Sunset Limited BULLETIN

[Montanan]

Even after reading all of this, I have to say that I'm one of the people who feels this is an extremely positive step for Amtrak. They'll be adding a LOT of train-miles with this change ... and how long has it been since they've done that without a state paying for it? In addition, a very large number of endpoint pairs are getting significantly improved service, both through the increased frequencies and the return of a full diner north of San Antonio. Travel time for many of those city pairs will be reduced, and arrival/departure times at several major stops will be improved. And coach passengers will no longer have to spend a long night in San Antonio without moving towards their destination.

The lack of sleeping car service to New Orleans is definitely unfortunate, as is the need for a cross-platform transfer, but I think the increased frequency more than makes up for that. Certainly the readers of this group are willing to wait a day or two to ride a less-than-daily train, but that's undoubtedly less true of the public in general. And we have to remember that even today, the vast majority of the Sunset's passengers aren't traveling the entire LA - New Orleans route end-to-end -- most won't even be impacted by the cross-platform change.

I've ridden the Sunset three times, and it's pretty clear that its ridership is strongest in the west, and weakest between San Antonio and Houston. The last time I rode the train (eastbound, about two years ago), my notes show that there were roughly 35 passengers on the entire train leaving San Antonio. While that was an off-season run, it still suggested to me that the current service approach wasn't working. Basically, the only way for them to go is up, and I think Amtrak is to be commended for its willingness to try something.

As an aside: has anyone seen statistics of passenger numbers riding through San Antonio ... it would be interesting to know what percentage of through passengers currently connect to/from the Eagle, and what percentage use the Sunset east of there.

 

[henryj]

Everyone's made some excellent points, but I think Henry's right; this seems to be what's going to happen, and the best thing we can do is hope for the best. If it works, hopefully it can be the catalyst for improved service not just in Texas, but elsewhere, too. My main reason for optimism is that TEMPO is involved--not just because it's a 'local' group for me, but because I think those guys and gals have really done a wonderful job for the past decade or so. I don't know for sure, but I'd assume that one of the selling points for the new daily Eagle was this group and their past performance.
I know enough to know that I shouldn't make any predictions about whether the effort will increase revenue or ridership, and I'll eat my share of crow if this turns out badly.

Blake we do have a web site we set up when it became apparent that SMART and NARP were going to go their own way and abandon us out west. we would be glad to have you or anyone else that is interested. It's a low key site where we just try and keep up with what is going on in our own area.

http://groups.google.com/group/sunset-limited-west?hl=en

 

[Bob Dylan]

If you're going Westbound from Houston the coach run is only a couple of hundred miles to San Antonio. Eastbound from Houston to NOL is about 350 miles. I think either run is fine for a day coach only train. I do think the entire run NOL to SAS is kind of long on a coach only train at about 550 miles but doable. The tradeoff is getting daily daytime service. I do hope they put some kind of Diner-Lite on it instead of just a snack bar but looking at the Palmetto I doubt it.

Since they said there will be a daily stub train between SAS-NOL with coaches AND a Biz class car I'm pretty sure they can take one of the unloved CCC's

and Reconfigure it into a cafe/biz car similar to the biz cars on the River Runners and the NEC trains except it will be a Superliner (we hope!) which should

make more folks on this route happy! I'm with the Please no Amcans with nuclear reactor microwaves like another poster said!

 

[BlakeTyner]

Blake we do have a web site we set up when it became apparent that SMART and NARP were going to go their own way and abandon us out west. we would be glad to have you or anyone else that is interested. It's a low key site where we just try and keep up with what is going on in our own area.
http://groups.google.com/group/sunset-limited-west?hl=en

I've bookmarked the site and poked around a bit. I'm happy to help in whatever way I can, sir.

 

[Guest]

Even after reading all of this, I have to say that I'm one of the people who feels this is an extremely positive step for Amtrak. They'll be adding a LOT of train-miles with this change ... and how long has it been since they've done that without a state paying for it? In addition, a very large number of endpoint pairs are getting significantly improved service, both through the increased frequencies and the return of a full diner north of San Antonio. Travel time for many of those city pairs will be reduced, and arrival/departure times at several major stops will be improved. And coach passengers will no longer have to spend a long night in San Antonio without moving towards their destination.
The lack of sleeping car service to New Orleans is definitely unfortunate, as is the need for a cross-platform transfer, but I think the increased frequency more than makes up for that. Certainly the readers of this group are willing to wait a day or two to ride a less-than-daily train, but that's undoubtedly less true of the public in general. And we have to remember that even today, the vast majority of the Sunset's passengers aren't traveling the entire LA - New Orleans route end-to-end -- most won't even be impacted by the cross-platform change.

I've ridden the Sunset three times, and it's pretty clear that its ridership is strongest in the west, and weakest between San Antonio and Houston. The last time I rode the train (eastbound, about two years ago), my notes show that there were roughly 35 passengers on the entire train leaving San Antonio. While that was an off-season run, it still suggested to me that the current service approach wasn't working. Basically, the only way for them to go is up, and I think Amtrak is to be commended for its willingness to try something.

As an aside: has anyone seen statistics of passenger numbers riding through San Antonio ... it would be interesting to know what percentage of through passengers currently connect to/from the Eagle, and what percentage use the Sunset east of there.

If you fill the train to full capacity out SAS going east, then no one east of SAS can ride. This is what many of you don't understand.

If the Great Golden state is truely successful, at full capacity going into SAS from Chicago, then the 7 million people SAS to NOL wouldn't be able to tranfer.

This Golden State train will hit many huge MSA's;Dallas, FW, Austin, SAS, military base at Killeen, and LR. I can not believe those areas can not sell out a

LD train to LA daily. This leads to the stub passengers getting snub. Unless Amtrak will run a half empty train from Chicago to SAS reserved for the stub train.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Currently the Eagle deadheads the STL coach to/from STL-SAS daily. Today was the first time all year I've actually seen pax in the third coach, and the sleepers were full but thats rare on this route. With the train going daily to LAX, instead of the Sunset being thrice weekly from NOL-SAS-LAX, there will be more spaces available, not less! The Sunset from SAS-NOL very rarely is even half full most trips, it's probably Amtraks lowest rated train in # of pax IINM?

Once the details are worked out I hope they let the customers name the train, not some lame group think name like the Golden State Ltd. (what's golden about Ill/MO/Ark?TEX/NM/AZ??), what's wrong with keeping the Oldest continously used passenger route name in the USA, the Sunset Ltd. ?The sun sets three times on this route! The Texas Eagle can be the stub train SAS-NOL and if it ever happens the Lone Star Eagle from DAL-HOS!

 

[TVRM610]

Just my 10 cents... Every town is still served by a train DAILY! That is an improvement in service for all towns IMHO. I understand the argument, but i really do think this is a good thing.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Just my 10 cents... Every town is still served by a train DAILY! That is an improvement in service for all towns IMHO. I understand the argument, but i really do think this is a good thing.

But sleepers make more money.

 

[TVRM610]

That I am not arguing... Amtrak as we all know does not exist to make money, they provide transportation service. There is no possible way that any of us can guess, but I have a feeling that Amtrak may just fill more sleepers with this routing anyways.

 

[Montanan]

That I am not arguing... Amtrak as we all know does not exist to make money, they provide transportation service. There is no possible way that any of us can guess, but I have a feeling that Amtrak may just fill more sleepers with this routing anyways.

Well, at the very least the sleepers (and other revenue-generting equipment) will spend significantly less time sitting idle. And that's a good thing, especially considering Amtrak's equipment constraints.

 

[GG-1]

Just my 10 cents... Every town is still served by a train DAILY!

REALLY, I wasn't aware we had rail service, or Phoenix either.

Aloha

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

That I am not arguing... Amtrak as we all know does not exist to make money, they provide transportation service. There is no possible way that any of us can guess, but I have a feeling that Amtrak may just fill more sleepers with this routing anyways.

If they are there to provide service... why are they giving daily service SAS-NOL in place of tri-weekly service NOL-ORL

 

[AlanB]

The Sunset from SAS-NOL very rarely is even half full most trips, it's probably Amtraks lowest rated train in # of pax IINM?

While the Sunset is currently the lowest performing train in terms of the number of passengers, it's interesting to note that when it comes to sleepers the Sunset does top the Cardinal which sells the least amount of sleepers, 14,692 to 6,856 respectively. Granted there simply are more sleepers to sell on the Sunset than the Card, but still sleepers are popular on this train.

Even more interesting is that the Sunset not only beats out the Cardinal for generating more revenue from it's sleepers, it generated nearly 3 times as much revenue despite just barely doubling the number of rooms sold. And it's only $260M behind the City of NOL in terms of revenue generated by the sleepers. And the CONO sold 28,893 sleepers in 2008. This means that Amtrak is generating a far greater return on those sleepers on the Sunset, by comparison to some of the other runs.

Now granted in theory Amtrak won't loose all that revenue, unless guest is correct and the Eagle comes in sold out to SAS going westbound, but still one has to figure that they'll loose at least half the sleeper revenue since one night is being cut out, which results in a loss of $1.9 million in revenue.

And just imagine what the Sunset could be doing if it was running 7 days a week, if it can currently sell half the number of rooms of the CONO, but only lag $300M behind it in revenue. That's a lot of money to walk away from IMHO.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

The Sunset from SAS-NOL very rarely is even half full most trips, it's probably Amtraks lowest rated train in # of pax IINM?

While the Sunset is currently the lowest performing train in terms of the number of passengers, it's interesting to note that when it comes to sleepers the Sunset does top the Cardinal which sells the least amount of sleepers, 14,692 to 6,856 respectively. Granted there simply are more sleepers to sell on the Sunset than the Card, but still sleepers are popular on this train.

Even more interesting is that the Sunset not only beats out the Cardinal for generating more revenue from it's sleepers, it generated nearly 3 times as much revenue despite just barely doubling the number of rooms sold. And it's only $260M behind the City of NOL in terms of revenue generated by the sleepers. And the CONO sold 28,893 sleepers in 2008. This means that Amtrak is generating a far greater return on those sleepers on the Sunset, by comparison to some of the other runs.

Now granted in theory Amtrak won't loose all that revenue, unless guest is correct and the Eagle comes in sold out to SAS going westbound, but still one has to figure that they'll loose at least half the sleeper revenue since one night is being cut out, which results in a loss of $1.9 million in revenue.

And just imagine what the Sunset could be doing if it was running 7 days a week, if it can currently sell half the number of rooms of the CONO, but only lag $300M behind it in revenue. That's a lot of money to walk away from IMHO.

I have a feeling the cross-platform transfer will be short-lived and will be replaced by a split going east and a merging going west. I think they are doing the across platform transfer at this time to save on equipment, It will also ensure the equipment is there in SAS to send back east even if the LAX train arrives extremely late. Once more cars are available I think we will see a split similar to the EB or LSL with the majority of the train going to CHI and a couple coaches, a sleeper and a CCC or diner-lite going to NOL.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Once the details are worked out I hope they let the customers name the train, not some lame group think name like the Golden State Ltd. (what's golden about Ill/MO/Ark?TEX/NM/AZ??), what's wrong with keeping the Oldest continously used passenger route name in the USA, the Sunset Ltd. ?The sun sets three times on this route! The Texas Eagle can be the stub train SAS-NOL and if it ever happens the Lone Star Eagle from DAL-HOS!

Golden State Limited is not a lame name. Its a storied name, a Rock Island & Pacific train running from Chicago to Los Angeles, via Tucson. It wasn't quite as round about as the train proposed here, but it was close. It competed with Santa Fe's Chief.

It is important for Amtrak to drop the Sunset name. Its a public relations disaster.

 

[AlanB]

I have a feeling the cross-platform transfer will be short-lived and will be replaced by a split going east and a merging going west. I think they are doing the across platform transfer at this time to save on equipment, It will also ensure the equipment is there in SAS to send back east even if the LAX train arrives extremely late. Once more cars are available I think we will see a split similar to the EB or LSL with the majority of the train going to CHI and a couple coaches, a sleeper and a CCC or diner-lite going to NOL.

If they're going to do that, then there is no point to this entire exercise. Just run the Sunset daily as if we're going to split the train like the EB, then there is no point to run the Eagle all the way instead. We're just flip-floping things now. If Amtrak can find the equipment to do what you suggest once more cars are available, then let's just stick with 3 days a week service until we get those cars out of Beech Grove.

Waiting another six months isn't going to make that big a difference.

 

[AlanB]

Once the details are worked out I hope they let the customers name the train, not some lame group think name like the Golden State Ltd. (what's golden about Ill/MO/Ark?TEX/NM/AZ??), what's wrong with keeping the Oldest continously used passenger route name in the USA, the Sunset Ltd. ?The sun sets three times on this route! The Texas Eagle can be the stub train SAS-NOL and if it ever happens the Lone Star Eagle from DAL-HOS!

Golden State Limited is not a lame name. Its a storied name, a Rock Island & Pacific train running from Chicago to Los Angeles, via Tucson. It wasn't quite as round about as the train proposed here, but it was close. It competed with Santa Fe's Chief.

It is important for Amtrak to drop the Sunset name. Its a public relations disaster.

It doesn't have to be a disaster and it's easy to fix. Instead of putting more equipment on the EB, take everything coming out of Beech Grove from the wreck repairs and do up the Sunset just like the EB, with real table cloths and a bit more quality. Watch the Sunset's numbes climb and all the bad stuff about the name will go bye-bye.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

It doesn't have to be a disaster and it's easy to fix. Instead of putting more equipment on the EB, take everything coming out of Beech Grove from the wreck repairs and do up the Sunset just like the EB, with real table cloths and a bit more quality. Watch the Sunset's numbes climb and all the bad stuff about the name will go bye-bye.

Alternatively, the sane concept that not many people along its route have much interest in trains compared to the EB, which is a major transportation option in its location, and it will just cost more money to operate and become an even bigger money losing disaster, a poster child for Amtrak mismanagement.

As a transit advocate, I'll tell you this is more attractive and more workable. The concept of one seat ride becomes less and less important as the length of the ride increases. Keep in mind that the Cardinal serving New York was competing with a single seat ride that took, ahem, TEN HOURS LESS then that two-seat Cardinal ride. I'd say the increase in ridership has to do with it having a lower bucket coach price and people just going with the cheaper train.

Your railfan mind is gumming at the perspective of losing the Sunset Limited. Working-transit wise, the Golden State Limited and Texas Sunrise plan works better, period.

 

[NativeSon5859]

The problem is that there is pretty strong Sleeper demand year-round on the Sunset to/from New Orleans. Even on the days in the Summer and during off-peak times when the train might be carrying 60 in Coach into NOL, it's not uncommon for the sleeper to be full or nearly full. I have totally mixed emotions about this. Daily service is great, and long needed, but the lack of a Sleeper or through Coach service for NOL and HOS leaves a LOT to be desired. New Orleans and Houston didn't totally get screwed due to the daily service, but still...was this the best they could come up with?

 

[NativeSon5859]

I'm also curious to see what happens to the NOL-JAX cities if/when this new schedule is introduced. I assume they'll have to list them so as not to say that the service is officially canned.

So will this be the first time since 1894 that there won't be same train service between NOL and LAX? What a disgrace...

If I had my way I'd have the TE CONNECT in SAS to the SL....not the other way around. CHI-LAX already has a daily train operating on a much faster schedule and why have NOL/HOS lose their through train at the expense of DFW? As for STL passengers, they can still easily connect in SAS or CHI.

 

[henryj]

The Sunset from SAS-NOL very rarely is even half full most trips, it's probably Amtraks lowest rated train in # of pax IINM?

Now granted in theory Amtrak won't loose all that revenue, unless guest is correct and the Eagle comes in sold out to SAS going westbound, but still one has to figure that they'll loose at least half the sleeper revenue since one night is being cut out, which results in a loss of $1.9 million in revenue.

And just imagine what the Sunset could be doing if it was running 7 days a week, if it can currently sell half the number of rooms of the CONO, but only lag $300M behind it in revenue. That's a lot of money to walk away from IMHO.

LOL, this just doesn't compute. How are they cutting out one night? The schedule is the same both ways. Between NOL and SAS there is no night. That night is spent sitting in SAS going nowhere. Additionally the Sunsets sleeper sits in New Orleans for three days before returning and earns nothing. Now these cars will be utilized daily and earn revenue daily. By going daily sleeper space will more than double on the route as will coach seats. The reason for the coach only trains east of SAS is because they were told they could go daily only if they did not require any additional equipment. This was the only combination they could come up with that met that criteria. And all this planning started before all the stimulus money became available. Perhaps now when more equipment becomes available they can began through cars from NOL. Like I said before a through sleeper from NOL will take five more cars and a through coach at least three more. When you add up the equipment pool there may be one spare sleeper and one spare coach. Even more critical is locomotives. The trains will have to be single engine to SAS. They might have enough to put on two west of SAS. If necessary they could add a coach and sleeper in SAS during peak periods. But, we will have to wait and see just how Amtrak actually handles all this. It will be interesting to say the least. Going daily is the key. This is a huge step for the Sunset route and for Amtrak. As for Florida, well who knows what happens over there. Those people want corridor day trains. They don't give a hoot about the Sunset because it served all those little towns at night.

 

[Montanan]

One thing I wonder is if the railfans are jumping the gun again ... after all, the board only authorized Amtrak to enter into negotiations with Union Pacific on the proposal. UP is notorious for their dislike of Amtrak, so it's probably likely that they're going to play hardball on this. I can see them demanding an insane amount of track improvements in exchange for the added frequency, causing Amtrak to back down.

At any rate, if Amtrak is just beginning to talk with UP now, even if UP cooperates it would be a challenge to get everything sorted out in time for the next timetable change.

 

[Montanan]

Oh, and my proverbial two cents on train names.

If I were the timetable king of Amtrak, I'd give the Sunset name to the daily Chicago-LA train, and name the stub train The Argonaut ... which was the name of the secondary train on the Sunset Route back in Southern Pacific days. It's a cool name, I think, and it would fit for the stub train.

Overall, I really like the legacy of the classic train names ... and the names Amtrak has constructed over the years just don't compare. In particular, I never liked the "hybrid" names, where Amtrak constructed its own names using phrases from the great historic names. They just seem awkward and forced to me: San Francisco Zephyr, North Coast Hiawatha ... Texas Eagle.

And though I can't find it now, I know I read it somewhere: I'm pretty sure that back in the 1890s (before the Golden State Route was completed) the Sunset LImited actually had a section that ran to Chicago!

 

[AlanB]

Alternatively, the sane concept that not many people along its route have much interest in trains compared to the EB, which is a major transportation option in its location, and it will just cost more money to operate and become an even bigger money losing disaster, a poster child for Amtrak mismanagement.

If Amtrak had a survey that proved that, then I might be willing to accept it. But I rather doubt that would be true. History shows us in fact that it wouldn't be true, especially for Texas. When the Eagle went from 3 to 4 days, ridership went up. When the Eagle went from 4 to day 7 days, ridership soared.

And then there is the fact that despite having lost all that ridership east of NOL, that the remains of the Sunset has managed to surge back on ridership.

As a transit advocate, I'll tell you this is more attractive and more workable. The concept of one seat ride becomes less and less important as the length of the ride increases. Keep in mind that the Cardinal serving New York was competing with a single seat ride that took, ahem, TEN HOURS LESS then that two-seat Cardinal ride. I'd say the increase in ridership has to do with it having a lower bucket coach price and people just going with the cheaper train.

The Cardinal is not a cheaper ride than the LSL. I just pulled up the date of Feb 24th and both the Card & the LSL are selling at $84 for a coach seat. That's low bucket for NY to CHI.

So no, the Cardinal's surge in ridership isn't because it's cheaper and it's certainly not because it takes 10 hours longer. It's because people want one seat rides.

Your railfan mind is gumming at the perspective of losing the Sunset Limited. Working-transit wise, the Golden State Limited and Texas Sunrise plan works better, period.

I'm not a historian of RR's past and present, while I do find it interesting to hear about things (especially from Bill Haithcoat's near encyclopedia mind), my thing is to get out and ride trains. That's what I like to do. I couldn't care if they called the Sunset Limited the Sunset Limited, the George HW Bush, the Money Pit, or just plain Train #1 & Train #2. The Sunset's history means nothing to me. Numbers are what's important to me and so far I've not seen any numbers period, much less any numbers that show that this might actually be good for both Amtrak and the states affected.

We've studied several other possible trains, including the return east of the Sunset, and these projects aren't being rushed. In fact some actually acuse Amtrak of deliberately dragging its feet and coming up with unrealistic numbers because they don't want to restore those trains. So why are we rushing this and without a study?

 

[AlanB]

LOL, this just doesn't compute. How are they cutting out one night? The schedule is the same both ways. Between NOL and SAS there is no night. That night is spent sitting in SAS going nowhere.

Henry, when I just rode the Sunset from NOL to LAX this past July, I was sound asleep in my room about 2 hours out of Houston, as were the other OTOL'ers. Under the new plan, there would be no sleeper for us and Amtrak would have lost that revenue. Revenue that we know to be substantial.

Additionally the Sunsets sleeper sits in New Orleans for three days before returning and earns nothing. Now these cars will be utilized daily and earn revenue daily. By going daily sleeper space will more than double on the route as will coach seats.

I wouldn't argue this, except to say that it would be better to utilize them daily on the Sunset route.

The reason for the coach only trains east of SAS is because they were told they could go daily only if they did not require any additional equipment. This was the only combination they could come up with that met that criteria. And all this planning started before all the stimulus money became available.

This idea was first floated, at least publicly, after the Stimulus plans had been announced. And I still haven't seen anything that says that they aren't getting some of the Stimulus cars to do this. In fact, while I haven't had the time to go looking, I remain convinced that I saw something that did indeed indicate that they were getting a few Stimulus cars in order to make this happen.

Even more critical is locomotives. The trains will have to be single engine to SAS. They might have enough to put on two west of SAS. If necessary they could add a coach and sleeper in SAS during peak periods.

Engines aren't a problem. Amtrak has 15 P40's coming back on line, and they could take still more out of mothballs if needed.