Freight on the NEC

[Mark]

I had a thought the other day while watching the SWC head out for LA. It was that the idea of running fast-freight on back of the LD trains was a reasonable idea but not so rasonable in practice. That being said, I know this has been discussed before and I understand why it was discontinued but what I don't understand is: Amtrak owns the NEC. Why did they never attempt to run pure fast-freight there? I would think that somebody would want to move freight up and down the coast quickly, at least mail- something to help Amtrak's bottom line. On the NEC there is no 'host railroad' to get irritated about Amtrak hauling freight. It could be done at night when the NEC is not at capacity with passenger traffic.

Thoughts?

 

[Amtrak OBS Employee gone freight]

Well keep in mind CSX and NS both have trackage/haulage rights on the NEC (in certain sections). And remember the sole purpose of Amtrak's creation is to operate passenger trains to relieve the freights of the responsibilty. And for your information there is a little bit of mail that continues to be moved on the NEC by Amtrak. I am not sure of its frequency, though I have seen it it in the past when I was up that way. I am sure the others will chime in with better details to help answer your questions. OBS gone freight...

 

[Penn Central]

I had a thought the other day while watching the SWC head out for LA. It was that the idea of running fast-freight on back of the LD trains was a reasonable idea but not so rasonable in practice. That being said, I know this has been discussed before and I understand why it was discontinued but what I don't understand is: Amtrak owns the NEC. Why did they never attempt to run pure fast-freight there? I would think that somebody would want to move freight up and down the coast quickly, at least mail- something to help Amtrak's bottom line. On the NEC there is no 'host railroad' to get irritated about Amtrak hauling freight. It could be done at night when the NEC is not at capacity with passenger traffic.
Thoughts?

It will fail miserably.

1.There may not be a host railroad, but it will still enrage NS and CSX. NS has trackages rights over a good portion of the NEC, while CSX owns the ex-B&O line which parrells the NEC. So Amtrak would be in competition with them, and we have a return to the same situation we had with the failed Roadrailers and Express Box Cars.

2.Freight railroading needs..freight equpiment, which Amtrak notably lacks. They also lack the money to buy any.

3. Metro-North would never agree to be part of this, so there would be two isolated 'pockets', Washington-New York, and New Haven-Boston. This will limit flexability severely.

And the most important one:

4. Politics. If Amtrak somehow suceeds in making this profitable, Congress may decide Amtrak doesn't need as big an appropriation, or maybe not any appropriation at all. If it fails, Congress will have even less trust in Amtrak then they do now, which will certainly not help Amtrak appropriations. It's a no-win situation.

 

[battalion51]

The only customers Amtrak would really be able to attract for such a business is UPS, FedEx, or USPS. While limited mail is still moved by Amtrak, the other two have such a large network that most of the truly time sensitive material is going to move by plane through one of their major terminals.

 

[Mark]

The only customers Amtrak would really be able to attract for such a business is UPS, FedEx, or USPS. While limited mail is still moved by Amtrak, the other two have such a large network that most of the truly time sensitive material is going to move by plane through one of their major terminals.

This is what I was aiming at. I would figure that a few nightime highball moves might generate some much needed revenue.

As for Metro North: Isn't this a two way street? Run our stuff or we won't run yours.

NS-same deal. They may have trackage but Amtrak could, (and should), run their stuff late just like NS does to them right now. Ride the LSL if you don't believe me on that.

CSX- too bad our tracks, were moving it, we need the money and besides were not after the really big stuff, (coal or massive intermodal trains), so let's make a deal.

Equipment, well they don't really need any. They have enough P40s, P42s and yard dogs to make short, (say 20 cars or less), terminal to terminal moves. You don't have to buy cars, trailers or road railers. Most cars today are line to line interchangeable. A cut of UPS pigs on TTX TOFCs would just require crews and power. UPS is ALWAYS looking for a faster way to move thier stuff and planes are more limited in what they can carry.

Yes, of course we all know Amtrak is in the business of moving passengers but mistakes made in the previous attempt can be remedied. The main point here is shortlines with less track in less viable markets manage to do quite well. Take a look at IHB, EJE, ICE, BRC, IAIS, WC, WSOR just to name a few. CN is putting the finishing touches on purchasing the 'J' and they bought the WC a few years ago. Certainly not because they were losing money.

Congress: Well I would venture to think that most of them don't believe much of what comes out of Amtrak's mouth anyway. Amtrak's credibility has been in doubt for just about all of its existance. I doubt they could sink themselves on this, (count the perceived blunders over the last 35+ years), but heck I'm just speculating here.

 

[PRR 60]

The NEC is an extremely busy piece of railroad. The only time Amtrak has available to do track, catenary, or signal maintenance is off hours: between one and five am. I have had occasions to have to get Amtrak to kill the NEC catenary and signal system, and my only chance is early AM, and even that is a tough sell. Internally, it is no easier for Amtrak to plan its own work.

The incremental revenue from late-night freight moves would be more than offset by the cost and inconvenience of having to work around additional off-hours trains. Bottom line: it is more important to have work windows to keep the corridor maintained than it is to run some ancillary freight trains for what would be nickle and dime revenue.

 

[Mark]

The NEC is an extremely busy piece of railroad. The only time Amtrak has available to do track, catenary, or signal maintenance is off hours: between one and five am. I have had occasions to have to get Amtrak to kill the NEC catenary and signal system, and my only chance is early AM, and even that is a tough sell. Internally, it is no easier for Amtrak to plan its own work.
The incremental revenue from late-night freight moves would be more than offset by the cost and inconvenience of having to work around additional off-hours trains. Bottom line: it is more important to have work windows to keep the corridor maintained than it is to run some ancillary freight trains for what would be nickle and dime revenue.

Well, the UPS moves are not really nickle and dime stuff but fairly high-revenue, time-sensitive shipments, (of which both CSX and UP have screwed up in the past). Amtrak has the fastest tracks in the country connecting major markets. However if the window is too tight to squeeze a few fast-freights through then that makes sense.

 

[gswager]

Other possibility is Amtrak doesn't want heavy freight on passenger lines, thus shorten the track life. Just my opinon.

 

[battalion51]

The NEC is an extremely busy piece of railroad. The only time Amtrak has available to do track, catenary, or signal maintenance is off hours: between one and five am. I have had occasions to have to get Amtrak to kill the NEC catenary and signal system, and my only chance is early AM, and even that is a tough sell. Internally, it is no easier for Amtrak to plan its own work.
The incremental revenue from late-night freight moves would be more than offset by the cost and inconvenience of having to work around additional off-hours trains. Bottom line: it is more important to have work windows to keep the corridor maintained than it is to run some ancillary freight trains for what would be nickle and dime revenue.

Well, the UPS moves are not really nickle and dime stuff but fairly high-revenue, time-sensitive shipments, (of which both CSX and UP have screwed up in the past). Amtrak has the fastest tracks in the country connecting major markets. However if the window is too tight to squeeze a few fast-freights through then that makes sense.

I'm with PRR here. While the NEC does have high track speeds for passegner trains, if you crack the book for freight trains you'll find a much different story.
Between MP 86 & MP 94 Speeds on the Main Line between Mill River and Boston

Acela-125 MPH

Regional-100 MPH

Freight-40 MPH

I think those numbers pretty much speak for themselves. Maximum Speed permitted for freight on the NEC is 50 MPH. I expect these numbers for several reasons. First, Amtrak doesn't want freight trains tearing up the rails. Passenger trains are fast and light while freight trains are slow and heavy. Even if you have plenty of power to move the train you also have to think about the wear of the track. Secondly is the equipment itself. Even the best TTX cars are authorized to travel at a maximum of 70 MPH (as are most freight engines). You have to remember that the way a passenger engine is geared is far different than that of a freight engine, they're not readily interchangeable. There are also height restrictions to take into consideration, I know you can get TOFC through Baltimore, but I don't think you can get it through the Hudson/East River tunnels. I could be wrong though. Double stack is definitely out of the question. Even assuming you can get TOFC through the A Tower area in New York, you also have to remember that you have to run through there under electric power, not diesel. The only engines Amtrak had in recent history that could consistently handle freight are the E-60's, most of which have been scrapped. The AEM's may be able to handle freight, but the HHP's definitely cannot, and neither engine is set up to read EOT signals. As for the Metro North issue, Amtrak does not carry any Metro North trains on its tracks. Metro North hosts Amtrak, but not vice versa. Amtrak does host other MTA trains (LIRR), but they in all reality are two separate authorities.

Plain and simple the freight roads are better equipped to handle the high priority freight. They have the facilities, skills, people, and equipment to handle these trains. Their tracks are built and maintained to allow high priority trains to be able to move at speeds up to 70 MPH. You may even recall Amtrak and NS did an experiment moving TOFC between Philadelphia and DC interchanging to NS from there. As you might imagine after a few test runs the project fell flat on its face, and it never became a regular train. At this point in time Amtrak needs to stay with the basics. Get good at moving people before you start diving into other projects.

 

[Amtrak OBS Employee gone freight]

The NEC is an extremely busy piece of railroad. The only time Amtrak has available to do track, catenary, or signal maintenance is off hours: between one and five am. I have had occasions to have to get Amtrak to kill the NEC catenary and signal system, and my only chance is early AM, and even that is a tough sell. Internally, it is no easier for Amtrak to plan its own work.
The incremental revenue from late-night freight moves would be more than offset by the cost and inconvenience of having to work around additional off-hours trains. Bottom line: it is more important to have work windows to keep the corridor maintained than it is to run some ancillary freight trains for what would be nickle and dime revenue.

Well, the UPS moves are not really nickle and dime stuff but fairly high-revenue, time-sensitive shipments, (of which both CSX and UP have screwed up in the past). Amtrak has the fastest tracks in the country connecting major markets. However if the window is too tight to squeeze a few fast-freights through then that makes sense.

I'm with PRR here. While the NEC does have high track speeds for passegner trains, if you crack the book for freight trains you'll find a much different story.
Between MP 86 & MP 94 Speeds on the Main Line between Mill River and Boston

Acela-125 MPH

Regional-100 MPH

Freight-40 MPH

I think those numbers pretty much speak for themselves. Maximum Speed permitted for freight on the NEC is 50 MPH. I expect these numbers for several reasons. First, Amtrak doesn't want freight trains tearing up the rails. Passenger trains are fast and light while freight trains are slow and heavy. Even if you have plenty of power to move the train you also have to think about the wear of the track. Secondly is the equipment itself. Even the best TTX cars are authorized to travel at a maximum of 70 MPH (as are most freight engines). You have to remember that the way a passenger engine is geared is far different than that of a freight engine, they're not readily interchangeable. There are also height restrictions to take into consideration, I know you can get TOFC through Baltimore, but I don't think you can get it through the Hudson/East River tunnels. I could be wrong though. Double stack is definitely out of the question. Even assuming you can get TOFC through the A Tower area in New York, you also have to remember that you have to run through there under electric power, not diesel. The only engines Amtrak had in recent history that could consistently handle freight are the E-60's, most of which have been scrapped. The AEM's may be able to handle freight, but the HHP's definitely cannot, and neither engine is set up to read EOT signals. As for the Metro North issue, Amtrak does not carry any Metro North trains on its tracks. Metro North hosts Amtrak, but not vice versa. Amtrak does host other MTA trains (LIRR), but they in all reality are two separate authorities.

Plain and simple the freight roads are better equipped to handle the high priority freight. They have the facilities, skills, people, and equipment to handle these trains. Their tracks are built and maintained to allow high priority trains to be able to move at speeds up to 70 MPH. You may even recall Amtrak and NS did an experiment moving TOFC between Philadelphia and DC interchanging to NS from there. As you might imagine after a few test runs the project fell flat on its face, and it never became a regular train. At this point in time Amtrak needs to stay with the basics. Get good at moving people before you start diving into other projects.

Well, bat51 has pretty much summed up my point in my first posting with the last sentence! PRR pretty much covered the political side of things! The present operation is the best way for things to be on the NEC. I say we should leave the NEC alone! OBS gone freight...

 

[Amtrak OBS Employee gone freight]

I meant to add to the previous posting..... As bat51 has already posted in detail, the main point is there is a whole lot more involved with initiating new services than just saying "we are gonna start operating our own fast freight service." My main point in my very first posting in this thread is this (bat51 points this out again as well). As a current freight conductor and former Amtrak employee we need to remember exactly WHY Amtrak was created in the first place! Let Amtrak handle the passenger service, and allow the freights to continue the cargo portion of the railroad! OBS gone freight...

 

[AlanB]

The only engines Amtrak had in recent history that could consistently handle freight are the E-60's, most of which have been scrapped. The AEM's may be able to handle freight, but the HHP's definitely cannot, and neither engine is set up to read EOT signals.

The HHP's were hauling freight back when Amtrak was still pulling Express Trak. It was the AEM-7's that couldn't handle having the box cars tacked on the back, so all Silver Service trains and the Crescent either had to get an E60 or an HHP-8 if Express Trak was going to be added at Philly. Otherwise if they didn't have an E60 or HHP available, then they had to do the engine change in Philly instead of DC.

As for the Metro North issue, Amtrak does not carry any Metro North trains on its tracks. Metro North hosts Amtrak, but not vice versa. Amtrak does host other MTA trains (LIRR), but they in all reality are two separate authorities.

I'm not sure that's 100% true, as I've heard that Metro North's territory ends just past the New Haven plaforms. If that is true, then Amtrak is hosting MN for a short distance from New Haven to the new New Haven-State Street station. Again I'm not real sure just where the dividing line is.

For the future, sometime in 2011 or so there is the often talked about changes that might come once the East Side access project is done and online. That could find the New Haven division running some trains into Penn over Hell Gate, as well as some Hudson line trains into Penn via the West Side line.

Regardless though, while you are correct that the LIRR and MN are run as two seperate departments, they do have the same parent, the MTA. So MN can't be too hostile to Amtrak. But I also don't see Amtrak asking MN if they can haul freight either.

While I won't deny that UPS and others want fast service, the reality is that they want fast service over longer distances, not the rather short 400+ miles that the NEC represents. That was the attraction of trying to put freight on the bottom of the Long Distance trains, faster and cheaper long distance service. UPS wants a hotshot from the west coast to the east coast that costs less than flying the packages. They don't need hotshot service from DC to NY, or even Boston. They can haul that in their own trucks faster and cheaper and still meet the delivery deadlines.

 

[had8ley]

The NEC is an extremely busy piece of railroad. The only time Amtrak has available to do track, catenary, or signal maintenance is off hours: between one and five am. I have had occasions to have to get Amtrak to kill the NEC catenary and signal system, and my only chance is early AM, and even that is a tough sell. Internally, it is no easier for Amtrak to plan its own work.
The incremental revenue from late-night freight moves would be more than offset by the cost and inconvenience of having to work around additional off-hours trains. Bottom line: it is more important to have work windows to keep the corridor maintained than it is to run some ancillary freight trains for what would be nickle and dime revenue.

Well, the UPS moves are not really nickle and dime stuff but fairly high-revenue, time-sensitive shipments, (of which both CSX and UP have screwed up in the past). Amtrak has the fastest tracks in the country connecting major markets. However if the window is too tight to squeeze a few fast-freights through then that makes sense.

If my memory serves me right some of those UPS contracts are so sensitive that they have a money back guarantee if the train is late. How many times have you been on a first class Amtrak passenger train and been late? I'd hate to see the fiasco one of these contracts would cause to the bottom line of Amtrak.

 

[sechs]

If my memory serves me right some of those UPS contracts are so sensitive that they have a money back guarantee if the train is late.

If UPS doesn't deliver my package on time, I get my money back; so, it'd make a lot of sense for them to recoup that from the source -- the railroad.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

If I remember right Amtrak did allow NS to borrow some Genesis units for a while to override the ATS speed limit in the NS locos for use on the NEC. They would put one Genesis unit on the front with the rest being NS units this was only for two daily intermodal trains which are now rerouted. Assuming Amtrak follows the horse power hours system of locomotive sharing this probably kept them for paying NS for bailing out trains with failed units. There is a photo of this in an issue of Trains magazine but i don't recall which one. The units were in P4 paint so it was a few years ago.