Having just made this connection yesterday/today, I can't say how awesome it would have been if I was on a through sleeper instead of having to get off at 5am and sit in the lousy excuse for a station that Pittsburgh has become with the modern structure for 2 1/2 hours. At least it was manned, and they gladly held my luggage so I could use the restroom (traveling by myself, so no one to watch things for me).
Don't know about weekdays, but I'd say at least 75% and possibly more of the people boarding this mornin'gs 42 came off of yesterday's 30. Though there were only 2 others besides myself who came off the sleeper.
Even more, I don't get what's up with not adding capacity, the Cap is continually sold out - in fact the only reason I had a roomette was that coach was sold out, over a week in advance. Seems like there's more revenue to be had.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
The Capitol Limited was mixed heritage/Amfleet II until the Superliner II cars were delivered in 1995-1996. The use of a single level connecting sleeper would not have been an issue.
I understand that my first great grandchild is expected in January--so it may not be much longer?
Johnny
Sam1 It appears the team that recommended a through sleeper from the Pennsylvanian to the Capitol Limited and vice versa did not think through all the problems doing so would entail.
It appears the team that recommended a through sleeper from the Pennsylvanian to the Capitol Limited and vice versa did not think through all the problems doing so would entail.
In the Warrington regime, the "Pennsylvanian" operated as a Chicago-Philadelphia day train primarily for mail and express. Consists were usually a baggage car, one or two coaches, a snack-bar-coach, and about 20-30 express boxes and Roadrailers. The "Skyline Connection" was a proposed Chicago-New York schedule which never operated.
My son and I rode the Three Rivers in the summer of 2004 in the Viewliner sleeper from NYP to Chicago. The trip was great through Pittsburg. The food in the dinette was adequate and the SCA was good. In fact I believed they changed SCA's in Pittsburg. We were OT into Pittsburg, around 11 PM. We left Pittsburg and I fell asleep. Woke up the next morning and realized the train was not moving. We were stuck in eastern Ohio on the CSX waiting for a new crew. Apparently during the night we got stuck around a CSX yard due to freight congestion. Since we were going to Nebraska we were ticketed on the Zephyr that evening. Suffice to say we did not make our connection in Chicago, the line at customer service was too long, so we took a cab to Midway and flew to Omaha on Southwest. One other thing...the dinette totally ran out of food...the only thing they had left during most of the day between Ohio and Chicago was Snicker's bars. Quite the trip!
The Pennsylvanian is a Pittsburgh to New York Penn Station train. If it had a connecting Superliner sleeper and coach from or to the Capitol, the cars could not operate through the Hudson River tubes into Penn Station. I am not sure whether they would fit into 30th Street Station.
If the decision were to use Superliners for the through cars, a transition car would be necessary since the Pennsylvania has single level cars. When I rode it last summer it had four coaches and a food service/business class car.
Even if the high level cars could fit through the tunnels into Penn Station, Amtrak does not have enough high level cars to re-equip the Pennsylvanian.
I just spent some time looking through my collection of Amtrak timetables (some issues are missing), and here are my findings on the New York-Pittsburg-Chicago service.
The Broadway was still in the Fall-Winter 1994-95 timetable.
The Three Rivers, with coaches only, appeared in the Fall-Winter 1995-96 timetable. The Spring-Summer 2000 issue as a Heritage sleeper, which continued through the Spring-Summer 2001 issue. a Viewliner sleeper appeared in the Fall-Winter 2001-02 issue. The Fall-Winter 2005-06 issue does not have the Three Rivers or through service, and no succeeding issue shows any through service via Pittsburgh.
I made no note of the dates, but there was a time when the Pennsylvanian ran through as a separate train, with coach only service. Also, the Skyline Connection, with a Viewliner sleeper is shown in the same issues--with the note that service was to begin on a date that is to be announced; the date was never announced.
Back in the late 1980's-early 1990's, there was a through Heritage sleeper from the New York-Pittsburgh "Three Rivers" that continued to Chicago on the "Capitol". My memory is a bit rusty so somebody else may be able to fill in the details.
Superliners are rarely restricted by physical clearance issues on main lines that handle freight equipment. Their 16 ' 4" height is 6" taller than traditional Budd Dome cars and other similar height cars. The bigger issue is possible contact with the overhead wire east of Harrisburg and on the Corridor. Superliners regularly operate under wire on the north (non-tunnel) approach to Washington Union Station on the Capitol Limited, and have operated into Philadelphia on special movements. Virginia Railway Express operates ex-C&NW 15' 10" bilevels through the First St. Tunnel so there must be sufficient clearance for them, though maybe not for Superliners - at least with the overhead power on. Baltimore's tunnels had (and may still have) gauntlet tracks for high equipment. A bigger issue is that all Corridor stations have high level platforms - not a good fit for Superliners! (DC has both high and low-level platfroms.) New York tunnels also have LIRR third rail which Superliners may not clear. Amtrak's height restriction in the New York Teminal district with AC power on was 16' 1 1/2".
pgatonna By the way, where is the height limitation that prohibits Superliner equipment on this route, in 30th Street Station?
By the way, where is the height limitation that prohibits Superliner equipment on this route, in 30th Street Station?
I imagine that there are several restricted clearances. The most difficult would have to be the Penn Station tubes below the Hudson & East Rivers. The tunnel approaches to Baltimore and to Washington Union stations come to mind, too. Possibly some bridges, too?
Like you, Sam, I don't know how Amtrak makes its projections. Amtrak could do market research by conducting a telephone survey and that research would have to be statistically valid and reliable. Maybe they do and maybe they don't and if they do it at all I don't know whether or not they do it on the Pennsylvanian.
They can also look at the trends based on their own sales of tickets. For that they have all of the data they need.
John
John WR Sam1 Once thing is reasonably certain. Their numbers are based on statistical samples Why do you say this, Sam? Amtrak doesn't have to take a statistical sample. It has a census of the whole population of Amtrak riders. I don't know how Amtrak makes its projections. I have heard making projections is like driving your car by blacking out the windshield and looking through the rear view mirror. But projections are widely used. John
Sam1 Once thing is reasonably certain. Their numbers are based on statistical samples
Why do you say this, Sam? Amtrak doesn't have to take a statistical sample. It has a census of the whole population of Amtrak riders.
I don't know how Amtrak makes its projections. I have heard making projections is like driving your car by blacking out the windshield and looking through the rear view mirror. But projections are widely used.
Amtrak knows how many tickets it lifts and, therefore, how many passengers connect to or from the Pennsylvanian and Capitol Limited in Pittsburgh. This is descriptive statistics. Projecting how many people might ride a through coach and sleeping car from the Pennsylvania to the Capitol Limited and vice versa requires the use of inferential statistics. Amtrak does not tell us how it derived its estimates for this proposed enhancement.
The most effective way to determine the likely ridership would be to take a statistical sample of the population of potential riders. The population must be defined carefully, e.g. anyone over 18 and under 80 with sufficient income to be able to travel commercially.
The size of the sample would be a function of the confidence level, confidence interval, and sampling error. Whether the sample would be with or without replication would also impact its size. The sample must be random. That is to say, everyone in the population must have an equal probability of being selected.
The researchers must determine the best way to get the information, i.e. telephone interviews, questionnaires, personal interviews, focus groups, etc. They must build the queries so as not to bias the outcomes. These are challenging tasks. Most market research does not go beyond telephone interviews and follow-up questionnaires. It is too expensive. However, our company made extensive use of focus groups as to prepare for competition in the deregulated Texas electricity market.
The researchers must project the results of the sample to the population as a whole as a range of potential outcomes. The range will be a function of the tightness of the sampling construct, i.e. we are 95 per confident with a margin of error of plus or minus three per cent that the potential number of riders for a through coach and sleeper from the Pennsylvanian to the Capitol Limited is 18 passengers per car per trip. They cannot, however, project one number. At least not if they adhere to valid statistical sampling techniques!
If Amtrak knows the current number of coach passengers that transfer from the Pennsylvanian to the Capitol Limited in Pittsburgh and, further, if it has collected the data for a more than five years, it could use regression analysis to project the number of people who would ride a connecting coach and sleeper from points east of Pittsburgh to points west of the Iron City. However, this projection would be biased because it does not take into consideration the market appeal for people who might use a through connection but shun the current arrangement because of the inconvenience of a late night or early morning transfer in Pittsburgh. Again, however, depending on the results of the regression analysis, the researcher could only come up with a range of potential riders and not an absolute number.
Amtrak's numbers don't suggest anything more than relatively high level market surveys, if that, but I could be wrong. One thing, however, is certain. As soon as it says that the potential ridership for a new service is XX, they probably are wrong or would only be correct coincidentally.
If market trending data and projections are done with the right tools, they can result in some pretty accurate projections. However, one should never lose sight of the fact that market projections, like political, economic, and stock market projections, are at least partially a fools game.
bill613aAccording to one person after the train arrives in Pittsburgh it continues west where it either wyes or goes on a balloon track at Conway yard (he wasn't sure which-anybody know for sure?).
It wyes at Island Ave.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Alan,
Thanks for the update. John
blue streak 1 Alan F The Viewliner II order with CAF has options for up to 70 additional cars, but the options are only for baggage, baggage-dorms, sleeper, diner cars. Any order for coach cars, based on the Viewliner II design or not, would be an entirely new order which would have to go through an open bid process. As for the options, alan: Where did you source this ? I had not ever been able to know the exact order with CAF.
Alan F The Viewliner II order with CAF has options for up to 70 additional cars, but the options are only for baggage, baggage-dorms, sleeper, diner cars. Any order for coach cars, based on the Viewliner II design or not, would be an entirely new order which would have to go through an open bid process. As for the options,
The Viewliner II order with CAF has options for up to 70 additional cars, but the options are only for baggage, baggage-dorms, sleeper, diner cars. Any order for coach cars, based on the Viewliner II design or not, would be an entirely new order which would have to go through an open bid process. As for the options,
alan: Where did you source this ? I had not ever been able to know the exact order with CAF.
IIRC, the 70 car option was mentioned in the news releases when the order with CAF was announced. The breakdown of the CAF options was widely discussed on other forums such as Amtrak Unlimited and railroad.net.
Sam1 If the state legislature failed to pass an budget and appropriations bill for the coming FY year, where does the PADOT get the money to continue the Pennsylvania?
If the state legislature failed to pass an budget and appropriations bill for the coming FY year, where does the PADOT get the money to continue the Pennsylvania?
The PA State legislature passed a budget on June 30. They ended up dropping the gas tax and transportation funding increase at the last minute because of disagreements on how much, how quickly, and how to allocate the additional funds between the state Senate and House. Really hurt SEPTA which is badly in need of additional capital funding for maintenance and improvement projects.
I was incorrect, the subsidy agreed to by Amtrak and PennDOT is $3.8 million for the next year. PennDOT has $20 million in unallocated transportation money that they were likely keeping in reserve for short notice outlays. See http://triblive.com/news/adminpage/4296700-74/million-penndot-service#axzz2ZSc3DHoV
Alan F Sam1 Has the Pennsylvania Legislature ponied up the $4.5 to $6 million per year to continue the Pennsylvanian? According to a story that appeared several months ago in the New York Times, the jury was out on whether the legislature would put up the money. If the state does not fund the train, it is probably history. What is the market demand for a through sleeping car from Newark, Trenton, Philadelphia, Paoli, etc.? If it is not sufficient to generate enough revenue to off set the incremental cost of the service, Amtrak should not be adding any capacity anywhere. PA has agreed to provide $4.8 million in subsidy for the Pennsylvanian service. This was restated by PennDOT after the state legislature failed in the last day before the July 1 budget bill had to be passed to come to an agreement to raise the state gas tax and increase transportation funding. The state legislature will try again in the fall on gas taxes and increasing state transportation funding, but the Pennsylvanian is safe for the next year at least. As for market demand, read the 2010 PRIIA Capitol Limited Product Improvement Plan report which discusses adding the through cars from the Pennsylvanian (On the Amtrak website on the Reports & Documents page). The 2010 report predicts an increase of 20,400 in ridership and a 4% improvement in the cost recovery ratio. The ridership increase projection is likely on the conservative side. The plan has been around since 2010, but Amtrak has not been able to implement it because they don't have 3 Viewliner sleepers available for the 3 train sets (one Viewliner sleeper, 2 Amfeet IIs, 1 Amfleet cafe car per pass-through set). The delivery of the Viewliner II sleepers will fix the shortage.
Sam1 Has the Pennsylvania Legislature ponied up the $4.5 to $6 million per year to continue the Pennsylvanian? According to a story that appeared several months ago in the New York Times, the jury was out on whether the legislature would put up the money. If the state does not fund the train, it is probably history. What is the market demand for a through sleeping car from Newark, Trenton, Philadelphia, Paoli, etc.? If it is not sufficient to generate enough revenue to off set the incremental cost of the service, Amtrak should not be adding any capacity anywhere.
Has the Pennsylvania Legislature ponied up the $4.5 to $6 million per year to continue the Pennsylvanian? According to a story that appeared several months ago in the New York Times, the jury was out on whether the legislature would put up the money. If the state does not fund the train, it is probably history.
What is the market demand for a through sleeping car from Newark, Trenton, Philadelphia, Paoli, etc.? If it is not sufficient to generate enough revenue to off set the incremental cost of the service, Amtrak should not be adding any capacity anywhere.
PA has agreed to provide $4.8 million in subsidy for the Pennsylvanian service. This was restated by PennDOT after the state legislature failed in the last day before the July 1 budget bill had to be passed to come to an agreement to raise the state gas tax and increase transportation funding. The state legislature will try again in the fall on gas taxes and increasing state transportation funding, but the Pennsylvanian is safe for the next year at least.
As for market demand, read the 2010 PRIIA Capitol Limited Product Improvement Plan report which discusses adding the through cars from the Pennsylvanian (On the Amtrak website on the Reports & Documents page). The 2010 report predicts an increase of 20,400 in ridership and a 4% improvement in the cost recovery ratio. The ridership increase projection is likely on the conservative side. The plan has been around since 2010, but Amtrak has not been able to implement it because they don't have 3 Viewliner sleepers available for the 3 train sets (one Viewliner sleeper, 2 Amfeet IIs, 1 Amfleet cafe car per pass-through set). The delivery of the Viewliner II sleepers will fix the shortage.
The PRIIA Capitol Limited Product Improvement Plan report claims that ridership on the through cars would increase by 20,400. It says nothing about sleeping car passengers. Moreover, adding through cars would increase the net loss for the train(s) by more than $700,000. I cannot think of a business that would add a money losing product line that would increases its losses. And claim that it would increase its cost recovery factor to boot.
What is the basis for claiming that the ridership and revenue estimates are conservative? They could be overly optimistic. As the GAO pointed out in its study of high speed rail projects, the proponents almost always overstate the benefits and understate the costs. This is not to say that this is the case here, but it could be.
Without access to Amtrak's market assessment methodologies, it is impossible to determine the accuracy of its ridership and revenue projections. Once thing is reasonably certain. Their numbers are based on statistical samples. One would need access to the sampling construct to determine the tightness of the projections. Anytime someone says that ridership will increase by a specific number, they are almost always wrong. If they said that they are 95 per confident, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3 per cent, that the ridership increase is likely to be between 19,788 to 20,012, but could be below or above that estimate, I might buy into their estimates. I would be even more interested to see the regression statistics used to forecast the projections.
The 3 Viewliner sleepers and Amfleet II coaches can be mustered by transferring them from the LAKESHORE. The PENNSYLVANIAN currently runs with an Amfleet cafe car. That being said the other obstacle seems to be the switch that NS removed some years ago,
In November I rode 29 thru Pittsburgh. During the station stop there several people on the platform were discussing the lack of progress with the 2010 PRIIA CAPITOL/PENNSYLVANIAN improvement plan. A question arose as to how the PENNSYLVANIAN sets itself for its eastbound run. According to one person after the train arrives in Pittsburgh it continues west where it either wyes or goes on a balloon track at Conway yard (he wasn't sure which-anybody know for sure?). It then procedes back to the station where it backs into a siding for the next mornings eastbound departure.
If the above scenario is correct there may be a way to initiate this improvement without the cost of replacing the removed switch. Eastbound would be the least complex operation as 30 would come into the station at a more reasonable AM time, discharge and receive passengers and then before departing the NY section would be uncoupled and remain at the station. Once 30 had cleared the station 42 could then pull out from its siding track onto the main line, back up and couple onto the NY cars and be on its way. Westbound would be a bit more involved. 29 and 43 would both have to arrive at Pittsburgh fairly close together ( I would reschedule 29 to arrive in Pittsburgh closer to 43's arrival time). 29 would pull into the station first. 43 would follow 29 into the station but before going onto its siding track would uncouple the thru NY-Chicago cars. Once it was on the siding 29 would back up to couple these cars and then head westward. 43 could then back out onto the main line for its resetting procedure.
One major caveat here is of course Amtrak is not the Swiss National Railways in either timekeeping or operations but I believe this is practical and affordable.
The reason I raised the question in the first place is that from my perspective there is an unserved market: Chicago and west going to points in Pennsylvania and Philadelphia and visa versa. You cannot get to Philly without a change of trains today. Since I had read somewhere that Amtrak was considering making the connection, I presumed (hoped) a market survey has been done to justify the cost. (and of course it appears that Pennsylvania will have to continue funding the Pennsylvanian itself!)
If so, then the issues raised here about Viewliner equipment availability would be the operative question. When available, it would appear that the necessary schedule adjustments would be a minor issue.
By the way, where is the height limitation that prohibits Superliner equipment on this route, in 30th Street Satition?
Amtrak would need to answer at least two questions before adding a through sleeper from NYC or Philadelphia to Chicago on the Pennsylvanian and Capitol Limited.
blue streak 1 Additionally if there is an equipment problem --- 1. If the present Viewliner-2 order is extended to add coaches then once those coaches were added to the sold out low level consists then the Capitol could bcome a single level train as it is very often sold out. 2. Also the possibility that there becomes a shortage of Superliners the Capitol could go single level once Viewliner-2s sleepers are built however where to find the coaches ?.
Additionally if there is an equipment problem ---
1. If the present Viewliner-2 order is extended to add coaches then once those coaches were added to the sold out low level consists then the Capitol could bcome a single level train as it is very often sold out.
2. Also the possibility that there becomes a shortage of Superliners the Capitol could go single level once Viewliner-2s sleepers are built however where to find the coaches ?.
The Viewliner II order with CAF has options for up to 70 additional cars, but the options are only for baggage, baggage-dorms, sleeper, diner cars. Any order for coach cars, based on the Viewliner II design or not, would be an entirely new order which would have to go through an open bid process. As for the options, it is doubtful that Amtrak will be able to exercise any part of the option with CAF, given the funding cuts and shortfalls they are facing and the poor prospects for any significant increase in federal capital grants for the next 2 fiscal years. Amtrak is likely scrambling to pay for the 130 car order.
For additional coaches for the LD trans, one possibility is to convert the Horizon coach cars to LD configuration as the Horizons get freed up in the Midwest when the new bi-level corridor cars are delivered.
The last I read is that the through cars on the Pennsylvanian are still in the plans, but is on hold until enough Viewliner II cars are delivered. The Capitol Limited and Lake Shore Limited schedule would likely flip on the departure times from Chicago, but major schedule changes for those trains is waiting for CSX to wrap up clearance projects in MD & PA and may be waiting for other track improvements projects on the routes to make some progress.
3. All this possible need to manipulate consists points out the need now for more rolling stock.
It is a possibility once some Viewliner-2s are in service. Until then forget it not enough Viewline-1s.. The Capitol limited has a transition superliner in its consist so the 2 level train is no problem,.
Another problem is that at present Amtrak needs a switch replaced at Pittsburgh station so that the car can be switched in and out of the Capitol. That IMHO is especially important if for some reason there is a late train that causes 2 opposite direction sleepers to be present in Pittsburgh at the same time.
Somewhat murky is where the sleeper would originate. Although Amtrak could block any reservations from / to NYP AMTK might allow reservations Newark south / west. Another idea would be for the sleeper to originate in PHL. However since Sunnyside yard now handles all the single level cars that option appears very unlikely.
All this is in the Amtrak PRIIA report on the Capitol limited
I do not recall if Amtrak has had any positive thoughts on how it would handle operating a Viewliner sleeper on the Capitol. Does Amtrak have stepdown cars?
As to the current connections in Pittsburgh, the two hour wait eastbound is worse than the four hour wait westbound, considering that #30 is due in Pittsburgh at 5:05 in the morning. Would a setout sleeper be considered, with occupancy at 9:00 pm, and vacancy by 7:30 am? If daily through service were inaugurated, three sleepers would be required.
I read a while back that Amtrak was considering connecting a sleeper from the Capitol Limited to the Pennsylvanian at Pittsburgh so the historic route of the Broadway would at last have through service again. But the newly posted timetable shows nothing. Not only that, for persons wanting to transfer from the Capitol Limited to the Pennsylvanian eastbound at Pittsburgh, there is a four hour layover!
Any word if this is still in the works?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.