# Proposal: Shifting Empire Builder Eastbound Schedule



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Nov 7, 2015)

I was responding to a post about the late departure/arrival times of the LSL. I am very sure that the late time is due to make sure passengers from the west coast don't get stranded in CHI if they get in late from the trains from the west. The LSL PRIIA in 2011 suggested a 6pm departure for the LSL and the 7:30pm departure for the CL. But could Amtrak live with the latest eastbound departure from CHI at 7:30pm? And if this is the case, will more passengers get stuck overnight in CHI? Will Amtrak be forced to not guarantee west/east connections?

So my thought was to see if it was possible to switch one or more of the eastbound trains from the west coast to arrive in Union Station earlier. This was my discussion:

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/65974-amtrak-express-ld-trains/?p=632077

I found the Empire Builder was the only train that was possible to shift without a drastic effect to a "major" intermediate stop along the route. The shift wasn't an easy shift because of the need to schedule the MSP-CHI portion at reasonable hours. The only one that "worked" to me was shifting the EB 8 hours up. The train would travel overnight between MSP and CHI and arrive in CHI early morning (MSP 12:03am, CHI 7:55am). Instead of leaving the northwest before the evening rush hour they would then leave early in the morning (SEA 8:40am/ PDX 8:45am). So passengers from SEA/PDX will "lose the entire day" leaving for CHI but would get into CHI early so they would "get the day back" on that end. The best thing about my proposed shift would be that the train would then arrive/leave Spokane during the late afternoon and not late at night.

We would probably like all four trains to get into CHI around lunchtime and not middle of the afternoon to give enough time to connect east but I can't think of one train that would work for. I also don't think there's any way to "improve" the arrival times of the SWC, CZ, or TE. So the only train that we can do anything with would be the EB and admittedly it would be drastic. Anyone traveling from the EB to east Chicago would have to wait all day in Union Station until the eastbound trains leave. On the other hand, would you rather wait all day or be stranded overnight in CHI because the EB gets in after 9:30pm? Plus, if you add All Aboard Ohio's new Three Rivers route, then you can leave CHI earlier.

So if we can move just the EB would that be enough to do the CL/LSL time shifts without fear of stranded passengers in CHI? If the EB is causing the most problems coming into CHI, that might be enough to help eliminate the need for the LSL to leave so late and it would have a chance of arriving before the afternoon rush hour. The EB does have the latest arrival into CHI of the four major trains from the west coast/Texas.


----------



## neroden (Nov 7, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> So if we can move just the EB would that be enough to do the CL/LSL time shifts without fear of stranded passengers in CHI? If the EB is causing the most problems coming into CHI, that might be enough to help eliminate the need for the LSL to leave so late and it would have a chance of arriving before the afternoon rush hour. The EB does have the latest arrival into CHI of the four major trains from the west coast/Texas.


I hope so!!!

The problem with shifing the EB to run overnight between MSP and CHI is that there is strong daytime demand in Wisconsin. *Sigh* The correct thing to do about that is to run a daytime train from CHI through Wisconsin to MSP, which has been proposed repeatedly, but sabotaged by Scott Walker, may-he-rot-in-hell.

There's some swapping of schedule "winners" and "losers" between Spokane and MSP but frankly I don't think it's significant, not even politically speaking; they seem quite balanced. The loss of riders in Wisconsin probably outweighs everything else, though, so it has to be addressed first. (I don't think those riders are connecting to East Coast trains; I think they're just going to Chicago, mostly, or maybe to Michigan.)


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Nov 7, 2015)

neroden said:


> Philly Amtrak Fan said:
> 
> 
> > So if we can move just the EB would that be enough to do the CL/LSL time shifts without fear of stranded passengers in CHI? If the EB is causing the most problems coming into CHI, that might be enough to help eliminate the need for the LSL to leave so late and it would have a chance of arriving before the afternoon rush hour. The EB does have the latest arrival into CHI of the four major trains from the west coast/Texas.
> ...


When you say Wisconsin I assume you mean west of Milwaukee because Milwaukee can certainly take Hiawatha trains.


----------



## afigg (Nov 7, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> I found the Empire Builder was the only train that was possible to shift without a drastic effect to a "major" intermediate stop along the route. The shift wasn't an easy shift because of the need to schedule the MSP-CHI portion at reasonable hours. The only one that "worked" to me was shifting the EB 8 hours up. The train would travel overnight between MSP and CHI and arrive in CHI early morning (MSP 12:03am, CHI 7:55am). Instead of leaving the northwest before the evening rush hour they would then leave early in the morning (SEA 8:40am/ PDX 8:45am). So passengers from SEA/PDX will "lose the entire day" leaving for CHI but would get into CHI early so they would "get the day back" on that end. The best thing about my proposed shift would be that the train would then arrive/leave Spokane during the late afternoon and not late at night.


Again with the endpoints and only the biggest cities in-between. And drastic changes. A 6 hour earlier #28 departure from Portland breaks the connection with #14 Coast Starlight at Portland.

The #8 Empire Builder has been doing pretty good in getting to CHI in recent weeks in time for connections to the east bound LD trains. See the Status Map archives table below. The recent performance indicates that the BNSF double-tracking and other track upgrades are working to make the corridor more reliable. With more double tracking and upgrades planned for 2016, the route will see another round of improvements. I recall reading that Regardless of what happens to the total output of the Bakken field, pipelines will start moving more of the oil out of North Dakota, reducing the amount that is being shipped by rail. So it might be possible in another year, to actually begin to trim padding from the EB schedule. Instead of a big schedule shift, have the EB depart MSP an half hour earlier, get to CHI circa 3:15 PM. That would provide a larger buffer for east coast connections.


```
History for Amtrak 8 at CHI (Chicago - Union Station, IL)
Origin Date Sch AR Act AR Comments Service Disruption Cancellations
11/04/2015 (We) 11/06/2015 3:55 PM (Fr) 4:59PM Arr: 1 hr, 4 min late. 
11/03/2015 (Tu) 11/05/2015 3:55 PM (Th) 4:36PM Arr: 41 min late. 
11/02/2015 (Mo) 11/04/2015 3:55 PM (We) 3:35PM Arr: 20 min early. 
11/01/2015 (Su) 11/03/2015 3:55 PM (Tu) 5:59PM Arr: 2 hr, 4 min late. 
10/31/2015 (Sa) 11/02/2015 3:55 PM (Mo) 3:35PM Arr: 20 min early. 
10/30/2015 (Fr) 11/01/2015 3:55 PM (Su) 3:42PM Arr: 13 min early. 
10/29/2015 (Th) 10/31/2015 3:55 PM (Sa) 3:36PM Arr: 19 min early. 
10/28/2015 (We) 10/30/2015 3:55 PM (Fr) 3:28PM Arr: 27 min early. 
10/27/2015 (Tu) 10/29/2015 3:55 PM (Th) 4:28PM Arr: 33 min late. 
10/26/2015 (Mo) 10/28/2015 3:55 PM (We) 3:29PM Arr: 26 min early. 
10/25/2015 (Su) 10/27/2015 3:55 PM (Tu) 3:31PM Arr: 24 min early. 
10/24/2015 (Sa) 10/26/2015 3:55 PM (Mo) 3:27PM Arr: 28 min early. 
10/23/2015 (Fr) 10/25/2015 3:55 PM (Su) 4:35PM Arr: 40 min late. 
10/22/2015 (Th) 10/24/2015 3:55 PM (Sa) 3:58PM Arr: 3 min late. 
10/21/2015 (We) 10/23/2015 3:55 PM (Fr) 3:44PM Arr: 11 min early. 
10/20/2015 (Tu) 10/22/2015 3:55 PM (Th) 6:46PM Arr: 2 hr, 51 min late. 
10/19/2015 (Mo) 10/21/2015 3:55 PM (We) 3:28PM Arr: 27 min early. 
10/18/2015 (Su) 10/20/2015 3:55 PM (Tu) 6:18PM Arr: 2 hr, 23 min late. 
Average AR delay:  22 minutes late
Median AR delay:  12 minutes early
```


----------



## neroden (Nov 11, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> When you say Wisconsin I assume you mean west of Milwaukee because Milwaukee can certainly take Hiawatha trains.


La Crosse has more riders than any single station in the whole of Montana, averaging more than 25 on/offs on each train in 2012 (when the delays weren't as bad as they are now).

Columbus (for Madison), Wisconsin Dells, and Tomah are also quite busy averaging more than 13 on/offs on each train.

I've looked at the merits of "flipping" the schedule of the Empire Builder to run overnight Chicago-MSP.

You get better times MSP-Rugby, Seattle-Spokane and Portland-Spokane, and worse times Williston-Browning and through Wisconsin.

Williston-Browning is a mild loss, MSP-Rugby is a gain of pretty much the same amount.

Seattle-Spokane and Portland-Spokane are valuable gains, but I don't think they outweigh the losses in La Crosse/Columbus/Wis Dells/Tomah.

MSP-Chicago single-overnight captures the "visit the other city for a day without getting a hotel" market but loses the "prefer daytime travel" market.

If there were a separate daytime MSP-Chicago train, however, it would become very clear that the Empire Builder should be "flipped" to go overnight from MSP-CHI. Because the new day train would capture most of the Wisconsin market and the prefer-daytime-travel MSP-CHI market (by virtue of having fewer delays).

At that point, the calculation would look like this:

Williston-Browning is a mild loss, MSP-Rugby is a gain of pretty much the same amount.

Seattle-Spokane and Portland-Spokane are valuable gains

MSP-Chicago single-overnight captures the "visit the other city for a day without getting a hotel" market



afigg said:


> A 6 hour earlier #28 departure from Portland breaks the connection with #14 Coast Starlight at Portland.


I don't count this as a significant loss once there's a MSP-CHI day train. Here's why.Portland's a nice city to stay overnight in, and nobody making THAT connection is in a raging hurry -- and there aren't that many of them.

-- For connections from the Empire Builder as far south as Eugene or northward, there's Cascades.

-- The population south of Eugene and north of Sacramento (5 stations) is miniscule, mostly doesn't take the train, and is very unlikely to be heading for Montana/North Dakota/Minnesota. We can consider this travel pattern insignificant.

-- So we're looking at people from Sacramento through LA. But if they're headed to Chicago or Milwaukee, the faster route is to take the Zephyr or Chief to Chicago (and Hiawathas to Milawukee if needed).

-- If there were a separate MSP-Chicago day train, the same would be true for all of Wisconsin and as far as Minneapolis. In fact, when you add in the possibility of driving or buses, this is probably already the case.

-- So we're talking people from Spokane, North Dakota and Montana (all low population density) heading to Sacramento, the Bay Area or Southern California. By train. This isn't a major travel flow, even by Amtrak standards. Travel on the Empire Builder within Wisconsin alone is probably several times larger.

Anyone who is taking the route for the scenery is by definition not in a hurry, and anyone who has to go via Portland because they have business in Portland has to stay overnight anyway.


----------



## CCC1007 (Nov 11, 2015)

I personally know that Whitefish has close to 60 people on and off every train on average. If Whitefish is not in Montana to you then you need to brush up on where Montana is.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Nov 11, 2015)

neroden said:


> Philly Amtrak Fan said:
> 
> 
> > When you say Wisconsin I assume you mean west of Milwaukee because Milwaukee can certainly take Hiawatha trains.
> ...


Separate daytime MSP-Chicago train? Another reason we need to get rid of the 750 mile rule.


----------



## zephyr17 (Nov 11, 2015)

Minneapolis/St. Paul to Chicago is an obvious corridor candidate in any rational world, and it was something of a corridor back in the day (the CNW's 400s, Burlington's Morning and Afternoon Zephyrs, the Milwaukee Road's Hiawathas). It is probably one of the best corridor candidates in the country.

While I am not a big fan of the 750 rule and believe if the rest of the country is stuck with it, so should the NEC, I do believe in states chipping in and funding trains they want. I don't think making all those decisions in DC is effective, and do not think the flourishing corridor services in California, Oregon, Washington, Michigan and Illinois would exist without state sponsorship and active participation. Minnesota and Wisconsin would be the big beneficiaries of such a service, Illinois not so much, so I think that could be made to happen with just the two states. How much does Indiana chip in for Michigan services? Zero.

With that said, Scott Walker is not exactly going to step up here.

Regarding shifting the Builder's schedule I can think of one large practical impediment: Metra. It is doubtful that Metra would accept scheduling the Builder into Chicago at the the height of the morning rush hour, and they own the track south of Roundout.


----------



## Eric S (Nov 11, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> > Philly Amtrak Fan said:
> ...


OK. The rule is gone. Now, how is the train funded?


----------



## Anderson (Nov 11, 2015)

I think the answer with Metra might be to shove the train a hair earlier (perhaps to 0730?) so it would be before the peak of the rush.

One thing to consider is that while you'd break the link in PDX, SEA would still offer a legal connection.

As to the CHI-MSP route, I believe MN wants this. To me, the question on the 750-mile route is whether MN should have to bear _all_ the costs for the route or whether Amtrak should be able to cover _part_ of the deficit.


----------



## jebr (Nov 11, 2015)

Anderson said:


> As to the CHI-MSP route, I believe MN wants this. To me, the question on the 750-mile route is whether MN should have to bear _all_ the costs for the route or whether Amtrak should be able to cover _part_ of the deficit.


I'll be interested to see if it comes up in 2016. Considering all of the MN House and Senate are up for re-election next year, I'm not sure how likely it'll be that something that primarily benefits the metro area will pass through, unless it happens to get into the bonding bill with some outstate concessions made. (Ideally I'd like to see it be extended at least to SCD, along with all of the Northstar trains. SCD - MSP could be a corridor in its own right, and the station is seeing some improvements.)


----------



## neroden (Nov 12, 2015)

CCC1007 said:


> I personally know that Whitefish has close to 60 people on and off every train on average. If Whitefish is not in Montana to you then you need to brush up on where Montana is.


No, it doesn't. You're incorrect for the 2012 numbers (I'm ignoring more recent numbers due to the delays). Look at the actual yearly ridership numbers, which I did. What's going on is probably seasonality: 60 people in-season, nobody out of season.


----------



## keelhauled (Nov 12, 2015)

neroden said:


> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> > I personally know that Whitefish has close to 60 people on and off every train on average. If Whitefish is not in Montana to you then you need to brush up on where Montana is.
> ...


According to Amtrak's 2014 Montana fact sheet (http://www.amtrak.com/pdf/factsheets/MONTANA14.pdf), Whitefish had 52,012 passengers in FY2014. 52,012/365=142.5, divided by two daily trains is 71 passengers per train per day.


----------



## CCC1007 (Nov 13, 2015)

keelhauled said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> > CCC1007 said:
> ...


thank you


----------



## JayPea (Nov 13, 2015)

CCC1007 said:


> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> > neroden said:
> ...


If you use the 2012 figures for Whitefish, as I did here: http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/96/644/Top-Amtrak-Stations-by-State-ATK-12-097.pdf, Whitefish had 66.614 on/offs. Divide that by 366, as 2012 was a leap year, you come up with 182 riders/day. Divide that by the two trains per day and you come up with 91 riders per day. And Whitefish is far from a seasonal stop. Big Mountain Resort is a very popular ski resort and draws people year-round. While on the subject of seasonal stops, consider East Glacier. Using the same source, it had 14,886 on/offs in 2012. Of course, the station is closed in the winter. I don't know exactly when it opened and closed in 2012, but it is usually open little over 5 months a year. Using 160 days as a nice round figure, you come up with 93.5 on/offs. So on average for both trains that is about 46 riders per day, comparing very favorably with LaCrosse. And throw in the stop in Browning, you have a total of 17,057 on/offs in FY 2012 between the two. That compares even more favorably to Columbus. Shelby at 15,501 and Havre at 14, 198 also outpace Tomah and Wisconsin Dells. I don't know how much of the traffic in Whitefish and East Glacier comes from points west, but I would think it's a decent percentage. And I don't think I'd want to detrain East Glacier at 0 dark 30. Nor would Terry, the owner at the Mountain Pine Motel, my motel of choice at East Glacier, want me to.  But since the world doesn't revolve around me (though it should   :lol: ) whatever would be more beneficial to Amtrak as a whole is fine by me.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Nov 13, 2015)

JayPea said:


> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> > keelhauled said:
> ...


Does anyone have a link for 2014 (or 2013) figures of this format?


----------



## Eric S (Nov 13, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> JayPea said:
> 
> 
> > If you use the 2012 figures for Whitefish, as I did here: http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/96/644/Top-Amtrak-Stations-by-State-ATK-12-097.pdf,
> ...


Amtrak used to have lists, by state, of ridership at every station. I can't find them now, though.

NARP does provide ridership numbers for every station for the years 2008-2014 (not sure if that's CY or FY). Here's a fairly large PDF: http://narprail.org/site/assets/files/1038/cities_2014.pdf

I don't think you need to be a member to access that page.


----------



## afigg (Nov 13, 2015)

Eric S said:


> Amtrak used to have lists, by state, of ridership at every station. I can't find them now, though.
> 
> NARP does provide ridership numbers for every station for the years 2008-2014 (not sure if that's CY or FY). Here's a fairly large PDF:...
> 
> I don't think you need to be a member to access that page.


The state fact sheets with the FY14 passenger counts for each station are still there. Just buried a level deeper under the state economic impact brochures. On the webpage for State Economic Impact Brochures, click on the state. Then in the PDF document, click on the Profile link on the second page. That retrieves the State Fact Sheet. Direct link to the Montana FY14 fact sheet.

Whitefish had 52,012 boardings + alightings in FY2014. That is a decline as Whitefish had 66,614 passengers in FY2012 (I have copies of the state fact sheets going back to at least FY2010). Edit: Whitefish had 66,840 passengers in FY13, so FY14 is a sharp one year dropoff.


----------



## Eric S (Nov 14, 2015)

Ah, thanks. Good to know there are still buried in there somewhere.


----------



## neroden (Nov 18, 2015)

Anyway, Whitefish is not between Williston and Browning. Neither is East Glacier.

Moving the Empire Builder schedule to run overnight between MSP and CHI would leave Whitefish, and East Glacier, with perfectly reasonable daytime hours.

So my analysis remains 100% valid. Shelby and Havre are less busy than La Crosse. In fact Shelby + Havre is comparable to La Crosse by itself.

Let me repeat the facts here:



> I've looked at the merits of "flipping" the schedule of the Empire Builder to run overnight Chicago-MSP.
> 
> You get better times MSP-Rugby, Seattle-Spokane and Portland-Spokane, and worse times Williston-Browning and through Wisconsin.
> 
> ...


By contrast, if instead a Seattle-Spokane daytime train were established but an MSP-CHI train was not established, the case for "flipping" the Empire Builder would get much *weaker*.

My general point here is that adding an additional frequency along part of the route changes all the calculations regarding what schedule is most suitable, and changes them quite substantially. Additional frequencies along part of the route may make schedule changes good for business when they are currently bad for business.


----------



## CCC1007 (Nov 18, 2015)

My only beef with what you said is that you discounted two of the highest ridership stations in my state. I would prefer not a twelve hour shift, but an eight hour shift.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Nov 18, 2015)

CCC1007 said:


> My only beef with what you said is that you discounted two of the highest ridership stations in my state. I would prefer not a twelve hour shift, but an eight hour shift.


I said 8 hours, not 12. A 12 hr shift would put the train into Chicago in the middle of the night (3:55am)


----------



## neroden (Nov 22, 2015)

I was thinking something more like 8 hours as well; basically start with "overnight MSP-CHI" and work from there. I should actually calculate the schedule scheme again. Sorry I forgot about Whitefish; I think it gets served in the day by anything I can come up with.

I still say you have to have a second train on part of the route before seriously considering a schedule change, because the current schedule optimizes ridership on the Empire Builder as best as possible given only one train a day.

While I would love to sacrifice Empire Builder ridership to gain significantly more ridership on the Lake Shore Limited, I think geographic politics would make that difficult to impossible.

If on the other hand there's another train running along part of the route, maximizing ridership on the route overall requires different calculations.


----------



## capltd29 (Nov 28, 2015)

How would this impact connections from the Coast Starlight and Cascades and PDX and SEA?


----------



## CHamilton (Nov 28, 2015)

A schedule change is in the works for January. See http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/66362-empire-builder-8-schedule-change-11116/


----------

