posted
Southwest Chief would be a NY to LA train via Flagstaff/ABQ/KC/SL/Louisville/CIN/PIT/PHILLY/NY
Heartland flyer would be Mexico City to Chicago via Laredo/San Antonio/Austin/FW/OC/Tulsa/KC/Chicago.
With that population and the addition of extra coaches on a daily schedule, those routes would make money.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
And this train does ok as far as the money is concerned: not even close to the best but well ahead of the worst.
Glad you're not the Amtrak dictator or I'd have to start up a coup
-------------------- Matt Visit gallery for photos of our train layouts Posts: 579 | From: San Bernardino Subdivison | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Chicago is the problem, too many trains to Chicago. Would I eliminate Chicago as a hub, no. Do you not agree a NY-LA train would make money? What route would you take for a NY-LA train.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whats so bad about connecting to the Lakeshore Limited?
Another thing, even if Amtrak WANTED to, chances are they would not have track rights to make these runs.
Posts: 1082 | From: Los Angeles, CA. USA | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read Amtrak has track rights to 95% of the usa. It was part of the agreement to release frieght lines from passenger service. Only a few small railroads is not part of this agreement.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The question is whether the trackage available is in good enough shape to run passenger trains. Anyone remember the Kentucky Cardinal? Or the train that ran out of Chicago up into Wisconsin (sort of ended in Janesville...what was the name of that one? I must be getting old). The tracks were so bad that the trains took forever to get to their destinations.
It would be ridiculous to run trains on trackage that only supports 20mph or less.
Posts: 171 | From: Aurora, Illinois | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The new funding is suppose to put Amtrak under highway money. Meaning states can upgrade tracks to 80/20 funding.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by jgart56: The question is whether the trackage available is in good enough shape to run passenger trains. Anyone remember the Kentucky Cardinal? Or the train that ran out of Chicago up into Wisconsin (sort of ended in Janesville...what was the name of that one? I must be getting old). The tracks were so bad that the trains took forever to get to their destinations.
It would be ridiculous to run trains on trackage that only supports 20mph or less.
Chicago to Janesville? Wasn't that the 'Heifer Zephyr'?
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The superliners are too high for the East Coast tunnels and subterranean stations which also happen to have platforms that are too high for the Superliner exit doors. More $$$$ would be needed for the changes. It's a nice wish list fantasy. With the exception of through pullmans transferred around Chicago and St. Louis rail yards I can not recall any through train in total from LAUPT to GCT or NYP. Hoboken terminal (just across the Hudson River from NYC might be an alternative.From there the PATH line or ferry would be the transport to NYC.
Posts: 498 | From: New Hope, PA, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even under Amtrak, the National Limited (former NYC) had through sleepers NY-LA that were hitched to the Chief. We got one for our honeymoon in 1977. We got on in Warrensburg MO and went to Arizona.
It didn't go through Chicago. I believe the National went through Indianapolis to St. Louis, and the sleepers sat in the KC station for 3-4 hours in the evening waiting for the Chief. It was advertised as "use your bedroom as your hotel while you explore KC". I think Amtrak did the same thing in New Orleans before the Sunset was extended to Florida.
It could still work with Superliners using a transition car at the end of the Chief, as well as a Sunset-Crescent connection.
If I were dictator, these would be restored, as well as the Desert Wind and Pioneer. Maybe throw in the North Coast Hiawatha. And as long as I am dictator, all Amtrak opponents would be in forced labor maintaining and cleaning Superliner toilets. Most LD routes would have 2 trains a day running about 12 hours apart, so that late connections would not require expensive alternate transportation and you could see all scenery in daylight.
And for me, there would be the Twin Star Rocket from Minnesota to Texas (North Star state to the Lone Star state). It would connect to the Chief and the Eagle for us snowbirds.
I think all of these routes still have tracks conducive to acceptable speed.
Posts: 1572 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
While we are playing memories, what was the route of the "Super Train" you remember that NBC TV Show the only railroad thats life was shorter then the Penn Central Corp. It was sort of a Love Boat on Rails. For all you TV fans this was a period when ABC was No 1 and NBC was a distant No 3 in the ratings, about 4 years from the Cosby Show and must see Thursday and FOX was a glimmer in Rupert's eye. I guess the route would be sort of a track along RT 80.
Posts: 516 | From: New Haven, CT USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
All kidding aside (Heifer Zephyr), here are some routes that, in a perfect world, I would like to see offered -
Highest Priority - restore what should have never been lost in the first place:
*The late 'Desert Wind' Salt Lake City - Las Vegas - Los Angeles. *The 'Pioneer' Denver - Seattle via Wyoming and Boise. *Anything direct from Chicago to Florida. (My preference would be a route via Louisville, Nashville, Chattanooga, and Atlanta. If the track situation Indy to Louisville remains a problem then on CSX via Evansville to Nashville would be OK.) *The 'Lone Star' - Chicago to Texas via Kansas City and Oklahoma City.
Next Priority - experiment with some shorter extensions connecting with the existing network such as, but not limited to;
*Asheville, NC - Salisbury, NC *Raleigh, NC - Wilmington, NC *Lynchburg, VA - Roanoke, VA - Bristol, VA *Milwaukee, WI - Madison, WI *Kansas City, MO - Omaha, NE *Minneapolis, MN - Duluth, MN *Denver, CO - Colorado Springs - Pueblo - La Junta, CO
Then, how about some new (and radical) superliner equipped long-distance trains?
*Denver to Houston via Pueblo, Amarillo, Ft. Worth and Dallas *Washington - Charleston, WV - Cincinnati, OH - St. Louis, MO - Kansas City, MO - La Junta, CO - Denver, CO (a similar route was proposed but never implemented in the 1970's.)
Such a train, with a connection CHI - CIN could replace the 'Cardinal' and would likely operate combined with the Chief KCY - LAJ. Perhaps it would offer a through sleeper to LAX from DC. Seamless.
Finally, Twin Star Rocket, since a number of my ideas mirror yours, I fully agree that a reincarnated 'Twin Star Rocket' Minneapolis to Texas (via Kansas City of course) would be a wonderful train to have once more.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Suggest pasting Schickelgruber into the Google search field and see what you get returned. Hint; it is not related to your Mother, lest maybe her name is Eva.
To Mr. Tanner--
If you are referring to the trestle that X's CT Route 80 near North Branford, that is (if even still there) used by the New Haven Trap Rock Co, or its successor.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you are going to be the Amtrak dictator, presumably able to get the money you want to do what you want, don't worry about the track situation. Fix it instead. Need a second track? Build it! Need to rerail Indianaopolis to Louisville, snap your fingers and make it happen.
I definitely agree that any route worth having service should have at least two trains about 12 hours apart. For something like New York to Chicago there should be four trains on both the former NYC and the former Pennsy route. Never did understand why when they could do it in 16 hours they neither ever put on a City of New Orleans style day train. If you could consistently fill 10 coaches normally up to 20 on weekends between Chicago an New Orleans on a fast day train, what could you have done between New York and Chicago?
George
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 20th Century: The superliners are too high for the East Coast tunnels and subterranean stations which also happen to have platforms that are too high for the Superliner exit doors. More $$$$ would be needed for the changes. It's a nice wish list fantasy. With the exception of through pullmans transferred around Chicago and St. Louis rail yards I can not recall any through train in total from LAUPT to GCT or NYP. Hoboken terminal (just across the Hudson River from NYC might be an alternative.From there the PATH line or ferry would be the transport to NYC.
As dictator, I would pull the old streamliners and old 1 level Amtrak coaches for my NY-LA.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would: 1. Upgrade all old or broken equipment 2. Create a Denver to El Paso train via Colorado Springs Albuquerque Belen and Las Cruces 3. Use all equipment that is sitting around in stroage 4. Get tough with the UP for not running are trains on time 5. Thank BNSF for running trains on time 6. Upgrade the Sunset and add a special Lounge for Sleeping Car passnegers, Have two Sleepers in the front and three Coachs in the back going to Florida (Miaimi) 7.Make the Sunset a daliy run
posted
I have always thought there should be one more north-south route somewhere between the City of New Orleans and the Coast Starlight -- the most likely routing would be El Paso-Albuquerque-Raton-Denver-Cheyenne-Cody-then a connection in northern Montana to the Empire Builder -- I don't remember exactly where the available rail lines are in Wyoming-Montana (from a RR Atlas I recently looked at).
Anyway, such a route could connect the Sunset Ltd, Southwest Chief, Zephyr, and Empire Bldr.
Posts: 2428 | From: Grayling, MI | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
"Lake Country Limited" it was. How could I foget that? NBC News took great glee in showcasing this bad service to the American Public!
Great brainstorming gang!! There were some neat ideas here. I go along with consistently repairing and upgrading equipment...as well as a good study of the routes that could use a second train!
Posts: 171 | From: Aurora, Illinois | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I was the one it would be the return of.
National Limited North Coast Hiawatha Desert Wind Pioneer Lone Star Floridian
New Service would include: Boston to Montreal Minnepolis, Des Moines to Kansas City Kansas City to Omaha Duluth to the Twin Cities Houston, Dallas, Forth Worth, Pueblo, Colorado Springs, Denver, Cheyenne, Douglas, Cody to Billings Williams, Phoenix to Tucson Fargo to Winnipeg Kansas City Shreveport to New Orleans Deoroit, Toledo, Cincinnati, Atlanta to Jacksonville then down the Florida East Coast Route to Miami. Milwaukee to Madison
To do all this I would have Superliner 3's, Viewliners 2's and Amfleet 3 built.
posted
gp35,You can't beat those old streamliners and coaches. I'm all for it! Domeliners too! Add the domeliner in Albany after the train passes through the low clearances. Amtrak did such a thing on the Adirondack in the 70's.
Posts: 498 | From: New Hope, PA, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
We can call it the Millenium Ltd. But as Chris suggests the National Limited would be ideal. Now all we need is a genie to make this happen because there is certainly no genie in our nation's capital these days.
Posts: 498 | From: New Hope, PA, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem with north/south routes is that there's very little demand, except on the coasts and along the Mississippi River. Look at the traffic on Interstate 25 between Las Cruces, New Mexico, and Denver. Certainly, if the track was in good condition, you could start running trains between Pueblo and Denver or Fot Collins tomorrow and they'd probably be full. This is reflected in the traffic on Interstate 25. Between Pueblo and Santa Fe, however, there's just no traffic on the Interstate. Santa Fe to Belen has lots of traffic on the Interstate and, therefore, passenger demand. As much as I'd like to see an Albuquerque to Denver train, it will be a long time coming.
The passenger demand has always been from Chicago to Los Angeles--along the Chief route--not to San Francisco. When the Lincoln Highway was first proposed and marked in the 1920s, the demand was to Los Angeles, even though the highway went to San Francisco. People left the Lincoln Highway in Nevada and drove to Los Angeles through what became Las Vegas. This is probably reflected in the number of passenger trains that AT&SF ran on the current Chief route.
It is essential, though, for Amtrak to expand to survive. People who run city buses know that when ridership falls--which isn't happening on Amtrak--if you cut service, the whole thing collapses. With more service, the ridership stays up.
-------------------- Kiernan Posts: 155 | From: Santa Fe, New Mexico | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The service between El Paso and Albuquerque would be very popular because there is a heavy demand to go to Albuquerque and there's simply not enough planes. Plus it can be used for college students who live in El Paso and attend NMSU in Las Cruces. It would also go through Hatch, where a very big chile festival is held in the fall and would draw lots of people. Plus if it stops in Truth of Consquences,NM passengers can travel to Elephant Butte lake which is a very popular water skiing destination. Finally it would be on track which is owned by BNSF but hardly any trains run on it, so freight congestion would not be a problem.
posted
While we are adding, there is no diagonal service northwest to southeast. How about something at least Jacksonville - Atlanta - Birmingham - Memphis - Kansas City - Omaha - and somehow to the Empire Builder route. Someone also mentioned reinstaement of the Twin Star. That also fills a hole. Minneapolis to Kansas City, then on to Texas. Use the MKT route, it would be shorter and faster. Of course, this train in total presumes some track money and inspiration on the part of UP to run the trains to reasonable schedule.
George
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
A Denver to Galveston train(Denver/Amarillo,Lubbock,FW,Dallas,Houston) would fill a daily train. During the winter the train would be full of snow skiiers. The summer, beach going water skiiers.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A possible third North-South route would be to extend the Capitol Limited from Washington to Florida along the CSX tracks. No clearance problem for Superliners, and track is already ready for Amtrak (such as it is). I'd expand LA-SFO - SAC frequency along coast with California Car trains and high-speed through Inland Empire LA BAK-OAK-SAC. A seperate branch from SJ to SFO for both services. Replace Amfleet with Talgo on Adirondack, Maple Leaf, Pennsylvanian, Vermonter, Ethan Allen, Carolinian, Palmetto, and Virginia trains. Diesel one end, electric the other. BTW, ditto Empire Service. Extend Empire Service Buffalo-Cleveland-Detroit. Establish HSR Cleveland-Cincinnatti, Cleveland-Detroit, Cinn-Louiville, Chicago-Indianapolis-Louiville+Cinn. "Tennesseean" Memshis-Nashville-Chattanooga-Knoxville-Bristol-Roanoke-Lynchburg-Charlottesville-Washington. (Daylight hours of course). Re-establish North Coast along CZ type schedule. Scenic Western Montana in daylight, less interesting ND at night, like VIA does Saskatchewan. This line has alternate transportation, so it wouldn't serve as a "remote" like the Empire Builder does.
Posts: 510 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you weren't dictator and had to do something really cheap, you could run a small bus or passenger van: Columbus, WI (EB) - Madison - Rockford, IL - Mendota, IL (CZ,SWC) - Bloomington, IL (Eagle & St. Louis trains), and perhaps on to Champaign-Urbana for the CNO.
It is all uncongested freeway and the times are doable. It would connect all the western trains at the right times with a short bus ride. You cannot connect between any western trains in CHI without a 23 hour layover.
If it was promoted, it would really expand the market for LD's. So many people up here in MN/WI have retired parents in Texas and the southwest that do not want to drive or fly. It also would provided connectivity between Minneapolis, St.Louis, Madison and KC.
I also believe a Denver-El Paso train would work if it provided connectivity with all the western LD's and had daily reliable (non-UP?) service into Texas. Any time you increase the number of possible city pairs, you increase the market exponentially.
Denver and the southwest are much larger population centers than they were in the glory days of passenger trains. Phoenix is also a must!
Posts: 1572 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
As dictator, I would order a redesign of the superliners. Instead of 2 trucks to a superliner, I would have 4 coaches sharing 5 trucks. Each superliner would have about 25% more room compared to current superliners.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
The problem with sharing trucks is that if one coach get's bad ordered than the whole unit, all 4 coaches would be out! There is no flexability with shared trucks. The individual railroads learned that lesson when they had passenger cars with shared trucks in the early decades of the last century.
Posts: 171 | From: Aurora, Illinois | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
The problem with sharing trucks is that if one coach get's bad ordered than the whole unit, all 4 coaches would be out! There is no flexability with shared trucks. The individual railroads learned that lesson when they had passenger cars with shared trucks in the early decades of the last century.
The railroads learned their lesson so Amtrak was born. I'll take my chances with the extra room and extra passengers.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Many good ideas and some great routes that once were popular.
However, none of you have mentioned a PRINTING PRESS to generate the $$$$. None of this can happen without $$$$ and all Dictators know it.
Posts: 467 | From: Prescott, AZ USA | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
or I'd have to start up a coup ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
