# Skyline Connection-Crescent Star



## battalion51 (Jul 29, 2003)

When I was looking through the Amtrak 2001 Travel Planner I noticed two routes in there that never came to be, the Skyline Connection (PHL-CHI) and the Crescent Star (NYP-ATL-DAL). Does anyone know why Amtrak never picked up these routes that were advertised?


----------



## AMTRAK-P42 (Jul 29, 2003)

battalion51 said:


> When I was looking through the Amtrak 2001 Travel Planner I noticed two routes in there that never came to be, the Skyline Connection (PHL-CHI) and the Crescent Star (NYP-ATL-DAL). Does anyone know why Amtrak never picked up these routes that were advertised?


Well, I can tell you that the CS never really ever got past the planning stages. Presumable, there were not enough funds to do this route. I can remember discussing with one of the conductors over why they canceled the CS and he basically said that lack of funds and questionable ridership came heavily into play. Although, living in Atlanta, it would be very cool to see such a long train come through, as the crescent now runs with 2 Engines, 1 Dorm, 2 Viewliners, 1 Diner, 5-6 Coaches, 1-2 Baggage Cars (In order of consist). We rarely see three engines, almost never northbound, rarly southbound. But oh well.


----------



## Bill Haithcoat (Jul 29, 2003)

Yes, B51, that all got caught up in the various budget crunches---don''t remember which. It (the Crescent's wing to Texas) almost seemd like a sure thing for awhile,I was even planning a vacation around it(my sister lives in Austin TX) but it got caught in one or the other of the very frequent budget problems.


----------



## Viewliner (Jul 29, 2003)

Equipment is an obvious issue, as there isn't enough of it. The Skyline Connection (#45, #46) never came to be because talks between NS and Amtrak broke down. Initially it was supposed to be NYP-CHI, but then shortened to Philly. The Skyline Connection would've used a Viewliner, Lounge, and Coaches, like the Three Rivers Today. It would've run via Cleveland like the Pennsylvanian did, on a daylight schedule. If you want, I can email you a pdf schedule with the Three Trains from 2000.


----------



## AlanB (Jul 29, 2003)

Lack of equipment and lack of an agreement with NS did indeed contribute to the Skyline's death before it ever got off the ground. However if memory serves, the biggest blow came from the lack of Express Trak freight on the ill-fated Lake Counties Limited.

The Lake Counties was supposed to feed Express Trak cars to the Skyline. That's one of the bigger reasons that the Skyline had better hours for Ohio but crappier hours on the end points in Chicago and NYP/Philly.

The fact that the Skyline was supposed to carry freight was also one of the reasons that talks broke down with NS. They didn't want to give Amtrak more freight business disguised as passenger service.


----------



## Amfleet (Jul 29, 2003)

I think the worse plan of them all was the "New England States". It was going to be a limited train with no Diner, haul up 30 cars of express, and have late night arrival and departure times in Boston and Chicago. The name didn't even suit the train either considering the only New England state it would have traveled through would have been Massachusetts.


----------



## AMTRAK-P42 (Jul 29, 2003)

Amfleet said:


> I think the worse plan of them all was the "New England States". It was going to be a limited train with no Diner, haul up 30 cars of express, and have late night arrival and departure times in Boston and Chicago. The name didn't even suit the train either considering the only New England state it would have traveled through would have been Massachusetts.


Was this train even published in the 01 Travel planner? I have never heard of it.


----------



## Amfleet (Jul 29, 2003)

AMTRAK-P42 said:


> Amfleet said:
> 
> 
> > I think the worse plan of them all was the "New England States". It was going to be a limited train with no Diner, haul up 30 cars of express, and have late night arrival and departure times in Boston and Chicago. The name didn't even suit the train either considering the only New England state it would have traveled through would have been Massachusetts.
> ...


No, it only made it to a few on-line groups, and an article in Railpace magazine. The very week Amtrak released the plan CSX and NS said heck know. Both CSX and NS were tired of Amtrak's express business which took away from the freight railroads business.


----------



## Bill Haithcoat (Jul 30, 2003)

As to Amfleet's point about "New England States" being an unsuitable name---actually that was one of the "oldie goldie" train names. A beautiful streamliner by that name did run CHI to BOS beginning in the 40's. Guess it was so-called to distinguish going from to Boston(which a fewer number of trains did) comparative to the many trains which went CHI to NYC.It was a New York Central train. .

The New England States was often featured in ads by the Budd Company in things like the National Geographic during the 40's and 50's time period.

If anyone has parents or grandparents who have old National Geographics around, you could easily find such ads.


----------



## hippyman (Apr 14, 2010)

Bill Haithcoat said:


> As to Amfleet's point about "New England States" being an unsuitable name---actually that was one of the "oldie goldie" train names. A beautiful streamliner by that name did run CHI to BOS beginning in the 40's. Guess it was so-called to distinguish going from to Boston(which a fewer number of trains did) comparative to the many trains which went CHI to NYC.It was a New York Central train. .
> The New England States was often featured in ads by the Budd Company in things like the National Geographic during the 40's and 50's time period.
> 
> If anyone has parents or grandparents who have old National Geographics around, you could easily find such ads.



So, is there any chance that they could revive the Crescent star at anytime in the future? I think that is just what amtrak needs right now, with the SL being discontinued in the east.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Apr 14, 2010)

The Skyline Connection and the Crescent Star were part of Amtrak's Ill-fated express and freight initiative. Trains which actually ran under the initiative included the Pennyslvania (from Philadelphia to Chicago), Kentucky Cardinal, Lake Country Limited and Three Rivers. Freight/express cars also were attached to most long distance trains. There were lots of complaints about the time it took to add/subtract the freight cars to trains. The plan also put Amtrak at odds with the freight railroads since the railroads perceived that Amtrak was stealing their business while using their tracks. It's probably the reason Amtrak trains were treated so badly by Union Pacific dispatchers. The trains were regarded as competitors running on a host railroad and such trains also get the lowest pecking order. Tons of money was spent buying high speed box cars, refers and roadrailer units, as well as more locomotives than were needed to maintain the passenger fleet. On top of all this, the inititiative apparently lost money! The whole thing was killed as soon as David Gunn became Amtrak president.


----------



## jis (Apr 14, 2010)

Yes. That was what we jokingly called "Boxcar George's initiative to convert Amtrak into a freight railroad which incidentally carried a few passengers too".  Of course, the freight railroads were not born yesterday, and they put a kabash to it, probably just as well for the long term health of Amtrak as a passenger carrier.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 14, 2010)

hippyman said:


> Bill Haithcoat said:
> 
> 
> > As to Amfleet's point about "New England States" being an unsuitable name---actually that was one of the "oldie goldie" train names. A beautiful streamliner by that name did run CHI to BOS beginning in the 40's. Guess it was so-called to distinguish going from to Boston(which a fewer number of trains did) comparative to the many trains which went CHI to NYC.It was a New York Central train. .
> ...


Always a chance, but I wouldn't hold my breath either waiting for it.

And it can't happen until Amtrak has the new Viewliners that they're trying to buy right now. They don't have enough equipment without those extra sleepers and diners in that order.


----------



## Bill Haithcoat (Apr 14, 2010)

Bill Haithcoat said:


> Yes, B51, that all got caught up in the various budget crunches---don''t remember which. It (the Crescent's wing to Texas) almost seemd like a sure thing for awhile,I was even planning a vacation around it(my sister lives in Austin TX) but it got caught in one or the other of the very frequent budget problems.



Well this brings back about seven years of memories and some posters long gone.  I had forgotten all about seriously planning a trip on the Crescent Star to see my sister in Austin.. She is still in Austin, maybe some day.....by magic.....we can only hope........


----------



## Guest_George Harris_* (Apr 14, 2010)

If Warrington had been honest and ujpright about the thing and been willing to pay the railroads the going rate for a trackage rights operation for the non-passenger tonnage on these trains, the souring of the relationship between Amtrak and the host RR's might not have occurred. As part of the deal to get out from under the passenger train losses, Amtrak gets a reduced rate for their trains. Most of the "freight" moved on the Amtrak express service was not likely to have moved on the rails otherwise, so it really was not lost business to the railroads, but the additional cars being moved in the passenger trains did result in increased expense to the railroads due to increased wear on the tracks. These additional cars combined with the reduced maintenance of the equipment which Warrington imposed to make the cost structure look better made the Amtrak operation less reliable, thereby increase their consumption of track capacity.

He may have honestly believed that the Express service would be a profit source, but such did not appear to be the case, and the increased run times and reduced reliablity drove away passenger patronage which was and is the reason for Amtrak's existance.

This was part of Warrington's "Glidepath to self sufficiency" which proved to be more of a dive nose first into the ground.

As to teh Crescent-Star: At the time it was proposed the Meridian Shreveport line was not in very good shape. I do not have an old ICRR schedule at hand, but I think the last passenger schedule was about 10 hours for 313 miles. Add about 4 more hours on the UP from Shereport to Dallas, and you have 14 hours from Meridian to Dallas. The ex ICRR line was unsignaled and never fast, despite having a fairly good alignment.

Thankas to the major upgrades by KCS, including signals, the Crescent Star would make more sense now than it did at the time it was proposed. most likely KCS would (justifiably) was some additional sidings installed so as to not increase train delay beyond that occuring with the current all freight operation.


----------



## Bill Haithcoat (Apr 14, 2010)

Guest_George Harris_* said:


> If Warrington had been honest and ujpright about the thing and been willing to pay the railroads the going rate for a trackage rights operation for the non-passenger tonnage on these trains, the souring of the relationship between Amtrak and the host RR's might not have occurred. As part of the deal to get out from under the passenger train losses, Amtrak gets a reduced rate for their trains. Most of the "freight" moved on the Amtrak express service was not likely to have moved on the rails otherwise, so it really was not lost business to the railroads, but the additional cars being moved in the passenger trains did result in increased expense to the railroads due to increased wear on the tracks. These additional cars combined with the reduced maintenance of the equipment which Warrington imposed to make the cost structure look better made the Amtrak operation less reliable, thereby increase their consumption of track capacity.
> He may have honestly believed that the Express service would be a profit source, but such did not appear to be the case, and the increased run times and reduced reliablity drove away passenger patronage which was and is the reason for Amtrak's existance.
> 
> This was part of Warrington's "Glidepath to self sufficiency" which proved to be more of a dive nose first into the ground.
> ...



I grabbed a 1954 Southern timetable. Due to the Washington to Shreveport sleeper handled by the Pelican from WAS to Meridian and IC beyond that.

It shows the southwest bound leaving Meridian 2.50 a.m., arr Shrvpor 1.30 p.m.

The other dircetion it left Shreveport 4.30 pm, ar Meridian 2 a.m.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 14, 2010)

jis said:


> Yes. That was what we jokingly called "Boxcar George's initiative to convert Amtrak into a freight railroad which incidentally carried a few passengers too".  Of course, the freight railroads were not born yesterday, and they put a kabash to it, probably just as well for the long term health of Amtrak as a passenger carrier.


Not to be a grammar ****, Jis, but its spelled "kibosh". It's an actual word, and is in the dictionary.


----------



## PRR 60 (Apr 15, 2010)

Green Maned Lion said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > Yes. That was what we jokingly called "Boxcar George's initiative to convert Amtrak into a freight railroad which incidentally carried a few passengers too".  Of course, the freight railroads were not born yesterday, and they put a kabash to it, probably just as well for the long term health of Amtrak as a passenger carrier.
> ...


For the record, spelling and grammar are two different things. You might not be a grammar ****, but you appear to be a spelling *******.


----------



## Chris J. (Apr 15, 2010)

Guest_George Harris_* said:


> This was part of Warrington's "Glidepath to self sufficiency" which proved to be more of a dive nose first into the ground.


I know the 'glide path to self sufficiency' gets a lot of stick, but did it perhaps in a way help save Amtrak? If Warrington had been totally honest and said "there's no way Amtrak will ever turn a profit" would the plug been pulled there and then?


----------



## Trogdor (Apr 15, 2010)

Chris J. said:


> Guest_George Harris_* said:
> 
> 
> > This was part of Warrington's "Glidepath to self sufficiency" which proved to be more of a dive nose first into the ground.
> ...


That's exactly what David Gunn said, and the plug didn't get pulled, and Gunn faced a generally more hostile political environment for Amtrak than Warrington did.

But, in the end, there's no way to know the answer to that "what if" scenario.


----------



## jis (Apr 15, 2010)

Green Maned Lion said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > Yes. That was what we jokingly called "Boxcar George's initiative to convert Amtrak into a freight railroad which incidentally carried a few passengers too".  Of course, the freight railroads were not born yesterday, and they put a kabash to it, probably just as well for the long term health of Amtrak as a passenger carrier.
> ...


Actually you meant to say "spelling police"  :lol:


----------



## George Harris (Apr 16, 2010)

Bill Haithcoat said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > As to teh Crescent-Star: At the time it was proposed the Meridian Shreveport line was not in very good shape. I do not have an old ICRR schedule at hand, but I think the last passenger schedule was about 10 hours for 313 miles. Add about 4 more hours on the UP from Shereport to Dallas, and you have 14 hours from Meridian to Dallas. The ex ICRR line was unsignaled and never fast, despite having a fairly good alignment.
> ...


Thanks, Bill. I see that my memory was not too far off. I would love to get my hands on a recent KCS ETT to see what the speed limits are now. I do know that west of Vicksburg, at least, the railroad is near dead straight for long sections, so a 79 mph speed would be practical.


----------



## Bill Haithcoat (Apr 16, 2010)

George Harris said:


> Bill Haithcoat said:
> 
> 
> > George Harris said:
> ...



I think about that pullman off and on George. I must have seen it come backing around the corner into Chattanooga Terminal Station (today's Choo Choo) on the Pelican, about one million times, northbound and southbound. I wish I had ridden it.

So far as I remember the car was always pullman green. I do not recall seeing brown and orange IC colors.

Guess it was later in life that I learned what a stickler Wayne Johnson, IC President, was for color uniformity.

Guess that car was not too important in the big picture. Or maybe Wayne Johnson was not president yet or I was just too young to know or notice.

Do you recall if brown and orange IC was ever in the pool for that line? Of course the Southern handling from Washington to Meridian was longer than the IC handling between Meridian and Shreveport.


----------



## George Harris (Apr 16, 2010)

Bill Haithcoat said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > Bill Haithcoat said:
> ...


Bill: I have no idea, as I never saw this train at all. The line was well off my beaten path. The pullman was gone before my interest got as far afield as any part of this run, anyway. In fact, by the time I got around to seeing the Pelican, all its sleepers south of Chattanooga were gone.

While talking pullman colors: My home town day train, through not stopping, was the Kansas City Florida Special. Even though its route was almost half on Southern rails, the sleeper was always Frisco to the best of my memory. Occasionally there would be a Southern stainless steel coach, but usually both coaches were Frisco, as well. If it went over two coaches the additional coaches were always green heavyweights.


----------



## rrdude (Apr 16, 2010)

On one hand, kinda makes you "miss" the early Amtrak "rainbow days" doesn't it?

What other time period could you be on the east coast, and see, (RARELY) a GN, or SF, or NP coach? Same for the midwest, and west coast.

What a mixed up train world it was then..


----------



## jis (Apr 17, 2010)

And then there were the "Jersey Builders" run by NJT on the North Jersey Coast Line using ex-Empire Builder coaches for a while before the Comets arrived.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 17, 2010)

jis said:


> And then there were the "Jersey Builders" run by NJT on the North Jersey Coast Line using ex-Empire Builder coaches for a while before the Comets arrived.


Somehow, I'd think ex-Empire Builder coaches would be more comfy than Comets.


----------



## jis (Apr 18, 2010)

Green Maned Lion said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > And then there were the "Jersey Builders" run by NJT on the North Jersey Coast Line using ex-Empire Builder coaches for a while before the Comets arrived.
> ...


Only if they had less than one and a half of their two feet already in the grave  But they were nice while they alsted, though the window glazing had become somewhat translucent


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Apr 15, 2017)

Viewliner said:


> Equipment is an obvious issue, as there isn't enough of it. The Skyline Connection (#45, #46) never came to be because talks between NS and Amtrak broke down. Initially it was supposed to be NYP-CHI, but then shortened to Philly. The Skyline Connection would've used a Viewliner, Lounge, and Coaches, like the Three Rivers Today. It would've run via Cleveland like the Pennsylvanian did, on a daylight schedule. If you want, I can email you a pdf schedule with the Three Trains from 2000.


Not .pdf, but here you go via Timetables.org: http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=20000521n&item=0030

Assuming this schedule,

If going from PHL to CHI, I would definitely choose the Three Rivers (41) over the Skyline Connection (45) to avoid the 1:05am departure time (although your travel time to 30th St. Station would be before midnight). But eastbound I would consider the earlier Skyline Connection (46) over the later Three Rivers (40) if I were not transferring from a western train (and I have several times visited just Chicago as opposed to using it as a transfer point). The Skyline would give the overnight PHL-PGH trip I have longed for as well (I'd deal with the 1:05am for that trip). But the big benefit of the Skyline Connection would obviously be Ohio (CLE and TOL). It is way better than the Pennsylvanian (43/44) because it has better times at the endpoints (CHI and PHL). Obviously the Pennsylvanian schedule was chosen to make it a non overnight train so sleeper cars weren't necessary. But I can't believe any CHI-PHL passenger would choose that schedule, especially with the alternative of 40/41.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51 (Apr 15, 2017)

Revisiting a thread from 2010?


----------



## A Voice (Apr 15, 2017)

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Revisiting a thread from 2010?


Hey, sometimes a person gets a bit behind on their forum reading.....


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Apr 15, 2017)

A Voice said:


> Just-Thinking-51 said:
> 
> 
> > Revisiting a thread from 2010?
> ...


Not to mention I didn't even know AU existed in 2010 (or as some of you would say, the good old days).

I was actually looking for a thread discussing the "Crescent Star" and this came up. I created a new thread because it deals with the more recent movement towards the train rather than the effort back in 2000-01.


----------



## Chessie (Apr 15, 2017)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> A Voice said:
> 
> 
> > Just-Thinking-51 said:
> ...



Which year do you think had the most efficient Broadway Limited schedule?


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Apr 17, 2017)

Chessie said:


> Which year do you think had the most efficient Broadway Limited schedule?


I only rode the actual BL in 1994-95: http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19941030n&item=0018

I did ride the Three Rivers to Capitol Limited once and the Three Rivers directly to Chicago twice and the schedules were to my memory pretty similar. I like the Pittsburgh times in 1994-95, leaving westbound around 11pm and returning around 7am, making for a decent overnight between PGH and CHI, not leaving PGH too late and not arriving back too early.

Ideally, I'd like this schedule. I remember the TR serving as the "cleanup" train for passengers who miss their connections to the LSL and CL. Between the TR, LSL, and CL, the TR made the most sense to be the cleanup for me. Like the LSL, it served NYP. Like the CL, it served PGH. If you were going CHI-WAS, you'd have to transfer in PHL to go to WAS but it's better than being stranded overnight. Same for BOS or ALB (transfer in NYP).

My "second" schedule would be overnight between PGH and PHL, approximately 11pm-midnight to 7-8am on both ends, providing daytime service to Ohio. The problem is you couldn't use it for transfers. If you have three CL, LSL, and TR between CHI and the NEC, you'd like to have one as the "Ohio" train and the TR would be the best choice. You'd want to keep the CL as a transfer train for WAS and the LSL for BOS (it also looks to be the more popular from NYP and gets plenty of traffic from upstate NY).


----------



## railbuck (Apr 17, 2017)

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Revisiting a thread from 2010?


Actually a thread from 2003, temporarily revived in 2010. :wacko:

I'll put a note in my calendar for 2024.


----------



## Skyline (Apr 17, 2017)

Ah, the Slumbercoaches were still alive and well on the BL! A sleeper I could actually afford in my (almost) youth. They really were not that bad.


----------



## RPC (Apr 18, 2017)

I rode the BL Slumbercoach every two weeks when visiting my then fiancée in the late 80s/early 90s. (I lived in CHI, she near TRE - long story.) I knew I was a regular the morning I sat down in the diner and the waiter asked, "The usual?" Now I live near TRE (she won) and wish for the return of the BL.


----------

