The Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle Daily Service

[BlakeTyner]

No, 1 coach. 1 P42, 1 CCC, 1 coach. Amtrak says it might add a business coach in the future. I guess for the big business oilmen goingto NOL for business. Who needs a private jet when we got the stub train.

1 P42, 1 CCC, 1 coach...there you have it. What a waste of a 4000 hp locomotive. Logic suggest Amtrak

should use an EMD SW7 and a $800 portable generator for HEP for this train

That disagrees with my information--everyone I've spoken to at Amtrak has said at least 2 coaches and food service (we're assuming CCC, though that's not official.)

If it is, in fact, one coach, then I'll gladly retract my previous posts.

Anyway, I'm going to bow out--ultimately, I have no idea what will happen and what the results will be.

 

[Guest]

No, 1 coach. 1 P42, 1 CCC, 1 coach. Amtrak says it might add a business coach in the future. I guess for the big business oilmen goingto NOL for business. Who needs a private jet when we got the stub train.

1 P42, 1 CCC, 1 coach...there you have it. What a waste of a 4000 hp locomotive. Logic suggest Amtrak

should use an EMD SW7 and a $800 portable generator for HEP for this train

That disagrees with my information--everyone I've spoken to at Amtrak has said at least 2 coaches and food service (we're assuming CCC, though that's not official.)

If it is, in fact, one coach, then I'll gladly retract my previous posts.

Anyway, I'm going to bow out--ultimately, I have no idea what will happen and what the results will be.

I doubt Amtrak knows. I also heard coach upstair and business downstairs.

One more point.

For example, If all 100% passengers rode SAS-NOL for $48 one way, Amtrak would make $3,552 each way.

2 drivers from SAS-BMT, another 2 from BMT-NOL, 1 conductor SAS-BMT, 1 conductor BMT-NOL, at least 1

coach attendant and 1 in the CCC, now add fuel for a 4000 hp p42 for 573 miles. Need I say more?

 

[NativeSon5859]

When talking about Houston city pairs, the thing to remember is that ridership last year was only 16,191. Even if HOS-NOL was one of the top city pairs, the total traffic would still be very small....possibly around 2,500 each way total for the whole year (based on the percent of pax traveling between 300-399 miles from Houston)...which equals around 17-18 per trip. So even if the service is daily, we're not talking about a huge number of potential riders here. HOS-NOL is a city pair that is just tough to be super successful by rail based on the duration of the trip and the frequency of the service. HOS-SAS was not even in the top 8 city pairs of ridership for the train in '08... the poor timings of that segment couldn't have helped...so I'd expect that market to improve some...how much is the real question. And the fares on HOS-SAS are super cheap...$64 roundtrip....so even if they got a few extra riders per trip, the additional revenue won't be all that much.

Another thing to consider...for people living in NOL, HOS, and all cities in between, since the late 1890's, this train has been a one-seat ride for points west of SAS. That could no longer be the case. Any way you slice it, it will be an inconvenience changing trains. The connecting times I heard for San Antonio are approx 1030pm to 1200am going to LAX, and 630am to 800am going to NOL. You have familes traveling with children...elderly passengers...it has the potential to be fairly inconvenient. Sure it can be done, and I'm sure some won't care, but some will...like the groups who regularly go LAX-NOL by sleeper to catch a cruise. We can only guess as to how that will affect ridership for points past SAS. Why they can't just split and add the NOL cars from/to the CHI-bound train, like what is done today with the Eagle cars, is beyond me. That whole process can be done in 1.5 hours. As of '08 HOS-LAX and NOL-LAX were two of the top 5 city pairs for the train, so this is something to consider.

Amtrak will have to do a stellar job of marketing this. I'm talking print ads, radio ads, community involvement, etc. Public perception is sometimes the hardest thing to change. The public will have to know, flat out, that this is better than what's currently offered.

 

[jphjaxfl]

Top city pairs by ridership, 2008City Length

1. Los Angeles, CA 1633 mi

2. New Orleans, LA 362 mi

3. San Antonio, TX 210 mi

Top city pairs by revenue, 2008

City Length

1. Los Angeles, CA 1633 mi

2. New Orleans, LA 362 mi

8. San Antonio, TX 210 mi

THE NUMBER 1 REVENUE AND PASSENGER ON THE SUNSET OUT OF NOL.

LAX....that is a lot of incidental.

Actually, what I see is Houston-NOL at number two and Houston to SAS at number 3 and SAS to NOL at number 6 and 7. That's a big positive for the so called stub trains. When they go daily and at decent hours you will see those numbers explode. There will be very little lost traffic going through San Antonio from either Houston or New Orleans. So what I see, inspite of all the negatory here is that daily service at decent hours will be a huge sucess.

I agree with your comments. When I have traveled on the Sunset LTD between New Orleans and Houston and vv, there has been surprisingly a fair amount of on/off traffic at the stations in between even with the train being tri-weekly. With daily service, that should improve. A coach train with a food service car is much less expensive to operate from the labor aspect than a train with Sleeping Cars and a full dining car. The Palmetto to and from Savannah is a similar run to New Orleans to San Antonio. It does very well specially at the smaller cities that don't have alot of alernative transportation. If the Palmetto ran 3 days per week, it would be worthless to cities along the route. Amtrak has to try something different along its routes and the plan when it actually materializes sounds like it will generate more revenue with less labor costs.

 

[jis]

Isn't it the case that at least as it looks so far, Amtrak will have to come up with financial support for UP to complete the doubling work before any daily service can be instituted on that route?

 

[henryj]

If it flops, then it is not an important connection. Too you it is a cute little gamble by Amtrak, too us our service is at risk. I don't want to bet it away. Hopefully congress agrees.

It's a change that is long overdue. I don't know who you are or why you are so against this but it smells like SMART. I hope Congress stays out of it and it all come to fruition as planned. New Orleans, Houston and San Antonio will be the big beneficiaries of this new service. Ridership will mushroom including long distance. I think that is what you are afraid of. If it's a big success you can forget Florida being serviced ever by the SSL route.

 

[NativeSon5859]

If it flops, then it is not an important connection. Too you it is a cute little gamble by Amtrak, too us our service is at risk. I don't want to bet it away. Hopefully congress agrees.

It's a change that is long overdue. I don't know who you are or why you are so against this but it smells like SMART. I hope Congress stays out of it and it all come to fruition as planned. New Orleans, Houston and San Antonio will be the big beneficiaries of this new service. Ridership will mushroom including long distance. I think that is what you are afraid of. If it's a big success you can forget Florida being serviced ever by the SSL route.

"Smells like SMART?" Is SMART a four letter word around here? LOL. Come on. This is getting silly. You know as well as I do that if they are still pushing for Sunset East, they'll likely be waiting a long time...I have a strong feeling, though, that they'll take any train service between NOL-ORL at this point. But that has no bearing on this discussion. "Guest" makes some good points, as does everyone, basically. San Antonio would certainly benefit from this. Houston, New Orleans...I doubt it...but no one would know for sure until the numbers are posted. "Smells like SMART" or "Smells like TEMPO"...not sure which is worse...

 

[Guest]

If it flops, then it is not an important connection. Too you it is a cute little gamble by Amtrak, too us our service is at risk. I don't want to bet it away. Hopefully congress agrees.

It's a change that is long overdue. I don't know who you are or why you are so against this but it smells like SMART. I hope Congress stays out of it and it all come to fruition as planned. New Orleans, Houston and San Antonio will be the big beneficiaries of this new service. Ridership will mushroom including long distance. I think that is what you are afraid of. If it's a big success you can forget Florida being serviced ever by the SSL route.

I am not with SMART. Do you always need black vans and spys in your defense of this plan. I post my opinion, I don't

ride other people's coat-tail. In my opinion, this plan will end up killing passenger service to Houston. This is not the east

coast. Unless this train is +150 mph, nobody will give up their cars and business people won't give up the Gulfstream or

Piper Arrow.

 

[AlanB]

Amtrak will have to do a stellar job of marketing this. I'm talking print ads, radio ads, community involvement, etc. Public perception is sometimes the hardest thing to change. The public will have to know, flat out, that this is better than what's currently offered.

My guess is that Amtrak's marketing will be very limited for the entire plan, and that the bulk of any monies spent will be spent on the SAS-LAX area.

 

[AlanB]

Actually, what I see is Houston-NOL at number two and Houston to SAS at number 3 and SAS to NOL at number 6 and 7. That's a big positive for the so called stub trains. When they go daily and at decent hours you will see those numbers explode. There will be very little lost traffic going through San Antonio from either Houston or New Orleans. So what I see, inspite of all the negatory here is that daily service at decent hours will be a huge sucess.

I agree with your comments. When I have traveled on the Sunset LTD between New Orleans and Houston and vv, there has been surprisingly a fair amount of on/off traffic at the stations in between even with the train being tri-weekly. With daily service, that should improve. A coach train with a food service car is much less expensive to operate from the labor aspect than a train with Sleeping Cars and a full dining car. The Palmetto to and from Savannah is a similar run to New Orleans to San Antonio. It does very well specially at the smaller cities that don't have alot of alernative transportation. If the Palmetto ran 3 days per week, it would be worthless to cities along the route. Amtrak has to try something different along its routes and the plan when it actually materializes sounds like it will generate more revenue with less labor costs.

One big difference between the Palmetto and this plan is that the Palmetto did not remove the sleeper option from the cities that it serves. People still have the choice of boarding a train with a sleeper, even if in some places it's at a far less convienent time.

I'm not suggesting that NOL-SAS should have two trains right away, and I'm not sure that it could support 2 at present. But again, I do have to wonder just how much affect having two trains available has on the Palmetto's numbers. A similar bounce in ridership can also be seen with the new Lynchburger.

 

[AlanB]

If it flops, then it is not an important connection. Too you it is a cute little gamble by Amtrak, too us our service is at risk. I don't want to bet it away. Hopefully congress agrees.

It's a change that is long overdue. I don't know who you are or why you are so against this but it smells like SMART. I hope Congress stays out of it and it all come to fruition as planned. New Orleans, Houston and San Antonio will be the big beneficiaries of this new service. Ridership will mushroom including long distance. I think that is what you are afraid of. If it's a big success you can forget Florida being serviced ever by the SSL route.

For the record, guest's IP address is from a city in Texas that is served by the Sunset Limited.

 

[jis]

If it flops, then it is not an important connection. Too you it is a cute little gamble by Amtrak, too us our service is at risk. I don't want to bet it away. Hopefully congress agrees.

It's a change that is long overdue. I don't know who you are or why you are so against this but it smells like SMART. I hope Congress stays out of it and it all come to fruition as planned. New Orleans, Houston and San Antonio will be the big beneficiaries of this new service. Ridership will mushroom including long distance. I think that is what you are afraid of. If it's a big success you can forget Florida being serviced ever by the SSL route.

Labeling and name calling is hardly a good way to credibly win an argument. I have not seen Guest mention Florida yet, so it seems to me like a big strawman has been set up and knocked down using a different strawman in the above.

If UP does not back down from its insistence that the completion of the doubling project be paid for before any additional frequencies will be allowed on that route, I don't see how this plan can be executed without the Congress's involvement.

 

[Donctor]

Why they can't just split and add the NOL cars from/to the CHI-bound train, like what is done today with the Eagle cars, is beyond me. That whole process can be done in 1.5 hours.

It is questionable as to whether the equipment for thru-cars will exist for these two trains. Yes, Amtrak can find the equipment. No, this is not the best way to use it.

And why would the NOL cars be added to the CHI-bound train? With daily service on the Eagle and the City, that wouldn't make much sense (at least not that I can figure). Running thru-cars LAX-NOL was looked at, but Amtrak doesn't have the equipment, as evidenced by the Sunset's current "tri-weekly" status.

A separate question: If Amtrak runs a CCC on the CHI-LAX Eagle, assuming the table seating has been restored, will any posters be upset about the train's lack of a "real" diner? I suppose it's something to complain about...

 

[Donctor]

Isn't it the case that at least as it looks so far, Amtrak will have to come up with financial support for UP to complete the doubling work before any daily service can be instituted on that route?

UP seems to be holding this up.

 

[NativeSon5859]

Why they can't just split and add the NOL cars from/to the CHI-bound train, like what is done today with the Eagle cars, is beyond me. That whole process can be done in 1.5 hours.

It is questionable as to whether the equipment for thru-cars will exist for these two trains. Yes, Amtrak can find the equipment. No, this is not the best way to use it.

And why would the NOL cars be added to the CHI-bound train? With daily service on the Eagle and the City, that wouldn't make much sense (at least not that I can figure). Running thru-cars LAX-NOL was looked at, but Amtrak doesn't have the equipment, as evidenced by the Sunset's current "tri-weekly" status.

A separate question: If Amtrak runs a CCC on the CHI-LAX Eagle, assuming the table seating has been restored, will any posters be upset about the train's lack of a "real" diner? I suppose it's something to complain about...

Regarding the cars...the NOL-bound cars would unhook from the train in SAS and vice-versa...so at least the one-seat ride is preserved....which is important. If there's not enough equipment for at least that then the change shouldn't be made until there is.

Same train service + sleeping car service along the original Sunset route greatly outweighs a daily stub train for a portion of the route in my mind. You'll be taking one step forward but two steps back if you live in Houston, or any city in Louisiana, if this comes to pass.

 

[mfastx]

There is a reason that the NOL-SAS route doesn't do as well. People aren't going to go from NOL-SAS, most people will go from either HOU-SAS or HOU-NOL. Of course nobody's riding those routes now. People aren't going to board houston at 5:00 IN THE MORNING to get on a train that takes 7-9 hours to get to NOL, nor are they going to board at 9:30 PM to arrive at SAS at 3:00 IN THE MORNING.

People will ride the routes if boarding time is more convienent, the trains run daily, and service to NOL from HOU is shortened to around 5-6 hours.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

UP is holding this up. Which, quite frankly, is an indication UP thinks it will be successful. If UP thought this would be the SAS-NOL routes deathknell, they'd be tickled pink by it- and from a freight roads perspective, a daily train is easier to handle than a tri-weekly.

That is a trick GML uses.

Listen here, you myopic heel. I will say this once, and you better freakin' listen. I talk from my perspectives. I am not a politician trying to be elected, merely a person defending what he considers to be false holes driven into his argument. I am not "pulling tricks". Get it through your head. Thank you.

You can't combine CHI-SAS-LAX numbers with SAS-NOL. Each train will be seperate. So when SAS-NOL is reviewed and show bad numbers, the trainwill be killed. GML won't lose service, Houston will.

Amtrak under Boardman has been showing a distinct tendency towards daily service. This is inline with those policies. Everything indicates that Boardman & Co are looking for, and expecting, large increases in ridership and long term success for Amtrak. I would be astonished- ASTONISHED- if any plans of his were meant to kill service. If this results in lower ridership numbers, it will be easy for Amtrak to backtrack.

Your thinking of the Republican appointed, lazy, dull, and unimaginative era under Alex Kummant. Now is quite different.

All wrong. First, you can't use the current Sunset average price for the SAS-NOL and 1036 tickets for 1 coach train. SAS-NOL price is $48 one way. No way to average $74. Your math is as fuzzy as GML.

Lets use facts and not cherry pick numbers. The data clearly says amtrak should go daily with a NOL-LAX

LD train and add sleepers. I say LAX-ORL daily.

His logic is entirely sound. Your all wrong comment is just obnoxious. As for my math being fuzzy, my math can't be fuzzy. Why? I've used none. I am basing my statements upon various things I've picked up, and general transit patterns, the studying of which is one of the things I spend my time doing. I'm not figuring things on hard data here. I have none.

I am somewhat surprised your direct attacks on posters, me in particular have not been checked by Mods or Admins. Maybe they agree with you and thus are blind to your being distinctly officious. However, if you want to convince me or anyone else here with a functioning brain, you'd find your case better supported by arguing rationally with information, data, and cold logic. Insulting everyone around you just makes you sound like a shrill, childish, imbecile.

Furthermore, the ideal operation here is to run the Sunset Limited from MIA to LAX, daily, and the Texas Eagle from Chicago to SAS with through cars daily. Then the entire market would be served and all. Unfortunately, we are about 9 sleepers, 6 diners, 6 Sightseers, and 9 coaches short of the equipment we'd need to do that. Actually, we're possibly even short of locomotives.

Given what equipment Amtrak has, this solution, in my not-so-humble opinion, makes the most sense.

No, 1 coach. 1 P42, 1 CCC, 1 coach. Amtrak says it might add a business coach in the future. I guess for the big business oilmen goingto NOL for business. Who needs a private jet when we got the stub train.

1 P42, 1 CCC, 1 coach...there you have it. What a waste of a 4000 hp locomotive. Logic suggest Amtrak

should use an EMD SW7 and a $800 portable generator for HEP for this train

I don't know what idiot told you that information, but you can present him the official Green Maned Lion Bad Rumor Generation Dunce Cap. Amtrak would NEVER assign a 2-3 staff member diner-type all-booth food service car to a one-coach train. If Amtrak ever ran a one coach train again (and they won't, memories of the Hilltopper and Shenandoah still linger too strong) it would run it with a Superliner snack coach. All plans I have heard have called for a 3-4 car train consisting of a possible business-class car, a CCC, a coach, and a baggage-coach.

Another thing to consider...for people living in NOL, HOS, and all cities in between, since the late 1890's, this train has been a one-seat ride for points west of SAS. That could no longer be the case. Any way you slice it, it will be an inconvenience changing trains.

Any way you slice it, from the 1800s through 2004 with only a brief interruption in the late 90s, a one seat ride existed from Harrisburg to Chicago. It doesn't anymore. You have to change trains. Actually, from the 1800s until 1971, like many places, a one seat ride existed from Scranton to Chicago. They have no trains whatsofrickinever. That is what I call inconvenience.

You are getting a daily train back. Not having a daily train is a bigger inconvenience than not having a one seat ride. Why are you complaining again?

 

[NativeSon5859]

GML, I'm just saying it's not the ideal situation by any means, and it will put off some riders who are traveling past SAS. I guarantee it will. Daily or not, how is connecting better than not having to connect? It's not complaining...it's just stating what I think. In time perhaps people would get used to it, I don't know. I just think it's a poor decision, and if they want to make the train daily, they should just wait until they have ample equipment to make the current train daily, instead of breaking the route up. Like I said, one step forward, but two steps back...daily is a good thing, loss of sleeper and one seat ride, not so much. My two cents, nothing more.

 

[Guest]

UP is holding this up. Which, quite frankly, is an indication UP thinks it will be successful. If UP thought this would be the SAS-NOL routes deathknell, they'd be tickled pink by it- and from a freight roads perspective, a daily train is easier to handle than a tri-weekly.

Black vans and spys again. UP is not holding this bad plan up, Congress must decide on the 3 plans.

Listen here, you myopic heel. I will say this once, and you better freakin' listen. I talk from my perspectives. I am not a politician trying to be elected, merely a person defending what he considers to be false holes driven into his argument. I am not "pulling tricks". Get it through your head. Thank you.

So am I.

Amtrak under Boardman has been showing a distinct tendency towards daily service. This is inline with those policies. Everything indicates that Boardman & Co are looking for, and expecting, large increases in ridership and long term success for Amtrak. I would be astonished- ASTONISHED- if any plans of his were meant to kill service. If this results in lower ridership numbers, it will be easy for Amtrak to backtrack.
Your thinking of the Republican appointed, lazy, dull, and unimaginative era under Alex Kummant. Now is quite different.

This sounds like a politican. Nobody said Amtrak is purposely trying to kill service to this region.

His logic is entirely sound. Your all wrong comment is just obnoxious. As for my math being fuzzy, my math can't be fuzzy. Why? I've used none. I am basing my statements upon various things I've picked up, and general transit patterns, the studying of which is one of the things I spend my time doing. I'm not figuring things on hard data here. I have none.

If SAS-NOL trip is $32 per person, how is it possible to average $74 per person. FUZZY MATH.

I am somewhat surprised your direct attacks on posters, me in particular have not been checked by Mods or Admins. Maybe they agree with you and thus are blind to your being distinctly officious. However, if you want to convince me or anyone else here with a functioning brain, you'd find your case better supported by arguing rationally with information, data, and cold logic. Insulting everyone around you just makes you sound like a shrill, childish, imbecile.

If that is not pot calling the kettle black.

Furthermore, the ideal operation here is to run the Sunset Limited from MIA to LAX, daily, and the Texas Eagle from Chicago to SAS with through cars daily. Then the entire market would be served and all. Unfortunately, we are about 9 sleepers, 6 diners, 6 Sightseers, and 9 coaches short of the equipment we'd need to do that. Actually, we're possibly even short of locomotives.
Given what equipment Amtrak has, this solution, in my not-so-humble opinion, makes the most sense.

Amtrak plan to start up several new trains after purchase and repairs. I am willing to tolerate tri-weekly until

those new/rebuild coaches are ready. We been waiting 39 years.

I don't know what idiot told you that information, but you can present him the official Green Maned Lion Bad Rumor Generation Dunce Cap. Amtrak would NEVER assign a 2-3 staff member diner-type all-booth food service car to a one-coach train. If Amtrak ever ran a one coach train again (and they won't, memories of the Hilltopper and Shenandoah still linger too strong) it would run it with a Superliner snack coach. All plans I have heard have called for a 3-4 car train consisting of a possible business-class car, a CCC, a coach, and a baggage-coach.

Nobody knows...We all hear different rumors. Yours don't out weight mine.

 

[jis]

UP is holding this up. Which, quite frankly, is an indication UP thinks it will be successful. If UP thought this would be the SAS-NOL routes deathknell, they'd be tickled pink by it- and from a freight roads perspective, a daily train is easier to handle than a tri-weekly.

I must say that is quite a leap of logic! Primarily UP is trying to explore the possibility of getting their doubling project partly funded by government sources. As for whether they think anything will succeed or fail is mostly a construct of ours and possibly a figment of our imagination as far as I can tell.

Amtrak under Boardman has been showing a distinct tendency towards daily service. This is inline with those policies. Everything indicates that Boardman & Co are looking for, and expecting, large increases in ridership and long term success for Amtrak. I would be astonished- ASTONISHED- if any plans of his were meant to kill service. If this results in lower ridership numbers, it will be easy for Amtrak to backtrack.
Your thinking of the Republican appointed, lazy, dull, and unimaginative era under Alex Kummant. Now is quite different.

And yet all this is being done by Republican appointees like Boardman, and Kummant appointees like Fremaux. Do we have to bring politics into this gratuitously all the time? Not that I am Republican apologist mind you, but why bring that factor in when we are talking about Boardman, who was afterall a Republican appointee in his NY State DoT position and then at FRA too?

 

[AlanB]

UP is holding this up. Which, quite frankly, is an indication UP thinks it will be successful. If UP thought this would be the SAS-NOL routes deathknell, they'd be tickled pink by it- and from a freight roads perspective, a daily train is easier to handle than a tri-weekly.

Black vans and spys again. UP is not holding this bad plan up, Congress must decide on the 3 plans.

Congress must decide on the 3 plans for the Sunset east of NOL. Congress has nothing to do with the plan under discussion here to take a reduced service Sunset daily NOL-SAS and the Eagle daily west of SAS.

And rumor has it that UP is indeed holding up that later plan.

Amtrak under Boardman has been showing a distinct tendency towards daily service. This is inline with those policies. Everything indicates that Boardman & Co are looking for, and expecting, large increases in ridership and long term success for Amtrak. I would be astonished- ASTONISHED- if any plans of his were meant to kill service. If this results in lower ridership numbers, it will be easy for Amtrak to backtrack.
Your thinking of the Republican appointed, lazy, dull, and unimaginative era under Alex Kummant. Now is quite different.

This sounds like a politican. Nobody said Amtrak is purposely trying to kill service to this region.

Boardman has also made it quite clear that he wants more state funded services and I for one have my suspicions that this is part of the plan. It would be great for Amtrak to not only get rid of the name Sunset Limited, but also the cost of running part of that train. It would also take the option from above out of Congress' hands preventing them from giving Amtrak another unfunded mandate of restoring a full length Sunset, something that could well happen. Not that Congress still couldn't order it, but it would be harder.

Mind you Congress could also order the extension of the City and not fund that too.

 

[AlanB]

UP is holding this up. Which, quite frankly, is an indication UP thinks it will be successful. If UP thought this would be the SAS-NOL routes deathknell, they'd be tickled pink by it- and from a freight roads perspective, a daily train is easier to handle than a tri-weekly.

I must say that is quite a leap of logic! Primarily UP is trying to explore the possibility of getting their doubling project partly funded by government sources. As for whether they think anything will succeed or fail is mostly a construct of ours and possibly a figment of our imagination as far as I can tell.

Agreed. UP isn't worried about the success of this plan. They couldn't care less if it succeeds or fails; as long as they get what they want. In fact, a daily train would be easier for UP to handle since they don’t have to worry about what day of the week it is and whether or not Amtrak will be coming along that day. It’s often been suggested that the less than daily frequency is part of the time keeping issues with the Sunset.

 

[Guest]

UP is holding this up. Which, quite frankly, is an indication UP thinks it will be successful. If UP thought this would be the SAS-NOL routes deathknell, they'd be tickled pink by it- and from a freight roads perspective, a daily train is easier to handle than a tri-weekly.

Black vans and spys again. UP is not holding this bad plan up, Congress must decide on the 3 plans.

Congress must decide on the 3 plans for the Sunset east of NOL. Congress has nothing to do with the plan under discussion here to take a reduced service Sunset daily NOL-SAS and the Eagle daily west of SAS.

And rumor has it that UP is indeed holding up that later plan.

If Congress choose the cheapest plan, LAX-ORL tri-weekly, then Amtrak can not stub this train.

Amtrak is waiting on Congress, not UP.

Amtrak under Boardman has been showing a distinct tendency towards daily service. This is inline with those policies. Everything indicates that Boardman & Co are looking for, and expecting, large increases in ridership and long term success for Amtrak. I would be astonished- ASTONISHED- if any plans of his were meant to kill service. If this results in lower ridership numbers, it will be easy for Amtrak to backtrack.
Your thinking of the Republican appointed, lazy, dull, and unimaginative era under Alex Kummant. Now is quite different.

This sounds like a politican. Nobody said Amtrak is purposely trying to kill service to this region.

Boardman has also made it quite clear that he wants more state funded services and I for one have my suspicions that this is part of the plan. It would be great for Amtrak to not only get rid of the name Sunset Limited, but also the cost of running part of that train. It would also take the option from above out of Congress' hands preventing them from giving Amtrak another unfunded mandate of restoring a full length Sunset, something that could well happen. Not that Congress still couldn't order it, but it would be harder.

Mind you Congress could also order the extension of the City and not fund that too.

Amtrak should not get into the business of fixing the problem by changing the name. Fix the Sunset would be

a better option to a public doubting Amtrak competency.

 

[AlanB]

UP is holding this up. Which, quite frankly, is an indication UP thinks it will be successful. If UP thought this would be the SAS-NOL routes deathknell, they'd be tickled pink by it- and from a freight roads perspective, a daily train is easier to handle than a tri-weekly.

Black vans and spys again. UP is not holding this bad plan up, Congress must decide on the 3 plans.

Congress must decide on the 3 plans for the Sunset east of NOL. Congress has nothing to do with the plan under discussion here to take a reduced service Sunset daily NOL-SAS and the Eagle daily west of SAS.

And rumor has it that UP is indeed holding up that later plan.

If Congress choose the cheapest plan, LAX-ORL tri-weekly, then Amtrak can not stub this train.

Amtrak is waiting on Congress, not UP.

When Amtrak first announced this idea of a daily Eagle almost a year ago, if not already more than a year ago, they wanted it running by this Spring's Timetable. In fact IIRC, they were even hoping that they might be able to do it by last Fall's TT, although many deemed that unlikely. They weren't waiting for Congress to decide on any plans east of NOL, as they hadn't even finished the study at that time. The reason that this hasn't already happened has nothing to do with Congress. Amtrak is NOT waiting for Congress.

Besides as I noted in my subsequent post, Congress can always reverse any Amtrak decisions on a daily Eagle if they choose to restore the pre-Katrina Sunset plan. After all they hold the purse strings.

There are other factors holding up the daily NOL-SAS stub train and the daily Eagle west of SAS, but Congress is not one of those factors!

 

[jis]

I find it absolutely fascinating nay mind boggling that some people actually think that Congress ought to be micromanaging Amtrak on a route by route basis. The last time they tried something akin to that we got Diner LIte and CCC. Congress is about the worst outfit to try to do anything of the sort. The only thing they seem to be able to manage effectively is the regular increments in their own salaries and benefits, if that.