29 replies to this topic

[Swadian Hardcore]

I've thought of another idea that has been rarely discussed on these forums or any other forums. Amtrak could restart the Shasta Daylight. The CS currently takes 17:33 from EMY-PDX. If they trim down the travel time by 00:45, then they could operate this with a departure around 6:00-7:00AM and arrive at the other end 10:45-11:45PM. No time zone change.

The CS gets a lot of passengers from intermediate stations like KFS. Station like CIC and RDD have a lot of potential ridership that is probably being put off by the CS's inconvienient schedule. The Shasta Daylight could resolve this problem. California and Oregon are both quite supportive of pax rail so this could materialize if Amtrak asked for the funding. DUN and CMO could even get some extra riders even though they have low pop..

Guys, this is possible. Somebody's just got to do it. Now on to your opinions!

edit: typo

Edited by Swadian Hardcore, 28 June 2012 - 01:20 PM.

[johnny.menhennet]

I've thought of another idea that has been rarely discussed on these forums or any other forums. Amtrak could restart the Shasta Daylight. The CS currently takes 17:33 from EMY-PDX. If they trim down the travel time by 00:45, then they could operate this with a departure around 6:00-7:00AM and arrive at the other end 10:45-11:45PM. No time zone change.

The CS gets a lot of passengers from intermediate stations like KFS. Station like CIC and RDD have a lot of potential ridership that is probably being put off by the CS's inconvienient schedule. The Shasta Daylight could resolve this problem. California and Oregon are both quite supportive of pax rail so this could materialize if Amtrak asked for the funding. DUN and CMO could even get some extra riders even though they have low pop..

Guys, this is possible. Somebody's just got to do it. Now on to your opinions!

edit: typo

Give me unlimited bilevels and I say yes.

I assume you looked at this in addition to the CS schedule to figure out some things. This is the old Shasta Daylight train schedule courtesy of streamlinerschedules.com. This is also probably how you came up with the name for the train.

Since this is complete fantasy, I'm saying yes. But in all honesty I would want this as a third frequency on the route. I have a better proposal. You would have to add a stop on the CS route at RSV and push back some of the padding on the end of #5 to the end of the route. Have a train that leaves LAX at 11P, SJC at 9:30A, EMY at 11:00A, SAC at 1:00P, RSV at 1:30P, PDX at 5A, SEA at 8:30A, VAC at 12:30P. Southbound leave VAC at 6P, SEA at 10P, PDX at 1:30A, SAC at at 5:30P, EMY at 7:30P, SJC at 9:00P, LAX at 7:30A. Screws mid-Oregon and PDX, but hey. provides the SoCal-NorCal overnight and provides another frequency needed on the route north of SAC. It allows a no-transfer connection from anywhere south of Eugene to go straight to VAC

Edited by johnny.menhennet, 27 June 2012 - 11:48 PM.

[Swadian Hardcore]

This is the old Shasta Daylight train schedule courtesy of streamlinerschedules.com. This is also probably how you came up with the name for the train.

Actually, this schedule was the first inspiration for this topic: http://espee.railfan...1958_page05.jpg

[johnny.menhennet]

This is the old Shasta Daylight train schedule courtesy of streamlinerschedules.com. This is also probably how you came up with the name for the train.

Actually, this schedule was the first inspiration for this topic: http://espee.railfan...1958_page05.jpg

But you realize that the way they were able to achieve those quicker speeds was by having less padding and by going through the western part of the Sacramento Valley and so it bypassed Sacramento. It's safe to say that the trains may not have always followed the exact speed limits or that the speed limits along the flat parts were higher too

[zephyr17]

This is the old Shasta Daylight train schedule courtesy of streamlinerschedules.com. This is also probably how you came up with the name for the train.

Actually, this schedule was the first inspiration for this topic: http://espee.railfan...1958_page05.jpg

I want the Shasta Daylight, but keep the Starlight

[johnny.menhennet]

This is the old Shasta Daylight train schedule courtesy of streamlinerschedules.com. This is also probably how you came up with the name for the train.

Actually, this schedule was the first inspiration for this topic: http://espee.railfan...1958_page05.jpg

I want the Shasta Daylight, but keep the Starlight

Yes that is assumed. If not the case, then every single person with a right mind would vote no (then again, not everyone here is in his/her right mind ).

Edited by johnny.menhennet, 28 June 2012 - 12:52 AM.

[Swadian Hardcore]

It's safe to say that the trains may not have always followed the exact speed limits or that the speed limits along the flat parts were higher too

Well, in 1958 the government (was it the ICC?) had already passed the 79mph speed limit, and I don't think that SP would have upgraded the track on that route. So either the engineer broke the limit and/or the padding was removed. There's no saying that the SD ran with good OTP.

[TCRT]

My impression is that Amtrak's results with longer day trains on an early morning to late night day schedule are a mixed bag - on one hand, the Palmetto and Carolinian do decent business (especially the latter), but on the other hand I have read that the Pennsylvanian did not do quite so well when it had a 6AM-1AM CHI-PHL schedule (while impersonating a freight train).

To put things in perspective, PDX-EMY is 721 miles, while the Carolinian is 704, the Palmetto is 829, and the old Pennsylvanian route would be 834 miles.

This also means that this route would need to be state funded. I imagine that Oregon and California are more amenable to this than many other states.
In the real world, however, I get the impression the current owners of the former Southern Pacific have made it quite clear how they would vote regarding more Amtrak service (though apparently they get along with Amtrak California).

[jphjaxfl]

You would need some new DOME Cars to include in the Shasta Daylight. Espee operated their beautiful full length Dome Lounges on the Shasta. Espee built these cars themselves from single level cars. Are you going to fund building them?

[Anderson]

You would need some new DOME Cars to include in the Shasta Daylight. Espee operated their beautiful full length Dome Lounges on the Shasta. Espee built these cars themselves from single level cars. Are you going to fund building them?

Eh...I think this train would be bilevel, and you'd just get an SSL thrown on the route.

I voted "no", but that has more to do with the fact that I see this as a likely "bad" route since so much of it is thinly populated.

[johnny.menhennet]

You would need some new DOME Cars to include in the Shasta Daylight. Espee operated their beautiful full length Dome Lounges on the Shasta. Espee built these cars themselves from single level cars. Are you going to fund building them?

Eh...I think this train would be bilevel, and you'd just get an SSL thrown on the route.

I voted "no", but that has more to do with the fact that I see this as a likely "bad" route since so much of it is thinly populated.

I agree with both. It would be bilevel and also just a route from the Bay Area to PDX would not have a large enough population along the route. The population on this route IS more suited to an overnight like it currently is, hence why i proposed extending it in both directions to make an anti-Starlight, almost 12 hours off and two overnights. Screws the Portland market, but they would still have other options. It would be REALLY nice to have a train that could go to and turn in Vancouver.

[jphjaxfl]

While the bilevel cars and sightseer lounges are practical and efficient for Amtrak, the lounges do not offer the "see ahead and 360° vistas that dome cars do. The Shasta Daylight was started as a train to attract tourists much as the California Zephyr was in the same year. We all know that bringing the Shasta Daylight back is a dream. If you fantasize about bringing back a great train like the Shasta Daylight you have to have great equipment that made it a success in first 10 years until Espee decided to they did not want to be in the passenger train business.

[Karl1459]

I suspect that UP would be VERY reluctant to add another train slot as PDX south is mostly single track, and in the economy boom had SERIOUS over capacity issues (one UP freight reportedly took 24 hours PDX-EUG!!!). To make a second train work double track is needed along with some serious speed capacity improvements. Double track is unlikely. OR-DOT has plans (read pipe dreams) of a second ROW PDX-EUG. EUG-Cresent Lake is a tough mountain railroad, with unstable areas and lots of tunnels... very expensive for UP to double track or even improve speed. Cresent Lake to Chiloquin would be "easy". Chiloquin to KFalls would be tough as there is not much room for the UP and Hwy 97 already, and some very steep bluffs. KFalls to Weed "easy" but Weed to Redding is again steep, winding mountain railroading and expensive to change.

Now maybe a PDX-Bend-Feather River-SAC segment? Still has a problem with getting a slot on the joint UP-BN Chemult-KFalls segment but maybe that can be overcome.

[AlanB]

but on the other hand I have read that the Pennsylvanian did not do quite so well when it had a 6AM-1AM CHI-PHL schedule (while impersonating a freight train).

I've got to disagree with this. While I'm not looking at the financial side of things, in terms of ridership the Pennsy did quite well on that schedule. Back in 2004, the Pennsy carried 171,483 passengers. As of last year, fiscal 2011, ridership had only increased to 207,422 passengers. Now most of that I would attribute to the simple fact that Amtrak ridership in general has been increasing for the last several years.

However, even if all of that cannot be attributed to the general trend of increasing ridership, there is yet another factor here to be considered. That is the Three Rivers, which also carried passengers on the same route through PA. While I don't have a breakdown of just the PA riders on the 3R's, overall ridership was 152,842. So surely at a minimum, it's pretty easy to believe that ridership along that route in PA was at least equal, if not higher than today's single run of the Pennsy.

And certainly, overall ridership along that route from NYP to Chicago took a big hit with the cut back of the Pennsy and the loss of the 3R's.

[Swadian Hardcore]

You would need some new DOME Cars to include in the Shasta Daylight. Espee operated their beautiful full length Dome Lounges on the Shasta. Espee built these cars themselves from single level cars. Are you going to fund building them?

Um, I thought that the SP home-built 3/4 dome cars, not full length dome cars. They may have had some but those were not home built.

[zephyr17]

You would need some new DOME Cars to include in the Shasta Daylight. Espee operated their beautiful full length Dome Lounges on the Shasta. Espee built these cars themselves from single level cars. Are you going to fund building them?

Um, I thought that the SP home-built 3/4 dome cars, not full length dome cars. They may have had some but those were not home built.

Swadian, you are absolutely correct. The only domes that SP ever had were their 3/4 dome home-builds, and those are what ran on the Shasta Daylight (for a while). They also were lower than the usual dome and had very restricted views in front and rear, although the sides had lots of glass.

jphjaxfl, Amtrak has lots of runs that could use domes. If you think that all routes that had domes back in the day should have domes, how about the Vista-Dome California Zephyr. The domes were the very signature of that train (and they were the best domes as well, the Budd short-dome, superior to SP's home builds). The Amtrak CZ does without them, although I'd love to see them.

[jphjaxfl]

Yes, I agree the Espee Dome Lounge cars were 3/4 length of the car, but sitting in the Dome Lounge felt like being in the GN's Great Domes, Santa Fe 's Big Domes or Milwaukee Road's Super Domes. They were all great to ride on and I miss them.

[zephyr17]

Yes, I agree the Espee Dome Lounge cars were 3/4 length of the car, but sitting in the Dome Lounge felt like being in the GN's Great Domes, Santa Fe 's Big Domes or Milwaukee Road's Super Domes. They were all great to ride on and I miss them.

SP's 3/4 dome best feature, IMHO, was the lounge/bar area on the lower level but whose ceiling was the dome. Wonderful, spacious, airy and bright, a great space on the train. I like the full length domes, but still think you can't beat the short domes. I just wish we had any domes, though.

Edited by zephyr17, 28 June 2012 - 04:03 PM.

[Swadian Hardcore]

The domes were the very signature of that train (and they were the best domes as well, the Budd short-dome, superior to SP's home builds). The Amtrak CZ does without them, although I'd love to see them.

What about the Great Domes? I thought that they were batter than the regular short domes. They were and still are one of my favourite railcars. Amtrak still has one, which is great except that they don't have enough to put them on regular service. Now if only they had two or three.....

edit: link does not work

Edited by Swadian Hardcore, 28 June 2012 - 10:49 PM.

[johnny.menhennet]

The domes were the very signature of that train (and they were the best domes as well, the Budd short-dome, superior to SP's home builds). The Amtrak CZ does without them, although I'd love to see them.

What about the Great Domes? I thought that they were batter than the regular short domes. They were and still are one of my favourite railcars. Amtrak still has one, which is great except that they don't have enough to put them on regular service. Now if only they had two or three.....

edit: BTW, this is a great source for info about SP: http://espee.railfan...-car-index.html

link don't work