Sunset limited schedule to change in may

[Anderson]

In general, I like the shift around...the main thing I think that Amtrak needs to be clear on is allowing rooms to be occupied until a decent hour (even guaranteed occupancy until 6:30 AM wouldn't be that bad). To put it plainly, policy or not, I generally try to tip well...but there's a good chance that I would omit the tip in such a situation (either out of irritation or out of it's-4-AM-and-I'm-not-awake-ness). And so help me if I'm getting booted at 2 AM because the train ran early.

What seems to be missing from some of the pro-change posts is WHY the poster likes the change. Or why only sleeper passengers should be allowed to remain on board until a decent hour. Who do you think represents the vast majority of passengers Amtrak hauls? Sleeper passengers are a tiny minority of the total and will remain so into the foreseeable future. If only sleeper passengers can be accommodated at a reasonable arrival hour then the passenger totals and the revenue for the SL will likely drop even further.

To get a better feel for where all the pro-change views are coming from I'd like to make a list of MAJOR on-route cities with improved scheduling.

So far I have Houston and Tuscon.

I think Houston and Tuscon are enough to justify the changes. There aren't many "big" cities on the Sunset route, but Tuscon (and Maricopa, if Amtrak was willing to stick in a bus bridge to Phoenix) would definitely qualify as a good candidate for schedule improvement, as would Houston (Houston-NOL and Tuscon-LAX are the two biggest available intermediate markets for Amtrak). San Antonio is another possible one, but I get the feeling that HOU-NOL and SAS-NOL aren't necessarily compatible with some scheduling options.

Just as a note, the existing/possible big cities on the route are:

-New Orleans

-Houston

-San Antonio

-El Paso

-Tuscon

-Maricopa [if a connection to Phoenix were set up]

-Los Angeles

El Paso has a decent time, but there's not much improvement to be had there. Trading a bad time in SAS for good times in two others seems like a winning proposition (particularly with respect to Los Angeles, where the sheer number of connections to be had is worth noting).

As to allowing sleeper vs. coach occupancy, I think the argument is more or less the multiple of a coach fare that sleeper passengers pay. I wouldn't be opposed to letting everyone stay onboard until time X (heck, even guaranteeing 5:30 AM occupancy would be better than the risk of being shuffled off at about 4 AM, which being discharge-only after Palm Springs certainly risks), but there's a certain amount of aggravation that comes from paying lots and lots of money only to have an unpleasant surprise in the middle of the night. I think we all know that a few weeks or months into this, there are going to be some very sore passengers getting into Los Angeles at earlier than normal at some point who will be offering rather novel curses towards UP for rapid dispatching.

 

[Shortline]

Wow. I think this totally screws me. I am not going to sit in SAS station overnight waiting for it to get in after arriving on the TE at 9pm. Guess I'll see about getting my 40,000 points back and fly, unless something gives.

You'll be sitting in the train, not in the station.

That is the exact itemerary I wanted to do, and it looks like it no longer shows as a valid one with the 8.5 hour layover. The reverse trip is still showing up though. Hopefully they just haven't programmed in all the connections yet, or this is yet another missing one we will never see in the system.

They will for sure kick you off upon arrival into SAS, so you'd have a long night at Denny's or need to spring for a hotel room.

I just checked, the TE-SL connection is back as a valid routing, with the 8 hour layover showing. I went ahead and changed to a OKC-FTW-CHI-NOL routing anyway, cancelled my return, and bought plane tickets. Extra day in Pensacola, and still get in 7 hours before we would if we stuck with the train. Actually going to work out a lot better, though I'm having to eat the cost of 3 one way plane tickets.

 

[saxman]

Yeah I hardly think the loss of a decent time in SAS is going to affect anything really. It was 5:40 am and now its 2:45 am. This mean instead of getting up at 3 or 4 in the morning, you just stay up really late and get to the station around 2. I'd much rather do that unless you are use to getting up at that hour. Another big reason for the improvement is to tighten the layover in SAS. Espcially those going eastbound on 422, we're always horrified when they find out that they get into SAS at 10 pm, and have to sit there for 9 hours when all they wanted to do was go to Austin, only 80 miles away.

Amtrak has been working on this for awhile now. I heard UP was giving them a lot of road blocks, as they didn't want to change the schedule again. But sounds like they came to an agreement.

Now if we could get a same day connection to any train in NOL....I suppose that is impossible though.

 

[jis]

So what you're saying is that there will not be saved equipment because it needs to sit in LAX for 6 days? Not good...

It is inherently difficult to get good equipment utilization on tri-weekly service unless the running times work out to be just right, or you are able to create links with other service to utilize the consist in its off time. Unfortunately in case of SSL at the California end there is apparently no choice but to waste resources waiting for the next run.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Got a Robo Call and e-mail today informing me that my Train TE#421 from CHI-AUS on Thurs 5/17 was CANCELLED with NO Alternate Transportation Available! :angry2: Since it is part of a 2 Zone AGR Award Returning from NTD in PHL,, I called and was told that, as was said by the OP, Train #421 would Now be Leaving CHI for LAX on Friday instead of Thursdays !(they had no Info on the other Two Days that #421 Runs CHI-LAX )I was able to Rebook from BOS-CHI on #449 on Thursday 5/17 and CHI-AUS on #421 on Friday 5/18 in Roomettes,(High Buckets, these are Popular Trains1!), will have to spend the Night in Portland, Ride the DownEaster, it's a Dirty Job but Someone has to Do It!!!

 

[Trogdor]

So what you're saying is that there will not be saved equipment because it needs to sit in LAX for 6 days? Not good...

It is inherently difficult to get good equipment utilization on tri-weekly service unless the running times work out to be just right, or you are able to create links with other service to utilize the consist in its off time. Unfortunately in case of SSL at the California end there is apparently no choice but to waste resources waiting for the next run.

It's not a complete waste of resources. The Sunset's consist has been the de facto spare set in Los Angeles, bailing out the Chief or Starlight when needed because the inbounds are horribly late (such as the train that hit the SUV/trailer the other day) or have multiple bad-orders that can't be fixed in time.

 

[trainman74]

Partial credit where credit is due: I did get a robocall informing me of the "cancellation" of 421 on Thursday 6/14, just as Jim Hudson did. Only partial credit because the "no alternate transportation available" messaging is not the best Amtrak could be using.

For various reasons including the schedule change, I decided to cancel my trip entirely -- didn't ask about an overnight in Chicago (had a feeling they wouldn't be able to get the computer to spit that option out anyway).

 

[City of Miami]

After a day's thought, I think it's going to work out well for me. The non-overnight trip to NOL both ways is very attractive and I'm sure I'll be taking The Sunset to Houston and New Orleans much more often now. Previously the options had been the rotten bus service or flying. I'll have those options for TWO trips in April.....too soon for the change. Regarding the dreaded 2:45 am #1 departure, the train is scheduled to arrive at midnight after all and with the same time allowance from Houston on the current schedule often arrives an hour early. So maybe (probably) the attendants will allow sleepers at least to board soon after arrival.

 

[The Davy Crockett]

LAUS needs a more substantial food concession somewhere in its vast interior.

YES!!! IMHO it is the one thing truly lacking at LAUS. ...Well that and maybe a Metropolitan Lounge. hboy:

LAX has a full-service restaurant, a Subway, a Starbucks, Wetzel's Pretzels, and a 24 hour convenience store...not to mention an entire city downtown right outside the doors and/or a couple of stops away on the subway...I think that's sufficient...

Other than the 24 hour 'convenience' micro-mini market, which of the plethora of options you cite will be open if the SL gets in before 5:00? Granted the Starbucks opens at 5:00, but unless you like 'the breakfast of champions' (coffee and a cigarette)its not much of a breakfast place IMHO.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I feel sorry for you in SAS! Having to get an early wake up call to get off! How about SLC eastbound, receiving a 3 am wake up for about a 3:30 am arrival! Or PGH eastbound, receiving a 4:30 am wake up call for a 5 am arrival! And these happen EVERY DAY and have happened FOR YEARS! So poor SAS! You must change!

So the only answer you can muster is that other stations have it slightly worse? A NEC'er with over a dozen trains per day telling folks thousands of miles away (with a dozen trains per week) that their criticisms are irrelevant because another city that neither party lives in has it worse? Seriously, that's the best you could come up with?

I think Houston and Tuscon are enough to justify the changes.

As I understand it San Antonio currently has more O&D than Houston, Tuscon, and Maricopa combined (see below). Over time I can see those three cities picking up whatever is lost at San Antonio, but I do not foresee major improvements in total passenger numbers anytime soon. So long as this route remains less than daily it will probably continue to simply tread water like it has for many years now. If we accept that a major increase in total numbers is unlikely then it becomes clear that the real jewel in this whole change up is another free train set to use elsewhere. I don't see it becoming a regular addition to any one route so much as an emergency backup set. Something Amtrak can use for recovery purposes after the next commercial vehicle "accident" has occurred and taken yet another train out of service.

-Houston 19,637

-Tuscon 23,340

-Maricopa 9,819

-San Antonio 67,168

As to allowing sleeper vs. coach occupancy, I think the argument is more or less the multiple of a coach fare that sleeper passengers pay. There's a certain amount of aggravation that comes from paying lots and lots of money only to have an unpleasant surprise in the middle of the night.

If the amount paid is the only dividing line then why not kick off folks with AGR sleeper tickets who paid even less than coach passengers?

I think we all know that a few weeks or months into this, there are going to be some very sore passengers getting into Los Angeles at earlier than normal at some point who will be offering rather novel curses towards UP for rapid dispatching.

Yes, I'm sure they'll blame anyone but the company they actually bought their tickets from.

Yeah I hardly think the loss of a decent time in SAS is going to affect anything really. It was 5:40 am and now its 2:45 am. This mean instead of getting up at 3 or 4 in the morning, you just stay up really late and get to the station around 2.

A 5:40 departure is still within the realm of what you might get on a very early flight. People may not find that acceptable, but you can still suggest it with a straight face. 2:45AM is in a dead zone when few if any average folks are ready to depart. Rail fans may be just as happy to wait up all night getting hyped about their upcoming journey, but I'm inclined to believe that many non-fans are going to blow it off without a second thought.

 

[afigg]

Amtrak has posted a news release on the SL schedule change with the new #1,#2 schedules. Just a statement from Boardman on the passenger benefits and financial improvements from the change. The financial improvements matter because Amtrak has to show that they are trying to improve the cost recovery for the SL and reduce the subsidy per passenger. Freeing up equipment, reducing crew costs, and hopefully more passengers should do that.

No mention of the agreement with UP, but this is a general public and media news release. The 2 year agreement with UP is left for the railroad industry press and passenger rail interest groups. Also, no mention of any schedule change for the southbound Texas Eagle which was proposed in the SL/TE PIP report. Either that will show up in the spring schedules or Amtrak is holding off on any changes on the TE schedule until prompted by changes on the CHI-STL corridor or Dallas-FTW segment.

On the issue of the 5:35 AM PT arrival in LA, I don't see why Amtrak could not have gone for a 1 hour later departure from either NOL or San Antonio for the westbound #1 and slip the arrival in LA to a more acceptable 6:35 AM. El Paso, Tucson and Maricopa still get good daytime hours. Really not that much difference between a 2:45 AM and a 3:45 AM departure from San Antonio for those in San Antonio. I guess there are timing issues with UP or crew reasons for the 5:35 AM arrival.

 

[The Davy Crockett]

A few more DEEP thoughts: hboy:

For real:

1)Think the new published schedule will drop stations east of NOL, now that the new schedule effectively eliminates this option for at least the next two years?

For fun:

2)If the change brings #1 much closer to its original schedule, is the reason it is called the Sunset Limited is because, with the early arrival into LA, sunset is the time one will need to go to sleep and not be dead tired the next day? :giggle:

 

[fairviewroad]

As I understand it San Antonio currently has more O&D than Houston, Tuscon, and Maricopa combined (see below).

Well of course it does, because SAT has 13 weekly departures (SL east x3, SL west x3, TE north x7) whereas the other three cities only have 6 weekly departures. (SL 3x each way)

A truer apples-to-apples comparison of average passengers per departure still reveals SAT to be the leader, but not by a significant amount, and certainly not more than those other 3 combined.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Regarding the dreaded 2:45 am #1 departure, the train is scheduled to arrive at midnight after all and with the same time allowance from Houston on the current schedule often arrives an hour early. So maybe (probably) the attendants will allow sleepers at least to board soon after arrival.

Does anybody know what the official/practical line is from Amtrak on stuff like this? How soon can sleeper passengers expect to board after arrival for a departure that's still hours away?

Think the new published schedule will drop stations east of NOL, now that the new schedule effectively eliminates this option for at least the next two years?

Seems doubtful to me. After they've already left it "suspended" for this long what's an extra couple years going to change?

If the change brings #1 much closer to its original schedule, is the reason it is called the Sunset Limited is because, with the early arrival into LA, sunset is the time one will need to go to sleep and not be dead tired the next day?

I used to subconsciously think of it as the Sunrise Limited because that's generally what you saw soon after a Westbound departure. Now you can get a similar experience by heading East of SAS, but I really don't have many inherent reasons to travel in that direction unless and until Amtrak can reach Florida without detouring through the North East.

Well of course it does, because SAT has 13 weekly departures (SL east x3, SL west x3, TE north x7) whereas the other three cities only have 6 weekly departures. (SL 3x each way) A truer apples-to-apples comparison of average passengers per departure still reveals SAT to be the leader, but not by a significant amount, and certainly not more than those other 3 combined.

Good points all around.

 

[jis]

A few more DEEP thoughts: hboy:

For real:

1)Think the new published schedule will drop stations east of NOL, now that the new schedule effectively eliminates this option for at least the next two years?

Why do you think it eliminates the possibility anymore than before? Afterall just because the train can be turned overnight does not mean it has to be, should one find useful revenue earning mission for the consist. CSX is not UP so UP's two year window of "no more non-state supported trains" does not apply for NOL - JAX. As a matter of fact I suppose they could run daily service on the BNSF segment out of NOL westwards to their hearts content too, why they would do so I don't know, but they could, without running afoul of any agreement with UP.

 

[The Davy Crockett]

A few more DEEP thoughts: hboy:

For real:

1)Think the new published schedule will drop stations east of NOL, now that the new schedule effectively eliminates this option for at least the next two years?

Why do you think it eliminates the possibility anymore than before? Afterall just because the train can be turned overnight does not mean it has to be, should one find useful revenue earning mission for the consist. CSX is not UP so UP's two year window of "no more non-state supported trains" does not apply for NOL - JAX. As a matter of fact I suppose they could run daily service on the BNSF segment out of NOL westwards to their hearts content too, why they would do so I don't know, but they could, without running afoul of any agreement with UP.

I say this because the current schedule followed the schedule when it ran to Orlando. Does not the new schedule make this impossible without additional train sets?

 

[the_traveler]

I feel sorry for you in SAS! Having to get an early wake up call to get off! How about SLC eastbound, receiving a 3 am wake up for about a 3:30 am arrival! Or PGH eastbound, receiving a 4:30 am wake up call for a 5 am arrival! And these happen EVERY DAY and have happened FOR YEARS! So poor SAS! You must change!

So the only answer you can muster is that other stations have it slightly worse? A NEC'er with over a dozen trains per day telling folks thousands of miles away (with a dozen trains per week) that their criticisms are irrelevant because another city that neither party lives in has it worse? Seriously, that's the best you could come up with?

For your information, while I don't live in either city, I have had experience with both! Once on a trip to SLC - and then having to wait at the airport for over 1 hour for the car rental counter to open! The other in PGH, arriving at 5 AM on the eastbound CL and waiting for over 2 hours for the departure of the Pennsylvanian!

Oh yeah - one more thing: I did wait in SAS from 2 AM to 7 AM from the SL from NOL to the TE northbound!

And as far as your O/D figures for SAS, I can bet that many are passengers who booked #21 connecting to #1 or #2 connecting to #22 - and not booking on #421 or #422! Technically from the accounting standpoint, their trips end in SAS on #21 or #2 and originate in SAS on #1 or #22!

 

[jis]

A few more DEEP thoughts: hboy:

For real:

1)Think the new published schedule will drop stations east of NOL, now that the new schedule effectively eliminates this option for at least the next two years?

Why do you think it eliminates the possibility anymore than before? Afterall just because the train can be turned overnight does not mean it has to be, should one find useful revenue earning mission for the consist. CSX is not UP so UP's two year window of "no more non-state supported trains" does not apply for NOL - JAX. As a matter of fact I suppose they could run daily service on the BNSF segment out of NOL westwards to their hearts content too, why they would do so I don't know, but they could, without running afoul of any agreement with UP.

I say this because the current schedule followed the schedule when it ran to Orlando. Does not the new schedule make this impossible without additional train sets?

Surely you mean that the schedule that goes into effect in May (i.e. the new schedule, or one quite close to it) is the one that was used between NOL and LAX, when the SSL ran to Orlando, as say in the 2001 timetable?

Notwithstanding all the bellyaching that is going on here about SAS, in 2001 SAS timings were 4:11a - 5:25a eastbound and 2:50a - 3:40a westbound.

That has nothing to do with two years anyway. If Amtrak wanted to run a train from NOL to JAX they could pretty much do so tomorrow subject to negotiations with CSX and scrounging together of three consists, or one for bi-weekly service, which is quite independent of anything that happens west of NOL.

 

[afigg]

As I understand it San Antonio currently has more O&D than Houston, Tuscon, and Maricopa combined (see below). Over time I can see those three cities picking up whatever is lost at San Antonio, but I do not foresee major improvements in total passenger numbers anytime soon. So long as this route remains less than daily it will probably continue to simply tread water like it has for many years now. If we accept that a major increase in total numbers is unlikely then it becomes clear that the real jewel in this whole change up is another free train set to use elsewhere. I don't see it becoming a regular addition to any one route so much as an emergency backup set. Something Amtrak can use for recovery purposes after the next commercial vehicle "accident" has occurred and taken yet another train out of service.

The freed up equipment is only part of the benefits to Amtrak from an operational viewpoint. The SL/TE PIP report discusses the inefficient use of personnel with a long layover in NOL. The SL loses significantly more money per passenger than any other Amtrak train. The FY12 projected budget loss is $373 per passenger which puts a big target on it for the cost cutters in Congress. Amtrak has to do something to reduce the losses and improve cost recovery.

You may not like it, but this schedule change may well the best option that Amtrak can achieve within the constraints they have. Picking a fight with UP over daily service in the current political environment may have repercussions. Amtrak does not have the funds to pay to restore service to Phoenix or pay for signal & track upgrades for the SL east corridor for better trip times there. The best long term, and I mean really long term, prospects for Phoenix and SL East service would be state supported corridor service (Phoenix to Tucson, Pensacola to Jacksonville FL for example). Meanwhile, Amtrak can only try to trim the losses. The SL will likely still lose the most money per passenger, but if they can get it so it is not losing more than 2 times per passenger of any LD train, that should improve its survival prospects.

The other choice may be to face the prospects of no SL service at all. Which would make for a very long layover wait in San Antonio.

Looking at the proposed (daily) schedule in the PIP report, that schedule had the SL/TE arriving in LA at 5:05 AM and departing LA at 11:30 PM. So the LAX times have been made a little better. If the westbound SL is running very early, maybe the plan is to have it sit in Ontario or Pomona CA so it does not get in before 5 AM.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

The SL loses significantly more money per passenger than any other Amtrak train. The FY12 projected budget loss is $373 per passenger which puts a big target on it for the cost cutters in Congress. Amtrak has to do something to reduce the losses and improve cost recovery. You may not like it, but this schedule change may well the best option that Amtrak can achieve within the constraints they have. Picking a fight with UP over daily service in the current political environment may have repercussions. Amtrak does not have the funds to pay to restore service to Phoenix or pay for signal & track upgrades for the SL east corridor for better trip times there. The SL will likely still lose the most money per passenger, but if they can get it so it is not losing more than 2 times per passenger of any LD train, that should improve its survival prospects.

Excellent points afigg. Hopefully the upside exceeds and outlives the downside. Better than losing the train entirely anyway. Just need to get a lot more creative in routing I suppose. Either that or start heading East, which really isn't my cup of tea until you hit Florida.

 

[The Davy Crockett]

Surely you mean that the schedule that goes into effect in May (i.e. the new schedule, or one quite close to it) is the one that was used between NOL and LAX, when the SSL ran to Orlando, as say in the 2001 timetable?

That has nothing to do with two years anyway. If Amtrak wanted to run a train from NOL to JAX they could pretty much do so tomorrow subject to negotiations with CSX and scrounging together of three consists, or one for bi-weekly service, which is quite independent of anything that happens west of NOL.

I didn't. I can't recall, or don't know, most old schedules without looking at them, so my mistake. I'll review some of the old schedules in the handy Museum of Railway Timetables.

I suppose with the new Viewliner IIs coming into play, especially with the additional order being talked about, there could be an 'equipment change' in NOL for points east when/if enough equipment becomes available.

 

[haolerider]

As I understand it San Antonio currently has more O&D than Houston, Tuscon, and Maricopa combined (see below). Over time I can see those three cities picking up whatever is lost at San Antonio, but I do not foresee major improvements in total passenger numbers anytime soon. So long as this route remains less than daily it will probably continue to simply tread water like it has for many years now. If we accept that a major increase in total numbers is unlikely then it becomes clear that the real jewel in this whole change up is another free train set to use elsewhere. I don't see it becoming a regular addition to any one route so much as an emergency backup set. Something Amtrak can use for recovery purposes after the next commercial vehicle "accident" has occurred and taken yet another train out of service.

The freed up equipment is only part of the benefits to Amtrak from an operational viewpoint. The SL/TE PIP report discusses the inefficient use of personnel with a long layover in NOL. The SL loses significantly more money per passenger than any other Amtrak train. The FY12 projected budget loss is $373 per passenger which puts a big target on it for the cost cutters in Congress. Amtrak has to do something to reduce the losses and improve cost recovery.

You may not like it, but this schedule change may well the best option that Amtrak can achieve within the constraints they have. Picking a fight with UP over daily service in the current political environment may have repercussions. Amtrak does not have the funds to pay to restore service to Phoenix or pay for signal & track upgrades for the SL east corridor for better trip times there. The best long term, and I mean really long term, prospects for Phoenix and SL East service would be state supported corridor service (Phoenix to Tucson, Pensacola to Jacksonville FL for example). Meanwhile, Amtrak can only try to trim the losses. The SL will likely still lose the most money per passenger, but if they can get it so it is not losing more than 2 times per passenger of any LD train, that should improve its survival prospects.

The other choice may be to face the prospects of no SL service at all. Which would make for a very long layover wait in San Antonio.

Looking at the proposed (daily) schedule in the PIP report, that schedule had the SL/TE arriving in LA at 5:05 AM and departing LA at 11:30 PM. So the LAX times have been made a little better. If the westbound SL is running very early, maybe the plan is to have it sit in Ontario or Pomona CA so it does not get in before 5 AM.

After all is said and done.....negatives and positives.......the changes will allow Amtrak to utilize equipment that has been sitting in NOL under-utilized and save money on crew that have been housed in NOL waiting for their return trip. Early into LA should not be a major problem and as has been said by many people in many cities, "the train has to be somewhere in the middle of the night"......too bad it's your city!

 

[LA guest]

Two points: if you need breakfast and you're at LAUS, after about 6 a.m. or so, you can go across the street to Olvera Street and eat at La Noche Buena, or down the block to Philippe. Or, you can hop the subway and go three stops if you want to go to the Original Pantry or any number of other legendary LA restaurants (the hilariously exotic Clifton's Cafeteria is set to reopen soon). If you're afraid to walk a block, train travel overall might not be your best option.

Regarding the change in hours across Texas, I'd bet dollars to doughnuts (or beigniets) that Amtrak will see traffic from Houston increase by several hundred percent. The new schedule will actually make it a viable option for many business travelers, and more appealing for pleasure travelers.

 

[GAT]

Just my two cents' worth.....Living in San Francisco and loving New Orleans, I just love this new schedule. With all due respect to San Antonians and related connecting passengers, this schedule makes the western USA "Great Circle" route (CS, EB, City of New Orleans, CS) much more attractive.

 

[Train2104]

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobkey=id&blobwhere=1249238713922&blobheader=application%2Fpdf&blobheadername1=Content-disposition&blobheadervalue1=attachment;filename=Amtrak_ATK-12-018_Sunset_schedule_change.pdf

Arriving Train 1 sleeping car passengers at Los Angeles will be invited to remain aboard the train until 6:30 a.m.