Chicago-Boston direct service

[Joel N. Weber II]

The next train from New York to Boston (after 9:45 pm) is train 66, which leaves NYP at 3:15 am and arrives in Boston just before 8:00 am. This train does have a baggage car, at least.
I don't know what kind of Viewliner-specific parts might break that would need to be fixed in Boston, nor do I know how long it might take to fix them. In any event, they'd have a 3-4 hour window in which to fix the issue.

Who knows? Depending on the nature of the issue, and whatever spare equipment might be available, it might be easier to ferry a Viewliner up on 66 from Sunnyside, and send the broken one down to New York to get fixed.

On the other hand, if something is discovered last-minute, they'd have no choice but to blank the sleeper line (unless, again, Sunnyside had an extra Viewliner that they could attach to the regular Lake Shore).

A few minutes before I read your post, it was occuring to me that indeed, ferrying an entire Viewliner might be easiest.

If there's something wrong with the Viewliner that's discovered before #448 gets to Boston, even if the train is an hour or two late, there's plenty of time to notice that a spare should be ferried up on #66 in time for it to get to Boston long before the next #449 departs. (And #66 is the best train for this type of ferrying since its schedule has the most padding of all the northbound Northeast Regional trains.)

The broken Viewliner may not manage to catch the same day's #67 unless #67 is held up to wait for it, but it could probably catch a different Northeast Regional. Or if it's sufficiently broken to be emptied out before reaching ALB, it could go as part of #48 to New York City.

If a problem isn't discovered until, say, 11:30 AM, then yes, the best option may be to ferry a spare Viewliner (if one is available) to ALB on #49, and let the Boston passengers ride in coach, or maybe if there's a club-dinnette car available, put that on #449 and let the sleeper passengers ride in that. This doesn't seem any substantially worse than the September 2008 state of affairs. (I'd much rather have a 98% chance of a Viewliner and a 2% chance of coach than a 100% chance of a club-dinnette.)

Furthermore, if there's no spare Viewliner at Sunnyside, then under the September 2008 scheme, any last minute problems that can't be quickly solved also require bumping sleeper passengers to coach.

 

[AlanB]

My continued understanding is that the addition of the through sleeper has been postponed due to issues involving the servicing of a single Viewliner in Boston.

By that logic, Amtrak should cut the baggage car off of 66/67, since it too represents a single car that must be serviced in Boston.

And I do realize Bill that you're only passing on what you're hearing, I'm just ranting at the nonsense.

Ps. Assuming that it hasn't already been used for another bad ordered car, there is generally a spare Viewliner sitting in Sunnyside Yard.

 

[had8ley]

My continued understanding is that the addition of the through sleeper has been postponed due to issues involving the servicing of a single Viewliner in Boston.

By that logic, Amtrak should cut the baggage car off of 66/67, since it too represents a single car that must be serviced in Boston.

And I do realize Bill that you're only passing on what you're hearing, I'm just ranting at the nonsense.

Ps. Assuming that it hasn't already been used for another bad ordered car, there is generally a spare Viewliner sitting in Sunnyside Yard.

The only things, short of mechanical bad order, that need to be accomplished to this orphan Viewliner in Boston is dumping the toilets and watering the car which I'm positive can be accomplished in BOS. I think Amtrak can figure out what to do with a bad order car and get things back on track if it ever comes to pass.

 

[PRR 60]

The only things, short of mechanical bad order, that need to be accomplished to this orphan Viewliner in Boston is dumping the toilets and watering the car which I'm positive can be accomplished in BOS. I think Amtrak can figure out what to do with a bad order car and get things back on track if it ever comes to pass.

To defend the Boston maintenance people for a moment, sleeper car servicing is more involved than servicing a coach. It is kind of like maintaining a small hotel. There are bedding issues with all the supplies for that work, bath supplies, towels, soap and the like. There are a whole bunch of toilets, not just two, that must be cleaned and kept working. This, plus all the conventional mechanical stuff (electrical, plumbing, HVAC, brakes, etc.) the designs of which are unique to the Viewliner. All of the materials required for that work would have to be stocked at Boston to service one car each night.

So the question is not whether having a through sleeper to Boston would be nice. The question is whether the revenue gained by extending one Lake Shore Viewliner to Boston (and deleting one to New York) justifies the materials and the labor needed to service that one Viewliner in non-Viewliner terminal. In other words, are there enough customers out there who are not riding the Lake Shore to or from Massachusetts today who would decide to ride only because they could have a room all the way and not have to change to or from a coach seat at Albany. My guess is there are not.

 

[had8ley]

The only things, short of mechanical bad order, that need to be accomplished to this orphan Viewliner in Boston is dumping the toilets and watering the car which I'm positive can be accomplished in BOS. I think Amtrak can figure out what to do with a bad order car and get things back on track if it ever comes to pass.

To defend the Boston maintenance people for a moment, sleeper car servicing is more involved than servicing a coach. It is kind of like maintaining a small hotel. There are bedding issues with all the supplies for that work, bath supplies, towels, soap and the like. There are a whole bunch of toilets, not just two, that must be cleaned and kept working. This, plus all the conventional mechanical stuff (electrical, plumbing, HVAC, brakes, etc.) the designs of which are unique to the Viewliner. All of the materials required for that work would have to be stocked at Boston to service one car each night.

So the question is not whether having a through sleeper to Boston would be nice. The question is whether the revenue gained by extending one Lake Shore Viewliner to Boston (and deleting one to New York) justifies the materials and the labor needed to service that one Viewliner in non-Viewliner terminal. In other words, are there enough customers out there who are not riding the Lake Shore to or from Massachusetts today who would decide to ride only because they could have a room all the way and not have to change to or from a coach seat at Albany. My guess is there are not.

I think that most of he items you listed are simply supplying the car which is part of a coach cleaners assignment. Some of the work can be done by the car attendant. As far as mechanical work goes I would think the bulk of repairs would be put off, if possible, until the return trip to Chicago. I've ridden many a LD train where the write up sheet for the car has the same defect noted trip after trip. Next time you're on a Superliner sleeper look in the luggage storage area. There usually is a defect book stored there with the daily defects and the date. I'm not trying to berate Boston Mechanical; just trying to show that one car to Boston isn't going to shut Amtrak down.

 

[zoltan]

I have to take a bus from Boston to Portland and then drive 2 more hours home to Maine that night.

Bus? Downeaster plz?

Yes, ok, 3 hours, 20 minute transfer in Boston, and a necessity to change terminals that isn't there with the bus. So you're excused.

Damn the fact the big dig couldn't produce a South Station to North Station tunnel...

I would probably go for the Downeaster in any case, as I do take considerable time and cost penalties in order to defy the logical option in favour of the option that involves the train. My defiant stance regarding bus vs. train took a lot of explaining to my friend in Portland, who couldn't understand why I sacrificed 45 minutes on a daytrip to Boston and spent $3 more each way just so I could take the train, but... I just like the train!

Where there is the logical option, and the option involving traveling by train, nine out of ten times, I will choose the latter.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

To defend the Boston maintenance people for a moment, sleeper car servicing is more involved than servicing a coach. It is kind of like maintaining a small hotel. There are bedding issues with all the supplies for that work, bath supplies, towels, soap and the like. There are a whole bunch of toilets, not just two, that must be cleaned and kept working. This, plus all the conventional mechanical stuff (electrical, plumbing, HVAC, brakes, etc.) the designs of which are unique to the Viewliner. All of the materials required for that work would have to be stocked at Boston to service one car each night.

But how does servicing a train that consists of one Viewliner, one cafe car, and three coach cars compare to servicing a typical Northeast Regional? The former probably has 16 toilets in the Viewliner plus perhaps two in each of the other cars, for a total of maybe 24. The later probably has something like 14-18 toilets. But the Viewliner's toilets are probably not as heavily used, so the total volume of waste to pump out may not be all that different.

Also, isn't it the case that this Viewliner is going to be serviced in either Boston or Sunnyside? Does Amtrak really save money by having the work done in New York City instead of Boston?

So the question is not whether having a through sleeper to Boston would be nice. The question is whether the revenue gained by extending one Lake Shore Viewliner to Boston (and deleting one to New York) justifies the materials and the labor needed to service that one Viewliner in non-Viewliner terminal. In other words, are there enough customers out there who are not riding the Lake Shore to or from Massachusetts today who would decide to ride only because they could have a room all the way and not have to change to or from a coach seat at Albany. My guess is there are not.

But another thing to think about is the potential implications for the train formerly known as the Twilight Shoreliner.

A Viewliner that arrived in Boston on 66 would arrive in plenty of time to become 449's Viewliner.

448 is supposed to arrive in Boston roughly the time 67 departs. But if 448 could be moved earlier (and possibly 67's departure a bit later), it might be possible for 448's Viewliner to be cleaned and put on 67. If Amtrak could make that dance work, then it's effectively the case that one of the two Viewliners for 66/67 can be the Viewliner that would otherwise sit overnight in Boston for the Lake Shore Limited.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Damn the fact the big dig couldn't produce a South Station to North Station tunnel...

There doesn't seem to be any reason why several billion dollars couldn't put a heavy rail tunnel under I-93 at some point in the future.

 

[PRR 60]

...Also, isn't it the case that this Viewliner is going to be serviced in either Boston or Sunnyside? Does Amtrak really save money by having the work done in New York City instead of Boston?

Yes, because that is where the parts and expertise exists to work Viewliners and sleeping cars. Sunnyside works Viewliners off the Silver Service (5 a day), the Crescent (2 a day), the Lake Shore (3 a day?), and three days a week off the Cardinal (1 car?). There is an economy of scale. Stocking the repair parts and even having a spare car or two is justified at New York.

Overnighting a single Viewliner at Boston would be like flying one Airbus A320 into an airport that only sees Boeing 737-700's. Boston works lots of Amfleet cars and a couple of Heritage baggage cars and has the parts and expertise to do that work. They do not work Viewliners. Without the parts to service the car, Boston is dead in the water to correct even the simplest of problems. Complex pieces of equipment like rail cars develop lots of problems.

Even if the Viewliner were added back to the old Shoreliner, it would still only put 2 a day into Boston. To stock the parts and develop the expertise at Boston to do what New York does everyday would cost money. Would offering the ability to sit in a sleeping car room for a daytime ride between Boston and Albany generate enough new revenue to offset the cost equipping Boston to maintain one or even two unique cars a night? Is it even possible that cutting one Viewliner off the New York section would cost more revenue than sending that car to Boston would generate? I think it is pretty hard to objectively justify adding a Viewliner to the Boston section of the Lake Shore. That is not to say that Amtrak might not go ahead and do it anyway, but it considering all the ramifications, it does not seem to make much sense.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Overnighting a single Viewliner at Boston would be like flying one Airbus A320 into an airport that only sees Boeing 737-700's. Boston works lots of Amfleet cars and a couple of Heritage baggage cars and has the parts and expertise to do that work. They do not work Viewliners. Without the parts to service the car, Boston is dead in the water to correct even the simplest of problems. Complex pieces of equipment like rail cars develop lots of problems.

And isn't Denver or San Antonio dead in the water to correct a problem that a Superliner Sleeper develops a day out of Chicago, too? If the Superliner sleepers can run two days from one end of the route to the other, why can't a Chicago to Boston to Chicago sleeper run for two days from Chicago to Chicago, regardless of what maintenance infrastructure is at Boston?

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I don't agree with PRR, but let me play devils advocate by pointing out:

The Pullman-built Superliner Is were perhaps Pullmans best postwar effort, at least durability wise. Great cars.

The Bombardier-built Superliner IIs are also fairly durable cars.

The Budd and Amtrak designed, Morrison Knudson built Viewliners have been referred to by many people, including David Gunn, as "Junk". They are practically falling apart. They have problems out the wazoo. I'd be a lot more comfortable sending a Superliner into the abyss than a Viewliner, were this MY railroad.

 

[zoltan]

There doesn't seem to be any reason why several billion dollars couldn't put a heavy rail tunnel under I-93 at some point in the future.

I think the crucial issue here is the several billion dollars part. Let's remember that the world views money spent on roads as investment, and money spent on railways as subsidy.

I'd be a lot more comfortable sending a Superliner into the abyss than a Viewliner, were this MY railroad.

Going on various sentiments you've expressed, I don't think I would mind at all if it were your railroad...

 

[had8ley]

There doesn't seem to be any reason why several billion dollars couldn't put a heavy rail tunnel under I-93 at some point in the future.

I think the crucial issue here is the several billion dollars part. Let's remember that the world views money spent on roads as investment, and money spent on railways as subsidy.

I'd be a lot more comfortable sending a Superliner into the abyss than a Viewliner, were this MY railroad.

Going on various sentiments you've expressed, I don't think I would mind at all if it were your railroad...

ALL ABOARD !!!

 

[wayman]

I think the crucial issue here is the several billion dollars part. Let's remember that the world views money spent on roads as investment, and money spent on railways as subsidy.

I wish we even saw money spent on roads as an investment. My highway engineer friend pointed out the other day:

22% of the 2700 bridges in District 6 (Philadelphia 5-county area) are structurally deficient.
The federal highway trust fund is projected to run out of money sometime next year.

America cares about building highways, but when it comes to maintaining them, it's just as bad as with the railroads. Maintenance has no immediate gratification. Maintenance shuts down a "perfectly good bridge" for a year, inconveniencing everyone. Maintenance prevents resources from going into new construction. Maintenance exists to employ people. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. These are common attitudes! A major bridge collapse happens every now and then, and it's a big deal, and we say "wow, we'd better inspect all the bridges!", and then we see the price tag and it gets forgotten about.

Basically, I think Americans care about construction and not about infrastructure, and since highway construction has been a state-paid-for venture for everyone's lifetime nobody has a problem with that, but since railroad construction has been a private-industry venture for everyone's lifetime in America... railroads can't even get capital funding. But neither roads nor rails get maintenance money willingly from taxpayers.

The federal highway trust fund will continue on better footing if the federal gas tax is raised. Think there's any way any politician can lobby for that?

 

[amamba]

Damn the fact the big dig couldn't produce a South Station to North Station tunnel...

There doesn't seem to be any reason why several billion dollars couldn't put a heavy rail tunnel under I-93 at some point in the future.

I'm not sure that the political will can exist to do this. I am pretty sure bostonians are pretty tapped out with anything big dig related. Let's hope if they do this some day, that they at least use regulation concrete and correctly adhere ceiling tiles so it doesn't become the tunnel of death again.

 

[VentureForth]

Hi Rafi. Can you explain the difference in the Texas Eagle/Sunset Limited and LSL as far as the split/combine? Thanks!

Hi Mark,

Sure. The Lake Shore and Empire Builder actually split into two separate, distinct trains, kind of like a worm getting cut in half. Coming the other way, the two separate trains combine into one.

Is that totally accurate? How come Business Class is only available from ALB to BOS?

 

[printman2000]

Hi Rafi. Can you explain the difference in the Texas Eagle/Sunset Limited and LSL as far as the split/combine? Thanks!

Hi Mark,

Sure. The Lake Shore and Empire Builder actually split into two separate, distinct trains, kind of like a worm getting cut in half. Coming the other way, the two separate trains combine into one.

Is that totally accurate? How come Business Class is only available from ALB to BOS?

Well, I assume Rafi was talking about the LSL in as much as what is going to happen come the end of October (or what is been said to happen). The way it runs now, LSL trainset stays together all the way CHI-NYP and those going to Boston go across the platform in Albany to a stub train that runs ALB-BOS.

 

[Rafi]

Yep, printman's correct. What I described above becomes effective October 27 (which is when the LSL stub from BOS-ALB loses business class, takes on through coaches and is supposed to get that through sleeper unless something changes).

 

[Railroad Bill]

Wife and I just returned Thursday AM from a NYP to CLE run on the LSL. Had a long conversation with the conductor in the lounge car and she noted that sleeper service would begin soon? between Boston and Albany. Still getting bugs out on how to get the CHI-ALB train split up in Albany

As to the discussion re: equipment, I would note that wife and I were the only people in our 4910 sleeper from NYP to Albany. There were two other sleepers on the train as well as three coaches and they were not full. When we arrived in Albany there were a hoard of Boston people boarding our car and the other two sleepers.

Perhaps the extra sleeper can be found on the regular LSL run. (Taking the "extra" sleeper off the NYP to Albany and back and placing it on the Albany-Boston and back run. Seemed to be several Viewliner cars and locos in the Albany Amtrak shops when we passed by. :unsure:

Had a great time on our CLE-CHI-NOL-NYP-CLE five day tour. Will have a trip report later.

Railroad and Mrs. Bill lovin' Amtrak

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

I'm not sure that the political will can exist to do this. I am pretty sure bostonians are pretty tapped out with anything big dig related. Let's hope if they do this some day, that they at least use regulation concrete and correctly adhere ceiling tiles so it doesn't become the tunnel of death again.

The purpose of the ceiling tiles is purely aesthetic, and they tend to be omitted from railroad tunnels.

The North South Rail Link is not going to be paid for entirely by state money; the state has a finite amount of money, and IIRC about 45% of the state's population favors eliminating the income tax, as is proposed on our first ballot question next month. Raising income taxes would likely lead to more people voting in favor of eliminating the income tax, which would have a severe impact on state and local services if it meant that would actually pass.

The federal government can just print more money if they want to spend more than they tax. The states don't really have that option.

If next year's Congress has an easier time making investments that would reduce our petroleum consumption (perhaps as a result of having a President and Vice President who don't have a history of involvement with Halliburton), perhaps we'll see some federal money for this. Massachusetts apparently can afford to pay for the Green Line extension to Somerville and Medford without federal assistance, at somewhere over half a billion dollars; if the federal government provided 90% of the construction money for both the Green Line and the NSRL, we might be able to come up with the last 10% (though it might still be a stretch; if MA pays $500 million and that's supposed to be 10% of the total, and the Green Line costs $500 million, that only leaves $4.5 billion for the NSRL, which I'm not really sure will be enough).

 

[PRR 60]

...The purpose of the ceiling tiles is purely aesthetic, and they tend to be omitted from railroad tunnels.

Your right that tile ceilings and walls can be omitted in railroad tunnels, but the purpose in highway tunnels is not aesthetics. The tiled wall and ceilings in highway tunnels is to provide a surface that can be cleaned and kept light in color so the interior lighting can maintain the required level of illumination for traffic safety.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

The federal government can just print more money if they want to spend more than they tax.

That opinion is so hilariously naive that I am speechless.

 

[printman2000]

From NARP...

Amtrak has revised plans to reinstate the Lake Shore Limited thru cars. While thru car operations will resume on October 27, a sleeping car going to and from Boston will not be added for an unknown number of days.

http://www.narprail.org/cms/index.php/hotl...re/hotline_575/

 

[rtabern]

Sounds like the same answer when you ask about the Sunset Limited restoration between NOL-ORL

 

[PRR 60]

From NARP...

Amtrak has revised plans to reinstate the Lake Shore Limited thru cars. While thru car operations will resume on October 27, a sleeping car going to and from Boston will not be added for an unknown number of days.

http://www.narprail.org/cms/index.php/hotl...re/hotline_575/

Any number of days between 1 and 100,000?