Reason for justifying DW and Pioneer?

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.

johnny.menhennet

Conductor
Joined
Apr 17, 2011
Messages
1,425
Location
Solana Beach, CA
I was wondering something about the cuts of 1979. The cuts took a devastating toll to the LD network, and it was supposedly to save money. However, that same year, the Pioneer and Desert Wind, and maybe others I don't know, were started in previously unserved markets without state funding. So if so many popular trains were all cut, then what was the justification for spending more money and using more equipment to start new routes at a time when Amtrak "couldn't afford to keep the money-losing LD services?" Was this politically motivated in an attempt to please the lawmakers in the west?
 
I was wondering something about the cuts of 1979. The cuts took a devastating toll to the LD network, and it was supposedly to save money. However, that same year, the Pioneer and Desert Wind, and maybe others I don't know, were started in previously unserved markets without state funding. So if so many popular trains were all cut, then what was the justification for spending more money and using more equipment to start new routes at a time when Amtrak "couldn't afford to keep the money-losing LD services?" Was this politically motivated in an attempt to please the lawmakers in the west?
Craig Sanders in Amtrak in the Heartland goes into this in some detail. I don't have in front of me but my recollection is that yes, there was political pressure in both cases. It's also worth remembering that the Desert Wind started off as something of a corridor train, with no through cars and no sleepers. It was scheduled for a cross-platform transfer in Ogden with the San Francisco Zephyr but that was all. It's also debatable how popular the North Coast Hiawatha, Floridian and National Limited really were, and at least in the latter two cases there were serious operational hurdles (Indiana) to keeping them operating.
 
Well "DW" is needed, because it is my initials!
laugh.gif


Really, yes, I think it was political. No trains served the state of Idaho at all, and there was no train service to Las Vegas, NV! Both the Pioneer and Desert Wind lasted until 1997 when they were cut quickly, with little notice. There was no "180 day notice" at that time, it was started mainly after these quick cuts. (That is why the SL-East is "temporarily suspended" and not "discontinued" - because if Amtrak decided to start service tomorrow, they can. The other 2 routes were "discontinued", and now Amtrak has to reach a new agreement with UP to operate trains, and UP wants $XXX billions in "improvements" before they allow passenger trains again! That does not have to be done on the SL-East, because it was never "discontinued"!)
 
I was wondering something about the cuts of 1979. The cuts took a devastating toll to the LD network, and it was supposedly to save money. However, that same year, the Pioneer and Desert Wind, and maybe others I don't know, were started in previously unserved markets without state funding. So if so many popular trains were all cut, then what was the justification for spending more money and using more equipment to start new routes at a time when Amtrak "couldn't afford to keep the money-losing LD services?" Was this politically motivated in an attempt to please the lawmakers in the west?
Craig Sanders in Amtrak in the Heartland goes into this in some detail. I don't have in front of me but my recollection is that yes, there was political pressure in both cases. It's also worth remembering that the Desert Wind started off as something of a corridor train, with no through cars and no sleepers. It was scheduled for a cross-platform transfer in Ogden with the San Francisco Zephyr but that was all. It's also debatable how popular the North Coast Hiawatha, Floridian and National Limited really were, and at least in the latter two cases there were serious operational hurdles (Indiana) to keeping them operating.
The Pioneer actually started in 1977, a couple of years before the big 1979 cuts. As with the Desert Wind, the Pioneer initially just had Amfleet coaches and a dinette, no sleeping car -- though a heritage sleeper was added a year or two later. When I rode it in 1979, the train seemed fairly well patronized.

I don't know the numbers, of course, but one has to wonder if the Seattle-Salt Lake Amfleet version of the Pioneer would have had at least a slightly better chance of long-term survival than the Seattle-Denver Superliner version of the train did. I'm sure the Amfleet version of the train had a much better cost-recovery ratio.

As for the North Coast Hiawatha, it was a surprisingly well-patronized train, especially considering the fact that it only operated tri-weekly for much of its life. I think what did it in was the political notion that it somehow duplicated the Empire Builder's route, even though most of the train's traffic wasn't end-to-end, and that much of its route was a couple hundred miles away from that of the Empire Builder. If I recall correctly, there was actually some question in 1979 which of the two Chicago-Seattle trains should be cut ... the Empire Builder wasn't a clear-cut better performer.
 
When I look at the 1997 NTTs, I see that the Pioneer and DW were there in one timetable with no notice of cancellation and not there in the next! They probably did talk about and notified the passengers about the cancellations and also posted notices in the stations, but they never said much in the NTTs!
 
When I look at the 1997 NTTs, I see that the Pioneer and DW were there in one timetable with no notice of cancellation and not there in the next! They probably did talk about and notified the passengers about the cancellations and also posted notices in the stations, but they never said much in the NTTs!
There was a realtively long lead time on those discontinuances, and the Pioneer got like a 6 month stay of execution, which the Desert Wind didn't. Not sure about the National Timetables, but the word was certainly out and I think there were notices posted in stations, IIRC. I am pretty sure they followed the 180 day rule.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top