Mail and Express - Adios

There are reports, including the text of a David Gunn letter that has been circulated to employees, at other boards that Amtrak will have discontinued the handling of all Mail & Express Systemwide by "early October". "Package Express" (i.e. "armstrong" in Baggage Cars) will continue to be handled.

While the offical site is silent on this news, the letter appears to be in the style that Mr. Gunn, or publicist, has used in the past for employee communications. However, at present, no news source with which I am familiar has reported this story.

While the possibility of again seeing marker lights on a Superliner is "intriguing", I must wonder if a "dollars and sense' business decision has been made or is this simply further repudiation of the Warrington Gang (you all know how much of a fan I am of theirs) by the Gunnmen.

There could be a downside, consider the possibility of the Chief-Zephyr being combined Chi-Galesburg (The "Everywhere West"; after all it is originating on the "Q" and that was their slogan); also Lake Shore and Capitol Cleveland-Chicago ("Everywhere East" I guess). Further, lest we note that the Three Rivers handles "heap big" M&E; a casualty in the offing?

But let's close on a positive note; "Auto Train Service" for the Chief and Zephyr, anyone?

Two questions:

1.) Could this be done in an effort to improve relations with the host railroads? I know that one of UP's complaints with Express was that it was "unfair competition"

2.) How much, if any, fuel savings will be realized by eliminating M&E?

Other than that, and if they don't axe the 3 Rivers, I'm all for it. Let's order a round of bullet-ended lounge cars

NO! Keep freight services! A important Amtrak service.

That is an interesting point, Mr. Drumcorp; we know that UP went to the STB for a ruling in matter of Amtrak Freight. "Surfboard' essentially ruled in favor of Amtrak.

However, the worst of timekeepers over the UP is of course the Sunset. That train essentially carries no M&E whatever. The Zephyr, of which only half its route miles are on UP rails, carries some (I'm not sure about the Starlight; don't get out that way - not a boycott, just no reason), but hardly at the level of either Three Rivers (ATK-NS-CSX) or Chief (BNSF) - the heaviest two simply based upon my observations.

If elimination of M&E suddenly results in significantly improved timekeeping, then I would say my contention that no road out there is intentionally delaying Amtrak trains is "off the table". Intermediate switching of M&E has been greatly curtailed by the incumbent Gunn Administration. However, at this time I still give "benefit of doubt" to the roads.

I agree that no railroad is deliberately delaying Amtrak trains, particularly because of M&E. Rather, my thought is that this was done as a way to address a general criticism of Amtrak by certain hosts, and take that issue off the table.

It probably has as much to do with the "getting back to basics" idea as anything.

The Starlight doesn't handle mail and express. It's worth pointing out that near the end of the Warrington administration, there was some discussion on this or another board of the dismissal/resignation of the guy who'd started the big-time express business -- it turned out he'd misstated the revenue, and they lost money on the whole thing. This was the reason for putting so many Amboxes up for sale a couple of years ago.

I remember hearing on this or another board that Gunn said that mail and express was an important part of the Amtrak system. It gave the tone that it was here to stay for a long time.

I'll have to dig up the exact thread/URL and post it.

Here's your guy; Mr. Scanner; link is to an article appearing in November 1999 Railway Age.

BTW, I knew Mr. Ellis "along the way"; we were industry contemporaries during the "seventies". He was with the C&NW; I with the MILW.

http://www.railwayage.com/nov99/timevalue.html

Thanks Gilbert for the link.

Based on that article, Amtrak would be shooting themselves in the foot if they discontinue mail/express. While Amtrak has certainly done that in years past, it doesn't seem that Gunn would execute such a blunder.

Handling mail and express:
Pros:
More income for the train
More trains, maybe
Services to places that might not otherwise have service
Cons:
Requires more locomotives to run the same train and thusly increases the
cost of fuel and other operations.
Requires increased running time, not all of these cars can run at full
passenger train speeds over all pieces of railroad
Causes loss of time because of switching this cars in or out of the train at
intermediate locations.
Some places causes a switcher to be employed just to handle them.
Increase of running time due to a longer train
Can (but not always) cause ride quality to go downhill for various reasons
Can be a problem with the freight railroads as they conceive this to be
competetion with their own services.
In my opinion, Amtrak should be handling mail in closed pouches in
baggage cars but not freight in their trains. Mail cars should go from end
to end and not cause a delay being switched in or out of a passenger train.
I do not think the freight experiment has worked well for Amtrak.
Noel Weaver

Most of the cars are rated for 90+ mph operation. Those that are not are (I think) rated for 79-mph operation. Thus, speed is not really an issue.

These cars travel at the rear end of a passenger train, as opposed to right behind the locomotives about 10 years ago.

When I took the Southwest Chief 4 weeks ago, the USPS used a forklift to unload certain cars at Albuquerque. I don't know if there was cargo/mail remaining in those cars to continue on, or if they deadheaded empty to Los Angeles. It doesn't seem like they do much switching at points along the route. The only other place I can think of that they may do switching is Kansas City. Just about a mile west of the station is a large USPS sorting facility.

Of course, the key is does the revenue from handling mail offset the wear and tear on the equipment involved and other additional expenses.

Ok I am confused : does this mean their getting out of the Mail Contracts? If they are, this is stupid that made money. I heard that the Chief and Three Rivers could go to Tri Weekley why is that I saw a ton M&E on 4(25) Today also I agree with Mr. Perkowski I would still haul pouches of Mail in the Baggage Car. Also I want to see an Eveywhere West 3/5 I'd pay to see it. I like Dave Gunn better than Voluher Boy Warrington but I don't like this decision.

AmtrakFan

I haven't seen anyone at the site ponder yet how much COST Amtrak incurs for those precious mail & UPS contracts when the chronic and extremely poor OTP of late causes substantial delays to the shipments....

Let's put it this way. If Amtrak really made money on the mail & express, they'd keep it. Sure, it brings in revenue, but it probably costs as much, if not more, to provide it.

All those M&E cars need maintenance. Right now, Amtrak has a significant backlog of passenger car maintenance that needs to be done. When car mechanics are wasting their time fixing roadrailers and boxcars, they're not fixing Superliners and Amfleets.

When trains run late (which is almost always, lately), Amtrak has to pay penalties to the shippers. Recently, there was a series of incidents in which a roadrailer went b/o on the SW Chief. This required the entire block of roadrailers to be set out (because you can't just set out one roadrailer). Not only does that delay the arrival of those shipments, it also forces Amtrak to run a train without roadrailers, so that it can pick up the set that was set out (which means the roadrailers that were supposed to be on that train either have to get trucked, at great expense, or delayed, costing Amtrak money).

If Amtrak was making money on the service, and it wasn't degrading their passenger service too much, it would stay. The bottom line is, either it wasn't making enough in revenue to justify the expenditures, or the handling of freight was to the detriment of passenger service. Either way, David Gunn is no dummy, and he knows a losing proposition when he sees one. Those that are criticizing the decision to cut M&E need to take this into consideration, and also realize that they don't have very much information available to them (apparently, other than a five-year old magazine article) that would enable them to make similar decisions.

Will the shorter (freight-free) passenger trains fit into more passing zones (or whatever you call them), and give the host railroads more flexibility, reducing delays?