But Maine cares enough to support the Downeaster. Sure, NH does not give a crap about the route.
Do people along the route care about the train? Do local politicians come out in support of the train?
You really don't like New England, do you?
I'm trying to remember: Would the stub train have through-cars onto the Eagle, or would passengers have to change trains?
Nothing set in stone. Once it became apparent that Nippon (NS ) delivery of bi-levels was not going to happen plans became uncertain. Originally a Daily Eagle to LAX with Super liners. A daily connecting train of single levels at SAS to NOL. Now Amtrak has absolutely no idea what long range plans to make. Once delivery and acceptances of Siemens cars is assured the plans not only for this service but who know what else national plans ? Politics are also the 800 pound bear as well.
I'm thinking the original poster meant the least ridership affected, were an Amtrak long distance train to go away. That said, I don't think the Sunset is THAT bad for ridership, and still gets some due to the fact it serves Phoenix(via Maricopa), Tucson, El Paso, and Alpine(for those going there, Marfa, or Big Bend National Park). It has both the issue of the fact it only runs 3 days a week, and the fact it was rerouted outside of downtown Phoenix, that hurts its ridership. The main issue with bringing Sunset service back to Phoenix, is that the Union Pacific tracks west of Phoenix would need to be restored
I agree with Mike. I think the OP was asking which train has the least political support and the fewest people that rely on it, along its route. I don't think he was asking which train has the fewest total people along the route, regardless of whether or not they rely on it and use it.
Not really, the SW Chief proposal wasn't an attempt to get rid of it, but an attempt to remake it. On the SW Chief, you have a daily train with a single (NMRX really doesn't count) cooperative host RR who would have been agreeable to most changes Amtrak wanted to make (on the current route). The non starter was always the bus bridge. Meanwhile with the SL, you have a tri weekly train, so it won't be a good corridor service regardless and a hostile host RR. So your only options with the SL are discontinuing or status quo. That's why Amtrak went after the Chief first.
Chopping up a two night train into short train segments and a very long bus segment would have 100% destroyed the Chief. Virtually no one would have been willing to transfer to/from a bus two times for a trip that long. They weaponized the PTC mandate to justify what would have effectively been a train-off, without having to worry about the 180 day rule or anything like that.
Considering that the NEC north carries over 50% of the combined rail/air passengers on this route, this making it one of the few places in the US where passenger rail is actually an important part of the transportation mix, I think not.
Exactly! If Amtrak really tried, I think they really could turn things around for many of their unsuccessful LD trains. Remember, "Where there's a will, there's a way"
