# Sunset must go daily



## Guest_GP35_* (May 19, 2008)

Amtrak needs to stop screwing around. All Sunset needs is 3 addition trainsets and a 4th for replacement for daily service.

Repair 8 of the single level coaches(Amfleet, viewliners, horizon) thats is rusting away. 4 diners, 12 sleepers, 4-8 engines...maybe the p32's

in storage. Or buy new from Colorado rail. It is much cheaper to opertate a daily Sunset vs a Tri-weekly Sunset.

8 coaches

4 diners

12 sleepers

4 lounge

4-8 locos

Could be all old refurbished equiment. Just do it.


----------



## NativeSon5859 (May 19, 2008)

I'm just tired of seeing the train "hanging on". Amtrak needs to do one of two things in my opinion:

1) Extend it back to Orlando

or...

2) Make it daily

The train has a lot of potential. It's a shame that potential has to go unused.


----------



## Rafi (May 19, 2008)

NativeSon5859 said:


> I'm just tired of seeing the train "hanging on". Amtrak needs to do one of two things in my opinion:
> 1) Extend it back to Orlando
> 
> or...
> ...


It's not going back to Florida any time soon...

Click Here.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 19, 2008)

While we're at it, lets bring back the 20th Century limited, the Dixie Flager, AND City of Miami on daily schedules, the Golden Rocket can finally be born, and we should also and a thrice-daily service between Peoria and Albequrque.

What I mean to say is, given the way you think it can happen, get real!


----------



## the_traveler (May 19, 2008)

Guest_GP35_* said:


> Amtrak needs to stop screwing around. All Sunset needs is 3 addition trainsets and a 4th for replacement for daily service.*Repair 8 of the single level coaches*(Amfleet, viewliners, horizon) thats is rusting away. 4 diners, 12 sleepers, 4-8 engines...maybe the p32's
> 
> in storage. Or buy new from Colorado rail. It is much cheaper to opertate a daily Sunset vs a Tri-weekly Sunset.
> 
> ...


Good idea to make it daily - but why single level coaches? :huh: The SL operates with Superliner equipment! What will happen in SAS when the TE arrives? Will you make all the thru pax get off and stand around the station al night?

You can't combine Superliner equipment and Amfleet equipment on one train without another car in between!


----------



## NativeSon5859 (May 19, 2008)

Rafi said:


> NativeSon5859 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm just tired of seeing the train "hanging on". Amtrak needs to do one of two things in my opinion:
> ...


You know what then? Amtrak needs to just take away all reference to the service. They need to update the national route map and do away with the line connecting the two cities, they need to take away the cities between ORL and NOL which are still listed in the timetable, albeit without times next to them, and they need to do away with the "Service between Orlando and New Orleans has been suspended. Future service has not been determined." announcement in the timetable. It's all getting rather annoying.


----------



## Guest_GP35_* (May 19, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> Guest_GP35_* said:
> 
> 
> > Amtrak needs to stop screwing around. All Sunset needs is 3 addition trainsets and a 4th for replacement for daily service.*Repair 8 of the single level coaches*(Amfleet, viewliners, horizon) thats is rusting away. 4 diners, 12 sleepers, 4-8 engines...maybe the p32's
> ...


Move the transition sleeper to the back or maybe continue the tri-weekly service of the Eagle on the Sunset Superliner trains only. Either way is better than the

current situation.

Why not superliners? because of the lack of superliners. Amtrak has plenty of single deck coaches on the sideline. I say repair them and use them

Get those Sunset numbers up. Stop giving Amtrak critics Ammunition.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 19, 2008)

You've got to be kidding me. You seriously have got to be kidding me, right? The Sunset as an all coach train? Amtrak has NO spare single level sleepers, single level diners, and few single level cafes- I don't think they have spare lounges, either. Amtrak doesn't have enough single level sleepers and diners for the trains they do run- and all fifty of the Viewliner's built by Morrison-Knudson are in service! Amtrak does not have the equipment to run this daily from Orlando to LAX. The train has never NEVER run daily under Amtrak.

Perhaps the train could be made to run daily NOL to LAX. But not LAX to ORL. No.

BUT! The Superliners from that section of the Sunset Limited could be better used in other ways, such as making the Cardinal Superliner, and using its sleepers to restore the profitable "Twilight Shoreliner", the "Broadway Limited", or both.


----------



## Guest (May 19, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> You've got to be kidding me. You seriously have got to be kidding me, right? The Sunset as an all coach train? Amtrak has NO spare single level sleepers, single level diners, and few single level cafes- I don't think they have spare lounges, either. Amtrak doesn't have enough single level sleepers and diners for the trains they do run- and all fifty of the Viewliner's built by Morrison-Knudson are in service! Amtrak does not have the equipment to run this daily from Orlando to LAX. The train has never NEVER run daily under Amtrak.
> Perhaps the train could be made to run daily NOL to LAX. But not LAX to ORL. No.
> 
> BUT! The Superliners from that section of the Sunset Limited could be better used in other ways, such as making the Cardinal Superliner, and using its sleepers to restore the profitable "Twilight Shoreliner", the "Broadway Limited", or both.


sheesh, no one said anything about an all coach train. And I was refering to NOL-LAX. Let me get this right, you want Superliners on the NEC


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 19, 2008)

The Cardinal once ran WAS to CHI as a Superliner train.


----------



## Guest_GP35_* (May 19, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> The Cardinal once ran WAS to CHI as a Superliner train.


Cardinal now run to NYC.


----------



## AlanB (May 19, 2008)

Guest_GP35_* said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > The Cardinal once ran WAS to CHI as a Superliner train.
> ...


Nothing stops Amtrak from cutting it back to DC once again, other than perhaps NARP.


----------



## Guest (May 19, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Guest_GP35_* said:
> 
> 
> > Green Maned Lion said:
> ...


So you agree with killing the Sunset for Daily Cardinal.


----------



## AlanB (May 19, 2008)

Guest said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Guest_GP35_* said:
> ...


Please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say any such thing. Just said, that nothing stops Amtrak from cutting the Cardinal back to WAS. It used to run Superliner's to WAS before the Sunset was even cut back to NOL, so there is always the chance of bringing Superliner's back regardless of what does or doesn't happen on the Sunset.


----------



## Guest (May 19, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > AlanB said:
> ...


But he said at the expense of killing the Sunset. So let me ask you, do you think Amtrak should kill the Sunset to make the Cardinal daily?


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 19, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> You've got to be kidding me. You seriously have got to be kidding me, right? The Sunset as an all coach train? Amtrak has NO spare single level sleepers, single level diners, and few single level cafes- I don't think they have spare lounges, either. Amtrak doesn't have enough single level sleepers and diners for the trains they do run- and all fifty of the Viewliner's built by Morrison-Knudson are in service! Amtrak does not have the equipment to run this daily from Orlando to LAX. The train has never NEVER run daily under Amtrak.


I'd argue that the Twilight Shoreliner, I mean the train formerly known as the Twilight Shoreliner, demonstrates that Amtrak has negative spare single level sleepers.

Does Morrison-Knudson still exist? If Congress decided to spend money on 50 more Viewliners, would there be any difficulties in getting someone to convert dollars to Viewliners?


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 19, 2008)

"Killing" the Sunset, and not utilizing the NOL-ORL marginal equipment to make a train that has never been daily, daily are two different things. This would simply be moving currently unused cars into service elsewhere.


----------



## Guest (May 19, 2008)

Kill the Sunset to make the Cardinal daily. Kill the Sunset to add another NEC train.

The politics is showing. NEC vs non-NEC. This was a Sunset thread quickly turned into a Kill Sunset

for the benefit of the NEC. What other LD train should be killed to give the NEC more?


----------



## AlanB (May 20, 2008)

Guest said:


> Kill the Sunset to make the Cardinal daily. Kill the Sunset to add another NEC train.The politics is showing. NEC vs non-NEC. This was a Sunset thread quickly turned into a Kill Sunset
> 
> for the benefit of the NEC. What other LD train should be killed to give the NEC more?


Well the only spare Amfleets sitting around are AMF I's, technically the car of choice for the NEC, which you proposed to give over to a quasi-long distance service. I for one wouldn't want to go ORL to NOL in an AMF I. And there are no mothballed AMF II's sitting around.

That said, no I wouldn't want to see an LD killed just to support a run on the NEC. However, killing the Sunset wouldn't help the NEC anyhow, since it's cars can't run on the NEC. Killing the Sunset to transfer the cars to the Cardinal wouldn't really help the NEC either overall, since the NEC doesn't need AMF II's or Diner-Lite cars. Yes, the Viewliner's could be used on the overnight run, but the revenue doesn't justify that. Now perhaps if by killing the Sunset, the Card went daily, that might be justification financially to do it. As things stand right now, the Card has carried some 10,000 more pax this fiscal year than the Sunset. On the other hand, the Sunset has pulled in more money than the Card has. That however might be equalized by running the Card daily, along with the revenue from putting the current Viewliners on the Card over on the overnight run on the NEC.

But the problem with all of those numbers is that we don't know how much cutting the Sunset out might hurt the numbers on the Crescent, the City, and the services out of LAX. Connecting pax are a reality on Amtrak. A harsh lesson that Amtrak learned recently by cutting the CS out after the mud slide. And it is a proven fact that having the Cardinal run to NY, helped to increase its ridership and its numbers considerably. Cutting it back to DC would cause a drop in those numbers, a drop that running daily might just equalize.

Personally I'd be loath to see any part of Amtrak's route structure be cut, simply to support another route. But if confronted with a choice, something that we're not currently confronted with, then I might have to vote in favor of cutting one train to better another.


----------



## the_traveler (May 20, 2008)

Guest said:


> Kill the Sunset to make the Cardinal daily. Kill the Sunset to add another NEC train.The politics is showing. NEC vs non-NEC. This was a Sunset thread quickly turned into a Kill Sunset
> 
> for the benefit of the NEC. What other LD train should be killed to give the NEC more?


Where do you get "Kill the Sunset to add another NEC train"? :huh: If the Cardinal did in fact again become Superliner, they would be forced to only run it WAS-CHI (as they did in the past)! Superliners can not run at all on the NEC!  Thus, the Cardinal would not run on the NEC at all!


----------



## Chris J. (May 20, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > Kill the Sunset to make the Cardinal daily. Kill the Sunset to add another NEC train.The politics is showing. NEC vs non-NEC. This was a Sunset thread quickly turned into a Kill Sunset
> ...


Would there be anything to gain in making the Cardinal Chicago - Washington only on the days it currently doesn't run at all?

I thought that one of the reasons it did fairly well was people could get a one-seat (or one-bed) trip from NYP.

As to removing the sunset totally, very bad idea IMHO - you'd be cutting a whole load of places off from any amtrak service.


----------



## AlanB (May 20, 2008)

Chris J. said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > Guest said:
> ...


There's certainly something to gain by doing that, but I'm not sure that it's a good idea. And it would create great confusion I suspect as people try to figure out why they can't get to/from NY on certain days. And it certainly wouldn't be worth it at the cost of the Sunset.

One also has to remember that the numbers that I mentioned earlier which were mixed between the two trains, could also be affected by making the Sunset daily and/or returning it to Orlando. While Amtrak can't do it at present for lack of equipment, the best answer here is for Amtrak to make both the Cardinal on it's current run daily, as well as making the full length Sunset daily.


----------



## NativeSon5859 (May 20, 2008)

The thought of killing the Sunset is ridiculous. If that was the case, Amtrak would not offer any service to one of the largest market's in the U.S: Houston. Other key cities which would lose all Amtrak service include El Paso (not a small city), Tucson, and the Phoenix area...not to mention Palm Springs, which seems like it could be a popular market for Amtrak if marketed. Also, killing the Sunset would kill the connections to the Crescent...which, while currently involving an overnight stay in NOL, is bookable on Amtrak.com...and is one which people actually make. Of course, that overnight connection problem could be solved if Amtrak considered a schedule for 1/2 like the one listed below. It would depend on if UP would agree with it, of course. All it would require would be for #20 to depart NOL at 8:00am instead of 7:10am (which would not really adversly affect ANY market on its route to a high degree, including ATL), and #19 would probably have to operate maybe 10-15 minutes earlier just to be safe. I just wonder sometimes if Amtrak even considers things like this or if they are just happy with the status quo?

Dp. New Orleans 855p

Schreiver 1020p

New Iberia 1146p

Lafayette 1214a

Lake Charles 147a

Beaumont 340a

Ar. Houston 630a

Lv. Houston 707a

Ar. San Antonio 1212p

Lv. San Antonio 1232p

Del Rio 337p

Sanderson 612p

Alpine 826p

Ar. El Paso 1212a

Lv. El Paso 1257a

Deming 228a

Lordsburg 323a

Benson 428a

Ar. Tucson 622a

Lv. Tucson 701a

Ar. Maricopa 824a

Lv. Maricopa 834a

Yuma 1121a

Palm Springs 139p

Ontario 307p

Pomona 317p

Ar. Los Angeles 510p

Lv. Los Angeles 700a

Pomona 741a

Ontario 754a

Palm Springs 936a

Yuma 1154a

Ar. Maricopa 237p

Dp. Maricopa 247p

Ar. Tucson 505p

Dp. Tucson 550p

Benson 650p

Lordsburg 950p

Deming 1045p

Ar. El Paso 1246a

Dp. El Paso 130a

Alpine 650a

Sanderson 841a

Del Rio 1107a

Ar. San Antonio 255p

Dp. San Antonio 320p

Ar. Houston 805p

Dp. Houston 830p

Beaumont 1025p

Lake Charles 1149p

Lafayette 135a

New Iberia 201a

Schreiver 323a

Ar. New Orleans 615a


----------



## AlanB (May 20, 2008)

NativeSon5859 said:


> The thought of killing the Sunset is ridiculous. If that was the case, Amtrak would not offer any service to one of the largest market's in the U.S: Houston. Other key cities which would lose all Amtrak service include El Paso (not a small city), Tucson, and the Phoenix area...not to mention Palm Springs, which seems like it could be a popular market for Amtrak if marketed. Also, killing the Sunset would kill the connections to the Crescent...which, while currently involving an overnight stay in NOL, is bookable on Amtrak.com...and is one which people actually make. Of course, that overnight connection problem could be solved if Amtrak considered a schedule for 1/2 like the one listed below. It would depend on if UP would agree with it, of course. All it would require would be for #20 to depart NOL at 8:00am instead of 7:10am (which would not really adversly affect ANY market on its route to a high degree, including ATL), and #19 would probably have to operate maybe 10-15 minutes earlier just to be safe. I just wonder sometimes if Amtrak even considers things like this or if they are just happy with the status quo?


Well you've got to remember that it's not just Amtrak that has to be happy with a new schedule. UP also has to be happy with it.

And one other thing that could also help and should be considered, that being the current double tracking of the Sunset route by UP. Once completed, it might actually be possible to get back some of the 9+ hours of padding that Amtrak has given to UP over the last 7 years.


----------



## AmtrakWPK (May 20, 2008)

We also need to remember that the (intact) Sunset IS (was) the Southern Transcontinental Route for the U.S.A., which Katrina broke and CSX FIXED but Amtrak has so far refused to resume, holding the balance of the route hostage to try to extort a ransom from LA/MS/AL/FL in order to restart it. The LAST thing we need to consider is permanently discarding the southern transcon route; We need, rather, to do whatever it takes to restore it, even if that means starting a new service JAX-NOL.

The primary reason, I think, for the continued "suspension" language Amtrak continues to use, even though their Corporate nose is now substantially longer than the route, is that if they cancel it officially, they can't use it later if they decide to. Since they haven't officially "cancelled" service NOL-JAX, they still have the right to resume service on that rail path. So the fact that you may be sick and tired of hearing Amtrak claim that the service on that path is simply temporarily suspended may be true, but it sure beats losing the right to resume service on that path in the future. And a (hopefully) daily NOL-JAX, even with older, less comfortable cars, would be WAY better than nothing, IMHO. It would at least provide a resumption of the southern transcon route, and connect LAX, and all the stations east to NOL, and south from Chicago, with a connection to Florida via the Silver Service trains, at JAX.

If, as it appears, Sunset east of NOL is dead, we still need to effect a replacement for that part of the Sunset, to restore the southern transcon. What Amtrak doesn't seem to care about, or realize, or simply refuses to acknowledge, with or without actual or tacit goading from the administration, is that IT is supposed to be a NATIONAL rail system. And that -NATIONAL SYSTEM- MUST include the southern transcon route. That's Amtrak's responsibility, as the NATIONAL passenger rail SYSTEM, not the responsibility of the states along the route. If a state wants to begin an intrastate corridor, fine, require them to fund it to the extent that it doesn't cost Amtrak anything from it's national coffers. But the NATIONAL passenger rail SYSTEM is Amtrak's responsibility, not the states. And that MUST include the southern transcon.


----------



## NativeSon5859 (May 20, 2008)

Not that it will do any good, but I just concluded an intense writing campaign, sending off the below email to state Senators as well as local news stations in New Orleans and...for the hell of it...the DOT.

"I am writing today to complain about the status of Amtrak's Sunset Limited service between New Orleans and Orlando. As you may or may not know, the Sunset Limited, prior to Hurricane Katrina, was operating from Los Angeles to Orlando, via New Orleans. Ever since Katrina, Amtrak has not operated the New Orleans to Orlando segment. Initially...for well over a year...they blamed the service disruption on the hurricane. Indeed, the hurricane did destroy the tracks between New Orleans and Bay St. Louis, MS. The problem is, those were re-built in less than six months. Still, as the months progressed, Amtrak still used the same excuse.

I believe that Amtrak is required by law to provide a 180 day "train off" notice for communities along a route or a portion of a route which it is discontinuing service to. Thus far...nearly three years after the service east of New Orleans was cancelled...there has been no such notice. All of the stations between New Orleans and Orlando are still listed in the Amtrak national timetable (although no times are listed next to them), and the N.O-Orlando route is still listed on the national route map.

In my opinion, Amtrak is not being honest with the public here, and I expect more from them. Every time I contact them...generally every month...I get the same response every time: the service is currently suspended. And that's all. I'm sorry, but I have never heard of a three year "suspension" before.

From what I have read recently, the Amtrak CEO has said that the service is gone unless the states along the route (LA, MS, AL, and FL) step up and fund it; yet, before the storm, this portion of the route was not state supported. I cannot understand why such demands are being made now.

I personally feel that Amtrak is still using the hurricane as an excuse to keep the service suspended, and I would love to see Amtrak be held accountable for this. If they do not intend on bringing back the service for whatever reason, they need to step up to the plate and let the public know. By keeping the service listed as "suspended", it keeps all of the cities along the route...including Biloxi, Mobile, Pensacola, and Tallahassee...held in limbo. The way I see it, they are just keeping the service listed as "suspended" so that they don't lose the traffic rights to operate over the CSX railroad if they ever decide to operate a portion of the route again down the road.

I personally think this service should be started again as soon as possible. Amtrak President Alex Kummant said in a recent hearing that "there is no budget for it". That is interesting, because there was a budget for it before Katrina. I guess Mr. Kummant feels that the Gulf Coast is still in shambles and doesn't have the population base to support the service, which of course is utterly ridiculous. The Gulf Coast needs more transportation options, not less.

Anyway, thank you for your time in reading this. I hope this issue finds an outcome at some point. Amtrak service is vitally important for the New Orleans area, and it's a shame when our national railroad can't make up its mind...after three years...on what to do about this. I suppose Amtrak doesn't really consider the Gulf Coast region to be a vital market anymore, which is a shame. As a tax payer, I expect a lot more from them. "


----------



## Guest_GP35_* (May 20, 2008)

It doesn't matter, Amfleet I or II or restored Heritage. Sunset between NOL-LA needs to go daily.

3 trainsets are needed, a 4th for replacing a broken coach. Amtrak would save money. Extra money

that could later go towards NOL-ORL.


----------



## the_traveler (May 20, 2008)

AmtrakWPK said:


> If, as it appears, Sunset east of NOL is dead, we still need to effect a replacement for that part of the Sunset, to restore the southern transcon. What Amtrak doesn't seem to care about, or realize, or simply refuses to acknowledge, with or without actual or tacit goading from the administration, is that IT is supposed to be a NATIONAL rail system. And that -NATIONAL SYSTEM- MUST include the southern transcon route. That's Amtrak's responsibility, as the NATIONAL passenger rail SYSTEM, not the responsibility of the states along the route. If a state wants to begin an intrastate corridor, fine, require them to fund it to the extent that it doesn't cost Amtrak anything from it's national coffers. But the NATIONAL passenger rail SYSTEM is Amtrak's responsibility, not the states. And that MUST include the southern transcon.


Right!

In fact *NATIONAL* is part of the official name of Amtrak - the *NATIONAL* Passenger Rail Corporation! (Did I mix up the 2nd and 3rd words?) I don't see anywhere that it says "NPRC (except between NOL and JAX)"!  I'm not saying there should be a route from say Rapid City to Colorado Springs or Nashville to Wichita, but if it is "national", it should allow you to travel from LAX to FL or TX to FL without having to go thru CHI and/or WAS!


----------



## NativeSon5859 (May 20, 2008)

At the very least, the Senators from LA, AL, MS and FL...if they read the letter I sent...will at least know of this issue if they were indifferent to it before.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 20, 2008)

3 trainsets? Are you nuts? It would require 4 standard sets and, given its lateness, probably another 2 spares. 6 sets. Not 3, six.

That being said, Guest, I don't like you putting words in my mouth, so please stop. I never, NEVER, suggested killing the Sunset. I don't want a single train on the system killed. I have a list of about 2 dozen routes I want added or restored, not to mention doubling frequency on most of the current routes!

Today, the Sunset runs NOL to LAX, just the way it did the day Amtrak was formed. I don't know about you guys, but I have been collecting material to write a comprhensive history of Amtrak. Among this material is every single article the _New York Times_ ran from the first mention of Railpax in 1970 until 1973! As such, I know what that "National System" is, probably better than you do!

That system includes the _Broadway Limited_ (Long discontinued in favour of the not-included _Lake Shore Limited_), the _National Limited_, a train called and similar to the _Empire Builde_r, a train known as the _San Francisco Zephyr_ running much of the current _California Zephyr_ route but cutting through Wyoming, the _Super Chief_ (Now _Southwest Chief_), the _Coast Starlight_, the _Texas Chief_ (roughly the Texas Eagle), the _City of New Orleans_ still running as a daylight coach train, a Chicago to Florida train, the Silver Service including the _Palmetto_ route all the way to (IIRC) Ft. Myers, the _Champion_, and the _James Whitcomb Riley/George Washington_, which we now call the Cardinal. It also included a variety of shorter distance trains such as the _San Diegan_ (now _Pacific Surfliner_) and the NEC.

Excluding the _Broadway Limited_ west of Pittsburgh, some of the stops along the Chicago/Florida route, much of the _National Limited_, and some stops that got bypassed due to reroutings and abandonments, that entire system is still served! Most of the '79 cuts, and '97 cuts involved trains that were added experimentally after the system was set! A Sunset Limited daily, and a Sunset Limited to Orlando (the so-called "Southern Transcon") are NOT part of that mandated national system, sorry.

Thats forgetting the part that the mandate to run that original system expired many years ago. Amtrak is not required to run that ORL-NOL service, period. They ARE required to give 180 days notice to cancel it, yes, but they are not legally required to run that particular route.

That being said, I wasn't advocating killing the Sunset. I simply don't think the cost metrics are there to justify running it daily, and I don't think the cost metrics are there to run it, as a single seat train, to Orlando. But it never in its history ran daily.

Here is the plan I advocate: Currently, the system runs with it not connecting NOL and ORL. That stays as it is. There are heavily under-utilized Superliner train sets that are sitting there due to that change. Those sets go to the _Cardinal_, which will run on its current schedule, but truncated to Washington with a dedicated connection train going to New York. It continues tri-weekly. The Viewliner cars that used to run on it go towards restoring sleeping service on the overnight Regional. The diner-lite can go to one of the really long day trains, perhaps the _Palmetto_ bug. The Amfleet II coaches can go to increasing capacity on the other single-level trains. Or the Amfleet IIs and Amfleet Diner-Lite can go to a train called, say, the _Gulf Breeze_ running on a fast day schedule from NOL to JAX.

You are thus sacrificing an underperforming route section, whilst restoring the southern Transcon, improving the _Cardinal_, and restoring the profitable NEC overnight sleeper service.


----------



## George Harris (May 20, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Or the Amfleet IIs and Amfleet Diner-Lite can go to a train called, say, the _Gulf Breeze_ running on a fast day schedule from NOL to JAX.


Not possible without spending a boatload of money for:

1. Signals Flomaton AL to Tallahassee FL so the max speed can be raised from 59 mph to 79 mph.

2. Add several long sidings Flomaton to Jacksonville, preferably with at least 40 mph turnouts.

3. Add sections of double track between New Orleans -Mobile - Flomaton

Even then, a day schedule would be pushing the rational limits for a day train. Remember a 79 mph speed limit does not mean you run the whole thing at 79 mph. The curve constraints are still there unless you want to spend another boatload of money.


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2008)

You're the one nuts. You wanted Superliners on the NEC. Whats next? Acela on the Empire Builder route.

Between NOL-LA, Sunset needs 3 additional trainsets for daily service. If the trainsets are not Superliners, a 4th set.


----------



## MrEd (May 20, 2008)

I don't think you can move the Acela to the empire builder route, maybe something around Orlando would work for it.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 20, 2008)

Oi veigh, are you capable of reading comprehension? I never suggested Superliners be on the NEC. I didn't make a suggestion, I didn't imply one, I didn't even intimate one!

Superliners on the NEC would be a good thing if we managed to make the clearances- actually, a car more like the California cars would probably be ideal. But thats besides the point.

Currently the _Cardinal_ runs New York to Chicago as a single level train. 4 years ago, before the Autotrain wreck, the train ran Washington to Chicago, entirely bypassing the NEC. The connection train of which I speak would OBVIOUSLY be an Amfleet/Horizon train!

Now do me a favour, ok? Before you reply again, read over everything I said. You obviously are reading things into it, possibly from some kind of hallucination, that aren't there.


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Oi veigh, are you capable of reading comprehension? I never suggested Superliners be on the NEC. I didn't make a suggestion, I didn't imply one, I didn't even intimate one!
> Superliners on the NEC would be a good thing if we managed to make the clearances- actually, a car more like the California cars would probably be ideal. But thats besides the point.
> 
> Currently the _Cardinal_ runs New York to Chicago as a single level train. 4 years ago, before the Autotrain wreck, the train ran Washington to Chicago, entirely bypassing the NEC. The connection train of which I speak would OBVIOUSLY be an Amfleet/Horizon train!
> ...


 ..


> BUT! The Superliners from that section of the Sunset Limited could be better used in other ways, such as making the Cardinal Superliner, and using its sleepers to restore the profitable "Twilight Shoreliner", the "Broadway Limited", or both.


Trains 66 and 67 (former Twilight Shoreliner/Federal)

The nightly Boston-Richmond 66/67 round trip was once the Twilight Shoreliner, with higher-class accommodations than other corridor trains. It is now simply another Regional train, but runs overnight.

The Twilight Shoreliner was the only name to survive the 1999 retirement of names due to its elevated level of service. The train first ran July 10, 1997 as a renaming and extension of the Boston-Washington Night Owl (trains 66 northbound and 67 southbound), which at one time also carried the New York-Washington Executive Sleeper (trains 866 and 867) to allow New York passengers to stay in their sleeping cars longer. At that time train 66 was split into 66 (Sunday to Thursday evenings) and 76 (Friday and Saturday evenings); they were rejoined as the daily 66 on April 29, 2001. On April 28, 2003 the 66 and 67 were cut back to Boston-Washington to allow Washington passengers to remain in their sleeping cars and renamed the Federal. The daily 76, weekend morning 75 and weekday morning 77 Regional trips provided connecting service beyond to Newport News. The November 1, 2004 schedule rejoined the separate trains into the northbound 66 and southbound 67, now Regional trains with no separate accommodations.


----------



## SUNSETLIMITED02 (May 20, 2008)

Guys you also have to think about a fact that geven if the Sunset service from New Orleans to Orlando does get restored and if a daily service is ever put on it may not be 8 superliners it could be like 6-8 sets of 10-12 superliners with a heritage baggage car. Places on the route east of New Orleans can be very busy and a lot do travel to these areas especially Florida.


----------



## AmtrakWPK (May 20, 2008)

My understanding is that 40% of Sunset's passenger miles pre-Katrina were EAST of NOL, and that's less than 40% of the route miles. Second, running Acela through Orlando would require a VERY long extension cord.


----------



## Rail Freak (May 20, 2008)

AmtrakWPK said:


> My understanding is that 40% of Sunset's passenger miles pre-Katrina were EAST of NOL, and that's less than 40% of the route miles. Second, running Acela through Orlando would require a VERY long extension cord.


I'll donate the first 50' out of TPA


----------



## yoohoo (May 20, 2008)

I recently contacted the FL. Department of Transportation to inquire about when passenger rail service would be continued in the panhandle and west coast area. This was their response:



> Amtrak travel between the two cities (Orlando and Pensacola). Please visit their Web site:http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServe...Amtrak/HomePage


Are they kidding me?? How could the Florida's own DOT *not know* there hasnt been rail service in the area for the last 3 years now!!!!

And after I corrected them, this was their followup response:



> Must have been an old map. To my knowledge DOT has no plans for passenger rail service.


Great, then I have ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO TAKE THE TRAIN as it does not connect me to any nearby city!!!


----------



## Crescent ATN & TCL (May 20, 2008)

Until more equipment is available there is no need for talks of expansion or of increasing frequency. Amtrak is running at full capacity, you can't expand or increase frequency without cutting somewhere else. According to Kummant once Amtrak is given the green light to look for new equipment it will be 7 years or more before it can be put into service. So Amtrak is basically going to have to trundle along and manage the equipment it has the best it can for at least 7 years, personally I think 10 would be more reasonable. Equipment should be Amtrak's top priority, but without congress approval little money will be available. Amtrak could take out another DOT loan but would have even more debt service to deal with.

NOL-ORL/MIA is not returning as a full sleeper train, it is in the process of being returned as a corridor service paid for by the states involved. Kummant confirmed this in a article posted earlier in this topic.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 20, 2008)

Guest said:


> Trains 66 and 67 (former Twilight Shoreliner/Federal)The nightly Boston-Richmond 66/67 round trip was once the Twilight Shoreliner, with higher-class accommodations than other corridor trains. It is now simply another Regional train, but runs overnight.
> 
> The Twilight Shoreliner was the only name to survive the 1999 retirement of names due to its elevated level of service. The train first ran July 10, 1997 as a renaming and extension of the Boston-Washington Night Owl (trains 66 northbound and 67 southbound), which at one time also carried the New York-Washington Executive Sleeper (trains 866 and 867) to allow New York passengers to stay in their sleeping cars longer. At that time train 66 was split into 66 (Sunday to Thursday evenings) and 76 (Friday and Saturday evenings); they were rejoined as the daily 66 on April 29, 2001. On April 28, 2003 the 66 and 67 were cut back to Boston-Washington to allow Washington passengers to remain in their sleeping cars and renamed the Federal. The daily 76, weekend morning 75 and weekday morning 77 Regional trips provided connecting service beyond to Newport News. The November 1, 2004 schedule rejoined the separate trains into the northbound 66 and southbound 67, now Regional trains with no separate accommodations.


*sits and stares in sheer astonishment at you*

The Cardinal runs a viewliner, an Amfleet diner lite, and a few Amfleet coaches per set. The diner lite and Coaches go to something else. The VIEWLINER sleepers previously on the Cardinal get placed on 66/67 as they have been. The Cardinal gets truncated to WAS and runs Superliner. Where the heck in this are Superliners running the Corridor?


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > Trains 66 and 67 (former Twilight Shoreliner/Federal)The nightly Boston-Richmond 66/67 round trip was once the Twilight Shoreliner, with higher-class accommodations than other corridor trains. It is now simply another Regional train, but runs overnight.
> ...


BUT! The Superliners from that section of the Sunset Limited could be better used in other ways, such as making the Cardinal Superliner, and using its sleepers to restore the profitable "Twilight Shoreliner", the "Broadway Limited", or both.


----------



## Ryan (May 20, 2008)

Guest said:


> BUT! The Superliners from that section of the Sunset Limited could be better used in other ways, such as making the Cardinal Superliner, and using its sleepers to restore the profitable "Twilight Shoreliner", the "Broadway Limited", or both.


Yes, and as he clearly stated, the Cardinal he's talking about is a truncated version that terminates at WAS.
So where again are you getting Superliners on the NEC from? :huh:


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2008)

HokieNav said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > BUT! The Superliners from that section of the Sunset Limited could be better used in other ways, such as making the Cardinal Superliner, and using its sleepers to restore the profitable "Twilight Shoreliner", the "Broadway Limited", or both.
> ...


 Here is the full post, where does it say terminate in WAS? He said it after Alan explained it to him.



> You've got to be kidding me. You seriously have got to be kidding me, right? The Sunset as an all coach train? Amtrak has NO spare single level sleepers, single level diners, and few single level cafes- I don't think they have spare lounges, either. Amtrak doesn't have enough single level sleepers and diners for the trains they do run- and all fifty of the Viewliner's built by Morrison-Knudson are in service! Amtrak does not have the equipment to run this daily from Orlando to LAX. The train has never NEVER run daily under Amtrak.
> Perhaps the train could be made to run daily NOL to LAX. But not LAX to ORL. No.
> 
> BUT! The Superliners from that section of the Sunset Limited could be better used in other ways, such as making the Cardinal Superliner, and using its sleepers to restore the profitable "Twilight Shoreliner", the "Broadway Limited", or both.


----------



## darjel (May 20, 2008)

At an absolute minimum, you could do a bus ( I know) ORL-NOL


----------



## the_traveler (May 20, 2008)

Guest said:


> HokieNav said:
> 
> 
> > Guest said:
> ...


What he was saying is to make to Cardinal Superliner (as it was) *but truncate it at WAS* (as it was)!  Superliners can not - even if they tried - operate on the NEC!


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 21, 2008)

I didn't say it in my initial post because I figured that on this board, in the presence of people who know Amtrak, the NEC, the Cardinal's history as a Superliner train, and the concept of train car gauge, would know what I meant. Unfortunately, I overestimated one of those people. *shrug*


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 21, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> Superliners can not - even if they tried - operate on the NEC!


I bet if you just wanted to operate a Superliner between Boston and New Haven, and either happened to pick stations with low platforms or were willing to go through a single level (or commuter bi-level) car on your way to a high platform, Superliners would work just fine.


----------



## AlanB (May 21, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > Superliners can not - even if they tried - operate on the NEC!
> ...


Hmm, I'm not so sure of that. IIRC if they hung the catenary high enough in all places so as to clear the height of a Superliner. I also can't recall if I've ever seen double stacks on the corridor.

And boarding/detraining through one single level car at South Station, Back Bay, and Route 128 would be a nightmare. It would also tie up the BBY and RTE platforms for longer than they'd like.


----------



## Ryan (May 21, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Joel N. Weber II said:
> 
> 
> > the_traveler said:
> ...


You suspicion is correct, even if the catenary were good, the tunnel in Baltimore would prohibit this.


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> I didn't say it in my initial post because I figured that on this board, in the presence of people who know Amtrak, the NEC, the Cardinal's history as a Superliner train, and the concept of train car gauge, would know what I meant. Unfortunately, I overestimated one of those people. *shrug*


yeah right, Sure you did. Just like news analysis people needs to tell us what the canidates really meant to say.

Getting back on subject. A bus would be better than nothing. It could link Florida to NOL station without going to WAS. This could be

used until regular train service is restored.

Amtrak also have 27 hurricane evacuation train coaches in NOL. Why couldn't these coaches be used to make a daily Sunset.

The coaches could always be returned in case of a hurricane.


----------



## AmtrakWPK (May 21, 2008)

Personally, I would NOT want to take a bus from NOL to ORL. If they did run a bus, it would only have to go JAX-NOL anyway, with Silver Service trains connecting in both directions at JAX. And frankly it would be a much shorter connection to just run ATL-JAX or ATL-SAV by bus, and the Crescent would complete the connection to/from NOL. But that would still leave the Florida Panhandle, AL, and MS stations high and dry, as they have been since Sunset was "temporarily" truncated at NOL.

The "evacuation coaches" in NOL, as far as I understand it, do not meet FRA Regs, and were only allowed to be taken to NOL by FRA waiver to be used in an emergency evacuation situation, where there would be a genuine danger of loss of life if they were not available. They could not, without serious repair, maintenance, upgrade, whatever, be put into regular revenue service, much as I would like to see them be able to do it.

What we need is a NOL-JAX train, at the very least. Daily.

And the purchase of a LOT of new rolling stock, before Amtrak runs out of the WD-40 and duct tape that they currently use to keep a lot of the current rolling stock in operational condition.


----------



## NativeSon5859 (May 21, 2008)

Well, I've decided to start a grass roots movement...SAVE THE SUNSET.

I personally feel that without a Florida extension or connection....or the improbable daily service NOL-LAX....the train will slowly meander into oblivion.

check out: myspace.com/trains1and2

All campaigns have to start small. I have big plans for this...already working on designs for a "real" website as well as for merchandise. We'll see where it leads me.


----------



## AlanB (May 21, 2008)

HokieNav said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Joel N. Weber II said:
> ...


While I'm fully aware that the tunnels in Baltimore would stop Amtrak from running a Superliner down there, I'm not real sure how they would have any effect on someone trying to run Superliners between Boston and New Haven, which is what Joel said in his post. :unsure:


----------



## Ryan (May 21, 2008)

Guest said:


> Amtrak also have 27 hurricane evacuation train coaches in NOL. Why couldn't these coaches be used to make a daily Sunset.The coaches could always be returned in case of a hurricane.


Not anymore, these cars were removed from NOL in December of 2007.
http://on-track-on-line.com/amtkrinf-runaway.shtml


----------



## Ryan (May 21, 2008)

AlanB said:


> HokieNav said:
> 
> 
> > AlanB said:
> ...


Ah, you got me there.
I vaguely remember reading somewhere that the catenary wasn't high enough everywhere - in my searching to try an refresh my memory, most of what I found was either "It doesn't matter because of the tunnel", or were in the context of a discussion about extending Auto Train on the NEC "Double stacks no, Superliner, probably not". Between my searching, and in the context of of the "superliners on the Cardinal" conversation here, I missed the relevant part of your quote.


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2008)

HokieNav said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > Amtrak also have 27 hurricane evacuation train coaches in NOL. Why couldn't these coaches be used to make a daily Sunset.The coaches could always be returned in case of a hurricane.
> ...


So what will Amtrak do with them? I say daily Cardinal or daily Sunset. Sunset is the whipping boy of every Amtrak hater. Daily service will

get the numbers up.


----------



## AlanB (May 21, 2008)

Guest said:


> HokieNav said:
> 
> 
> > Guest said:
> ...


All the cars were returned to the Bear shops in Delaware. Amtrak has started on a program to return those cars, as well as another 20 or so that never left Bear at all, to service.


----------



## the_traveler (May 21, 2008)

AlanB said:


> HokieNav said:
> 
> 
> > AlanB said:
> ...


They couldn't run BOS-NHV due to the catenary issue.

Back many (7+) years ago, before they extended the catenary north to BOS, there was a re-dedication of the KIN station. On that day, they brought many locos and other cars *including Superliners* to KIN!  But since there is catenary on both tracks, that is no longer possible!


----------



## jis (May 21, 2008)

AlanB said:


> All the cars were returned to the Bear shops in Delaware. Amtrak has started on a program to return those cars, as well as another 20 or so that never left Bear at all, to service.


According to what I have heard most of those cars are going into the Northeast Regional pool, in an attempt to provide some more capacity on the Regional service to collect some more much needed high revenue/mile revenues for the coffers. All regionals to be restored in general to 8 cars and additional cars to be added to select trains that are overcrowded as discovered through monitoring the reservation system. Doesn't seem like a bad idea.

BTW, they are all Amfleet I Coach cars that we are talking of here. They could be used in the Midwest Corridor service in addition to the NEC pool. It is unlikely they would be used on any LD train.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 21, 2008)

Guest said:


> yeah right, Sure you did. Just like news analysis people needs to tell us what the canidates really meant to say.


Just keep telling yourself that, ok?



Guest said:


> Amtrak also have 27 hurricane evacuation train coaches in NOL. Why couldn't these coaches be used to make a daily Sunset.The coaches could always be returned in case of a hurricane.


They could not, for the reason everyone else states. Also, the Sunset, running daily, would, in my opinion, lose even more money. In the event that Amtrak gets a ****load more equipment and can run all the other trains and routes to their full potential, then making the Sunset daily would be great. Until that time, concentrating on the less-loss-heavy routes, upgrading overall capacity, and improving service on routes that get decent ridership makes alot more sense.


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > yeah right, Sure you did. Just like news analysis people needs to tell us what the canidates really meant to say.
> ...


Daily Sunset plus east of NOL shoulod be Amtrak top priority. Sunset before Katrina served 3 of the 4 largest states. One of the fastest growing states, Arizona.

The nations 2nd, 4th, 5th(Mariposa/Phoenix), and 8th largest cities. 8 states, 16 senators. You may hate passenger trains outside of your area, but there is a lot of

political power along that route. Lose the Sunset, Amtrak loses.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 21, 2008)

What makes you say I hate passenger trains out of my area? I want to ride the whole system, man. I love trains. Were I not hooked up to someone, I'd get a job working OBS on LD Amtrak trains, and man, the Passriding that came with it would be almost enough compensation for me. I'd love riding the whole southern transcon route, and wish I had done so prior to Katrina.

HOWEVER. I also happen to be a financial realist, and doing the best both financially and ridershipwise is in the company's best interest. It isn't that I hate passenger trains outside of my area- I just don't concentrate on one of them. I think the system as a whole would be healthier with what I suggest, and therefore advocate it.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 21, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> They couldn't run BOS-NHV due to the catenary issue.
> Back many (7+) years ago, before they extended the catenary north to BOS, there was a re-dedication of the KIN station. On that day, they brought many locos and other cars *including Superliners* to KIN!  But since there is catenary on both tracks, that is no longer possible!


I've ridden on bilevel coaches that happen to belong to the MBTA all the way from BOS to PVD. I was under the impression that the Superliners were not any taller than the MBTA coaches.

I guess it wouldn't be too surprising if somewhere south of that, there were one or more bridges carrying roads over the tracks that happened to be too low for bilevel cars; if that were the case, it would make very good sense to simply lower the catenary wires rather than rebuilding the bridges or lowering the tracks, until there's real demand for taller cars, or the bridges happen to be getting rebuilt for some other reason.


----------



## MrEd (May 21, 2008)

Guest said:


> Daily Sunset plus east of NOL shoulod be Amtrak top priority. Sunset before Katrina served 3 of the 4 largest states. One of the fastest growing states, Arizona.The nations 2nd, 4th, 5th(Mariposa/Phoenix), and 8th largest cities. 8 states, 16 senators. You may hate passenger trains outside of your area, but there is a lot of
> 
> political power along that route. Lose the Sunset, Amtrak loses.


Not sure, but I think the sunset still stops in Arizona, maybe up to 4 stops each way.

Maybe it went to Phoenix before I started riding. Recently I tried to book a trip to Phoenix but found no connection possible from the sunset.

I looked up the 4 largest states, still no service to number 1 state.

Rank State km² miles²

1 Alaska 1,717,854 663,267

2 Texas 695,621 268,581

3 California 423,970 163,696

4 Montana 380,838 147,042


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> What makes you say I hate passenger trains out of my area? I want to ride the whole system, man. I love trains. Were I not hooked up to someone, I'd get a job working OBS on LD Amtrak trains, and man, the Passriding that came with it would be almost enough compensation for me. I'd love riding the whole southern transcon route, and wish I had done so prior to Katrina.
> HOWEVER. I also happen to be a financial realist, and doing the best both financially and ridershipwise is in the company's best interest. It isn't that I hate passenger trains outside of my area- I just don't concentrate on one of them. I think the system as a whole would be healthier with what I suggest, and therefore advocate it.


What you advocate would kill Amtrak. Amtrak would have died years ago if not for the collective efforts of all pro-Amtrak politicans ACROSS the country.

Lose Amtrak outside the NEC, then no politican in states outside the will risk making an effort for all tax payers to pay for train service in the NEC. Amtrak

not serving my state, so its not important to me. We need Amtrak in more states and more cities for stronger political support. Sunset is the anti-Amtrak favorite target.

I say take it away from them.


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2008)

MrEd said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > Daily Sunset plus east of NOL shoulod be Amtrak top priority. Sunset before Katrina served 3 of the 4 largest states. One of the fastest growing states, Arizona.The nations 2nd, 4th, 5th(Mariposa/Phoenix), and 8th largest cities. 8 states, 16 senators. You may hate passenger trains outside of your area, but there is a lot of
> ...


Population, not land size.


----------



## p&sr (May 22, 2008)

MrEd said:


> Recently I tried to book a trip to Phoenix but found no connection possible from the sunset.


The System Timetable says Maricopa counts as Phoenix. Not sure how realistic that is.


----------



## edding (May 22, 2008)

p&sr said:


> MrEd said:
> 
> 
> > Recently I tried to book a trip to Phoenix but found no connection possible from the sunset.
> ...


In no way is it in the realm of reality unless you can con a family member or s.o. to take you, drop you off and pick you up( I've never even been brave enough to ask).

Ed


----------



## Ryan (May 22, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > They couldn't run BOS-NHV due to the catenary issue.
> ...


Wikipedia shows Superliners at 16' 2" tall, whereas this press release from Kawasaki says that the bi-levels are 15' 6" inches tall, so there is a little bit of a difference. Looking at the whole NEC, these are the same bi-levels operated by MARC that make the trip from WAS to Perryville, MD on a daily basis, so the 8" is enough to make a difference between go and no-go down here.


----------



## AmtrakWPK (May 22, 2008)

> Jesus, I could have a more effective conversation with a brick wall.


That might be more productive and less offensive for the other members of the Board.



> I am one of LD Amtrak's biggest advocates.


Then you should realize, vis-a-vis the Sunset, that what needs to happen is a very distinct change in U.P.'s operations, first, and, second, for all non-daily trains, including Sunset to be made daily. Do they have the equipment to do that? NO. But there have been numerous discussions on the board over the past several years, and, I believe, sufficient statistics showing that when you make a train non-daily, ridership, financial performance, AND OTP all suffer.



> This ludicrous imitation of a discussion, however, is over.


For now, that is probably a very good idea. Effectively calling another participant in a discussion on this Board more obtuse than a brick wall does NOT meet the level of civility and good manners that is the standard on this board. We do NOT have to agree with each other, and you can privately think what you want about another person who posts here. However, when it comes to the public discourse on this Board, unless you can disagree without being disagreeable, i.e., name calling, please don't make the post. And while it is an issue aside from the name calling, I would have to also comment that blasphemy is just as offensive to a lot of people as profanity.


----------



## jis (May 22, 2008)

HokieNav said:


> Wikipedia shows Superliners at 16' 2" tall, whereas this press release from Kawasaki says that the bi-levels are 15' 6" inches tall, so there is a little bit of a difference. Looking at the whole NEC, these are the same bi-levels operated by MARC that make the trip from WAS to Perryville, MD on a daily basis, so the 8" is enough to make a difference between go and no-go down here.


Actually, the Kawasaki supplied MARC bi-levels are subtly different from the MBTA ones, including the fact that they are half an inch taller at 15' 6.5" and are capable for operation at upto 135mph, though currently operate only at 125mph, unlike the MBTA ones which are limited to 88mph. Info on the MARC cars can be found here.


----------



## Ryan (May 22, 2008)

jis said:


> HokieNav said:
> 
> 
> > Wikipedia shows Superliners at 16' 2" tall, whereas this press release from Kawasaki says that the bi-levels are 15' 6" inches tall, so there is a little bit of a difference. Looking at the whole NEC, these are the same bi-levels operated by MARC that make the trip from WAS to Perryville, MD on a daily basis, so the 8" is enough to make a difference between go and no-go down here.
> ...


I did note those differences, "the same" was poor word choice on my part - I didn't think that the 1/2 inch difference was big enough to highlight for the purpose of our discussion.


----------



## AlanB (May 22, 2008)

HokieNav said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > HokieNav said:
> ...


Not to be a nitpicker, but when you're talking about 25,000 volts of electricity, a 1/2 inch can make a big difference between the juice staying in the wire or arcing into the car.


----------



## jis (May 22, 2008)

Bringing the discussion back to Sunset, does anyone know how many accident damaged Superliners are still around awaiting repair? I know that there is a bunch of accident damaged ones parked in Beech Grove, but I am not sure how many of them are repairable, and how many are just sitting there waiting to be scrapped after insurance and other legal issues are settled.

Are there enough to form an additional set (given that resources are made available to make the repairs needed)?


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 22, 2008)

IIRC, most or all of them are simply awaiting scrapping.


----------



## the_traveler (May 22, 2008)

edding said:


> p&sr said:
> 
> 
> > MrEd said:
> ...


It may count as Phoenix, but Maricopa is many miles south of Phoenix - and there is no transportation to Phoenix. In fact, if you request to go from say NYP or WAS to Phoenix, it will route you on the SWC to FLG *and a thruway bus to Phoenix*!

I agree, I was brave only once to as a "friend" (who actually volunteered B)) to give me a ride to NDL so I could catch the SWC ~2 AM!

At one point (many years ago), the SL did stop in Phoenix proper. But then after the derailment just west of there, and later abandonment of that line, it started serving Maricopa instead.


----------



## George Harris (May 22, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> At one point (many years ago), the SL did stop in Phoenix proper. But then after the derailment just west of there, and later abandonment of that line, it started serving Maricopa instead.


Last I knew, the Phoenix West line was out of service, but still in place. However, that does not mean able to be put back in service cheaply. The track is/was some or in all in old, probably pre WW2 jointed 113 lb/yd rail, a section unique to Southern Pacific, and of course the ties are way old by now. The signal system is/was a non-upgraded 1920's automatic block with semaphores which is probably no longer functional, even if the various parts are still there.

At least, if it is still in place they have not lost the right of way.

If it were to be restored to use for passenger service, that is for something more than say 25 mph, I would suspect that the whole track structure would need replacing from the subgrade up, plus the signals would need complete replacing as well. Therefore a cost of something on the order of $2 million plus per mile would be in the ballpark.


----------



## had8ley (May 22, 2008)

Let's not forget that the S/L derailment west of Phoenix was proven to be sabotage. I'm not so sure the track is welded rail either as the saboteur evidently removed a section of rail. My memory is very foggy on this as I believe it happened in the middle '90's. Any help George?


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 22, 2008)

Are you thinking of the Palo Verde derailment?


----------



## George Harris (May 23, 2008)

had8ley said:


> Let's not forget that the S/L derailment west of Phoenix was proven to be sabotage. I'm not so sure the track is welded rail either as the saboteur evidently removed a section of rail. My memory is very foggy on this as I believe it happened in the middle '90's. Any help George?


The track was fixed and the train ran a few more years after the derailment, if I recall correctly. The rail was jointed. The sabatour did not remove a section of rail. He removed a joint bar, shifted one rail over slightly and applied some sort of jumper cable so the break was invisible to the signal system. This was done on a curve in approach to a steel bridge of a couple of spans. Somebody left a note purporting to be a group never heard of before or since called the sons of the ***** or something like that.

The press was at their typical best. They called the steel bridge a trestle, and called the 1920's era ABS system a "computerized control system"

Another little tidbit: Somebody had written an article for a fan magazine on the City of San Franciso unsolved sabatoge case that had occurred some 30 years earlier that came out about the time of this derailment and he got some heavy attention from the FBI.

The FBI also pronounced that there was a limited pool of suspect becuase the perpertrator had to have specialized knowledge of railroads. I would guess that the number of people in the US alone that would understand that what was done would both derail the train and not affect the signal system probably would be a couple million, at least: mjority of poeple that were living and still not in a nursing home at that time that had ever worked for a railroad would probably be somewhere over one million, maybe two. Add in those that are semi-serious fans, another million or so, Anybody with a more than rudimentary knowledge of electricity, 10 million plus??

Somewhat like FBI's first pronouncement after the Oklahoma City bombing: The prime suspects would be someone with access to ammonium nitrate fertilizer and diesel fuel in quantity, liked guns and who was unhappy about the way the government acted at Waco. Probably somewhere around 3/4 the rural population fit that description.


----------



## Neil_M (May 23, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Guest said:
> 
> 
> > yeah right, Sure you did. Just like news analysis people needs to tell us what the canidates really meant to say.
> ...


I know we are not supposed to disagree with you,because you know everything about everything, but a service only running x times a week is not likely to generate that much custom anyway, even once a day is regular enough that people can plan trips around it. If you have to stop and work out what day you need to travel and if it coincides with the train running, then to the average customer/passenger that's not a good deal.

Maybe, just maybe, daily service might encourage more custom......


----------



## had8ley (May 23, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Are you thinking of the Palo Verde derailment?


Yes, that's it!


----------



## MrEd (May 23, 2008)

had8ley said:


> Joel N. Weber II said:
> 
> 
> > Are you thinking of the Palo Verde derailment?
> ...



now it makes sense why they don't go to phoenix.

>>

PHOENIX, Arizona (CNN) -- The FBI is looking for a mysterious figure in a cowboy hat seen by passengers on Amtrak's Sunset Limited in the minutes after it derailed in the Arizona desert last Monday.>>

thanks for the link.


----------



## George Harris (May 23, 2008)

It appears that the NTSB report of this accident is not to be found on line.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 23, 2008)

Neil_M said:


> I know we are not supposed to disagree with you,because you know everything about everything, but a service only running x times a week is not likely to generate that much custom anyway, even once a day is regular enough that people can plan trips around it. If you have to stop and work out what day you need to travel and if it coincides with the train running, then to the average customer/passenger that's not a good deal.Maybe, just maybe, daily service might encourage more custom......


Of course it would increase customers. I believe such an increase, however, would be Pyrrhic.


----------



## jis (May 24, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Neil_M said:
> 
> 
> > I know we are not supposed to disagree with you,because you know everything about everything, but a service only running x times a week is not likely to generate that much custom anyway, even once a day is regular enough that people can plan trips around it. If you have to stop and work out what day you need to travel and if it coincides with the train running, then to the average customer/passenger that's not a good deal.Maybe, just maybe, daily service might encourage more custom......
> ...


I think the issue is that given a set of limited resources what is the best way to deploy them to get maximum return from those resources (according to some definition of that concept, which in itself may be open to debate). Is it better to deploy them to make Sunset daily? Or would it be better to deploy them to make say Cardinal daily? Or perhaps add cars to the CZ and say SWC? I don;t have an answer handy since I don;t have the relevant determining facts and figures available to me. However, I can think of scenarios where it might make sens eot make the Sunset daily as opposed to say adding cars to CZ and SWC, and also vice versa.

I think, based on whatever facts GML is using he has come to the conclusion that deploying limited additional resources to make Sunset daily would not be as efficacious (by some measure) as deploying them elsewhere, while some others think the other way round. It is a legitimate disagreement which can be debated without calling each other names and making snide remarks if people would bring forth the specific facts that they are basing their positions on.


----------



## GP35 (May 25, 2008)

Another option, if Amtrak did refurbish old single deck coaches and bought a few from colorado rail, Amtrak could

give the capital limited the single deck coaches and Sunset takes the Capital limited superliners for daily service. Then

the Eagle coaches could go full trip daily.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 26, 2008)

Amtrak would be crazy to take their premier east coast train and downgrade it with the garbage CRC turns out to improve a train that is historically a financial black hole.


----------



## AlanB (May 26, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Amtrak would be crazy to take their premier east coast train and downgrade it with the garbage CRC turns out to improve a train that is historically a financial black hole.


Amtrak might want to make the Capitol it's premier train on the East coast, or at least one of the premier trains, but it is not currently Amtrak's premier train on the East Coast.

That honor falls to the Auto Train, which currently gets the best of everything.

Even after that, at present the Capitol tops only the lowly Cardinal for both ridership & revenue. Both Silver's, the Crescent, and the LSL bring in more riders and revenue than the Capitol. And lately, the LSL's OTP has even been better than the Capitol's.

All of that said though, I do agree that taking the Capitol to single level equipment is not a good idea.


----------



## NativeSon5859 (May 26, 2008)

Yeah, the Capitol is anything but the "premier" train. I rode it a couple of months ago. No different from any other Superliner train out there.

And what's with all the Sunset Limited hating as of late? Man, thank God the train has its share of supporters (like me and a few others) or else threads like this would be dull and hardly worth reading.


----------



## GP35 (May 26, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Amtrak would be crazy to take their premier east coast train and downgrade it with the garbage CRC turns out to improve a train that is historically a financial black hole.


There you go again hating on non-NEC trains. You know well that train is at a huge disadvantage with tri-weekly service, however just

like all those anti-passenger rail groups, you poop on it as if the problem is the route. You make anti-Amtrak groups and politicans proud everytime you attack another train.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 26, 2008)

*wonders if you know what the NEC is*

*assumes a professorial voice*

The Northeast Corridor refers to several sections of track, primarily a 450 mile stretch between Washington DC and Boston. It also includes a 187 mile stretch between DC and Newport News, and a 62 mile stretch between New Haven Connecticut and Springfield, Mass. All but the 187 miles between DC and Newport are owned by either Amtrak or a commuter rail authority, and most of it is primarily passenger track. Some people would also include the 104 miles of the Keystone Service (also Amtrak owned and primarily passenger service), the 142 mile Empire Service corridor between Albany and New York City, the Downeaster's 116 mile route, and possibly even the remaining 319 miles of the Empire Service to Niagara Falls. Amtrak considers all of these its "Northeast Services".

The _Capitol Limited_, excluding the Washington Union Station itself, uses none of these tracks. It is not a Northeast Corridor train. The _Cardinal_ currently runs the 226 miles between New York and Washington, but otherwise is not an NEC train. My earlier suggestion removes that section from the _Cardinal_, making it strictly Washington to Chicago. Naturally, by removing the NEC section of a train, I am favoring the NEC over the LD routes. I'm not sure how this works, but whatever.

If anything, I don't particularly like the NEC. I prefer longer, overnight trains. However, Amtrak is a company that depends on its serving profitable markets to justify its existence. Amtrak has limited resources, and it is simply sanity to allocate those resources to allow it to best serve its ENTIRE CUSTOMER BASE. If more people utilize Eastcoast to Chicago trains than NOL to LAX trains, supporting the Eastcoast to Chicago trains makes the most sense.

I, under no circumstances, am not in favor of the idea of a daily _Sunset Limited_. If you manage to pull the required equipment out of thin air to run that train without affecting the potential of the rest of the system, please, do make it daily. Until then, it is the worst performing passenger train based on PER PASSENGER loss, and other trains make a lot more sense to upgrade than the one that bleeds red ink like a ruptured jugular.


----------



## GP35 (May 26, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> *wonders if you know what the NEC is*
> *assumes a professorial voice*
> 
> The Northeast Corridor refers to several sections of track, primarily a 450 mile stretch between Washington DC and Boston. It also includes a 187 mile stretch between DC and Newport News, and a 62 mile stretch between New Haven Connecticut and Springfield, Mass. All but the 187 miles between DC and Newport are owned by either Amtrak or a commuter rail authority, and most of it is primarily passenger track. Some people would also include the 104 miles of the Keystone Service (also Amtrak owned and primarily passenger service), the 142 mile Empire Service corridor between Albany and New York City, the Downeaster's 116 mile route, and possibly even the remaining 319 miles of the Empire Service to Niagara Falls. Amtrak considers all of these its "Northeast Services".
> ...


You sound just like the kill Amtrak LD train now advocates. Just a side note in your bias no understanding hate for the Sunset. The Texas Eaglewas equally as bad as the Sunset before it went daily.

You claim to like LD trains, but fail to have an understanding of how killing 1 LD train is one step closer to killing them all.

Also, no true Amtrak supporter would ever attack another train and call for its cancelation. I personally wonder what is your true motivation and what side are you really on.


----------



## MrEd (May 26, 2008)

Amtrak should have one train with coast to coast service, not just Boston to Washington. Acela ridership was down in March 08 compared to 07, I would not call for it to be killed. I am not sure where that train runs, but I think its on the NEC. In addition to daily service for sunset, I would like to see it run to Florida, we just need to build one station in Alabama and then we will be all set.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 26, 2008)

I really have to ask you how dense you are!

Telegraph Format:

I. Do. Not. Want. The. Sunset. Dead. Stop.

I. Do. Not. Want. The. Sunset. Killed. Stop.

I. Do. Not. Want. Service. On. Any. Train. On. The. Amtrak. System. Reduced. One. Iota. From. What. It. Is. Today. Stop.

Amtrak. Does. Not. Have. Unlimited. Equipment. Stop.

There. Is. More. Equipment. Assigned. To. The. Sunset. Than. Needed. Stop.

The. Extra. Equipment. Would. Be. Better. Utilized. Elsewhere. Stop.

The. Required. Equipment. For. The. Current. Level. Of. Service. Should. Continue. On. The. Sunset. Stop.

Is this finally clear or are you going to try and misread, misquote, misconstrue, and misunderstand what I am saying yet again?


----------



## GP35 (May 26, 2008)

> Amtrak has limited resources, and it is simply sanity to allocate those resources to allow it to best serve its ENTIRE CUSTOMER BASE. If more people utilize Eastcoast to Chicago trains than NOL to LAX trains, supporting the Eastcoast to Chicago trains makes the most sense.


Since May 1971 Amtrak has been killing trains for the sake of bettering the remaining trains. Look at the current system, has it worked?

or has it made it easier for critics argue against Amtrak?


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 26, 2008)

I'd say your statement was false. Of the original system, there have been a few re-routings, but other than the _National Limited_ and _Floridian_, that system is still served, and then some.

I don't agree with everything the managment has done, but let me ask you: did the _Hilltopper_ make sense? I don't think so. It was a train to nowhere. Dropping it was a sensible thing to do.

Write your congressman, give Amtrak the resources they need to run the whole system to its full potential. Until then, they have to do the best they can, and the Sunset is not the best train for expansion given its numbers.


----------



## GP35 (May 26, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> I'd say your statement was false. Of the original system, there have been a few re-routings, but other than the _National Limited_ and _Floridian_, that system is still served, and then some.
> I don't agree with everything the managment has done, but let me ask you: did the _Hilltopper_ make sense? I don't think so. It was a train to nowhere. Dropping it was a sensible thing to do.
> 
> Write your congressman, give Amtrak the resources they need to run the whole system to its full potential. Until then, they have to do the best they can, and the Sunset is not the best train for expansion given its numbers.


Only because its tri-weekly. If it was daily with the same numbers, then you have a point. Let me repeat, a coast to coast Sunset would serve 3 of the 4 largest states. 4 of the 10 largest cities in nation. 14 MSA with 300,000 ppl or more. No other LD train has a population base that big. In my opinion, Sunset has the potential

to out perform the Empire Builder.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 26, 2008)

Thats not the big factor. the big factor is that in running coast to coast the Sunset requires 12 hours of padding to give it 30% on time performance! It also had one of the highest average lateness in minutes of any Amtrak run this year, and thats excluding the NOL-ORL section! If your train runs that late, its not a viable run. Its simply a bad run, with boring scenery (a lot of LD EB traffic are people riding it for scenery, keep in mind) and awful OTP. Ridership would improve if it went daily, but its too expensive a run for it to make money on that increase.


----------



## GP35 (May 26, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Thats not the big factor. the big factor is that in running coast to coast the Sunset requires 12 hours of padding to give it 30% on time performance! It also had one of the highest average lateness in minutes of any Amtrak run this year, and thats excluding the NOL-ORL section! If your train runs that late, its not a viable run. Its simply a bad run, with boring scenery (a lot of LD EB traffic are people riding it for scenery, keep in mind) and awful OTP. Ridership would improve if it went daily, but its too expensive a run for it to make money on that increase.


Again, the tri-weekly helped to contribute to its lateness. Dispatchers needs to see it daily to be able dispatch it ontime. Also the UP double track

will solve a lot of lateness. In the last 2 weeks, the east bound train was on time all but 1 time. The old Sunset east bound use to be late nearly

all the time. Sunset needs to be daily and I know Amtrak understands this.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 26, 2008)

I think the combination of poor ontime performance and number of large cities might be an argument for Congress to give Amtrak a huge pile of money to build track along this route that's basically dedicated to passenger service, preferably with a concrete slab base and spaced far enough from any other track that it will be ready for 200 MPH operation when trainsets that fast become available.

If TGV costs are any indication, a new dedicated track from New Orleans to Los Angeles might cost roughly $200 billion. But if you amortize it over some reasonable number of years, it's not all that huge in the grand scheme of the federal budget. And I bet that $200 billion includes electrification, which wouldn't need to be done to initially operate the train with diesels at 110 MPH.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 27, 2008)

Eh, 200 billion here, 200 billion there, pretty soon, you're talking real money.

Seriously, dude, are you crazy? Thats $670 a tax payer, $2000 a household.


----------



## Amtrak OBS Gone Freight (May 27, 2008)

Well, I can see the "Sunset" operating on a daily frequency on its current LAX - NOL route at some point in time maybe with some slight variations of the route. However, I am with GM Lion on the fact that right now at this point in time, the ends just will not justify the means in regard to the actual ridership on that route. It would be smarter to cut that route into several corridors with local traffic operating within them along with the "Sunset" in its current route and a separate long distance service NOL - JAX or ORL, TPA, or MIA. In any event on the Florida side, the S-line needs "actual" daylight rail service with localized corridor services within the entire state (FEC, A-line , S-line, Southeast, and Southwest FL) to enhance the long distance services! Unfortunately, that is a long way off in Florida as well as on the entire "Sunset" route with the exception of maybe in California at some point. But in any event, a whole lotta money is needed!!!

OBS gone freight....


----------



## Neil_M (May 27, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Eh, 200 billion here, 200 billion there, pretty soon, you're talking real money.
> Seriously, dude, are you crazy? Thats $670 a tax payer, $2000 a household.


That's ok, just stop giving your military money for an hour or so, granted they wont be able to buy any more deathray space ships to kill Iraqis with, but you might get a decent public transport system out of it! h34r:


----------



## BobWeaver (May 27, 2008)

Neil_M said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Eh, 200 billion here, 200 billion there, pretty soon, you're talking real money.
> ...


:lol:

It is rather disgusting to think that we spend $500-600 billion every year on National Defense, isn't it.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 27, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Eh, 200 billion here, 200 billion there, pretty soon, you're talking real money.
> Seriously, dude, are you crazy? Thats $670 a tax payer, $2000 a household.


Building dedicated TGV quality track along all of Amtrak's current long distance routes probably has a one time cost that's equal to about what we spend on our military every 2-4 years.

If I'm crazy, the part of our government that thinks we can afford the war in Iraq is far more insane.


----------



## frj1983 (May 28, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Eh, 200 billion here, 200 billion there, pretty soon, you're talking real money.
> ...


I'm not sure there's room for dedicated track in all the areas you are speaking of...have you factored in the amount it would cost to buy all the land needed? And have you factored in court costs with eminent domain takeovers of those who refuse to sell? And I don't believe electrification would work out on those windswept, heavy thunder storm, prone to tornado areas! :blink:


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 28, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Eh, 200 billion here, 200 billion there, pretty soon, you're talking real money.
> ...


I couldn't agree more. Personally, I think the money would be better spent on human welfare. But thats just me.


----------



## Palmland (May 29, 2008)

BobWeaver said:


> Neil_M said:
> 
> 
> > Green Maned Lion said:
> ...


No, our veterans of WWII, Korea, and the Cold War would disagree as do I. Sure we make dumb decisions, like Iraq, but that doesn't mean we should cut spending for military defense. I think the Reagan era military build up in fact made a big difference in the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union. Let's hope we don't have to have history repeat itself to learn the lesson again of the importance of a strong military.

This forum should stick to Amtrak issues. To properly fund Amtrak we should bite the bullet and pay for it directly through a gas tax or some other pay as you go mechanism directly tied to transportation. It is unfortunate that Amtrak seems to be more and more tied to a political point of view rather than a debate on it's own merits. In the long run, that is not good regardless of whether you are democrat or republican.


----------



## Ryan (May 29, 2008)

Palmland said:


> No, our veterans of WWII, Korea, and the Cold War would disagree as do I. Sure we make dumb decisions, like Iraq, but that doesn't mean we should cut spending for military defense. I think the Reagan era military build up in fact made a big difference in the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union. Let's hope we don't have to have history repeat itself to learn the lesson again of the importance of a strong military.
> This forum should stick to Amtrak issues. To properly fund Amtrak we should bite the bullet and pay for it directly through a gas tax or some other pay as you go mechanism directly tied to transportation. It is unfortunate that Amtrak seems to be more and more tied to a political point of view rather than a debate on it's own merits. In the long run, that is not good regardless of whether you are democrat or republican.


Amen!
Less than a week after Memorial Day to boot. Of course, most people think that it's just a free day off work/school without thinking about what the day is actually for.


----------



## Guest (May 29, 2008)

_"No, our veterans of WWII, Korea, and the Cold War would disagree as do I_"

My husband, a veteran of several wars from the "Cold War" on (actually has a certificate showing that he served in the Cold War :huh: ) would disagree with you. We (and other nominal countries) went into Iraq on the basis of the UN WMD inspection refusals. It escalated until it was monikered "Operation Iraqi Freedom" and is now in what is called "nation building". I would like to see these funds that are being used to build that nation put, instead, into rebuilding our own, including our passenger railroad infrastructure. As columnist, Jay Bookman put into an article 4 July 2005 in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

"The problem is freedom and democracy are easier to appreciate in theory than to put into practice: they represent learned behaviors and ways of thinking that do not come instinctively to human beings. If they came naturally, democracy and freedom would have taken permanent hold much sooner in human history than 1776."

As far as a "strong military", please be reminded that during WWII 1,600,000 troops served. Over 400,000 perished. In WWI (1917-1918) over 116,000 perished. (Statistics probably courtesy of the American Legion magazine). The waste in this current war is phenomenol and unaffordable and the reasons to remain, muddy. The Government Accounting Office's auditors have indicated that they can't get their hands around the spending, and the lack of controls and responsibility (Washington Post article a few days ago). So, troop-wise, this is not a strong military. It is, however, a wasteful military.


----------



## George Harris (May 29, 2008)

post deleted


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 29, 2008)

Palmland said:


> This forum should stick to Amtrak issues. To properly fund Amtrak we should bite the bullet and pay for it directly through a gas tax or some other pay as you go mechanism directly tied to transportation.


I don't think a gas tax should fund Amtrak, though I do think having automobile gas taxes pay for any Interstate highway costs that are proportional to usage might be a good thing. (If we believe that having barely used four lane Interstate highways in unpopulated areas is a good thing, it might be appropriate to use general funds there; then again, those highways are probably already built and paid for at this point, and they may not wear out as quickly as the oversaturated highways in more densely populated areas.)

The interesting question is, if taxpayers give Amtrak enough high quality track so that the general economics surrounding the NEC apply everywhere, could Amtrak pay for future track maintenance as well as all the other operational expenses and rolling stock maintenance and replacement from future ticket revenues?


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 29, 2008)

frj1983 said:


> I'm not sure there's room for dedicated track in all the areas you are speaking of...have you factored in the amount it would cost to buy all the land needed? And have you factored in court costs with eminent domain takeovers of those who refuse to sell?


I think most of the western long distance routes' miles are pretty uninhabited.

The TGV wikipedia article indicates that TGV trains use conventional lower speed track going into terminal stations in large cities, and I think doing the same would make sense in the US. I also think that slowing down in the middle of routes to use existing track through intermediate cities would probably be a better design than what the TGV uses, possibly with some high speed track that bypasses intermediate cities completely on express trains.



frj1983 said:


> And I don't believe electrification would work out on those windswept, heavy thunder storm, prone to tornado areas! :blink:


Are there any parts of the country that bury all their electric utility lines within, say, a couple hundred mile radius of some point because of such concerns? I don't remember hearing of any.


----------



## Guest (May 29, 2008)

"_What is your point_"

It's time to get out and focus on the issues, including crumbling or insufficient infrastructure, that face us here. Neither can _I_ leave some of the comments unchallenged. The original commenter referred to the military as "strong". The troops are at almost (if not the) lowest level they have been since long before 1900 (the Legion's magazine had the exact number). They are volunteer and they are seriously stressed by multiple deployments. I cannot pick up an Army Times without there being an announcement of the latest retention bonus. In case you're not up to speed, the ground troops (Army and Marine) are increasingly coming from small towns with few other employment opportunities.) General Petraus and others have referenced the stretching of the troops to the breaking point. We do not have the manpower, without a draft (speak up here Green Lion- that might be you and many others on here) to fight a multiple-front war which could include Iran or any other nut-tended country. Venezuela (nice oil there,too, I hear) comes to mind. Only you have implied that 4000 killed makes it a wrong war. Similarly, somewhat over 4,000 died in the Revolutionary War. Number of deaths doesn't justify or invalidate a war. I believe what the Bible says, "there will always be wars and rumors of wars" and paraphrasing Ecclesiates, "there is a time for everything".

And yes, I am aware that the Atlanta Journal-Constitution is a Cox newspaper and that the Cox family allegedly contributes to the Democratic (which I am not) party. I don't know the background on the WaPo (other than its stock costs an arm and a leg) but an article there stating facts is not opinion. I read everything under the sun (except USA Today), including the phone book and the back of cereal boxes. If you know anything about the American Legion magazine you will know that it is very traditional and quite likely, conservative.

Jody


----------



## Rafi (May 29, 2008)

This topic is quickly spinning out of control. My recommendation is that the mods close this one down since the same topic regarding the Sunset is being addressed in other threads. Folks, stay on topic, for crying out loud. Unbelievable.


----------



## George Harris (May 29, 2008)

Guest said:


> Only you have implied that 4000 killed makes it a wrong war.


That is not what I said, at all. Given that I see no point in a continuation of a subject irrelvant to the topic, particularly one that generates more heat than light, I am deleting my previous post in its entirety.


----------



## AlanB (May 29, 2008)

Well I'm not inclined at the moment to close this thread, but I will ask everyone to get back to the topic at hand, the Sunset Limited.


----------



## RTOlson (May 29, 2008)

Here's an on-topic hypothetical. Let's say Amtrak found enough resources to do one of the following (but not both):


Run the Sunset daily on its current route.

Restore transcontinental service to Orlando but only 3x per week.



What would you do if it could only be one?

I'm personally torn. It would be good to restore service to Florida, but daily service seems like a much better way to go because it provides a reliable schedule for traveler.

I know there's a lot of possible options out there, but if it came down to one solution, what do you think is the best one?


----------



## MrEd (May 29, 2008)

If a vote were taken, I am in favor of Restore transcontinental service to Orlando but only 3x per week.


----------



## Ryan (May 29, 2008)

MrEd said:


> If a vote were taken, I am in favor of Restore transcontinental service to Orlando but only 3x per week.


++

The poster from P-cola this week really drove home the point that there's a gaping hole in the services available in that area of the country.


----------



## GP35 (May 29, 2008)

RTOlson said:


> Here's an on-topic hypothetical. Let's say Amtrak found enough resources to do one of the following (but not both):
> 
> 
> Run the Sunset daily on its current route.
> ...


Tough question. Coast to coast tri-weekly gives us more political support.

Daily gives us much better operating numbers and takes a away a favorite target for the haters.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (May 29, 2008)

Use the sets to make the _Cardinal_ Supeliner, or restore the _Floridian_. The Sunset needs 9 hours cut off its schedule for it to make money.


----------



## AlanB (May 30, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> The Sunset needs 9 hours cut off its schedule for it to make money.


Cutting 9 hours of running time from the Sunset's schedule isn't going to make it profitable.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 30, 2008)

If the resource bottleneck was federal dollars, wouldn't the best answer be to get Congress to provide more dollars so they could do both? And if sleepers, diners, and lounges are the limited resource, shouldn't Congress give Amtrak money to buy more rolling stock?


----------



## RTOlson (May 30, 2008)

^^

Perhaps, but the point of my hypothetical was what would you choose? What would you rather see if it was one or the other?

For my hypothetical, I would like to see Amtrak put its resources for a daily Sunset from LAX to NOL -- at first. A reliable service serving some is probably better than an unreliable service attempting to serve all. A stronger performance would help show there is demand for rail and help justify future requests for funding and equipment.

At the same time, since it would cost very little in terms of upfront resources, I would repair and strengthen Amtrak's relationship with the Florida, Alabama and Louisiana governments (perhaps Georgia as well). The long-term goal would be to work with these state governments to lobby for federal funding for regional rail which would eventually tie in with Amtrak's Southern long-distance lines.

That regional link would take time, but it's time that Amtrak could use to get newer equipment across the system. Some of that could could benefit the Southern lines.

There's probably a lot of nuances that I'm missing, but I think that could be an effective, long-term way to help the South and Southwest as a whole.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 30, 2008)

How does making the Sunset daily make it more _reliable_ than it is now? When I think of reliability, I mostly think of the probability that a train will get me to my destination on the schedule I expect (which is not necessarily the schedule printed on the timetable; when I took the Lake Shore Limited to Chicago, I was paying a lot more attention to amtrakdelays.com than the timetable).


----------



## RTOlson (May 30, 2008)

I should probably find a better word, but I mean reliability as a travel and scheduling option.

If a train runs daily, it's arguably easier to plan trips around. Compare this to a thrice-weekly service where one has to figure out which day a train runs and then figure out if it's an option for them.

Many railfans have long asserted that travelers favor long-distance routes with daily service. I don't have documentation, but some cite the boost in passengers when other long-distance trains moved from thrice-weekly to daily (California Zephyr comes to mind).


----------



## GP35 (May 30, 2008)

Many, including myself, would love to take the Sunset out on Friday, spend a day in NOL, come back Sunday, back to work on Monday.

No can do with the current schedule.


----------



## AmtrakWPK (May 30, 2008)

I have seen numerous statements (probably in the area of a hundred) over the past several years, in various places, not just here on this board, to the effect that a train which is scheduled daily tends to be more on-time overall than a less-than-daily train. The host RR dispatchers don't have to try to remember "Let's see now -- what day of the week is it today? Do we have Amtrak coming through here today? Or was that yesterday? or is it tomorrow? Ah, the heck with it, I won't worry about whether to try to have a slot for it unless it shows up..." -- and then it shows up and has to sit on a siding for a couple of hours in several places.

If a train is daily, there is a daily slot for it already worked out and available, per agreement between the RRs. Now, OK, U.P. has historically been pretty crappy (to be kind) and CSX on some routes, at least, has been less than stellar, in providing that slot, but they do seem to be improving in a lot of cases.

But when you have a daily train, OTP seems to be better, on the whole, than with a non-daily train.

And of course you won't have the revenue-losing problem of non-savvy passengers (that don't really understand the "which day of the week does it run?" question) who will be buffaloed by the reservations computer when they try to book a seat or a connection on a non-scheduled day and have the system tell them there is no such train, at which time the prospective passenger gives up and books an airline ticket...

If the choice is between restoring a 3x/week Sunset to Orlando, or simply leaving Sunset as it is and adding a JAX-NOL daily, do the latter. It could provide daily connex for pax to/from Chicago, on the City of New Orleans, daily connex to complete the Southern Transcon Route that we lost when Sunset was truncated to NOL, and daily connex South into Florida and North to SAV, CHS, etc., both by way of the Silver Service trains. And it would undoubtedly be more reliable on OTP than the Sunset was, especially Eastbound. While it would be nice to go all the way to ORL, and of course folks prefer a "one seat ride" where they don't have to connect with another train, on balance it's probably better to simply have the connection available than to not have it, and there are currently two trains in each direction (North and South) that go through JAX. Another option I suppose would be to restore a 3x/wk Sunset all the way to ORL and add a 4x/wk JAX-NOL train. That would in effect make a daily on that JAX-NOL path, but it would be a lot less OTP dependable Eastbound and therefore would receive worse dispatching performance (because it would frequently be out of it's time-slot Eastbound).

One other option would be to have a NOL-MIA daily, which would simply be one or two coaches and perhaps a snack car, tacked on to 97/98 out of Miami Northbound and out of JAX Southbound, with a couple of engines and a baggage car at JAX and cut them to/from 97/98 at JAX and run the NOL-JAX segment with those cars. Passengers could use the Diner or existing Lounge on the Silver Service part of the consist MIA-JAX and just have the snack bar/Lounge car for JAX-NOL. JAX is a long crew-change and refueling stop anyway, so switching NOL-MIA cars on and off should be a viable option at JAX without adding much if any delay to 97/98 there. It would allow a one-seat ride NOL-MIA and all stations in-between, and car servicing in MIA overnight. If an engine on the NOL-JAX segment was due for service, they could append it to 98 or 92 North to SAV or South on 97/91 to SFA (Auto-Train) or MIA for overnight servicing on the East end and then tack it on to a 91/92/97/98 as appropriate to get it back to JAX. And there is already sufficient overnight servicing at NOL, as I understand it, at the West end of that run. They would of course need to transfer baggage for the MIA-NOL passengers to and from the JAX-MIA baggage car at JAX, or have a second baggage car run with the NOL-bound cars all the way from MIA.

As I understand things, there are plenty of engines available, it's the passenger cars that are in short supply. If/when they can get the cars from the NOL evacuation train refurb'ed and back in full FRA spec'd condition (I understand that is being done), perhaps some of those would be available for that run. It would not be nearly as nice as the Sunset's Superliners, with Diner, Observation Lounge car, and so forth, but it would undeniably be better than the current status of NO SERVICE WHATSOEVER between NOL and JAX


----------



## NativeSon5859 (May 30, 2008)

Here's my take.

Not long ago Amtrak CEO Alex Kummant said, in regards to the Sunset East, that "it wasn't a very effective service", and that "it served all these small towns in the middle of the night."

Note to Alex. Do you remember WHY it wasn't an effective service? Maybe because the train was often canceled between NOL and ORL due to its lateness, or best case, it was excessively late? It wasn't effective because it wasn't dependable. I don't know about you guys, but I have seen a big improvement in the on time reliability of #2 lately. Look below...

2008-05-27: Scheduled: 4:00 pm Actual: 4:58 pm Delay: 58 minutes

2008-05-25: Scheduled: 4:00 pm Actual: 6:37 pm Delay: 157 minutes

2008-05-23: Scheduled: 4:00 pm Actual: 6:28 pm Delay: 148 minutes

2008-05-20: Scheduled: 4:00 pm Actual: 5:52 pm Delay: 112 minutes

2008-05-18: Scheduled: 4:00 pm Actual: 5:52 pm Delay: 112 minutes

2008-05-16: Scheduled: 4:00 pm Actual: 3:59 pm Delay: -1 minutes

2008-05-13: Scheduled: 4:00 pm Actual: 5:03 pm Delay: 63 minutes

2008-05-11: Scheduled: 4:00 pm Actual: 4:36 pm Delay: 36 minutes

Amtrak could have a 7:30pm departure eastbound from New Orleans and it would have been on time on every one of the above days. A 7:30pm departure would serve the Miss. Gulf Coast at reasonable times (between 9:00pm and 9:45pm) and Mobile at 11:10pm....not terribly ideal, but better than 2:00am+, what it was before. Pensacola would still get middle of the night service, but Tallahassee would get decent times for once. Unless #2's times out of LAX are drastically changed, this is probably the most ideal schedule for the service.


----------



## GP35 (May 30, 2008)

NativeSon5859 said:


> Here's my take.
> Not long ago Amtrak CEO Alex Kummant said, in regards to the Sunset East, that "it wasn't a very effective service", and that "it served all these small towns in the middle of the night."
> 
> Note to Alex. Do you remember WHY it wasn't an effective service? Maybe because the train was often canceled between NOL and ORL due to its lateness, or best case, it was excessively late? It wasn't effective because it wasn't dependable. I don't know about you guys, but I have seen a big improvement in the on time reliability of #2 lately. Look below...
> ...


Im use to seeing train 2 six hours late, so those times look good.


----------



## had8ley (May 30, 2008)

RTOlson said:


> Here's an on-topic hypothetical. Let's say Amtrak found enough resources to do one of the following (but not both):
> 
> 
> Run the Sunset daily on its current route.
> ...


Sometimes the simplest solution is the best and I believe we have a BINGO !


----------



## p&sr (May 30, 2008)

AmtrakWPK said:


> And of course you won't have the revenue-losing problem of non-savvy passengers (that don't really understand the "which day of the week does it run?" question) who will be buffaloed by the reservations computer when they try to book a seat or a connection on a non-scheduled day and have the system tell them there is no such train, at which time the prospective passenger gives up and books an airline ticket...


Better than that... sometimes the Amtrak Reservations Website will simply bump your itinerary forward to the next available date. It would be easy to get these tickets issued and printed without quite noticing that little detail.

Then the Passengers show up one (or two) days early and wonder why there's no train, and nobody at the Station!

Will they then look closely at their tickets and see the Travel Date printed thereon? Nobody can say...


----------



## Rail Freak (May 30, 2008)

RTOlson said:


> Here's an on-topic hypothetical. Let's say Amtrak found enough resources to do one of the following (but not both):
> 
> 
> Run the Sunset daily on its current route.
> ...


being from Florida, of course I want service, and it is a dilema. Either way we need service & either way we need to take it it one step at a time but, we need to take that first step!!! :unsure:


----------



## edding (May 30, 2008)

Rail Freak said:


> RTOlson said:
> 
> 
> > Here's an on-topic hypothetical. Let's say Amtrak found enough resources to do one of the following (but not both):
> ...


And being from Arizona, I'd vote for making it daily. I think there are quite a few people that would go west to LA or east to NM or TX cities if the train were daily( Heck, I'd drive to Maricopa for a day trip to Tucson, if the schedule were reasonable).

Ed


----------



## George Harris (May 30, 2008)

If we are going to do much for this route, then Phoenix needs to be back in the picture. I saw somewhere that the number of tickets sold to/from Phonix was on the order of 100 per trip, but dropped immediately to under 30 after Maricopa became the substitute for Phoenix. While we are dreaming, think in terms of this:

The Phoenix west line has not been abandoned. It is all still there, but of its 137 miles, 51 miles are out of service and the rest is 25 mph or less. The total distance Phoenix to Los Angeles by rail is 426 miles, give or take a couple - I do not have the milepost info for the stations at hand. Get this 137 miles back in service and good for 79 mph, or better, equipped for 110 mph. For reliablility, the rest of the main line between Wellton and Los Angeles needs doubled and the portion over Beaumont Hill, already doubled needs a third track.

Now, you should be able to run about 3 reliable trains per day on something like a 6.5 to 7 hour schedule within the 79 mph limit.

There has been talk, I have no idea how realistic, of running a multiple train per day service between Phoenix and Tucson. Tack this onto the LA trains. At this point, the Daily Sunset becomes one more train on a line being operated to carry relatively fast passenger trains.

Now, you have to start dealing with delay areas in Texas and Louisiana.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 30, 2008)

How valuable are the stops at Yuma, Palm Springs, Ontario, and Pomona?

I'm wondering if building Phoenix to Flagstaff tracks might make any sense. The downside of rerouting the westbound Sunset Limited to Phoenix, then Flagstaff, then west to Los Angeles along the Southwest Chief route would be that Flagstaff seems to be a bit east of Phoenix, so that route would involve a bit of backtracking; on the other hand, that would open up the possibility of frequent train service between Flagstaff and Phoenix if there was a demand for that.

In the shorter term, what if there were two trainsets each with a P42, some Amfleet I coaches, and a cabbage car that made multiple daytime trips along the existing Phoenix to Tuscon tracks, along with middle of the night trips to a new intermediate station where the Phoenix train would meet the Sunset Limited for cross-platform transfers? Would any of the existing track need to be upgraded for this to work at some minimally reasonable speed?


----------



## edding (May 31, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> How valuable are the stops at Yuma, Palm Springs, Ontario, and Pomona?
> I'm wondering if building Phoenix to Flagstaff tracks might make any sense. The downside of rerouting the westbound Sunset Limited to Phoenix, then Flagstaff, then west to Los Angeles along the Southwest Chief route would be that Flagstaff seems to be a bit east of Phoenix, so that route would involve a bit of backtracking; on the other hand, that would open up the possibility of frequent train service between Flagstaff and Phoenix if there was a demand for that.
> 
> In the shorter term, what if there were two trainsets each with a P42, some Amfleet I coaches, and a cabbage car that made multiple daytime trips along the existing Phoenix to Tuscon tracks, along with middle of the night trips to a new intermediate station where the Phoenix train would meet the Sunset Limited for cross-platform transfers? Would any of the existing track need to be upgraded for this to work at some minimally reasonable speed?


In response to the first question, in my opinion a case could be made for all these except Pomona( which I know nothing about). In terms of the second question, while I don't know about the actual track situation, I would have to surmise that re-instating train service to Flag( which as far as I know was never a main kind of service -- maybe Arizona Eastern, but I honestly don't know) would be geographically problematic( for one thing about a 5500ft, at least, elev. gain betwn PHX and Flag) as well as demographically irrational. Flag has a metro population of maybe 75,000 while metro Tucson is at or around 1 million. PHX - Tucson also picks up major exurban towns on the way to Tucson.

Ed


----------



## George Harris (May 31, 2008)

There is a line Pheonix to Williams. It is BNSF. When it had passenger service, it was just about all night to cover the distance. Very curvey, lots of grades. To make it fast would be hugely expensive. There is a more direct line that hits the BNSF main line somewhere west of Needles, but I have no idea what the distance is or what the alignment is like. This line used to be ATSF, but was sold to a short line operator years ago.


----------



## GP35 (May 31, 2008)

The best option is to repair and upgrade the SP line west of Phoenix. The Phoenix area will continue to grow, fuel prices will not be going down,

fewer trucks, more goods will need to be move in and out of the Phoenix MSA, UP will evenually need to open that line.


----------



## MrEd (May 31, 2008)

according to what I am reading, the plan is to restore service on sunset to florida, but not to bring it to phoenix.

Was the service daily before 2005 ?

http://gulfcoastnews.com/GCNnewsAmtrakBill...etLtd052208.htm

WASHINGTON – Rep. Gene Taylor announced that a bill instructing Amtrak to report its plan to restore passenger rail service between New Orleans and Sanford, Fla. was approved and reported out by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure today.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 31, 2008)

edding said:


> In response to the first question, in my opinion a case could be made for all these except Pomona( which I know nothing about). In terms of the second question, while I don't know about the actual track situation, I would have to surmise that re-instating train service to Flag( which as far as I know was never a main kind of service -- maybe Arizona Eastern, but I honestly don't know) would be geographically problematic( for one thing about a 5500ft, at least, elev. gain betwn PHX and Flag) as well as demographically irrational. Flag has a metro population of maybe 75,000 while metro Tucson is at or around 1 million. PHX - Tucson also picks up major exurban towns on the way to Tucson.


A change of roughly a mile in elevation over a course of 100 miles actually wouldn't be a significant grade at all if it were a nice, gradual slope between those two cities: that would be about a 1% grade, and passenger track is sometimes contructed at a 3% grade. Of course, there's probably a lot of flat land with a sharper grade somewhere, and there may be some mountains that would have to be tunneled through.

Do Phoenix residents care about being able to travel quickly between Phoenix and Los Angeles? If it's roughly 450 miles of track, being able to really go 110 MPH just about the whole way except near stations would probably make the trip about 4.5 to 5 hours, at which point flying would be a bit faster. But if you could get the average speed up to 170 MPH or so (which the French TGV demontrates is possible), the travel time would be roughly two hours and fourty minutes. Tunneling through mountains and skipping the existing intermediate stops could also shorten the trip; google maps says that driving from Phoenix (the city center, presumably) to Los Angeles Union Station is only 356 miles, largely along Interstate 10. There's obviously some slop in where the Phoenix train station would be; but 356 miles averaging 170 MPH would be about 2:06, and averaging 110 MPH would be less than 3:20.

If there were high speed Phoenix to Los Angeles track, I would think that building some sort of connecting track to allow the Southwest Chief to use that track would be more cost effective than building a high speed track all the way to Los Angeles just for the benefit of the Southwest Chief. One train a day could then be maintained along the existing freight mainline routes to serve residents of those communities.


----------



## edding (May 31, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> edding said:
> 
> 
> > In response to the first question, in my opinion a case could be made for all these except Pomona( which I know nothing about). In terms of the second question, while I don't know about the actual track situation, I would have to surmise that re-instating train service to Flag( which as far as I know was never a main kind of service -- maybe Arizona Eastern, but I honestly don't know) would be geographically problematic( for one thing about a 5500ft, at least, elev. gain betwn PHX and Flag) as well as demographically irrational. Flag has a metro population of maybe 75,000 while metro Tucson is at or around 1 million. PHX - Tucson also picks up major exurban towns on the way to Tucson.
> ...


Having driven PHX to Flag many times( incl. April blizzards!), I would only say it's most assuredly not a nice gentle ascent to 7000+. There are several steep ups and downs plus what track exists probably isn't in very good shape. I will reiterate that Phx to Flag to pick up the SWC makes little or no sense, geographically, demographically or temporally( it takes 2+ hours to drive to Flag).

There would be interest in a PHX connection to a daily Sunset -- as a previous poster said it was boarding 100 per day before $4.00/gal gas. Bring it on( yes, I know I'm dreaming but it's been done before)

Ed


----------



## NativeSon5859 (May 31, 2008)

MrEd said:


> according to what I am reading, the plan is to restore service on sunset to florida, but not to bring it to phoenix.
> Was the service daily before 2005 ?
> 
> http://gulfcoastnews.com/GCNnewsAmtrakBill...etLtd052208.htm
> ...


Now THAT is good news. At the very least it forces Amtrak's hand to study the service resumption. I am very, very excited about this.


----------



## AlanB (May 31, 2008)

NativeSon5859 said:


> MrEd said:
> 
> 
> > according to what I am reading, the plan is to restore service on sunset to florida, but not to bring it to phoenix.
> ...


Well that assumes that the President actually signs it into law or that Congress has a veto proof majority.

Otherwise its just one more worthless piece of paper floating around in DC.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 31, 2008)

Does "reported out by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure" imply that the necessary vote of 100 Senators and however many Representatives has already been taken?


----------



## AlanB (May 31, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Does "reported out by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure" imply that the necessary vote of 100 Senators and however many Representatives has already been taken?


I don't believe so. I think that means that the committee aproves of the bill and it now goes to the floor for a vote.


----------



## had8ley (May 31, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> Does "reported out by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure" imply that the necessary vote of 100 Senators and however many Representatives has already been taken?


Unfortunately "reported out" means just that; the committee has voted and now it goes to both houses of Congress for amendments, additions, subtractions or just lingers without a vote. I must say this is a surprise and I sincerely hope it pans out. AmtrakWPK will be thrilled I'm sure.


----------



## AmtrakWPK (May 31, 2008)

One small step forward. But I'm not exactly holding my breath.....


----------



## NativeSon5859 (May 31, 2008)

AmtrakWPK said:


> One small step forward. But I'm not exactly holding my breath.....


Better than another step backwards.


----------



## George Harris (May 31, 2008)

MrEd said:


> according to what I am reading, the plan is to restore service on sunset to florida, but not to bring it to phoenix.
> Was the service daily before 2005 ?
> 
> http://gulfcoastnews.com/GCNnewsAmtrakBill...etLtd052208.htm
> ...


Better re-read this little blivet from the Gulf Coast News.

$1 million for Amtrak to study . . ."

"9 months after the date of enactment, . . . a plan"

Words simply fail me. This subject has been studied to death, dug up, stuffed and mounted and restudied to death. Some Beltway Bandit is getting a big pot of money to produce a pile of useless paper. The sum involved is quite sufficient to clean up stations, replace signs or whatever and after 9 months, reinstate the service. All this "study" stuff is a complete exercise in absolute nonsense being done to provide a minor apeasement to those that want something to happen by that most favored of all tactics of a politician, *DO A STUDY*. YES, I AM SHOUTING OUT OF PURE FRUSTRATION.

Look at the top: It says "Office or Gene Taylor" That is probably a typo that is supposed to say "Office of Gene Taylor". The only thing more idiotic than a return on a memo than "From the Office of Joe Selfimportant" is a momo "From the Desk of Joe Selfimportant" Hey, Joe, I don't care what your desk says. What do you say? My desk don't say nothing. If it did, it would say, "you are killing me with those piles of papers," but otherwise it just sits there and suffers in silence.

<few deep breaths>

No, the Sunset has not been daily since sometime in the late 1960's. For a while San Antonio to LA was daily as an extension of the Texas Eagle, but the whole route, no, not for a very long time.


----------



## MrEd (May 31, 2008)

oh, got it. its a plan to study the plan to restore service. I thought for that amount of money they were going to build the mobile station, etc. This could also be a report to study the plan.

They could save some money and hire GP35, who already has plans for the sunset ready to go.


----------



## JohnF (May 31, 2008)

George Harris said:


> MrEd said:
> 
> 
> > according to what I am reading, the plan is to restore service on sunset to florida, but not to bring it to phoenix.
> ...


Amen to that George. We studied this to death already. We know for a fact that Amtrak lets the equipment just sit in New Orleans for three days before returning it west as if it went on to Florida. I assume the crews just sit in a hotel also and do nothing. As for all the little stations in between, they generated little traffic as most of the passengers boarded west of New Orleans and were headed for Orlando - the major attraction for the train in the first place. All it takes to resume service is to call the crews and start running it. CSX gave to green light two years ago. Amtrak is either trying to hold up these Gulf states for more money or they are just idiots.


----------



## AmtrakWPK (May 31, 2008)

> Amtrak is either trying to hold up these Gulf states for more money or they are just idiots.


BOTH.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (May 31, 2008)

MrEd said:


> oh, got it. its a plan to study the plan to restore service. I thought for that amount of money they were going to build the mobile station, etc.


For reasons that have never been clear to me, most station construction projects seem to be more expensive than $1 million.


----------



## GP35 (May 31, 2008)

MrEd said:


> oh, got it. its a plan to study the plan to restore service. I thought for that amount of money they were going to build the mobile station, etc. This could also be a report to study the plan.
> They could save some money and hire GP35, who already has plans for the sunset ready to go.


Yep, I got a plan for east of NOL and Amtrak can have it for free.

I am a big believer in trains sharing a route for part of the way. I know this would never happen because of limited funding.

I would start a new train east of NOL. The Gulf Breeze would run from Tampa Bay, Jax, NOL. Then it would continue past NOL to

Shreveport, then Dallas/FW, then Denver. This gives a diret route to Florida from those cities and vice-versa.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Jun 1, 2008)

MrEd said:


> They could save some money and hire GP35, who already has plans for the sunset ready to go.


Oh god forbid.

That being said, this is democracy, and thats how it works. (Or rather, doesn't.)


----------

