Federal, Night Owl, Twilight Shoreliner (Trains 65, 66, 67)

markhb wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 4:35 pm Have they removed the checked baggage on 448/449?

Also, I feel the continued talk of dropping rail service on 448 and 449 entirely is wrongheaded. Boston (and by extension ME and NH) is every bit as worthy of its direct connection to Chicago as any other city on either coast.

To be honest, I'd reassign the Lake Shore Limited as 448/449, get rid of the split (make it a full train), and revive the 20th Century Limited as 48/49. Offset the schedules to provide more service between Chicago and Albany.

You could also time the separated train to have a connection in Albany for NYP as well.

Back to the topic at hand. I would like to hear why baggage is being removed. Personnel might be it because if it was equipment there are easier trains to eliminate baggage from (Pennsylvanian comes to mind).

I have taken this train several times and checked my baggage from Williamsburg to Boston. On each of my trips practically no other passengers checked baggage and the baggage car was almost empty on arrival in Boston.

Lets get back on the original topic on hand, because the loss of the sleeper on the Night Owl is bad IMHO... but I don't know how many folks were going the full Boston to DC-and-beyond length. Was it viable? Or is there any LD service that covers that Boston-to-DC route?

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 6:04 am To be honest, I'd reassign the Lake Shore Limited as 448/449, get rid of the split (make it a full train), and revive the 20th Century Limited as 48/49. Offset the schedules to provide more service between Chicago and Albany.

Sorry to stray further off topic, but if we're just talking NYP -> CHI, the Broadway probably makes more sense as a revival. Even if it were to run over the current 42/43 + 29/30, it would likely be about 4 hours quicker than the 20th.

To answer your Nite Owl question, I don't think any LDs continue past NYP, though one could certainly be extended rather easily.

No there is no through LD service to Boston on the NEC. That means there is no way to check your baggage for any long distance trip out of NYP (e.g., Orlando/Miami/Atlanta/New Orleans, etc.,).

I would have loved to see the Silver Star extended to Boston when they eliminated the diner a few years ago. Would have been a good test bed for potential future service.

I always needed to bring my luggage to South Station the day before a long LD trip and pick it up the day after arrival because the "Night Owl" was the only train that carried checked baggage. Now you can't even do that inconvenient procedure.

west point wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 8:21 pm Mr Norman. You may have missed it but BOS, PVD, New Haven all had baggage positios posted in the employment e mails. That may mean more baggage service but that is just speculation.

Mr. West Point, I'm at a total loss to understand why Amtrak is doing such? With resumption of 66-67 without Baggage service, that means there is no longer any of such over the New Haven or the B&A.

Now if they would return 448-9 to an ALB-BOS connection, they would no longer need to have mechanical forces at BOS qualified on Viewliner Sleepers, would have no need to stock linens, and have no need for Cafe menu items that are only sold/comped on this train.

Really volks, Boston has done "quite well" with the political clout Amtrak enjoys up there. Just think the electrification (I'm not saying that was a waste), through Acelas even though the business is hardly as strong as over the PRR, and not having NHV-BOS become an "important feeder" such as NHV-SPF, NYP-ALB, and PHL-HBG.

mcgrath618 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:06 am

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 6:04 am To be honest, I'd reassign the Lake Shore Limited as 448/449, get rid of the split (make it a full train), and revive the 20th Century Limited as 48/49. Offset the schedules to provide more service between Chicago and Albany.

Sorry to stray further off topic, but if we're just talking NYP -> CHI, the Broadway probably makes more sense as a revival. Even if it were to run over the current 42/43 + 29/30, it would likely be about 4 hours quicker than the 20th.

Messrs. McGrath and Wolf, we're talking about some 2000 additional train-miles daily over Chessie's and Topper's systems. You can be sure the claws and hoofs would be doing their things if any such proposal moved forth.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:18 am
Now if they would return 448-9 to an ALB-BOS connection, they would no longer need to have mechanical forces at BOS qualified on Viewliner Sleepers, would have no need to stock linens, and have no need for Cafe menu items that are only sold/comped on this train.

There are no specialized or "qualified" mechanical forces for Viewliners here at Boston. If your craft is Carman, you work on whatever comes up to us be it a Viewliner or even rarely a Horizon car. So you wouldnt save anything in that regard. Also Aramark takes care of all the linens and all food items that are stocked in Boston. They're all ready here to load the regionals and the Acela so whats one more train to them?

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 9:44 am Eliminating the checked baggage @ BOS, means that they can eliminate all baggage handling positions there.

If no baggage service on 65/66/67, this would mean no connecting baggage for New England passengers headed
to points south (including Florida), in addition to being the only baggage train north of New York.

Years ago, during the M&E initiative, there was a plan to extend the Silver Star to Boston, operating over the Inland Route.

Regardless, I still don't see why Amtrak thinks the NYP-BOS leg of the NEC doesn't see at least one long distance train extended. Perhaps its because of the limited bridge opening stipulation for a certain # of trains, and Amtrak would rather have their limited slots be higher-revenue trains such as Acela. Most likely the limited openings is why the "inland route" was chosen for the stillborn Silver Star extension.

Or maybe the demand isn't there. But then again, you never know until you try!

bostontrainguy wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 9:21 am There are reports that the "Night Owl" is returning on July 11 but it will not have a baggage or sleeper in the consist. Part of the problem is that 65/67 will be coming north from Newport News and 66 is coming north from Roanoke.

Aren't 65 and 67 southbound, not northbound? If they go to Newport News, but 66 returns from Roanoke, how does that work?

shadyjay wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 8:29 pm Years ago, during the M&E initiative, there was a plan to extend the Silver Star to Boston, operating over the Inland Route.

Regardless, I still don't see why Amtrak thinks the NYP-BOS leg of the NEC doesn't see at least one long distance train extended. Perhaps its because of the limited bridge opening stipulation for a certain # of trains, and Amtrak would rather have their limited slots be higher-revenue trains such as Acela. Most likely the limited openings is why the "inland route" was chosen for the stillborn Silver Star extension.

Or maybe the demand isn't there. But then again, you never know until you try!

The last line is my big point. I mean, I would love to do an overnight DC/Boston in a sleeper, but that doesn't mean it didn't fill a sleeper pre-pandemic. I'd love to see ticketing stats for the Night Owl between city pairs. If there's a good chunk of people that are doing overnights between DC and Boston... why not try the sleeper again?

On adding Boston to any LD service... well, from looking at the schedules, we'd have to shift them a lot. The Night Owl does it in 9 hours. I'd think any LD service would only hit major cities and transfer points, so it would do it in less time. That doesn't make sense... and most current timings would have Boston in most unfortunate times.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sat Jun 25, 2022 7:49 am On adding Boston to any LD service... well, from looking at the schedules, we'd have to shift them a lot. The Night Owl does it in 9 hours. I'd think any LD service would only hit major cities and transfer points, so it would do it in less time. That doesn't make sense... and most current timings would have Boston in most unfortunate times.

Not true. An extended Silver Star would leave Boston around 7:00 AM and arrive back around 11:00 PM. The Crescent would leave about 10 :00AM and arrive back about 10:30 PM.

You can make transfers now in NYP from connecting trains at reasonable times right? Through trains would only make things better.

I don't see the value proposition on extending either train being worth the added complexity...

Plus, you'd have to kick everyone out at midnight, which negates the whole argument for paying for a sleeper.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk