Time lost per stop

[Anderson]

Though I recognize right now that it won't happen (or at least it not in the foreseeable future), I'm wondering how much time you lose per stop on the LD trains per the schedule. I know the "actual" time lost can vary (if you have 45 people boarding, half of them families with rambunctious children, it'll take longer to board folks than it would to board 2 regular rail travelers), but between the sheer bulk of the traffic on the Capitol Limited that involves either the endpoints or three intermediate stations (Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and Toledo), I'm wondering if shaving off those stops one way or both might not make sense on either the Cap or the LSL. This would go double if you ever wound up with a third CHI-NEC train running (a resurrected Broadway, a re-extended Pennsylvanian, or anything else in that general vein) and it got put on that same route with similar timings either way.

The stations that scream this to me are Elyra and Sandusky (both in Ohio, both with less than 10k/year in traffic, and both with two awkward hour trains)...the LSL's timing both ways is unbelievably awful, and if you get through cars from the Cap onto the Pennsylvanian, cutting these stations from the LSL would not be much of a loss.

 

[GlobalistPotato]

It does depend on passenger loads. But usually there's enough padding in the schedule to make up any lost time if the stop takes 5 minutes instead of 1.

This is one reason why Amtrak doesn't count a train late until it's 10-30 minutes off schedule. Cause sometimes it takes a little longer to load someone onboard, causing the train to be 3 minutes late or something. :giggle:

But there are some stations that need to be longer than one minute because of the amount of passengers boarding the train. Take for instance, Austin Texas. It's just "stop on the clock", but whenever I've gone down there's usually like 50 people boarding and departing the train. Takes about 5 minutes or longer. So the traffic loads at Austin are suitable for it to have a 15 minute stop, considering that it often arrives 20 minutes early anyway. (9:15 am-9:30 am for 22 and 6:15 pm-6:30 for 21)

This makes even more sense once the siding is restored for Amtrak's use.

 

[TransitGeek]

Stop cost is a function of a lot of things, including station dwell time (for loading and unloading of passengers, as well as possibly crew changes and loading food and supplies), but also including train speed before and after the station and the train's acceleration and braking characteristics. (Stop cost is lower for electric trains, for example, because they tend to accelerate quicker. This is a big reason why electric traction is used in light rail.) Time lost isn't just the time sitting at the station, but also the time it took to slow down, the time it takes to get back up to speed, and the distance that would have been covered if the train could have run through at speed.

I did try and google around for a "rule-of-thumb" sort of figure for stop cost, but I couldn't find one.

 

[Anderson]

TransitGeek, you hit on the head what I know...I know there's variability in there. Also, the "lateness" rule is pretty standard among transit companies: With airlines, I think the rule is usually 15 minutes. I'm not sure about bus companies (I've never taken a bus), but I know there's a margin there because of "noise" in the system.

 

[stntylr]

Don't forget time lost on smoke stops.

 

[Anderson]

Smoke stops are (usually) crew change stops of one kind or another...though they may also be stops where there's a lot of padding that doesn't always get used, and which they therefore get stuck at for half an hour or an hour longer than usual.

 

[stntylr]

Smoke stops are (usually) crew change stops of one kind or another...though they may also be stops where there's a lot of padding that doesn't always get used, and which they therefore get stuck at for half an hour or an hour longer than usual.

Temple, Texas is a smoke stop and the crew doesn't change there. In fact train #21 is often running late by the time it gets to Temple but they still let people get off for what is sometimes a very short break.

 

[had8ley]

Smoke stops are (usually) crew change stops of one kind or another...though they may also be stops where there's a lot of padding that doesn't always get used, and which they therefore get stuck at for half an hour or an hour longer than usual.

Temple, Texas is a smoke stop and the crew doesn't change there. In fact train #21 is often running late by the time it gets to Temple but they still let people get off for what is sometimes a very short break.

Maybe Jungle Jim Husdon can clarify this one :help: but I thought Austin was the last/first smoke break on the Screaming Eagle? :help: :help: :help:

 

[Bob Dylan]

Smoke stops are (usually) crew change stops of one kind or another...though they may also be stops where there's a lot of padding that doesn't always get used, and which they therefore get stuck at for half an hour or an hour longer than usual.

Temple, Texas is a smoke stop and the crew doesn't change there. In fact train #21 is often running late by the time it gets to Temple but they still let people get off for what is sometimes a very short break.

Maybe Jungle Jim Husdon can clarify this one :help: but I thought Austin was the last/first smoke break on the Screaming Eagle? :help: :help: :help:

That's Correct Jay, Austin is the First/Last Smoke/Fresh Air Stop on the Eagles, Only the Engineer Changes Now in Austin, the Diner Crew used to Board/De-Board Here in the Days of the 4PM Suppers on #21 and Box Lunch Breakfasts on #22. Temple IS a Smoke Stop as Stan said, not a Crew Change, think Most Know the Crews Change Out in FTW after the Engineer Change in Austin!

 

[George Harris]

Deceleration and acceleration time form 79 mph to stop and back up to 79 mph adds between three and four minutes to the time above that of a train not stopping. Add to this the time spent stopped. So, consider a stop as adding at least 5 minutes to the run time.

A number of stops having only a leaving time in the schedule have a normal dwell time in the operation.

Temple may be a smoke stop because it is where the train changes between BNSF and UP tracks

 

[TransitGeek]

Deceleration and acceleration time form 79 mph to stop and back up to 79 mph adds between three and four minutes to the time above that of a train not stopping. Add to this the time spent stopped. So, consider a stop as adding at least 5 minutes to the run time.

A number of stops having only a leaving time in the schedule have a normal dwell time in the operation.

Temple may be a smoke stop because it is where the train changes between BNSF and UP tracks

Yay! An answer!

So the question is, is it worth it to cut two stops out of the LSL's schedule in order to save 10 minutes' travel time? On a long-distance, overnight train, I can't figure that those 10 minutes are going to be worth inconveniencing even the tiny number of passengers boarding at Elyria and Sandusky.

 

[Anderson]

Deceleration and acceleration time form 79 mph to stop and back up to 79 mph adds between three and four minutes to the time above that of a train not stopping. Add to this the time spent stopped. So, consider a stop as adding at least 5 minutes to the run time.

A number of stops having only a leaving time in the schedule have a normal dwell time in the operation.

Temple may be a smoke stop because it is where the train changes between BNSF and UP tracks

Yay! An answer!

So the question is, is it worth it to cut two stops out of the LSL's schedule in order to save 10 minutes' travel time? On a long-distance, overnight train, I can't figure that those 10 minutes are going to be worth inconveniencing even the tiny number of passengers boarding at Elyria and Sandusky.

I tend to agree. I wasn't sure of the acceleration/deceleration times there. Of course, this doesn't mean that it might not be a decent idea to ditch the stops from one of the trains if you get a highly redundant situation going and you can show that you're only inconveniencing 12 people per year who go to Albany, Erie, and Buffalo because 90% of the traffic from those stops is either heading to CHI and points in that direction, or heading to PGH, WAS, and/or NYP (even the through cars on the Cap would make the stops more or less redundant on the LSL, and for that small handful, you can always force a transfer at Cleveland or Toledo...at microscopic levels, you're basically looking at noise in the system). And I'd note that the ten minutes often comes in the context of incremental improvements all around...would any of us turn down ten minutes' improvement from a shuffled freight routing, all else being equal? Also, if you can grab 20 minutes somewhere, that could get you to a post-4 PM departure time for the LSL (or an earlier arrival time in CHI). Yes, you really need to work on the back end as well, but I think that's a good thing to shoot for.

 

[jis]

So the question is, is it worth it to cut two stops out of the LSL's schedule in order to save 10 minutes' travel time? On a long-distance, overnight train, I can't figure that those 10 minutes are going to be worth inconveniencing even the tiny number of passengers boarding at Elyria and Sandusky.

No. 10 minutes is noise in a schedule that clearly has almost 2 hours of padding. It will most likely just become 2 hours and 10 mins of padding instead.

What makes sense is what they are trying to do in New York State, i.e. reduce freight interference by building additional tracks at critical places, and doubling the remaining single track portion between SDY and ALB. All that together could lop off upto 30 mins from the schedule, if they can increase predictability of running times so as to be able to remove some of the padding.

If they (Illinois and Indiana) would get off their butts and do the additional passenger tracks from Porter to Chicago, that would have a tremendous effect too.

BTW, by scanning the NEC schedules one can surmise that the cost of the Metropark and BWI stops to Acelas is about 4 mins each. BWI is in 125/110 mph territory and does not involve any crossovers. Metropark is in 100/90 mph territory that involves a crossover from fast to platform track and then back to fast track.

 

[Guest]

At my little unstaffed station out in the middle of nowhere they could cut time by putting signage up telling people to be next to the track when the train is coming. I know where to be when the train comes, but you get first timers and people who are just generally clueless who putz around in the parking lot and add an extra 5 minutes to the stop. Make the signs overly dramatic with empty threats of leaving people who are not next to the track and that will get them to hustle.

 

[Anderson]

So the question is, is it worth it to cut two stops out of the LSL's schedule in order to save 10 minutes' travel time? On a long-distance, overnight train, I can't figure that those 10 minutes are going to be worth inconveniencing even the tiny number of passengers boarding at Elyria and Sandusky.

No. 10 minutes is noise in a schedule that clearly has almost 2 hours of padding. It will most likely just become 2 hours and 10 mins of padding instead.

What makes sense is what they are trying to do in New York State, i.e. reduce freight interference by building additional tracks at critical places, and doubling the remaining single track portion between SDY and ALB. All that together could lop off upto 30 mins from the schedule, if they can increase predictability of running times so as to be able to remove some of the padding.

If they (Illinois and Indiana) would get off their butts and do the additional passenger tracks from Porter to Chicago, that would have a tremendous effect too.

BTW, by scanning the NEC schedules one can surmise that the cost of the Metropark and BWI stops to Acelas is about 4 mins each. BWI is in 125/110 mph territory and does not involve any crossovers. Metropark is in 100/90 mph territory that involves a crossover from fast to platform track and then back to fast track.

Well, there's a part of me that suggests that the two are not mutually exclusive. Also, tracks in NY state help the longer Empire Service trains as well (though the work in IN helps both the LDs and the Michigan runs)...and yes, removing those two bottlenecks will both cut travel time and reduce the necessary padding. Ultimately, I guess, the goal in my mind is 16 hours NYP/WAS-CHI.

 

[Paul Dow]

Another reason for some stops I'll bet is politics. If Amtrak cut back, or stopped service at some locations, there would be less support in D.C. for funding. There's a reason Amtrak has service in every state in the continental US, except for Wyoming and South Dakota.

 

[George Harris]

Ultimately, I guess, the goal in my mind is 16 hours NYP/WAS-CHI.

Suddenly it's 1950!!

 

[JayPea]

This thread reminds me of a news story I heard from England years ago. It seems that buses on a certain route there in England stopped picking up passengers. It was reported by frustrated passengers that the buses would zoom right past lines of up to 30 passengers. When contacted by irate passengers, an official of the bus company in question said that if the buses stopped for passengers, it would disrupt their timetable. :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[railbuck]

Why not make the later train in each direction an express, with TOL the only stop between CLE and CHI. Keep all the stops on the earlier train (adding BYN to the EB CL) so there's minimal impact on the smaller communities. Passengers to and from the local stops can change in CLE or TOL as needed.

Skipping one or two stops at 5 minutes each doesn't make much difference, but cutting 5 or 6 stops would add up to a significant schedule improvement.

 

[Anderson]

Ultimately, I guess, the goal in my mind is 16 hours NYP/WAS-CHI.

Suddenly it's 1950!!

I wish. And as much as I wish that were the case...

If you rip the two hours of padding out of the LSL's timetable, you can get a 5 PM (EST) departure and a 9 AM (CST) arrival time. In the meantime, the Cap is almost there as it stands (4:05 PM EST/8:45 AM CST). 16 hours is not hard to envision if you straighten out the Water Level Route and the Empire Corridor so you can both remove a bunch of padding and speed the trains up to at least 90 MPH to boot. As a long-term goal, I do not think what I'm proposing is too "out there", and I'd also like to point out that if PA puts its back into upgrading the HAR-PGH corridor, that also becomes an option to work with.

Edit: As to the politics, the main thing I'm thinking of is yanking a couple of redundant insane-hour departure/arrival times.

 

[bombcar]

I'm glad the late for sure stopped in Elyra - even though I was the only passenger getting on or off, and it was 5 hours late. Saved a trip into Cleveland for my friends in Lorain.

Before removing stops entirely, they could convert more of them to flag stops. Or, if they send multiple trains a day down the same route, have some stop at one set of little-used stops, and the others stop at the other set.

However, I've always felt that making stops doesn't really slow things down; it's congestion.

 

[jis]

However, I've always felt that making stops doesn't really slow things down; it's congestion.

Depends on what route one is talking about. For example an Acela or a Northeast Regional requires well known number of additional minutes in its schedule for each added stop. For Acelas it is 3 to 4 minutes per stop. It depends on whether the stop is on a high speed segment or on a slow speed one and what is the volume of passengers involved.

E.g. An Acela that stops at Metropark NJ takes 4 additional minutes in its schedule between Newark and Philadelphia. Metropark is on a 100mph curve, but involves slowing down to 45 mph one block before CP Iselin preparatory to crossing over from track 3 to track 4 due to the current signal setup, which is admittedly less than optimal. ACSES may improve this situation. It also departs Metropark with a restricting clear at CP Menlo to cross over from 4 to 3 before it can resume full speed.

 

[bombcar]

Fair enough; if the track is Amtrak controlled then stops matter - and then you can have express trains and normal trains.

I also think (for example) that they might as well put a Moorpark stop on 785 because it always sits there waiting for the southbound to pass.