Railroad Forums 

  • Return of the "Daylight"

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #304370  by wigwagfan
 
Noel Weaver wrote:Maybe the best thing to do in this case is to run a daylight train between Seattle and Oakland in each direction.
I've thought long and hard about such a proposal, and theoetically it could work (SP did it for many years!).

My question is, with the various slow orders, could such a train run reliably (or will the train arrive way too late for someone travelling the full extent of the route); and is there really a market for someone wanting to travel 12 hours on a train when they can do it for two hours on a plane, for the same price?

Where there are a lot of stations and a lot of different transportation needs, I can see such a service being successful; but once you leave Eugene going south, there isn't much for 360 miles until you get to Redding (except Klamath Falls).

 #304486  by Vincent
 
I too have scratched out a few possible Starlight timetables with different scheduling scenarios. The biggest obstacle is that with current track conditions it takes a Superliner 24 hours to run SJC-SEA, so 4 train sets are required to offer daily service with good connections south of the Bay Area. Also, with track capacity in the Bay Area so congested, does it make sense to have two trains a day running essentially "discharge only" through the Capitol Corridor? So if the Starlight's recent schedule improvements are for real there isn't a compelling reason to terminate in the Bay Area if the entire LA-SEA schedule can be run with just 4 trainsets.

In a post-PRIIA world there might be some hope for improved running times. If tracks were improved between Dunsmuir and Sacramento and if the California and Cascade rail plans were fully implemented three hours or more might be shaved off the schedule. And if the states wanted to spend some roger bucks and buy new equipment, think what Talgos or other tilt trains could do through the Siskiyous to save more time. So a future Starlight timetable might look like this:

(read down/read up)
1700 SEA 1200
2015 PDX 0845
2230 EUG 0630
0900 SAC 2000
1200 SJC 1700
2200 LAX 0700

With a tight turn in Seattle that schedule could be done with 3 trainsets, but 4 sets would be a more prudent. It's a schedule that's much more business friendly and offers good timings at the major stations but requires cutting about 6 hours off the current running times. Calling Buck Rogers!

 #304756  by wigwagfan
 
With Vincent's proposed schedule, I see one significant improvement that could be made:

The two Portland-Eugene Cascades trains could be moved north, providing more service in the corridor where the passenger loads dictate it (in the Portland-Seattle segment.)

The Starlight/Daylight/whatever could terminate at Portland rather than Seattle, with a cross-platform transfer at PDX both directions. That's four fewer hours (each direction) that the train is on the road, meaning more maintenance opportunity that could be done in Portland. The early morning schedule northbound and late evening schedule southbound minics the Cascades schedule in that stretch, and if need be a dedicated coach could be used (like Chicago-Minneapolis on the Empire Builder) for the Portland-Eugene passengers.

However there is one thing to note; the train would leave Portland SB late enough, that diner meal service wouldn't be really necessary. If the train were just operated PDX-SJC, I wonder if a better solution would be to replace the dining and lounge cars with a table/lounge car (since there isn't much to see at night, anyways), and replace the F&B service with an evening snack service (since it's well past dinner time), and a continential morning breakfast - and possibly include the cost of both with the train fare. The SFO-LAX train could keep the Sightseer (since there's actually scenery to watch) as an extra-fare club car, and maybe a revamped diner that is probably a notch below that of the LD trains, but a notch higher than the San Joaquin or Cascades - continue the table service, but not as formal???
 #1517489  by gokeefe
 
Well ... It's been a few years. Still no Coast Daylight yet but it came up in the Amtrak Expansion topic and seems well worth further discussion right back here.
gokeefe wrote: Mon Aug 19, 2019 11:56 am It took a little bit of digging but the Coast Daylight is most definitely in the planning process in California. Here's the most recent mention from an official document.

Very interesting development. Clearly ongoing for many years and appears to be very close to implementation.
 #1517594  by gokeefe
 
A "Coast Rail Coordinating Council" has been formed along regional and county level entities.

Detail in this report can be found starting at PDF Page 75 of 216.
 #1517879  by gokeefe
 
In case it wasn't clear what the Coast Rail Coordinating Council is supposed to do ...
Primarily, the CRCC is working with the Caltrans Rail Program, Amtrak and Union Pacific to initiate a new train from downtown San Francisco to downtown Los Angeles – the Coast Daylight train.
This is a staffed effort at a full time regional council of governments ... Pretty significant commitment of resources.
 #1518115  by John_Perkowski
 
WHY?

There are no fewer than 20 nonstop flights per day from San Francisco International alone to Los Angeles, Burbank, and Ontario. That’s just Southwest, and doesn’t account for Oakland and San Jose.

Each of those is a 737-700, 800, or at some point, 800 Max. 150 pax per bird.

That’s 3000 seats per day. EVEN ASSUMING 3 hours front and back end for traffic and airport processing, the time in transit is 7 hours.

If Amtrak runs an 18 car train (its old Heritage days max) of 2 units, a baggage, 2 lounges, and 13 coaches, the salable seats are 1040. Add in 11 hours time in transit (a lost workday), and Amtrak’s crappy WiFi, and I don’t see the business case.
 #1518121  by mtuandrew
 
It doesn’t make sense as a business connection; the ideal business schedule would leave San Fran/Los Angeles at dusk, hit San Jose/Oxnard after nightfall, then reach Oxnard/San Jose around dawn and LAX/SFO in the 8am hour.

This train is for the people who would otherwise drive I-5 or US 101. They’ve already written off the value of their time because they’re otherwise committed to driving this distance in daylight, so the train is a good one-for-one substitute without appreciable traffic.
 #1518135  by David Benton
 
Tourists, not going into San Francisco would deter many from riding . Plus the Starlight is often booked out on this section , and could be hours late.
Intermediate traffic , Salinas seems to be a logical first step form San Jose.
There is a thruway bus already. California gets the need for connections and network. This is just another step .
 #1518138  by gokeefe
 
John_Perkowski wrote: Sun Aug 25, 2019 2:53 pmThere are no fewer than 20 nonstop flights per day from San Francisco International alone to Los Angeles, Burbank, and Ontario. That’s just Southwest, and doesn’t account for Oakland and San Jose.
Col., I believe you answered your own question.

There's a significant travel market with high frequency air shuttle service. Rail is underutilized and has minimal freight interference. Intermediate points have minimal service to/from urban centers. And to top it all off the highways are heavily congested.

Sounds like a classic case for new service to me. Agreed that end to end wouldn't be competitive against air. But a lot of other city pairs definitely would be.

This isn't restoring the Pioneer or the North Coast Hiawatha.
 #1518140  by bdawe
 
John_Perkowski wrote: Sun Aug 25, 2019 2:53 pm WHY?

There are no fewer than 20 nonstop flights per day from San Francisco International alone to Los Angeles, Burbank, and Ontario. That’s just Southwest, and doesn’t account for Oakland and San Jose.

Each of those is a 737-700, 800, or at some point, 800 Max. 150 pax per bird.

That’s 3000 seats per day. EVEN ASSUMING 3 hours front and back end for traffic and airport processing, the time in transit is 7 hours.

If Amtrak runs an 18 car train (its old Heritage days max) of 2 units, a baggage, 2 lounges, and 13 coaches, the salable seats are 1040. Add in 11 hours time in transit (a lost workday), and Amtrak’s crappy WiFi, and I don’t see the business case.
There was an average of 9,610 passengers per day between SF & LA in 2017, the 2nd busiest city pair in the United States and 31st busiest in the world.

Don't me wrong, even the 9:45 schedule of the old Daylight isn't going to draw much non-touristic overhead traffic. Think of this as really more of an extension and run-through of the regional trains bringing people from outlying cities into the metropolitan hubs that terminate the route - Salinas, San Louis Obispo, etc. Los Angeles/San Diego trains already stretch up to San Louis Obispo, and San Francisco Bay trains are being extended to Salinas. This is simply filling in that last 130 miles between the two.
 #1518142  by electricron
 
gokeefe wrote: Tue Aug 20, 2019 7:58 pm Coast Rail Coordinating Council website as maintained by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG).
Apparently, if I read this link correctly, there are two rail projects underway for the CRCC region.
(1) A Caltrain extension underway from Gilroy to Salinas that will reach downtown San Francisco.
(2) An Amtrak train being planned from Oakland to Los Angeles using recent FRA funds to install PTC between Oakland and San Louis Obispo.

Doesn’t the existing Coast Starlight need these PTC improvements anyways?
And improving the bus service between Salinas and SLO is apart of the Caltrain extension service above.

I do not think a new Daylight service will be a slam dunk yet, it may or may not happen.
 #1518203  by gokeefe
 
I think that's fair.

The Coast Daylight service is a policy goal that local, regional and state government agencies are publicly cooperating on.

It's very positive and after almost 20 years they haven't given up. In fact the longer it takes the more determined they have become. Their case for the service has improved substantially since 2004.
 #1518208  by electricron
 
I can see why they would want an additional train between the Bay Area and the LA area, but the existing Starlight runs during daylight already. CHSR was supposedly going to provide this service faster and more frequently, but CHSR is in such a mess implementing it they are now looking at finding an alternate and cheaper solutions once again.
I think this fact clearly points out how bad CHSR management has been over the last decade or two.