A Different Sunset/Eagle Proposal?

[Donctor]

The Sunset Limited has four sets.
It used to need three, until the schedule change back in 2005-ish, which eliminated the same-day turn in LAX.

That said, the discussion of "trainsets" really isn't the issue, since each trainset would run with different equipment. The real question is, are there enough sleepers to run a daily NOL-LAX train and a daily CHI-SAS (with a through car to LAX) train. The answer to that is no.

So, you take the four consists currently devoted to the Sunset, and use them on the Texas Eagle instead, to run a daily service to LA. There are plenty of coaches around to put together a couple of coach-only consists for a day train (heck, 370/371 still use Superliners, and they don't really need to).

The proposed operation can be done with current equipment. A daily Sunset on its current route cannot.

I keep telling Allan that the Sunset has only four sets assigned, but he insists that it's five. The Eagle also has four sets plus whatever it takes to go to LAX three times a week. It takes seven sets to run the Eagle daily to LAX. That means there are at least 8 sleepers and 8 trans dorms plus maybe one or two for the Eagle service to LAX. That means there are only enough sleepers to run a daily train with one sleeper and one trans dorm from CHI to LAX. The surplus will just be move to another service or kept as spares or they could add a second sleeper occasionally during peak periods. There are not enough extra to run a daily through sleeper from NOL to LAX as it would take five. Perhaps they could add a sleeper in SAS to LAX. I am just waiting to see if they actually do anything for this route.

Ok, so it's 4 currently and 5 would be needed.

Amtrak has 8 sleeping cars and 2 Trans/Dorms coming out of Beech Grove thanks to the wreck repairs. More than enough to get us to the 5 sets needed.

So why should the people of Louisiana and Texas settle for the inferior plan that degrades onboard services when they can not only keep the same service levels on board and obtain daily service? It's the best of both worlds.

I'd suggest putting those trans-dorms on CHI trains. I typically see one or two trains a week that have an extra sleeper because there weren't any dorms. That can't be good when Amtrak is selling roomettes in the dorms.

 

[Donctor]

I keep telling Allan that the Sunset has only four sets assigned, but he insists that it's five. The Eagle also has four sets plus whatever it takes to go to LAX three times a week. It takes seven sets to run the Eagle daily to LAX. That means there are at least 8 sleepers and 8 trans dorms plus maybe one or two for the Eagle service to LAX. That means there are only enough sleepers to run a daily train with one sleeper and one trans dorm from CHI to LAX. The surplus will just be move to another service or kept as spares or they could add a second sleeper occasionally during peak periods. There are not enough extra to run a daily through sleeper from NOL to LAX as it would take five. Perhaps they could add a sleeper in SAS to LAX. I am just waiting to see if they actually do anything for this route.

The Eagle does not have four sets. It and the City share six.

 

[Donctor]

My plan makes more sense, simply because you're wrong. Those cities you've cited wouldn't be loosing through service with my plan.
If we currently have 4 Sunset trainsets and need 5 to run daily, we have no need to steal the through cars from the Eagle to make this happen. We have 8 sleepers and 2 Trans/Dorms coming out of Beech Grove. More than enough to get us to 5 trainsets without touching the current Eagle.

We may not have enough sleepers to make through cars from the Eagle daily, unless other plans are given up for those sleepers coming out of BG, but again there is no need to curtail the current Eagle service levels or through cars. With my plan there is no need for anyone to loose their through service, while Sunset riders gain the advantage of daily service.

It would make a lot more sense to use those sleepers to increase capacity on the Empire Builder (which could probably use a 2731/2831 car) or California Zephyr (whose 33 car should run west of DEN).

 

[AlanB]

My plan makes more sense, simply because you're wrong. Those cities you've cited wouldn't be loosing through service with my plan.
If we currently have 4 Sunset trainsets and need 5 to run daily, we have no need to steal the through cars from the Eagle to make this happen. We have 8 sleepers and 2 Trans/Dorms coming out of Beech Grove. More than enough to get us to 5 trainsets without touching the current Eagle.

We may not have enough sleepers to make through cars from the Eagle daily, unless other plans are given up for those sleepers coming out of BG, but again there is no need to curtail the current Eagle service levels or through cars. With my plan there is no need for anyone to loose their through service, while Sunset riders gain the advantage of daily service.

It would make a lot more sense to use those sleepers to increase capacity on the Empire Builder (which could probably use a 2731/2831 car) or California Zephyr (whose 33 car should run west of DEN).

We only need one of the 8 coming online to make a daily sunset. That leaves 7 available to the Empire Builder, more than enough to add a 2731/2831 car. And that is the plan by the way, to add that 31 sleeper with some of those cars coming out of BG.

 

[had8ley]

The Sunset Limited has four sets.
It used to need three, until the schedule change back in 2005-ish, which eliminated the same-day turn in LAX.

That said, the discussion of "trainsets" really isn't the issue, since each trainset would run with different equipment. The real question is, are there enough sleepers to run a daily NOL-LAX train and a daily CHI-SAS (with a through car to LAX) train. The answer to that is no.

So, you take the four consists currently devoted to the Sunset, and use them on the Texas Eagle instead, to run a daily service to LA. There are plenty of coaches around to put together a couple of coach-only consists for a day train (heck, 370/371 still use Superliners, and they don't really need to).

The proposed operation can be done with current equipment. A daily Sunset on its current route cannot.

I keep telling Allan that the Sunset has only four sets assigned, but he insists that it's five. The Eagle also has four sets plus whatever it takes to go to LAX three times a week. It takes seven sets to run the Eagle daily to LAX. That means there are at least 8 sleepers and 8 trans dorms plus maybe one or two for the Eagle service to LAX. That means there are only enough sleepers to run a daily train with one sleeper and one trans dorm from CHI to LAX. The surplus will just be move to another service or kept as spares or they could add a second sleeper occasionally during peak periods. There are not enough extra to run a daily through sleeper from NOL to LAX as it would take five. Perhaps they could add a sleeper in SAS to LAX. I am just waiting to see if they actually do anything for this route.

Ok, so it's 4 currently and 5 would be needed.

Amtrak has 8 sleeping cars and 2 Trans/Dorms coming out of Beech Grove thanks to the wreck repairs. More than enough to get us to the 5 sets needed.

So why should the people of Louisiana and Texas settle for the inferior plan that degrades onboard services when they can not only keep the same service levels on board and obtain daily service? It's the best of both worlds.

I'd suggest putting those trans-dorms on CHI trains. I typically see one or two trains a week that have an extra sleeper because there weren't any dorms. That can't be good when Amtrak is selling roomettes in the dorms.

Nor the lose of five high dollar bedrooms plus a costly family room that the dorms don't have...

 

[Green Maned Lion]

My plan makes more sense, simply because you're wrong. Those cities you've cited wouldn't be loosing through service with my plan.
If we currently have 4 Sunset trainsets and need 5 to run daily, we have no need to steal the through cars from the Eagle to make this happen. We have 8 sleepers and 2 Trans/Dorms coming out of Beech Grove. More than enough to get us to 5 trainsets without touching the current Eagle.

We may not have enough sleepers to make through cars from the Eagle daily, unless other plans are given up for those sleepers coming out of BG, but again there is no need to curtail the current Eagle service levels or through cars. With my plan there is no need for anyone to loose their through service, while Sunset riders gain the advantage of daily service.

... I didn't know you were that bad with allocating equipment. The City Of New Orleans requires 3 trainsets all by its lonesome. That leaves 3 Texas Eagle sets. The Texas Eagle needs 6 sets to run daily, allowing for a comfortable turning time in both Chicago and Los Angeles, needed due to the train's long run.

The Sunset has 4 sets assigned to it, meaning that this maneuver would actually release one trainset. I have worked out the schedule fairly extensively, and with it the set would have about 7 hours to turn in LA and 8 hours to turn in Chicago. However, if you were to use 7 sets, (all sets available) you could even have one set overnight in either of the destinations.

Actually, a recent rumor I picked up from a fairly reputable source, the sleepers originally allocated to the Empire Builer, or rather 6 of them, are supposed to be allocated to the Texas Eagle. Not because they need them to run this, but because Amtrak feels that with this service change, sleeper ridership along the Texas Eagle's route would justify operation of a second sleeper on the train. The rest of the sleepers are to be allocated to the Cardinal.

Amtrak's position is that these sleepers would be better revenuewise allocated that way, then adding sleepers to the already adequately performing Empire Builder. If a through sleeper happens, it would be from the second sleeper, and I have heard that it is in Amtrak's plans to give a through sleeper a tentative run to see if traffic justifies it.

 

[jis]

The City Of New Orleans requires 3 trainsets all by its lonesome. That leaves 3 Texas Eagle sets. The Texas Eagle needs 6 sets to run daily, allowing for a comfortable turning time in both Chicago and Los Angeles, needed due to the train's long run.
The Sunset has 4 sets assigned to it, meaning that this maneuver would actually release one trainset. I have worked out the schedule fairly extensively, and with it the set would have about 7 hours to turn in LA and 8 hours to turn in Chicago. However, if you were to use 7 sets, (all sets available) you could even have one set overnight in either of the destinations.

Actually, a recent rumor I picked up from a fairly reputable source, the sleepers originally allocated to the Empire Builer, or rather 6 of them, are supposed to be allocated to the Texas Eagle. Not because they need them to run this, but because Amtrak feels that with this service change, sleeper ridership along the Texas Eagle's route would justify operation of a second sleeper on the train. The rest of the sleepers are to be allocated to the Cardinal.

Amtrak's position is that these sleepers would be better revenuewise allocated that way, then adding sleepers to the already adequately performing Empire Builder. If a through sleeper happens, it would be from the second sleeper, and I have heard that it is in Amtrak's plans to give a through sleeper a tentative run to see if traffic justifies it.

Leaving aside all the personal jibes at each other for the moment, all I can say is that when this proposal was first announced, I did a detailed rake (oops consist - pardon my origins are showing ) and equipment allocation analysis and it came out pretty similar to what GML has presented here. I must admit that I did not do a detailed analysis of the daily Sunset scenario when I discovered that if you do that you have to lose the through sleeper on the Eagle at least on some days. Having done that I put it on the shelf and sat down to enjoy the arguments and the to and fro that has gone on here on this forum over the months. Also from an overall system return perspective it makes sense to allocate equipment to a train that has significant promise rather than to a train that is already doing relatively well, so I can understand where Amtrak is coming from, if GML's source's information is accurate.

 

[Donctor]

Ok, so it's 4 currently and 5 would be needed.

Amtrak has 8 sleeping cars and 2 Trans/Dorms coming out of Beech Grove thanks to the wreck repairs. More than enough to get us to the 5 sets needed.

So why should the people of Louisiana and Texas settle for the inferior plan that degrades onboard services when they can not only keep the same service levels on board and obtain daily service? It's the best of both worlds.

I'd suggest putting those trans-dorms on CHI trains. I typically see one or two trains a week that have an extra sleeper because there weren't any dorms. That can't be good when Amtrak is selling roomettes in the dorms.

Nor the lose of five high dollar bedrooms plus a costly family room that the dorms don't have..

Nope. Amtrak isn't selling bedrooms in the "substitute" dorms (which are standard sleepers). In fact, they're not selling anything in these cars. They sell roomettes in the dorm. And then the dorm isn't there.

 

[Donctor]

... I didn't know you were that bad with allocating equipment. The City Of New Orleans requires 3 trainsets all by its lonesome. That leaves 3 Texas Eagle sets. The Texas Eagle needs 6 sets to run daily, allowing for a comfortable turning time in both Chicago and Los Angeles, needed due to the train's long run.

SEVEN. No same-day turn in CHI. If you mess with the schedule, you lose the connection to 821/822.

And the current Eagle requires four sets without interlining. There is not a same-day turn at either endpoint.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

... I didn't know you were that bad with allocating equipment. The City Of New Orleans requires 3 trainsets all by its lonesome. That leaves 3 Texas Eagle sets. The Texas Eagle needs 6 sets to run daily, allowing for a comfortable turning time in both Chicago and Los Angeles, needed due to the train's long run.

SEVEN. No same-day turn in CHI. If you mess with the schedule, you lose the connection to 821/822.

And the current Eagle requires four sets without interlining. There is not a same-day turn at either endpoint.

I know the Texas Eagle requires 4 sets without interlining. However, we already seem to believe that the present 2234 mile run is overdoing the interlining thing. Having the whole set run LAX-NOL each time without servicing is asking for it. So I figured to do this, the CONO would have to be separated. Thus, it would require taking 3 sets from the TE's current pool. Leaving this grouping with 3 more sets. Take the rest of the needed sets from the Sunset, and there you have it.

 

[AlanB]

My plan makes more sense, simply because you're wrong. Those cities you've cited wouldn't be loosing through service with my plan.
If we currently have 4 Sunset trainsets and need 5 to run daily, we have no need to steal the through cars from the Eagle to make this happen. We have 8 sleepers and 2 Trans/Dorms coming out of Beech Grove. More than enough to get us to 5 trainsets without touching the current Eagle.

We may not have enough sleepers to make through cars from the Eagle daily, unless other plans are given up for those sleepers coming out of BG, but again there is no need to curtail the current Eagle service levels or through cars. With my plan there is no need for anyone to loose their through service, while Sunset riders gain the advantage of daily service.

... I didn't know you were that bad with allocating equipment. The City Of New Orleans requires 3 trainsets all by its lonesome. That leaves 3 Texas Eagle sets. The Texas Eagle needs 6 sets to run daily, allowing for a comfortable turning time in both Chicago and Los Angeles, needed due to the train's long run.

The Sunset has 4 sets assigned to it, meaning that this maneuver would actually release one trainset. I have worked out the schedule fairly extensively, and with it the set would have about 7 hours to turn in LA and 8 hours to turn in Chicago. However, if you were to use 7 sets, (all sets available) you could even have one set overnight in either of the destinations.

Actually, a recent rumor I picked up from a fairly reputable source, the sleepers originally allocated to the Empire Builer, or rather 6 of them, are supposed to be allocated to the Texas Eagle. Not because they need them to run this, but because Amtrak feels that with this service change, sleeper ridership along the Texas Eagle's route would justify operation of a second sleeper on the train. The rest of the sleepers are to be allocated to the Cardinal.

Amtrak's position is that these sleepers would be better revenuewise allocated that way, then adding sleepers to the already adequately performing Empire Builder. If a through sleeper happens, it would be from the second sleeper, and I have heard that it is in Amtrak's plans to give a through sleeper a tentative run to see if traffic justifies it.

There is no need to discuss either the Eagle or the City of NOL. Other than the fact that the Eagle currently switches cars to/from the Sunset, it has nothing to do with anything in my plan.

We currently have 4 trainsets for the Sunset Limited. We need 5 to run it daily NOL-LAX. Take 1 sleeper from the 8 coming out of BG; take 1 Trans/Dorm of the 2 coming out of BG; add a few coaches, a diner, and a lounge which can also be taken from those being restored at BG; and Viola! we have 5 trainsets to run the Sunset daily and we haven't touched the Eagle or the City. And in fact, we still have the through cars on the Eagle to transfer at SAS 3 days per week in each direction.

No one looses any service, no one has to have their services downgraded, and we get daily service on the Sunset route. Heck, Amtrak can even add some of the remaining sleepers if it wants to the Eagle to provide more run through days.

 

[AlanB]

I'd suggest putting those trans-dorms on CHI trains. I typically see one or two trains a week that have an extra sleeper because there weren't any dorms. That can't be good when Amtrak is selling roomettes in the dorms.

I've actually been on the Eagle booked into the Trans/Dorm when they subsituted a regular sleeper for the dorm. Oddly enough it was a Superliner I still in its original colors and furnishments. Amtrak just accomodated us in the regular roomettes, and the crew took over the rooms downstairs and the bedrooms.

One just needed the attendant to translate the dorm room numbers into regular sleeping car numbers.

But otherwise no big deal and no problem for the passenger.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

There is no need to discuss either the Eagle or the City of NOL. Other than the fact that the Eagle currently switches cars to/from the Sunset, it has nothing to do with anything in my plan.
We currently have 4 trainsets for the Sunset Limited. We need 5 to run it daily NOL-LAX. Take 1 sleeper from the 8 coming out of BG; take 1 Trans/Dorm of the 2 coming out of BG; add a few coaches, a diner, and a lounge which can also be taken from those being restored at BG; and Viola! we have 5 trainsets to run the Sunset daily and we haven't touched the Eagle or the City. And in fact, we still have the through cars on the Eagle to transfer at SAS 3 days per week in each direction.

No one looses any service, no one has to have their services downgraded, and we get daily service on the Sunset route. Heck, Amtrak can even add some of the remaining sleepers if it wants to the Eagle to provide more run through days.

But... the Cardinal remains tri-weekly, and you have produced little in the way of improved daily capacity.

 

[Donctor]

But... the Cardinal remains tri-weekly, and you have produced little in the way of improved daily capacity.

There are no definite plans for the Cardinal.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

But... the Cardinal remains tri-weekly, and you have produced little in the way of improved daily capacity.

There are no definite plans for the Cardinal.

There are no definite plans for any of this, but about as definite as this plan, the Cardinal is supposed to be truncated to WAS and made daily.

 

[AlanB]

There is no need to discuss either the Eagle or the City of NOL. Other than the fact that the Eagle currently switches cars to/from the Sunset, it has nothing to do with anything in my plan.
We currently have 4 trainsets for the Sunset Limited. We need 5 to run it daily NOL-LAX. Take 1 sleeper from the 8 coming out of BG; take 1 Trans/Dorm of the 2 coming out of BG; add a few coaches, a diner, and a lounge which can also be taken from those being restored at BG; and Viola! we have 5 trainsets to run the Sunset daily and we haven't touched the Eagle or the City. And in fact, we still have the through cars on the Eagle to transfer at SAS 3 days per week in each direction.

No one looses any service, no one has to have their services downgraded, and we get daily service on the Sunset route. Heck, Amtrak can even add some of the remaining sleepers if it wants to the Eagle to provide more run through days.

But... the Cardinal remains tri-weekly, and you have produced little in the way of improved daily capacity.

Please stop mixing things into the equation that have nothing to do with the original plan. The original plans for the Sunset & Eagle did not include anything to do with the Cardinal. The fact that Amtrak is now rethinking it's orginal plans has nothing to do with the discussion that was at hand, that being that they can make the Sunset Daily which greatly improves capacity with 4 extra trains per week in each direction between NOL & LAX without comprimising the current onboard service levels or affecting the Eagle. Seems like a huge improvement to me.

That said, if they don't assign the extra sleepers coming out of BG to either the Eagle or the Builder, then there are more than enough to take the Cardinal daily. Especially with the one trainset scheduled to be released from the Capitol Limited, which by my understanding gets them two Cardinal trainsets right there. Even when the Card ran with Superliners year's ago it didn't get a Trans/Dorm and it only had 1 sleeper.

 

[jis]

There is no need to discuss either the Eagle or the City of NOL. Other than the fact that the Eagle currently switches cars to/from the Sunset, it has nothing to do with anything in my plan.
We currently have 4 trainsets for the Sunset Limited. We need 5 to run it daily NOL-LAX. Take 1 sleeper from the 8 coming out of BG; take 1 Trans/Dorm of the 2 coming out of BG; add a few coaches, a diner, and a lounge which can also be taken from those being restored at BG; and Viola! we have 5 trainsets to run the Sunset daily and we haven't touched the Eagle or the City. And in fact, we still have the through cars on the Eagle to transfer at SAS 3 days per week in each direction.

No one looses any service, no one has to have their services downgraded, and we get daily service on the Sunset route. Heck, Amtrak can even add some of the remaining sleepers if it wants to the Eagle to provide more run through days.

As long as a few additional cars as described above can be put into the pool the daily Sunset plan works. The daily Eagle + daytime SAS - NOL plan can be made to work theoretically at least without adding any cars to the pool. That is the only difference. If the additional cars are available, naturally the daily Sunset would be the way to go. And a quick back of the envelope scribble suggests one needs to find at least 3 maybe 4 more sleepers (and equivalent number of additional coaches) to make the Eagle through sleeper+coach daily. Sounds like an overall win-win to me. I guess Alan has convinced me that with the additional equipment available daily Sunset is feasible.

 

[Ryan]

Especially with the one trainset scheduled to be released from the Capitol Limited,

Slightly OT, but how are they going to do this? Assuming eliminating the set laying overnight at WAS, turning a 1:10 arrival for a 4:05 departure seems mighly risky, especially since there aren't any extra Superliners in WAS to cobble together a consist if need be (although I guess that would change if the Cardinal was truncated at WAS and went Superliner).

 

[henryj]

There is no need to discuss either the Eagle or the City of NOL. Other than the fact that the Eagle currently switches cars to/from the Sunset, it has nothing to do with anything in my plan.
We currently have 4 trainsets for the Sunset Limited. We need 5 to run it daily NOL-LAX. Take 1 sleeper from the 8 coming out of BG; take 1 Trans/Dorm of the 2 coming out of BG; add a few coaches, a diner, and a lounge which can also be taken from those being restored at BG; and Viola! we have 5 trainsets to run the Sunset daily and we haven't touched the Eagle or the City. And in fact, we still have the through cars on the Eagle to transfer at SAS 3 days per week in each direction.

No one looses any service, no one has to have their services downgraded, and we get daily service on the Sunset route. Heck, Amtrak can even add some of the remaining sleepers if it wants to the Eagle to provide more run through days.

As long as a few additional cars as described above can be put into the pool the daily Sunset plan works. The daily Eagle + daytime SAS - NOL plan can be made to work theoretically at least without adding any cars to the pool. That is the only difference. If the additional cars are available, naturally the daily Sunset would be the way to go. And a quick back of the envelope scribble suggests one needs to find at least 3 maybe 4 more sleepers (and equivalent number of additional coaches) to make the Eagle through sleeper+coach daily. Sounds like an overall win-win to me. I guess Alan has convinced me that with the additional equipment available daily Sunset is feasible.

He convinced me too. The problem all along has been the Florida people & NARP wanting NOL to Florida service restored before anything else. That would kill any plans for daily service on the Sunset or the Eagle. For me daily service trumps everything else. NOL to Florida, Phoenix, everything else wrong with the train can be fixed after daily service is accomplished. Personally I con't care which plan, Allan's or Amtrak's, as long as we get daily service on the route. I am still holding my breath. lol.

 

[AlanB]

The problem all along has been the Florida people & NARP wanting NOL to Florida service restored before anything else. That would kill any plans for daily service on the Sunset or the Eagle. For me daily service trumps everything else. NOL to Florida, Phoenix, everything else wrong with the train can be fixed after daily service is accomplished. Personally I con't care which plan, Allan's or Amtrak's, as long as we get daily service on the route. I am still holding my breath. lol.

Yes, bringing in Sunset east under the present conditions and equipment availability kills any chance of daily service on the Sunset route.

And for the moment, Sunset east is a long ways off it would seem. And hopefully, if Congress decides to order its restoration, they'll also provide the needed funding to buy the equipment that will be needed.

 

[AlanB]

Especially with the one trainset scheduled to be released from the Capitol Limited,

Slightly OT, but how are they going to do this? Assuming eliminating the set laying overnight at WAS, turning a 1:10 arrival for a 4:05 departure seems mighly risky, especially since there aren't any extra Superliners in WAS to cobble together a consist if need be (although I guess that would change if the Cardinal was truncated at WAS and went Superliner).

Schedule changes; earlier departure out of CHI and trim a little padding. They'll also eliminate the heavy cleaning in DC that the train normally gets. I guess that the thinking is that the western trains can go 2 night without a heavy cleaning, so why not the Capitol. And it will still be better than those western trains, as it will get a light cleaning in DC, something the western trains don't get on their 2 night runs.

 

[Greg]

The problem all along has been the Florida people & NARP wanting NOL to Florida service restored before anything else. That would kill any plans for daily service on the Sunset or the Eagle. For me daily service trumps everything else. NOL to Florida, Phoenix, everything else wrong with the train can be fixed after daily service is accomplished. Personally I con't care which plan, Allan's or Amtrak's, as long as we get daily service on the route. I am still holding my breath. lol.

Yes, bringing in Sunset east under the present conditions and equipment availability kills any chance of daily service on the Sunset route.

And for the moment, Sunset east is a long ways off it would seem. And hopefully, if Congress decides to order its restoration, they'll also provide the needed funding to buy the equipment that will be needed.

I think with the oil spill and the effect on the gulf states, now would be the perfect time to reinstate passenger rail service between New Orleans and Florida

 

[Devil's Advocate]

In my specific case I'd benefit more from daily operation than from opening up the track east of NOL. However, I must admit that of the Texans who leave the state they tend to go two places. One of them is Las Vegas and the other is Orlando. I happen to think they're crazy but that's where they go. If Amtrak could get some sort of Disney consist going it could end up being their most lucrative train ever. I'm kind of surprised they haven't had this for decades now.

I think with the oil spill and the effect on the gulf states, now would be the perfect time to reinstate passenger rail service between New Orleans and Florida

I really don't follow you?

 

[Guest]

Especially with the one trainset scheduled to be released from the Capitol Limited,

Slightly OT, but how are they going to do this? Assuming eliminating the set laying overnight at WAS, turning a 1:10 arrival for a 4:05 departure seems mighly risky, especially since there aren't any extra Superliners in WAS to cobble together a consist if need be (although I guess that would change if the Cardinal was truncated at WAS and went Superliner).

Schedule changes; earlier departure out of CHI and trim a little padding. They'll also eliminate the heavy cleaning in DC that the train normally gets. I guess that the thinking is that the western trains can go 2 night without a heavy cleaning, so why not the Capitol. And it will still be better than those western trains, as it will get a light cleaning in DC, something the western trains don't get on their 2 night runs.

And then there's the CONO/Texas Eagle run throughs that don't seem to get any cleaning when passing through CHI as we have been discussing!Hope that the Cap doesnt get the empty the trash/put in toliet paper "cleaning" that we get down this way! The route Managers and suits need to get out of their offices and stay out of Beech Grove when traveling so as to ensure @ least clean and well maintained train sets!

 

[Donctor]

There are no definite plans for any of this, but about as definite as this plan, the Cardinal is supposed to be truncated to WAS and made daily.

It's a possibility.