Jump to content




Help Support AmtrakTrains.com by donating using the link above or becoming a Supporting Member.

Photo

Extending the California Zephyr to LAX?


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 Philly Amtrak Fan

Philly Amtrak Fan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,710 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia Area

Posted 03 December 2017 - 07:19 AM

Let's see how quickly this gets shot down.

 

So the CZ would go down from EMY to make stops in Oakland Jack London Square, San Jose, Salinas, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Los Angeles. Using the CS schedule,

 

5: EMY 5:20pm, Oakland 5:35/5:50pm, San Jose 6:55/7:07pm, Salinas 8:48pm, San Luis Obispo 12:20am, Santa Barbara 3:02am, LAX 6:00am

6: LAX 8:10pm, Santa Barbara 10:40pm, San Luis Obispo 1:35am, Salinas 4:28am, San Jose 6:11/6:23am, Oakland 7:24/7:39am, EMY 7:54am/8:04am

 

Sure, there already is the SWC to go between CHI-LAX. On the other hand, some people at this group have taken the TE between CHI-LAX and there is a thread about wanting to go between CHI-SAN via the CZ so if the CZ goes to LAX then that would be made much easier as it would be just one transfer in LAX and the times would be very easy. In addition, the extension would give one seat rides between Chicago-San Jose, Chicago-Oakland, Chicago-Santa Barbara and also Denver-Los Angeles, Salt Lake City-Los Angeles, and Reno-Los Angeles.which don't exist now as well as overnight service between the Bay Area and the Los Angeles area.

 

Running the CZ an additional 469 miles between EMY and LAX seems expensive. On the other hand, if you do that, you can close the long distance facilities in the Bay Area. How much does it cost to maintain those facilities vs. running the train those extra miles? Hopefully the ability to close the facilities in the Bay Area helps pay the cost of the additional service (and eventually they will make back the money with the additional revenue).

 

As for getting the OK from the host railroads, Amtrak runs tons of trains between LAX and San Luis Obispo and SJC and EMY right now so one more can't be that big a deal. The only one that could possibly be a deal breaker would be the 203 miles between SJC and San Luis Obispo. 

 

Sure you can say once CASHR is coming this service will be obsolete. And how many years away will that be? 10? 20? 


Trains Traveled: Broadway Limited (CHI-Harrisburg, PA), Three Rivers (Harrisburg, PA-CHI, Altoona, PA-CHI, PHL-CHI), Capitol Limited (CHI-WAS), Lake Shore Limited (NYP-CHI), , Silver Meteor (PHL-ORL), Southwest Chief (CHI-LAX), California Zephyr (CHI-SLC, SLC-EMY), City of New Orleans and/or Illini (CHI-Champaign, IL), Texas Eagle (CHI-DAL)
Bring back the Broadway Limited (or Three Rivers or any Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philly train)!
 
https://www.facebook...roadwayLimited/


#2 AmtrakBlue

AmtrakBlue

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,761 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Delaware

Posted 03 December 2017 - 07:25 AM

Let me be the first to shoot this down.

You do know that the OBS work the trains end-to-end, and back-to-back runs, don’t you? I don’t think they or the unions would agree to adding another 2 full days to their schedules.

I would not want to add another day to my trip on one train. I would welcome the connection. Everyone is not looking for long one-seat rides.


Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

#3 Ryan

Ryan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,728 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:OTN
  • Interests:a fact checker combined with a ferret

Posted 03 December 2017 - 07:42 AM

As for getting the OK from the host railroads, Amtrak runs tons of trains between LAX and San Luis Obispo and SJC and EMY right now so one more can't be that big a deal. The only one that could possibly be a deal breaker would be the 203 miles between SJC and San Luis Obispo.


Here in the Real World, problems don't get solved that easily.
Posted Image

Disclaimer: Any images or links you see in my post may in fact be invasive advertising or even fraudulent phishing attacks silently injected into my post by our spam based hosting service. If anything looks suspicious or inappropriate or you have any doubt whatsoever then do not click any links (particularly those appearing in green and/or with a double underline) or interact with the spam in any way. You may also want to consider using ad-blocking plugins such as Adblock Plus and/or Ghostery)to help reduce the number and severity of advertising scams directed at you.

#4 Thirdrail7

Thirdrail7

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,360 posts

Posted 03 December 2017 - 11:25 AM

Let's see how quickly this gets shot down.

 

So the CZ would go down from EMY to make stops in Oakland Jack London Square, San Jose, Salinas, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Los Angeles. Using the CS schedule,

 

5: EMY 5:20pm, Oakland 5:35/5:50pm, San Jose 6:55/7:07pm, Salinas 8:48pm, San Luis Obispo 12:20am, Santa Barbara 3:02am, LAX 6:00am

6: LAX 8:10pm, Santa Barbara 10:40pm, San Luis Obispo 1:35am, Salinas 4:28am, San Jose 6:11/6:23am, Oakland 7:24/7:39am, EMY 7:54am/8:04am

 

 

Running the CZ an additional 469 miles between EMY and LAX seems expensive. On the other hand, if you do that, you can close the long distance facilities in the Bay Area. How much does it cost to maintain those facilities vs. running the train those extra miles? Hopefully the ability to close the facilities in the Bay Area helps pay the cost of the additional service (and eventually they will make back the money with the additional revenue).

 

 

I'll take this part. Operationally, if you close the Bay area facility, you'd still need to find another place to perform a calendar day inspection. You've added another 12 hours to the trip and pushed the trip into another calendar day. Therefore, you'd need a facility and mechanical presence to perform this inspection. You'd also need additional crews.

 

Fuel looks like it would be an issue. The CS fuels twice en route while the CZ fuels three times. Judging where they both take on fuel, I'd say you'd need additional fuel for the diesels on the CZ.

 

Therefore, I submit you would save very little money since you'd need a presence somewhere prior to SLO going west and prior to ELK going east to service the train.  The only possible savings is if you can do it in a cheaper place but then you're talking about the cost associated with abandoning existing profiles while building new ones.


They say laughter is the best medicine. Obviously they never posted on AU.


#5 Bob Dylan

Bob Dylan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,526 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austin Texas
  • Interests:Passenger Trains/Travel/Sports/Gov't/ Politics/History/Reading/
    Movies/Music/Space-Ancient Aliens

Posted 03 December 2017 - 11:40 AM

A Non-Starter just like Killing the Cardinal!😉
"There's Something About a Train! It's Magic!"-- 1970s Amtrak Ad
 "..My heart is warm with the friends I make,and better friends I'll not be knowing,
Yet there isn't a train I wouldn't take,No matter where its going!.." -Edna St. Vincent Millay

#6 TiBike

TiBike

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 311 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alta California

Posted 03 December 2017 - 12:19 PM

If you want to know about the issues involved in getting another train running along the coast, between the Bay Area and LA, check out the planning documents for the Coast Daylight:

 

Coast Rail Coordinating Council home page

 

Amtrak study

 

We've been trying to get the Capitol Corridor extended to Salinas for 20 years, and even that's proved impossible, for all kinds of reasons: UP unwillingness, nimbys near the station, union conditions, train storage, agricultural opposition to anything that attracts people and, of course, budget. The Coast Daylight has similar problems, plus the need to do extensive track upgrades between SLO and Paso Robles, or so we're told.

 

There might be demand for overnight service between the Bay Area and LA, and there's a bus company that's trying that business model:

 

Cabin

 

I'm planning to try it sometime. It's a genuine 8 hour overnight that appears to run on time (they actually have to do some extra driving around to make it last 8 hours, to give passengers something like a full night's sleep). An overnight run on the Zephyr would be 12 hours, and is almost guaranteed not to run on time southbound. At best, its on time performance would be comparable to the Coast Starlate, I'm sorry, Starlight, which is not good enough for business travel. At best. Northbound, the Starlight has the same on time issues, which for the Zephyr would play havoc with the eastbound run out of Emeryville.

 

It's hard to imagine who else would want to ride it, besides rail fans. Even the land cruise market would be a hard sell: "See the spectacular California Coast in the dark!". You're left with the occasional through passenger from Reno or Salt Lake, or maybe Denver, and, as on the Starlight, college students and people who have no other options (particularly true for Salinas and Paso Robles). And it's not like that's a market that'll explode if a second option becomes available.

 

I don't see much enthusiasm for it in the coastal counties that are pushing for the Daylight and the Capitol Corridor extension. Those trains, at least, would add service to several more cities, serve business travellers as well as everyone else and eventually provide connections to high speed rail.

 

Extending the Zephyr to LA is a nice thought, but not practical or needed.


Coast Starlight • California Zephyr • Crescent • Lake Shore Limited • San Joaquin • Capitol Corridor • Pacific Surfliner

Shinkansen • TranzAlpine (NZ) • Northern Explorer (NZ) • Coastal Pacific (NZ) • Great Southern Rail Overland (Oz) • Tze-Chiang Limited (ROC) • Thello Venice-Paris

#7 Anthony V

Anthony V

    Service Attendant

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 90 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2017 - 02:15 PM

For California Zephyr service to Los Angeles, it would make more sense to revive the Desert Wind. Much more direct route and it would serve Las Vegas!



#8 west point

west point

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,323 posts

Posted 03 December 2017 - 02:29 PM

A connecting train at EMY would be much more in line.  Granted that a late westbound CZ will be a problem but if that happens occasionally Amtrak can certainly provide some kind of alternatively.  How the 750 mile rule could be  avoided is for others.  California doe not seem to be ready yet to support it.  Then we get into the need for more equipment.  Cannot see spare 4 SL sleepers available. ( 3 for train and spare at OAK ) 



#9 AmtrakBlue

AmtrakBlue

    Engineer

  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,761 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Delaware

Posted 03 December 2017 - 02:44 PM

A connecting train at EMY would be much more in line.  Granted that a late westbound CZ will be a problem but if that happens occasionally Amtrak can certainly provide some kind of alternatively.  How the 750 mile rule could be  avoided is for others.  California doe not seem to be ready yet to support it.  Then we get into the need for more equipment.  Cannot see spare 4 SL sleepers available. ( 3 for train and spare at OAK ) 

But remember the OP HATES making connections.  He only wants one-seat rides.  ;)



#10 Just-Thinking-51

Just-Thinking-51

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,313 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:USA

Posted 03 December 2017 - 02:55 PM

The only positive would be able to charge the full amount of the maintenance base to the state. There was some issues a few years back.

Just not sure the benefits out weight the cost.

#11 bmjhagen9426

bmjhagen9426

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 575 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Klamath Falls, Oregon
  • Interests:Computers, riding trains/travel, watching movies/sporting events, listening to music/speeches/talk radio, reading

Posted 03 December 2017 - 07:33 PM

If we are talking another LD train out of LAX or the CZ extension, I would rather prefer to talk about revival of Desert Wind: Service to Las Vegas NV (think all of the tourists, nice alternative to LAX-LVS Greyhound or BFD-LVS Ambus), and much more direct route to SLC from LAX.


Trains taken (US): Coast Starlight, San Joaquins, Empire Builder, Southwest Chief, Hoosier State, California Zephyr, SP4449 excursion 2015
Current Amtrak mileage: 26406 miles


#12 Steve4031

Steve4031

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,247 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago
  • Interests:Riding Trains Often!!

Posted 08 December 2017 - 06:42 PM

This would never happen IMHO. Also IMHO it would make more sense to run the cz to Bakersfield with the bus connection.


Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

#13 CCC1007

CCC1007

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 December 2017 - 11:37 PM

This would never happen IMHO. Also IMHO it would make more sense to run the cz to Bakersfield with the bus connection.


Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


Now how would that help?

#14 tomfuller

tomfuller

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Crescent Oregon (17 miles from Chemult)
  • Interests:Trains, geocaching, travel.

Posted 09 December 2017 - 12:08 AM

If you are coming in on the westbound CZ, the thing that makes the most sense to me if you want to go to LAX would be to get off in Sacramento and have a dedicated San Joaquin train instead of the bus at 3:05 to Stockton.
The last northbound SJ goes to SAC to connect with the northbound CS before midnight. On the Sunday after Thanksgiving, my wife and I left Bakersfield 20 minutes late
and got to SAC 18 minutes late (11:59). Luckily, the CS was also 18 minutes late to SAC.

#15 Philly Amtrak Fan

Philly Amtrak Fan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,710 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia Area

Posted 09 December 2017 - 05:56 AM

This would never happen IMHO. Also IMHO it would make more sense to run the cz to Bakersfield with the bus connection.


Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

 

That's even more impractical than Los Angeles. You're running the train an extra six hours in each direction. If they want to get to LAX from DEN/SLC they still have to transfer (and it's a bus rather than a train). The only relevant one seat rides (that no one cares about other than me) are Stockton, Fresno, and Bakersfield and you are getting away from the Pacific Coast/Bay Area/Southern California where there's a lot more people. Plus where are you going to park/service the CZ then? In my proposal you park the CZ with the SWC/CS/SL and close the CZ service facilities in the Bay Area. At least you can save some money although as Thirdrail7 said it would pale in comparison to the added costs of running the CZ to LAX. In yours, you have to find a whole new place to service the CZ. That will add more money on top of the additional cost of running the train to Bakersfield. Plus while there may be value of going to Bakersfield and Fresno for people in the Bay Area this Philly area resident might want to go to Yosemite once in his life and after that no thanks so to me a train going from Chicago to Bakersfield is about as useless as a train going from Chicago to Seattle. 


Edited by Philly Amtrak Fan, 09 December 2017 - 05:57 AM.

Trains Traveled: Broadway Limited (CHI-Harrisburg, PA), Three Rivers (Harrisburg, PA-CHI, Altoona, PA-CHI, PHL-CHI), Capitol Limited (CHI-WAS), Lake Shore Limited (NYP-CHI), , Silver Meteor (PHL-ORL), Southwest Chief (CHI-LAX), California Zephyr (CHI-SLC, SLC-EMY), City of New Orleans and/or Illini (CHI-Champaign, IL), Texas Eagle (CHI-DAL)
Bring back the Broadway Limited (or Three Rivers or any Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philly train)!
 
https://www.facebook...roadwayLimited/


#16 jebr

jebr

    Engineer

  • Forum Manager
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,817 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"The Last Great City of the East," St. Paul, MN

Posted 10 December 2017 - 03:24 PM

Honestly, other than the trackage rights issue, this doesn't seem like a terrible proposal on its face. You're adding distinct new markets, there's been a desire to have an overnight train between San Francisco and Los Angeles already, and the timing on the CZ currently is actually somewhat conducive to being that overnight train.

 

I'd push the departure back to 7:00 PM southbound from EMY - if trackage allows just rest the consist at EMY for that time (or wherever you could do a daily inspection/refuel stop.) It'd give some time to make up delays en route, while also allowing a more reasonable 7:40 AM arrival into LAX. The labor issue is a concern, but maybe Amtrak changes OBS crew there as well if there's no way to negotiate the layover to LAX? You're going to need much the same OBS crew if we ever get a Bay Area - LAX train anyways, so I don't think that should be a showstopper.

 

The biggest issue, as always, is trackage rights. I don't know the details of that, but it'll take work to get that negotiated and likely require some state funding to make it happen. Still, if California ever decides to make a go of an overnight train between the Bay Area and LAX, they'll likely hit the same issue.

 

It'll take state intervention to make the funding happen, but should California decide to pursue getting an overnight train, extending the CZ may be a way to make it cheaper than making a whole new train, and (if my math is right) require only one extra consist versus two.



#17 Green Maned Lion

Green Maned Lion

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,071 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ
  • Interests:Sleeping

Posted 10 December 2017 - 04:02 PM

It seems rather silly.


Travelled: Broadway Limited (1), Lake Shore Limited (6), Capitol Limited (7), Empire Builder (1), Southwest Chief (2), Sunset Limited (1), California Zephyr (3), Coast Starlight (2), Silver Meteor (5), Silver Star (5), Silver Palm (2), Crescent (1), Cardinal (4), Auto Train (4), Pennsylvanian (2), Palmetto (1), Acela Express (1), Empire Service (1), Northeast Regional (11), Keystone Service (1) --- Total Miles: 50,144 --- Total Trains: 61
Most important: Keep it Simple, Stupid!
Posted Image
Dream of love, dream of me, for you are my love. I love you.
Avatar and sig were done by my fiance, Corvidophile.

#18 Philly Amtrak Fan

Philly Amtrak Fan

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,710 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia Area

Posted 10 December 2017 - 05:21 PM

Honestly, other than the trackage rights issue, this doesn't seem like a terrible proposal on its face. You're adding distinct new markets, there's been a desire to have an overnight train between San Francisco and Los Angeles already, and the timing on the CZ currently is actually somewhat conducive to being that overnight train.

 

I'd push the departure back to 7:00 PM southbound from EMY - if trackage allows just rest the consist at EMY for that time (or wherever you could do a daily inspection/refuel stop.) It'd give some time to make up delays en route, while also allowing a more reasonable 7:40 AM arrival into LAX. The labor issue is a concern, but maybe Amtrak changes OBS crew there as well if there's no way to negotiate the layover to LAX? You're going to need much the same OBS crew if we ever get a Bay Area - LAX train anyways, so I don't think that should be a showstopper.

 

 

 

Or you can add also some padding/rest time at OKJ and/or SJC. The train can better serve Oakland and San Jose.


Trains Traveled: Broadway Limited (CHI-Harrisburg, PA), Three Rivers (Harrisburg, PA-CHI, Altoona, PA-CHI, PHL-CHI), Capitol Limited (CHI-WAS), Lake Shore Limited (NYP-CHI), , Silver Meteor (PHL-ORL), Southwest Chief (CHI-LAX), California Zephyr (CHI-SLC, SLC-EMY), City of New Orleans and/or Illini (CHI-Champaign, IL), Texas Eagle (CHI-DAL)
Bring back the Broadway Limited (or Three Rivers or any Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philly train)!
 
https://www.facebook...roadwayLimited/


#19 TiBike

TiBike

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 311 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alta California

Posted 11 December 2017 - 01:24 AM

The Zephyr's on time performance rating is 35%. The Capitol Corridor's is 93% and it makes more stops. If you want to improve service for Oakland and San Jose, terminate the Zephyr at Sacramento and get it out of the way.


Coast Starlight • California Zephyr • Crescent • Lake Shore Limited • San Joaquin • Capitol Corridor • Pacific Surfliner

Shinkansen • TranzAlpine (NZ) • Northern Explorer (NZ) • Coastal Pacific (NZ) • Great Southern Rail Overland (Oz) • Tze-Chiang Limited (ROC) • Thello Venice-Paris

#20 BCL

BCL

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,493 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 11 December 2017 - 01:42 AM

Running the CZ an additional 469 miles between EMY and LAX seems expensive. On the other hand, if you do that, you can close the long distance facilities in the Bay Area. How much does it cost to maintain those facilities vs. running the train those extra miles? Hopefully the ability to close the facilities in the Bay Area helps pay the cost of the additional service (and eventually they will make back the money with the additional revenue).

 

The yard in Oakland primarily services the state corridor services.  It's already is there and is not going away.  Taking just the CZ away isn't going to save much.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users