Tri-Weekly or Every Other Day?

[railiner]

If a train could not be run daily, as in the case of the Cardinal and the Sunset, which would be a better alternative?

Obviously, running every other day would mean a slight increase in service, with no cases of two days in a row with no service, but tri-weekly schedules would be easier to remember which days a train runs, without the need to consult a calendar.

What are your thoughts on this?

 

[Bob Dylan]

Both suck!

A Daily LD Train is the Minimum acceptable and two Trains a Day is Mas Mejor!

 

[StriderGDM]

So, if I'm following your question, you're asking should a train run Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays like the Cardinal, or run every other day such as:

Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday, Monday, Wednesday Friday, Sunday?

(because if you mean "every other day, but same schedule every week, you end up tri-weekly and the question makes no sense.) (you can't say, well run Saturday AND Sunday because the point is you don't have the equipment to do so.)

 

[the_traveler]

Given the choice, even though both are bad, I'll take tri-weekly as it is now.

"Lets see - I want to travel on Sunday August 17, 2017. Is that the 1st week or the 2nd week? :huh: "

 

[west point]

At one time the Eagle made a 4th trip SAS - LAX. That IMO is probably the best solution. Unfortunately repeat passengers need to know the days of the week. Agree all three options suck and daily is best option.

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

At one time the Eagle made a 4th trip SAS - LAX.

That might've been during the days when the Desert Wind/California Zephyr and Pioneer/Empire Builder split days. Amtrak wanted to provide daily service between Chicago and Denver/Salt Lake City so someone had to get the extra day.

That IMO is probably the best solution.

Would you require extra equipment to run either of the 3 day trains a fourth day? Track rights, etc?

Agree all three options suck and daily is best option.

You're assuming daily is an option. If it was, you probably would've seen it by now. Something is in the way in both cases and your guess is as good as mine: http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/67708-bottlenecks-preventing-cardinalsunset-limited-from-going-daily/

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

Ever other day except Tuesday.

Not sure that works. But one crew, one set of equipment. If the run is short enough. The crew you might need two, work this week off next week.

Just Thinking out aloud.

 

[railiner]

So, if I'm following your question, you're asking should a train run Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays like the Cardinal, or run every other day such as:

Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday, Monday, Wednesday Friday, Sunday?

(because if you mean "every other day, but same schedule every week, you end up tri-weekly and the question makes no sense.) (you can't say, well run Saturday AND Sunday because the point is you don't have the equipment to do so.)

Sorry I made the question confusing....I mean every other day, where the days of operation would change each week...one other advantage of that would mean that for those wishing to begin a trip in conjunction with their days off, it would be possible alternate weeks, while with the tri-weekly schedule, it would never coincide for some...

 

[A Voice]

I'm not sure an every-other-day schedule is practical.

First, additional equipment or crews might be needed; You can't keep making tight turns for long without taking time off for trainset maintenance; That day off may be what keeps things caught up. Adding an extra set of equipment might actually give you enough cars to operate daily, but with only half the revenue with the alternating days schedule.

However, the biggest concern is the confusion to prospective passengers. Knowing there is always a train on Wednesday, for instance, is less confusing than always having to check what days the train runs this week. People aren't going to bend over backwards to accommodate the train's schedule (already bad enough with a tri-weekly operation).

An every-other-day schedule would solve the problem of two days with no train, granted, but you pay (literally) a high price for just two additional trains per month (156 annually for tri-weekly, 181 or 182 for alternating days). The ideal solution is, of course, daily operation; Barring that, running a four day a week schedule would also solve the two days without a train issue and some other shortcomings of tri-weekly schedules (with 208 trains a year).

 

[neroden]

Daily operation is necessary. Four a week would be a tolerable interim schedule.

 

[railiner]

Prior to Amtrak, there were some interesting variations on the less-than-daily schedules. One that comes to mind was the service from Chicago to Florida...each route would have a daily accommodation train, but in addition was a streamliner that ran on alternate days...One day, the PRR South Wind would depart, the next day the IC City of Miami would operate, and IIRC, at one time there was a three way pool, with the C&EI Dixie Flagler.

While each started out on different routes, I believe by the time they reached Florida, they all ran the same schedule on the FEC for the last lap to Miami...

 

[west point]

Suspect that every day service for a train is much more efficient for T&E crews and slightly more for OBS personnel. Take the Sunset. Amtrak has some artificial crew change locations to reduce away from base layovers but it cannot completely eliminate the problem of two day waits one trip a week.

Daily probably will only require 5/3 more T&E as T&E can be reasonable crew lengths but that is only a WAG.

OBS probably would only take twice number ?

 

[Gemuser]

While daily is definitely the best, you could do what RZD [Russian Railways} do and run trains on even date or odd date [missing the 31st of all months] it seem to work for them on lower traffic lines.

Allen

 

[chakk]

The B&O did a similar move with its third sleeper dome car on the Shenandoah (trains 7 and 8) between Washington and Chicago. The dome ran west on even dates, east on odd dates, and skipped the 31st and leap days.

 

[jphjaxfl]

Prior to Amtrak, there were some interesting variations on the less-than-daily schedules. One that comes to mind was the service from Chicago to Florida...each route would have a daily accommodation train, but in addition was a streamliner that ran on alternate days...One day, the PRR South Wind would depart, the next day the IC City of Miami would operate, and IIRC, at one time there was a three way pool, with the C&EI Dixie Flagler.

While each started out on different routes, I believe by the time they reached Florida, they all ran the same schedule on the FEC for the last lap to Miami...

You are correct, but the City of Miami/Southwind was a daily Chicago to Florida train so only the cities and towns enroute had to be concerned about what day the train ran. At one time in the 1940s and 1950s, the Pennsylvania Railroad ran a train from Chicago to Louisville on the days the Southwind did not run so for a while there was daily service on that part of the route. Both the City of Miami and the Southwind required 2 sets of equipment each so it was a great way of having daily service. Much of the 3 days per week service came about in the years immediately before Amtrak started where Railroad like the Espee were trying to get the ICC to approve train offs so they compromised with 3 days per week service. The City of San Francisco between Ogden and Oakland and the Cascade (processor to the Coast Starlight) from Portland to Oakland as well as the Sunset LTD were all 3 times a week when Amtrak started. The Cardinal was actually discontinued altogether, but came back 3 times a week as a compromise when Senator Byrd intervened. In my opinion, anything less than daily is a serious mistake. An old friend of mine was doing a western circle trip on Amtrak with a stopover in San Antonio. He had forgotten the day he was supposed to head west from San Antonio on the Sunset and he arrived at the Amtrak station, he was told he was either a day early or a day late. He ended up flying on that segment, but it sort of made the whole trip a bad experience. He was not a rail enthusiast, just someone who enjoyed traveling by train. He could not understand why they would only run a train 3 times per week.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Right now I live along a less than daily train that leaves on Tuesday, Thursday, and Sunday. As a working age adult this schedule is utterly useless for the types of trips I would make. At least if Amtrak ran this train every even or odd day there would be some weeks when things would line up with my desired transit days and I could continue to ride occasionally. As it stands now the train schedule and my work schedule almost never line up and I almost never ride this route anymore. The passengers at my station are plummeting as well so maybe I'm not the only person with this problem. To everyone who insists that daily is the only option you're basically voting to discontinue the line completely.

 

[A Voice]

To everyone who insists that daily is the only option you're basically voting to discontinue the line completely.

Why? Why would the only alternative to a tri-weekly train be no train at all?

 

[Devil's Advocate]

To everyone who insists that daily is the only option you're basically voting to discontinue the line completely.

Why? Why would the only alternative to a tri-weekly train be no train at all?

I never said there was no alternative to tri-weekly running. I implied that making daily service a requirement for all Amtrak routes would most likely leave the less than daily routes with no service at all. The reasons have been hashed out a hundred times right here on this very forum. Basically they boil down to lack of necessary hardware, lack of funding, lack of political support, and lack of motivation within Amtrak itself. There are ways around each of these issues but Amtrak is not in a position to stretch limited resources even thinner than they are now. If anything Amtrak is in a position to discontinue less than daily operations as part of a compromise during the next Congressional investigation, budget debate, and/or witch-hunt.

 

[Hotblack Desiato]

At one time the Eagle made a 4th trip SAS - LAX.

That might've been during the days when the Desert Wind/California Zephyr and Pioneer/Empire Builder split days. Amtrak wanted to provide daily service between Chicago and Denver/Salt Lake City so someone had to get the extra day.

It was actually after that. The Texas Eagle California Service (as the 4th trip per week was called) ran from 1998 - 2001. The other routes you mention ended in 1997.

As for the actual question for the thread topic (which very few posts have actually addressed), 3x weekly on the same days is typically much easier than the every-other-day, alternating weeks scenario.

You just need to know the days of the week, and you know if the train is or isn't operating. Easier for trip planning to know you can (for example) leave on a Thursday and come back on a Sunday.

The even/odd days-except-for-the-31st model might work on shorter trips, but for a multi-day route like the Sunset, the "except for the 31st" becomes "except for the 1st/2nd following a month with 31 days" exception for downline stations, and that becomes just as confusing. Plus, you still can't count on specific days of the week with certainty.

Yes, it still sucks, but 3x/week on the same days each week makes the best of a bad situation. The alternative just muddies things even more.

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

At one time the Eagle made a 4th trip SAS - LAX.

That might've been during the days when the Desert Wind/California Zephyr and Pioneer/Empire Builder split days. Amtrak wanted to provide daily service between Chicago and Denver/Salt Lake City so someone had to get the extra day.

It was actually after that. The Texas Eagle California Service (as the 4th trip per week was called) ran from 1998 - 2001. The other routes you mention ended in 1997.

The Texas Eagle California Service is also known as the Sunset Limited. Maybe the portion north of San Antonio was 4x/week but I can't believe Texas-California service has ever been more than 3x/week.

 

[A Voice]

At one time the Eagle made a 4th trip SAS - LAX.

That might've been during the days when the Desert Wind/California Zephyr and Pioneer/Empire Builder split days. Amtrak wanted to provide daily service between Chicago and Denver/Salt Lake City so someone had to get the extra day.

It was actually after that. The Texas Eagle California Service (as the 4th trip per week was called) ran from 1998 - 2001. The other routes you mention ended in 1997.

The Texas Eagle California Service is also known as the Sunset Limited. Maybe the portion north of San Antonio was 4x/week but I can't believe Texas-California service has ever been more than 3x/week.

The San Antonia to Los Angeles portion was, indeed, four days a week, driven by mail & express business.

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

At one time the Eagle made a 4th trip SAS - LAX.

That might've been during the days when the Desert Wind/California Zephyr and Pioneer/Empire Builder split days. Amtrak wanted to provide daily service between Chicago and Denver/Salt Lake City so someone had to get the extra day.

It was actually after that. The Texas Eagle California Service (as the 4th trip per week was called) ran from 1998 - 2001. The other routes you mention ended in 1997.

The Texas Eagle California Service is also known as the Sunset Limited. Maybe the portion north of San Antonio was 4x/week but I can't believe Texas-California service has ever been more than 3x/week.

The San Antonia to Los Angeles portion was, indeed, four days a week, driven by mail & express business.

I stand corrected:

http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=20000521n&item=0050

http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=20000521n&item=0052

So the westbound 1 (originated from ORL via NOL) was ThSaMo between SAS-LAX while the westbound 21 was ThFrSaMo. So there was a day where the SL didn't run but the TE just continued through to California while one day the opposite occurred.

It didn't make any sense to me. Why not just run the SL a fourth day then?

 

[Hotblack Desiato]

It didn't make any sense to me. Why not just run the SL a fourth day then?

Because the Texas Eagle was already daily between Chicago and San Antonio. So, it didn't require as much in the way of crew and equipment vs. running an extra day of the Sunset Limited.

As noted, this was back when Amtrak was messing around in the Mail & Express business, and that was the primary driver of this service.

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

It didn't make any sense to me. Why not just run the SL a fourth day then?

Because the Texas Eagle was already daily between Chicago and San Antonio. So, it didn't require as much in the way of crew and equipment vs. running an extra day of the Sunset Limited.

As noted, this was back when Amtrak was messing around in the Mail & Express business, and that was the primary driver of this service.

Why not run the TE to LAX on the remaining days the SL doesn't run? Why run it just one of the four days the SL doesn't run? Why one and not two?

 

[A Voice]

It didn't make any sense to me. Why not just run the SL a fourth day then?

Because the Texas Eagle was already daily between Chicago and San Antonio. So, it didn't require as much in the way of crew and equipment vs. running an extra day of the Sunset Limited.

As noted, this was back when Amtrak was messing around in the Mail & Express business, and that was the primary driver of this service.

Why not run the TE to LAX on the remaining days the SL doesn't run? Why run it just one of the four days the SL doesn't run? Why one and not two?

Again, the additional frequency was for the benefit of express traffic, not the passengers. Run one more day to test the market and grow the business before committing to full operation ( I don't know, but its quite possible Amtrak had a mail or freight contract at the time which called for four trains a week).

At one time - and no, I am not making this up - there was actually talk of two additional Chicago to Los Angeles daily trains via San Antonio.

There were serious problems in planning and - particularly - execution (many equipment related), but the express business had potential; Hence the argument that perhaps Amtrak should again make a (very modest) try at limited express traffic.