Restarting the Broadway Limited

Notable:

Per Street Insider Canadian Pacific has terminated any attempt at merging with Norfolk Southern.

Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd. (NYSE: CP) announced that it has terminated efforts to merge with Norfolk Southern Corp. (NS), including the withdrawal of a resolution asking NS shareholders to vote in favour of good-faith negotiations between the two companies. No further financial offers or overtures to meet with the NS board of directors are planned at this time.

Any barriers this merger attempt may have presented to interest by Amtrak in extending or increasing services on NS owned tracks are now moot.

gokeefe wrote:One thing I have found myself reflecting on a lot lately is the importance of running daylight trains regardless of location. Overnight service can be great when you're talking about passenger demand that rides solely for the sake of endpoints, but that isn't the case at all with so much of modern day Amtrak. Amtrak is at its best when it provides daytime transportation options for communities on intermediate points especially those in air markets with high fares.

Unfortunately for any LD train someone has to wind up in the graveyard shift (IMHO midnight-6am). The key to me is to travel through small populated areas at that time rather than bigger ones and hurt ridership in a major city (like the Cardinal passes through Cincinnati in the graveyard shift both ways hurting ridership there). When scheduling a NYP-CHI train, I thought it would be a priority to schedule it so Ohio wouldn't be in the graveyard shift again. Pennsylvania wasn't as much a concern since the Pennsylvanian (and Keystone for trains east of HAR) serves these cities at better times. I would schedule the Capitol Limited on an Ohio friendly schedule as there hardly is any traffic between PGH-WAS but that would hurt WAS passengers traveling west of CHI. The Broadway Limited (or Liberty Limited) doesn't have to worry too much about western transfers because the LSL exists and the Pennsylvanian/CL (although it's a transfer) would still be an option for PA passengers.

Suburban Station wrote:The original Pennsylvanian schedule was PHL PGH (Then NYP PGH). It ran opposite the Broadway to give daylight service to PA.
I would suggest that Amtrak would be best suited reviving the Broadway Name and not seeking state reimbursement for the service.
Pennsylvania would be adequately served by two state funded trains to Pittsburgh. One of those trains should be extended to Pontiac (the morning train out of NY) which would add CLE, TOL, and DET to day train service.
the Broadway should run roughly on your schedule except it should run the fastest route between Chicago and PGH. This route is actually competitive with driving and should not be detoured through MI on its only daylight run. A third train, though, should free the other two trains for modifications and if you really want a MI connection then concentrate on running one of the other two trains in that way. Seems to me the best time would be evening (especially once the time is removed from the MI runs). By scheduling it this way you service MI in a timely fashion and the overnight train stays overnight CHI-PGH but adds overnight MI-NEC. I'd move the Capitol later, that should be the cleanup train not the LSL. The LSL then becomes the MI train with the only loser being Erie.

Let me see if I understand you correctly.

You want two state supported PGH-NYP trains, one running through to DET via CLE and TOL and a Broadway Limited which would be a third PGH-PHL-NYP train and Amtrak would not seek state reimbursement? That seems very ambitious to me. Certainly the second train along the Pennsylvanian route is being talked about already. I can see if you extend that train to Michigan you might get some help from Michigan and maybe either CLE or TOL (TOL more so because of the connection to DET). I would imagine the DET-NYP would be early departure and late arrival on each end with times in PGH in the middle of the afternoon?

As for running a CHI-NEC train through Michigan you are suggesting the LSL? I can see that as you get Michigan to upstate New York/Boston and the route is more northern than the Pennsylvanian route is. I think Michigan-East Coast service should happen in some form or at the very least Michigan-Toledo so passengers don't have to take the Thruway buses to/from Toledo to connect to the LSL or CL.

mtuandrew wrote:Good, we're agreed that this train needs to hit Philadelphia.

I feel like we're split on whether this train should be a continuation of the Pennsylvanian or a new train. For that, it's important to note that the Pennsylvanian serves PA and NJ (mostly) in daylight, has an excellent on-time record, and already connects with the Capitol Limited to give a two-seat ride to Chicago. That on-time status would be shot to hell if Amtrak tried to extend the train to Chicago, and would do the eastern states a big injustice.

With a new train NYP-PHL-PGH-CHI, even a paltry 5-car train (bag, sleeper, cafe, two coaches), Amtrak unchains itself from guaranteed connections at either end or middle point. I feel strongly that a Broadway needs something similar to the Three Rivers schedule too, rather than following on the tail of the Pennsylvanian. That provides a needed clean-up train out of NYP (which lets the Lake Shore Limited's schedule float, if desired), it clears the backlog of early passengers out of CHI, and it gives IN, OH, and western PA a daylight train, which hasn't happened since pre-Amtrak days.

As for Michigan, I'm really undecided. I want the train to follow the NS Chicago Line, and eventually the proposed Midwest HSR line Toledo-Ft. Wayne-Chicago, but NS Chicago is choked. The Michigan Central isn't crowded and will eventually get to 90/110 throughout, but it's also a significant detour with a necessary backing move to access DET.

I'm not against the through car option as it seems to work well with the Boston leg of the LSL when it's working (obviously now it's not). Plus, it would be less likely for Amtrak to cancel the through service like they were the full Broadway Limited and Three Rivers trains.

The problem is in the PRIIA proposal they do not wish to change the Pennsylvanian times so the wait times in PGH aren't going to go away. In this case, you can stay in the train and don't have to worry about your bags, but it's still four hours westbound and 5am eastbound. It's certainly an improvement but not that much IMO.

https://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/152/943/PR ... ed-PIP.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If Amtrak/PennDOT runs two trains PGH-NYP perhaps they can push back the current westbound schedule to arrive in PGH closer to midnight (10pm?) to cut the wait time while still having an earlier time for passengers to get to PGH earlier (the earlier one might leave NYP before 8am and arrive around 5pm?)

The other way to help things (in both directions) would be an earlier westbound departure out of PGH and later (after 6am) eastbound arrival from CHI on the Capitol Limited. That would require the CL to leave WAS earlier and arrive later. I am assuming they can't turn the train in WAS between 1:05pm and 4:05pm so that shouldn't be an issue. The 92/29 combo no longer appears on the CL schedule so I'm guessing that's no longer guaranteed (the gap is less than two hours). The 30/91 combo does appear but the gap is exactly two hours and if the train arrives in WAS late passengers are going to miss the Silver Star anyway. Ideally you'd leave WAS and CHI two hours earlier and leave CHI one and a half hour later. That would give a PGH departure of 9:59pm and an arrival at 6:35am. Even if you still had to transfer in PGH the times are way better and way better for passengers who live in Pittsburgh as well. You would still have plenty of time transferring to either the Crescent or Silver Meteor in WAS (2:35pm) and a 3:05pm departure out of WAS isn't going to hurt the 20-29 or 98-29 transfers as both arrive in WAS in the morning.

Philly Amtrak Fan wrote:

Suburban Station wrote:The original Pennsylvanian schedule was PHL PGH (Then NYP PGH). It ran opposite the Broadway to give daylight service to PA.
I would suggest that Amtrak would be best suited reviving the Broadway Name and not seeking state reimbursement for the service.
Pennsylvania would be adequately served by two state funded trains to Pittsburgh. One of those trains should be extended to Pontiac (the morning train out of NY) which would add CLE, TOL, and DET to day train service.
the Broadway should run roughly on your schedule except it should run the fastest route between Chicago and PGH. This route is actually competitive with driving and should not be detoured through MI on its only daylight run. A third train, though, should free the other two trains for modifications and if you really want a MI connection then concentrate on running one of the other two trains in that way. Seems to me the best time would be evening (especially once the time is removed from the MI runs). By scheduling it this way you service MI in a timely fashion and the overnight train stays overnight CHI-PGH but adds overnight MI-NEC. I'd move the Capitol later, that should be the cleanup train not the LSL. The LSL then becomes the MI train with the only loser being Erie.

Let me see if I understand you correctly.

You want two state supported PGH-NYP trains, one running through to DET via CLE and TOL and a Broadway Limited which would be a third PGH-PHL-NYP train and Amtrak would not seek state reimbursement? That seems very ambitious to me. Certainly the second train along the Pennsylvanian route is being talked about already. I can see if you extend that train to Michigan you might get some help from Michigan and maybe either CLE or TOL (TOL more so because of the connection to DET). I would imagine the DET-NYP would be early departure and late arrival on each end with times in PGH in the middle of the afternoon?

As for running a CHI-NEC train through Michigan you are suggesting the LSL? I can see that as you get Michigan to upstate New York/Boston and the route is more northern than the Pennsylvanian route is. I think Michigan-East Coast service should happen in some form or at the very least Michigan-Toledo so passengers don't have to take the Thruway buses to/from Toledo to connect to the LSL or CL.

you got it right. it is ambitious but not outrageous.

mtuandrew wrote:Good, we're agreed that this train needs to hit Philadelphia.

I feel like we're split on whether this train should be a continuation of the Pennsylvanian or a new train. For that, it's important to note that the Pennsylvanian serves PA and NJ (mostly) in daylight, has an excellent on-time record, and already connects with the Capitol Limited to give a two-seat ride to Chicago. That on-time status would be shot to hell if Amtrak tried to extend the train to Chicago, and would do the eastern states a big injustice.

In all fairness to anyone who has posted, I believe the Pennsylvanian serves this route quite well, with the connection to the Capitol Limited noted above. The only service that I can honestly see being improved would be an additional frequency or two of the Pittsburgh-NYC train where there is actually demand for additional services. That is something the states could easily get behind and agree on as well, versus these pipe dreams of extending these services to Michigan or a 4th eastern train into Chicago. If anything they could probably add a daily train between Pittsburgh and Chicago to serve that particular market, but I don't see any ridership gains or any additional ridership beyond that of the Capitol Limited ( would Amtrak be wise to try that idea, maybe ).

num1hendrickfan wrote:
In all fairness to anyone who has posted, I believe the Pennsylvanian serves this route quite well, with the connection to the Capitol Limited noted above. The only service that I can honestly see being improved would be an additional frequency or two of the Pittsburgh-NYC train where there is actually demand for additional services. That is something the states could easily get behind and agree on as well, versus these pipe dreams of extending these services to Michigan or a 4th eastern train into Chicago. If anything they could probably add a daily train between Pittsburgh and Chicago to serve that particular market, but I don't see any ridership gains or any additional ridership beyond that of the Capitol Limited ( would Amtrak be wise to try that idea, maybe ).

The Pennsylvanian-Capitol Limited transfer SUCKS. Let me repeat. SUCKS. If you've never done it, you don't know. You want to spend 8:05-11:59pm or 5:05am-7:30am waiting for a train in a tiny station? I don't.

If you're going to add PGH-CHI then might as well send it to PHL-NYP and let that be the 2nd Pittsburgh-NYC train. Anything just PGH-CHI doesn't help much and would be less than 750 miles so you'd absolutely have to get state support. One train PGH-NYP and one CHI-PGH-NYP. It's not so hard. We had it for most of the time before they canceled the Three Rivers.

IMO the Cardinal is not an "eastern train into Chicago". No one from New York, Washington, Philly, or anyone in between would take it unless they want to spend an extra 6-9 hours traveling (and if the track is downgraded, even longer). Not to mention the less than daily service. At best, you can say they are 2 and a half trains (or 2 and 3/7), not 3. If you want to say LSL and CL over BL fine but you'll never tell me Cardinal over BL. The BL was faster and served bigger markets. So the Broadway should be the "3rd" eastern train to Chicago. I would say the Cardinal is mainly for Indianapolis and Cincinnati if it actually served those markets at decent times but it doesn't.

I completely agree if there's a need to service PGH-CHI during daytime hours and also a second frequency PGH-NYP then it might as well be one train. I do think there is a legitimate question as to whether or not it is possible for a restarted Broadway Limited to achieve this goal in a sensible fashion.

gokeefe wrote:I completely agree if there's a need to service PGH-CHI during daytime hours and also a second frequency PGH-NYP then it might as well be one train. I do think there is a legitimate question as to whether or not it is possible for a restarted Broadway Limited to achieve this goal in a sensible fashion.

since Amtrak has crews in PGH it would certainly be possible to run a day train westbound in the morning. this would be right in their wheelhouse as the station is already staffed and active for the eastbound. the question is who pays? that's four states it touches which is ultimately a serious weakness in 209 policy

An overnight train works great when there is a counter part running in the day time (eg the overnight Silver Meteor and the day-time Palmetto).

The Capitol Limited can't afford to not serve Pittsburgh at some sort of passenger friendly hour. Even though 5 am is not passenger friendly, it's the best that can be done..... IF the Broadway Limited comes back as a separate train, this takes some of the shackles off of the Capitol Limited's schedule. And the mere fact that that the Capitol,Limited can't afford to lose Pittsburgh as a stop should give more strength of a restored Broadway Limited. Make the Broadway the passenger friendly train to/from Pittsburgh.

If you recall, Gunn was trying to get the Capitol Limited into Washington DC prior to 12 noon. Closest it got was 11:59 am WHEN the Three Rivers was still serving Pittsburgh at passenger friendly hours......the goal was to get the Capitol Limited down to using two train sets......if it had an 11 am arrival into DC and 5:30 pm departure from Washington DC - this was doable.

Even when Ohio had daylight running with the Pennsylvanian (when extended to Chicago) it was not a very well patronized train. So one has to wonder - will a second try work? Ohio will not go for a state-supported train.

I just think any East Coast to/from Midwest train is going to have to have a late afternoon departure (Capitol Limited early evening) westbound and an early to evening departure eastbound from the Midwest. Reason being there are still a lot of connections at the end points.

Otherwise, it would be great to have something like the Skyline Connection - in addition to the Broadway. Follow the schedule as someone put together like the Liberty Limited. This way PA stations have daylight service, offset by an evening overnight train, and then travels in daylight west of Pittsburgh.

The route is in excess of 750 miles. No reason at all to worry about funding, this train is either going to get funded directly by Amtrak or it simply isn't going to be run. The only real question is whether or not Amtrak thinks this train is worth running. If running this train, potentially using redistributed existing equipment, allows Amtrak to reduce the operating costs of the Capitol Limited and to improve its schedule then I think this proposal is going to be very compelling to Amtrak. Probably more so than anything else other than restoring sleeping car service to 66/67 (and hopefully a nice name to go with it ....).

When conducting a cost-benefit analysis the equipment operation savings on the Capitol Limited would almost certainly help support a justification for running the train. These are not small dollar amounts. Operating costs for a single Superliner trainset are easily into the millions of dollars per year. Additional revenues from improved passenger counts would factor in as well. In general I think there are a lot of reasons to run this train and very few against it.

electricron wrote:

n2cbo wrote:

Woody wrote:

electricron wrote:

CHTT1 wrote:Somebody's got to pay for it. I would suggest that this fall everybody vote for congresspersons who support Amtrak and would be willing to vote for increased funding. . . .

I wouldn't object for increasing Amtrak funding as long as you include increasing your taxes, or cutting other programs ...

That's the rub isn't it, who's going to pay for it? If you want more, you should pay more.
Here's a thought, how about . . .

Here's a thought, how about raising taxes to pay for wars?
Remember when taxes were increased to pay for Iraq? I don't either. What did it cost to search for "weapons of mass destruction" in the oil fields of Iraq? About a trillion bucks, right, that's one thousand billions. You can squander 1,000 Billions losing a bloody war in the Middle East, but 2 or 3 or 4 Billion a year for Amtrak is just too much?

. . . buy off congress like the defense contractors do. So it won't happen. 8^(

Let's put things into perspective.
Amtrak had 31.6 million trips last year, 15.8 million riders making a round trip. It collected $2.1 Billion in fares, yet required another $1.6 Billion to balance it books. Amtrak earned on average $66.45 per trip from fares, and required an additional $50.63 in subsidy per trip.

The Defense Department employs 3.23 million workers directly, both military and civilians. It had a budget last year of $496 Billion. That averages $153,591 per employee; that's salaries, medical, shelter, and war fighting equipment per employee. . . Is that really too much?

During a period when Amtrak has been starved for investment -- can we have $3 or $4 Billion for 600 or 700 or 800 new single levels cars please? -- we've squandered a Trillion dollars on wars and proxy wars we are losing or have lost.

Afghanistan where the Taliban is gradually retaking the country, Iraq where the factions are frozen into a stalled civil war, Syria where maybe the Russians are winning but we aren't, Yemen where our proxy role in the civil war has gained us nothing, and Libya, which Obama recently called his biggest mistake, oh, and should I list Somalia too?

I don't feel safer now, do you? We pissed away a Trillion dollars but are no more secure than we were on 9/11.

No, FAIL is not good value for money.

Amtrak's role is to provide transportation to those who need it and want it. It does its job and delivers. Can't say that about the latest aircraft carriers or jet fighters, which so far seem useless against ISIS.

We'd be better off following the advice of George Washington, to avoid involvement in foreign wars.

Woody: all I can say is, talk to your representative and senator.

Woody wrote:I don't feel safer now, do you?

As someone who has served in Afghanistan (twice with the Army National Guard) I can tell you with certainty. "You should."

I have been to places that quite frankly were the "heart of darkness" in 2001 (Logar Province). Although I'm sure the Taliban propagandists would love for you to believe that they are "gradually retaking the country" (and that has been their primary message for years now). I am happy to tell you that they are still bottled up in the same nearly unpopulated rural districts where they have made their homes on rock outcroppings, in caves and small hamlets for the past decade and a half. True, Helmand Province has serious challenges but "retaking the country" is their message (and biggest lie).

Don't let them get into your head.

In terms of great infrastructure and economic development opportunities. I strongly support additional spending on infrastructure at all levels and restarting the Broadway Limited service is very high on a list of major opportunities for connecting America's communities with additional passenger rail service. In fact, I would challenge anyone to find another route, not already served by Amtrak, worth restarting that has similar impact in absolute figures and in population densities served than the Broadway Limited.

I mention All Aboard Ohio a lot because they are the only ones I am aware of who want to see this train happen. Ken Prendergast plans to speak at a meeting of Western Pennsylvanians for Passenger Rail on April 25: "Potential for NYC/Pittsburgh - Chicago service via Cleveland, Toledo and Michigan"

http://www.wpprrail.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So if "Ohio" (they represent Ohio after all) is pushing to help us in PA, I think we in PA should work together with Ohio for a train that benefits us both. So that's why I prefer the schedule overnight through PA and better times through Ohio. You scratch our back, we'll scratch yours.