From the new Amtrak timetable effective April 2, "Sunset Limited service has been suspended between New Orleans and Orlando. Future service has not been determined."
The missing link is no longer blamed on Hurricane Katrina. This bland statement doesn't sound like the Sunset will ever return east of New Orleans to me.
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
But did you notice, David, the unmitigated gall of them not to change the route map to delete the line between NOL and JAX? The least they could have done was create another color for that line and explain it in the legend. Now I know, by the way, why it's called a "legend." In the case of the Sunset Limited, the note would start with "Once upon a time..."!
Posted by notelvis (Member # 3071) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ocala Mike: But did you notice, David, the unmitigated gall of them not to change the route map to delete the line between NOL and JAX? The least they could have done was create another color for that line and explain it in the legend. Now I know, by the way, why it's called a "legend." In the case of the Sunset Limited, the note would start with "Once upon a time..."!
Yes. In fact the line being present on the route map is why I went directly to the Sunset timetable. I'd hoped I might find an encouraging little note about service restoration when I got there.
Posted by Boyce (Member # 2719) on :
Our Father, which art in heaven, please bring back the Sunset Limited east of New Orleans.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Thanks for the "heads up", Mr. Presley, that it is time to order a new System Timetable.
Posted by TwinStarRocket (Member # 2142) on :
Time for someone to write a song, along the lines of "City of New Orleans" or "The MTA" by the Kingston Trio.
Under "What's New at Trainweb", check out Johnny Cash Ridin the Rails on YouTube.
Posted by gp35 (Member # 3971) on :
The next change in Sunset will be quad-weekly service.
Posted by RRRICH (Member # 1418) on :
gp35 - where did you hear that? If it is true, that is good -- better than tri-weekly service.
Posted by MDRR (Member # 2992) on :
Its more likely to become Quad monthly than Quad weekly
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
The March NARP newsletter referred to an Amtrak staff plan for daily service from NOL to Mobile (presumably a continuation of the City of New Orleans) and tri-weekly on to Orlando. They reported the status of that plan as 'uncertain'.
I suspect service to Mobile would be about the best we could realistically hope for now. I guess you gotta fill up those casinos. Long ago the L&N ran a commuter train from New Orleans through Biloxi and Gulfport to Ocean Springs (about 90 miles). Would be ironic if that gets a new life but not one of the good trains like the Gulf Wind or Pan American.
Posted by gp35 (Member # 3971) on :
quote:Originally posted by RRRICH: gp35 - where did you hear that? If it is true, that is good -- better than tri-weekly service.
Trust me on not naming my source. The source said a new time schedule and 4th weekly train is very likely soon. Daily service and east of nol is unlikely anytime soon. Lack of equiment was the reason. The goal overall was daily service for Sunset and Cardinal.
Posted by RRRICH (Member # 1418) on :
....which would also be very good!!! (Sunset and Cardinal daily service)
Posted by notelvis (Member # 3071) on :
quote:Originally posted by RRRICH: ....which would also be very good!!! (Sunset and Cardinal daily service)
I sure would like to see Superliners on the Cardinal again.....although I know Amtrak sells more tickets when they can run the train through to New York rather than terminating in Washington.
Posted by RRRICH (Member # 1418) on :
..............So, to sum up everything, is this year the "sunset" year for the Sunset Ltd East?
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
No, because termination requires re-starting the train so there can be 180 day STB notices...
Posted by gp35 (Member # 3971) on :
Sunset has been running good on time.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
....And so much for the great internet myth that the Class I's are intentionally delaying Amtrak trains.
My personal take is that Class I's move Amtrak trains consistent with their own requirements of service; the Class I's will not 'lay down" their roads for the convenience of Amtrak - nor should they considering how Amtrak has forced their way (their right of access pursuant to RPSA '70) on to investor owned ROW's that can otherwise be best utilized with traffic that pays the bills and provides a return to the investors.
But conversely, as many here know, I have little use for postiions taken by advocacy groups and others who hold that Amtrak is owed some special rite of passage.
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
Now Gil, you arch conservative, you really have to lighten up a little while you're here. Be glad I'm not President; the second thing I'd do is nationalize the railroads. If you remember the ball cap I was wearing when we met in Sanford, I think you know what the first thing I'd do is.
Posted by notelvis (Member # 3071) on :
I've always respected your views Mr. Norman but I do not feel like Amtrak forced their way onto investor owned ROW's.
The freight railroads, rather, were thrilled to unload their passenger operations (and the expenses associated with operating them) in 1971. Amtrak was their ticket out of the passenger business and something that, to a degree, was welcomed by the good private investors at that time. Given that the number of passenger trains Amtrak operates over those ROW's today is a mere fraction of what existed on April 30, 1971, I'd say the freight class I's and their corporate successors are barely impacted by Amtrak's presence one way or the other. You yourself have noted the irony that Union Pacific's main stem, the Overland Route, is totally devoid of scheduled passenger train movements.
For the record, I agree with you in that I don't believe that Amtrak trains are being delayed intentionally. Just some host railroads are far better at getting all trains over the road than others.
In an unrelated note - any chance you'll be out walking the K-9 this Thursday (April 12) about 3:45ish? I'll be looking for you from my roomette on #3. North side of the tracks, right?
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
I too respect the thoughts of both Messrs. Mike and Presley, even if I do not agree.
I can't be sure, but when the concept of a National passenger system was 'sold' to the roads during the late 60's, it was with the intent the Adios drumheads would be in place in 'about five years'. It was meant to be an orderly means to eliminate passenger service save the Corridor and commuter services operated by (already ward of the state) Penn Central. That is what the water cooler in my office thought. That is what managers "a mite bit higher up than I' also thought - and shared that thought with me.
But the politicos discovered they had constituents that "loved trains" (a few even rode them) and I think we know the "rest of the story'.
Had the roads known 1) that 'dereg" would have allowed them to unilaterally discontinue all trains overnight (hopefully not in the middle of a run - that happened a few times down your way, Mr. Presley) and 2) that if there was any scenario that would have LD's in place thirty five years after A-Day, I think the roads would have thought twice about signing up.
Now to what extent Amtrak trains are the bane and the root of all that is wrong with railroad operations has likely been overblown by me. As you note, whatever operational ills occur along the UP Overland Route can hardly be attributed to Amtrak. Nor can CSX's boneheads in single tracking the ACL and truncating the SAL as a through route for any class of service be laid at Amtrak's feet. Most likely, Amtrak is simply a nuisance that must be accomodated such as work trains must also be accomodated.
But it is my conviction that even though I have been removed from the industry for more than 25 years, if the industry had its "druthers', Amtrak would be gone.
Posted by notelvis (Member # 3071) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Had the roads known 1) that 'dereg" would have allowed them to unilaterally discontinue all trains overnight (hopefully not in the middle of a run - that happened a few times down your way, Mr. Presley) and that if there was any scenario that would have LD's in place thirty five years after A-Day, I think the roads would have thought twice about signing up.
Nor can CSX's boneheads in single tracking the ACL and truncating the SAL as a through route for any class of service be laid at Amtrak's feet.
Yes, it's true that I feel that a national railroad passenger system ought to exist just for the sake of having such.....even if most of the routes are little more than a rolling National Park. I also have 'green leanings' though not to the degree my wife would like!
I am in full agreement that the class I's would not have rushed to sign on the dotted line had they imagined Amtrak would still be toddling along beyond the mid-1980's at the latest. In fact, I fully expected that you would point that out in your reply. Thanks for not letting me down!
The class I's probably would have managed to be freight only by 1980 had it not been for Amtrak. Their desire for immediate and complete relief in 1971 was a huge miscalculation and one that I'm very glad of.
The other two sections of your post which I have quoted are there because
A) the example of CSX's single-tracking the 'A' line and truncating the 'S' line is the exact example I had in mind when I said that some railroads had done a better job of moving their trains over the road than others. CSX falls squarely into the 'others' category.
and B) one of the most remarkable stories of the 60's and 70's, to me anyway, was how Graham Claytor evolved from the hatchet man finding the loopholes which allowed Southern to halt trains for good unannounced in the wee hours at backwoods depots to the patron saint of railfans with his steam excursions and Southern Crescent of the 1970's. Without his presidency at NPRC, Amtrak may very well have not made it past the mid-80's.......but I digress.
I'll keep my eye peeled for the pooch who takes you walking on the 12th!
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
notelvis, I'm sure Gil will weigh in on this, but he confided to me when we met in Sanford a few weeks ago over a Pizza Hut double sausage that he is presently "poochless."
Also, it may be bad luck (for him)for us to do a Gil Norman search when passing through Clarendon Hills on Amtrak. When I did so on #5 last Nov. 29th, he was out having a fender-bender in his sparkling new black Lexus.
Posted by TwinStarRocket (Member # 2142) on :
On a related note regarding the relevant competency of the Class I's, I notice in the news that Warren Buffet just bought 10% of BNSF, his first RR investment. He has a history of impressively wise decisions.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
I hope it is understood, Mr. Presley, that even though I do not agree, I certainly respect the courage of your convictions regarding Long Distance rail passenger service.
You believe it is fortunate that the USA has some semblance of a National system and that there should be a significant expansion of such over the existing Class I trackage. I take a differing view in that the underlying intent of Staggers is that no transportation company should be forced by fiat to offer any service and/or rate they choose not to. I am further of thought that since the Class I's are investor owned, their managements should have full prerogative over such services and rates. The marketplace will either reward (BNSF with Warren taking a position therein?) or penalize (CSX for their boneheads - including letting Snowman behind the throttle) management's performance. That is how capitalism works, and it has worked pretty good for us over the years.
But that is why we have a Forum at which both sides of this issue can be discussed with maturity and respect. It is indeed testament to the Members regularly participating that this unmoderated Forum works as well as it does .
I thank you, Sir, for your participation here.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
quote:Originally posted by TwinStarRocket: On a related note regarding the relevant competency of the Class I's, I notice in the news that Warren Buffet just bought 10% of BNSF, his first RR investment. He has a history of impressively wise decisions.
Here is major financial newssource confirmation:
Bloomberg Posted by delvyrails (Member # 4205) on :
To get back to the railroad east of New Orleans, might I speculate on a schedule for this "Gulf Wind" extension of the City of New Orleans?:
8p Chicago 9a 332p ar New Orleans lv 145p 430p lv New Orleans ar 1220p 820p Mobile 630a CT (less than daily service below) 730a Tallahassee 1145p ET 9a Lake City 930p 740-8a Jacksonville 815-30p 245p ar Orlando lv 445p Proceed to Sanford for servicing while Auto Train is out of town.
A Tampa-Miami extennsion would be a nicety: 435-45p Tampa 3-310p 1005p Miami 1140a Miami is an alternate service point.
A quicker alternate route to Tampa would be a Thruway Motorcoach from Lake City via I-75.
If this all happens, the big Chicago-Orlando market would be served by a through train again for the first time since the Floridian expired. No more hair-raising routing via Washington connection!
Posted by notelvis (Member # 3071) on :
Hi All....Mr. Norman in particular,
At one point in my life I would have advocated a significant expansion of the long distance Amtrak routes. I think that I've moderated a bit in that I now feel there are only a handful of routes presently not seeing any passenger service that ought to.
In fact, I can only strongly argue for three such routes.....all of which had some sort of Amtrak service at some time -
1) The former 'Gulf Wind/Sunset' route between Jacksonville and New Orleans. (advocated above by Mr. Pawson.....I like the idea of extending the City of New Orleans by-the-way.)
2) The former 'City of LA/Desert Wind' route between Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, and Los Angeles.
3) Some sort of direct service, even if only tri-weekly, from Chicago to Florida. (again, extending the City of NO to Orlando would be an acceptable way of accomplishing this.)
There are others that would be nice to see....such as a return of the Pioneer (Denver-Seattle) or something like the National Limited (New York - Kansas City). Of course I'd like to see the NCDOT get something back to Asheville, NC (finally) and while I'm not sure I could advocate a train from the Twin Cities to Texas, I could certainly advocate for a day train from the Twin Cities as far as Kansas City. This would open up numerous connectivity options to the west coast using trains 3/4 and 5/6.
OK - I suppose here is where I catch my breath and admit that we have to define the meaning of 'significant expansion'. I see talking about 3-6 new routes as bringing me to the brink. (IE: six new trains is not significant but seven would be!) Mr. Norman, I'm imagining that you would probably define 'significant expansion' in the 2-4 new route range....perhaps lower. We haven't even gotten into the issue of increasing the frequency of service on existing routes either!
Regardless - your positions have always been rational and respectfully submitted. I enjoy reading them for the insider perspective. Most importantly, your posts help me to discern what quantity of service is realistic and what is hopeless fantasy.....well, for the most part.
I'll withdraw from this particular thread now as my chances to be online will be limited through Sunday. I am departing tomorrow on my next rail trip, Atlanta, GA to Albuquerque, NM via DC and Chicago. Had some Guest Reward points crying to be spent!
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Regarding our subtopic here, the graphic appearing in The Wall Street Journal of Warren 'Taking a Ride on the Reading" is almost worth in itself the buck at the newsstand for a copy of such.
Nevertheless, for those with access to the subscription site, here is Journal coverage of the event:
Aside from me and all of you (above comments) the people who live in western Florida would like to also know--what the hell happened to their Sunset Limited service to Tallahassee, Pensacola, Madison, etc. This is already preposterous! We can have TWO WARS but not Amtrak service east of New Orleans!
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
Pojon: You need to write to Gov. Crist, Senators Nelson and Martinez, and your US Representative. Assuming you live in a town along the line that lost service, you need to contact your local politicos and civic leaders and talk up the effect that the loss of this service is having on their economy.
Posted by SilverStar092 (Member # 2652) on :
It is beyond pathetic that Amtrak has abandoned us in North Florida. During a high school football trip to Pensacola this fall, I stopped by the Pensacola station and found a notice on the door stating that service was disrupted due to Katrina. It was the original notice indicating the Sunset was only operating west of San Antonio and the Crescent and City were truncated as well! In other words, nobody has ever put up a replacement notice. I spent many a lunch time at the Tallahassee depot talking with the agent (we had 4 or 5 different ones over the years before they unstaffed it). Perhaps 6 or 7 years ago the agent and I agreed the best service would be an extended City of New Orleans as it would permit popular Florida-Chicago service and could retain a westbound connection to the Sunset. It also was painfully obvious that cutting the Sunset back to Sanford and eventually Orlando was poor judgement as that killed student travel and turned away a good deal of business from other folks who wanted to travel to West Palm Beach, Ft. Lauderdale, and Miami. Oddly one could not go to Sotuh Florida but could return via a Silver Meteor connection in Orlando. What always amazed me was that Amtrak never tried a Thruway bus connection at Tallahassee to Tampa, a 4 1/2 hour ride which would have cut about 4 hours off the schedule of an orlando-Tampa connection. This easily could have continued to St. Pete, Sarasota, Ft. Myers, and Naples. It's time to stop the games and get service rolling again east of NOL!
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
SilverStar092, you are preaching to the choir here! See my post above.
Posted by 4020North (Member # 4081) on :
We need a widely expanded national rail system, not just a few more routes, not just trying to restore what we had a few years ago. We can make trains a choice that more than just a relative handful of people rely on. If we can't even restore the 1971 levels of Amtrak service, what does that say about the future? Rather, we can. The reasons we can, lie in the economy of using rail as a main component of passenger transport. When Amtrak expands to that point, then our system will be much more efficient. It will cost us far less. It is apparent to me that the way things are now won't work. Having millions of people who are all going the same place over the same route at the same time forced into driving doesn't make sense by any kind of economics. It's simply bad policy. Discontinuing the Sunset, the Silver Service, the Desert Wind or the International are just that. We can't change things overnight. We can act intelligently in our everyday life. We can work with what we are given and make things better for the future. For my part, the next time I have the opportunity I am going to make use of the Sunset Limited.
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
Mr 4020North,
To do what you want requires two elements:
1) Amendment of the 1997 ARAA, which in turn amended RPSA 70: Amtrak's level of access to the railroad needs to be "the former level of utility" sometimes called "priority of access" by us fans.
2) Money above and beyond the "State of Good Repair."
Until then, there will not be change.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
From Marriott Courtyard Roswell GA--
Regarding my earlier remarks made at this topic I would like to qualify such to some degree.
While I still hold to my thought (no; it does not mellow with my being out of town - in fact this trip is by auto) that the only constructive use of the LD in the 21st century is to be a catalyst to garner Federal funding for the one thing Amtrak has that counts - the Northeast Corridor, and that the Class I freight industry would just as soon be gone with LD's. I do not mean to infer that railroad managements are devoting night and day efforts planning a strategy to get rid of them.
I believe the Amtrak LD's are seen by railroad management as simply a "nuisance" that came about from a timely decision, i.e. to sign up pursuant to RPSA '70, made by predecessors. The outflow from the cookie jar during the late 60's was "real" and signing up was the most expedient way to "stop the bleeding" (any of us who have served in the Armed Forces remember what the First Aid training films said).
As I noted earlier, no one envisioned LD's would be around thirty six years later. The Act was intended to provide for an orderly means to get rid of the remaining one third of the system that survived A-Day. The plan was to spruce up some equipment, institute a national marketing plan, and quickly come to the same conclusion thar railroads had during the 20's that passenger service was a hopeless looser and that the Adios drumheads would be broken out in about five years.
Depending upon your personal viewpoint, fortunately or unfortunately, congresscritters had different thoughts.
I am certain there are many higher priorities on the railroad industry's legislative agenda than seeking repeal of the Amtrak "right of access". Without such, the "party WOULD be over". Likely "top of the charts" presently is fending off any populist initiatives of "rereg" . Also on the list I think would be resisting any additional safety and environmental initiatives ("we can police ourselves" being the usual refrain).
Oh well, I guess it will be at home before I review the firestorm this posting causes, as I doubt if Marriott's Fairfield brand, which is where I am next staying in Fredericksburg VA, offers computers as does their Courtyard brand - and unlike some here I am not carrying a Comp USA store with me when traveling about.
Lastly, I note Mr. 4020's comment that he intends to ride the Sunset; while I can't be certain, his posting suggests that such will be done as a matter of principle and support and not necessarilly to fufil a travel requirement. I hope it is noted that, when convenient to my travel needs as distinct from "riding just to ride", I do use Amtrak LD myself. But on this current trip, it was simply not reasonable and practical to do so.
Posted by 4020North (Member # 4081) on :
Mr. Pullman, I agree that laws would have to be amended and substantial investment would be required. My point was higher levels of service as a goal for the future. If we can spend large amounts of money, and change legislation, for the wars mentioned above, we can think about spending and changing some for passenger rail instead. We can take some of the money we are spending to promote inefficient auto travel, and spend it toward expanding Amtrak. If that's difficult today so be it, but the difficulty is in overcoming our reluctance to change. The weapon of those who oppose that change, is the incorrect idea that an expanded rail system would mean decreased efficiency. They want you to believe that, and it works on "Idiot America" with great effect. The problem is, it's not true.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
At a subscription railforum, there is a report that the Amtrak Board has now formally sought discontinuance of the "Sunset East".
It is interesting to note that Amtrak is now choosing to seek discontinuance of the Sunset East (come on folks, did anyone REALLY expect to see it back?) in accordance with the "180 Day Notice" provisions set forth in ARAA '97 (that incidentially superseeded 90 days pursuant to RPSA '70).
The advocacy groups and others, if any, now have opportunity to be heard as the law intends for them to have. I think most here know my position on the LD's in that they should have been gone with the omplementation of "Dereg" and the growth of traffic that Act along with "Globalization" has brought about. But of course we have a working democracy (instead of the "paper democracies" in places such as Iraq and Russia) and I wish such groups luck.
Personally, I think they are going to need it.
I guess Amtrak was told to "stink or get off the pot' regarding the Sunset East. I thought they were attempting the "Korean War' strategy by prolonging this Katrina excuse indefinitely. Oh and the analogy to that long forgotten war, even though hostilities ceased 54 years ago, North and South Korea still remain in a State of War with one another.
Lastly, I had occasion to use Sunset East during both '02 and '04 as part of ORL-1-NOL-58-CHI routings. In both instances "more positives than negatives".
Posted by 20th Century (Member # 2196) on :
Well....just a thought. I think extending the City of New Orleans along the eastern Sunset Route should be a replacement (all the way to Miami). Passengers enroute to/from points east and west of New Orleans change in New Orleans. I'm sure this must have been mentioned before.
Posted by Geoff M (Member # 153) on :
Why don't we forget the through trains and instead try for a NOL-Florida only train? Much as I prefer Superliners to Viewliners, run it as a Viewliner train from NOL to MIA so both endpoints have suitable maintenance facilities. Run the Florida segment overnight as there are already day trains, and the NOL-JAX section during the day to give the folks a decent train, and ensure it doesn't "connect" with anything anywhere.
Example: Read down - - Read up 07:00 New Orleans 22:00 19:00 Jacksonville 10:00 22:15 Orlando 06:45 06:00 Miami 23:00
NOL-JAX timings guessed as I don't have an old timetable to hand. I know it *can* be done in 14 hours, but...
By my reckoning that's four trainsets required, plus NOL and MIA should already have some spares. There should be plenty of maintenance time at each end.
Gulf [bag-] Piper anyone?
Geoff M.
Posted by 20th Century (Member # 2196) on :
Sounds good Geoff, but are there enough viewliners in the fleet to do that?
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
After Mr Norman's post this morning, I went out and searched both the STB and the Amtrak sites.
There is no evidence of a: - Regulatory - Business Case - PR release
which formally places 1/2 (east of New Orleans) into discontinuance proceedings. This includes anything resembling simply "dropping the train."
That said, we're talking about Amtrak, and that means everything is "firmly cast in a sea of Jel-lo."
Posted by 1702 (Member # 4508) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: At a subscription railforum, there is a report that the Amtrak Board has now formally sought discontinuance of the "Sunset East".
If the reference is to the post on trainorders.com, the poster actually said that the "Board is likely to take up this week the matter of officially discontinuing the Sunset Limited east of New Orleans". Your characterization of the matter is unfortunately at odds with what was posted.
I have no idea who the trainorders.com poster is, nor if he has any "inside sources" (himself included) to support his claim. There is a distinct possibility that it's just more rumor and speculation, standard operating procedure in the internet world.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Mr. 1702, I too have re-read that posting and I agree that there is the possibility my report was premature.
However, my thoughts regarding the efficacy of Sunset East stand, and, if the report proves unfounded, there appears there will be no change in Amtrak's "Korean War" strategy.
I would think that advocacy groups would welcome a formal "180 Day Notice' under ARAA '97. As I noted at the posting, the mechanics for persons desiring to object to the change in service would enjoy the formal means to be heard instead of simply , in internetese, ranting.
And finally, here is a "trove" of previous discussion we have had here regarding Sunset East.
My experience with the Trainorders rumor mill is that it is largely fueled by the Amtrak employee rumor mill, which isn't particularly reliable.
It has often been suggested that the Sunset should long ago have been split into two routes at New Orleans. There has been some talk of doing just that, with some sort of corridor development replacing the eastern portion. But that's just another rumor. No more or less credible than any other at this point.