Amtrak kills the Sunset and uses trainsets to run daily CHI-SAS-LAX. The remaining sleepers will go to California LD trains.A few coaches will go for a daily SAS-NOL snub train and a daily NOL-Florida snub train. That makes over 1,000 miles of a snub
train between SAS-Florida. A fancy bus service on rails. This is what we get for billions in extra funding, 100 repaired coaches, and new orders. Your 21st
century Amtrak.
GP35 there are no remaining sleepers to distribute anywhere. It takes every sleeper now dedicated to the Eagle/Sunset service to run a daily Eagle which requires seven sets of equipment. As for any surplus coaches, I presume would be used on the stub trains. So there isn't going to be an equipment dividend by making these changes. If anything it will require more equipment. But, there is other news, this from 'All Aboard':
Just a brief response on this. I've received highly reliable inside
information that Amtrak is "conflicted" on this issue - the proposal
as described is just a PROPOSAL being advanced by some elements of
Amtrak's middle management. This is not a done deal. There is
considerable support for maintaining an LA-NOL Sunset (with that
name) with a separate connector train east from NOL.
LH
At 2009/05/07 16:27, Gene Poon wrote:
>ANONYMOUS (from an Amtrak official for forwarding to discussion
>groups):
>
> > I wanted to clarify a number of misconceptions that have come
> > up about the revamped Sunset Limited proposal that was
> > presented by Brian Rosenwald in Los Angeles to RailPAC.
> >
> > First of all, this is nothing more than a proposal that is
> > under development and discussion, and at this time has not
> > been finalized or approved by Amtrak's Executive Committee or
> > Board of Directors.
> >
> > 1) As part of this proposal, the Texas Eagle (see name caveat
> > below) would run from Chicago - San Antonio - Los Angeles
> > daily, and a connecting Superliner train (with checked
> > baggage and meal service) would operate from New Orleans -
> > San Antonio daily.
> >
> > 2) Make no mistake, this proposal would restore daily service
> > to all points on the Sunset route. Tri-weekly service is
> > inefficient, confusing to passengers, results in poor
> > financial performance, and presents a number of marketing and
> > other challenges. The only bias that Amtrak had going into
> > this analysis was to have daily service on this route.
> >
> > 3) As presented to RailPAC, the analysis for this proposal
> > showed over 100,000 additional yearly riders for the
> > proposal, along with significant revenue increases. The
> > analysis took into account ridership demand, forecast demand,
> > and markets.
> >
> > 4) The transfer in San Antonio from the thru train to the
> > connecting train would NOT be in the middle of the night. As
> > part of the proposed schedule, the eastbound train would
> > leave Los Angeles after 10 PM, arriving San Antonio around 6
> > AM, and the eastbound connecting train would leave around
> > 7:30 AM. Going west, the connecting train would leave New
> > Orleans around 10:30 AM, arrive New Orleans around 11:30 PM,
> > and passengers could then get on the Eagle before it departs.
> > Again, no schedule has been approved by any host RR and this
> > is only a discussion at this time.
> >
> > 5) No name has been chosen for either service. This is
> > certainly up to discussion and is probably the least of the
> > concerns.
> >
> > 6) This proposal is completely independent of the Sunset-East
> > study, and would not end the possibility of re-instating a
> > transcontinental service, should the corporation decide to do
> > so. Thru-cars could potentially operate between Los Angeles,
> > San Antonio, and New Orleans, and even continue to points
> > east should this be what the study recommends.