Amtrak Passenger services may return to the Gulf Coast

shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
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.
F

Fan_Trains

Guest
I just saw on wlox news that the Biloxi city council will consider a resolution tp bring passenger train serviceback to the Mississippi gulf coast. the idea is to have the old sunset limited route roll through south mississippi once again.
 
That's only 1 CITY! Now to get the 3 STATES to agree also!
rolleyes.gif
 
Hey, its a start, isnt it? I like this news alot better than everything I'm always seeing on here about this route never returning. At least this is positive.
 
The problem is that while there are a lot of cities that have passed resolutions to this effect, there's no money behind such resolutions...and such a service would need a lot of money.
 
One city ain't gonna make it happen. Everybody along the route has to support it, and not only so, they ALL have to pay money. Once that day comes, the SL East is not comingback, unless the National Government pulls a miracle and pays a ton of money.
 
I don't know why everyone keeps saying that the resoration of the Sunset Limted route to Florida will cost " a lot of money". First off the same exact Sunset Limited train will just continue on to Florida when it leaves New Orleans. No new equipment will be needed. Second the track from NOL to Fl is in great shape. It was restored right after Hurricane Katrina hit.

So why would lots of money be required to restore the route? Most of the stations are still there and just need to be refreshed and/or cleaned and some passenger signaling installed. That's it. What am I missing here?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For what it is worth cost estimates and farebox recovery estimates for the three alternatives studied can be found in Gulf Coast Service Plan Report - PRIIA Section 226 (PDF, 1.6MB). As for whether that is a lot of money or a little money is a matter of value judgement. I think the main reason that Amtrak has been hedging around this one is that they do not want to add an ongoing drain to their operating budget at this time, and they'd rather have someone else pick up the Opex. Just my guess.
 
Plus any train services under 750 miles must be paid by the states involved. So for a SL-East train, that would include LA, MS. AL and FL. It's hard enough to get 1 to pay, harder for 2 to agree, so what are the chances of 4 states agreeing?
huh.gif


And if the "original" SL was indeed extended (resumed), you may be seeing those 8-36 hour delays again! (Why do you think they added those extra hours to the schedule, and changed the departure time from LAX from 10:30 PM to 2:30 PM in the first place?
huh.gif
)
 
the_traveler said:
And if the "original" SL was indeed extended (resumed), you may be seeing those 8-36 hour delays again! (Why do you think they added those extra hours to the schedule, and changed the departure time from LAX from 10:30 PM to 2:30 PM in the first place?
huh.gif
)
Click to expand...
I don't understand..... Wasn't that because of delays on UP? What does that have to do with Gulf Coast? Gulf Coast is all CSX, no? Was SL-East extremely delay prone on CSX when it ran? In any case that would not have cause LAX departure to be moved to an earlier time as was done.
 
When the SL east was running the CSX was not exactly a poster child for prioritizing Amtrak either, but they were not in the same league as Union Pacific. The Gulf Coast Line between New Orleans and Flomaton AL was, and I think is, quite congested. It was quite common for any train, whether Amtrak or freight, to do its trips on this line by bouncing from siding to siding. Flomaton to Tallahassee was and is unsignaled with widely spaced sidings, also resulting in somewhat erratic delays.

There was about 3 hours dwell time in New Orleans to allow catch up, but, particularly eastbound it was far from sufficient. Read the accident report for the Bayou Canot accident. The passenger count was about 200 if I remember correctly. That it was not at all a "nobody rides it" train. Horrible timekeeping west of NOL certainly drove these numbers down, but that should have improved with improved timekeeping.

The train could have and should have been restored about 6 months after the hurricane. Yes there was station work needed, but lack of station facilities had not stopped them from serving Beaumont and a few other places with similar facilities or lack thereof.

* * * * *

Back to the original post:

There have been others similar. No need to get at all worked up. It is simply posturing. That and a couple of bucks will get you a cup of coffee.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Part of what isn't helping the Sunset East is the huge (but unfortunately necessary) "detour" via Flomaton, AL. Using the number from the April, 2005 timetable, the train took 8 hours, 43 minutes to cover the 249 track miles (courtesy of timetables.org) from Mobile to Pensacola for an average speed of 28mph. These two cities have a road distance of about 58 miles. If you took the same 8:43 to go the road distance from Pensacola to Mobile, you'd only have to go about 6mph...a good cross country runner, or just about anyone on a bike, could beat the train. Going all the way to Orlando, the numbers look a little better as I get an average speed of 24mph for about 31.5 hours of train time, but when drive time is only 10-12 hours, it still doesn't look great. In my anecdotal experience, people are more likely to take an alternate transportation mode if it's not significantly longer than the driving time is. For instance, Atlanta to Washington drive time is about 11-12 hours, whereas the Crescent takes 14 hours so it's only about 27% longer than driving whereas taking the Sunset from New Orleans to Orlando is close to 200% longer than driving.
 
MattW said:
1335294442[/url]' post='363131']Part of what isn't helping the Sunset East is the huge (but unfortunately necessary) "detour" via Flomaton, AL. Using the number from the April, 2005 timetable, the train took 8 hours, 43 minutes to cover the 249 track miles (courtesy of timetables.org) from Mobile to Pensacola for an average speed of 28mph. These two cities have a road distance of about 58 miles. If you took the same 8:43 to go the road distance from Pensacola to Mobile, you'd only have to go about 6mph...a good cross country runner, or just about anyone on a bike, could beat the train. Going all the way to Orlando, the numbers look a little better as I get an average speed of 24mph for about 31.5 hours of train time, but when drive time is only 10-12 hours, it still doesn't look great. In my anecdotal experience, people are more likely to take an alternate transportation mode if it's not significantly longer than the driving time is. For instance, Atlanta to Washington drive time is about 11-12 hours, whereas the Crescent takes 14 hours so it's only about 27% longer than driving whereas taking the Sunset from New Orleans to Orlando is close to 200% longer than driving.
Click to expand...
Um, no. The 249 track miles are from NEW ORLEANS to Pensacola, not Mobile to Pensacola. Your 58 road miles become 104 by detouring through Flomaton, adding only 46 miles to the straight line distance, not 191 like you calculate above. The train took 2.5 hours to cover that distance, and I don't think your cross country runner is running from Mobile to Pensacola in 2.5 hours. Secretariat, maybe.

Now let's look at New Orleans to Orlando. The train left at 10:30 pm and arrived at 8:45pm. Accounting for the time change, that's 21.25 hours, not 31.5, averaging 36mph, not 24. Yes, longer than driving, but nowhere NEAR by the factor you claim.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
George Harris said:
When the SL east was running the CSX was not exactly a poster child for prioritizing Amtrak either, but they were not in the same league as Union Pacific.
Click to expand...
George,

What you say can also easily be seen by how Amtrak adding padding. Back in the early 2000's Amtrak added 10-1/2 hours of padding to the Sunset route because of the huge delays going on during the UP meltdown. IIRC, of that 10-1/2 hours, 2-1/2 hours were on the CSX side, the other 8 on the UP side.
 
jis said:
the_traveler said:
And if the "original" SL was indeed extended (resumed), you may be seeing those 8-36 hour delays again! (Why do you think they added those extra hours to the schedule, and changed the departure time from LAX from 10:30 PM to 2:30 PM in the first place?
huh.gif
)
Click to expand...
I don't understand..... Wasn't that because of delays on UP? What does that have to do with Gulf Coast? Gulf Coast is all CSX, no? Was SL-East extremely delay prone on CSX when it ran? In any case that would not have cause LAX departure to be moved to an earlier time as was done.
Click to expand...
I think it's a case of then is then and now is now. When was the last time the SL-west was 36 hours late?
 
dlagrua said:
I don't know why everyone keeps saying that the resoration of the Sunset Limted route to Florida will cost " a lot of money". First off the same exact Sunset Limited train will just continue on to Florida when it leaves New Orleans. No new equipment will be needed. Second the track from NOL to Fl is in great shape. It was restored right after Hurricane Katrina hit.

So why would lots of money be required to restore the route? Most of the stations are still there and just need to be refreshed and/or cleaned and some passenger signaling installed. That's it. What am I missing here?
Click to expand...
Wrong. New equipment will be needed after May 7th, when the SL time shift/day shift take effect. This will reduce 1 consist out of the rotation and will make any eastern restoration that much harder.
 
There's also on-board operating expenses (staff time, fuel, etc.) for a train that is running for an extra X hours. You'll need more operating crews and conductors who are qualified on the NOL-JAX segments. Staffing stations even part-time provides another ongoing expense, and let's not even get into track rent and the like. And so on. Even if the equipment would otherwise be sitting idle, it does cost money to operate it.
 
Anderson said:
and let's not even get into track rent and the like. And so on.
Click to expand...
Track rental, assuming a 3 day a week service is next to nothing. This is at least part of why Amtrak continues to call it a "suspension" of service. By doing that, they don't lose their right to operate trains over those tracks at the original rates setup when Amtrak was formed.

Only if Amtrak changes the frequencies or outright cancels the service and then seeks to restore it, does CSX get to charge what they like.
 
Encouraging News!!!!!

The State of Alabama along with a few of its major cities are studying the feasibility of creating a passenger railroad connecting Mobile with Montgomery and Birmingham. Hopefully some good will come of this effort. Amtrak has reduced itself to a non-entity along the Gulf. We need a VIABLE alternative to the national rail carrier and its very arrogant attitude.
 
Amtrak wanted "out" of its commitment to Gulf Coast cities long before Katrina struck. The storm merely gave them their excuse. They complained about the costs of running a train through to Orlando but conveniently forgot that they depend on OUR tax dollars and not profit in order to operate.
 
jasper mcmillan said:
Encouraging News!!!!!

The State of Alabama along with a few of its major cities are studying the feasibility of creating a passenger railroad connecting Mobile with Montgomery and Birmingham. Hopefully some good will come of this effort.
Click to expand...
What I have said before, a study and a buck or two will get you a cup of coffee.

Studies are the way a government agency looks like it is doing something when it really is not. This particular study also may be considing a restoration of the B'ham to Mobile section of the Crescent that ran for a while. (I have yet to read the study, and unless I have some time that I am trapped with nothing else to read, I may not read it.)

As pre-Amtrak train service in the southeast went, Mobile to Montgomery was reasonably fast. However, it will still be well slower than driving time.

Also, by going to B'ham before turning south the travel time between Atlanta and Montgomery and points southwest would be way slower than driving. Secondly, making the southwest end Mobile does not provide service to the several medium sized cities along the Mississippi Gulf Coast or to New Orleans.

If and when there is ever a second train from the Northeast into Atlanta, it would be logical to run one on the current Crescent route and the other directly Atlanta-Montgomery-Mobile-New Orleans. Hello! That is the original route of the Crescent Limited which was for many years the premier New York to New Orleans train.

As to Amtrak wanting out of the Gulf Coast, the ridership was up there in the same range as quite a few other long distance trains, so ridership would not have been the reason.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top