Will Americans ever take sleepers again?

[neroden]

Let's run an exercise (and pardon any sarcasm here; I couldn't resist):

Assume that the Budd Fairy came to Amtrak and said that they'd been a good intercity railroad, and that if Amtrak left its retired Heritage cars under its pillow then the Budd Fairy would replace them with brand new sleepers!

So, Amtrak wakes up in the morning with another 75 single-level sleeping cars...what should Amtrak do with them?

In answer to Andersons's Budd Fairy question. In priority order.

(1) Daily Cardinal (needs more coaches too)

(2) Added sleepers on every existing single-level sleeper train

(3) Broadway Limited / 3 Rivers (needs more coaches too)

(4) BOS-WAS sleeper on 66/67 (to Newport News or perhaps Norfolk)

(5) Palmetto -> Silver Palm (needs more coaches too)

(6) Split the LSL into two trains (it's getting too long for the platforms); maybe separate Boston and NY trains, maybe not; needs more coaches too. This should wait until we see whether enough traffic is diverted to the Broadway Ltd. and Cardinal to shorten the LSL. But if not, if it instead keeps growing, then it needs to become two trains.

(7) Single-level Capitol Limited (so as to dispatch the Superliners to other trains); needs more coaches too

The above do not require station or track improvements or revival of "freight only" track for passengers. The below do.

(8) Service down the Florida East Coast on one of the Florida-NY trains

(9) Toledo-Detroit-Ann Arbor-Chicago service via one of the Chicago-east coast trains

(10) Service via Columbus, Ohio, via one of the Chicago-east coast trains

(11) Service via Fort Wayne, Indiana, via one of the Chicago-east coast trains

This is arguably a modest list. It focuses on beefing up services on a limited collection of corridors which are mostly already served. And it reserves Viewliners for services which *must* be single-level, with the exception of the Capitol Limited.

 

[StriderGDM]

About 8 years ago I suggested a split LSL, calling the NYC-CHI the 21st Century Limited (but not nearly as posh as its previous version) and run it a bit earlier than a BOS-CHI train (still called the Lake Shore Limited).

Both would make stops at Albany, Buffalo, Toledo and other major cities, but then would alternate some of the smaller cities in between.

This would give a bit more service to existing cities along the wy, and give more options for folks going to/from Chicago.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

About 8 years ago I suggested a split LSL, calling the NYC-CHI the 21st Century Limited (but not nearly as posh as its previous version) and run it a bit earlier than a BOS-CHI train (still called the Lake Shore Limited).

Both would make stops at Albany, Buffalo, Toledo and other major cities, but then would alternate some of the smaller cities in between.

This would give a bit more service to existing cities along the wy, and give more options for folks going to/from Chicago.

You'd probably like this study:

http://midwesthsr.org/lakeshore

The Midwest High Speed Rail organization has proposed

a Lakeshore Corridor, basically stretching the Empire trains

west from Buffalo to Chicago. The plan would provide four

trains a day (minimum) for the length of the route. The

emphasis is NOT on end-to-end service, but rather shorter

trips between the many overlapping city pairs along this route.

Nothing is cheap, of course, but this plan seems to offer

a lot of bang for the buck. It is NOT high speed rail; like

the Midwestern Corridors, it's proposed to be high(er)

speed rail, up to 90 mph, or with luck, up to 110 mph

over some stretches.

Before you make reservations, a few things need to happen.

"South of the Lake" is a package of improvements from Chicago

to where the Michigan trains now diverge from the East Coast

trains. For $1.5 to $2 Billion, the South of the Lake project alone

will cut 50 minutes from the schedules of the trains using this

currently hugely congested segment.

Then upgrades on the track the rest of the way to Toledo and

Cleveland will allow heavy corridor service there. Wildguessing

from the costs of St Louis-Chicago, about $1 Billion will make

a good start, another $1 or $2 Billion should finish the job. And,

when the skies fill with pigs, a Cleveland-Toledo-Chicago

corridor would cut another hour or two out of the timetables

of the Lake Shore Ltd and the Capital Ltd (as well as any

Broadway Ltd or 21st Century Ltd or whatever).

On the Empire Corridor, planning work suggests that for a mere

$6 or $7 Billion iirc we could see two hours cut from the NYC-

Buffalo schedule. (This project, like the Cleveland Corridor,

will go forward, or not, with no attention at all paid to Amtrak's

interest here.)
In the meantime, using the slots of the two NYC-Buffalo-

Niagara Falls Empire Service trains to extend service to

Cleveland and Chicago could at least head off some of

the squealing sure to come from CSX.

To keep on topic, the plan envisions using lots of sleepers,

and marketing them to business users during daytime hours.

 

[neroden]

About 8 years ago I suggested a split LSL, calling the NYC-CHI the 21st Century Limited (but not nearly as posh as its previous version) and run it a bit earlier than a BOS-CHI train (still called the Lake Shore Limited).

Both would make stops at Albany, Buffalo, Toledo and other major cities, but then would alternate some of the smaller cities in between.

There's no suitable "alternation" to do, I'm afraid. The really small cities on this route don't have stations at all. And the LSL is already a "Limited" in reality -- it skips Amsterdam NY and Rome NY.

On any train on this route, you *must* stop at Albany, Schenectady, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, Cleveland, Toledo, Elkhart, South Bend, and Chicago. You really ought to stop in Utica, Erie, Sandusky, and Elkhart as well. Waterloo is the station for Fort Wayne. Elyria is the west-suburban Cleveland station.

I guess you could skip Bryan. The Capitol Limited skips Bryan. But that's it really.

Apart from Bryan, the stops tend to be a bit over an hour apart from each other on the current schedule; it's good spacing, so that anyone along the route is within 1-2 hours drive of a station. With more frequency, every one of these stations would see increased ridership; none of them should be skipped by any trains.

 

[Anderson]

I have to wonder both ways on station stops: On the one hand, are there some stops which might be skippable on one or two trains due to absolutely atrocious hours on those trains (particularly east of Buffalo, where you'd have at least one additional train [the Maple Leaf], and probably more, to work with)...and on the other hand whether there might not be some places where you could swap stations around.

Elyria is probably skippable for whatever train happens to be hitting it at the clumsiest times, and some of the others could probably be dropped for similar reasons. On the other hand, you could probably "make up for" this sort of thing by (assuming local support on at least an experimental basis) adding a few stops in midsized towns to one or two trains (possibly, east of Buffalo, combined with some trains stopping there that are NY-only). Hitting every city with 4-6 trains along the Empire Corridor doesn't mean they all need the same 4-6 trains if you have 8+ there, and I believe that New York does want additional trains along there.

 

[Bus Nut]

Can't help bus chime in on this "fantasy" list. I do believe in fairies, I do!

Let's run an exercise (and pardon any sarcasm here; I couldn't resist):

Assume that the Budd Fairy came to Amtrak and said that they'd been a good intercity railroad, and that if Amtrak left its retired Heritage cars under its pillow then the Budd Fairy would replace them with brand new sleepers!

So, Amtrak wakes up in the morning with another 75 single-level sleeping cars...what should Amtrak do with them?

In answer to Andersons's Budd Fairy question. In priority order.
(1) Daily Cardinal (needs more coaches too)

This is in the PIP, granted there are host railroad issues, but if they make that happen this is sure to be a slam dunk. Doesn't hurt that VA is investing in their portion of this route.

(2) Added sleepers on every existing single-level sleeper train

I'd prefer to see Amtrak move them around seasonally where needed.

(3) Broadway Limited / 3 Rivers (needs more coaches too)

Yes!!

(4) BOS-WAS sleeper on 66/67 (to Newport News or perhaps Norfolk)

I took this coach in the wintertime from Quantico to 128 in '99. To be fair, I was a student. Anyway it was a good sleep until we hit NYP. Lots of noisy people who I guess had been out late partying and were catching their ride back to CT or maybe RI/MA woke me up. That and the fricking cold. Big layover. Don't expect to sleep on this train w/o a sleeper, truly a terrible loss (all due to equip shortages, nothing to do with business needs).

(5) Palmetto -> Silver Palm (needs more coaches too)

Totally!

(6) Split the LSL into two trains (it's getting too long for the platforms); maybe separate Boston and NY trains, maybe not; needs more coaches too. This should wait until we see whether enough traffic is diverted to the Broadway Ltd. and Cardinal to shorten the LSL. But if not, if it instead keeps growing, then it needs to become two trains.
(7) Single-level Capitol Limited (so as to dispatch the Superliners to other trains); needs more coaches too

The above do not require station or track improvements or revival of "freight only" track for passengers. The below do.
(8) Service down the Florida East Coast on one of the Florida-NY trains

I thought they had a deal years ago to do FEC? Whatever happened? Or are they are SAL? Doesn't AAF preclude Amtrak on FEC? Isn't TriRail on FEC? I'm lost when it comes to Florida, as you can probably tell.

(9) Toledo-Detroit-Ann Arbor-Chicago service via one of the Chicago-east coast trains
(10) Service via Columbus, Ohio, via one of the Chicago-east coast trains

Ohio would have to buy a clue, first.

(11) Service via Fort Wayne, Indiana, via one of the Chicago-east coast trains

Indiana is almost a lost cause. One can only hope that they will watch as the states around them get attractive, modern, higher speed train service and they start to wonder why they are left out. Oh, and Wabash Cannonball is just a song.

This is arguably a modest list. It focuses on beefing up services on a limited collection of corridors which are mostly already served. And it reserves Viewliners for services which *must* be single-level, with the exception of the Capitol Limited.

What do you think about the eternal Grand Central debate? Seems like a great station to take a train from, assuming it originates there and wasn't a thru-line. I know there is a clearance issue. Would single-levels allow more trains to start there?

 

[Anderson]

Ok, going down the list with respect to AAF/FEC:
-There was a plan, I believe prior to the HSR money being given to FL, to add Amtrak service on FEC's tracks (shall we just call it the F-line to keep the terms steady here?).

-FEC did, I believe, say that Amtrak and AAF were not mutually exclusive.

-FEC operation did go into the PIP for the Silvers, but there was an insurance/liability issue mucking things up. I think Florida was able to fix that issue. However, equipment remains at issue, not to mention the complete lack of existing passenger stations along the line. What buildings might still be present haven't been used for the purpose in close to 50 years, so I rather doubt they're going to be ADA-compliant.

I'm not sure what went haywire here. It is possible that the Orlampa bullet train thing made a total hash of the plans given what happened there, but I don't know if it was a case of Orlampa distracting the state or Scott's canning of it getting in the way or what.

With respect to possible service on the line, the biggest issue is the station issue. AAF is sticking in a bunch of stations...there are three confirmed and I know they've said they want to add more but don't want to do anything until they get through their current process since tinkering with anything could screw up/void their existing environmental reports. In their negotiations with Tri-Rail they indicated that they want to have up to six stations in the WPB-MIA area, and if they go more frequently than hourly it is quite possible that you could get some interesting local/express mixes.

North of WPB, they've also indicated a desire to add a stop or two (if only to shut up the complainers in the area)...Jupiter, Vero, Port St. Lucie, Palm Bay/Melbourne and Cocoa are all possible locations, and I think FEC owns possible station locations in most of the towns along the line. So something there might get taken care of (and taken care of quite quick) once the trains are in service.

However, north of Cocoa there's no clear start of service...and that's where you get into a hangup. There's already a subsidiary that has been set up to run trains to Jacksonville, so it seems likely that FEC will be getting its ducks in a row for service there by the end of the decade (that is to say, they'll be looking to break ground by then, not start service by then). Cocoa-Jacksonville service won't be that hard to set up, but (A) it isn't as lucrative as Orlando-Miami and (B) it'll require a full kabuki dance of environmental paperwork as well...and there's still the setting-up-stations issue.

The way I see it, there are three possibilities:
(1) FEC tries to get Amtrak to pony up for some stations and/or improvements on the JAX-Cocoa line in exchange for access. It probably isn't unreasonable for FEC to hope they could get a free station or two in the deal, or at least some defrayed costs there.

(2) FEC lets Amtrak in after-the-fact, but with some restrictions (no local ticket sales on Amtrak's trains south of Cocoa or WPB, for example).

(3) FEC is willing to run trains on the line...but pushes to handle them "in house" in some fashion (i.e. they use their own operating crews instead of Amtrak's).

I'd note that, assuming schedules like exist now, the Silver Palm/Palmetto would almost assuredly be a non-competition train with FEC's (it would run more or less overnight on the line, and I don't think FEC is likely to be running anything super-late). The Meteor and Star are a more complicated story: The SB Star would probably be the second or third train out of Jacksonville in the morning (FEC would probably run a departure at sometime in the 0500-0600 range, and the Star doesn't leave JAX until 0715) while the NB Star would probably be in a similar position at the end of the day (the arrival in JAX at close to 2300 means there wouldn't be many trains after it). The Meteor would be in the middle of the day both ways.

Some of this also depends on service density, too...if FEC is only running 3-6 trains/day to Jacksonville at the start they might be able to work with Amtrak so that Amtrak's trains (and equipment) basically allow them to leverage starting frequencies by 50-100% (three Amtrak and three FEC trains as a starting point isn't a bad service; if we assume some semblance of timekeeping on Amtrak's part, even if aided by a big pad in Jacksonville SB, then FEC probably just saved themselves 4-6 equipment sets and somewhere in the range of $60-100m in startup costs). If they want to run more, the picture is a bit trickier.

===============

As to Grand Central...there's a reason that Amtrak moved all of the Empire trains to Penn Station. Lousy though NYP may be, you at least have same-station connectivity in New York...which in turn means that you can reliably connect to a train within 30-60 minutes when coming off of the NEC. If you shift a bunch of trains to NYG, you're going to be stuck adding time to allow the station-to-station connection...not to mention ridership being lost from passing-through passengers who don't want to haul their luggage across Midtown.

===============

Finally, a word on Indiana/Ohio: I believe that Ohio will get back on track in a few years. Kasich is term-limited, after all. I'll point out, however, that the idea of serving another line in Indiana doesn't have much to do with Indiana...it has a lot to do with the points on Columbus as well as the fact that, assuming competent scheduling and whatnot, the potential to add another route that Amtrak would be serving with a minimal direct cost deficit. Being able to temporarily re-route trains in those states would be a plus, too.

 

[neroden]

Hitting every city with 4-6 trains along the Empire Corridor doesn't mean they all need the same 4-6 trains if you have 8+ there,

Well, sure, but if you only have 4 trains heading west to Chicago, then all 4 of the trains *to the west* should stop at all the major upstate NY cities.
Some of the other 4+ trains only heading to New York City could skip some of the intermediate points.

There's really a lot of traffic between upstate NY and Ohio/Indiana/Michigan/Illinois. This is a case where more departures per day would boost ridership by giving people options.

Can't help bus chime in on this "fantasy" list. I do believe in fairies, I do!

What do you think about the eternal Grand Central debate? Seems like a great station to take a train from, assuming it originates there and wasn't a thru-line. I know there is a clearance issue. Would single-levels allow more trains to start there?

Grand Central's closer to my favored hotel, so there's that. But frankly I don't care much either way; GCT is more convenient for terminating in NY, Penn is more convenient for making connections.
The *ideal* thing to do is to run tracks from Grand Central through Penn (known as "Alternative G" from an old study), which would solve an awful lot of problems and be like the Berlin Hauptbahnhof or London Crossrail or the RER. But this isn't Germany or even California, so we don't get grand rail projects. :sigh: