# The Gulf Sunset Limited--Coming Back Again??



## zepherdude (Aug 28, 2015)

Advocates hope to restore Amtrak service lost since Katrina

I found this article today while surfing around. Thought you might find it of interest. These advocates wish a study funded to restore the service. I know times have turned around for Amtrak, but what is the reason to keep beating the Sunset Limited on how it used to be. Maybe short trips or something more creative in passenger routes. Anyway, as I read it, the states involved have 100 million for this study.

http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/252183-advocates-hope-to-restore-amtrak-service-cut-by-hurricane-katrina

This link works, more better!


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Aug 28, 2015)

Can any of that $100 million fund be used to restart the Broadway Limited or Three Rivers?


----------



## CCC1007 (Aug 28, 2015)

Probably not as it is state money


----------



## MikefromCrete (Aug 28, 2015)

Yeah, I don't think Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana are interested in funding a revived Broadway Limited.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Aug 28, 2015)

MikefromCrete said:


> Yeah, I don't think Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana are interested in funding a revived Broadway Limited.


The article stated "The Senate has passed a very good bill that does two things: It creates a $100 million fund for states to access for services which were annulled (Sunset Limited) or under threat of downgrading of discontinuance (Southwest Chief)," 

The Southwest Chief doesn't go through any of these states so my assumption was that all discontinued routes were fair game.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Aug 28, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, I don't think Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana are interested in funding a revived Broadway Limited.
> ...


I don't think the SL east is discontinued. Just "on hold".


----------



## Bob Dylan (Aug 28, 2015)

The official words on the Sunset East are: "The Sunset Limited service between Orlando and New Orleans has been suspended. Future service has not been determined."

Yesterday the Nation remembered the 10th Anniversary of Katrina, the Nightmare that drowned a City and devistated the Mississippi Coast.

Everything, except the Sunset East, has been rebuilt or restarted in the stricken areas.

Maybe the Newspeak version of "Temporary" is Forever?


----------



## offroad437 (Aug 29, 2015)

jimhudson said:


> The official words on the Sunset East are: "The Sunset Limited service between Orlando and New Orleans has been suspended. Future service has not been determined."
> 
> Yesterday the Nation remembered the 10th Anniversary of Katrina, the Nightmare that drowned a City and devistated the Mississippi Coast.
> 
> ...


Katrina is Saturday FYI. and here in Louisiana, they have been talking about a joint venture with Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida. But only to Jacksonville.


----------



## me_little_me (Aug 29, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, I don't think Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana are interested in funding a revived Broadway Limited.
> ...


I'm sure the states can quickly come up with studies to use up the money (for the studies, not the service).


----------



## Ryan (Aug 29, 2015)

I read through the bill last night and the associated programs that it's funding, and it's completely inscrutable to me. Anyone know exactly what the ground truth language is on this?


----------



## Bob Dylan (Aug 29, 2015)

Ryan said:


> I read through the bill last night and the associated programs that it's funding, and it's completely inscrutable to me. Anyone know exactly what the ground truth language is on this?


Ryan: you live in Washington! You know that's how it's done! Only a few members ( and staffers) know what's in a bill before its passed! 
Smoke and Mirrors! Surprise!!!

And the Lawyers ,Lobbyists and Consultants clean up "fixing and clarifying" it!


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Aug 30, 2015)

I am surprised they don't even have Thruway Bus service. Today Amtrak doesn't even serve Tallahassee or Pensacola and Mobile is a 7 hour thruway from Tuscaloosa. I was thinking of going to a wedding in Pensacola and had I been able to take the SL from Jacksonville off the Silver Meteor I might have gone.


----------



## DryCreek (Aug 30, 2015)

jimhudson said:


> Ryan: you live in Washington! You know that's how it's done! Only a few members ( and staffers) know what's in a bill before its passed!
> Smoke and Mirrors! Surprise!!!
> 
> And the Lawyers ,Lobbyists and Consultants clean up "fixing and clarifying" it!


Wait, hold on there!

I know for a _fact_ that you cannot know what is in a bill until _after_ it has been passed. That came directly from the Speaker Of The House, so it has to be true, doesn't it?


----------



## Ryan (Aug 30, 2015)

For about the eleventy billionth time, that's not what she said. But don't let facts get in the way of your off topic political rant.


----------



## DryCreek (Aug 31, 2015)

Ryan said:


> For about the eleventy billionth time, that's not what she said. But don't let facts get in the way of your off topic political rant.


Well, actually it _is_ - but it is one sentence, and taken out of the context of the entire paragraph it can be misconstrued. The gist of the entire quote is not suggesting that no one is capable of reading the entire bill so it must be passed for the surprises to be found out. What she was trying to convey is that the bill "has many wonderful things in it, and you have to pass it in order to see those changes and appreciate them".

I find that equally as ludicrous.

But, I was using that quote just to exemplify the opinion general populace has of Congress in general. In other words, it was a joke.


----------



## Ryan (Aug 31, 2015)

No, she was trying to convey that the lying liars that lie a lot (incidentally the same group of partisan jackasses that seized on it, twisted it into something it wasn't, and continue to joke about it today), were making up all sorts of crap about the ACA in order to try and scare the American people into opposing it. They did a pretty fine job, when you look at the polls where overwhelmingly people said they were against "Obamacare", but when asked about the individual policies it contained, indicated they supported them.

In actuality, you and Jim are both wrong. These bills are talked about, studied and discussed nine different ways until Sunday before they're voted on. While it may be a popular myth that this stuff is complicated and nobody reads it, that shouldn't be further from the truth. Unfortunately, that doesn't fit the "politicians are evil and everything Washington does sucks" narrative, so the facts become irrelevant.

This particular bit of legislation is a pain to dig through because it only changes dollar amount ps and years, and so you have to cross reference each line against the original funding bill that it's updating. It's a time consuming pain in the neck, and I wasn't able to successfully complete it in the limited amount of free time I had available last night.

Next time you try to crack a joke, maybe make it funny instead of going for the easily disproved political cheap shot.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Sep 1, 2015)

Some of what you say about Congress Used to be true Ryan!

But today, Bills are written by Lobbyists and staffers, and your average Congress critter, who is dumb as dirt when it comes to Governing, votes in Lockstep however Leadership tells them to.

Then they get back to fund raising since the duty of a Congress Critter is to get Re-Elected!

You have every right to disagree but my Congress person, whom Im proud to have represent me,( 20 year member) told me personally that it is becoming more and more like this and the that the ill will and even pure hate is growing like topsy on the Hill!

How can you run against "Washington" when you're a Career Politician?

One of our Senators,doesn' have a friend in the Senate, and goes out of his way to alienate other Members! He couldn't get the Ten Commandments passed, he's worthless!

Lowest ranked Profession in the US by the Polls: Congressperson


----------



## Ryan (Sep 1, 2015)

Don't get me wrong, there is quite a lot of truth in what you're saying. I'm not claiming that everything is all "Mr. smith Goes to Washington" up on the Hill, but they're also not all a bunch of idiot partisan hacks. There are a lot of hard working folks up there doing the best that they can, and when you write off the entire city as a cesspool of filth, you're ignoring all of that good and throwing out the good with the bad.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Sep 1, 2015)

Ryan said:


> Don't get me wrong, there is quite a lot of truth in what you're saying. I'm not claiming that everything is all "Mr. smith Goes to Washington" up on the Hill, but they're also not all a bunch of idiot partisan hacks. There are a lot of hard working folks up there doing the best that they can, and when you write off the entire city as a cesspool of filth, you're ignoring all of that good and throwing out the good with the bad.


Of course you're correct Ryan! The real problem is the money machine that has to run 24/7 in order for the ones that are there to be able stay in Washington!

Isn't it ironic that the clowns that run against "Washington" fight so hard to stay there once they make it??!!

When I was a kid I thought the best job in the world was to be a US Senator, there were Giants in the Senate in those days! Now we have pygmies and empty suits and partisan hatred dominating the Hill!

Maybe we really do need to throw em all out and start over! We already have term limits, its called Elections!

So if everyone would turn out and vote lots of what's wrong would disappear rapidly!

Of course the Washingtin "Establishment" is totally opposed to this!


----------



## jis (Sep 1, 2015)

I have not seen any clear evidence that the Washington establishment is against people voting per-se. OTOH, there is a certain party which seems to be dead set on figuring out every possible way to keep people from voting these days - especially the ones that they consider to be the undesirable "they" as opposed to the desirable "we".


----------



## Bob Dylan (Sep 1, 2015)

You're right jis, but I get notes from the principal's office if I get too specific on political topics, so I'm trying to stay generic in my posts when it comes to the shell game in Washington!


----------



## jis (Oct 14, 2015)

Bob Dylan said:


> You're right jis, but I get notes from the principal's office if I get too specific on political topics, so I'm trying to stay generic in my posts when it comes to the shell game in Washington!


Yeah, but my point is that this particular shell game is not in Washington, but in individual states.

Anyhow, there is a new article that is of greater interest to the subject of this thread:

http://www.al.com/news/mobile/index.ssf/2015/10/momentum_builds_for_amtraks_gu.html



> It might not be the "All clear!" that rail enthusiasts want to hear, but a December visit by Amtrak representatives to Mobile could signify a key moment in restoring passenger train service to the Gulf Coast.
> 
> The Dec. 4 meeting of the Southern Rail Commission will reveal findings of an Amtrak study focusing on reviving passenger rail in a region that saw it disappear 10 years ago after Hurricane Katrina.
> 
> ...


----------



## west point (Nov 5, 2015)

As much as this poster would like to see the sunset east restored do not think it possible at this time. Its mainly a lack of equipment. Once Amtrak gets additional 1000 passenger cars and 100 locos + capital funds for restoring stations then we will see the service restored. There would probably be additional service to New Orleans (NOL) from Baton Rouge, Mobile ( on SL east ) Montgomery to provide additional connecting passengers.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Nov 5, 2015)

west point said:


> As much as this poster would like to see the sunset east restored do not think it possible at this time. Its mainly a lack of equipment. Once Amtrak gets additional 1000 passenger cars and 100 locos + capital funds for restoring stations then we will see the service restored. There would probably be additional service to New Orleans (NOL) from Baton Rouge, Mobile ( on SL east ) Montgomery to provide additional connecting passengers.


They're also low on Superliners too? I thought the main problem was Viewliners.


----------



## neroden (Nov 5, 2015)

Yes, I've been told the Superliner supply is tight. I'm not sure exactly which types of Superliners are in short supply (coaches, dining cars, sightseer lounges, or sleepers), but the 'extra' set for the Empire Builder strained Amtrak's supply of something pretty badly, which is why they have discontinued it.

The coach supply will be alleviated when the new bilevels arrive, assuming they manage to fix the design so that they pass the "crush test".


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Nov 12, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> west point said:
> 
> 
> > As much as this poster would like to see the sunset east restored do not think it possible at this time. It's mainly a lack of equipment. Once Amtrak gets an additional 1000 passenger cars ...
> ...


Low on both.

Try going daily with the _Texas Eagle/Sunset Ltd_ and we'll be short a consist or two.

But difficult to get funding for an order of hundreds or thousands of new coaches, diners, lounges, whatevers.

And twice as difficult to fund both Viewliners and Superliners.

Some speculation about changing one or more of the Superliner routes to single-level equipment, and spreading the freed-up Superliners across the West. I've suggested that the _City of New Orleans_ looks like a good candidate to switch to rehabbed Horizons.

Others would switch the _Capitol Limited_, but where to get equipment to do that? The Viewliner II order, sans options, does not give enuff diners (or bag-dorms or maybe not even enuff sleepers) to fill out the trains on these two routes. But this might work somehow, once hundreds of new single-level cars join the fleet.

Need I add that if Amtrak can only get funding for one type of car, it will be single-levels for the East before bi-levels for the West. The equipment is older, and as a group the routes are closer to break-even, so, more bang for the buck there. Then you hope that the single-level fleet expansion increases revenue, and lowers the gap between revenue and expenses. Then when you go back to Congress you can say, "That order was a great success, now we need another."


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Dec 17, 2015)

Maybe not the SL we were expecting but it works for me.

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/64510-news-on-the-daily-sunset-and-possible-sl-east/?p=638401


----------



## west point (Dec 18, 2015)

This poster really wants to see Amtrak add more routes but. Amtrak first needs to Maximize its revenue on present routes first That way the loss ( or even an operating profit ) per passenger carried can be reduced.. Getting as many Additional passengers on present trains should be first priority. Given the present rate of construction that will take almost all the new equipment being built for the next 4 - 5 years. That will first be car demand for end to end trains such as Meteor, Star, Palmetto, Lakeshore, Cardinal, Empire builder, Sunset / Eagle. CHI short hauls.

Next is adding cut off cars for such as Crescent ( Atlanta north ). Zephyr ( Denver east and Reno west. Eagle ( ST. Louis north.). Empire ( MSP - CHI ) CONOL ( Memphis south weekends ).

Next daily trains Sunset & Cardinal this will less expensive since can do better scheduling of T&E and OBS crews.

Next adding more trains where needed on current routes. ex. ATL - NYP day thru Raleigh and Richmond, Extend Palmetto, Another train NYP / BOS - CHI, NEC fill outs, CHI - MSP, Chicago mid west short hauls.

Then we can expand to other new routes. Maximizing current routes will give more interconnecting passenger to any new route.


----------



## Anderson (Dec 19, 2015)

I think there's a case to at _least_ do a daily Cardinal sooner rather than later. Not likely to happen, but for reasons related to equipment utilization (and likely crew pay, since I think there's at least one multi-day layover for them that Amtrak gets stuck paying for) this would make a good deal of sense. IIRC the impact on operating losses is a pretty marginal increase in exchange for adding somewhere in the range of 120-150k pax (and that increase is _likely_ offset by at least some increase in connecting traffic).

To be fair, I would be inclined to put the first 30-40 new single-level sleeping cars to expanding existing services (I'll count any pass-through cars as part of that) or _possibly_ adding a split-off section to an existing train (e.g FEC service). Ditto adding coaches (a lot of LD trains could probably add a coach at peak-ish times, not to mention shuffling/cascading equipment). After that, it's down to a judgment call of being able to add a new train while only making a limited addition to direct losses at the startup.


----------



## neroden (Dec 20, 2015)

I've been trying to update my projections based on the best data I can get from Amtrak (which isn't very good), but my estimate based on 2014 data says that switching the Cardinal from tri-weekly to daily would *improve* Amtrak's bottom line by about $5.1 million / year, changing it from requiring a subsidy to being profitable on a direct-costs basis.

This is with the naive (but conservative) assumptions that revenues would multiply by 7/3, and direct costs would multiply by 1.5. And, for purposes of backing out the overhead misallocation, the assumption that the percentagewise allocation of overhead amongst the long-distance trains hasn't changed since 2012 (since I have a new *total* overhead allocated to the group, but not new individual numbers per train).

I don't know what would be required in capital costs to make a daily Cardinal happen, but it needs to be done ASAP. Not only is a triweekly train an embarassment, at this point it's probably actually costing Amtrak $5 million every year. It would be viable to finance a $42 million loan with a 10-year term and 4% interest rate based on that. I don't know what the capital cost requirements are for a daily Cardinal, but Amtrak should *figure them out* by consulting with CSX and Buckingham Branch and NS, start looking for grant funds, and consider an RRIF loan.


----------



## looshi (Dec 20, 2015)

This is the time to do it too. I can't imagine CSX would like any additional passenger service, but with the state of the coal market they may be helpful for any revenue that helps cover costs for the C&O mainline. I mean, they are looking at abolishing the Hunington Division. Amtrak has the strongest negotiating position for a daily Cardinal that they have had in years.


----------



## Anderson (Dec 21, 2015)

looshi said:


> This is the time to do it too. I can't imagine CSX would like any additional passenger service, but with the state of the coal market they may be helpful for any revenue that helps cover costs for the C&O mainline. I mean, they are looking at abolishing the Hunington Division. Amtrak has the strongest negotiating position for a daily Cardinal that they have had in years.


Agreed. The coal boom actually fouled the lines on possible commuter service on the Peninsula a few years back (there's been a suggested Toano/Norge-Newport News line for some time). It's also complicated efforts to get us a third daily train. Traffic on the Peninsula Subdivision has been highly dependent on the coal market basically since the start (Norfolk has a _lot_ of various freight; Newport News is largely a coal market). There might even be room to negotiate the TDX, though IMHO that is a reasonably low priority for the state.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Dec 21, 2015)

west point said:


> This poster really wants to see Amtrak add more routes but. Amtrak first needs to Maximize its revenue on present routes first That way the loss ( or even an operating profit ) per passenger carried can be reduced.. Getting as many Additional passengers on present trains should be first priority. Given the present rate of construction that will take almost all the new equipment being built for the next 4 - 5 years. That will first be car demand for end to end trains such as Meteor, Star, Palmetto, Lakeshore, Cardinal, Empire builder, Sunset / Eagle. CHI short hauls.
> 
> Next is adding cut off cars for such as Crescent ( Atlanta north ). Zephyr ( Denver east and Reno west. Eagle ( ST. Louis north.). Empire ( MSP - CHI ) CONOL ( Memphis south weekends ).
> 
> ...


I'd argue that any Broadway Limited is a "present route" if you use the CL route from CHI-PGH and the Pennsylvanian route from PGH-NYP. It would be a third frequency between CHI-CLE, a second from CLE-PGH, and a second from PGH-NYP so I feel it's consistent with your desire to increase frequencies. There wouldn't be any new tracks used and asking NS for a second train between CHI-HAR is no different than asking anyone other freight company for an additional train (assuming all freight companies are equally as negotiating with Amtrak which I'm sure isn't the case).


----------



## frequentflyer (Jan 14, 2016)

What if the Cardinal was cancelled? How many consists or equipment would that free up?

If less than daily service is so expensive, Amtrak should have negotiated a daily Eagle from SAT to LAX and not LAX to NOL. That may not have spooked UP as much.

No one wants to cut trains, because they never come back (hello Desert Wind and Pioneer), but if its for the good of the system, then changes must be made. PHX can be served with an overnight daily to LAX, and bus to connect to the SWC at Flagstaff. Houston will eventually be connected to Dallas via High Speed Rail, in the mean time reinstitute the Temple -HOU connection from the Lone Star. Why have equipment used on a tri weekly train, that sucking up resources when UP is not going to budge?


----------



## CCC1007 (Jan 14, 2016)

You sound a lot like Philly Amtrak fan did when he first showed up, so to answer your questions, maybe you can look back to the conversations that he has posted in.

The cardinal uses two locomotives, two baggage cars, two Viewliner sleepers, two amfleet cafe/dinettes, six amfleet coaches, and starting in a week, two amfleet cafe/business class cars.


----------



## neroden (Jan 16, 2016)

Worth noting for reference that the Cardinal uses two trainsets (hence all those "two" in CCC1007's post) but a daily Cardinal would use only three trainsets (so replace the "two" with "three" and replace the "six" with "nine".)


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Jan 16, 2016)

CCC1007 said:


> The Cardinal uses two locomotives, two baggage cars, two Viewliner sleepers, two amfleet cafe/dinettes, six amfleet coaches, and starting in a week, two amfleet cafe/business class cars.


Thanks for laying it out that way. I can clearly see that the cafe/business class cars are added capacity (modest but real) as well as an upgrade to the service (and possibly meal options).

Looking ahead, I wonder if the baggage cars are usually full, or only half full? If only half, then the Cardinal could use one of the promised Viewliner II bag/dorms. By moving crew out of the sleeper, it would increase capacity in a half step, when going with a full second sleeper might be more than the market can support.


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Jan 16, 2016)

frequentflyer said:


> If less than daily service is so expensive, Amtrak should have negotiated a daily Eagle from SAT to LAX and not LAX to NOL. That may not have spooked UP as much.
> 
> ...
> 
> Why have equipment used on a tri weekly train, that sucking up resources when UP is not going to budge?


Why wouldn't UP budge?

The negotiations for a daily blew up a few years back, and many accounts put the blame on Amtrak's negotiator, who is no longer with the company. Anyway, the upshot was an interim deal that took 9 hours, iirc, out of the run time as an upgrade (that also freed up a set of equipment that was put into a stronger _Capitol Limited_). And a promise from Amtrak not to ask for a daily for two or three years, which point has gone by.

Meanwhile UP used the time to doubletrack its system El Paso-L.A., with its own money, and has pretty much completed that work.

A nice little TIGER grant last round is helping fund a new station and station track in Maricopa [Phoenix], so the_ Sunset_ (or _Eagle_) will pull off the main line to serve the station without blocking UP's freights passing thru.

The UP appears about ready to accept the inevitable daily train.

The hold-up has been Amtrak's perpetual shortage of equipment. In about two years, Amtrak will have some Horizons that can be put to some use, perhaps on the daily _Shuttle_ that will run New Orleans-San Antonio when the_ Eagle_ becomes that main train. Other equipment could get shuffled around and cars freed up for the daily _Sunset/Eagle_.

+++++++++++

Neroden thinks the bi-levels coming to the Midwest and West Coast could help. But seems that would require a slightly different "long distance" version, and a new round of bids.


----------



## neroden (Jan 17, 2016)

At the moment, the single-level dining cars are Amtrak's most acute shortage, but they should arrive any month now. Following that, diesel power is Amtrak's most acute shortage. The "long distance" variant of the "Sprinter" locos exists as an option on the order with a defined price, but Amtrak would have to order some of them.

Amtrak appeared to think that they had enough cars to add a trainset to extend the CONO to Orlando, which means they have enough cars for a daily Sunset... probably.

The Midwest bilevels... still have to be engineered to pass the crush test. But when they arrive, they should free up existing Superliner coaches (as well as freeing up the Horizons and a few Amfleets) so coaches shouldn't be a problem for a daily Sunset once that happens (late 2017, I guess). There are enough baggage cars now, as well.

There might be some issues with number of Superliner sleepers, diners, or Sightseer Lounges. I don't know.

Whenever I run the math, it tells me that a daily Cardinal is a slightly higher priority than a daily Sunset; a daily Cardinal looks like it should be about $5.6 million net positive change to the bottom line, a daily Sunset about $4.5 million net positive change (though the rearrangement into a "Sunset Eagle" and a "Sunset Shuttle" may improve that number somewhat). More importantly the Cardinal would rise into "contributing to overhead" category -- which I think is politically important, as it makes politicians who want to cut it look stupid -- while the Sunset would still be requiring subsidy before overhead allocation.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jan 17, 2016)

WoodyinNYC said:


> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> > If less than daily service is so expensive, Amtrak should have negotiated a daily Eagle from SAT to LAX and not LAX to NOL. That may not have spooked UP as much.
> ...


I might totally be reading this wrong (won't be the first time), but "Sunset Shuttle" means that passengers east of San Antonio who wish to go west of San Antonio must change trains in SAS to go further west?

https://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/970/304/PRIIA-210-SunsetLtd-TexasEagle-PIP,0.pdf

If I live in either NOL or HOS, to me this is the equivalent of taking away the BL or TR so now I only get to go as far west as SAS and would have to transfer to go to LA or Arizona. The westbound layover according to the PRIIA is 11:00pm-1:10am and the eastbound layover is 6:50-7:50am. I've never been to the SAS station but if it's similar to or worse than PGH than this really sucks for them. Then missed connections enter the picture and if the NOL-SAS train is late those passengers will get stuck in SAS overnight.

If I'm Houston/New Orleans, you're saying I can either go to SAS daily and have to transfer to go further west or only go to SAS 3x/week but then can continue a one seat ride to LAX those days. If there is a large number of passengers east of SAS currently going west of SAS, that number is going to go down if they are forced to change trains in the middle of the night. Amtrak themselves says that the PM/TM will actually decrease 18% from 160.7 to 132.0 under the new plan.

Does taking away the through cars save Amtrak that much money/equipment to essentially take away direct service from NOL/HOS? Is that why Amtrak refuses to set up the CL/Pennsylvanian through cars? Will they eventually force Massachusetts passengers on the LSL to change trains in Albany permanently?

In addition, the proposed times of the Eagle do reduce the layover for passengers north of SAS but the train for LAX still leaves at 1:10am and arrives in LAX at 5:05am, even worse than the time now. The PRIIA said the train will remain available until 6:30am but I believe it no longer is now with the train arriving at 5:35am.

Right now IMHO the biggest negatives of the TE/SL combo (other than the fact that it isn't daily) are the departure/arrival times in NOL, departure/arrival times and westbound layover in SAS, and the arrival time in LAX. The train is great going into/out of NOL from Texas/California but worthless going east or north of NOL unless you can afford to stay overnight. The plan does appear to cut the westbound layover in SAS in half but does little to change the times along the route and add the forced transfer in SAS for passengers east of SAS. If you're going from SAS to LAX, the times still suck (get on at 1:10am and get off at 5:05am). Daily or not daily, this is a problem. You can talk about making trains daily all you want but a lousy schedule 7 days a week is still lousy. Just ask Cleveland.

My proposal (http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/65927-proposal-for-extending-crescent-to-sas-improving-te-schedule/?p=640928) gives a way better arrival time into LAX, way better departure/arrival times into SAS, and the ability for a same day connection to the Crescent and CONO (including the proposed extension to Florida). In my plans, the through car portion would be an additional daily from DAL to SAS. Even if Amtrak doesn't want to do through cars anymore, if you add a train from DAL-SAS and then force them to change trains the transfer times would be in the afternoon and not the middle of the night. The Heartland Flyer extension is a bonus and not necessary for the SL plan. All of a sudden NOL becomes sort of a second east-west transfer point. If Amtrak goes through with the proposed TE/SL plans in the PRIIA and the CONO extension to Florida, if you want to go from Florida to California, it will require two change of trains, one in SAS in or close to graveyard shift and one overnight in NOL. In my plans, it would be one change of trains in NOL and an overnight stay would not be required.


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Jan 17, 2016)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> > frequentflyer said:
> ...


Yes. They refer to a cross-platform transfer. I take that to mean no passenger has to get off the _Shuttle_ to get on the _Eagle_ until the _Eagle_ pulls in, then get up, walk across the platform, board the _Eagle_ and take your new seat. Checked baggage will be transferred. The two hours or so scheduled for SAS dwell time is padding for late trains.

I'm ok with all that.

The proposed extension of the _City of New Orleans _to Florida does allow a much better east/west connection than riders can get now. After all, 23 hours in New Orleans ain't a bad deal for leisure travelers, even if they have to pay hotel, meals, tourism expenses. Hotels are within sight of Union Terminal. Perhaps Amtrak, or an authorized private enterprise tour operator, could take a block of rooms to get a volume discount at a couple of hotels, one bargain, one more upscale, and offer them in an Amtrak package for thru passengers. A street car out front will take riders to the French Quarter, and (connection required) down St Charles Ave., so they can see a lot of the city for not much money.

For passengers to/from Houston and New Orleans, I'm more concerned about the low average speed, 40 or 45 mph iirc.


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Jan 17, 2016)

For _Sunset/Eagle_ passengers to/from Houston and New Orleans, I'm more concerned about the low average speed, only 40 or 45 mph iirc.

Houston-San Antonio should be a state-supported corridor with upgraded faster tracks and 4 or 5 trains each way every day. The next step would be, 3 or 4 trains Houston-Beaumont-Lake Charles-Lafayette-New Orleans. The New Orleans-San Antonio segment is the 4th busiest city pair on the _Sunset_ now, despite the lousy 3-days-a-week schedule, slow speed, and all. (But I don't know if they credit connections to the NB _Eagle_ to this segment.) Even one more frequency here could help things, giving an option for a cross-platform transfer in New Orleans and a stop-over in San Antonio instead.

Such corridor service would make possible marketing a "Stop-Over Tourist" ticket, under the *current* Amtrak rule allowing a free stop-over if the connection is 23 hours or less. So, careful scheduling using the _Star_ or _Meteor_ could get a tourist on this itinerary: Miami -one day Orlando -one day Jacksonville -one day New Orleans -one day Houston -one day San Antonio (or any parts of this route segment).

Then add a corridor train Tucson-Maricopa (Phoenix)-L.A. making possible stop-overs in Arizona. Market a warm-weather transcontinental land cruise to rival the _Canadian_. Or to complement the _Empire Builder_: One way thru snow-covered mountains, down the _Coast Starlight_, one way thru the sunny desert to subtropical Florida. Pretty nice land-cruise package for certain foreign, and for U.S. tourists, too.

Or, don't wait for corridor trains.

Couldn't Amtrak partner with a tour operator, with a *special *rule, to allow 2 or 3 night stop-overs for, say, a nominal $50 each if reserved 14 days in advance? The tour operator then puts together and markets the package: pick up and return to the station, hotel room with breakfasts, a city tour, museum or attraction admission, dinner at a nice restaurant, the usual stuff. Daily service and a special rule would make such tour packages very attractive, and help to fill the long distance trains.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jan 17, 2016)

WoodyinNYC said:


> Philly Amtrak Fan said:
> 
> 
> > ... "Sunset Shuttle" means that passengers east of San Antonio who wish to go west of San Antonio must change trains in SAS to go further west?
> ...


Is the CL/Pennsylvanian connection considered cross-platform?

In the SL/TE plan, the TE is scheduled to arrive in SAS before the Sunset Shuttle so assuming OTP passengers would be able to just walk across to their new train. That is clearly not the case for passengers from PA/NJ going on to the CL as the Pennsylvanian arrives almost four hours before the CL. Ideally going east the Sunset Shuttle should be ready for passengers to board at SAS once they get off the TE. I am guessing in the case of CL to Pennsylvanian that is not the case and passengers have to fend for themselves in PGH (assuming OTP into PGH from the CL which on the last time I rode was not the case, the Pennsylvanian left PGH before the CL got in).

Theoretically if the Sunset Shuttle is late getting into SAS then the TE can leave without them and vice versa going east so that's clearly a negative if it happens (especially the westbound).


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jan 17, 2016)

WoodyinNYC said:


> For _Sunset/Eagle_ passengers to/from Houston and New Orleans, I'm more concerned about the low average speed, 40 or 45 mph iirc.
> 
> Houston-San Antonio should be a state-supported corridor with upgraded tracks and 6 or 8 trains each way every day. (This segment is the 4th busiest city pair on the _Sunset_ now, with the lousy 3-days-a-week schedule, slow speed, and all.) The next step would be, 4 to 6 trains Houston-Beaumont-Lake Charles-Lafayette-New Orleans - (maybe on to Biloxi-Mobile if the trains moved a lot faster). Even one more frequency here could help things, giving an option for a cross-platform transfer in New Orleans and a stop-over in San Antonio instead.
> 
> ...


If you want to do the state corridor way, I'd go with DAL-SAS as a state corridor option first as my plans dictate. Then you can truncate the TE at SAS and then have better times for the SL into LAX, SAS, and NOL times with a potential same day connection to the Crescent/CONO. DAL-HOU would be my next priority (extend HF?). Clearly the only SAS-HOU option now is the current SL with lousy times into/out of SAS so multiple frequencies should surely increase ridership between those cities. But as long as the SL leaves SAS in the graveyard shift (and arrives in LAX before 6am) that IMHO is still a problem.


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Jan 17, 2016)

What drives the arrival times in L.A. is the departure times in Tucson and Maricopa (Phoenix). Amtrak wants that segment to be an overnight corridor both ways, which makes good sense. That and the fact that L.A. Union Station gets filled with morning commuter trains, and LAUS wants the _Sunset _to hurry in and then GET OUT OF THE WAY. So there you are.

(A lot of work is planned, or even underway, for LAUS, with thru-running tracks, CAHSR, and so on. I don't know if any of it will help the _Sunset_ find a more comfortable time and place.)

++++++++++++++++++++

Console yourself that the L.A. arrival is Pacific time. The bodies of the passengers from the east are still on Mountain or even Central time. So they feel like they are waking up "an hour later" than it shows on the clock in L.A., waking up for a 6:30 a.m. arrival, or even a cozy 7:30 morning arrival, not for the horrible 5:30 a.m. pre-dawn hour on the timetable.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jan 17, 2016)

In reality if Amtrak doesn't want to do through cars anymore between the SL and TE there are really two options:

1) Force NOL-SAS to transfer to the TE.

2) Force CHI-SAS to transfer to the SL.

If Amtrak wants to do option #1, you would think that there are more passengers that travel from CHI-SAS to SAS-LAX than NOL-SAS to SAS-LAX.

Here's some interesting data (http://www.narprail.org/site/assets/files/1038/cities_2014.pdf)

New Orleans: 4.3% of 196,768 passengers (8,462) traveled 1900-1999 miles (LAX is 1995 miles away)

Houston: 23.1% of 20,108 passengers (4,645) traveled 1600-1699 miles (LAX is 1633 miles away)

Ft. Worth: 1.6% of 126,394 passengers (2,022) traveled 1700-1799 miles (LAX is 1706 miles away)

Dallas: 3.5% of 49,446 passengers (1,731) traveled 1700-1799 miles (LAX is 1737 miles away)

Of the top nine city pairs to Maricopa, New Orleans ranked 4th and Houston ranked 5th. Neither Dallas nor Ft. Worth made the top nine. Chicago is 2nd and St. Louis is 9th.

Of the top nine city pairs to Tucson, NOL is 4th and HOS is 7th. Neither Dallas nor Ft. Worth made the top nine. Chicago is 3rd.

Of the top nine city pairs to El Paso, HOS is 4th, NOL is 5th, and CHI is 6th. Neither Dallas nor Ft. Worth made the top nine.

From these numbers, I think it's reasonable to say more passengers from NOL-SAS travel west of SAS than CHI-SAS. Now maybe the near 6 hr. layover in SAS for that portion is the reason why there is more traffic to NOL/HOS.

But you wonder if maybe it would be better to force the transfer for the CHI-SAS passengers. Also, I'd imagine there would be times where the TE north of SAS heading to CHI is delayed because the SL/TE from LAX is late. If you break that train up, you can guarantee the train leaves SAS on time more often (of course that means the passengers coming from west of SAS miss the TE connection so six of one and half dozen of the other).


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Jan 17, 2016)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> > For _Sunset/Eagle_ passengers to/from Houston and New Orleans, I'm more concerned about the low average speed, 40 or 45 mph iirc.
> ...


I wasn't thinking priorities there.

But here:

I'd warn that Laredo-San Antonio-Austin-Ft Worth is the NAFTA rail route for freight (as is I-35 for trucks) from/to Mexican factories. It's terribly crowded and likely to get more so.

Some years down the road, commuter rail San Antonio-New Braunfels-San Marcos-Austin-Round Rock-Georgetown-Taylor could help with better tracks, but only on that segment. The northern half to Dallas-Ft Worth would remain crowded and slow.

San Antonio-Houston is busy for freight, but nothing like the NAFTA route.

Surprisingly, sprawl hasn't yet ruined the land between exurban San Antone and exurban H'town. (They're working on it, tho. LOL.) The right of way is wide enuff for many long sidings or double track. Many level crossings need upgrades in any case, but there's usually room to do grade separations. So this a good segment to spend money and get quick results. North from San Antonio, where the tracks run thru towns no longer small, will be much more costly per mile, much more. (We're talking my childhood stomping grounds, btw.)

East from H'town you could get a commuter/short-corridor line to Beaumont, an old oil industry city with strong ties to Houston. Then to make things really work to N'awlins, you'd need cooperation from Louisiana. Two states with lots of haters. Still, a large construction project always presents large opportunities for graft and contractor corruption, so it could appeal to many powerful people in Austin and Baton Rouge.

Another way to upgrade the _Eagle_ is Marshall-Longview-Mineola (for Tyler)-Dallas-Ft Worth. Fairly dense intermediate population is left over from the great boom of the giant East Texas Oil Field. Push the route from Marshall barely 40 miles to Shreveport, where riverboat gambling is a huge draw from the D-FW MetroPlex, so it overlaps the _Eagle _almost all the way. Money spent on upgrades would benefit both.

The SB _Eagle_ leaves Marshall at 7:50 a.m. to arrive Dallas at 11:30. NB it leave Dallas at 3:40 p.m. to arrive in Marshall at 7:30 in the evening. Not bad, but doesn't get the gamblers to Shreveport. (There is a kinda sorta, but slow, Thruway bus.) Taking an hour, even hlf an hour, out of the run times would be great.

If Shreveport puts in for operating support, and Dallas joins in, and those intermediate towns start to whine, "Texas is helping to support a train to Oklahoma City, why not help with *our *train?" some Texas money might be forthcoming for one or two corridor trains each way.

But that segment Marshall-Ft Dallas is 151 miles, in 3 hrs 40 minutes or 3 hrs 50 minutes, plus about an hour on the bus to the casinos. Too slow a trip, at barely 40 mph.

So, one TIGER grant at a time (or how?), speed up that segment for passenger trains, to get Dallas-Shreveport under 4 hours, and make room for another 2 or 3 corridor trains on this route. Getting the _Eagle_ into Dallas at 11 a.m. instead of 11:30 would be a good thing, too.

Another way to crack the nut. If Amtrak ever gets money for new routes (like, after a nuclear temper tantrum in the Middle East, or whatever) : Take a second run of the _Crescent_, (the long-desired _day_ _train_?) or split the _Crescent_ we've got at Atlanta (or Birmingham if ATL never gets it act together), then Meridian-Jackson-Vicksburg-Monroe-*Shreveport-Dallas-Ft Worth* (or even on down to San Antonio, I'm open to that). That creates a second frequency for the gamblers and others on the East Texas Corridor.

Then take Bobbi Jindal's suggestion, before they told him that because Obama was for trains all right-thinking people were supposed to be against them. Jindal wanted New Orleans-Baton Rouge-Alexandria-*Shreveport-Dallas-Ft Worth*. (You could, I guess, make that one another version splitting off the Crescent Birmingham-Montgomery-Mobile-Biloxi-New Orleans-Baton Rouge-*Shreveport-Dallas-Ft Worth*, if you could do another long distance train.) So that gets another frequency for the gamblers and others on the East Texas Corridor.

Both of those schemes add a lot of connectivity, and with the _Sunset Shuttle, _they cover all of Louisiana, to offset the political power of the haters.

But as for priorities, they all look good. So I'll let the Lege in Austin (and the CongressCritters in D.C.) sort them out.


----------



## west point (Jan 17, 2016)

IMHO The San Antonia station is the worse of Amtrak's high usage stations. ATL is a palace compared to SAS. SAS station is a repurposed old SP building just south of original SP station. It really needs replacing in conjunction of proposed additional service.

The station waiting room cannot hold all originating passengers for the Eagle in either direction. ( only about 30 seats )( maybe another 30 standees). It is even worse for the eastbound 3 day a week trains. Then imagine 7 days a week service with east and west bound trains arriving at the same time ( Now only Sundays and Tuesday possibilities ). Platforms are breaking down. Lighting is terrible with CFLs only in about every other light fixture. No PA. room for only one or two agents. Bathrooms ugh !

Now there is a stub end track west of main tracks and the two platforms that comes in from the north ( east ). It could be used for a NOL - SAS train to terminate but probably should be backed in if a wye close by. A 480V station HEP power connection is available some 1000 feet north of the stub end which could be extended to the stub end. A permanently parked SP steam loco would need to be moved off the stub to somewhere else.

Westbound the OBS personnel should remain on duty until west bound Eagle arrives. As well OBS for eastbound Sunset should be on duty for the arrival of the Eagle to allow for connecting passengers to transfer without having to wait in station..

The original SP station is located ideally for service as trains to / from FTW can approach from either of 2 tracks ( MP & MKTT ). The stub end occupies the closest track next to and south of the old station. The old MP station location would not work that way. The original SP station is reported in private hands ( law firm ? ). If the city could acquire the building which is in very good condition then all the interior space could meet the requirements for a station size for the planned traffic of expanded service. As well the platforms, lighting, servicing facilities need complete rebuilding.

Note SAS is a maintenance location that spends time when trains are not in station to do light maintenance on the standby Superliner sleeper and coach that is based there.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jan 17, 2016)

A few corrections on the SAS Amshak:

The current Station, the condition of which you accurately describe, was built as an Amshak, it is not an old SP Building, that is what you call the SP Station that the City of San Antonio owned @ one time, but sold to a Company that rents it out for Festivals,Banquets, Parties, Music Concerts etc but it's seldom used!And there is No Parking!

Most of St. Paul Square ( the area around the rail Station) is basically

unoccupied buildings that are deteriorating. At one time there were lots of Clubs, a Ruth's Chris Steakhouse, Big Concerts etc.but now the area is mostly deserted day and night.

The current Amshak is next to the Alamo Dome which now only has a few events a year, and except for the Hotels close by, not much is happening here now-a-days!

The City has bought the Historic old IG &N/MoPac Station on the West Side ( #21 passes it on its loop around downtown on the way to the current Station)and had plans to have an Intermodel Station located there for the VIA Busses Sreet Cars and Rail..


----------



## neroden (Jan 17, 2016)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> In reality if Amtrak doesn't want to do through cars anymore between the SL and TE there are really two options:
> 
> 1) Force NOL-SAS to transfer to the TE.
> 
> ...


Eh, it's hard to figure this out without numbers which Amtrak has but which we don't have. For one thing there are an *awful lot* of trips listed as terminating in San Antonio, and I suspect some of them are actually connecting to the Texas Eagle.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jan 17, 2016)

west point said:


> IMHO The San Antonia station is the worse of Amtrak's high usage stations. ATL is a palace compared to SAS. SAS station is a repurposed old SP building just south of original SP station. It really needs replacing in conjunction of proposed additional service.


How does SAS compare to PGH? When it comes to PGH, is the first syllable accurate?


----------



## Seaboard92 (Jan 18, 2016)

Can I ask where you are getting your city pair ridership from. As I would love to use that tool


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jan 18, 2016)

Seaboard92 said:


> Can I ask where you are getting your city pair ridership from. As I would love to use that tool


The link to 2014 NARP city data is listed in one of my previous post. NARP also has route data and state data.

http://www.narprail.org/our-issues/ridership-statistics/


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jan 18, 2016)

neroden said:


> Philly Amtrak Fan said:
> 
> 
> > In reality if Amtrak doesn't want to do through cars anymore between the SL and TE there are really two options:
> ...


The only trains that serve SAS currently to my knowledge are the TE and SL. I guess you could transfer from the southbound TE to the eastbound SL but that would require an overnight stay (9:55pm to 6:25am). Same if you were coming from NOL/HOU and going north to say Texas (12:05am to 7:00am). But you have to transfer already for those and there is no proposal that would change that.

If you eliminate the through car option, you're forcing someone to have to transfer. The Amtrak proposal is forcing NOL-SAS to transfer to the TE. My alternative (which I'm not saying is better) is forcing DAL-SAS to transfer to the SL. So the real question is do more passengers going to/from LAX/Arizona/El Paso originate from the TE portion north of SAS or the SL portion east of SAS. Unless there is some AGR trick or some other reason, no one would "transfer" at SAS if they didn't have to. I am assuming those who terminate in SAS are going the opposite way (west to north and south to east) and they don't factor in the decision into who you force to transfer since they're still going to transfer anyway. The hope is you force fewer people to have to transfer and be stuck in the Amshack that west point described.

Or better yet, keep the through cars and have no one forced to transfer.


----------



## DetroitTed (Jan 18, 2016)

WoodyinNYC said:


> For _Sunset/Eagle_ passengers to/from Houston and New Orleans, I'm more concerned about the low average speed, only 40 or 45 mph iirc.
> 
> Houston-San Antonio should be a state-supported corridor with upgraded faster tracks and 4 or 5 trains each way every day. The next step would be, 3 or 4 trains Houston-Beaumont-Lake Charles-Lafayette-New Orleans. The New Orleans-San Antonio segment is the 4th busiest city pair on the _Sunset_ now, despite the lousy 3-days-a-week schedule, slow speed, and all. (But I don't know if they credit connections to the NB _Eagle_ to this segment.) Even one more frequency here could help things, giving an option for a cross-platform transfer in New Orleans and a stop-over in San Antonio instead.
> 
> ...


For all of those posters that conflate Maricopa with Phoenix, it just ain't so. Until Amtrak returns to Phoenix/Tempe/Mesa, no one in the Phoenix area would consider Maricopa to be a Phoenix stop.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jan 18, 2016)

DetroitTed said:


> For all of those posters that conflate Maricopa with Phoenix, it just ain't so. Until Amtrak returns to Phoenix/Tempe/Mesa, no one in the Phoenix area would consider Maricopa to be a Phoenix stop.


Can anyone think of a feasible reroute of the SL to get to or closer to Phoenix? Is the old route still possible?


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Jan 18, 2016)

DetroitTed said:


> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> > Then add a corridor train Tucson-Maricopa (Phoenix)-L.A. making possible stop-overs in Arizona. ...
> ...


Look at the timetables, or as described on Amtrak.com, the *SCHEDULES*, it says "Maricopa, AZ (Phoenix)".

So I'm using Amtrak terminology on an Amtrak thread.

When the _Sunset_ goes daily, limos and shuttle buses will connect the Maricopa station with various stops and hotels in the Phoenix Metro. So I'm sorry. Uuntil somebody pays to rebuild the line thru downtown Phoenix to points west -- and who's got a spare Billion or $5 Billion? -- Maricopa is all you got, like it or not.


----------



## keelhauled (Jan 18, 2016)

Yeah but it's 35 miles from Maricopa and Phoenix. Regardless of what Amtrak wants you to believe that's like saying the Wilmington, Delaware station serves Philadelphia.


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Jan 18, 2016)

keelhauled said:


> Yeah but it's 35 miles from Maricopa and Phoenix. Regardless of what Amtrak wants you to believe that's like saying the Wilmington, Delaware station serves Philadelphia.


If there were no station in Philly, and Amtrak said that the station serving Philly was Wilmington, then yes, I would say that Wilmington serves Philadelphia. Of course there is a station in Philly, while there isn't one in Phoenix itself. So your example is really pretty far out there.

I said I was *using Amtrak's language in discussing Amtrak*. "Maricopa, AZ (Phoenix)" is on every timetable for the _Sunset_ and the _Eagle. _The Maricopa station is discussed in the PRIIA study from 6 or 7 years ago. It is discussed in the recent TIGER grant press release as serving Phoenix. I think everyone posting on this blog has a notion that Maricopa is some ways from the heart of downtown Phoenix, to the extent that there is such a thing. For myself, I actually have a first-hand acquaintance with Maricopa, having driven thru the town, and the city of Phoenix, some two years ago.

Do you suggest that I should not mention Maricopa and Phoenix in the same sentence? Do you want me to use the name of another station better serving Phoenix? For the foreseeable future, Maricopa serves the Phoenix market. Get over it.

Meanwhile, a glance at the *SCHEDULES *on Amtrak.com will show many other examples of Amtrak simply labeling its nearest station with the nearby, or not so near, city: Florence, SC (Myrtle Beach), Newton, KS (Wichita), Walnut Ridge, AR (Jonesboro), Waterloo, IN (Fort Wayne), Columbus, WI (Madison), Lynchburg, VA (Roanoke), and Osceola, IA (Des Moines) among others.

I'm not going to tell Amtrak to end that practice, and I'm not going to stop saying that Maricopa serves Phoenix.


----------



## keelhauled (Jan 18, 2016)

WoodyinNYC said:


> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah but it's 35 miles from Maricopa and Phoenix. Regardless of what Amtrak wants you to believe that's like saying the Wilmington, Delaware station serves Philadelphia.
> ...


If you can't figure out that it was a distance comparison I'm not sure I can help you.



> I said I was *using Amtrak's language in discussing Amtrak*. "Maricopa, AZ (Phoenix)" is on every timetable for the _Sunset_ and the _Eagle. _The Maricopa station is discussed in the PRIIA study from 6 or 7 years ago. It is discussed in the recent TIGER grant press release as serving Phoenix. I think everyone posting on this blog has a notion that Maricopa is some ways from the heart of downtown Phoenix, to the extent that there is such a thing. For myself, I actually have a first-hand acquaintance with Maricopa, having driven thru the town, and the city of Phoenix, some two years ago.
> 
> Do you suggest that I should not mention Maricopa and Phoenix in the same sentence? Do you want me to use the name of another station better serving Phoenix? For the foreseeable future, Maricopa serves the Phoenix market. Get over it.


No it doesn't serve the Phoenix market, no matter how much Amtrak pretends it does. There are no public transportation links and the train arrives outside of rental car hours (if there are any convenient locations anyway). Phoenix locals can drive to the station, (and park in one of the whopping 29 parking spaces) but do tell, how is a visitor supposed to go anywhere? A taxi is $80-90 to Phoenix proper.



> Meanwhile, a glance at the *SCHEDULES *on Amtrak.com will show many other examples of Amtrak simply labeling its nearest station with the nearby, or not so near, city: Florence, SC (Myrtle Beach), Newton, KS (Wichita), Walnut Ridge, AR (Jonesboro), Waterloo, IN (Fort Wayne), Columbus, WI (Madison), Lynchburg, VA (Roanoke), and Osceola, IA (Des Moines) among others.
> 
> I'm not going to tell Amtrak to end that practice, and I'm not going to stop saying that Maricopa serves Phoenix.


Doesn't mean it's not misleading in the extreme.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jan 18, 2016)

There is the Thruway Bus (Greyhound) between Flagstaff and Phoenix but the hours are just about/in the graveyard shift. What's Flagstaff's station like at night?


----------



## Anderson (Jan 19, 2016)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> There is the Thruway Bus (Greyhound) between Flagstaff and Phoenix but the hours are just about/in the graveyard shift. What's Flagstaff's station like at night?


Not bad. Sleepy, but not a dump (it's definitely better than, say, SLC). I say this having waited for an eastbound Chief there in the past.

Also, downtown FLG isn't exactly a dump. It'll all be closed then (save perhaps a McDonalds or a stray diner) but it doesn't seem to be the sort of place to be worried about being, so to speak.


----------



## Eric S (Jan 19, 2016)

WoodyinNYC said:


> Meanwhile, a glance at the *SCHEDULES *on Amtrak.com will show many other examples of Amtrak simply labeling its nearest station with the nearby, or not so near, city: Florence, SC (Myrtle Beach), Newton, KS (Wichita), Walnut Ridge, AR (Jonesboro), Waterloo, IN (Fort Wayne), Columbus, WI (Madison), Lynchburg, VA (Roanoke), and Osceola, IA (Des Moines) among others.
> 
> I'm not going to tell Amtrak to end that practice, and I'm not going to stop saying that Maricopa serves Phoenix.


I think it's perfectly reasonable for Woody to state that Maricopa serves the Phoenix market. It may not serve it well, but it is the nearest Phoenix-area station, it is located in the Phoenix metropolitan area (defined as Maricopa and Pinal counties), and as he mentions, Amtrak lists it as "Maricopa, AZ (Phoenix)".

None of this is to suggest it provides adequate service to the Phoenix market (but, then again, neither does a single tri-weekly train), but I don't think Woody would ever suggest that it does.


----------



## neroden (Jan 23, 2016)

What I was trying to say was that I think there are a fair number of people who go "through" from the Texas Eagle to the western Sunset Limited *without being in the through car* -- changing seats, changing rooms. This has been documented anecdotally. They would show up as passengers going to San Antonio in the stats, but they wouldn't be going to San Antonio. If Amtrak happens to know that there are lots of these passengers, it would provide evidence supporting a rearrangement of service.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Jan 23, 2016)

neroden said:


> What I was trying to say was that I think there are a fair number of people who go "through" from the Texas Eagle to the western Sunset Limited *without being in the through car* -- changing seats, changing rooms. This has been documented anecdotally. They would show up as passengers going to San Antonio in the stats, but they wouldn't be going to San Antonio. If Amtrak happens to know that there are lots of these passengers, it would provide evidence supporting a rearrangement of service.


So in other words a passenger would want to go from DAL-LAX but buy two separate tickets, one DAL-SAS and one SAS-LAX instead of just buying one ticket? Other than to stop over in SAS (I once stopped in SLC en route between CHI and EMY so I did essentially split the trip into two legs), why would anyone split a trip into two tickets with no intention of stopping in SAS? Is it some AGR trick? Also, could a passenger from NOL to LAX or from HOS to LAX do the same and split his/her ticket in two at SAS?


----------



## Eric S (Jan 23, 2016)

Two tickets in the sense of a ticket for each train (Train 21 and Train 1), but not two separate reservations.

If you search DAL-LAX (for a day the Sunset Limited operates), you'll typically see Train 21 DAL-SAS connecting to Train 1 SAS-LAX, or Train 421 DAL-LAX.


----------



## afigg (Jan 26, 2016)

Amtrak news release on an inspection train to run from New Orleans to Jacksonville in mid-February: AMTRAK AND SOUTHERN RAIL COMMISSION TO HOST AN INSPECTION TRAIN ACROSS GULF COAST.



> CHICAGO -- Amtrak and the Southern Rail Commission (SRC) are conducting a tour to examine new ideas for intercity passenger rail by operating an Inspection Train from New Orleans to Jacksonville, Fla., on Thursday, Feb. 18, and Friday, Feb. 19.
> 
> The Inspection Train, hosted by Amtrak President and CEO Joe Boardman, will carry elected officials, industry representatives, community leaders and federal stakeholders. The goal of the invitation-only trip is to examine the existing CSX railroad infrastructure and to better understand rails economic, cultural and mobility opportunities. It will provide an unparalleled perspective on reintroducing intercity passenger rail along the Gulf Coast. The special train will be at each of these stations for 10 minutes before departing at the times below (all times local). Details can be found on the SRC website.


 The schedule and more info is in the rest of the news release. Probably another 3 to 5 years of discussion and debate and if by some miracle, the states or local governments find some funding for it, but an extension of the CONO to FL could someday happen.


----------



## jis (Jan 26, 2016)

They ran such a train down the FEC some five years back.


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Jan 26, 2016)

jis said:


> They ran such a train down the FEC some five years back.


As I'd tell the story, that one worked out just fine. Amtrak said all the usual things about what an attractive route it would be, but due to the lack of equipment blah blah blah some sweet summer's day.

Then someone at FEC RR took a hard look at the numbers that Amtrak had shared, and a little light went on. "Oh. There's money to be made here." And thus was born All Aboard Florida. Soon the FEC will put trains on the stronger half of the route -- many more, faster, better, etc -- than Amtrak ever could have done.

So I hope this Inspection Train trip works out even half as well. 

I'm encouraged that Boardman himself is leading the tour. He isn't riding along to look at more pine trees. Obviously he wants to make this one happen and thinks it can.


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Jan 26, 2016)

Another clue that Amtrak thinks this one can work. NARP has been beating the drum on restoration of service here for a couple of years. I used to be annoyed that NARP would waste the energy on something not going nowhere.

But now I think, if Amtrak hadn't been OK with NARP making a stir, someone would have nicely suggested to NARP's leadership that the group should work on something else. Then NARP would have quieted down about east of New Orleans. They have a relationship, after all.


----------



## jis (Jan 26, 2016)

What makes one think that the NARP's beating the drum on something having any correlation with the potential of something working, beats me. But whatever ....

Of course this might legitimately make you wonder why I have been a patron member (or whatever they call it theses days) for so many years


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Jan 26, 2016)

jis said:


> What makes one think that the NARP's beating the drum on something having any correlation with the potential of something working, beats me. But whatever ....
> 
> Of course this might legitimately make you wonder why I have been a patron member (or whatever they call it theses days) for so many years


Let's try it again. The dog didn't bark in the night.

If Amtrak thought it was bad for NARP to beat that particular drum, when they have a drum corp's worth of percussion to choose among, somebody would have let NARP know about it.


----------



## Anderson (Jan 26, 2016)

WoodyinNYC said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > They ran such a train down the FEC some five years back.
> ...


The collapse of Florida HSR didn't hurt, either. That's one place where, ironically, the government quite possibly_ was_ crowding out private investment: It wouldn't make sense for FEC to run a three-hour train trip from Miami to Orlando if the state was about to pop in a bullet train that could do it in two, now, would it? But once that was gone...


----------



## neroden (Jan 27, 2016)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> So in other words a passenger would want to go from DAL-LAX but buy two separate tickets, one DAL-SAS and one SAS-LAX instead of just buying one ticket? Other than to stop over in SAS (I once stopped in SLC en route between CHI and EMY so I did essentially split the trip into two legs), why would anyone split a trip into two tickets with no intention of stopping in SAS?


If the only through-car coach is *full*, additional passengers from DAL-LAX would have to buy two separate tickets. And change seats at SAS!

I know this sort of stuff happens when the only through-car sleeper is full!



Eric S said:


> Two tickets in the sense of a ticket for each train (Train 21 and Train 1), but not two separate reservations.
> 
> If you search DAL-LAX (for a day the Sunset Limited operates), you'll typically see Train 21 DAL-SAS connecting to Train 1 SAS-LAX, or Train 421 DAL-LAX.


Yes. If you book train 21 and train 1, you will probably have to change seats at SAS. But train 421 may be sold out.


----------



## warrenwarner (Feb 7, 2016)

I was wondering if the people who live in the cities and towns along the route for The Sunset Limited (past New Orleans) were enthusiastic about train service possibly returning to their locations. They will be doing a test run on Feb. 18th and 19th. NARP is calling for local citizens to make a large showing to encourage government to invest in restoring service. I wonder how it will go.


----------



## afigg (Feb 7, 2016)

I see that you are a new member. Welcome. However before posting, you should look for existing or recent threads on the topic you are asking about, read it and post there than start a new thread. The prospects of eventually restoring service between New Orleans and Sanford/Orlando FL and Amtrak's recent study have been extensively discussed: The Gulf Sunset Limited--Coming Back Again??


----------



## caravanman (Feb 7, 2016)

I did not read the Sunset revival threads, as I assumed that it was wishfull thinking...

A "test run" sounds a positive move, and let's hope it works out for a reinstated service.

Moderators will consolidate or move a topic if it is felt to be a duplicate, so don't worry too much about starting a new one.

Sorry moderators. 

Ed.


----------



## benale (Feb 7, 2016)

It's been over ten years since The Sunset suspended service East of New Orleans. I hope this is the final test and service will be re-instated soon. Obviously Mississippi,Alabama and Florida want the service back. I would imagine it's the states ponying up the money. Why has it taken so long? Shouldn't this test run been done five,six,seven years ago? I remember taking The Sunset when it ran all the way to Miami. Please make the "test run" positive and re-instate the full length of the Sunset! Soon!


----------



## CCC1007 (Feb 7, 2016)

It took an act of congress to get Amtrak to even study the restoration of service on the line.

Why would it not take as much to get them to start the service up again?


----------



## neroden (Feb 7, 2016)

benale said:


> It's been over ten years since The Sunset suspended service East of New Orleans. I hope this is the final test and service will be re-instated soon. Obviously Mississippi,Alabama and Florida want the service back.


See, this is actually the problem. The *cities* want the service back. The *states* don't. We discussed this earlier in the thread: Mississippi and Alabama state governments apparently think of their own coastal cities as the enemy, and take a particular delight in sabotaging whatever the coastal cities want. This apparently happens to a lesser extent in Louisiana state government (located in Baton Rouge) as well. And Florida state government couldn't care less about the Panhandle.


----------



## ParanoidAndroid (Feb 18, 2016)

Well! Does anyone know West Florida? It's basically the coastal cities of Mississippi and Alabama and the current Florida panhandle. Make a state called that, perhaps with a different name, then get a train-supporting politician to be one or both of its senators!


----------



## jis (Feb 18, 2016)

benale said:


> It's been over ten years since The Sunset suspended service East of New Orleans. I hope this is the final test and service will be re-instated soon. Obviously Mississippi,Alabama and Florida want the service back. I would imagine it's the states ponying up the money. Why has it taken so long? Shouldn't this test run been done five,six,seven years ago? I remember taking The Sunset when it ran all the way to Miami. Please make the "test run" positive and re-instate the full length of the Sunset! Soon!


In case you have missed what has been going on, this is not about extending the Sunset. That is not one of the alternatives being considered. The alternatives being considered is either a self standing train NOL to ORL or extending the CONO from NOL to ORL. There is a third alternative involving Thruway bus service too. Whatever is chosen is still several years away.


----------



## WoodyinNYC (Feb 18, 2016)

jis said:


> benale said:
> 
> 
> > . . . Why has it taken so long? Shouldn't this test run been done five,six,seven years ago? . . .
> ...


This is the second big study ordered by Congress since the service was "suspended" back in 2005. (The earlier one is still up on Amtrak.com with the PRIIA studies.)

The first study said Amtrak didn't have enuff equipment, and ordering new equipment would add millions and zillions to the costs. The end of that plan.

This study says Amtrak expects to have enuff equipment by the time such service could start, so NO added costs for equipment. This plan is good to go.

Apparently the new bi-level cars coming for the Midwest corridors and California will free up some equipment used there, and Amtrak is ready to use it here.


----------



## Palmetto (Feb 19, 2016)

Good place for Horizon cars. It never gets too cold on this route to run them.


----------



## warrenwarner (Feb 19, 2016)

What kind of cars were used on the test train?


----------



## CCC1007 (Feb 19, 2016)

Amfleet, viewliner, and two heritage company service cars.


----------



## jis (Feb 19, 2016)

CCC1007 said:


> Amfleet, viewliner, and two heritage company service cars.


And the SUper Dome


----------



## CCC1007 (Feb 19, 2016)

jis said:


> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> > Amfleet, viewliner, and two heritage company service cars.
> ...


The super dome is one of the two heritage company service cars I was referring to.


----------

