Train schedule setup

[BrianPR3]

i have a question howcome certain trains (mostly long distance) have a formula for scheduling

like the sunset limited departs LA at night and arrives in new orleans at night almost 48 hours later.

coast starlight departs in the AM and arrives in the pm the next day

(you can add other long distance trains in to the topic)

is there a reason on why schedules are like that?

 

[Ryan]

I'm not sure what you're asking - arrival and departure times are driven by how long it takes to travel the route and represent a best attempt to serve the major population centers on that route at reasonable times.

 

[Guest]

For LD trains, there is also a factor of an available time slot on the host railroad (who owns and controls the track the Amtrak LD train will be traveling upon).

 

[RampWidget]

To build on Ryan's answer, Amtrak schedules are based upon, among many other factors, negotiated times with the freight RRs that own and dispatch the tracks that Amtrak's trains run upon (except in the NEC and a few other places) as well as connecting times at the origin and destination stations.

Schedule planning is an operating discipline in its own right that used to be done on paper with the trains' schedules represented in graphical form from origin to destination in station & time order. These paper tools were known as "stringlines" or "string graphs" because a completed one for a territory looked like a bunch of strings stretched across a board. Stringlines showed not only where trains would be at a certain time, but where and when trains would meet and pass one another, a vital piece of information on a single-track railroad.

In the computerized age, there are several schedule planning tools available that will generate possible schedules based on whatever parameters the schedule planner inputs into the model. It's much easier and faster to develop a workable schedule now because you can quickly generate and then fine-tune your proposed schedule.

Edit: typo (again)

 

[Everydaymatters]

Several years ago, Amtrak advertised that they depart from many major cities in the evening and a full day can be spent enjoying that city. But times have changed and now they have savvy riders who know Amtrak is often at the mercy of the host railroads.

 

[Nathanael]

The goal when designing a longer-distance train schedule usually works like this:

- First, try to design a daytime schedule where most people going between major origins and major destinations are on the train less than, say, 8 hours. What, it just takes too much time between cities to do that? OK, then...

- Try to design a "get on in the evening, get off in the morning" schedule for the major "too far apart" cities, and design a daytime schedule for other more popular cities.

- In short, you get worse ridership when you serve a station at 2 AM, so you're trying to avoid that at major stations.

But the thing is, when you're trying to serve a very long string of cities, and you have to accomodate the needs of the host railroads, the need for refuelling and servicing, the need to connect with other trains, etc. etc. etc., you can't really do this. So all schedules end up being compromises.

An example: the Coast Starlight carefully plants the overnight segment of the trip between the southernmost popular station in Oregon, and the northernmost popular station in California. The rest of the schedule is determined by that, and by how fast the train can go on the tracks, basically. This ensures that all popular stations are reached during the daytime, which tends to help ridership.

Another example: the Lake Shore Limited can provide "on in the evening, off in the... midday" or "on in the... midday, off in the morning" service between NY and Chicago due to the trip length. The "on in the evening" and "off in the morning" is located at Chicago to maximize connections, and because there isn't much ridership from the vast empty spaces across Indiana. Whereas NYC gets the "midday" times, because it still allows for "on in the evening" (or "off in the morning") in upstate NY, which generates a lot more riders. The eastbound schedule is further distorted by trying to meet late connections from west of Chicago. This schedule causes later-than-desired arrivals across the whole of NY and Amtrak has been talking about moving it back to the more "natural" schedule.

If you look at most of the train services with these thoughts in mind, you start to see the logic behind them. A few of the really odd schedules are driven by trying to get equipment to its maintenance base, which can even determine routings (if Amtrak had a maintenance base at Tampa rather than Miami, you can bet the Florida trains would be arranged differently).

 

[chakk]

I believe the SL departs LAX at the late hour of 10 PM now so that it can connect to the CS from Seattle, which arrives LAX around 9 PM. And if the CS is running late, either the departure of the SL may be delayed somewhat or the connecting passengers from the CS bussed from a San Fernando Valley stop to San Berdoo to "catch up" to the SL enroute..

 

[ArchBishop]

I thought I read once that the CZ schedule was designed to be in the Colorado mountains (most scenic?) during daylight.

CZ and SWC go through Nebraska and Kansas at night. I live in Kansas, and would agree, not much to see.

 

[Trogdor]

The primary driver for long-distance schedules is connections, particularly to/from the west through Chicago. Everything else pretty much falls into place with little wiggle room.

The biggest slotting issues Amtrak faces is not with the freight railroads (which generally don't care when the train runs, as long as they get the same amount of time to get it across their territory), but with passenger railroads. Even the Empire Builder and Southwest Chief have to deal with passenger railroad slotting at their ends, and that often limits what you can realistically do, without a major shift in schedules to get them completely out of the commuter peaks, but doing so would completely mess up your connections, and/or equipment turns.

One of the biggest holdouts to the Sunset Limited's rescheduling a year or two ago was Metrolink, which didn't want train 1 scheduled in at a different rush hour slot than it had at the time. The end result was a 5-something am arrival, because no other slot would get the meets between trains 1 and 2 to work on UP.

The Southwest Chief doesn't really have a good departure slot out of LAX, and it already runs into delays meeting a Metrolink at FUL. Adjusting its time would either create more Metrolink conflicts (and Metrolink would deny the schedule change; in fact the current, poor 6:15 pm time was a Metrolink compromise), or it would break the connection with train 314 in KCY, and then get tangled even more with the BNSF/Metra rush hour in Chicago. Any later, and you miss your eastern connections.

Lots of examples of that, where if you change things just a little bit, you have to change them by a lot, and then you lose your connectivity. That's one reason why LD train schedules don't change that often. Once they get a slot that reasonably works, Amtrak doesn't want to give it up because the alternative might be a shift of several hours.

 

[Guest]

The Southwest Chief doesn't really have a good departure slot out of LAX, and it already runs into delays meeting a Metrolink at FUL. Adjusting its time would either create more Metrolink conflicts (and Metrolink would deny the schedule change; in fact the current, poor 6:15 pm time was a Metrolink compromise),

I believe that the triple-tracking between Fullerton and LAX is supposed to alleviate that, right? Metrolink can run its schedule in both directions on two tracks and the SWC can slip in on the third track... unlike in Metra/BNSF territory, there aren't any expresses on Metrolink's Orange County line, though there are the Pacific Surfliners to contend with, and of course the freights.

 

[GG-1]

The Southwest Chief doesn't really have a good departure slot out of LAX, and it already runs into delays meeting a Metrolink at FUL. Adjusting its time would either create more Metrolink conflicts (and Metrolink would deny the schedule change; in fact the current, poor 6:15 pm time was a Metrolink compromise),

I believe that the triple-tracking between Fullerton and LAX is supposed to alleviate that, right? Metrolink can run its schedule in both directions on two tracks and the SWC can slip in on the third track... unlike in Metra/BNSF territory, there aren't any expresses on Metrolink's Orange County line, though there are the Pacific Surfliners to contend with, and of course the freights.

Aloha

What do you mean "Triple Track" there are 3 tracks in Fullerton. And Most of the way between there and LAX. The only place that is less (I think) is the entrance Wye to the station

 

[SarahZ]

I have to show this thread to a friend of mine. They told me Amtrak designs their schedules around scenery, i.e. the most scenic portions are during the day and the "boring" portions are during the overnight hours. It sort of made sense when I saw a couple timetables, but now that I know more about Amtrak and the timetables for almost all of the routes, I see how amusing that is. It's a cute theory, though.

 

[Trogdor]

The Southwest Chief doesn't really have a good departure slot out of LAX, and it already runs into delays meeting a Metrolink at FUL. Adjusting its time would either create more Metrolink conflicts (and Metrolink would deny the schedule change; in fact the current, poor 6:15 pm time was a Metrolink compromise),

I believe that the triple-tracking between Fullerton and LAX is supposed to alleviate that, right? Metrolink can run its schedule in both directions on two tracks and the SWC can slip in on the third track... unlike in Metra/BNSF territory, there aren't any expresses on Metrolink's Orange County line, though there are the Pacific Surfliners to contend with, and of course the freights.

No, the triple track itself won't solve the problem. The issue is that train 4 always has to use track 1 at FUL (normally the LA-bound track for passenger trains), due to the amount of checked luggage that train carries and the desire to avoid having the agent haul all those bags across three active tracks (or so it was explained to me, anyway). Since Metrolink always uses track 1 for LA-bound trains, and 3 for trains from LA, the conflict still exists because of two trains needing to use the same platform at the same time.

What triple track will solve is that BNSF won't allow Metrolink to increase service until triple track is completed. Once it is finished, Metrolink plans (unless they've changed their mind) to redo the schedule on the 91 line (700 series trains to/from Riverside), which would then eliminate that specific conflict. The triple track is mostly about having a place for freight trains to go when passenger trains are running through, not about giving passenger trains the ability to pass each other.

 

[the_traveler]

I have to show this thread to a friend of mine. They told me Amtrak designs their schedules around scenery, i.e. the most scenic portions are during the day and the "boring" portions are during the overnight hours. It sort of made sense when I saw a couple timetables, but now that I know more about Amtrak and the timetables for almost all of the routes, I see how amusing that is. It's a cute theory, though.

Yes, scenic areas are part of the reason for a daylight run, but the 2 biggest things are connection times and departing or arriving at the major cities and endpoints at "reasonable times". That's way you depart Chicago, New York, Seattle, LA, etc... at "reasonable times" and arrive at the other end point at a "reasonable time". it it true it stops at Lincoln, NE or Columbia, SC or Cleveland, OH I the middle of the night, but you leave or arrive Chicago or NYC in the morning/afternoon!

 

[Nathanael]

Aloha

What do you mean "Triple Track" there are 3 tracks in Fullerton. And Most of the way between there and LAX. The only place that is less (I think) is the entrance Wye to the station

So you're saying they finished the project?
There has been a long-term and rather slow project to triple-track that section. It was being done in very small segments, a few thousand feet at a time. Last time I checked there were still a few thousand feet to go, IIRC near the Metrolink coach yards.

 

[Nathanael]

No, the triple track itself won't solve the problem. The issue is that train 4 always has to use track 1 at FUL (normally the LA-bound track for passenger trains), due to the amount of checked luggage that train carries and the desire to avoid having the agent haul all those bags across three active tracks (or so it was explained to me, anyway).

Hmm. So it's not the LA scheduling which is the problem, it's the Fullerton scheduling. Interesting. A baggage float underpass would help, but really a third or fouth platform track is what's wanted. I wonder if there are similar problems at San Bernadino and Riverside. It looks like Riverside has enough platforms to handle anything, and it looks like San Bernadino does too.
This of course gives an example of why scheduling can be so hard; the choke points can be anywhere.

 

[GG-1]

Aloha

What do you mean "Triple Track" there are 3 tracks in Fullerton. And Most of the way between there and LAX. The only place that is less (I think) is the entrance Wye to the station

So you're saying they finished the project?
There has been a long-term and rather slow project to triple-track that section. It was being done in very small segments, a few thousand feet at a time. Last time I checked there were still a few thousand feet to go, IIRC near the Metrolink coach yards.

Aloha

Here is a Video I made in Fullerton Station, I am next to track 1. And 2 tracks are visible. As far as I remember the station was about the same when I lived and worked around there back in the mid 60's

Can't seem to get the video to post so here is a link to it.

Well even that failed so go to my train Gallery on Smugmug. http://gg-1.smugmug.com

 

[VentureForth]

50% convenience, 50% cooperation, 50% politics...