Which existing LD route best for daily double?

[Swadian Hardcore]

I think the LSL needs a double before other LDs. Especially considering the BL was pretty popular when it ran.

Considering how crowded my favorite train the TE has become I would to see more service along that route.

But the TE is obly seven cars long. Surely it could get some more cars before going double.

 

[George Harris]

Item 1 on the daily double to me would seem to be a second, at least on the Lake Shorer Limited Route. It nees soemthing that gives a start of business day arrival on each end, a second frequency that would be a mid to late afternood dparture on each end, and preferably a third that would have a late evening departure on each end.

Another which would be something of a one and one-half instead of a double would be to extend the down in the moring back in the evening Chicago to Carbondale train to Memphis which would give a decent daytime frequency on that route. There was always a good demand for that sort of time.

If we want a second Texas train, make it a split off the City of New Orleans at Memphis. That would give a late evening deaprture early morning arrival at Chicago for a Texas train. The only part not currently having passenger service would be the UP line between Memphis and Balk Knob, Arkansas, 90 miles. It is currently in good condition. MoPac ran Memphis to Little Rock in just over 3 hours into the early 1960's.

Another premier candidate would be New York to Atlanta. It needs a early morning arrival northbound in New York and a post business day departure that would give an early morning arrival southbound in Cbarlotte NC.

 

[johnny.menhennet]

The best candidate for a twice daily service would have to be the fact that it would provide the greatest good for the most amount of people, or utilitarianism. I think that the current ridership trends plus the boom in the Bakken field necessitates a second frequency. An option for this that I went for was to have one of the trains run to Seattle, and the other to Portland. On the Portland train - I had it closely mimic the current calling times in order to keep the Coast Starlight connections in both directions. Also having the trains not separate and attach saves time in Spokane. The Seattle run is also timed fairly strategically as well. Going east, it arrives Everett in the morning with a little time to spare so to allow a connection from the morning southbound Vancouver run, assuming that time can be shaved off the schedule north of Bellingham if the US Immigration people can preclearing everyone in Vancouver. It then provides daylight service to Spokane, and allows people to arrive in Whitefish at 11PM so that a coach ride would be tolerable. It hits the Bakken oil field in the late morning, and then allows a daytime run from those ND cities to the Twin Cities. It then provides an overnight frequency Twin Cities to Chicago. Same stuff is in effect in the other direction. There is a basic 45 minute pad at each endpoint here. The equipment, to be utilized more effectively, should rotate between the sets. The Seattle set would arrive Chicago at 7:15am, then leave for Portland at 3:15pm. The Portland section would arrive at 2:45pm, and leave for Seattle that night at 11:15 pm. This allows for better utilization while still having plenty of time at each end to be serviced. I assume a consist at that point would be something like P42DC, P42DC, Viewliner bagdorm, Superliner Transdorm, Sup Sleeper, Sup Sleeper, Sup Diner, Sup SSL, Sup Coach, Sup Coach, Sup Coach, and then maybe a fourth coach depending on the time of the year. Seems pretty good to me

9:00A Seattle, WA 5:30P

5:00P Portland, OR 9:00A

5:00P 12:30A Spokane, WA 12:45A 8:45A

11:15P 6:45A Whitefish, MT 8:30P 4:30A

4:45A 12:15P Havre, MT 3:00P 11:00P

10:00A 5:30P Williston, ND 11:45A 7:45P

12:15P 7:45P Minot, ND 9:45A 5:45P

4:45P 12:15A Fargo, ND 5:00A 1:00P

10:45P 6:15A St. Paul, MN 11:15P 7:15A

4:45A 12:15P Milwaukee, WI 5:00P 1:00A

7:15A 2:45P Chicago, IL 3:15P 11:15P

Edit: I'm sorry that the schedule is formatted funny. When on the composition and edit screens, it appears spaced how I planned, but on the post, it is all centered to the left. Do the best you can with it.

 

[NW cannonball]

The best candidate for a twice daily service would have to be the fact that it would provide the greatest good for the most amount of people, or utilitarianism. I think that the current ridership trends plus the boom in the Bakken field necessitates a second frequency. An option for this that I went for was to have one of the trains run to Seattle, and the other to Portland. On the Portland train - I had it closely mimic the current calling times in order to keep the Coast Starlight connections in both directions. Also having the trains not separate and attach saves time in Spokane. The Seattle run is also timed fairly strategically as well. Going east, it arrives Everett in the morning with a little time to spare so to allow a connection from the morning southbound Vancouver run, assuming that time can be shaved off the schedule north of Bellingham if the US Immigration people can preclearing everyone in Vancouver. It then provides daylight service to Spokane, and allows people to arrive in Whitefish at 11PM so that a coach ride would be tolerable. It hits the Bakken oil field in the late morning, and then allows a daytime run from those ND cities to the Twin Cities. It then provides an overnight frequency Twin Cities to Chicago. Same stuff is in effect in the other direction. There is a basic 45 minute pad at each endpoint here. The equipment, to be utilized more effectively, should rotate between the sets. The Seattle set would arrive Chicago at 7:15am, then leave for Portland at 3:15pm. The Portland section would arrive at 2:45pm, and leave for Seattle that night at 11:15 pm. This allows for better utilization while still having plenty of time at each end to be serviced. I assume a consist at that point would be something like P42DC, P42DC, Viewliner bagdorm, Superliner Transdorm, Sup Sleeper, Sup Sleeper, Sup Diner, Sup SSL, Sup Coach, Sup Coach, Sup Coach, and then maybe a fourth coach depending on the time of the year. Seems pretty good to me

9:00A Seattle, WA 5:30P

5:00P Portland, OR 9:00A

5:00P 12:30A Spokane, WA 12:45A 8:45A

11:15P 6:45A Whitefish, MT 8:30P 4:30A

4:45A 12:15P Havre, MT 3:00P 11:00P

10:00A 5:30P Williston, ND 11:45A 7:45P

12:15P 7:45P Minot, ND 9:45A 5:45P

4:45P 12:15A Fargo, ND 5:00A 1:00P

10:45P 6:15A St. Paul, MN 11:15P 7:15A

4:45A 12:15P Milwaukee, WI 5:00P 1:00A

7:15A 2:45P Chicago, IL 3:15P 11:15P

Edit: I'm sorry that the schedule is formatted funny. When on the composition and edit screens, it appears spaced how I planned, but on the post, it is all centered to the left. Do the best you can with it.

For me, more service on the eastern end of the EB run from MSP to CHI via MKE or possibly Madison would help and might have enough pax to be viable running on the suggested schedule. There's plenty MKE - CHI service available - Madison-CHI more direct has been wanted for a long time and been hashed over again and again and not getting anywhere as far as I can see.

If there's some way to serve SD on the way to southern MT on a new CHI-SPK route it would help offload some of the traffic to Williston and surrounding. Unfortunately the old CMSPP has been cut off at MSP and at Snoqualmie so that's not easily possible. Anyway the old CMSPP was laid with less than current light-rail standard(115lb/yard) rail anyhow - couldn't work for fast trains today - the ROW is there part way but would take a lot of work. But the Snoque (now a rail-trail) was amazing -- unfortunately now on the west end there's only the Stevens Pass (at capacity) or the Stampede Pass.

 

[cirdan]

By the way, just a thought, but it seems possible that a "daily double" or a second section of a train would be covered under PRIIA, given that the system's definition was the routes, not the trains or frequencies.

That unfortunately does not mean that the host railroad would accept them as such at the current trackage rates. Usually that is a bigger problem than what PRIIA or something says. And such things can be litigated until kingdom comes.

On busy freight lines I can see that the host railroads don't want more Amtrak service.

But are all Amtrak LD trains on busy tracks? I don't know, just asking.

 

[gswager]

I think Coast Starlight will most likely to get double schedule- short distance train, Coast Daylight in a near future. However, it is not Amtrak's choice, but California's. The route would be LAX - San Fransisco via San Jose. Two factors- availability of cars & locomotives and funds.

 

[jis]

On busy freight lines I can see that the host railroads don't want more Amtrak service.

But are all Amtrak LD trains on busy tracks? I don't know, just asking.

Not all, but most run on heavy freight traffic routes.

 

[Ryan]

Edit: I'm sorry that the schedule is formatted funny. When on the composition and edit screens, it appears spaced how I planned, but on the post, it is all centered to the left. Do the best you can with it.

You can use the [ code ] tag (without the spaces) to force a legible monospaced font.

 

[afigg]

I think Coast Starlight will most likely to get double schedule- short distance train, Coast Daylight in a near future. However, it is not Amtrak's choice, but California's. The route would be LAX - San Fransisco via San Jose. Two factors- availability of cars & locomotives and funds.

Availability of equipment for a Coast Starlight can and will likely be addressed by CA exercising options on their portion (42) of the corridor bi-level car order. And for that matter, on the combined buy of Next Gen diesel locomotives. Caltrans has the funding available for track upgrades and to buy because of the passage of the CA HSR authorization bill. The hold-up, according to a recent news article, is Union Pacific. UP is asking for more track and capacity upgrades than CA and their analysts thinks are justified. They are running the traffic analysis software and arguing over what is needed for an additional daily train. But this is the sort of back and forth in negotiations that will likely end in an agreement. Odds of a Coast Starlight service in 3-4 years are pretty good.

However, this dispute shows the problem Amtrak would have on many routes if they wanted to run an additional "doubled up" LD train. The freight railroad can say, ok, if you want to do that, we need $250 million in additional bypass tracks, cross-over tracks, double tracks, bridge repair. Puts a kibosh on that idea rather quickly.

 

[George Harris]

I think Coast Starlight will most likely to get double schedule- short distance train, Coast Daylight in a near future. However, it is not Amtrak's choice, but California's. The route would be LAX - San Fransisco via San Jose. Two factors- availability of cars & locomotives and funds.

One that did fairly good while it ran several years back was the the state supported overnight Los Angeles to SF area, maybe on to Sacramento, I just don't remember which on the north end. A Restoration of that one would seem like a good idea. That one could also have San Francisco as teh north end with a connection at San Jose to the East Bay and on to Sacramento.

 

[zephyr17]

I think Coast Starlight will most likely to get double schedule- short distance train, Coast Daylight in a near future. However, it is not Amtrak's choice, but California's. The route would be LAX - San Fransisco via San Jose. Two factors- availability of cars & locomotives and funds.

One that did fairly good while it ran several years back was the the state supported overnight Los Angeles to SF area, maybe on to Sacramento, I just don't remember which on the north end. A Restoration of that one would seem like a good idea. That one could also have San Francisco as teh north end with a connection at San Jose to the East Bay and on to Sacramento.

It was the "Spirit of California" otherwise known as the "Medfly(er)". It went from LA to Sacramento via the East Bay. It was more than several years back, it ran in the early 80s and was killed in 1983 after the election of George Deukmejian when they pulled state support. I don't know that it did that well. I rode it once, it was Amfleets and a 10-6.

 

[George Harris]

I think Coast Starlight will most likely to get double schedule- short distance train, Coast Daylight in a near future. However, it is not Amtrak's choice, but California's. The route would be LAX - San Fransisco via San Jose. Two factors- availability of cars & locomotives and funds.

One that did fairly good while it ran several years back was the the state supported overnight Los Angeles to SF area, maybe on to Sacramento, I just don't remember which on the north end. A Restoration of that one would seem like a good idea. That one could also have San Francisco as teh north end with a connection at San Jose to the East Bay and on to Sacramento.

It was the "Spirit of California" otherwise known as the "Medfly(er)". It went from LA to Sacramento via the East Bay. It was more than several years back, it ran in the early 80s and was killed in 1983 after the election of George Deukmejian when they pulled state support. I don't know that it did that well. I rode it once, it was Amfleets and a 10-6.

What do you mean the early 1980's is more than several years back?

I had heard that it had 2 or 3 sleepers, but then in the early 1980's Louisiana and Texas was about as far west as I got, and with small kids a lot of other interests were kinda neglected.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Item 1 on the daily double to me would seem to be a second, at least on the Lake Shorer Limited Route. It nees soemthing that gives a start of business day arrival on each end, a second frequency that would be a mid to late afternood dparture on each end, and preferably a third that would have a late evening departure on each end.

Another which would be something of a one and one-half instead of a double would be to extend the down in the moring back in the evening Chicago to Carbondale train to Memphis which would give a decent daytime frequency on that route. There was always a good demand for that sort of time.

If we want a second Texas train, make it a split off the City of New Orleans at Memphis. That would give a late evening deaprture early morning arrival at Chicago for a Texas train. The only part not currently having passenger service would be the UP line between Memphis and Balk Knob, Arkansas, 90 miles. It is currently in good condition. MoPac ran Memphis to Little Rock in just over 3 hours into the early 1960's.

Another premier candidate would be New York to Atlanta. It needs a early morning arrival northbound in New York and a post business day departure that would give an early morning arrival southbound in Cbarlotte NC.

1. I agree. The NYP-CHI market nedds more trains than it currently has.

2. I also agree that a CHI-MEM day train would be great.

3. I disagree about the second Texas train. I think a second Texas train should be the TC or TS, not going through MEM. If you want MEM-LRK I think it should run all the way to OKC as a day train.

4. I think NYP-ATL needs addditional service but the current situation in ATL is not good.

 

[George Harris]

If you want MEM-LRK I think it should run all the way to OKC as a day train.

Unfortunately the direct line, Rock Island's Chocktaw Route is no longer there. Other than random segments here and there, it has been abandoned. Have no idea what exists as a reasonable alterrnative, but I think the answer is nothing that could give a reasonable run time.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

If you want MEM-LRK I think it should run all the way to OKC as a day train.

Unfortunately the direct line, Rock Island's Chocktaw Route is no longer there. Other than random segments here and there, it has been abandoned. Have no idea what exists as a reasonable alterrnative, but I think the answer is nothing that could give a reasonable run time.

Ooops, I thought it still existed all the way to Enid. Looks like you can still detour through Muskogee and Tulsa, though, but I've never been a fan of detours.

 

[johnny.menhennet]

If you want MEM-LRK I think it should run all the way to OKC as a day train.

Unfortunately the direct line, Rock Island's Chocktaw Route is no longer there. Other than random segments here and there, it has been abandoned. Have no idea what exists as a reasonable alterrnative, but I think the answer is nothing that could give a reasonable run time.

Ooops, I thought it still existed all the way to Enid. Looks like you can still detour through Muskogee and Tulsa, though, but I've never been a fan of detours.

First, Choctaw Route would not have gone through Enid - it went through El Reno. Second, if you are talking about a MEM-OKC day train, it would have no reason to go to Enid anyway, because it is northwest of and further than OKC.

 

[zephyr17]

I think Coast Starlight will most likely to get double schedule- short distance train, Coast Daylight in a near future. However, it is not Amtrak's choice, but California's. The route would be LAX - San Fransisco via San Jose. Two factors- availability of cars & locomotives and funds.

One that did fairly good while it ran several years back was the the state supported overnight Los Angeles to SF area, maybe on to Sacramento, I just don't remember which on the north end. A Restoration of that one would seem like a good idea. That one could also have San Francisco as teh north end with a connection at San Jose to the East Bay and on to Sacramento.

It was the "Spirit of California" otherwise known as the "Medfly(er)". It went from LA to Sacramento via the East Bay. It was more than several years back, it ran in the early 80s and was killed in 1983 after the election of George Deukmejian when they pulled state support. I don't know that it did that well. I rode it once, it was Amfleets and a 10-6.

What do you mean the early 1980's is more than several years back?

I had heard that it had 2 or 3 sleepers, but then in the early 1980's Louisiana and Texas was about as far west as I got, and with small kids a lot of other interests were kinda neglected.

Wasn't following consists closely. I know the one time I rode it (LA-Oakland) it only had the one 10-6.

 

[zephyr17]

By the way, just a thought, but it seems possible that a "daily double" or a second section of a train would be covered under PRIIA, given that the system's definition was the routes, not the trains or frequencies.

That unfortunately does not mean that the host railroad would accept them as such at the current trackage rates. Usually that is a bigger problem than what PRIIA or something says. And such things can be litigated until kingdom comes.

On busy freight lines I can see that the host railroads don't want more Amtrak service.

But are all Amtrak LD trains on busy tracks? I don't know, just asking.

No, not all Amtrak LDs are on busy tracks. Some of the Western LDs that use more lightly used "secondary" mainlines:

Coast Starlight UP Coast Line LA - Oakland (technically, the line from Moorpark to LA is Metrolink/SCRRA owned).

Empire Builder Minot-Fargo (approximately)

Southwest Chief Dalies (jct with Transcon south of Albuquerque)- Newton

Also, you could consider the CZ over the former D&RGW from Denver to Salt Lake to be a secondary main, and also the former WP between Salt Lake and Wells, NV ("Alazon").

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

If you want MEM-LRK I think it should run all the way to OKC as a day train.

Unfortunately the direct line, Rock Island's Chocktaw Route is no longer there. Other than random segments here and there, it has been abandoned. Have no idea what exists as a reasonable alterrnative, but I think the answer is nothing that could give a reasonable run time.

Ooops, I thought it still existed all the way to Enid. Looks like you can still detour through Muskogee and Tulsa, though, but I've never been a fan of detours.

First, Choctaw Route would not have gone through Enid - it went through El Reno. Second, if you are talking about a MEM-OKC day train, it would have no reason to go to Enid anyway, because it is northwest of and further than OKC.

Argh! Total mess-up on my part! I meant Erick when I said Enid! I agree that the MEM-OKC day train would have no reason to go through Enid or Erick. What I meant was that I thought the Choctaw Route still exists all the way MEM-LRK-OKC-Erick, only without the section Erick-Tucumcari. Apparently there's another missing section in Oklahoma and a detour through Musjogee and Tulsa would be required. Not good but not that bad either.

Now that was what I meant. Very sorry for the confusion.

 

[Nathanael]

The only way I know of to fix this situation is to bring more parties to the table,

Look up "Duverger's Law" in Wikipedia and educate yourself about it.

Thanks for the suggestion. I did not intend to imply we can create a proportional result out of plurality contest. I do acknowledge that there are many fundamental factors (both direct and indirect) working against the sustainable creation of a third party that will need to be removed or modified before we can expect other parties to become and remain viable under our current system. However, I see our current system as being dysfunctional enough to make major changes worth the effort and risk at this point.

Awesome! I hope knowing about the structural mathematical element helps with pushing for reform which will actually stick. I think a lot of attempts at reform have foundered due *not* recognizing what the structural obstacles are.

 

[Nathanael]

When Amtrak started the connection that the Boston section of the LSL uses to depart Albany had been deliberately abandoned by Penn Central or Conrail to prevent the return of Albany-Boston passenger train operations. Many people fought very hard to get the connection resurrected. We would not want to do anything like abandon train service to have the line torn up again. The states of New York and Massachusetts should really start some state funded trains as an alternative to the LSL.

And the line is now partly owned by Amtrak (Post Road Branch), partly owned by the state of Massachusetts (Worcester to Boston), partly owned by a locality (Springfield station), and gaining better north-south connections with Connecticut's Springfield Line improvements and the Vermonter reroute and improvements... the B&A route is actually ripe for *improvement* in service.

 

[Shawn Ryu]

Simple question: Which existing LD route would be best for going to daily double schedule?

From a supply-and-demand POV? Lake Shore Limited. The timing of the second frequency could be debated; serving Toledo and Cleveland in the daytime would certainly have an effect.

But that would mean serving NYP and CHI late at night?

Then it wouldnt make much sense, NYP and CHI convenient timing would be far more beneficial for the ridership than CLE day time service.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Simple question: Which existing LD route would be best for going to daily double schedule?

From a supply-and-demand POV? Lake Shore Limited. The timing of the second frequency could be debated; serving Toledo and Cleveland in the daytime would certainly have an effect.

But that would mean serving NYP and CHI late at night?

Then it wouldnt make much sense, NYP and CHI convenient timing would be far more beneficial for the ridership than CLE day time service.

TOL and CLE would be much better served with a CHI-CLE day train. Unfortunately Ohio will not support such a service.