This is topic Amtrak and UP: Antagonistic Relationship? in forum Amtrak at RAILforum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.railforum.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/11/953.html

Posted by amtraxmaniac (Member # 2251) on :
 
UP and Amtrak don't seem to get along. Cases in point:
1. Amtrak blames UP for delays on the Starlight-because of dragging their feet on track maintenance and, I've heard, running their freight trains behind schedule and even going as far as deliberately holding Amtrak trains behind on purpose.

2. The Sunset Limited might be a more profittable train except for the fact that it only runs 3 times a week. Why? I've been told because UP will not allow them to run any trains on that line. The Sunsets that do run on the line-UP can't or/refuse to run them on time. I've always have been told that Amtrak trains are SUPPOSE to be given priority in dispatching. I've come to find out, boy is that a pipe-dream.

3. Amtrak's recent request to do a study on the feasibility of running a poassenger train over the Tehachapis drew a 'Go to hell' response from UP. In case you don't know, this would connect Bakersfield, Fresno, and other San Joaquin Valley cities with Los Angeles without the need to transfer on to a bus in Bakersfield. In response to UP, there was a comic strip in a recent issue of California Rail news lampooning UP-referring to them as 'Union Pathetic'.

Why is Amtrak and UP's relationship so embittered?

Does Amtrak have as poor of a relationship with BNSF and other railroads?

I would like some comment and even more so some history.

------------------
Patrick
 


Posted by Geoff Mayo (Member # 153) on :
 
I was lucky enough to visit BNSF's Network Operations Center in Fort Worth recently. I asked the same type of question as you: why are the on-time performances of Amtrak trains so poor on UP and so good on BNSF? Their reply, from the company PR representative showing me around to the dispatchers at their workstations was the same: On BNSF, Amtrak goes first, everything else gets held for it. On UP "their" trains go first, often to the detriment of Amtrak. It's BNSF's philosophy practically. As a result, they say they have a great relationship with Amtrak.

I'm in no way related to BNSF by the way, just impressed by the company.

Geoff M.
 


Posted by MPALMER (Member # 125) on :
 
I've heard various explanations for UP's "hostility".

1. UP resented Amtrak's addition of express freight shipments to trains, even though that's really not an area that UP focuses on. One comment I heard was that Sunset timekeeping improved after Amtrak dropped Express from the LA-Texas segment of the Sunset.

2. Tehachapi...still has some one track segments, and the line is still too busy. Also that round-about segment to LA would be awesome for railfans but I wonder if the public would sit for it? But as you mention it would include the Central Valley on a through route, and bring some other California communities onto the national network, so the "on the way" stops could add passengers assuming the station stops are not in the wee hours.

3. The UP line from LA-Salt Lake is mostly single track but with many long freights. The (late & lamented) Desert Wind almost always took the sidings for meets because some of the passing tracks were too short for the freights.

4. Change subject...FYI last year George Drury wrote some articles for Railfan & Railroad regarding riding the rails in Calif., and he managed to minimize the gap between Bakersfield and LA by catching a bus to Lancaster and then staying overnight and riding Metrolink into LA. It can be done...by the diligent railfan.
 


Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
 
There are certainly some good reasons to complain about UP, but I don't consider UP to be all bad.

Timekeeping on the Starlight has improved tremendously in the past year. I know UP was having to do a lot of maintenance that Southern Pacific had neglected before the UP buyout. I was on the Starlight two years ago and we suffered terrible delays because of trackwork. But most of that is done now, and timekeeping is much better now. I think David Gunn may have had a railroader to railroader talk with UP that also helped.

As for the proposed overnight train over the Tehachipis, I'm inclined to agree with UP that the proposal was a non starter. Amtrak calculated a 5 to 7 hour trip over the mountains. The Throughway bus currently takes about 2 hours. Anything more than 3 hours for a train is pointless.

But UP does seem to favor its trains over Amtrak. Here's an interesting statistic. In 2000 UP paid $1.2 million to Amtrak for late train penalties. It was the only railroad in the country that paid penalties that year. The same year BNSF received $12 million from Amtrak in on-time incentive rewards. David Gunn, in one inteview said BNSF considers Amtrak to be a "profit center." Its not hard to see why.

On another board some argued that the $1.2 million that UP paid was a drop in the bucket compared to UP's total revenues, and thye could afford to lose it. But that is still a lot of money. UP could have paid $50,000 a year to 24 employees for what it paid to Amtrak. BNSF could afford to pay $50,000 to 240 employees with what it received from Amtrak in incentives.

Clearly there is a very different corporate culture at BNSF. Santa Fe gave up its flagship passenger services very reluctantly, and it still seems to consider quality passenger services on its tracks as a matter of corporate pride. I also think BNSF may be a more progressive company. It is an interesting coincidence that UP is the only major railroad in the US that still has the same name that it had in the 19th century.

------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy

The Del Monte Club Car
 


Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
 
I just wonder....

UP left the passenger business on May 2, 1971, when the last City of Everywhere arrived in LA, Oakland, and Chicago. Thereafter it had the Denver to Salt Lake segment of the SFZ, until the Rio Grande bailed. Then, it had nothing.

For a while, UP had the Desert Wind somewhat forced upon it, as the LA-Ogden line heated up.

Meanwhile, back at the Mustang Ranch, the codgers at 1 Market Plaza (you know that place, Mr Toy, it's the home of YOUR railroad, the EssPee...) continued to be somewhat put upon for rail service ... Zephyr into JLS, Daylight/Starlight, Sunset, ad infinitum. Folks at 1 Market really don't like passenger.

BTW, how much is Amtrak now ponying up for infrastructure??? BTW, do I not recall that in the early 90s, SP (pre-merger) was down to just the Starlight on the Coast Route, and was contemplating abandonment.

John

[This message has been edited by PullmanCo (edited 02-01-2003).]
 


Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
 
Pullman, I really wasn't paying much attention to Amtrak until about three years ago, so I don't know what SP was doing with the coast line in the 90s. I do know that UP has a fair amount of freight traffic on the coast line now. I see it frequently. On the scanner the Watsonville yard is pretty busy.

And I actually don't know where or what 1 Market Plaza is. There are some gaps in my knowledge, to be sure.

As to your question, how much is Amtrak putting up for infrastructure? I don't know, but with UP giving some of it back in penalties, UP certainly isn't getting all it could. The more Amtrak trains run on time, the more UP gets.

------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy

The Del Monte Club Car
 


Posted by MPALMER (Member # 125) on :
 
1 Market Plaza was SP headquarters in downtown San Francisco.
From reading old rail magazines SP was friendly towards passenger trains in the 50s, but later management teams turned SP hostile to these trains...some of it may have been resentment for being required to run the SF Peninsula commute line for years (with deficits) before the route was taken over by Caltrans.
 
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
 
MPalmer, I read about SP's horrible treatment of its passengers in Fred Frailey's excellent book Twilight of the Great Trains. Passengers abandoned SP trains in droves. But after Amtrak took over the passengers came back in huge numbers, showing there was a demand for them after all. The Coast Starlight became Amtrak's most heavily traveled train in the 1970s. That was when I was using it frequently to get between home in Oregon and a boarding school in California.

Thanks for the info about 1 Market Plaza. Does UP operate a regional office out of there now?

------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy

The Del Monte Club Car
 


Posted by Southwest Chief (Member # 1227) on :
 
BNSF has a better infastructure to run passenger trains. Such as many segments of double track. So it's no surprize they can keep Amtrak relatively on time. The old Santa Fe Chi-La transcon is perfect for running passenger trains. The Empire Builder's route is also passenger friendly.

UP inherited some poor track from SP in the merger and has had to spend time and money on repairs. Which results in delays for Amtrak.

But I do know, from my experience, that BNSF gives the highest priority to the Southwest Chief when it is running close to on time. I live close to the Fullerton to Riverside portion of the line and listen in with my scanner. The San Bernardino dispatcher often calls train #4 to see what it's arival and departure times were for Fullerton. And if there are any potential frieghts that might slow the SWC, it's usually the freight that has to wait. Even for the hottest Z trains! Although if the SWC is running late, it seems to lose it's priority.

I assume the same is true for UP. If Amtrak is close to on time, they'll give it the line. But if it's late, it loses priority. But since I'm not too familiar with UP dispatching, I could be wrong.
 


Posted by MPALMER (Member # 125) on :
 
Mr. Toy,

I don't think UP is using the old SP HQ; I think the building was sold. SP's tracks were not in the best shape but it did own a lot of valuable real estate purchased piecemeal in the 1800's...

SouthWest Chief,
Your comparison of UP vs [BN]SF dispatching was interesting. I recall SF retained pride in its passenger fleet right up until Amtrak Day 1. SF even forced Amtrak to drop the 'Super Chief' name from the LA-Chicago train because Amtrak was not maintaining it up to SF standards. Amtrak historians will recall that it was called the SouthWest Limited during those years; after Amtrak had improved the quality the compromise name "SouthWest Chief" came to be.
 


Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
 
MPALMER sure got it right.

IIRC (as in Nov or Dec Trains or else 4Q 2002 CLassic Trains), both UP and SF waited to the last minute to commit to Amtrak. Reason was both of them were proud of the quality operations they delivered.

FWIW, my travels on UP trackage have been pretty close to "on time." My worst experience on Amtrak was with BNSF, when a freight ahead of the CZ died on the clock and had not made the next passing siding. It tied up the Nebraska racetrack for a good three hours.

I've also seen the CZ wb 7 hours late. A wreck on BNSF was so bad that Amtrak had to back up to get to a UP interchange, and then divert onto UP to get back to Omaha.

John

------------------
The City of Saint Louis (UP, 1967) is still my standard for passenger operations
 


Posted by Santa Fe 5704 (Member # 2277) on :
 
UP gives Amtrak hardly nothing between Kansas City and St Louis especially if the train get's a fraction behind time. No room for errors on that heavily travesed freight lane. As a matter of record this is double track from St Louis to Jefferson City. Single track from Jefferson City to Kansas City but UP has two subdivisions between these two points. Sedalia sub where Amtrak runs and the River Sub where UP runs almost if not all Freight. So, Amtrak gets very good handling on the Sedalia Sub but between Jefferson City and St Louis you never know what will happen.

This is a long way from the area being discussed but it all comes out the same. UP don't want Amtrak on their lines period but cannot keep Amtrak off account of Federal Mandates dating back to May 01, 1971. If and when Congress ruins Amtrak then the Union Pacific probably will never allow another passenger train to operate over it's trackage.
 


Posted by Italiancanuck89 (Member # 1873) on :
 
I have an artcle in past Trains magazine saying that it is the law to give passenger trains the priority over freight. Another thing that gets to me is, Amtrak long distance trains are on average, 15-20 cars long with the exception of the Auto train. It would take no time at all for Amtrak to fly by, clear the next signal point and be gone before the freight train even got the chance to get moving again. Where's the logic? Amtrak can tell all their infuriated travelers that it's the freight trains delaying them, but that won't calm the passenger because they're still stuck their.
 
Posted by Santa Fe 5704 (Member # 2277) on :
 
How old is the Article that you mention?? I know of no law that you refer too but would like to know where to find it just the same. Amtrak pays to be put first as long as it is on time and that's the largest reason for the big time money losers. If Amtrak causes it's train to be delayed then the Freight Carrier still get's their money but if the Freight Carrier causes the delay then they forfeit payment. So, it's all about money and no law has ever been mentioned in my railroad career of 35 years!!! Please correct me if I'm wrong.
 
Posted by tubaallen (Member # 2057) on :
 
Does anyone know what the story is with this? As you've probably seen on other posts, I live just a couple blocks from the Bloomington-Normal train station on the UP CHI-STL line. For the most part, the only trains I see go by there, are the Amtraks. In fact, when I drive to Chicago, I almost only see Amtraks. Anyone know what's up with that?
 


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2