good grief Sunset. Stop giving your enemies ammunition

[Guest_gp35_*]

Amtrak came through Beaumont Downtown today at 4:30...8 hours late.

 

[AlanB]

Amtrak came through Beaumont Downtown today at 4:30...8 hours late.

It's neither Amtrak's fault or the Sunset's fault that the train is that late. Blame UP. Until someone punishes UP, the Sunset will continue to have a dismal on time record.

 

[MrFSS]

Amtrak came through Beaumont Downtown today at 4:30...8 hours late.

Maybe it was the next one, early! :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[nr272]

Amtrak came through Beaumont Downtown today at 4:30...8 hours late.

It's neither Amtrak's fault or the Sunset's fault that the train is that late. Blame UP. Until someone punishes UP, the Sunset will continue to have a dismal on time record.

How does this work exactly? If Amtrak pays to use UP's tracks, shouldn't Amtrak get priority?

 

[AmtrakWPK]

Amtrak is supposed to get priority but the law has no teeth and it doesn't cost UP hardly anything to ignore it, so UP is known as Unlimited Parking or Utterly Pathetic as far as Amtrak is concerned. I personally think Congress needs to write into the law something that creates a GENUINE incentive for UP to comply. For instance, put in there that if an Amtrak train is sitting stationary while a freight goes by, that freight railroad has to pay EACH PASSENGER on that train, AND AMTRAK, $2 per freight car on that freight train (i.e., $2 per freight car, multiplied by the number of passengers on the train, split between the passengers and Amtrak). So if the Amtrak train had to sit while a total of thirty freight trains went by during the trip, a total, let's say, of 1800 freight cars,and there were an average of 150 passengers on the train during those passings, it would cost UP $540,000, for that particular train, let's say P002-10 (Sunset Limited that departed on the 10th day of that particular month). And the passengers would receive half of that money, based on the number of freight cars that passed their stationary train. It should boost ridership, boost passenger morale, compensate the passengers for being held up and having their personal schedules delayed, help the Amtrak bottom line, and, one would hope, it would begin to change UP's behavior. I think I would also put into the law that if the on-time performance of the Amtrak trains over a given freight company's tracks was less than 80% due to delays caused by the freight company, Amtrak would travel on the freight company's tracks for free for the following six months, in addition to receiving compensation (on a per-freight-car X number of passengers basis). Unless something along these lines actually happens, I don't see any improvement on the horizon. UP will simply continue to give Amtrak and its' passengers the middle-finger salute.

 

[Grill Master]

so UP is known as.......Utterly Pathetic as far as Amtrak is concerned.

Its called that in the frieght world too.

 

[400 MILE CORRIDOR]

Yes, I think we should take away the food and pillows and make this a coach train.

 

[Guest_nr272_*]

Amtrak is supposed to get priority but the law has no teeth and it doesn't cost UP hardly anything to ignore it, so UP is known as Unlimited Parking or Utterly Pathetic as far as Amtrak is concerned. I personally think Congress needs to write into the law something that creates a GENUINE incentive for UP to comply. For instance, put in there that if an Amtrak train is sitting stationary while a freight goes by, that freight railroad has to pay EACH PASSENGER on that train, AND AMTRAK, $2 per freight car on that freight train (i.e., $2 per freight car, multiplied by the number of passengers on the train, split between the passengers and Amtrak). So if the Amtrak train had to sit while a total of thirty freight trains went by during the trip, a total, let's say, of 1800 freight cars,and there were an average of 150 passengers on the train during those passings, it would cost UP $540,000, for that particular train, let's say P002-10 (Sunset Limited that departed on the 10th day of that particular month). And the passengers would receive half of that money, based on the number of freight cars that passed their stationary train. It should boost ridership, boost passenger morale, compensate the passengers for being held up and having their personal schedules delayed, help the Amtrak bottom line, and, one would hope, it would begin to change UP's behavior. I think I would also put into the law that if the on-time performance of the Amtrak trains over a given freight company's tracks was less than 80% due to delays caused by the freight company, Amtrak would travel on the freight company's tracks for free for the following six months, in addition to receiving compensation (on a per-freight-car X number of passengers basis). Unless something along these lines actually happens, I don't see any improvement on the horizon. UP will simply continue to give Amtrak and its' passengers the middle-finger salute.

Thanks for the explanation. I guess it is expected though that UP or CSX or whoever will screw over Amtrak in order to make more money. It's really frustrating that there seems to be a relatively simple fix to this problem but no one is doing a thing about it. I guess we can just hope congress will doing something about this.

 

[had8ley]

so UP is known as.......Utterly Pathetic as far as Amtrak is concerned.

Its called that in the frieght world too.

Don't know if Amtrak "officially" calls it that but we did after they bought out the Misery Pacific (Missouri Pacific) in 1984.

 

[NEW RIVER GEORGE]

If the alternative is to have to go to Chicago first, I'll still prefer an 8 hour-late Sunset Limited!

 

[PRR 60]

To take the very unpopular position of defending the Union Pacific, this particular piece of railroad is among the most traffic congested in the country. The predecessor owner, the Southern Pacific, pulled up most of the double track years before the UP bought them, and the unprecedented and unpredicted explosion of freight traffic emanating from China has simply overwhelmed this single-track line. Amtrak is caught in the same traffic congestion as the UP freights.

To dispel a commonly held myth, the Union Pacific and all Amtrak hosts are only required to provide "priority" to Amtrak, not absolute priority. There is a difference. Priority means that Amtrak has to be moved as well as the best of the UP freight trains. They do not, however, have to move everything out of the way every time Amtrak approaches. The law does not require that. They do not have to turn away paying business to keep Amtrak moving. The law does not require that either. Amtrak has not taken action against the UP for the simple reason that there are no grounds for such action. Unless Amtrak can show that the UP is consistently moving freight at the expense of Amtrak timekeeping, there is no violation of law. Just because Amtrak is running late does not mean that Amtrak is not getting priority treatment. Everything on the Sunset route is running late, Amtrak included.

Presently the Union Pacific is restoring double track to the Sunset route from LA to El Paso. This is a long and expensive job (being financed, I might add, entirely by the UP). Once that is done, the Sunset will have a much better chance of keeping schedule. Until then, the Sunset is in the same mess as the rest of the traffic on that route: no better and no worse.

 

[Steve4031]

Wheni is that track work going to be done?

 

[George Harris]

The predecessor owner, the Southern Pacific, pulled up most of the double track years before the UP bought them,. . . .

This is incorrect. The Sunset route has never had double track except for a few miles over Beaumont hill east of San Bernandino and a few miles east of Tucson where a piece of the former El Paso and Southwestern was kept. Otherwise, it has always been a single track line. So it is not a simple add a track on a roadbed that is already there. It is do the grading and structures for a new roadbed as well as lay track. In a lot of areas they are also redoing the existing track with new rail and ties as the go through. I believe that they are now past the halfway point on this job.

So far as I know, there is not even a plan to add a second track east of El Paso, which also could do with a lot of help, particularly at the very least between El Paso and Sierra Blanca where the ex-T&P route to Ft. Worth splits off.

 

[PRR 60]

The predecessor owner, the Southern Pacific, pulled up most of the double track years before the UP bought them,. . . .

This is incorrect. The Sunset route has never had double track except for a few miles over Beaumont hill east of San Bernandino and a few miles east of Tucson where a piece of the former El Paso and Southwestern was kept. Otherwise, it has always been a single track line. So it is not a simple add a track on a roadbed that is already there. It is do the grading and structures for a new roadbed as well as lay track. In a lot of areas they are also redoing the existing track with new rail and ties as the go through. I believe that they are now past the halfway point on this job.

So far as I know, there is not even a plan to add a second track east of El Paso, which also could do with a lot of help, particularly at the very least between El Paso and Sierra Blanca where the ex-T&P route to Ft. Worth splits off.

I will not dispute you on that. The only SP timetable I have does not differentiate between single and double track lines. My understanding was that in the later days of the SP significant downsizing occurred on the Sunset route and I had heard that included removal of all double track sections. I assumed that the affected sections were more than a couple of miles here and there. What is factual is that little or no capacity downsizing of the Sunset Route has occurred under UP ownership.
The UP double tracking is a huge project, made more so if most of the line never had double track and now needs everything from grading on up. The often stated allegation than the UP is simply sticking it to Amtrak on the Sunset Route does not see the big picture on that piece of railroad.

 

[George Harris]

So far as I know, the SP never did any downsizing on the Sunset Route anytime in the last 50 odd years. The did some downsizing on the Central Pacific route across Donner, and some of the track was transferred to the Sunset to lengthen sidiing and even connect a couple up to give a few short sections of double track. They were struggling to increase capacity even before the UP takeover and the flood of additional traffic that UP managed to get.

I do not count elimination of the Phoenix line as a downsizing for capacity, as it was so much longer, and also somewhat hillier than the freight line through Maricopa so that no through freight went that way.

George

 

[Dakguy201]

George is correct, the downsizing occured on the Overland Route when the SP had it. In addition to the double tracking project on the Sunset Route, the Overland Route between Sparks and Winnemucca is the source of many delays for the Amtrak's CZ, and the UP is upgrading that stretch as well.

Combine those with the joint BNSF/UP work to add an additional line out of Donkey Creek (Powder River), and there is a ton being spent on new track.