Through car CL <---> Pennsylvanian? (2+ years old)

[the_traveler]

and scrap the slow trek through nowhere that is WAS-PGH

Tell all the residents who ride Amtrak between PGH and WAS that they live "in the middle of nowhere"!

I would personally ride on a "slow" Superliner than an Amfleet! Plus, there are many trains running between PHL and WAS, so why should some cars go to WAS from PHL?

Part of the reason many chose between the LSL and CL (even from NYP and other cities) is that the LSL is Amfleet and the CL is Superliner!

 

[Ryan]

the most capable station for a move is Philadelphia. When the new viewliners come online, make the capitol viewliner only, break the train in philly, and send some cares north to ny and some south to washington and scrap the slow trek through nowhere that is WAS-PGH.move the superliners over to the cardinal which would now depart from washington and any extra superliners could be used in the west.

For real?

There's plenty between WAS and PGH that would be abandoned without service. The route that you propose already has service by other trains.

Not going to happen.

 

[jis]

the most capable station for a move is Philadelphia. When the new viewliners come online, make the capitol viewliner only, break the train in philly, and send some cares north to ny and some south to washington and scrap the slow trek through nowhere that is WAS-PGH.move the superliners over to the cardinal which would now depart from washington and any extra superliners could be used in the west.

I don't think there is any justification for discontinuing service to Cumberland and other stops on that line.

The right place to split service between Washington and New York really is Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia incidentally get direct service that way too.

During PRR days the split/join was in Philly or Harrisburg because of railroad company jurisdiction issues and such continued well into the Amtrak era. And even then before Amtrak there was the B&O Cap Limited serving the other route. There is no real reason to go back to that arrangement now specially when there is only a single train west of PGH, not two.

If you think WAS to PGH is a slow trek through nowhere it is curious that an even worse trek through nowhere such as the Card would deserve an upgrade at the cost of the Cap. Seems illogical to me. Maybe the Card should also be somehow routed from Cincy to PGH and then run through the center of the world Philadelphia to save it from a slow trek through nowhere perhaps?

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Has this thing gotten a go ahead I hadn't heard?

 

[jis]

Has this thing gotten a go ahead I hadn't heard?

If you ask about the through running of Pennsy cars, there is no official word on it except at a few presentations from the likes of Drew Galloway. At least two of us have had the pleasure of traveling with one of the members of the PIPs and he mentioned to both of us that the Pennsy run through is most likely to be put into effect first and that the project to install the necessary switch at PGH is funded and most likely will be put in place in course of 2012. But as is usual with all these things you can never be sure until the proverbial "fat lady sings".

 

[Green Maned Lion]

That's what I figured.

 

[Gratt]

That's what I figured.

As you are well aware Amtrak would never announce a new service until has everything planned out and the equipment in place. That could take a few years and if complications occur they would look foolish promising a new service and then going back on it.

But I would not disregard this as idle chatter or simply plans on paper. From reports around here Amtrak is digging up the dirt and putting the money into laying the switch that will be necessary for the extra cars.

That means they are serious about this and they have a timetable in mind. Again, things can change, and they often do, but this is not some rail fan club or local politician without money making noise. I think Amtrak thinks this is a good idea and willing to put up the captial needed to make it happen.

 

[Trogdor]

As you are well aware Amtrak would never announce a new service until has everything planned out and the equipment in place. That could take a few years and if complications occur they would look foolish promising a new service and then going back on it.

That's not true.

During the Warrington era, a number of new trains were announced (including the Crescent Star, a rerouted Wolverine frequency, possibly even a rerouted Sunset Limited, tough my memory is a bit hazy on the last one). Two trains even made it into the October 2000 national timetable (check timetables.org and look for the "Skyline Connection," as well as the Hiawatha extension to Fond du Lac, WI).

One train even made it as far as being available for reservations (New England States, Chicago-Boston as a separate frequency from the Chicag-New York Lake Shore Limited) before it was pulled back.

Today, Amtrak is surely far more careful in making sure things are ready to go before releasing something to the public, but you can't say that Amtrak would "never" do that, because they did.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I never believe a project is a done deal until wheel hits rail in revenue service. I recall Jishnu insisting ARC was a done deal.

 

[Anderson]

As you are well aware Amtrak would never announce a new service until has everything planned out and the equipment in place. That could take a few years and if complications occur they would look foolish promising a new service and then going back on it.

That's not true.

During the Warrington era, a number of new trains were announced (including the Crescent Star, a rerouted Wolverine frequency, possibly even a rerouted Sunset Limited, tough my memory is a bit hazy on the last one). Two trains even made it into the October 2000 national timetable (check timetables.org and look for the "Skyline Connection," as well as the Hiawatha extension to Fond du Lac, WI).

One train even made it as far as being available for reservations (New England States, Chicago-Boston as a separate frequency from the Chicag-New York Lake Shore Limited) before it was pulled back.

Today, Amtrak is surely far more careful in making sure things are ready to go before releasing something to the public, but you can't say that Amtrak would "never" do that, because they did.

1) Which timetable would the New England States have been in?

2) Where was Warrington finding the equipment for these trains?

3) How was adding trains requiring more equipment, operating slots, etc. going to get Amtrak to self-sufficiency (at least in the short term) given that those LD trans don't make money (by a long shot) as it stands?

 

[MikefromCrete]

As you are well aware Amtrak would never announce a new service until has everything planned out and the equipment in place. That could take a few years and if complications occur they would look foolish promising a new service and then going back on it.

That's not true.

During the Warrington era, a number of new trains were announced (including the Crescent Star, a rerouted Wolverine frequency, possibly even a rerouted Sunset Limited, tough my memory is a bit hazy on the last one). Two trains even made it into the October 2000 national timetable (check timetables.org and look for the "Skyline Connection," as well as the Hiawatha extension to Fond du Lac, WI).

One train even made it as far as being available for reservations (New England States, Chicago-Boston as a separate frequency from the Chicag-New York Lake Shore Limited) before it was pulled back.

Today, Amtrak is surely far more careful in making sure things are ready to go before releasing something to the public, but you can't say that Amtrak would "never" do that, because they did.

1) Which timetable would the New England States have been in?

2) Where was Warrington finding the equipment for these trains?

3) How was adding trains requiring more equipment, operating slots, etc. going to get Amtrak to self-sufficiency (at least in the short term) given that those LD trans don't make money (by a long shot) as it stands?

These trains were part of the ill-fated "glide path to self sufficiency" which meant adding trains based on express/freight service, not passenger convenience. These trains were to be basically freight/express trains with a couple of coaches, a cafe car and maybe a sleeper. Some made onto the schedule (i.e. The Lake County Limited and Kentucky Cardinal). Others were announced and even appeared in public schedules, but never operated because the host railroads did not want competition (i.e. semi-freight trains) on their tracks. Many long distance trains were burdened with the freight cars making extra stops to switch out cars or stopping just outside Chicago Union Station to add or subtract the express cars. This nonsense stopped when Gunn became Amtrak president, declared that the whole Amtrak Express operation was operating at a loss and cancelled existing contracts.

 

[Anderson]

A silly question regarding the shipping mess, but why didn't Amtrak just hold the freight cars on the train until after discharging passengers or hook the cars up before backing the train into the station?

 

[Anderson]

*sighs*

Ok, looked at the Skyline Connection's timetable. WB, this probably qualifies as a "somebody shoot me now" train with those times. EB, however, I actually like that timetable. It's too bad they cut it back to Philly in the plan, because you'd actually have a train from the Midwest getting into NYP before dinnertime. Granted, I know the issues with broken connections and so forth, but I do think this would have been a good thing to have in the mix. It's a shame they couldn't whack another few hours off the schedule, but I am well aware that such is reality. Still, you'd have had a decent connection between a lot of "Chicago Hub" destinations and New York.

I still can't find the New England States on the timetables...should I be looking before or after 2000 for that one?

Finally, per the 2000 timetables, Amtrak was still running heritage passenger cars in at least 2000 (on the Three Rivers, though that went Viewliner in 2003). When did those get pulled from service, since that's capacity Amtrak lost? Clearly they still had a few in service in at least 2000, and if nothing else, those would have been nice to have around for seasonal service on some of the East Coast trains for the last few years.

 

[Trogdor]

I don't think the New England States made it into a timetable.

That was something that was put up for sale in between timetables, then removed just as quickly.

Here's a message I found from the All Aboard yahoo group, from Gene Poon (I hope there aren't any rules about quoting from other forums on here):

I don't remember if it was specifiied in Warrington's National GrowthPlan, but the Boston-Chicago train rumored to be named "New England

States" came so close to fruition that its availability appeared in

Amtrak's reservations system; two Sleeping Car reservations were made

for what was to be the inaugural runs in each direction. The tickets

issued for those reservations turned out to be the only ones ever issued

for the train.

One was for Train 39(16OCT1999), BOS-CHI (that's Boston-Chicago, for

Marty) in Viewliner Standard Bedroom 3, Car 3910. Scheduled times for

the BOS-CHI run were 1215am-935pm.

The other was for Train 38(16OCT1999), CHI-BOS (that's Chicago-Boston,

for Marty); I don't recall what space; the times were similar.

The train was cancelled when (apparently) the freight railroads

over which it was to be run, made a deal with the shipper whose express

freight was to be handled, taking the business away from Amtrak. Those

two tickets were issued only four days prior to the inaugural date; the

train was cancelled THAT close to its becoming a reality!

By special arrangement with Amtrak, the passengers holding the tickets

were allowed to keep them, after the fares were refunded.

-GP

It's message 146462 for those that have access to the group's archives.

 

[Trogdor]

Finally, per the 2000 timetables, Amtrak was still running heritage passenger cars in at least 2000 (on the Three Rivers, though that went Viewliner in 2003). When did those get pulled from service, since that's capacity Amtrak lost? Clearly they still had a few in service in at least 2000, and if nothing else, those would have been nice to have around for seasonal service on some of the East Coast trains for the last few years.

The Three Rivers was converted from Heritage to Viewliner in fall 2001 (I managed to get a ride in the Heritage sleeper in April 2001, just a few months before the conversion).

The heritage sleepers ran as crew dorms on eastern trains until some time mid-decade (I'm thinking 2006 or 2007).

 

[jis]

If my recollection serves me right, the Three Rivers was started without any Sleeper on it. Then a few Heritage Sleepers were pulled out of storage, dusted off and put on the Three Rivers. Unfortunately that was during a period when I was not paying too much attention to the goings on at Amtrak so I may not be remembering right.

 

[Oldsmoboi]

I think the addition of this switch will happen regardless of what Amtrak eventually does. It is a benefit to the Norfolk Southern as well because it will allow them to schedule an east bound train through the station easier while the Cap is in the station.

 

[jis]

I think the addition of this switch will happen regardless of what Amtrak eventually does. It is a benefit to the Norfolk Southern as well because it will allow them to schedule an east bound train through the station easier while the Cap is in the station.

That's the reason I couldn't understand why they removed it in the first place.

 

[Anderson]

Trogdor,

Thanks a bunch. Honestly, for a dedicated railfan those two tickets would probably be worth a decent amount of money considering their sheer rarity.

By the way, is there anywhere I could find a link to Warrington's plan? I'm getting a feel for what he was trying to do with his badly-planned freight operation (improving travel options on a bunch of routes and getting multiple daily options in place, and providing daylight times in places like Ohip, western PA, and Indiana), and I'm embarrassed to say that it's actually starting to make sense to me that he did what he did.

 

[AlanB]

By the way, is there anywhere I could find a link to Warrington's plan? I'm getting a feel for what he was trying to do with his badly-planned freight operation (improving travel options on a bunch of routes and getting multiple daily options in place, and providing daylight times in places like Ohip, western PA, and Indiana), and I'm embarrassed to say that it's actually starting to make sense to me that he did what he did.

This might help to get you started. Not sure if the more detailed plans are still around anyplace, but the links at the page above will give you some idea on just what routes & changes were proposed. Only 2 of the changes ever made it into service and both are now gone.

 

[AlanB]

And as long as we're revisiting the past, here's a press release for Amtrak's first attempt to do electronic ticket collection.

 

[Anderson]

*sighs* I'll have to look it up when I get home. Apparently, Amtrak doesn't want me looking it up...>_<

(I'm on the train right now and I think that sight gets blocked because of bandwidth issues)

 

[AlanB]

Some other useful information, especially in the appendixes, can be found here.

 

[Anderson]

Alright, some thoughts:

1) If Warrington had been willing to stick explicitly with mail contracts, from the GAO report it sounds like he might have been able to get a bit further. The problem was the huge numbers of freight cars he purchased.

2) Honestly, I think the Network Growth Strategy, notwithstanding the freight-heavy aspect, was (and is) the right tack to take in a lot of places. I say "right tack", not that the plan itself was good. It more or less strikes me that the absolute worst route on the list (the Lake Country Limited...really, I'm still wondering who thought that would get passengers) and one of the more dubious ones (the Kentucky Cardinal, due to track conditions) were put into action...and I'd also point out. Of note is the fact that one, the daily Texas Eagle, was implemented and stuck.

In particular, I think the Skyline Connection was probably one of the best ideas on the list, and I'll also give a positive nod to the Meteor extension and the FEC split (one had an immediate precedent at the time; the other is still being pursued). I'd also note that the Hawkeye is being pursued in two sections (the IL portion of the route is more or less the Black Hawk, and the IA portion is part of the long-term plan for the Iowa City line...if that ever goes anywhere). Stitching those lines together makes for a mess, but the fact that both chunks are being followed up on now is worth noting. Though not being considered, I don't think the Twilight Limited was a bad idea...I suspect it was stillborn because of post-9/11 political reality more than anything, but it does seem to have at least been achievable at the time, and it had a precedent in the Niagara Rainbow.

So, on the good end we have:

-The International (rerouting via Detroit vs. Port Huron just makes sense to me)

-The Skyline Connection/Manhattan Limited

-The Crescent Star, potentially

-The Twilight Limited, pre-9/11 (post-9/11 it makes little sense, but at the time it was more or less reviving a route that had only been eliminated in the mid-1990s)

-The Hawkeye, in some form (good idea, dubious route)

-The Florida reroutes (at least the FEC portion; I can't find a map for the rest of the plan)

-The Meteor to Boston (at least depending on the conditions on MNRR's sections of the track...if timekeeping is good or you can park the train at Penn for a while in the vein of parking the train in WAS for a bit to allow for the engine change, it makes sense)

Note that a few of these (particularly the Skyline Connection/Manhattan Limited) are ones that I like because they'd probably have made it hell on Kasich to kill the 3Cs if that were connecting to a bunch of trains in Cleveland.

On the bad end:

-The Aztec Eagle makes little sense after the collapse of the Mexican railroads, unless Amtrak was seriously (for some strange reason) looking to go charging into the Mexican market. I'll file this one under "Who knows what they were thinking?", but in a vacuum, it seems to be a very random route.

-The Lake Country Limited (if this had been planned to go through to Madison, I could buy it even if the routing is a bit funny, but Janesville?).

-The Hiawatha Extension falls in the same vein as the Aztec Eagle: If the plan was ultimately to extend the line to Green Bay via Oshkosh and Appleton, I can buy into it, but Fond Du Lac is on a short list of "most random destinations".

-The Kentucky Cardinal (track conditions doomed it, though yet again, if part of a larger plan to ultimately run the train into Tennessee and improve the tracks, I can buy into it per the Tennessee rail reports from this time)

And on "I'm not sure":

-"Luxury Transcontinental": Really, this isn't enough information for me to go on and judge the proposal. Was the plan a full new route? Simply something like a fancy version of the National Chief plan?

-The Sunset Limited rework: This looks like a mess to me, but it also looks like Warrington was being canny and getting around "Texas won't pay for a corridor network" troubles. The other question mark here is how it would have interchanged with the Crescent Star.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

A long-time resident of PHL, and frequent traveller to CHI, I (as several suggest) take a regional to DC, and connect to 29 (CL) west.

But I do think that the addition of thru coaches from NYP / PHL would be profitable, and figure out the damn switching!

Much is made of the PGH layover, but it is possible to consider schedule changes to shorten these. Even if the schedules all stay as they are, many long-distance coach passengers are insensitive to such things. Connection layovers are routine in modern hub and spoke travel: being able to sleep while you wait, and not having to move your baggage around, is a big positive (see San Antonio).

Moreover, for non-experts (so, I am not talking to you, OBS Chief), the Regional - CL connect is not as easy as it is made out to be. The Amtrak computer automatically puts you on train 141 (dp PHL 11a, 3-hour connection). You have both know how to ask, and find an agent competent to override the system with the same fares, to get train 95 instead (depart noon, 2-hour connection). If you take 125 instead (departs PHL at 1p, 1-hour connection), no thru fares are possible, and you add $50 to your ticket cost (plus, if you miss the Cap, no refund to a discount ticket). In contrast, 43 heads west at 12:45p. All schedules approximate, from memory, but accurate within a few minutes: I live on these trains.

So... maybe for OBS Chief the trip is as quick via DC (even 15 mins faster if he takes some risk). But for most of the traveling public, it adds an hour if they are lucky, 2 for most, in addition to the train change.

In the other direction, the lack of precision of 30's arrival in DC makes timing the connection problematic, for similar reasons. Book tight, miss your train. Book loose, arrive on time and wait through 2 departures before yours. Again, experts know the work-arounds. But not everyone does....

The thru sleeper is probably not a good idea, given the lack of any meaningful lounge or diner on the "Pennsylvania Limited." If a sleeper were added, it should be attached and detached in PHL to save a car (most traffic would originate in PHL). Train Attendant stays aboard, crews from Chicago. Emergency in the event of late running: drop and pick up in HBG.

Idea: a new train, called (obviously) "The Loop". CHI - CLE - Buffalo - ALB - NY - PHL - HBG - PGH - CLE - CHI. Build in lots of recovery time (in Buffalo, some in NY, in PGH). Saves an equipment set, and allows for first class service on all legs. Creates all sorts of new city pairs (Buffalo - PHL, ALB - PGH...). Equipment set is out for 2 nights, but CHI OBS crews are used to crewing 2-night trains, and prefer them (based on bids observed).

A final observation re the "Capitol Limited": I am surprised to hear that it often sells out, or has high fare buckets (see above). I booked the lowest possible cost room ($150 or so?) on a pre-Christmas train a couple of weeks ago: Dec. 19 Westbound. I ALWAYS find space on that train. In contrast, the room on the Lake Shore that night was $500 (I'm starting in New Haven, so the Lake Shore had the better schedule, and I would have preferred it). I think that 29 / 30 could probably use a bit of help in the ridership department. Lovely train, but not a crowded one.