WHEN A RAILROAD USED A "SLEEPER AS PARLOR CAR", HOW DID THIS WORK, AND WHAT KIND OF SLEEPER WAS USED?
On the New York Central we generally tried to use our 22 roomette cars. In the heavyweight days
12 section one drawing room cars were preferred.
I assume this was a situation where a daytime train (i.e. coaches, no sleepers) normally had a parlor car for first-class passengers, but none was available so a sleeping car was used as a fill-in??
I already noted the Day Express which was the State of Maine equipment making a round trip and use of the State of Maine's Pullman sleepers as Day Parlor cars, and railroads were the New Haven and the B&M. I am sure there were other cases of this during WWII when travel demand was high and equipment short. Possibly the Milwaukee's Pioneer between Chicago and the Twins made a daytime reverse move, also possibly the same happened with the Owl between Chi and St.L
The Day Express State of Maine was discussed ini one of the questions threads.
In addition, when a Florida streamliner or the Southerner was very late northbound during WWII, it was turned at Washington or Philadelphia, and the PRR would send a train of standard PUllman sleepers to take the coach passengers (during WWII these were all-coach trains) to and from the truncated streamliner journey. I experienced this several times as a youngster, usually traveling by myself. This is the only known use of PUllman cars for coach passengers without upgrade or space charge.
The NYC, PRR and SP all used sleeper lounge and lounge cars in parlor service the SP on the El Monte I believe it was called used a a full lounge car for the parlor car patrons. The NYC both assigned 5 DBR Lounge and 6 DBR lounge cars as parlors mostly for commuters but many times the PRR cars operated NY - Washington.
Al - in - Stockton
In certain instances, Pullman scheduled the use of a sleeper as a parlor car to move a car from where its run ended in the morning to another station at which its next run as a sleeper began. The first passenger who was assigned a seat in a section in such a sleeper would sit facing forward, and the second passenger assigned to the same section would sit facing the rear.
Johnny
Passengers could also do this. Penn Central and early Amtrak timetables with sample fares sometimes list the minimum number of tickets required for exclusive use of a room, with different requirements for "seat" service and "berth" service. Sample 1st Class fares sometimes have a foot note for part of the trip, "seat in sleeping or Parlor car between X and Y".
The Senator and Congressional Limiteds on the late 1950s NorthEast Corridor had "Day Roomettes and Drawing Rooms. I wonder if these were sometimes spare sleeping cars.
In the 1960s, the Long Island Rail Road bought used sleeping cars to use as parlor cars on the Cannonball to Montauk.
jimboylan Passengers could also do this. Penn Central and early Amtrak timetables with sample fares sometimes list the minimum number of tickets required for exclusive use of a room, with different requirements for "seat" service and "berth" service. Sample 1st Class fares sometimes have a foot note for part of the trip, "seat in sleeping or Parlor car between X and Y". The Senator and Congressional Limiteds on the late 1950s NorthEast Corridor had "Day Roomettes and Drawing Rooms. I wonder if these were sometimes spare sleeping cars. In the 1960s, the Long Island Rail Road bought used sleeping cars to use as parlor cars on the Cannonball to Montauk.
I would think Sleepers substituting for Parlors would just not offer use of the bed during the day. Rememer, those berts were folde into the walls tottaly unseen or unnoticed. The point is they were not removed, just not used. But Parlor cars, of course, were not built with berths.
Plus I am assuming that a Parlor or Sleeper used for Parlor service, was just for the comfort of the easy seating and privacy and not for bar or food and/or beverage services except where a lounge was included in the car or a lounge or diner were close if not adjacent cars.....
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
While idly looking through Car Names Numbers and Consists, I came across, on p. 20, in the PRR section, evidence that some lounge sleepers were operated regularly in parlor car service with no modification as to capacity. As built, these cars were 2 Master Room-1 Double Bedroom-Buffet-Lounge-Observation, 2 Drawing Room-1 Compartment-1 Double Bedroom-Buffet-Observation, and 1 Drawing Room-3 Double Bedroom-Buffet-Lounge.
The bedding may have been removed from the cars, and returned to the four of them that were returned to sleeper service.
The beds and bedding were folded into the wall near the cieling in a Pullman car, not removed.
Is the U.S. definition of parlour car different than that used in Canada? I was just browsing through floor plans of CNR parlour buffet cars, and the heavyweight cars shown indicate single separate chairs (possibly swivelling) on either side of a centre aisle. Seating for the entire car was usually for 21, plus a pair of facing banquette-type seats with a centre table. There was also a small dining area providing seating for 8 at two tables, with a small adjoining galley.
Later rebuilds of these cars retain the diner/galley, but the seating changes to a 2/1 plan, and with each seat still separate from the others and all forward facing. Capacity is increased to 45. An alternate plan shows centre-facing armchairs in two groups of 16 and 14, separated by a pair of facing double seats with a centre table on both sides of the aisle.
Parlour cars that had no galley seemed to have the same seating arrangements, but the galley was replaced by a smoking room.
I don't understand how a Pullman could sub for a parlour car, as the floorplans are so different, with the former being more communal in nature (albeit in a low-density fashion) while the latter is much more compartmentalised. That's not to say that the railroad couldn't substitute whatever they wished, but neither car would be an adequate replacement, in terms of accommodations/amenities, for the other.
Maybe it's that extra "u" in parlour that made the Canadian cars so different.
Wayne
Strictly speaking, a parlor or parlour, car would have been single seating on each side of the aisle, sometimes swivel, sometimes stationary, but never conventional 2x2 walkover seats like normal coach arrangement. Parlor also indicated some kind of refreshment service, so there would be a small bar or kitchen somewhere in the car. Some sleeping cars would be part rooms and part lounge with parlor seating arrangments. When pressed for cars, virtually any Pullman car would be put into service in the proximity of a diner for the service or other space in the car would be so set up for the service.
doctorwayne Is the U.S. definition of parlour car different than that used in Canada? I was just browsing through floor plans of CNR parlour buffet cars, and the heavyweight cars shown indicate single separate chairs (possibly swivelling) on either side of a centre aisle. Seating for the entire car was usually for 21, plus a pair of facing banquette-type seats with a centre table. There was also a small dining area providing seating for 8 at two tables, with a small adjoining galley. Later rebuilds of these cars retain the diner/galley, but the seating changes to a 2/1 plan, and with each seat still separate from the others and all forward facing. Capacity is increased to 45. An alternate plan shows centre-facing armchairs in two groups of 16 and 14, separated by a pair of facing double seats with a centre table on both sides of the aisle. Parlour cars that had no galley seemed to have the same seating arrangements, but the galley was replaced by a smoking room. I don't understand how a Pullman could sub for a parlour car, as the floorplans are so different, with the former being more communal in nature (albeit in a low-density fashion) while the latter is much more compartmentalised. That's not to say that the railroad couldn't substitute whatever they wished, but neither car would be an adequate replacement, in terms of accommodations/amenities, for the other. Maybe it's that extra "u" in parlour that made the Canadian cars so different. Wayne
To me, a parlor car was one with rotating, reclining seats that were far more comfortable than the usual coach coach seat, and there was an attendant in the car who paid more attention to the comfort of the passengers than a coach attendant did.
Thanks to both of you for the additional information. Since the parlor/parlour cars were similar, a car pressed into substitute service would be simply any car, other than a coach, that might be somewhat similar in amenities.
Remember that in the heavyweight era, coach seats weren't all that comfortable. They didn't recline like later streamliner seats did, and were often fairly hard. Coaches seated 76-80 people, in comparison to later streamlined coaches which usually seated say 44 or 56 people. In comparison, a heavyweight Pullman 12-1 had soft overstuffed seats, much like living room furniture. You had more space too. So using a sleeper to pinch-hit for a parlor car would make sense, you'd be paying more for a much better seat than you'd have in the coach.
One train the NP mainstreeter operated with 1/2 parlor 1/2 lounge cars and for the day portions of the trip the parlor seating was sold as such at night the parlor seating became lounge seating restricted to the sleeping car passengers. The other half of the lounge was for sleeping or coach passengers.
Also, except for the B&O, C&O, and AT&SF, very few heavywieght coaches were air-conditioned. All Pullmans, including Parlors, except Tourist Pullmans with their rattan seating, were air-conditioned by around 1932 or 1933, usually ice air-conditioning. C&O and AT&SF also pioneered reclining seats in coaches, in heavyweight cars.
Union Pacific advertised sleeping car seat rates for daytime travel in its public timetable. The May 15, 1969, issue, for example, quoted fares for various city pairs, including Denver to Cheyenne, $1.15, Denver to North Platte, $2.65, Las Vegas to Los Angeles, $3,25, and Salt Lake City to Pocatello, $1.50. This was in addition to the first-class railroad fare. Passengers simply rode in the regular sleeping cars, if space was available. By then UP was also charging for coach reservations on the Streamliners.
Nebraskafan Union Pacific advertised sleeping car seat rates for daytime travel in its public timetable. The May 15, 1969, issue, for example, quoted fares for various city pairs, including Denver to Cheyenne, $1.15, Denver to North Platte, $2.65, Las Vegas to Los Angeles, $3,25, and Salt Lake City to Pocatello, $1.50. This was in addition to the first-class railroad fare. Passengers simply rode in the regular sleeping cars, if space was available. By then UP was also charging for coach reservations on the Streamliners.
A seat in a roomette would generally cost the same as a seat in an section, but to have a seat in a bedroom, compartment, drawing room, bedroom suite, or master room cost more; for instance, in 1954, if you had seat space on the Southern, you paid for two seats in a bedroom, three seats in a compartment or drawing room, four seats in a bedroom suite, and six seats in a master room. You also paid more for your transportation if you occupied a compartment, drawing room, bedroom suite, or master room. The Pullman seat and rail ticket requirements did vary according to the region you were traveling in.
I think the term "Day roomettes" appeared for the first time on the New Haven's 1948 parlor car fleet. They had 20 cars, in various combinations of parlor lounges and lounges, which were all equipped with two small rooms designated "day roomettes." I don't know how popular these accommodations were. The same 20 cars each had one "drawing room," which I know were popular.
"Drawing rooms" in parlor cars went all the way back through the heavyweight era and continued into the modern postwar parlors of both the New Haven and PRR. In fact, a few years after the New Haven put its postwar parlor fleet in service the NH discovered that some of the best trains (specifically, the Merchants Limited, Yankee Clipper, and one of the Boston-Washington through jobs) had fewer drawing rooms than needed to meet demand. So, in the early 50s the RR had 6 lounge cars shopped and reconfigured with 3 drawing rooms each (Those cars originally had one drawing room).
The PRR's Congressional car series had two parlor cars that were built with ALL drawing rooms. They called them "conference room cars."
Interesting topic, this.
Tom Curtin
Controller, NHRHTA
Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!
Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter