Sunset Limited / Texas Eagle PRIIA §210 FY10

Direct Document Link...

Contents Page Link...

1. New daily Los Angeles - Chicago service combines the Los Angeles - San Antonio portion of the Sunset Limited with the San Antonio - Chicago Texas Eagle.2. New daily San Antonio - New Orleans service with cross-platform transfer of passengers at San Antonio.

Click to expand...

Looks like they're still moving forward on the daily Sunset/Eagle both west and east of SAS.

Although the restructured service will increase sleeping car capacity and revenues, and offer full meal service on all portions of the Sunset/Eagle route, the elimination of equipment utilization inefficiencies will enable Amtrak to provide that service with four fewer Superliner Sleepers and four fewer diners. These cars will be shifted to the Capitol Limited to ease capacity constraints on that route. The plan also requires five Diner Lounges and one coach car to support the new service. This equipment is immediately available; the diners shifted from the Sunset Limited to the Capitol Limited will replace diner-lounge cars currently used on that route.

Click to expand...

This is one of those topics that's probably best left to other analysts more familiar with Amtrak maintenance and operations, but it looks good to me.

The new schedule in Los Angeles will enable better connections with the Coast Starlight. Along with reductions in San Antonio layover time, the new route gives customers much better arrival and departure times in key cities. Amtrak’s Market Research & Analysis Group estimates that these changes will drive higher ridership in these cities. The new service will vastly improve San Antonio layovers for through passengers. The most dramatic reductions will be for passengers traveling between Los Angeles and Chicago, with trip times falling by 9 and 5 hours for eastbound and westbound travelers respectively.

Click to expand...

Although this may not be a direct benefit to SAS O&D pax it's still a net benefit in my view.

Amtrak presented this plan to its Board of Directors in early 2010 and received approval to proceed. Amtrak believes it is logistically feasible to begin the new service in early 2011, pending host railroad approval. Amtrak is currently in discussions with Union Pacific (UP), SCRRA, and BNSF Railway (BNSF). Assuming these approvals occur, the Southern and Southwest Divisions have plans in place to begin the hiring, training, and qualifying process for the T&E and OBS personnel. Since the new service will not travel over any new route segments, Amtrak will not have to qualify crews on new Amtrak routes or establish new crew bases or commissaries. This plan includes a service reroute from Colton Crossing (San Bernardino) to Los Angeles via Fullerton and the BNSF Fullerton Subdivision. Amtrak does not currently expect to be able to implement this reroute at the outset due to operational issues. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), which has made significant investments in BNSF infrastructure in this Corridor, has expressed support for the reroute via Fullerton.

Click to expand...

Early 2011 sounds great to me, assuming a new anti-rail congress doesn't start dismantling Amtrak before they can begin implementation.

Amtrak’s customers will benefit in the following ways:
* Daily Los Angeles to New Orleans Service through San Antonio

* Up to 91% reduction of San Antonio through passenger layover time

* More daylight hour departure times in many major cities

* Improved on-time performance

* Restored connection with the Coast Starlight in Los Angeles

* Greater sleeper availability on the Capitol Limited with improved dining experience

Amtrak benefits in the following ways:

* More efficient usage of equipment by reducing layover times

* Higher employee productivity by reducing held away times

* Reduced loss per passenger-mile

* Increased long distance ridership (124,100) and revenue ($10m)

* Improved cost recovery on Sunset/Eagle, Coast Starlight and Capitol Limited

Click to expand...

If this pans out I don't see much to complain about, at least not yet.

There's plenty to digest in the full document, so please take a look and post your impressions!

-Dax

daxomni said:

Early 2011 sounds great to me, assuming a new anti-rail congress doesn't start dismantling Amtrak before they can begin implementation.

Click to expand...

Probably depends a lot more on the UP than Congress. There have been regular attempts to dismantle Amtrak in Congress for the last 39 years, some quite serious. Amtrak always manages to squeak by, but the insecurity and starvation diet has been the root of much of the ineffective culture at Amtrak. But if the Republicans seriously gain in Congress, there will be yet another attempt, which will again most likely fail. If G. W. Bush and a completely Republican controlled Congress couldn't get it done, it probably won't get done. This show has been going on for a LONG time.

So the "host railroad approval" condition is the real gotcha here. Amtrak can have it planned out and be completely ready, but UP owns the track. And UP is not hospitable to adding daily service without significant $$$ from Amtrak for capital improvements (750 million?). That cost was entirely absent from the report, although to be fair that news didn't come out until just a few days before the report was released. Until they get that worked out, there isn't a prayer.

With that said, I read the document and think it is pretty well reasoned, with some flaws/little white lies. They restored the WB to NB Starlight connection last year. Changing the schedule back to close to what it was before they caved to UP around 2005 or so could be done without going daily, which would reduce the monumental dwell times in the current schedule. But the document does make sense, and vastly improves equipment utilization. Hate to say it, because for my own reasons I'd rather see a full service train continue to New Orleans, but it is well reasoned.

I didn't really find much in the report that I disagreed with. (I've been one of those who has been in general agreement with the proposal as we've discussed on here many, many times at length.) Unless/until Union Pacific agrees, though, or agrees to something more reasonable than $750 million, I don't think this has much chance of happening/being implemented, whereas the California Zephyr and Capitol Limited/Pennsylvanian proposals can probably be implemented rather quickly and without much cost.

We wanted a way to get from Atlanta (actually western NC) to San Antonio w/o having to arrive/depart SAS in the middle of the night. This gives us much better options especially to go on to El Paso from SAS.

Just read the whole plan... and I would say I am just "luke warm" to the proposal. The biggest thing I don't like is the arrival and departure time in Los Angeles. Going east, you'd not leave until 11:30PM?? I would hope they would let you board by like 8PM or something and get settled in. It didn't say anything about that. I am also not a big fan of the arrivial time into LAX -- 5AM?? And that is with the pad... so it could get in as early as 4:15AM. It did say people could remain on the train until 6:30AM or whatever -- but you're not going to be able to "sleep in" until 6:30AM because people are going to be banging around on the train, etc. as soon as you get in -- and I am sure the attendants will pressure sleeper passengers to get off ASAP so they can get to the hotel. I am not sure about everyone -- but I dont mind the dwell time in SAS. I always found it fun to have hours to walk around to the Alamo and Riverwalk. I am glad they are keeping the train 3 nights... the extra time on the train is part of the reason I will often take 421 over 3 going CHI-LAX. Again, I know this is the railfan in me speaking, as I am probably not your typical passenger either.

Im with rob on the lukewarm :huh: because of the arrival/departure times! Most of the pax that ride this train are going to LA, those catching the Coast Starlight will not have a Lounge to hang out in/place to keep their stuff, so will be busy keeping an eye on their stuff so the people that "live" in LAUS don't practice five finger discounts!

As rob said, the return on #22/#2,whatever they number it?, from LAX-CHI will result in the same problem! I'm not aware of any hotel that will let you stay in your room that long without charging; even if they hold your luggage you still have hours and hours to kill and downtown LA at night is not New York! :help:

Im beginning to agree with AlanB about this, a stubb train from SAS-NOL is not the answer for that route either!Cut out cars from SAS-NOL would be a much better idea IMO!(ie sleeper,CCC,coach,coach baggage!(the CCC could even be made into a Business Class car,Amtrak does have spares of this not so favorite car!)

rtabern said:

Just read the whole plan... and I would say I am just "luke warm" to the proposal. The biggest thing I don't like is the arrival and departure time in Los Angeles. Going east, you'd not leave until 11:30PM?? I would hope they would let you board by like 8PM or something and get settled in. It didn't say anything about that. I am also not a big fan of the arrivial time into LAX -- 5AM?? And that is with the pad... so it could get in as early as 4:15AM. It did say people could remain on the train until 6:30AM or whatever -- but you're not going to be able to "sleep in" until 6:30AM because people are going to be banging around on the train, etc. as soon as you get in -- and I am sure the attendants will pressure sleeper passengers to get off ASAP so they can get to the hotel.

Click to expand...

I am probably one of the few who had ridden the Sunset Limited in its original schedule which resembled the schedule being proposed, as well as the current schedule, and of course each has its pluses and minuses. But overall I think the original schedule and the new proposed one are better than the current one. Late departure never proved to be a problem for me, since I stored my bags at what was then LAUPT, and went out for the evening. Indeed now it is easier to do so with excellent transit connection by LRT and Subway, which was absent back then. And I guess I have always preferred early arrival rather than middle of the morning arrival, so that was not an issue for me.

So I am an enthusiastic supporter of the new schedule. I would prefer the NOL section to be a bunch of through cars from LAX, but I can see why that is not feasible right now.

I voted LukeWarm.

I am very excited to hear about a more concrete plan; however:

Why:

No mention of Heartland Flyer. This train would benefit from the improved connections. And NO mention on PAGE 32 / "Other Routes"

Why:

No detraining in SAS during engine switch operation (see PAGE 21).

No mention of how long this might take, why can't both happen same time, or better yet - why can't it wait till after detraining.

Why:

LAX arrival can stay till 0630. Why not a little later, maybe 0800.

Errata

Schedule PAGE 15

does not use current schedule for southbound travel. oh well

How About

at least a mention of service East of New Orleans (possibly a continuation of the SAS-NOL)

at least a mention of through cars NOL-SAS-LAX (both sleeper and coach)

Perhaps the engineer should adjust the speed of train so that it can arrive at LA on-time, not early! Makes sense for European and Japanese trains that are rigorously followed the time schedule, not at the highest speed.

Not to be a "Debbie Downer"... but the other thing I forgot to mention about the plan THAT STINKS is the fact there is only going to be 1 SLEEPER on the Chicago to Los Angeles section of the train with maybe 4 roomettes being sold in the Transdorm. 1 SLEEPER for the whole train??? I would be much happier if there were 2 sleepers -- atleast during the summer months on the "new" Texas Eagle.

Yes, I know there is currently only 1 thru sleeper (#421) right now from CHI-LAX (with another sleeper (#21) that just goes to SAS). However, generally they encourage people going past SAS to go in the #421 sleeper and folks going to San Antonio to be in the #21 sleeper and that seems to work out okay. However, sometimes I find it hard to snag a deluxe bedroom in the #421 sleeper --- what the heck is it going to be like with just 1 sleeper on the whole train??? YIKES!!! You will have people who want a bedroom from just CHI-STL or even CHI-DAL tying up the rooms for others who want the 3-night trip from CHI-LAX.

Amtrak, you need 2 sleepers on theis train!

I am actually a big fan of the daily "thru-train" CHI-LAX, because, if I have time, I love taking #421 over #3 because I love being able to stay in the same bedroom for 3 nights on the train!! It's a cool experience...

This seems to be a horrible plan for people traveling NOL-LAX, or even traveling to/from NOL in general. They seriously expect people to stay up until 11pm, grab their belongings, and "step across the platform" onto an entirely different train? I hope they stop selling NOL-LAX tickets and start selling NOL-SAS-LAX tickets separately-they've pretty much gutted the Sunset Limited but kept the name for sentimental reasons.

Since there is already Chicago-Los Angeles service every day, it would have made more sense to keep the NOL-LAX train as the "primary" train and the CHI-SAS train as the "add-on" train.

The way I read it, the Sunset/Eagle has just been downgraded to a CCC vs a full diner, one sleeper instead of two west of SAS and two coaches vs three and no baggage car. Four sleepers and four diners are being robbed and given to the Capitol Limited which I guess makes our eastern readers happy but guts the Sunset Ltd. It would only take five sleepers with the new schedule to run one through from NOL to LAX. Although technically this change increases overall capacity, if you are just counting seats, due to it being daily, but individual trains will be short a coach, sleeper, full diner and baggage car west of SAS.

The so called stub trains are to be tiny little 2 coach and a CCC trains. The Sunset/Eagle itself will be one of the shortest and smallest in capacity of all the Amtrak long distance trains. To reduce costs, all switching in SAS will be discontinued, thus no thru coach or sleeper from NOL will be possible without reinstating this expense. So the train will be basically a sleeper, trans dorm, CCC, lounge, two coaches with no baggage car and a capacity of less than 200 people. A short little six car train for what is still a 60 hour trip from Chicago. New Orleans to LAX even with the transfer is around 45 hours.

Eastbound passengers on the stub trains will be able to transfer immediately on arrival to the Sunset/Eagle which is a plus. Certainly the schedules have been improved and the arrival times in Houston and San Antonio have been improved substantially, but they could have done that long ago with the existing service. Plus the connection eastbound to the Coast Starlight has been restored.

They do mention that the improved daily schedule will encourage establishment of a daily shuttle service connecting Maricopa to Phoenix, a city of some 4 million people that currently is just abandoned. But there is no committment to do that which is a glaring omission. Finally, I see that Beaumont is now listed as a flag stop even though they have committed to building a new station and have a metro area population of almost 400k while the likes of Lafayette and Lake Charles are regular stops.

Finally, all this depends on UP's approval and they have demanded $750 million to start up this type of daily service. No way Amtrak is going to pony up that kind of money to run a little six car train.

So I will believe it when I see it. I plan to be on the first daily train coach Houston to New Orleans, preferrably in business class. Anyone want to join me?

rtabern said:

Yes, I know there is currently only 1 thru sleeper (#421) right now from CHI-LAX (with another sleeper (#21) that just goes to SAS). However, generally they encourage people going past SAS to go in the #421 sleeper and folks going to San Antonio to be in the #21 sleeper and that seems to work out okay. However, sometimes I find it hard to snag a deluxe bedroom in the #421 sleeper --- what the heck is it going to be like with just 1 sleeper on the whole train??? YIKES!!! You will have people who want a bedroom from just CHI-STL or even CHI-DAL tying up the rooms for others who want the 3-night trip from CHI-LAX.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that on days that 421/422 runs, that sleeper is the only full sleeper on the train. Trains 21/22 only sell rooms in the Trans/Dorm. On days that 421/422 doesn't run, then and only then does 21/22 get a full sleeper.

So this plan doesn't change capacity on the Eagle at all. However, it does decrease the number of sleepers on the SAS-LAX portion of the Sunset Limited. Granted with daily service that does increase overall sleeper capacity, but still I could see sell outs on the weekends and certainly the issue of getting a through room could raise its ugly head too.

One more reason not to like this plan.

Sounds like a good plan to me, it's an improvement so I'm all for it. I like the new Houston departure times, still a little dissapointed in the travel time to New Orleans, 9 hours is a little long.

But overall good plan.

Gob said:

This seems to be a horrible plan for people traveling NOL-LAX, or even traveling to/from NOL in general. They seriously expect people to stay up until 11pm, grab their belongings, and "step across the platform" onto an entirely different train? I hope they stop selling NOL-LAX tickets and start selling NOL-SAS-LAX tickets separately-they've pretty much gutted the Sunset Limited but kept the name for sentimental reasons.

Since there is already Chicago-Los Angeles service every day, it would have made more sense to keep the NOL-LAX train as the "primary" train and the CHI-SAS train as the "add-on" train.

Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree. As someone who no longer likes to fly, I've booked a sleeper from LAX to NOL and back next May for the Rotary International convention. With a two year old in tow, I can't imagine trying to put her to sleep in a coach seat (it's never worked for us before), waking her up in the middle of the night by switching trains, and trying to put her back to sleep.

I agree that daily service is essential to the health of long-distance service, but forcing passengers to switch trains enroute is going to be a turn off for a lot of people including me. Despite how they might want to market it, it seems what they are really proposing is a daily LAX-CHI Texas Eagle, plus further truncating the Sunset Limited to really just be an SAS-NOL train. Might as well just take the "Sunset" out of the name and just call it "Limited" because that's what it'll be. Now, if at least one through sleeper and coach are offered, I'd be happy to sing the praises of this proposal. If not, I just hope any changes will only occur after my trip.

With respect to the SL/TE, there are two major issues that I would like to see addressed at some point or another:

(1) Service East of New Orleans

(2) Service to Phoenix

The first issue has been ongoing for over five years now, and it seems that the only thing hindering it from being resolved is a lack of political will among those in Congress.

The second issue has been ongoing for almost 15 years now, and according to reports from the Arizona Rail Passenger Association and the Southwest Rail Corridor Coalition, the "abandoned" track segment between Phoenix and Wellton still exists and can be reactivated for less than $100 million. The Arizona DOT now has plans to use newly available federal money to try to bring the SL/TE back to Phoenix.

I can't predict when these issues will be resolved, but I will certainly celebrate on the day(s) when service is restored to both of the aforementioned areas.

Previous speculation on this board about a Dining Car on the Eagle got our hopes up. Now Amtrak's PRIIA Section 210 Report Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle Performance Improvement Plan is just that, a plan to improve performance, not comfort.

Daily service will be swell. The new sked looks better, especially San Antonio layover decrease, and other Texas times (<--- that is provincial, but I live here).

Of course I prefer a Dining Car over the ill-designed CCC, and a second sleeper would make sense on such a long* distance route.

Some of the Amtrak staff PIP contributors may not know, or failed to include, any reference to anticipated Sleeper increases from Econ Recovery program(s) for ongoing refurbs and repairs. My understanding is that will net increase the fleet Sleeper roster.

Doesn't the Capitol Limited presently run a Dining Car?

The PIP notes:

The plan also requires five Diner Lounges and one coach car to support the new service. This
equipment is immediately available; the diners shifted from the Sunset Limited to the Capitol
Limited will replace diner-lounge cars currently used on that route.
*Please note full route mileage on Eagle-Sunset Chicago-LA is 2728 miles (current route), and Capitol Limited Chicago-DC is 1163 miles. New Orleans-San Antonio is 573 miles. I've ridden all three routes. I would like a Dining Car on Chicago-LA and Chicago-DC. The "New Orleans Stub" seems a nice fit for a CCC.

I did not see anything speculating a resumption-to-Florida leg, so I guess that ship has sailed. And on a historical note, SP comes off looking pretty bad in the PIP. Ha!

Also, New Orleans Stub may catch on as a train name,,,

The Chief said:

Doesn't the Capitol Limited presently run a Dining Car?

Click to expand...

No, currently the Capitol uses CCC's instead of full diners, since Amtrak converted too many diners to CCC's.

However, the Capitol was originally slated to get full diners thanks to the Stimulus monies fixing several wrecks. Don't know what happened to that plan.

AlanB said:

The Chief said:

Doesn't the Capitol Limited presently run a Dining Car?

Click to expand...

No, currently the Capitol uses CCC's instead of full diners, since Amtrak converted too many diners to CCC's.

However, the Capitol was originally slated to get full diners thanks to the Stimulus monies fixing several wrecks. Don't know what happened to that plan.

Click to expand...

Didn't two diners out West catch fire this summer?

ALC_Rail_Writer said:

AlanB said:

The Chief said:

Doesn't the Capitol Limited presently run a Dining Car?

Click to expand...

No, currently the Capitol uses CCC's instead of full diners, since Amtrak converted too many diners to CCC's.

However, the Capitol was originally slated to get full diners thanks to the Stimulus monies fixing several wrecks. Don't know what happened to that plan.

Click to expand...

Didn't two diners out West catch fire this summer?

Click to expand...

Yes, but only one is listed as being out of service. Could be that the railfan that maintains that page is unaware of the other or it could be that it's back in service.

Additionally, the Cap plan only required 3 of the 4 diners being restored with Stimulus monies.

AlanB said:

The Chief said:

Doesn't the Capitol Limited presently run a Dining Car?

Click to expand...

No, currently the Capitol uses CCC's instead of full diners, since Amtrak converted too many diners to CCC's.

Click to expand...

Thanks Alan.

My Spring Summer 2010 timetable lists "Dining: Full meal service" under Capitol Ltd Service. And I checked the Amtrak site which lists "Dinette, Cafe and Snack Cars, Dining Car," so I thought there was a Diner.

The Chief said:

AlanB said:

The Chief said:

Doesn't the Capitol Limited presently run a Dining Car?

Click to expand...

No, currently the Capitol uses CCC's instead of full diners, since Amtrak converted too many diners to CCC's.

Click to expand...

Thanks Alan.

My Spring Summer 2010 timetable lists "Dining: Full meal service" under Capitol Ltd Service. And I checked the Amtrak site which lists "Dinette, Cafe and Snack Cars, Dining Car," so I thought there was a Diner.

Click to expand...

I think the CCC on the Capitol is used as a full diner - ie. it has the normal diner menu, just with the CCC seating.

Chris J. said:

The Chief said:

AlanB said:

The Chief said:

Doesn't the Capitol Limited presently run a Dining Car?

Click to expand...

No, currently the Capitol uses CCC's instead of full diners, since Amtrak converted too many diners to CCC's.

Click to expand...

Thanks Alan.

My Spring Summer 2010 timetable lists "Dining: Full meal service" under Capitol Ltd Service. And I checked the Amtrak site which lists "Dinette, Cafe and Snack Cars, Dining Car," so I thought there was a Diner.

Click to expand...

I think the CCC on the Capitol is used as a full diner - ie. it has the normal diner menu, just with the CCC seating.

Click to expand...

Correct!

When the Los Angeles-Chicago train is ready to depart at 7:40

AM (after a 1,500-mile inspection), it follows the same route the northbound Texas Eagle uses

today. It shoves west from station track # 3 to Del Rio Main Track # 1 and back to Tower 112.

Then when it is clear of the Austin Subdivision Track 2 switch at Tower 112, the train begins to

travel railroad north on the Austin Subdivision Track 2.

When did 22 depart north by backing out of San Antonio? Its already facing north, it used to depart heading north,when did it change?

I voted no. IMHO, they should have a full service diner on this route. I guest I should have said luke warm because the schedule is improved from Chicago to LA.