Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The only numbers in that book I have are:

 

California Zephyr

1994 - 379,000

1995 - 322,000

1996 - 224,000

2003 - 292,000

2004 - 335,764

 

Desert Wind

1995 - 120,000

 

Pioneer

1977 - 68.566

1995 - 89,000

 

Rio Grande Zephyr

1971 - 19,809

1973 - 30,750

 

OK, nice to know. Looks like the CZ had a low in 1996.

 

Right now, does anybody have the LSL, BL, SM, SS, Champ., SL, and/or CS ridership datum 1971-1979? Still waiting, sorry if I'm getting annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, nice to know. Looks like the CZ had a low in 1996.

 

Right now, does anybody have the LSL, BL, SM, SS, Champ., SL, and/or CS ridership datum 1971-1979? Still waiting, sorry if I'm getting annoying.

 

Nobody knows anything about any of the above lines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Zephyr's 1996 low was a side-effect of the Charlie Foxtrot that was less-than-daily service out west (for at least part of the year).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Zephyr's 1996 low was a side-effect of the Charlie Foxtrot that was less-than-daily service out west (for at least part of the year).

 

What is a Charlie Foxtrot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Zephyr's 1996 low was a side-effect of the Charlie Foxtrot that was less-than-daily service out west (for at least part of the year).

 

What is a Charlie Foxtrot?

 

Google it - it is a euphemism for another term that can't be mentioned on the forum.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Zephyr's 1996 low was a side-effect of the Charlie Foxtrot that was less-than-daily service out west (for at least part of the year).

What is a Charlie Foxtrot?

You should google it because we can't provide a complete explanation on a PG rated forum. :giggle: For example, here is the wiktionary link without further comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nathanael

this gets around to another thing: money has got to be spent on track. Note that somehow by political manipulation there has been a near complete rail relay plus a lot of other work on the Vermonter route north of Springfield, Mass. There are other places where there would be a bigger bang per mile for your buck. Kansas City ot Albuquerque would be one. In years past much of that was 100 mph territory. It is only track that keeps that from happening again. The Memphis to Jackson, Miss. "Grenada District" formerly used by the Panama Liited would have been another. That may be partly abandoned by now, but in years past run times Memphis to Jackson under 4 hours were the norm.

 

Vermont state government wants better track -- Kansas and Mississippi state governments don't. That's why Vermont gets improved track and Kansas and Mississippi don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amtrak in the Heartland by Craig Sanders details the changes in Amtrak's various routes/trains which serve and have served the "Heartland," which he essentially defines as any trains operating to, through, or from the Midwest (basically all Chicago trains plus a few corridors that are appendages of Chicago trains). In the book, some ridership figures are listed, but unfortunately it does not list every train every year. With that in mind, here is what it has (with 2011 figures for comparison):

Cardinal

1975 - 111,965

1976 - 129,294

2011 - 110,923

 

Empire Builder

1973 - 363,100

1974 - 385,300

1975 - 324,639

1976 - 311,576

1977 - 297,180

2011 - 469,167

 

Floridian

1974 - 157,198

1975 - 139,670

1976 - 153,054

1977 - 146,500

 

Inter-American/Eagle/Texas Eagle

1974 - 48,851

1975 - 40,476

1977 - 144,477

2011 - 299,508

 

National Limited

1975 - 163,422

1976 - 179,213

1977 - 191,692

 

North Coast Hiawatha

1973 - 227,200

1974 - 280,800

1975 - 208,809

1976 - 191,615

1977 - 205,642

 

Panama Limited/City of New Orleans

1974 - 195,899

1975 - 174,014

2011 - 233,318

 

Super Chief/Southwest Limited/Southwest Chief

1974 - 327,000, with a note that most years in the 1970s hovered around 280,000

2011 - 354,912

 

Texas Chief/Lone Star

1973 - 257,800

1974 - 277,760

1975 - 255,881

1976 - 274,448

 

Hopefully this it at least somewhat helpful.

 

Why aren't the BL, LSL, and CZ not listed? They were Chicago area trains too.

 

The Lone Star was way more popular than the Inter-American. Interesting that the Lone Star was the main Texas train from east of Chicago (http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19770501&item=0052) leaving at 4:30pm as opposed to 8:35am so that might have helped (plus Houston has a higher population than San Antonio). This clearly shows they killed the wrong train (if you look at my PM-TM chart before the 1979 cuts (http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/66476-passenger-miles-per-train-mile-metric/) the I-A was dead last among LD trains (even worse than Byrd Crap) while the LS was a lot higher. The TE looks pretty healthy now but the TE in 2011 wasn't that much higher than the Lone Star in 1976. I still don't understand why the I-A was kept over the LS. Both served Texas (as well as Illinois and Missouri). The differences state wise were Arkansas for the I-A and Kansas and Oklahoma for the LS and city wise St. Louis, Little Rock, Austin, San Antonio for the I-A vs. Kansas City, Wichita, Oklahoma City, and Houston. The only explanation from a Senator standpoint would be Arkansas. I'd be shocked if nepotism weren't involved but it's harder to explain than the other case.

 

The Floridian was a surprising stinker. Florida was just as far away as Seattle but not only did one Seattle train top the Floridian but two did and it's not like there weren't intermediate points either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Why in the world would somebody run a passenger train to Catlettsburg? That just has no practical reason.

What is the Niagara Rainbow?

One runs a train to Catlettsburg just because one can force it to be run by threatening budget approval for the rest of the system if it is not run.

 

 

 

 

Speaking of the Cardinal, it was actually cut in 1981, but then was restored as an unfunded mandate from Congress in early 1982.

 

 

 

aka Nepotism.

 

 

Edit: I figured out what the magic "cut" metric was for '79: Passenger miles per train mile.

 

with some exceptions thrown in...

 

Those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it. Let's learn from the mistakes of '79 and make sure they don't happen again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seriously brought back a 5 year old thread to peddle more of your ****?

 

We get it. Now stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Amtrak in the Heartland by Craig Sanders details the changes in Amtrak's various routes/trains which serve and have served the "Heartland," which he essentially defines as any trains operating to, through, or from the Midwest (basically all Chicago trains plus a few corridors that are appendages of Chicago trains). In the book, some ridership figures are listed, but unfortunately it does not list every train every year. With that in mind, here is what it has (with 2011 figures for comparison):

Cardinal

1975 - 111,965

1976 - 129,294

2011 - 110,923

 

Empire Builder

1973 - 363,100

1974 - 385,300

1975 - 324,639

1976 - 311,576

1977 - 297,180

2011 - 469,167

 

Floridian

1974 - 157,198

1975 - 139,670

1976 - 153,054

1977 - 146,500

 

Inter-American/Eagle/Texas Eagle

1974 - 48,851

1975 - 40,476

1977 - 144,477

2011 - 299,508

 

National Limited

1975 - 163,422

1976 - 179,213

1977 - 191,692

 

North Coast Hiawatha

1973 - 227,200

1974 - 280,800

1975 - 208,809

1976 - 191,615

1977 - 205,642

 

Panama Limited/City of New Orleans

1974 - 195,899

1975 - 174,014

2011 - 233,318

 

Super Chief/Southwest Limited/Southwest Chief

1974 - 327,000, with a note that most years in the 1970s hovered around 280,000

2011 - 354,912

 

Texas Chief/Lone Star

1973 - 257,800

1974 - 277,760

1975 - 255,881

1976 - 274,448

 

Hopefully this it at least somewhat helpful.

 

Why aren't the BL, LSL, and CZ not listed? They were Chicago area trains too.

 

The Lone Star was way more popular than the Inter-American. Interesting that the Lone Star was the main Texas train from east of Chicago (http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19770501&item=0052) leaving at 4:30pm as opposed to 8:35am so that might have helped (plus Houston has a higher population than San Antonio). This clearly shows they killed the wrong train (if you look at my PM-TM chart before the 1979 cuts (http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/66476-passenger-miles-per-train-mile-metric/) the I-A was dead last among LD trains (even worse than Byrd Crap) while the LS was a lot higher. The TE looks pretty healthy now but the TE in 2011 wasn't that much higher than the Lone Star in 1976. I still don't understand why the I-A was kept over the LS. Both served Texas (as well as Illinois and Missouri). The differences state wise were Arkansas for the I-A and Kansas and Oklahoma for the LS and city wise St. Louis, Little Rock, Austin, San Antonio for the I-A vs. Kansas City, Wichita, Oklahoma City, and Houston. The only explanation from a Senator standpoint would be Arkansas. I'd be shocked if nepotism weren't involved but it's harder to explain than the other case.

 

The Floridian was a surprising stinker. Florida was just as far away as Seattle but not only did one Seattle train top the Floridian but two did and it's not like there weren't intermediate points either.

 

Look at the Chicago times for the relevant trains in the timetables and you'll see that most of the cut trains misconnected in Chicago. It wasn't the times in Texas that were at issue...it's that if you took the Lone Star you could connect to/from most of the other system trains while I'm not sure you could reliably make anything other than a stray weekend Hiawatha Service from the Inter-American. The trains that got cut seem to have primarily been ones where you couldn't make solid connections for chunks of the 1970s.

 

To their credit, it looks like towards the end Amtrak was improving on this front (again, look at the Inter-American/Eagle: No small part of that spike in ridership is due to the train's times in CHI getting improved to allow connections)...but it was too little too late for some trains (which presumably didn't have a chance to build up their ridership bases before the ax fell).

Edited by Anderson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Look at the Chicago times for the relevant trains in the timetables and you'll see that most of the cut trains misconnected in Chicago. It wasn't the times in Texas that were at issue...it's that if you took the Lone Star you could connect to/from most of the other system trains while I'm not sure you could reliably make anything other than a stray weekend Hiawatha Service from the Inter-American. The trains that got cut seem to have primarily been ones where you couldn't make solid connections for chunks of the 1970s.

 

To their credit, it looks like towards the end Amtrak was improving on this front (again, look at the Inter-American/Eagle: No small part of that spike in ridership is due to the train's times in CHI getting improved to allow connections)...but it was too little too late for some trains (which presumably didn't have a chance to build up their ridership bases before the ax fell).

 

 

Here's a chart of the Chicago connections from a 1979 timetable: http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19790429&item=0033

 

You can argue ridership for the Lone Star was inflated by the ability to connect to the East and if you switched the schedules then the LS's ridership would go down while the I-A's ridership would go up. But there was a big difference here. The TE now also does benefit from less competition just like the EB without the NCH although ridership is always handicapped by capacity (but then fares go up with fewer options like the LSL right now). I still think having choices on schedule as opposed to two trains chasing each other's tails (SM and SS, LSL and CL) is better for passengers in giving them choices. Back then the BL and LSL were within a half hour going east but westbound the BL arrived into Chicago in the morning while the LSL arrived in the afternoon. Damn the host railroads!

 

It's interesting the Floridian was perfect in terms of connections from the West Coast, leaving late from Chicago and arriving early into Chicago from Florida. Then again Disney World didn't open until I believe 1971 so it might not have been as popular as it is today. I still can't believe more people from Chicago would want to spend two days traveling to Seattle than two days traveling to Florida. Then again a large portion of the US on the East Coast wouldn't have used the Floridian because they have NEC-Florida trains. You can say how "lousy" or slow a specific train is but I still say a bad train is better than no train. You think I get cranky because I have to transfer to get to Chicago? How about passengers from west of Chicago now having to make TWO transfers? I still hate the fact that to get from Texas to Florida or California to Florida you have to go all the way north to Chicago to go south (of course back in the 70's the SL was only LAX-NOL like it is today).

 

It's impossible to predict population 40 years from now like it was 40 years ago to predict the population of today. But based on recent population, the Floridian cancellation cost Amtrak two of the largest markets (Louisville and Nashville) that don't have Amtrak now, the National Limited cost Amtrak Columbus, and the Lone Star cost them Wichita and Oklahoma City (they did get OKC back but it only gets them to Ft. Worth.

 

I think the Texas Eagle split during the 90's was the best solution to give all four of the biggest markets (Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Austin) a one seat ride to Chicago as opposed to Houston not having one today.

 

If I had to choose between Floridian or Sunset East coming back (assuming extension of CONO for one seat ride Chicago-Florida), SL East would help out southern travelers going to Florida (although they also have to fix the east-west connections in NOL to make it more pleasant) while Floridian gets Louisville and Nashville back in the mix. I would say if there was a same day connection in NOL I'd favor the SL East. But if you pretty much have to go through Chicago to avoid an overnight stay, I'd say Floridian.

 

In reality, the National Limited really only helped KCY, STL, and IND get to the East Coast (and Columbus to get anywhere). Columbus is certainly valuable but I wonder how big a deal it is that you can't get from the NEC to KCY or STL. Certainly not being on a Chicago route doomed them. Then, I still say Amtrak f'ed up Columbus (and Cincinnati) on A-Day when they got rid of the Cincinnati Limited. Could you imagine a James Whitcomb Riley-Cincinnati Limited (going through Columbus) today?

 

Then again, Amtrak should make an attempt to follow population trends and at least try to get service back to high populated areas. The US of 2017 isn't the same as the US of 1977, Amtrak should change with them to better serve the US. Unless they could care less about serving the US. Seriously, Catlettsburg?

Edited by Philly Amtrak Fan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A pertitent point is that ticket yields were *way* lower in the 1970s. Costs.... weren't lower. So this has to be considered when looking at ridership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG!!!!!! It's finally happened!!! It took time, but Philly Amtrak Fan clearly understands. in his own words (which will be saved for prosperity, of course)

 

 

 

<snip>

 



I still can't believe more people from Chicago would want to spend two days traveling to Seattle than two days traveling to Florida. Then again a large portion of the US on the East Coast wouldn't have used the Floridian because they have NEC-Florida trains. You can say how "lousy" or slow a specific train is but I still say a bad train is better than no train. You think I get cranky because I have to transfer to get to Chicago? How about passengers from west of Chicago now having to make TWO transfers? I still hate the fact that to get from Texas to Florida or California to Florida you have to go all the way north to Chicago to go south (of course back in the 70's the SL was only LAX-NOL like it is today).

 

 

Senator Byrd may now rest in peace, knowing that you have finally see the light and understands what he did. A train is often better the no train because once it goes, it may not come back. Therefore, you must work to preserve it.

 

I'm glad I was around for this milestone moment! Sunrise, sunset...they grow up so fast!

 

epiphany-epiphany-demotivational-posters

Edited by Thirdrail7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Floridian would be nice Nashville , BHM but why not a Royal Palm that runs CHI <> Cincinnati tied to Cardinal and following Cardinal's time on days it does not operate and if Cardinal daily then combined CIN >< CHI ? Then NS CIN <> JAX and on to Florida. South bounds could connect to Southbound Crescent giving CHI <> BHM south service. Maybe build an ATL suburban station somewhere from Howell - Austell for connections until an ATL station can be built ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I made the statement of a bad train is better than no train, I was referring to the Floridian.

 

 

Keep in mind that the Floridian and National Limited in the 1970s were impacted by very bad Penn Central Trackage which drove away passengers. Both trains were frequently late. The Floridian trackage was bad from Chicago to Louisville. In 1975, they finally switched it to the former Monon routing and the schedule was more predictible. The National Limited trackage was bad from Pittsburgh to St. Louis. Much of the route is now abandoned. The St. Louis-Kansas City section west bound was so unpredictable that no one rode it. Missouri was not providing a subsidy at that point.

 

 

 


7. The Floridian was not doing too well. No surprise it got cancelled. It was late all the time and the trakcs were always damaged.




 

 

Which trains should have been cut in 1979? Of course the answer is none of them. Why pit one train against one another? Why should we have to choose one over another? Don't ask me, ask Congress why they didn't give Amtrak enough money to keep all of them. As long as Amtrak has to cut trains, I'm going to believe some trains should have been canceled and other should've been saved and if I have any impact I would do my best to keep the "right" trains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Political. Jimmy Carter was an abject failure as a president, and with an election coming up he wanted to make it look like he was Doing Something. Amtrak had been sold with the notion that passenger trains could be "profitable", but in an environment where air and highway competition is both directly and indirectly subsidized that's just not possible without some form of direct subsidy. JC wanted to make a big show of chopping that subsidy. Considering that the Ayatollahs were preparing to reset the gas pumps yet again...can you say, "Penny wise, Pound foolish?"

 

This is especially sad in that I recall he took the train to DC for his inauguration. And carried his own bags a la Everyman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also, if you don't restrict trains to just Amtrak trains, but look at the bigger picture with commuter rail and urban rail, there is considerably more mileage being operated today than in the 1970s and considerably more ridership, and the trend is clearly continuing with several more projects either being built or likely to be built soon. That means more people are likely to either use rail service (of some sort) more or less regularly or even if they don't use it themselves, they may work with people who do or have family members or friends who do so the whole concept of passenger rail is becoming more and more normal and embedded in people's awareness. That means that whereas people once thought of the car as the first and basically only way of getting anywhere, with there having to be a very compelling reason to even consider any alternative, people are becoming more open minded.

A major factor in supporting expansion of intercity passenger rail from what the situation was in 1971 is the growth of city rail transit systems, be it heavy rail metro, commuter & regional rail, light rail, street cars. In the 1950s and 60s, many cities shut down their street car and remaining interurban trolley systems. In 1971 at A-day, the only cities that had surviving extensive rail transit systems that come to mind are NYC, Philly, Boston, Chicago with smaller systems in Cleveland, DC with several commuter rail lines, Buffalo?, Pittsburgh?

 

 

Allegheny County Port Authority abandoned most of its street cars for buses by Fall 1966. Some were phased in on weekends prior to that. The street cars remained for the South Hills only, and continue today as newer LRT cars that are part of the South Hills to downtown (and more recently, North Shore) T-system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, eyeballing that chart (it did shuffle a lot over timetables), I spot the following trains as being potentially troubled:
-50/51
-21/22
-7/8-17/18

The Cardinal barely connects with anything to feed it (56 is a bad feeder, so you've got 9/10 and 330/337 (ex Su/Sa) that make the list of "recommended" connections and 380 that's legal-but-getting-tight. The Cardinal ultimately only survived because of political reasons. My guess is that another aspect was simply the fact that there was such a mess west of CIN at this point that someone decided it was better to break connections outright than to promise them and not make them.

The Lone Star is doing better in this timeframe, but at the same time Amtrak today probably wouldn't schedule anything so early...and when timekeeping got "interesting" it would have been a bad situation outbound.

The Empire Builder/North Coast Hiawatha is interesting: It arrives late (the only logical connection for 8/18 is 57).

The Lake Shore is also a bit of a mess: It misses two western connections and two more are getting tight (especially given ex-Penn Central tracks at this time), but it did well...I'm guessing this is a function of the daylight business it was able to command internally.

Finally, there's a dishonorable mention to the National Limited: it manages a legal connection in Kansas City...but good Lord that connection is worthy of 66/67 at NYP. It's passable as a backstop to a Chicago meltdown, but it's not pretty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily believe east west trains have to allow for east-west connections, especially if two routes parallel each other. In the two Texas routes, you had the choice of two times to get between Chicago and Dallas. I'm pretty sure not every passenger through Chicago necessarily transferred from another train. I know many times I do just visit Chicago so I don't have a problem arriving there in the late afternoon after the California trains leave or leaving Chicago in the morning before they return (unless I actually am going to California, and even then, I have at times spent time in Chicago between the SWC/CZ and the TR/CL/LSL). If the Cardinal was a secondary Chicago-Washington train (the Broadway was the shortest), then it shouldn't be a disadvantage for it to be out of slot. Back then the Cardinal schedule actually served Cincinnati outside of the graveyard shift which to me is WAY better than it is today (in fact the chart says Washington and Cincinnati while today you can't really say the Cardinal serves Cincinnati unless you believe stopping by at 3am is serving them). Sure, maybe Cincinnati passengers desire to travel west of Chicago but give them a choice between a 1:30am train which gives them a chance to head to California or Texas or an 8am that doesn't and see what they choose (oh wait choice in this group is a swear word as the answer is why not both?) The Silver Star only allows a connection to/from the Capitol Limited in one direction while the Silver Meteor offers it in both directions (and more padding in case the CL comes in late from Chicago). But it doesn't mean the Star is worthless as it gives travelers from WAS, PHL, and NYP a choice in departure and arrival times (except into Miami where they are within half an hour from each other).

 

It's interesting to me there was essentially just one train between Chicago and Los Angeles, just one train between Chicago and the Bay Area, but two trains between Chicago and Seattle. Why should the least attractive destination(s) get the second train? When the Desert Wind came about LAX got a second train to Chicago but San Fran (assuming Emeryville counts as San Fran) only had one which was even worse during the non daily phase. Assuming we can restart both the Broadway and Desert Wind (and the host railroads cooperate, pretend it's fantasy world), then we can have the Broadway come into Chicago around 5-6pm (giving Cleveland and Toledo a non graveyard shift time) and then have the Desert Wind leave Chicago around 10pm at night while eastbound you can have the Broadway leave for Philly around noon but have the DW come in before 8am. In this case, even if the DW comes in late and you miss the Broadway you can still take the CL or LSL to get to Philly (with a transfer but it's better than being stranded in Chicago). Then you can still have transfers without trains being in the traditional transfer window. I've always said the Cardinal should be scheduled to favor Cincinnati and Indianapolis. I also once discussed the three Chicago-West Coast trains and found that the Empire Builder could be scheduled out of slot the most feasibly so it could leave Chicago late in the evening and arrive early in the morning so you could still transfer between the Cardinal and Empire Builder (bonus would be Spokane would be out of the graveyard shift). In fact if you made these changes today then you would be guaranteed to not be stranded in Chicago overnight from a late EB into CHI (unless it was really, really late)!

 

I'm not saying a train having the ability for East-West trains is a bad thing but not every east west train absolutely must require it and some trains need to consider the intermediate markets and not the endpoints (cough, Cardinal).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll agree that you don't need to have every train make every connection (especially if, for example, on the Texas trains you can make the connection on a regional train to/from STL). The issue is if trains are making no connections.

Conceptually, CHI would be well-served by having two pulses of trains in each direction. Heading east, one pulse would be aimed at daylight coverage east of (roughly) PGH/BUF and the other at daylight coverage west of there. Both would connect to/from at least some western trains (for example, an overnight CHI-MSP[-Winnipeg?] train should be able to connect with a train arriving in early evening from New York. You could also manage a CHI-STL-KCY train which would connect with that (or, indeed, an overnight "direct" train which continued on towards Texas, California, or elsewhere). And so on. As long as each train has a reasonable set of connections I think you're good...it's when a train has almost no connections on one end (if not both) that you have issues.

On the East Coast, the Adirondack is another example of this: I accept that a NYP-MTR train probably can't make connections at both ends, but I'd want to arrange it so that an "early" train (departing around the time of the Maple Leaf, possibly paired with it) could connect through to Ottawa/Quebec City while a "late" train (probably departing around 1000) could make connections from NYP that aren't painfully early. SB, the "early" train wouldn't make any connections out of MTR but it would be able to connect to more than just the last train or two of the night (e.g. you could connect to Boston on a train other than the Shoreliner) while the "late" train would trade bad connections in New York for being late enough to recieve pax from Quebec/Ottawa.

Edit: So, to swing back to CHI, a good "early" EB train would have the Star and Palmetto as SB connections while a "late" train would be stuck with the Meteor/Crescent. One batch would focus on "connect with everything at CHI" while the other would angle for a strong connection set at WAS/PHL/NYP.

Edited by Anderson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 trains to SEA / PDX ? That is a real stretch of the truth. Maybe we could call it 2 - 1/2 trains 1 to SEA and 1 to PDX ?

 

1977: EB was daily, NCH 3 days/week MSP-SEA: http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19770622&item=0053

1979: EB was 4 days/week, NCH 3 days/week (daily between CHI-MSP): http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19790729&item=0043

 

Neither train served Portland, only the Pioneer (http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19770622&item=0055) served PDX. I'm guessing the through branch of the EB didn't start until the Pioneer was canceled.

 

I know most of you hate non daily service but in 1979 CHI-SEA did have daily service as did CHI-MSP (and all cities between) and SPK had daily service to both CHI and SEA. The times in Washington (SEA, SPK) were different depending on which train was running that day. You didn't have the problem with the current Cardinal and SL where a train has to wait in an endpoint until the next run since one of the trains leaves CHI daily and one trains leaves SEA daily. I think the alternating EB/NCH worked. The only cities without daily service were the Rugby, ND's and Deer Lodge, MT's of the country. But now Rugby gets daily service but Deer Lodge doesn't have any service. I'm sure Deer Lodge would love to have 3x/week service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your guess about Pioneer cancellation before or at the same time as the introduction of the EB Portland section is wrong. There were many years between the introduction of the Portland section of the EB (1979 when the NCH was canned) and the discontinuance of the Pioneer. Indeed there were several occasions when on a trip to Portland I went there by one and left there on the other.

 

Also as I recall there were periods when there was no NCH and the EB was three times a week.

Edited by jis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your guess about Pioneer cancellation before or at the same time as the introduction of the EB Portland section is wrong. There were many years between the introduction of the Portland section of the EB (1979 when the NCH was canned) and the discontinuance of the Pioneer. Indeed there were several occasions when on a trip to Portland I went there by one and left there on the other.

 

Also as I recall there were periods when there was no NCH and the EB was three times a week.

 

This schedule had 4 days/week EB and 3 days/week Pioneer: http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19951029n&item=0032

 

The Pioneer was roughly through cars off the California Zephyr at DEN. Like the EB/NCH combo, this combo had daily service between CHI-SEA but the EB route was much faster than the Pioneer route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×