Why doesn't Amtrak add a freight car or two?

[Eric S]

If trains had freight cars attached along with passenger cars on Amtrak, would it operate at the passenger limit of 79 MPH or the freight limit of 60-70 MPH?

I seem to recall Amtrak had problems with some of its "freight" cars back in the 1990s, and had operate at reduced speeds if they were empty.

 

[leemell]

And IIRC, many of Amtrak's MHC's are stored in the yards just south of LAX Union Station. Alan, did Amtrak eve experiment with the RoadRailer equipment, or am I just blending NS and Amtrak in my poor memory?

One would think that Amtrak could make a little extra cash if they managed the end-point to end-point "freight" better. But as many have said, it really did wreck havoc on the PAX timetable.

I just (two weeks ago) saw all those Amtrak MHCs still in the LA yard when returning to LA on the SWC.

 

[George Harris]

Don't confuse a mixed freight train with a passenger train with freight cars.

two distinct different ways of running specially with freight brakes.

Southern was still calling these passenger grains. There was no caboose. The ETT's said passsenger trains carrying piggyback cars would observe passenger speed limits, but not exceed 70 mph. In most of the territory I ran around in, that last was meaningless, as the curves kept everything below 60 for the most part. At the time, Southern was strongly promoting the big john high capacity grain hoppers, so I have a feeling that they were on the Carolina Special for some sort of special move. Again, this train was in the timetable, both public and employee as a passenger train, not a mixed.

Traveler: I don't know what the limits were for the cars used in the Warrington freight era. For the Auto Train, CSX imposes a speed limit of 70 mph on a line that is 79 mph for the other passenger trains. Basically, the limits would be the lesser of what would be regarded as safe for the car or the speed limit set by the host railroad company.

 

[Trogdor]

I'm pretty sure Amtrak's trains could run 79 mph with their MHCs, boxcars, and roadrailers. They may have even been able to do 90 mph on the Southwest Chief route, but someone else would have to confirm that.

Also, wasn't it David Gunn, not the USPS, that canceled the mail service? Perhaps that was throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but what's done is done.

 

[zephyr17]

I'm pretty sure Amtrak's trains could run 79 mph with their MHCs, boxcars, and roadrailers. They may have even been able to do 90 mph on the Southwest Chief route, but someone else would have to confirm that.

Also, wasn't it David Gunn, not the USPS, that canceled the mail service? Perhaps that was throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but what's done is done.

They did do 90 with the MHCs. The MHCs did not slow them down, however, the schedules had to be extended due to terminal switching cutting them on and off just outside of terminal stations.

I know Mr. Gunn cancelled the express service for shippers, not sure about the mail.

 

[had8ley]

Don't confuse a mixed freight train with a passenger train with freight cars.

two distinct different ways of running specially with freight brakes.

Southern was still calling these passenger grains. There was no caboose. The ETT's said passsenger trains carrying piggyback cars would observe passenger speed limits, but not exceed 70 mph. In most of the territory I ran around in, that last was meaningless, as the curves kept everything below 60 for the most part. At the time, Southern was strongly promoting the big john high capacity grain hoppers, so I have a feeling that they were on the Carolina Special for some sort of special move. Again, this train was in the timetable, both public and employee as a passenger train, not a mixed.

Traveler: I don't know what the limits were for the cars used in the Warrington freight era. For the Auto Train, CSX imposes a speed limit of 70 mph on a line that is 79 mph for the other passenger trains. Basically, the limits would be the lesser of what would be regarded as safe for the car or the speed limit set by the host railroad company.

How many remember the Amtrak six axle fiasco where the host RR's had the speed limit cut to 45 mph in curves because they kept derailing? I believe it was the SDP-45's but may be wrong as usual.

 

[frj1983]

Don't confuse a mixed freight train with a passenger train with freight cars.

two distinct different ways of running specially with freight brakes.

Southern was still calling these passenger grains. There was no caboose. The ETT's said passsenger trains carrying piggyback cars would observe passenger speed limits, but not exceed 70 mph. In most of the territory I ran around in, that last was meaningless, as the curves kept everything below 60 for the most part. At the time, Southern was strongly promoting the big john high capacity grain hoppers, so I have a feeling that they were on the Carolina Special for some sort of special move. Again, this train was in the timetable, both public and employee as a passenger train, not a mixed.

Traveler: I don't know what the limits were for the cars used in the Warrington freight era. For the Auto Train, CSX imposes a speed limit of 70 mph on a line that is 79 mph for the other passenger trains. Basically, the limits would be the lesser of what would be regarded as safe for the car or the speed limit set by the host railroad company.

How many remember the Amtrak six axle fiasco where the host RR's had the speed limit cut to 45 mph in curves because they kept derailing? I believe it was the SDP-45's but may be wrong as usual.

Actually it was the SDP40F

see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_SDP40F

 

[Michael061282]

It didn't fail the contract was dropped by amtrak and at least one Clint sued amtrak over the dropped contract.

No, it failed on Amtrak. It failed to make the profits predicted by George Warrington who was President at the time it as started. It also failed the passengers totally, since the priorities of the freight were put ahead of the passengers. Just about every LD was running late because the trains all stopped to pick up/drop off freight delaying the passengers.

So Gunn killed it.

Personal story.. 2001 I rode the Three Rivers to Chicago, we had 5 freight "express" cars on the front end. , we arrived into Chicago 45 minutes EARLY, then had to wait for Amtrak to disconnect the Express cars before we were allowed to back into to Union Station, we ended up being 45 minutes LATE. We sat for 90 minutes with in sight of Union Station. THAT pretty much sums up the Warrington Era of Amtrak... Passengers err "guests" were an inconvenience, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[jis]

They did do 90 with the MHCs. The MHCs did not slow them down, however, the schedules had to be extended due to terminal switching cutting them on and off just outside of terminal stations.

And lest we forget, MHCs were also determined to be a significant reason for a derailment of the Lake Shore Limited near Batavia NY. After that a slow order was slapped on empty MHCs for a while.

 

[George Harris]

Don't confuse a mixed freight train with a passenger train with freight cars.

two distinct different ways of running specially with freight brakes.

Southern was still calling these passenger grains. There was no caboose. The ETT's said passsenger trains carrying piggyback cars would observe passenger speed limits, but not exceed 70 mph. In most of the territory I ran around in, that last was meaningless, as the curves kept everything below 60 for the most part. At the time, Southern was strongly promoting the big john high capacity grain hoppers, so I have a feeling that they were on the Carolina Special for some sort of special move. Again, this train was in the timetable, both public and employee as a passenger train, not a mixed.

Traveler: I don't know what the limits were for the cars used in the Warrington freight era. For the Auto Train, CSX imposes a speed limit of 70 mph on a line that is 79 mph for the other passenger trains. Basically, the limits would be the lesser of what would be regarded as safe for the car or the speed limit set by the host railroad company.

How many remember the Amtrak six axle fiasco where the host RR's had the speed limit cut to 45 mph in curves because they kept derailing? I believe it was the SDP-45's but may be wrong as usual.

You are absolutely right on this one. Somewhere I have an ICG ETT that gives this sort of stuff for them. If I remember right, this was not done by everybody. I think ti was doen by ICG, Penn Central, Family Lines or whatever the southern part of CSX was calling themselves at that time, and maybe MoPac and BN. Best I remember, it was not done by ATSF, and Southern was not part of Amtrak then.

How true, I don't know, but the rumor was that these things were purchaased based on the thought that they could be sold to the variuos freight companies when Amtrak closed its doors injust a few years.

 

[Big Iron]

It didn't fail the contract was dropped by amtrak and at least one Clint sued amtrak over the dropped contract.

No, it failed on Amtrak. It failed to make the profits predicted by George Warrington who was President at the time it as started. It also failed the passengers totally, since the priorities of the freight were put ahead of the passengers. Just about every LD was running late because the trains all stopped to pick up/drop off freight delaying the passengers.

So Gunn killed it.

Personal story.. 2001 I rode the Three Rivers to Chicago, we had 5 freight "express" cars on the front end. , we arrived into Chicago 45 minutes EARLY, then had to wait for Amtrak to disconnect the Express cars before we were allowed to back into to Union Station, we ended up being 45 minutes LATE. We sat for 90 minutes with in sight of Union Station. THAT pretty much sums up the Warrington Era of Amtrak... Passengers err "guests" were an inconvenience, nothing more, nothing less.

And don't forget, the express packages/mail got a "one seat" ride coast to coast while the pax had to change trains in chicago. I remember sitting outside of CHI for what seemed like an eternity waiting for those box cars to be removed.

 

[spacecadet]

Question. Prior to Amtrak forming did hauling freight on the rear of passenger trains worked or was it failing?

(I realize I'm reaching back a bit in the thread but I don't think this was ever answered directly.)

Anyway, you tell us - how many of those railroads still exist and haul both passengers and freight?

Obviously hauling passengers was not profitable for them; hauling freight was but why would you saddle the profitable part of your business with the unprofitable part? To the big railroads, sticking freight cars onto passenger trains would have been reducing the profit of their freight trains rather than raising the revenue of their passenger trains.

It's been proven time and time again that hauling freight and passengers together just does not make sense except maybe in certain special cases. Freight trains are more profitable than passenger trains, but unless Amtrak is going to get into the business of hauling dedicated freight trains, it just doesn't make sense to haul freight and passengers together.

 

[AlanB]

They did do 90 with the MHCs. The MHCs did not slow them down, however, the schedules had to be extended due to terminal switching cutting them on and off just outside of terminal stations.

And lest we forget, MHCs were also determined to be a significant reason for a derailment of the Lake Shore Limited near Batavia NY. After that a slow order was slapped on empty MHCs for a while.

Although I don't recall which group, it was a specific type of MHC that had that issue. So only that group/style of MHC had the slow order. Those MHC's were the first to go too when Amtrak started to get out of the business.

 

[jis]

They did do 90 with the MHCs. The MHCs did not slow them down, however, the schedules had to be extended due to terminal switching cutting them on and off just outside of terminal stations.

And lest we forget, MHCs were also determined to be a significant reason for a derailment of the Lake Shore Limited near Batavia NY. After that a slow order was slapped on empty MHCs for a while.

Although I don't recall which group, it was a specific type of MHC that had that issue. So only that group/style of MHC had the slow order. Those MHC's were the first to go too when Amtrak started to get out of the business.

That is correct, AFAIR too.

 

[had8ley]

I can remember pulling into SAS westbound on the Sunset one foggy morning. Next thing I know I'm out of bed and on the floor (rough coupling). I walked back to the rear of the train and there were green box cars coupled up as far as I could see. The carman said it was 15 loads of Budweiser that had come down on two Screaming Eagles from St. Louis and missed the previous Sunset. It was quite a ride through the hog backs and hills of west Texas.Almost thought I was on the caboose of a 100 car freight train !

 

[George Harris]

Question. Prior to Amtrak forming did hauling freight on the rear of passenger trains worked or was it failing?

(I realize I'm reaching back a bit in the thread but I don't think this was ever answered directly.)

Anyway, you tell us - how many of those railroads still exist and haul both passengers and freight?

Thought it was obvious. All the discussion on other railroad passenger trains having freight (mostly piggyback) on the back related to pre-Amtrak trains. Therefore, all these trains are no more. Due to multiple mergers, most of the railroads discussed are now part of another corporate sheel, but for the most part the rail lines under discussion are still in place. The non-continuance of the service does not mean that it was a bad idea at the time. In fact, from the stories told about the Amtrak version, the delays due to freight on these trains was much less than that with freight on the Amtrak trains.

 

[railiner]

Freight has been hardly handled on passenger trains, a few mixed freights ran with a passenger car but thats a other story.

Amtrak has no rights to handle freights, they are a tennant on freight railroad and can not compete with the host railroad.

Mail was another story but USPS has elliminated all mail by rail.

Conrail enforced this a number of years ago when Amtrak started running a mail train from Boston to New York on the 'Inland Route' via Springfield. Amtrak did not intend to carry any passengers on this train, but Conrail refused to carry the train from Boston to Springfield over its portion of the route unless it had at least one coach in the consist. So Amtrak was forced to comply. I believe it was carded as "Train 13", the 'Fast Mail'?