posted
I travel on Capital Limited alot, last time in August. I just booked a ticket and see that the new departure time is 7:00 p.m. instead of 5:30 p.m. Anyone know the reason? I thought Amtrak finally figured out that the east bound trains had a hard time making the 5:30 connection.
Posts: 54 | From: Chagrin Falls, OH, USA | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is the "downside" regarding Chicago-Florida trips, which is adapted from material I submitted to another railforum.
Effective Oct 31 #30 arrives WAS 130P; 91 departs 305P. Even though the usual rule of thumb sets one hour as the guaranteed connection, Amtrak simply has recognized that #30's timekeeping has deterioriated to such extent that even 1.5hrs is impractical and if offered "guaranteed", would expose Amtrak to burdensome misconnect costs.
I checked an itinerary Chicago to Raleigh which is served only by 91; the system returns "no service' account no same day connection.
Speaking for myself, I think that breaking this 30-WAS-91 connection means rail trips to Fla for me are now, as the medical professions refers to such, HX - and those who have been around here at least a year know I "go down' every year. Although I have a number of friends residing in the DC area, 97's departure is TOO EARLY to have dinner with any; only a 'quick drink' after their workday could be scheduled - and I would still be stuck sitting around for four hours (as you likely know, I'm "not into' railfanning). Further, routing the return as I have in the past ORL-1-NOL-58-CHI made for a nice diversity in routes and equipment, but that as we know also is HX.
However, if I am able to schedule a more extended visit with friends in the DC area in conjunction with the Fla trip, auto and use of AT is "in the running"; but otherwise for one of my two potential uses of LD - the other being CHI-STM, "sic transit gloria".
Posts: 9977 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suspect that the reason for a later EB Capitol departure would be to reduce the number of misconnects coming off the California Zephyr and, to a lesser degree, the Empire Builder and Southwest Chief.
-------------------- 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
Afew years ago after making the Capital by the skin of our teeth I called Customer relations to lodge a complaint about the insane schedule. The woman I talked to said she personally felt the problem was the people who decide on the schedules never rode the train or at least the routes they were scheduling. They simply didn't have a clue. She said she would pass along my suggestion that the departure be moved to 8 PM so the passengers who were changing trains would at least have a fighting chance but didn't hold out much hope. Maybe they finally got a new scheduler.
Posts: 1577 | From: virginia | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You have a point, Mr. Presley and Ms. Train Lady.
Even if I am hardly the biggest advocate of LD's around here, and am not about to start riding just to ride, I still like to ride when they are convenient to my travel requirements. Breaking the 30-WAS-91 connection makes them considerably less so in my case for the reasons I set forth above.
Posts: 9977 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
What baffles me though is that the Capitol and the Lake Shore Limited continue to depart eastbound practically on each other's heels. I wonder if they could save any money combining these two trains between Chicago and Cleveland. It's not like there is a separate Boston section on the Lake Shore anymore.
-------------------- 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
According to an eastbound Capitol passenger, his train departing at 5:30 pm was stopped at Englewood crossing a half hour for Metra trains. Comments?
-------------------- John Pawson Posts: 137 | From: Willow Grove, PA | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Pawson, the PRR (route of the Capitol) and the Rock Island (METRA route to Joliet) X at grade 63rd & State where the Englewood station was once located.
Posts: 9977 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aren't AMTRAK schedules also governed quite a bit by the host freight railroads' schedules? I mean -- AMTRAK can't just schedule trains willy-nilly at their convenience -- they need to consider the freight RR requirements too, don't they?
Posts: 2428 | From: Grayling, MI | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by notelvis: It's not like there is a separate Boston section on the Lake Shore anymore.
No? The LAKE SHORE LIMITED is still listed in the Fall 2006/Winter 2007 Timetable as being "New York/Boston-Albany-Chicago" with trains 449 and 448 listed in the timetable with 48 and 48. Are those seperate trains? Not sections that connect and disconnect?
Doesn't the TEXAS EAGLE still have sections that connect and disconnect with the SUNSET LIMITED?
Posts: 134 | From: New York, New York USA | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Norman- Yet another option to keep you on the rails. Take the City of New Orleans - although I wish they would call it the Panama Ltd. (sleeper fares seem to be more reasonable than other routes). The timekeeping on the train is good and it will get you out of the cold northland faster.
Have some serious good food and drink in New Orleans. Than fly Southwest New Orleans to Orlando.
Posts: 2397 | From: Camden, SC | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by notelvis: It's not like there is a separate Boston section on the Lake Shore anymore.
No? The LAKE SHORE LIMITED is still listed in the Fall 2006/Winter 2007 Timetable as being "New York/Boston-Albany-Chicago" with trains 449 and 448 listed in the timetable with 48 and 48. Are those seperate trains? Not sections that connect and disconnect?
Sadly 449 and 448 are now separate trains with coaches and a cafe car. They make an across the platform connection (ie: change of train) with the Lake Shore at Albany. There are no sleepers or any other car that runs through from Boston to Chicago anymore. Those were dropped a year or two ago.
As there are no sleepers on the overnight NEC trains anymore, it is not possible to arrive or depart Boston in a sleeping car.
-------------------- 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 |
quote:Originally posted by notelvis: Sadly 449 and 448 are now separate trains with coaches and a cafe car. They make an across the platform connection (ie: change of train) with the Lake Shore at Albany. There are no sleepers or any other car that runs through from Boston to Chicago anymore. Those were dropped a year or two ago.
As there are no sleepers on the overnight NEC trains anymore, it is not possible to arrive or depart Boston in a sleeping car.
Why did Amtrak do this? Is it "cheaper" to not have through car service?
Posts: 134 | From: New York, New York USA | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 20thCenturyLimited: Is it "cheaper" to not have through car service?
There certainly are costs associated with any switching operation, and in current Amtrak mindset, cutting costs "trump" passenger convenience.
It is more economical to concentrate the servicing of any style of car at one location, as well as possibly having a "protect" car in the event of a last minute bad order. As a result, Boston no longer has any trains with Sleeping cars.
Posts: 9977 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
