union rules will demand on the ground time for such a layover. Perhaps EB OBS can speak more to the requirements that Amtrak would be facing for the OBS crews were Amtrak to operate this daily to Whitefish.

You are trying to find excuses and explain why it is impossible to turn the train in Whitefish. But please explain me why it is possible to do this on 06/10 and 06/13? They don't have to stay overnight on those days? Union rules work only on certain days???