- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Amtrak vs freight railroads
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:10 am
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:10 am
LINK
Amtrak wants to put two trains daily, with 12 cars on each train, between NOLA and Mobile.
Amtrak says this will be no big deal for the rails.
The commercial railroads and the Port of Mobile say the two daily treks
It's crazy how two sides can have such completely opposite views.
This is not a "new" idea, there was Amtrak service on this section before Katrina.
It worked before then. I'm sure there has been growth of commercial rail traffic since 2005... but has it grown THAT much?
I know we have some commercial railroad fanboys on here... what's the real deal? Are 2 small trains a day enough to bring the system down? Or is this simply the commercial railroads want federal funds for improvements to their facilities?
Amtrak wants to put two trains daily, with 12 cars on each train, between NOLA and Mobile.
Amtrak says this will be no big deal for the rails.
The commercial railroads and the Port of Mobile say the two daily treks
quote:
will create “staggering” delays in Alabama and a degradation of freight operations, according to the freight rail operators.
It's crazy how two sides can have such completely opposite views.
This is not a "new" idea, there was Amtrak service on this section before Katrina.
It worked before then. I'm sure there has been growth of commercial rail traffic since 2005... but has it grown THAT much?
I know we have some commercial railroad fanboys on here... what's the real deal? Are 2 small trains a day enough to bring the system down? Or is this simply the commercial railroads want federal funds for improvements to their facilities?
12
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:13 am to LSUFanHouston
I mean if its only hurting Alabama than what's the downside?
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:14 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
will create “staggering” delays in Alabama and a degradation of freight operations, according to the freight rail operators.
They used to run a passenger route to Mobile before. I'm sure the freight railroads can handle the inconvenience of twice daily trains.
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:15 am to LSUFanHouston
No, nowhere close. NS and CSX are being unreasonable here, IMO. The gulf line is nowhere near as busy as the other districts through Alabama and Georgia. Both of the freight hosts have been unwilling to work with Amtrak and the state governments. It stems from the current management’s attitude. Short term profits first over any sort of customer service or community goodwill.
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:17 am to dewster
quote:
They used to run a passenger route to Mobile before. I'm sure the freight railroads can handle the inconvenience of twice daily trains.
CSX claims traffic has changed drastically since then, yet are unwilling to provide data. Anecdotally, I’d say traffic has decreased.
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:18 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
It's crazy how two sides can have such completely opposite views.
Go to a bar and put a Rep on 1 side of you and a Dem on the other side and ask a question, any question and see how far apart they are.
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:26 am to LSUFanHouston
Freight railroads ain't what they used to be. There seems to be more hurry up and wait than there used to be. The old "set your clock by the railroad" mentality is no more. NS and CSX know that any little ripple can significantly dicker their operations. They will have to adjust......something they don't seem to be that great at these days.
I will say that IF Amtrak can run the trains on existing infrastructure with minimal cost to the taxpayer, do it. However, if it is going to be a large project that sucks up money......fricking don't. We have existing infrastructure that is crumbling around our ears. That needs to be addressed without harnessing the public with billions of dollars of debt.
I will say that IF Amtrak can run the trains on existing infrastructure with minimal cost to the taxpayer, do it. However, if it is going to be a large project that sucks up money......fricking don't. We have existing infrastructure that is crumbling around our ears. That needs to be addressed without harnessing the public with billions of dollars of debt.
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:35 am to LSUFanHouston
I don't blame them. Letting Amtrak on the tracks would be like letting the mafia or the cartel on the tracks, but worse.
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:40 am to browl
It's CSX's property. They have every right to tell the government to frick off.
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:41 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
will create “staggering” delays in Alabama and a degradation of freight operations, according to the freight rail operators.
Sounds like postering from rail companies to get compensation out of the federal government
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:48 am to LSUFanHouston
I think one of the main issues is that variable schedules and delays that are no big deal to freight trains (AFAIK on this route mostly CSX, maybe some NS, probably a few short lines here and there) are a major problem for passenger trains (here Amtrak). So it's not the two, twelve-car trains per day--it's that those trains want to operate on a 'get out of my way!' basis. Imagine trying to work your freight trains around that.
I think CSX and maybe NS have decided that the increase in problems for moving their freight traffic efficiently would outweigh (maybe far outweigh) whatever Amtrak would pay to use the tracks and maybe upgrade them in a few places.
As for community relations, I can't imagine that any significant fraction of the people living in the cost communities ride or rode (pre-Katrina) the 'Sunset', or would ride it now, or even really care much. There are things the railroads could (and arguably should) do to improve community relations, but I don't really see this as one of them.
I think CSX and maybe NS have decided that the increase in problems for moving their freight traffic efficiently would outweigh (maybe far outweigh) whatever Amtrak would pay to use the tracks and maybe upgrade them in a few places.
As for community relations, I can't imagine that any significant fraction of the people living in the cost communities ride or rode (pre-Katrina) the 'Sunset', or would ride it now, or even really care much. There are things the railroads could (and arguably should) do to improve community relations, but I don't really see this as one of them.
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:49 am to LSUFanHouston
AMTRAK is sooooooooo outdated and ugly! It is operated just like a fed. govt. program ---- poorly
Posted on 4/7/22 at 8:50 am to LSUFanHouston
I knew a guy that got ran over by a freight train once... messed up his left side real bad.. he’s all right now
Posted on 4/7/22 at 9:08 am to Juan Betanzos
quote:
AMTRAK is sooooooooo outdated and ugly! It is operated just like a fed. govt. program ---- poorly
It is not the best-managed company, but it does well with the cards it is dealt.
Posted on 4/7/22 at 9:08 am to PaulBurbank007
Posted on 4/7/22 at 9:11 am to VolsOut4Harambe
There's a need for it in the dense population areas on the coasts - especially in the northeast where there's public transportation available where you'll get dropped off in the city centers. But here? Who TF is going to take Amtrak to Mobile or Tallahassee and rent a car when it'd be cheaper in the long run just do drive?
I'm with CSX on this. Tell Amtrak to buy land and build their own damned track if it's this important to them.
I'm with CSX on this. Tell Amtrak to buy land and build their own damned track if it's this important to them.
This post was edited on 4/7/22 at 9:13 am
Posted on 4/7/22 at 9:21 am to LegendInMyMind
quote:
Freight railroads ain't what they used to be. There seems to be more hurry up and wait than there used to be. The old "set your clock by the railroad" mentality is no more. NS and CSX know that any little ripple can significantly dicker their operations. They will have to adjust......something they don't seem to be that great at these days.
I thought the whole deal these days with them was that they were trying to be more timely and accurate. Is that not working out?
quote:
I will say that IF Amtrak can run the trains on existing infrastructure with minimal cost to the taxpayer, do it. However, if it is going to be a large project that sucks up money......fricking don't.
Yes, I think that is a worthwhile discussion as well.
Posted on 4/7/22 at 9:21 am to browl
quote:
I don't blame them. Letting Amtrak on the tracks would be like letting the mafia or the cartel on the tracks, but worse.
What do you mean by this?
Posted on 4/7/22 at 9:23 am to Horsemeat
quote:
It's CSX's property. They have every right to tell the government to frick off.
They also are federal regulated and I believe that comes with certain requirements. To be honest, I don't have a great understanding of how all that works.
I just know everytime they blow their whistle at 2 am in a neighborhood, everyone says basically they are federally regulated and can do what they want, unless the feds stop them.
Posted on 4/7/22 at 9:25 am to Juan Betanzos
quote:
It is operated just like a fed. govt. program ---- poorly
That's bc it's a poorly operated federal organization.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News