posted
Almost weekly we seem to have a "BNSF dispatches better than UP" subthread - but are there any studies to show WHY BNSF appears to be better to Amtrak than UP? We know about the money - no RR company in its right mind would turn down huge incentive payments, so that can't be the sole reason.
So what about capacity studies? Headways? Trains per day compared to available trackage? Type of signalling used? Maintenance blocks? Siding lengths compared to train lengths?
I guess what I'm asking for is a list of lines, or segments of lines, and the number of trains per day that each can handle versus the number of trains that actually use it. I'm only considering through trains here, not local pick-ups where they block the main line for extended periods.
Thanks
Geoff M.
-------------------- Geoff M. Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think, Mr M, that an investor owned company would consider such to be proprietary information, which means anyone here privy to such is not at liberty to discuss at a public forum, or for that matter down at the pub.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
These are some items off the top of my head:
Several years ago, BNSF predicted (correctly) that traffic would be picking up, and leased locomotives and hired additional employees as necessary (which they are still doing). UP made next to no preparations, leading to "meltdowns" as crew shortages were widespread.
The SP from the '60's and '70's until their absorption into the UP was not known for capacity upgrades-in fact they were almost constantly skimping and cutting their physical plant. As a result, the Sunset route is pretty much the same as it was during the '40's. Same with the Coast Line (witness the joined mainline and ancient block signals). Today, the Sunset Route is saturated with autoracks, petro-chemical, and intermodal coming from the LA ports to points east such as Houston. When you try to cram 35 trains a day into a line that was built for 30, you're going to have problems.
UP is trying to upgrade their capacity, but all this takes years and $$$.
From what I've heard, there was and still is poor management in the UP. Yardmasters would release trains as soon as they were ready, in order to reduce the "yard dwell time" metric. Unfortunately, the mainline then becomes the parking lot as you have all these trains shoved out onto the mainline. UP also accepted whatever business they got, and it's come back to haunt them (witness the UPS fiasco). I think BNSF played their cards right and only accepted busines they knew they could handle and profit from.
Working for the railroad is no picnic, but I think morale at BNSF is a lot better than at the UP, leading to a more efficient railroad.
Posts: 286 | From: Knee deep in the retention tank | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I bet the reason is BNSF is run by people who love trains. UP is run by people who see trains as a means to move goods, no passion. Although UP does still use steam engines an a caboose, is this correct?
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr Norman, actually virtually all the data is already in the public domain; all it needs is for somebody to collate it into a useful format. I, for one, could provide you with a more-or-less up-to-date version of the IC/CN line right from Chicago to New Orleans with information that was obtained legally and at minimal cost. I just don't have the time to wade through 1,000 pages of diagrams.
(Actually the data was for a Microsoft Train Sim route which was abandoned once I realised MSTS wasn't fully capable of some of the signalling detail that was required).
Even without such information, a lot can be determined readily from various sources and visual scouting. Let's ignore the so-called security morals of that for this discussion.
Remember also that BNSF have (or at least had last time I looked) employee timetables online, free for anybody to view without any security. There was a disclaimer but even that got bypassed by search engine robots.
So I therefore have no need, nor any desire, to "go down the pub". I don't know whether that was intended as an insult but luckily I am thick skinned but I know others would be offended by such tactless comments. I am aware that you're not normally known to be this way so I hope that this was simply an unintentional faux pas.
Thanks to the others for contributing positive and useful discussion.
Geoff M.
-------------------- Geoff M. Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
At one time material such as Employee Timetables, Track Profiles, and Special Instructions were available at Union Pacific's website, and presumably other Class I as well. However they have today chosen to protect that information by password so that it is disseminated only to authorized individuals. That they chose to control access to such information suggests that it either is proprietary to their business interests or possibly to their property's (including lading in their care, custody, and control) security.
I know from having spent eleven years in the railroad industry (well before the internet was a public communication device) that ladings are considered proprietary information.
Lastly Mr Geoff M, on our little "personal matter'. I thank you for the respect afforded me in "that you're not normally known to be this way". I think key is that nowhere in the offensive posting was the term "YOU" used. Possibly my error in judgement occurred using the term "pub' which, noting your UK residence (and presumably citizenship), implied "you'. For what it be worth, although I consume alcohol myself, namely wine, both in restaurants and at home, I do not go to drinking establishments, be they called taverns, bars, or "pubs'.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, the reference to "pub" was what I implied to be a reference to myself.
What was publically available before switching to a password protected system remains publically available - that can't be changed. What is currently password protected is obviously their own data and they have every right to protect that. While I only have 9 years of railway employment, and little of that specifcally US, I am still aware of what can and what can't be used.
Further to public sources of information, the magazine "Trains" often quotes statistics for line segments - these are obviously coming from a public source, but where?
Therefore let me rephrase this into wording which I hope you will find acceptable.
Is there any publically available information regarding line capacities, line usage, and headways?
Geoff M.
-------------------- Geoff M. Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, the reference to "pub" was what I implied to be a reference to myself
OK Mr Geoff M, had I not been addressing a British Subject, I simply would have said bars in place of pubs. However, here in "the States", there have been many an instance of individuals "flapping' at drinking establishments about stuff that should have been left at the office ("what you learn here, you leave here") and that is what I was noting and in no way implying yourself.
I sincerely hope we can now put this matter to rest.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmmm, that sounds like you were addressing me personally, albeit not in the context originally interpreted. I therefore accept your explanation/apology and hope that we can carry on with the subject in hand, though I suspect that has been somewhat dampened by these "misunderstandings".
However, I would point out that while I may be a British citizen, I am reasonably conversant with US culture, having worked and lived there for an appreciable amount of time. I do come across a huge wealth of contractual railway information in my current employment which I would not dream of divulging to anybody not privy to such information.
Geoff M.
-------------------- Geoff M. Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It takes more digging, and of course becomes obsolete with time, but there are a number of studies that include rail related information. I ran into one that was discussing issues of capacity in the Powder River basin that had track charts, employee timetable pages, and sundry other bits of information in its appendices. This report appeared on one of the US government sites shortly after UP removed access to their employee timetable pages.
If you want track charts of the North Carolina railroad tracks used by the state funded trains, they are available on their web site as well. No one stop shopping, but a lot of inforation is out there in various locations.
What "security' issues there are in keeping it hiddne are completely beyond me.
George
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
