Possible new train (Floridian) from MIA to CHI (rumor)

[jis]

I don’t think a train can sit in Washington, DC for 2 hours each day. It would block the regionals going to and from points south.

I don't think that is true, since there are six usable platform tracks. A train sitting in one is not going to block anything. Locomotives that are now parked on platform tracks awaiting next assignment can be parked elsewhere.

 

[JWM]

I'm going to slightly back off my previous comments about combining the two train. Can anyone give me statistics on what percentage of "Silver Star" passengers originate and disembark north of D.C.?

 

[thefirewarde]

I don’t think a train can sit in Washington, DC for 2 hours each day. It would block the regionals going to and from points south.

They manage 30 minute engine changes already. I don't think a two hour hold is insurmountable.

 

[Steve4031]

They manage 30 minute engine changes already. I don't think a two hour hold is insurmountable.

IMHO the problem is that a two trains sitting there for two hours each day will tie up a much needed platforms on the through tracks. Those platforms are are also used by the regionals and Virginia railway express commuter trains.

If they do engine changes in 30 minutes, it should be possible to service a through train that doesn’t require an engine change in the same amount of time.

One possible issue with my thinking is that diesel engines cannot be refueled from those platforms.

 

[Steve4031]

I don't think that is true, since there are six usable platform tracks. A train sitting in one is not going to block anything. Locomotives that are now parked on platform tracks awaiting next assignment can be parked elsewhere.

Jishnu, I just read your post. My post just above this one should be removed because I was thinking there was 2 through track platforms, not 6.

 

[jimdex]

Again, I hope this will NOT be marketed as a through train, because that would either require padding the schedule with ridiculously long layovers in Washington, or else it would produce many very late arrivals in Chicago or Washington. Or possibly both. If Amtrak thinks it can achieve more efficiency by pooling Capitol Limited and Silver Star equipment, fine. But I really don't think there's any substantial market for a Chicago to Florida train running via Washington, except possibly for railfans who want to stay on the train as long as possible. And contrary to a claim earlier in this thread, Chicago-Washington-Florida is NOT a traditional sleeping car route. There would have been virtually no need for such a service, because there were so many trains running directly from the Midwest to Florida.

As I understand it, the more direct routes from Chicago to Florida, via Cincinnati, Kentucky and through eastern Tennessee (Nashville or Knoxville) to Atlanta are in very bad shape and very twisty and indirect that it would be much slower than the better maintained route of the Cap and the Silvers,

As far as I know, the routes are in good shape. They may be twisty in parts, but they are no more twisty than they were back in the days when they were the preferred route for Midwest to Florida passenger service. The biggest problems with reinstating direct Midwest-Florida service (aside from funding, of course) is probably freight interference.

 

[jis]

Jishnu, I just read your post. My post just above this one should be removed because I was thinking there was 2 through track platforms, not 6.

It is true that there are only two tracks through the 1st Ave Tunnel between Union Station and CP Virginia. But no train would wait on those tracks. They will wait on a platform tracks of which there are several and the number is actually increasing with addition of platforms.

One possible issue with my thinking is that diesel engines cannot be refueled from those platforms.

They could be refueled in Richmond and/or Toledo

 

[MARC Rider]

I'm going to slightly back off my previous comments about combining the two train. Can anyone give me statistics on what percentage of "Silver Star" passengers originate and disembark north of D.C.?

The rail passengers association is your friend:

https://www.railpassengers.org/site/assets/files/3458/16.pdf

Two of the "top 10" city pairs (by ridership) are New York - Washington and New York to Philadelphia, both what are essentially NEC rides. None of the top 10 city pairs are between points north of Washington and points south of Washington.
Total 2022 ridership was 435,000. Baltimore: 13,000, New York: 87,000, Newark: 16,000, Philadelphia: 33,000, Trenton: 5,000, Wilmington: 7,000. Thus 311,000 passengers, although it appears that a lot of them might be taking intra-NEC trips. The loss of a direct train from the NEC (New Yok- Baltimore) to Raleigh is a bit of a suck, but there is another train on the route, and if they have a cross-platform transfer at Washington, it won't be that bad (except for higher risk of late departures from Washington given that the Silver Star or whatever they're going to call it, is coming from Chicago.) It's also a bit of a suck that there will be no direct train between the NEC and Tampa, but, again, a cross-platform transfer will ease the pain a bit, though it might be nice to get a high-level platform in the lower level, which I don't think is happening any time soon.

If this is being done to improve equipment utilization, we, the rail traveling public, will just have to accept it. This will apparently free up Superliners so that more space will be made available on the western trains, which everyone is complaining about. Until Amtrak gets some more long-distance rolling stock, this is what we're stuck with.

 

[Septa9739]

Number 5 on that list is New York to Orlando, which I imagine is only the case due to people taking cheaper fares than the Meteor.

I don’t think this is entirely something we’re “stuck with.” The train did relatively little NEC-FLA business. Most would rather the Meteor for that. There is also the opportunity for hourly or better connecting service from New York for those who need Tampa, or Southern Pines, or Okeechobee. The one seat ride will undoubtedly draw more Midwest to Southeast business than Amtrak currently gets, even if less than ideal. But honestly, in 2024, who is going to balk at a 47 hour schedule versus a 39 hour schedule? And there’s no guarantee we’d get that over the old Floridian route. And for the first time in almost 5 years, the flailing failing faltering Capitol will finally have enough equipment to have a chance at being successful. I for one am glad the railroad is trying something to improve capacity, improve finances, improve utilization, improve connectivity, and maybe improve ridership for a change, rather than just cut, cut, cut. I also like that it hasn’t required thirty years of studies to make a simple change.

 

[jis]

Number 5 on that list is New York to Orlando, which I imagine is only the case due to people taking cheaper fares than the Meteor.

I don’t think this is entirely something we’re “stuck with.” The train did relatively little NEC-FLA business. Most would rather the Meteor for that. There is also the opportunity for hourly or better connecting service from New York for those who need Tampa, or Southern Pines, or Okeechobee.

Southbound the connection will be from 95 I bet. 95 and 91 are often at WAS at the same time anyway, one chasing the marker of the other.

Northbound there are many to choose from. One thing Amtrak could consider doing is connect the Sleeper passengers to Acela as a bonus, but of course that is too original an idea for Amtrak to stomach perhaps.

BTW, the argument used by Amtrak to kill the Broadway and retain the Cap was that corridor passengers could change at Washington DC. I have lost count of the number of times I had to change in WAS between the Cap and Regionals to get to NY because either the LSL was sold out or its fares were sky high, not an unusual occurrence. And of course those transfers at WAS will continue unabated. The transfers from the south will just be an additional one of something that happens already from the west. As a concept this is nothing new.

 

[Qapla]

Who knows, with the way Amtrak sometimes does things, they may decide, since the height restrictions are north of WDC, they could make the Star/Cap/Floridian out of superliners - thus taking even more needed equipment away from the western routes so they can park the viewliners in preparation for a new administration that is not passenger train friendly - thus killing multiple birds with one stone.

 

[Cal]

Again, I hope this will NOT be marketed as a through train, because that would either require padding the schedule with ridiculously long layovers in Washington, or else it would produce many very late arrivals in Chicago or Washington. Or possibly both.

It doesn't matter if it's marketed as a through train or not, the equipment is still the same so there will still be a longer DC layover. A two hour, while longer than most others, isn't that long. I don't think anyone who is going to take the slow train will be that mad over a longer sit in DC anyway.

But I really don't think there's any substantial market for a Chicago to Florida train running via Washington, except possibly for railfans who want to stay on the train as long as possible.

And that's fine because that was never the point of this move.

If Amtrak thinks it can achieve more efficiency by pooling Capitol Limited and Silver Star equipment, fine.

I don't think Amtrak just thinks they can. It's inherent to anyone that a 24+ hour layover in any city is bad equipment utilization, especially considering nearly every western LD train still has short consists.

 

[zephyr17]

Who knows, with the way Amtrak sometimes does things, they may decide, since the height restrictions are north of WDC, they could make the Star/Cap/Floridian out of superliners - thus taking even more needed equipment away from the western routes so they can park the viewliners in preparation for a new administration that is not passenger train friendly - thus killing multiple birds with one stone.

It is crystal clear from the reservations system sleeper inventory that the Cap (or whatever replaces it) is going Viewliner November 10th.

 

[frequentflyer]

Again. Why is the Meteor preferred over the Star?

The Star’s route through the Carolinas has higher population centers.

 

[joelkfla]

Again. Why is the Meteor preferred over the Star?

The Star’s route through the Carolinas has higher population centers.

The Meteor is the fast train; the Star is the local.

 

[west point]

If this goes thru the locations in NC and SC will have thru service from the Midwest. Much better than using the Meteor. Also can get some connections to CLT & ATL.

 

[Amtrak25]

If they paired off the Capitol Ltd with the Silver Metoer instead, lateness recovery at DC would be a far simpler matter. They could probably send the train off to Ivy City to refresh it. It would also balance out one seat ride service along the Atlantic Coast: the A-line and S-line would each get one NYC originating train (Palmetto and Star). Give the Tampa service to the Meteor instead of the Star.

The purpose of this is not to offer thru service, but to conserve Superliners. I do not expect the reservation system to recognize this as a thru service and more than any of the Chicago-run thrus over the decades were.

 

[MARC Rider]

It doesn't matter if it's marketed as a through train or not, the equipment is still the same so there will still be a longer DC layover. A two hour, while longer than most others, isn't that long. I don't think anyone who is going to take the slow train will be that mad over a longer sit in DC anyway.

The Canadian has a 2 hour layover in Winnipeg, a four hour layover in Edmonton, and a 3 hour layover in Jasper.

Again. Why is the Meteor preferred over the Star?

The Star’s route through the Carolinas has higher population centers.

The Star takers that detour to Tampa, which makes it a longer ride to South Florida.

 

[railiner]

Historically, the SAL and SCL always favoured the Meteor over the Star, and then lesser trains, equipment wise. The Meteor received the unique “Sun Lounge”, glass-topped 5 BR sleeper lounges, as well as the round-end Tavern Lounge Observation car. The Meteor also carried a registered nurse.

 

[cocojacoby]

Again. Why is the Meteor preferred over the Star?

The Star’s route through the Carolinas has higher population centers.

For passengers going north of NYP, the Star didn't offer connections.

 

[jimdex]

The Canadian has a 2 hour layover in Winnipeg, a four hour layover in Edmonton, and a 3 hour layover in Jasper.

The Canadian is pretty much a cruise train these days, not actual transportation. Perhaps, at this point, that's what Amtrak's long-distance trains are, too. I personally hope that notion won't catch on, though, because in the long run, it's going to be difficult to ask taxpayers to subsidize a system of cruise trains.

 

[jis]

One should remember that at present we are discussing our own fantasy timetables, since we have not seen any real timetable for the rumored train from Amtrak. Afterall it is CSX at both sides of WAS for this rumored train, so Amtrak probably has an opportunity to negotiate a timetable that CSX can stand behind. Afterall, otherwise it is CSX that will get raked over coal. So let's wait and see what happens.

 

[rookzie]

Seems to me this idea of a Chicago-Florida train via Washington DC is a futile effort to create a substitute for a revived Floridian. It has never worked and won't work now. It's just too far out of the way. The only solution to the Midwest-Florida problem is a revived Floridian running through Atlanta. With all the official emphasis on preventing Amtrak expansion, though, there's basically no chance of that ever happening.


Sorry. Forgot to say that the real benefit of this plan is better equipment utilization and freeing up Superliners desperately needed in the West. Unfortunately, though, with all of the general railroad unreliability now and the resulting delays, I think two additional low-level trainsets are going to be needed

As I understand it, the more direct routes from Chicago to Florida, via Cincinnati, Kentucky and through eastern Tennessee (Nashville or Knoxville) to Atlanta are in very bad shape and very twisty and indirect that it would be much slower than the better maintained route of the Cap and the Silvers, which already have passenger infrastructure (stations and platforms and places for any needed servicing.) It would cost many millions, possibly billions to upgrade the tracks along any of the Atlanta routes to even 60 mph, let alone near high speed rail, and the routes are so convoluted, the times would still be dreadful.

The rumored Chicago<->Florida service is just a matter of scheduling, no construction required.

Maybe if successful, a more direct route could be pieced together from various future corridor expansions and upgrades (Ohio's Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati service, Atlanta commuter rail to the north, etc.) because the corridor projects would have filled in and upgraded some of the gaps.

The idea of 24 hour + layover in Washington makes no sense at all. If that were the plan, they could just change the Cap from Superliners to Viewliners/Amfleet on the existing schedule, and move the Superliners to the western trains. No fuss, no bother, and no reason for AU to get involved except the traditional second-guessing of everything Amtrak does.

It's really not. It is an effort to improve equipment utilization and free up Superliners to be used on Western trains where they are badly needed. Creating a one seat, though long, ride between Chicago and Florida is a side effect, not the reason. I agree with others that there probably won't be a lot of Midwest to Florida riders on it, but that isn't the point. Most travel will probably be similar to current travel patterns on the separate Cap and Star. I think that is what Amtrak hopes for, that they don't lose a lot of riders in their pursuit of better equipment utilization, not a to get a big gain in the Midwest-Florida market.

Thinking it is the other way around, that equipment utilization is the side effect, would be the tail wagging the dog.

As zephyr17 stated, no it isn’t a half-step or even futile effort to create a substitute for a revived Floridian (former “South Wind”).

The primary goal of this change seems overwhelmingly aimed at better utilization of whatever serviceable equipment remains in the long-distance pool. This is what several commenters in the thread seem to be in consensus with. Many if not most existing ridership travel patterns probably won’t change much if at all, and such a combined run provides the added benefit of one-seat riding among points along two separate LD paths.

The masses observed at the boarding point extremes (CHI and MIA) aren’t expected to surge or even necessarily significantly increase — at least not initially. And while the “Silver Star” route is longer than that of the Meteor, it does provide MIA-NYP service to boot. It will, however, mean no more one-seat rides between MIA and NYP for patrons along the former A-Line Atlantic Coast Line RR) segment between Fayetteville (NC) and Yemassee (SC) inclusively, so that becomes a tradeoff. But I do expect it to benefit more riders between many combinations of intermediate points west of and south of WAS.

Again though, to connect the outlying termini Chicago and Miami is not the intent of this strategy. As far as restoration of a more direct route between the Midwest and Florida is concerned, that has to undergo the long and slow process of vetting and approval among stakeholders instituted in the Corridor ID initiative. Just as John Santos noted, most of the infrastructure of the former passenger service between Chicago and Florida has been removed, and that applies to all pre-Amtrak routes as well. The purposes of that long-term goal and this change are not even close to being the same.

 

[Cal]

Perhaps, at this point, that's what Amtrak's long-distance trains are, too. I personally hope that notion won't catch on, though, because in the long run, it's going to be difficult to ask taxpayers to subsidize a system of cruise trains.

I don't think I agree. Plenty of people still use Amtrak to get around (especially in coach where the price is more competitive)

 

[Steve4031]

I have one teaching colleague who cheerfully connected through Washington DC when traveling from Chicago to Florida. She did not want to fly. And she pointedly told me she was not interested in railfan info. But she did appreciate knowing about the food court in Washington, D.C.

She enjoyed her trip but would have preferred a one seat ride.