Brainstorming a rational LD route system

David Benton wrote:

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sun Dec 20, 2020 9:51 pm Strangely enough, in routing the train in my first novel... I found that yes, Union Pacific has a Welton branch off the Phoenix subdivison, which can serve moving the Sunset Limited into Phoenix. You may need to lay down new track, but they still got the right-of-way.

I believe the track is still there , and been considered for a light rail or commuter line.

It's intact most of the way and has been used for storage, but if we are spending endless money, simply run new track along I-17 from Casa Grande to downtown Phoenix... the existing Phoenix to Picacho line ain't exactly straight or speedy, and Casa Grande to Phoenix has been identified as a preferred routing for PHX TUS rail service. Slap a locomotive on each end and you wouldn't need to wye at PHX or do a 30+ mile backup move...

Or better yet, lay new rail Palm Springs to downtown Phoenix along I-10... other than Yuma, you don't miss any population centers.

Put a line up from Blythe along us93 and you've got a flatter route PHX LAS.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

UP has severed the ex-SP Phoenix sub at Kofa AZ. There's no service beyond Buckeye except for possible car storage and the Nuc power plant.
BNSF Phoenix sub to Wickenburg/Matthie has commuter service possibility

Regarding the Pennsylvanian; what if you ran two trains per day, but one on an overnight schedule? For example the same trainset arrives in Pittsburgh in the early evening, is cleaned & restocked during the layover, then departs late evening to arrive in NYC the next morning, and then vice-versa. The Twilight Pennsylvanian would have fewer stops than the Daylight Pennsylvanian (probably only at Harrisburg between Pittsburgh & Philadelphia). If the sleeping car stays attached to the day trains space can be sold as First Class day compartments. Assuming Amtrak is purchasing new sleeping cars some all roomette models with shared facilities (& an ADA en suite) would be perfect for routes like these or the overnight Northeast Regionals).

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Alphaboi wrote: ↑Wed Dec 23, 2020 2:04 am Regarding the Pennsylvanian; what if you ran two trains per day, but one on an overnight schedule? For example the same trainset arrives in Pittsburgh in the early evening, is cleaned & restocked during the layover, then departs late evening to arrive in NYC the next morning, and then vice-versa. The Twilight Pennsylvanian would have fewer stops than the Daylight Pennsylvanian (probably only at Harrisburg between Pittsburgh & Philadelphia). If the sleeping car stays attached to the day trains space can be sold as First Class day compartments. Assuming Amtrak is purchasing new sleeping cars some all roomette models with shared facilities (& an ADA en suite) would be perfect for routes like these or the overnight Northeast Regionals).

This was discussed in the Pennsy thread. The run time (barely 8 hours PGH-PHL) and freight traffic makes an overnight questionable from NYC. It's a little better if you do PGH-PHL-WAS, but it's still questionable (because freight).

Doing tunnels Pittsburgh through to Harrisburg? That cuts the time between Pittsburgh to Harrisburg to roughly 2 hours vs 5.5 hours on Norfolk Southern rail. That's not "overnight" territory.

Edit for clarity.

Why are we discussing a regional, state subsidized train on a thread supposedly dedicated for "rational" long distance trains? Additionally, is having two long distance trains on the same route "rational"? The only way it can be "rational" is if the routes diverged slightly, like the Silver Meteor and Silver Star, or there is too much business for one train to handle. It has been decades if not scores since the latter has been true.

I think routes from the Midwest to Florida/Southeast are the big missing gap in the eastern states. Routes from Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland through Atlanta to South Carolina or Florida would seem to be missed opportunities especially with snowbirds. It might also serve the purpose of making Atlanta a passenger hub for traffic to South Carolina, Florida and Tennessee

I'm not going to spend too much time on here other than a few comments:
1) Fund it well and make sure folks understand it's a service as much as anything else, just like we don't expect the highway system, the armed forces, the FDA, etc to make a profit.
2) Return Silver Palm. Actually have probably 4+ LD trains to Florida, with at least one starting in Boston. And probably another starting in the Midwest going through Atlanta.
3) Day train from WAS-ATL running basically the reverse of the current Crescent
4)Replace the LSL with the "21st Century Limited" (in name) and make 448/449 a separate train to CHI from BOS with skipping smaller stops with the 21st.
5) Southwest Scout, 12 hours later than Chief, coach only.
6) Bring back the Pioneer
7) In general, where feasible, add "spokes" to existing LD trains with via shorter distance trains (i.e. 2 hours so) or bus lines. Basically add a feeder network.
8) Denver-Chi train (Plains Zephyr?)
9) Basically add not LD trains, but more Corridor trains that perhaps overlap/interchange (see 6 and 8).
10) Fund it well

electricron wrote: ↑Wed Dec 23, 2020 9:22 am Why are we discussing a regional, state subsidized train on a thread supposedly dedicated for "rational" long distance trains? Additionally, is having two long distance trains on the same route "rational"? The only way it can be "rational" is if the routes diverged slightly, like the Silver Meteor and Silver Star, or there is too much business for one train to handle. It has been decades if not scores since the latter has been true.

I think the way forward is to remove the distinction between regional and long distance trains. If they operate over the same route they need to hare resources and interconnectivity. This is part of my plan , once I clear the pre Xmas rush , i will post.

Greg: The daytime Crescent route should be Atlanta - CLI - Raleigh - Richmond - WASH. That provides a thru train to stations east of Greensboro that as far as I know SOU RR never had a thru train. . As well A direct train to Raleigh, Petersburg, Richmond , that has not had single train service from ATL since long ago SAL service. Once the "S" line is restored travel time will be about the same as the Crescent route CLT <> WASH. The growth in NC will provide many potential passengers on this route.

You may say that Charlottesville is loosing service but a daily Cardinal would fill the gap at approximately a day time Crescent will pass.

My wish list would have a dedicated funding source for Amtrak (like the Interstate System) instead of the ad hoc system we have had in place for the last 50 years. (With "Amtrak Joe" in the White House and if there is a Democratic Senate or at least a few Republicans willing to vote for a big green infrastructure bill--this could happen).

I would then like to see Amtrak purchase and maintain their own routes using abandoned ROWs or ownership of lightly used freight routes so passenger railroading is no longer at the mercy of freight congestion or corporations that don't have to answer to Amtrak. Separation of freight from passenger railroading is essential in an age of mile long PSR freights.

Frequency of all LD routes must be a minimum of two a day. Regional routes at the end of the national routes would have more service.

Use the California model of connecting Amtrak to through buses to serve many intermediate points with seamless connections and ticketing. Subsidize these services.

As others have pointed out, we need more service in the midwest to the south including building out the routes across Ohio and Indiana. We need to have a national system that links population centers regardless of whether the states are red or blue so we don't have the huge gaps in service that we have now--e.g. no eastern service other than through Chicago, no midwest Florida service, etc.

Keep the Empire Builder. Much like the postal system, there is something to be said for a national passenger service model that strives for universal service. Leaving the entire upper third of the country without any rail service--even if not heavily used--is not ideal. (I also suspect bus and flight service in Montana and Idaho may be quite limited so the rail service may actually be a lifeline for oilfield workers and others).

west point wrote: ↑Wed Dec 23, 2020 9:54 pm Greg: The daytime Crescent route should be Atlanta - CLI - Raleigh - Richmond - WASH. That provides a thru train to stations east of Greensboro that as far as I know SOU RR never had a thru train. . As well A direct train to Raleigh, Petersburg, Richmond , that has not had single train service from ATL since long ago SAL service. Once the "S" line is restored travel time will be about the same as the Crescent route CLT <> WASH. The growth in NC will provide many potential passengers on this route.

You may say that Charlottesville is loosing service but a daily Cardinal would fill the gap at approximately a day time Crescent will pass.

I like the idea.

In general I think like mentioned in regards to the Silver Service, where you have more than one train on the same "route" it really should be somewhat different routes, or at least station stops. For example, my suggestion of the NYP-ALB-CHI "21st Century Limited" and BOS-ALB-CHI "Lake Shore Limited" would have the same major stops, but in between might stop at different stations to give a bit more coverage.

One key factor in something like a day ATL-WAS train is at least at some stations you're getting more efficiency out of your resources. Atlanta is a great example of 2 peak times (morning/night) with nothing in between. So, make it serve more trains.

And I'd add, for Silver Service, I'm comfortable with as many as 4-5 a day over similar, but slightly different routes with different endpoints in Florida (but most should probably stop in/near Orlando).

electricron wrote: ↑Wed Dec 23, 2020 9:22 am Why are we discussing a regional, state subsidized train on a thread supposedly dedicated for "rational" long distance trains? Additionally, is having two long distance trains on the same route "rational"? The only way it can be "rational" is if the routes diverged slightly, like the Silver Meteor and Silver Star, or there is too much business for one train to handle. It has been decades if not scores since the latter has been true.

The reason is the state supported services offer more choice and may do more to boost ridership than speeding up LD service. Chicago to Galesburg supported by 1x a day Illinois Zephyr. Good choice over 3x a week Chief or Zephyr. In the expansion plans for Nashville-Atlanta this would be a day train, not LD service. For some city pairs need a medium distance train say Chicago-Denver. If you go back in the day CZ or DZ made different city stops.

It may be more reasonable to supply coach, lounge, business class type seating & don't have to carry full sleepers or diners.

GWoodle wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 4:14 pm

electricron wrote: ↑Wed Dec 23, 2020 9:22 am Why are we discussing a regional, state subsidized train on a thread supposedly dedicated for "rational" long distance trains?

The reason is the state supported services offer more choice and may do more to boost ridership than speeding up LD service. Chicago to Galesburg supported by 1x a day Illinois Zephyr. Good choice over 3x a week Chief or Zephyr. In the expansion plans for Nashville-Atlanta this would be a day train, not LD service. For some city pairs need a medium distance train say Chicago-Denver. If you go back in the day CZ or DZ made different city stops.

It may be more reasonable to supply coach, lounge, business class type seating & don't have to carry full sleepers or diners.

Please stop advocating for a rational regional train network on a thread supposedly dedicated for rational long distance trains. If you only wish to discuss regional trains, there are plenty of other threads to do so than this one. Thanks for being understanding.

My thoughts are:

I don't have a comprehensive plan thought out, but I do have a few discrete ideas:

• Restore the Floridian in some way, cutting diagonally from Chicago to Atlanta and Jacksonville, probably using the existing pass near Chattanooga to cross the Appalachians. One of the drawbacks to the existing schedule is that the only choices from the Southeast either go straight west to Texas, straight north to DC-NY-BOS, or take weird routes. If all options are on the table, few people will choose the one that requires you to go through Washington or New Orleans to get from Orlando to Minneapolis.
• Since the only LD I've ridden is 449, I'd say regarding that: make it more of a Limited by removing stops at Framingham, Schenectady, and Utica; Utica is an hour's drive from Syracuse and is also well-served by the Empire Service locals, Schenectady is a single CDTA ticket to ALB and similarly sees Empire Service, and Framingham is on the MBTA commuter rail to South Station or Worcester. (I can't speak to any of the stops further west, and Pittsfield has no other service at all.)
• Given that the cost structure and relative volume largely forces Amtrak to be a more-expensive (and yet, obviously, slower) option than flying for any distant city pair, make the service worth the extra money by bringing back the bling. Again, imagine for a given party that all options (fly, train, self-drive) are on the table and ultimately they are destination-driven; what makes Amtrak compelling?

At the risk of getting yelled at for bringing regionals into the discussion, I would agree with markhb on the topic of LD trains having limited stops. Not an end-to-end express, obviously, but take advantage of more regional situations to collect and distribute the LD trains. You already do so with some regionals that branch off of the LD routes, but within the LD routes themselves, using the LSL as an example, I agree that the Empire Service could operate as a collector to bring LSL riders from some of the smaller and closer stations on the route (particularly in the eastern end of the state where you have stations so close) and meet up with the LD routes. I understand in some cases you'd add new trains to the mix, but if we're looking pie-in-the-sky here, why not? It could also provide the opportunity to add some more small stations in between on other LD routes and keep the LD routes moving quickly.

Just as a purely hypothetical example, without being super familiar with the economics of the stations in between, but run a smaller train from Schenectady to Syracuse, stopping at all the stations in between, that would arrive at SYR about half an hour before the westbound LSL's scheduled arrival. This would be a "guaranteed connection" stop, meaning if by some fluke the LSL managed to pass the collector train, it would have to wait. Turn the collector train and wait for the eastbound LSL, and anyone destined for stations between Syracuse and Schenectady would switch trains in Syracuse. This way the LSL could run full speed ahead to Albany without making a bunch of smaller stops. You could do the same thing from Utica to Albany and vice-versa. It adds trains, it adds turns (or push-pull operation) but it definitely makes the LSL a "Limited" in the original sense of the term from the pre-consolidation railroads. Obviously this is just spitting out a thought, and more research would have to play into where and how you operate your collector/distributors.

The same could be done for other LD trains, maybe even the Maple Leaf between NYC and Buffalo. I'm not entirely familiar with the station spacing on trains out west, such as the Empire Builder, but you could probably do the same thing to speed that train up some, and also add some smaller stops in between, even if they become "flag stops" in a sense (only stopping if there are tickets purchased where that station is an origin or destination for that specific day).

I know this would also complicate some matters in that you'd start and end with empty-ish trains, and that would probably cause concern for some. But you don't offer amenities on these either, they're simply there to get you to a "limited" station for the LD train and inter-city travel within their territories.