Trip Reports: October 8 - 28, 2000
by Ted & Sylvia Blishak
ONBOARD AMTRAK
WITH TED AND SYLVIA BLISHAK
FEEDBACK ON TED AND SYLVIA BLISHAK'S CROSS-COUNTRY AMTRAK TRIP
Thanks for the entertaining account of your cross-country Amtrak journey.
It largely confirms my travel experiences and those of my family.
However, I want to take exception to one of your closing statements.
You talk about "bolted rail on wooden ties" as an explanation for the
very rough rides you've experienced. Well, according to Progressive
Railroading's "Track Yearbook", a copy of which just arrived at my
office, Class I railroads operate 120,000 route miles and about 150,000
track miles of railroad. The Track Yearbook reports that 104,000 of those
miles are laid with welded rail, so your chances of riding on bolted rail on any
Class I mainline are very small.
While the freight roadbeds may not offer the level of comfort we would
like, I think that part of the "rough ride syndrome" is in fact poor
maintenance of the Amtrak equipment. If equipment is not maintained
properly, it will ride very badly, and I have ridden enough Amtrak equipment with worn
flanges and deflated airbags to confirm this.
I strongly suspect that the maintenance deferrals by Amtrak are not
limited to burned-out lights and malfunctioning toilets; they are a
symptom of an almost desperate attempt to conserve cash. This is a problem that will
be rectified only by more generous Federal support. We can but hope..
Randolph Resor
railroad consultant
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------
Dear Mr. Resor,
Thank you very much for your comments about our account of our
cross-country journey.
May I use your comments on our web site? We have had many responses and
I feel that they might be of interest to our readers.
I had no idea that we had so much welded rail in the USA. Do you know if
there is any affect on the ride quality if the welded rail is laid on
wooden ties versus concrete ties? I have observed that concrete ties are
heavily used in Europe and Canada, and wondered if this contributes to a
smoother ride.
Regards, Ted Blishak, President
---------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, you're welcome to use what I said.
As to concrete ties: concrete ties have a higher "track modulus"
(stiffness) than wood ties, which actually produces a "harder" ride. If you travel
on Amtrak's Northeast Corridor, you can hear the difference between concrete
and wood very clearly as you travel from one to the other.
The advantage of concrete ties is that they are much heavier (about 700
lbs. each vs. less than 100 for wood), and so make the track more stable.
It's easier to maintain tight geometric tolerances (needed for high speed rail
--
and one reason concrete ties are used so widely in Europe). However, the
price of this is that concrete ties cost more to buy and install, and
they require both resilient tie pads (to provide a cushion between rail and
tie) and elastic fasteners (to allow limited differential movement of rail vs.
tie when trains pass over). Also, in Europe wood is scarce and expensive.
Here, concrete ties are limited to extremely busy main lines with heavy
curvature. Much of the BNSF route between Seattle and Havre, MT is laid
with concrete ties, for example. The reason for this is that speeds are
lower, and (most importantly) wood is a lot less expensive here than in
much
of Europe.
One promising alternative to wood AND concrete is a tie made of
resilient, recycled plastic. It has the resiliency of wood, can be used with
conventional cut spikes and plates, but does not rot. It is somewhat
moreexpensive than wood, but much cheaper than concrete. UP has bought
10,000 to test.
Hope this is of interest. BTW, I see your ads in Trains magazine and may
use you to book a trip across Canada in the next year or two.
Randolph Resor
Return to this trip's index page
