Empire Builder vs Canadian

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
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.
H

henryj

Conductor
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
1,589
Location
Houston, Texas
Much has been written about the EB's suspension due to weather and it looks like it is still suspended today the 6th. My question for the experts on here is how has this weather affected it's neighbor to the north, Via's Canadian. When I rode it in 2008 the crew talked some about the ferocious winters they encountered and how the weather was so bad that passengers could not get off at certain stops for a smoke or to just walk around as the cold and wind were too dangerous. So how does Via cope with this type of weather when Amtrak cannot?
 
henryj said:
Much has been written about the EB's suspension due to weather and it looks like it is still suspended today the 6th. My question for the experts on here is how has this weather affected it's neighbor to the north, Via's Canadian. When I rode it in 2008 the crew talked some about the ferocious winters they encountered and how the weather was so bad that passengers could not get off at certain stops for a smoke or to just walk around as the cold and wind were too dangerous. So how does Via cope with this type of weather when Amtrak cannot?
Click to expand...

Most likely they are serious about running a rail passenger system. It seems that most at amtrak aren't. Nor is our government, at least in recent past.
 
Larry H. said:
henryj said:
Much has been written about the EB's suspension due to weather and it looks like it is still suspended today the 6th. My question for the experts on here is how has this weather affected it's neighbor to the north, Via's Canadian. When I rode it in 2008 the crew talked some about the ferocious winters they encountered and how the weather was so bad that passengers could not get off at certain stops for a smoke or to just walk around as the cold and wind were too dangerous. So how does Via cope with this type of weather when Amtrak cannot?
Click to expand...

Most likely they are serious about running a rail passenger system. It seems that most at amtrak aren't. Nor is our government, at least in recent past.
Click to expand...
It also seems to me that much depends on whether the Freight Railroad(s) on which Amtrak runs also has some say in the matter. If they're having trouble keeping the line clear for use what choice does Amtrak have?
 
i think it was a couple years ago during a bad stretch of winter, amtrak was totally helpless and i checked the via site for delays. they had a very apologetic note that due to the bad weather the canadian could be running up to 20 minutes late. check out this week's rail passenger assoc. letter (1/05/10) in the pinned topic at the top of the board. a great synopsis of the amtrak operational philosophy
 
yarrow said:
i think it was a couple years ago during a bad stretch of winter, amtrak was totally helpless and i checked the via site for delays. they had a very apologetic note that due to the bad weather the canadian could be running up to 20 minutes late. check out this week's rail passenger assoc. letter (1/05/10) in the pinned topic at the top of the board. a great synopsis of the amtrak operational philosophy
Click to expand...
Could you provide a link to this newsletter? I joined NARP a while back but for some reason all they send me are more subscription offers and an occasional newsletter in the mail...
 
yarrow said:
i think it was a couple years ago during a bad stretch of winter, amtrak was totally helpless and i checked the via site for delays. they had a very apologetic note that due to the bad weather the canadian could be running up to 20 minutes late. check out this week's rail passenger assoc. letter (1/05/10) in the pinned topic at the top of the board. a great synopsis of the amtrak operational philosophy
Click to expand...
Via also charges more, I believe. Yes, they are superior in their service and seriousness of train travel, but they are subject to the same political woes we are here.

I don't think that the delays have anything to do with freight or clearing of the lines. I can't understand for the life of me how they can't seem to have equipment that can handle the cold. Aircraft have been designed for over a half century to be able to handle temps down to 40 below and still be completely operational. It's ridiculous that a train can't be made to the same requirements - seemingly only in this country.
 
Larry H. said:
henryj said:
Much has been written about the EB's suspension due to weather and it looks like it is still suspended today the 6th. My question for the experts on here is how has this weather affected it's neighbor to the north, Via's Canadian. When I rode it in 2008 the crew talked some about the ferocious winters they encountered and how the weather was so bad that passengers could not get off at certain stops for a smoke or to just walk around as the cold and wind were too dangerous. So how does Via cope with this type of weather when Amtrak cannot?
Click to expand...

Most likely they are serious about running a rail passenger system. It seems that most at amtrak aren't. Nor is our government, at least in recent past.
Click to expand...
They can't be that serious since the Canadian only runs three days a week.
 
..and last time I compared prices online, similar accommodations on the Canadian from Vancouver to Toronto (similar to Seattle to Chicago) were roughly four times the price, even after converting the currency...
 
If you were traveling from Vancouver BC to Toronto on 1/8/10, the "Economy Discounted" fare would be Fare: $497.00, with a total, including the G.S.T./H.S.T. of $24.85, of $521.85 (US$505.42).

A "Reserved Coach" ticket from Seattle to Chicago would run from $236.00 on $334.00 on The Builder, and $358.00 via The Coast Starlight and The California Zephyr. The cheapest ticket would be a bit of a "Robin Hood's barn" ride, including a trip from Seattle to Portland on the Cascades, then going east on the Portland section of the Builder. You could also save $34.00 buying a ticket from Seattle to Spokane on #8, then taking #28 from Spokane to Chicago.

If you wanted to take a sleeping car, an "Upper Berth - Discounted" on The Canadian would set you back $834.00 + G.S.T./H.S.T. of $41.70, for a total of $875.70 (US$847.77).

Traveling from Seattle to Chicago on the same day in a "Superliner Roomette" (which I'm taking to be the closest equivalent to the "Upper Berth" on the VIA Rail service) would add $311.00 to the $334.00 Seattle-Chicago direct fare, or $262.00 + $184.00 ($446.00) to the trip via Sacramento on the Starlight and Zephyr. (The other "Superliner Roomette" options, e.g., via Portland, are sold out.)

I understand The Canadian sleeping car room includes meals.
 
Henry,

One way that VIA deals with the cold weather is that they have more time to actually service the equipment. First, during the run itself, there are a few major stops where the train just sits for hours on end. This time can either be used to fix things if the train is running on time, and of course it can be used as recovery time too. Going westbound for example, there's 35 minutes at Kamloops, an hour and a half at Jasper, 45 minutes at Edmonton, 3 hours at Winnipeg, 35 minutes at Hornepayne, 30 minutes at Capreol.

And then at the end point in Vancouver for example, VIA assuming an ontime arrival which with all the padding typically happens, the crews have from 9:42 AM until say 7:30 PM the next day to get the train ready. And technically they could keep working on things right up and until the scheduled 8:30 PM departure. That's basically 22 hours to not only clean and restock the train, but to fix issues and work on things.

Contrast that with the EB that if on time, arrives at 10:25 AM and has to be back in the station by 4:00 PM, a mere 6 hours later.

I'm not saying that Amtrak couldn't be doing better with things, and they do have more time on the Chicago end to do work (in fact almost as much time as VIA has), but still there are big differences. VIA's getting 22 hours on one end and 10 on the other; Amtrak gets 20 on one end if on time, 6 on the other; and VIA only has to deal with one long distance train on each end. Seattle has two; Chicago has 7 daily LD's to deal with, plus the 3 day a week Cardinal.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MikeM said:
yarrow said:
i think it was a couple years ago during a bad stretch of winter, amtrak was totally helpless and i checked the via site for delays. they had a very apologetic note that due to the bad weather the canadian could be running up to 20 minutes late. check out this week's rail passenger assoc. letter (1/05/10) in the pinned topic at the top of the board. a great synopsis of the amtrak operational philosophy
Click to expand...
Could you provide a link to this newsletter? I joined NARP a while back but for some reason all they send me are more subscription offers and an occasional newsletter in the mail...
Click to expand...
If you are reading someone else’s copy of This Week at Amtrak, you can receive your own free copy each edition by sending your e-mail address to

[email protected]

You MUST include your name, preferred e-mail address, and city and state where you live. If you have filters or firewalls placed on your Internet connection, set your e-mail to receive incoming mail from [email protected]; we are unable to go through any approvals processes for individuals. This mailing list is kept strictly confidential and is not shared or used for any purposes other than distribution of This Week at Amtrak or related URPA materials.
 
AlanB said:
Henry,
One way that VIA deals with the cold weather is that they have more time to actually service the equipment. First, during the run itself, there are a few major stops where the train just sits for hours on end. This time can either be used to fix things if the train is running on time, and of course it can be used as recovery time too. Going westbound for example, there's 35 minutes at Kamloops, an hour and a half at Jasper, 45 minutes at Edmonton, 3 hours at Winnipeg, 35 minutes at Hornepayne, 30 minutes at Capreol.

And then at the end point in Vancouver for example, VIA assuming an ontime arrival which with all the padding typically happens, the crews have from 9:42 AM until say 7:30 PM the next day to get the train ready. And technically they could keep working on things right up and until the scheduled 8:30 PM departure. That's basically 22 hours to not only clean and restock the train, but to fix issues and work on things.

Contrast that with the EB that if on time, arrives at 10:25 AM and has to be back in the station by 4:00 PM, a mere 6 hours later.

I'm not saying that Amtrak couldn't be doing better with things, and they do have more time on the Chicago end to do work (in fact almost as much time as VIA has), but still there are big differences. VIA's getting 22 hours on one end and 10 on the other; Amtrak gets 20 on one end if on time, 6 on the other; and VIA only has to deal with one long distance train on each end. Seattle has two; Chicago has 7 daily LD's to deal with, plus the 3 day a week Cardinal.
Click to expand...

Alan, I can appreciate that, but if you are running multiple trains then you have the staff to deal with it and even more equipment to pull from. The Canadian has only the equipment on the train. But to take it even further, Via has many many trains including long distance and corridor trains all of which operate north of our borders and thus have to cope with this same weather every year, year after year and they do it seemingly with ease.

Finally, if the line is blocked out there in North Dakota, you would think they could at least operate Chicago to Minneapolis/St Paul and perhaps Seattle to Spokane with some kind of stub train wouldn't you? Winter comes every year for Amtrak and seemingly they are never prepared.
 
In any case, the question for me is what locomotives VIA rail is using, since I believe that all of the problems on the Empire Builder, at least, are from P42s failing. I don't think that there's any problem turning the cars around.

I don't remember these sorts of problems with the F40s, or whatever the previous locomotive was called (I'll confess that I'm no expert on locomotives), and BNSF clearly isn't having Amtrak's difficulties keeping trains moving in weather that is, let's face it, no worse than average.

It used to be (before this year and the year before) that the eastbound Empire Builder would be late because of snow in the mountains, or because it was -40 F in Minot and they couldn't refuel because the diesel jelled. Not because it was stuck in Minot for 18 hours because of locomotive brake problems.

I can only hope that next winter the older locomotives Amtrak is bringing out of mothballs will be assigned to the Hi Line, since the P42s clearly aren't making the mark.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
yarrow said:
MikeM said:
yarrow said:
i think it was a couple years ago during a bad stretch of winter, amtrak was totally helpless and i checked the via site for delays. they had a very apologetic note that due to the bad weather the canadian could be running up to 20 minutes late. check out this week's rail passenger assoc. letter (1/05/10) in the pinned topic at the top of the board. a great synopsis of the amtrak operational philosophy
Click to expand...
Could you provide a link to this newsletter? I joined NARP a while back but for some reason all they send me are more subscription offers and an occasional newsletter in the mail...
Click to expand...
If you are reading someone else’s copy of This Week at Amtrak, you can receive your own free copy each edition by sending your e-mail address to

[email protected]

You MUST include your name, preferred e-mail address, and city and state where you live. If you have filters or firewalls placed on your Internet connection, set your e-mail to receive incoming mail from [email protected]; we are unable to go through any approvals processes for individuals. This mailing list is kept strictly confidential and is not shared or used for any purposes other than distribution of This Week at Amtrak or related URPA materials.
Click to expand...
For the record, (since there seems to be some confusion), that "newsletter" isn't from NARP.
 
DET63 said:
If you were traveling from Vancouver BC to Toronto on 1/8/10, the "Economy Discounted" fare would be Fare: $497.00, with a total, including the G.S.T./H.S.T. of $24.85, of $521.85 (US$505.42).
A "Reserved Coach" ticket from Seattle to Chicago would run from $236.00 on $334.00 on The Builder, and $358.00 via The Coast Starlight and The California Zephyr. The cheapest ticket would be a bit of a "Robin Hood's barn" ride, including a trip from Seattle to Portland on the Cascades, then going east on the Portland section of the Builder. You could also save $34.00 buying a ticket from Seattle to Spokane on #8, then taking #28 from Spokane to Chicago.

If you wanted to take a sleeping car, an "Upper Berth - Discounted" on The Canadian would set you back $834.00 + G.S.T./H.S.T. of $41.70, for a total of $875.70 (US$847.77).

Traveling from Seattle to Chicago on the same day in a "Superliner Roomette" (which I'm taking to be the closest equivalent to the "Upper Berth" on the VIA Rail service) would add $311.00 to the $334.00 Seattle-Chicago direct fare, or $262.00 + $184.00 ($446.00) to the trip via Sacramento on the Starlight and Zephyr. (The other "Superliner Roomette" options, e.g., via Portland, are sold out.)

I understand The Canadian sleeping car room includes meals.
Click to expand...
Perhaps these comments might clarify and/or add to the discussion:

1) The Canadian is a much longer route - about 27% longer. Per the timetables on both websites, EB mileage is 2205, Canadian mileage is 4466km = 2791 miles. In terms of time - again per the timetables - EB is 46 hours, Canadian is 80-3/4 hours or 75% longer.

2) The Upper and Lower berths on The Canadian are equivalent to the old Pullman all-berth cars with nothing but curtains, except there are only a few in each Canadian car. A more apt equivalent to the Superliner Roomette would be the Cabin for One. (But nicer - check out the 360-degree views on the VIA website.) The standard fare for "Cabin for One discounted" is CDN$1320 or about US$1250 @ 4%. (There is no bucket pricing on The Canadian.)

3) Not only do you get meals with sleeper accomodation on The Canadian, you get truly first class service, as attested by a recently posted trip report on this forum. And you get more meals - 4 breakfasts, 3 lunches, and 3 dinners plus snacks and, I believe, wines.

4) In terms of accomodation - assuming you're on vacation and would be staying in a hotel otherwise, you have twice as many nights (4) on the Canadian as on the EB (2).

5) All in all, you're paying US$315 per night for 27% more miles on The Canadian vs. $321 per night on the EB (($311+$334)/2). Using the cheapest coach fare quoted above ($236), the nightly fare is US$274 vs. US$315 for The Canadian.

So, if origin and destination ports are not an issue, and taking quality of service into account, which train would you rather take? I guess I'm saying, Which train is the better value?
 
George said:
DET63 said:
If you were traveling from Vancouver BC to Toronto on 1/8/10, the "Economy Discounted" fare would be Fare: $497.00, with a total, including the G.S.T./H.S.T. of $24.85, of $521.85 (US$505.42).
A "Reserved Coach" ticket from Seattle to Chicago would run from $236.00 on $334.00 on The Builder, and $358.00 via The Coast Starlight and The California Zephyr. The cheapest ticket would be a bit of a "Robin Hood's barn" ride, including a trip from Seattle to Portland on the Cascades, then going east on the Portland section of the Builder. You could also save $34.00 buying a ticket from Seattle to Spokane on #8, then taking #28 from Spokane to Chicago.

If you wanted to take a sleeping car, an "Upper Berth - Discounted" on The Canadian would set you back $834.00 + G.S.T./H.S.T. of $41.70, for a total of $875.70 (US$847.77).

Traveling from Seattle to Chicago on the same day in a "Superliner Roomette" (which I'm taking to be the closest equivalent to the "Upper Berth" on the VIA Rail service) would add $311.00 to the $334.00 Seattle-Chicago direct fare, or $262.00 + $184.00 ($446.00) to the trip via Sacramento on the Starlight and Zephyr. (The other "Superliner Roomette" options, e.g., via Portland, are sold out.)

I understand The Canadian sleeping car room includes meals.
Click to expand...
Perhaps these comments might clarify and/or add to the discussion:

1) The Canadian is a much longer route - about 27% longer. Per the timetables on both websites, EB mileage is 2205, Canadian mileage is 4466km = 2791 miles. In terms of time - again per the timetables - EB is 46 hours, Canadian is 80-3/4 hours or 75% longer.

2) The Upper and Lower berths on The Canadian are equivalent to the old Pullman all-berth cars with nothing but curtains, except there are only a few in each Canadian car. A more apt equivalent to the Superliner Roomette would be the Cabin for One. (But nicer - check out the 360-degree views on the VIA website.) The standard fare for "Cabin for One discounted" is CDN$1320 or about US$1250 @ 4%. (There is no bucket pricing on The Canadian.)

3) Not only do you get meals with sleeper accomodation on The Canadian, you get truly first class service, as attested by a recently posted trip report on this forum. And you get more meals - 4 breakfasts, 3 lunches, and 3 dinners plus snacks and, I believe, wines.

4) In terms of accomodation - assuming you're on vacation and would be staying in a hotel otherwise, you have twice as many nights (4) on the Canadian as on the EB (2).

5) All in all, you're paying US$315 per night for 27% more miles on The Canadian vs. $321 per night on the EB (($311+$334)/2). Using the cheapest coach fare quoted above ($236), the nightly fare is US$274 vs. US$315 for The Canadian.

So, if origin and destination ports are not an issue, and taking quality of service into account, which train would you rather take? I guess I'm saying, Which train is the better value?
Click to expand...
George, yes and an additional note to your second point. Upper and lower berths (sections) are sold as separate space. That is, the person in the lower berth and the person in the upper berth are not necessarily traveling together. There is no door, only a green curtain.

The lower berth is a more expensive space. Sometimes the person in lower allows the person in upper to sleep in the lower as a courtesy, due to gender,physical condition,etc.

Also, in the past not that many cars were all section. Most were very much like those on the Canadian today, a mixture of several kinds of space, several kinds of rooms.

Finally, a lot of railrods kind of did away with sections beginning in the 40's as roomettes were invented. They were largely on the older heavyweight trains. Once the war was over and streamlining and diesels began as lot of lines got ride of sections. Amtrak did not buy any. However, some lightweight streamlined trains in the preAmtrak day did have them. Both major companies in Canada did buy streamlined cars with sections, as shown.
 
henryj said:
Alan, I can appreciate that, but if you are running multiple trains then you have the staff to deal with it and even more equipment to pull from. The Canadian has only the equipment on the train. But to take it even further, Via has many many trains including long distance and corridor trains all of which operate north of our borders and thus have to cope with this same weather every year, year after year and they do it seemingly with ease.
Finally, if the line is blocked out there in North Dakota, you would think they could at least operate Chicago to Minneapolis/St Paul and perhaps Seattle to Spokane with some kind of stub train wouldn't you? Winter comes every year for Amtrak and seemingly they are never prepared.
Click to expand...
Henry,

Actually, no, VIA has far more equipment to pull from than does Amtrak. During the summer months it's not uncomon to see the Canadian with 30 cars or so. During the winter, the typical consist is closer to 15 to 20 cars. With six consists, dropping even 5 cars from each train during the winter as compared to the summer, gives one 30 spare cars. Granted there are different types of each car sitting around in standby, but the odds are very good that VIA has at least 50 spare cars during the winter, if not more.

Amtrak's Empire Builder, and most other trains, don't change their consists by much at all. Maybe they drop one coach, but the sleepers typically remain constant year round. The only trains that I think vary Superliner sleepers are the CS, which may go from 3 to 2 during the winter, and the Zephyr which typically short turns a Zephyr sleeper in Denver during the summer. And Chicago simply doesn't have dozens of spare cars just sitting around at anytime. Again at most, they could probably cobble together one trainset and that would then leave them with no spares for any other bad ordered car on an inbound train.

I believe, although I'm not sure, that all of VIA's other LD trains additionally see changes in their consists during the winter.

As for running trains part way, I could see running to MSP, and there are times that Amtrak has done just that. I'm not so sure that running to Spokane makes all that much sense. I don't think that the ridership justifies that. I could be wrong on that, but somehow I don't think so.
 
Bill Haithcoat said:
George said:
DET63 said:
If you were traveling from Vancouver BC to Toronto on 1/8/10, the "Economy Discounted" fare would be Fare: $497.00, with a total, including the G.S.T./H.S.T. of $24.85, of $521.85 (US$505.42).
A "Reserved Coach" ticket from Seattle to Chicago would run from $236.00 on $334.00 on The Builder, and $358.00 via The Coast Starlight and The California Zephyr. The cheapest ticket would be a bit of a "Robin Hood's barn" ride, including a trip from Seattle to Portland on the Cascades, then going east on the Portland section of the Builder. You could also save $34.00 buying a ticket from Seattle to Spokane on #8, then taking #28 from Spokane to Chicago.

If you wanted to take a sleeping car, an "Upper Berth - Discounted" on The Canadian would set you back $834.00 + G.S.T./H.S.T. of $41.70, for a total of $875.70 (US$847.77).

Traveling from Seattle to Chicago on the same day in a "Superliner Roomette" (which I'm taking to be the closest equivalent to the "Upper Berth" on the VIA Rail service) would add $311.00 to the $334.00 Seattle-Chicago direct fare, or $262.00 + $184.00 ($446.00) to the trip via Sacramento on the Starlight and Zephyr. (The other "Superliner Roomette" options, e.g., via Portland, are sold out.)

I understand The Canadian sleeping car room includes meals.
Click to expand...
Perhaps these comments might clarify and/or add to the discussion:

1) The Canadian is a much longer route - about 27% longer. Per the timetables on both websites, EB mileage is 2205, Canadian mileage is 4466km = 2791 miles. In terms of time - again per the timetables - EB is 46 hours, Canadian is 80-3/4 hours or 75% longer.

2) The Upper and Lower berths on The Canadian are equivalent to the old Pullman all-berth cars with nothing but curtains, except there are only a few in each Canadian car. A more apt equivalent to the Superliner Roomette would be the Cabin for One. (But nicer - check out the 360-degree views on the VIA website.) The standard fare for "Cabin for One discounted" is CDN$1320 or about US$1250 @ 4%. (There is no bucket pricing on The Canadian.)

3) Not only do you get meals with sleeper accomodation on The Canadian, you get truly first class service, as attested by a recently posted trip report on this forum. And you get more meals - 4 breakfasts, 3 lunches, and 3 dinners plus snacks and, I believe, wines.

4) In terms of accomodation - assuming you're on vacation and would be staying in a hotel otherwise, you have twice as many nights (4) on the Canadian as on the EB (2).

5) All in all, you're paying US$315 per night for 27% more miles on The Canadian vs. $321 per night on the EB (($311+$334)/2). Using the cheapest coach fare quoted above ($236), the nightly fare is US$274 vs. US$315 for The Canadian.

So, if origin and destination ports are not an issue, and taking quality of service into account, which train would you rather take? I guess I'm saying, Which train is the better value?
Click to expand...
George, yes and an additional note to your second point. Upper and lower berths (sections) are sold as separate space. That is, the person in the lower berth and the person in the upper berth are not necessarily traveling together. There is no door, only a green curtain.

The lower berth is a more expensive space. Sometimes the person in lower allows the person in upper to sleep in the lower as a courtesy, due to gender,physical condition,etc.

Also, in the past not that many cars were all section. Most were very much like those on the Canadian today, a mixture of several kinds of space, several kinds of rooms.

Finally, a lot of railrods kind of did away with sections beginning in the 40's as roomettes were invented. They were largely on the older heavyweight trains. Once the war was over and streamlining and diesels began as lot of lines got ride of sections. Amtrak did not buy any. However, some lightweight streamlined trains in the preAmtrak day did have them. Both major companies in Canada did buy streamlined cars with sections, as shown.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reminder, Alan. I do remember the old Pullman's had at least one drawing room at the opposite end from the washroom. In fact, when I last crossed the country by train - 1967 - CN (as it was known then) were selling the drawing rooms at discounted prices because they were not in the stainless cars further back on the train. My wife and I occupied the drawing room from Vancouver to Edmonton, where they had to switch the car out because it was badly leaking. As a result, we were put into a newer drawing room. What a palatial ride for the rest of the way to Toronto. The drawing rooms had two lower berths and the room extended across two car windows. There was an easy chair and separate toilet and washbasin - can't remember if we had our own shower.
 
henryj said:
Alan, I can appreciate that, but if you are running multiple trains then you have the staff to deal with it and even more equipment to pull from. The Canadian has only the equipment on the train.
Click to expand...
That is simply not true. Specially in winter when Canadians are very short trains there is enough additional equipment lying around in Vancouver to be able to field an entire new additional consist should such a need arise. One reason that Canadians are able to be kept in better shape is that VIAs equipment utilization is not exactly spectacular on that route. Lots of downtime for individual pieces to enable better servicing.

This is not to say that Amtrak could not do much better than it does though.
 
I thought that the EB had a whole trainset in CHI. I believe I saw in a documentary last year that the train gets a 30 hour maintenance once over - not a 6 hour turn around.

Of course, that could have been just what Amtrak wanted the media to portray...
 
AlanB said:
Actually, no, VIA has far more equipment to pull from than does Amtrak. During the summer months it's not uncomon to see the Canadian with 30 cars or so. During the winter, the typical consist is closer to 15 to 20 cars. With six consists, dropping even 5 cars from each train during the winter as compared to the summer, gives one 30 spare cars. Granted there are different types of each car sitting around in standby, but the odds are very good that VIA has at least 50 spare cars during the winter, if not more.
Click to expand...
when I rode the Canadian in May 2008 the train was something like 21 cars long. The equipment used for the Canadian was ordered by Canadian Pacific in the mid 50's. It is all stainless steel built by Budd. Via has refurbished it in it's original art deco decor. It carried two coaches and a dome buffet for coach passengers. The coaches were mostly for local traffic but there were some hardy souls going all the way. The rest of the train was first class only. It consisted of two diners, two dome lounges, the Park dome observation and 13 sleepers. The sleepers were of the Manor and Chateau class which I believe were unique to Canada. The Manor's have 3 sections(the fourth having been converted to a shower), 4 Roomettes, 5 Double Bedrooms and 1 Drawing Room. The Chateau has the same 3 sections and shower, 8 Roomettes, 3 Bedrooms and 1 Drawing Room. The Park observation has 3 Bedrooms and 1 Drawing Room(a Drawing Room sleeps three). Via calls the Drawing Rooms Triple Bedrooms. In first class, all meals are included. Free champagne was passed out in the Dome lounges on several occasions. In the Diner I believe beer,wine and mixed drinks were extra. The food and service were excellent. At that time the train left Toronto in the morning. The schedule has been lengthened and it now leaves the night before. Some of the change involved longer dwell times at certain stops. Winnipeg is now three and a half to four hours vs one. Edmonton is an hour and Jasper is an hour and half. The train is a first class operation. If you want to experience what train travel was like before Amtrak this is it. If you book before Memorial Day or after Labor Day the fares are much discounted. It's an experience that should not be missed. Here is a link showing the layout of the sleepers.

http://www.train-canada.net/train_accommodation.htm
 
Larry H. said:
Most likely they are serious about running a rail passenger system. It seems that most at amtrak aren't. Nor is our government, at least in recent past.
Click to expand...
A serious passenger rail network does not consist of a handful of overnight trains that run a few times a week and misconnect every which way, and a small corridor set in the east.

Via runs a small, highly overfunded rail network consisting of a small set of real corridors, a couple of toy tourist baubles, and a few remote access trains. They maintain a oversized set of trains that gives them the luxury of tolerating their underfunding without effort. They took the easy way out when their funding was cut, simply reducing their area and frequency of service.

Amtrak, contrarywise, has maintained its network amazingly through decades of severe underfunding, rarely cutting trains in its system. Of the trains in service on A-day, only the stretch between Chicago and Florida and between OKC and Newton are without service. Service is increased on most routes. Only the Cardinal and SSL run something other than daily and the SSL route is about to get that daily service.

Amtrak's concentration on streamlining their operations while providing a full and realistic transportation network is that of a serious passenger rail network. The fact that they cut out luxuries instead of cutting trains means they are serious. VIA takes the easy way out- they cut frequency. VIA is going to disappear. It will cut itself to death.

VIA may run nicer trains, but Amtrak runs the more functional and serious network.
 
As nice as the Canadian may be--and I do intend to take it someday, if the funds ever permit--if an Amtrak train ran with a dozen sleepers and only one or two coaches, you can bet Congress would be crying foul.

Granted, my only experience with VIA (if you don't count the conductors/cafe car attendant on the Maple Leaf) was the Malahat last summer. Beautiful scenery, and it did get me where I needed to go (Victoria to Nanaimo) largely on time, and riding in an old RDC was definitely fun... and certainly no illusions of speed on that line. But in the words of a Canadian looking at the Superliners parked in Vancouver, "Those American trains look so efficient!"
 
Green Maned Lion said:
Larry H. said:
Most likely they are serious about running a rail passenger system. It seems that most at amtrak aren't. Nor is our government, at least in recent past.
Click to expand...
A serious passenger rail network does not consist of a handful of overnight trains that run a few times a week and misconnect every which way, and a small corridor set in the east.

Via runs a small, highly overfunded rail network consisting of a small set of real corridors, a couple of toy tourist baubles, and a few remote access trains. They maintain a oversized set of trains that gives them the luxury of tolerating their underfunding without effort. They took the easy way out when their funding was cut, simply reducing their area and frequency of service.

Amtrak, contrarywise, has maintained its network amazingly through decades of severe underfunding, rarely cutting trains in its system. Of the trains in service on A-day, only the stretch between Chicago and Florida and between OKC and Newton are without service. Service is increased on most routes. Only the Cardinal and SSL run something other than daily and the SSL route is about to get that daily service.

Amtrak's concentration on streamlining their operations while providing a full and realistic transportation network is that of a serious passenger rail network. The fact that they cut out luxuries instead of cutting trains means they are serious. VIA takes the easy way out- they cut frequency. VIA is going to disappear. It will cut itself to death.

VIA may run nicer trains, but Amtrak runs the more functional and serious network.
Click to expand...
GML, I must take exception with your conclusions. Just for starters, VIA rail serves a country almost 150% the size of USA from sea to sea, yet has a population less than 10% of the USA's. The economies of scale are totally different. With the exception of serving mining and other remotely populated communities in the north, the raison d'etre of the Canadian rail system is to tie the country together with a freight and transportation system that provides Canadians the ability to get across the country. Indeed, BC refused to enter Confederation until the Canadians built a railway to do that. Granted, there used to be two transcontinental railroads, but with the exception of the Alberta-to-Pacific coast portions, they were almost parallel. That was overkill for so small a population once jet airplanes became the norm. Nowadays, three-day service from the Pacific to Ontario is adequate for Canada's population needs. Montreal to the Maritimes is still daily service. VIA Rail is indeed subsidized, like Amtrak, but for the very same reason, which is, as you say, to provide "a full and realistic transportation network." (Underlining is mine.)

As for misconnecting, please give me an example. When you travel from Halifax to Vancouver, you take one train to Montreal, have several choices from Nontreal to Toronto (Canada's "Northeast Corridor") with no more than a three or four hour wait in Toronto for the Canadian to Vancouver. In July 2008, I had a 4+ hour layover in CHI from the EB to the CONO. In February of this year, I will have a 5.25 hour wait from the Capitol Limited to the CZ.

I agree VIA does put on the glitz to attract tourists, and they seem to be pretty good at doing just that. But that is the cream at the top of the bottle of providing reliable cross-country transportation for Canadians.

On another note, are you back home yet? I've been tracking your journey along with all your other fans.
 
George said:
GML, I must take exception with your conclusions. Just for starters, VIA rail serves a country almost 150% the size of USA from sea to sea, yet has a population less than 10% of the USA's. The economies of scale are totally different. With the exception of serving mining and other remotely populated communities in the north, the raison d'etre of the Canadian rail system is to tie the country together with a freight and transportation system that provides Canadians the ability to get across the country. Indeed, BC refused to enter Confederation until the Canadians built a railway to do that. Granted, there used to be two transcontinental railroads, but with the exception of the Alberta-to-Pacific coast portions, they were almost parallel. That was overkill for so small a population once jet airplanes became the norm. Nowadays, three-day service from the Pacific to Ontario is adequate for Canada's population needs. Montreal to the Maritimes is still daily service. VIA Rail is indeed subsidized, like Amtrak, but for the very same reason, which is, as you say, to provide "a full and realistic transportation network." (Underlining is mine.)
As for misconnecting, please give me an example. When you travel from Halifax to Vancouver, you take one train to Montreal, have several choices from Nontreal to Toronto (Canada's "Northeast Corridor") with no more than a three or four hour wait in Toronto for the Canadian to Vancouver. In July 2008, I had a 4+ hour layover in CHI from the EB to the CONO. In February of this year, I will have a 5.25 hour wait from the Capitol Limited to the CZ.

I agree VIA does put on the glitz to attract tourists, and they seem to be pretty good at doing just that. But that is the cream at the top of the bottle of providing reliable cross-country transportation for Canadians.

On another note, are you back home yet? I've been tracking your journey along with all your other fans.
Click to expand...
Nope, I'm in Seattle waiting for tomorrows Empire Builder.

As for what I'm saying, can you connect, for instance, from the Canadian to the train formerly called Hudson Bay without overnighting?

For the price VIA puts on those 22 car long Canadians, they could run daily train service. They could run it with a pair of F-40s, a baggage car, a Superliner Trans-Dorm, a coach, a sightseer, a diner, 3 sleepers, a diner, a sightseer and three sleepers.

13 cars. 2 engines. Same capacity. Half the sleeping car attendants. Two-thirds the dining car attendants. Less than half the lounge attendants.

That is functional transporation. Favoring usable transportation over luxury. VIA choose to run the Canadian daily. They would just have to give up making it a luxury experience.

For the regular rider, the person who has somewhere to go, the latter makes more sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top