Sunset Limited Coming Back?

[profwebs]

Just got alerted to this article from the AP:

Under the new law, Amtrak has until July to come up with a plan to restore service. The railroad is not required to act on that plan — at least not yet. The law also directs Amtrak to conduct studies about establishing or expanding service in other places, including two Seattle-Chicago routes discontinued years ago.

You can read the rest of the article here.

 

[MrEd]

Let me know the restart date, I have a trip to Mobile planned.

 

[profwebs]

Let me know the restart date, I have a trip to Mobile planned.

Well, being that they have until July to come up with a plan and no set date to launch said plan, you might wanna hold off till 2010

 

[had8ley]

I can see the fall 2009 TT now; "We are now planning to study why we haven't run the Sunset east of NOL for four years now. We will release the results at a later date." I wouldn't call reservations quite yet... <_<

 

[Guest]

I think the result is obvious...

"Amtrak's Plan is to reestablish the Sunset Limited route to FL, and restore the two unprofitable Chicago-Settle routes, as soon as Congress provides sufficient new, additional, grants to fund track, equipment, maintenance, and full operations."

 

[zoltan]

TWO Chicago-Seattle routes restored? Am I alone in thinking that this is focusing investment on certain areas too much?

I do think that if Amtrak is to receive funding in order to expand, the best focus would be on short and medium distance city to city links, like useful daytime trains from New York to Atlanta, Houston to San Antonio, Los Angeles to Phoenix and Chicago to Cincinnati, or Cincinnati to Columbus and Cleveland; which, by being composed entirely of coaches would benefit the most passengers, and by the same token bring in large amounts of fares revenue, and take the maximum numbers of cars off the roads. Amtrak needs to lose the prevention of only doing long haul business outside of the north east if it's to gain more relevance to the majority of Americans.

 

[Shawn]

If they are going to restore service/expand, there are 3 things I would personally love to see:

-Restore the Sunset to FL

-Restore service from Seattle to LA via Salt Lake and Vegas (old Pioneer and Desert Wind)

-Expand service from OKC to St Louis to create a Chicago to Dallas service.

 

[Kevin L.]

It would be nice to have the SL going back to florida, because combined with via rail, one could then circle the entire US, a cool trip idea that I have, and if my first trip works out, it's a possibility.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

they're never going to restore the sunset to its full route. the repairs were made to the damages done by the hurricane so why haven't they restarted it. CSX said you can restore. they just don't want to for political reasons.

 

[MattW]

To be honest, I don't see why they have to completely restore the service to Orlando. Why not truncate it at Jacksonville? Orlando already has two trains each way to and from Jacksonville. Granted, it's easier and probably cheaper from a consumer standpoint to run straight from Orlando all the way through to LA or wherever, but truncating it in Jacksonville would be a bit cheaper would it not? Instead of three trains and the required crew and fuel connecting Orlando to Jacksonville, just have the two with a connection to the SL at Jacksonville. I'd guess the reason for not doing that is maintenance right? At Orlando, it's a short hop up to the Sanford yard for the coaches isn't it?

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

TWO Chicago-Seattle routes restored? Am I alone in thinking that this is focusing investment on certain areas too much?
I do think that if Amtrak is to receive funding in order to expand, the best focus would be on short and medium distance city to city links, like useful daytime trains from New York to Atlanta, Houston to San Antonio, Los Angeles to Phoenix and Chicago to Cincinnati, or Cincinnati to Columbus and Cleveland; which, by being composed entirely of coaches would benefit the most passengers, and by the same token bring in large amounts of fares revenue, and take the maximum numbers of cars off the roads. Amtrak needs to lose the prevention of only doing long haul business outside of the north east if it's to gain more relevance to the majority of Americans.

Well I could see one of the routes restored, but why have three trains going that way? Two would seem sufficient.

The other one would be better used to re-introduce the Desert Wind...

The Tri-C corridor in Ohio will come to pass, I believe, but Ohio needs to put the money into it.

 

[JohnF]

If they are going to restore service/expand, there are 3 things I would personally love to see:
-Restore the Sunset to FL

-Restore service from Seattle to LA via Salt Lake and Vegas (old Pioneer and Desert Wind)

-Expand service from OKC to St Louis to create a Chicago to Dallas service.

This is one post I really don't understand. We already have a Chicago to Dallas service. It's called the Texas Eagle. The track from OKC to St Louis through Tulsa doesn't exist anymore. If you route the Heartland Flyer up to KC then you can connect with the SWC to Chicago. It's on BNSF tracks all the way.

As for the rest of the posts...there are a lot of really uninformed ideas lurking out there it seems. A restored Pioneer and Desert Wind would be nice but they run on the UP so they would never be on time. What is really needed and continually overlooked on here is a Dallas/Ft Worth to Denver train ala the old Texas Zephyr. Colorado is the number one destination for Texas vacationers and there is no service. Also missing since 1965 is corridor service between Dallas and Houston the states two largest population centers.

With regards to the Sunset, daily service would be my priority. Much more important than going back to Florida. The article says they don't have the equipment. Well actually they do. It only takes 5 train sets for daily operation and Amtrak has four sets tied up in the tri-weekly service due to extremely poor scheduling. As for Florida, just serve it with a cheap connecting train from NO using whatever single level hand-me-downs Amtrak can scrape up. Why tie down valuable superliners on this route? It will still take 17 hours to negotiate the 600+ miles to Jacksonville and 3 more down to Orlando requiring at least three train sets. You can drive NO to Orlando in less than 10. Even when it ran on time the service was excrutiatingly slow.

 

[Shawn]

I was being honest about what I would like to see, bypassing OKC on a north-south corridor train doesn't help ridership. Just because you have the Texas Eagle, doesn't mean it goes through all the areas that should be targeted for riders.

Wait you do have service to Denver! You just have to go up north and come back! Oh, wait, kinda like if I want to go from Chicago to OKC?

Seems ironic...

If they are going to restore service/expand, there are 3 things I would personally love to see:
-Restore the Sunset to FL

-Restore service from Seattle to LA via Salt Lake and Vegas (old Pioneer and Desert Wind)

-Expand service from OKC to St Louis to create a Chicago to Dallas service.

This is one post I really don't understand. We already have a Chicago to Dallas service. It's called the Texas Eagle. The track from OKC to St Louis through Tulsa doesn't exist anymore. If you route the Heartland Flyer up to KC then you can connect with the SWC to Chicago. It's on BNSF tracks all the way.

As for the rest of the posts...there are a lot of really uninformed ideas lurking out there it seems. A restored Pioneer and Desert Wind would be nice but they run on the UP so they would never be on time. What is really needed and continually overlooked on here is a Dallas/Ft Worth to Denver train ala the old Texas Zephyr. Colorado is the number one destination for Texas vacationers and there is no service. Also missing since 1965 is corridor service between Dallas and Houston the states two largest population centers.

With regards to the Sunset, daily service would be my priority. Much more important than going back to Florida. The article says they don't have the equipment. Well actually they do. It only takes 5 train sets for daily operation and Amtrak has four sets tied up in the tri-weekly service due to extremely poor scheduling. As for Florida, just serve it with a cheap connecting train from NO using whatever single level hand-me-downs Amtrak can scrape up. Why tie down valuable superliners on this route? It will still take 17 hours to negotiate the 600+ miles to Jacksonville and 3 more down to Orlando requiring at least three train sets. You can drive NO to Orlando in less than 10. Even when it ran on time the service was excrutiatingly slow.

 

[SUNSETLIMITED01]

Personally I hope they restore the Orlando-Los Angeles route. Plus I hope good luck to them. By the way you guys do know that 2009 will mark the 140th anniversary of the Transcontiental route.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Personally I hope they restore the Orlando-Los Angeles route. Plus I hope good luck to them. By the way you guys do know that 2009 will mark the 140th anniversary of the Transcontiental route.

It would be nice, but there are more revenue opportunities out there... or at least opportunities that have a better value.

 

[Tony]

To be honest, I don't see why they have to completely restore the service to Orlando. Why not truncate it at Jacksonville?

I have to agree. The SL could easily connect with the Silvers in Jacksonville. If needed, I guess a SL trainset could then go to Sanford for maintenance, but unfortunately, the Silvers don't stop in Sanford so it would have to be an empty run from Jacksonville to Sanford.

The real question is, would the Silvers have the capacity to handle the passenger load? I mean, for southbound 91 and 97, it would need to travel most of its route with empty seats/sleepers to take on the SL passengers who would board in Jacksonville to travel the remaining southbound route. Though, I guess that the Silvers could have a set of extra couches that only travel from Jacksonville to Miami and back.

 

[AlanB]

To be honest, I don't see why they have to completely restore the service to Orlando. Why not truncate it at Jacksonville? Orlando already has two trains each way to and from Jacksonville. Granted, it's easier and probably cheaper from a consumer standpoint to run straight from Orlando all the way through to LA or wherever, but truncating it in Jacksonville would be a bit cheaper would it not? Instead of three trains and the required crew and fuel connecting Orlando to Jacksonville, just have the two with a connection to the SL at Jacksonville. I'd guess the reason for not doing that is maintenance right? At Orlando, it's a short hop up to the Sanford yard for the coaches isn't it?

While it might be slightly cheaper if one thinks in terms of what's need to run to JAX vs. ORL, that doesn't consider other very important factors.

The first, there no longer is a base in JAX that can clean, service, and reprovision the train. Therefore one of two things must happen, either endure the expense of reopening the service base that one existed in JAX, as well as the expense of keeping it running, or endure the expense of deadheading the trains down to Sanford. And by the way JAX was never setup to handle repairs if something is bad ordered, whereas Sanford is. The deadhead run from ORL to SAN is much shorter than a deadhead run from JAX to SAN.

The second, and perhaps larger reason, is the fact that ORL is an major endpoint destination. Take away ORL from the Sunset's run, and I'd bet that you'd probably loose close to half the ridership that the Sunset used to have east of NOL. Someone traveling from LAX to Disney World is far more likely to consider Amtrak if the train gets them to ORL, than if after 3 days of riding, they have to change trains for another 4 or 5 hours just to get to Disney. They want a one seat ride.

Bottom line, terminate in JAX and you'll loose major revenue.

I don't have the stats available to me right now since I'm in Boston for the OTOL fest, but I'll try to remember to post the stats that show what a one seat ride did to ridership for the Cardinal when it went from terminating in WAS to NYP. The numbers are significant. This is one reason that despite constant rumors that Amtrak is considering putting Superliner equipment back on the Cardinal, that it hasn't happened. The ridership & revenue numbers can't be ignored for the one seat ride.

 

[MattW]

Thanks for enlightening me. I was afraid the one-seat thing would be a factor, I just didn't know how much. Also, I guess I didn't quite understand the difference in servicing between ORL and JAX.

BTW-if you GoogleMaps the Jacksonville station, one of the SB trains is in station! (LOL, I know old news, but it surprised me)

 

[PaulM]

Also missing since 1965 is corridor service between Dallas and Houston the states two largest population centers.

It's probably a case of your blinking and missing it; but in 1994 I rode the Houston section of the Texas Eagle from Houston to Dallas. It was practically empty; so it wasn't surprising that it was dropped during the next cost cutting session.

On the same trip, I rode what I believe was called the Gulf some or other from Birmingham to Mobile. This train carried through cars to and from the Crescent. It also connected the two largest cities in a state, had very few riders, and was dropped soon after.

I developed the theory based on two data points that southerners don't ride trains.

 

[MrEd]

Ap story on the sunset.

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/ap/20081109/twl-c...ad-1be00ca.html

WASHINGTON Until Hurricane Katrina ripped up the railroad tracks east of the Mississippi, Amtrak's Sunset Limited ran from Los Angeles to Sanford, Fla. The tracks were repaired long ago, but Amtrak didn't return east of New Orleans.

The national passenger railroad has said that the service was ineffective and made little financial sense for a company with limited resources. But that explanation doesn't satisfy U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Fla., who chairs a rail subcommittee and whose district felt the impact of suspended service.

Thanks to Brown, comprehensive Amtrak legislation recently signed into law includes a requirement that the railroad come up with a plan to bring back the Sunset Limited.

 

[JohnF]

Also missing since 1965 is corridor service between Dallas and Houston the states two largest population centers.

It's probably a case of your blinking and missing it; but in 1994 I rode the Houston section of the Texas Eagle from Houston to Dallas. It was practically empty; so it wasn't surprising that it was dropped during the next cost cutting session.

On the same trip, I rode what I believe was called the Gulf some or other from Birmingham to Mobile. This train carried through cars to and from the Crescent. It also connected the two largest cities in a state, had very few riders, and was dropped soon after.

I developed the theory based on two data points that southerners don't ride trains.

Yes I was aware of the Houston section of the TE. I even rode it once. It took over 6 hours to negotiate the 265 miles. Amtrak spent millions of dollars to rehab the old Texas Central(SP) route to Dallas, ran the train for a few years then dropped it. That route had not seen passenger trains since 1958. Originally the SP's sunbeam took 4hrs25min to negotiate that distance. There is a much shorter route using the Burlington-Rock Island route, now BNSF, that is only 240 miles long. This route is the one that lasted until 1965. This route once had 4hr service between the two cities. The lobby groups like TXARP down here seem to have forgotten about it as they never mention it. It's still there and in excellent shape. When Amtrak was formed we had the Lone Star(former Texas Chief) which gave good service between Houston/Ft Worth/KC and Chicago and ran until the Carter masacre. That route now hosts the Heartland Flyer and part of the Texas Eagle's route. Then we had the InterAmerican which became the Texas Eagle. For a time it split at Temple with a Houston section. That was the bone they threw us for dropping the Lone Star. Now the only Houston service other than the Sunset is a bus connection to the Eagle at Longview. People here would utilize rail service if it were practical and timely. The Sunset is well patronized considering it only runs three times a week, serves San Antonio in the middle of the night, stops at a woefully pitiful little station in Houston that is hidden behind the main Post Office, stops in Beaumont where there is no station at all, just a concrete slab and never runs on time. The Eagle tries to become an everything train wondering accross Texas making all the stops on it's way north on a well padded schedule, but is still well utilized. As for the Texas to Colorado service, it is never mentioned and seems unlikely to ever be restored. The BNSF route it utilized is clogged with coal trains and very busy. The passenger train advocacy group here, TXARP, does not promote the route. Instead they propose some roundabout route through Lubbock using unsignalled slow tracks to go north from there. It's a pipe dream. I don't belong to TXARP as they have no common sense at all. As a result, down here in Texas we continue to have pitiful service from Amtrak. But, we have Southwest Airlines so who needs it.

 

[Guest]

The Sunset is well patronized considering it only runs three times a week, serves San Antonio in the middle of the night, stops at a woefully pitiful little station in Houston that is hidden behind the main Post Office, stops in Beaumont where there is no station at all, just a concrete slab and never runs on time.

I guess the answer is:

Pass a law requiring Amtrak have schedules which limit stations stops to only the convenient hours of between 9am and 5pm, reguardless of now long the route might be.

Pass a law requiring all cites with passenger rail stops spend a minimum of $85 million on new/upgraded passenger station every 5 years, and state DOTs build limited access super-highways that terminate at those stations.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

I guess the answer is:
Pass a law requiring Amtrak have schedules which limit stations stops to only the convenient hours of between 9am and 5pm, reguardless of now long the route might be.

But that makes the train much less attractive for people going from Chicago to the west coast, if you're going to have only one train along each route.

The real solution is to have multiple trains a day along each route, with tracks used primarily for passenger service along the major routes.

I also find 5PM to be an inconveniently early cutoff time. I would much rather have the option of arriving at the station somewhat later.

Pass a law requiring all cites with passenger rail stops spend a minimum of $85 million on new/upgraded passenger station every 5 years, and state DOTs build limited access super-highways that terminate at those stations.

I don't see where that's necessary (the only upgrade South Station in Boston really needs is some underground tracks that continue north, and $85 million won't come close to paying for that; in the absence of such underground tracks, I can't see anything wrong with the station that would be fixed by spending $85 million); and it would be much better having people taking local transit where possible than driving to railroad stations. I generally get to South Station by walking to the MBTA Red Line, and taking the Red Line from there. Forcing me to rent an automobile to drive to the train station and park at the station for the duration of my trip would be a huge step backwards.

 

[Chris J.]

I guess the answer is:
Pass a law requiring Amtrak have schedules which limit stations stops to only the convenient hours of between 9am and 5pm, reguardless of now long the route might be.

But that makes the train much less attractive for people going from Chicago to the west coast, if you're going to have only one train along each route.

The real solution is to have multiple trains a day along each route, with tracks used primarily for passenger service along the major routes.

I also find 5PM to be an inconveniently early cutoff time. I would much rather have the option of arriving at the station somewhat later.

Limiting stops to 9am-5pm seems a bit overkill - but with multiple trains a day it should be possible to allow the option of a stop between say 8am and 7pm. There may well be other stops, maybe one at 4am - that may work better for some people, so why remove that option?

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I think this guest is being sarcastic. I hope so. Otherwise, they need their head examined.