So reads the title of one of Trains News Wire articles for July 17. Restoration of service east of New Orleans in any of the three manners proposed by Amtrak seems less than an optimal use of Amtrak resources given the relatively low population and low pre-Katrina patronage along this route. The superior patronage and revenue solution would seem to be to restore the N.O./Florida passenger rail link by adding service to the 5.5 million people of the Atlanta metropolitan region which presently sees only the Crescent. Restoring the C of G's relatively short Nancy Hanks' run (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Hanks_(train)) between Atlanta and Savannah would make north-south passenger rail travel between Atlanta and Florida possible. By proper timing of the Crescent with both the New Orleans' eastern terminus of the Sunset (either as at present or as the presently-under-consideration connecting train at San Antonio with the new Chicago to L.A. Texas Eagle) and the southern terminus of the City of New Orleans, passenger rail travel between New Orleans and Florida could be accomplished, albeit using a longer routing, but with a minimum of added cost and the potential for much greater patronage by tapping into the grossly under-served Atlanta population base.
If all goes as planned, the SouthEast corridor will eventually extend to Atlanta.
That will connect Boston / NYC / Newark / Philadelphia / Baltimore / DC / Richmond / Raleigh / Charlotte / Atlanta.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
A quoite from the news item:
"The study lays out the options, but it will be up to Congress to decide which option, if any, Amtrak will pursue."
The three options mentioned were 1) extend the Sunset east, 2) extend the CONO east, or 3) run a seperate train. No mention was made of a specific destination nor the route to get to (wherever). Nor is there any mention of how this coordinates with the possible rearrangement of the Sunset and the Texas Eagle.
It is possible the local paper just got overenthusiastic about what is being considered. However if the paper has it correctly, Amtrak is punting the decision back to Congress. Offhand, I can't think of a body less capable of making route decisions. Perhaps Amtrak's real motive is to put back the time when they actually have to operate a train -- by saying it is up to Congress further postponement is inevitable.
Dakguy201It is possible the local paper just got overenthusiastic about what is being considered. However if the paper has it correctly, Amtrak is punting the decision back to Congress
Have you read the report on AMTRAK's web pages? You will see that AMTRAK is punting the decision to Congress.
Dakguy wrote:
"Amtrak is punting the decision back to Congress. Offhand, I can't think of a body less capable of making route decisions."
Congress might not make the best parent for Amtrak, but this is not an easy world and they are what we have.
Our government-sponsored national rail system is having growing pains. Amtrak's guardian, Congress, is like the parent of a child facing the "real world" for the first time. The child was neglected during its formative years, and is now presented with the rosy lifetime philosophy that its future is made up of small, simple jobs (that is, "corridors"). But the "real world" is not letting that happen. The corridors are growing and blending in to one another.
Congress needs to realize that Amtrak needs help. This requires a change in philosophy. Like a child who barely made it through high school, Amtrak is not ready to fulfill its destiny. This child needs to go to college: Amtrak needs the total support of Congress while it transitions from a bumbling teenager into the best-in-the-world national rail network.
Yes, we need a train from New Orleans to Florida. And San Francisco to Los Angeles, Concord to Montreal, Pittsburgh to Cleveland, Atlanta to Birmingham....
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham
Ummmm....there already IS a train from Atlanta to Birmingham...#s 19 & 20, the Crescent!
Don't forget that it was Congress, courtesy of Corrine Brown (D) from Jacksonville, FL that instructed Amtrak to study the re-establishment of the Sunset Limited East from New Orleans. No comment on the wisdom of asking Congress to decide.
Mel Hazen; Jax, FL Ride Amtrak. It's the only way to fly!!!
I took Blue Streak's suggestion above on where to locate the report, downloaded it and have read it a couple of times.
A quick summary of the report is that it examines 3 alternatives for New Orleans/Orlando service, and Amtrak apparently doesn't want anything to do with any of them but will do so if ordered to do it by a Congress willing to pay for it (at what appears to be an inflated cost and on a very foot-draggy timetable).
I'm neither an expert on Amtrak nor on the route but several items struck me:
$20 mil for PTC for the route. Surely CSX is going to install it anyway as it will be required for TIH hazmat, but it appears the report volunteers Amtrak to pick up the bill.
$24 to $63 mil for additional rolling stock. Granted, this is a wild card, especially if the City and the Sunset are to remain Superliner equipment; but after current plans are executed for repairing Superliners, there still remains a pool of repairable cars.
$3.2 mil for a new station at Sanford. This is close to being a suburb of Orlando. Does it really need a stop? I thought Sanford was already getting a new station for the Auto Train -- is there not some local connection between the two rail routes?
It takes Amtrak 20 months to hire and train crews, station personnel, etc.? Surely, there are qualified people in the system who have run the route before or would welcome the opportunity to transfer to these locations. Sure, the system as a whole will have to do some hiring but the lead times here appear to presume it will be necessary to staff the operation exclusively with new hires.
The ridership projections show farebox recovery of operating expenses of between 56% to 23% depending on the option selected. I am prepared to accept Amtrak's direct operating cost estimates, but wonder about ridership. The highest ridership option was 96,100 a year on an extension of the City, which works out to 131 per train. Orlando is one of the nation's premier tourist destinations, so I find this difficult to accept.
The Auto Train Terminal is off the mainline on a spur just before the site of the Sanford station. The station on the mainline at Sanford is way beyond its prime and needs major upgrading or replacement. I haven't ridden the train that way in several years so I don't even know if the Sanford station is still standing.
Dakguy201The ridership projections show farebox recovery of operating expenses of between 56% to 23% depending on the option selected. I am prepared to accept Amtrak's direct operating cost estimates, but wonder about ridership. The highest ridership option was 96,100 a year on an extension of the City, which works out to 131 per train. Orlando is one of the nation's premier tourist destinations, so I find this difficult to accept.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I have taken the Crescent from New Orleans to Washington, and it is merely a ghost of viable intrastate transportation. If the Sunset competes with bicycles, then the Crescent competes with mopeds...
Development of efficient intercity transportation is exactly the kind of economic expansion that this region needs.
Dakguy201: Now that you read it I'll give some background.
this I agree with you. the alternative for CSX would be to divert the TIH traffic up to Montgomery and then to Waycross but there is still a dark section on that route. Maybe charge CSX a fee for every TIH car running on the AMTRAK route?
Sorry! The superliners at Beech Grove that are being repaired will be needed to cover the present routes and equipment needs. We have not seen a timetable for ordering additional conventional and superliners but if the 4 billion vs 1 billion HSR proposal goes through then maybe an order for rolling stock can be placed. Facilities for a large car order seem to be lacking although many proposals have been put forward. Any suggestions?
Sanfor station is being expanded. Sanford is between Deland and Winter Park then onto Orlando. The regular Sanford station is a derilic hulk that has been condemmed. I see no reason for rebuilding that station. The Auto Train facility could be used and also by the Silver trains but it probably would take an act of Congress to use it since there is some kind of fence agreement from the original Auto Train employees and AMTRAK. Anyone know the specifics? The access to Auto Train and the main line is both north and south? so no problem with access as long as the track work is in decent shape to the south. The proposed schedule puts the new train at Sanford at 15:30 so another platform on the east side and also for would be needed for silver trains there so as to not intefere with the 16:00 Auto Train departure. It appears to make no sense to rebuild the Sanford regular station. For your information the FY 2008 boardings and detrains were: Orlando -- 147,491; Winter Park -- 29,514; Deland -- 24,854; and Auto Train -- 234,839.
It takes Amtrak 20 months to hire and train crews, station personnel, etc.? Surely, there are qualified people in the system who have run the route before or would welcome the opportunity to transfer to these locations. Sure, the system as a whole will have to do some hiring but the lead times here appear to presume it will be necessary to staff the operation exclusively with new hires
That is reasonable because the crews in JAX qualify to Florence, Miami now. The NOL crews qualify to Memphis, Lake Charles, and maybe one or two to Meridian if Cresent is delayed excessivly. Even if others crews transfer in the qualification of other crew members takes all that time no mater where you transfer in from. Read the number of trips to be taken on each route. Station personel is only 3 months. Another factor is that during this time there will be a large hiring of T&E all over the AMTRAK system to fill in additional trains and routes.
You may be correct on that point. There are a lot of gulf coast destinations that are already heavily used by people from the mid west. Orlando certainly is a destination. Since AMTRAK did not release its present midwest (Capitol trains) to Florida ridership no projections of how many people might divert to this route. Also how many would want to make a circle trip?
The real fly in the ointment is the distance from NOL - Orlando and the length of time to travel by rail. 769 miles 18+ Hrs - Rail; 639 miles 10+ Hrs - Highway; 530+ miles 2hrs Air. The rail trip is really hurt by several track issues. Many grade crossings and bridges NOL - JAX. Trent Lott's idea to move the tracks north of the present alignment has much merit. The track Winds through Mobile. The worse detour is from Flomaton, Al to Milton, Fl through Pensacola. This 80+ mile section took 2-1/2 hrs to transition because of 20MPH street running in Pensacola and the track winding along Pensacola bay at 30 MPH. Now as the crow flies it is only about 30+ miles Flomaton - Milton but of course that bypasses Pensacola entirely to the northeast . Crestview - Flomaton would save an additional 15 miles. The 20mph yard restrictions at Chattahoochee of 7 miles is another impediment. Also the slow running in Tallahassee.
In regards Sanford:
The spur into the Auto Train Terminal joins the CSX mainline and heads North ONLY. If Amtrak were to use the Auto Train Terminal to load and unload Silver Service passengers a pull in, back out, or back in, pull out operation would be required. If Silver Service Trains were to stop on the main line, it is a considerable hike to and a sizeable drop down to ground level at the Auto Train facility.
Maglev If the Sunset competes with bicycles, then the Crescent competes with mopeds...
The southern half of the Crescent is a bit better than the Sunset was in terms of speed and ridership (and demographics of area). The Atlanta - north half is way better in all 3 areas.
blue streak 1Sorry! The superliners at Beech Grove that are being repaired will be needed to cover the present routes and equipment needs.
Explain. Once upon a time, there were enough Superliners for this train and all others in the system. No new Superliner trains have been added. In fact, the Cardinal has been un-superlinered. So, fix'em all and there should be plenty.
oltmanndExplain. Once upon a time, there were enough Superliners for this train and all others in the system. No new Superliner trains have been added. In fact, the Cardinal has been un-superlinered. So, fix'em all and there should be plenty
Ok! Here goes. Under AMTRAK's web site under the heading for the stimulus funds here is their explanations for all Superliner (SL) rebuilds. These are listed under project # PRJ 29110043:
1 - SL b/c fill in daily equipment shortage
2 -- Coaches no assignment listed but suspect to cover coach demand on some route (maybe CHI -- MSP)
6 --superliner sleepers to add one to each EB equipment set.
Footnote: The AMFLEET restoration is the next report but is so complicated that you need a spread sheet program as to where they are going. It appears that they will provide for about 10 additional train sets but assignments not specified.
2 -- transition sleepers to meet daily shortage.
4 -- lounges to fill out all SL trains.
1 -- Sleeper to Auto Train to fill in for demand.
1 -- Dinner to go to fll in for EB
This leaves no repairable Superliner Equipment for any expansion. The limiting factor is enough Dinning and Lounge cars for a certain number of equipment sets. Read the AMTRAK site!!!!!!!. Frankly I support longer trains as the demand appears on certain routes especially the Empire Builder. The main thing is to build more cars as locomotive shortages appear to be covered by the rebuilding of the P-40s.
Note: The AMFLEET overhauls are going to be allocated for NEC service with some food service cars returned. The long distance coaches allocated to other single level trains but haven't figured it all out.
blue streak 1oltmanndExplain. Once upon a time, there were enough Superliners for this train and all others in the system. No new Superliner trains have been added. In fact, the Cardinal has been un-superlinered. So, fix'em all and there should be plenty Ok! Here goes. Under AMTRAK's web site under the heading for the stimulus funds here is their explanations for all Superliner (SL) rebuilds. These are listed under project # PRJ 29110043: 1 - SL b/c fill in daily equipment shortage 2 -- Coaches no assignment listed but suspect to cover coach demand on some route (maybe CHI -- MSP) 6 --superliner sleepers to add one to each EB equipment set. Footnote: The AMFLEET restoration is the next report but is so complicated that you need a spread sheet program as to where they are going. It appears that they will provide for about 10 additional train sets but assignments not specified. 2 -- transition sleepers to meet daily shortage. 4 -- lounges to fill out all SL trains. 1 -- Sleeper to Auto Train to fill in for demand. 1 -- Dinner to go to fll in for EB This leaves no repairable Superliner Equipment for any expansion. The limiting factor is enough Dinning and Lounge cars for a certain number of equipment sets. Read the AMTRAK site!!!!!!!. Frankly I support longer trains as the demand appears on certain routes especially the Empire Builder. The main thing is to build more cars as locomotive shortages appear to be covered by the rebuilding of the P-40s.
oltmannd blue streak 1Sorry! The superliners at Beech Grove that are being repaired will be needed to cover the present routes and equipment needs. Explain. Once upon a time, there were enough Superliners for this train and all others in the system. No new Superliner trains have been added. In fact, the Cardinal has been un-superlinered. So, fix'em all and there should be plenty.
The need for additional Superliner cars is difficult to see. The average load factor for Superliner equipped trains during the first eight months of FY09 was 54.6 per cent. Moreover, the number of sleeping car passengers on these trains declined .85 per cent from FY08 to FY09 and 3.6 per cent from May FY08 vs. May FY09.
Undoubtedly there are days, especially during the summer months, as well as select holiday periods, when the load factor is higher, but obtaining additional equipment to meet these relatively few peak periods is probably not a good business decision. A better decision would be to use stimulus money to buy or upgrade corridor equipment.
Some further thoughts. For normal turns on the Empire Builder it takes 5 equipment sets. With 6 sleepers going to the EB maybe one will be a spare maybe in Seattle? The same could be said for the sleeper going to Auto train for maybe a spare in Lorton? I know the last time I looked in Sanford that they had several cars laying over in several maintenance bays after the normal departure.
oltmanndThough I still wonder where all the Superliners went. Consists in 2009 certainly aren't any bigger than in 2004 and they covered the Sunset to Orlando then.... Possibly there are a bunch scrapped or beyond the economic limit of repair?
Could it be that a more reasonable spare car policy has taken some SL cars out of normal turns and onto spare capacity? At the different holiday rushes the NEC uses every spare car at that time and maybe the same can be said for SLs. A few years back I was on a couple different trains that had a BO car removed and no spare added but lately a sub has been available to be substituted. Also the proposed daily Texas Eagle extension to LA may have equipment already allocated for that service ( 1 or 2 trainsets? ).
Sam1The need for additional Superliner cars is difficult to see. The average load factor for Superliner equipped trains during the first eight months of FY09 was 54.6 per cent. Moreover, the number of sleeping car passengers on these trains declined .85 per cent from FY08 to FY09 and 3.6 per cent from May FY08 vs. May FY09.
Sam: Load factors can be very deceiving. Having worked for Airlines in both passenger and Cargo load factors they can be very deceptive. However I'll try to apply them to rail only.
1. Non - stop trips can be very high loads especially when capacity constricted. Auto - Train is an example. Have you ever come across their figures? Even so with two classes of passenger (coach and sleeper) the factors will be down if one class is limited (sleeper?) . Then if balancing of equipment is needed the oposite return trip can be light ( before and after Thanksgiving for example). I've been on almost empty trains where the opposite train was reported full)
2. the one trip a day can sell out a short portion of a train (especially sleepers) and leave a demand that is filled otherwise. (note complaints of the Cresent Charlottesville -- Washington)
3. Every stop added to a train's itinerary will lower overall load factor. Hard example is the NEC where the PHL -- BAL -- WASH is lower that NYP -- PHL. Since AMTRAK does not publish each segment's load factor we can only guess at the load factors.
4. Equipment not needed on a trip may be considered Dead Heading and up the load factor. the Cresent BHM -- NOL often shuts down a couple coaches and I wonder if they are considered revenue for load factors?
5. Equipment substitutions with a different capacity may make figuring even more difficult and not knowing if standard consists are used in the figures or actual may skew the results.
6. I would not count the 0.85% decline meaniful as May 08 had an extra Sunday vs 09.
As I pointed out in my post, there are days when a train may sell out. And clearly the load factor on some segments of a run, e.g. Chicago to Minneapolis on the Empire Builder may be higher than the load factor west of Minneapolis. In fact, based on my experience, which consists of taking the train from Milwaukee to Portland, it is.
The calculations are based on passenger miles measured from end point to end point. If a train sells out between points A and B, the load factor will be well below average between points B and C, assuming the total trip has a low factor below 100 per cent.
Amtrak publishes end point to end point load factor information for its trains. It has segment information, based on tickets lifted and equipment used, but the information is not readily available to the public. Undoubtedly, it is possible for a train like the Auto Train to be turning away sleeping car passengers whilst having ample coach space, and the over all figures would not show this information. I am sure Amtrak has this information. If the data showed that there was a serious shortage of sleeper space on the Auto Train, I think management would probably have repaired and returned to service the idle sleepers. Even Amtrak's management knows how to generate revenue.
I was only addressing the need for additional Superliner cars. Schedulers would have to know the configuration of any substitute equipment since passengers are guaranteed space on these trains. It would be relatively easy to plug this information into a computer database and generate quickly the load factors.
The .85 per cent, which is insignificant, although indicative of a direction that is accelerating because of the recession, was for the fiscal year. The 3.6 per cent decline is a May FY08 to May FY09 comparison for the months only.
If I was the President of Amtrak and a subordinate manager told me that we needed to ramp up the number of Superliner cars, because they have an average load factor of approximately 55 per cent, I would want a lot more information. But then if I was the President of Amtrak, I would run it like a business, which means that an economic (financial) case would need to be made for the additional equipment. Too often, I suspect, Amtrak makes decisions for political rather than business reasons, in large part because it is a creature of our political system.
Thanks. Very clear picture of the cars to be repaired. Though I still wonder where all the Superliners went. Consists in 2009 certainly aren't any bigger than in 2004 and they covered the Sunset to Orlando then.... Possibly there are a bunch scrapped or beyond the economic limit of repair?[
Don,
Here is arundown of the list. Maybe this will give a clearer picture:
Of all the Superliner I and II's, there are 22 cars which have been scrapped, 11 coaches, 8 sleepers, 2 diners and 1 dorm. Of the remaining inventory, 42 were held for disposition. As of April 09, 20 of the 42 were selected for rebuild using stimulus funds. The remaining 22 are currently held pending final dispostion, i.e, scrapping or rebuild at a later date using unknown funding. The 22 "outlanders" are held for various reasons, mostly financial due to serious damage, I would expect. Of the original fleet, a total of 479 cars, 415 remain in service. The rebuilds will increase inventory to 435.
Inventory is adjusted daily for cars out for mechanical work, inspections, held in reserve, etc., so the in service number is usually less on a day to day basis. As you can see, 20 cars will hardly suffice for new or extended service if full consideration is given to other routes, i.e., Texas Eagle, Pioneer, Vegas, North Coast Hi, etc.
All the info is on public sites on the web and is frequently advertised as being from Amtrak public records.
Keep in mind that Amtrak ran the Sunset thrice weekly and at night through the Florida panhandle. I am sure a daily daylight train would attract better ridership.
Roy
Perhaps I'm out of line here, but I still strongly feel that so many of the Heritage Fleet coaches were retired prematurely. Even with the expense of retrofitting the toilet systems to get them EPA compliant, that seems like a far better route than the situation now in which there is a shortage of coaches. Add to that, the Heritage cars exhibited superior riding qualities.
Our Canadian neighbors managed to rebuild and continue to run their Budds years after Amtrak started retiring many of the Heritage units.
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
Sanford station is still there, still in terrible shape. I personally don't see the need for a major station renovation at Sanford, given that Winter Park is less than 20 minutes down the road. But if they do decide to use it, the station building needs some serious help.
I am not sure how feasible it would be, but couldn't Amtrak get better long term results from an Atlanta - Orlando route?
I rode the Sunset LTD NOL - ORL two weekends before Katrina hit, and I didn't get the impression of it as being an effecient train for the passenger. Granted, it was overnight to/from NOL, but it seemed to take a long time, and there were a lot of slow orders and long siding waits for passing CSX freights. Because it used to go all the way out to JAX, it seemed an ineffecient way to get from ORL to the state capital, albeit the only available train access at the time.
I think a train north from ORL through Tallahassee to Atlanta would be more useful to Florida riders, while allowing Crescent passengers from NOL a reasonable transfer. It would also open ORL to traffic / passengers from the Piedmont cities (Charlotte, Greensboro), as well as providing a more reasonable route between the capital and central FL.
Of course, there is also some discussion underway right now about a commuter rail system in FL that would move passengers Tampa - Orlando, Orlando - Tallahassee, and Jacksonville - Miami (along the eastern seaboard route instead of the current inland one). I don't know if Amtrak is taking that into consideration.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.