Why do trains spend so long stopped in Washington?

[njtmnrrbuff]

On the low level tracks that go underneath Capitol Hill, not only do you have Amtrak's own trains. During the week, VRE trains use those tracks as well. Marc trains do too. I boarded a MARC train once from those platforms.

[JoeG]

I'm with Tadman on this. Amtrak does very little right. For instance, they ordered some new Viewliners. How many years behind is this order? Apparently the vendor works with extreme slowness, and Amtrak seems to have no recourse. Why is that?

As far as what is laughingly called customer service, I doubt if any pre-Amtrak railroad was as bad as Amtrak. We see no reason why Amtrak engine changes should take as long as they do. If Europe, with their strong unions and commitment to safety, can do fast engine changes, then Amtrak should send some observers across the Atlantic to see how they do it there, and how we could do better. If the current blue flag rules are too cumbersome, we should learn from Europe. Anyway, can we find out how much of the slowness results from cumbersome rules, and how much from Amtrak management having no interest in better or faster service?

It breaks my heart to see American passenger service, which was the world's best when I was a kid, devolving into something that would be an embarrassment to many Third World countries.

[SouthernRailway]

Keep in mind that at WUS there are other activities going on besides engine changes.
Correct me if I am wrong (I haven't been there in several years), but cars are watered and inspected, toilets drained and commissary restocked. Sometimes SILVER METEOR #98 gets out within 20 min. if everything goes right and there are not conflicting activities on other tracks.
I might also add that southbound trains are occasionally delayed due to the diesel engine crew having problems initializing the PTC needed to go over CSX and, in some cases, also NS.
Andy

Yes, and that begs the question: if a southbound train stops in Washington for cars to be watered and inspected and the commissary restocked, etc.: the train had originated in NYP only a few hours earlier. Why wouldn't all of that be done prior to originating in NYP?

Unrelated to your post: why does Amtrak start boarding in Washington at least 10 minutes or more after arrival, instead of immediately when the train arrives? Surely boarding could take place at the same time as other activities. If Amtrak needs to avoid having people walking onto the train when the new locomotive is coupled to it, well just hold off for a few moments when that happens, but boarding should have started earlier.

[Station Aficionado]

On the low level tracks that go underneath Capitol Hill, not only do you have Amtrak's own trains. During the week, VRE trains use those tracks as well. Marc trains do too. I boarded a MARC train once from those platforms.

Very rare for MARC to load on the lower level. Does not happen a regular basis.

To follow on SR’s comments, Amtrak’s refusal to allow passengers to wait on the platforms (as happens pretty much everywhere else) in the world) is baffling. This practice, discussed here and elsewhere, is also a contributing factor to long layovers at WAS.

A big factor, though, is simply congestion south of the station. Even if the trains were serviced more quickly, they still might not be able to leave.

[charlesriverbranch]

Amtrak’s refusal to allow passengers to wait on the platforms (as happens pretty much everywhere else) in the world) is baffling. This practice, discussed here and elsewhere, is also a contributing factor to long layovers at WAS.

The last time I was at Chicago Union Station, passengers weren't allowed to wait on the platforms there, either. At Boston's South Station, they're allowed on most platforms but not platforms next to Amtrak trains, until boarding has been announced.

[rcthompson04]

Amtrak is considering buying dual powered diesel/catenary locomotives and that would be great for extensions of Northeast Regionals as well as the Palmetto and the Carolinian. It would benefit the long distance trains as well, although I think the 75+ straight diesel charger order will make up all of the long distance routes. There's other rail traffic at Union Station.

Dual modes would solve a lot of problems in the Northeast including issues at Washington, Philadelphia and New Haven. Lets not forget that some greater use of cab cars with the dual modes might help as well.

[Bob Roberts]

Amtrak is considering buying dual powered diesel/catenary locomotives and that would be great for extensions of Northeast Regionals as well as the Palmetto and the Carolinian. It would benefit the long distance trains as well, although I think the 75+ straight diesel charger order will make up all of the long distance routes. There's other rail traffic at Union Station.

Dual modes would solve a lot of problems in the Northeast including issues at Washington, Philadelphia and New Haven. Lets not forget that some greater use of cab cars with the dual modes might help as well.

And, while its a long-shot, dual mode power would also make it much easier to do piecemeal electrification between WAS and CLT. If money fell from the sky (e.g. a sensible green new deal) I could imagine wires down to Richmond (its been discussed a bunch here) on the reconstructed S-Line (discussed by NCDOT a little) and possibly on new passenger tracks on the very wide NCRR ROW (justified by SEHSR and Triangle area commuter rail).

[mtuandrew]

Mr. Roberts: short of the Federal government purchasing the RF&P from CSX, or somehow weaving a new right-of-way along the I-95 corridor, I don’t see WAS-RVR/RVM-PTB electrification happening. With 125 mph diesels (which could be biodiesel-fueled with no adverse effects or performance limitations), I also don’t see the need!

Even if electrification and common ownership do happen, I think WAS will be a long station stop regardless. Having the new passenger concourse will help, especially if they create (and allow) multiple boarding points along the platform.

[WhartonAndNorthern]

Mr. Roberts: short of the Federal government purchasing the RF&P from CSX, or somehow weaving a new right-of-way along the I-95 corridor, I don’t see WAS-RVR/RVM-PTB electrification happening. With 125 mph diesels (which could be biodiesel-fueled with no adverse effects or performance limitations), I also don’t see the need!

Even if electrification and common ownership do happen, I think WAS will be a long station stop regardless. Having the new passenger concourse will help, especially if they create (and allow) multiple boarding points along the platform.

I could see it happening to a limited extent. Historically, the Virginia Avenue freight route and Long Bridge were electrified to allow PRR/PC/Conrail electric freights to access Potomac Yard in Alexandria for RF&P interchange. Potomac yard's long gone now that CSX owns a good chunk of Conrail and the B&O and the RF&P and doesn't need an interchange there.

There is a plan to add a third track to Long Bridge as part of the DC2RVA/SEHSR expansion. I don't see the funding being there for DC to Richmond or even Fredericksburg electrification.

However, the Ivy City Yard's Acela service facility could be relocated to Northern Virginia and expanded to serve longer trains. This would give Acela speedier access to Northern Virginia and room to grow. The regionals would probably still need to change engines at WAS.

The catenary would need to be very high since the B&O, Virginia Avenue and the RF&P are cleared for doublestacks (two trains per day, although it was 4 this spring).

[rcthompson04]

The catenary would need to be very high since the B&O, Virginia Avenue and the RF&P are cleared for doublestacks (two trains per day, although it was 4 this spring).

Double stacks run somewhat frequently under catenary in Norristown.

[mtuandrew]

The Virginia Avenue freight bypass was electrified, but I don’t think the 1st Street Tunnel has the clearance.

[west point]

Someone mentioned the rebuilding o WASH as being needed for speeding up boarding. Remember the lower level AIR only has one escalator . You need it going up for passengers arriving at WASH ad then reverse it to going down for boarding. As VRE also uses the same platform ( Maybe track across from Amtrak ) passenger congestion gets very heavy. As pointed out the rebuilding of the Station will allow multiple points for going up and down at the same times.

[mohawkrailfan]

Someone mentioned the rebuilding o WASH as being needed for speeding up boarding. Remember the lower level AIR only has one escalator . You need it going up for passengers arriving at WASH ad then reverse it to going down for boarding. As VRE also uses the same platform ( Maybe track across from Amtrak ) passenger congestion gets very heavy. As pointed out the rebuilding of the Station will allow multiple points for going up and down at the same times.

Will multiple stairs be useful if the crew requires everyone to board through one door, as I have seen several times in DC?

[Station Aficionado]

Someone mentioned the rebuilding o WASH as being needed for speeding up boarding. Remember the lower level AIR only has one escalator . You need it going up for passengers arriving at WASH ad then reverse it to going down for boarding. As VRE also uses the same platform ( Maybe track across from Amtrak ) passenger congestion gets very heavy. As pointed out the rebuilding of the Station will allow multiple points for going up and down at the same times.

Umm, the 23/24 platform has 2 escalators plus a staircase. Pretty sure the 25/26 platform does too.

[ExCon90]

The Virginia Avenue freight bypass was electrified, but I don’t think the 1st Street Tunnel has the clearance.

It certainly wasn't electrified--the freight trains originated and terminated in PotYard, but passenger trains not continuing to the South had no need for wire south of Union Station.