# Improving the Pennsylvanian's calling times in Pittsburgh



## TML (Mar 4, 2016)

Currently, train 42 departs Pittsburgh at 07:30, while 43 arrives at 20:05. Both times are outside the hours of operation for nearby car rental agencies (except the ones at the airport), which forces arriving passengers to wait at least one day for a rental and departing passengers to return their rentals at least a day before departure. I figured that if one or both trains are adjusted to depart at ~08:30 and arrive at ~17:30, it would allow passengers to get a rental car immediately after disembarking and/or return their rental immediately before boarding the train, thereby potentially increasing ridership. Does anyone else support this idea?


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Mar 4, 2016)

Under the current CL schedule, arriving in PGH earlier and leaving later would mean an even longer wait time in PGH than there is now. Can you imagine arriving in PGH at 5:30pm and having to wait until midnight for the CL? As long as Pennsylvanian passengers west of PHL have to connect there, that is a problem. Now PennDOT has proposed a second frequency between PGH and NYP. If that happens, you have a better chance of leaving/arriving PGH in normal business hours. It would be even nicer if one train went west of PGH to CHI but that's a whole new issue.

The other issue is you want to avoid arriving in NYP during the evening rush hour or leaving during the morning rush hour because there's a lot of traffic going in and out of NYP at those times.


----------



## HARHBG (Mar 4, 2016)

The Pennsylvanian really needs to become an overnight train ending in Chicago. With the LSL sleeper section often selling out and the CAP running at capacity most of the time the ridership _seems_ to be there.

This would give Philadelphia, Harrisburg, Pittsburgh et al, direct connection to CHI and the Western US.

The Pennsylvanian could be routed through Ohio/Indiana to pick up those cities without Amtrak service.

Now that the Congress has *OVERWHELMINGLY* voted the FAST ACT in and the south connection between New Orleans and Florida looks certain, perhaps this NYP direct connect to CHI through Pennsylvania/Ohio/Illinois might have a real chance to actually happen.


----------



## ParanoidAndroid (Mar 4, 2016)

It's probably one of the most likely trains to resume if any did.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Mar 4, 2016)

HARHBG said:


> The Pennsylvanian really needs to become an overnight train ending in Chicago. With the LSL sleeper section often selling out and the CAP running at capacity most of the time the ridership _seems_ to be there.
> 
> This would give Philadelphia, Harrisburg, Pittsburgh et al, direct connection to CHI and the Western US.
> 
> ...


You all know I probably want the western extension to CHI more than anyone else on the group.

All Aboard Ohio suggested traveling through Michigan on the way to Chicago in its proposals for the service: http://freepdfhosting.com/cf26514bc8.pdf

They propose two trains/schedules:

Pennsylvanian (42/43) using the current schedule and west to CHI. This would give a 7:25am arrival into CHI and a 7:00pm departure from CHI.

Three Rivers (40/41) traveling the same route but overnight between PHL and PGH. For those of you who saw my Liberty Limited proposal, it is based off of AAO's Three Rivers. I did shift the times to accommodate a 3-C branch (CLE-CIN via Columbus and Dayton) splitting/merging at CLE (also an AAO idea but to a different train). This train would not allow same day western connections but would give better travel times for CLE and TOL (and for Michigan than the extended Pennsylvanian).

Remember that either of these proposed AAO trains will not only give Pennsylvania (and New Jersey) a direct route to Chicago but also a direct route from Michigan to PHL/NYP as well. The obvious advantage to Michigan is while it makes the route longer Amtrak owns much of the route and can go faster and not have to pay NS any more track usage fees.

Even though the extended Pennsylvanian would be a more favorable schedule for PHL, I do like the Three Rivers schedule better so CLE and TOL would get a train at daytime hours and it opens up the possibility for a 3-C extension (although that's farther down the road). Both trains would probably be asking for too much.

Neither of these trains would give PGH any trains arriving/departing during the business day as the original poster suggested. But if Amtrak agrees to the extended Pennsylvanian, PennDOT has discussed a second Pennsylvanian frequency: http://www.masstransitmag.com/news/12176479/pa-officials-considering-new-funding-option-for-commuter-rail-line. Perhaps that could be scheduled at better times for PGH. Ideally, we'd have two daily trains PGH-NYP with one continuing to CHI and the other terminating in PGH so PGH passengers heading east don't have to wait for the train from CHI if it gets delayed.

The last page shows estimated capital costs, estimated new annual operating subsidy, projected ridership, and projected economic impact. I believe their Pennsylvanian ridership figure includes the current ridership (2015 FY: 231,720). So the extended Pennsylvanian probably adds around 130,000 new passengers while a Three Rivers adds around 200,000 (but of course costs more).

Some possibilities:

Amtrak takes over the current Pennsylvanian, turns it into an LD train CHI-NYP and fully funds it. Then PennDOT will certainly be able to fund a new Pennsylvanian and we'll have the two frequencies we want.

Amtrak agrees to fund the extended Pennsylvanian west of PGH and PennDOT funds the Pennsylvania portion of the train and/or a second Pennsylvanian. Ideally we'd have two trains from PGH-NYP but I would say if the Pennsylvanian is extended to CHI it would be well appreciated by me (and HARHBG among others).

Hopefully Michigan will find this train beneficial and will chip in to help make the train happen.

The Pennyslvanian extension will be cheaper than the "new train" but the "new train" schedule would benefit Michigan and northern Ohio more. Will Michigan and/or Cleveland/Toledo help? Will they insist on the new train rather than another train through the graveyard shift? Hopefully Michigan is under the mentality of it's better just to have a train east of DET no matter when it's scheduled (and the AAO eastern Pennsylvanian times are before midnight).
It's been said that we need sleepers but from old timetables.org schedules I remember right after they canceled the BL, they first did TR from NYP-PGH with through cars to the CL (I did travel on this combo). Then they ran the TR NYP-CHI without sleeper or diner service (I was on that train as well). I believe they eventually got sleepers back but never the diner car.

I don't see why Amtrak can just run a coach only overnight train until the Viewliner II's come in just to get the service running again. I know some of you don't consider a train without sleepers/diners to be acceptable but to me it's better to just have the train at all than to be forced to do transfers as we in PA do now. I am sure there are plenty of passengers who use coach service overnight and several of them survive on cafe car service. To me, I just want a train, I can do without the bells and whistles. And if you want the bells and whistles, the LSL and CL aren't going away, just transfer then.

But yes, this train (or trains) needs to happen!


----------



## fairviewroad (Mar 14, 2016)

TML said:


> Currently, train 42 departs Pittsburgh at 07:30, while 43 arrives at 20:05. Both times are outside the hours of operation for nearby car rental agencies (except the ones at the airport), which forces arriving passengers to wait at least one day for a rental and departing passengers to return their rentals at least a day before departure. I figured that if one or both trains are adjusted to depart at ~08:30 and arrive at ~17:30, it would allow passengers to get a rental car immediately after disembarking and/or return their rental immediately before boarding the train, thereby potentially increasing ridership. Does anyone else support this idea?


What is your estimate on the % of current (as well as potential) customers for which this is an issue.

It's not an issue for pax connecting to/from the Cap. It's not an issue for business travelers staying in the central city area. It's not an issue for leisure travlers getting picked up by friends/family. It's not an issue for people who use the local transit system.

I realize that it's better IF there are car rental options. But I'm not convinced that's enough of a driver (no pun intended) to completely change the schedule. [by the way, many rental agencies allow you to return a car after hours, tho I'm not sure about the ones near the PIT Amtrak station specifically).


----------



## MARC Rider (Mar 15, 2016)

fairviewroad said:


> TML said:
> 
> 
> > Currently, train 42 departs Pittsburgh at 07:30, while 43 arrives at 20:05. Both times are outside the hours of operation for nearby car rental agencies (except the ones at the airport), which forces arriving passengers to wait at least one day for a rental and departing passengers to return their rentals at least a day before departure. I figured that if one or both trains are adjusted to depart at ~08:30 and arrive at ~17:30, it would allow passengers to get a rental car immediately after disembarking and/or return their rental immediately before boarding the train, thereby potentially increasing ridership. Does anyone else support this idea?
> ...


A taxi to the airport takes about 25 minutes and costs about $40. The 28X airport Flyer bus takes about 40 minutes and costs $3.75. I think the nearest 28X bus stop is a few blocks from the train station on Liberty St. Buses to the airport run until 11 PM, Buses start running from the airport at 5:30 AM. Super Shuttle also operates in Pittsburgh, so you might be able to get a shared-ride van at a price intermediate between a taxi and the bus.

In other words, it's not entirely impractical to rent a car from the airport. It's certainly a better situation than Toledo, which I've done. At Toledo, the only alternative is a taxi, it cost $50 10 years ago, and it seemed like the airport was halfway to South Bend.


----------

