Revisiting Amtrak's Network Growth Strategy, 1999

[jis]

Or just do a push pull by finding a cab car from somewhere. Saves a lot of time and headache. Operate it like the Keystones for the afternoon turn. Just flip a few seats around to go the other way. Even cheaper than a Wye, which by the way is presumably already there anyway, where the Richmond sets are turned.

 

[ainamkartma]

Or just do a push pull by finding a cab car from somewhere. Saves a lot of time and headache. Operate it like the Keystones for the afternoon turn. Just flip a few seats around to go the other way. Even cheaper than a Wye, which by the way is presumably already there anyway, where the Richmond sets are turned.

OK, now having looked at the Richmond schedule, I feel like a complete doofus. It appears to be a net source for scheduled trains, or some kind of time-warp discontinuity. It appears that twelve trains per week arrive there (195 (2), 93 (4), 87 (1), 85 (5)), but thirteen trains per week depart from there (86 (5), 164 (2), 174 (5), 82 (1)). NPN is the opposite: fifteen scheduled trains arrive there, but only fourteen depart per week.

It would appear that each Friday night, a train (either 83 or 95) runs empty from Newport News to Richmond to become Saturday morning's 164 or 82 north from Richmond. Weird. Does anyone know why Amtrak would choose to run empty trains around on a regular basis?

Seems surprising to me that they don't have a better use for their rolling stock than this.

Regarding the wye at Richmond, I couldn't find it on the google. It could of course be very far away from the station, since the trains have all night long to reverse direction. In principle, they would have plenty of time to use the wye at either Newport News or Norfolk...

Ainamkartma

 

[neroden]

I have a strong feeling that an undue amount of Amtrak's operations are driven by inertia and habit. Right down to the Penn-Central-era accounting practices, which are no good for anyone any more but are "the way we've always done it". This business at Newport News is probably more of the same...

 

[Anderson]

Or just do a push pull by finding a cab car from somewhere. Saves a lot of time and headache. Operate it like the Keystones for the afternoon turn. Just flip a few seats around to go the other way. Even cheaper than a Wye, which by the way is presumably already there anyway, where the Richmond sets are turned.

OK, now having looked at the Richmond schedule, I feel like a complete doofus. It appears to be a net source for scheduled trains, or some kind of time-warp discontinuity. It appears that twelve trains per week arrive there (195 (2), 93 (4), 87 (1), 85 (5)), but thirteen trains per week depart from there (86 (5), 164 (2), 174 (5), 82 (1)). NPN is the opposite: fifteen scheduled trains arrive there, but only fourteen depart per week.

It would appear that each Friday night, a train (either 83 or 95) runs empty from Newport News to Richmond to become Saturday morning's 164 or 82 north from Richmond. Weird. Does anyone know why Amtrak would choose to run empty trains around on a regular basis?

Seems surprising to me that they don't have a better use for their rolling stock than this.

Regarding the wye at Richmond, I couldn't find it on the google. It could of course be very far away from the station, since the trains have all night long to reverse direction. In principle, they would have plenty of time to use the wye at either Newport News or Norfolk...

Ainamkartma

Yeah, I know what's going on here. At one point there was train 78 that ran NPN-RVR on Fridays but had negligible traffic since IIRC it arrived at RVR too late to even connect with the Meteor once the Meteor got moved to its present schedule (it might have had some traffic back when the Meteor went through at about 0100). Per the October 1999 timetable, train 95 (arr NPN 1907) turned as train 78 (dep NPN 2015, arr RVR 2152). You'd have a three-hour layover but that would definitely be a legal connection (and the 0650 time for the NB Meteor at RVR was also a lot friendlier to a connection out to NPN...three hours beats five and change, and three hours isn't even an insanely long connection time to/from a "thin" connection).

When the Meteor got pushed back from leaving NYP at about 1900 to 1415/1515 (it's listed as leaving at 1415 in the November 2004 timetable, but apparently this was a last-minute decision: The Meteor is still positioned in the timetable as if it were leaving NYP at its former time but the time is changed; it moves to its now-familiar 1515 departure in the next timetable...it appears that they roughly swapped the Crescent and the Meteor's times out of NYP while moving the Star later as well...I think this was a "teething issue" after cutting the Palmetto back) this train didn't have much of a purpose. It's still listed until 2008; the 2009 timetables are oddly lacking in an NEC timetable, and when I get to the 2010 timetable it's gone.

Edit: Also, this whole situation is an artifact of the fact that Amtrak used to have modestly different timetables on Fridays and Sundays (anyone remember when the Pennsylvanian ran on one schedule Monday-Saturday and another one on Sunday?). A few of those differences date way back while some others were due to trying to do the best they could amid network cuts (if I'm not mistaken, the Pennsylvanian's odd schedule was basically down to "Well, the Pennsylvanian does better on most days but the Three Rivers picks up a lot of traffic on Sunday...so since we've gotta cut 3R, we're going to run the Pennsylvanian on its schedule on Sunday...").

 

[Thirdrail7]

Allow me to intervene here and I will commit to this when I have more time.

Neroden, you asked why 67/66 continues to run to NPN. If anyone recalls, I've mentioned that those trains were in extreme danger for various reasons. Howeve, there are two MAJOR reasons why that train still exists.

A major reason is the state of Virginia WANTS that train to exist. Not only that, they want additional service to NPN as well as NFK. There have been minor changes in the schedules over the last few years. More tweeks and a major overhaul in the timetable are being looked at to optimize service to the regional, particularly with the ROA service almost completed.

Now, here is the main reason for 67 remaining as it is, which also ties into train 78 missing from the public timetable. The Peninsula Sub is not multiple tracked, high speed area. CSX has basically made it clear that until certain improvements are made, if you give up the slot...it may not magically reappear when you want it to. If you give up 67's slot, you may not find an adjacent slot. This goes all the way back to LONG Bridge near ALX. if you give up that slot or try to change it, you may not get it back. That's a heck of risk until you have all of your ducks in a row. It is also a heck of a risk since the line is well used. With work currently in progress to alter the Tidewater service, everyone is wary that once the change is made, there may be no going back.

What does have to do with 78? Currently, 95 turns for 78 and deadheads back to RVR. It is still scheduled as train 78in the employee timetable. The reason it is no longer in the public timetable is it had low ridership. However, it was scheduled train. If it didn't run or was heavily delayed for some reason, alternate transportation had to be arranged. As a non revenue train, you can run it as needed. It retains its schedule train 78 number as an operation profile so CSX has to run it. Otherwise, it would be extra service and CSX could refuse to run it or say we'll get to it when we get to it." As long as it is properly positioned and ready to depart, CSX has to run train 78 as a scheduled train according to the operating agreement.

 

[neroden]

Allow me to intervene here and I will commit to this when I have more time.

Neroden, you asked why 67/66 continues to run to NPN. If anyone recalls, I've mentioned that those trains were in extreme danger for various reasons. Howeve, there are two MAJOR reasons why that train still exists.

A major reason is the state of Virginia WANTS that train to exist. Not only that, they want additional service to NPN as well as NFK. There have been minor changes in the schedules over the last few years. More tweeks and a major overhaul in the timetable are being looked at to optimize service to the regional, particularly with the ROA service almost completed.

Now, here is the main reason for 67 remaining as it is, which also ties into train 78 missing from the public timetable. The Peninsula Sub is not multiple tracked, high speed area. CSX has basically made it clear that until certain improvements are made, if you give up the slot...it may not magically reappear when you want it to. If you give up 67's slot, you may not find an adjacent slot. This goes all the way back to LONG Bridge near ALX. if you give up that slot or try to change it, you may not get it back. That's a heck of risk until you have all of your ducks in a row. It is also a heck of a risk since the line is well used. With work currently in progress to alter the Tidewater service, everyone is wary that once the change is made, there may be no going back.

What does have to do with 78? Currently, 95 turns for 78 and deadheads back to RVR. It is still scheduled as train 78in the employee timetable. The reason it is no longer in the public timetable is it had low ridership. However, it was scheduled train. If it didn't run or was heavily delayed for some reason, alternate transportation had to be arranged. As a non revenue train, you can run it as needed. It retains its schedule train 78 number as an operation profile so CSX has to run it. Otherwise, it would be extra service and CSX could refuse to run it or say we'll get to it when we get to it." As long as it is properly positioned and ready to depart, CSX has to run train 78 as a scheduled train according to the operating agreement.

Informative. Also disgusting on the part of CSX.
Time to buy the Long Bridge. Sadly, Virginia's then-incompetent government, which used to own enough of the RF&P to throw its weight around, sold it to CSX for much less than it was worth some years back.

This all gets back to the essential inappropriateness of having important national infrastructure owned by short-sighted private companies. Not that short-sighted state governments are any better, as we saw in Virginia. Perhaps a charitable foundation devoted to railroad service would be the best option.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

Anderson 08 May 2017 - 03:28 AM #23
(Sorry I lost the connection. -- Woody)

The first big step is more equipment

First big step is more single-level equipment.

Second big step is even more single-level equipment:

Third big step is to order hundreds of [bi-level] cars for the Western trains.

In summary, First, Second, and Third steps are all about getting lots more equipment. More cars, more seats, more riders, more revenues, more network effects, more frequencies, more economies of scale, and so, lower losses. Nothing succeeds like success, and even partial steps -- this is a 10-year plan -- make it easier to get support for the next steps.

TBH what Amtrak should do here is order another hundred (or two hundred) Viewliner shells that they can equip at Beech Grove.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

WoodyinNYC says:

Maybe a deal like this could get Amtrak the cars it needs. Just sayin'.

As reported in a paragraph in Railway Gazette,

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/technology/single-view/view/iranian-rolling-stock-production-agreement.html

Industrial Development & Renovation Organisation of Iran and Russian rolling stock manufacturing group Transmashholding have signed a joint venture agreement to co-operate in the financing and manufacturing of 500 coaches in Iran.

 

[Carolina Special]

Iran building passenger cars for the Great Satan? Sounds like a great plot for a terrorist novel when all the cars blow up at one time!

 

[jis]

Iran has been an active rail equipment exporter to several countries in Asia and Africa in the last ten years or so. This is just another project to do technology transfer for manufacturing passenger cars. They have been more into freight cars in the past, though they did export some passenger cars too several years back as I recall.