LD on downward path

[Bob Dylan]

The answer is not to eliminate the oldest continuously run LD Train in the US but to make the Texas Eagle Daily from CHI-LAX with stub train from SAS to NOL!

And eliminate the CONO?

No, the CONO needs to be made a single level train to free up Superliner equipment ( it uses run through equipment with the Texas Eagle most days) and be expanded from NOL to Jacksonville so as to connect with the Silver Trains! Return of the Sunset East ( "suspended" since Katrina) by another name!

 

[WoodyinNYC]

It makes no sense to constantly complain about

the lack of spare equipment

...

Will coaches be freed up from the Regionals when

they start running more Acelas at peak times? There's

a very tight limit on how many trains can run each hour

thru the Hudson tunnels. So if you add one more Acela

on the half hour, something's got to give. Would it be

possible then to switch a few trains worth of coaches

from the NEC to the LD trains?

Amtrak really needs to buy more Viewliner IIs.

 

[guest_nj_2]

I don't know the CONO ridership statistics, so wouldn't advocate eliminating it just yet.

However, it has been known for a while that ridership is quite low on SL and on the

middle part (DEN-SLC in particular) of CZ outside of "touristy" Summer months.

So, why not to go after the "easy" targets first, and investigate CONO later ?

I would rather use the extra equipment for increased frequencies / lengthening

of decently performing trains than to keep SL just because it's the "oldest continuously

running LD train". Who cares ?? It's business after all, not a melodrama that is

controlled by emotions.

 

[George K]

CONO is a 19 hour trip - unless you can shorten the ride somehow, can you eliminate sleepers ( I know you said Superliners, but did you mean sleepers?)?

 

[Bob Dylan]

Guess you've never noticed that when Amtrak routes disappear they don't come back! ( ie Desert Wind/ Pioneer/Lone Star/Broadway Ltd./ Three Rivers etc)

Amtrak is supposed to be a NATIONAL Passenger Rail Network, not a Regional One or the NEC System!

As the old saying goes, be careful what you ask for, you might get it!!

Once cuts start they tend to spread! Less is not more! That's not emotion, that's a fact! YMMV

 

[Bob Dylan]

CONO is a 19 hour trip - unless you can shorten the ride somehow, can you eliminate sleepers ( I know you said Superliners, but did you mean sleepers?)?

No, the Superliner Equipment would be replaced by Single Level equipment freeing up the Superliner Equipment to be used where needed! Same thing could be done with the Cap Ltd., the only Superliner equipped Eastern Train!!!

 

[George K]

I just re-read your comment about single level, Jim. I assume you mean convert it to Viewliners, rather than eliminate sleepers altogether.

Right?

Edit: We cross posted!

Edit again: Why is the Cap Limited Superliners? Lack of Viewliners?

 

[guest_nj_2]

Sometimes less is better than more.

Less of "good" stuff is definitely better than more of "bad" stuff.

Truisms aside, having a somewhat "lesser" system of trains that

are full and running like clockwork would be much better than what we have now.

And please don't immediately bring the "NEC bias". Well-patronized

East-West trains with established "need" (like EB) would stay, just the "dogs" would

be cut out.

 

[William W.]

I will not pay more than $300-400 for an Amtrak ticket. I used points for my EB/CS trip this January, and that's how I intend to pay for bigger trips in the future.

A roundtrip bedroom ticket on the EB can cost 2.5-3K. That is simply too much for me, based on the level of service, and amenities. I can get a roundtrip business class ticket to Europe for 3-4K these days.

 

[Ryan]

Edit again: Why is the Cap Limited Superliners? Lack of Viewliners?

Pretty much.

 

[guest_nj_2]

One theme that is constant throughout this forum is how convenient Amtrak

travel is, especially comparing to the airlines.

Well, there are many things that make Amtrak REALLY INCONVENIENT,

that nobody wants to talk about.

1. Amtrak stations are in city centers, whereas airports are far away.

True in cities like New York, Boston, Philadelphia, etc. But in smaller

places you may need to drive as much to the Amtrak station as to the

airport. Heck, even in NJ where I live, it takes faster to get to the

Newark airport than to the Metropark Amtrak station.

2. Once you are in the airport, hell breaks loose (TSA, security lines, etc.)

Well, TSA checkpoints aside, airports are actually INFINITELY MORE

CONVENIENT than typical Amtrak stations. Sometimes there is hardly

a station at all, just the platform.

- at the airport, you check your luggage outright.

at the Amtrak station, you have to haul your luggage with you until train

arrives (unless you are at a megastation like NYP that may have a baggage

service)

- at the airport, you usually can sit in a comfortable waiting area (with Wi-Fi and

charging outlets), with multiple food vendor options and often a big TV on the

wall -- surely makes it amenable to wait for a delayed flight.

at the Amtrak station, you may be sitting on a bench in a shack (that is generously

called a "station") with a vending machine (and no TV in sight). Also, you may be

biding time with complete strangers, sometimes of questionable quality (at the airport,

you are surrounded by ticketed passengers).

- at the airport, boarding process takes at least 35-45 minutes (depending on aircraft).

at smaller Amtrak stations (BWI or Metropark), boarding takes 1-2 minutes.

Unless you are an "expert" in a given station and know exactly where each train car

stops, it may be quite a hassle to run (with luggage) from the middle of a car to the

nearest open door. And although the train probably won't depart if an attendant sees

you hustling on the platform, this may NOT be true if you want to disembark the train.

Unless you start preparing to exit very well in advance, you may MISS exiting at your

station as the doors will close and train starts moving again.

- watching scenery beneath the airplane (from the window) may be as entertaining (if

not more, depending on weather) than watching the scenery from the window of

Amtrak train (especially if this is a Silver train or the Auto Train, where there is hardly

any scenery outside).

- comfort -- although Amtrak clearly wins here, it's not in all rounds.

Sure, leg room in coach is great, and the whole bedroom concept is great.

But, Amfleet I seats DO NOT HAVE ELBOW RESTS (!), which makes even a 4-hour

ride in the aisle seat potentially muscle-aching.

And the height of second-level berths in roomettes and family bedrooms is not that

large (which can make one, particularly with asthma or other breathing problems) quite

claustrophobic.

And, on almost full trains, it may be a challenge to actually find an open coach seat.

One may need to walk down 3-4 cars before finding it. And if you are a group of 2-3

people (small enough to be called a "large group" and have a block of seats reserved for

you), you may end up riding in different cars.

- interaction with fellow passengers, another topic frequently brought by Amtrak protagonists.

Well, it's all good unless these passengers are mean-spirited (for whatever reason).

I actually had a few fiery exchanges with passengers in Auto Train lounge car (mostly for

expressing opposing opinions). And unless you are in your room alone, coach travel is not that

different between plane and train as far as passenger interactions are concerned.

And I deliberately did NOT mention issues like OTP, [sometimes] rude service, disappearing amenities, etc.

All in all, train travel seems to be *WAY OVERRATED*.

People still use it because they like it and because in some cases (like NEC) it may be convenient.

But it seems unfathomable that given all the above people are willing to pay OUTRAGEOUS PRICES

for train travel.

People would tolerate all of the above if Amtrak travel was priced at the level of European low-cost

airlines (like RyanAir). But, given today's Amtrak price levels, it's hard to imagine how people tolerate

all these issues.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

Edit again: Why is the Cap Limited Superliners? Lack of Viewliners?

Pretty much.

I'm sure that bi-level cars, carrying more passengers, are more

efficient (better revenue to cost ratios) than the single-level cars.

So even if you had plenty of both types, you'd want to carefully

study it before making a switch on the Capitol Ltd or the City of

New Orleans, or the Sunset Ltd east of San Antonio.

I remain convinced that Amtrak will find a way somehow to buy

more single-level coaches to replace the worst of the Amfleets

and take the Cardinal daily.

It's much harder to see how it can buy BOTH enuff single-level

coaches for Eastern trains AND bi-level equipment for the West

for years to come. All the economies of mass manufacturing are

lost if the orders are spread too thin.

So to replace the worst cars and expand the capacity of the

Western trains (and take the Sunset daily), one or two or three

Superliner routes may have to become Viewliner routes for

some time.

 

[Ryan]

All in all, train travel seems to be *WAY OVERRATED*.

People still use it because they like it and because in some cases (like NEC) it may be convenient.

But it seems unfathomable that given all the above people are willing to pay OUTRAGEOUS PRICES

for train travel.

People would tolerate all of the above if Amtrak travel was priced at the level of European low-cost

airlines (like RyanAir). But, given today's Amtrak price levels, it's hard to imagine how people tolerate

all these issues.

Yet they do, all the time. Crazy how things work out like that.

 

[guest_nj_2]

Well, in the US [domestic] airplanes carry 60 million passengers A MONTH.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/press_releases/bts052_14

Amtrak carries 30+ million passengers A YEAR.

So, RyanS, let's see who does what "all the time" ...

 

[guest_nj_2]

Amtrak is and will always be a "niche" transportation (and even "more niche" in LD sector)

until it reinvents itself.

 

[FormerOBS]

Maybe I'm missing something. I hear the suggestion that the CL should be converted to single level, but I am unclear as to the reasoning. Is it simply to free up Superliner equipment for other trains, or is it because you see an advantage to the CL itself? The are two possible advantages that I see, both of which would involve more equipment:

1. Initiate a through sleeper service NYP to PGH, with the cars being picked up/dropped midway for through service to Chicago. This would enable direct sleeper service Philadelphia or Harrisburg to Chicago. Possibly a through coach, too.

2. Initiate through sleeper and coach service Chicago to Miami using CL/Star, connecting at Washington.

Tom

 

[Anderson]

Maybe I'm missing something. I hear the suggestion that the CL should be converted to single level, but I am unclear as to the reasoning. Is it simply to free up Superliner equipment for other trains, or is it because you see an advantage to the CL itself? The are two possible advantages that I see, both of which would involve more equipment:

1. Initiate a through sleeper service NYP to PGH, with the cars being picked up/dropped midway for through service to Chicago. This would enable direct sleeper service Philadelphia or Harrisburg to Chicago. Possibly a through coach, too.

2. Initiate through sleeper and coach service Chicago to Miami using CL/Star, connecting at Washington.

Tom

I read it as a matter of (A) freeing up the equipment and (B) easing the operation of through cars. Six sleepers gets you an extra one on any of your western LD trains, and the Cap's equipment could probably be recombined for 2-3 extra sets for any of those trains.

With that being said, my read is that we'd need 4-5 single-level sleepers per set of the Cap at present (so the train would probably be somewhere in the range of 9-13 cars long out of WAS), and another 3-5 added at PGH. It would be a massive train getting into Chicago, though Union Station should be capable of handling that.

 

[tonys96]

Amtrak is and will always be a "niche" transportation (and even "more niche" in LD sector)

until it reinvents itself.

Agreed. And that is the whole darned idea.

 

[Ryan]

Well, in the US [domestic] airplanes carry 60 million passengers A MONTH.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/press_releases/bts052_14

Amtrak carries 30+ million passengers A YEAR.

So, RyanS, let's see who does what "all the time" ...

I'm not sure what your point is. Despite your doom and gloom about how awful trains are, 30 million people manage to use them each year, and the number continues to climb. Obviously they don't share the same opinion as you do.

The number of people that use other travel modes is irrelevant. It isn't a competition.

 

[Dakota 400]

All of the previous discussions are interesting. After traveling in October on the Crescent, the Sunset Limnited, and the Southwest Chief, for Amtrak to present its best face to the traveling public a major investment in management time and skills are needed to improve the consistency of the product offered to Amtrak guests. LD trains are viable in my opinion. But, the experiences and explanations for the variations in such experiences from one train to another is not.

GET EVERYBODY ON THE SAME PAGE COAST TO COAST!

 

[Anderson]

Well, in the US [domestic] airplanes carry 60 million passengers A MONTH.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/press_releases/bts052_14

Amtrak carries 30+ million passengers A YEAR.

So, RyanS, let's see who does what "all the time" ...

I'm not sure what your point is. Despite your doom and gloom about how awful trains are, 30 million people manage to use them each year, and the number continues to climb. Obviously they don't share the same opinion as you do.

The number of people that use other travel modes is irrelevant. It isn't a competition.

The number is also, as discussed numerous times elsewhere, hamstrung by capacity issues. That ridership of 30 million has been achieved on basically the same batch of equipment that it was generating 25-30% less with a few years back. Kicking out 700,000 for bad estimates before, the current set of equipment probably maxes out at 33-35 million riders per year overall. The LD trains probably max out at around 5-5.5 million, the NE Regionals probably at about 9-10 million (though the story there is a bit more complex because of the Virginia Regional situation; you'd be looking at somewhere in the 10 million plus range since VA adds close to another million or so). I can't guess at the state corridors...some trains are likely closing in on capacity, but others likely still have room to run.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

Well, in the US [domestic] airplanes carry 60 million passengers A MONTH.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/press_releases/bts052_14

Amtrak carries 30+ million passengers A YEAR.

I'm not sure what your point is. Despite your doom and gloom about how awful trains are,

30 million people manage to use them each year, and the number continues to climb. ...

The number of people that use other travel modes is irrelevant. It isn't a competition.

The number is also, as discussed numerous times elsewhere, hamstrung by capacity issues. …

There are also capacity issues on the tracks. Penn Station is crowded, but the Hudson Tunnels are rationed. If free Viewliners started popping up like mushrooms in Elmira, you still couldn't get more long distance trains heading south out of NYC, not even the always-desired day train to Atlanta. Oh, and if the day train to Atlanta made it into New Jersey, it couldn't cross into Virginia until the Potomac Long Bridge is expanded. We all like to see more trains NYC-Chicago, an extended Pennsylvanian or a Broadway Ltd. But between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, the NS says that to get another passenger train thru, they'd need another set of tracks. On CSX thru Upstate New York you get a similar sad song and dance. On the South of the Lake segment heading into Chicago, NS can't even get the 7 current passenger trains thru on time -- or its own freights, for that matter -- so how to add another frequency to the popular Wolverines from Chicago to Kalamazoo, Ann Arbor, Dearborn, and Detroit?

 

[afigg]

I just re-read your comment about single level, Jim. I assume you mean convert it to Viewliners, rather than eliminate sleepers altogether.

Right?

Edit: We cross posted!

Edit again: Why is the Cap Limited Superliners? Lack of Viewliners?

The CL uses Superliners because it does not operate on the NEC except for a very short distance at WAS. So the route has the clearance for Superliners, even though the Superliner cars are a tight fit under the catenary at DC Union Station. Why not use the more efficient cars with greater capacity for the CL?

The replace the CL or CONO with Viewliner cars proposals are based on the idea that Amtrak is going to buy more Viewliner sleepers, diners, and I assume new Viewliner II coach and cafe cars as there are not enough Amfleet IIs to cover the CL or CONO. Given the likely federal funding siituation facing Amtrak over the next 2+ years against the many outstanding capital project needs, I think the odds are small that Amtrak will buy any additional Viewliners from CAF beyond the 130 car order. The Nippon-Sharyo bi-level car order for CA and the Midwest will free up Superliner coach and coach-cafe cars for use on the LD trains, so the coach car situation for the Superliner LD trains will improve.

Honestly, I have to say that I am glad that many of the proposals and changes pitched in this thread have zero chance of ever being implemented.

 

[afigg]

Well, in the US [domestic] airplanes carry 60 million passengers A MONTH.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/press_releases/bts052_14

Amtrak carries 30+ million passengers A YEAR.

So, RyanS, let's see who does what "all the time" ...

The NYC Subway system carried an average of 5.46 million passengers per weekday in 2013. Lot shorter distances sure, but still way more a month than domestic flights in the US. Yes, this is arguably a silly comparison, but what the heck.

The main reason Amtrak only carries 30+ million passengers a year (which, BTW, does not count intercity travel that one can do on commuter railroads on the NEC.) is the lack of investment in passenger rail over the past 40 to 50 years in the US. If we had kept and modernized a substantial passenger rail network in the Northeast, Midwest, Southeast, and west coast, the intercity passenger rail numbers would be far larger.

 

[Anderson]

Well, in the US [domestic] airplanes carry 60 million passengers A MONTH.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/press_releases/bts052_14

Amtrak carries 30+ million passengers A YEAR.

I'm not sure what your point is. Despite your doom and gloom about how awful trains are,

30 million people manage to use them each year, and the number continues to climb. ...

The number of people that use other travel modes is irrelevant. It isn't a competition.

The number is also, as discussed numerous times elsewhere, hamstrung by capacity issues. …

There are also capacity issues on the tracks. Penn Station is crowded, but the Hudson Tunnels are rationed. If free Viewliners started popping up like mushrooms in Elmira, you still couldn't get more long distance trains heading south out of NYC, not even the always-desired day train to Atlanta. Oh, and if the day train to Atlanta made it into New Jersey, it couldn't cross into Virginia until the Potomac Long Bridge is expanded. We all like to see more trains NYC-Chicago, an extended Pennsylvanian or a Broadway Ltd. But between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, the NS says that to get another passenger train thru, they'd need another set of tracks. On CSX thru Upstate New York you get a similar sad song and dance. On the South of the Lake segment heading into Chicago, NS can't even get the 7 current passenger trains thru on time -- or its own freights, for that matter -- so how to add another frequency to the popular Wolverines from Chicago to Kalamazoo, Ann Arbor, Dearborn, and Detroit?

With respect to that "sad song", one approach that's come up in conversation is to agree to that extra track...but only if the Class I in question is willing to also cede additional slots that can be picked up in the future. For example:

-NS wants an extra track for a second PHL-PGH train? Fine, but if they get the extra track the state (or some entity) get the rights to run, say, 4-5 trains per day on the track and those rights don't vanish if a train is discontinued. Make the agreement in theory for those trains to be added without improvements, albeit knowing that some will be insisted upon.

-UP wants a bunch of improvements to run the additional Coast Daylight. Agree to that with the agreement that at least one more set of slots are to be made available in the future. Alternatively, offer UP a lot of support for double-tracking Tehachapi/somehow getting additional track capacity into LA that way, with part of the agreement being that the state buys out the rest of the Coast Line (while ceding UP operating privileges that are more or less above and beyond what is done at present).