posted
we are booked on the Sunset in September to Ontario, CA. I am getting very concerned about the timeliness of this train as we are driving to Vegas on Sunday our day of arrival. While it is more expensive I have been looking at changing to the SW Chief and getting off in San Bernardino. Is there a historical time chart for the Sunset so that we can see which days it is later than others? Ironically, Amtrak does not even offer the route we have booked as a round trip option any longer (Memphis thru New Orleans to Ontario CA)
Posts: 5 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are two routes we will do almost anything to avoid in the future...The Lake Shore Ltd AND the Sunset Ltd. We accept "late" as a given, but those two trains abuse the privilege. Were we in your place there would be no contest; opt for the SWC! On future trips between Boston and Los Angeles/San Francisco we'll go "round the horn" so to speak and travel via Washington to Chicago. While on the subject of on-time-manship; the Coast Starlight runs the above noted routes a close third in abysmal punctuality. Enjoy. Rodger
Posts: 83 | From: MERRIMAC,MA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unless you have traveled the Santa Fe route in the past and want to add the Sunset Route to your travel logs, I think the sure bet would be to change to a MEM-58-CHI-3-SNB routing.
There are simply too many 'horror stories' regarding timekeeping involving the Sunset to take the risk. The worst would be if such were to make you into a "never again' consort.
You have a far greater expectation of an enjoyable travel experience routed via the Chief; suggest you make appropriate changes and pay what you must. However, offsetting any additional rail and accomodation fares is that a same day connection 58-CHI-3 and v.v. is quite doable. So in the absence of choosing to spend some time in Chicago (worth it; I live there), you need not factor any en-route lodging into your travel budget.
Posts: 9977 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought the SW Chief was gorgeous from southern Colorado until it got dark en route to Flagstaff. Raton Pass, Apache Canyon, and the simply exquisite red rocks between Albuquerque and Gallup--I was glued to observation deck window. I've never been on the Sunset Ltd, though I plan to take it soon, as I think it will be gone soon.
I have taken the Lakeshore Ltd several times and am booked to do so again. It was only a couple of hours late when I took, as they were doing track work; I don't consider that a horror story. However, I would be happy to go another route if it were the same price and time. How do you avoid it? What do you take instead? Does it have sleeping cars too?
Posts: 2642 | From: upstate New York | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm booked on the Sunset July 26 to LA and #2 on the 31st to El Paso,TX. I've noticed a pattern, and sunsets that arrive Wed. into lax are not horibly late.
posted
In December I will be doing the same thing as Sandy, taking the Sunset to Ontario Calif. and then driving to Las Vegas. I've done this before, arriving in Ontario, taking a taxi to the nearby airport and renting a car for the drive to Las Vegas. You do save a few hours driving by avoiding going into Los Angeles. The Sunset is scheduled to arrive in Ontario at 8:05 am, but more likely expect a noon to 3:00 pm arrival. The SW Chief is more reliable at 5:32 am in nearby San Bernardino, and I believe Hertz will pick you up at the station (better check on this as I'm not sure if the station has re-opened after its renovation). The reason I'm risking the Sunset is because I want to take the City of New Orleans to NOL (never done that route) and so I'm stuck taking the only train from that city to California.
Posts: 524 | From: Toronto Ont. Canada | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought the way to go to Las Vegas with Amtrak is to take the SW Chief to Kingman AZ stop, where an Amtrak-related bus meets the train (whenever it gets in) and takes you there. It used to be Needles CA but was changed to Kingman recently.
GP, I believe Amtrak will be slowly starved of money (not one fell swoop, which might hit a few Republican politicians a little too hard) and that when long-distance lines are curtailed, the Sunset Limited will be the first to go.
Posts: 2642 | From: upstate New York | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read talk of Amtrak adding a 4th train to the SL route. I think SL route needs daily service. It might happen since Amtrak may get the $1.8 billion.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by gp35: I read talk of Amtrak adding a 4th train to the SL route. I think SL route needs daily service. It might happen since Amtrak may get the $1.8 billion.
This is unrelated to anything else on this thread, so why is it here? However, to answer you. What Amtrak gets will have nothing or almost nothing to do with another Chicago to St. Louis train. There is work going on at an apparantly glacial pace to speed up this line, and increased frequency is part of it, but when it will happen, don't hold your breath. George
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
George - not to be nasty, but I think GP's "SL route" is the Sunset Ltd route, not a "St. Louis" route, and I believe he is saying he feels that AMTRAK may make the Sunset Ltd 4 times weekly, rather than tri-weekly.
BTW, George, I always enjoy your perspectives and extensive knowledge on the issues which are discussed on this forum!
--Rich
Posts: 2428 | From: Grayling, MI | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
so sojourner your one those people who dispise the Sunset
I'm not certain, Mr. Sunset, how you can draw such a conclusion when Ms. Sojourner simply expressed an opinion that she believes the "beginning of the end' is at hand for the LD's and that the Sunset will be among the first to go.
I'm afraid, as I have noted at several boards, I kind of agree with her.
Moving to more pertinent points regarding Ms. Sandy's inquiry, the 6AM arrival at San Bernardino likely will be "more or less' on time. Considering the post 9/11 airport security screening process, this would be "prime time' for limo concerns to get passengers out to ONT for 8AM flights - the peak hour on a business day. You may, if you desire to do things on the cheap, "line up' a routing using a municipal bus to ONT (all major airports have such - they are just not that conspicuous). If Hertz (or whoever) has "put you on the driver's seat" by roundly 10AM, you now are looking at a four hour drive up to "The Meadows' - over a stretch of highway where reportedly too many motorists are 'law unto themselves'.
I have found that all too often 3PM check in @ Vegas means just that; therefore arriving too early will find you in the uncomfortable position, considering normal travel fatigue, of nowhere to stay.
I think "All the way on the Santa Fe' is the way to go.
Posts: 9977 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
On our trip on the 'train from he**) we had planned to rent a car at LA's Union Station; when it became evident we would not arrive by the 6:00pm closing time we arranged to switch the reservation to the airport at Ontario; where we arrived some time after 10:00 PM. If you want to put in a "fudge factor" to allow for late arrival, may I suggest TWELVE HOURS as a starting point. Best regards, Rodger
Posts: 83 | From: MERRIMAC,MA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for all the info - we are still undecided on what to do. I really hate to spend 6 hours or more of our vacation "waiting on freight" and the possibility of being late exists on both. It would help if there was a historical performance chart - guess I will have to track it myself - if it ever starts back up. Never even factored in hurricanes!
Posts: 5 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Historic charts won't help. It's like pulling a slot machine. Plan on being 3 hours late and hope for the best. Most important, enjoy.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
To answer sojourner's question on a previous post, with the Three Rivers out of the picture, there are only two DAILY trains now to get to the East Coast:
1. Capitol Limited (Chicago to Washington DC)
-Superliner train with full service diner and sleepers.
2. Lake Shore Limited (Chicago to New York City/Boston)
- Single level trainset with Amfleet cars and Viewliner sleepers
The Lake Shore averages, and I mean this lightly, about 2 to 3 hours late. I think in my 15+ trips in the past 3 years on the Lake Shore, only once was I ontime into NYP. I can recall two instances where we arrived early into Chicago Union Station, and two times when we were ontime or nearly ontime.
I've grown accustomed to taking the Capitol Limited lately if travelling eastbound and westbound when possible, just because it will get me home earlier if somewhat ontime (I live in the metro NY area), sleeper's are often cheaper than on the Lake Shore, and its a Superliner trainset with Sightseer Lounge etc.
However, considering I work in NYC, I still use th Lake Shore on it is easier heading westbound to get nearly a full day's work in (now with the recent schedule change) and take a 15 minute subway ride to NY Penn Station.
Posts: 337 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
As Mr Norman surmised, I am absolutely not someone who thinks the Sunset Limited should be done away with--I have no idea how I gave that impression but I certainly didn't mean to. I simply think it WILL be done away with--but certainly not with my support. I MOURN the demise of all trains and think it's perfectly disgusting that there isn't daily--nay, twice daily--thrice daily--is there such a word as fice daily?-- service between LA and Tucson, Tucson and El Paso, El Paso and San Antonio, San Antonio and Houston, Houston and New Orleans, New Orleans and Biloxi, Biloxi and Pensacola (okay maybe not this week), Pensacola and Jacksonville, and so on. They can have one long train once a day and break the others into smaller bits (with good connections) or whatever, but they should have lots of 'em! I also think it's disgusting that there is no train to Wyoming, or to Mount Rushmore, or through southern Montana. I think it's disgusting there is no direct train between NYC and Detroit. I think it's disgusting there is no direct train from Atlanta to Chicago. I think it's disgusting there is no train to Phoenix, or Las Vegas, or Asheville, NC, or Galena, IL, or Hannibal, MO. I think it's perfectly vomitatious that the Chicago- to-Toronto line now ends in Michigan. I think it's terrible that there is no train up from Minnesota directly into Canada; and no train directly up from Montana into Canada too. I think it's horrible that I cannot get on a train in the Northeast and go all the way to Tierra del Fuego!!! And most of all, I think it's an outrage that there is no Chattanooga Choo Choo!!! (You must have missed my posts on this)
JP, re your info on the Lakeshore Ltd vs Capitol Ltd, I thought that was the one you meant, but I was hoping maybe there was a sleeper again through Pennsylvania that I hadn't heard about! When I looked into it, the cost of travel to DC (coach) and then on to Chicago (sleeper) was definitely higher than the sleeper fare I got on the Lakeshore Ltd. Plus I live upstate NY--although when I last took the Lakeshore Ltd, I actually went down to NYC to overnight for other reasons and because it was fun to start at the beginning. But ordinarily I can catch the Lakeshore Ltd in Albany. Also, as far as sleepers go, I like the Viewliner sleepers better than the Superliner because I have my own toilet! Though of course I like the sightseer car in the Superliner; so maybe one day I would try the Capitol Ltd just for a different route.
I thought there was some other train that went through Indianapolis, but only ran 3 days a week, or something like that? I have to go check the Amtrak site again . . .
Posts: 2642 | From: upstate New York | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sojourner, it would be difficult to get rid of the Sunset Limited as long as Senator Hutchison is in the Senate. I don't think she would let any Texas train "die".
Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sojourner: I think it's disgusting there is no train to Asheville, NC.
I thought there was some other train that went through Indianapolis, but only ran 3 days a week, or something like that? I have to go check the Amtrak site again . . .
Hear, Hear on Asheville! That's 25 minutes from my house and would quickly become my 'home station of choice'. The NCDOT has been talking about a passenger train to Asheville from Salisbury since 1994 and has already done renovations on the old Southern Railway stations in Morganton, Marion, and Old Fort in preparation for a service which might happen by 2008. (See the website <www.bytrain.org>)
Personally, I would love to see a passenger train from Asheville to Salisbury that would then continue to Charlotte and Columbia, SC offering connections (and wouldn't a through sleeper be sweet) to Orlando and Miami on the Silver Star. It would make trips to visit the in-laws in Winter Park a breeze.
But then the issue is Norfolk Southern. They want enormous amounts of money to upgrade signals and add sidings to accomodate an Asheville train. The state doesn't have a predisposition to spend that kind of money. Particularly on a railroad that is already in much better condition than when the Southern Railway was operating passenger trains on it in 1975.
You're thinking of the 'Cardinal' tri-weekly through Indianapolis and West Virginia. It still runs but is not a train of choice for frequent riders. It takes eight hours or more longer (but compensates with superior scenery) and carries a single viewliner sleeper, and amcafe, and two or three amcoaches......a far cry from it's Superliner days. Beyond this, Amtrak offers daily service to Indianapolis from Chicago. Trains 850-851 are called the 'Hoosier State' and they operate only on the days when the 'Cardinal' does not. However, they exist primarily to ferry equipment to and from the Beech Grove shops. They are on the same user-unfriendly schedule as the Cardinal (ie: Pre-dawn departure, late night arrival) and available seating is usually in a single horizon coach. No food/beverage service.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cardinal is the only train I have NOT ridden in the whole system--always wanted to but never got around to it. Which way is best to ride--East or West (for scenery, "on-timeliness"?
Posts: 287 | From: Palatka, FL, USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by RRRICH: George - not to be nasty, but I think GP's "SL route" is the Sunset Ltd route, not a "St. Louis" route, and I believe he is saying he feels that AMTRAK may make the Sunset Ltd 4 times weekly, rather than tri-weekly.
DUHHHHH Obvious if I had not been in too much of a hurry. Forgot to put brain in gear before putting fingers to keyboard. Having spent a large chunk of my life along the Mississippi and the real main line (remember the ICRR's "Main Line of Mid America"); when in a semi-comatose condition SL always means St. Louis, as in Chi, SL, Mem, and NO. The Sunset was what you connected to at NO.
Actually, if they do anything about frequency, it should be to daily. It might actually help the timekeeping, as then the dispatchers would have to remember it every day rather than occasionally.
George
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
I like what you had to say above! However, as notelvis pointed out, the freight railroads would balk at additional trains on their lines. And as Mr. Nomran pointed out recently, capacity is the problem with most RR companies, and those darn passenger trains are a nusiance.
But in the long run, the truth of the matter is that our Government decided for us a long time ago that we should be flying or driving. After all, the airlines and highways are an "investment" and Amtrak is just a "handout." OK sarcastic rant off...but I think you get my point.
Posts: 171 | From: Aurora, Illinois | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wonder if Amtrak is making an effort to make peace with the freight lines. For example, help double track a few lines. Amtrak could provide $50 million a year to train companys to improve lines. Maybe freight companys will stop lobbying against Amtrak.
I also think private contractors should take over rail maintanance.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This thread has wandered far from the original question, but I would like to respond to GP35.
$50 million spread over all of the host railroads (and over all the time it would take to make needed track improvements) would probably not be worth it to the railroads. They are concerned with maximizing their freight traffic and Amtrak is just in their way. I believe there is now a bonus and penalty system in place where Amtrak rewards host railroads for keeping Amtrak on time. But compared to the huge revenues that can be gained by moving around all the goodies the Asians have manufactured for us, these Amtrak payments are a pittance. (Which could get me into a rant about how buying local could reduce oil consumption but that is another story).
It is a problem without a simple solution. If you believe in the free enterprise system like I do, then railroads should be able to do what is good for their business. And if you believe that it is in the national interest to have a well functioning passenger rail system, then we should expect the railroads to do their part.
As a rail advocate, of course I think we should give Amtrak a lot more money and guarantee it over a long period of time. And let them use that money as they choose to improve on time performance. But, it probably ain't gonna happen.
Oh, and by the way, to answer the original question. Put your money on the SWC and BNSF. On time performance is far superior, scenery is better, and the entire route is either double track or off the mainline.
Posts: 1572 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well going back to the original thought - yes we did change to the SW Chief - just too much of a risk to spend hours waiting on freight. Realizing that any train can be late we like our chances with the Chief better. Considered taking SL back but it is worse that direction. It is a shame they can't do something to make this train operate more timely. We are looking so forward to our trip.
Posts: 5 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Twin we can have both, if UP and Amtrak cooperate. $50 million a year spent right could do wonders. Let me give you an example. A major bottleneck on the Lafayette Subdivision. There are 3 sidings, on a single line track, between Beaumont and Houston. Those siding can be connected for less than $30 million for 1 huge siding. This siding would be nearly 40 miles long. Beaumont and Houston is 80 miles apart. Instead of trains stopping on 3 siding, trains will use the siding as a double track.
Another example. KCS and UP line split about 1000 yards east of Beaumont. KCS line goes north of Orange, UP goes to Orange. UP line in Orange makes a 120 degree turn from east to northwest to come within 1 mile of the KCS line. Duhhhhh.
These small lines connecting the dots, so to say, across the country could end delays. There is a lot trains getting stuck in Houston and Houston is not their destination. They abandon the one Houston bypass line. How stupid can you get. The Sunset limited is a victim to stupid railroad companys.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
$50 million a year is a teacup of water on a forest fire. We should be looking at a 50-50 split, retroactive to 1971 on money spent to upgrade tracks in the northeast corridor and tracks used by passenger trains in the rest of the country. Budget it at somewhere above $500 million a year for starts they increase.
However, it just isn't going to happen with the present mindset on BOTH sides of the aisle in congress.
George
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
First you have to understand something!!!! Amtrak does not own any rail tracks with the exception of the Northeast of the country. The Sunset Limited runs on Union Pacific/Southern Pacific rail lines. And for God only knows what reason...they hate us. Everytime #2 the Sunset Ltd runs on their rails....it's late. The train will do fine, and then BAM, it's in California wating behind stalled freight trains, and trains crew that are "dead" on the law. (Meaing the crew cannot work any longer account of Federal Regulated hours of work service). So poor #2 has to sit and wait for SPUP to get their act in order. We seem to never have this problem with the BNSF, they actually get the trains in early!!!! So with the SPUP it could be poor dispacthing, poor maintenance of equipment, overworked crews, or just plain hate that causes them to have all Amtrak trains on their route to be late. Another reason is that account of most major companies moving their factories to China for cheap labor, now they have to import their products here for sale. That means they have to have a way to get their products from the LA port to the distribution centers nationwide...hence the freights (all of them) are way overbooked with promises to get shipments on time.
Take your pick on the reason for the problem...but no one wants to take the blame, or find an acceptable solution!!!!
Posts: 7 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
