Coast Starlight rerouting in September

[George]

Our records indicate that you are scheduled to depart on Amtrak Train number 0011 from Sacramento-CALIFORNIA at 6:35AM on Saturday September 14 and arriving in Los-Angeles-CALIFORNIA.

That train has been re-routed, and your connection point has been changed. For your convenience, Amtrak is providing you with alternate transportation. To speak to an Amtrak representative about transportation options call us at 8772319448 at your earliest convenience.

We apologize for any inconvenience and want to thank you for being a valued Amtrak customer.

Sincerely,
Amtrak

 

[yarrow]

call amtrak and ask what the message means. it's confusing to me. is the train not stopping in sac so you board elsewhere or is there a reroute on the way to los angeles? call and ask

 

[roadman3313]

I believe they are rerouting through Techacapi so there are no stops between OKJ and LAX due to some tunnel work down in Chattsworth (I guess there is no shorter detour?). If you are getting off in between there Id understand a change, however if connecting in LAX and the time didnt change I don't see an obvious change?

 

[leemell]

Anybody know how long the rerouting is for?

 

[roadman3313]

Looking at booking it appears to be just for that day for both trains 11 and 14. Surfliners are also bussed between OXN and LAX with train service North and South of those points.

 

[the_traveler]

If it detours via Techacapi, the time is actually a few hours SHORTER between SAC and LAX nonstop. So #11 would arrive LAX earlier! So I'm confused about that "connection point" statement. The CS does not need any connection between SAC and LAX! (It also has no connection point between SEA or PDX and LAX!)

 

[zephyr17]

If it detours via Techacapi, the time is actually a few hours SHORTER between SAC and LAX nonstop. So #11 would arrive LAX earlier! So I'm confused about that "connection point" statement. The CS does not need any connection between SAC and LAX! (It also has no connection point between SEA or PDX and LAX!)

Not so much the way they've done it the last few times, running the regular route to Oakland, then going over Altamont Pass, and having to do a time-comsuming wye move with hand throws at Lathrop to get on the Valley Sub southbound. The first few detours, where the started the detour in Sacramento, yes, it was much faster.
The thing I am confused about is the alternative transportation notice for SAC-LAX. If they are detouring over Tehachapi, which is my understanding, then no alternative transportation is necessary, the detouring Starlight will serve those points.

From a selfish viewpoint, I will be on the southbound Starlight on 9/18, just a few days later, and I would LOVE to ride over Tehachapi.

 

[Sactobob]

I suspect that Amtrak sent out a mass-produced "one size fits all" notice rather than custom designing the notice to fit each person's individual itinerary.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

If this train is detouring through the Central Valley, why no just run south from SAC straight to SKT then south to LAX? Detouring through OKC dosen't sound logical.

 

[Sactobob]

If this train is detouring through the Central Valley, why no just run south from SAC straight to SKT then south to LAX? Detouring through OKC dosen't sound logical.

On the contrary, it is VERY logical. It avoids having to inconvenience any passengers from Oregon or Washington with destinations in the Bay Area, and any passengers in Davis, Martinez, Emeryville, or Oakland destined for L.A. They can all stay on or take the Starlight rather than having to go part way by bus. It also reduces the cost of bus bridges.

 

[Anderson]

If this train is detouring through the Central Valley, why no just run south from SAC straight to SKT then south to LAX? Detouring through OKC dosen't sound logical.

On the contrary, it is VERY logical. It avoids having to inconvenience any passengers from Oregon or Washington with destinations in the Bay Area, and any passengers in Davis, Martinez, Emeryville, or Oakland destined for L.A. They can all stay on or take the Starlight rather than having to go part way by bus. It also reduces the cost of bus bridges.

There's also the fact that bus bridges or cancellations going the other way are avoided. If the Starlight goes through OKJ and EMY, in particular, they can still pick up a good share of the Bay Area-LA traffic. Not making those stops would either require folks to connect to the train at SAC (which would probably require the bus leave OKJ at 0500 or earlier to make an 0635 connection with any reliability), which would cost that much business.

 

[Sactobo]

If this train is detouring through the Central Valley, why no just run south from SAC straight to SKT then south to LAX? Detouring through OKC dosen't sound logical.

On the contrary, it is VERY logical. It avoids having to inconvenience any passengers from Oregon or Washington with destinations in the Bay Area, and any passengers in Davis, Martinez, Emeryville, or Oakland destined for L.A. They can all stay on or take the Starlight rather than having to go part way by bus. It also reduces the cost of bus bridges.

There's also the fact that bus bridges or cancellations going the other way are avoided. If the Starlight goes through OKJ and EMY, in particular, they can still pick up a good share of the Bay Area-LA traffic. Not making those stops would either require folks to connect to the train at SAC (which would probably require the bus leave OKJ at 0500 or earlier to make an 0635 connection with any reliability), which would cost that much business.

You are right. I should have mentioned that in my earlier post. Several years ago, I boarded in Sacramento one of the first Coast Starlight trains to detour down the San Joaquin valley. It went directly, bypassing the Bay Area. Of course it was faster. In fact we arrived in LA about five hours early!! Of course the railfans loved it, but the train was only about one third full leaving Sacramento, even with the extra railfans aboard, since all the passengers destined to the Bay Area had to bail out in Sacramento to transfer to a Capitol Corridor train (if yhou were in a sleeper would you like to get up before 6am to transfer to another train if wasn't necessary?) Our train also missed all the passengers after Sacramento who were destined for locations further south.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

OK, makes sense. I would still say that from an operational perspective, it's better to bypass OAK. I don't know why the extra bus bridge would be so hard since the bus bridge is already running OAK-LAX, so why not just run it a bit more to SAC?

Edit: Mistake! Should have been OAK!

 

[zephyr17]

I didn't know the Starlight went to Oklahoma City (OKC).

 

[Eric S]

I didn't know the Starlight went to Oklahoma City (OKC).

Maybe a Heartland Starlight? :giggle:

 

[Eris]

OK, makes sense. I would still say that from an operational perspective, it's better to bypass OKC. I don't know why the extra bus bridge would be so hard since the bus bridge is already running OKC-LAX, so why not just run it a bit more to SAC?

Wait. There isn't a bus from Oakland to LAX on that day, there's a train that isn't stopping at any intermediary stations, isn't there?

 

[Anderson]

Ok, let me explain why this might be an issue. Let's say I'm on a vacation and that I am, for the moment, not a railfan. Amtrak reroutes the Starlight starting at Sacramento down to LAX and I am taking it SB from Oakland initially (as IIRC, OKJ is the stop for pax going SB from San Francisco). So I get a message telling me that instead of boarding the train at 0850, I need to board a bus somewhere around 0500 (or indeed, maybe 0430) to go up to Sacramento to catch my train. That's really all I'm told.

Now, not being a railfan and not knowing the scenery at Tehachapi (something that Amtrak won't tell me), only that the train won't be going down the coast, how likely am I to come to the conclusion that this is a bit insane and promptly bail on this trip, opting to either drive or fly?

The same thing applies NB: I'm told that instead of getting to Oakland/Emeryville at around 2130/2200, I'll be getting into Sacramento at midnight and from thence be put on a bus into the bay area, arriving somewhere between 0130 and 0200 (nevermind that my train will probably get in early...again, Amtrak likely won't put a shorter estimated travel time in their notice even if the train would be likely to get into Sacramento at 1900, putting me in Oakland early even after the bus ride).

 

[roadman3313]

OK, makes sense. I would still say that from an operational perspective, it's better to bypass OAK. I don't know why the extra bus bridge would be so hard since the bus bridge is already running OAK-LAX, so why not just run it a bit more to SAC?
Edit: Mistake! Should have been OAK!

If you mean a bus bridge is running to connect the intermediate stations between OKJ and LAX, I do not believe this is the case. Passengers with destinations in between OKJ and LAX would have to transfer to regularly scheduled Coastal Thruway Service 4796 departing OKJ at 9:55am. Passengers travelling from LAX to points North (south of OKJ) would have to take a Pacific Surfliner Bus Substitution from LAX to OXN, Pacific Surfliner Train from LAX to OXN/SLO and then regularly scheduled Coastal Thruway Service to PRB and/or SNS.

The extra bus bridge would be difficult due the number of passengers who get on/off at those stops and the number of buses required. It would also be more logistical work between Amtrak and a Charter Company as an outside charter company provides the service as it is separate from the Amtrak Thruway Contracts.

 

[the_traveler]

And (with apologies to Swadian) most train passengers (not just foamers) would bail on Amtrak if told they must ride a bus or drive. I think given that choice, many would either drive or if possible fly - or even cancel the trip entirely.

 

[railiner]

I looked at the Amtrak service alerts for that date, and could only see mention of delays between Seattle and Portland.....did I miss the California reroute somewhere?

I did see that you could not book Train 11 to any coastal points that date, but did not see any mention in the service alerts.....

Will train 14 also detour on that date?

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

OK, makes sense. I would still say that from an operational perspective, it's better to bypass OAK. I don't know why the extra bus bridge would be so hard since the bus bridge is already running OAK-LAX, so why not just run it a bit more to SAC?
Edit: Mistake! Should have been OAK!

If you mean a bus bridge is running to connect the intermediate stations between OKJ and LAX, I do not believe this is the case. Passengers with destinations in between OKJ and LAX would have to transfer to regularly scheduled Coastal Thruway Service 4796 departing OKJ at 9:55am. Passengers travelling from LAX to points North (south of OKJ) would have to take a Pacific Surfliner Bus Substitution from LAX to OXN, Pacific Surfliner Train from LAX to OXN/SLO and then regularly scheduled Coastal Thruway Service to PRB and/or SNS.

The extra bus bridge would be difficult due the number of passengers who get on/off at those stops and the number of buses required. It would also be more logistical work between Amtrak and a Charter Company as an outside charter company provides the service as it is separate from the Amtrak Thruway Contracts.

Oh no, did I get the Station Code wrong again? I've been so used Greyhound codes for so long that I'm getting lots of Amtrak codes wrong. Greyhound's Oakland station is OAK, but still not OKC! :help:

And (with apologies to Swadian) most train passengers (not just foamers) would bail on Amtrak if told they must ride a bus or drive. I think given that choice, many would either drive or if possible fly - or even cancel the trip entirely.

Well that just means I need to increase bus reputation more. It would be helpful to alleviate the hate, fear, and general aversion of buses that results in pointless bailing out of the trip. But I have no sympathy for the Van Hools that run many Amtrak California Thruways.

Now I don't mean to start another Van Hool argument on this forum.

 

[Anderson]

Swadian,
The simple fact is that there's a substantial difference between a train with a cafe and/or dining car on board on the one hand, and a bus making a stop at McDonald's on the other. The bus may be cheaper. It may even be nominally faster. But even if the seats are comparable to Amtrak's, there's a difference to be had when there's a cafe you can go to at most points during the trip as well as the ability to stretch your legs. And yes, the six to eight hours that a bus from LA-San Francisco is going to take is a bit long to go without OBS.*

It's one thing to have a "bus leg" at an odd end of a trip (San Francisco-Oakland comes to mind) and entirely another to swap in a bus for the whole thing or for a major (i.e. over an hour or so) portion of it, especially once connection time comes into the mix as well. And yes, there are those out there who pick the train because they can get a premium accommodation and relax or sleep the whole way.

Let's consider something for a moment. The Oakland-Bakersfield San Joaquins take 6:11, 6:06, 6:11, and 6:06 SB. NB it's a minute less...so we're looking at 6:10 +/- 5 minutes. Those trains are getting packed with riders (we're on course for somewhere between 1.2m and 1.25m riders on the San Joaquins; ridership there is up somewhere around 55% since FY06 with no material schedule changes). If you could get a train from Bakersfield to LAX in about two hours instead of a bus bridge (yes, it's a big "if" and I recognize this) and/or if you could reduce the time from Oakland to Bakersfield significantly (as with the improvements to the Valley line, even absent CAHSR), it seems likely you could push ridership even further up...the question with an eight-hour train from Oakland-Los Angeles is more whether the trains on the line now could cope with the load than anything.

*Yeah, the Google time is 5:48. Let's face it: A non-stop bus is still going to buffer that time by a little to account for incidental travel delays; gotobus.com lists times running from 6:05 to 8:00, though some buses clearly make multiple stops in each area. Greyhound runs 7:25-9:25 for most trips LA-SF, with an odd one or two running longer but taking a coastal routing. Most of these buses make at least one or two stops for meals and/or to let the driver go to the bathroom as well as to allow some ridership interchanges.

 

[Danial Tijuana]

1st : Yours truly is/am/are going north on Saturday 14 Sept. Coast Starlight with two larail.com PVs (Tioga Pass and Silver Splendor) which are grabbing ahold of train #14 specifically for the Tehachapi loop detour. We will be returning Monday via the regular coastal route. Or so we are told (um, yeah...) Round trip price is 500 (food included), one-way northbound 300, southbound 200. ANYONE WHO WANTS TO GO JUST GO TO larail.com and read the info etc.

So much looking forward to this trip!!!

2nd : Responding to bus comments, yes, generally agree that the train, whether Amtrak or attached PV tour, is preferable to a bus. Have had to use Amtrak busses when service was interrupted and did not like it. HOWEVER I am a bus rider, and often enjoy them, even prefer them to airplanes. Especially have gone long distance in Mexico, where 1st class and Luxury service is (usually) better than Greyhound or Amtrak bus.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

1st : Yours truly is/am/are going north on Saturday 14 Sept. Coast Starlight with two larail.com PVs (Tioga Pass and Silver Splendor) which are grabbing ahold of train #14 specifically for the Tehachapi loop detour. We will be returning Monday via the regular coastal route. Or so we are told (um, yeah...) Round trip price is 500 (food included), one-way northbound 300, southbound 200. ANYONE WHO WANTS TO GO JUST GO TO larail.com and read the info etc.So much looking forward to this trip!!!

2nd : Responding to bus comments, yes, generally agree that the train, whether Amtrak or attached PV tour, is preferable to a bus. Have had to use Amtrak busses when service was interrupted and did not like it. HOWEVER I am a bus rider, and often enjoy them, even prefer them to airplanes. Especially have gone long distance in Mexico, where 1st class and Luxury service is (usually) better than Greyhound or Amtrak bus.

Ahem, while many people like to ride comfortable Mexican buses, they're a lot more dangerous than the American buses. I so wish that Mexico still had train service, I never got to ride a Mexican train and I don't trust Mexican bus companies except Autobuses Expreso Futura which seems OK.

Greyhound dosen't even go to San Diego much (only Phoenix buses are real Greyhounds), so most of your "Greyhound" rides are probably on Cruceros anyway, another Mexican bus company brought by the same parent corporation as Greyhound. Those buses are not going to beat Pacific Surfliner service. And Ambuses are usually pretty bad too, most are Van Hools which aren't any good either.

Bad buses are a lot worse than a bad train, so I have to be picky about them. I would take an Amtrak any day over those irregular buses. But I obviously approve of real Greyhound buses, so I will ride them a lot, too.

 

[Slasharoo]

Our records indicate that you are scheduled to depart on Amtrak Train number 0011 from Sacramento-CALIFORNIA at 6:35AM on Saturday September 14 and arriving in Los-Angeles-CALIFORNIA.
That train has been re-routed, and your connection point has been changed. For your convenience, Amtrak is providing you with alternate transportation. To speak to an Amtrak representative about transportation options call us at 8772319448 at your earliest convenience.

We apologize for any inconvenience and want to thank you for being a valued Amtrak customer.

Sincerely,

Amtrak

I just got an email stating that my reservation on the Coast Starlight from Sacramento to Santa Barbara later this month has changed. I compared the two tickets and noticed that the arrival time in Santa Barbara changed from 6:02 pm to 5:55pm. Whatever they are doing on the line looks to be saving me 7 minutes...at least on paper.