Pent-up demand for new routes

Just a guess, but I'd bet an attempt to force Amtrak to resume the Sunset East would lead to changes in the statutes to a) grandfather in the discontiuance of the Sunset East and b) make other discontinuances easier.

At worst, Mr. Afficiando, if Amtrak were forced to restore Sunset East, it would be gone for good in 181 days. Lest we forget, Amtrak has never been denied authority under either RPSA '70 or ARAA '97 to discontinue a route.

Something tells me that "service" that would operate for those 181 days (1 day to give Notice followed by the statutory 180 days) would "not exactly" be called "attractive". How would a couple of A-I's - ideally with 84 seats and still in their as delivered "Chinese house of ill-repute' motif - sound?

And finally to Mr. Ultra, I'm "pleased as punch' to learn of the favorable numbers being turned in by the Lynchburg Regional.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:At worst, Mr. Afficiando, if Amtrak were forced to restore Sunset East, it would be gone for good in 181 days. Lest we forget, Amtrak has never been denied authority under either RPSA '70 or ARAA '97 to discontinue a route.
Something tells me that "service" that would operate for those 181 days (1 day to give Notice followed by the statutory 180 days) would "not exactly" be called "attractive". How would a couple of A-I's - ideally with 84 seats and still in their as delivered "Chinese house of ill-repute' motif - sound?

I don't disagree with your assessment. Never-the-less, it would be nice for Amtrak to follow the law and actually issue that notice and have the 180 days public comment period.
Ignoring the statue like it doesn't exist teases people into thinking that service will eventually return, and teasing people isn't cool to do anywhere.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Something tells me that "service" that would operate for those 181 days (1 day to give Notice followed by the statutory 180 days) would "not exactly" be called "attractive". How would a couple of A-I's - ideally with 84 seats and still in their as delivered "Chinese house of ill-repute' motif - sound?

And with no food service, and the a/c in the coaches strangely inoperative!

mtuandrew wrote:Well, consider yourself lucky that you live near the hub, and have those train options at all Take a look at the Megabus midwestern route structure, and you'll see the Chicago Hub network that a new "Amtrak Heartland" should operate. Since Amtrak itself is Congressionally limited to providing skeletal LDs, mid-distance day trains, and state-supported service, I hope to eventually see the midwestern states step up and create a compact to fund intercity train and bus service much like California does. I know it's a vain hope at present, especially with the anti-government furor in several gateway states (Indiana and Wisconsin for instance), but there's no reason Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin and Missouri should all be funding their own haphazard improvements without forming a purchasing coalition and standard guidelines. High-speed rail can be the next step, but I just want to see more than one train a day to Minneapolis, not to mention the other cities with limited or no service at all.

As for auto-free living, I'd add Minneapolis and St. Paul to the areas navigable without a car, and would emphatically remove Detroit from that list except for a very few concentrated areas (Royal Oak comes to mind.)

Make no doubt, I know the goodness of living near transport hubs. Having O'Hare nearby makes a lot of places non-stop via air. Having Union Station about 1:40 from home (:07 walk to station and wait, 1:23 on train, :10 from OTC to Union Station) makes a difference. For that matter, I've got Metra trains departing 3 blocks from home. I've got serious options for getting around that don't involve a car. I am spoiled and know it.

Yeah, a day train to the Cities from Chicago is probably a good idea especially if it served places that the Empire Builder didn't, and there are certainly other routes that are deserving. I had chosen to focus on the routes as they exist. Is a multi-state rail compact a good idea? I should think it would cut some costs and increase frequencies. Mind you, I'm no big-gummint liberal so I'm pretty averse all kinds of spending. On the other hand, I'm well aware that roads aren't free either. So a multi-state compact isn't something I'd balk at.

Yeah, the Cities are manageable without car, but are cussedly difficult to get to by train at the time. Ann Arbor, yeah technically not Detroit, is manageable without car. Certainly Detroit taken as a whole is not a car-free region, but parts can be. (Incidentally, I lived car-free in Rockford, IL for a year, so my notion of what is car-free and what is not may be warped.)

What I would hope, in a worst case scenario where Surf Board would not grant an exemption requiring the service be run for the statuory 180 days, that 60 Mass has "run the numbers" to determine the hopefully favorable impact on the bottom line from having the release of one set of equipment (IIRC; T-Dorm, 2 Sleepers, Diner, Lounge, 3 Coaches) to be reassigned where it could earn some revenue.

If even the advocacy groups, i.e. NARP. accepts "it's gone', Amtrak should petition and may even get an exemption from actually running the service (suspended sentence of sorts); somehow, I think there is someone at 60 Mass (likely within the Legal Dept) whose 'ego is on the line"

sipes23 wrote:Incidentally, I lived car-free in Rockford, IL for a year, so my notion of what is car-free and what is not may be warped

Sure like to know how you were able to do that, Mr. Sipes. Even well-known celebrity railfan and author Mike Schafer (who I've personally known for some 40 years), who lived much of his life in Rockford, has always had his VW's.

I think you'd have a better chance of living "auto-free' in Crystal Lake. I could "do it if I had to" here in Clarendon Hills, but I'm not about to even think of such. However, residing .06mi from the station, when I use METRA-BNSF, such as for the Symphony, connect with Amtrak, or part of my "poor man's way" to O'Hare, the buggy is in the garage.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:The "suspension" position is carried to such extent that the Sunset's route timetable shows the New Orleans-Orlando stations and in Amtrak records #1, a Westbound Sunset, is identified as the date of origin for its "phantom" ORL-NOL run. The dates of "origin" from New Orleans continue to be unchanged resulting in one additional Superliner train set needed and hence depriving that scarce equipment (and the revenue it represents) from being assigned elsewhere on the System (there's your third Sleeper line for 29-30, Capitol Limited or an extension of the CHI-DEN line to EMY on 5-6 Zephyr).

I'm completely confused by what you're saying here, I'm afraid, regarding the origin point(s) and why they necessitate an extra trainset.

So far as poor ridership on the Eastern Sunset goes, and how it might possibly reflect on possibilities for its return, I think the map on this page is telling. Other than the Tallahassee area, and that lone blue county that is home to Gainesville and UFlorida (and isn't even on the line itself), the entire route of the Sunset across Florida (setting aside the ORL-JAX segment) is deeply Republican territory; this includes Jacksonville and Pensacola themselves at either end. I don't want to read a huge amount into that, but at the very least in this Tea Party era it seems likely that most of the people who would be served by the line would tend to be philosophically disposed to do away with the Sunset and the subsidies it requires. IOW, if Amtrak wants local grassroots support before it will restart the service, someone might need to go down to Florida and plant some new grass.

From what I am reading on here, there are people in various locations whom would like to be able to go to a nearby station and get on a passenger train headed somewhere that they want to go. Fine, I would like that too. Here's at least part of the problem, while we would like service and might even use it from time to time, we have to find a way to support it probably with state and local tax dollars. Some pretty small states like Vermont and Maine have found a way to do that but for one reason or another Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida and others do not see fit to do so.
Elections come up every year or two, you who want expanded passenger services need to contact the candidates running for public office especially at state levels and find out exactly what their position is regarding support of rail passenger service.
You need to support the ones who support services and vote the ones out who do not support rail service. It is just as simple as that.
I do not intend to get in to a political discussion here but rail passenger service is or should be just as important as other local and state issues are and the sooner the people recognize this, the sonner they will be able to have hope for some rail service near their homes. Read or listen to their speeches, read their position papers if they have one, go to their events and do not be afraid to ask questions, listen to their answers to questions from others and finally vote with your brains.
Again, I do not want to get in to politics but it is time for us as train enthusiasts to start supporting and continue supporting people who support trains and public transportation. It's really not that difficult is it?
Noel Weaver

While I'm not up on the regulations and laws, my conclusion would be this.

Assumptions
1. Amtrak issues the 180 day notice. Whether or not they run the trains would be irrelevant (and they'd probably get a fair amount of "rare mileage" passengers if they ran it).
2. The 180 day notice runs, and the train is discontinued at the end.

Effects:
3. The route is gone forever, as well as any current operating agreements.
4. If Amtrak ever wants to get back in the market, it would be extremely difficult. They'd have to negotiate new operating agreements, and pay a pretty penny to do so. Look at the negotiations going on for a mere resumption of daily Sunset service on the existing operating route.
5. Amtrak's motive for suspending rather than discontinuing the route was a holding pattern while they figured out what to do with some of their "problem children" routes.

Conclusion
6. Amtrak is being smart by preserving their options and doing the Sunset East a huge favor by suspending the service rather than discontinuing it, as it may become a useful feeder route someday. I'm not saying it would, but.....

Prologue: If Amtrak had been that smart with the Ocala routing, they might have preserved an option there. Disclosure: I know nothing about the Ocala routing and why or how it was discontinued.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Sure like to know how you were able to do that, Mr. Sipes. Even well-known celebrity railfan and author Mike Schafer (who I've personally known for some 40 years), who lived much of his life in Rockford, has always had his VW's.

Through a convergence of being young, living in exactly the right place so that nothing—at least for daily life—was too far away and being willing to walk. There were some RMTD bus trips involved, but not too many. I would not care to live in Rockford without a car again, but it was fun when I did it. I suppose the total goes up to three years if you add in college years, but that's a different beast.

Noel Weaver wrote:From what I am reading on here, there are people in various locations whom would like to be able to go to a nearby station and get on a passenger train headed somewhere that they want to go.

Yes, you are exactly right. That is what I want. Being somewhat realistic, I know it's not going to happen. But why isn't there a way to tell Amtrak/other passenger rail provider where and how much demand exists? It would have to help rail funding bodies (i.e. Amtrak, states, local governments, foreign investors) make decisions to have that data. Sure, such a thing would produce a lot of nonsense routes, but if you've got enough data points the signal will outweigh the noise. Of course, such a thing could probably be made as an internet site, but I'm not the programmer to do that.

As for the politics, I'm not sure it matters how one votes. Ticket revenue, which presumably correlates with butts in seats, speaks loud and clear as the Lynchburg experience shows. Of course, there will still be ideologues, but nothing is to be done about them.

I believe the Ocala routing was dropped due primarily to lack of ridership on the line. Forget any future service on the "S"-Line through Ocala/Wildwood again as this is going to be CSX's main freight routing when (if?) the "A"-Line becomes part of the proposed SunRail commuter operation.

Mr. Smith has presented an interesting position regarding the "suspension' of Sunset East.

I'm not certain to what extent I agree as I personally hold that Amtrak is not interested in promoting Long Distance passenger trains - save possibly Auto Train, which can be considered a 'flyover' extension of the Corridor (Times and Journal are quite available at both LOR and SFA gift shops, which both happen to be operated by Faber Enterprises - a concessionaire familiar to regular Corridor riders). They are interested in operating, as distinct from promoting, trains that are needed to ensure continued funding and that the service is adequately attractive so that key legislators are not picking up letters saying to the effect "Sir, I'd like to tell you about the really crappy trip I had on Amtrak....'

I think the "suspension" was born of legitimate and defensible reasons, but someone at 60 Mass who was looking for an "out' from a poor performing (revenue and on-time) route that had lost its political patrons, decided "well let's just keep it suspended until someone that counts starts rattling our cage. We're rid of it now and don't have to go through the charade of the public hearings and the possibility that we'll be denied....' Somehow, release of the equipment set (look at the days of arrival and days of departure from New Orleans, Mr. Markhb) was secondary to whomever (I think within either the Legal or Congressional Affairs Dept) developed the "suspension" strategy.

The success of this strategy can best be measured if the service is ever required to be restored.

ne plus ultra wrote: I'd also suggest that the Maple Leaf, bringing in close to 75% of costs at the farebox, has a claim.

The other trains from mkellerm's list that are above 50% in cost recovery are .....the Empire trains......and the Ethan Allen, all benefitting from NEC connections. (He didn't list LD trains, but I don't think any of them are that solid by the standards he used.)

If the Maple Leaf has a 75% farebox recovery, it isn't because of the service to Toronto, which eats up a lot of time and wages. If anything, the real revenue come from Albany and points south. The same goes for the Ethan Allen Express, where the train is sold out south of Albany but runs mostly empty up in to the boondocks of Vermont. Actually, ridership isn't all that bad in the Mohawk Valley or Central New York, but the trains are almost always sold out from Albany south - and the fares aren't exactly cheap. Sometimes fares for destinations in Central and Western, NY aren't all that much more than Albany to NYP fares.

Basically, the Albany to New York market is far closer to sustainability than most corridors outside of the NE Corridor.

Do you happen to have ridership/revenue numbers to support this claim that the farebox recovery comes from Albany-NYC on these trains, Mr. Wayne? I think that study would be quite fascinating.