Hypothetical Keystone Limited

[Oldsmoboi]

If/When the additional viewliner sleepers come online, they could run an overnight service with the Viewliners being the only additional new equipment.

Departing PGH at 10pm with Viewliners and arriving into NYP at around 7am, this would then turn into the 10:50A Westbound out of NYP into PGH at 8:05pm with through Viewliners for the Cap. Drop the through Viewliners at PGH for the Cap. Ltd. and pick up a stored set from the next train described below.

Depart NYP at 9pm with Viewliners and arrive into PGH at 6am, drop these Viewliners at the station for storage till 10pm. Pick up through Viewliners from the 4:35am Cap Ltd arrival, and turn for the 7:20am departure out of PGH.

This could be done with the current equipment being used + viewliners in between the existing schedule.

 

[fairviewroad]

If/When the additional viewliner sleepers come online, they could run an overnight service with the Viewliners being the only additional new equipment.

Departing PGH at 10pm with Viewliners and arriving into NYP at around 7am, this would then turn into the 10:50A Westbound out of NYP into PGH at 8:05pm with through Viewliners for the Cap. Drop the through Viewliners at PGH for the Cap. Ltd. and pick up a stored set from the next train described below.

Depart NYP at 9pm with Viewliners and arrive into PGH at 6am, drop these Viewliners at the station for storage till 10pm. Pick up through Viewliners from the 4:35am Cap Ltd arrival, and turn for the 7:20am departure out of PGH.

Could work logistically but you are missing the best scenery at night not to mention calling on a lot of towns in the middle of the night that aren't used to that type of service.

 

[Oldsmoboi]

While I'd love another daytime run, this run I thought up was as a way to get a second timing with the least amount of investment into equipment. For me, it's not about the scenery all the time. I've actually successfully integrated Amtrak into my regular business travel from Pittsburgh to Chicago. I like it because it isn't flying. My boss likes it because I get more time "on the ground" in the Chicago office and I also reduce the cost of my hotel since I can cut up to 2 nights hotel stay by going overnight on the Cap.

I am also in NYC regularly for business, as are many colleagues. If I could get a similar setup into NYP, there is a business market, not just a consumer/vacationer market, waiting on Amtrak for that kind of service.

 

[Penn]

The Pennsylvanian began on April 27, 1980 as a state-supported daylight train between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh...After significant ridership gains in 1984 PennDOT proposed to Amtrak that a second frequency be added to the route. This train would also have its operating costs split 50/50. Amtrak officials were favorable, but budget problems stalled the plan and in the end nothing was done...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvanian_(train)#History

if I'm not mistaken, it was a 9 am departure out of philly and an afternoon departure out of harrisburg. the idea of going into suburban is an excellent one, more than 2/3's of septa's cc ridership uses suburban or market east, there's no reason to think that amtrak's ridership profile is any different...maybe even more skewed since the leisure travelers are almost certainly going to center city rather than 30th st. harrisburg generally has a protect on hand as it is, and NS has a fueling station nearby. obviously, the scheduling becomes easier with a short trip (and costs much lower if you can turn a set from ny).

 

[DivMiler]

If/When the additional viewliner sleepers come online, they could run an overnight service with the Viewliners being the only additional new equipment.

Can Viewliners and Superliners be used together? Would the vestibules at the ends of the cars line up?

 

[Eric S]

DivMiller:

See this thread from a few days ago:

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/47057-can-a-single-level-car-connect-to-the-lower-level-of-a-superliner/

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: Yes, but it requires the use of a Superliner Transdorm.

 

[Oldsmoboi]

I want to add, just in case there is anyone that matters reading this, that the single biggest reason I don't take the Pennsylvanian more often is the lack of a late afternoon/early evening departure from NYP

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

I want to add, just in case there is anyone that matters reading this, that the single biggest reason I don't take the Pennsylvanian more often is the lack of a late afternoon/early evening departure from NYP

But wouldn't that put you into PGH at 3a, or whenever? I'm not sure that that is an arrival time many people would opt for.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

While I'd love another daytime run, this run I thought up was as a way to get a second timing with the least amount of investment into equipment. For me, it's not about the scenery all the time. I've actually successfully integrated Amtrak into my regular business travel from Pittsburgh to Chicago. I like it because it isn't flying. My boss likes it because I get more time "on the ground" in the Chicago office and I also reduce the cost of my hotel since I can cut up to 2 nights hotel stay by going overnight on the Cap.

I am also in NYC regularly for business, as are many colleagues. If I could get a similar setup into NYP, there is a business market, not just a consumer/vacationer market, waiting on Amtrak for that kind of service.

I agree with Oldsmobol here. There is a significant non-railfan base for overnight coach travel. Students, mothers with small children and not a lot of money, business travellers on stipends, not-1%-people broadly defined.... Many people who are just trying to "get there" can't afford to give up a day for scenery. Small children sleep well in coach seats (and do better than if they are on a 10-hour daylight run). And a night schedule uses equipment that otherwise sits in a yard. Even if per-mile occupancy is lower, a proper economic analysis would factor in the equipment costs as lower, too.

There is also a small but real business clientele interested in the sleepers. An overnight train is effectively time-competitive with a plane on a 10-hour route, because you don't really do anything that you wouldn't do in a hotel room. So, it's as if your travel time were zero, provided you get sufficient rest in a moving bed.

My only question would be this: given the proposed schedule, might it not make sense to "burn" a trio of coaches and a locomotive, and run the train through to Cleveland? This would eliminate the tight turn in PGH, but the extra revenue from the big, nearby market might be sufficient to amortize a crew and the cost of the coaches+loco, and the Viewliner sleeper was sitting all day, anyway. You would also create a PGH - CLE daylight train, morning up, afternoon back, which might garner some riders. You would need a stable in Cleveland, but which could also serve what I see as the inevitable daylight CHI - CLE - CHI turn, which Ohio will fund once they come to their senses.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

I think it would be easy to just add a TransDorm in between single and double dexckers. Just open up the crew spaces for passengers. Does anybody know if the equipment is there to do so? If the Pennsy/CL through sleeper gets in operation, I would assume passengfers would have to pass through the TransDorm.

 

[AlanB]

I think it would be easy to just add a TransDorm in between single and double dexckers. Just open up the crew spaces for passengers. Does anybody know if the equipment is there to do so? If the Pennsy/CL through sleeper gets in operation, I would assume passengfers would have to pass through the TransDorm.

Amtrak doesn't have any spare Trans/Dorms just sitting around. Between inspections, repairs, spares, and normal use the 42 cars are pretty well spoken for. And if one opens up the crews spaces for passengers, then where does Amtrak put the crew? The crew is guaranteed a bed.

And yes, if the Pennsy/CL through cars become a reality, then passengers will have to pass through the crew dorm if they wish to eat in the dining car. It wouldn't surprise me however to see that Amtrak only allows the sleeping car pax to walk through and that they keep the coach pax confined to the single level coaches and the single level cafe car.

 

[Blue Marble Travel]

I think it would be easy to just add a TransDorm in between single and double dexckers. Just open up the crew spaces for passengers. Does anybody know if the equipment is there to do so? If the Pennsy/CL through sleeper gets in operation, I would assume passengfers would have to pass through the TransDorm.

Amtrak doesn't have any spare Trans/Dorms just sitting around. Between inspections, repairs, spares, and normal use the 42 cars are pretty well spoken for. And if one opens up the crews spaces for passengers, then where does Amtrak put the crew? The crew is guaranteed a bed.

Presumably, if the dorm car became a "walk-thru" sleeper, you could put all rooms in the trans dorm up for sale, and put the crew rooms in a regular sleeper. Isn't the key the number of rooms? Or, not move the crew at all... perhaps equip the crew rooms with card key locks? I'm must be missing the issue here...

 

[jis]

Presumably, if the dorm car became a "walk-thru" sleeper, you could put all rooms in the trans dorm up for sale, and put the crew rooms in a regular sleeper. Isn't the key the number of rooms? Or, not move the crew at all... perhaps equip the crew rooms with card key locks? I'm must be missing the issue here...

Dorm car becoming walk through has nothing to do with moving the crew somewhere else (well the crew might be a bit miffed to have people pass through, but they face that anyway when they are housed in revenue sleeper cars anyway). The crew rooms were quite lockable at least in the Trans-Dorms that I traveled in. I don't think there is any issue at hand per se.

 

[afigg]

Getting the subject back to the Keystone and Pennsylvanian if I may, a couple of comments and questions.

According to the Amtrak website, the Pennsylvanian had an Endpoint on-time performance of 100% in February, 2012. Good month. This is the ENDPOINT OTP, which I think for the Pennsylvanian means it was no more than 20 minutes into either PGH or NYP. Could have run later at stations en-route, but the 100% means that it did not get seriously hung up on any trip during the month. The 100% does suggest that there is padding in the schedule that could be trimmed.

Question: any thoughts or info on why the Pennsylvanian is so expensive to run? The Five Year plan document has an budget table in the appendix for each train service for FY12 to FY16. The FY12 budget table shows the allocated expense for the Pennsylvanian is $15.5 million. The Adirondack is $12.9 million, the Vermonter $10.1 million for comparison eastern once a day trains. The Carolinian is more at $21.8 million, but it travels 704 miles vice 444 for the Pennsylvanian. The Adirondack runs 381 miles, but is an ~11 hour trip time. Are there crew allocation issues, station costs west of Harrisburg, trackage rights to NS, something else that drives up the Pennsylvanian operating cost?

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

100% OTP at endpoints? I've never heard of that for Amtrak. They should seriously trim the schedule to 8:30 or even 8:00. That might get a few extra passengers.

The Vermonter runs 600 miles, yet is surprisingly cheap to run at $10 million. The Carolinian is also too expensive because for 100 extra miles it has over twice the cost. Why is the Vermonter so economical?

 

[afigg]

100% OTP at endpoints? I've never heard of that for Amtrak. They should seriously trim the schedule to 8:30 or even 8:00. That might get a few extra passengers.

The Vermonter runs 600 miles, yet is surprisingly cheap to run at $10 million. The Carolinian is also too expensive because for 100 extra miles it has over twice the cost. Why is the Vermonter so economical?

A quick response. Amtrak can't trim the schedule that much just because the Pennsylvanian has very good OTP. But 5-10 minutes, mostly from the NS end, might be doable in the near term. Getting the train to under 7 hours PHL-PGH would make it more competitive. I may post some comparisons and thoughts on that later, but might be better under a new Pennsylvanian thread.

The expenses for the Vermonter would be for the portion that is off of the NEC. Whether that would be from New Haven to St. Albans or Springfield to St. Albans, don't know. But there are similarities to the Pennsylvanian as both run on the NEC with electric locos, then switch to diesels to run over non Amtrak tracks. The VA Regionals, Carolinian, of course, do the same. The Carolinian runs 260 miles further than the Pennylvanian, BTW.

An impressive accomplishment for February was that the Acelas had an endpoint 96.2% OTP and the NE Regionals 92.9%.

 

[Oldsmoboi]

I want to add, just in case there is anyone that matters reading this, that the single biggest reason I don't take the Pennsylvanian more often is the lack of a late afternoon/early evening departure from NYP

But wouldn't that put you into PGH at 3a, or whenever? I'm not sure that that is an arrival time many people would opt for.

A 3pm NYP departure could get you into PGH at midnight with some schedule tightening. I just need to be able to spend 24 hours on the ground in NYC with one hotel stay, or if there was overnight each direction, I could do a single day in NYC with no hotel stay like I sometimes do for Chicago.

 

[Oldsmoboi]

While I'd love another daytime run, this run I thought up was as a way to get a second timing with the least amount of investment into equipment. For me, it's not about the scenery all the time. I've actually successfully integrated Amtrak into my regular business travel from Pittsburgh to Chicago. I like it because it isn't flying. My boss likes it because I get more time "on the ground" in the Chicago office and I also reduce the cost of my hotel since I can cut up to 2 nights hotel stay by going overnight on the Cap.

I am also in NYC regularly for business, as are many colleagues. If I could get a similar setup into NYP, there is a business market, not just a consumer/vacationer market, waiting on Amtrak for that kind of service.

I agree with Oldsmobol here. There is a significant non-railfan base for overnight coach travel. Students, mothers with small children and not a lot of money, business travellers on stipends, not-1%-people broadly defined.... Many people who are just trying to "get there" can't afford to give up a day for scenery. Small children sleep well in coach seats (and do better than if they are on a 10-hour daylight run). And a night schedule uses equipment that otherwise sits in a yard. Even if per-mile occupancy is lower, a proper economic analysis would factor in the equipment costs as lower, too.

There is also a small but real business clientele interested in the sleepers. An overnight train is effectively time-competitive with a plane on a 10-hour route, because you don't really do anything that you wouldn't do in a hotel room. So, it's as if your travel time were zero, provided you get sufficient rest in a moving bed.

My only question would be this: given the proposed schedule, might it not make sense to "burn" a trio of coaches and a locomotive, and run the train through to Cleveland? This would eliminate the tight turn in PGH, but the extra revenue from the big, nearby market might be sufficient to amortize a crew and the cost of the coaches+loco, and the Viewliner sleeper was sitting all day, anyway. You would also create a PGH - CLE daylight train, morning up, afternoon back, which might garner some riders. You would need a stable in Cleveland, but which could also serve what I see as the inevitable daylight CHI - CLE - CHI turn, which Ohio will fund once they come to their senses.

I don't see PGH-CLE-PGH demand for it at current speeds and routing between PGH and CLE. There would need to be a market for PHL-CLE, HAR-CLE, or NYP-CLE travel that was wanting to overnight from the east just to get into CLE at a reasonable morning hour... and I seriously doubt it exists.

edit: my justification to my boss has always been that a roomette is just a rolling hotel room that includes food. So the spend for the hotel is less even if the overall cost of transportation is higher. Round trip Roomette on the Cap has to hit $650 before overall airfare + baggage charges + airport parking costs + extra hotel night + extra rental car night + extra meals is cheaper.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Guys, sorry for posting the idea that got this thread so far off topic. I didn't expect it to get this outrageous.

 

[Oldsmoboi]

My question would be this: The AEMs can already do 125mph. If that is the best the line could see after upgrades, why would Amtrak burn a trainset that can do 150mph on that line when there are better places to use its full effectiveness?

 

[AlanB]

Guys, sorry for posting the idea that got this thread so far off topic. I didn't expect it to get this outrageous.

Don't worry! This is what happens all the time around here, we start out on one topic and end up talking about 3 other topics often totally unrelated to the original topic. There are some RR forums out there that don't allow that to happen, one must stay strictly on the original topic or feel the wrath of the moderator. That's not us! And so far, based upon PM's & comments from many of our members, most seem to prefer our laid back style when it comes to discussing whatever comes to mind within one topic.

 

[Ryan]

Why is it that everytime someone see's a gap in electric to diesel service they automatically jump to the ALP-45DP... The Unit hasn't even proven it can run by it's self and let alone in service.. IMHO it's a waste of money if it hasn't proven itself.. Also Amtrak's relationship with Bombardier isn't a good one since AE and the HHP's.

Because there are enough trains that cross the gap that a significant amount of time could be saved by something like the ALP-45DP. That particular locomotive might be unproven at this time, but the concept is a good one. Hopefully something will come along that will fit in with Amtrak's plans and budget.

There are some RR forums out there that don't allow that to happen, one must stay strictly on the original topic or feel the wrath of the moderator. That's not us! And so far, based upon PM's & comments from many of our members, most seem to prefer our laid back style when it comes to discussing whatever comes to mind within one topic.

And many thanks for that.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

A far out alternative to the ALP-45DP would be to run a train with both a Genesis and a electric. Wonder if they could just electrify all the way to PGH? I heard that the PRR wanted to do that in the 1930s but it was cancelled.

 

[Ryan]

They'd need a lot more electrics to do that. They barely have enough as it is now, let alone have them unavailable getting drug places where there is no wire.

 

[Oldsmoboi]

Trains from Pittsburgh run diesel to Philly. There is no facility anymore to change engines at Harrisburg, except in emergencies.

Just to stir things up, the Pennsylvanian and a PHL-PGH train would be interesting candidates to run ALP-45DP dual electric/diesel locomotives on. Amtrak could contract with NJ Transit to do the major maintenance on the locomotives. Saves on diesel fuel to Harrisburg and a engine swap at 30th Street for the Pennsylvanian. Amtrak could get PA DOT to help cover the cost of leasing the ALP-45DPs. I realize that this is an idea that Amtrak is unlikely to pursue or adopt, but figured I would throw it out there.

UGH!! h34r: WHYYYYY!!! :blink:

Why is it that everytime someone see's a gap in electric to diesel service they automatically jump to the ALP-45DP... The Unit hasn't even proven it can run by it's self and let alone in service.. IMHO it's a waste of money if it hasn't proven itself.. Also Amtrak's relationship with Bombardier isn't a good one since AE and the HHP's.

Well I have to disagree with the "haven't proven it can run by itself" part.