Empire Builder Summer Blues Started Early this year

[gmushial]

Argh, can't Amtrak just give the EB timetable a seasonal makeover? I'm not confidant that more padding would help, but at least more travel time to account for lower speeds.

Because they have a contract with BNSF to run that train on time. If BSNF can't do that, then they need to pull a few of their freight trains off the line until such time as they can properly accommodate Amtrak.

What are the chances of Amtrak making a new seasonal contract with BNSF. The delays aren't going away anytime soon.

Amtrak doesn't want to do that. Doing so means breaking connections. Broken connections mean fewer tickets sold.

Alan - what's more offensive to the potential ticket buying public: connections which are lost in theory, ie, the published schedule indicates they are not possible (but represents reality w/re actual train arrivals); or actual missed connections, which were sold as theoretical connections, promised connections, which are then missed? I think in one case one may (fraudulently) sell a ticket involving connections which in fact won't be made - leaving the customer dissatisfied and willing to badmouth Amtrak. In the other case the schedule merely looks inconvenient, but those which buy tickets will more than likely make the promised connections. In one case Amtrak promises that which it can't deliver; in the other case it can only appear to improve on an inconvenient schedule over time. I know in my business I would always rather under-promise and then appear to over-deliver vs over-promise and fail to deliver - in one case I have a customer which likely won't come back and potentially will poison the well for other customers; in the other case I can appear to be trying and improving. I think that's what updating the schedule to reflect reality comes to.

 

[crescent2]

But once given up, it's difficult to ever get the old schedule back from the host. Apparently at least part of the problems are seasonal, so why would Amtrak want to bind itself to being permanently "late" (according to the old schedule) even during those times it could be on time?

If Amtrak had control of the rail line, changing the EB timetable back and forth would be easier. But they don't.

They do need to make passengers aware of the fact that currently the connections with the EB probably will not be made, however. Realistic expectations are a desirable thing. I don't have a solution, but I do understand why they don't just change the timetable to reflect the current delays.

 

[montana mike]

The recent pattern of somewhat shorter delays over the weekend continues-with yesterday's #8 about 2 hours late and today's projected to be under two hours as well. Less than 2 hours late allows a connecting passenger to have a reasonable shot at #30 going east. The weekday performance (tues thru fri) remains a question though with 3-5 hour late arrivals still more common. The suspension of track work for the winter (Nov thru April) will help somewhat for all EBs, but the increase in energy related traffic and more and more intermodal trains are here to stay. Perhaps we will get a good handle on how much these factors contribute to the arrival delays into Chi during this timeframe. I guess as long as Amtrak is willing to underwrite the costs to put people up overnight in Chicago for missed connections the current schedule will remain in place. Does anyone know how much this costs Amtrak?

PS--Somewhat troubling is the recent arrival performance into SEA (that is when the trains aren't turned in SPK). Today's for example is currently running well over 2 hours behind in WA. In the past the westbound EBs seemed to perform somewhat better than the eastbound ones.

 

[scoostraw]

I haven't booked yet, but in a couple of weeks I plan to ride #8 from WDL, connecting to the LSL @ Chicago. That gives me over 5 hours leeway. Does Amtrak always make sure at least the LSL connection is made? I'll be bummed of course if I have to ride a bus, but I'd rather do that than have to spend the night in Chicago.

 

[Rail Freak]

I'll be bummed of course if I have to ride a bus, but I'd rather do that than have to spend the night in Chicago.

Really, & why is that?

 

[Ryan]

I'll be bummed of course if I have to ride a bus, but I'd rather do that than have to spend the night in Chicago.

Really, & why is that?

I'm going to guess that it has something to do with people's desire to get to their destination in a somewhat timely manner?

Arriving 24 hours later because of an overnight in Chicago doesn't really help that to happen.

You've got your best bet at making the LSL connection - what time of year are you traveling?

 

[montana mike]

It would appear that the LSL connection has only been missed a few times in the past couple months, so that connection looks like the best bet!

 

[Rail Freak]

I'll be bummed of course if I have to ride a bus, but I'd rather do that than have to spend the night in Chicago.

Really, & why is that?

I'm going to guess that it has something to do with people's desire to get to their destination in a somewhat timely manner?

Thanx for your guess, I'll file that!

 

[scoostraw]

I'll be bummed of course if I have to ride a bus, but I'd rather do that than have to spend the night in Chicago.

Really, & why is that?

I'm going to guess that it has something to do with people's desire to get to their destination in a somewhat timely manner?

Arriving 24 hours later because of an overnight in Chicago doesn't really help that to happen.

You've got your best bet at making the LSL connection - what time of year are you traveling?

Because I have plans at my destination. Meeting people for a business transaction etc. Hope to travel in a couple of weeks.

 

[scoostraw]

It would appear that the LSL connection has only been missed a few times in the past couple months, so that connection looks like the best bet!

I'm guessing it would have been missed by passengers who originated west of MSP, correct? Since I'll be boarding at WDL, won't I be guaranteed to make the LSL since I'd be bustituted to MKE and then Hiawatha'd to CHI if #8 is too late to make it otherwise?

 

[Ryan]

More than likely. Next few weeks are going to be dicey.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Argh, can't Amtrak just give the EB timetable a seasonal makeover? I'm not confidant that more padding would help, but at least more travel time to account for lower speeds.

Because they have a contract with BNSF to run that train on time. If BSNF can't do that, then they need to pull a few of their freight trains off the line until such time as they can properly accommodate Amtrak.

What are the chances of Amtrak making a new seasonal contract with BNSF. The delays aren't going away anytime soon.

Amtrak doesn't want to do that. Doing so means breaking connections. Broken connections mean fewer tickets sold.

Alan - what's more offensive to the potential ticket buying public: connections which are lost in theory, ie, the published schedule indicates they are not possible (but represents reality w/re actual train arrivals); or actual missed connections, which were sold as theoretical connections, promised connections, which are then missed? I think in one case one may (fraudulently) sell a ticket involving connections which in fact won't be made - leaving the customer dissatisfied and willing to badmouth Amtrak. In the other case the schedule merely looks inconvenient, but those which buy tickets will more than likely make the promised connections. In one case Amtrak promises that which it can't deliver; in the other case it can only appear to improve on an inconvenient schedule over time. I know in my business I would always rather under-promise and then appear to over-deliver vs over-promise and fail to deliver - in one case I have a customer which likely won't come back and potentially will poison the well for other customers; in the other case I can appear to be trying and improving. I think that's what updating the schedule to reflect reality comes to.

That's what the airlines are doing. They add lots of extra time to their schedules to improve OTP, resulting in most planes arriving early.

But once given up, it's difficult to ever get the old schedule back from the host. Apparently at least part of the problems are seasonal, so why would Amtrak want to bind itself to being permanently "late" (according to the old schedule) even during those times it could be on time?
If Amtrak had control of the rail line, changing the EB timetable back and forth would be easier. But they don't.

They do need to make passengers aware of the fact that currently the connections with the EB probably will not be made, however. Realistic expectations are a desirable thing. I don't have a solution, but I do understand why they don't just change the timetable to reflect the current delays.

That makes sense. I guess the EB is just stuck for now. Hopefully, the BNSF will reach a point when they don't have enough maintanece to constantly hold up the EB.

I'll be bummed of course if I have to ride a bus, but I'd rather do that than have to spend the night in Chicago.

Really, & why is that?

I'm going to guess that it has something to do with people's desire to get to their destination in a somewhat timely manner?

Arriving 24 hours later because of an overnight in Chicago doesn't really help that to happen.

You've got your best bet at making the LSL connection - what time of year are you traveling?

I'd be willing to ride a bus for a bus fare, but not if I'm paying for a Sleeper Roomette and especially not if I have to ride a cramped 57-seat chartered Van Hool!

 

[montana mike]

The BNSF has a 5 year maintenance plan (newly initiated last year) which, according to my BNSF friends, has about the same amount of "activity" each year, with even a slight uptick in construction efforts during the last couple years. Any long term plan has almost continuous maintenance efforts to be effective I would imagine. Considering we are looking at thousands of miles of track, after 5 years they would almost surely need to be looking at working on the track/beds they tackled in year one!!! It's just like our interstate highways, they are constantly "under construction" at any given location.

 

[calwatch]

At San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee, a BNSF rep mentioned they asked Amtrak to change the schedule during the summer to account for track work and add padding but Amtrak refused. If that was the case on the San Joaquin I would assume it was the case on the EB as well. With the track speed restrictions after new track or ballast is laid there will always be schedule issues.

 

[AlanB]

At San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee, a BNSF rep mentioned they asked Amtrak to change the schedule during the summer to account for track work and add padding but Amtrak refused. If that was the case on the San Joaquin I would assume it was the case on the EB as well. With the track speed restrictions after new track or ballast is laid there will always be schedule issues.

That would be a good assumption to make. Amtrak doesn't control the schedules for the SJ's, Caltrans controls the schedules. Only Amtrak has a say in the EB's schedule beyond the host RR's. Makes for a world of difference.

That said, I'm sure Amtrak doesn't want to change things; again because it breaks the connections.

 

[montana mike]

A few notes from my current trip on #7 plugging thru ND now:

1. we are only 45 minutes behind after running thru the construction gauntlet in ND. We likely were the beneficiaries of no active work being done on a Sunday night. Some of the delay was due to slow orders due to very wet conditions in western MN after heavy rains.

2. I see #8 in MN this AM lost over 4 hours as it made its way thru MT and ND last evening and night--ouch! Not looking good for connections for this train.

3. It appears the work to raise the tracks around Devils Lake is complete. The speed restrictions remain however. We chugged along at around 25 mph thru this entire section. But I think it has always been slow thru here, so we only lost about 15-20 minutes thru this area.

4. The crew-attendants and conductors-are well aware of the EB's scheduling challenges into CHI. They say the number of missed connections has been very high, similar to last summer. And with full trains some have not been able to be accommodated on the following day. That would be a real bummer for me.

5. I have definitely noticed more energy (tanker) trains. although, so far we have only had two times where we had to wait for these to go by. They are lonnnnnnng trains! Currently stopped east of Stanley as we let two freights go by.

All in all could be worse!!

 

[Ryan]

At San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee, a BNSF rep mentioned they asked Amtrak to change the schedule during the summer to account for track work and add padding but Amtrak refused. If that was the case on the San Joaquin I would assume it was the case on the EB as well. With the track speed restrictions after new track or ballast is laid there will always be schedule issues.

That would be a good assumption to make. Amtrak doesn't control the schedules for the SJ's, Caltrans controls the schedules. Only Amtrak has a say in the EB's schedule beyond the host RR's. Makes for a world of difference.

That said, I'm sure Amtrak doesn't want to change things; again because it breaks the connections.

That would NOT be a good assumption to make? Think you left out the "not"...

 

[AlanB]

At San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee, a BNSF rep mentioned they asked Amtrak to change the schedule during the summer to account for track work and add padding but Amtrak refused. If that was the case on the San Joaquin I would assume it was the case on the EB as well. With the track speed restrictions after new track or ballast is laid there will always be schedule issues.

That would be a good assumption to make. Amtrak doesn't control the schedules for the SJ's, Caltrans controls the schedules. Only Amtrak has a say in the EB's schedule beyond the host RR's. Makes for a world of difference.That said, I'm sure Amtrak doesn't want to change things; again because it breaks the connections.

That would NOT be a good assumption to make? Think you left out the "not"...

Yup, the fortunes of typing on a train. It is not a good assumption.

 

[montana mike]

Update to my enroute report--hit the slow orders in eastern MT--poking along at about 25 mph most of the time now. Rats. Supposed to speed up shortly, but we likely have lost another 30 minutes. Now about 90 minutes behind.

 

[Nathanael]

At San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee, a BNSF rep mentioned they asked Amtrak to change the schedule during the summer to account for track work and add padding but Amtrak refused.

Amtrak is not about to alienate the State of California, who funds the San Joaquins and has been trying to make them faster, by acquiescing to BNSF requests to run slower schedules. This wouldn't generalize to the Empire Builder.

 

[Texan Eagle]

Update to my enroute report--hit the slow orders in eastern MT--poking along at about 25 mph most of the time now. Rats. Supposed to speed up shortly, but we likely have lost another 30 minutes. Now about 90 minutes behind.

Check out what time you reach Havre. I have been following #7's progress since about a month and have figured out that the delay at Havre is more or less a good estimate of how late it will reach SEA and PDX, the formula is delay at Havre minus two hours. If #7 is 2 hours or less down in Havre, it will arrive on time, if it is down 3 hours down in Havre, it will reach PDX and SEA about 1 hour late and so on...

 

[montana mike]

So far we have been under slow orders for all but a few miles since entering MT. Now approaching two hours behind and the conductor says we have at least another hour or so of poking along at a whopping 25 mph. Other than one brief moment close to Wolf Point I see little evidence of any active construction, but I do know that recently upgraded tracks do need a "setting in" period, so that is likely the cause of our slow speed . There have been several huge piles of new ties at several points, but no BNSF employees actually replacing ties that we have seen Arrrrrgh

Given the fact that #8 will likely arrive about 4 hours late in CHI today had similar slow orders last night I think we are in for a long and slow PM for today's #7 as it traverses west thru MT.

I know this work needs to be done, just painful to craw along as we go thru the wide open prairies.

 

[montana mike]

Update to my enroute report--hit the slow orders in eastern MT--poking along at about 25 mph most of the time now. Rats. Supposed to speed up shortly, but we likely have lost another 30 minutes. Now about 90 minutes behind.

Check out what time you reach Havre. I have been following #7's progress since about a month and have figured out that the delay at Havre is more or less a good estimate of how late it will reach SEA and PDX, the formula is delay at Havre minus two hours. If #7 is 2 hours or less down in Havre, it will arrive on time, if it is down 3 hours down in Havre, it will reach PDX and SEA about 1 hour late and so on...

Pulling into Havre about 2 hours down now, so I guess this means, IF #7 doesn't lose any more time the train will be close to on time in SEA and PDX. Unfortunately, I get off in WFH, I think I will be about 90 minutes or more late getting in there. Still better than the 2 AM arrival a few months back.

)

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

The BNSF has a 5 year maintenance plan (newly initiated last year) which, according to my BNSF friends, has about the same amount of "activity" each year, with even a slight uptick in construction efforts during the last couple years. Any long term plan has almost continuous maintenance efforts to be effective I would imagine. Considering we are looking at thousands of miles of track, after 5 years they would almost surely need to be looking at working on the track/beds they tackled in year one!!! It's just like our interstate highways, they are constantly "under construction" at any given location.

That's not good. Do you mean that the Northern Transcon will be constantly under repair for four years (last year took out one) then they will have to do it all over again? On the same line? I wonder why the EB was so on-time before if the BNSF does this all the time.

 

[montana mike]

Not privy to their plans, other than the local BNSF folks saying there is "substantial" track maintenance and improvement effort on their docket for the next four years, that is one reason why they have been hiring a lot of people in MT. I honestly don't know if they are catching up or just trying to anticipate the extra wear and tear from the increased traffic on this line. SInce most of the hi-line is single track there is quite a bit of "wear and tear. I know BNSF has made a big effort in the pass 2 years to replace a good part of the ties over the Marias Pass with concrete ties, which in theory, should hold up well under the harsh winter conditions--we shall see.

BTW--Just left Cut Bank--made up about 20 minutes of the delay so far. While there have been quite a few freights it appears BNSF is trying hard to minimize the EB delays by placing them on sidings and letting us go thru.