LSL Eastbound schedule change

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

TimePeace

Disillusioned.
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
1,166
In the thread about padding, the discussion came up about the LSL Eastbound schedule changing, to arrive earlier.

Anyone know more about this, in particular when the change might take place.

And how would the schedule change affect arrivals at BOS as well as NYP?
 
To clarify: I am interested in the proposed timetable changes.
 
Like Sgt Schultz "I know nothing". The LSL is the last Amtrak train out of CUS every night.

What puzzles me is why it takes 1:15 longer to get to CLE than the CL.

I took the LSL to Cleveland from Chicago because I didn't want to get to Cleveland at 1AM.

For Amtrak efficiency, I think that the LSL could leave CUS about 15 minutes behind the CL.

I would hope that the host railroad could put this train in an earlier "slot".

As always I'm hoping that Amtrak will develop some better options for car rentals at or near their stations. My taxi fare from CLE to the Cleveland airport was equal to 2 days rental on the car.
 
IIRC, they were considering changing the time for the LSL (and maybe the CL) when the tunnel work in ?PA? was completed. I think they were planning to swap the two schedules.
 
Maine Rider said:
In the thread about padding, the discussion came up about the LSL Eastbound schedule changing, to arrive earlier.

Anyone know more about this, in particular when the change might take place.

And how would the schedule change affect arrivals at BOS as well as NYP?
Click to expand...
You can read pages 44-45 of the LSL section of the 2011 PIP report located here (~ 6 MB PDF file) for the reasons and possible schedule shifts. The initial idea was to have the LSL depart CHI 2 hours earlier, but arrive NYP and BOS 3 hours earlier (yes, there is major padding in the EB LSL schedule). Would bring in a projected additional $2 million in revenue. The further refined proposal was to have the LSL depart CHI around 6 PM, the CL around 7:30 PM. The plan was on hold until the CSX tunnel clearance work east of Pittsburgh was completed - which was supposed to be done last August.

Since there have been no announcements, the schedule shift is not going to occur with the timetable starting on January 14. The constant severe delays of the EB last summer and fall may be a reason to hold off on the schedule change until the #8 EB on-time performance stabilizes for spring and summer seasons. Or maybe CSX has not agreed to the schedule changes?
 
I often take the Lake Shore Limited from Chicago to New York. I like the times, both departure and arrival.

My experience is that it is usually 30 to 45 minutes late of the scheduled arrival time which makes it at the

end of the New York City rush hour and convenient for me to take my NJT train home. I also like the

wine and cheese in Chicago. The LSL is the only "one seat ride" from Chicago to New York.
 
If the LSL arrived earlier in Boston, it might have more time for folks to make connections to MBTA commuter trains or even the 67. I believe with the current schedule the LSL arrives after the 67 departs. It would be great to be able to take the Boston section of the LSL and then connect to the 67 to get to PVD, for example, rather than having to go into NYP and then take a regional north.
 
tomfuller said:
What puzzles me is why it takes 1:15 longer to get to CLE than the CL.
Click to expand...
I think the LSL makes 1 or 2 stops that the CL does not make. Also it may travel slower so that it arrives into CLE at a "reasonable" time.

An example is #66 from WAS to BOS. It has a "layover" of 1 hour at NYP, and between KIN and PVD I have been on it and clocked it going about 40 MPH. (Other Regionals on that stretch do 110-125 MPH.) All this is done so #66 arrives into BOS about 8 am, instead of like 5-6 am.
 
Agree that it would be so good to have the LSL arrive in Boston earlier.

Didn't it arrive earlier some years ago?

Now we return on the Capitol Limited from Chicago to DC, stay over a night, and then take the NER in the morning to make earlier connections to Maine.
 
the_traveler said:
tomfuller said:
What puzzles me is why it takes 1:15 longer to get to CLE than the CL.
Click to expand...
I think the LSL makes 1 or 2 stops that the CL does not make. Also it may travel slower so that it arrives into CLE at a "reasonable" time.

An example is #66 from WAS to BOS. It has a "layover" of 1 hour at NYP, and between KIN and PVD I have been on it and clocked it going about 40 MPH. (Other Regionals on that stretch do 110-125 MPH.) All this is done so #66 arrives into BOS about 8 am, instead of like 5-6 am.
Click to expand...
Could it just be different placement of schedule padding on one route versus the other? In my one experience with each train (admittedly, this is not much to go off of), both the Lake Shore Limited and Capitol Limited lost serious time by Toledo but made it up later. The Lake Shore Limited made it up between TOL and CLE (on time arrival into CLE), but the Capitol Limited didn't make it up until after CLE (late into CLE but on time into PGH).
 
NETrainfan said:
Agree that it would be so good to have the LSL arrive in Boston earlier.

Didn't it arrive earlier some years ago?

Now we return on the Capitol Limited from Chicago to DC, stay over a night, and then take the NER in the morning to make earlier connections to Maine.
Click to expand...
Pulling up a 2003 schedule, the #48 LSL departed CHI at 7 PM CT, arrived NYP 1:50 PM, #448 arrived BOS at 5:20 PM. Notice the huge difference in CHI to NYP trip times. If it was reliable enough, a circa 5:20 PM arrival at BBY would allow for a connection to a Downeaster 6:45 PM BON departure. One of the benefits of a 2-3 hour earlier LSL CHI departure is better connection options at SPG and Boston for VT, greater Boston region, and Maine. And more passengers.

CHI to BOS via WAS and the NEC is obviously not the short way to get there!

In the next 2-3 years, the Englewood Flyover, Indiana Gateway projects, Schenectady to Albany upgrades, possibly MBTA upgrades for WOR to BOS segments may all be completed. Those should lead to some trip time reductions for the LSL to Boston above taking out some of the padding.
 
I was on #448 back in 2003 back when the scheduled arrival into BOS was 5:20 pm. Plenty of time to connect to the Regionals to KIN. However due to a locomotive breakdown in OH/PA, 448 did not arrive into BOS until 3 am! :eek:

I would love to see 48/448 have an earlier departure time from CHI, to allow for more connections in both BOS and NYP. Right now, the only connection to the north is 48 to NYP and departing on 67 at 3 am. :eek: :eek:
 
I like the earlier CHI departure and arrival in Boston because I still have a 2 hour bus and then a 2 hour drive to get home.

Currently, the 9:30 BOS arrival, when running late, make a long night for me - especially when returning home from a cross-continent trip.

Thanks to all for the info.
 
afigg said:
Maine Rider said:
In the thread about padding, the discussion came up about the LSL Eastbound schedule changing, to arrive earlier.

Anyone know more about this, in particular when the change might take place.

And how would the schedule change affect arrivals at BOS as well as NYP?
Click to expand...
You can read pages 44-45 of the LSL section of the 2011 PIP report located here (~ 6 MB PDF file) for the reasons and possible schedule shifts.
Click to expand...
Very interesting document. I have never looked at one of these before. Thanks.
 
I read that as well. Im glad that the CL will depart a bit later to give time for the Western LD trains to connect. I hope that the new LSL schedule works out a bit better than the current one.

Extra coach cars on the Crescent between NYP-ATL will be a nice addition. The sleepers will continue the full run, so thats a good thing.

Proposed new Thruway connections as well. That would help connections between the Crescent and the SM/SS trains *among other routes*.
 
afigg said:
The plan was on hold until the CSX tunnel clearance work east of Pittsburgh was completed - which was supposed to be done last August.

Since there have been no announcements, the schedule shift is not going to occur with the timetable starting on January 14. The constant severe delays of the EB last summer and fall may be a reason to hold off on the schedule change until the #8 EB on-time performance stabilizes for spring and summer seasons. Or maybe CSX has not agreed to the schedule changes?
Click to expand...
Note that the schedule changes need the agreement of CSX, NS, Metro-North (for the approach to New York), and the MBTA (for the approach to Boston). They probably also have to consult with MARC (for the approach to DC). The associated plan to have through cars connecting from the Capitol Limited to the Pennsylvanian in Pittsburgh needs additional rolling stock and needs switches installed. On top of this, the Albany-Poughkeepsie line just got transferred to Amtrak; there's recently-started construction there, in Albany, and from Schenectady to Albany; there's ongoing construction at Englewood in Chicago; and there's ongoing construction on the line from Worcester to Boston which was recently bought by the MBTA from CSX.

So there's a lot of moving parts. Amtrak is likely to be sending proposed schedules back and forth to CSX, NS, Metro-North, and MBTA, so I wouldn't expect this to be going quickly. And Amtrak could perfectly well have decided to postpone the schedule change until after some of the construction is done, since the construction from Schenectady eastwards is supposed to speed train service up a lot and allow the removal of a lot of padding.
 
Amtrak Cajun said:
I read that as well. Im glad that the CL will depart a bit later to give time for the Western LD trains to connect. I hope that the new LSL schedule works out a bit better than the current one.

Extra coach cars on the Crescent between NYP-ATL will be a nice addition. The sleepers will continue the full run, so thats a good thing.

Proposed new Thruway connections as well. That would help connections between the Crescent and the SM/SS trains *among other routes*.
Click to expand...
Just note that the PIP is sort of like a 'wish list.'
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top