Extremely PO'd people for stopped CSX trains at Joy Road

[Tier4GEVO]

After listening to radio reports, a CSX conductor himself, and seeing ATCS going crazy, I have visited Joy Road two times this week - what a mess. CSX Q392 is getting halfway through, then stops anywhere from 30 minutes to 1.25
Hours. It's getting ridiculous. Today I witnessed 6 cars consecutively floor out of the line about 30 mins into it, hop a curve and drive along the ballast/grass line. CSX has to become more efficient with this D708 car transfer situation. Scanner 160.230 is a nightmare.. I've heard crews voices very aggressive in nature, and they seem to be extremely stressed and annoyed at this too. Last time I checked, CSX was nowhere near financial troubles, just bring the Q334/335
Back.

[SW]

Or just start running 326/327 to/from Detroit again.

[Tier4GEVO]

Or just start running 326/327 to/from Detroit again.

For sure, I don't think that's likely though.
FYI since we're both Saginaw Sub people, I have noticed - whether it's 322, 321, G650 or something, there is SOMETHING that 90% of the time comes between 2-6pm. Everything else seems to be wakin me up at 3am lol

[Doktor No]

Or just start running 326/327 to/from Detroit again.

Experts agree, everything is fine.

[Saturnalia]

Obviously I'm just a railfan, but given the historical and present knowledge I posses, consider this sort of operational scheme:

Q326:
- Chicago Barr Yard to Detroit
- Monday, Wednesday, Friday
- Two blocks out of Chicago: Wyoming (cars that fit tonnage-wise) on the headend, Detroit on the rear. Pickup Waverly Block in Holland. Setout Waverly and GR Blocks in Wyoming, pickup Lansing Block. Setout Lansing Block in Ensel, then continue to Detroit with that block.

Q327:
- Detroit to Chicago Barr Yard
- Monday, Wednesday, Friday
- One block out of Detroit for Chicago. Pickup Lansing block at Ensel. Drop Lansing block at Wyoming, pickup Waverly Block and any GR Chicago traffic that fits. Drop Waverly Block in Holland, then continue on to Chicago.

Q334:
- Chicago Barr Yard to Toledo
- Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday
- Begin with regular Chicago to GR traffic. Picks up Waverly Block in Holland, then drops the whole train in GR. Grabs Toledo block and departs hence.

Q335:
- Toledo to Chicago Barr Yard
- Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday
- Begin with regular Toledo to GR traffic. Leave that block in Grand Rapids. Pickup Waverly block and Chicago Block in GR. Setout Waverly Block in Holland. Continue to Chicago with the remaining block.

D707:
- GR East End Local (Sunnyside to Grand Ledge)
- Weekdays
- Work all customers between GR and Grand Ledge
- 3-man crew
- Originates in Wyoming Yard

Y106:
- Cancel this former Sunnyside to Elmdale Local, unless D707 can't get all the work done. Bring back Y106 as traffic dictates, perhaps as an arm of an existing GR yard job out as far as Fox

D708:
- Lansing East Local
- Weekdays
- Work all customers between Lansing and Plymouth (effectively Howell currently)
- 3-man crew
- Originates in Ensel Yard with the pickup/setout from Q326/327

D700:
Open question here, since if the Q-trains take the Waverly Block, then D700 currently only has Sawyer and Standale Lumber as active customers. Perhaps leave the Waverly Block with D700 (simply omit from Q-train schedules) as traffic dictates. Perhaps they could take over Zeeland from the Waverly Yard Jobs, keeping just Y121 for Holland. That'd give D700 everything on the GR sub mainline, with New Buffalo (yard), Sawyer, Zeeland (3 active) and Grandville as their work.

No changes otherwise.


So ya I'm no expert, but based on what I'm aware of as far as run times and whatnot this sort of schedule could solve the Lansing local issue and keep traffic moving steadier. They could always add more days to the Q-trains, I used a 3-day schedule on those for current traffic levels. Not exactly sure how much Detroit-Chicago traffic there is, but by also having them work Lansing, the run would still be worth it with less than huge traffic floes.

That'd be about 39 Crew Starts per week, with D700 running weekdays and Y106 not running at all. Presently, they run about 33 with the current arrangement, accounting for 4 Q326/327s, no 334/335, multiple 707 and 708 re-crews, and weekday calls for 106 and 700. That's four crews more per week, but it should reduce the number of re-crews, increasing fluidity and customer service. Adding the Detroit traffic overhead is another bonus added essentially "for free" if that is considered.

I'd certainly be interested in any commentary from those who know the lines from experience how that'd work, or further elaborations on problems which have arisen now or would arise with this sort of scheme. In essence, what I have written is a "consider this" exercise, I don't claim to have all the answers.

[CSX_CO]

The sooner you guys accept that without some big traffic boom in west/central Michigan, CSX nor NS, cares how fast stuff moves across the state, the better off you'll be.

Move Chicago-Detroit traffic via Toledo and leave just local traffic for the former PM. Already funneling traffic from other points to Stanley, why duplicate things? Two AC4400'AH are good for 16,200 tons between Chicago and Toledo. Only good for 7400 on the PM. Double the tonnage to keep it off the PM...

[~Z~]

Another mention on MQT3001's post: Axe Y121 in Holland. Have D700 start in Holland and work all local customers, as well as working west towards Sawyer, and east to Standale. Run a 2nd shift D701 that continues work where D700 left off. Also get rid of most D800 jobs for pushing coal trains.
If a coal load is coming in that day, schedule D700/701's work to allow them to be the shove to get the coal over the hill when it's needed, and have them work other customers in between. Grab a 2nd 6-axle when heading west. Call D700/D701 on weekends as needed.

[Saturnalia]

Move Chicago-Detroit traffic via Toledo and leave just local traffic for the former PM. Already funneling traffic from other points to Stanley, why duplicate things? Two AC4400'AH are good for 16,200 tons between Chicago and Toledo. Only good for 7400 on the PM. Double the tonnage to keep it off the PM...

Of course the Garrett is good for 16200 because it is flat as a pancake. It is also a high-tonnage route so it makes a difference.

On the PM, it is rare to have over 10,000 tons, most of it either coal which is already dealt with, or a result of their plans to run fewer, long trains. Thus, the lower tonnage ratings don't matter because it isn't being used as a high-density through route.

For years, Q326/327/334/335 ran without issue, two 6-axles up front, day in and day out with very few failed trips (stalls, recrews, etc). Most of the problems have arisen by trying to run fewer longer trains, with the increased failure rate probably coming close to wiping the slate of any gains.

Another thing to consider, Q335 ran for over a year with excess Toledo-Chicago traffic. Clearly, when they can move traffic off the Garrett instead of cramming it all in, they have chosen to. Seems like the Detroit Traffic could reduce the strain on some Chicago-Toledo trains while moving for very minimal cost on the PM while also improving inefficiencies.

The sooner you guys accept that without some big traffic boom in west/central Michigan, CSX nor NS, cares how fast stuff moves across the state, the better off you'll be.

Like has been said, if CSX doesn't want to keep the lines, then they should punt them to a shortline, who'd be willing to run the lines, develop the customer base, and still hand off the majority of the traffic to CSX. Just look at what MQT, HESR and LSRC have been able to do with their former CSX lines.

The Michigan business is good business. Maybe it isn't 40% margin-worthy, but if that's not good enough at least let somebody take it over for the public good and economic efficiency [and they'd still be taking the traffic eventually]. It doesn't help anybody to let the line rot because the profit isn't "good enough" for overreaching bean counters.

[CSX_CO]

Your post is so full on contradictions. I wish I had a keyboard and time to point them out.

326/337/334/335 grew because of that additional overhead traffic, which is what caused the operational headaches. You advocate running that additional traffic, which caused the problems, as a solution to the problems? Never mind it takes double the locomotives to move that equivalent tonnage. FYI, SD40-2 is good for 3900 from Chicago to GR and 8550 to Toledo via Garrett. You really fail to grasp how dynamic the railroad is, and need to focus how everything fits together outside your narrow regional view.

I don't get how a route being "high tonnage" as anything to do with tonnage ratings? It's a high tonnage route because it's flat. They don't inflate the tonnage ratings just because the line has more trains. That seems to be what you're implying?

You are right about one thing, The PM is not a tonnage route. It's cobbled together branches that just happen to get from Chicago to Detroit. The west end didn't even connect to Chicago, it connected to LaCrosse, IN before they thought about going to Chicago.

[Saturnalia]

326/337/334/335 grew because of that additional overhead traffic, which is what caused the operational headaches. You advocate running that additional traffic, which caused the problems, as a solution to the problems?

Only Q335 grew due to the overhead traffic, AFAIK, and it only caused problems when they were adding 100 cars of BRC traffic to an already 100-car long train. I'm not exactly sure how much tonnage goes between Detroit and Chicago, but because 326/327 would only HAVE to take the Detroit Block up the biggest hills at Saugatuck/St Joseph and AnnPere/Salem, there wouldn't likely be major problems with the tonnage ratings. To rephrase that, the trains wouldn't have their full load over the major grades, hence they wouldn't need to account for the pickups with more power. They could fill out the ratings of two locomotives with GR traffic eastbound if they had any. The Waverly Traffic would only have to move a short distance without any hills. Hence, the running of modest Detroit floes while taking care of the two big block moves to and from Grand Rapids shouldn't cause any new operational issues, while opening up time for the locals to switch customers instead of moving around their blocks.

I don't get how a route being "high tonnage" as anything to do with tonnage ratings? It's a high tonnage route because it's flat. They don't inflate the tonnage ratings just because the line has more trains. That seems to be what you're implying?

No, what I'm suggesting is that it is a good thing that a Garrett is flat because it sees lots of tonnage. It is a benefit for a high-density line to be that way (like what you're saying). To the contrary, the fact that the PM is not a high-tonnage line means that the fact that it takes more horsepower to move said tonnage is not as big of a deal. It doesn't matter much that CW44ACs are only good for 7400 tons each, because it'd only require two more 6-axles per day to get the two daily manifest trains over the road. Interestingly, most trains I've seen on the Garrett and Willard subs have 2-3 units, while nearly everything via GR runs with just two...even many of those 200-car Q335s.

[BL2-1843]

The sooner you guys accept that without some big traffic boom in west/central Michigan, CSX nor NS, cares how fast stuff moves across the state, the better off you'll be.

Move Chicago-Detroit traffic via Toledo and leave just local traffic for the former PM. Already funneling traffic from other points to Stanley, why duplicate things? Two AC4400'AH are good for 16,200 tons between Chicago and Toledo. Only good for 7400 on the PM. Double the tonnage to keep it off the PM...

EXACTLY, This would solve Plymouth problems, AND the Plymouth Sub problems. And, take away a lot more crews not to have two, if not three crews to move D708 & D707 every day. Just leave the Plymouth sub with nothing but local traffic and let Toledo, Garrett and Chicago worry about how to get the darn traffic to GRP. You could even send the the GRP stone trains and Newaygo grain trains via Chicago too. No way to get around the Lansing stone trains, and the Webberville and Grand Ledge grain trains but you would not have nearly as many crossings blocked on any given day. You know how bad its getting when MofW wanted track time a few days ago, and the RN told them no way until D708 goes west. They are just by Beck Road Plymouth and are hotter than Amtrak. Never thought I'd hear that.

Speaking of stone trains, did have our first K901 stone train of the season go west a couple days ago. 61 loads in all CSX cars instead of the usual cars that carry this product.

[Typhoon]

For years, Q326/327/334/335 ran without issue, two 6-axles up front, day in and day out with very few failed trips (stalls, recrews, etc).

You owe me a new keyboard. I spit coffee all over mine while laughing when I read that.

[GP30M4216]

I'm not sure where the D708/GR cars are blocked on Q392. If they are right behind the power, Q392 could cut off the Rougemere traffic in Hix siding south of Lilley, drag the D708 cars north and around the wye, leave them at the siding at CH25 on the Plymouth Sub, then head back south for the rest of their train and roll for the Rouge. D708 could grab any other cars in either East or North Yard before tying on to their train west of the diamond and heading for Salem Hill. No crossings to block for extended periods of time with parked trains trying to switch cars or do air tests.

Geography for the win! Of course, either of the other two solutions would probably work better (Q334/Q335 or Q326/Q327 Detroit-GR).

[Jochs]

For years, Q326/327/334/335 ran without issue, two 6-axles up front, day in and day out with very few failed trips (stalls, recrews, etc).

You owe me a new keyboard. I spit coffee all over mine while laughing when I read that.

[CSX_CO]

Sounds easy on paper. Is going west of the diamond in the crew districts advertised limits? If not, they are due a penalty claim, and someone in GR is due one too. Are the crews qualified to make the move. Are all the crews qualified to make the move?

So much more to this then what is being put down.

[bdconrail29]

Sounds easy on paper. Is going west of the diamond in the crew districts advertised limits? If not, they are due a penalty claim, and someone in GR is due one too. Are the crews qualified to make the move. Are all the crews qualified to make the move?

So much more to this then what is being put down.

Definitely not atypical on this site.

[CAT345C]

Let them run it all screwed up, the crews are working and making that $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ with this new plan, and CSX thinks there is nothing wrong.

[Patriot]

I generally find this website to be informational and, at times, entertaining. Then, sometimes I come across a thread that some believe themselves to be railroad barrons, and not willing to listen to other peoples thoughts and ideas, or without at least some level of attack. The railroad industry is going thru some incredible change right now, and if the industry doesn't adapt to those changes, it will be right back to where it was before the intermodal (and western coal) saved its behind. Adapt and improvise, or get out of the way. No industry can survive without regularly making changes. Stop thinking about what was, and start thinking about what should be...knowing that the "should be" will be obsolete within a matter of a few years. A brilliant clollege biology professor started out each semestser with the following quote --- "what I will instuct you over the next four months, 50% will be proved wrong within the next 20 years".

[Patriot]

Let me be clear --- a vast majority, if not all, of the regular posters know more about railroading than I will ever know. I understand that, and appreciate it. Please do not take any of my posts as an attack. But rather, a suggestion to sometimes think out of the box. I am not involved in railroading by any means, but do serve in an executive role in an industry that has been and currently is going thru exteme change....and hugely regulated, with my employer having over a dozen federal and state regulators to accomodate, while at the same time trying to accomodate over 4,000 shareholders.

[TrainWatcher]

The sooner you guys accept that without some big traffic boom in west/central Michigan, CSX nor NS, cares how fast stuff moves across the state, the better off you'll be.

Move Chicago-Detroit traffic via Toledo and leave just local traffic for the former PM. Already funneling traffic from other points to Stanley, why duplicate things? Two AC4400'AH are good for 16,200 tons between Chicago and Toledo. Only good for 7400 on the PM. Double the tonnage to keep it off the PM...

EXACTLY, This would solve Plymouth problems, AND the Plymouth Sub problems. And, take away a lot more crews not to have two, if not three crews to move D708 & D707 every day. Just leave the Plymouth sub with nothing but local traffic and let Toledo, Garrett and Chicago worry about how to get the darn traffic to GRP. You could even send the the GRP stone trains and Newaygo grain trains via Chicago too. No way to get around the Lansing stone trains, and the Webberville and Grand Ledge grain trains but you would not have nearly as many crossings blocked on any given day. You know how bad its getting when MofW wanted track time a few days ago, and the RN told them no way until D708 goes west. They are just by Beck Road Plymouth and are hotter than Amtrak. Never thought I'd hear that.

HOTTER than Amtrak? Jesus. That's plain incredible.