Amtrak seeks to Dispatch Canadian National

RandallW wrote:Does Amtrak still have authority to seize rail lines as it did when it seized part of the Boston & Maine and then sold it to Central Vermont on the Montrealer route?

Amtrak can use eminent domain, but would never succeed in taking over an active railroad like CN.

The B&M situation involved a barely maintained line with hardly any overhead traffic, and tranferring ownership to someone who would maintain it.... CN's physical plant is in excellent shape with plenty of traffic.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

JimBoylan wrote:Is this simply Amtrak branching out into the contract dispatching business, and Canadian National considering if it is cheaper to pay Amtrak for dispatching than to keep its own employees? .

No, this is about Amtrak trying to micromanage the host railroads. They're blaming dispatching for the fact that Amtrak doesn't run on time, and think that if they can make stipulations about corrective actions through the STB, it's magically going to fix their on-time dependability.

I can't imagine the dispatchers union will sit back and let Amtrak determine their fate. Nor should they. This overreach goes well beyond the intent of providing access to Amtrak to operate passenger services.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

Hold on here. I think we're drilling too deep when it's a higher-level problem.

The freight railroad industry is in a PSR kick... but is going full moron on it. They're lengthening train consists but not improving the infrastructure to handle such consists. Add in Amtrak's relatively short consists and the chances of a conflict increase significantly as the consists grow longer... which makes a dispatcher's job harder.

I now think it's not a dispatcher problem but an infrastructure problem, which can be solved with one simple regulation: You can't have a train longer than any passing pocket track in single track territory, or longer than the length of a in-line yard in multi-track territory.

What does this do? It makes the railroad companies actually improve their infrastructure to properly accommodate those long trains, on their dime.

Just to be sure, I would add one other regulation: A railroad that asks for money to improve their infrastructure must prove that it needs the government grant by completely opening it's books for a public audit.

Will this happen? Not anytime this century...

FRA has no right to regulate train length or makeup. Private business can use their properties how they see fit. They paid for it, they maintain it. Blaming PSR has become gaslighting by unions who are upset because all the small and intermediate yards are being closed down taking away Union featherbedding....

When Congress makes grant funds available to railroads, its no different than grants given to green energy startups or companies pretending to feed children when schools were shut down.... nobody demands transparency or accountability on those unless it's clear laws were broken.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sat Jun 04, 2022 8:12 am A railroad that asks for money to improve their infrastructure must prove that it needs the government grant by completely opening it's books for a public audit.

Mr. Wolf, that's already in place; both the R-1 filed with the Surfboard and, excepting privately held BNSF, the 10-K with the SEC, are prepared from AUDITED Financial Statements.

Never let it be said that Amtrak "doesn't get the road" over the BNSF Chicago Sub.

Today, I observed WB Container train with many a JBHunt container in the consist on the 2 Track. About by my house at MP 18.7 this train starts to slow and eventually comes to a complete stop.

Now comes #5(4) operating on the normally Eastward 1 Track, as the 3 Track was being given to (METRA) #2011 (4).

Obviously, #3 was placed on 2 Track at MP 20 (to the East of Westmont), resulting in about a five minute delay of the "Z train".

The point being the five minutes is inconsequential and if JBH had knowledge of such would just say Warren is having fun with his 1:1 Lionel set.

But how many other roads would have "paid homage to Saint Elwood" and simply held #3 behind the "Z" running at 60mph likely all the 145 miles to Galesburg.

eolesen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 04, 2022 8:43 am FRA has no right to regulate train length or makeup. Private business can use their properties how they see fit. They paid for it, they maintain it.

Good thing there is absolutely no precedent of regulatory control over private infrastructure, especially not when said infrastructure is deemed critical for societal functioning. It's an especially good thing there is not at least a century of legal precedent for it in this exact industry.

Jadebenn wrote: ↑Sat Jun 04, 2022 5:37 pm

eolesen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 04, 2022 8:43 am FRA has no right to regulate train length or makeup. Private business can use their properties how they see fit. They paid for it, they maintain it.

Good thing there is absolutely no precedent of regulatory control over private infrastructure, especially not when said infrastructure is deemed critical for societal functioning. It's an especially good thing there is not at least a century of legal precedent for it in this exact industry.

True, but government regulatory control is limited by, among other things, the takings clause of the US Constitution. The long standing extensive legal precedent is that regulation must be the product of reasoned decision making, not unduly discriminatory, and allowable cost recovery must be just and reasonable. To the extent that Amtrak control would adversely affect profitability, the railroad is entitled to receive just compensation.

The Amtrak dispatchig certainly seems better. Very few delays on the NEC today. An exceptio was Vermonter that had to wait on the Bush River swing to go thru its Saturday only opening. Have heard that it take 10 + persons to split rails, open and close bridge, and weld rails back together?

Amtrak dows man the NEC RRR at a much highe value than the Class 1s.

eolesen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 04, 2022 8:43 am FRA has no right to regulate train length or makeup. Private business can use their properties how they see fit. They paid for it, they maintain it. Blaming PSR has become gaslighting by unions who are upset because all the small and intermediate yards are being closed down taking away Union featherbedding....

I don't claim that the regulation would come from FRA or STB, or even Congress. I also know there's other factors going on, looking to mismanagement of the railroads at a corporate level, based on STB filings. I do know that there has to be *some* regulations, and the trick is to get the right ones.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sat Jun 04, 2022 8:12 am A railroad that asks for money to improve their infrastructure must prove that it needs the government grant by completely opening it's books for a public audit.

Mr. Wolf, that's already in place; both the R-1 filed with the Surfboard and, excepting privately held BNSF, the 10-K with the SEC, are prepared from AUDITED Financial Statements.

The keyword there being "excepting privately held BNSF". I would not make that exception.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Never let it be said that Amtrak "doesn't get the road" over the BNSF Chicago Sub.

Today, I observed WB Container train with many a JBHunt container in the consist on the 2 Track. About by my house at MP 18.7 this train starts to slow and eventually comes to a complete stop.

Now comes #5(4) operating on the normally Eastward 1 Track, as the 3 Track was being given to (METRA) #2011 (4).

Obviously, #3 was placed on 2 Track at MP 20 (to the East of Westmont), resulting in about a five minute delay of the "Z train".

The point being the five minutes is inconsequential and if JBH had knowledge of such would just say Warren is having fun with his 1:1 Lionel set.

But how many other roads would have "paid homage to Saint Elwood" and simply held #3 behind the "Z" running at 60mph likely all the 145 miles to Galesburg.

I looked at that and I said "wait a minute". It took me a few minutes to hash this out.

The interlock has Hinsdale METRA station right in the middle of it. METRA 2011 was on track 3 and serviced the station. Southwest Chief #3 was behind the METRA until Hinsdale and went 3-2. CZ #5 went 1-2 afterwards. The freight was held up before the interlock so Amtrak could get their trains out first... and CZ #5 got a 5 min delay for all the trouble.

My question now is... what held up CZ #5 (4) almost hour before then?!?

No word on Twitter... check a live map... No, no delay on CZ #5 (4), that must of been a different Amtrak... but there's none there that would fit. I'm confused there.

Mr. Wolf, #5(4) passed 18.7 "more or less" OT. I have no knowledge of where to the East #5 and the WB "Z" took 1 and 2 Tracks respectively.

All I know is that the "Z" (high priority Containers) lost not more than five minutes in allowing the Zephyr to run around and use the 2 Track.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 3:44 pm Mr. Wolf, #5(4) passed 18.7 "more or less" OT. I have no knowledge of where to the East #5 and the WB "Z" took 1 and 2 Tracks respectively.

All I know is that the "Z" (high priority Containers) lost not more than five minutes in allowing the Zephyr to run around and use the 2 Track.

Ah, the "Z" is the freight here, not the Cali Zephyr. That makes more sense, having the Zephyr get in front of the freight. I saw the "3" and I thought that was another Amtrak train.

Glad this one is "put to bed", Mr. Wolf.

You are a "heads up guy" around these parts: and I was prepared to accept, and if necessary to clarify, the report of my observations.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 4:00 pm Glad this one is "put to bed", Mr. Wolf.

You are a "heads up guy" around these parts: and I was prepared to accept, and if necessary to clarify, the report of my observations.

Yeah, just give me a few more clues and I'll pick it up, no problems.

Back to the topic, though... how many of you would think this would be a "shot across the bow" to the other host railroads? I'm wondering if this is signaling to them that Amtrak's willing to explore alternate ways of enforcing the FRA lateness regulation, including by changing contracts to have enforcement procedures written in.

Amtrak would be better served not alienating the Class 1's they depend on.

If the recession fears come true, painful budget cuts are coming, and the appetite from flyover country to support the LD network just might not be there this time around.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk