# Winter Planning for Empire Builder Trips



## montana mike (Nov 27, 2013)

An update from the local BNSF people: Travelers on the Hi-Line taking the Empire Builder both east and west bound should expect to experience up to 2 hour delays primarily in eastern Montana and thru most of North Dakota, due mostly to increased freight traffic and continuing slow orders, both of which are anticipated to remain in place through out the winter season. All of the major construction and maintenance projects have either been completed or have ceased until next spring, however, there may be unexpected maintenance issues which may cause additional delays to freight and passenger traffic from time to time.

So, it would appear that the "status quo" of what we are seeing now should remain in place for most of the time over the coming 5 months or so. I asked when they plan to begin the 2014 construction season and that is all dependent upon the weather, as usual. It would be OK I guess to have the EB arrive in Chicago "only" 1-2 hours late each day, compared to what we have all seen over the past 6+ months. I will be taking the EB at least a couple times this winter and will try to report how things go.


----------



## TraneMan (Nov 27, 2013)

Why or what is the slow order about??


----------



## oregon pioneer (Nov 27, 2013)

Well, as long as it's "only" 1-2 hours!

Getting so excited to be on the EB @PDX a week from Monday, headed to CHI (and SPI, hopefully not in a van)... I am _ready _for a break!


----------



## montana mike (Nov 27, 2013)

TraneMan said:


> Why or what is the slow order about??


According to the BNSF folks slow orders (speed limitations below a possible 79 mph max) remain in effect in several places in eastern MT and parts of ND for both "operational" reasons (I would read a lot of traffic trying to get thru limited track resources) and for recently upgraded tracks that have mandated speed limitations for specified periods of time-partly due to the fact that the upgrades may not have been fully completed. I guess the tracks are A-OK to use at certain speeds but either BNSF or Govt regs require slower speeds. I asked my local BNSF guy (an engineer) and he said BNSF plans to keep many of the speed restrictions in place throughout this winter and well into next spring.


----------



## Ryan (Nov 27, 2013)

Sounds like BNSF needs to run fewer trains so that they can live up to their agreement to handle Amtrak on schedule.

I'm pretty sure they can't just say "hey, we're not going to run you on time ever because we've got other trains we'd rather run".


----------



## Bob Dylan (Nov 27, 2013)

RyanS said:


> Sounds like BNSF needs to run fewer trains so that they can live up to their agreement to handle Amtrak on schedule.
> 
> I'm pretty sure they can't just say "hey, we're not going to run you on time ever because we've got other trains we'd rather run".


The Question is: What can Amtrak Do About This since that Court Overturned the Law Requiring Class I Rail Roads to Facilitate Amtrak Passenger Trains??? This has to be Costing Amtrak Big Bucks and Running off Passengers on the Hi-Line!

Brings to mind that Famous Line from "Network": "Go to the Window and Stick out Your Head and Yell Loud as You Can, I'm Mad as Hell and I'm Not Gonna Take it Anymore!" :excl: :excl: :excl:


----------



## Tumbleweed (Nov 27, 2013)

Maybe the timetable should be adjusted to compensate for the delays.....kinda like "out of sight, out of mind".....then when performance is able to pick up again, change them back and they could brag about the faster schedule.... h34r: ....


----------



## tricia (Nov 27, 2013)

Thanks, Montana Mike--and others who've posted updates relating to EB OTP.

A perhaps unquantifiable cost for Amtrak in this: How many would-be EB passengers are deciding not to book tickets because they're uncomfortable with the current odds of NOT making a connection to another long-distance train, and are either incapable of or unwilling to spend all night sitting up in coach if that's all Amtrak can offer them as a replacement for whatever sleeping-car reservation they'd miss with that missed connection?

I'm thinking here of my elderly dad, who'll be taking the EB eastbound (is that EB EB?) with me in February, and whose bad back really can't cope with sitting up overnight in coach if we were to miss our connection with the Cap Ltd that day, and sleepers were sold out the following day. If that's what happens, I'll take care of getting him onto an airplane for the last leg of his journey. But if we didn't REALLY love trains, I'm pretty sure we'd find a more reliable way to get him home than any itinerary that includes the EB at this point.

Best I can tell, this situation is NOT Amtrak's fault, and Amtrak does the best it can to get delayed passengers safely to their destinations. But there's a cost being paid, both by the many delayed EB passengers in recent months, and by Amtrak--perhaps in lost ticket sales currently, certainly in ground lost in the ongoing effort to present trains as a realistic and reliable long-distance travel option.


----------



## tim49424 (Nov 27, 2013)

The newest BNSF issues are not good news for me as I have another trip scheduled for December 22 from TOH to KAL (I just completed one yesterday). The connections in Chicago to any of the Michigan Services are almost impossible to make, without bus involvement and actually, there is no connection to #370 anymore due to the issues out west. Personally, I don't have to worry about travel eastbound on the Empire Builder as often as I've been (5 times per year) as I'm moving to Holland, Michigan in the spring, however I do know this has to be a logistical nightmare for Amtrak. I'm wondering if there ever will be a solution to the ongoing problem.


----------



## zephyr17 (Nov 27, 2013)

Well, the timekeeping didn't push me off the Empire Builder but it did push me off the Hoosier State/Cardinal connection. I'm driving to Indy this time. Hopefully, it will be there by 7 so the Hertz counter is still open (as opposed to 4am last year).


----------



## Guest (Nov 27, 2013)

jimhudson said:


> RyanS said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds like BNSF needs to run fewer trains so that they can live up to their agreement to handle Amtrak on schedule.
> ...


The law wasn't overturned; only the standards for measuring delay were overturned (by a partisan, extremist Republican court panel). Amtrak *can* simply file a lawsuit. Amtrak tends to hold off for decades before doing that, though.


----------



## the_traveler (Nov 27, 2013)

Tumbleweed said:


> Maybe the timetable should be adjusted to compensate for the delays.....kinda like "out of sight, out of mind".....then when performance is able to pick up again, change them back and they could brag about the faster schedule.... h34r: ....


Amtrak did that (added padding and adjusted the schedule) with the SL when it was running hours (and sometimes days) late during the SP/UP merger meltdown. So what happened? :huh: 
UP used all that extra padding time to delay the SL! It remained running hours late!


----------



## AlanB (Nov 27, 2013)

Tumbleweed said:


> Maybe the timetable should be adjusted to compensate for the delays.....kinda like "out of sight, out of mind".....then when performance is able to pick up again, change them back and they could brag about the faster schedule.... h34r: ....


Or maybe BNSF should just start honoring both the schedule and contract that they have with Amtrak.

I appreciate the fact that they have more freight now than they did before. But that's not Amtrak's problem and it shouldn't be made Amtrak's problem.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Nov 27, 2013)

AlanB said:


> Tumbleweed said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe the timetable should be adjusted to compensate for the delays.....kinda like "out of sight, out of mind".....then when performance is able to pick up again, change them back and they could brag about the faster schedule.... h34r: ....
> ...


Maybe Joe Boardman should give Warren Buffet a call,(maybe Conference in Amtrak Joe Biden) then Mr. Buffet could let the BNSF Dis[patchers and Brass know that he wants Amtrak given Priority on the Hi-Line as per the Contract and Schedule as Alan says!


----------



## montana mike (Nov 27, 2013)

Looking at today's delays (three of the EBs currently around 3 hours behind), I would guess that the issues are fairly balanced between traffic and track issues. Plus it also appears that CPR is causing a good amount of the delay for #8 as it winds thru Wisconsin. Not excusing any party at all-I agree every effort should be made to allow the EBs to stay close to schedule, just the fact that there are two railroads involved here and I would also think some accommodation would need to be made for the major track work that has taken place this year.

The point about people seeing the constant delays may choose another rode of transportation because of likely missed travel connections made earlier is a good one. I know for myself, I often connect with either another train or plane in Chicago and if my chances of making connections are slim I would likely be forced to fly.

:-(


----------



## Ryan (Nov 27, 2013)

AlanB said:


> Tumbleweed said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe the timetable should be adjusted to compensate for the delays.....kinda like "out of sight, out of mind".....then when performance is able to pick up again, change them back and they could brag about the faster schedule.... h34r: ....
> ...


Exactly.
I wonder if BNSF's tune would change if they started footing the bill for all of the misconnects that they're causing in Chicago.


----------



## anir dendroica (Nov 27, 2013)

I don't fault BNSF too much for this. They are building a better railroad to handle the oil business which will benefit Amtrak in the longer term (10+ years) once oil traffic starts to decline a bit.

As it is, the EB needs to get almost all green signals across Montana to stay on schedule. Once traffic volume gets to a certain point on a single-track line, there is no way to do this without essentially gridlocking the line, i.e. having every siding filled with a freight and holding freights in yards until Amtrak passes. In my experience the BNSF dispatchers rate Amtrak one notch above their premium UPS trains, but not quite the equivalent of an ambulance on rails. I think that is fair, and rather than force BNSF to eat the expense of keeping Amtrak on schedule at all costs I think it would be prudent to modify the schedule to reflect the reality of increased freight volumes. From what I know of BNSF dispatching, I don't think they would pull a SL and just create longer delays.


----------



## Ryan (Nov 27, 2013)

Construction delays that will eventually yield better performance is understandable, even if there are better ways of doing it. Take for example CSX, which wanted to do a bunch of work on the Capitol Limited's route. They approached Amtrak, said "Hey, here's what we're going to do - if you don't get the train through Cleveland by 0330, you're going to have to come up with something else". Amtrak took that into account, published service advisories and made due until the project was complete.

On the other hand "we have too many trains" isn't acceptable. You agreed to a schedule, stick with it. If it means that you can't run as many oil trains as you would like, tough. BNSF obviously could handle this schedule, or else they never would have agreed to it.

If they want to ramp up the number of freight trains, and the only way to do so is to slow Amtrak down by a few hours, the right way to do it is to approach Amtrak and ask for a schedule change. If Amtrak agrees, then publish a new schedule and get on with it. But don't just clog the line with freight trains, deliver Amtrak hours late every. single. day. and say "Eh, that's just the way things are. They'll get better in a few years".

Someone at Amtrak, plus the Congressfolk and Senators from that area need to get on the horn with Mr. Buffet and have a serious heart to heart talk and get this crap fixed.


----------



## Nathanael (Nov 27, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Looking at today's delays (three of the EBs currently around 3 hours behind), I would guess that the issues are fairly balanced between traffic and track issues. Plus it also appears that CPR is causing a good amount of the delay for #8 as it winds thru Wisconsin.


Unfortunately CP has had a particularly bad Amtrak-dispatching record in recent years. Hunter Harrison, I presume. Getting a late handoff from BNSF will only exacerbate this.
Regarding BNSF, if the situation is that track work didn't finish when planned and there are slow orders due to track which hasn't been sufficiently tamped and fettled -- well, that's life, nothing to be done until the track is settled down.

But if there's a completely bogus excuse about "too many trains", fergawdsakes hire some more gandy dancers and build some more sidings -- and in the meantime, BNSF should stop breaking its contract with Amtrak and dispatch the train as promised. BNSF's contract with Amtrak predates nearly all of its oil train contracts on this line, and therefore takes priority. Would you do business with a company which deliberately breaks earlier contracts in order to land later contracts? I wouldn't.

The *45 minute stop* in Minneapolis should be long enough to settle any delays due to handoff between BNSF and CP. If it isn't, someone's not dispatching the train right.

I guess I'm agreeing with RyanS.


----------



## jebr (Nov 28, 2013)

Nathanael said:


> montana mike said:
> 
> 
> > Looking at today's delays (three of the EBs currently around 3 hours behind), I would guess that the issues are fairly balanced between traffic and track issues. Plus it also appears that CPR is causing a good amount of the delay for #8 as it winds thru Wisconsin.
> ...


Not to excuse BNSF on this one, but one conversation I had with a BNSF official coming home on the Northstar was that there's a 50% increase in traffic (from the high 50s to the low 90s) for trains coming through each day between at least Big Lake or Coon Rapids (can't remember which) to the Fridley yard. That takes a bit more than just a few sidings to fix if most of that traffic is coming from North Dakota's oil fields.

The only real solution is for BNSF to either find a way to put most of those oil trains in the hole to let Amtrak through or just not run the oil trains. I somehow doubt that all this track work will let Amtrak get through faster than the current schedule permits, so these delays likely won't help Amtrak out in the long term other than hopefully helping OTP.


----------



## Ryan (Nov 28, 2013)

jebr said:


> Not to excuse BNSF on this one, but one conversation I had with a BNSF official coming home on the Northstar was that there's a 50% increase in traffic (from the high 50s to the low 90s) for trains coming through each day between at least Big Lake or Coon Rapids (can't remember which) to the Fridley yard.


My point is that those extra 40ish trains just didn't materialize out of nowhere - someone at BNSF made a conscious decision to run them. Obviously, somewhere between 50 and 90, Amtrak OTP goes to hell, and someone made the decision "Eh, who cares?". That's what I have issue with and Amtrak should be raising hell about.

Bad analogy alert:

I'm a contract worker. I agree to work 8 hours a day for my boss, with the expectation that I get a certain amount of work done. After that agreement is in place, I decide that "hey, I'd like more money, and there's this guy offering me a side job that I can take to bring in some more cash!". One of the side effects of taking that side job is that I can only spend 6 hours of my day at my day job, but I keep drawing an 8 hour paycheck, in addition to the paycheck from the side job.

Unless my boss is an idiot, he's quickly going to catch on and realize that he's not getting what he's paying for and fire me.

BNSF has taken on too much work, and Amtrak isn't getting what they paid for. BNSF either needs to take on less work so that they can get Amtrak over the road on the agreed-upon schedule, or they need to reach out to Amtrak and inquire about a schedule change (which IMO Amtrak should say "get bent" unless BNSF comes to the table with some nice concessions).


----------



## PRR 60 (Nov 28, 2013)

Unless the terms of the contract are known, the statement that BNSF has an contractual obligation to move Amtrak on schedule may or may not be accurate. I don't believe any of the Amtrak contracts with the freight railroads include schedule adherence standards. Amtrak's attempt to unilaterally impose on-time standards on all access contracts was what was thrown out by the federal courts. Given that Amtrak tried to impose those standards through law certainly suggests that such standards are not in the contracts. What is included are bonus payments for on-time operation. If the trains run on time, the railroads get extra payments. If not, they don't.

The legal obligation of the freight railroads is to provide priority to Amtrak operations. If Amtrak feels they are not getting priority, that freight is being moved to the detriment of Amtrak operations, Amtrak's recourse by law is through the Surface Transportation Board. The STB has the final say. Amtrak does not have the option to take court action.


----------



## Ryan (Nov 28, 2013)

I never spoke to what the contract says.

Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but when you say you you're going to do something, you should follow through with it and do it, regardless of whether there are contracts in place that would penalize you for not following through on your word.

I'm sure Amtrak didn't just hand BNSF a schedule and say "Here is when we're running our train, make sure you're out of the way". At some level, there was agreement by BNSF on the current schedule. They should honor that agreement or seek to change it, whether there are contractual penalties for failing to run the train on time or not.


----------



## montana mike (Nov 28, 2013)

As a footnote to the Empire Builder's struggles I have asked Amtrak on two occasions about these continuing delays and the downstream problems they create and I have yet to receive other than a "canned" response that they are aware of the issues. Looking at today's EB's things did not improve even during a "holiday" schedule. #8 in MN is about 5 hours late and still not in MSP, #7 in ND is almost 4 hours behind and even #7/27 in WA/OR are running over 2 hours behind, which will mean late arrivals into both PDX and SEA today-this without any bad weather along the entire length of the Hi-Line. Clearly there is just not the capacity available on this mostly single track line to support the Empire Builder's schedule into CHI at this time.

We don't know what discussions, if any, Amtrak has had with BNSF concerning this matter, but at least until now any that may have taken place have not yielded satisfactory results.

We know this train can run on time--It used to be Amtrak's shining star in this regard. I took it dozens of times for several years without any significant delays along the entire route. As my local BNSF guy has stated several times, until all of the track improvement work is completed (2 more years) the schedule "challenges" will likely continue at varying amounts. He did say however, that BNSF has no current plans to double track the hi-line route, just too costly.


----------



## tim49424 (Nov 29, 2013)

As we are discussing all the doom and gloom with the future of the Empire Builder, #8 left MSP *on-time* this morning. Maybe that gives me a slight glimmer of hope pertaining my December 22 trip after all, however, I have feeling this is just an exception to the daily rule and things will go back to status quo soon. The slight advantage I have with my next trip to Chicago/Kalamazoo is that it's on a Sunday, if weekends make a difference anymore with all the track work done for the winter.


----------



## montana mike (Nov 29, 2013)

I saw that too and my heart skipped a beat at seeing two "greens" on the status map. Both #8 in MN and #7 in ND are on time, BUT, BNSF drastically curtailed movement of all of its trains on the hi-line for the Thanksgiving holiday according to my local contact who sent me a note about the same time I was looking at the status boards. It looks like #8 has a chance to actually make it into CHI on time--which would be a first in many, many months. They likely will greet the train with champagne and a band!! (Just kidding). Wait until next week's trains to get a better picture of the new "normal".

Weekends appear to help somewhat, so that should be in your favor.


----------



## tim49424 (Nov 29, 2013)

montana mike said:


> BUT, BNSF drastically curtailed movement of all of its trains on the hi-line for the Thanksgiving holiday according to my local contact who sent me a note about the same time I was looking at the status boards.


I was told the same thing as well by a friend who is an Amtrak employee and also has many contacts with BNSF and CP. However, when I was on #8 on Tuesday, it arrived into Chicago after 6 PM. OTOH, it was well off the hi-line and out of BNSF territory into CP's jurisdiction when it started losing major time. It left MSP 1 hour and 15 minutes late and arrived in TOH, where I boarded, nearly 2 hours and 10 minutes behind schedule. I have heard that the CP dispatchers are not as kind to Amtrak as the BNSF ones. I've noticed quite a time loss daily for the most part from MSP to RDW, sometimes 45 minutes to an hour, so my gut feeling is CP is to blame for a good deal of that.


----------



## montana mike (Nov 29, 2013)

CP has had some bridge issues lately, which could have been the cause for your delay. Several hours later and #8 is still on time not to far from MKE. Unless something unusual happens it should arrive on time in Chicago--chill that Champagne!!!!!!


----------



## montana mike (Nov 29, 2013)

Note: today's #8 arrival into CHI: 14 minutes EARLY. First time that has happened in a very long time!!!!!!!!!! Amazing what a national holiday can do in this regard to remove most of the freight traffic.


----------



## Guest (Nov 30, 2013)

PRR 60 said:


> The legal obligation of the freight railroads is to provide priority to Amtrak operations. If Amtrak feels they are not getting priority, that freight is being moved to the detriment of Amtrak operations, Amtrak's recourse by law is through the Surface Transportation Board. The STB has the final say. Amtrak does not have the option to take court action.


I'm pretty sure Amtrak can sue; the priority law predates the STB, it does *not* say that the STB has discretionary authority, and the STB can be overruled by the courts. There is some question over whether Amtrak can sue before it has tried an STB case, but Amtrak can certainly sue after trying the STB.


----------



## Nathanael (Nov 30, 2013)

tim54449 said:


> I have heard that the CP dispatchers are not as kind to Amtrak as the BNSF ones.


Hunter Harrison developed a reputation for bad dispatching of passenger rail, to the point of violating contracts with passenger rail agencies, when he was at CN -- and he moved to CP a year or two ago.
Matt Rose stated some years back that the cost of dispatching Amtrak on-time is minimal compared to the public relations benefits.

So yeah, I would be unsurprised if CP is causing trouble. Whereas I am inclined to give BNSF the benefit of the doubt and assume that they really are doing their best and are having trouble with trackwork.


----------



## tim49424 (Nov 30, 2013)

Nathanael said:


> tim54449 said:
> 
> 
> > I have heard that the CP dispatchers are not as kind to Amtrak as the BNSF ones.
> ...


Don't the freight lines have a contract with the government and thus they are breaching that contract by attitudes such as Harrison's and Rose's? That would be like me having a leaky pipe above my apartment and the landlord saying "Well, we'll get to you when we get to you" and the ceiling collapses due to the weight of the water.


----------



## tim49424 (Nov 30, 2013)

Both 7 and 8 have been taken off the map due to Service Disruptions out west. Anybody know why this happened?


----------



## yarrow (Nov 30, 2013)

tim54449 said:


> Both 7 and 8 have been taken off the map due to Service Disruptions out west. Anybody know why this happened?


8 isn't shown making it west of spk and 7 isn't shown east of libby. something must have happened. slide, track problem...?


----------



## oregon pioneer (Nov 30, 2013)

yarrow said:


> tim54449 said:
> 
> 
> > Both 7 and 8 have been taken off the map due to Service Disruptions out west. Anybody know why this happened?
> ...


According to amtrak.com, train 8 was at Sandpoint 4 hours and 12 minutes late, but has not arrived in Libby (maybe never left SPT). Train 7 made it to Libby, but not through to Sandpoint. Can't find anything on the news about why that is.


----------



## EB_OBS (Nov 30, 2013)

oregon pioneer said:


> yarrow said:
> 
> 
> > tim54449 said:
> ...



BNSF freight crew had a rules violation west of Sandpoint, ID.

They passed a stop signal and damaged a switch.


----------



## yarrow (Nov 30, 2013)

EB_OBS said:


> oregon pioneer said:
> 
> 
> > yarrow said:
> ...


good grief. thanks for the info


----------



## montana mike (Nov 30, 2013)

The poor EB just can't cut a break!! Well, we had one day of on time trains--better than none.

:-(


----------



## tim49424 (Nov 30, 2013)

EB_OBS said:


> oregon pioneer said:
> 
> 
> > yarrow said:
> ...


From what I've heard, that's the second time that happened in the last couple weeks.


----------



## tim49424 (Nov 30, 2013)

montana mike said:


> The poor EB just can't cut a break!! Well, we had one day of on time trains--better than none.
> 
> :-(


Today's arrived into CHI about 45 minutes late. Not bad, as it seemedly made all connecting trains.


----------



## montana mike (Nov 30, 2013)

Looks like #8 in eastern MT is several hours late due to the BNSF SNAFU earlier today. Meanwhile 28 left PDX only a little over 2 hours behind. Remarkable, considering it was 6 hours late arriving!


----------



## NW cannonball (Dec 1, 2013)

Now, #8 in eastern Montana has fallen of the map (both JB's and Amtrak's tracker) and it seems today's #8 didn't depart SEA (bustitution?)

Looks like another interesting midnight in Spokane - :wacko:


----------



## the Other Mike (Dec 1, 2013)

Follow the money.

If railroad X is paid minimum $ for allowing Amtrak to use it's rails

and, railroad X is paid a premium for Amtraks "on time" performance ( keeping the tracks clear )

and railroad X pays a penalty for "not keeping the tracks clear"

yet railroad X can earn 100 times more than the penalty to run 40 or 50 other trains

What's the name of the bus driver ?

It's all about the money


----------



## montana mike (Dec 1, 2013)

Back to "normal". Three of the four EBs are "in the red" as usual this Morning. Bummer.


----------



## yarrow (Dec 1, 2013)

i guess amtrak's eb service advisory for novemeber has expired. wonder what the december advisory will look like? "you might get there and you might not. merry xmas from amtrak."


----------



## montana mike (Dec 1, 2013)

I stand corrected--ALL of the EBs currently enroute are in the red--with at least two over 4 hours behind. My BNSF contact said BNSF is back to "normal" freight ops now, so he said expect to see up to 2 hour delays as the EBs travel thru MT and ND each way until a similar holiday schedule around Christmas.


----------



## yarrow (Dec 1, 2013)

montana mike said:


> I stand corrected--ALL of the EBs currently enroute are in the red--with at least two over 4 hours behind. My BNSF contact said BNSF is back to "normal" freight ops now, so he said expect to see up to 2 hour delays as the EBs travel thru MT and ND each way until a similar holiday schedule around Christmas.


we are going spk-chi on 12/26 to connect with the cono. i hope we hit the holiday work lull.


----------



## mwmnp (Dec 1, 2013)

In a few more days, the following information, lifted from the BNSF System Special Instructions, may be relevant. For the Empire Builder, Spokane is where the "regions" split: "Region 1" is the route west of Spokane and "Region 2" is the route east of Spokane to the Twin Cities.







On the CP, cold weather speed restrictions don't go into effect until the temperature reaches -30°F or colder, with the exception of Chicagoland, where a temperature of -10°F or colder may trigger restrictions. In any event, temperatures that cold along the CP line from St. Paul to Chicago are virtually unheard of in this day and age.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 1, 2013)

-20 degrees is pretty standard fare for Eastern MT and much of ND in the winter, so these next 4-5 days should be tough ones for the EBs as well.

:-(


----------



## Joe F (Dec 2, 2013)

Today's eastbound EB is over 9 hours late out of Rugby, ND. Looks like the on-time arrivals in Chicago over the weekend were flukes.

I ride Amtrak MSP-CHI-DER a couple of times a year. The 2 hour connection in Chicago was never a problem, and in nearly 25 years taking this route I never had a bustitution until about 4 years ago. Since then, EVERY trip has involved a bus on one of the two legs. (Eastbound only; the return trip has never been a problem).


----------



## montana mike (Dec 2, 2013)

Sadly you are correct. Every EB is in the red today (back to the "new normal")--looks like #8 currently still in ND will arrive in CHI around 2 AM tomorrow--ouch. I wonder if this will effect the turn around? Even #7/27 in WA/OR are running about 3 hours behind-and should arrive in SEA/PDX about 2 1/2 hours late today. Riders on the Empire Builders will just have to realize that the best they are likely to see are 2 hour delays into CHI, with occasional days where the trains are 6+ hours late, as we are seeing again today. If I was a traveler going thru CHI on #8 I would not book ANY connections that were less than 3 hours, and even that may be pushing it. As my BNSF contact said again over the weekend, they are trying as hard as possible with respect to helping the Empire Builders get thru the challenges on the Hi-Line , but just too many trains and not enough tracks--period………


----------



## Ryan (Dec 2, 2013)

montana mike said:


> As my BNSF contact said again over the weekend, they are trying as hard as possible with respect to helping the Empire Builders get thru the challenges on the Hi-Line , but just too many trains and not enough tracks--period………


I'm not shooting the messenger (you or your friend), but this line is crap. Someone is making a conscious decision to run those "too many trains" and as we saw over the holiday, without them the EB can get through just fine. This is a problem 100% of BNSF's making.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 2, 2013)

RyanS said:


> montana mike said:
> 
> 
> > As my BNSF contact said again over the weekend, they are trying as hard as possible with respect to helping the Empire Builders get thru the challenges on the Hi-Line , but just too many trains and not enough tracks--period………
> ...


Ryan has Nailed it! Amtrak needs to get this Fixed Before the Long, Cold Winter causes even More Problems!


----------



## Ryan (Dec 2, 2013)

Unfortunately, pending the nature of the contract between Amtrak and BNSF (which we don't know), this probably isn't something that Amtrak has the ability to fix. If BNSF makes the business decision that they'll make more money running the "too many trains" and either pay a penalty or forgo bonuses for living up to their end of the bargain and dispatching Amtrak on time, that's exactly what they'll keep on doing.


----------



## yarrow (Dec 2, 2013)

RyanS said:


> If BNSF makes the business decision that they'll make more money running the "too many trains" and either pay a penalty or forgo bonuses for living up to their end of the bargain and dispatching Amtrak on time, that's exactly what they'll keep on doing.


not surprising. bnsf is in the freight business. add in amtrak's equipment problems, which always seem worse in the winter, and it doesn't look pretty.


----------



## Joe F (Dec 2, 2013)

Amtrak's choices are limited, but they could modify the EB schedule to account for this new reality. Adding a second train between MSP and CHI would help as well, but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 2, 2013)

Couple problems with that.

Amtrak doesn't unilaterally set schedules, and any lengthening of the schedule will result in broken connections and the need for more equipment, since the same day turn on the west coast would go away.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 2, 2013)

Based on my lengthy discussions with the local BNSF people I don't think Amtrak has too many options and even if there are some hefty "penalties" built into the deal, BNSF is making so much money moving the additional freight, the Empire Builder's twice a day woes are not even getting Warren Buffett's hair on edge. This IS the new reality and I truly believe Amtrak is "stuck" in a no win situation. They don't have the ability to regularly stage extra equipment to prevent the turns in SPK due to the big delays often generated thru MT and ND, they are bound by agreements with state officials to serve certain towns and cities, which prevents possible routing around the high traffic areas and you are correct, they don't want to admit the reality of mostly broken connections in CHI, since this would indeed eliminate same day turns thru CHI from the west coast and likely decrease EB ridership.

The facts are what they are. It's nice to be able to air our opinions and observations in this great forum, but we are seeing firsthand what can and does happen on this route and will likely remain this way for a long time to come.


----------



## yarrow (Dec 2, 2013)

nice synopsis of the situation, montana mike. if only amtrak would be similarly up front with the traveling public


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 2, 2013)

First major winter storm hitting the Hi Line over the next couple of days. Looks like #7/#8 currently in MT/ND will get through with no more than usual delays. I wouldn't be surprised to see some 4+ hour delays and Spokane turns starting tomorrow, though without any existing snowcover to create big drifts the impacts could also be fairly minimal.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 2, 2013)

Sadly #8, still in MN looks like it will be around 12 HOURS late into CHI tomorrow morning


----------



## Jason McHuff (Dec 2, 2013)

Regarding Empire Builder delays, what is up with this showing 25 hours late then 5 hours late?

The official Amtrak Android app does say that 8 was 25 hours late on the 1st at Glasgow.

Was it something to do with the freight crew screw up?

Currently at MSP waiting to go west and see what happens. Am thankful that 8 arrived on Thanksgiving in time for dinner.


----------



## Jason McHuff (Dec 3, 2013)

Oh, and when I did this trip (PDX-MSP) in 2010, we had three engines going East but there weren't enough good ones to get us up to the pass. We had freight helpers push us, and added a fourth, BNSF engine at Minot. Arrived MSP at 2 AM the next morning.

Am wanting to ask the agents here at MSP how many times they've done the buses (just hope that people find out about them and not just check train status)


----------



## tim49424 (Dec 3, 2013)

I was on tonight's #7 from CHI to TOH. CP made us wait for nearly half an hour about 5 minutes east of CBS for their approaching freight. I remember an OBS (was either a conductor or a/c) telling me a couple years ago that most members of Amtrak crews believe CP dispatchers "over-rates" their speeds and makes the Empire Builder wait unneccessarily. This happened as we had to wait one mile outside of TOH. I couldn't help but think of that discussion again tonight and believes it rings very true yet again. We arrived into TOH one hour late tonight.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 3, 2013)

#8 from yesterday arrived in CHI this morning at 3:29 AM--almost 11 1/2 hours late--ouch!!! #8, currently in Western MT is almost 4 hours late already and has yet to go thru the mess in eastern MT and ND. My guess is it too will be 6-8 hours late in arriving in CHI. Tough times for the EB. :-(


----------



## yarrow (Dec 3, 2013)

i have asked this question before and seem to have some psychic need to ask it every so often. granted that if bnsf didn't run trains on their tracks the eb would have better otp but given that they do and that the eb has had terrible otp for most of the past couple years and that it will continue at least another year, why won't amtrak own up? there was a service notice posted for november which significantly understated the delays but now there is nothing. why won't smilin' joe or an underling post a notice on amtrak.com stating the problem. that would make me happy. just an acknowledgement of the problem. by the way, i did call amtrak customer relations a couple months ago regarding the eb delays. the rep wasn't aware of a problem but did go so far as to check arrival into chi in the couple weeks before my call. her response was along the lines of "gosh, i didn't know about that. that's really bad".


----------



## zephyr17 (Dec 3, 2013)

They probably should do what they did with the Sunset a few years ago, drastically lengthen the published schedule to reflect reality. That was when they put the Sunset's departure from LA back to mid-afternoon. When they changed the schedule last year, they were putting it back to a schedule similiar to what it was before.

For the EB, that probably means making the departure from Seattle quite a bit earlier, which in turn probably shortens the time allowed for turning, which might mean an extra trainset because it can't be turned in time. A trainset Amtrak doesn't have. They were able to do it with the Sunset because it was three times a week and the trainset was already there.

In any case, it is better to have a realistic schedule that can be met than one that can't be for whatever reason. It also would reduce some costs by reducing the misconnects.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 4, 2013)

Today's EB in MN is already 7 1/2 hrs late. Super slow with #7 out of SPK as well--looks like at least 4 hours behind there heading west. :-( I received a reply from Amtrak about the EB issues--just a form letter, didn't even address my question really. Very disappointed.


----------



## Guest (Dec 4, 2013)

Amtrak really does need to work with BNSF to make the schedule more realistic. Currently I wouldn't recommend the EB to anyone right now. I can't imagine how many passengers with these delays will say never again and bad mouth Amtrak to their friends. Adjusting the schedule will break connections and hurt business but I would think business is being hurt already or will be in the future.


----------



## Ispolkom (Dec 4, 2013)

How much Empire Builder travel involves connections? I'm not particularly happy about the constant delays, but since my usual trip is MSP-MOT, the delays are not a deal-breaker for me. Not that I enjoy catching a 3 am train, of course.

Be that as it may, my last trip on the Empire Builder was well within specs. #7 was only half an hour late into Minot, and #8 was 2.5 hours late into Chicago, with plenty of time to catch #448. The bad part was the Lake Shore Limited, where the vacuum in the toilets in our sleeper failed just after departure, and the toilets in our car didn't work all the way to Boston. Another call to Consumer Relations...


----------



## montana mike (Dec 4, 2013)

Given the breakdown now in both directions lately-westbound thru western MT, ID and WA are now also experiencing delays of 2+ hours at least several times a week as well, things aren't getting better. Today's delays are partly weather related, but we aren't looking at the storm of the century here, just more "normal" conditions for the Hi-line in the winter. And Amtrak/BNSF do not adjust the timetable for the winter as we all know.

As to how many people make connections, it would be good to see that number, but I would venture a guess that the number is not insignificant. The local Amtrak agent here in WFH shared with me at the end of last summer that it was costing Amtrak a huge amount of money for hotels and transfers for people missing connections in CHI due to the EB's delays last summer. So much so that it was a lead topic of discussion at several Amtrak regional discussions.


----------



## Jason McHuff (Dec 4, 2013)

7:30 AM and on the Portland section of 7(02) just leaving Spokane. No buses. The Seattle section has the Great Dome and two Horizon coaches for the Leavenworth train.


----------



## yarrow (Dec 4, 2013)

Ispolkom said:


> How much Empire Builder travel involves connections?


good question. our travel on the eb nearly always involves connections at either sea/pdx or chi. on our trip to atl in mid-september we got into chi at midnight and those of us with connections more than filled one bus which amtrak used to take us to our hotel. late arrivals i don't mind so much. it's the missed connections that impact out travel. on our return in september we got into spk at 10:30am instead of 1:30am which was great (not to mention running along the kootenai river in daylight)


----------



## zephyr17 (Dec 4, 2013)

Last December when I was on a 12 hour late edition of 8, most folks in my car were making connections (including me). Once we arrived in Chicago, It sure seemed like most of the passengers crowded into Passenger Services getting their revised arrangements. So solely based on what I observed, I would say coming into Chicago, a very significant number of passengers are making connections.

The situation is bad, approaching the UP induced Sunset meltdowns and Starlate issues of the past. It is a wonder the loads have held up (Williston probably helps). Considering the Builder is Amtrak's poster child LD train, they really ought to do something about it beyond breaking out the Dinty Moore.


----------



## yarrow (Dec 4, 2013)

jb's status map for the eb is just bizarre. 8 will be 12+ hours late into chi. 7/27 that were due in sea/pdx this morning won't get their until about their scheduled departure time this afternoon. 7 and 8 in Montana are doing their best to fall way behind. ???????


----------



## oregon pioneer (Dec 4, 2013)

We are booked on the Builder leaving PDX Monday afternoon, and all I can say is: I am glad we are booked in a sleeper, and I am glad we are not trying for a connection to another LD train.

But it looks like we are probably in for a late night (or early morning) bus ride to Springfield.


----------



## Joe F (Dec 5, 2013)

I nearly always connect from the EB to Wolverine 354 in Chicago. With a (theoretical) arrival time of 3:55 and a departure of 6:00, making this connection has become nothing more than a fond memory in the past few years. If the EB is seriously late, Amtrak will run a bus from MSP to CHI for people making connections. It works, but it's not the reason I ride Amtrak.

For my next trip, I'm seriously considering taking the Megabus from MSP to CHI. If I'm going to be on a bus anyway, I might as well save some money in the process.


----------



## yarrow (Dec 5, 2013)

who, at amtrak, in charge of the eb? and what in the heck do they do? iirc ,i remember when the recently retired brian rosenwald, a great amtrak employee imho, was in charge of the cs. he took personal responsibility for problems and fixed them to the customer's satisfaction


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 5, 2013)

This has been said many times, but Amtrak just needs to have more flexibility and change the schedules. Even if it means cobbling together a sixth trainset (best option) or breaking all eastbound connections in Chicago by having the #8 arrive c. 10 pm (with a matching later departure from the west coast). Traffic volumes on the railroad have increased nearly 50% with the oil boom. That's not BNSF's fault - it's not fair for a relatively minor interest to ask a company in the business of hauling freight to refuse shipments - and any efforts to expand capacity such as are presently underway will have the near term effect of making problems worse with construction zones, slow orders, etc.

When a delay is predictable, as with road construction or rush hour traffic, the only prudent response is to adapt to the delay and then reassess the situation if and when the heavy traffic/construction delays end.

Heck, Amtrak could even contract with a hotel in Chicago to allow booking of overnight connections from the EB. That would add cost to the tickets and time to the journey, but it would save Amtrak money and would be preferable to the uncertainty of the current situation.


----------



## Joe F (Dec 5, 2013)

I wonder what percentage of connecting passengers originate in MSP and points east? If this number is significant, Amtrak might consider adding a second MSP-CHI train to take the load off the EB. A better on-time performance might induce others to ride the train -- people who won't consider it now because of the delays and missed connections.


----------



## zephyr17 (Dec 5, 2013)

Don't they already usually put on an OT bus for passengers boarding at MSP and points east when the Builder is super late? Or did they stop that for some reason?

Don't get me wrong, I think CHI-MSP makes perfect sense as a corridor, but the main justification would not be just to protect connections. In any case, it would be subject to the PRIIA rule that runs under 750 miles have to be funded by the states, and Wisconsin seems to be a problem there.


----------



## tim49424 (Dec 5, 2013)

zephyr17 said:


> Don't they already usually put on an OT bus for passengers boarding at MSP and points east when the Builder is super late? Or did they stop that for some reason?


I think it usually depends on how late the train is and what's facing #8 the night before. The times a bus has taken me from TOH to either MKE (to catch the Hiawatha) or CHI, I've received a call from Amtrak between 2 PM and 7 PM Central Time. If I don't receive a call by 7 PM, I just assume the train will be taking me to CHI and if my connection is missed, alternate transportation is arranged from there. The announcement is made shortly after we depart MKE if the latter is the case and we are told to go to Passenger Services for the details once we arrive at CUS.


----------



## Joe F (Dec 6, 2013)

I think the decision to run a bus from MSP to CHI is at the discretion of MSP station personnel. If the EB is running 3-4 hours late or more, they will order a bus; otherwise, missed connections are dealt with in Chicago.

On one trip I took this past August, the EB was running about 1-2 hours late in ND, and they decided not to order the bus. By the time it reached MSP, it was down 6 hours. I got into Chicago around 10 PM, and was bussed to Dearborn from there. Arrived DER at 4:30 AM!


----------



## Ryan (Dec 6, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> That's not BNSF's fault - it's not fair for a relatively minor interest to ask a company in the business of hauling freight to refuse shipments


Like hell it isn't. Those trains don't just magically appear.

It's "not fair" to expect that a company honor agreements that they've made? How would you feel if you bought an Amtrak ticket and showed up at the station and the conductor said "I know you've paid for this ticket and all, but that guy over there is willing to pay $50 bucks more for your room. Pay up, or I'm selling the room to him". I'd be pretty pissed myself.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 6, 2013)

So why has Amtrak tolerated this mess for almost the entire 2013?


----------



## Ryan (Dec 6, 2013)

That is nearly as inexcusable.

Their problem is that lengthening the schedule means you need a 6th trainset, and I don't think they have the equipment for that.

It's a problem that doesn't have a quick and easy solution so long as BNSF continues to refuse to dispatch Amtrak on time.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 6, 2013)

When is a Contract not a Contract? Perhaps One of our Attorney Members can shed some Light on this Mess? (Pro Bono of Course!  )


----------



## montana mike (Dec 6, 2013)

Sorry, but Amtrak going up against BNSF and a guy who has one of the deepest pockets in the entire world, is not an option. I have had clients who had solid cases against the US government for example, and we were told point blank to our faces by the govt lawyers to go ahead and try to sue them, because in 5 years when the case was still being litigated and we were out of money the government would "win" anyway. This is similar, except in this case Amtrak is the poor stepchild and it is the commercial entity holding all of the cards.

Sad to say this really isn't a case of right or wrong, but the reality of what has happened on this line. My BNSF guy said he believes they are paying some penalties, per the contract, for the delays outside the established parameters, which clearly does not appear to be bothering Berkshire Hathaway at all. He also noted, rather pointedly, two very key points: (1) Amtrak is a tiny, tiny part of BNSF's operation, and (2) that a certain percentage of the very lengthy delays experienced by Amtrak trains on the Hi-Line this year (outside of BNSF derailments, which evidently don't kick in any penalties) were due at least in part or significantly to Amtrak equipment issues.

No easy answers here. That is why I say people from both Amtrak and BNSF need to look at what is realistic and what can be done, both short term and long term (one would hope long term the $1.4 Billion that BNSF is spending on the Hi-Line will make a big difference-we won't know until it is all done in a couple years though will we).

Based on all of the replies from Amtrak customer relations so far it would appear they are willing to just take the hits and live with the very long delays.


----------



## Ispolkom (Dec 6, 2013)

> My BNSF guy said he believes they are paying some penalties, per the contract, for the delays outside the established parameters, which clearly does not appear to be bothering Berkshire Hathaway at all.


This is what I thought must be the case. Could Amtrak actually force BNSF to forego business so that the Empire Builder runs on time? Wouldn't any court case instead focus on the issue of how much BNSF had to pay for violating its contract? My ignorance of civil law is very deep, so I'd be happy to be wrong.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 6, 2013)

After Reading Montana Mikes Last Post perhaps its time for the Politicians to get Involved! As the Old saying Goes, from the Courthouse to the White House! I still wonder if Warren Buffet got a Call from the Veep Amtrak Joe Biden or even President Obama about Working Something Out Between BNSF and Amtrak that a Reasonable Solution to this Issue Couldnt Be Found????

This is Costing Amtrak LOTS of Money that they really Don't have! Perhaps Joe Boardman and Amtrak's Crack Political Liaison Department could get the Mayors, Governors and Congress Critters from the Involved Cities, Districts and States Involved in this Situation????


----------



## Ryan (Dec 6, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Sad to say this really isn't a case of right or wrong, but the reality of what has happened on this line.


Bull.

It's very clearly a case of what's right and what's wrong.

BNSF has made a business decision that making more money comes before honoring their commitments to Amtrak. It's a business decision that corporations make every day, and it's bulls--t.

Realistically, Amtrak has no options. They can do a better job of communicating the utter trainwreck (no pun intended) that the Empire Builder is and will be until either a) additional equipment is procured or b) BNSF adds enough capability or freight traffic decreases enough to allow them to get Amtrak to get over the road on the agreed upon schedule.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 6, 2013)

You answered your own comment in the last paragraph--Amtrak has no options.

This is how the REAL world operates--like it or not. And sadly I think WB would likely ignore Amtrak Joe--I know I would (just as the Chinese just not so politely told him to go back to the US and sit down and shut up over the air space issues in the far east this week).

If BNSF is paying the fines IAW the contract I don't see where Amtrak has any recourse, legal or otherwise.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 6, 2013)

montana mike said:


> This is how the REAL world operates--like it or not.


I don't.

We can either sit back and take it, or try and do something about it, and I'm not going to just sit by and give BNSF a pass because they're holding all of the cards.

When I make an agreement, I do my best to live up to it. The world would be a better place if more people thought and acted that way.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 6, 2013)

Where is BNSF not living up to the LETTER of the contract? They are causing delays and paying for them, IAW the contract. I think any of our lawyers would say there is no "breach of contract" here. That is why the penalty clauses are in place. We don't know how much AMtrak is getting in this situation. But my guess is the fact that we haven't seen ANY public squawking about this mess would indicate that BNSF is fully complying with the Quid Pro Quo in that contract and therefore Amtrak is either in no position to do anything else and/or the compensation is such that it compensates them fully for the mess in Chicago (and along the route) and perhaps then some.

The entire idea behind penalty clauses in contracts (I was contracting officer for years) is to try to make the party that has been "injured" whole via compensating factors--either in the form of cash or other mitigating actions. It would appear this is in place.

PS--I have never gotten the impression from any of my discussions with the BNSF people that they aren't trying very hard to make things work. They have just been overwhelmed with circumstances (yes, some of the company's own doing) and they are at least putting a vast amount of resources into this region to improve the situation, but please remember the construction season on the Hi-Line is only about 6 months long, so any and all "fixes" will take longer than say in the SE or SW US. Plus we have avalanches, floods and other wonderful natural occurrences that are an ongoing challenge. For example, I look at how much BNSF is spending to mitigate (finally) the mudslide areas north of Seattle--big bucks.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 6, 2013)

Where did I say that they weren't living up to the "LETTER of the contract"?

(hint: I didn't)

BNSF is legally 100% in the right. I'm a federal contractor and understand how contracts work.

I'm speaking morally, and in that realm, BNSF is in the wrong. They agreed to handle Amtrak on-schedule and then abandoned that when they were put in a position to make more money. Same as most other corporation out there. Screw the little guy, as long as they can get away with it legally and it helps the bottom line.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 6, 2013)

As a federal contractor--as part of my company is as well-- you should know very well that the first entity to "screw the little guy" is the federal government--brutal. I have been on BOTH sides of the aisle in this situation and there is no harsher, unfeeling, uncaring entity to deal with than federal bureaucrats.

Sadly, if the Amtrak people weren't smart enough to build into their contract with BNSF safeguards to adequately protect them, then they have no one to blame but themselves.

I would suggest you take a ride all the way on the Hi-Line and see first hand what BNSF is trying to do the "fix" the mess and the challenges they face (for example the years and years of EIS and permitting required to do anything on NPS land, USFS land). I am not defending BNSF (they should have reacted better and more quickly to this mega change in this region, but they didn't), just pointing out the reality of the situation.


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 6, 2013)

I take a somewhat different perspective here. Sure we can say that BNSF didn't live up to its contract and fight over that. But let's look at what is really happening.

Railroads are infrastructure that move freight - essential for the operation of our society. Sure corporations make money in the process, but the truth is that we all like to drive, fly, etc., and it so happens that much of the oil that is keeping our fossil fuel economy afloat is coming from North Dakota. Like it or not, we have collectively decided not to build much in the way of new pipelines, which means the oil has to move by rail. I don't blame BNSF for not seeing this coming in 2003 and starting upgrades then. They had no way of knowing at the time how much oil there would be and how many pipelines might get built.

Now we have the rail equivalent of congested highway made more congested by emergency construction to expand the highway. Now imagine if a city bus operator had a contract with the construction company that their buses must always get through on time, or else. Would the resultant delays to construction and other traffic be worth it, or would it be better overall to renegotiate the contract?

We are all of us, at the gas pump, benefiting from the oil BNSF is hauling. It's not about BNSF being a greedy corporation; it's about BNSF being a cog in the giant machine that feeds energy into modern society. Rather than force BNSF to run a highly inefficient operation (by clearing all trains from the main to let Amtrak through), let's renegotiate the contract for the time being, setting a schedule that allows Amtrak to run reliably on time and that allows BNSF to get their trains over the road and their tracks upgraded.

Mark


----------



## montana mike (Dec 6, 2013)

Bravo! Good Points


----------



## oregon pioneer (Dec 6, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> Railroads are infrastructure that move freight - essential for the operation of our society. Sure corporations make money in the process, but the truth is that we all like to drive, fly, etc., and it so happens that much of the oil that is keeping our fossil fuel economy afloat is coming from North Dakota. Like it or not, we have collectively decided not to build much in the way of new pipelines, which means the oil has to move by rail. I don't blame BNSF for not seeing this coming in 2003 and starting upgrades then. They had no way of knowing at the time how much oil there would be and how many pipelines might get built.


It's not so much about whether we've decided to build pipelines -- the fact is, railroads have beaten the pipeline guys by underbidding them. Transporting crude by rail is dangerous in a different way than potentially leaky pipelines, as the accident in Lac-Mégantic Canada illustrated. One of the reasons I like rail travel is that it's a more efficient use of energy resources (but that's another topic...). Anir, you make some good points -- but not all of us want to keep pumping oil like there's no tomorrow.


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 6, 2013)

I don't actually want to keep pumping oil - I'm working on a PhD in alternative energy at the moment and see quite a bit of promise in wind, solar, biomass, hydro, wave power, geothermal, and even the much-maligned nuclear power (in smaller, safer, modular plants). My point is that we're not pumping oil because corporations can make money. We're pumping oil because our society as it is built needs that oil. Now if we can transition to some combination of alternatives before the oil runs out that will make our future look quite a bit brighter, but in the meantime the unfortunate truth is that we need oil and lots of it.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 6, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> I don't actually want to keep pumping oil - I'm working on a PhD in alternative energy at the moment and see quite a bit of promise in wind, solar, biomass, hydro, wave power, geothermal, and even the much-maligned nuclear power (in smaller, safer, modular plants). My point is that we're not pumping oil because corporations can make money. We're pumping oil because our society as it is built needs that oil. Now if we can transition to some combination of alternatives before the oil runs out that will make our future look quite a bit brighter, but in the meantime the unfortunate truth is that we need oil and lots of it.


Excellent Points! You sound like you'lll make an Excellent Energy Company Scientist and Future CEO! Keep on Keeping On!

(and I'm not a Fan of Atomic Energy due to the Cost and Safety Factors!)


----------



## yarrow (Dec 6, 2013)

montana mike said:


> That is why the penalty clauses are in place. We don't know how much AMtrak is getting in this situation. But my guess is the fact that we haven't seen ANY public squawking about this mess would indicate that BNSF is fully complying with the Quid Pro Quo in that contract and therefore Amtrak is either in no position to do anything else and/or the compensation is such that it compensates them fully for the mess in Chicago (and along the route) and perhaps then some.
> 
> The entire idea behind penalty clauses in contracts (I was contracting officer for years) is to try to make the party that has been "injured" whole via compensating factors--either in the form of cash or other mitigating actions. It would appear this is in place.


very interesting. speculation of course, but i had never considered the idea that smilin' joe boardman might be making money off this and just leaving the passenger/subsidizer to twist slowly in the wind


----------



## jebr (Dec 6, 2013)

What's happening with 8(4) today? It lost 4 hours between GFK and FAR and is stuck a few miles out of SPL. If it wasn't so bitterly cold, I'd almost drive over there myself to see what's happening.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 6, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> Now we have the rail equivalent of congested highway made more congested by emergency construction to expand the highway. Now imagine if a city bus operator had a contract with the construction company that their buses must always get through on time, or else. Would the resultant delays to construction and other traffic be worth it, or would it be better overall to renegotiate the contract?


Well thought out post, but this isn't happening, there is no construction happening right now. The only thing holding up Amtrak is the number of trains BNSF is choosing to run.

I didn't say anything all summer when construction was causing the delays, because I agree - it's worth an inconvenience now to get the upgrades in.

But now that the construction season is over, that excuse is no longer valid.


----------



## guest (Dec 6, 2013)

yarrow said:


> montana mike said:
> 
> 
> > That is why the penalty clauses are in place. We don't know how much AMtrak is getting in this situation. But my guess is the fact that we haven't seen ANY public squawking about this mess would indicate that BNSF is fully complying with the Quid Pro Quo in that contract and therefore Amtrak is either in no position to do anything else and/or the compensation is such that it compensates them fully for the mess in Chicago (and along the route) and perhaps then some.
> ...


Yeah that's exactly what he's doing, old Smilin' Joe. Yep. That's gotta be it. Duping us poor taxpayers/ticket buyers so that he can feather his own nest. I am sure he is so clever that no one but an AU member could figure it out.


----------



## yarrow (Dec 6, 2013)

guest said:


> yarrow said:
> 
> 
> > montana mike said:
> ...


glad you agree


----------



## Ispolkom (Dec 6, 2013)

jebr said:


> What's happening with 8(4) today? It lost 4 hours between GFK and FAR and is stuck a few miles out of SPL. If it wasn't so bitterly cold, I'd almost drive over there myself to see what's happening.


Perhaps the weather has something to do with the delay. Weather.com claims that in Staples it's -20 (real temp, not windchill), and if something breaks down, it's painfully hard to work on metal at that temp. Plus, Amtrak's locomotives seem not to handle cold very well.


----------



## guest (Dec 6, 2013)

I read on the outstate MN yahoo group that #8 through Minnesota today had a grade crossing incident: Here's what they said.

Somewhere East of Philbrook on single track. Lead locomotive (AMTK 90) is damaged to the point where it needs to be set out.


----------



## TraneMan (Dec 6, 2013)

Looks like 8 is moving at last.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 7, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> I don't actually want to keep pumping oil - I'm working on a PhD in alternative energy at the moment and see quite a bit of promise in wind, solar, biomass, hydro, wave power, geothermal, and even the much-maligned nuclear power (in smaller, safer, modular plants). My point is that we're not pumping oil because corporations can make money. We're pumping oil because our society as it is built needs that oil. Now if we can transition to some combination of alternatives before the oil runs out that will make our future look quite a bit brighter, but in the meantime the unfortunate truth is that we need oil and lots of it.


I'd agree on all points except that "we" designed a great amount of infrstructure around oil and to keep that infrastructure going we are going to keep making that oil, and also because oil companies have been making massive profits off of this investment at all stages of the process. The fossil fuel industry has done more than enough to make sure we suck up every last drop before they will allow the consensus to drift towards an alternative-energy future.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 7, 2013)

ALC Rail Writer said:


> anir dendroica said:
> 
> 
> > I don't actually want to keep pumping oil - I'm working on a PhD in alternative energy at the moment and see quite a bit of promise in wind, solar, biomass, hydro, wave power, geothermal, and even the much-maligned nuclear power (in smaller, safer, modular plants). My point is that we're not pumping oil because corporations can make money. We're pumping oil because our society as it is built needs that oil. Now if we can transition to some combination of alternatives before the oil runs out that will make our future look quite a bit brighter, but in the meantime the unfortunate truth is that we need oil and lots of it.
> ...


I don't want to sound like I am defending the energy firms, I am not, but if you looked at the top 5 integrated energy firms their ROI's are less than half of what firms like Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc… are making. It isn't about profits, it's about what our economy is based on. We rely on fossil based items for far more than just fuels. Look around you-from the computer you typed your messages on, to the smart phone you communicate with, to the clothes you wear (unless you can make it with just all cotton-except your waistband on underwear is almost always spandex, not cotton!), to the food we eat, I could go on and on…..these types of changes take decades, many decades. They will change of course, but not overnight. Every time I look at the hundreds of wind turbines along the Rocky Mtn front a couple hours from where I live, I see both the promise of change but at a huge cost. These turbines operate about 30% of the time, producing electricity at about 3 times the cost of our hydro and coal power here in MT. They "sell" this power into the grid, which is great, but it raises all of our rates accordingly, but if we jumped into trying to add thousands of these turbines to get rid of other power sources (as some are trying to do), our electricity costs would be untenable …change takes time. And, oh yes, we the people pay the operators of these turbines when they don't run (too much or too little wind), because if we didn't they wouldn't have the cash to operate them…

I am a great believer in the ability of our society to find new ways to do things, but it needs to be driven by demand and need, not by some artificial fiat.

One great example of both the best and worst of how the marketplace can and does work well is the continuing change in the way our vehicles are powered. Our federal government spent $2.1 BILLION with GM to create and build the "Volt"-and what did they come up with? A car that goes 27 miles on a single electric charge and 33 mpg on its 4 cylinder motor-all for an astounding price of $45K-and oh, yes, MUST use premium fuel! Average sales less than 2000 a month, with some of those sales to federal agencies to use as "VIP" cars. Makes no sense. Now look at the Toyota Prius. ZERO government money, a demand based hybrid vehicle that people want. The hybrid drive gets 50 mpg, uses regular fuel and cost $22K, and more importantly over a million have been sold. I have driven both of these cars and the Prius is the better choice. Demand based vs government driven. Simple choice here. And guess what, Toyota and Honda are coming out some time in 2015 with their first Fuel Cell vehicles--again, no federal fiat here. They see the demand and the need and have embraced the opportunity.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 7, 2013)

Amazingly Amtrak is sending both 7 and 27 on to SEA and PDX respectively. Even though they are both 6 hours late. Which means the departing #8/28 this evening will be a late starter. Perhaps they figured things are so out of whack now another r4-6 hours behind won't be that big of a deal?


----------



## yarrow (Dec 7, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Amazingly Amtrak is sending both 7 and 27 on to SEA and PDX respectively. Even though they are both 6 hours late. Which means the departing #8/28 this evening will be a late starter. Perhaps they figured things are so out of whack now another r4-6 hours behind won't be that big of a deal?


pretty amazing status map. all red.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 7, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Amazingly Amtrak is sending both 7 and 27 on to SEA and PDX respectively. Even though they are both 6 hours late. Which means the departing #8/28 this evening will be a late starter. Perhaps they figured things are so out of whack now another r4-6 hours behind won't be that big of a deal?


Possibly thinking they can terminate that train anywhere and send it back to the West coast on time if they have to...


----------



## tim49424 (Dec 7, 2013)

My guess is that a turn in Seattle is still inevitable in the next few days. I too was pretty surprised it wasn't today.

Also, I've been told that #7 likely doesn't leave Chicago today before 6 PM.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 7, 2013)

Amtrak currently shows a 90 minute delay in departure, but you may be closer to the mark.


----------



## tim49424 (Dec 7, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Amtrak currently shows a 90 minute delay in departure, but you may be closer to the mark.


I got that from someone who works for Amtrak.

EDIT: Much to our surprise (my Amtrak friend and myself) your information was spot on. #7 departed 1 hour and 32 minutes late from Chicago. That's much better than the anticipated 6 PM departure. The reason why he got that estimate was at the time he heard from his people that there was no crew yet for #7 nor was there a replacement engine from the accident with the semi. Both, obviously, were found in quicker order than anticipated. IMO, look for there to be considerable time loss, however, because of the late departure and Metra, CP and BNSF traffic, plus the bitter cold in Wisconsin and states westward.


----------



## NAVYBLUE (Dec 7, 2013)

Curious. With the 7 and 8 delays of 4-10 hrs, are not the crews timing out between their scheduled crew changes of WIN, SCD, MOT, SBY AND SPK in the middle of nowhere or are they just lucky that they are getting to the crew change locations before they time out ? I would think that would further compound the problems if it happened on a frequent level. Just wondering.

NAVYBLUE


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 7, 2013)

Even by Montana standards, these numbers are crazy. Hope everyone stays warm, and that the trains stay moving.

-50F Wind Chills in Montana Coldest On Earth As Of Now


----------



## EB_OBS (Dec 7, 2013)

NAVYBLUE said:


> Curious. With the 7 and 8 delays of 4-10 hrs, are not the crews timing out between their scheduled crew changes of WIN, SCD, MOT, SBY AND SPK in the middle of nowhere or are they just lucky that they are getting to the crew change locations before they time out ? I would think that would further compound the problems if it happened on a frequent level. Just wondering.
> 
> NAVYBLUE


Some crew are expiring on HoS. Most crews are receiving set-backs to their on-duty time but some crews are still having to be dog caught in order to keep the trains moving. So far, at least for Amtrak anyway, trains haven't been delayed due to crew and staffing issues.

Unfortunately, after several days like this, going on three in a row now, you begin to run out of qualified and rested people.


----------



## EB_OBS (Dec 7, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Amazingly Amtrak is sending both 7 and 27 on to SEA and PDX respectively. Even though they are both 6 hours late. Which means the departing #8/28 this evening will be a late starter. Perhaps they figured things are so out of whack now another r4-6 hours behind won't be that big of a deal?


There weren't any buses available this morning. #7(7) will be turning here.


----------



## Ispolkom (Dec 8, 2013)

CHamilton said:


> Even by Montana standards, these numbers are crazy. Hope everyone stays warm, and that the trains stay moving.
> 
> -50F Wind Chills in Montana Coldest On Earth As Of Now


Oh, it's cold, don't get me wrong, but I grew up in Minot. Is a -50 wind chill that cold for the Hi Line? It's miserable, and maybe a little early in the season, but I always associate winter with snow that's so cold it squeaks, sun dogs, and, when walking into the cold wind, my eyes tearing up and the tears freezing on my knitted facemask.

But still, God help anyone who has to work outside in this sort of cold.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 8, 2013)

I see #7 just into MT (and at the time 6+ hours late) experienced a "service disruption". Anyone know what happened? All of the other EBs are in the red as well-what a mess.

:-((


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 8, 2013)

montana mike said:


> I see #7 just into MT (and at the time 6+ hours late) experienced a "service disruption". Anyone know what happened? All of the other EBs are in the red as well-what a mess.
> 
> :-((


Have you ever seen "The Day After Tomorrow"? That might give you a clue... lol.


----------



## oregon pioneer (Dec 8, 2013)

EB_OBS said:


> montana mike said:
> 
> 
> > Amazingly Amtrak is sending both 7 and 27 on to SEA and PDX respectively. Even though they are both 6 hours late. Which means the departing #8/28 this evening will be a late starter. Perhaps they figured things are so out of whack now another r4-6 hours behind won't be that big of a deal?
> ...


So, if the buses aren't available, they have to run the train through?

And Rail Writer, this kind of weather _*used to be*_ normal in these kinds of places! Hasn't been down near our "average" annual lows for 3 years, and hasn't been what we used to call a "cold" winter for more than a decade (at least here in Eastern Oregon, minus 22 right now, our "average" used to be -25° to -30°. But I guess they keep the infrastructure up for the weather they expect.


----------



## AlanB (Dec 8, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Where is BNSF not living up to the LETTER of the contract? They are causing delays and paying for them, IAW the contract. I think any of our lawyers would say there is no "breach of contract" here. That is why the penalty clauses are in place. We don't know how much AMtrak is getting in this situation. But my guess is the fact that we haven't seen ANY public squawking about this mess would indicate that BNSF is fully complying with the Quid Pro Quo in that contract and therefore Amtrak is either in no position to do anything else and/or the compensation is such that it compensates them fully for the mess in Chicago (and along the route) and perhaps then some.
> 
> The entire idea behind penalty clauses in contracts (I was contracting officer for years) is to try to make the party that has been "injured" whole via compensating factors--either in the form of cash or other mitigating actions.


Um, there are no penalty clauses in the contract. That is the problem! It costs BNSF nothing to delay Amtrak.
The PRIIA Act from 2008 had penalty clauses that for the first time in its history, would have given Amtrak greater recourse. But those just got tossed out by a judge because Amtrak was too involved in the process of deciding what offenses are worthy of punishment and how much to pay.

That said, BNSF is still loosing money in that Amtrak isn't paying then anything for the incentive side of things, where on time trains mean extra cash for the host.


----------



## PRR 60 (Dec 8, 2013)

AlanB said:


> montana mike said:
> 
> 
> > Where is BNSF not living up to the LETTER of the contract? They are causing delays and paying for them, IAW the contract. I think any of our lawyers would say there is no "breach of contract" here. That is why the penalty clauses are in place. We don't know how much AMtrak is getting in this situation. But my guess is the fact that we haven't seen ANY public squawking about this mess would indicate that BNSF is fully complying with the Quid Pro Quo in that contract and therefore Amtrak is either in no position to do anything else and/or the compensation is such that it compensates them fully for the mess in Chicago (and along the route) and perhaps then some.
> ...


The contracts provide bonus payments for on-time performance. By not operating Amtrak on-time, BNSF is forfeiting the bonus payments. In that sense, delaying Amtrak does cost BNSF.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 8, 2013)

LOL. I showed this to my local BNSF guy just now--and he said do people realize how many freights are on the Hi-Line each day? He said BNSF is in the business of moving freight trains and does their best to accommodate Amtrak, but the "peanuts" (his wording) that BNSF would get to make sure the Empire Builder arrived on time are very tiny compared to BNSF's overall revenues. He also was adamant that BNSF does try very hard to keep the Amtrak trains on schedule, but the past 7-10 have seen a combo of weather mandated slowdowns, accidents, equipment failures, very heavy freight traffic movements (he said this is a story in itself) as well as crew issues.

I do agree though with the statement that there really isn't much, if anything, Amtrak can do, other than begging and pleading, to improve the situation.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 8, 2013)

We're well aware of how many freight trains are out there.

We're also well aware of the fact that they're there BNSF made a business decision to give up the money they would get from running Amtrak on time in exchange for more revenue from running freights.

Legally, they're well within their right to do so, as long as you're willing to condone just walking away from agreements you've made to chase higher profits. Money before morality, just like 90% of the other companies out there, and the traveling public gets screwed.

If they were truly doing their best to move Amtrak on time, they would run a number of freight trains that allowed them to do so. But they don't, with the obvious results.

It's better to be a BNSF shareholder than an Amtrak passenger.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 8, 2013)

Berkshire Hathaway--Warren Buffett is Da Man! Perhaps you and others could pen him a note about the mess he has created. My guess is if anyone does get a reply it will be a form letter thanking them for their interest in BH and not address the issues at all.

:-(

While this total collapse in Amtrak's schedule on the Hi-Line is a big deal to those of us who ride the rails frequently I think you will agree WB and his minions could care less about Amtrak's troubles.


----------



## AlanB (Dec 8, 2013)

montana mike said:


> LOL. I showed this to my local BNSF guy just now--and he said do people realize how many freights are on the Hi-Line each day? He said BNSF is in the business of moving freight trains and does their best to accommodate Amtrak, but the "peanuts" (his wording) that BNSF would get to make sure the Empire Builder arrived on time are very tiny compared to BNSF's overall revenues. He also was adamant that BNSF does try very hard to keep the Amtrak trains on schedule, but the past 7-10 have seen a combo of weather mandated slowdowns, accidents, equipment failures, very heavy freight traffic movements (he said this is a story in itself) as well as crew issues.
> 
> I do agree though with the statement that there really isn't much, if anything, Amtrak can do, other than begging and pleading, to improve the situation.


In general I would agree that BNSF actually does a pretty good job regarding Amtrak. In fact, at least as of two years ago or so, BNSF maintained an Amtrak desk staffed by an employee 24/7 who's sole job was to monitor all Amtrak services and ensure that Amtrak was getting the best possible treatment from the dispatchers. In fact, that employee had the power to overrule a local dispatcher and order him/her to put a freight in the hole instead of an Amtrak train.

But that still doesn't change the fact that BNSF has simply taken on more than they can handle period. Not just for Amtrak, but for themselves. This is NOT sound business management IMHO. And it doesn't change the fact that BNSF has an obligation to Amtrak and its contract with Amtrak. And in fact, Amtrak would not even exist but for the fact that BNSF's predecessors wanted out of the passenger rail business.


----------



## jebr (Dec 8, 2013)

AlanB said:


> But that still doesn't change the fact that BNSF has simply taken on more than they can handle period. Not just for Amtrak, but for themselves. This is NOT sound business management IMHO. And it doesn't change the fact that BNSF has an obligation to Amtrak and its contract with Amtrak. And in fact, Amtrak would not even exist but for the fact that BNSF's predecessors wanted out of the passenger rail business.


I wonder what other shippers are getting delayed freights as well and how BNSF is reacting to that. I remember CHamilton having a delayed package due to a train on that line running late as well. I'm sure that doesn't help out either, if other (more profitable for BNSF) shippers are getting delayed as well.


----------



## jebr (Dec 8, 2013)

...and 8(6) is nearly twelve hours late into MSP again. Maybe my dream of an overnight (MSP- CHI) EB will come through, thanks to BNSF's consistent delays! h34r:


----------



## montana mike (Dec 9, 2013)

I could not agree more that BNSF has indeed gotten themselves into a pickle here-dragging their "tenant" with them. Getting out of the mess is going to take time and diligent efforts by BOTH BNSF and Amtrak though sadly. My BNSF contacts have been somewhat circumspect on their own delays, other than to say they too are "quite challenged" in moving freight at the moment as well.

With weather conditions returning to normal this week this might help a bit, but clearly the weather is not the main factor now driving these horrendous delays in ALL of the Empire Builders. We have all seen past big time delays as a result of derailments, flooding, etc., but these were mostly "one-offs" that usually effected one or a couple trains and were cleared up reasonably quickly. Just looking at what is happening over the past week is downright scary, just about every eastbound EB is losing so much time that 8-12 hour delays are showing up on a regular basis and now 4-6 hour delays and longer going westbound-where they have no margin of error at all. Looking at current temps in MT and ND they appear to be a few degrees either side of zero, which for the Hi-Line is not really extraordinary at all. I would not want to be the person(s) at Amtrak and BNSF trying to make some sense of this mess. :-(


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 9, 2013)

The Builder's problems have hit the AP wires.

Traffic, construction hurts Amtrak's performance



> The Associated Press
> 
> KALISPELL, Mont. —
> 
> ...


----------



## montana mike (Dec 9, 2013)

Yup, no surprises at all. Trying to figure out where they got those overall percentages for October and November. I know December's numbers will be very grim. As we have been saying the light at the end of the tunnel is more like an oncoming freight!!!


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 9, 2013)

38 trains per day on a single-track railroad is really pushing it. I sure wouldn't want to be a dispatcher...


----------



## montana mike (Dec 9, 2013)

Going to 48 in the next year or so according to reliable sources!!! Yikes. A little puzzling--the construction is over and performance has done anything but improve……..

btw-#7 is still in CHI, hopefully just a minor departure delay.


----------



## Joe F (Dec 9, 2013)

CHamilton said:


> The Builder's problems have hit the AP wires.
> 
> Traffic, construction hurts Amtrak's performance
> 
> ...


"Less-than-reliable" is an understatement! Today's 8/28 departed Detroit Lakes, MN at 2:30 PM -- 11 hours and 20 minutes late. My guess is that departure from MSP will be 12+ hours late.

My usual connection to Wolverine #354 in Chicago is nothing more than a fond memory. However, if this trend continues, I could make a connection to #350 with a 7:20 AM departure.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 9, 2013)

#7 has still not departed from CHI, approaching a 2 hour delay. Understandable given the very late arrival of #8 (11 hours and 25 minutes late-ouch), which will be duplicated by today's (or should I say tomorrow morning's arrival of #8-likely also around 4 AM!!!)

Grim, grim, grim…….


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 9, 2013)

montana mike said:


> #7 has still not departed from CHI, approaching a 2 hour delay. Understandable given the very late arrival of #8 (11 hours and 25 minutes late-ouch), which will be duplicated by today's (or should I say tomorrow morning's arrival of #8-likely also around 4 AM!!!)
> 
> Grim, grim, grim…….


Not Understandable to Me when the Chicago Yard Gang Can't Service and Turn a Train in 10 Hours????  New Management was Put into Chicago to Shape Up All Areas of Amtrak Service Including the Notorious "Lick and a Spittle" Yard and Mechanical Crews!!


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 9, 2013)

oregon pioneer said:


> EB_OBS said:
> 
> 
> > montana mike said:
> ...


Yes the weather here in Ohio has been seasonably cold as well. When I was younger "white" Thanksgivings and Christmasses were much more common than they have been during the last decade. This is far from the coldest year on record but it is the coldest in recent memory, thus far.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 9, 2013)

Good Point. If they can turn a train completely in SEA and PDX in about 6 hours one would think they could do it at their main hub in less than 10 hours!! Nothing appears to be working right for them these days.

:-(


----------



## VentureForth (Dec 9, 2013)

My understanding is that in Chicago, the crews do a full up maintainance job in Chicago as well as perform safety checks that exceed what is done at other terminii in the system.

Now whether the crews are actually performing those required inspections properly and timely is a completely different story - but I would tend to believe that the work being done in Chicago and NYP are far more intensive than what's being done in LA, Seattle, Miami, DC, etc.


----------



## DR04 (Dec 9, 2013)

I was planning and much looking forward to our first cross country train trip with sleepers on #7 leaving CHI the 12/21 and departing SPK 12/29 back to CHI.

I'm OK with late trains but between Chicago and Spokane are we likely to be riding in a _bus_? Or are bustitutions occurring moreso west of Spokane?


----------



## Ryan (Dec 9, 2013)

No, the busses run from Spokane to Seattle/Portland when they have to turn the train around early.

If you are traveling between CHI and SPK, you won't see a bus (unless there's something like a derailment that you have to be bussed around.


----------



## DR04 (Dec 9, 2013)

RyanS said:


> No, the busses run from Spokane to Seattle/Portland when they have to turn the train around early.
> 
> If you are traveling between CHI and SPK, you won't see a bus (unless there's something like a derailment that you have to be bussed around.


Ryan good to know. Thanks for the speedy reply.

While I'm not eager for big delays, I can deal with it a lot better in a sleeper with a bottle of wine than on a bus


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 9, 2013)

From Facebook:



> Just got a voicemail that the Empire Builder is CANCELLED on Friday from SEA to MSP. "No Alternate Service"


Amtrak.com lists 8(13) and 28(13) as "sold out". Not looking good for Friday the 13th.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 9, 2013)

Hmmmm, what a mess. So what do all of those people do? I guess no extra train sets to try to help right the ship?

:-(


----------



## Ryan (Dec 9, 2013)

Nope, which is why we've seen the Spokane turns.

With 6 sets, lots more things are possible, but the rolling stock just isn't there.

Which is also why the "extend the schedule" option is off the table.


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 9, 2013)

CHamilton said:


> From Facebook:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hmm.... That means no departure from Chicago this Wednesday. No idea why they would cancel that far out. Perhaps EB_OBS will tell us more.

Leaving PDX for MSP on the 18th, hoping things are at least a little better by then (i.e. 4 hour delays instead of 12-18 hour delays).


----------



## bgiaquin (Dec 9, 2013)

RyanS said:


> Sounds like BNSF needs to run fewer trains so that they can live up to their agreement to handle Amtrak on schedule.
> 
> I'm pretty sure they can't just say "hey, we're not going to run you on time ever because we've got other trains we'd rather run".


They have a business to run, besides I think they have very kind to Amtrak over the years. From what I see, they do their best at keeping Amtrak's trains on time. It is not like they are trying to make Amtrak late (cough, cough UP, CSX).


----------



## Ryan (Dec 9, 2013)

You may want to catch up on the 8 pages of discussion where this has been hashed out extensively.


----------



## EB_OBS (Dec 9, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> CHamilton said:
> 
> 
> > From Facebook:
> ...


Basically it looks like we are canceling #8 every other day thru 6 days to allow #7 to reach SEA and PDX. Since there won't be a #8 leaving then the equipment won't be in CHI to turn as a #7.

There was a conference call today. Sounds like the extra equipment for another consist just doesn't exist at the moment.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 9, 2013)

The sad thing is the oil and gas hauled in those BNSF cars will further fuel anthropogenic global warming which will make the Empire Builder OTP increase as the winters in this region become less severe.

I am only being semi-sarcastic.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 9, 2013)

And the grain feeding all of those people will causing over population. Gee, get a life!

)


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 9, 2013)

Playing with Amtrak.com, the following are listed as sold out, so I think these are the days not running:
Eastbound 8: Mon 9, Wed 11, Fri 13.

Westbound 7 Thu 12, Sat 14, Mon 16.


----------



## tim49424 (Dec 9, 2013)

Personally, I hope they get this all straightened out in SEA by the 20th, as I'll be getting on in TOH (hopefully) on the 22nd.

Actually, for the sake of all pax, I hope this gets better after the last cancellation.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 10, 2013)

This is a desperation move on the part of Amtrak, BIG time. The delays are now thru out the entire length of the Hi-Line, plus they have to be losing millions on this-a huge black eye for their ability to be a reliable transportation mode. My local BNSF guy was floored when I sent him an email on this.

We shall see how this "helps" them.

C'est La Vie'

:-(


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 10, 2013)

Ten bucks says UPS is having a hell of a time, then again this is why ground takes 4-7 days... y'now, logistics.


----------



## Phil S (Dec 10, 2013)

AlanB said:


> montana mike said:
> 
> 
> > Where is BNSF not living up to the LETTER of the contract? They are causing delays and paying for them, IAW the contract. I think any of our lawyers would say there is no "breach of contract" here. That is why the penalty clauses are in place. We don't know how much AMtrak is getting in this situation. But my guess is the fact that we haven't seen ANY public squawking about this mess would indicate that BNSF is fully complying with the Quid Pro Quo in that contract and therefore Amtrak is either in no position to do anything else and/or the compensation is such that it compensates them fully for the mess in Chicago (and along the route) and perhaps then some.
> ...


So how much are the incentive payments and how do they compare with the increased revenues to BNSF from (over?-) loading the Hi-line with freight? I suspect they're just delighted to forego the incentive $ (but I really would like to have data to support this). Random thoughts: Obviously the contract terms are not working. Buffet isn't a total ogre. When does the current contract end?


----------



## NW cannonball (Dec 10, 2013)

montana mike said:


> #7 has still not departed from CHI, approaching a 2 hour delay. Understandable given the very late arrival of #8 (11 hours and 25 minutes late-ouch), which will be duplicated by today's (or should I say tomorrow morning's arrival of #8-likely also around 4 AM!!!)
> 
> Grim, grim, grim…….


At 03:30 looks like #8 will break 12 hours late at Chicago.

#7 arrived MSP 03:09, 4 hours 38 minutes late after departing Chicago only 2 hours 10 minutes late. An hour and a half of that was lost between RDW and MSP - hope it's not equipment problems that will add to the delay. Train tracker was showing #7 stopped maybe 25 minutes at Newport, another 15 or so stopped just west of Hoffman, another 10 or so stopped in downtown Saint Paul. Oy


----------



## montana mike (Dec 10, 2013)

ALC Rail Writer said:


> Ten bucks says UPS is having a hell of a time, then again this is why ground takes 4-7 days... y'now, logistics.


We use UPS perhaps 3-4 times a week in my biz and have had ZERO issues--even for items sent into the areas that had ice last week. I just sent a package to NY from MT late last week and it arrived one day early! No, not logistics, it's management and leadership and planning. If you don't plan for these types of situations you are guaranteed to fail. If your entire plan is based on everything working "perfectly" you are guaranteed to fail. Firms like UPS and FedEx do exactly the opposite, they build their entire biz plan around "what ifs" and work arounds to be as sure as possible that they can move their packages. Amtrak is stuck in a bare survival mode with almost no options right now…..sadly.


----------



## MrFSS (Dec 10, 2013)

montana mike said:


> ALC Rail Writer said:
> 
> 
> > Ten bucks says UPS is having a hell of a time, then again this is why ground takes 4-7 days... y'now, logistics.
> ...


I agree - we just received several UPS shipped packages that arrived 2-3 days early and we are in the ice/snow area somewhat. UPS delivered one yesterday by a guy in a pickup truck, hired on as extra help for the season no doubt. And it was delivered at 7:30 PM!


----------



## jebr (Dec 10, 2013)

montana mike said:


> ALC Rail Writer said:
> 
> 
> > Ten bucks says UPS is having a hell of a time, then again this is why ground takes 4-7 days... y'now, logistics.
> ...


Most of our packages here were delayed two days due to what I thought was an "average" winter storm. Even my two-day package that was shipped on Monday didn't arrive here until Friday.


----------



## JayPea (Dec 10, 2013)

The famous quote by Benjamin Franklin and Winston Churchill amongst many others comes to mind: "Failure to plan is planning to fail." Or something similar.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 10, 2013)

jebr said:


> montana mike said:
> 
> 
> > ALC Rail Writer said:
> ...


Then you should get your money back--UPS has always refunded my money when they don't meet their standards.

The point of this conversation is firms like UPS and FedEX, while not getting everything down perfectly 100% of the time come about as close as humanly possible because they PLAN for things such as ice storms and other man made issues.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 10, 2013)

You're king of Amtrak for a day.

What's your plan?


----------



## jebr (Dec 10, 2013)

montana mike said:


> jebr said:
> 
> 
> > montana mike said:
> ...


Unfortunately, I was only the recipient, and shipping was "free" to me, so I wouldn't get anything. Plus, they had an "alert" due to winter storms and so would probably claim that anyways as an exemption. Not worth my hassle, honestly.


----------



## jebr (Dec 10, 2013)

RyanS said:


> You're king of Amtrak for a day.
> 
> What's your plan?


Do I get infinite resources? After all, if I was king I'd demand infinite resources. 

Without additional resources, my only thought would be to run it either MSP or FAR - CHI, where the delays should be less (and thus give the Chicago shops plenty of time to turn the train.) It'd still make a *lot* of passengers mad, but hopefully it would help somewhat. I'm still not sure why they are completely shutting it down over truncating it in SPK like they'll do when delays are excessive usually.


----------



## AlanB (Dec 10, 2013)

WellTrained said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > montana mike said:
> ...


I'm sure that BNSF is making more on the freight than what they're losing in incentive payments. I was using the word "losing" in the sense that they're leaving the money on the table; wasn't trying to imply that it was more than they could make doing their regular business.


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 10, 2013)

EB_OBS said:


> anir dendroica said:
> 
> 
> > CHamilton said:
> ...


Not to be an armchair manager here, but...

If there are five trainsets, and six are needed to have an overnight in PDX/SEA, then it should work to cancel the train one out of every six days. While disruptive, such an arrangement would allow most passengers to be reaccommodated.

I'm scheduled to leave PDX on the 18th. Now I'm fine leaving on the 19th or the 20th, or ending up 18 hours late, but if they tell me I'm screwed and better buy a last-minute holiday plane ticket to get to MN, then I will well and truly be mad at Amtrak.


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 10, 2013)

As an alternative to annulling every sixth train, which would create serious planning headaches, I could see it working to operate west of MSP five days a week.

Eliminate the Tuesday departure, as not that many folks travel in the middle of the week. The other choice would be harder, maybe Friday?

In this system, trains would make one round trip per week as opposed to the current one trip every five days. It shouldn't be too hard to put together a stub train of three cars or so to run between CHI and MSP on the "off" days, running CHI-MSP on Tues, MSP-CHI on Thurs, CHI-MSP on Fri, MSP-CHI on Sun.

Not ideal, but possibly one of the better options in the near term.


----------



## tricia (Dec 11, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> I'm scheduled to leave PDX on the 18th. Now I'm fine leaving on the 19th or the 20th, or ending up 18 hours late, but if they tell me I'm screwed and better buy a last-minute holiday plane ticket to get to MN, then I will well and truly be mad at Amtrak.



This!

I REALLY don't want to get a robocall voicemail from Amtrak in early February, when I'm already traveling, telling me that the EB tickets I bought back in November are useless and I need to make some other arrangements to get home.


----------



## yarrow (Dec 11, 2013)

tricia said:


> anir dendroica said:
> 
> 
> > I'm scheduled to leave PDX on the 18th. Now I'm fine leaving on the 19th or the 20th, or ending up 18 hours late, but if they tell me I'm screwed and better buy a last-minute holiday plane ticket to get to MN, then I will well and truly be mad at Amtrak.
> ...


been there, done that. hopefully your trip will be fine but amtrak has scant concern for the individual travelers they inconvenience


----------



## Joe F (Dec 11, 2013)

Looks like both #7 and #8 lost over 4 hours between Grand Forks and Fargo today. #8 is 10:20 late out of Detroit Lakes, and #7 is 8:46 late out of GFK. Anybody know what is going on? They usually lose time between those points, but not this much.


----------



## EB_OBS (Dec 11, 2013)

#8 had a locomotive breakdown.


----------



## zephyr17 (Dec 11, 2013)

EB_OBS said:


> #8 had a locomotive breakdown.


When it rains, it pours.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 11, 2013)

zephyr17 said:


> EB_OBS said:
> 
> 
> > #8 had a locomotive breakdown.
> ...


Or in the case of the Hi-Line when it Rains it Freezes!!!!


----------



## zephyr17 (Dec 11, 2013)

I notice on Amtrak's GPS tracker that 7(9) is running through to Seattle, despite being 7 1/2 hours late at Spokane. Anyone care to venture a guess as to how fast they'll turn it and when it will leave tonight.

Right now at 2:30 pm PT it is showing on the move just east of the east portal of the Cascade Tunnel at about Berne in Stevens Pass.


----------



## kbmiflyer (Dec 11, 2013)

So is Amtrak cancelling some of the Empire Builders this week?

http://kfgo.com/news/articles/2013/dec/11/heavy-rail-traffic-grinds-amtrak-to-temporary-halt/


----------



## chrsjrcj (Dec 11, 2013)

RyanS said:


> You're king of Amtrak for a day.
> 
> What's your plan?


What about the North Coast Hiawatha route?


----------



## montana mike (Dec 11, 2013)

It won't. I believe they annulled #8 previously scheduled for tomorrow. This entire mess has turned into an incredible nightmare! Look at the two EBs now trying to make their way thru ND--BOTH have lost 6+ hours just in that small area and are now more than 10 hours behind already!! Unreal. My local BNSF guy ha said he has never seen such a mess on the Hi-Line in his 20+ years on the railroad………


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 11, 2013)

RyanS said:


> You're king of Amtrak for a day.
> 
> What's your plan?


Ride in the executive car for 24 consecutive hours.

I mean seriously what else can they do besides turn it into a series of day trains and bus bridges? It would seem they are pulling out all the stops (ironically 'stopping' a few trains). Then engine failures happen and you realize it is mostly up to the whims of the hardware and the weather at this point... If they had the spare gear I'm sure they'd be able to take some of the pressure off with a sixth consist but as it stands, as a British TV chef likes to put it "we're deep in the ****."


----------



## NW cannonball (Dec 11, 2013)

Most recent look at amtrak.com indicates that Empire Builder #8 will *not *depart Seattle on Dec 11,13,15. So there will be plenty of time to turn today's arriving #7 in Seattle, since it won't depart until Thursday afternoon the 12th


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 11, 2013)

Well anybody who ever wanted to know what tri-weekly Builder ridership would look like will be looking forward to the next monthly report...


----------



## NW cannonball (Dec 11, 2013)

Looking again at amtrak.com - for the Westbound #7 - only the Dec 12 and 14 departures from Chicago are showing unavailable.

Hope this gives the yard dogs time to catch up on maintenance on the trainset that (we all hope) arrives in Chicago late tonight or early morning of Thursday 12 Dec.


----------



## NW cannonball (Dec 11, 2013)

ALC Rail Writer said:


> Well anybody who ever wanted to know what tri-weekly Builder ridership would look like will be looking forward to the next monthly report...


Yup, that'll be - uh - "interesting and educational" to see.

For a while, was it 10-15 years back?, the Builder was tri-weekly between MSP and SEA.


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 12, 2013)

If you haven't been following the EB trip report from AU member oregon pioneer, it makes for interesting reading.

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/57811-empire-builder-plus-around-the-country-december-epic/


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 12, 2013)

And from Facebook, a BNSF dispatcher says:



> ... it is a real mess. We don't handle Amtrak on the Surrey cutoff, but we have reopened the Devils Lake line to freight traffic and it is so busy that about 10-12 eastbounds use the DL sub with Amtrak now. There are 60-70 trains a day now through Minot and I had 12 westbound freights waiting for 4 eastbounds at 730pm tonight, some trains on the east end waiting 3 hrs to move west again. I know the company is trying to catch up, but the whole Glasgow and KO/Devils Lake subs are saturated with trains. Amtrak 7 was 11 hrs late wbound which is very unusual. They meet the eastbound at White Earth, ND. I hope it gets better, as I know most of us that dispatch do feel for the passengers, there are just too many trains to make it work right now.


----------



## Tumbleweed (Dec 12, 2013)

And yet another news article...at least the public is getting the word.... http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/420850/


----------



## oregon pioneer (Dec 12, 2013)

Joe F said:


> Looks like both #7 and #8 lost over 4 hours between Grand Forks and Fargo today. #8 is 10:20 late out of Detroit Lakes, and #7 is 8:46 late out of GFK. Anybody know what is going on? They usually lose time between those points, but not this much.


I was on that #8. The lead loco unit burned up 10 minutes out from Fargo (we could see the town from where we sat), and we held up everyone (including the #7 in Fargo station) till we got a BNSF loco to lead us. Couldn't even limp to a siding. See my trip report.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 12, 2013)

Sort of like rubbing salt into a wound! Kicking someone when they are down! Ouch.

Also, important to note that the freight situation is so messed up that BNSF, in addition to running their freights on the Surrey Cutoff, is also running them on the Devils lake-Grand Forks route as well, which normally has very few freights on it.

:-((


----------



## Ispolkom (Dec 12, 2013)

NW cannonball said:


> ALC Rail Writer said:
> 
> 
> > Well anybody who ever wanted to know what tri-weekly Builder ridership would look like will be looking forward to the next monthly report...
> ...


In the 90s it looks like the Empire Builder was 3-4 times a week (a '96 timetable gives it MWFSat). Wasn't making the Empire Builder daily one of the reasons the Desert Wind and Pioneer were canceled?


----------



## montana mike (Dec 12, 2013)

Interesting comment from one of my locals: Running the EB's three times a week will likely just mean Amtrak will have three very late trains instead of seven.

Perhaps he has a point. His point was that the folks "in the trenches" don't see the Amtrak move as having any material impact on what has become a major mess on the Hi-Line route. He understands what they are trying to do, but given the realities of the moment and what he has been told to expect over the coming months, is there is no "fix" that will improve things to a point that people riding this train will be very happy. He also said BNSF's normal ship times have, in some cases, gone up considerably (he would not elaborate) from pick up to delivery for their freight customers, which has not made them happy either.

I hope his assessment is on the pessimistic side and something can be done, but unlike the airlines the rails are what they are and cannot quickly be increased. He did get back to me on the timeframe to "double track" the hi-line that is single tracked and he said: 2.5-3 years for the entire project (after all approvals have been obtained). He reminded me that the effective working time for this route is less than ideal (translated the northern winters greatly limit their ability to do any work in the winter), most of the length of the Hi-line is single track thru ND and MT and BNSF doesn't even have all of the ROW's in place for the entire length anymore and that there are areas that will require some significant "engineering" efforts to make something like this to happen.


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 12, 2013)

Tumbleweed said:


> And yet another news article...at least the public is getting the word.... http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/420850/


An AP story is being posted many places, including here and here.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 12, 2013)

Thanks for sharing the AP story-as simplified as it is. If they only knew how complicated and difficult this entire mess is. :-((


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 12, 2013)

This Mess is Costing Amtrak Millions of Dollars they Don't Have!!! :help: It's Time to Look @ a Re-Reoute for the Empire Builder, Not Cancellations, Schedule Changes or 3 day a Week "Watch us Fail" Trains!

Is it Possible to Run the Builders as far east as Glacier Park and then Cut down through Montana on a Re-Route? Maybe Even

Change the Routing to the Old Pioneer Route! (Temporary)

As was Said, The Current Mess is Due to Get Worse over the Next Few Years Due to Increasing Freight Traffic and Track Work , so Going Along With the Status Quo is NOT the Answer ! Joe Boardman and the [email protected] Amtrak and BNSF Need to Get Together on this Fiasco Right NOW!!!!! (We Doesn't need this "Fiddled while Rome Burned!" Scenario Used by the Anti-Amtrak Crowd to Attack LD Trains!


----------



## fairviewroad (Dec 12, 2013)

No one is forcing BNSF to run so many freights. If they can't handle that much freight traffic, why don't they just raise their shipping rates until demand

levels off to a level they can handle?


----------



## montana mike (Dec 12, 2013)

Because they are the only game in town in many parts of the Hi-Line it isn't just a simple matter of raising rates. They are bound by many contractual agreements to charge certain rates-period on most of what they haul. Any oil, grain and coal hauled is done so on long term contracts. Intermodal even has LT arrangements for the larger players (e.g. UPS, the overseas container firms, TL carriers). The farmer or coal mine or oil patch folks just don't pick up the phone to ask for a couple cars and the latest rates--these are contracts that are in place for many months at a time.

As one of the BNSF folks shared with me recently, the rapid rise of energy shipments (yes, he admitted to me BNSF underestimated the explosion in output in ND), the lack of any other way to move the oil out of ND (and soon out of MT) plus a very solid agricultural year with big time exports to the Far East this year has been the perfect storm that just won't go away.

As far as rerouting the EB's--MT is a really big state with not many tracks that could handle the EBs (read trackage that does not meet pax train standards, low tunnels and the Rocky Mtns in the way). Other than taking a far southern route there are really not alternatives.


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 12, 2013)

I still think that a schedule extension is the way to go here. Yes, it would require a sixth trainset. If there really aren't enough cars for that, Amtrak would have to make some tough choices - either reduce service or pull cars off of trains on other routes if it is judged that utilization would be higher on the EB.

BNSF has found themselves in the position of running a very congested railroad. They can still get Amtrak through, but over the single-track portions they need to be able to run the EB with the flow of high-priority freight (i.e. 60 mph, not 79 mph) without incurring major delays. Unfortunately it also means that Amtrak needs to add a crew district. Right now we have SEA-SPK, SPK-Shelby, MT, Shelby-Minot, Minot-St. Cloud, and St. Cloud-Chicago. One possible breakdown might be Shelby-Williston, Williston-Grand Forks, Grand Forks-MSP, and MSP-Chicago.


----------



## fairviewroad (Dec 12, 2013)

Question of the day: Will 7(11) catch up with 7(10)?   

Currently, 7(11) is down a mere 1 hr, 42 minutes departing STN.

It's almost nipping at the heels of 7(10), which just departed BRO 16 hrs, 11 minutes late.

[The other interesting thing about 7(11) is that it departed CHI 1 hr, 7 minutes late, meaning it's lost only

35 minutes from Chicago all the way through western North Dakota. Probably a fluke, though the 7's have

typically been doing better than the 8's]

[i'm guessing the chicken dinners were a little cold by the time 7(10) pulled into Havre at 6 o'clock this morning.]


----------



## montana mike (Dec 12, 2013)

I was writing this as Fairviewroad was writing their commentary!! LOL Looking at the two #7's chugging thru MT right now-one over 16 hours late, one less than 2 hours behind schedule--It could get a wee bit crowded in SEA, since appears both may be there at least part of the time if the first one loses too much more time. Interesting!

Friends in WFH just got a call from Amtrak this morning, canceling their planned trip--with no offer of even rebooking or any other help other than to say they can contact another number to get their money back. Amtrak has to be losing their shirt on this mess. The local stationmaster here said every EB was almost totally booked from now thru New Years.


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 12, 2013)

When was their planned trip?


----------



## Joe F (Dec 12, 2013)

If there is any upside to this mess, it is that people on 7(10) will get to see Glacier Park and Marias Pass in daylight!



fairviewroad said:


> Question of the day: Will 7(11) catch up with 7(10)?
> 
> Currently, 7(11) is down a mere 1 hr, 42 minutes departing STN.
> 
> ...


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 12, 2013)

If #7(11) makes it to SEA/PDX less than six hours late (which looks possible), then there will briefly be two EB trainsets on the west coast on Saturday.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 12, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Because they are the only game in town in many parts of the Hi-Line it isn't just a simple matter of raising rates. They are bound by many contractual agreements to charge certain rates-period on most of what they haul. Any oil, grain and coal hauled is done so on long term contracts. Intermodal even has LT arrangements for the larger players (e.g. UPS, the overseas container firms, TL carriers). The farmer or coal mine or oil patch folks just don't pick up the phone to ask for a couple cars and the latest rates--these are contracts that are in place for many months at a time.


Then whoever accepted/closed more contracts than the railroad can handle screwed up, and some of them are going to have to be broken since it's physically impossible to move all of the goods and people that they've agreed to.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 12, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> When was their planned trip?


This week. Don't recall which day, but she was crestfallen that the trip they had planned many months ago was now not going to happen. Besides her train travel being canceled she has now had to cancel auto rental and hotels as well. Oh, well…


----------



## montana mike (Dec 12, 2013)

RyanS said:


> montana mike said:
> 
> 
> > Because they are the only game in town in many parts of the Hi-Line it isn't just a simple matter of raising rates. They are bound by many contractual agreements to charge certain rates-period on most of what they haul. Any oil, grain and coal hauled is done so on long term contracts. Intermodal even has LT arrangements for the larger players (e.g. UPS, the overseas container firms, TL carriers). The farmer or coal mine or oil patch folks just don't pick up the phone to ask for a couple cars and the latest rates--these are contracts that are in place for many months at a time.
> ...


I would bet there are "penalty" clauses and other "outs" in these, BUT BNSF is the only way to move millions of tons of coal, wheat and billions of barrels of oil. There is no alternative. This fiasco will likely cost BNSF's bottom-line a good amount, but there is nothing anyone can do in the short run to make the problem go away and make anyone happy. I would imagine the great minds of BNSF and Amtrak are trying to figure things out as we write our missives! BTW-Amtrak has yet to reply to my fairly detailed email to them about this mess--going on three days now. I would imagine they just will ignore my email to them.


----------



## jebr (Dec 12, 2013)

montana mike said:


> RyanS said:
> 
> 
> > montana mike said:
> ...


Don't expect anything soon other than a form letter of "we're looking at it." I'm still waiting on an actual response from Customer Relations on an email I sent on _November 1_. Why it takes many weeks for them to respond to an email, I'm not sure.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 12, 2013)

Perhaps Customer Relations is overwhelmed with complaints???

:-(


----------



## Ryan (Dec 12, 2013)

montana mike said:


> BUT BNSF is the only way to move millions of tons of coal, wheat and billions of barrels of oil. There is no alternative.


It's obvious at this point that BNSF isn't an alternative either. The stuff can't be moved.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 12, 2013)

It is just: s l o w l y………….


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 12, 2013)

NARP has details of the cancellations. http://narprail.org/news/narp-blog/2470-empire-builder-schedule-slashed-by-half-until-dec-15


----------



## Ispolkom (Dec 12, 2013)

montana mike said:


> It is just: s l o w l y………….


Grain don't care how slow it's moving. If it's heading east, it's a long time until Lake Superior or the Mississippi opens for traffic. (The Twin Cities papers still consider it news when the first boat reaches St. Paul in the spring.) On the other hand, BSNF probably wants to drag everything out of its picket fence branches in MT and ND before they get completely snowed in.


----------



## Tumbleweed (Dec 13, 2013)

It ain't gonna get any better very soon, folks.... http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/420995/


----------



## fairviewroad (Dec 13, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> If #7(11) makes it to SEA/PDX less than six hours late (which looks possible), then there will briefly be two EB trainsets on the west coast on Saturday.


Indeed. 7(10) finally pulled into SEA at 2:24AM this morning, one-minute shy of being exactly 16 hours late.

7(11) was merely 2 hrs, 25 minutes leaving LWA for the trip up over the Cascades this morning, so barring any

additional delays it will arrive into SEA about 5 hours before 8(13) leaves .... if there is an 8(13)....I'm kind of lost

on that score these days.


----------



## Nathanael (Dec 13, 2013)

montana mike said:


> As one of the BNSF folks shared with me recently, the rapid rise of energy shipments (yes, he admitted to me BNSF underestimated the explosion in output in ND),


There's the key incompetence.
BNSF had lots of options, more than most railroads do, actually. It can move the freights south onto the ex-Northern Pacific line, by upgrading the various north-south connecting lines. It can switch them onto CP (yeah, I know it doesn't WANT to do that). It can double-track most of its lines -- and if they actually sold off so much ROW that they can't do that, then they're really idiots. They've had several years to do upgrades to deal with the oil boom. They just chose to underinvest and hoped they'd get less business than the worst case scenario. It was a very bad business move for the one railroad which has cheap capital.


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 13, 2013)

fairviewroad said:


> if there is an 8(13)....I'm kind of lost
> 
> on that score these days.


It's confusing, for sure. According to NARP's list, there will be an 8(13), but it will travel only SEA-SPK.



> There will be no service between St. Paul and Spokane for these days and directions:
> 
> ...
> 
> Train 8 departing West Coast Friday Dec. 13


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 13, 2013)

There is an 8(13), but it is only running SEA-SPK. When 7(11) reaches SEA today there will be two trainsets on the west coast, one #8 in Montana, one #7 departing CHI, and another trainset in CHI (though part of it will be running MSP-CHI as 808).

Still not clear on whether there will be a sixth trainset when regular schedules resume on 12/16.


----------



## fairviewroad (Dec 13, 2013)

So the SEA-SPK train will (I presume) simply use the regular EB trainset (or at least the half of it that ends up in SEA). So I wonder if they'll serve dinner? Seems like the load, especially in sleepers, would be light since everyone heading east of SPK would have no reason to board the train.

It looks like they're not selling sleeper space on 8(13) leaving SEA for SPK this afternoon (but coach space is still available). It simply says "none left" but that makes me wonder whether they're just not selling it (as opposed to sleepers being sold out). I wonder if they'll even add the sleepers on the train, period. Just run it with coaches and diner (at least they'd want the diner in order to sell cafe items even if they don't have full diner service).

Reports from the field, please! :hi:


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 13, 2013)

Tumbleweed said:


> It ain't gonna get any better very soon, folks.... http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/420995/


There is a limit to how much impact the oil will have. One tank car holds about 700 barrels of oil, so a 100-car train is 70,000 barrels. The best estimates put maximum output of the Bakken around a million barrels per day, and if 70% of this goes by rail that's 10 loaded (and 10 empty) trains per day, of which most will move east and some will move west.

Is an extra 20 trains per day enough to justify full double-tracking? Certainly it is from the oilfields to Minot, and this work is already underway (some double track, some additional sidings). From Minot to Fargo BNSF is banking on the renovated Devils Lake sub to provide a functional second track. West of Williston it will depend on what fraction of the oil moves westward.

I would guess that there is still more grain than oil moving on the line, though it is probably getting close now.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 13, 2013)

Current API estimate for Bakken just in ND is 1.2 million BBLS/day within the next 2-3 years. For the nest area of interest, which is just starting to the shape in eastern MT, no firm numbers, but friends who are in the oil patch biz in Williston say it should easily be 50% of that rate once it is developed, which won't happen for several years at the earliest.

BTW--Two new huge grain elevators were just completed on the Hi-line over the past year to service agricultural needs in that area. Rather impressive structures and operations. A good portion of the grain now handled by these operations-with their own sidings, et. al. had been trucked out to other points in the past.

It's cyclical but my BNSF guy pointed out yesterday that new vehicle movements have gone up sharply on this line. Sound logical, since auto production has jumped from a miserable 10 million/yr to 15 million/yr.

Lastly, ND officials have publicly stated they do not believe the pipeline will happen now, so they are planning on rail as the main method to move energy products from ND to points south, east and west.


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 13, 2013)

fairviewroad said:


> Reports from the field, please! :hi:


From SEA : Tonight's 8 will only go to SPK, according to the agent. But the equipment has not yet arrived, so I don't know whether it will include sleeping cars and a diner.


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 13, 2013)

So the inbound #7 will become the stub #8 then. Which begs the question of what happened to the 16-hour late #7 that arrived early this morning.


----------



## fairviewroad (Dec 13, 2013)

I assume he meant the equipment has not yet arrived from the yard, not that the equipment has not yet arrived in SEA.


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 13, 2013)

7 just arrived in Seattle, so that is not too late. And the agent checked, and it looks like 8 to SPK will have sleeping cars.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 13, 2013)

Soooo, how many train sets do we have in SEA now? Two? This is a wee bit confusing here. Not sure why anyone would pay for a sleeper to SPK from SEA, but oh, well…….And then it turns around in the middle of the night and heads back to SEA to arrive the following AM? Sigh…..

Meanwhile #8 chugging along in MT is still less than an hour late, although major caution, it has not yet reached the "crunch zone".


----------



## Nathanael (Dec 13, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> Is an extra 20 trains per day enough to justify full double-tracking? Certainly it is from the oilfields to Minot, and this work is already underway (some double track, some additional sidings).


This probably should have been done last year or the year before, though. BNSF had plenty of warning. Is BNSF short on trained track crews or something?


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 13, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Soooo, how many train sets do we have in SEA now? Two? This is a wee bit confusing here. Not sure why anyone would pay for a sleeper to SPK from SEA, but oh, well…….And then it turns around in the middle of the night and heads back to SEA to arrive the following AM? Sigh…..
> 
> Meanwhile #8 chugging along in MT is still less than an hour late, although major caution, it has not yet reached the "crunch zone".


Well SPK is a bit like ALC in that it has that midnight calling time. I usually go coach from either CHI-ALC or WAS-ALC (and vice versa) but sometimes the sleepers are priced so low that the upragde cost is negligable relative to how much you save for one or two people coach when the rail fare is reduced. Plus I know a lot of people who have money to burn and would "waste" it on that sort of thing, for the Boston Gathering I paid for a sleeper for mom and I from ALB-BOS just for fun.


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 13, 2013)

King Street is a bit of a zoo today. As I left on 507, our Talgo, another Talgo, and one of the new Oregon Talgos (Mt. Jefferson, there for a Portland marketing event) were all sitting in the station, together with the Superliners from 7. No idea what might have been in the yard.


----------



## mwmnp (Dec 13, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Current API estimate for Bakken just in ND is 1.2 million BBLS/day within the next 2-3 years. For the nest area of interest, which is just starting to the shape in eastern MT, no firm numbers, but friends who are in the oil patch biz in Williston say it should easily be 50% of that rate once it is developed, which won't happen for several years at the earliest.


Just out of curiosity because I know relatively little about Montana geology, is the excitement in regard to the Bakken or other formations? By all accounts I've seen, the "mature" (oil-producing) part of the Bakken extends as far west as eastern Valley County and as far south as northeast McCone County and the southern border of Richland County, but I routinely glance at the weekly oil and gas activity reports published by the Montana DNRC and almost all of the good wells targeting the Bakken are confined to eastern Roosevelt County or Richland County. What I see in the other areas of the state where the Bakken is present are a lot of "dry holes" and mediocre wells, although admittedly, the lands inside the Fort Peck Indian Reservation are a pretty big question mark due to a lack of recent exploratory activity there. By and large, though, Richland County seems to be the "sweet spot" of the Bakken in Montana. Going through historical data, horizontal wells in that county played a significant role in the quick increase, and subsequent temporary decline, of Montana oil production beginning about a decade ago.

There's oil and gas activity farther west along the Hi-Line, specifically northeast of Malta in Phillips County (predominately gas wells) and either side of Highway 2 from roughly Havre to Cut Bank, but, since the Bakken is not present here, other formations are targeted. The same goes for oil and gas development south and west of Richland County.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 13, 2013)

Excellent question. The Bakken formation pays a big role but there are several others. I can ask my oil patch neighbor about them. The amount of exploration and seismic testing in the eastern and northern part of MT has increased significantly in the past year. Of course we also appear to have some significant energy possibilities along the Rocky Mtn front (mostly natural gas), but much of this is in Federal or Tribal hands and as such is likely not going to be touched.


----------



## oregon pioneer (Dec 14, 2013)

OK, I am going to be a little bit of a "Devil's Advocate" here (sorry for stealing your name Devil. It's only temporary):

I've heard that they've already drilled all they can in the "sweet spots" and that those wells have a high depletion rate (i.e. that production begins to decline pretty rapidly, before they've been around for very long). I know that it takes more wells in the less-productive areas to produce the same amount of oil.So they are working just as hard, with just as many people, to get less future production.

What if they are not building pipelines, and not double-tracking the Hi-line, because they know the rate of oil production won't keep this pace up for enough years to justify the investment?


----------



## montana mike (Dec 14, 2013)

Wishful thinking my friend. According to ALL of the oil patch sources in ND and MT they haven't even reached the 10% level yet on drilling (with the drilling in MT just having been started btw). I was just sent info by one of my U of M associates who said the USGS will be upping the estimates of recoverable energy from the Bakken and adjacent fields in 2014 to reflect additional amounts that will more than DOUBLE the recoverable energy. He said that the energy service firms that are working in these areas now (and further west in MT, are looking at sufficient reserves to last at least an additional 30-40 years in ND and another 30+ years in MT--using today's technology. His personal estimate (he is a petroleum geologist as well as a professor) on the longevity of this entire energy play (which he refers to as the most significant find in 50 years) is well over 75 years.

The pipeline issue is purely political, nothing else.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 14, 2013)

Anyone have any idea why #8 in ND lost 6 hours in one short stretch this AM. They were doing reasonably well until things appeared to come to a complete halt. Clearly they sat for a very long line going nowhere. No bad weather either. Now about 9 hours late!!! Wha t a mess in eastern ND. Must be a real traffic jam. I was looking at Amtrak's "Track a Train" and the Builder was just crawling along at less than 20 mph. It's going to be another every late arrival tonight (or tomorrow AM).

Bummer…..even on the weekends it's still ridiculous.


----------



## EB_OBS (Dec 14, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Anyone have any idea why #8 in ND lost 6 hours in one short stretch this AM. They were doing reasonably well until things appeared to come to a complete halt. Clearly they sat for a very long line going nowhere. No bad weather either. Now about 9 hours late!!! Wha t a mess in eastern ND. Must be a real traffic jam. I was looking at Amtrak's "Track a Train" and the Builder was just crawling along at less than 20 mph. It's going to be another every late arrival tonight (or tomorrow AM).
> 
> Bummer…..even on the weekends it's still ridiculous.



Disabled freight train.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 14, 2013)

And alas in an area with no alternatives or work arounds. Bummer….


----------



## montana mike (Dec 16, 2013)

Update on #7(15) currently stopped in western ND. This train had actually not lost any appreciable time (although it had left CHI over 2 hours late on Sunday) as it trekked thru ND, until it had major power issues. Stopped dead just outside of Stanley. They are now having to reposition the baggage and dorm cars to the back of the train (these were the cars causing the power issues) then recouple everything back together to be on their way. Likely about a 2 hour evolution.

Poor Empire Builder, even when everything else seems to be going their way a snafu like this happens--bummer…… :-(


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 16, 2013)

http://www.lifehack.org/articles/communication/takes-20-years-build-reputation-and-5-minutes-ruin-warren-buffett.html


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 16, 2013)

Amtrak might get more respect from BNSF if their shoddy equipment didn't foul mainlines so often...



montana mike said:


> Update on #7(15) currently stopped in western ND. This train had actually not lost any appreciable time (although it had left CHI over 2 hours late on Sunday) as it trekked thru ND, until it had major power issues. Stopped dead just outside of Stanley. They are now having to reposition the baggage and dorm cars to the back of the train (these were the cars causing the power issues) then recouple everything back together to be on their way. Likely about a 2 hour evolution.
> 
> Poor Empire Builder, even when everything else seems to be going their way a snafu like this happens--bummer :-(


----------



## jebr (Dec 16, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> Amtrak might get more respect from BNSF if their shoddy equipment didn't foul mainlines so often...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Except wasn't it a disabled BNSF freight that delayed Amtrak last time? BNSF isn't innocent here either.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 16, 2013)

CHamilton said:


> http://www.lifehack.org/articles/communication/takes-20-years-build-reputation-and-5-minutes-ruin-warren-buffett.html


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 16, 2013)

True, but BNSF runs 50 100-car trains on the line every day and Amtrak runs two 11-car trains. The breakdown rate per train mile must be at least five times higher for Amtrak. Granted passenger cars and locos are a bit more complicated than freight versions, but for whatever reason it seems Amtrak equipment reliability goes to heck in cold weather.



jebr said:


> anir dendroica said:
> 
> 
> > Amtrak might get more respect from BNSF if their shoddy equipment didn't foul mainlines so often...
> ...


----------



## Ryan (Dec 16, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> True, but BNSF runs 50 100-car trains on the line every day and Amtrak runs two 11-car trains. The breakdown rate per train mile must be at least five times higher for Amtrak. Granted passenger cars and locos are a bit more complicated than freight versions, but for whatever reason it seems Amtrak equipment reliability goes to heck in cold weather.


You're going to need to come with some data if you're going to make that argument. I'm sure that there are breakdowns that happen when the Empire Builder isn't around that we never hear about.


----------



## zephyr17 (Dec 16, 2013)

Passenger engines rack up the miles much faster than most freight units. To be valid you'd need to analyze the number of breakdowns at of both freight and passenger fleets at different mileage points.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 17, 2013)

Update for today. The local BNSF people stated that the westbound trains should experience 2-3 hour delays for the "foreseeable future" as the freight traffic continues to increase to the west coast over the next several months. Looks like arrival times in both PDX and SEA will average around 2 hours late for a while, except perhaps right around Christmas and New Years, when freight traffic is scheduled to slow down somewhat.

Personal note: I was picking up my son on #7 last night (almost 5 hours late) at 2 AM and the amount of freight traffic going thru Whitefish at that time of the night was amazing! In just a matter of 30 minutes a one mile long energy train, one grain train and one intermodal went by, plus the yard itself is just totally full!


----------



## yarrow (Dec 17, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Update for today. The local BNSF people stated that the westbound trains should experience 2-3 hour delays for the "foreseeable future" as the freight traffic continues to increase to the west coast over the next several months. Looks like arrival times in both PDX and SEA will average around 2 hours late for a while, except perhaps right around Christmas and New Years, when freight traffic is scheduled to slow down somewhat.
> 
> Personal note: I was picking up my son on #7 last night (almost 5 hours late) at 2 AM and the amount of freight traffic going thru Whitefish at that time of the night was amazing! In just a matter of 30 minutes a one mile long energy train, one grain train and one intermodal went by, plus the yard itself is just totally full!


that is helpful to know. what do your contacts say about eastbound delays? we are going spk-chi to connect with the cono on 12/26?


----------



## Ispolkom (Dec 17, 2013)

yarrow said:


> that is helpful to know. what do your contacts say about eastbound delays? we are going spk-chi to connect with the cono on 12/26?


Look at this thread.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 17, 2013)

3+ hour delays going east, except if you are connecting to the CONO on 12/26 you may (assuming no Amtrak equipment issues) catch a break, since very few BNSF trains will run on Christmas Day itself. I will keep my fingers crossed for you on this one!


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 18, 2013)

Landslide reportedly strands residents near Index (WA)

The affected area is not far from the BNSF tracks used by the EB, but none of the press reports indicate that the slide affected the tracks. The Builder is probably in the area at the moment, having left Leavenworth almost 5 hours late at 10:52 am.


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 18, 2013)

CHamilton said:


> Landslide reportedly strands residents near Index (WA)
> 
> The affected area is not far from the BNSF tracks used by the EB, but none of the press reports indicate that the slide affected the tracks. The Builder is probably in the area at the moment, having left Leavenworth almost 5 hours late at 10:52 am.


Today's EB 7 got through the area without losing any further time, so the slide did not affect the train.


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 18, 2013)

About to board 28 in Portland. Sounds like they are using the protect trainset for closer to on time departure.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 18, 2013)

I thought I noticed 28 departed PDX 1 hour 53 minutes late tonight though?

:-((


----------



## montana mike (Dec 19, 2013)

Update for today:

1. Big time congestion in eastern ND today-again too many trains and not enough tracks. Both EB's (7 and 8) lost about 3 hours each in this short stretch. Mostly between Grand Forks and Fargo.

2. Another area that is experiencing increased congestion on a regular basis is between WFH and SPK. Several days recently have seen delays of between 1 and 2 hours (including today), just to get thru this stretch. The 7 mile long, single track tunnel just west of Whitefish is likely a contributing factor. #7 waited for over an hour as west bound freights went thru this feature early AM.

3. The BNSF prediction that SEA and PDX will experience arrival delays of 1-2 hours on a more regular basis has come true if you look at the past week's arrivals. Bummer.


----------



## Guest (Dec 19, 2013)

I see the Northstar commuter trains that use mostly the same corridor between Minneapolis and Big Lake as the Empire Builder is experiencing delays also.

http://www.startribune.com/local/north/236545601.html


----------



## yarrow (Dec 20, 2013)

montana mike said:


> Update for today:
> 
> 1. Big time congestion in eastern ND today-again too many trains and not enough tracks. Both EB's (7 and 8) lost about 3 hours each in this short stretch. Mostly between Grand Forks and Fargo.
> 
> ...


was in downtown spk yesterday. the tracks are elevated through town giving a good view of traffic. couldn't believe the number of westbound freights. grain, oil, merchandise. 2 at a time. never saw anything like it for the time i watched


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 20, 2013)

Western Washington state is getting a little bit of snow this morning, but as of 8 am PT, all of the Cascades trains are running on time, and the westbound Empire Builder is no later than usual. The snow is supposed to turn to rain in the next couple of hours, so the trains should not be affected.


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 20, 2013)

Report from #8/28(18)

We were the first train to use the protect trainset. However both the extra lounge and sleeper in PDX were "inoperable" according to the station crew, so after they switched in the lounge and sleeper from the late #27 and got the sleeper cleaned we were two hours late departing. The two coaches started out with car numbers 04-12 and 04-13, so it looks like they were last assigned to the SWC.

Arrived into MSP 3:30 behind schedule. Estimated breakdown of delays:

Amtrak equipment: 2:40. Two hours in PDX, then forty minutes between Minot and Rugby when we developed a leak in the airbrake system. Turned out to be a gasket by the main reservoir, relatively quick fix.

Passenger loading: 0:20. Longer station stops due to lots of folks on and off, mainly at Stanley, Williston, Minot

Permanent track conditions: 0:30. Guaranteed half-hour loss between Grand Forks and Fargo due to downrating of track speed 2+ years ago that has not yet been reflected in a schedule change. I would presume that BNSF plans to improve that track again over the next couple of years for the oil traffic.

Temporary track conditions: 0:30. Variety of slow orders, mostly 40 mph and 60 mph as the track construction 20's have been cleared. 10 mph at south end of Northtown through working switch crew. 10-15 minutes coming into Staples due to a frozen crossover switch that BNSF was already fixing when we arrived.

Freight congestion: 2:30. BNSF is doing what they can to move trains. Longest wait was 45 minutes in Tampico coming into Glasgow as we took the siding to meet a fleet of three westbound Z-trains hot on the heels of #7/27(18). There was already another eastbound on the Glasgow siding that ended up waiting for at least five trains (#7, the three Z's, and then us) before proceeding. A large portion of the double track between St. Cloud and MSP is effectively single track now with a line of at least four freights parked waiting to get into Northtown.

Total delays PDX-MSP: 6:30

Minus 3 hrs schedule padding: 3:30 late into MSP

Overall conclusion: This route is not broken, but it absolutely needs a schedule change to reflect the congestion and summer construction. It might still be possible for a train to run on time given no equipment issues (Amtrak or BNSF), but that would be an exception. If the extra trainset can be maintained, #8/28 should leave the west coast between 10 am and noon, enough to make Chicago connections 80+% of the time. The 14-28 connection would be broken, but that is not a huge number of passengers and is frequently missed as is anyway. As an added benefit, if it were actually possible to run the train on time, the missed incentive payments might mean more to BNSF.

In light of all of the recent negative reports, I want to say kudos to the Amtrak crew for a great on-board experience. A smooth and quiet ride on sleeper #32000, with working temperature control and the best sleep I have yet managed on a train. Cheerful service despite the delays. Film crew of eight was on board recording for a documentary, which may have helped motivate everyone to put their best foot forward. Very fun wine and cheese tasting. Met lots of interesting folks, heard lots of good stories. One downside was that first the shower and then all of the bathrooms in our sleeper froze across North Dakota despite normal winter temps around -13. Didn't hurt the experience for us, but the EB equipment could definitely use some winterizing.

Until next time....

Mark


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 20, 2013)

:hi: Excellent Trip Report with Good Info! If VIA can Run Trains Regularly with Constant Below Zero Temps No Reason Amtrak Can't Winterize the Equipment used on the Hi Line! :help: Based on your Report, and With What's Happening on the Hi-Line, Unless you Live There I would Say Dont Travel on the Empire Builder Unless You Are an Adventure Seeker with Patience,Willing to Pay High Bucket Prices and Have a High Tolerance Level for Discomfort and Plenty of Time! Opps, :blush: Sounds like Me!(Except for the High Bucket Fares!) :lol:


----------



## montana mike (Dec 20, 2013)

I second the comments--Excellent report!


----------



## TraneMan (Dec 20, 2013)

Great report on what's going on.

What was the film crew about? Have any info of what it is and when it will be shown?


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 21, 2013)

Re: the film crew

Albert Maysles is still making documentaries at age 87, and he was on board with his crew of seven. For whatever reason they chose to highlight the EB and will be riding it a few times over the coming days and months. They said they have been trying for some time to get the necessary permissions from Amtrak and finally succeeded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_and_David_Maysles

http://www.mayslesfilms.com/production/index.html


----------



## anir dendroica (Dec 21, 2013)

I see that my train lost another two hours before arriving in Chicago. Too bad for all of the folks I met who were hoping to make connections...

CP delays between MSP and CHI are becoming unfortunately consistent. It has been a while since a late #8 has made up time between MSP and CHI.


----------



## TraneMan (Dec 21, 2013)

anir dendroica said:


> Re: the film crew
> 
> Albert Maysles is still making documentaries at age 87, and he was on board with his crew of seven. For whatever reason they chose to highlight the EB and will be riding it a few times over the coming days and months. They said they have been trying for some time to get the necessary permissions from Amtrak and finally succeeded.
> 
> ...


Cool, will have to keep an eye out on this and see the movie when it's done.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 22, 2013)

I see #7 is still sitting in CHI, more than 2 hours after scheduled departure time……anyone know what happened? Last night's EB arrived "only" about 2 hours behind schedule, so the yard should have had plenty of time to prep today's #7. Perhaps a bad ordered car or locomotive?


----------



## TraneMan (Dec 22, 2013)

montana mike said:


> I see #7 is still sitting in CHI, more than 2 hours after scheduled departure time……anyone know what happened? Last night's EB arrived "only" about 2 hours behind schedule, so the yard should have had plenty of time to prep today's #7. Perhaps a bad ordered car or locomotive?


Im guessing bad order??


----------



## montana mike (Dec 22, 2013)

Perhaps, but I also noticed that several of the other LD trains were also greatly delayed in departing as well. Bummer.


----------



## Joe F (Dec 23, 2013)

Curious situation on the Dixieland status map this morning. One EB is between GFK and FAR, and the other is between SCD and SPL. However, the train numbers are opposite from the usual situation. #8 lost 4 hours between RUG and DVL and is down 5:43. #7 departed CHI 3 hours late and lost an additional 1.5 hours between MSP and SCD; now running 6:02 late. The two trains will probably meet somewhere around Detroit Lakes.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 23, 2013)

Very heavy traffic congestion and some cold weather issues I would imagine. Not looking good for either train. :-(


----------



## fairviewroad (Dec 23, 2013)

On the plus side, 7(20) arrived in SEA just 10 minutes late yesterday.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 23, 2013)

#7 chugging away today in ND (now 7 1/2 hours behind) will make sure they make up for that good deed!! They lost over three hours alone going thru the short "squeeze zone" in western MN and eastern ND--ouch!!

:-((


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 24, 2013)

Freight slowing Amtrak’s Empire Builder




> By Curtis Tate
> 
> McClatchy News Service
> 
> ...


----------



## NW cannonball (Dec 24, 2013)

Good to see some media coverage of the Northern Transcon - HI-Line

BUT



> Roxanne Butler, a BNSF spokeswoman, attributed the congestion to an increase in the number of grain trains from 60 a day to 122. She said the crude-oil shipments account for 85 trains a day, “one-half of 1 percent of the total daily train volume.”
> 
> Still, that’s 85 trains BNSF was not operating before the Bakken boom, and many observers have questioned whether the railroad has enough track space to handle increased shipments without delaying other trains.


The numbers in this quote make absolutely no sense at all. "85 trains a day" crude shipments is "one-half of 1 percent" -- The mind boggles -


----------



## montana mike (Dec 24, 2013)

Perhaps a percentage of ALL freights in the US? I agree, doesn't make much sense. My local BNSF guys say the number of ALL freight trains moved by BNSF nationwide has gone up significantly this year, especially the energy trains. The intermodal trains were particularly singled out as being a much bigger player, as trucking firms move more and more long distance freight via rail.

I do agree that grain trains play an important role on the Hi-Line, but this is no "surprise" and the larger number of these trains is cyclical in nature and has been a major player on the Hi-Line for decades. They all say BNSF was really caught "with their pants down" (their comment) with regard to not doing a good job of anticipating these increases-despite many in the trenches trying to get senior management's attention. On several occasions they have said for the first several years BNSF was run purely as a profit center, without regard to long term planning by senior Berkshire Hathaway "hired guns" who knew little about railroads, but who tried to squeeze extra profits out of the railroad in the short term. They are paying for their short sighted mismanagement now big time.


----------



## bgiaquin (Dec 24, 2013)

I have compiled a list of all the double track segments (excluding sidings) on the Hi-Line between Surrey, ND and Shelby, MT, the area that causes the most delays.

Surrey, ND-WL Switch(Gassman). 12.7 miles.

Gassman Switch,ND-Des Lacs, ND. 8 miles.

Palerno, ND-Ross, ND. 15 miles

Epping, ND- West Williston, ND. 19 miles.

Havre East, MT-Pacific Jct., MT. 6.6 miles.

East Joplin, MT-Gilford West, MT. 23 miles

Note: BNSF is working on completely double-tracking the entire 154 mile Surrey,ND to Snowden, MT segment.

Current total double track mileage Surrey-Shelby: *84**.3 miles.*


----------



## Guest (Dec 24, 2013)

I read on the outstate Minnesota yahoo group that even on the double track segments many freights are parked effectively making these segments single track. Probably explains why many trains have lost time between Fargo and MSP also.


----------



## fairviewroad (Dec 24, 2013)

Both #7s are doing almost exactly the same today....

7(22) is 7hrs, 3 minutes late leaving SPK.

7(23) is 7 hrs, 7 minutes late leaving GFK.

Well, at least they're consistent. :blush:


----------



## montana mike (Dec 24, 2013)

BNSF had estimated delays within this area is 4 hours and I have been following this for about a week and sadly they are dead on with their estimates. No major improvements in this mess until all of the track work is done after the end of the 2015 construction season.

I think it is also noteworthy to observe that the delays into PDX and SEA have progressively grown to the point that they are approaching the delays seen in Chicago.

:-(


----------



## Karl1459 (Dec 24, 2013)

I was "fortunate" to be on 7-27 of 12/22 getting on at Essex (3:18 am 12/24). Crew explained delay at Chicago was due to bad ordered cars being switched out and finding replacements. Arriving the 7-27 overshot the platform for the front PDX coach. The ski bums getting off did not care... they bailed out into the snow, the conductor got them their skis and they looked happy.

Full train, tired but generally patient crew and passengers. KFC for everyone after Pasco. We got into VAN about 4:00 and it looks like they made a record turn as the 28 is showing out on time at 4:45 pt.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 24, 2013)

Is there not a second train set? There must be-since #7 arrived in SEA 14 minutes after #8 departed.

:-(


----------



## JayPea (Dec 25, 2013)

I am at the point now that if I wanted to connect to the southbound CS, I'd take the EB from Spokane to Seattle and stay overnight there rather than risk the same day connection in Portland. The additional money spent on a hotel room in Seattle would be worth it to me. I'm planning an EB trip to Seattle in June, spend a couple of nights there, take the EB from there to Glacier Park, spend a couple of nights there, and return to Spokane. As I'm not making connections to any other trains, I don't care how late the EB is then.


----------



## tricia (Dec 25, 2013)

JayPea said:


> I am at the point now that if I wanted to connect to the southbound CS, I'd take the EB from Spokane to Seattle and stay overnight there rather than risk the same day connection in Portland. The additional money spent on a hotel room in Seattle would be worth it to me. I'm planning an EB trip to Seattle in June, spend a couple of nights there, take the EB from there to Glacier Park, spend a couple of nights there, and return to Spokane. As I'm not making connections to any other trains, I don't care how late the EB is then.


Ah, but you WOULD care if instead of being late, your EB got cancelled shortly before you're planning to travel--as happened recently, when all those late trains backed up to the point where Amtrak decided that the best way to "catch up" was to cancel trains every other day for a while.

I've got EB tix for February myself, and my nightmare scenario is a last-minute phone call, when I'm already in transit, saying my train home has been cancelled and they're not providing any alternative. I'm FINE with delays (more time on trains! yay!) but NOT fine with having to figure out lodging and transport logistics (while traveling, away from my computer) and pay $$$$ for last-minute airline tix to get home--when I've already booked that passage home with Amtrak, months in advance.

Sorry for rant. Merry Christmas! :hi: Maybe best NOT to worry about this now, and instead postpone until January.


----------



## JayPea (Dec 25, 2013)

Well, I live 270 miles from Seattle and 380 from Glacier. The logistics for me wouldn't be nearly so hard to figure out. Worse comes to worse I can take the Thruway bus to/from Seattle then drive to/from Glacier. The Thruway bus has a stop in my town, right outside my door. EB or no EB, I'm headed to both Seattle and Glacier.


----------



## JayPea (Dec 28, 2013)

An editorial from today's Spokane _Spokesman-Review:_


----------



## montana mike (Dec 28, 2013)

Well, a good start and reasonably fair account, but only touches the proverbial tip of the ice berg--as all of us in this forum recognize. There is no simple solution. Why BOTH BNSF and Amtrak management didn't see the "headlights" coming at them over the past several years is a topic of discussion in itself, but suffice to say what could be an absolute gem of a ride thru some of America's most spectacular countryside has been fraught with a myriad of roadblocks for more than a year now and it will likely get worse before getting better.

I got somewhat of a chuckle out of BNSF's plans for 50 more miles of double tracking!! Gee, out of a trip of well over 1500 miles on the hi-line (most of which is single track), that's a tiny drop in the bucket-yes, a start, but not much........


----------



## Ryan (Dec 28, 2013)

There is a very simple solution.

Run less freight.

X number if trains can run of the line without delays. Solve for X and run that many trains a day.

Raise rates until demand matches supply.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 28, 2013)

As I said before most of their contracts are locked in for YEARS for rates--eg. the coal and grain they move. These are not only negotiated between the two parties the various state regulators even get into the mess. There is NO way they could change this even if they wanted to.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 29, 2013)

Yeah, they've also got a contract to run Amtrak on time, and we see how well they're honoring that one.


----------



## montana mike (Dec 29, 2013)

I do believe contracts with state agencies override the agreement BNSF has with Amtrak. My local BNSF contacts say there is a good deal of language in the Amtrak contract that gives "both sides a lot of flexibility" with several pages of "exceptions" that mitigate against your position. I sent your comment to two of my local BNSF people. It will be interesting to see what/if they come back with anything specific.


----------



## JayPea (Dec 29, 2013)

I was surprised to see this editorial in the local paper in the first place. As it stated, many people in Spokane may not be aware of Amtrak's presence at all. Amtrak by and large gets ignored by the Spokane press. That anyone on the editorial board took notice of the EB's woes is really quite surprising.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 29, 2013)

montana mike said:


> I do believe contracts with state agencies override the agreement BNSF has with Amtrak. My local BNSF contacts say there is a good deal of language in the Amtrak contract that gives "both sides a lot of flexibility" with several pages of "exceptions" that mitigate against your position. I sent your comment to two of my local BNSF people. It will be interesting to see what/if they come back with anything specific.


Sounds like they need some of that flexibility in their other contracts. Promising to deliver more than they could possibly supply is pretty stupid.


----------



## bgiaquin (Dec 29, 2013)

RyanS said:


> There is a very simple solution.
> 
> Run less freight.
> 
> ...


Freights are not the problem, track capacity is.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 29, 2013)

If you're going to go full pedant on us, it's the fact that they're running more freights than they have capacity for.

One of these things can be fixed virtual overnight.

The other can't.


----------



## Ispolkom (Dec 30, 2013)

RyanS said:


> montana mike said:
> 
> 
> > I do believe contracts with state agencies override the agreement BNSF has with Amtrak. My local BNSF contacts say there is a good deal of language in the Amtrak contract that gives "both sides a lot of flexibility" with several pages of "exceptions" that mitigate against your position. I sent your comment to two of my local BNSF people. It will be interesting to see what/if they come back with anything specific.
> ...


You're assuming that they are promising more than they can deliver. It ain't necessarily so. Grain and coal shipments usually don't mind when they arrive a day late. I wouldn't be surprised if oil trains are equally patient. The same isn't true, of course, for passenger trains or the high-priority container trains. BNSF could well be meeting its OTP performance standards for the vast majority of its customers, but not meeting it for a relatively few especially demanding customers. Sucks to be us, but I don't expect BNSF to share our priorities.


----------



## Ryan (Dec 30, 2013)

If that's the case they can run less trains. Since Mike indicated that wasn't an option, that seemed like a logical conclusion.


----------



## Ispolkom (Dec 30, 2013)

RyanS said:


> If that's the case they can run less trains. Since Mike indicated that wasn't an option, that seemed like a logical conclusion.


Our they can run the same number of trains and pay a few penalties, which seems to be what they are doing. I'm sure that they can figure what is optimal for them. It doesn't seem to be optimal for my needs, as a regular Empire Builder passenger, but I figure that I can take it or leave it.


----------



## Karl1459 (Dec 30, 2013)

JayPea said:


> An editorial from today's Spokane _Spokesman-Review:_





JayPea said:


> I was surprised to see this editorial in the local paper in the first place. As it stated, many people in Spokane may not be aware of Amtrak's presence at all. Amtrak by and large gets ignored by the Spokane press. That anyone on the editorial board took notice of the EB's woes is really quite surprising.


There were a fair amount of passengers getting on/off at Spokane on my trip last week. This editorial is showing the change from "Amtrak, whats that", to "Amtrak, great for some...", with a implied recognition that there may be demand for daylight SPK-SEA and SPK-PDX service (Mr Hamilton, your cue...). There is also a tone of "I don't use it but don't take it away", which becomes an opportunity for Amtrak to invite people to actually use the service and see the relative advantages of train travel.


----------



## CHamilton (Dec 30, 2013)

Karl1459 said:


> There were a fair amount of passengers getting on/off at Spokane on my trip last week. This editorial is showing the change from "Amtrak, whats that", to "Amtrak, great for some...", with a implied recognition that there may be demand for daylight SPK-SEA and SPK-PDX service (Mr Hamilton, your cue...).


Okay, I'll bite. Daylight service SPK-SEA has been talked about forever, including by state staffers, but it is not explicitly included in the state rail plan that is currently being finalized. We rail advocates need to make more noise about this, and to support rail advocacy organizations at the national (NARP) and state levels (All Aboard Washington). Haven't finished your end-of-year donations? To quote Davy from another thread, get out your checkbooks!


----------



## anir dendroica (Jan 9, 2014)

Time to revive this thread...

Looks like the EB is the only train not yet up and running after the "polar vortex" episode. Departures on 1/7 but service disruptions yesterday.

Anyone know if they will be operating today, and if the sixth trainset will stay in rotation for the rest of the winter (or even through summer construction season)?


----------



## CHamilton (Jan 9, 2014)

Not much information, but...

Passenger train service being restored


----------



## anir dendroica (Jan 10, 2014)

#7(9) left Chicago 7:18 late. #3 and #5 did little better. Still not back to normal in the Chicago yards, or else they were held for some very late eastern arrivals.


----------



## Ispolkom (Jan 10, 2014)

I've occasionally wished for a day train between St. Paul and Minot, like the Great Northern once had. This isn't what I had in mind.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 10, 2014)

I see even today's #7 is now going to depart AT LEAST 1 hour and 45 minutes behind schedule (as we know yesterday's went out over 7 hours behind). #3 and #5 are also, scheduled to leave at least 90 minutes late as well. Here we are 5 days after the "Big Chill" (and temps in Chicago actually above normal!!) and the trains are still not even leaving the CHI hub on time. Rats.......Hopefully the slower weekend pace will allow Amtrak to fully catch up!!


----------



## TraneMan (Jan 10, 2014)

They had the same yesterday, and kept on getting pushed out as the evening went on..

My trip is in a few weeks, and ended up taking the next day off just in case the non stop delay from CHI cont then in Feb, and no way I am arrving home a few hours before work.


----------



## fairviewroad (Jan 10, 2014)

Some crook on board took a swing at the conductors on 7(9) today.

Grand Forks deputies respond to Amtrak after intoxicated individual assaulted two Amtrak conductors

http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/281992/group/homepage/


----------



## montana mike (Jan 13, 2014)

Monday 1/13: More than a week after the cold weather Amtrak still cannot get the trains out of the yard on time. Today's Empire Builder left over an hour late, again.


----------



## tricia (Jan 13, 2014)

Sad to say, I've bailed out on the EB trip I'd booked for mid-February. Will now head back east from Portland, OR, on the Coast Starlight to Zephyr to Cap Ltd ,....

If it were just myself, I'd have taken my chances. But I'll be traveling with my father, who's elderly and not able to sleep sitting up in coach if the EB is cancelled or misses its Chicago connection and Amtrak's only available option is to book us on overnight train(s) in coach.

Hope things get better for the EB--but that's a hope not well grounded in reality, alas.


----------



## tim49424 (Jan 13, 2014)

I have no trust in the EB anymore. I want to do a round trip as well to Portland from Holland, Michigan this summer sometime with my mother and sister, but am looking to do the Pere Marquette to Chicago, the California Zephyr to the coast and the Coast Starlight up to the north (and in the reverse order for the trip back). In better times, I'd do a PM/EB combo and may do that sometime if the EB's time problems ever get solved.


----------



## jebr (Jan 13, 2014)

It appears that Amtrak has broken connections from the eastbound Builder to all connecting trains in Chicago *except* the Lake Shore Limited.

Dang, they're expecting quite a few issues if that's the case.


----------



## Ryan (Jan 13, 2014)

I don't think that expectation is unrealistic, though.


----------



## andersone (Jan 14, 2014)

I am booked on the EB in August, but luckily I am only going from LaCrosse to Glacier and return. As this is a vacation, with a rental car and six days at Glacier I think I can handle the delays. Mel Brooke's once told us it is good to be king, I am just happy to be roaming around on the steel rail. One of pappy's rules was never be in a rush on vacation,,,,,,


----------



## TraneMan (Jan 14, 2014)

andersone said:


> I am booked on the EB in August, but luckily I am only going from LaCrosse to Glacier and return. As this is a vacation, with a rental car and six days at Glacier I think I can handle the delays. Mel Brooke's once told us it is good to be king, I am just happy to be roaming around on the steel rail. One of pappy's rules was never be in a rush on vacation,,,,,,


Enjoy the trip! I've been out there 3 times, and LOVE Glacier.. Are you getting off at Glacier or Whitefish?


----------



## montana mike (Jan 16, 2014)

Anyone know what happened to #7 in ND this AM. It was actually running pretty good until the dreaded "Service Disruption" notice was posted by Amtrak--rats.......


----------



## yarrow (Jan 16, 2014)

montana mike said:


> Anyone know what happened to #7 in ND this AM. It was actually running pretty good until the dreaded "Service Disruption" notice was posted by Amtrak--rats.......


yeah, 7 and 8 in mt and nd dropped off the map together. was feeling good about our trip on 27 from spk saturday morning. not so much now


----------



## montana mike (Jan 16, 2014)

It is strange. According to the Amtrak Track a train map they are both still moving, but Amtrak's system has put them both in a Service Disruption status. Something must be going on with BNSF perhaps? I will try to ask my local BNSF contacts, but usually they are very good about giving me heads up when problems do arise.

Bummer. I am going to be on the EB in a few days and I specifically built in a night in CHI because of this mess. I hope 24 hours is sufficient time!

:-(


----------



## andersone (Jan 16, 2014)

TraneMan said:


> andersone said:
> 
> 
> > I am booked on the EB in August, but luckily I am only going from LaCrosse to Glacier and return. As this is a vacation, with a rental car and six days at Glacier I think I can handle the delays. Mel Brooke's once told us it is good to be king, I am just happy to be roaming around on the steel rail. One of pappy's rules was never be in a rush on vacation,,,,,,
> ...


actually getting off in East Glacier and re-boarding in West. Will rent a car for six glorious days in the most beautiful place in America (my sainted mother always contended Lake Louise and I dare not contravene her thoughts, at least in text, for fear of incurring her wrath from beyond) Haven't been there since I was a teen, next year Yellowstone, trying to relive my past now that I am over 60 and survived radical head and neck cancer surgery twice. Life is precious, as are the people and places in it.


----------



## Steve Manfred (Jan 16, 2014)

I heard there were 70mph winds in North Dakota last night. Maybe that's got something to do with it.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 16, 2014)

I just looked at the wealth observations in ND now, windy (currently 30+ mph) and cold (0 to 10 degrees), but nothing that isn't even approaching what occurred 10 days ago, and quite frankly, not too far from "normal". And absolutely NO weather issues here in MT to cause #8 to go into Service Disruption--it's mild, calm and dry. Arrrgh.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 16, 2014)

Update: My BNSF guy says a freight derailed about 90 miles West of Minot late last night. And he believes it is in an area of single track, which means a likely 4-6 hour delay (or more), while BNSF gets equipment to the scene to put the derailed cars back on the tracks. He had no other info at this time.

The Builders just can't get a break can they!

:-(


----------



## yarrow (Jan 16, 2014)

i guess they will hold 8 at havre and 7 at minot. quite a few cars involved in the freight derailment which, possibly, was due to wind.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 16, 2014)

Not sure. I asked my BNSF guy that very question. He said the derailment actually occurred around 6:30 AM today and winds in the area were between 30-40 mph, which normally is not a concern, but a "rogue" gust could have contributed to this derailment. In a quick follow up he said this issue "may take a while to untangle". That does not sound encouraging.

:-(

PS-BNSF has already put out a bulletin to its freight customers to expect 36-48 hour delays in receiving their goods as a result of this mess, so my guess is this will not be cleared up for a while. Another reason for double tracking this route!


----------



## yarrow (Jan 16, 2014)

montana mike said:


> Not sure. I asked my BNSF guy that very question. He said the derailment actually occurred around 6:30 AM today and winds in the area were between 30-40 mph, which normally is not a concern, but a "rogue" gust could have contributed to this derailment. In a quick follow up he said this issue "may take a while to untangle". That does not sound encouraging.
> 
> :-(
> 
> PS-BNSF has already put out a bulletin to its freight customers to expect 36-48 hour delays in receiving their goods as a result of this mess, so my guess is this will not be cleared up for a while. Another reason for double tracking this route!


wow, wonder what will happen to today's 7 out of chi? that was to have been "our train" out of spk on saturday morning. since havre and minot are service stops, i suppose, they could turn the trains there and bus bridge between


----------



## yarrow (Jan 16, 2014)

the derailed freight was a bnsf "z" train, afaik. they can't bee too happy about that. at least not another flaming crude oil mess


----------



## montana mike (Jan 16, 2014)

My BNSF guy says he didn't think the weather was a direct factor, while it is cold there (actually just low teens at the accident site at the time of the accident), and it was windy (NW at 25-35 mph+), neither of these two factors should have been the main cause of this derailment. Hopefully BNSF will be able to step up to the plate and work some miracles on putting things back together--never a dull moment on the Hi-Line!!! Amazing. If I was BNSF senior management I would be all over this line like a fly on you know what. This is their $$$ line and things get screwed up royally on a regular basis.

Oh well.........


----------



## Ispolkom (Jan 16, 2014)

yarrow said:


> wow, wonder what will happen to today's 7 out of chi? that was to have been "our train" out of spk on saturday morning. since havre and minot are service stops, i suppose, they could turn the trains there and bus bridge between


The problem with a bus bridge might be the high winds. While the no-travel advisory is for eastern North Dakota, there is a high wind advisory in the western part that reads in part: "Motorists should be advised that extremely high winds are making travel difficult across the state, especially for high-profile vehicles such as semis, trucks, busses and SUV’s." Williston's weather forecast warns of "sustained northwest winds to 45 mph with gusts to 70 mph." Not a good day to be on the road.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 16, 2014)

Current Williston ND weather: Sunny, North wind at 18mph, temp 23--This is actually ABOVE normal for them!

It would appear #7 is being held at Minot and #8 will likely be held at Havre (currently just west of Havre). Could be a long stay for both--bummer.........


----------



## montana mike (Jan 16, 2014)

BTW-It's about a 7 hour drive from Minot to Havre. The weather right now is mild and dry in MT (30's) and just cold and dry in western ND (teens), with 25+ MPH winds in Minot, certainly not anything out of the ordinary for the Hi-Line. The BNSF repair efforts may take a long time and a bus bridge may be the only option.


----------



## yarrow (Jan 16, 2014)

i note that today's 7 hasn't left chi. wonder if it's a crew or equipment problem or it it's related to the derailment?


----------



## montana mike (Jan 16, 2014)

Let's hope it is just a "minor" equipment issue, otherwise things could get really ugly.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 16, 2014)

Update: #7 scheduled to depart CHI about 2 1/2 hours late. And they are holding #7 and #8 in Minot and Havre respectively. No update at all from my BNSF contacts on the derailment. Not a good sign.

Just got word that the track should reopen around Noon Mtn time (1 PM Central time) on 1-17. I hope they bus bridge those folks, otherwise that is a 24+ hour wait-yikes!!!


----------



## yarrow (Jan 16, 2014)

from TO, 7(16) is annulled and will run to msp as 807. no further word on 7 and 8 stuck on either side of the derailment. i guess the best we can hope for out of spk tomorrow night is an on-time bus to pdx.


----------



## amamba (Jan 16, 2014)

yarrow said:


> from TO, 7(16) is annulled and will run to msp as 807. no further word on 7 and 8 stuck on either side of the derailment. i guess the best we can hope for out of spk tomorrow night is an on-time bus to pdx.


I bet they do a bus bridge and turn them.


----------



## Acela150 (Jan 16, 2014)

montana mike said:


> The Builders just can't get a break can they!


Of course not.. It's railroad Karma.. The EB can't get a break.. When it does it'll be the day of the rapture.. :lol:


----------



## Trainut (Jan 16, 2014)

Just talked with a EB conductor. He said that the wind derailed 2 freight cars west of Minot.


----------



## n00ax (Jan 17, 2014)

Could the builder out of Minneapolis to Chicago become majorly delayed on Saturday?


----------



## Phil S (Jan 17, 2014)

Folks, IMO all this is the inevitable result of a system in which private companies own the track and structures, and the rolling stock (or at least all of it except Amtrak). Most other countries don't work this way. The trend in Europe, for example, is for the gov't to own the track and structures. then franchise (via a bidding process) companies to run the trains, both freight and pax. So, If we're going to bang our heads against brick walls, maybe we should try to at least bang our heads against the same wall with the same goal in mind? No promises we'll get anywhere, But I think it might help if we left these short-term problems aside for a while and discussed long-term fundamental challenges..

Cheers, Phil

PS: Mike, many thanks for your input. You're in touch with some good people at BNSF and It's helping a lot!


----------



## montana mike (Jan 17, 2014)

Track is re-opened now according to BNSF!


----------



## Ryan (Jan 17, 2014)

n00ax said:


> Could the builder out of Minneapolis to Chicago become majorly delayed on Saturday?


At this stage of the game, yes - major delays are ALWAYS a possibility on this line.
I want to echo what WellTrained said about Mike too - I greatly appreciate the info he brings to the thread and am in no way shooting the messenger when I go off and call BNSF management a bunch of dunderheaded idiots for putting themselves into this mess.


----------



## NS (Jan 17, 2014)

I wonder with the EB would have all these delays if it was still operated by BNSF itself? Anyone remember it's performance under Great Northern/Burlington Northern?


----------



## Ryan (Jan 17, 2014)

Looking at the performance of their freight trains, I'd say it'd still be pretty crappy. Too much congestion to run anything in a timely fashion.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 17, 2014)

I took the Empire Builders when the Great Northern ran it and while that was only two times, we were on time almost the entire length of our journey-and that was in the summer time both times! There is something to be said about "ownership" with anything. If you "own" something you tend to take much more interest and pride in making things work well.

A do agree with RyanS though, that given the current state of the BNSF mess on the Hi-Line I wouldn't expect much change in the EB's status......


----------



## dabrilloman (Jan 17, 2014)

I am going to Reno again this year in late March. USBC Open bowling tournament. I have already booked my return trip (RNO-SAC-PDX-MSP) with roomette for the PDX-MSP segment. I am very leery of booking the out bound on the outbound portion the same way due to all the problems on the EB as of right now. I have no leeway in my time off to depend on a timely trip westward. But plenty of time for the eastbound half. So it's looking like Mega Bus to Chicago over night and the CZ, CHI-RNO, with roomette. Either way it will be fun...first time on the CS and EB.


----------



## tomfuller (Jan 18, 2014)

The HI hostel is a good cheap safe place to spend overnight in Chicago. It is on Congress not too far from the lake.

Even if the CZ is late getting out of Denver, there is enough cushion time built in at SLC that you should be right on time into RNO. I was on the westbound CZ on Dec. 17-18.

When you get to Sacramento, put your bags on "hold" at the baggage area and then wander down to the California Railroad Museum in Old Town Sacramento. Stay until closing and then find a good meal in Old Town. Be back to the station by 10PM to wait for the CS. Hopefuly at midnight


----------



## dabrilloman (Jan 18, 2014)

Thanks for the info Tom. I guess I could have worded it better about the Mega Bus ($5 to Chi), I catch it at midnight in St. Paul and arrive in Chicago at 8:30 or so with drop off right at Union Station. Saves me a vacation day and money. I have checked about the Hostel and it was going to be my option until I found the overnight bus.

I did ride the CZ last year (Ott-Rno round trip) and really enjoyed it. So I am looking forward to the whole route with a roomette to Reno. Also thanks for the info about SAC. Was kind of wondering about what to do with my time there.


----------



## Michigan Mom (Jan 18, 2014)

I wish the delays and missed connections were the worst problem. This fracking garbage is going to make those issues seem very minor.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 19, 2014)

They have been "fracking" in ND for over 60 years. What does this comment have to do with EB delays on the Hi-Line?


----------



## Ryan (Jan 19, 2014)

Pretty much nothing.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 19, 2014)

Does anyone know what has happened to #7(18)? It was actually doing pretty good, and just went into Service Disruption. Track a train shows it is still heading west though.

:-(


----------



## montana mike (Jan 19, 2014)

Update; I see #7(18) is running thru ND on the Surrey cutoff and NOT the usual route. I wonder it this means BNSF has had another "challenge" on the other route or are they still running west bound trains on this route and eastbound thru Devil's Lake?


----------



## Michigan Mom (Jan 19, 2014)

What it has to do with it, Mike, is I read somewhere that when the oil companies upped thier fracking activities in the area, their increased usage of the tracks had a detrimental effect on Amtrak's performance. I didn't make this up, I read it somewhere, maybe even here. This might be wrong, this might be right, but for anyone reading this, please do understand one thing. If you truly seek to create more "rail advocates" there are a few users on this forum who could scale back a little on their hostility.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 19, 2014)

It's not the tracking per se. It's the energy activity throughout the entire Hi-Line, especially ND and MT. Fracking doesn't "cause" delays. The delays are because most of the new oil has to be shipped via rail, since the pipeline is now a dead duck. If you had said BNSF's major increases in energy trains was the main issue you would have been correct.

Meanwhile, I see another derailment-this time a UP coal train (19 cars) in Caledonia, WI. Good grief! I wonder if this will effect Amtrak trains?


----------



## Michigan Mom (Jan 19, 2014)

Thanks, Mike


----------



## montana mike (Jan 20, 2014)

Currently on #8 in MN. For once BNSF did a superb job on guiding the EB thru a myriad of freight traffic last night in ND (amazing the number of energy train on the tracks now!!). We arrived in MSP only 43 minutes behind schedule--which for this year is terrific. However, now that we are under CP control we have gone only 25 miles in the past hour, so all of the good time gained appears to be disappearing under CP. Hopefully this train will still arrive less than 2 hours behind schedule. The conductor believes it is going to be a slow go all the way into CHI today.


----------



## MrFSS (Jan 20, 2014)

montana mike said:


> Currently on #8 in MN. For once BNSF did a superb job on guiding the EB thru a myriad of freight traffic last night in ND (amazing the number of energy train on the tracks now!!). We arrived in MSP only 43 minutes behind schedule--which for this year is terrific. However, now that we are under CP control we have gone only 25 miles in the past hour, so all of the good time gained appears to be disappearing under CP. Hopefully this train will still arrive less than 2 hours behind schedule. The conductor believes it is going to be a slow go all the way into CHI today.


Mike - when it changes to CP, what happens to all the oil trains BNSF has running? They have to go somewhere. I assume BNSF has their own lines that head toward Chicago, etc, but aren't used by the EB past MSP?


----------



## montana mike (Jan 20, 2014)

Good question--not sure. There are certainly more tracks than the ones Amtrak run on. The BNSF system map shows their lines runs south to the west of where Amtrak runs its trains. But the Builders run on CP Rail lines from MSP to just north of CHI, where they pick up Metra tracks. I have seen several CPR track crews out today (slowed us down twice). Tough job in January!


----------



## greatcats (Jan 20, 2014)

I remember seeing the Empire Builder going west at East Glacier around 1969. I was on a cross country trailer trip with my parents. It was about 3 hours late. A sleeping car porter grumbled, " just plain delayed. "


----------



## tim49424 (Jan 20, 2014)

MrFSS said:


> montana mike said:
> 
> 
> > Currently on #8 in MN. For once BNSF did a superb job on guiding the EB thru a myriad of freight traffic last night in ND (amazing the number of energy train on the tracks now!!). We arrived in MSP only 43 minutes behind schedule--which for this year is terrific. However, now that we are under CP control we have gone only 25 miles in the past hour, so all of the good time gained appears to be disappearing under CP. Hopefully this train will still arrive less than 2 hours behind schedule. The conductor believes it is going to be a slow go all the way into CHI today.
> ...


Not that this answers your question at all, but I do know there are sand fracking pits just west of Tomah, along the CP rail that the EB uses. I was told that the sand from those pits is being shipped west to North Dakota.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 20, 2014)

Yes, that is correct. Quite a complex. I have watched them construct this amazing facility over the past several years! BTW: My #8 lost the 2 hours we had gained back on its trek thru Wisconsin and MN ( due to very heavy freight), so we arrived 2 hours late in CHI. Still, better than many of the EBs over the past months.


----------



## anir dendroica (Jan 21, 2014)

The EBs look better on the map tonight than they have since some time last May. It's possible that the seasonal grain crunch is starting to ebb, freeing up some capacity on the line. Here's hoping it's a trend...


----------



## TraneMan (Jan 21, 2014)

anir dendroica said:


> The EBs look better on the map tonight than they have since some time last May. It's possible that the seasonal grain crunch is starting to ebb, freeing up some capacity on the line. Here's hoping it's a trend...


Not any more! :-( 3+ hours both 8 and 7.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 21, 2014)

Perhaps the closure (due to the derailment) of the UP line that parallels the CPR line may have contributed to both the #7 and #8 delays, since it would be logical to move these trains on the other line while UP fixes their mess in WI? That may have contributed to the very heavy freight traffic on my trek thru WI yesterday.


----------



## shorebreeze (Jan 21, 2014)

Oh, for the Milwaukee Road transcon to be reopened. Until that mistake is rectified in some way, this situation on the Hi-Line won't end.


----------



## montana mike (Jan 21, 2014)

#8 in MN now over 7 hours behind and #7 is 5 hours and 41 minutes latex. not a good start to Tuesday

:-(


----------



## anir dendroica (Jan 21, 2014)

Fargo to Chicago is back in the deep freeze (temps around -10 to -20). Points further west are being spared this time.


----------



## greatcats (Jan 21, 2014)

Not to be snide, but I'm sure it is a certainty that the Milwaukee will be rebuilt soon, complete with electrification. Snowballs in hell are more likely.


----------



## fairviewroad (Jan 24, 2014)

Yet another derailment on the Builder route. This article, naturally, makes no mention of the Empire Builder

but it does say that 13 corn cars derailed yesterday near Ross, ND, which is just west of Stanley.

On the EB Yahoo list, it was reported that 8(22) spent the night in Williston as there was no train on "the other

side" to bus bridge to (since 7(22) slipped through the area prior to the derailment.) As of this morning 8(22)

appears to be on the move again. The train tracker website, if accurate, shows that it's moved past the

derailment and just stopped in Stanley, some 16 hours late.

Meanwhile 7(23) was re-routed via New Rockford and made it into Minot "only" 3 hours late where it currently

sits.

I have in-laws scheduled to travel on 7(24) departing GFK tomorrow morning. They just got the dreaded "service

disruption" call and told they'll be bussed from GFK to Minot.


----------



## RalphCT (Jan 24, 2014)

I saw the Service Disruption on the Amtrak train status yesterday (1/23/2914) for 8. Are there actually passengers on board east of Williston do you think?

A Montanan who enjoys trail travel.


----------



## zephyr17 (Jan 24, 2014)

shorebreeze said:


> Oh, for the Milwaukee Road transcon to be reopened. Until that mistake is rectified in some way, this situation on the Hi-Line won't end.


Eastern end of the MILW Pacific Extension to Terry, MT is still there and used. I don't think it is helping much.


----------



## Tumbleweed (Jan 24, 2014)

I'm planning to deboard in DVL about 2/13.....sounds like it's a crap shoot right now...


----------



## fairviewroad (Jan 24, 2014)

RalphCT said:


> I saw the Service Disruption on the Amtrak train status yesterday (1/23/2914) for 8. Are there actually passengers on board east of Williston do you think?


I suspect there are. For one thing, the derailment happened after the train left SEA/PDX on Wednesday evening. So Amtrak/passengers

had no reason to suspect they wouldn't get through. So once the train pulled into Williston, what would the passengers bound for east of

there do? If you were headed to Stanley or Minot, you might have been able to arrange local transportation. But for everyone else, there

would be no choice but to wait. Even if Amtrak had put everyone up in a hotel (assuming there was space available) they would still probably

put them back on the train this morning for the onward journey.

Both 7 and 8 have now made it past the derailment spot. 7(23) is about 3 1/2 hours down, having resumed its regular route in Minot. 8(22)

is pulling into Minot about 17 hours late.


----------



## RalphCT (Jan 24, 2014)

Wow! I'd sure want to be in a sleeper on that one. Hey, looking at the next 8 eastbound (in Montana on 1/24)-- it's running on time. That's different. Let's hope it stays that way.

A Montanan who enjoys trail travel.


----------



## anir dendroica (Jan 24, 2014)

fairviewroad said:


> RalphCT said:
> 
> 
> > I saw the Service Disruption on the Amtrak train status yesterday (1/23/2914) for 8. Are there actually passengers on board east of Williston do you think?
> ...


That's two freight derailments six days apart in time and 30 miles apart on the map. It appears that the roller coaster temperatures are taking their toll on the rails...


----------

