neroden
Engineer
So I got to thinking about this, because I was annoyed by the need to stay overnight in New York to catch any train leaving New York in the morning. (I'm coming from Syracuse.) And I thought, "there should be a train which runs overnight through upstate NY". And then I realized that this could of course be the much-requested train which serves Ohio in the daytime. Proposed schedule:
(Eastbound)
Chicago 9:30 AM
Toledo 3:20 PM
Cleveland 5:50 PM
Buffalo 8:51 PM
Syracuse 11:18 PM
Albany 3:45 AM
New York 6:23 AM
(Westbound)
New York 8:40 PM
Albany 12:05 AM
Syracuse 2:49 AM
Buffalo 4:59 AM
Cleveland 8:45 AM
Toledo 11:15 AM
Chicago 2:45 PM
The more I look at it the more I like it. I'd probably call it the "Ohio Express". It would need more single-level rolling stock, obviously, and I think it should run with sleepers. Amtrak can try prepackaged meals on it if they like (which would actually be better for me than the regular dining cars if they had ingredients lists).
When I'd looked at this before I'd thought it wouldn't be attractive to upstate NY passengers, but I just realized that it *would*, because it would fill a schedule gap which I am already complaining about. Buying a sleeper from Syracuse to NY would probably still cost less than an NYC hotel room, and less than a short flight, so the schedule would be attractive for day trips on a tight schedule from central and western NY to NYC -- despite the late boarding times.
Given that it would also be much stronger than the LSL in the Ohio market, this seems like potentially a really powerful ridership generator. And it doesn't require any new stations or any new track, though I'm sure CSX and NS would want some upgrades. (Second platforms at Buffalo and Syracuse are needed anyway.) The "second frequency" effect can be really powerful for ridership.
Furthermore, eastbound passengers who misconnect in Chicago due to late-arriving Western trains would have a morning departure option instead of having to wait 24 hours.
I'm sure there are tweaks which could be made to the schedule. This is a nice schedule, partly because times at Buffalo are good. Time could be cut out by not switching cars at Albany, but cutting out too much may actually mess the schedule up. It may be desirable to move that dwell time into the Albany-NYC section to give more "wiggle room" to accomodate overnight work windows on that section.
(Eastbound)
Chicago 9:30 AM
Toledo 3:20 PM
Cleveland 5:50 PM
Buffalo 8:51 PM
Syracuse 11:18 PM
Albany 3:45 AM
New York 6:23 AM
(Westbound)
New York 8:40 PM
Albany 12:05 AM
Syracuse 2:49 AM
Buffalo 4:59 AM
Cleveland 8:45 AM
Toledo 11:15 AM
Chicago 2:45 PM
The more I look at it the more I like it. I'd probably call it the "Ohio Express". It would need more single-level rolling stock, obviously, and I think it should run with sleepers. Amtrak can try prepackaged meals on it if they like (which would actually be better for me than the regular dining cars if they had ingredients lists).
When I'd looked at this before I'd thought it wouldn't be attractive to upstate NY passengers, but I just realized that it *would*, because it would fill a schedule gap which I am already complaining about. Buying a sleeper from Syracuse to NY would probably still cost less than an NYC hotel room, and less than a short flight, so the schedule would be attractive for day trips on a tight schedule from central and western NY to NYC -- despite the late boarding times.
Given that it would also be much stronger than the LSL in the Ohio market, this seems like potentially a really powerful ridership generator. And it doesn't require any new stations or any new track, though I'm sure CSX and NS would want some upgrades. (Second platforms at Buffalo and Syracuse are needed anyway.) The "second frequency" effect can be really powerful for ridership.
Furthermore, eastbound passengers who misconnect in Chicago due to late-arriving Western trains would have a morning departure option instead of having to wait 24 hours.
I'm sure there are tweaks which could be made to the schedule. This is a nice schedule, partly because times at Buffalo are good. Time could be cut out by not switching cars at Albany, but cutting out too much may actually mess the schedule up. It may be desirable to move that dwell time into the Albany-NYC section to give more "wiggle room" to accomodate overnight work windows on that section.