Return of Daily LD Service

The whole premise of the Trains article is flawed...

With sufficient capacity, lower prices can attract more revenue where travel demand is elastic.

It's not a lack of low fare capacity that makes people avoid trains.... LDs have operated well below 50% for years in coach, and elastic demand isn't shopping for a sleeper or roomette at Amtrak's price points.

It's all about the schedule. Who wants to leave at 11pm and arrive at 6am?... Who wants to ride thru the Rocky Mountains in total darkness?

There's nothing experiental about a thousand miles of corn, wheat or sand.



Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

eolesen wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 10:08 am It's all about the schedule. Who wants to leave at 11pm and arrive at 6am?... Who wants to ride thru the Rocky Mountains in total darkness?

There's nothing experiental about a thousand miles of corn, wheat or sand.

To solve the schedule issue, you need to run more trains. You need a 2 round trip per day schedule on the long distance services.

Can you do that now? No. The freight companies will demand Amtrak fund track expansions, even though rail traffic is going up and it would benefit them more to just lay down more track now.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 4:36 pm

eolesen wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 10:08 am It's all about the schedule. Who wants to leave at 11pm and arrive at 6am?... Who wants to ride thru the Rocky Mountains in total darkness?

To solve the schedule issue, you need to run more trains. You need a 2 round trip per day schedule on the long distance services.

The TX Eagle is often down to running one transition sleeper, one diner-lounge, and two coaches cars. On the few days per week it is extended to LA, Amtrak adds a regular sleeper and coach. So it is either a 4 car or 6 car train. There are not 8 cars or 12 cars amount of passengers on the route to justify two round trips trains per day.
The purpose of having sleeper cars on trains is to run them overnight. When you have trains running at 2 am, eventually they reach stations at 2 am. You wish to eliminate trains reaching stations at 2 am, stop running the trains at 2 am. Good luck providing long haul passengers with services between NY and Midwest, NY and Florida, Midwest and Texas, Midwest and California, and Midwest and Northwest without sleeper trains.

eolesen wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 10:08 amIt's all about the schedule. Who wants to leave at 11pm and arrive at 6am?... Who wants to ride thru the Rocky Mountains in total darkness?

If it is "all about the schedule" why did you complain about the lack of cars a few posts ago?
Or is this a case of Amtrak not doing anything right?

The schedule is a challenge for any train that runs more than a few hours (which by definition is all LD trains). One cannot run 750+ miles and not have to choose where the train will be running at night or non-optimal times. Amtrak has chosen to serve the endpoints with the best times.

Afternoon and evening departures from Chicago following morning arrivals. Serving Cleveland at 3am isn't "good". (1:45am or 5:38am EB, 2:59am or 3:45am WB) Neither is serving Cincinnati at 3:17am (1:41am WB). How would YOU fix that? Earlier departures and later arrivals at Chicago that would destroy that ridership?

One needs to look at the schedule for the entire route. Do the math. On long runs one cannot have every stop be at the most optimal time. Even if one adds additional frequencies (at great expense) there will still be some point on the line where the time or view is inconvenient at some station.

justalurker66 wrote: If it is "all about the schedule" why did you complain about the lack of cars a few posts ago?
Or is this a case of Amtrak not doing anything right?

You either read incorrectly or are making a bad assumption. I've complained about the configuration of cars and over-dependence on bilevel equipment, but never the lack of equipment.....

But yeah, goverment rarely gets anything right when it comes to directly running a service.


Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 4:36 pm

eolesen wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 10:08 am It's all about the schedule. Who wants to leave at 11pm and arrive at 6am?... Who wants to ride thru the Rocky Mountains in total darkness?

There's nothing experiental about a thousand miles of corn, wheat or sand.

To solve the schedule issue, you need to run more trains. You need a 2 round trip per day schedule on the long distance services.

Can you do that now? No. The freight companies will demand Amtrak fund track expansions, even though rail traffic is going up and it would benefit them more to just lay down more track now.

Or, In most cases, Relaying track that was ripped up for tax/PTC reasons.

scratchyX1 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 27, 2021 9:43 am

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 4:36 pm

eolesen wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 10:08 am It's all about the schedule. Who wants to leave at 11pm and arrive at 6am?... Who wants to ride thru the Rocky Mountains in total darkness?

There's nothing experiental about a thousand miles of corn, wheat or sand.

To solve the schedule issue, you need to run more trains. You need a 2 round trip per day schedule on the long distance services.

Can you do that now? No. The freight companies will demand Amtrak fund track expansions, even though rail traffic is going up and it would benefit them more to just lay down more track now.

Or, In most cases, Relaying track that was ripped up for tax/PTC reasons.

I often wonder if a customer comes to CSX or NS and wants a new 100 car freight run everyday, if they would tell the customer they can't find a "slot" for them unless they pay millions for passing sidings so they have the capacity to accommodate them.

eolesen wrote: ↑Mon Dec 27, 2021 1:07 am

justalurker66 wrote:If it is "all about the schedule" why did you complain about the lack of cars a few posts ago?
Or is this a case of Amtrak not doing anything right?

You either read incorrectly or are making a bad assumption. I've complained about the configuration of cars and over-dependence on bilevel equipment, but never the lack of equipment.....

Or

eolesen wrote: ↑Sat Dec 25, 2021 8:08 pmWithout coaches how can anyone really argue that LD trains are critical transportation to rural communities?....

I suppose that is a configuration complaint but I see it as complaining about the lack of coaches.

I hate to put words in mouths but I think Mr. Olesen was commenting on the idea of a coachless sleeper only train not being feasible.

Yup. The notion of all-sleeper services would completely undercut the oft-quoted need for rural essential transportation by rail.... and that has nothing to do with availability of equipment.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

eolesen wrote: ↑Mon Dec 27, 2021 10:12 pm Yup. The notion of all-sleeper services would completely undercut the oft-quoted need for rural essential transportation by rail.... and that has nothing to do with availability of equipment.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

Additionally, the only train in Amtrak's lineup that avoids stopping at small cities and towns altogether is the Auto Train, and it still runs coaches. It is the only Amtrak ran train I foresee that might ever become an exclusive sleeper train.

If it is "all about the schedule" why does the existence or number of coach cars matter?
One could schedule the perfect train (actually one can't for aforementioned reasons) but still have a train that doesn't serve the "under served" that need a cheap ride.

The need for coaches is pretty simple. Amtrak exists to provide basic and essential transportation to rural communities. Take away that essential transportation component, and you've just eliminated any justification for its continued funding outside the NEC.

And to be perfectly clear, I'm fine eliminating that justification and the funding.

Schedule is another issue altogether, and honestly anyone who doesn't understand that schedule is Amtrak's biggest downfall has no business even discussing its future.

The only way any mode of transportation is going to be successful as if it can get people where they want to go quickly when they want to travel and at a price they're willing to pay.

Amtrak fails on most of those points outside the NEC and Autotrain.

Schedule is two legs of that three-legged stool.

They are an unwanted tenant on about every host railroad in the country, and nothing the government tries to do is ever going to change that absent Amtrak paying full rate for use of host railroads.

If Amtrak where to pay full rate, they might be able to achieve their published schedule and get people where they want to be on time. They might be able to add frequencies and new services. They might be able to attract business.





Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

Nah doubt it, pay them more they would still find a way to prong Amtrak. A few reasons off the top of my head.

They do not like to slow their stuff down they will say too much fuel to get them back up to speed burn up to many brake shoes, dynamic brake grids slowing them down.

Maintaining the physical plant, I get it lots of money involved here. You have to WANT to spend it on your physical plant. NOT put it in your shareholders pockets. One or two Amtrak trains a day paying full rate will not make that much difference. Funny every year around Xmas temporary speeds magically disappear so "Santa's" sleigh can get across the RR. Those UPS trains $$$, the rest of the year MEH

Dispatching, it has gotten much worse over the years. The new kids cant or are not allowed to dispatch. I do not believe they even make trips over the territories they are qualified on any longer. The old timers understood time and distance knew the section of railroad they were dispatching (which was much smaller) and kept stuff moving with ease.

Precision scheduled railroading or as I like to call it Pretty sh!tty railroading. Its a money grab plain and simple.