posted
When Amtrak prepares its national timetable , is there "time-frame" guide-lines dictated by the freight-rail companies , in particular ? I know that commuter-line arrivals/departures must be taken into account.
Here is my thought:
"Pad" the schedules for those trains that have a "history" of running hours late , regularly---due, primarily to freight congestion. I realize that the schedules are padded already. I am talking about increasing this amount dramatically.
For example:
The south-bound Starlight is due to arrive into LA at 9 PM. Move up this arrival time to the (riduculous ?)arrival time of 3:00 AM. The train could most likely arrive before THAT time, and thus be EARLY. Since ACTUAL arrival times are not realistic , why not announce a DIFFERENT arrival time that is JUST as unrealistic. Place hours and hours of extra padding time into the schedule of certain trains.
Is a passenger more likely to be upset if a train arrives 4 hours late, or 4 hours early ? Which is more inconvenient ?
Naturally this would not have to be done for every long-distance train. But why not at least for some of those with more "trouble-some" time-keeping. Then re-evaluate every six months when the new schedule is printed.
Most likely, freight-rail companies would "freak-out." But it was just a thought of mine. I was not certain whether arrival/departure time-slots are "assigned" by the freight-rao; companies or not.
Lastly, I think it is time Amtrak cancels any and all GUARANTEED connections----except perhaps along the NEC.
In one year alone, imagine how much Amtrak must spend to "accomodate" missed connections---whether by using buses, taxis, and hotels. Does anyone out there have a "guess-timate". It MUST be thousands of dollars.
At the very least, NO guaranteed connections of LESS than 6 hours. That alone would improve matters.
Mechanical problems, crew problems , weather , freight congestion , derailments. Today it's literally a "crap-shoot" trying to determine if a train will arrive on time or not.
In that I am an experienced rail traveler (like many of you) I simply do not take a chance with my same-day connections anymore----I simply do NOT plan on them; especially if they are less than 6 hours. But this is not the case with "new" riders. They look at the schedule (or are told the schedule) and simply PRESUME that same-day connections can readily be made---when this is just not the case at all. Then its frustration and a decision never to use Amtrak again.
This could all be easily avoided by simply cancelling any guaranteed connections---especially those of 6 hours or less.
My son and I are taking a Western trip from Pittsburgh this May. I have purposely scheduled two over-nites because I KNOW that we (most likely) would NOT be able to make a same day connection---first in Emeryville to connect from the Starlight to the Zephyr and one in Chicago to connect from the Zephyr to the Capitol.
It makes me far less "upset" to have to schedule these two over-nites than it would by missing a same-day connect attempt that I KNOW will , most likely , NOT be possible.
I think the general public would feel the same way. Why "hint" ? that a same-day connection might be possible when in reality it probably would not.
posted
That treats the symptom and it doesn't treat the disease. It's not just Amtrak that is suffering from congestion, it's the freight railroads, too. John McPhee's New Yorker article explained that quite clearly for coal trains, and it's not much different for other freight. We need to invest LOTS of money--public and private--to get the system working correctly.
-------------------- Kiernan Posts: 155 | From: Santa Fe, New Mexico | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In short, Amtrak would ask that the host roads treat the LD's as "Passneger Extras'; Amtrak would simply state "it arrives when it arrives; call or log on ahead for best estimated time'.
A "guaranteed connection" is simply an accomodation that Amtrak has chosen to make, as there is no requirement within the transportation contract between Amtrak and a passenger to do so. Why Amtrak continues to guarantee the connections that they do astounds me; they simply should acknowledge that a train's arrival time is a crapshoot.
All that contract requires is "reasonable dispatch', which is one of these terms that can be defined however the user chooses, i.e. what do you WANT it to mean???
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
I am glad that you agree with me that Amtrak's "honoring" guaranteed connections is ridiculous, given the present state of operational affairs. It makes absolutely no sense.
Kiernan:
With all due respect, better to treat the symptom than do nothing at all.
I certainly understand that the private freight-rail companies are in a real "bind" also. But, just how realistic is the probability of huge investment (either public or private) in our nation's rail infra-structure ? We simply can not be in "denial" anymore. If this investment were going to occur, in my opinion , it would have been initiated already--- I am talking about massive investment.
I merely am trying to suggest small options that Amtrak might consider to lessen at least some expense AND improve customer satisfaction.
Changes like extra "pad" time , cancellation of guaranteed connections and suggesting (on Amtrak's part) that certain same-day connections NOT be attempted simply make sense to me---perhaps to few others, but at least to me.
Amtrak is in a very "delicate" situation , as we all know. Management needs to "work within the system" more (again in my opinion) and come up with other options to both save some money AND placate passengers who are not reasobable when it comes to expectations.
Now, I don't know if my options are possible. But I sincerely think they might make at least a small difference in both the "bottom-line" and customer satisfaction.
Posts: 187 | From: Pittsburgh , PA | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Padding is not the solution. Amtrak have tried that and it doesn't work. Take the Sunset Limited as an extreme example. The schedule has been padded by something like 6 hours since 1995 and, while it was still running to Orlando, still couldn't keep to time.
Padding can in fact increase congestion - something which I'm sure many of you will point to as a cause of Amtrak's lateness. If that train was running early and knew it had passengers to pick up at the next stop, that train will now block that route until it's time to go. Going back to the Sunset example, there are several stops on single track where other trains would not be able to pass. Blocking a congested main line is not a good idea.
So how about holding it back at the previous passing point? Well, that now renders that siding out of use, and passengers wanting to get off the train at the next stop would be unnecessarily delayed.
To a lesser degree, what happens when that train arrives at its destination, hours early? Will there be a track to arrive on? Will crew be available to unload baggage and/or perform any shunting required?
Finally, what about crewing? If you pad the schedules, that means more crew or longer hours, both of which cost money - the one thing Amtrak hasn't got.
Sorry to harp on about it, but I've seen padding tried before outside the US and it simply does not work.
Geoff M.
-------------------- Geoff M. Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the schedule is padded, what's to stop the host railroad from using that as an excuse to keep Amtrak on sidings while freight trains go on by?
posted
TALKrr, thanks for the comments. I think your other points are valid. I see the guaranteed connection as a perk or a bonus, rather than a integral part of the price. Having said that, widening the margin to 6 hours like you suggest seems reasonable, rather than scrapping it altogether.
Geoff M.
-------------------- Geoff M. Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't just consider the Sunset Limited. Also consider the Coast Starlight. This train arrived at its terminus nearly two hours earlier than it does in the present timetable. An arrival time reported in the 7 p.m. hour was not uncommon.
They tightened up a little on the westbound Lake Shore Limited, but the eastbound remained the same. I remember comparing that schedule not too long ago.
The removal of M&E did shorten running times of some long distance trains, but for the most part, they still need that padding. Amtrak touted that "getting you through Chicago connections faster" as a result of dropping the M&E service.
The only two trains that seem to operate semi-reliably are the Empire Builder and Southwest Chief. Thank you BNSF!
The connections afforded by the Coast Starlight, Empire Builder, Sunset, and Southwest Chief that are now kinda lost (officially, or unofficially) is really pathetic and no doubt has affected ridership.
Posts: 337 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
