Amtrak Train Numbers

Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

S. White

AU Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
1
Location
Carthage, TX
Good evening, I am new to this Discussion Forum and wanted to know if any one could help me with some of Amtrak's train numbers. Did Amtrak ever have Train Number 9, 12, or 13? I can't find any information on this subject and would appreciate any help in finding an answer. Thanks again

S. White
 
I'm going to take a stab here and say that 12/13 may have been the Coast Daylight, which Amtrak dropped in 1974. I say this not only because the Coast Starlight has 11/14, but because the "Spirit of California" got the numbering of 15/18 (18 was recycled from the North Coast Hiawatha, which was 17/18 to coincide with the 7/8 of the Empire Builder). Whatever 9/10 was (and that would almost assuredly have been a pairing) was probably one of the trains dropped in the late 70s.
 
From old timetables, it looks like 12/13 was definitely the Coast Daylight. 9/10 is a bit harder to sort out. In earlier timetables (November 1974, for instance), it's the North Coast Hiawatha/Twin Cities Hiawatha, but later on (1978), the North Coast Hiawatha was given 17/18 and 9/10 was given to the North Star (Chicago-MSP-Duluth). It looks like the North Star kept 9/10 until it was discontinued in 1985, at that point running MSP-Duluth only.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TCRT said:
From old timetables, it looks like 12/13 was definitely the Coast Daylight. 9/10 is a bit harder to sort out. In earlier timetables (November 1974, for instance), it's the North Coast Hiawatha/Twin Cities Hiawatha, but later on (1978), the North Coast Hiawatha was given 17/18 and 9/10 was given to the North Star (Chicago-MSP-Duluth). It looks like the North Star kept 9/10 until it was discontinued in 1985, at that point running MSP-Duluth only.
Click to expand...
I'm going to take a wild guess here: The NCH got 17/18 to try and harmonize the numbers of the CHI-SEA/PDX trains (IIRC, the NCH and EB ran on alternate days) when the North Star got broken out. 9/10 was shifted to the new service...keeping it in place for CHI-MSP (albeit at a different time, in all likelihood).

And yes, this discussion is depressing...though now I want to know what the original 15/16 was, and why the Spirit of California got 15/18 instead of a more conventional pair (i.e. either 15/16 or 17/18).
 
So am I correct to guess that the lower the number, the older the route? (possibly)

It would make sense as the Sunset Limited (1/2) probably existed long before the Pere Marquette route (371/370). Now I'm curious...what's the highest numbered route? Texas Eagle (CHI-LAX, 421/420)?
 
You can see every Amtrak train number since day one if you have time to peruse the tables at our own site showing all tables since 1971

LINK
 
jdcnosse said:
So am I correct to guess that the lower the number, the older the route? (possibly)

It would make sense as the Sunset Limited (1/2) probably existed long before the Pere Marquette route (371/370). Now I'm curious...what's the highest numbered route? Texas Eagle (CHI-LAX, 421/420)?
Click to expand...
The Acelas are all 4 digit numbers in the 2xxx series.
 
The Acelas would be the highest (2xxx as noted). Below that would be the occasional double-up of a train because of either a time shift or a split route, which generates 1xxx (1089/1090 for the Palmetto recently, for example). After that, I know that the Empire Builder generates an 800-number for the CHI-MSP segment...but other than that, I can't think of any 800 or 900 trains off the top of my head.
 
Anderson said:
And yes, this discussion is depressing...though now I want to know what the original 15/16 was, and why the Spirit of California got 15/18 instead of a more conventional pair (i.e. either 15/16 or 17/18).
Click to expand...
I believe it was for the same reason the Coast Starlight is 11/14 -- it changed timetable directions during its run as it passed San Francisco (i.e., all trains going toward San Francisco are westbound, and all trains going away from San Francisco are eastbound). So it was officially 15-16 in one direction and 18-17 in the other, but to avoid confusion, they only put one set of numbers in the public timetable.
 
As far as the reason why the CS is numbered 11/14, and not consecutive numbers is this. (And I may have the names backwards.) #11/12 was the Daylight and #13/14 was the Starlight when they were operated by SP. And SP considered San Francisco as the center of their (railroad) universe. One started in LA and one started in IIRC Portland. Both ended in San Francisco.

When Amtrak began a route between LAX and SEA, essentially combining both these routes, they used the number from one train (#11) and one number from the other train (#14). Thus, there is no #12 or #13 on Amtrak!

Someone please correct me if I am wrong.
 
Espee's Cascade from Oakland to Portland was numbered 11&12. The Coast Daylight was numbered 99&98. There never has been a #13. Number 15&16 was the Texas Chief /Lone Star.Number carried over from Santa Fe. Sunset Number 1&2 carried over from Espee also.
 
trainman74 had the correct answer as it relates to Trains 12 and 13.

The Southern Pacific had a directional convention that had all trains heading toward San Francisco as "westbound" and all trains heading away from San Francisco as "eastbound". Westbound trains required odd numbers for the SP, and eastbound trains required even numbers. Since pre-Amtrak, the SP did not have any trains that passed through the Bay Area, there was no problem. But when Amtrak started the Coast Starlight from Seattle through to Los Angeles (and originally San Diego), the train required a number change as it passed through the Bay Area for SP dispatching. So, southbound Amtrak Train 11 would be westbound SP Train 11 from Portland to Oakland, then it became eastbound SP Train 12 from Oakland to Los Angeles. Similarly, northbound Amtrak Train 14 would be westbound SP train 13 from Los Angeles to Oakland, then it became eastbound SP train 14 from Oakland to Portland.

In order to not confuse passengers, and to keep the Amtrak computer reservation system happy, the public numbers of the Coast Starlight were kept with the Amtrak convention of Train 11 southbound (odd) and Train 14 northbound (even). But the numbers used by Amtrak for interface with SP were 11 and 12 for the southbound train, and 13 and 14 for the northbound train.
 
To add to PRR 60's explanation above....as mentioned, to the passengers the train was numbers 11 and 14. But when the conductor or engineer would communicate on the railroad radio, they refered to it by SP's number according to their location. Between Oakland and Los Angeles, it was trains 12 or 13.

The employee timetable showed those numbers. The Amtrak public timetable did not.

Amtrak did use those numbers however, in the NEC for their "Fast Mail" train. In one direction, it only carried mail for a brief time before Conrail refused to carry it between Boston and Springfield until at least one coach was added.
 
I'm just wondering, but how was Conrail able to refuse the Fast Mail unless it had a coach added (and why did they)? I thought they'd have to carry it under common carrier rules (sorta like how a number of RRs have been stuck carrying hazardous cargo)?
 
Anderson said:
I'm just wondering, but how was Conrail able to refuse the Fast Mail unless it had a coach added (and why did they)? I thought they'd have to carry it under common carrier rules (sorta like how a number of RRs have been stuck carrying hazardous cargo)?
Click to expand...
It wasn't under common carrier rules, it was under the Amtrak authorization and Amtrak was the common carrier in that case. They only had to host Amtrak (National Railroad Passenger Corporation)trains which carried passengers. They didn't have to let Amtrak operate trains over their railroad which didn't carry passengers.
 
zephyr17 said:
Anderson said:
I'm just wondering, but how was Conrail able to refuse the Fast Mail unless it had a coach added (and why did they)? I thought they'd have to carry it under common carrier rules (sorta like how a number of RRs have been stuck carrying hazardous cargo)?
Click to expand...
It wasn't under common carrier rules, it was under the Amtrak authorization and Amtrak was the common carrier in that case. They only had to host Amtrak (National Railroad Passenger Corporation)trains which carried passengers. They didn't have to let Amtrak operate trains over their railroad which didn't carry passengers.
Click to expand...
That is correct. At the time, Amtrak was starting to greatly increase its carriage of bulk mail and purchased all those Material Handling Cars to serve that purpose to supplement the ageing fleet of baggage cars. And those Roadrailers were coming, also. The freight carriers did not mind when Amtrak only carried a small amount of express on its passenger trains, but when they saw Amtrak starting to seriously attempt to compete with their host carriers for a bigger share of that business, they took a dim view of it.

I was at an annual meeting of Conrail shareholders in Philadelphia, back then. When Mr. Stanley Crane, Conrail CEO, entertained questions from those in the audience, I asked Mr. Crane if he was aware of the Fast Mail running sans coaches, and why did Conrail permit this. He answered that he was not aware, and tasked a subordinate to investigate. Sure enough, shortly after that Conrail told Amtrak it would not carry any Amtrak revenue trains that did not have at least one car for passengers to ride. So Amtrak had to choose between rerouting the train through Providence to keep it on an 'all Amtrak' routing, and lose the business between Boston and Springfield, or add the coach.
 
When the Carolinian ran as Charlotte-Rocky Mount only, it was numbered 889/890.
 
gn2276 said:
Per the Jan. 16, 1972 Timetable Trains 9/10 where the North Coast Hiawatha and Trains 12/13 where the Coast Daylight.

Travis
Click to expand...
That was when the Coast Daylight/Starlight only went through to Seattle 3 days a week. The other 4 days it was only LA-Oakland. 12 and 13 were the train numbers used LA-Oakland by SP operationally. Just curious, on the 3 through days, was the train listed as 11/12-13/14 of just 11 and 14.

The timetable date shows just how quickly Amtrak and the host railroads adopted the new train numbers. Just a little more than 6 months after AmDay.
 
Anderson said:
How long did the "PC" numbering persist in the NE?
Click to expand...
One could cogently argue that some of the PC numbers persist even today. The through corridor trains in the 1xx and 2xx series, and the south of DC Atlantic Coast trains with 7x, 8x and 9x number. The NJT local in the 3xxx series and even the second digit in those pretty much track what was the practice in the PC days. But there are certain other PC patterns that are not used anymore, specially on the NH side. OTOH, NJT has expanded upon the PC scheme to add in the Midtown Directs with a new 6xxx series of their own, and even Amtrak has now jumped on the 4 digit bandwagon with Acelas in the 2xxx series.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top