Lake Shore Limited - New Schedule

Otto Vondrak wrote:Are we still talking about the LAKE SHORE LIMITED?


As long as we're talking about the Boston area, can someone describe the current situation with the Boston-Albany section?

-otto-

I guess not lately, I agree with you, this should be an LSL (Late For Sure Ltd) thread, not a Boston Area thread

It would seem that regardless of the schedule of the Boston section of the Lakeshore, you will surely be able to make a connection to the Downeaster...just not the one you had planned on!

Based on my last eastbound Lakeshore experience (4+ hrs. late at Springfield) you would not make the connection in Boston. You might even miss the last MBTA train!

I noticed that it arrived in Boston on time both last Saturday and Sunday...

<i>As long as we're talking about the Boston area, can someone describe the current situation with the Boston-Albany section?</i>

What is there to describe? It's a train. It moves. It's usually 1-2 hours late. It uses a P42 in Phase 5 (whoosh) paint. Car consist varies.

The Viewliner on there has to be there most days, because it's used to cycle the BOS-NPN Viewliner out of the Chicago pool (unless things has changed recently).

According to the website, first trip for a Sleeper on 449 is May 7. #67 has been without its BOS-WAS Sleeper for most of the winter; no definite return date has been set.

Lastly, Hialeah is the "home base" for the Viewliners, even though it would appear that Sunnyside would be a logical assumption; all of them get there for periodic maintenance.

I believe the "current situation" is that it's still a stub, BOS-ALB train, until at least May. However, there is no guarantee that the through service will return on time.

Otto

The reason for the stub train on the B&A side is because of the lack of equipment. As we all know Amtrak had a policy of defered maintence Mr Gunn is attempting to over come this problem. I have heard the LSL will be going back to its normal consist in May?

The schedule change will effect arrival times on the EB trip into Boston , the train will be right in the middle of rush hour traffic on the MBCR right out of Worchester. Having had a few trips were this has happened and done the B&A shuffle to get around MBCR trains I dont think anyone thought this out.

Otto,

The Lake Shore will going back to its old B&A consist sometime in May the stub train running between ALB & BOS was due to equipment shortages and lack of maintence on sleepers ect.

Gilbert the East Bound schedule on the B&A, while it may look good on paper it puts you right in the middle of rush hour from WOR in. Have you ever done the B&A shuffle? You will if the train is so much as 5 min late. Know for a fact if its 5 late or more CSX loses its incentive money.

Lastly anyone who has used the LSL in the winter knows that its either late or extremly late which with the new schedule for both the EB & WB portions they could both meet in ALB, then its a flip of the coin to see which train is going to be worked first.

LSL meets at or near Albany aren't necessarily a bad thing. Check out this photo I took from the rear of the WB LSL Dec. 26, 2002, the day after a Christmas snow storm dumped over 26 inches in the Berkshires.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=40645

Wow, nice picture. I have changed my plans for the return trip, going to NYC on one of the Empire Service Trains and then from NYC to BOS. This will make it more likely to connect with the downeaster, and if I miss it I could take one of the MBTA trains. I would hate to miss the last MBTA train!

A little off topic, but worth mentioning... I am going to Boston on Thursday for an interview at MBCR for an assistant conductor position.

ok, now back on topic.. the Lake Shore Limited. I really like taking Amtrak trains because of the (usual) friendliness of the crew and the other passengers. True, the lateness can be a pain sometimes but overall I find the trips enjoyable. One of these days I hope to take the LSL all the way to Chicago and Back, just for fun.

So why is the new LSL westbound schedule faster (arriving into Chicago at 8:55 a.m. as opposed to 9:20 a.m.) and the eastbound LSL is arriving into NYP about an hour later (after factoring in a new 7:20 p.m. departure out of Chicago)? It appears the eastbound train is adding time to the schedule in Ohio. Anyone know what is causing this? Seems odd.

I was on the eastbound LSL this past weekend. We were an hour late leaving NYP, but got back on schedule upon entering Ohio. Didn't make up any time between NYP and Albany b/c the 3:45 p.m. Empire local was dispatched ahead of us (dumb move in my opinion). We arrived into Chicago on time! The amount of padding is amazing. Seems as though the LSL has greatly improved its timekeeping this past month. I was monitoring its train status prior to my trip.

Last couple of trips over the B&A with the new schedule in effect. Mon 1 and a half hours late into Bos, Wed 2 and a half hours late into Bos. Those are just the 2 trips I was on. Over three months on time into Bos gone with one stroke of a pen. As I said before new EB schedule not as good as it looks

I have no data to back this up, but IMHO lengthening train schedules has rarely helped Amtrak improve OT performance, except on its own track. That's because most delay-causing problems are the result of either (a.) freight traffic interference/congestion, or (b.) equipment maintenance issues, i.e. breakdowns en route, as opposed to track conditions.

If you lengthen running time, these issues do not go away. Meets will still have to be scheduled and poorly maintained equipment will still break down. These problems are fixable, however. Amtrak can up incentive payments and it can improve maintenance practices to avoid breakdowns. This, of course, requires MONEY!!

The $64 million question is whether investing in OT performance improvements for pokey trains like the Lake Shore, Sunset, Cardinal, Coast Starlight, etc. will generate sufficient revenue gains to offset the cost of improving OT performance. I.e., on-time performance can be managed. You just need the will and resources to do it.

Who is this "you" we refer to? Surely we don't mean only Amtrak. Let's include the freight "hosts" in this discussion. Some clearly have the "will" to run Amtrak trains properly; others clearly don't.

When you throw more money at hosts who don't, you simply create a vicious cycle: Every time a host feels it needs more money from Amtrak, it need only revert to its bad old ways. Call it a rail "fan" approved protection racket.

As is frequently--and bitterly--pointed out, none of Amtrak's carded schedules represents any kind of speed record. As I point out, each is the product of negotiation between Amtrak and its host(s). There should be no question that a host railroad should be expected to do its part to keep Amtrak trains on the advertised. At no extra charge.

Incentives to run the Lake Shore in 16 hours? Sure. To keep it on time at its current schedule? No way. A real fan wouldn't keep urging Amtrak to pay blackmail. Didn't we say we wanted Amtrak to keep a tight grip on expenses?

mattfels wrote:"Who is this "you" we refer to? Surely we don't mean only Amtrak. Let's include the freight "hosts" in this discussion. Some clearly have the "will" to run Amtrak trains properly; others clearly don't."

"When you throw more money at hosts who don't, you simply create a vicious cycle: Every time a host feels it needs more money from Amtrak, it need only revert to its bad old ways. Call it a rail "fan" approved protection racket."


As is frequently--and bitterly--pointed out, none of Amtrak's carded schedules represents any kind of speed record. As I point out, each is the product of negotiation between Amtrak and its host(s). There should be no question that a host railroad should be expected to do its part to keep Amtrak trains on the advertised. At no extra charge.

Incentives to run the Lake Shore in 16 hours? Sure. To keep it on time at its current schedule? No way. A real fan wouldn't keep urging Amtrak to pay blackmail. Didn't we say we wanted Amtrak to keep a tight grip on expenses?

The freight railroads also have their own customers who demand on-time delivery. It is in their best interest to keep trains moving, as well. Unfortunately, so far they have been unable to attract the capital necessary to make the needed investments.

Incentives aren't rail fan approved. They are market approved. The law of supply and demand comes into play, here. Track space is a scarce commodity and it is going to go to the highest bidder.

In the freight business, if you want guaranteed delivery you pay a premium, just as in the printing business you pay more for two-day turnaround than you do for two-week turnaround. It's called a "Rush" job or "Special." It is only worth doing if the benefits outweigh the costs of paying extra for better service.

Applying it to the Amtrak situation, if Amtrak pays CSX a $5,000 bonus to deliver the Auto Train to Sanford on time, while Florida Power & Light is paying $10,000 for on-time delivery of a unit coal train to a nearby power plant, guess who's going to get priority.

Is it fair? No. Does it optimize passenger rail? No. Can anything be done about it? Doubtful. David Gunn could complain till the cows come home, but he'll hardly get anything more than lip service. Remember, Dick Davidson has George W. Bush in his pocket. Congress could pass laws requiring passengers trains to get priority, but most likely the freight RRs would prevail in court to get them overturned.

Long-term solution is some kind of public-private partnership that helps railroads raise needed funds to reinvest in order to upgrade and expand capacity to better compete with other modes.