Cardinal With Superliners 1/23?

[Ryan]

This would also mean staffing the additional car, moving passengers into new rooms and remaking these rooms for the next trip out. In addition, which train would lose it's sleeper for this ricochet from NYP and back?

None would - the Viewliner that should have been making the trip from Chicago was sitting in New York with the rest of the Cardinal's consist, and it could have been staffed by the same TAS's that manned the train from Chicago. OK, yeah, they would have had to make an extra switching move to tack the Viewliner onto the tail end of another train from NYP - WAS, and then another move to pull it off the tail end at WAS (which could likely be done at the same time as the engine was being changed out). Perhaps "pretty pissed" were stronger than I intended, but I would be mighty disappointed if I was planning on riding in my room all the way to NYP and ended up riding in coach for the last 5 hours while the sleeper car I should be riding in sat unused in New York.

 

[wayman]

Perhaps "pretty pissed" were stronger than I intended, but I would be mighty disappointed if I was planning on riding in my room all the way to NYP and ended up riding in coach for the last 5 hours while the sleeper car I should be riding in sat unused in New York.

Whereas I'm amazed and impressed as all heck that Amtrak was able to pull together a solution like this and not have to anull a train or two.

 

[Ryan]

I never said that part of it wasn't impressive - it absolutely is. That sort of ingenuity throws into sharp relief the half-assedness of the "ride in coach from WAS - NYP" part of the solution. If they can go to all the trouble to pull together a replacement consist out of cars laying around, why can't they do a little extra switching at New York to go the distance?

 

[Nickrapak]

I don't really think that the extra time, crew, etc. needed for the four-hour trip is not worth it. I would stick them in BC (2-1 if the car was available), and reimburse them for the total cost of the sleeper WAS-NYP.

 

[Long Train Runnin']

This would also mean staffing the additional car, moving passengers into new rooms and remaking these rooms for the next trip out. In addition, which train would lose it's sleeper for this ricochet from NYP and back?

None would - the Viewliner that should have been making the trip from Chicago was sitting in New York with the rest of the Cardinal's consist, and it could have been staffed by the same TAS's that manned the train from Chicago. OK, yeah, they would have had to make an extra switching move to tack the Viewliner onto the tail end of another train from NYP - WAS, and then another move to pull it off the tail end at WAS (which could likely be done at the same time as the engine was being changed out). Perhaps "pretty pissed" were stronger than I intended, but I would be mighty disappointed if I was planning on riding in my room all the way to NYP and ended up riding in coach for the last 5 hours while the sleeper car I should be riding in sat unused in New York.

WAS to NYP on the cardinal is like 3 hours since you don't make a lot of stops.

 

[Dental Wiz]

I never said that part of it wasn't impressive - it absolutely is. That sort of ingenuity throws into sharp relief the half-assedness of the "ride in coach from WAS - NYP" part of the solution. If they can go to all the trouble to pull together a replacement consist out of cars laying around, why can't they do a little extra switching at New York to go the distance?

Ryan,

With all do respect, I realize that if you paid for that room CHI to NYP, you want it between those points,no questions asked. However, please understand, that "little extra switching" is enormously expensive, the attendant coming off of the Superliner sleeper already made up all those rooms and now you're asking he/she to start all over again with a new car between points they usually try to break down set up for the next trip out. As much as I appreciate your need for the room for that 3-4 hr ride, and that's what it is depending on traffic, it doesn't make much sense from a business or operations point of view. I'm sure most passengers were more than pleased by how Amtrak handled this situation.

Steve

 

[Rob_C]

Nice Christmas lights. Almost did that on our trip over the holidays, but it was mid-Dec and seemed a bit early. These folks evidently erred on the opposite side of the festivities. lol

Is that a CCC or a regular diner? Seems like a CCC would have made more sense in this case. With a four car train, doesn't seem like it would take that much equipment to do this tri-weekly with superliners. What are we talking, 8 cars total?

I don't know why New Yorkers get so excited about transfers in DC. Here in CA we have to connect from all LD trains if you want to go to anywhere south of LA. The "across the platform" changes from Coast Starlight to Surfliners are not exactly "across the platform" in most cases, but people still do them with regularity and ease. 30 minutes in a grand ol' train station sure beats 2 hours at an airport waiting for a connection!

Edit: spellin'

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I think its a regular diner. It's window configuration is wrong for a CCC

 

[wayman]

I don't know why New Yorkers get so excited about transfers in DC. Here in CA we have to connect from all LD trains if you want to go to anywhere south of LA. The "across the platform" changes from Coast Starlight to Surfliners are not exactly "across the platform" in most cases, but people still do them with regularity and ease. 30 minutes in a grand ol' train station sure beats 2 hours at an airport waiting for a connection!

It baffles me too, but the numbers (as I recall) are extremely clear: when one train goes all the way, ridership soars.

But that's comparing tri-weekly CHI-WAS with tri-weekly CHI-NYP. We don't have numbers comparing daily CHI-WAS with tri-weekly CHI-NYP. If the Superliner sets exist (or will, after wreck repairs) to try daily CHI-WAS (with a cross-platform transfer) I'd love to see them try it -- I think daily service convenience will more than make up for the two-seat inconvenience. Plus, it frees up two Viewliners for, eg, 66/67, and enough Amfleet II coaches that they could lengthen a train or two. I would think the overall equation would be very positive for Amtrak.

Those with knowledgeable fleet statistics, how close is Amtrak to being able to run a daily CHI-WAS Superliner Cardinal with their current active equipment pool? Could they do a daily sleeper, CCC, coach, coach-bag? (Is that enough capacity, or would it need an additional coach? Are there enough SLs to put that in the consist as well?)

 

[printman2000]

I think its a regular diner. It's window configuration is wrong for a CCC

I believe the window configuration changed on the side we cannot see.

If you look in the windows, right after the gap of no windows, you can see what looks like a rounded wall. That would make is a CCC.

 

[Amtrak839]

I think its a regular diner. It's window configuration is wrong for a CCC

I believe the window configuration changed on the side we cannot see.

If you look in the windows, right after the gap of no windows, you can see what looks like a rounded wall. That would make is a CCC.

Correct, I saw the train at BCV (Burke Centre, VA, for those who don't know, is now officially an Amtrak station), and it was a CCC.

 

[Rafi]

It was a CCC. However the car was bad-ordered as it turned out and only got through Dinner out of CHI before losing all water. They tried to rewater overnight, but it kept pouring out, according to the conductor I spoke with in CLP. So they had to bring on sandwiches and other assorted foods. Such a shame, especially given the fact that this was the first larger-capacity dining car (compared to the Amfleet Diner-Lite) to hit the Cardinal in about 7 years.

Rafi

 

[bretton88]

I wish I was one of the passengers on this train. It would be a trip to remember. Its also a definite upgrade over the existing train. How is amtrak going to get these superliners back to Chicago? Another cardinal with superliners? :huh:

 

[printman2000]

I wish I was one of the passengers on this train. It would be a trip to remember. Its also a definite upgrade over the existing train. How is amtrak going to get these superliners back to Chicago? Another cardinal with superliners? :huh:

Reported on trainorders they will use the Superliners for Wednesday Cardinal back to Chicago.

 

[AlanB]

Hopefully with a properly watered CCC.

 

[bretton88]

I wish I was one of the passengers on this train. It would be a trip to remember. Its also a definite upgrade over the existing train. How is amtrak going to get these superliners back to Chicago? Another cardinal with superliners? :huh:

Reported on trainorders they will use the Superliners for Wednesday Cardinal back to Chicago.

It probably will be. I did a test booking for wednesday and when I attempted to book a bedroom, it said "Hurry, only 3 bedrooms left! Since when did a viewliner have 3 bedrooms :huh: ? So I'm convince there will be superliners that day.

 

[oldtimer]

Hopefully with a properly watered CCC.

It was probably a failure of the automatic drain valves (Ogantz). These valves are designed to drain the water tanks to prevent freezing and the splitting of the water piping system. They drain the car at approximately 38 degrees F outside air temperature. There is a small heating coil to keep the temperature sensed by the valve above the drain temperature. It is powered by the cars HEP. If the power goes out the water automatically drains (some water still remains in some pipes that can split if the water freezes). Any malfunction of these heaters or the drain heater electric circuit can cause the water to drain.

Thus with that said if the car was operating properly out of Chicago and dinner was served as Rafi stated in his post the car must have been properly watered prior to departure.

 

[AlanB]

Hopefully with a properly watered CCC.

It was probably a failure of the automatic drain valves (Ogantz). These valves are designed to drain the water tanks to prevent freezing and the splitting of the water piping system. They drain the car at approximately 38 degrees F outside air temperature. There is a small heating coil to keep the temperature sensed by the valve above the drain temperature. It is powered by the cars HEP. If the power goes out the water automatically drains (some water still remains in some pipes that can split if the water freezes). Any malfunction of these heaters or the drain heater electric circuit can cause the water to drain.

Thus with that said if the car was operating properly out of Chicago and dinner was served as Rafi stated in his post the car must have been properly watered prior to departure.

I didn't mean to imply that someone in Chicago hadn't done their job. :blink:

Just making a plea that the car retain its water this time.

 

[DET63]

Just making a plea that the car retain its water this time.

Wouldn't it get a bloated feeling after a while?