Sunset Limited takes 7 hours across Louisiana?

[21135Traveler]

I've been considering taking the Sunset Limited from New Orleans to San Antonio. That's about an 8-hour trip by car, but it takes more than 15 hours on the SL. It takes almost seven hours just to get from New Orleans to Beaumont -- less than 300 miles. Are the tracks in bad shape?

 

[Amtrak Cajun]

No, the problem is that Interstate 10 is more of a straight shot between New Orleans and San Antonio. Also, the train makes way more stops than you have to you in your car *fuel and food notwithstanding*.

The train takes a route that us Louisianians call "the back way" through Schreiver, New Iberia, Lafayette *my stop*, Lake Charles, Beaumont, and then into Houston, and on to San Antonio from there.

On I-10, you can go from New Orleans to Baton Rouge in 2 hours, Lafayette is 1 hour west of Baton Rouge, then Lake Charles is 1 hour west of Lafayette, then you can bypass Beaumont without a glance lol. Houston, well you cant miss Houston, and then on to San Antonio from there.

Also, on the interestate, you dont have to deal with freight interferance from BNSF and UP along the way, that can really delay the SL as it did for my trip Friday, whereas the Interstate normally flows pretty easy.

It really comes down to time. if you have the time to relax and enjoy the ride, then take Amtrak, if you dont, then your best bet is to drive to San Antonio from New Orleans.

Helpful tip, if you are going to drive from New Orleans to San Antonio, avoid driving through Baton Rouge around 4pm, the Interstate gets gridlocked between the 10/12 split, and the Mississippi River bridge.

Just a local's 10 cents on the issue. If you have more questions, feel free to ask.

 

[Anderson]

In addition to the "back way" nature of the SL's route, the schedule has more padding than a quarterback. We got into TUS about half an hour early this morning, for example (and that plus the long hold at TUS basically amounts to a 60-minute pad between Maricopa and Tucson). There's an infamous pad at Houston as well, for example.

The ex-SP line is jammed up with freight...driving from TUS to Phoenix, I passed two 60-car intermodals full of double-stacks before I-10 broke away, and there were several mineral trains on sidings as well. The line is just getting truly jammed up now and desperately needs more capacity.

 

[NE933]

the schedule has more padding than a quarterback. ....... The line is just getting truly jammed up now and desperately needs more capacity.

LOL!!!! Love that quarterback joke.

Let's hope UP puts some fire under their project to double track the rest of the line. I would like to ride it's entirety some day. Especially with the extension to Florida restored!!

 

[battalion51]

IIRC, a portion of the line is under Track Warrant Control which means a maximum speed permitted of 59 MPH, and whenever there is a meet one train is having to get down and hand line the switches for their entrance and exit from the siding.

 

[Trogdor]

IIRC, a portion of the line is under Track Warrant Control which means a maximum speed permitted of 59 MPH, and whenever there is a meet one train is having to get down and hand line the switches for their entrance and exit from the siding.

Unsignalled territory is limited to 59 mph. Track warrant control can do 79, provided the tracks are good for it.

 

[Anderson]

At the risk of a thread derail (too late!), I kind of wish there had been the political will to respond to UP's price demands on the daily Sunset by simply saying "the price is fine but we want extra slots". To be fair, my understanding is that at least in VA, the going price is $100m per daily slot for around 150-200 miles of running (i.e. WAS-LYH or WAS-NFK), and a bit less for shorter runs. In that context, $500m or so for a once-daily LD train out West isn't an outrageous demand; the biggest issue was that it was for less than that. The $1.2bn or so that UP wanted should have been sufficient for a twice-daily operation (or for some options on shorter runs that could have been sublet to states, but for PRIIA), something that I think the current route (with limited time improvements/less padding and a few Thruways) could support...and even if Amtrak couldn't run the train immediately, having some sort of "demand option" that could be exercised with a given amount of notice wouldn't be a bad thing (especially since, again, if AZ or TX wanted to run a train, the slot could arguably be parceled out).

Mind you, the money wasn't there, but the more I learn, the less it seems that UP was being absurd in their demands and rather just being aggressive in their bids for that slot.

 

[railbuck]

The train takes a route that us Louisianians call "the back way" through Schreiver, New Iberia, Lafayette *my stop*, Lake Charles, Beaumont, and then into Houston, and on to San Antonio from there.

Yeah, I can see from the map that it's a bit farther than I-10. It starts out going the "long" way out of New Orleans (on the Long bridge, that is). Speaking of which, Google Street View has a great picture of the SL on the north approach to the bridge.

 

[Texan Eagle]

The train takes a route that us Louisianians call "the back way" through Schreiver, New Iberia, Lafayette *my stop*, Lake Charles, Beaumont, and then into Houston, and on to San Antonio from there.

Yeah, I can see from the map that it's a bit farther than I-10. It starts out going the "long" way out of New Orleans (on the Long bridge, that is). Speaking of which, Google Street View has a great picture of the SL on the north approach to the bridge.

Oh boy! Talk about right timing! Getting a train that runs only once a day, that too only three days a week, on a camera mounted on a moving car sprinting across a city, what are the odds! Great find!

 

[jphjaxfl]

The Sunset Route between New Orleans and Houston is a lot more scenic than I-10. I have ridden the route 2-3 times also the former Gulf Coast Lines, Missouri Pacific Route now UP but partially abandoned, I think. The Sunset route is the more scenic of the two as it goes further south. There use to be a great conductor out of New Orleans on the Sunset that gave an excellant "travelogue" regarding the bayous and scenery along the route. If you want an interesting and relaxing trip, the Sunset route is worth the time.

 

[NE933]

I don't think Amtrak or any of the passenger coalitions had any upper hand in demanding UP to give up multiple slots, even if the money were offered. The reason is simply there are no multiple passenger trains on the route, only Sunset Limited. It must become daily before an argument for more frequencies (Sunset #2, i.e.) can be made. That will likely not happen until more double tracking is done.

On the other hand, the fact that UP is actively talking with operators of the Las Vegas special by whatever name it is called, reveals a willingness to allow passenger services on their lines, if there is capacity and money. Amtrak sometimes screws up capacity by sending out equipment that is not roadworthy, such as engines that fail enroute. If we are to see a day when we can bargain with freight railroads for more passenger trains, we must make sure equipment is well maintained.

 

[Karl1459]

At the risk of a thread derail (too late!), I kind of wish there had been the political will to respond to UP's price demands on the daily Sunset by simply saying "the price is fine but we want extra slots". To be fair, my understanding is that at least in VA, the going price is $100m per daily slot for around 150-200 miles of running (i.e. WAS-LYH or WAS-NFK), and a bit less for shorter runs. In that context, $500m or so for a once-daily LD train out West isn't an outrageous demand; the biggest issue was that it was for less than that. The $1.2bn or so that UP wanted should have been sufficient for a twice-daily operation (or for some options on shorter runs that could have been sublet to states, but for PRIIA), something that I think the current route (with limited time improvements/less padding and a few Thruways) could support...and even if Amtrak couldn't run the train immediately, having some sort of "demand option" that could be exercised with a given amount of notice wouldn't be a bad thing (especially since, again, if AZ or TX wanted to run a train, the slot could arguably be parceled out).
Mind you, the money wasn't there, but the more I learn, the less it seems that UP was being absurd in their demands and rather just being aggressive in their bids for that slot.

As I see it the problem that Amtrak and UP have here is an unforseen consequence of the law that will penalize the host railroad for late trains, not to mention the bad PR that UP gets when trains are habitually late. Simply put the Sunset line is over capacity for freight... and was near gridlock during the economic boom. Allowing even daily service would put the UP at (methinks in their opinion) at an unwarrented risk for those fines and adverse publicity.

If the UP upgrades the line to double track, and that pencils out with excess capacity even in boom times, I expect UP attutide to shift to grudging acceptance or even welcoming daily service (as on time service is GOOD PR... BNSF has enhanced (imho) public relations on the PDX-SEA and PDX/SEA-MSP routes of the Cascades/Builder due to good service by Amtrak.

 

[21135Traveler]

The Sunset Route between New Orleans and Houston is a lot more scenic than I-10. I have ridden the route 2-3 times also the former Gulf Coast Lines, Missouri Pacific Route now UP but partially abandoned, I think. The Sunset route is the more scenic of the two as it goes further south. There use to be a great conductor out of New Orleans on the Sunset that gave an excellant "travelogue" regarding the bayous and scenery along the route. If you want an interesting and relaxing trip, the Sunset route is worth the time.

Thank you! I can spare the extra time of the train over I-10; I was just afraid the slow pace might mean all kinds of annoyances. Sounds as if there might be some -- but if it's more scenic, then it would be worth it.

 

[chakk]

Can't get that eastbound photo of the SL anymore, most likely, as the train now crosses this bridge after dark (or close to it), with the schedule of #2 pushed back 7 hours.

 

[henryj]

The route is just slow. There are numerous speed limits through the small towns along the way. At one time in the 1950's the Sunset was carded at around 7-8 hours for this route between NOL and HOS. Houston to San Antonio is usually four hours even with the fuel stop going into San Antonio. There is a long stop in Houston, particularly eastbound. I have ridden the New Orleans to Houston route a couple of times and it is agonizingly slow. The only time we got up to speed was between Beaumont and Houston. Houston to San Antonio the train usually arrives early. Best bet is to drive or fly SWA. West of San Antonio the train picks up speed.

 

[mwmnp]

Yeah, I can see from the map that it's a bit farther than I-10. It starts out going the "long" way out of New Orleans (on the Long bridge, that is). Speaking of which, Google Street View has a great picture of the SL on the north approach to the bridge.

Oh boy! Talk about right timing! Getting a train that runs only once a day, that too only three days a week, on a camera mounted on a moving car sprinting across a city, what are the odds! Great find!

Although nowhere near as impressive as the view of the Sunset Limited from the bridge, a Google Street View car also happened to be cruising through New Iberia, LA in 2008 as the train was stopped there.

https://maps.google.com/?ll=30.008819,-91.82299&spn=0.001786,0.003484&t=m&layer=c&cbll=30.008849,-91.822952&panoid=UuouNkEyBp_gtb1KoHRTZA&cbp=12,226.99,,0,6.06&z=19

 

[the Other Mike]

I've been on the Sunset when it took the full time to get to SA, however, one Christmas Eve we were so ahead of schedule we got some very long smoke stops lasting at least an hour each because of the lack of freight working Christmas Eve and still ended up in SA as early as the table allowed.

Still, I'd rather be sitting on a train in the hole for an hour than sitting in construction traffic on I-10 any day of the week.

( edit to add )

Besides, it takes several hours just to cross the Huey P Long bridge. Not because of traffic but it takes that long for the food to defrost before they can serve lunch. < insert rimshot here>

 

[Nathanael]

At the risk of a thread derail (too late!), I kind of wish there had been the political will to respond to UP's price demands on the daily Sunset by simply saying "the price is fine but we want extra slots". To be fair, my understanding is that at least in VA, the going price is $100m per daily slot for around 150-200 miles of running (i.e. WAS-LYH or WAS-NFK), and a bit less for shorter runs. In that context, $500m or so for a once-daily LD train out West isn't an outrageous demand; the biggest issue was that it was for less than that. The $1.2bn or so that UP wanted should have been sufficient for a twice-daily operation (or for some options on shorter runs that could have been sublet to states, but for PRIIA), something that I think the current route (with limited time improvements/less padding and a few Thruways) could support...and even if Amtrak couldn't run the train immediately, having some sort of "demand option" that could be exercised with a given amount of notice wouldn't be a bad thing (especially since, again, if AZ or TX wanted to run a train, the slot could arguably be parceled out).
Mind you, the money wasn't there, but the more I learn, the less it seems that UP was being absurd in their demands and rather just being aggressive in their bids for that slot.

1892 miles, so call it 9-12 times as long as a Virginia route. If a Virginia route costs $100 million, that should cost 900 million - 1.2 billion for a daily train *if there wasn't already a train running*. However, the Sunset Limited is already running three days a week, so the "going rate" should be 4/7 of that, $510 million to $690 million. Furthermore, from a dispatching point of view, going from daily to more-than-daily is significantly more disruptive than going from three-a-week to daily. Conclusion: UP was asking for more than twice what a reasonable price would be.

 

[jis]

But also remember the sucttlebutt that it was an Amtrak person that screwed up the negotiations by calling out expeletives in a meeting and stomping out, before all that happened Good theatrics, but bad for passenger rail and the Sunset.

 

[Trogdor]

But also remember the sucttlebutt that it was an Amtrak person that screwed up the negotiations by calling out expeletives in a meeting and stomping out, before all that happened Good theatrics, but bad for passenger rail and the Sunset.

Personally knowing many of the people in these meetings, let's just say without any actual evidence, I highly doubt that actually happened. I've worked with most of the folks involved for the past few years, and this is the first time I'd ever heard that story, from any source. I call BS.

 

[jis]

OK My lips are sealed and I ain't sayin' anything more except to note that said person does not work for Amtrak anymore. Of course all this should be treated as hearsay since I cannot divulge the source. That's why I said scuttlebutt. Hence if one feels it is BS that is fine too.

 

[Trogdor]

Knowing how the industry works, and knowing the folks involved, if a story like that were true, it wouldn't take three years for it to suddenly become known.

 

[George Harris]

As I see it the problem that Amtrak and UP have here is an unforseen consequence of the law that will penalize the host railroad for late trains, not to mention the bad PR that UP gets when trains are habitually late. Simply put the Sunset line is over capacity for freight... and was near gridlock during the economic boom. Allowing even daily service would put the UP at (methinks in their opinion) at an unwarrented risk for those fines and adverse publicity.
If the UP upgrades the line to double track, and that pencils out with excess capacity even in boom times, I expect UP attutide to shift to grudging acceptance or even welcoming daily service (as on time service is GOOD PR... BNSF has enhanced (imho) public relations on the PDX-SEA and PDX/SEA-MSP routes of the Cascades/Builder due to good service by Amtrak.

The high freight volume portion is primarily Sierra Blanca TX and west. UP has been concentrating on adding a second main through this distance fro El Paso west. I do not know the current status, but it is in place as far west as Tucson. Between Iowa Jct LA (about 10 miles east of Lake Charles) and San Antonio traffic is also fairly heavy, but by using the former SP and former MP both, is effectively double track between Beaumont and Houston, and to some extent between Beaumont and Iowa Jct - Kinder. East of Iowa Jct, the line is now BNSF's as part of the conditions of the takeover of SP by UP. Between San Antonio and Sierra Blanca traffic is fairly light.

So far as I know the MoPac's former Gulf Coast Lines main between Beaumont and Baton Rouge via Eunice and Opelousas is all still in place, except that the diamond with the ex T&P at Livonia has been removed. I think the line between Livonia and the west end of the bridge at Baton Rouge has been downgraded if not in part removed.