Amtrak National Timetable(s) 7/12/71

Discussion in 'Museum of Amtrak Timetables Discussion' started by Ken R., Mar 31, 2010.

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

  1. Mar 31, 2010 #1

    Ken R.

    K

    Ken R.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    1
    Hi Anthony:

    I am using your reply to Ed Von Nordeck (who I have known a long time) to follow-up on something that he and yours truly and others are interested in.

    But first, like everyone else who has posted earlier, you have done a GREAT JOB and PUBLIC SERVICE for all those interested in Amtrak train history, and Amtrak timetables, etc.

    In regards the two editions for 7/12/71 I have the following question-comments:

    The other day I discovered one small difference on the page before page 2, listing 480M on the original 7/12/71 edition, and 500M on the 7/12/71 revised edition.

    Without checking every page for both editions aside from what I have posted here, do you know of any other differences between the two 7/12/71 editions?

    Some months ago, I found one of the 7/12/71 editions within some stuff of mine that had been in storage and based on the info above, I have the original edition for 7/12/71.

    Thank you for all of your efforts

    Best regards,

    ---"Ken" Ruben---
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 31, 2010
  2. Apr 1, 2010 #2

    Anthony

    A

    Anthony

    Founder Honored Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,935
    Hi Ken,

    First of all, thank you for your kind words and support. :)

    As you may know, the 480M and 500M refer to the number of copies printed of that edition/revision (480,000 and 500,000, respectively). In contrast to these large numbers, only 50,000 copies of the original 5/1/71 system timetable were printed. (Many other timetables for individual routes, etc. were printed for day 1 by the individual host railroads to make up for this...)

    That said, unfortunately, I don't know what the revisions were in the 7/12/71 "revised" copy. :) I checked back through some original spreadsheets I was given, and don't see any footnote for that revision that would explain the changes, unlike other dates and copies. If you have the time, maybe you can go through each page and see if there is a difference... please do reply here and let us know if and when you find it! One of the great things about this timetable archive is the opportunity for a large audience to finally have access to these materials, and we can all benefit from the knowledge that folks will discover as a result.

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 1, 2010
  3. Apr 13, 2010 #3

    Ken R.

    K

    Ken R.

    Guest

    Hi Anthony:

    Last night, at the monthly meeting of the MTA (METRO) San Gabriel Valley Governance Council, I had a pleasant chat or two with Bruce Heard, a Council member, who for many years, worked at Amtrak and worked on Amtrak timetables.

    He is aware of my questions about the particular timetable in question, 7/12/71 and when he gets a chance (and he is very busy), he will try to see if there are any more differences other than what I have pointed out so far.

    He also gave me some Amtrak timetable history that I was unaware of but since I don't have permission to mention anything specific, we (Bruce and I) hope to someday sit down together other than at a public meeting, and go over some of his experiences in working for Amtrak.

    This may not be for a while though.

    ---"Ken" Ruben---

     
  4. Apr 14, 2010 #4

    had8ley

    h

    had8ley

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Messages:
    4,090
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    Some where...underneath all the brake shoes and torpedoes, I have an inverted National 1986 TT. The cover is upside down to the inside contents. Is this a freak or were there many bound mistakenly like this one? Thanks for any info.
     
  5. Apr 14, 2010 #5

    Anthony

    A

    Anthony

    Founder Honored Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,935
    It sounds like that might be a one-off error... I checked the records and don't see any special notation for 1986 about a printing error, which I have seen for some other years...
     

Share This Page



arrow_white