Passenger

Upon first perusal of Amtrak's 26 October "System Timetable", some connections have been restored.

Train #1, the "Sunset Limited", now arrives in Los Angeles (LAX) in time to connect with Train #14, The "Coast Starlight".  No more Ambus-"San Joaquin" round-about to catch #14 at Martinez.

Train #14 now connects with Train #28, the "Empire Builder", at Portland (PDX).  No more long bus trip from Klamath Falls, OR to Pasco, WA to catch #28.

I don't know how much of this phenomenon is due to Amtrak 'juggling' the sked of #1, but it sure is welcome.  It seems that Union Pacific may have restored the 'superiority' of passenger trains on its lines.  I hope so.  If so, "Congratulations!!!". 

If one looks at 1960 just between Seattle and Chicago there was a choice of three trains the Milwaukee Road Olympian Hiawatha(exited service that year), NP North Coast Limited and GN Empire Builder all with 45 hour timings. The Santa Fe Super Chief and El Capitan were still operating 39 hour 45 minute schedules between Chicago and Los Angeles as was the UP City of Los Angeles. There were also slower 45 hour trains on both the Santa Fe Chief and UP Challenger.

The only route where Amtrak has shown any improvement at all is the NEC. Everything else seems to be slower than trains in 1960.

Al - in - Stockton     

It's not at all surprising that today's long distance intercity trains are slower than the trains of the late 1950's or early 60's.  Consider the market the railroads were serving in that era.   In those days, intercity trains were still geared to serving business travelers (although, by 1960, this segment was definitely dwindling) and, to this market, speed was important.  Today, long distance business travelers rarely travel by train, so speed on a long distance passenger train is much less important than reliability. Face it, if you're a business traveler on a long distance trip and you want speed, you'll fly. 

In the early 60's, the switchover to jets occurred and that increase in speed and reliability finished trains for regular long distance travel.

In San Antonio Number 21 arrives at 9:55 P.M. as opposed to 10:25 P.M.  This makes for a more convenient arrival time for San Antonio passengers but expands the time through passengers must lay over in the Alamo City.  Number 2 arrives at San Antonio at 9:30 P.M., which again extends the dwell time for through passengers. 

Rumor had it that Amtrak wanted to run the Texas Eagle as a daily through train to LAX, thereby shortening the dwell time in San Antonio, and kill the Sunset Limited, with a day train between San Antonio and New Orleans.  Apparently politics derailed or at least delayed the plan.

Good evening,

I suggest that, before we all hail UP for an improved effort to treat Amtrak by the terms of the contract, we just wait till '' normal '' traffic levels return to the pre-2007 economy debacle.....One might find that

the current '' friendly dispatching'' is solely due to UP 's volume having reduced quite noticeably.

Similar '' improvements '' hae been noted throughout Amtrak's long distance network over the past year or so....and for the same reasons, I suspect.

Once freight traffic returns to ''pre-recession '' level...we'll see....

Of couse, this may seem pessimistic...but I rather call it ''realistic'' and I fervently hope I am wrong in my views.

It is indeed nice to scan the ''current status'' at Amtrak and find a lot of L.D. trains with the

''early '' tag to their arrival tag....quite a change

Cheers

Sam1:

Rumor had it that Amtrak wanted to run the Texas Eagle as a daily through train to LAX, thereby shortening the dwell time in San Antonio, and kill the Sunset Limited, with a day train between San Antonio and New Orleans.  Apparently politics derailed or at least delayed the plan.

Hi,

This was not  a rumour but one of three drafts presented by Amtak to UP ( and other RR involved).

IMO, this is the one which would have made the most practical sense, since SanAntonio-NewOrleans can be serviced by a daytime schedule, and a revival of the old Golden Gate  Chicago-L.A.  via

Texas, SanAntonio, etc... would have drawn more passengers and, operationally, have been easier to pull off.

Evidently, bureaucracy had other ideas....or didn't have enough ''time'' to ''fully study '' the options....so we're left with the statusquo.....for now.

Cheers

VerMontanan:

Yes, the schedule of the Sunset Limited has improved from pathetic to abysmal.  Today’s train averages just under 43 MPH, which was actually an improvement from the old schedule of 41.34 MPH westbound and 42 MPH eastbound.  But the Sunset Limited remains the slowest of the “transcontinental” trains.  Here’s how they all fare today: Train 1, Sunset Limited, 1995 route miles, 46’45” running time, average speed 42.67 MPHTrain 2, Sunset Limited, 1995 route miles, 46’25” running time, average speed 42.98

In spite of some improvement, it looks like the schedule of the westbound Sunset (Train #2) is a joke.  I have no idea about slow track or whatever, but I did notice incredibly long periods of sitting still in several stations.  In Houston, 38 minutes; San Antonio, 2 hours 40 min.; El Paso only 25 min.; and Tucson, 50 minutes.  So for 4 stops, 4 hours and 33 minutes are consumed.  What a way to run a "service."  

The westbound Empire Builder looks great by comparison. 44 minutes in MSP, 32 min in Minot, 25 in Havre, 20 in Whitefish and 35 in Spokane, where the Portland section is detached.  By comparison, the 1962 Great Northern westbound EB stopped 11 min in Minot, 10 min in Havre, 5 min in Whitefish, and 30 min in Spokane.  No wonder it takes today's EB 46 hr 10 min, compared to 42 hr 45 min. back then.

Admittedly, these long distance runs are not for speed.  But sitting still in a station for these extended  stops makes little sense.  Why continue the pretense of running along distance passenger service? As sam1, oltmann and others have pointed out so many times, the costs are way too high for the paltry service provided.

Unfortunately, "what you see isn't what you get" vis-a-vis the Amtrak timetable.  My last trip on the "Sunset" was about four years ago, TUS-LAX.  #1 arrived a bit after the scheduled 0105 departure time, having bad-ordered and cut-out my sleeper in El Paso.  I had to ride with the proletariat!  We still sat in Tucson for an hour, while five WB freights overtook us.  No 'dwell time' was indicated for TUS.  Now it needs 0:50 there.  Wonder why.

There is no 'dwell-time' indicated for the WB "Empire Builder", here in Shelby, MT, but it normally arrives about 1645 and sits until 1722, having spent 0:25 in HAV (a re-fueling stop) just 103 miles to the east.  Shelby is a 'crew base' and only five minutes are allocated for the crew change.  The EB accomplishes that every day, barely time for a cigarette.  Who is kidding whom?

As far as the need for the LD passenger trains, you are welcome to ride your "dinky", or " 'L " , or bus, or whatever, but we depend on and need these trains.  Sure beats EAS or Greyhound, even if we had it 

Hays --  Shelby, MT & Stowe, VT

One more aspect of the long, sad Sunset story:

Since the 1990s (?) schedules for that train do not include running on the longer "Phoenix line" and only offer a bus connection to one of the largest metropolitan areas in the nation.  The trains now run on the shorter, direct route through Casa Grande.

BNSFwatcher:

As far as the need for the LD passenger trains, you are welcome to ride your "dinky", or " 'L " , or bus, or whatever, but we depend on and need these trains.  Sure beats EAS or Greyhound, even if we had it 

Probably so.  But not just in serving passengers, only 167,455 in 2008.

Amtrak expended $268,336 for goods and services in Montana in FY08.

Total wages of Amtrak employees living in Montana were $3,604,411 during FY08.

A study by R.L. Banks & Associates commissioned by the state of Montana concluded that the Empire Builder contributes nearly $14 million annually in economic benefits to Montana. 

 So Amtrak paid the good people and services of Montana $23.13  for each Montanan carried.  Sounds more like welfare than a transportation service.  And none of the seven largest cities/metro areas are served.  All so you can avoid riding in aluminum tubes or sit with the "proletariat."

IIRC (CRS), I read, somewhere, that monies had been allocated to re-furbish the Phoenix-Welton/Yuma line.  Does anyone have more info?  TNX.

Hays