posted
I know, I know! This topic DOES come up from time to time. Where can service be expanded or improved if Amtrak exsisted in a PERFECT WORLD?What are our PIPE DREAMS for Amtrak service? Well, here'as my list. I'd like some discussion on what of these CAN be feasable.
1. LAX-SBA-SLO-EMY overnight train that provides connections from Southern California to the CZ.
2. A CHI to Florida train (via Atlanta). This is a CRITICAL break in service. A passenger coming from the west or midwest has to travel all the way to New York or Washington to get to the Southeastern US.
3. New Orleans to Florida-otherwise known as the Sunset East. This would relink Southwest and Southeast.
4. Ok-maybe a bit outlandish, but: LAX-Phoenix-Amarillo-Oklahoma City-Tulsa-St Louis- Chicago. Why? Well it seems to make sense and I could almost guarantee this could be the most popular LD train in terms of patronage in the west. Throw in maybe a through train that splits off in Amarillo to Dallas and maybe even from Dallas to New Orleans...imagine the possibilities there.
5. A seventh San Joaquin Train from Bakersfield to San Jose via Altamont Pass.
6. LAX-Las Vegas!!!! Need I justify that one?!?!?
Posts: 387 | From: Bakersfield, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My wish list would see a better series of north-south routes west of Chicago
Posts: 110 | From: Kansas City, Missouri | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
1. BFD-SJC: The 7th San Joaquin Train over Altamont would be great. I'm assuming this train would also make the ACE Train station stops and the Capital Corridor station stops between Fremont and San Jose?
2. Is your LAX-SBA-SLO-EMY train basically your variation of the Coast Daylight train? I personally think the Daylight should at least make a connection in SJC with the Capital Corridor.
3. I would like to see more Capital Corridor trains south of OKJ/OAK. Also, I'd be able to take the train more often if the last train didn't depart so early from both SAC and SJC. I'd love to see a Capital Corridor leave both SJC and SAC between 9 and 9:30 pm so that both trains make their end points by midnight. A morning train to Auburn with a evening return would also be great.
4. Capital Corridor to Reno.
5. San Joaquin extended to LAX (OKJ-BFD-LAX).
6. LAX-Las Vegas
Posts: 82 | From: San Lorenzo, CA | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Actually, I'd prefer to see the Capitol Corridor extended to Monterey instead of starting a new Monterey to San Francisco service. I think the existing customer base would be more than happy to ride it to our little corner of the world, and it would complement plans to extend the service at the other end to Reno. It would then run between two major travel destinations with major metropolitan areas in the middle.
posted
Las Vegas service would be EXCELLENT. I remember how the Desert Wind was always crowded with Vegas-bound or Vegas-returning passengers. Now whenever I go to BFD for the train/bus connection, I only see 5 or so people (if that) getting on the Thruway Bus to Vegas. I can't say I blame them......especially now that Virgin America flies from SFO to LAS round-trip for $88.
Posts: 2355 | From: Pleasanton, CA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Toy: Revive the Del Monte!
Actually, I'd prefer to see the Capitol Corridor extended to Monterey instead of starting a new Monterey to San Francisco service. I think the existing customer base would be more than happy to ride it to our little corner of the world, and it would complement plans to extend the service at the other end to Reno. It would then run between two major travel destinations with major metropolitan areas in the middle.
Mr. Toy,
I'd also like to see the Capital Corridor extended to Monterey. Wasn't Monterey one of the first state capitals anyways?
Also, I'd prefer to see the Capital Corridor extended to Salinas rather than CalTrain. They desperately need new equipment. I find their equipment to be cramped, dirty and uncomfortable. With the number of people riding CalTrain each day, they need to either buy more Baby Bullet trainsets or get on the fast track for the conversion to electric.
Just a few thoughts...
Posts: 82 | From: San Lorenzo, CA | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
1. NOL-MIA using City of New Orleans equipment. Connects with Sunset westbound but not eastbound. All the way to MIA. 2. CHI-ATL-FL 2a.One of the existing FL trains reroute via FEC to serve popular east coast of FL. 3. North Coast Limited route via ex-NP CHI-SEA 4. National Limited NYP-PIT-Columbus-Indianapolis-St.Louis 5. Desert Wind CHI-SLC-Las Vegas-LA 6. NOL-Dallas-Denver 7. (CHI) KC-Okla City-Dallas-Houston 8. Pioneer 9. overnight LA-SFO, perhaps thru daylight route continuing from San Jose-Portland 10. Montrealer (Montreal-WAS overnight or day service Montreal-Boston) 11. Daylight train WAS-ATL via NS
Posts: 561 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, in order for this so-called 'Coast Daylight' to work with a connection to the CZ-it would leave LA around 6:30pm or 7:00pm and arrive in EMY around 6:30am-an hr and a half before the CZ is due to leave EMY. That would also place the train in SJC around 5:00am or so which would be in plenty of time for the first Capitol Corridor train of the day (I'm assuming) SJC would also be a good emergency transfer point for CZ bound passengers if the 'daylight' is running late. It would make sense to place those passengers on a bus and catch them up to the CZ in Sacramento.
Posts: 387 | From: Bakersfield, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Maniac, before you were on this planet and likely when your Mother and Father were rockin' to Wolfman on "border blaster" Mexican radio station XERB, I was "out riding'. The overnight service you describe is the Southern Pacific's Lark. When I rode such during 1963, be it assured, the predominately Pullman consist stretched "out of sight". There was a three unit Diner which for Breakfast was used as such, but one of the units sufficed for "evening fare' with the remaining area used to sell "Nightcaps". Such was indeed a train; I can recall riding SB with a Roomette (it was said of me during college years "does Gil even know what a Coach is?") on the Engineer's side and opening the shade on a crystal clear morning near Vandenberg AFB - what a view!!!!
At this site owner's sufferance, I reference material I have posted elsewhere:
But, alas, even experiences such as that are not about to turn today's business traveler away from Southwest Airlines (I guess they are the predominant carrier in the SFO-LAX market ever since both American and USAir "nosedived" - great business plan guys, how you both went out and acquired regional carriers to enter that market - and then 'took off" not to return).
Amtrak and patron saint CalDOT did run an overnight train SAC-LAX via Coast Line circa 1983 named the Spirit of California; it didn't do well and was wisely killed in favor of an additional San Joaquin frequency.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
My personal wishlist is topped by a revival of passenger service to Asheville, NC.....a revival of the old 'Skyland Special' to Spartanburg, SC and then an overnight connection (through sleeper anyone?) to Florida at Columbia, SC. With relatives in the Orlando area and hating I-95, this is a train I would patronize 2-5 times each year.
Of course the reality is that service to Ashevile won't happen without support from the North Carolina DOT. As the line via Spartanburg wouldn't serve much of North Carolina, this route would not get much support even if the line down Saluda Mountain were still in service.
An alternate route might be Asheville - Hickory - Salisbury - Charlotte - Columbia. Connections to Greensboro and Raleigh at Salisbury.....connections to Florida at Columbia.
-------------------- 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 amtraxmaniac: 6. LAX-Las Vegas!!!! Need I justify that one?!?!?
Needless to say, Patrick, I heartily agree. A "five a day' service (stops in The Meadows by the airport for the "luxocrowd", Flamingo Road (for the 'middle of the roaders') and Downtown (for "the others') using "plain old trains' (well stocked Cafe with two Attendants assigned; WB "last call' leaving Yermo), and fares "priced @ market', would be an overnight success.
Only problem is how would you route it?
The UP has clearly let it known that the LA&SL is "not available'; nor are they about to accept any publicly funded track capacity expansion to accommodate passenger trains. Ditto for the BNSF over Cajon Pass; that they are in the process of adding an additional track is "not exactly' being done with passenger trains in mind.
Therefore, sponsors of an "Angels Meadows" initiative had best include in their budget some 250 miles of solely passenger railroad ROW - oh and let's throw in a tunnel under the San Gabriel Range.
Now how viable is such a proposal?
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Otherwise, all your wishful thinking is just that.
I'll get out my garden hose to spray ice-cold water on PullmanCo. suggestion. Writing the U.S. Congress is not going to produce much result (you all will have to trust me on this). If you want anything to happen in the way of dollars you better work your state legislature to consider enabling legislation, because service isn't going to expand unless the state or the region works together along a corridor.
PullmanCo's recommendation may help (a bit) but your efforts would be better directed or focused on Jim Oberstar's House subcommittee at this point. The Amtrak 50/50 funding bill successfully came out of the committee and that is where the S-294 80/20 funding bill currently sits. The 50/50 bill is now being handled by the FRA and states have been able to apply since March 18th. They have a year and a half to take advantage.
An individual voter as we know carries very little clout and matters little. Organizations and movements matter more if they work as a lobby to put pressure on legislative bodies, whether its about a power plant, a scewy but emotional social issue, or a cause.
PullmanCo doesn't identify the nature of targeted advocacy. What is this?
Posts: 110 | From: Kansas City, Missouri | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
" Organizations and movements matter more if they work as a lobby to put pressure on legislative bodies, whether its about a power plant, a scewy but emotional social issue, or a cause."
If you don't gather horsepower to get your individual route, you will not get it.
Oh, by the way: There is a finite quantity of equipment in Amtrak's fleet. Sooner or later, expansion means capital procurement, or no matter how much operating subsidy funding there is , there won't be a consist to operate on the subsidy.
Further, much of the ancillary physical plant needed to run passenger service (coach yards, commissaries, stations) is gone. That also has to be factored into the cost of new or restored service.
Posts: 1404 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
" Organizations and movements matter more if they work as a lobby to put pressure on legislative bodies, whether its about a power plant, a scewy but emotional social issue, or a cause."
If you don't gather horsepower to get your individual route, you will not get it.
Oh, by the way: There is a finite quantity of equipment in Amtrak's fleet. Sooner or later, expansion means capital procurement, or no matter how much operating subsidy funding there is , there won't be a consist to operate on the subsidy.
Further, much of the ancillary physical plant needed to run passenger service (coach yards, commissaries, stations) is gone. That also has to be factored into the cost of new or restored service.
Yeah,
I sat in on a teleconference with Amtrak and a couple of state DOT's last month. The equipment "poor" issue came up and the estimation is a necessary lead time of 28 months at a minimum for procurement of "additional", whether it is a new order or rehab.
But Rome wasn't built in a day, and only a childlike railfan believes that an initiative can be orchestrated in 6 months to a year.
The more mature recognize that rather than talk and dream, you better get off your butt and start working on it, prepare youself mentally that it will take several years to achieve, and that there will be political sabotage attempted at several points along the path (be prepared with a prevent defense).
There is support and interest however, and high and mighty political types have invested in this to a degree. The current administration's days are numbered (281 to be exact), and we should be optimists-what chance is there if we believe in failure (might as well shut up, say and do nothing more).
Posts: 110 | From: Kansas City, Missouri | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by notelvis: My personal wishlist is topped by a revival of passenger service to Asheville, NC.....
An alternate route might be Asheville - Hickory - Salisbury - Charlotte - Columbia. Connections to Greensboro and Raleigh at Salisbury.....connections to Florida at Columbia.
Of all of the railfan daydreaming the Asheville route has a fair chance of being realized thanks to the folks at NC DOT and the work already done for the stations. If it does happen it will be because of them and not Amtrak. So a Piedmont type train could happen.
I don't think it's likely it will continue on into SC as zero chance of this state providing funding and Amtrak has other priorities. Perhaps the 'Asheville Flyer' would be the train to continue from Greensboro to Raleigh-Selma-Goldsboro that NC has studied. This would allow for Selma connections north and south.
Let's hope they can figure out a way to improve the speed over the old Ashville Special. It took 6.5 hours to go the 197 miles. At a leisurely 30mph avg it would not be competitive with I-40, but sure would be scenic and fun.
Posts: 2397 | From: Camden, SC | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
As I've stated on the Heartland Flyer threads, velocity is one of several determining factors for passengers.
When a driver can leave a train in the dust, then the trains' customer potential may quickly reduce to the economically disadvantaged.
May I ask: What is the end-end speed of the Hound on that route? Do you have any idea of price competitiveness with the Hound?
-------------------- The City of Saint Louis (UP, 1967) is still my standard for passenger operations Posts: 1404 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by notelvis: My personal wishlist is topped by a revival of passenger service to Asheville, NC.....
An alternate route might be Asheville - Hickory - Salisbury - Charlotte - Columbia. Connections to Greensboro and Raleigh at Salisbury.....connections to Florida at Columbia.
Of all of the railfan daydreaming the Asheville route has a fair chance of being realized thanks to the folks at NC DOT and the work already done for the stations. If it does happen it will be because of them and not Amtrak. So a Piedmont type train could happen.
I don't think it's likely it will continue on into SC as zero chance of this state providing funding and Amtrak has other priorities. Perhaps the 'Asheville Flyer' would be the train to continue from Greensboro to Raleigh-Selma-Goldsboro that NC has studied. This would allow for Selma connections north and south.
Let's hope they can figure out a way to improve the speed over the old Ashville Special. It took 6.5 hours to go the 197 miles. At a leisurely 30mph avg it would not be competitive with I-40, but sure would be scenic and fun.
Hi Palmland,
The NCDOT has been studying and preparing for a proposed Asheville passenger train since 1994. Yeah, there is a chance - particularly since three of the en route stations have been renovated - for at the very least an Asheville - Salisbury train making connections to/from the Carolinian and Piedmont there.
The snag is that Norfolk Southern wants a whole lot of money for extending sidings and updating signals. The tracks themselves are already in better shape than they were at any time Southern was operating passenger trains on this route.
Maybe someday it will happen.
-------------------- 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 |
Otherwise, all your wishful thinking is just that.
This one-note Johnny business is getting old, fast. Acting like people don't already do that is also quite old. You also didn't pay attention to the first post, where the author made it plain that this is a pipe-dream wish-list.
If Congress hasn't listened in 37 years, they aren't going to suddenly listen now. They will continue to serve special interest over the people until it kills them.
Posts: 566 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
My wish list starts with getting the railroad lines into the condition that the trains can be run fast. Fifty years ago we had 16 hour trains between New York and Chicago on two routes. These were still end to end average speeds of under 60 mph.
Since the masses of people and closely spaced cities are still in the Northeast, and by northeast, I mean the territory between the Mason-Dixon Line and Ohio River to Canadian border and Atlantic Ocean to Mississippi River not the tiny area as defined by New Yorkers, we need to start there. It would be good for the rest of the country as well, as this territory is a sinkhole for money spent on highway construction. Everything done there costs more than the equivalent work done anywhere else in the country outside of California.
The start: get to the point that there are 4 to 6 or more trains averaging over 60 mph spread out throughout the day that connect all reasonable city pairs. These could and should as much as practical be long distance trains with the cities involved connected like beads on a string. I could expand on this, but I am supposed to be working.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by George Harris: My wish list starts with getting the railroad lines into the condition that the trains can be run fast. Fifty years ago we had 16 hour trains between New York and Chicago on two routes. These were still end to end average speeds of under 60 mph.
Since the masses of people and closely spaced cities are still in the Northeast, and by northeast, I mean the territory between the Mason-Dixon Line and Ohio River to Canadian border and Atlantic Ocean to Mississippi River not the tiny area as defined by New Yorkers, we need to start there. It would be good for the rest of the country as well, as this territory is a sinkhole for money spent on highway construction. Everything done there costs more than the equivalent work done anywhere else in the country outside of California.
The start: get to the point that there are 4 to 6 or more trains averaging over 60 mph spread out throughout the day that connect all reasonable city pairs. These could and should as much as practical be long distance trains with the cities involved connected like beads on a string. I could expand on this, but I am supposed to be working.
George Harris shares the perspective that I believe is the most rational, most reasonable and most practical approach to a viable passenger rail system for the 21st century. His values mirror my own.
Notice that he doesn't digress into profitability, politics, favorite regions or other extraneous issues. As a wish list, he isn't asking for the moon or talking pie in the sky. In fact this is exactly a prescription for what our country needs at the present time. It is also, in my opinion, in harmony with the economic, environmental, energy needs, and political state of the union.
I hope Mr. Harris' dream, or wish, comes to pass. I won't say anything to disparage it, in fact I am actively working and putting my own money into an effort to make just such a future come to pass.
Posts: 110 | From: Kansas City, Missouri | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree one hundred percent with Mr. Harris and Thunderchief. (Also, how is the first poster's list any more of a pie in the sky than the last? The former doesn't call for more trains than the latter; if anything it seems not quite so ambitious.) So to the original poster: That doesn't look like a pipe dream.
I think it's pathetic that these proposals for modest improvement to passenger service are talked about as unrealistic. To be sure, there is a certain inertia to be overcome starting new trains. But there is no reason for letting that be our focus. I like the comment that expanded train service is in harmony with the state of the union.
Tell me I can't buy an old bus, and personally carry enough passengers on the highway to compete seriously with an Amtrak train. Then tell me the government couldn't do the same, or do the same thing using trains instead. Are they going to? Are we going to support them? We as a nation need to wake up and realize that economics is on Amtrak's side.
----------- " 'War is peace. Ignorance is strength. Freedom is slavery.' " -- George Orwell, 1984Posts: 144 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PullmanCo: ...The Administration of Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, cut the Texas Chief aka Lone Star....The Administration of William Jefferson Clinton, a Democrat, cut the Desert Wind...
Now that the Bush administration is clearly into lame duck status (278 and a wake up), I think it can be noted that Amtrak fared better during the incumbent than it did under the predecessor Administration.
Despite (but maybe on account of) the poorly executed Mineta initiative (Dog and Pony show), there really have only been "prunings" consisting of the KYCARD, Lake Country, Sunset East, and Three Rivers - all services added subsequent to formulation of the Basic System inaugurated on A-Day.
While some here may lament that at this time, the only addition to the Basic System standing is the Portland Empire Builder; the other changes such as Lake Shore for Broadway, and Eagle for Lone Star, essentially represent reroutes.
I continue to remain astounded that save the relatively weak National Limited and Floridian, the Basic System set forth by the Incorporators to be a stop gap alternative to total overnight elimination of the LD trains, has remained intact.
The Incorporators envisioned, and the plan sold to the railroads as, a 'well we tried' period in which there would be a marketing campaign and an equipment 'freshen up", but the inexorable ending would occur somewhere around 1976 after it was realized that if the railroads could not make a dime at it, no one else can.
What the Incorporators and for that matter the railroad managers signing up did not fully realize was the extent to which LD trains would become some kind of inexpensive rolling pork barrel, and that they would be embraced as means towards that end.
So here we stand; anybody really think either a McCain or Obama administration will be anymore "LD friendly'? I know that I for one am not about to place my bets.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here's one Amtrak wish, or at least an intercity train wish: Service through Madison, WI, via the Empire Builder route. More than once per day each direction. SF Thunderchief's wish is a good one, too.
-------------------- "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one corner of the Earth all one's life." Posts: 506 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
I didn't realize a Federal appropriation, and the political battles within the Congress and the Executive, were extraneous issues.
This thread IS a wish list, and so my answer to you question is no, if "appropriation, and the political battles within the Congress and the Executive are extraneous issues" are what you want to wish for PullmanCo.
Posts: 110 | From: Kansas City, Missouri | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
How about a touch of pragmatism, Mr. Thunderchief, that Mr. Pullman, who incidentially I've learned holds a Masters in Public Policy Administration, brings to this discussion?
Would not this discussion be more meaningful if it were to address matters that possibly could move forth rather than absurdities such as "NARP's Vision"?
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
What you are suggesting is the perspective that I would like to see presented here. This particular thread is a wish list. It is predicated on ideas and concepts.
Other threads focus discussion on pragmatic issues, and that is good.
There is so much negative discussion of Amtrak, rarely is anything positive presented. In addition, there is progress being made across the country that suggests maybe a trend is developing. The Heartland Flyer developed 9 years ago, the Albuquerque Railrunner two years ago. There are other positive signs.
PullmanCo. is almost consistently negative. He admits he is cynical, probably from years of frustration. But what good will that do to encourage progress in the future?
PullmanCo. pooh-poohs or pours ice cold water on ideas, and enthusiasm, and reports of initiatives. What good does that do?
Posts: 110 | From: Kansas City, Missouri | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
You want my wish list? 1) M&E that works. What did Passenger Traffic Departments REALLY MAKE THEIR MONEY ON BEFORE OCTOBER 1967?? MAIL AND EXPRESS. The system we have (which in spite of everything is close to what was there in 1971) is a remnant which cannot support itself. Amtrak needs a revenue generator.
2) Second turns on each of the major routes, being M&E with quality of service supporting first fruits movement of seasonal fruits and vegetables, bulk 1st/2d/3d class US mail (not to mention Fedex/UPS as appropriate), and on and on.
3) Denver-KC, 3x daily, with a 60MPH average rate of advance.
4) A holistic debate about domestric transportation and its energy demands in the US, which doesn't look at the jobs generated by building highways.
Problem is, I've worked in public budgeting and funding, albeit in defense, not transportation. I saw David Gunn present a vision of the "State of Good Repair", complete with a price tag... and get fired for it.
I watched Congress take Mr Gunn's numbers, say thank you, and mark up the Amtrak budget by rate of inflation. At least that wasn't what the Administration wanted, but it sure wasn't what Amtrak needed.
I've watched the fleet dwindle one or two cars at a time, one or two locomotives at a time. We have no production capacity in the country. We have a 28 month lag to start a new train. You said that yourself.
I've watched NEC folks say to hell with the rest of the country. Amtrak is, the last time I checked, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation.
Sam Graves, R-6, MO, is my Congresscritter. He also sits the House Transportation Committee. I've talked to his transportation policy staffer. I've asked to keep the current system in place as a placeholder... I'm waiting for the carbon use tax to be factored in on top of the existing Federal fuels tax. I write the letters and I participate in the forums.
So yes, when I see pipe dreams anymore, I get out the cold water. Did you listen to KPR this morning? $130M shortfall in receipts for the Kansas budget beginning July 1. That's not chump change, even for KS. Something's gonna get schwacked right out of the budget. You think that 3-6-12M (pick number based on cost sharing algorithm) for the Oil Flyer would have made the cut had the studies been NOW, not ready for the 10 Legislative season?
Until bullet 4 of my wishlist happens, we're stuck in incremental policymaking. That is most assuredly NOT GOOD.
-------------------- The City of Saint Louis (UP, 1967) is still my standard for passenger operations Posts: 1404 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Before we get all excited about Mail and Express, remember this: mail and express was, from the passengers' perspective, the greatest delayer of trains there ever was. Most secondary trains had long stops almost everywhere to work the head end traffic, and most premier trains did not carry any head end traffic and those that did tried to limit it to traffic that simply ran through end to end.
Those that remember the Warrington era of "expedited freight will save us" should also remember the lengthening of schedules and random stops to switch in and out cars that added delay, not to mention the feeling, mostly unjustified, of the host railroads that Amtrak had decided to be in competition with their hosts.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
USPS is a dieing business. The mail is being replaced by email and UPS/FedEx. That's not a good solution for Amtrak.
Federally funded transportation is as ancient as the USA {almost}; we should be funding our third transportation option.
Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Would partnering with UPS/FedEx to move their freight help anything? I know BNSF has the UPS contract right now, but for certain items, could Amtrak deliver just as fast (if not faster)? For example, the San Joaquin route could probably get freight down to Bakersfield faster than BNSF... Just an idea...
Posts: 82 | From: San Lorenzo, CA | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It would be impractical on the San Joaquin for a couple reasons. For one, assuming these M&E cars are at the rear of the consists, SAn Joaquin trains have push-pull operations. The other factor is speed. The schedule on the San Joaquin depends on the train being able to attain higher speeds. A delayed train can mean less than desireable turnaround times. SOme of the South to North turnaround times in Bakersfield are LESS than two hours. As it is, they no longer turn the train in Bakersfield due to scheduling.
Posts: 387 | From: Bakersfield, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Prior to the Warrington era express initiative, mail and express added to the bottom line with little impact on operations and had done so for several years. The keys were limited en route handling and limiting shipments to the long distance network.
I think it was a mistake to expand to corridor services and include shipments needing en route handling, thus lengthening schedules and reducing reliability.
I think one area where M&E expansion could work with corridor length services would be in conjunction with restoration of overnight service between select city pairs. Otherwise, use the pre-Warrington model, though not necessarily just with mail.
Posts: 41 | From: San Diego, CA, USA | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting... totally skipped my mind about the push-pull operations... and I travel on the San Joaquin's all the time too... Well, it was a pipe dream
Too bad that doesn't go on any longer for the long-distance trains though.
One idea I just thought off - possibly if freight was added to certain long-distance trains by the host railroads from terminal-to-terminal, they could allow the LDs to enjoy better OTP. These trains could almost act as hot shots - getting both the important freight/produce and passengers to their destination quickly.
Posts: 82 | From: San Lorenzo, CA | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by amtraxmaniac: It would be impractical on the San Joaquin for a couple reasons. For one, assuming these M&E cars are at the rear of the consists, SAn Joaquin trains have push-pull operations. The other factor is speed. The schedule on the San Joaquin depends on the train being able to attain higher speeds. A delayed train can mean less than desireable turnaround times. SOme of the South to North turnaround times in Bakersfield are LESS than two hours. As it is, they no longer turn the train in Bakersfield due to scheduling.
At what point did they quit turning the trains in BFD? I've often wondered how they decide which direction to run the California Car trains - wonder why loco in rear going to BFD and in the front on the way back... ?
Posts: 82 | From: San Lorenzo, CA | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
First Jarrod, may I be the first to wish you "Happy 22nd Birthday".
By now from reviewing this topic, you have surmised that Amtrak once had a program to handle freight in the consists of the LD trains. The peak year of this program was likely 1999, or when you were age 13.
Likely you have further surmised that the program flopped. Even though "on paper', handling freight (anything that could be palletized other than HAZMAT) on a passenger train 'that was already there' appeared to be a sound concept, the 'facts of life" proved to be different. Although there was a Surface Transportastion Board ruling in favor of Amtrak for handling this business, the Class I industry perceived that Amtrak had far exceeded their franchise to operate passenger trains, which did include handling 'express' so long as it was within the scope of an ancilliary activity.
What of course is of interest is that since Amtrak withdrew from the business during the Gunn presidency, no railroad has considered operating a like service for their own account. This suggests that the business model was flawed from the "get go'.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: What of course is of interest is that since Amtrak withdrew from the business during the Gunn presidency, no railroad has considered operating a like service for their own account. This suggests that the business model was flawed from the "get go'.
Or was it a good idea that was simply handled poorly like so many other facets of Amtrak management?
-------------------- Chuck
“Adventure is just bad planning.” - Roald Amundsen Posts: 80 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is a safe assumption, Dr. Brown, that there was "flim flammery' about 60 Mass regarding the merits of the Mail & Express program initiative. It has come to my attention that the rates offered by Amtrak were simply 'giveaways"; no doubt this is why the refrigerated commodity carrier, ExpressTrak, held Amtrak's "feet to the fire" for a period of time long after Amtrak had made its intentions known to exit the business.
I must wonder to what extent Amtrak has had success in disposing the equipment made surplus by the cessation of the program, as 270 Boxcars were acquired for such. Somehow, I don't think Boxcars are exactly the most high demand railcar out there today.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
