Splitting the LSL in Toledo could be the foundation for restructuring the east-midwest service into a more balanced and passenger friendly setup.
1. Eastbound on a slightly earlier schedule (8:00pm) from Chicago would put the NY section into Pittsburgh at roughly 6:30-7:00am. This would replace the current PENNSYLVANIAN schedule whose equipment could then be used for a later morning or early afternoon NY-PITT train. The Boston section would run as it does now Toledo to Buffalo with an earlier arrival into Boston since it would not have the Albany switching to go thru. In addition to this section carrying at least two extra coaches for the upstate NY traffic it should also initiate stops in NE Ohio (Painesville & Ashtabula) and one in western NY (Dunkirk and or Westfield.)
2. Eastbound the CAPITOL then could run on a much earlier schedule (2:00pm) from Chicago with a roughly 9:00am arrival in DC. While this would give some balance to the CHI-TOL-CLE corridor it does break the connections to the EB western trains. Connecting passengers could ride the LSL to Harrisburg (bus connection to Baltimore & DC) or to Philadelphia for an cross platform transfer to these cities. In addition a modified (and daily) CARDINAL could also provide a DC connection.
3. Westbound both the NY & Boston sections of the LSL would leave several hours later for an 11:30am arrival into Chicago. This would provide more ,,than enough cushion for western connections,allow for fairly decent times for Toledo west and the NY section would compliment the wb PENNSYLVANIAN which could possibly be extended to Toledo to offer an all "day" schedule similar to the PALMETTO.
4. The westbound CAPITOL schedule would remain as is.
5. Being that the present LD system is not going to be expanded any time sonn is to optimize what we have now to its fullest potential.
Boardman did not offer any hope of new routes on in the LD service, or for that matter regionals, unless states were willing to essentially fund the expansions. I suspect that he is getting a strong message from Congress and the Administration that there is not going to be Federal funds for route expansion or "new" trains. Since they are looking for a $billion or so a year for equipment, perhaps that is seen as the priorty in their current "get the money" strategy.
I call their current planning for changes to LD a shuffling. The Eagle/Sunset plan calls for daily operation of the Texas Eagle through San Antonio then over the Sunset route to LA. A separate connection will run for the San Antonio New Orleans segment. The proposed schedule and the daily service is expected to produce new revenue that will at least cover the added operating cost and that seems to be a standard for such changes.
I guess in a better world, the Lake Shore would operate as present, and a new Chicago-New york train would run via Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, perhaps with morning departures from the end points. (Been there-done that?) Guess that's something that would make the folks in Cleveland happier. Not that it takes much to be happier in Cleveland.
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
Baggage
Viewliner
Coach
Dinette
Diner-lite
I suppose the split at Toledo is because the Cleveland Station is east of where you hang a right for Alliance. You can either bear right at Berea and take the Short Line (CSX) over to the PRR (NS) line to Alliance or run down to the lake front and get on the line there, just east of the ore dock. I suppose the train would stay the same, or similar. Perhaps a few more coaches on the Boston section. I wonder if it would make sense to run the Boston section as it's own train all the way to Chicago, running it via Detroit. It would require some work to get the Toledo to Detroit piece up to snuff. Years ago, when they ran on of the Michigan service trains all the way to Toledo to meet the LSL, it took two hours for the 60 mile trip.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
blue streak 1 jeaton I had stepped out of the room and missed part of the discussion, but one of the changes to LD being considered is to split the Lake Shore at Toledo and run the Boston section via the current route and the New York section on the ex-PRR line via Philadelphia. I am not sure why Toledo and not Pittsburgh, but Toledo does seem to have suitable trackage in the station. That plan avoids the problem of dealing with Superliner cars in limited clearance areas. Note my edit above. Don't think any changes will be made before sufficient sleepers and diners are added to the fleet. I think it was indicated at the meeting that Amtrak will soon release an RFP for 125 Viewliner style cars. As I recall they will be configured as coaches, diners and split crew dorm/baggage cars. Boardman commented that full length baggage cars throughout the system haul mostly air. Building a combine crew/baggage car would open up a great deal of revenue sleeeper space. Seems possible that a few of the new cars could be full sleepers. Reposted due to an interruption. I haven't heard that one! Did it come from Amtrak? A revived modified sort of "new Broadway"?. The possibilities are almost endless. Yes, from Amtrak at the meeting. 1. Could make for a very long Lakeshore out and into CHI depending on demand. 2. Maybe split sections from/to CHI during high ridership times when ever enough single level cars become available? 3. Toledo certainly has long enough platforms for this operation. 4. Cross over switch(s) for combining and spliting at Toledo would speed up those operations. 5. 2 more dinning cars needed for BOS section or at least a dinner lite? 6. East of Toledo how many passengers now go south of Albany? If enough a thru coach that will attach to the first available (almost every hr) southbound to NYP (no worry about late train TOL - ALB) . Could schedule northbound on a regular trip. Sleeper?maybe originate and terminate in Toledo or same use as coach. Again Amtrak unable to do this until there is enough equipment. 7. What is usual car type and count now on Lakeshore? 8. The possible schedules Toledo - Pittsburg - TOL may run very close to the Capitol Limited and would not provide a good second service. Also the PIT - PHL leg might run close to the Pennsylvanian eastbound unless the Pennsylvanian times are changed to the SU schedule every day eastbound? Then use the present eastbound Pennsylvanian schedule for the "new broadway". 9. Westbound ??? 10. Instead if Capitol was combined with "new broadway" one less dinner that could be added/deleted PIT ? I bet many other ideas can be thought out.??????? Amtrak has a group in Marketing that is working on such things. 8
jeaton I had stepped out of the room and missed part of the discussion, but one of the changes to LD being considered is to split the Lake Shore at Toledo and run the Boston section via the current route and the New York section on the ex-PRR line via Philadelphia. I am not sure why Toledo and not Pittsburgh, but Toledo does seem to have suitable trackage in the station. That plan avoids the problem of dealing with Superliner cars in limited clearance areas.
I had stepped out of the room and missed part of the discussion, but one of the changes to LD being considered is to split the Lake Shore at Toledo and run the Boston section via the current route and the New York section on the ex-PRR line via Philadelphia. I am not sure why Toledo and not Pittsburgh, but Toledo does seem to have suitable trackage in the station.
That plan avoids the problem of dealing with Superliner cars in limited clearance areas.
Note my edit above.
Don't think any changes will be made before sufficient sleepers and diners are added to the fleet. I think it was indicated at the meeting that Amtrak will soon release an RFP for 125 Viewliner style cars. As I recall they will be configured as coaches, diners and split crew dorm/baggage cars. Boardman commented that full length baggage cars throughout the system haul mostly air. Building a combine crew/baggage car would open up a great deal of revenue sleeeper space. Seems possible that a few of the new cars could be full sleepers.
Reposted due to an interruption.
I haven't heard that one! Did it come from Amtrak? A revived modified sort of "new Broadway"?. The possibilities are almost endless. Yes, from Amtrak at the meeting.
1. Could make for a very long Lakeshore out and into CHI depending on demand.
2. Maybe split sections from/to CHI during high ridership times when ever enough single level cars become available?
3. Toledo certainly has long enough platforms for this operation.
4. Cross over switch(s) for combining and spliting at Toledo would speed up those operations.
5. 2 more dinning cars needed for BOS section or at least a dinner lite?
6. East of Toledo how many passengers now go south of Albany? If enough a thru coach that will attach to the first available (almost every hr) southbound to NYP (no worry about late train TOL - ALB) . Could schedule northbound on a regular trip. Sleeper?maybe originate and terminate in Toledo or same use as coach. Again Amtrak unable to do this until there is enough equipment.
7. What is usual car type and count now on Lakeshore?
8. The possible schedules Toledo - Pittsburg - TOL may run very close to the Capitol Limited and would not provide a good second service. Also the PIT - PHL leg might run close to the Pennsylvanian eastbound unless the Pennsylvanian times are changed to the SU schedule every day eastbound? Then use the present eastbound Pennsylvanian schedule for the "new broadway".
9. Westbound ???
10. Instead if Capitol was combined with "new broadway" one less dinner that could be added/deleted PIT ?
I bet many other ideas can be thought out.??????? Amtrak has a group in Marketing that is working on such things.
8
I haven't heard that one! Did it come from Amtrak? A revived modified sort of "new Broadway"?. The possibilities are almost endless.
I bet many other ideas can be thought out.???????
oltmanndjeaton They better not mess with my train. OK. That made me laugh.jeatonActually it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the train would be changed to all single level equipment with the train split in Pittsburgh. However, I think Amtrak would not change it until they had top quality equipment (new or rebuilt) for the service. Idea being that they might not want to do any kind of downgrade in the Chicago-Washington service.If you like in Phila or Harrisburg, it's a pretty easy connection in DC to the Capitol. Or, from Harrisburg, drive 1-1/2 hrs to Martinsburg WV and hop on.
jeaton They better not mess with my train.
jeatonActually it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the train would be changed to all single level equipment with the train split in Pittsburgh. However, I think Amtrak would not change it until they had top quality equipment (new or rebuilt) for the service. Idea being that they might not want to do any kind of downgrade in the Chicago-Washington service.
Edit: I must have been half asleep when I wrote the last sentence. Hard to split an east bound train at a point 140 miles east of the diverging routes.
Now if they would put my train back to a 5:30PM Chicago departure...
Here is another another report -
http://www.railroadforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31350
I agree with the comments and summaries above, and I thank Amtrak and Trains for conducting the meeting. It was a great learning experience for me. I thought it was excellent overall, and I was extremely impressed with the detailed knowledge of Mr. Boardman and the presenters, as well as with their candid responses to over 100 questions and comments. I personally had about 12 questions, but there was time only for four, so I had to prioritize.
Mr. Don Phillips was there, but I didn't notice anyone else whom we might consider "media," except for the Trains folks, of course.
To answer one of the above questions, they permitted us to take photographs/videos at the exhibit at Union Station.
I am looking forward to a followup meeting, perhaps after the PRIIA Section 305 Committee publishes some initial results.
My trip to and from Chicago on the Texas Eagle was great also. Other than breakfast, I usually eat food from the snack bar or bring my own, but I had supper one night in the dining car. In a word, it was excellent. We saw only a handful of freight trains and the meets appeared to have been scheduled well because the longest wait for us was about ten minutes.
I would like to thank all the people at Trains and Amtrak who worked to put this together. It was a very imformative session and I was quite impressed with the turnout of Amtrak execs for the meeting.
oltmanndWhy not just run the Capitol thru Phila instead? You ought to be able to get one track in 30th to accommodate Superliners. Wouldn't be much slower, if any, and would gain quite a bit in population served.
I don't think that idea is automaticly off the table, but I would fight it tooth and nail. The Capitol is the Amtrak train I most often take as we have family in the DC area. They better not mess with my train.
Actually it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the train would be changed to all single level equipment with the train split in Pittsburgh. However, I think Amtrak would not change it until they had top quality equipment (new or rebuilt) for the service. Idea being that they might not want to do any kind of downgrade in the Chicago-Washington service.
jeatonSome are approaching a condition where the car bodies would need major work. That goes beyond rebuild into the category of restoration.
As long as the cost to strip it down is less than the cost of a new stainless steel carbody, why buy new? I'd SWAG that a heavy rebuild would be 70-80% of new. Why crush 500+ perfectly good stainless steel passenger carbodies?
Those old diners might cost a lot to keep running, but I'll tell you the only thing wrong with them from the my experience is that they have booths instead of tables and chairs.
I'd add a couple of points to the summary above. Amtrak is essentially responding to the Federal Administration and Congressional mandates for their current direction. The mandates put emphasis on regional train services and it is there that the states must participate with funding. The mandates do not require that states must participate in new long distance trains, however there is no federal funding now or expected any time soon to add new LD trains.
Boardman emphasized that the equipment plan is not locked in stone, with every indication that it will be changed as conditions dictate. The need now is to replace cars that Amtrak is obligated to provide to maintain existing services and to start with those oldest and most expensive to maintain. Some are approaching a condition where the car bodies would need major work. That goes beyond rebuild into the category of restoration. Those who follow museum restoration activities would know about those costs.
The fleet plan seems pretty firm despite some questions and the espoused promise to continually reevaluate the plan. Sounded like they weren't too open to suggestions just yet.
As for cars being replaced, the plan calls for scrapping but not initially, allowing for new services and reserve capacity for special events and emergencies. One such contingency would be another spike in gas prices; and another might be another "Katrina."
As with transit agencies, capitalizing maintenance expenses through lower maintenance new equipment reduces the apparent operating expenses. To this end, a commercial life of 24 years has been adopted as opposed to a useful life that might be considerably longer. This is interesting since the plan covers a 40-year span; so that some new cars may face replacement before the current plan runs its course.
One allowance in determining commercial life is for obsolescence of components that would seem to be a straw man. Other allowances seem to be for unforeseen changes in market, technology, and requirement such as for ADA. Another may be the dated look of equipment that has been around a long time, such as Heritage and Amfleet. Oddly, these are stainless steel cars that might otherwise last forever (useful life) with rebuilding and upgrades, at least well beyond my lifetime. The oldest active car is a 1954 Budd diner built for New York Central that sees some 110 mph operation on the NEC.
Think what we will, the goal is for a comprehensive fleet renewal plan that will support establishing long-term domestic manufacturing capability and will satisfy the Congress and Executive for long-term funding.
Asked if new cars would have all doors opening at stations, Amtrak said they are looking at a door and trap configuration such as used on NJT. The remote controlled door extends to the bottom step, eliminating a lot of snow buildup occurring at extended high speeds for intercity service. The other boarding issues implied in the question were not addressed or followed up on later in the open Q&A..
Dave Randall (Alton, IL) spoke out against the Horizon cars that are not among the initial single level cars to be replaced; saying in effect that they are shabby on the inside and out and ride roughly. One problem is the exterior appearance is marred by staining of the brushed aluminum finish and lack of an optional protective coating. Seating also is hard and with no room for feet due to the rotating seat support.
I pointed out that the fleet plan is based on the current fleet with little consideration for non-NEC (and non-California) needs for tilting and low level boarding. Tilting would increase speeds such that many more city-pair corridors may have reasonably viable rail passenger service if not high speeds. Even so, Amtrak is letting the states go it alone or cooperate with one another such as Washington and Wisconsin on Talgo as they see fit.
henry6Andy did a write up for Trains Newswire which seemed pretty upbeat and very railfanish (? would you rather I said 'railfanny'?). But was the mainstream media there? AP, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, CNN, etc.? Have not seen any reports from them concerning this meeting.
Andy did a write up for Trains Newswire which seemed pretty upbeat and very railfanish (? would you rather I said 'railfanny'?). But was the mainstream media there? AP, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, CNN, etc.? Have not seen any reports from them concerning this meeting.
Not evident - no cameras anyway.
Amtrak should least put 2 coaches and 1 sleeping car on Amtrak 42&43 on back of the Capitol Limited at Pittsburgh, Pa to Chicago?
Now we have it in so many words, from the horse's mouth: No addition to long-distance services without state support.
I wish it were otherwise, but given the realities -- including the history: 40 years of hand-to-mouth support from Washington -- this is probably as it should be. Why should my state of North Dakota, and Montana, NOT have to pony up for a North Coast Hiawatha? They have taken a free ride on the Empire Builder for 40 years.
In N.D., legislators of both parties have said ABSOLUTELY NOT in years past when asked about state support for Amtrak. Out here in the Great American West, the big shots fly and the rest of us are used to driving. At least you can go 75 mph on the four-lanes in N.D. and S.D.
Maybe, up here, we'd better just shut up and enjoy our rides on the Builder while we can.
ALCO Fan If you where there, what is your perspective on what happened ? I'm especially interested in you view of Amtrak's negative reaction to restoration of the Gulf Coast and Pioneer lines as reported on other train forums. Tony
If you where there, what is your perspective on what happened ? I'm especially interested in you view of Amtrak's negative reaction to restoration of the Gulf Coast and Pioneer lines as reported on other train forums.
Tony
There is no money and no change in the status of service proposals for the Pioneer, Gulf Coast, and North Coast Hiawatha. Amtrak is avoiding any new or restored long distance services without the respective state support. By inference, it will take an act of Congress to amend and fund expansion of the National (long distance) System.
Dakguy201After the meeting when they suggested you to go over to Union Station to inspect the reworked P-40 and the passenger cars, were you permitted to photograph them even though you were not holders of a train ticket? If so, did Amtrak explain that they had run background checks on each one of you to insure the group had not been infiltrated by foreign or domestic terrorists? Or perhaps did someone take some bootleg pictures with a cell phone? One more question -- do you sense that I find Amtrak's photographic policy and their defense of it somewhat less than convincing?
After the meeting when they suggested you to go over to Union Station to inspect the reworked P-40 and the passenger cars, were you permitted to photograph them even though you were not holders of a train ticket? If so, did Amtrak explain that they had run background checks on each one of you to insure the group had not been infiltrated by foreign or domestic terrorists? Or perhaps did someone take some bootleg pictures with a cell phone?
One more question -- do you sense that I find Amtrak's photographic policy and their defense of it somewhat less than convincing?
Of all the problems with Amtrak, we spent the morning talking about photo policy; then too, it became apparent that the meeting was organized by Trains for railfans. Yes, Amtrak politely and firmly explained the why of their photo policy.
A directive will be or has been put out that in no case will photos or images be ordered destroyed or deleted. It was said half-jokingly that it didn't make sense to destroy possible evidence.
One ray of sunshine is that personnel would be instructed to allow photography from public areas on Amtrak property with prior notice. One generally should seek out station staff and local police prior to taking photos or sound recordings to defuse the situations of authorities seeing or public reporting suspicious activity (I hadn't thought of that). One way or another, you will be asked to identify yourself and explain your intentions.
Amtrak is highly sensitive to photography of stations and other facilities inasmuch as this is a tool for planning terrorism - it's in captured al Qaeda training materials. This is bad news for those of us with an architectural and historical interest; so it seems permission to photograph would be less likely.
Another scenario I've experienced is that someone may report you as a possibly distressed motorist, that is either being sick or having a vehicle breakdown.
Second, Amtrak is looking into a railfan ID program similar to the BNSF that will help legitimize your recording.
Finally, it's not about you. Understand that this is Amtrak's call and HS is looking over their shoulder.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Did any forum member attend today's meeting (other than the Trains employees running the session)?
Waiting for Amtrak service on "The Delaware and Hudson Bridge Line"
rstaller I hope someone brings up the subject of Amtrak's photography policies. and gets answers. R. Staller
I hope someone brings up the subject of Amtrak's photography policies. and gets answers.
R. Staller
Got an e-mail about the meeting from Jim Wrinn - three issues will be addressed on the agenda: fleet plan, long distance trains, and photo policy. A summary of the proceedings will be posted on the Trains website.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.