Train speed.......historically speaking?

[Hans627]

Just curious if anyone knows what speed trains traveling during the "golden age" of passenger rail? I guess that would be the 1950's.

The reason for asking is that we were on train 98 (Silver Meteor) last night and the train traveled at about 78 to 80 mph most of the time. But there were some stretches of track that were extremely rough. Almost scary! Thoughts of derailing crossed my mind!

Are trains traveling faster today then they did in the 1950's? Or is the track in worse shape? Or was it the same?

Thanks!

 

[WICT106]

No. The trains don't travel as fast as they did during the "Golden Age" of the 1950s. Some specific trains of the pre- 1971 era traveled at speeds in excess of 100 mph, but the majority did not. This majority includes passenger trains of secondary status -- they didn't go as fast as the premier, "banner," trains. Part of the reason for the speed reduction is the requirement that for any train to travel in excess of 80 mph, one must have cab signals, an Automatic Train Stop feature, or Automatic Train Control ( a type of speed governor that will apply the brakes & bring the train to a stop in the event of a restricting [ ie., "yellow"], or stop [ red ] signal ). Almost all freight railroads in the USA lost money on passenger trains, and so decided to remove those features instead of maintaining the track and signals to the required degree. This resulted in the reduction of speed limits to slower than 80 mph. Having typed that, it is more economical to eliminate slow areas of track, and thus have a higher average speed, than it is to have one section of speedy track in amongst moderate, or intermediate- speed track.

 

[Cal]

Well Santa Fe’s Super Chief (ancestor to the Southwest Chief) used to have several stretches of track that we’re 90-100 that are currently 79 (although some 90). I don’t know the exact running times, but I believe the Super Chief took **slightly** less time than todays Chief.

 

[JWM]

Correct that speeds were higher pre-Amtrak except in certain areas like the N.E. Corridor, parts of Michigan, Chicago-St. Louis. The track condition has deteriorated greatly. I remember the Silver Meteor leaving West Palm Beach and accelerating with nary a ripple in a glass.

 

[ehbowen]

Well Santa Fe’s Super Chief (ancestor to the Southwest Chief) used to have several stretches of track that we’re 90-100 that are currently 79 (although some 90). I don’t know the exact running times, but I believe the Super Chief took **slightly** less time than todays Chief.

The Super Chief was scheduled at 39 hours and 45 minutes, bumper to bumper, for most of its pre-Amtrak existence...sometimes even 15 minutes less. It used to top out at 117 mph on the Kansas flats, until someone at Santa Fe decided to hang a camera under the train and study track dynamics on jointed rail at 100+ mph. Very shortly thereafter all Santa Fe passenger trains were restricted to 90 mph max.

In the classic days speed limits were enforced with a wink and a nod; one frequently heard phrase was, "You better be going at least that fast!" Still, an impossibly tight schedule would draw the ire of regulators after the ICC handed down its June 1947 order mandating maximum speed limits by quality of signalling. Before that it was "anything goes", quite literally...say, a 90 mph Sam Houston Zephyr over unsignaled 90 lb jointed rail, anybody?

 

[Hans627]

So, apparently the issue is track condition. And track condition is bad (based on my recent experience). So on train 98 that responsibility lies with CSX, correct? How fast do freight train run?So what determines if the track condition is good enough? What incentive does CSX have to keep it in good repair? Just trying to understand how it all works.

Thanks!

 

[ehbowen]

So, apparently the issue is track condition. And track condition is bad (based on my recent experience). So on train 98 that responsibility lies with CSX, correct? How fast do freight train run?So what determines if the track condition is good enough? What incentive does CSX have to keep it in good repair? Just trying to understand how it all works.

Thanks!

Actually, there was a documented article a few years back which said that CSX was quite willing to let ALL of its track degrade to Class 3 standards (max speed 40 for freight, 60 passenger) and if Amtrak wanted to maintain 79 mph passenger trains they would be socked with the whole nickel. IIRC they backed down, but things could be even worse than they are.

Just musing here...suppose UP and CSX, et al, got their wish and all Amtrak passenger trains disappeared tonight. Anyone seriously think the railroads would get their freight train handling act together tomorrow? Next week? A year from now?

 

[jis]

Actually, there was a documented article a few years back which said that CSX was quite willing to let ALL of its track degrade to Class 3 standards (max speed 40 for freight, 60 passenger) and if Amtrak wanted to maintain 79 mph passenger trains they would be socked with the whole nickel. IIRC they backed down, but things could be even worse than they are.

Just musing here...suppose UP and CSX, et al, got their wish and all Amtrak passenger trains disappeared tonight. Anyone seriously think the railroads would get their freight train handling act together tomorrow? Next week? A year from now?

No. Incompetence does not get fixed anywhere by tinkering at the margins

 

[ehbowen]

No. Incompetence does not get fixed anywhere by tinkering at the margins

Exactly. They say that Amtrak is the reason, when actually it's just an excuse. And a poor excuse, at that.

 

[PaTrainFan]

I cannot imagine moving at 100 MPH on jointed rail.

 

[MARC Rider]

I cannot imagine moving at 100 MPH on jointed rail.

The NEC was all jointed rail until it was upgraded for the Metroliners, which started running in 1969. I remember riding it through that period. OK, the trains went more like 90 mph than 100 mph, but the ride was OK. You could tell the difference between the jointed rail and the new welded rail, though. I'm not sure when the Burlington Route between Chicago and Denver got welded rail, but I rode the Denver Zephyr in 1968, and I think it was jointed rail, but I was impressed with the smooth ride, and the conductor told us that at times we were exceeding 90 mph.

 

[andytiedye]

Maybe CSX would be better if they brought back the kitten.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Are trains traveling faster today then they did in the 1950's? Or is the track in worse shape? Or was it the same?

Outside of a few regional corridors route most track speeds have been falling instead of increasing. When I was a kid 90MPH seemed common but when I rode those same tracks as an adult we only traveled at 75MPH and the urban speeds for my hometown trains are as fast as walking beside the track at this point. In many cases the track is heavier with fewer joints but maintained to a lower standard relative to modern regulations. Slower freight-focused track is cheaper to maintain but it means many remaining passenger trains are slower than ever.

 

[Seaboard92]

I've heard reports from people who rode the trains in the 50s and 60s that those old Seaboard engineers could have the Silver Meteor doing over 100 MPH between Camden, SC and Columbia, SC and that is not really a straight or flat route.

The railroads aren't nearly maintaining their tracks to the same standards that they were in the 50s and 60s. But another thing has to do with the rolling stock too and how often it's maintained. Budd cars and other heritage fleet cars tend to ride better than the Amfleets. A lot of that has to do with truck design.

 

[Willbridge]

At Oregon DOT we had a P.R. guy who had worked for Menk at the NP. He proudly told me that Menk had improved efficiency by buying an executive jet. Before that, he explained, the division superintendents and others rode the North Coast Limited to meetings in St. Paul. They wasted time by sitting around in the Travelers' Rest Lounge shooting the breeze and exchanging system gossip. With the jet they could get up before dawn and return home late that night.

At the time I was told this I was hearing how terrible the track was on Amtrak's North Coast Hiawatha. There were some other issues then that also made me wonder whether airlifting management might have solved one problem by creating another. Certainly no one managing a division in North Dakota would want to have his peers asking about being lifted out of their berths by poorly maintained track.

 

[ehbowen]

At Oregon DOT we had a P.R. guy who had worked for Menk at the NP. He proudly told me that Menk had improved efficiency by buying an executive jet. Before that, he explained, the division superintendents and others rode the North Coast Limited to meetings in St. Paul. They wasted time by sitting around in the Travelers' Rest Lounge shooting the breeze and exchanging system gossip. With the jet they could get up before dawn and return home late that night.

At the time I was told this I was hearing how terrible the track was on Amtrak's North Coast Hiawatha. There were some other issues then that also made me wonder whether airlifting management might have solved one problem by creating another. Certainly no one managing a division in North Dakota would want to have his peers asking about being lifted out of their berths by poorly maintained track.

Sounds about right. If I'm ever given a major Class 1 railroad for Christmas I'm going to sell all the corporate jets save one, use the money to buy new business cars, and mandate that the remaining jet be used only for business trips outside our system!

 

[Willbridge]

Sounds about right. If I'm ever given a major Class 1 railroad for Christmas I'm going to sell all the corporate jets save one, use the money to buy new business cars, and mandate that the remaining jet be used only for business trips outside our system!

Here's the Amtrak Coast Starlight running on time with the SP business car 'Sunset'.

 

[Seaboard92]

Sounds about right. If I'm ever given a major Class 1 railroad for Christmas I'm going to sell all the corporate jets save one, use the money to buy new business cars, and mandate that the remaining jet be used only for business trips outside our system!

If that ever happens may I have all of the jets because I would totally acquire them just to part them out and sell the usable parts. There is an airplane auction in Kenya right now I'm taking part in for some old CRJ100s and 200s that I'm literally going for just for the parts on them. Also in the auction is a B707, and a few 737s I probably should bid on the 737s again for the parts.

In all honesty having a business train and having executives use it is a very good thing. It is funny though you can always tell when the executives are on it or if it is deadheading. When they deadheaded the last Masters Train to Augusta it took twelve hours to cross South Carolina and got stuck in a three way meet with two too long freight trains. But when it goes to the hunting lodge it is the fastest moving train on the line.

CSX runs theirs quite a lot these days and it is a good way for them to see what lines are available. Last time I saw it it took a strange route from JAX to CHI. It went to CLB, then over to Greenwood, ATL, BNA, and IND.

 

[John819]

The time for an Amtrak run from New Haven to NYP today is about 15 minutes longer than it was when there was joint service by the New Haven and the PRR. This is due to FRA speed restrictions.

 

[jruff001]

No. The trains don't travel as fast as they did during the "Golden Age" of the 1950s. Some specific trains of the pre- 1971 era traveled at speeds in excess of 100 mph, but the majority did not. This majority includes passenger trains of secondary status -- they didn't go as fast as the premier, "banner," trains.

I think it is also tough to compare the end-to-end times of the banner trains of yore to today's Amtrak trains when talking about track speeds. The old banner trains had the advantage of being given priority over all other trains over their whole routes, unlike the situation today with Amtrak being at the mercy of the host railroads.

 

[jis]

I think it is also tough to compare the end-to-end times of the banner trains of yore to today's Amtrak trains when talking about track speeds. The old banner trains had the advantage of being given priority over all other trains over their whole routes, unlike the situation today with Amtrak being at the mercy of the host railroads.

That is true. However that will never prevent it from being a favorite bellyaching activity among specially the older railfans

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I think it is also tough to compare the end-to-end times of the banner trains of yore to today's Amtrak trains when talking about track speeds. The old banner trains had the advantage of being given priority over all other trains over their whole routes, unlike the situation today with Amtrak being at the mercy of the host railroads.

Amtrak still has priority over freight; they just never had a practical method for measuring and enforcing this priority.

That is true. However that will never prevent it from being a favorite bellyaching activity among specially the older railfans

I rarely complained about Amtrak's slow speeds and routine delays until I started traveling internationally and realized that other industrialized democracies did not suffer from this self-inflicted problem and expected to arrive on time.

 

[Burns651]

One can't generalize that track was in better shape before Amtrak. The Penn Central, where most of Amtrak's business was, had marginally worse to a lot worse track compared with its lines that survive to today and are still used by Amtrak. FRA track standards didn't exist before the early '70s. I'd bet a lot of those 90-100 MPH territories on ATSF, IC etc. wouldn't have been run higher than 79 if current FRA standards had been applied at the time. And today engineers simply can't get away with winking at the speed limits, for good reason.

 

[cirdan]

So, apparently the issue is track condition. And track condition is bad (based on my recent experience). So on train 98 that responsibility lies with CSX, correct? How fast do freight train run?So what determines if the track condition is good enough? What incentive does CSX have to keep it in good repair? Just trying to understand how it all works.

Thanks!

Track condition is important but other factors are timing of crossing gates and also safe stopping distance.

 

[jruff001]

Amtrak still has priority over freight; they just never had a practical method for measuring and enforcing this priority.

Oh is that all they have to do.