Why is average speed so low on LD trains?

[cp]

I've noticed that the average speed for most trains outside NEC is between 40 and 55 MPH, way lower than the max allowable speed of 79 MPH. Even if you account for intermediate stops, it should not bring the average speed down so much. Schedule buffers probably have something to do with it, but that's not the whole storry either. The Texas Eagle does not have that much buffer (2 hours max), and it's average speed is dismally low even if you took those buffers out. Interestingly, a train attendant on the City of New Orleans once told me that the original pre-Amtrak train with the same name was much faster and this was 40 years ago! What's going on?

 

[Trogdor]

The maximum speed isn't always 79 mph. There are very many areas where the speed is lower (in some cases, *much* lower).

 

[battalion51]

The reason is things like curves, acceleration/deceleration times, actual track speed, etc. have to all be factored into the run time.

 

[TransAtlantic]

Form A's, track conditions, close clearances, low-speed curves, unprotected grade crossings...there are almost as many reasons for slowing down as there are places that the trains have to do so. If you want to see 79, you have to take the SWC west of Gallup or across Kansas, or the CS north of Portland, or the SL across (parts of) west Texas...etc....

 

[George Harris]

First of all, 40 plus years ago when the railroad companies were operating the trains, most of the passenger train engineers were very senior men that knew the line like the back of their hand and there was a general unwritten understanding between them and the management: We have scheduled the premier trains based on everything going right and you have the railroad given to you to make it happen. When things get out of whack and you get behind schedule, use your best judgement as to what is safe and try to make up time. Therefore, a lot of times the speed limits were neither strictly enforced nor strictly observed.

For the City of New Orleans, I can be fairly specific, as I was a fairly regular Memphis TN to Fulton KY passenger for a few years and rode Memphis south several times. In the 1950's early 60's the ICRR main line was in reasonably good condition, was double tracked Chicago to Cairo IL, Fulton KY to Memphis, and Jackson MS to Hammond LA. Between Memphis and Jackson MS the passenger trains went through Grenada MS, a line they fairly well had to themselves which was about 6 miles shorter than the current route through Yazoo City. A goodly length of the line in Illinois had a 100 mph speed limt. Virtually all the rest was 79 mph. There were and are numerous cuves in the section between Carbondale IL and Grenada MS, but most were in the 50 mph to 70 mph range. At that time the CNO schedule was 16.5 hours for 921.1 miles Chicago to New Orleans. Everything except the Panama Limited got out of the way, and those meetings were usually on double track. It was well know that the train would move at 90 mph plus in the 79 mph territory when behind schedule, and sometimes even when not.

Those days are gone in almost all aspects. An engineer that fudges the speed limits today will find himself on the ground. The double track main is gone. It was singled a number of years ago but with long sidings. The 100 mph territory was reduced to 90 mph around the time Amtrak came into being and the signal hardware permitting plus 79 mph removed when the second main was taken up. The Grenada District is now a 10 mph streak of rust and the passenger trains share the longer but flatter freight line through the Delta. The freight line however has been given signals and welded rail so that the passenger train speed limit is 79 mph, but it has more miles of lower speed than the Grenada line.

Other locations are less extreme, but much the same has happened in other places. All of the BNSF 90 mph territory for the Southwest Chief was 100 mph in the 50's, and a lot of the 79 mph territory was as well. The ex ACL main from Richmond to Jacksonville also allowed 90 mph plus at one time and was fully double tracked. Now it is 79 mph with alternating segments of single and double track.

The Crescent is probably as close as any train to its pre-Amtrak best time, but it goes between Washington and Atlanta on a line that was once fully double track and is now reduced to alternating segments of single and double for much of its length and runs at a slightly slower schedule than its Southern Railway System best.

 

[MrFSS]

What are the speeds allowed/obtained by freights in the 79 MPH areas? Do they ever achieve this speed?

 

[AmtrakWPK]

Probably the biggest reason for slow average speeds nowadays is the horrendous freight congestion on many, if not most routes. UP in particular is one gigantic gridlock, responsible in recent years for Sunset Limited running over 24 HOURS late.

 

[battalion51]

WPK, in spite of freight congestion that has nothing to do with run times, as per the delay report. The delay report lists the fastest possible time that the train can move between two locations. Any deviations from the run time (whether is be slow orders, train interference, etc.) is noted on the delay report.

 

[AmtrakWPK]

Haven't they added sometimes some very large pads to the schedules because of consistent freight congestion delays (i.e., on Sunset)? Or are we just talking about two different ends of the same subject?

 

[AlanB]

Haven't they added sometimes some very large pads to the schedules because of consistent freight congestion delays (i.e., on Sunset)? Or are we just talking about two different ends of the same subject?

They sure have added some large padding numbers to the Sunset. In the last 5 years the Sunset's schedule has been lengthened by 10 and a half hours. Note: That's the full schedule, pre-Katrina, when it ran from ORL to LAX.

 

[battalion51]

There's a big difference between the advertised schedule and the actual run time. Example: P002 WPK-ORL, advertised time 1 hour, run time 18 minutes. Run times are not what's advertised on the timetable, it's what the run should take under normal conditions.

 

[AmtrakWPK]

For something like ORL-WPK I would agree. It's double-tracked and although it has a low speed limit, there's very little likelihood of sitting parked. It's a good opportunity to make up a little schedule time. But maybe they were considering that with 91/97/98 and 01 all arriving and departing from ORL within a limited window, (and sometimes 97/92 likewise later in the day) that one or more of them may end up sitting north or south of ORL waiting for one of the other trains to finish station work and clear ORL. I've certainly been on one of those trains several times waiting for one of the others to clear ORL so we could get into it, or vice-versa. And how do you define "normal conditions" on a segment that is normally gridlocked with freight congestion, especially on UP? If "normal conditions" does not take UP gridlock and UP "park 'em all!" dispatch attitude toward pax trains, then the numbers are useless. If "normal conditions" is the time that the segment should take you to run simply based on the distance at the rated speed limit, it gives you a number that's basically useless because unless the freight congestion disappears you will never see it happen. Sort of like basing your estimate of the time to travel from Sanford to U.S. 27 on I-4 at rush hour simply by using the posted speed limit and the total distance to be traveled. Add two hours to that and you might have a useful number, at least on a day with good weather no catastrophic wrecks.

 

[jg greenwood]

What are the speeds allowed/obtained by freights in the 79 MPH areas? Do they ever achieve this speed?

On the former IC, freight trains are restricted to 60-MPH. If you have more than 13,000 trailing tons, you're restricted to 50-MPH. Do we achieve this speed? Only if we're going downhill. The IC is, for the most part, extremely stingy with their power.

 

[Mark]

Along the same lines: How fast does the Lake Shore Ltd. go once its on the Empire Corridor? The schedule shows it needing 2:25 to go 141 miles, (croton-harmon-NYC), about 60 mph avg. Is the EC 79mph? I ride LSL about two times each year and it 'feels' faster than 79 between CH and NYC.

Mark

 

[George Harris]

While I don't have any employee timetables for the Lake Shore Ltd route, I do know that there are cab signals in place for some or most of the CSX portion of the route. I eleve that for most of it the speed limit is still either 79 mph or 80 mph. It may be faster in New York State. At least New York City to Albany is faster, I think 110 mph where practical. For sure at least 90 mph. However, this section does have quite a few restrictions below whatever the maximum is for curves.

George

 

[battalion51]

The trackage is rated for 110 MPH operation. The problem is once you approach that speed you are having to slow down for curve or station stops. But from NYP-UCA you will achieve speeds in excess of 100 MPH.

 

[Rafi]

The trackage is rated for 110 MPH operation. The problem is once you approach that speed you are having to slow down for curve or station stops. But from NYP-UCA you will achieve speeds in excess of 100 MPH.

I guess this begs the question (at least for me, out of curiosity), "Which LD trains see the fastest speeds?"

-Rafi

 

[battalion51]

On a consistent basis that would be the Cardinal, Crescent, Palmetto, Carolinian, and Silver Service trains. These trains run on corridor behind electrics that have no problem getting the trains up to 110. The LSL will see approximately 110 MPH, but the stints are much shorter due to diesel operation and track conditions that only allow this operation in a limited area.

 

[AlanB]

On a consistent basis that would be the Cardinal, Crescent, Palmetto, Carolinian, and Silver Service trains. These trains run on corridor behind electrics that have no problem getting the trains up to 110. The LSL will see approximately 110 MPH, but the stints are much shorter due to diesel operation and track conditions that only allow this operation in a limited area.

Overall you're correct, but for one small mistake. The Carolinian is not considered a long distance train. :lol:

 

[battalion51]

Well based on that criteria neither is the Palmetto. I just lumped it in with the long distance group since its part of the same business unit.

 

[AlanB]

Well based on that criteria neither is the Palmetto. I just lumped it in with the long distance group since its part of the same business unit.

Nope, Amtrak considers the Palmetto to be a long distance train, even though it does not run with sleepers. The Carolinian on the other hand is lumped in with State Supported and other Short Distance Corridorsl trains by Amtrak.

 

[Rafi]

On a consistent basis that would be the Cardinal, Crescent, Palmetto, Carolinian, and Silver Service trains. These trains run on corridor behind electrics that have no problem getting the trains up to 110. The LSL will see approximately 110 MPH, but the stints are much shorter due to diesel operation and track conditions that only allow this operation in a limited area.

Okay, touche. I should have chosen my words better, obviously. What I meant to ask was, "Which LD trains see the fastest speeds outside of the NEC?"

-Rafi

 

[George Harris]

Okay, touche. I should have chosen my words better, obviously. What I meant to ask was, "Which LD trains see the fastest speeds outside of the NEC?"
-Rafi

That one is obvious. Southwest Chief. There are many miles between Albuquerque and Barstow CA that permit 90 mph. there are of course numerous curve restrictions, but there are places where there is over 50 mples between the speed restricted areas. There are also parts on Illinois and Missouri that allow 90 mph. Part of the passenger line across Kansas did and some may still, but a lot of this line that used to be 90 mph is now 79 mph, and it is possible that all is by now. The cost of maintaining a low density track that is mostly still jointed rail, so far as I know, to FRA class 5 is difficult for BNSF to justify. Since they run a lot of their frieght at 70 mph, they have to maintain the FRA class 5 track condition west of Albuquerque (OK, Dailes for those that wish to be more exact) anyway, and the ATS has been in place for years and does improve the safety in the freight operation as well.

There is also a short section in Michigan that is Amtrak owned that permits 90 mph, maybe 110.

A few years ago there was a start on work to allow 110 mph on a goodly part of the Chicago to St. Louis line, but that poroject seems to have dissapeared.

Otherwise, to the best of my knowledge, it is 79 mph or less. Since contractually the railroads did not have to provide a passenger train speed limit higher than the one in place at the time Amtrak began, there are lots of miles of 70 mph limit that could, based on track conditions only, be 79 mph now. However, if the signal circuits and grade crossing warning circuit lengths are based on 70 mph, the speed increase would not be free. These things would have to be adjusted.

Some known areas of lower limits:

Texas Eagle:

St. Louis to Poplar Bluff MO: 60 mph except about 40 miles at 55 mph

Poplar Bluff to Ft. Worth: 75 mph

Temple TX to San Antonio: 70 mph

Sunset Limited:

New Orleans to at least San Antonio: 70 mph

If the east section ever comes back: Flomaton AL to Tallahassee FL: 59 mph (no signals)

Vermonter: St. Albans VT to White River Jct VT: 59 mph or 55 mph (no signals)

George

 

[Guest]

The section of the SWC that is 90mph is quite noticable. I was just sitting down to dinner as they announced the 90mph section was coming up. On the second level of a superliner it is much more noticable than the well maintained 110 NEC. To be fair, between Albuquerque and LA we made up almost two hours, so we may have been cheating the limit somewhat.

 

[Guest_Yerry_*]

One very big factor affecting speed limits is the massive proliferation of such high-center-of-gravity cars such as coal and grain hoppers. For these trains to avoid fuel-costly speed changes at each and every curve, superelevations (banked turns to the rest of us) were removed in many locations. At first this may make no sense,, but the issue was of too-slow trains and slack run-out tipping the cars inward, A.K.A "stringlining". And, I'll have to admit, removing the superlevations seemed (to me at least) to happen first and fastest on the lines hauling passengers.

As for sensation of speed, acceleration determines how you feel the CHANGE in speed (duh!), but it's the motion NOT in the same direction of travel that draws your brain's attention to your actual SPEED. That's why a train will often "feel" slower when it passes from rough track to smooth track. SO, in theory, a blindfolded person on freshly-laser-leveled track will have a very hard time determining speed.

But Slow Orders are the biggest obstacle. One of my earliest priviledged-railfan experiences involved a cab ride in a SDP40F on the old National Limited (NYP-IND-STL-KCM), and watching the Engineer leafing through an enormous stack of slow orders, one page every mile (or so it seemed), an image that I'll remember forever. His diligence and attention to detail was FAR greater than my own admitted "Sesame Street attention span).