Which train(s) would you cut?

[Tracktwentynine]

Fred Frailey makes a good case over at Trains that when the axe falls, the long-distance routes are likely to see cuts. He shows that it doesn't make sense for Amtrak to cut the NEC and the state-supported/corridor services. Personally, I think we should be expanding service, not cutting it. But I think Fred's analysis is a good one, and I think Amtrak will probably get less money than they need (if not this year, then soon).

If the federal funding situation does not improve, I think we could be at risk of losing at least one of the long-distance routes. Therefore, I think it would be interesting to discuss what you would cut if you had to cut one train. I'm not asking what you think is most likely to actually be cut, but for what you would do if you had to cut one.

So the question for discussion is: Which route(s) would you cut, and why?

I'm also interested in what you would do with the equipment that would then be free for reassignment. Would you somehow preserve service on parts of the line? How?

The 15 LD routes are listed below in order of their financial performance according to the PRIIA reports (#1 is best, #15 is worst):

1. Auto Train
2. Empire Builder
3. Southwest Chief
4. City of New Orleans
5. Coast Starlight
6. Silver Meteor
7. Crescent
8. Palmetto
9. Lake Shore Limited
10. Silver Star
11. Capitol Limited
12. California Zephyr
13. Texas Eagle
14. Cardinal
15. Sunset Limited

In case you choose to discuss what you'd do with the spare equipment, I've included this information below:

Equipment Required - Note: this information deduced from Donctor's frequent updates to the line numbers thread. It does not include the spares necessary for each train.

[Format]: Train Name: # sets needed to operate | 1 baggage per train (total for all sets) | 2 sleepers (4 total) | etc.

Superliner trains:

1. Auto Train: 2 sets | 1 TransDorm (2 total) | 6 sleepers (12) | 3 diners (6) | 2 lounges (4) | 4 coaches (8)
2. City of New Orleans / Texas Eagle: *The CONO and TE share the same consists, see below:
   .....[NOL-CHI-SAS] 6 sets | 1 TransDorm (6 total) | 1 diner (6) | 1 lounge (6) | 2 coaches (12) | + 1 coach [CHI-STL] (2 total)
   .....[NOL-CHI-SAS-LAX] 9 sets | 1 sleeper (9) | 1 coach (9)
3. California Zephyr: 6 sets | 1 baggage (6 total) | 1 TransDorm (6) | 2 sleepers (15*) | 1 diner (6) | 1 lounge (6) | 3 coaches (18) | + *1 sleeper [CHI-DEN] (3 total)
4. Capitol Limited: 3 sets | 1 baggage (3 total) | 1 TransDorm (3) | 2 sleepers (6) | 1 diner (3) | 1 lounge (3) | 3 coaches (9)
5. Coast Starlight: 4 sets | 1 baggage (4 total) | 1 TransDorm (4) | 3 sleepers (12) | 1 diner (4) | 1 lounge (4) | 1 PPC (4) | 4 coaches (16)
6. Empire Builder: 5 sets | 1 baggage (5 total) | 1 TransDorm (5) | 3 sleepers (15) | 1 diner (5) | 1 lounge (5) | 4 coaches (20) | + 1 coaches [CHI-MSP] (2 total)
7. Southwest Chief: 5 sets | 1 baggage (5 total) | 1 TransDorm (5) | 2 sleepers (10) | 1 diner (5) | 1 lounge (5) | 3 coaches (15)
8. Sunset Limited*: 4 sets | 1 baggage (4 total) | 1 TransDorm (4) | 1 sleeper (4) | 1 diner (4) | 1 lounge (4) | 2 coaches (8)
   *The above count does not include the TE through cars.
9. Texas Eagle: - See City of New Orleans above.
   

Single-level trains:

1. Cardinal: 2 sets | 1 baggage (2 total) | 1 sleeper (2) | 1 lounge (2) | 3 coaches (6) | + 2 coaches [CHI-IND] (2 total)
2. Crescent: 4 sets | 1 baggage (4 total) | 2 sleepers (8) | 1 diner (4) | 1 lounge (4) | 4 coaches (16)
3. Lake Shore Limited: 3 sets | 2 baggage (6 total) | 3 sleepers (9) | 1 diner (3) | 1 lounge (3) | 6 coaches (12)
4. Palmetto: 2 sets | 1 baggage (2 total) | 1 lounge (2) | 4 coaches (8)
5. Silver Meteor: 4 sets | 1 baggage (4 total) | 3 sleepers (12) | 1 diner (4) | 1 lounge (4) | 4 coaches (16)
6. Silver Star: 4 sets | 1 baggage (4 total) | 2 sleepers (8) | 1 diner (4) | 1 lounge (4) | 4 coaches (16)

 

[Bob Dylan]

Have to be the Sunset Ltd. that goes! That would allow Amtrak to make the TE a daily Train from CHI-LAX! The planned stub Train from SAS-NOL could use a CCC ( Amtrak has extras)and Coaches, the Diners on the Sunset could go on the Eagle freeing up more CCCs so the PDX Section of the EB can have the planned Food Service Car between PDX and SPK! The "extra" Superliner Sleepers, including the Transdorms, could be added to the Daily Eagle resulting in more revenue on this route! UP needs a good swift kick in the rear, these Trains should already be running!

As to the Silver Trains, Amtrak should take a look at combining them into a Longer Train, except for the Tampa bypass they pretty much duplicate service and times to MIA. Adding a couple of Sleepers, a couple of Coaches and a Diner to the Meteor (sort of an AutoTrain without Autos! :lol: ) would free up cars for the Cardinal which really needs them in addition to going to a daily Schedule between CHI and WAS, not NYP!!! (Diasagree with Alan B on this, the Card is Always late to NYP, plenty of Regionals and Acelas to pick up the slack!!)

 

[Ryan]

Even if the daily service can't happen (and with no money, I don't see it happening), the Sunset Limited is first against the wall. Run the TE CHI-LAX 3x a week, and let it terminate halfway the rest of the time.

As much as I would hate to see it go, the Card could go as well. You can already get WAS-CHI faster on the Cap and NYP-CHI on the LSL. Through cars on the Pennsy enhance east coast to CHI service, as well.

That said, I disagree with the premise of the thread, and wager a frosty beverage of the recipients choice that every train running today will still be running on 3 January 2013 when the 113th Congress takes the reigns.

 

[henryj]

I will give you my 2 cents worth which no one will agree with. There are not enough trains now so I wouldn't cut anything, I would do some layoffs and cost cutting in the high salary management levels and get within my budget. Having said that, rather than eliminate LD trains which would alienate the states that get only LD Service, I would start by totally restructuring Amtrak. Spin off the NEC as a separate entity. Set up separate business units to operate western LD train, eastern LD trains and state supported trains. If that doesn't cut it then start looking at making the western LD trains three times a week as Via does the Canadian. That would free up some LD equipment, reduce staff requirements and concentrate more passengers on fewer trains. The only western train I would keep daily is the Southwest Chief. In the east, the LSL and the Capitol should only require two sets of equipment, not three. Change the schedules appropriately. Something is wrong with the Silver Service if it continues to hemorage money as it is. It needs better marketing or restructuring of equipment and schedules. I would add a restored Pioneer or City of Portland with the spin off equipment from going three times a week and run it opposite the EB. And thats just for starters. All these LD trains are just cruise trains. Hardly anyone really uses them for business transportation, so start thinking and marketing them as such. Next I would start looking at new short distance markets that have potential such as the Texas 'triangle' and work with the states to get these running. Amtrak needs to get out of the 'bunker' mentality and start innovating and marketing. Obviously they are not going to be able to continue feeding at the trough as they have been.

 

[Trogdor]

I will give you my 2 cents worth which no one will agree with. There are not enough trains now so I wouldn't cut anything, I would do some layoffs and cost cutting in the high salary management levels and get within my budget. Having said that, rather than eliminate LD trains which would alienate the states that get only LD Service, I would start by totally restructuring Amtrak.

This is already being done.

Spin off the NEC as a separate entity. Set up separate business units to operate western LD train, eastern LD trains and state supported trains.

No good argument for making "Eastern LDs" and "Western LDs" into separate groups. Amtrak is planning to implement a Long-Distance Trains Business Unit which will be responsible for all LDs.

If that doesn't cut it then start looking at making the western LD trains three times a week as Via does the Canadian.

Amtrak tried that 20 years ago, and wound up losing more money. 3x/week service is horribly inefficient on all counts: Equipment rotation, crew scheduling, station staffing, etc. Plus, the issue of passengers trying to make connections (which is a significant portion of LD revenues) gets worse when the connections don't run on the right days. Then, misconnects become extrememly more expensive when your next departure isn't for two or three days instead of the next day.

If you don't guarantee the connections, then you lose tons of revenue.

Your paragraph might as well have said: "start looking at discontinuing the entire LD network."

The VIA Canadian is a completely different animal. Plus, I haven't found its financial info online anywhere, so I don't know if that train even does better from a cost-recovery perspective than Amtrak's LDs do. I know VIA as a whole does worse than Amtrak on cost recovery, so if the problem is financial performance, the VIA model is not one to emulate.

That would free up some LD equipment, reduce staff requirements and concentrate more passengers on fewer trains.

As I mentioned, that doesn't always work as easily as you think. Plus, if trains are full during peak season now, how are you going to put more passengers on them?

In the east, the LSL and the Capitol should only require two sets of equipment, not three. Change the schedules appropriately.

Amtrak already studied running the Capitol Limited with two sets. The necessary schedule changes would lose more in revenue than the savings from freeing up another set (believe it or not, some people who ride Amtrak do actually care about when the train runs). There's no way to get the Lake Shore down to two sets without some major changes and speed improvements, unless you break the connections with other trains (and there goes your revenue).

Something is wrong with the Silver Service if it continues to hemorage money as it is. It needs better marketing or restructuring of equipment and schedules.

That's what the PRIIA plans are supposed to do.

I would add a restored Pioneer or City of Portland with the spin off equipment from going three times a week and run it opposite the EB.

In other words, do exactly what Amtrak tried to do in the 1990s, which failed to help the financial performance of the LD trains and actually cost Amtrak tons more money and lost passengers. That's why those trains were eventually discontinued to make the other trains daily.

I really suggest you study Amtrak's history (particularly the last 15-20 years), as you'll see that all this has been tried and none of it worked.

All these LD trains are just cruise trains. Hardly anyone really uses them for business transportation, so start thinking and marketing them as such.

1) They are not cruise trains.

2) "Business transportation" is not the only type of transportation out there.

3) Marketing the trains as cruise trains is equivalent to saying "let's discontinue the LD network." Congress will not subsidize land cruises.

Next I would start looking at new short distance markets that have potential such as the Texas 'triangle' and work with the states to get these running. Amtrak needs to get out of the 'bunker' mentality and start innovating and marketing. Obviously they are not going to be able to continue feeding at the trough as they have been.

I guess you've been asleep the last few years as states across the nation have been applying for federal grants to study and implement new service, and others (such as North Carolina and Virginia) have already been doing so, in cooperation with Amtrak.

Part of it is that the states have to be interested in running the service.

 

[jis]

Boy! Am I glad Henryj does not come anywhere near any decision making position regarding Amtrak! What a formula for disaster he has spelled out! At least he is right that many will disagree with him, and with very good reason as spelled out by Trogdor.

3x week immediately raises the CASM dramatically, while at best keeping RASM unchanged. The results are completely predictable.

 

[the_traveler]

As said, running trains 3 times a week will not work! That is why for many years the Sunset Limited and Cardinal had such low riderships!

"Can I leave on Sunday from LAX to HOS - or do I have to wait until Monday or Tuesday?"

"To connect the next day in NOL - thus only having to pay for 1 night's hotel - do I depart ATL on Wednesday or Thursday?"

"I want to take the Cardinal from CHI to WAS so I can see the New River Gorge. What day of the week do I have to depart PDX to make a same day connect in CHI?"

Etc, etc...

 

[afigg]

If that doesn't cut it then start looking at making the western LD trains three times a week as Via does the Canadian. That would free up some LD equipment, reduce staff requirements and concentrate more passengers on fewer trains. The only western train I would keep daily is the Southwest Chief

...

All these LD trains are just cruise trains. Hardly anyone really uses them for business transportation, so start thinking and marketing them as such.

The LD trains with the worse cost recovery percentage are the two 3 day a week trains. How does changing the other trains to 3 days/week improve the overall cost recovery? By going to 3 days/week, the overhead per train goes up, the staffing requirements are not cut by 4/7ths, and you lose a lot of customers. It is pretty clear from the PRIIA reports, that 3 days/week LD train service simply does not work if the goal is to have a useful LD train system in place of "cruise" trains.

For all the fuss raised by the Frailey Trains magazine column, it should be noted that Amtrak's finances are in pretty decent shape compared to many other years of its existence. The August monthly report projected a operating cash loss of $465.9 million for the FY, a full $96 million less than the $562 million of operating grant subsidy provided by Congress. Yes, the LD trains lose money, but if Amtrak can trim the overhead, reduce maintenance cost & improve reliability with new equipment, reduce cost with smarter allocation of personnel and equipment resources, implement many of the PRIIA report recommendations, and take advantage of the $6 billion plus being spent on track & equipment upgrades across the system, they should be able to live with a measurably smaller annual operating grant in several years.

A benefit of the LD trains that I think is overlooked is how they keep some pieces of an intercity passenger rail system in the US alive and provide opportunities for new corridor services. A prime example is the very successful Lynchburger Regional. If the Crescent and Cardinal were not running, would Virginia and the local cities have been supportive of and able to start the new Lynchburg service? No, it would not have happened because the start-up cost would have been much larger in a skeptical environment. Would the cities along the FEC corridor in FL be interested in Amtrak service if there were no Silvers running to FL? Probably not.

Any review of the LD trains should consider what prospects they offer for extending or restoring corridor service in the next 10-15 years. The Cardinal keeps Chicago - Indianapolis - Cincinnati service alive while waiting for a change in the Ohio governorship and political climate. It also runs through WV where the Senators and a key Congressman support Amtrak service to their state. The Empire Builder maintains CHI - Minneapolis / St. Paul service for example and provides a foundation for Minn interest in better corridor service to Chicago.

The Sunset Limited, which is obviously the most at risk LD train if a cut has to be made, does at least keep a Houston to San Antonio and (more or less) Phoenix to LA service in place. However, for the SL or the route to show more utility, it needs to go to daily service and UP may be too much of a roadblock for that. What the Amtrak board, Boardman, and the upper management team are thinking, we don't really know.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Put the Sunset out of its misery. Daily trains won't happen until UP drastically drops their $750 million fee for a one time unmodifiable schedule change impacting less than one percent of the route's tonnage. Rather than expect payment my guess is that UP simply expects Amtrak to drop the issue. UP stands to benefit more than anyone if Amtrak eventually gives up on the Sunset route and without a schedule change it's unlikely that the financials will improve enough to give the Sunset any more of a reason to exist than it has today. My money is on UP winning this battle.

 

[henryj]

Well Trogodor and Jis lets hear your solutions. All I hear is negative negative negative to anything anyone has to say, but no real new ideas from anyone. I like Ryans suggestion, lets just screw the Texans first. If that is the mentality on here then I say lets just eliminate the NEC. You people are not realists, your just foamers. We want our trains first waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. Amtrak is broken and it cant be fixed. Its just a bloated inept government agency.

 

[the_traveler]

Amtrak is broken and it cant be fixed. Its just a bloated inept government agency.

So are highways (DOT) and airlines (FAA)!

They don't cover their operating expenses either - so let's get rid of them also!

 

[The Davy Crockett]

I decided to make this debate more interesting for myself a couple of weeks ago by booking on #1 after January 1. :lol:

 

[jphjaxfl]

UP has been lobbying to get rid of the LD trains for years. They will likely get their wish.

 

[Shawn Ryu]

Cut Capital Limited and diverge New York bound Lake Shore Limited to Alliance from Cleveland and on to Pittsburgh and follow Pennsylvanian route up to NY Penn?

 

[afigg]

Have to be the Sunset Ltd. that goes! That would allow Amtrak to make the TE a daily Train from CHI-LAX! The planned stub Train from SAS-NOL could use a CCC ( Amtrak has extras)and Coaches, the Diners on the Sunset could go on the Eagle freeing up more CCCs so the PDX Section of the EB can have the planned Food Service Car between PDX and SPK! The "extra" Superliner Sleepers, including the Transdorms, could be added to the Daily Eagle resulting in more revenue on this route! UP needs a good swift kick in the rear, these Trains should already be running!

That is not canceling the Sunset Limited, that is restructuring it. Of course, the daily SAN-LAX extension and stub train from New Orleans is the plan that was in the Texas Eagle/SL PRIIA report. OTOH, if UP were to allow daily service, Amtrak could pull a political move by saying they are going to "terminate" the Sunset Limited while extending the Texas Eagle to LA and starting a newly named stub train over the New Orleans to San Antonio section. See, Mr. Congressman, we are canceling the Sunset Limited and making some "adjustments" in the scheduling to compensate. It might work as a throw some pretend meat to the wolves political ploy. :lol:

As to the Silver Trains, Amtrak should take a look at combining them into a Longer Train, except for the Tampa bypass they pretty much duplicate service and times to MIA. Adding a couple of Sleepers, a couple of Coaches and a Diner to the Meteor (sort of an AutoTrain without Autos! :lol: ) would free up cars for the Cardinal which really needs them in addition to going to a daily Schedule between CHI and WAS, not NYP!!! (Diasagree with Alan B on this, the Card is Always late to NYP, plenty of Regionals and Acelas to pick up the slack!!)

Well, except for the different route through the Carolinas and different Northeast to Orlando trip times, yea, the 2 Silvers provide "duplicate" service. Florida is a big enough travel destination from the Northeast that Amtrak should be looking at expanding service to FL, not cutting it. The new Viewliner IIs should provide significant boosts to the revenue for the Silvers.

 

[Ryan]

I like Ryans suggestion, lets just screw the Texans first. If that is the mentality on here then I say lets just eliminate the NEC.

Not only is that response painfully ignorant of the financial realites, but also ignores the second half of my post were I suggest the elimination of a route that does serve the NEC.

You people are not realists, your just foamers. We want our trains first waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

This description applies to you more than anyone else in the discussion. If you were a realist, you'd be OK with cutting the bottom financial performers. But, since it impact you, instead we get the usual "woe is Texas, Amtrak hates us" routine.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

UP has been lobbying to get rid of the LD trains for years. They will likely get their wish.

It's not just Amtrak that UP pushes around. They also push around their customers by stifling competition through massive consolidation and implementing fuel surcharge systems that reward inefficient routing. And more recently they've been taken to court over accusations of price fixing in conjunction with the tiny number of super-sized freight railroads that bought out everyone else. Frankly, I cannot fathom why anyone would defend the actions and motives of a company with a history like UP, even if they hadn't been trying to run Amtrak off their rails all these years.

 

[Ryan]

Because "private industry=free market=can do no wrong" in the fantasyland that some people live in.

 

[Anderson]

As much as I like seeing the Sunset drive UP nuts, I'd cut it back to either (1) a stub train rolled in with the Texas Eagle or (2) run the Texas Eagle, CONO, and the linking train in a circle (i.e. each set goes CHI-DAL-SAS-NOL-CHI). I think you might be able to get NOL-SAS daily, and I'd just focus on running that segment as a daylight corridor. Failing that...yeah, let the Sunset go. Put the seven sleepers (4 dedicated Sunset plus 3 through cars that would "automatically" free up without any change to the CONO/TE) around as follows:

5 to the Empire Builder

2 to either CHI-DEN or as a "loose spare"

If you free up all 9, giving you 13, I'd appropriate:

5 to the EB

4 to the CS

3 to the CL

1 to the Zephyr CHI-DEN (I think this works, though you may need to move a spare in as well?)

On coaches, you've either got 11 (8+3) or 17. My distribution would be (for 11):

5 to the EB

4 to the CS LAX-EMY/SAC (two per set)

2 to the EB CHI-MSP

For 17:

5 to the EB, through

2 to the EB, CHI-MSP

4 to the CS, through

2 to the CS, LAX-EMY/SAC

4 to the CZ, cycling for spare seasonal capacity (either CHI-DEN or as "Sparks Cars")

After that, my second choice would be to cut the past-Atlanta Crescent back, train-wise and service-wise, and repurpose the equipment on the NYP-ATL leg.

A point: Do not forget that you have 25 new single-level sleepers and a bunch of baggage-dorms coming into the mix with the Viewliner IIs.

 

[cirdan]

Put the Sunset out of its misery. Daily trains won't happen until UP drastically drops their $750 million fee for a one time unmodifiable schedule change impacting less than one percent of the route's tonnage. Rather than expect payment my guess is that UP simply expects Amtrak to drop the issue. UP stands to benefit more than anyone if Amtrak eventually gives up on the Sunset route and without a schedule change it's unlikely that the financials will improve enough to give the Sunset any more of a reason to exist than it has today. My money is on UP winning this battle.

I agree, and much as I hate to say this, Amtrak should choose to fight the battles ot can win.

If a total abandonment of the Sunset West of San Antonio would be the consequence, that would be very sad, but if that sacrifice can keep something else running, then it may be worth it.

 

[George B]

For the sake of the innocent question posed in this topic, my answer would also be “Sunset Limited”.

In reality, cutting any LD rain would be the unraveling of the rest of the LD network. Once they start balancing Amtrak’s budget with eliminating trains, they will be forced to keep doing it every year until there is nothing left. When you satisfy budgeting requests of politicians, you add fuel to their argument, and give them a reason to ask you for more cuts. If we all want Amtrak to survive, then they should stick it out as long as they can and not cancel a single route. Otherwise, you will just be forced to watch the entire LD train network slowly fade away.

I’d rather have all Amtrak LD trains go “poof” one day because they could not get enough money to sustain all routes than watch it slowly bleed to death.

 

[jdcnosse]

So basically it's UP's fault, from what I'm reading anyways. Here's my logic.

Sunset Limited only runs 3 days a week, UP wants an outrageous amount to make it daily. The Sunset, as it stands now, is suffering because it's difficult to schedule when your a passenger. I have a good example of this. My girlfriend is from Tucson. She wants to come visit me in Michigan for New Year's Eve. She has only two choices on departure dates because she doesn't want to miss Christmas with her family either. So she's leaving Christmas night at 2am technically the 26th) because the only other choice gets here on NYE.

So it seems to me, at least for the Sunset, the miracle is getting UP to let it go daily.

 

[NY Penn]

Why can't Amtrak and the FRA just force UP to allow a daily train for a much cheaper price? THE LAW says that railroads must reasonably accommodate the passenger trains (or an I mistaken)?

 

[henryj]

For the sake of the innocent question posed in this topic, my answer would also be “Sunset Limited”.

In reality, cutting any LD rain would be the unraveling of the rest of the LD network. Once they start balancing Amtrak’s budget with eliminating trains, they will be forced to keep doing it every year until there is nothing left. When you satisfy budgeting requests of politicians, you add fuel to their argument, and give them a reason to ask you for more cuts. If we all want Amtrak to survive, then they should stick it out as long as they can and not cancel a single route. Otherwise, you will just be forced to watch the entire LD train network slowly fade away.

I’d rather have all Amtrak LD trains go “poof” one day because they could not get enough money to sustain all routes than watch it slowly bleed to death.

Amtrak has been doing this all it's life. It's their normal reaction to political pressure....cut another train. How many have we lost so far. Lets see, Floridian, National Limited, Lone Star, Pioneer, Desert Wind, Broadway Limited, and on and on. I am sure you can add to the list. So instead of fixing the Sunset, which is the worst managed of all the LD trains, we just eliminate it. Problem solved....that is until the next worst performing trains gets in the spotlight. It's already unraveling, this would just speed it up. Boardman has already blamed the LD trains for all Amtrak ills, so he wants to rid Amtrak of the burden or get more handouts to support them. No indication that they have any kind of plan to fix them. So like I said, make them all three times a week. You can run the Pioneer and CZ on different days thus giving you almost daily service Chi to Denver. Run a daily day train to MSP when the EB doesn't run. I like the CONO/Eagle/'Sunset' on the Chi/NOL/SAS/Chi circle. There are many many solutions out there. Amtrak isn't interested. All they want to do is run the NEC and get the states to support the rest. Unfortunately, the NEC falls under the 750 mile threshold so it should be state supported also. The Rocky Mountaineer trains seem to be doing ok, what is wrong with Amtrak?. They run their LD trains like a Greyhound bus ignoring the luxury market. The Canadian is a first class train, almost all sleeper space. It has just two coaches in the summer and one in the winter. Amtrak on the other hand tries to run greyhound on wheels and shuns first class. Sleeper space is always sold out on these LD trains, even the Sunset. If you go to three times a week you can add sleepers to all the LD trains from the surplus stock. And if Amtrak doesn’t order some more superliners soon this will have to be done just because they won’t have the equipment to run daily. How about bring back a superliner equipped Floridian. The LD network is already too thin. So I agree, start eliminating them one by one and there all gone. If they all go three times a week you can fill in with daily day trains where the traffic is there. Forget the so called connections thingy. Run these eastern overnights like they should be. If the connections from the west are so important then it justifies a second train on a different schedule. We can discuss this forever but............is anyone at Amtrak listening? Do they have any kind of a plan whatsoever? Apparently not.

 

[jphjaxfl]

There will likely be more cuts than just the Sunset Ltd from what I hear. CSX is already aware of some potential changes impacting its routes.