1. The corridor speed limit is 110 mph and the new equipment is designed for such.
2. Although Superliners were designed for a 100 mph limit, the VIA/Amtrak 1999 crash near Limehouse, ON showed structural problems with the sidewalls in Superliners. As a result, they were removed from Canadian service. Perhaps this is a consideration?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
BuslistIn the back of my mind I seem to remember that the contract between the State of Illinois and the UP imposes some restrictions on what can be operated at "high speed". I don't know the details but that may be a factor here.
Could be but I was thinking what Schlimm said........maybe they never tested them on the Pueblo test track above 79 mph. Back when the first batch was new 70 mph was fast for a LD train. Plus then they had all the issues with cracks on the boogies and stuff, maybe they are concerned about whatever fix they put on the boogies?.....presume welds or reinforcements? Beats me.
CMStPnP OK, well the big question is that if the Superliners can do 90 to 100 mph, will they speed up the Texas Eagle between Chicago and St. Louis and reflect it in the timetable? Also, hopefully now that it is a HSR corridor can we delete some of the stops for the Texas Eagle between Chicago and St. Louis?
OK, well the big question is that if the Superliners can do 90 to 100 mph, will they speed up the Texas Eagle between Chicago and St. Louis and reflect it in the timetable? Also, hopefully now that it is a HSR corridor can we delete some of the stops for the Texas Eagle between Chicago and St. Louis?
In the back of my mind I seem to remember that the contract between the State of Illinois and the UP imposes some restrictions on what can be operated at "high speed". I don't know the details but that may be a factor here.
I know my phone app clocked the Southwest Chief somewhere around 90mph on some sections when I rode it earlier this year. (Obviously not while going through the area around the Raton Tunnel.)
According to Amtrak Unlimited and Wikipedia, the top allowable speed for Amtrak's Superliner cars is 100 mph.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
schlimm CMStPnP Additionally, even with the high speed track St. Louis to Chicago, the train still only does 79 mph on that segment......apparently still not ready for an increase in speed there. Superliners are not to exceed 79mph.
CMStPnP Additionally, even with the high speed track St. Louis to Chicago, the train still only does 79 mph on that segment......apparently still not ready for an increase in speed there.
Superliners are not to exceed 79mph.
I don't think so. The Southwest Limited, which uses Superliners, has some 90 MPH streches.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTdvLDkSN1Y
An "expensive model collector"
schlimmSuperliners are not to exceed 79mph. The Lincoln Service trains (uses Amfleet and Horizon cars) hits 110 in stretches recently, and is supposed to run at 110 Alton to Joliet in 2017.
Geez man, after all that pain with the German designed Boogies in 1979 and they can't exceed 80 mph? WTH?
CMStPnPAdditionally, even with the high speed track St. Louis to Chicago, the train still only does 79 mph on that segment......apparently still not ready for an increase in speed there.
Superliners are not to exceed 79mph. The Lincoln Service trains (uses Amfleet and Horizon cars) hits 110 in stretches recently, and is supposed to run at 110 Alton to Joliet in 2017.
CJtrainguyOr could that be due to the host railroads not wanting to give higher speed passenger trains priority in a
Oh no, it is schedule padding. Can tell you this by observing the Texas Eagle at it's Dallas and Fort Worth stops as well as riding it. The UP line North of Dallas to St Louis is loaded with freight and I think in one case Amtrak is running against the flow but there are enough gaps that Amtrak can keep the train running fast with few stops in the siding. The slowness to the schedule are the many dubious station stops with light passenger loads and the waiting for the schedule to catch up at larger cities. Additionally, even with the high speed track St. Louis to Chicago, the train still only does 79 mph on that segment......apparently still not ready for an increase in speed there.
I remember in the early days when Amtrak was behind schedule and it had a stop with few or no passengers, train would remain stopped less than a minute then proceed (30-45 seconds). No longer the case on a lot of the LD trains, though I still see it every once in a while (probably an old timer conductor).
CMStPnP Sooo, according to the 1971 Timetable the Texas Chief arrived in Fort Worth from Chicago with three hours less of travel time (and via Kansas City) and an additional 30 miles to travel compared to the current Texas Eagle. I know the track is in better shape now than it was in 1971. Pretty sad the schedule has deteriorated so much with Amtrak.
Sooo, according to the 1971 Timetable the Texas Chief arrived in Fort Worth from Chicago with three hours less of travel time (and via Kansas City) and an additional 30 miles to travel compared to the current Texas Eagle. I know the track is in better shape now than it was in 1971. Pretty sad the schedule has deteriorated so much with Amtrak.
No inside bathrooms--were there outside bathrooms? That is what was available in my home town--and they were still there after passenger service was discontinued--for the benefit of the agent?
Johnny
The funny thing is that I distinctly remember New Brunswick being a flag stop on the Florida trains (boarding only southbound, discharge only northbound) by the mid-Seventies. At one point I think there was (very limited, something like one train per day) service to Princeton Junction.
Newark, Delaware is interesting for a couple of reasons: it's the south end of SEPTA coverage, and it's a university town. I can understand why (perhaps only at certain times of year) it would make sense to have some Amtrak trains stop there rather than go up to Wilmington. The thing is I don't think the Florida trains would 'qualify' as a likely market for Newark, and as I recall it was a really rudimentary facility - not even inside bathrooms - so there would have to be compelling "clientele" reasons to make it an optional stop.
Philly Amtrak Fan daveklepper If I recall correctly, Amtrak did have flag stops on startup. Even Newark, DL, and New Brunswick were flag stops at one time with Amtrak. Anyone have the 1971 timetable? In electronic form: http://www.timetables.org/browse/?group=19710501&st=0001 I couldn't find Newark, DE in the New York-Washington schedules. New Brunswick was listed in the New York-Philadelphia schedules but they weren't listed as flag stops.
daveklepper If I recall correctly, Amtrak did have flag stops on startup. Even Newark, DL, and New Brunswick were flag stops at one time with Amtrak. Anyone have the 1971 timetable?
If I recall correctly, Amtrak did have flag stops on startup. Even Newark, DL, and New Brunswick were flag stops at one time with Amtrak. Anyone have the 1971 timetable?
In electronic form: http://www.timetables.org/browse/?group=19710501&st=0001
I couldn't find Newark, DE in the New York-Washington schedules. New Brunswick was listed in the New York-Philadelphia schedules but they weren't listed as flag stops.
In the June 11, 1972 TT, there are flag and conditional stops and also stops to receive only or discharge only on many LD trains, such as the Broadway, National, Floridian, Meteor, Silver Star, Texas Chief, Super Chief, Chief, SF Zephyr, North Coast Hiawatha, and EB.
CMStPnPProblem I have with Hope as a infrequent Dallas to Chicago passenger is the time it takes to stop there. Whenever I ride the train, nobody gets on at Hope. So we just sit there for 3-5 min and I would rather be rolling. I would be happier if it was a flagstop and the train could roll through without stopping unless there was a ticketed passenger wanting to get on. Not too difficult to accomplish with an all reserved train. Conductor should know as we approach Hope if any tickets have been sold for that specific train arriving at that location.
Flagstops were quite common on secondary trains as late as the mid-60s. The concept is simple and should NOT be beyond Amtrak personnel's abilities.
narig01 One other item Greyhound discontinued service here before Amtrak started service giving more reason for the community to push for it. Greyhounds reason for discontinuing service had more to do with the inability to find a local vendor where the bus could stop without spending a lot of time getting to and from I-30. IMHO one real impediment to more ridership has been the lack of reliable service to Dallas/Fort Worth. One thing my son discovered is initially there were quit a few passengers using the Texas Eagle from Arkansas and east Texas to get to DFW for flights elsewhere(my son included, he was flying to London). Recently DART has started light rail service to DFW. There is no weekend service from the Centreport Station(on Trinity Rail Express) to DFW. There is talk of having the Texas Eagle stop there.
Actually, you meant to say no SUNDAY service to DFW Airport, which I do not understand myself why they shutdown TRE completely on Sunday. The DART Light rail line is not as fast and a rather long ride from downtown.
Greyhound has a program where they like to stop at gas/convinence store combos so their passengers can run into the convinence store and buy something to eat or stretch their legs in a well lighted parking lot or use the restroom which is probably cleaner than the one on the bus. They typically also want that gas/convience store to also sell their tickets in return for the patronage they provide. They would have accepted a small park and ride lot with a bus shelter, ticketing kiosk and vending machines though. Which although more expensive than the Amtrak stop to Hope was still probably within financial reach.
Problem I have with Hope as a infrequent Dallas to Chicago passenger is the time it takes to stop there. Whenever I ride the train, nobody gets on at Hope. So we just sit there for 3-5 min and I would rather be rolling. I would be happier if it was a flagstop and the train could roll through without stopping unless there was a ticketed passenger wanting to get on. Not too difficult to accomplish with an all reserved train. Conductor should know as we approach Hope if any tickets have been sold for that specific train arriving at that location.
The other issue I have as a Dallas to Chicago through passenger is the padding in the schedule and how the train is not run on a tighter schedule with a better on time record. Everytime I ride the Texas Eagle it is late arriving into Chicago, the last time it was almost two full hours late. With all the padding that only happens because nobody is really monitoring the trains performance or cares about it. Texas Eagle should have at least an 18 hour Dallas to Chicago schedule vs the 22 hours it uses now. Pretty sure it can cut 4 hours easy without a lot of challenge to the operating crew or tenant railroads. Once it hits that target I would attempt to lop off 2 more hours to bring it down to 16.
Why Hope, Ar?
We have only had Amtrak service for 3 years at this point. The local community put all the money into reestablishing the stop. This was mainly building a new platform and then rebuilding it when Amtrak and UP had built it to the wrong specifications.
Additionally Mike Ross the then congress-man from the district was able to get support from the entire Arkansas congressional delegation, both House and Senate. There is a lot of local support for Amtrak.
Arkadelphia is a flag stop(if memory does not fail me).
One other item Greyhound discontinued service here before Amtrak started service giving more reason for the community to push for it. Greyhounds reason for discontinuing service had more to do with the inability to find a local vendor where the bus could stop without spending a lot of time getting to and from I-30.
IMHO one real impediment to more ridership has been the lack of reliable service to Dallas/Fort Worth. One thing my son discovered is initially there were quit a few passengers using the Texas Eagle from Arkansas and east Texas to get to DFW for flights elsewhere(my son included, he was flying to London). Recently DART has started light rail service to DFW. There is no weekend service from the Centreport Station(on Trinity Rail Express) to DFW. There is talk of having the Texas Eagle stop there.
Thanks. That must have been the section I rode, and I did use Troup. Makes sense.
Troup, TX is 19.2 miles from Tyler, TX; Mineola, TX is 25.7 miles from Tyler.
The South Texas sections of The Texas Eagle stopped in Troup at 6:36 a.m. and 8:19 p.m., as per the April 1967 timetable.
[quote user="JPS1"]
According to the Missouri Pacific timetable for April 1967, The Texas Eagle, #21 called at Mineola, TX at 6:55 a.m; #22 called there at 6:40 p.m.
In 1958 Mineola was a flag stop for the West Texas Eagle, which was operated by the Texas and Pacific, which in turn was controlled by the Missouri Pacific.
Number 1 called at Mineola at 6:10 a.m.; Number 2 could be flagged for a stop, although the time is not shown. It was due at Grand Saline, which is the stop just before Mineola, at 7:28 p.m. and at Gladewater, which is the next station after Mineola, at 8:17 p.m.
dakotafredI sure couldn't see anything wrong with those (6?8?) express boxcars tacked onto the end of the Empire Builder for a couple of years. One of the problems, I know, was delay to the trains, the passengers, because of clumsy switching mechanics in attaching/detaching the cars at either end of the run. Why a problem like this should have been allowed to persist for more than the first week challenges the imagination. Maybe it was monkey-wrenching by the host rails, who resented Amtrak being in the business -- I don't know. Gunn was probably right in deciding the passengers came first and ending a flawed(Warrington) experiment. Although one thinks wistfully of what the business could have meant to Amtrak's bottom line, just as it did to that of the private rails in the old days.
LOL...
Yeah I agree, I saw that too with the too many express boxcars per train and wondered, WTH? If they have that much demand increase the min shipment weight, increase min price paid and establish a min distance to get the traffic down to 2-3 express cars and boost profits more............seems like a no brainer but Amtrak was running the show......sooooo.
They had to tailor it to everyone and make everyone happy except of course their two most important clients, the tenant railroads and their passengers. Still would like to hear the full story of how a five fold increase in Southwest Chief gross revenue, still managed to not add to the bottom line. Thats just incredible, someone is not being honest there. Either Amtrak with the accounting or Ed Ellis with the claim.
If they ever restart it, it should be a privately owned company run almost completely outside Amtrak management reach. Similar to how the Private Passenger Cars are attached and run on Amtrak trains. Remember when Amtrak didn't want that business and fought against it with stupid rules such as the passenger cars had to match the Amtrak paint? They've finally done a 180 on that and are promoting it in some of the timetables now.
Had Amtrak been smarter about this whole thing they would have insisted the Express Service be run via new baggage cars. Then they could have replaced their old baggage cars on the cheap......writing them off with the insolvency or discontinuance of the Express Business. Nope, had to be in express boxcars.
CMStPnP CSSHEGEWISCH The mail and express initiative in the early 1990's was a good idea on the face of it. Unfortunately, it covered its own costs but contributed little beyond that to the bottom line. In my mind, we will never know for sure because it was too short in duration, plus 100% under Amtrak accounting. My business sense tells me because the immediate costs of expansion and purchasing of capital items, labor, etc for expansion were eating up revenues. Had the experiment gone on for 4-5 years and been allowed to mature we would have had a better picture. I think it was terminated too early due to problems that probably could have been solved over time. I don't think it was a good idea to startup nationwide either, should have been regional at first, far less costly of an experiment.
CSSHEGEWISCH The mail and express initiative in the early 1990's was a good idea on the face of it. Unfortunately, it covered its own costs but contributed little beyond that to the bottom line.
The mail and express initiative in the early 1990's was a good idea on the face of it. Unfortunately, it covered its own costs but contributed little beyond that to the bottom line.
In my mind, we will never know for sure because it was too short in duration, plus 100% under Amtrak accounting.
My business sense tells me because the immediate costs of expansion and purchasing of capital items, labor, etc for expansion were eating up revenues. Had the experiment gone on for 4-5 years and been allowed to mature we would have had a better picture. I think it was terminated too early due to problems that probably could have been solved over time. I don't think it was a good idea to startup nationwide either, should have been regional at first, far less costly of an experiment.
My understanding from previous threads is that CEO Warrington over-estimated revenue rather badly and under-estimated costs. So often this is the case with start-ups, even those by established companies. A challenge by freight rails to the legality of the Amtrak express operation was turned down by the courts.
Why stop in a town which has contributed very few passengers for the last three years?
schlimm dakotafred mvs Amtrak stops at places like Hope, AR; Arcadia Valley, MO (when it opens); Wolf Point, MT; etc.; are akin to essential air service. When I rode the Texas Eagle from Los Angeles to Dallas recently, I wasn't bothered by stopping at Benson, Arizona, or creeping through flag stop Sanderson, Texas. These small town stops help move people, and probably create allies in the House and Senate. There is far bigger bloat in gov't that could be addressed before Amtrak. Just right -- thank you! Sure. Why not have those LD trains stop at every jerkwater town en route, even if only one person boards or alights? It might take 72+ hours to the coast, but who cares?
dakotafred mvs Amtrak stops at places like Hope, AR; Arcadia Valley, MO (when it opens); Wolf Point, MT; etc.; are akin to essential air service. When I rode the Texas Eagle from Los Angeles to Dallas recently, I wasn't bothered by stopping at Benson, Arizona, or creeping through flag stop Sanderson, Texas. These small town stops help move people, and probably create allies in the House and Senate. There is far bigger bloat in gov't that could be addressed before Amtrak. Just right -- thank you!
mvs Amtrak stops at places like Hope, AR; Arcadia Valley, MO (when it opens); Wolf Point, MT; etc.; are akin to essential air service. When I rode the Texas Eagle from Los Angeles to Dallas recently, I wasn't bothered by stopping at Benson, Arizona, or creeping through flag stop Sanderson, Texas. These small town stops help move people, and probably create allies in the House and Senate. There is far bigger bloat in gov't that could be addressed before Amtrak.
Amtrak stops at places like Hope, AR; Arcadia Valley, MO (when it opens); Wolf Point, MT; etc.; are akin to essential air service.
When I rode the Texas Eagle from Los Angeles to Dallas recently, I wasn't bothered by stopping at Benson, Arizona, or creeping through flag stop Sanderson, Texas. These small town stops help move people, and probably create allies in the House and Senate.
There is far bigger bloat in gov't that could be addressed before Amtrak.
Just right -- thank you!
Sure. Why not have those LD trains stop at every jerkwater town en route, even if only one person boards or alights? It might take 72+ hours to the coast, but who cares?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.