Amtrak in Transition

Is Southampton St. really set up to service LD consists (as to opposed a single sleeper off the LSL)? And is it wise to run often out-of-slot trains north of NYP, especially in MN territory?

gokeefe wrote:The best available option to Amtrak will probably be to conduct more "wreck rebuilds" from the 'wreck reserve' fleet pool at Beech Grove. I simply can't see them finding any other way to do it either, nor do I anticipate a major appropriation from Congress, ever, to do it. Especially now that Amtrak is proving operational profitability in certain service models and on certain segments that only makes the major losses on the Long Distance trains all that more glaring.

I think the political calculus still holds--the LDs are the price to be paid for support for Amtrak as a whole. A way will be found to continue at least most of the current routes, including the provision of new equipment when needed.

electricron wrote:

gokeefe wrote:I should have been a lot more clear about this. You are correct Amtrak in of itself cannot unilaterally introduce service. However, under the terms of 49 USC §24308, they can, and will petition the Surface Transportation Board for operating authority and a decision on compensation which then compels the railroad to open their lines. In the case of the Downeaster that is precisely what they did and that case was decided in May of 1998.

I agree that if in fact Amtrak's subsidies were eliminated that this would be the likely outcome, but I would also note that getting this scenario to occur now would take more than mere bi-partisan action, but a very broad consensus of many many lawmakers.

The PanAm corridors into Maine aren't that busy, and Maine is paying the costs to implement Downeaster service - not Amtrak! I believe you will not find the STB so accommodating on a very busy freight corridor, nor many states willing to pay the compensation required to get access. An example I can point out has been Amtrak's inability to convince the STB to introduce "Daily" service on the Sunset Limited on UP tracks west of El Paso - even though UP is double tracking that corridor. Additionally, Amtrak hasn't found a state willing to pay any funds for this Long Distance route for implementing "Daily" service.

What is apparent is Amtrak's unwillingness to pay for increasing any services, relying upon States to do so, including reinitiating Sunset Limited services east of New Orleans.

It's not a matter of track rights. The issue is network efficiencies. Amtrak is finally generating them. Illinois has its own passenger railroad, but the new services to Rock Island and Galena are being farmed to Amtrak because they'll gain far more customers from Amtrak's Chicago hub than rom Metra's. And illinois doesn't want to maintain (nor outsource) its own substitute board, its own service hub, its own maintenance division for non-commuter cars.

Greg Moore wrote:Well, I've advocated a "21st Century Limited" for awhile, with NY State picking up a fair share (and having an excuse to build more cars at the CAF facility in state).

States are not required to fund Long Distance trains. Given the high number of such trains that serve NYS, I would imagine they would be loath to break this rule and set some kind of new precedent. Amtrak has more than sufficient authority to run trains that they know will pay for themselves. The real question may be is a "Deluxe Sleeper" Viewliner in the offing? If all the new Viewliner cars really do in fact improve cost recovery Amtrak is going to be in a really really strong position to push for more. That may be "the moment" when "it" happens, that being the first major system wide service expansion by Amtrak of Long Distance trains since the 70s. This initiative wouldn't so much be composed of new routes as it would be composed of new frequencies and longer trains with faster service on existing routes. The accelerating effect of the upward "virtuous cycle" this could create has the potential to be breathtaking.

Greg Moore wrote:And I still think that the House of the Mouse should consider adding private cars to Silver Service trains to the Orlando area.

This would provide more equipment with no real cost to Amtrak.

I think Iowa Pacific might beat Disney to the start on this.

Greg Moore wrote:That said, yeah, no matter how they do it, I think additional Silver Service trains are a must and could easily pick up a bunch of passengers.

Indeed and perhaps it is understandable why it isn't discussed here, reinstatement and expansion of the full Silver Service to Florida is so obvious to the point of being bland. Not as interesting perhaps as the more fascinating possibilities for the Cardinal but absolutely essential nonetheless.

Greg Moore wrote:I don't know if starting in Boston makes sense, but I could see it happening if you had at least 3 Silver Service trains all the way to Florida.

I'm not so sure either but if you terminated the BOS originated Silver Meteor in ORL instead of MIA then you might have a workable schedule. I don't know what the original setup was but Palm to MIA, Star to TPA and Meteor to ORL seems like a good plan to start. Then depending on what happens with the FEC you could have some options for a resurrected Champion NYP-MIA.

gokeefe wrote: I cannot emphasize enough that I simply don't "see it in the cards" for Amtrak to prioritize restoring the Cardinal to daily service until they have met the market demand for their Florida services. I will even go out on a limb and say that we will see the Silver Meteor running from BOS again before we see any substantial amount of effort or money spent on the Cardinal. The Silver Service in particular and the Atlantic Coast Service as a whole have a serious need to be able to run trains using flexible consist management practices that will take advantage of seasonal fluctuations in demand. I would even go so far as to say that depending on the outcome of the FEC proposal we could see Amtrak extending the Silver Palm back into Florida and eliminating the Silver Star reverse move from Tampa.

All of these options have the potential to make Amtrak's Atlantic Coast Service extremely competitive once again. There's plenty of market share to be had for East Coast travel to Florida, consequently I only see potential for growth in this area. Growth which almost undoubtedly does not exist on the Cardinal.

Something to note about the Cardinal. If the FY12 Cardinal ridership numbers are extrapolated to daily service, it would have more passengers than the Capitol Limited and the CONO and would be not far behind the Crescent. Add some growth from the stations from Charlottesville to Cincinnati for daily service and more sleeper capacity with a bag-dorm & a second sleeper, the Cardinal could match the Crescent for total passenger numbers. The Cardinal has a number of city pairs on the route that provide seat turnover and thus revenue.

Beyond the 3 day a week Cardinal getting a bag-dorm to free up roomettes, the Silvers will undoubtedly get priority on bag-dorms, new diners, adding a 3rd sleeper to the Silver Star and probably adding a 4th sleeper to the Meteor for peak seasonal periods. Once the new CAF bag-dorms, diners, sleepers are delivered, Amtrak will have more than enough cars to supply the 3 Cardinal consists needed for a daily service with a bag-dorm, 2 sleepers, and a diner if they choose to do so - and can get clearance from CSX and BBRR for daily service.

As for the Silver Star "reverse move from Tampa", the top city pair for the Star is Tampa-Miami, the second is Tampa-West Palm Beach, the 3rd Tampa-Fort Lauderdale. The Star does a lot of in-state Florida business. What a split route down the FEC would do to passenger traffic, there are a lot of unanswered questions on how Amtrak would work with the FEC and the All Aboard Florida plans.

gokeefe wrote: The best available option to Amtrak will probably be to conduct more "wreck rebuilds" from the 'wreck reserve' fleet pool at Beech Grove. I simply can't see them finding any other way to do it either, nor do I anticipate a major appropriation from Congress, ever, to do it. Especially now that Amtrak is proving operational profitability in certain service models and on certain segments that only makes the major losses on the Long Distance trains all that more glaring.

I gather that there are no more viable wreck rebuilds at Beech Grove, except perhaps for cars that have been damaged since the stimulus rebuilds. I can see Amtrak getting funding for a Superliner III order in a couple of years once we are past the hissy fit antics the Republican House caucus is engaging in. If the economy continues to grow, unemployment rate drops, we cut the financial drain that are the Afghanistan operations, trim defense spending, and the annual federal budget deficit shrinks enough that it is no longer a big deal in a couple of years.

If I was proposing a Boston - Florida train ,it would be a combination of 66/67 , and the Palmetto .
The Palmetto is cut back to Washington or Richmond . Thru cars and sleepers are added to 66/67 , at either Washington or Richmond . On the southern end , the Palmetto should be able to reach Orlando before midnite , given its 2.5 hour earlier start from Washington .Northbound , it would be an early morning start from Orlando , serviced at Sanford .
Yes , I know New York , New York , but it does have a very late nite connection , and 2 other Florida trains to compensate .
For mid journey connections , a beefed up Carolinian would compensate loss of the Palmetto's time slot .

David Benton wrote:For mid journey connections, a beefed up Carolinian would compensate loss of the Palmetto's time slot .

No it wouldn't! Messing up two trains so some (very few) can travel all the way to Florida from Boston without transferring is stupid! Has there ever been a train that provided a one seat ride from Boston to Florida? In almost 200 years of passenger trains in America, NEVER!
While we're making new trains that never existed before, how about a one seat ride all the way to California from New York City, and another like train to Boston. Never mind the fact that Boston and New York City share the same train to Chicago.

um , such a N.Y- L.a train was proposed in the Warrington years actually .Plus another Boston -Chicago ( or other midwest destination train ) .
Its not messing up the schedules , it allows same day connections from most of the east coast to Orlando , and it also allows and overnite connection from Boston to most of the east coast .
and it does it without requiring any new trains ( apart from the Savannah -Orlando extension of the Palmetto , which is a reinstatement anyway ).

David Benton wrote:um , such a N.Y- L.a train was proposed in the Warrington years actually .Plus another Boston -Chicago ( or other midwest destination train ) .
Its not messing up the schedules , it allows same day connections from most of the east coast to Orlando , and it also allows and overnite connection from Boston to most of the east coast .
and it does it without requiring any new trains ( apart from the Savannah -Orlando extension of the Palmetto , which is a reinstatement anyway ).

Why stop in Orlando, why not go all the way to Miami? Don't the passengers in Miami have the same need for a one seat ride to Boston?
You would need more rolling stock; sleepers, diners, and crew-baggage cars; for that long a train, which Amtrak doesn't have now, and possibly will not have in the future even with the new additions coming soon.
Extending that train to Miami will also add an additional train set; locomotives, cafe, coaches, and baggage cars.
And please don't suggest extending a LD train to Boston would be enough to satisfy them, they will want that one seat ride all the way to Miami.

because Miami would be after midnite , and you would need another trainset .
This doesnt actually require more rolling stock other than the sleeping cars , and we are talking after the new sleeping cars are delivered .

David Benton wrote:because Miami would be after midnite , and you would need another trainset .
This doesnt actually require more rolling stock other than the sleeping cars , and we are talking after the new sleeping cars are delivered .

But what makes you think there will be any additional sleeping cars to extend a train to Boston - and/or Miami. Aren't they all already promised to existing trains?

David Benton wrote:um , such a N.Y- L.a train was proposed in the Warrington years actually .Plus another Boston -Chicago ( or other midwest destination train ) .
Its not messing up the schedules , it allows same day connections from most of the east coast to Orlando , and it also allows and overnite connection from Boston to most of the east coast .
and it does it without requiring any new trains ( apart from the Savannah -Orlando extension of the Palmetto , which is a reinstatement anyway ).

But just because it was proposed in the Warrington years does not mean that it was a good idea. One of the major problems with extending a Florida LD train to BOS is that it takes up a limited resource: a slot in the NYP-BOS route. Amtrak is limited to 39 trains a day on the Shore Line East. Yes, the extended Silver could be sent over the Inland Route, but Amtrak has daily limits on the New Haven Line as well. Extending a LD train to BOS also means that any long delays for the northbound train get propagated all the way to BOS.

Orlando is not the only destination in Florida, it had 172K passengers in FY2012. West Palm Beach had 68K passengers, Fort Lauderdale 57K, Miami 91K. While one seat rides are better, those in Boston has a range of Acelas and Regionals to pick from for a connecting trip to NYP to get on a Silver to Miami. More connection options than cities not on the NEC get.

electricron wrote:

David Benton wrote:For mid journey connections, a beefed up Carolinian would compensate loss of the Palmetto's time slot .

No it wouldn't! Messing up two trains so some (very few) can travel all the way to Florida from Boston without transferring is stupid! Has there ever been a train that provided a one seat ride from Boston to Florida? In almost 200 years of passenger trains in America, NEVER!

It's not quite that bad. There was at least at one time through coach service FL-BOS. I seem to recall ref. to an SOU through coach.

afiggatt wrote: One of the major problems with extending a Florida LD train to BOS is that it takes up a limited resource: a slot in the NYP-BOS route. Amtrak is limited to 39 trains a day on the Shore Line East. Yes, the extended Silver could be sent over the Inland Route, but Amtrak has daily limits on the New Haven Line as well. Extending a LD train to BOS also means that any long delays for the northbound train get propagated all the way to BOS.

Orlando is not the only destination in Florida, it had 172K passengers in FY2012. West Palm Beach had 68K passengers, Fort Lauderdale 57K, Miami 91K. While one seat rides are better, those in Boston has a range of Acelas and Regionals to pick from for a connecting trip to NYP to get on a Silver to Miami. More connection options than cities not on the NEC get.

Looks like i didnt make my prospoal too clear . there would be no new train on the NEC , the palmetto would have through cars added to 66/67 .
Orlando is simply about as far as you can get in one day . i know there's other destinations in florida , but Orlando is a major one . i'm not taking away any existing Florida trains , so i dont see what the problem is .

afiggatt wrote:

gokeefe wrote: I cannot emphasize enough that I simply don't "see it in the cards" for Amtrak to prioritize restoring the Cardinal to daily service until they have met the market demand for their Florida services. I will even go out on a limb and say that we will see the Silver Meteor running from BOS again before we see any substantial amount of effort or money spent on the Cardinal. The Silver Service in particular and the Atlantic Coast Service as a whole have a serious need to be able to run trains using flexible consist management practices that will take advantage of seasonal fluctuations in demand. I would even go so far as to say that depending on the outcome of the FEC proposal we could see Amtrak extending the Silver Palm back into Florida and eliminating the Silver Star reverse move from Tampa.

All of these options have the potential to make Amtrak's Atlantic Coast Service extremely competitive once again. There's plenty of market share to be had for East Coast travel to Florida, consequently I only see potential for growth in this area. Growth which almost undoubtedly does not exist on the Cardinal.

Something to note about the Cardinal. If the FY12 Cardinal ridership numbers are extrapolated to daily service, it would have more passengers than the Capitol Limited and the CONO and would be not far behind the Crescent. Add some growth from the stations from Charlottesville to Cincinnati for daily service and more sleeper capacity with a bag-dorm & a second sleeper, the Cardinal could match the Crescent for total passenger numbers. The Cardinal has a number of city pairs on the route that provide seat turnover and thus revenue.

Ah...didn't realize that relative numbers were so strong. Good to know. Almost seems/sounds as if the Cardinal or "Cardinal Corridor" is the only real hope for CIN. Thoughts turn to the rebirth of the George Washington but I can't see VA-CHI being a major market.

afiggatt wrote:Beyond the 3 day a week Cardinal getting a bag-dorm to free up roomettes, the Silvers will undoubtedly get priority on bag-dorms, new diners, adding a 3rd sleeper to the Silver Star and probably adding a 4th sleeper to the Meteor for peak seasonal periods. Once the new CAF bag-dorms, diners, sleepers are delivered, Amtrak will have more than enough cars to supply the 3 Cardinal consists needed for a daily service with a bag-dorm, 2 sleepers, and a diner if they choose to do so - and can get clearance from CSX and BBRR for daily service.

This speaks more broadly to my main point. I'm not so sure that onesy twosy additions to sleeper capacity would really meet demand. We're talking about a situation that calls for potentially a lot more than that. But regardless, you're right, Amtrak could pursue a smaller incremental strategy initially that would in fact result in availability of rolling stock to restore a daily Cardinal, which could potentially be more important in the short term.

afiggatt wrote:As for the Silver Star "reverse move from Tampa", the top city pair for the Star is Tampa-Miami, the second is Tampa-West Palm Beach, the 3rd Tampa-Fort Lauderdale. The Star does a lot of in-state Florida business. What a split route down the FEC would do to passenger traffic, there are a lot of unanswered questions on how Amtrak would work with the FEC and the All Aboard Florida plans.

Didn't realize that ridership was so strong on those segments. Certainly makes me wonder whether or not Amtrak dropping them would provoke consideration of state sponsored service in FL. In the meantime of course, it certainly sounds as if they should be retained.

afiggatt wrote:

gokeefe wrote: The best available option to Amtrak will probably be to conduct more "wreck rebuilds" from the 'wreck reserve' fleet pool at Beech Grove. I simply can't see them finding any other way to do it either, nor do I anticipate a major appropriation from Congress, ever, to do it. Especially now that Amtrak is proving operational profitability in certain service models and on certain segments that only makes the major losses on the Long Distance trains all that more glaring.

I gather that there are no more viable wreck rebuilds at Beech Grove, except perhaps for cars that have been damaged since the stimulus rebuilds. I can see Amtrak getting funding for a Superliner III order in a couple of years once we are past the hissy fit antics the Republican House caucus is engaging in. If the economy continues to grow, unemployment rate drops, we cut the financial drain that are the Afghanistan operations, trim defense spending, and the annual federal budget deficit shrinks enough that it is no longer a big deal in a couple of years.

I'm not entirely certain that the House is the problem. I think Congress as a whole is not impressed with the sheer scale of the losses on Amtrak's Long Distance routes. Strong cases could be made for improved capacity on some of them, most especially of course the Empire Builder and the Auto Train. After that I'm not so sure what to do. The Southwest Chief seems very likely to move over to the BNSF Transcon but its hard to tell what would happen if Amtrak were stuck building new stations along the route. I thought the Coast Starlight had a very nice plan for performance improvement as well but there are still absolutely yawning gaps that aren't going to be closed all that easily. All of this of course doesn't even factor into the equation the fact that the Western Long Distance trains have better equipment than the Eastern Long Distance trains and in general are in better shape. So this also would appear to eliminate the "new equipment" as being a factor that would assist improvement (in an aesthetic sense).