Iowa Pacific Pullman Service

afiggatt wrote:The trains to the Empire tunnel can only reach it from as high as Track #8. The platform between tracks #5 and #5 is 10 cars long and tracks #7 and #8 is 13 cars long. The really long platforms, 17 cars long, are the 3 center platforms between tracks 9 to 14.

It is possible to reach up to Track 9 from the Empire Tunnel.

mvb119 wrote:

afiggatt wrote:The trains to the Empire tunnel can only reach it from as high as Track #8. The platform between tracks #5 and #5 is 10 cars long and tracks #7 and #8 is 13 cars long. The really long platforms, 17 cars long, are the 3 center platforms between tracks 9 to 14.

It is possible to reach up to Track 9 from the Empire Tunnel.

Yes but it is limited space because the crossover is 1/4 way down the platform. Its not an ideal situation and they do not use it for revenue service on empires unless there is a major issue.

CarterB wrote:NYP at one time handled the Bar Harbor Express with 14 or more sleepers and several baggage cars as a through train with six of the sleepers added at NYP.
I am sure there are other long thru trains that either added or dropped cars at NYP

It was pointed out in another thread somewhere that the NY sleepers on the Bar Harbor deadheaded from Philadelphia, already in the train in position to be set off at the right places in Maine. I have also heard a comment, however, from someone experienced at NYP, that no train to or from the New Haven ever left Penn Station with the same consist it had when it arrived (there were a lot of head-end cars to be shifted). The Bar Harbor, being seasonal, may have been the exception.

ApproachMedium wrote:

mvb119 wrote:

afiggatt wrote:The trains to the Empire tunnel can only reach it from as high as Track #8. The platform between tracks #5 and #5 is 10 cars long and tracks #7 and #8 is 13 cars long. The really long platforms, 17 cars long, are the 3 center platforms between tracks 9 to 14.

It is possible to reach up to Track 9 from the Empire Tunnel.

Yes but it is limited space because the crossover is 1/4 way down the platform. Its not an ideal situation and they do not use it for revenue service on empires unless there is a major issue.

Yes I know. I was just pointing out that it was possible haha.

So Iowa Pacific just purchased two of the CN/IC's four ex-CB&Q E9's, the ones still in the IC "death star" look. They are in Horicon at WSOR being repainted. Anybody know the total of E's that Iowa Pacific has now? They have those two ex-CNW 500's by way of Metra and I think they bought the two "Lackawanna" units from an NRHS chapter in New York state. Have those Lackawanna units been painted or used?

They also bought the two ex NYSW units too. I think they are in cape cod?

Over on the Viewliner II thread, some folks mention that there probably still isn't enough new sleepers to run 66/67. I suggested it might be a good Iowa Pacific/Pullman project provided they could ticket through Amtrak. Others noted that the Pullman brand might be too expensive. I wanted to move that discussion over to the correct thread and hear your thoughts. The pricing issue is pertinent but I think it would be fairy easy for Pullman to put a no-frills sleeper with one attendant and a coffee machine on the route - you don't have nearly as much overhead to cover if it's not the deluxe white-jacket experience.

Tadman wrote:Over on the Viewliner II thread, some folks mention that there probably still isn't enough new sleepers to run 66/67. I suggested it might be a good Iowa Pacific/Pullman project provided they could ticket through Amtrak. Others noted that the Pullman brand might be too expensive. I wanted to move that discussion over to the correct thread and hear your thoughts. The pricing issue is pertinent but I think it would be fairy easy for Pullman to put a no-frills sleeper with one attendant and a coffee machine on the route - you don't have nearly as much overhead to cover if it's not the deluxe white-jacket experience.

Interesting idea. My question is this: are IP's sleepers rated for 66/67's speeds? On their current routes, I don't think they operate anywhere where MAS is above 79mph.

Assuming the matter of employer and union could be resolved, I think there would be a risk of degrading the brand by offering a no-frills service with one attendant and a coffee machine when they're trying to attract people to luxury, waited-on-hand-and-foot operations elsewhere; if things get that far, maybe they should think of another name just for that service. Probably not Pullman Lite, but something to indicate a more spartan service.

Since only meal NYP-WAS or WAS-NYP would be a very early breakfast, I think that could be accommodated
in a pullman service with decent coffee, juice, very nice breakfast rolls. If, however, onward service to
VA...different story.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Again we revisit the key issue I have previously addressed around here.

1. The Attendants for any such service immediately outlined would be employed by ________?

Iowa Pacific/Pullman

Gilbert B Norman wrote:2. Would these employees be covered by Agreement?

Only if IP/Pullman has a CBA in place.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:If 2 is negative, best be prepared to fill the car with passengers at Boston and all destined to Washington.

I don't see why that would be the case......Iowa Pacific is running their trains essentially as "private varnish" on the end of the Amtrak trains. There are no cross ticketing arrangements via Amtrak nor is it covered under the same contract of carriage.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Now if I P and Amtrak enter into a lease of equipment and if Agreement Amtrak employees staff those cars, that's a different story. But somehow I think Mr. Ellis' business plan envisions non-Agreement employees.

That would appear to be the case on the CONO at present.

Tadman wrote:Over on the Viewliner II thread, some folks mention that there probably still isn't enough new sleepers to run 66/67. I suggested it might be a good Iowa Pacific/Pullman project provided they could ticket through Amtrak. Others noted that the Pullman brand might be too expensive. I wanted to move that discussion over to the correct thread and hear your thoughts. The pricing issue is pertinent but I think it would be fairy easy for Pullman to put a no-frills sleeper with one attendant and a coffee machine on the route - you don't have nearly as much overhead to cover if it's not the deluxe white-jacket experience.

Any train running mostly on the NEC would be a bad choice for heritage equipment, including Train 66/67. The new Viewliner 2 equipment is being purchased so Amtrak can eliminate heritage equipment, while eliminating the old worn out it's adding the new and faster. This allows trains reaching 125 mph on the NEC, not restricted to 110 mph and slower speeds.
Trains that leave the corridor, Crescent, Silver Services, Cardinal, probably wouldn't be hurt with an occasional heritage car in their consist, just portions of their routes is the NEC, but Train 66/67 entire route is the NEC. Other trains with little if any NEC trackage, Lake Shore Limited, Capital Limited would be better having heritage equipment in their consists, very little of their tracks is rated fro 125 mph speeds.

I realize that Train 66/67 schedule is the slowest for the NEC today, but that doesn't mean it will remain so once it receives new baggage cars.

electricron wrote:

Tadman wrote:Over on the Viewliner II thread, some folks mention that there probably still isn't enough new sleepers to run 66/67. I suggested it might be a good Iowa Pacific/Pullman project provided they could ticket through Amtrak. Others noted that the Pullman brand might be too expensive. I wanted to move that discussion over to the correct thread and hear your thoughts. The pricing issue is pertinent but I think it would be fairy easy for Pullman to put a no-frills sleeper with one attendant and a coffee machine on the route - you don't have nearly as much overhead to cover if it's not the deluxe white-jacket experience.

Any train running mostly on the NEC would be a bad choice for heritage equipment, including Train 66/67. The new Viewliner 2 equipment is being purchased so Amtrak can eliminate heritage equipment, while eliminating the old worn out it's adding the new and faster. This allows trains reaching 125 mph on the NEC, not restricted to 110 mph and slower speeds.
Trains that leave the corridor, Crescent, Silver Services, Cardinal, probably wouldn't be hurt with an occasional heritage car in their consist, just portions of their routes is the NEC, but Train 66/67 entire route is the NEC. Other trains with little if any NEC trackage, Lake Shore Limited, Capital Limited would be better having heritage equipment in their consists, very little of their tracks is rated fro 125 mph speeds.

I realize that Train 66/67 schedule is the slowest for the NEC today, but that doesn't mean it will remain so once it receives new baggage cars.

See,I think you have it backwards. Amtrak doesn't really care if 66/67 is all that slow. It's designed to be slow because it's run at night when there can be multiple slow orders due to maintenance, it's sometimes run under diesel power and there's little incentive to speed it up.

A faster train would have to leave Boston later which is of marginal use to many travelers or arrive in WAS earlier, which is also of marginal use.

On the other hand, once they start running the Crescent, Silver Service etc on a first time table, they'll be loath to run it slower because they'll start to interfere with all the other train slots.

Also note that 66/67 do operate beyond the NEC (to/from Newport News).