The new service from Seattle to Vancouver is an extension of a train that formerly originated in the morning and terminated at night in Bellingham. Does the crew now need to commute to Vancouver? I saw a schedule for the pre-Amtrak Internationals, and it appeared that the equipment and crew was based in Seattle. This would be more efficient for the railroad in terms of personnel and equipment, but less convenient for travelers.
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham
Maglev The new service from Seattle to Vancouver is an extension of a train that formerly originated in the morning and terminated at night in Bellingham. Does the crew now need to commute to Vancouver? I saw a schedule for the pre-Amtrak Internationals, and it appeared that the equipment and crew was based in Seattle. This would be more efficient for the railroad in terms of personnel and equipment, but less convenient for travelers.
Johnny
It would seem that the crew that arrived on the present Cascades in VAC 1135 would take the new morning trip back to SEA and the new arrival in VAC would take the afternoon trip to SEA??
Having done airline crew scheduling that is what I would do.
Blue Streak,
That's exactly what's happening.
Both crew ''sets'' Seattle-(interbay) based.
north on # 516 South on # 517 ( next day )
North on # 510 South on # 513 ( next day)
''Hours of rest'' structure prevents a same day turnaround.
Cheers
Claude
So both crews stay in a hotel overnight at Amtrak expense? And a train sits all day in Vancouver?
Is this the most efficient use of personnel and equipment? Whom do we serve, the customers or the infrastructure?
Maglev So both crews stay in a hotel overnight at Amtrak expense? And a train sits all day in Vancouver? Is this the most efficient use of personnel and equipment? Whom do we serve, the customers or the infrastructure?
Crew availability is limited by labor contracts and the Hours Of Service Law. How would you propose to evade these restrictions?
MaglevSo both crews stay in a hotel overnight at Amtrak expense? And a train sits all day in Vancouver? Is this the most efficient use of personnel and equipment? Whom do we serve, the customers or the infrastructure?
I imagine it might be more efficient if there were a more frequent service between Vancouver and Seattle. Regulatory laws that protect us would prohibit any other plan you might propose.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm Maglev So both crews stay in a hotel overnight at Amtrak expense? And a train sits all day in Vancouver? Is this the most efficient use of personnel and equipment? Whom do we serve, the customers or the infrastructure?
As long as any train lays over in Vancover for more than approximately 2 hrs that crew will need to overnight in Vancover (1 hr report + 4 hr trip to VAC+ 2 hr layover + 4:20 return to SEA+ :40 possible delays return to SEA = 12:00 on duty Max hours of service>
I am certainly not proposing to evade any laws nor inconvenience Amtrak's workers further. On the contrary, Amtrak needs more funding and support to make employees' lives easier. Improved speed and increased frequency would not only attract more passengers, but also make it possible for some of the crews to return home every night. With such limited frequencies, the trains do not connect well with the Empire Builder or Coast Starlight. For me, the added service runs on the same schedule at Mount Vernon and still does not connect with ferries from Orcas Island or Victoria. It's only 150 miles from Seattle to Vancouver, so a four-hour trip is pretty slow.
When we say "trains are too expensive," there is a lot of extra expense from their being so limited in ability to service customers and employees.
MaglevWhen we say "trains are too expensive," there is a lot of extra expense from their being so limited in ability to service customers and employees.
Maglev I think this is preaching to the choir. Have not been to Pacific Central station since before 911. At that time even though the station is large the customs holding area was small and was used by both Canadian customs and US customs.. The inbounds will need clearing before the US destination persons can enter. That and required cleaning makes any turn less than 2 hrs highly unlikely.
Improved speed and increased frequency would not only attract more passengers, but also make it possible for some of the crews to return home every night.
I know the first 5 - 8 miles in SEA is along the waterfront so a speed of 30MPH probably in force. Almost every street going to the waterfront crosses the tracks after they exit the tunnel is at grade (I-5 is above). Someone who lives in the area can elaborate on the various speed restrictions. 4 hr = 39MPH average.
blue streak 1 MaglevWhen we say "trains are too expensive," there is a lot of extra expense from their being so limited in ability to service customers and employees. Maglev I think this is preaching to the choir. Have not been to Pacific Central station since before 911. At that time even though the station is large the customs holding area was small and was used by both Canadian customs and US customs.. The inbounds will need clearing before the US destination persons can enter. That and required cleaning makes any turn less than 2 hrs highly unlikely. Improved speed and increased frequency would not only attract more passengers, but also make it possible for some of the crews to return home every night. I know the first 5 - 8 miles in SEA is along the waterfront so a speed of 30MPH probably in force. Almost every street going to the waterfront crosses the tracks after they exit the tunnel is at grade (I-5 is above). Someone who lives in the area can elaborate on the various speed restrictions. 4 hr = 39MPH average.
You mention the speed restrictions north of King Street in Seattle. You who have been to Vancouver know that west of the Fraser River the line is anything but straight, and incoming trains are turned before they go on in to the station--so much time is consumed in covering the thirteen or so miles.
As to customs, I do not remember how it was when we went to Vancouver in '89, but this past spring we were passed through quickly. Coming south, in '03 and '07, going through Immigration and Customs did take a little longer.
DeggestyYou mention the speed restrictions north of King Street in Seattle. You who have been to Vancouver know that west of the Fraser River the line is anything but straight, and incoming trains are turned before they go on in to the station--so much time is consumed in covering the thirteen or so miles.
Forgot about the turning and the Fraser River restrictions. Another point for the slow times
Re; Fraser river trackage: in anticipation of a 2nd RT VAC-SEA,, BNSF had done its part of the deal and improved right of way quite substantially.. Higher speed now permitted ( NOT ''high"" speed but '' higher than before''....)
Re; turning on wye before entering depot: all SEA-VAC Talgo trains operate ''push pull''mode, thus this is no longer necessary. Saves a good 10-12 minutes right at the mouth of the station ( which is still CN territory.......)
cheers
CG
CG and others--
Thanks for the comments. I would still like to know more about the crew situation--what is their home base? Can Amtrak hire Canadian crews? And did the Internationals' crews do a turn-around trip the same day?
I also suggest that it is inefficient for a train to sit idle for six hours in the middle of the day
Whom do we serve, the infrastructure or the customers? I face that question at the five-building hotel where I work. When occupancy is low, should we group guests together to make it easier on the room attendants and houseboy (me)? Or is it better to give people more privacy--even though this means that service quality declines and costs increase?
Pulama!
Phil
Maglev CG and others-- Thanks for the comments. I would still like to know more about the crew situation--what is their home base? They are based in SEA. Can Amtrak hire Canadian crews? Not likely this is a trackage rights on BNSF except CN from Vancover Jct to the end of track at Pacific Central station. At the risk of being PC this is a train subsidized by US taxpayers and as such AMTRAK should use US operating crews The Canadian crews would be paid the same anyway and you then transfer the hotel and Layover costs from VAC to SEA. I have not heard of any Canadian money for this operation and in fact station services (agents, cleaners, caterers car and locomotive inspectors, etc), are probably all VIA employees (or contractors) that AMTRAK pays VIA to get these services performed. The only exception is probably the station manager who is a US citizen employed by AMTRAK. And did the Internationals' crews do a turn-around trip the same day? Someone? I also suggest that it is inefficient for a train to sit idle for six hours in the middle of the day. Only if the revenue received from additional trips are more than the operating costs. If the R/OC is close then it may be inefficient. That may be especially true when operating during the Winter Olympics. Remember Canadian customs was very reluctant to allow just the second train to VAC (wanted lots of money but did not get the money). Getting track time may be a problem? When Sound transit completes their track work from Everett to SEA (very busy BNSF freight) then maybe transit times can be reduced. (now 51 min to possibily 40 min Whom do we serve, the infrastructure or the customers? I do not know the track capacity situation from Everett to Vancover.
Thanks for the comments. I would still like to know more about the crew situation--what is their home base? They are based in SEA.
Can Amtrak hire Canadian crews? Not likely this is a trackage rights on BNSF except CN from Vancover Jct to the end of track at Pacific Central station. At the risk of being PC this is a train subsidized by US taxpayers and as such AMTRAK should use US operating crews The Canadian crews would be paid the same anyway and you then transfer the hotel and Layover costs from VAC to SEA.
I have not heard of any Canadian money for this operation and in fact station services (agents, cleaners, caterers car and locomotive inspectors, etc), are probably all VIA employees (or contractors) that AMTRAK pays VIA to get these services performed. The only exception is probably the station manager who is a US citizen employed by AMTRAK.
And did the Internationals' crews do a turn-around trip the same day? Someone?
I also suggest that it is inefficient for a train to sit idle for six hours in the middle of the day.
Only if the revenue received from additional trips are more than the operating costs. If the R/OC is close then it may be inefficient. That may be especially true when operating during the Winter Olympics. Remember Canadian customs was very reluctant to allow just the second train to VAC (wanted lots of money but did not get the money). Getting track time may be a problem? When Sound transit completes their track work from Everett to SEA (very busy BNSF freight) then maybe transit times can be reduced. (now 51 min to possibily 40 min
Whom do we serve, the infrastructure or the customers?
I do not know the track capacity situation from Everett to Vancover.
blue streak 1 And did the Internationals' crews do a turn-around trip the same day? Someone?
I do not know for sure, but I doubt that the Internationals’ crews made a turn-around trip the same day. Consider the fact that at that time, 150 miles was the basic day for passenger train crews, and 100 miles was the basic day for all engine crews. Thus, a one way trip constituted a trifle more than one day’s work for the train crew, and a little more than a day and a half’s work for the engine crew. It may be that the crews of the morning trains came back the same day, and the train crews then had a day off the next day, and the engine crews had two days off before going out again. Or the crews of the mid-day trains came back the same day and then had the same time off. The train crews of the third schedule would then work every day–out one day, and back the next. The engine crews may have worked two days out of three, since they received a day and a half’s pay for each trip. And, every crews may have made only one trip a day.
Each road had its agreements with the unions. The main passenger line of the IC’s Louisiana Division had two subs–Canton to Mc Comb (crew base) and McComb to New Orleans, and each sub was approximately 100 miles long (the north end of the freight line, McComb to Gwin, was about 130 miles long, and engine and train crews preferred being called to go north). Each engine crew ran the length of the sub, and the day was done. Passenger train crews would go out on their trains one day–and come back home, on the same train, 24 hours later and they would then be home for 24 hours, giving them 400 miles every other day. Except for the City of New Orleans, the crews changed out southbound. The Panama’s crews worked the Panama only, the City’s crews worked the City only. The southbound Louisiane’s crews took the Creole north, and the Southern Express’ crew took the Louisiane north.
Can we find someone who worked the Internationals? Or, someone who knew a crewman?
Regarding the track north of Everett, I think it is double track as far as Mount Vernon. The southbound train stops here just before the northbound train in the morning and evening. Track quality is also an issue north of Mount Vernon.
The "150 mile limit" for crews seems odd, even in the old days. Did trains use nine crews on the way from New York to Florida, or three crews between Boston and Washington?
We
MaglevDid trains use nine crews on the way from New York to Florida, or three crews between Boston and Washington?
Well the FEC used three. JAX - New Smyrna Beach; NSB - Ft. Pierce; FT P - MIA
Must have ridden the Internationals at least twenty times per year round trip from Seattle to visit grandparents in Vancouver for a period of eight years. The family left the car a King St. Station and boarded the last International of the day on Friday and after arrival in Vancouver picked up car left by grandfather at Great Northern Station in Vancouver. We always returned on the afternoon International on Sunday unless it was holiday weekend. We got to know all of the regular crew members. I may be wrong but I beleive all crew were based out of Seattle there were no Canadian crew on the Internationals. It was always different crews going then on the return which would leave me to believe that evening crew to Vancouver became the next morning International crew back to Seattle. I don't know but I would think the Morning International crew from Seattle would be the returning Afternoon International crew from Vancouver. The same with the Afternoon International crew from Seattle would be the evening International crew out of Vancouver. When service was cut to two Internationals that would have eliminated some crews or they bid elsewhere. I also remember the Seattle based crews for the GN Cascadian operated traveled from Seattle to Spokane then laid over and returned the next day These were the onboard crews not Engineers, Conductors and Brakemen. I have no idea how they worked. The Internationals required 4 hours to go from Seattle to Vancouver. The GN Cascadians required eight hours to go from Seattle to Spokane if I remember correctly.
Al - in - Stockton
blue streak 1 WeMaglevDid trains use nine crews on the way from New York to Florida, or three crews between Boston and Washington? Well the FEC used three. JAX - New Smyrna Beach; NSB - Ft. Pierce; FT P - MIA
My experiences riding the NE Corridor:
When I rode the Turbotrain from Back Bay to Grand Central (about 156 228 miles) in September of 1969, the engine crew changed in New Haven (about 156 miles) (I sat behind the fireman all the way); I do not know if the train crew changed or not. This gave the engine crew a day and a half’s pay east of New Haven–and would have given the train crew a little over one day’s pay. Then, again, the union agreement may have been that, even though it was a little over the basic day, it constituted one day’s work. (In 1964, I rode the overnight train from Atlanta to Nashville; as we were going into Nashville, the conductor told me that the Atlanta-Chattanooga train crew was paid for a full day’s work for the 133.7 miles, and he received only one day’s pay for his 151.5 miles.) Since the engines were changed in New Haven (unless an FL-9 took the train all the way), the engine crews on the other trains changed there. Whether or not an engine crew received a full day’s pay for the seventy plus miles between New York and New Haven, or they made a return trip in their work day and thus received about a day and a half’s pay, I do not know.
Going to Boston on that same trip, I rode from Penn Station to South Station. I may have been given a hat check to show the New Haven conductor that I was going all the way; I do not remember.
On my other trips between New York and Boston, I rode first class, so I was not bothered between New York and Boston, and so I have no sure knowledge.
In April of 1970, I rode the Metroliner from Washington to New York, standing in the front vestibule most of the way, and did not notice any engineer change.
It has been my impression that train crews, at least, went all the way between these two cities. In July of 1971, I took the National Limited from Washington to Jefferson City, and the Conductor out of Washington told me that Amtrak was extending the workday of the train crews; I remember that it was having them make a round trip every day.
South of Washington:
As to south of Washington, the RF&P crews ran, of course, between Washington and Richmond (113.5 miles to Broad Street; 116.5 miles to Main Street) ACL train crews, I believe, changed at Florence and Savannah. Engine crews may have changed at Rocky Mount, Florence, Charleston, and Savannah. SAL train crews rode, I believe between Richmond and Columbia; engine crews may well have changed at Raleigh and Hamlet. I am not sure about changes between Columbia and Jacksonville.
As blue streak 1 told us, the FEC used three crews between Jacksonville and Miami (when I rode from West Palm Beach to Jacksonville in October of 1967, it was different; being struck by the unions, the FEC had the crews of the northbound start back home when the southbound was met, and the crews of the southbound also went back home after meeting the northbound).
Between Jacksonville and Tampa, the crews changed at Sanford, which was originally the junction of the Tropical Trunk Line (Jax-Sanford) and the South Florida Division of the Plant System.
When I rode the City of Miami from Birmingham to Hialeah in February of 1970, one train crew took the train from Jax to Miami–going through Sanford and Auburndale (junction of the A & S lines of the ACL and SAL) as though they did not exist.
My only experience with crew changes on ACL’s Jacksonville-St. Petersburg line was in February of 1971, when I was going from St. Pete to Birmingham on the City of Miami. The South Wind was running late, and we met just outside Jacksonville–and the crews changed at that point and went back to their home terminals.
As I commented in an earlier post, each road had its own agreements with the unions. And, each agreement was worked out with consideration of the location of the division points, since it was impossible to have all division points exactly 100 or 150 miles apart. Though, why SAL passenger train crews went through Hamlet, which was a division point, I do not know.
DeggestyAs to south of Washington, the RF&P crews ran, of course, between Washington and Richmond (113.5 miles to Broad Street; 116.5 miles to Main Street) ACL train crews, I believe, changed at Florence and Savannah.
Johnny there was one more engine crew out of Wash. I will give a WASH - New Orleans trip.
1. SOU (dont know about the RF&P) ran smokeless steam engines in and out of WASH. The Loco and engine crew changed at Alexandria (great pay day sometimes if short of crews engine crew could get 4 days pay). I dont know if it changed before AMTRAK took over the Cresent.
2. Eng and N&W crew at Lynchburg.
3. Crew change at Roanoke sometimes engine.
4. SOU Crew and loco (except after 1956) at Bristol..
5. SOU Crew change Knoxville.
6. SOU (AGS) Crew change at Chatanooga sometimes loco.
7. SOU (NONE) Crew change at Birmingham sometimes loco.
8. Tuscaloosa (?)
9. SOU (NONE) crew change at Meredian
10. SOU (NONE) engine Crew change at Hattiesburg (train crew unknown)
blue streak 1 DeggestyAs to south of Washington, the RF&P crews ran, of course, between Washington and Richmond (113.5 miles to Broad Street; 116.5 miles to Main Street) ACL train crews, I believe, changed at Florence and Savannah. Johnny there was one more engine crew out of Wash. I will give a WASH - New Orleans trip. 1. SOU (dont know about the RF&P) ran smokeless steam engines in and out of WASH. The Loco and engine crew changed at Alexandria (great pay day sometimes if short of crews engine crew could get 4 days pay). I dont know if it changed before AMTRAK took over the Cresent. 2. Eng and N&W crew at Lynchburg. 3. Crew change at Roanoke sometimes engine. 4. SOU Crew and loco (except after 1956) at Bristol.. 5. SOU Crew change Knoxville. 6. SOU (AGS) Crew change at Chatanooga sometimes loco. 7. SOU (NONE) Crew change at Birmingham sometimes loco. 8. Tuscaloosa (?) 9. SOU (NONE) crew change at Meredian 10. SOU (NONE) engine Crew change at Hattiesburg (train crew unknown)
A few corrections and additions.
1. I had not heard of the change of steam engines in Alexandria.
2. The engine and crew change was at Monroe (Sou division point; "they handed him his orders in Monroe, Virginia....") and not at Lynchburg. (the Southern timetables issued from the time that that the Southern began using diesel power until the diesel engines ran through show the engine change at Monroe and at Bristol).
3. Yes; the N&W engines on some trains ran through Roanoke, and others were changed there (see the account of N&W steam power in Trains (I think it starts on p. 18 of the November, 1954 issue); it gives the regular assignment of the J's).
4. 31 December 1957 was the last day that N&W steam powered the through trains regularly; after that the Southern engines ran through Washington to Memphis, Birmingham, or New Orleans. I rode the Tennessean from Chattanooga to Bristol soon after the change; I think it was the second or third day of through operation; we had EMD units and not PA's on the point. From September of 1954 (when I started to college in Bristol) into December of 1957, I went into town, when I had the opportunity, to see the J's.
5. Yes, both engine and train crews changed in Knoxville. Hat checks were issued on the Tennessean and the Birmingham Special so that coach passengere were not disturbed in Knoxville. These hat checks showed the names of all the stops between Bristol and Chattanooga, inclusive.
6. Leaving the Southern and entering the AGS (and vice-versa), both crews were changed in Chattanooga. I don't know about engine changes. There was headend car switching in Chattanooga.
7. Northbound, brakemen ran through Birmingham (brakemen coming in on the Southerner went out on the Birmingham Special, conductors and enginemen changed both ways; Again, I do not know of any engine change.
8.No change in Tuscaloosa.
9. Leaving the AGS and entering the NO&NE (and vice-versa), all crews changed.
10. Train crews ran through between Meridian and New Orleans (based in Meridian, I believe), and I believe that engine crews changed in Hattiesburg.
Washington-Atlanta-Birmingham-New Orleans:
Train crews ran Washington-Spencer (actually Salisbury, since this was the passenger stop), and Salisbury-Atlanta; engine crews changed at Monroe, Salisbury, and Greenville. Atlanta-Birmingham was the next leg, and then (except that no crews ran on both AGS and Southern), it was the same into New Orleans as above.
The West Point-L&N Route had one crew between Atlanta and Montgomery, one between Montgomery and Mobile, and one between Mobile and New Orleans. (the L&N Gulf Wind crews changed at Pensacola, Flomaton, and Mobile)
.Johnny
On most of the Amtrak long distance trains I have ridden, the on-board service crew stays for the entire trip. I remember once on the California Zephyr our sleeper attendant changed en-route; she made a point of telling everyone because this was not the usual practice (and she wanted her share of any tips?).
It is my impression that airline crews work up to eight hours. This was a big issue when I lived in Hawaii: non-stop flights to Chicago or St. Louis were about eight hours, and the airlines did not want to invest in extra crews or crew rest space both on the planes and during layovers.
MaglevOn most of the Amtrak long distance trains I have ridden, the on-board service crew stays for the entire trip. I remember once on the California Zephyr our sleeper attendant changed en-route; she made a point of telling everyone because this was not the usual practice (and she wanted her share of any tips?).
Yes, except for the Texas Eagle, I do not know of any exception except for the on-board service crews on the Texas Eagle, who change at San Antonio. I do not remember our attendant saying anything about her getting off at San Antonio when we rode from Chicago to Los Angeles several years ago. Her relief was much friendlier.
Maglev It is my impression that airline crews work up to eight hours. This was a big issue when I lived in Hawaii: non-stop flights to Chicago or St. Louis were about eight hours, and the airlines did not want to invest in extra crews or crew rest space both on the planes and during layovers.
That was not a the FAA regulation.
The eight hour flight crew flying time is only on continental US flights. Since Hawaii, SANJuan, Carribean to the mainland or Alaska to the mainline is over international waters or over Canada those flight are considered international and three crew planes (either Captain, co-pilot, Flight engineer : or 2 Captains and one co-pilot) are limited to 12 hours flight time. A 2 man crew is limited to 8 hrs international or domestic. Now depending on the year pilot contracts may have limited all crews to 8 hours no matter where flown. EAL had that until the late 1970s. On duty times are another thing and get quite complicated but all basic crews can stay on duty 16 hours max.
Concerning crew changes on the Washington-Bristol line:
Deggesty2. The engine and crew change was at Monroe (Sou division point; "they handed him his orders in Monroe, Virginia....") and not at Lynchburg. (the Southern timetables issued from the time that that the Southern began using diesel power until the diesel engines ran through show the engine change at Monroe and at Bristol).
I was thinking about the engine crew, and not the train crew, when I wrote this. Since at that time Southern's Washington Division engine crews apparently ran only Washington-Monroe, the N&W ran its engines and enginemen into and out of Monroe. However, Southern's passenger trainmen would run through Monroe, to Salisbury (on the Danville Division), on the trains that stayed on the Southern south of Lynchburg, so the N&W and Sou train crews would change at Lynchburg, and not at Monroe.
One thing that has never been explained to me is why passenger engine crews had the same basic day that freight train and engine crews had--100 miles, while passenger train crews had a basic day of 150 miles. Perhaps because the engine crews had a much more demanding job than the train crews had?
An aside: As the "Wreck of the Old Ninety-seven" was written, the engineer was told that he had "...to get her in Spencer on time...." This made sense to the people of area at the time, for they knew where Spencer is. In the not too distant past, I heard it sung that he had "...to get her in Atlanta ("Spencer" scans; "Atlanta" does not) on time...." Evidently the rewriter had no idea as to where Spencer is, nor any idea as to the distance from Monroe to Spencer (166 miles) or the distance from Monroe to Atlanta (468 miles).
Blue Streak--
You have jarred my memory--the Hawaii airplane crew issue had to do with a third flight crew member on flights that were scheduled for under eight hours, but in fact averaged longer. TWA's Maui to St. Louis 767 was affected, and I think this contributed to the demise of United's non-stops from Chicago (a third engine on United's DC-10's also created inefficiency...)
Am I correct about service personnel on long-distance trains?
Magleva third engine on United's DC-10's also created inefficiency...)
Actually a DC-10 is a three man crew so flying tiime limits 12 Hrs. The CF-6 engines were fairly efficient. More likely lack of traffic and if the trip was not daily a long costly layover delay for crews.
Maglev Am I correct about service personnel on long-distance trains?
Sorry but I cannot answer that question. A wild guess is that those crews scheduled for 36 hours or less do not change. Above that figure I think it depends. Anone know about specific runs?. The only one I remember is that Sunset crews changed in New Orleans when it went to Florida.
Maglevthe Hawaii airplane crew issue had to do with a third flight crew member on flights that were scheduled for under eight hours, but in fact averaged longer. TWA's Maui to St. Louis 767 was affected,
Yes if a 2 man flying crew is scheduled under 8 but actually goes over 8 they are required to have twice the flying time off duty. ie 9 hrs flying time 18 Hrs off duty + 15min for debrief + 1:00 to 1:30 briefing time. Puts a flying crew back of the clock. ie fly 9:00 arrival at XYZ at 0400 = 2215 on duty for 23:15 departure. These rules are subject to change in the near future.
Deggesty MaglevOn most of the Amtrak long distance trains I have ridden, the on-board service crew stays for the entire trip. I remember once on the California Zephyr our sleeper attendant changed en-route; she made a point of telling everyone because this was not the usual practice (and she wanted her share of any tips?). Yes, except for the Texas Eagle, I do not know of any exception except for the on-board service crews on the Texas Eagle, who change at San Antonio. I do not remember our attendant saying anything about her getting off at San Antonio when we rode from Chicago to Los Angeles several years ago. Her relief was much friendlier. Johnny
On the Texas Eagle (21 & 22) in Texas, the engineer changes at Marshall, Fort Worth and Austin. The Austin driver takes the train to San Antonio or brings it from San Antonio to Austin. It must be one of the shortest legs on Amtrak's long haul system. I think the rationale for changing drivers in Austin has to do with the time keeping problems experienced by the Eagle, which have pretty much been corrected by the reduction in freight traffic due to the recession, but I am not sure.
The conductor and train persons change at Marshall and Fort Worth. The Fort Worth crew goes through to San Antonio and vice versa for the San Antonio crew.
The sleeping car and coach attendants service their cars from Chicago to San Antonio as does the lounge car attendant. However, the dinning car crew gets off at Austin. Thus, there is no breakfast service in the dinning car leaving San Antonio, and sleeping car passengers are served a cold breakfast. It was lousy the last two times that I had it.
The attendant for the through Eagle sleeper to or from Los Angeles is or at least was a LA based crew member. He or she gets off or on the train in San Antonio. On the east bound run the LA crew member stays on the sleeper until approximately 6:00 a.m., when he or she is relieved by the person who will service the car to Chicago. I am not sure when the crew change occurs on the west bound run.
Although Amtrak shows the Eagle as a Chicago to LA train, their doing so is disingenuous. Two cars (sleeper and coach) are transferred to the Sunset Limited, which at least for now is the real through train.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.