# Unrealized ridership potential of existing services



## DesertDude (Sep 20, 2016)

On this forum we talk a lot about restoring routes, new routes, schedule changes, and making tri-weekly trains into daily trains. These are all good discussions, but let's talk for a minute about Amtrak routes/services as they exist currently. Perhaps one of the best ways to achieve the bigger goals (daily Sunset Limited, restored Broadway Limited, etc.) is to do everything possible to maximize ridership on the current system.

Imagine for a moment that Amtrak had a huge marketing budget with plenty of money to spare (I know, I know, we're dreaming). Which existing route or route segment do you think could benefit most from a targeted ad campaign to increase ridership? We know that some routes have chronically low ridership figures, but is there one of these routes that would get a substantial boost if more people knew it was a viable option?


----------



## neroden (Sep 21, 2016)

Marketing won't help one bit. Complete waste of time.

The problems with Amtrak routes are more fundamental than that. There are a lot of ways to improve existing routes.

As noted many many times, running the Sunset Limited daily would boost ridership by a factor of more than 7/3, while raising variable costs by a factor of less than 3/2. The same is true of the Cardinal and the move should actually be profitable at this point. Frequency matters a lot.

Obviously shorter running times on existing routes increases ridership and everywhere this can be done, ridership goes up.

More important than either of the above, every improvement in *reliability* -- ability to run on schedule -- creates a massive increase in the number of passengers. Ridership is massively hampered by the fact that some trains are very *late*. The only consistent way to make the trains run on time, however, appears to be to buy the tracks out from the recalcitrant freight operators.

If you can't do any of that, perhaps you can improve the quality and consistency of onboard services, so the trip is more pleasant when it's slow or late. Have better food, for example. Maybe food which has actual ingredients lists.

These are all things which would make a given route a viable option for people for whom it is not a viable option. Once you do this, THEN you can think about a short marketing campaign to make people aware of it. Until the fundamental problems are addressed which make Amtrak non-viable for many people, marketing is a waste of time.

People who can tolerate the terrible problems with Amtrak are already riding it. In fact, lots of people are desperate to ride passenger trains. They're basically banging down Amtrak's door. But if Amtrak can't provide reliable service at a reasonable speed on a schedule which works for people's trip plans (and yes, with enough food service that people don't feel that they're roughing it), then a lot of people will reluctantly decide not to take Amtrak. All you need to do to get those riders is to show them that their "deal-breaker" problem is fixed.

When I write that out, it seems to me that the only routes which are basically functioning fine but might have a lack of awareness are the Downeaster, Piedmont, Vermonter & Ethan Allen, Pacific Surfliner, and San Joaquin. All of them have their own marketing campaigns already. Maybe the Hiawatha would benefit from a marketing campaign?


----------



## railiner (Sep 21, 2016)

neroden said:


> Marketing won't help one bit. Complete waste of time.
> 
> The problems with Amtrak routes are more fundamental than that. There are a lot of ways to improve existing routes.
> 
> ...


Some very good points....I strongly agree that before advertising, they should get their house in order. To lure new rider's with the promises of a great experience, and then not deliver as promised, does irreparable harm. I would be embarrassed to urge someone to give Amtrak a try, and then have them suffer a 'bad trip'...


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Sep 21, 2016)

neroden said:


> Marketing won't help one bit. Complete waste of time.
> 
> The problems with Amtrak routes are more fundamental than that. There are a lot of ways to improve existing routes.
> 
> ...


The Hiawatha recently advertised in both the Chicago and Milwaukee areas.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider (Sep 21, 2016)

Amtrak advertises in the Metra passenger newsletter "On the Bi-level" regularly, not specifically for any one service, iirc.


----------



## A Voice (Sep 21, 2016)

neroden said:


> Marketing won't help one bit. Complete waste of time.


On the contrary, an effective marketing campaign would work wonders for Amtrak. You underestimate the number of persons across the nation who are largely or completely oblivious of the company's existence. Even if they are vaguely aware passenger trains are a travel option, they don't have a clue where or when they operate, how or where to buy a ticket, or even where to get more information (hard to believe in this day and age, but true). The "option" isn't even considered; It's not part of their world. Even in cities with decent service and (typically) reasonably reliable trains, such as Savannah and the Carolinas, too many people aren't aware of the train.

Yes, there are problems - serious problems - ranging from late trains, to onboard food service, to a myriad of other service issues. But to wait until such problems are completely solved is really just another way of saying "never". While timekeeping needs to improve greatly from current levels, there will always be late trains (just as there are late or cancelled flights or buses, and you don't see the airlines canceling marketing efforts until that changes). Improve food service with diners on all long-distance (and perhaps some regional) trains and revamp cafe lounge offerings, but never doubt once you do there will remain further problems (food is too expensive, limited selection, etc.).

All such service issues need to be addressed (thoroughly and immediately), not so much to attract new passengers as to retain the ones you already have, but that doesn't mean you can ignore ridership (marketing) while you work on things. Can you imagine how it would play in Congress to see significant and continuing ridership declines while we wait on better service in the future? Indeed, for all the shortcomings and ineffectual marketing the long-distance trains notably _aren't_ seeing declining passenger numbers; Attracting new business also makes the trains look much better to legislators who are often hostile to providing an operating subsidy, and a potentially more generous budget makes solving all those service issues far simpler (or even possible).

However, to realize untapped ridership potential we absolutely must address the issue of capacity. Many or most trains - LD in particular - just don't have the available seats for large numbers of new passengers (note also the rationale for new high speed train sets). If you want to see significant increases, the trains are going to need more than the "standard" four coaches and two sleepers (with some variation, of course). So while we work on service issues and the like, we're also going to need a major order for new cars (150 more Viewliner coaches and lounges would simply replace the Amfleet II cars at current levels, leaving no room for increases). Ridership numbers far below 100% often represent sold-out trains (full over a portion of the route but plenty of empty seats at the ends); The objective should be increases in total numbers of passengers carried, though filling empty seats towards the end points of a route does appear to suggest a potential marketing approach.


----------



## DesertDude (Sep 21, 2016)

A Voice said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> > Marketing won't help one bit. Complete waste of time.
> ...


Thank you, A Voice, for stating that so eloquently.

Even with the recent renovation of Denver's Union Station, I still encounter people in the Denver area who are completely unaware that Amtrak serves Denver. It's not part of their world. Does Amtrak have some serious problems? Absolutely! But those problems aren't so horrendous that they keep me from suggesting Amtrak to people who've never even thought about it.

In a post from several months ago, I mentioned that taking the Zephyr from Salt Lake City to Reno worked out really well for my mother. If her son wasn't a rail fan, she'd probably have no idea that Amtrak provides an affordable, overnight train ride from SLC to Reno. I'd wager that at least 90% of the million people who live in the Salt Lake Valley are completely unaware of this option. I know, I know, the westbound arrival time in SLC is a problem, but there's still a chunk of the populace that would use it if they knew about it. IMO, Amtrak is missing out on revenue for that stretch of the CZ simply due to this awareness problem.


----------



## west point (Sep 21, 2016)

We need to wonder. Make specific add for locations. At Salt Lake city --- Example " Take Amtrak to Reno, Sacramento, San Francisco every day leaving at 11;30 PM every day. Or take Amtrak to Grand Junction, Denver, Omaha, Chicago every day at 3;30 AM ".

These adds might also have potential passengers calling their congress critters asking for another train at a more convenient time ?


----------



## Anderson (Sep 21, 2016)

While I don't think the prospect of an 0330 departure will attract scads of riders, the point of advertising some trips as being "functional" would probably be worthwhile. For example, BUF-CHI is a well-timed market (departures in the evening, arrivals in the morning) which could be pitched. NEC-Florida could also be pushed (NEC-Atlanta is a more tangled beast given the capacity squeeze there, but it could also be pushed).

One thing Amtrak needs to do is work on standardizing the customer experience, at _least_ within a route (I realize that the Builder, Cardinal, and Meteor will be different animals). In particular, the station experience comes to mind (I realize the boarding situation can only be helped but so much in some cases, but a _predictable_ experience is a key thing IMHO).


----------



## neroden (Sep 22, 2016)

DesertDude said:


> Even with the recent renovation of Denver's Union Station, I still encounter people in the Denver area who are completely unaware that Amtrak serves Denver. It's not part of their world. Does Amtrak have some serious problems? Absolutely! But those problems aren't so horrendous that they keep me from suggesting Amtrak to people who've never even thought about it.


You have a point. You might have pinpointed a good location for advertising.
The Zephyr's been running pretty much on time for several years now. Boarding procedures are sane. The food's tolerable for most people. Both UP and BNSF are being cooperative and have been for years now. The stations are in pretty good condition, particularly Denver. In short, service to Denver is good enough to advertise.

Denver also just acquired a large new commuter rail system, *and* is getting the Ski Train back in January. This is probably a great time for raising "Train awareness".

By contrast, I wouldn't try to market the Empire Service right now with three stations under construction, or the Silver Star with terrible delays and no food service, or god forbid the Cardinal. And honestly I'm afraid to recommend anything departing out of the hellhole of NY Penn Station. These are too likely to create "no, I won't ride again" passengers. I'm suggesting the LSL again now, but I didn't after NS's Autorouter meltdown, which was a massive deterrent to anyone riding. As long as that sort of garbage keeps happening it's not so helpful to advertise.

(Savannah and the Carolinas currently have extremely unreliable trains -- damn you, CSX -- and I wouldn't advertise them. I keep an eye on the OTP stats.)



railiner said:


> Some very good points....I strongly agree that before advertising, they should get their house in order. To lure new rider's with the promises of a great experience, and then not deliver as promised, does irreparable harm. I would be embarrassed to urge someone to give Amtrak a try, and then have them suffer a 'bad trip'...


This is my concern.
I believe the best places to advertise are where the service really seems to have stabilized in a decent state. Advertising a train which is running severely late on a regular basis right now is counterproductive. But in a situation like Denver or Salt Lake, where things seem to be working... that's a place to advertise. Now that the "Bakken mess" has cleared up, the Empire Builder would also be a good route to advertise (particularly since people who were avoiding it because of the delays, and the delays are gone).


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Sep 22, 2016)

Amtrak advertises itself every time prospective riders see one of the trains. The way "saturation marketing" works, every time the customer sees one of the outlets (for example, Au Bon Pan, McDonalds, KFC, Chase Bank, Bank of America, Walmart, Starbucks, etc), the signage acts like a big billboard. The more outlets (or trains) the more "impressions" on the customers. So, no surprise, the cure for what ails Amtrak advertising and marketing is more Amtrak.

Taking the _Sunset Ltd_ and the _Cardinal_ daily would more than double the "impressions" made on consumers in their markets, inevitably boosting total ridership for these routes (and to a lesser but real extent, to all other Amtrak trains). This is a subtle factor, difficult to measure, and rarely if ever included in the cost/value calculations of proposed extra service (such as more runs of the _Hoosier State_), but in your heart you know it's real. Those could be the easiest moves with the greatest impact.

Happily, thanks to the Stimulus, we will soon see a strong boost to Amtrak's saturation marketing in some important markets: By this time next year

* the _Piedmont+Carolinian_ should have 2 more frequencies than now (5, up from 3) running Raleigh-Charlotte

* the _Lincoln Service+Texas Eagle_ should have 1 more (or 3 more? has not been announced) frequencies (from 5 to 6 or 8) running CHI-St Louis,

* the _Cascades+Coast Starlight_ will have 2 more frequencies (from 5 to 7) running Seattle-Portland.

By early 2018, more trains will be running New Haven-Hartford-Springfield, augmenting the existing _Springfield Shuttle_ and the _Vermonter_.

Virginia is working to bring trains to D.C.-Richmond-Norfolk and D.C.-Lynchburg-Roanoke starting late next year.

California recently added a _San Joaquin_ frequency (from 6 to 7), and intends to add another (to 8). Another frequency will be added to the _Pacific Surfliner._

As each of these improved services start up, Amtrak should get a lot of "earned media" -- news reports on news segments or lifestyle talk programs and articles. A little bit of "new and improved and growing" can make a nice fresh story when the much repeated story has been "old and late and cutting back."

Of course, the additional services will attract new riders to fill the new frequencies. The new riders will tell their colleagues, friends, and family, and "word of mouth marketing" should also see a strong benefit.

So next year will demonstrate the marketing impact of growing Amtrak even a little bit. Imagine then, if the Stimulus level investment hadn't been a one-shot. Imagine if another dozen projects were adding speed, capacity, frequency, reliability, and marketing pizzazz to other parts of Amtrak.

Next January a new President, and a new Congress, meaning new funding, or same-o same-o?


----------



## jis (Sep 22, 2016)

My guess is on close to same-o same-o, since the House will most likely remain in the same hands and they are the ones that own the budgeting and appropriations process more than anyone else.


----------



## west point (Sep 22, 2016)

Good points about where to advertise. Let us come up with cities that are good candidates for advertising. Like DEN, Sacramento, San Francisco, LAX, SEA. Other cities with reliable timekeeping and good schedule times. Maybe CHI, New Orleans ?

*BUT: *Amtrak has to be prepared to add capacity to any route where the advertising fills all current available seats.


----------



## Hytec (Sep 23, 2016)

WoodyinNYC said:


> Posted in error, please delete. Thanks.


----------



## Hytec (Sep 23, 2016)

Posted by WoodyinNYC: "Amtrak advertises itself every time prospective riders see one of the trains."

This is true in concept, but viable only in high Amtrak traffic areas like the NEC. To a non-Amtrak person who is not a train enthusiast, a train at a crossing or blowing a horn near a house or office, is an annoyance. This is especially true in areas outside of the NEC where the predominate train traffic consists of long freights blocking crossings, with Amtrak occurring once or twice a day at best, and half the time unseen at night.

I agree with most of the above comments. First, Amtrak and this Country's leaders have to take rail passenger travel seriously with adequate reliable funding, encouraging logical service-oriented management (think Wal-Mart, the largest, most profitable company in the World!). Then, and only then, advertise train travel in local markets, on a personal level to attract the Moms and Pops visiting Grandma, vacation travelers, and business travelers looking to save hotel expenses at destinations. Also, reliable enjoyable service would lessen the damaging anti-Amtrak jokes by late-night TV hosts.


----------



## neroden (Sep 24, 2016)

Perhaps the best "advertising" will be the expansion to Moline circa 2017, which opens up an entire large metro area.

I do support the principle of a small ad campaign whenever a new station opens or a station relocates, just to let people know about the improvement.


----------



## railiner (Sep 24, 2016)

At the very least, they should maximize the publicity afforded by the press covering the "Grand Opening",and first train....passenger and crew interviews, speeches by the pol's, etc. Distribution of all available promotional materials, contests for train ride giveaways....


----------



## A Voice (Sep 24, 2016)

Hytec said:


> Also, reliable enjoyable service would lessen the damaging anti-Amtrak jokes by late-night TV hosts.


Jokes by late night talk show hosts have long been some of Amtrak's better advertising efforts. You've heard the expression "there's no such thing as bad publicity", and it has been reported previously that ridership - or at least interest by prospective passengers - actually increases following a major derailment.

I'd love to know how many first time passengers only discovered Amtrak because of Jay Leno.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 26, 2016)

Looking through ASMAD, the Meteor seems to have a problem at NYP. Basically, the train's average delay _out of NYP_ for the last six months is about 17 minutes. Granted, this is skewed by some major delays...but given that none of the LD trains out of NYP do a same-day turn, this _really_ should not be happening unless there's a bona fide emergency. The fact that 19, 49, 51, 89, and 91 all make it out without gross delays (the average is <5 minutes for all the others) means that there's a problem on Amtrak's end.

The real issue here is that if Amtrak can't get 97 down the track to WAS in a timely manner, the train winds up out-of-slot after WAS and the delays from there onwards are _Amtrak's _problem, not CSX's. Especially give that switching engines really shouldn't take more than 10 minutes if the yard folks have their act together, there's no reason that _any_ of the trains should be leaving WAS late on a regular basis.

That being said, I'll grant that there are issues surrounding the RF&P. I've _repeatedly_ lost half an hour between WAS and RVR either way along there, and that is subject for a talk with CSX and Virginia.


----------



## jis (Sep 26, 2016)

My experience on the Star, the few times I have traveled on 91 is that it shows up in Washington more or less on time and then somehow manages to depart half an hour late for no apparent reason.


----------



## Seaboard92 (Sep 26, 2016)

I've had a lot of experiences on 91 in WAS arriving on time to a few minutes early. And the engine change taking the better part of 90 minutes and leaving an hour or more late. And thats happened to me three times now so it isn't an isolated incident. One time they took the electric off and the crew switching was sitting at a picnic table nearby for half an hour before doing anything else.

The only excusable delay I've had in Washington was when the air hose completely snapped off and they had to get a new one and install it. And I want to say the problem was on the engine and not the baggage car.


----------



## A Voice (Sep 26, 2016)

Seaboard92 said:


> I've had a lot of experiences on 91 in WAS arriving on time to a few minutes early. And the engine change taking the better part of 90 minutes and leaving an hour or more late. And thats happened to me three times now so it isn't an isolated incident. One time they took the electric off and the crew switching was sitting at a picnic table nearby for half an hour before doing anything else.
> 
> The only excusable delay I've had in Washington was when the air hose completely snapped off and they had to get a new one and install it. And I want to say the problem was on the engine and not the baggage car.


Just curious, but do the problems appear to be the result of lethargic switching procedures or is the (diesel) power not ready when the train arrives? We know Amtrak is chronically short of power (exacerbated by locomotives badly in need of some time in the shop), which is the only excuse I can think of for sitting around half an hour.

Either way, delays getting out of Washington shouldn't be happening (A major Amtrak terminal, and its own rails north of there).


----------



## jis (Sep 26, 2016)

Whenever I have been through Washington, the diesel power that was eventually hooked on was sitting there on the track one voer from the platform all the time purring away. I have no clue what the holdup was.

I have been similarly clueless about what goes on at Albany even when half the tracks in the station are not torn up. We just arrive there and sit there until apparently some specific moment about 20 minutes after the scheduled departure when the planets align and people start working on getting the engines removed and hooked up and all that. It is rpetty mysterious, and I don't claim to know at all what the deal is.


----------



## neroden (Sep 26, 2016)

jis said:


> Whenever I have been through Washington, the diesel power that was eventually hooked on was sitting there on the track one voer from the platform all the time purring away. I have no clue what the holdup was.
> 
> I have been similarly clueless about what goes on at Albany even when half the tracks in the station are not torn up. We just arrive there and sit there until apparently some specific moment about 20 minutes after the scheduled departure when the planets align and people start working on getting the engines removed and hooked up and all that. It is rpetty mysterious, and I don't claim to know at all what the deal is.


I've eavesdropped on the radio at Albany. At least a couple of times, it seems to be a matter of carrying the updated current list of special orders for the track (CSX if heading west or east, Metro-North if heading south) physically from the dispatcher's office to the new crew, which is physically located quite some distance away from the dispatcher. This seems to be a very slow process. I guess someone is actually walking from the station to the locomotive shop...

I don't know what else is causing delays, but the paperwork delays are definitely part of it.

No idea what's going on at WAS. If the crew's sitting at a picnic table, they're *definitely* slacking off.

At Albany, they seemed to be constantly walking back and forth between the station and the shops and it seemed to take a very long time.


----------



## railiner (Sep 26, 2016)

The former NYNH&H seemed to have their act together, when switching frequent NEC electric to steam or diesel power, or vice-versa at New Haven. IIRC, they were carded just 7 minutes, and they did it in that time, or less.

The PRR did similar at Harrisburg with thru trains...

And the NYC at Croton-Harmon...


----------



## PVD (Sep 26, 2016)

Empire Service is pretty good if you are not going past Albany, and as to departing from NYP, it is not a pleasant place, but it is extremely convenient for many people, and the airports and bus terminals in this area are no picnic grounds either.


----------



## A Voice (Sep 26, 2016)

railiner said:


> The former NYNH&H seemed to have their act together, when switching frequent NEC electric to steam or diesel power, or vice-versa at New Haven. IIRC, they were carded just 7 minutes, and they did it in that time, or less.
> 
> The PRR did similar at Harrisburg with thru trains...
> 
> And the NYC at Croton-Harmon...


I've actually seen Amtrak do an engine change in six minutes. Circa 1983 on the short-lived Metroliner service between Boston and New York, our train was carded just 6 minutes dwell time in New Haven for the necessary engine change from diesel to electric. They made the switch in the allotted time, too (not that I might have been timing them or anything...).

First car was the dinette; We were at the front of the second car. I got up to go watch the engine change, and in the time it took 5 or 6 people to get off and clear the vestibule, by the time I stepped into the first car I was already looking at the end of an AEM-7.

The fact that they can - and have - done better proves Albany and Washington all the more unnecessary.


----------



## PVD (Sep 26, 2016)

Because of current safety procedures, you will likely never see the times that were previously attained. That being said, I don't think anyone doesn't believe it can't be better than it is.


----------



## Seaboard92 (Sep 26, 2016)

A Voice said:


> Seaboard92 said:
> 
> 
> > I've had a lot of experiences on 91 in WAS arriving on time to a few minutes early. And the engine change taking the better part of 90 minutes and leaving an hour or more late. And thats happened to me three times now so it isn't an isolated incident. One time they took the electric off and the crew switching was sitting at a picnic table nearby for half an hour before doing anything else.
> ...


Every time the engines are sitting one track over idling. Usually several engines hanging out down there.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Sep 26, 2016)

This may drive things off topic, but I will address some of it.



Anderson said:


> Looking through ASMAD, the Meteor seems to have a problem at NYP. Basically, the train's average delay _out of NYP_ for the last six months is about 17 minutes. Granted, this is skewed by some major delays...but given that none of the LD trains out of NYP do a same-day turn, this _really_ should not be happening unless there's a bona fide emergency. The fact that 19, 49, 51, 89, and 91 all make it out without gross delays (the average is <5 minutes for all the others) means that there's a problem on Amtrak's end.



There are a couple of major things about 97 that often lead to delays. The major problem with initial terminal delay is equipment troubles. It is the last train to get serviced and the first train to get robbed. I've explained it briefly  in the past:



> I'm sorry to divert from teh topic but I feel this needs to be addressed. Jis, while you are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts. The reality of the situation is SSYD movements (or in your opinion, lack thereof) has nothing to do with laziness. It is a byproduct of the cuts in mechanical department personnel. If 98 manages to arrive on time, the train is inspected. If everything is fine, that is good. If something has to come out for repairs, pm , etc, there is no one to work on the equipment until the next morning. Same thing goes for 92, 20 and 48. This is because they eliminated the entire overnight shift devoted to the long hauls (51 is made up during the day) while the remaining overnight crews deal with the regional and day trippers. *Now, daylight has to scramble to make repairs and 97 is last out, so it is the first train to lose equipment if (for example) 91 is short a dining car and the last train to get worked. If repairs aren't forthcoming (or their is a shortage of equipment), the next move is to wait for PD98 or PD20 to arrive.*
> 
> Such was the case today. SSYD has been short views and they moved up equipment leaving 97 without views. 98 arrives at 143pm and 20 is completely behind the 8 ball, so obviously 97 is going to take a hit. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that it is Wednesday, which means 51 (which along with 50 operates with 2 views) was not available to fill in.


The aforementioned trains that leave without gross delay often come at 97's expense. Once it gets on the road, it has a very slim slot on the NEC. It is routinely overtaken by an Acela that often runs late from Metro-North Territory. Once it is brushed aside, it has an 8 minute window at Baltimore. If it is not ready to depart at 626pm, it will end up behind a MARC train and lose more time. It snowballs.



jis said:


> My experience on the Star, the few times I have traveled on 91 is that it shows up in Washington more or less on time and then somehow manages to depart half an hour late for no apparent reason.





Seaboard92 said:


> I've had a lot of experiences on 91 in WAS arriving on time to a few minutes early. And the engine change taking the better part of 90 minutes and leaving an hour or more late. And thats happened to me three times now so it isn't an isolated incident. One time they took the electric off and the crew switching was sitting at a picnic table nearby for half an hour before doing anything else.
> The only excusable delay I've had in Washington was when the air hose completely snapped off and they had to get a new one and install it. And I want to say the problem was on the engine and not the baggage car.





A Voice said:


> Seaboard92 said:
> 
> 
> > I've had a lot of experiences on 91 in WAS arriving on time to a few minutes early. And the engine change taking the better part of 90 minutes and leaving an hour or more late. And thats happened to me three times now so it isn't an isolated incident. One time they took the electric off and the crew switching was sitting at a picnic table nearby for half an hour before doing anything else.
> ...





> Every time the engines are sitting one track over idling. Usually several engines hanging out down there


I'll take all of this at once. First of all, it is likely Seaboard has zero idea of what or who he is looking at. I've hung out at that picnic table while waiting for trains and I have zero involvement in the switching operations. Secondly, they may have been actually waiting for their next move. Was the diesel shopped? Did mechanical request a hold? There are plenty of things that occur and one that is left out is interference.

If you take a look at 91's slot at WAS, if things are operating correctly, 92 is there at the same time. Train 95 is due out as 91 is scheduled to arrive in WAS, meaning they shouldn't meet. However, if 95 is operating roughly 12 minutes late out of NYC, it will eventually get pushed aside for an Acela (2155) If it is 20 minutes late, it gets hung up by 43 and 2155 and 91 will operate on its heals. 95 will eventually get hung up behind the same MARC train that 91 usually catches. Now, they are all arriving WAS at roughly the same time. Lo and behold, when 91 arrives in WAS, the crew that is assigned to switch 91 is starting to switch 95 since its diesels are ahead of 91's. The electricians and mechanical department may start their work on 91 by preparing for the change (pulling the cables, securing the equipment, hanging the backup hose, etc) . However, the T&E crew now must cut 95's electric, and put the diesels on before they commence work on 91. During that time, if there are no mechanical issues on 91, the mechanical crews are probably hanging around the table until someone removes/adds the engines.

Another thing that wasn't covered is what happens south. If CSX can't handle the train, it will sit. Yesterday was a perfect example. 145 and 99 sat in DC since CSX couldn't handle them because of track work.

So, while the reasons are not apparent, there are many simple things that can delay trains. A rock in a switch point can do severe damage to an operation that is sensitive to congestion, like WAS, BOS and NYP. If you're short a crew, that is even worse.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 27, 2016)

Thirdrail7,
Just wanted to thank you for the details on what leads to those delays. I knew the windows were tight but I didn't realize _how_ tight they were (nor that consequence of the thou-shalt-not-delay policy on the Acela).


----------



## Seaboard92 (Sep 27, 2016)

I want to thank you as well for clarifying that as well. I can tell you about the PV world but not about Amtrak operations. So thanks for all of your knowledge.


----------



## Hytec (Sep 27, 2016)

Thank you for pointing out that railroad operation is not the well-oiled smoothly operating machine with perfectly meshed gears that we all wish it was. Trains are constrained by two rails and necessary sequence of events, unlike other modes of transportation where movement and routes are generally at the discretion of the individual driver/operator.


----------



## A Voice (Sep 27, 2016)

Thirdrail7,

Thanks for adding your comments. It is not only quite interesting, but also helps shed some light on our observations.


----------



## neroden (Sep 27, 2016)

Thirdrail, I appreciate the details on WAS and NYP operations. Makes sense.

Eliminating the overnight shift at NYP for long-distance trains seems deeply pound-foolish (given that there are *six* long-distance trains departing from NYP counting the Palmetto). I mean, I would totally understand eliminating such a shift at WAS or BOS, but not NYP.

Any ideas on Albany? Every time I've eavesdropped on the radio, there really do seem to have been delays running paperwork from one person to another (by hand!) (And apparently it's even slower if they have to copy it over the radio.) I wonder if office relocations -- or better sidewalks -- would help! (Better pathways from the platforms to the dispatcher's office to the mechanical shops to the bridge operator's location... doesn't sound like a very expensive project!)


----------

