Prioritizing freight over passenger trains

[winterskigirl]

I know that most Amtrak trains run on host railroads with the exception of the NEC but how exactly do the agreements work? Does the host railroad always decide which trains take priority? I've heard that Amtrak pays the host railroad an "incentive" to give them priority but in reality I've seen freight move first while passengers trains sit on a siding. I'm betting there's more $$ to be made on moving freight. I've noticed by my own travels in the west that BNSF is less accommodating than Union Pacific for example. Anyone know how this all works? And, which railroad companies are in general more giving towards moving Amtrak trains?

 

[Nathanael]

Federal law requires passenger trains to be given priority. In practice, this law is ignored by some of the freight haulers some of the time.

They always have excuses; sometimes the freight train has to move while passengers sit in a siding because the freight doesn't fit in the siding, the freight was already there running the opposite direction from the passenger train, etc -- and because it's very hard to prove that the railroad deliberately prioritized freight over passenger, it has been difficult for Amtrak to do anything. Amtrak has filed an STB complaint about CN however.

In practice, the only way to get priority is to take over dispatching.

Which freight haulers are taking passenger priority seriously varies from year to year and also line to line. UP had a *terrible* reputation, but they got sued by Amtrak, so they've been watching their behavior very carefully lately. Traditionally the Class Is were ranked by us passengers in roughly this order, with BNSF having the best reputation: BNSF, NS, CSX, CP, CN, UP. Shortlines usually treat passenger trains better than any of the Class Is do (but on the other hand, frequently have really slow track). Commuter railroads' behavior is variable too; Metro-North treats Amtrak trains which arrive on time very well, but treats those which arrive late very badly.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Federal law requires passenger trains to be given priority. In practice, this law is ignored by some of the freight haulers some of the time.

They always have excuses; sometimes the freight train has to move while passengers sit in a siding because the freight doesn't fit in the siding, the freight was already there running the opposite direction from the passenger train, etc -- and because it's very hard to prove that the railroad deliberately prioritized freight over passenger, it has been difficult for Amtrak to do anything. Amtrak has filed an STB complaint about CN however.

In practice, the only way to get priority is to take over dispatching.

Which freight haulers are taking passenger priority seriously varies from year to year and also line to line. UP had a *terrible* reputation, but they got sued by Amtrak, so they've been watching their behavior very carefully lately. Traditionally the Class Is were ranked by us passengers in roughly this order, with BNSF having the best reputation: BNSF, NS, CSX, CP, CN, UP. Shortlines usually treat passenger trains better than any of the Class Is do (but on the other hand, frequently have really slow track). Commuter railroads' behavior is variable too; Metro-North treats Amtrak trains which arrive on time very well, but treats those which arrive late very badly.

I've noticed that UP's gotten better, too. NS is getting worse and CSX has been reportedly boggling down the SS/SM.

 

[Guest]

... treats Amtrak trains which arrive on time very well, but treats those which arrive late very badly.

That's been my experience on several different host tracks. There comes a point were a late train becomes "loco non grata", and just keep slipping more and more late.

and CSX has been reportedly boggling down the SS/SM.

Several years ago, there was a high-level meeting between Amtrak and CSX. The result was that the SS/SM got a new schedule, and CSX gave the SS/SM all due priority, and those trains constantly ran on-time or better. That priory seemed to last less than a year, and things slipped back to the way the use to be.

 

[xyzzy]

As a resident of the Carolinas, my experience is that CSX does reasonably well with 52/53, 79/80, 89/90, 91/92, and 97/98 as long as those trains don't incur delays en route. But once a passenger train begins to run late, it often gets later. That's a phenomenon that is not unique to CSX.

Remember, CSX is primarily a single track railroad from Petersburg, Va. to Folkston, Ga. and again south of Jacksonville, Fla. Up to ten passenger trains a day plus numerous freights are a heavy burden on this line. I'm not an apologist for CSX, and I think they are due for justified criticism on many occasions -- but on the other hand, you have to respect the reality of the circumstances.

 

[henryj]

There is no way any of the freight railroads deliberatly delay passenger trains. In most cases their dispatcher is dealing with a single track railroad with passing sidings. They do what works best to keep the trains moving. Passenger trains are short and accelerate and stop quickly so sometimes it is prudent to have the passenger take the siding to keep a long heavy freight moving. All the railroads are very busy and run close to capacity so when a passenger train gets late and out of it's slot it is going to have problems catching up unless it's a quite day on the host railroad.

 

[George Harris]

She does not say what part of BNSF. As a passenger every month or so between Emeryville and Fresno, I see no evidence of regular delay of the passenger trains, and remember there are 6 in each direction on what is primarily a single track line here. In fact, generally if there is more than the briefest of stops it is for a passenger train in the other direction. The reality is that if the passenger train arrives at the meeting point first, the least delay is by putting it in the siding as the freight can maintain its speed and thereby clear the far end, from the passenger train, of the siding quicker.

 

[lo2e]

The majority of the Downeaster's route is on PanAm tracks, and several times I've ridden on the Downeaster as it passes a stopped PanAm train. I don't think I've ever seen the opposite.

 

[BOS-T-Time]

Hello,

I was just thinking about the Downeaster and PanAm as I was on train 686 POR-BON yesterday and last friday. Both trains were delayed by a PanAm freight heading North (East), last Friday we were held up about 15 minutes and yesterday 35 minutes, thank goodness for Shipyard Brew in the Dining CAFE car. Other than that, the Downeaster is a wonderful train trip, heading through woods, the sea coast, and Saco Maine. The only thing I noticed is that there is not a rail tie check-in for Freeport on the Passport map with the Amtrak App. to check-in with.

BOS-T-Time

Edit: Thank You the_traveler! I did write that in error! I wish I could figure out how to upload pics and videos. I wanted to do a trip report but couldn't figure out how. The Shipyard Export is delicious and makes the ride even nicer!

 

[the_traveler]

the Downeaster ... thank goodness for Shipyard Brew in the Dining car

Me thinks you had too much brew - as the Downeaster has no Dining Car. (Only a café.) :giggle:

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

As a resident of the Carolinas, my experience is that CSX does reasonably well with 52/53, 79/80, 89/90, 91/92, and 97/98 as long as those trains don't incur delays en route. But once a passenger train begins to run late, it often gets later. That's a phenomenon that is not unique to CSX.

Remember, CSX is primarily a single track railroad from Petersburg, Va. to Folkston, Ga. and again south of Jacksonville, Fla. Up to ten passenger trains a day plus numerous freights are a heavy burden on this line. I'm not an apologist for CSX, and I think they are due for justified criticism on many occasions -- but on the other hand, you have to respect the reality of the circumstances.

On my last trip someone told me that he had just transferred from the 98 who was blocked and mot moving for five hours because a CSX freight was on the single-track main and refused to move to the next siding that was only a few miles out. Don't know why that happened. That was in South Carolina.

 

[AlanB]

On my last trip someone told me that he had just transferred from the 98 who was blocked and mot moving for five hours because a CSX freight was on the single-track main and refused to move to the next siding that was only a few miles out. Don't know why that happened. That was in South Carolina.

No freight engineer would ever refuse to move their train when instructed by the dispatcher. If they did, they'd be looking for a new job. We may never know why the train couldn't move, but I'm quite certain that it wasn't because the engineer refused to move the train, unless he was past hours of service. That would be the only reason that an engineer could refuse and still keep his job.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

On my last trip someone told me that he had just transferred from the 98 who was blocked and mot moving for five hours because a CSX freight was on the single-track main and refused to move to the next siding that was only a few miles out. Don't know why that happened. That was in South Carolina.

No freight engineer would ever refuse to move their train when instructed by the dispatcher. If they did, they'd be looking for a new job. We may never know why the train couldn't move, but I'm quite certain that it wasn't because the engineer refused to move the train, unless he was past hours of service. That would be the only reason that an engineer could refuse and still keep his job.

I think the engineer stopped it then left the train.

 

[Trogdor]

On my last trip someone told me that he had just transferred from the 98 who was blocked and mot moving for five hours because a CSX freight was on the single-track main and refused to move to the next siding that was only a few miles out. Don't know why that happened. That was in South Carolina.

No freight engineer would ever refuse to move their train when instructed by the dispatcher. If they did, they'd be looking for a new job. We may never know why the train couldn't move, but I'm quite certain that it wasn't because the engineer refused to move the train, unless he was past hours of service. That would be the only reason that an engineer could refuse and still keep his job.

I think the engineer stopped it then left the train.

Only way that would happen is if the crew "died" (out of hours) or there was some other emergency.

Nonetheless, you're just paraphrasing what was already, at best, vague second-hand information, so I doubt we'll actually figure out the exact nature of whatever happened...whenever it happened.

 

[George Harris]

If a freight train. or any other train for that matter, is left sitting on a main track blocking other trains for 5 hours without an overwhelming evidence as to why, who ever is found responsible will all but certainly be looking for work elsewhere.

Some of the possibilities would be:

1. Member of the train crew "dead on the law" That is hit their 12 hours time limit.

2. Some form of defect in the engine or train that put it out of coompliance with FRA regulations for operation.

3. The train hit something and was not being allowed to move by some legal agency until their investigation was complete.

4. Some sort of track defect, broken rail or such like, that requires fixing.

I am sure their are others

 

[xyzzy]

Crews going "on the law" happens everywhere all the time. CSX General Rule R states "When it is apparent that they will be unable to complete their trip or tour of duty within the lawful periods they must give the proper office sufficient advance notice. After being on duty nine hours and if feasible, train and engine crews will notify the train dispatcher of the time that they will have been on duty twelve hours." Feasibility of notification on the CSX A-line is virtually assured. If a crew doesn't call the dispatcher in advance, the crew will be roasted. And if the dispatcher ignores the warning and allows the mainline to be tied up, the dispatcher will be roasted. Stuff happens, as the saying goes, but management won't tolerate violations of Rule R.

 

[railiner]

As some have indicated, it seems that railroads seem to go thru 'phases' in their handling of Amtrak. After litigation, a railroad will comply, and then slowly slip back into past practice.....

I wonder how much of that is due to the railroads employees individual attitudes toward Amtrak...Whatever the 'official' policy dictated by the top officials is, do some employees have a personal, deep ingrained resentment of Amtrak running on 'their' railroad? Could be for something as simple as Amtrak no longer granting any rail travel privileges.

Then again, it may come down from the top....I recall how the former CEO of the D&RGW had an intensely negative attitude toward Amtrak, and some of that probably trickled down to their employees.

 

[user 1215]

With all due respect to CSX and their handling of the Silvers, there is a lot of construction going on in Central Florida. For some reason, no one seemed to consider adjusting the time tables for these semi-permanent slow orders.

 

[Anderson]

With all due respect to CSX and their handling of the Silvers, there is a lot of construction going on in Central Florida. For some reason, no one seemed to consider adjusting the time tables for these semi-permanent slow orders.

The problem there would probably be getting CSX to go back to the old timetables afterwards.

 

[Guest]

Crews going "on the law" happens everywhere all the time. CSX General Rule R states "When it is apparent that they will be unable to complete their trip or tour of duty within the lawful periods they must give the proper office sufficient advance notice. After being on duty nine hours and if feasible, train and engine crews will notify the train dispatcher of the time that they will have been on duty twelve hours." Feasibility of notification on the CSX A-line is virtually assured. If a crew doesn't call the dispatcher in advance, the crew will be roasted. And if the dispatcher ignores the warning and allows the mainline to be tied up, the dispatcher will be roasted. Stuff happens, as the saying goes, but management won't tolerate violations of Rule R.

It was a while ago, but I was on a northbound Silver running late, that "timed out" (what you call "on the law"), and we simply stopped in a siding in the middle of a swamp. Yea, I blamed Amtrak for (1) not having a relief crew staged and ready, and (2) leaving the previous station when they knew the crew would "time out" before reaching their next scheduled station,

I am generally very "pro" Amtrak, but there are times that their professional stupidity is simply beyond belief.

 

[Caesar La Rock]

With all due respect to CSX and their handling of the Silvers, there is a lot of construction going on in Central Florida. For some reason, no one seemed to consider adjusting the time tables for these semi-permanent slow orders.

The problem there would probably be getting CSX to go back to the old timetables afterwards.

There use to be no freight trains throughout the afternoon, however now that appears to be increasing as more freights are now seen. This is from my personal sightings. Trains have been delayed for over an hour because of the construction around here. There is also slow orders too, so trains crawl through areas they would normally be going faster through because of the construction.

 

[AlanB]

It was a while ago, but I was on a northbound Silver running late, that "timed out" (what you call "on the law"), and we simply stopped in a siding in the middle of a swamp. Yea, I blamed Amtrak for (1) not having a relief crew staged and ready,

Amtrak doesn't always have a crew that is available to call. Once a crew works, Federal regulations require that they get several hours of rest. And the crew must be qualified for the territory that the train is operating in. In other words, it's not like Amtrak can move a crew from Florida to work a train in North Carolina to run a train.

and (2) leaving the previous station when they knew the crew would "time out" before reaching their next scheduled station,

If the dispatcher orders Amtrak to move the train out of the station, then they have no choice but to move the train. It's not Amtrak's choice to stay in the station, but rather the freight RR's choice.

 

[George Harris]

It was a while ago, but I was on a northbound Silver running late, that "timed out" (what you call "on the law"), and we simply stopped in a siding in the middle of a swamp. Yea, I blamed Amtrak for (1) not having a relief crew staged and ready,

Amtrak doesn't always have a crew that is available to call. Once a crew works, Federal regulations require that they get several hours of rest. And the crew must be qualified for the territory that the train is operating in. In other words, it's not like Amtrak can move a crew from Florida to work a train in North Carolina to run a train.

and (2) leaving the previous station when they knew the crew would "time out" before reaching their next scheduled station,

If the dispatcher orders Amtrak to move the train out of the station, then they have no choice but to move the train. It's not Amtrak's choice to stay in the station, but rather the freight RR's choice.

To expand a little on Alan's answer: Most station stops outside major cities are stops of the train on the main line track. Thus, CSX, or any other operator does not want the train left sitting on the main blocking all other train movements. The most logical thing to do would be to move the train to the furthest down the line siding where it could stay out of the way of all other traffic until a replacement crew could get to it. From that perspective, a siding in the middle of a swamp makes good sense. Plus, there is nothing really to be gained by leaving the train stopped at a station. There will be people that decide to get off and walk about that are not to be found when the train pulls out.

 

[Nathanael]

There is no way any of the freight railroads deliberatly delay passenger trains.

Oh yes they do. The Amtrak filing against CN details specific examples of deliberate dispatcher-caused delay. Some of them really do deliberately delay the trains sometimes.

In most cases their dispatcher is dealing with a single track railroad with passing sidings.

That really isn't an excuse on the Cleveland-Schenectady corridor (originally four tracks, now two mostly), and yet the passenger trains seem to run consistently late - -- and by late, I mean later than the delays caused by station working (which is definitely causing some delays lately due to huge passenger loads). In this case I suspect the problem is not dispatching, but poor track maintenance practices causing slow orders, and that may be an issue on other lines as well. The freight haulers often don't bother to fix tracks if only the passenger train needs the tracks maintained. This isn't illegal, but it is bad behavior -- the extra cost to keep the tracks up to passenger standards is really a drop in the bucket on busy intermodal lines like the Empire Corridor, but is worth a huge amount in goodwill.

 

[Paulus]

CN also responded noting that certain of Amtrak's specific dispatching claims either simply didn't happen or were advantageous for Amtrak. They also pointed out that Amtrak made a bad habit out of running out of fuel on their mainlines.