Should Amtrak....

[Anonymous]

I would eliminate all of them.  They bring in only 23 per cent of Amtrak's revenues while racking up 142 per cent of the operating expenses before other charges.  After other charges they eat up 48 per cent of the federal subsidy required to cover Amtrak's loses, as per the 2007 operating and annual reports.  Although ridership is up in 2008, so are expenses.  As a result, some of the long distance trains are losing even more per passenger mile than the lost in the first eight months of 2007.   

 You sound like an accountant!   Many businesses have suffered under such thinking.  When you order a sandwich in a resturant they could elimiate the pickle or chips, the lettuce, the mayo, even the plate because they are all extra to the two pieces of bread and a piece of meat!  I know Amtrak is not a sandwich, but I have enounterd so many businesses who have suffered with that kind of thinking.  Railroads who had shed branch lines and local services because there was a cost attached lost the business to trucks thus they had no cars to put on their long distance trains so they elminiated the whole railroad.  So when you are providing a service, such as a rail passenger service, you have to look at the whole of the operation and know that this train or that feeds into the system so that the whole system somehow succeeds.  Maybe what we really should be looking at is what I have advocated over the past several years and that is rationalize groups of regional systems inter linked with services.  Maybe there would be one train that linked it all from Portland, ME to Portland, OR, maybe not; but some kind of model based on regional needs coupled with inter regional needs has to be looked at.

I;ll shorten this: WHy have a XCorridor if I can;t go anywhere?

Amtrak classifies the Hoosier State as a State Supported and Other Short Distance Corridor Train.  If Amtrak discontinued the Cardinal, Indiana could run the Hoosier State as a daily train.

The overwhelming majority of Amtrak's passengers have shown that they do not want to ride a train across the country.  They take the train for relatively short distances.  For FY 2007 the average distance traveled by an Amtrak passenger was approximately 220 miles.  However, this figure is distorted by the relatively small number of people who rode one of the long distance trains.  Most passengers travel less than 150 miles on Amtrak.

I am a retired CPA.  A railroad is not a restaurant.  The railroads, which are equity companies, shed branch lines, giving up the traffic to truckers or turning it over to short line operators, because they were losing money operating the branch lines.  This also is the reason why they gave up passenger service.  

Most commercial activities in the United States, indeed the western world, are operated by private enterprise.  The objective of a business is to cover all of its costs and return something to the owners, i.e. shareholders in the case of a corporation.  

Accountants don't tell management what products and services to offer.  They don't tell them what business they should be in.  They don't advise management on marketing strategies.  But the do tell them how much it costs to run the business, product line by product line, and how much they have to charge to cover their costs and provide a return to the shareholders.  How much management prices the service is a management decision, although most managers and executives turn to their accountants for advice on pricing.    

Amtrak, interesting, is a government sponsored business.  However, it has never come close to covering its costs, and it probably never will.  It came into existence because the privately owned railroads could not make money on their passenger service; in fact, it was killing them, and they told the government that they were going to get out of the railroad passenger business.  The Nixon Administration stepped in and formed the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) as a quasi government business because it perceived that it would be politically unpopular to allow the nation's remaining passenger trains to be discontinued.  Thus, they opted to turn a commercial enterprise into a social service.  Most insiders at the time knew that Amtrak would never turn a profit.    

One can make a reasonable case for trains as a social service in high density corridors where the cost of building additional highway and airway capacity is prohibitive.  There is, however, no case for long distance passenger trains as per Amtrak's classification. 

[Flashwave]

I would eliminate all of them.  They bring in only 23 per cent of Amtrak's revenues while racking up 142 per cent of the operating expenses before other charges.  After other charges they eat up 48 per cent of the federal subsidy required to cover Amtrak's loses, as per the 2007 operating and annual reports.  Although ridership is up in 2008, so are expenses.  As a result, some of the long distance trains are losing even more per passenger mile than the lost in the first eight months of 2007.   

 You sound like an accountant!   Many businesses have suffered under such thinking.  When you order a sandwich in a resturant they could elimiate the pickle or chips, the lettuce, the mayo, even the plate because they are all extra to the two pieces of bread and a piece of meat!  I know Amtrak is not a sandwich, but I have enounterd so many businesses who have suffered with that kind of thinking.  Railroads who had shed branch lines and local services because there was a cost attached lost the business to trucks thus they had no cars to put on their long distance trains so they elminiated the whole railroad.  So when you are providing a service, such as a rail passenger service, you have to look at the whole of the operation and know that this train or that feeds into the system so that the whole system somehow succeeds.  Maybe what we really should be looking at is what I have advocated over the past several years and that is rationalize groups of regional systems inter linked with services.  Maybe there would be one train that linked it all from Portland, ME to Portland, OR, maybe not; but some kind of model based on regional needs coupled with inter regional needs has to be looked at.

I;ll shorten this: WHy have a XCorridor if I can;t go anywhere?

 

Accountants don't tell management what products and services to offer.  They don't tell them what business they should be in.  They don't advise management on marketing strategies.  But the do tell them how much it costs to run the business, product line by product line, and how much they have to charge to cover their costs and provide a return to the shareholders.  How much management prices the service is a management decision, although most managers and executives turn to their accountants for advice on pricing.    

 

HA! That;s the funniest thing I've heard all day. My Dad's in rehab, and right now is being told they're going to end his stay soon. Not because the Doctors think he's ready, although he;s close. The word is coming from Insurance Agents. People with the money, but little to no idea oin the individual case OR much of any experence in Medical stuff. We the Western World left not being governed by wallets a LOOONNNGGG time ago, probably even before Amtrak was formed.

And Indiana could currently care less about the Hoosier State under this government. zA lot of people would like a Rail System, but they aren;t holding the stirngs.

[daveklepper]

And in reply to Flashwave, if you were a Canadian, you would obviously also wish to eliminate the Canadian.   Again, I think those mentioned long distance trains do serve all Americans one way or another.

[henry6]

I have worked with many business where the accountants have told them to eliminate certain parts of the product or service or, in my instance, for advertising the business, because it was an unneeded expense.  Those businesses all have failed.  In one instance the CPA took over a restaurant.  After about two months I asked her if she was operating the restaurant by her CPA instincts or from her restauranteur instincts and she assured me her CPA instincts had to be ignored or there would be no product presntation of her product.  (BTW, she did get out of both businesses!)  In railroading, accountants told railroads that branch lines and terminal operations were not self paying and in essance to get out of the business of branch lines and picking up and delivering cars.  This of course overlooked the fact that in order to have a mainline train from one end of the railroad to another, the train, and the railroad, needed the cars from the branch lines and the terminal operations.  Even with the incorporation of the cost considered in many rates, the line item as a service, was considered an expense that could be done away with.

[oltmannd]

  In railroading, accountants told railroads that branch lines and terminal operations were not self paying and in essance to get out of the business of branch lines and picking up and delivering cars.  This of course overlooked the fact that in order to have a mainline train from one end of the railroad to another, the train, and the railroad, needed the cars from the branch lines and the terminal operations. 

That would be incorrect!

You don't know what you're talking about.

[oltmannd]

I would eliminate all of them.  They bring in only 23 per cent of Amtrak's revenues while racking up 142 per cent of the operating expenses before other charges.  After other charges they eat up 48 per cent of the federal subsidy required to cover Amtrak's loses, as per the 2007 operating and annual reports.  Although ridership is up in 2008, so are expenses.  As a result, some of the long distance trains are losing even more per passenger mile than the lost in the first eight months of 2007.   

 You sound like an accountant!   Many businesses have suffered under such thinking.  When you order a sandwich in a resturant they could elimiate the pickle or chips, the lettuce, the mayo, even the plate because they are all extra to the two pieces of bread and a piece of meat!  I know Amtrak is not a sandwich, but I have enounterd so many businesses who have suffered with that kind of thinking.  Railroads who had shed branch lines and local services because there was a cost attached lost the business to trucks thus they had no cars to put on their long distance trains so they elminiated the whole railroad.  So when you are providing a service, such as a rail passenger service, you have to look at the whole of the operation and know that this train or that feeds into the system so that the whole system somehow succeeds.  Maybe what we really should be looking at is what I have advocated over the past several years and that is rationalize groups of regional systems inter linked with services.  Maybe there would be one train that linked it all from Portland, ME to Portland, OR, maybe not; but some kind of model based on regional needs coupled with inter regional needs has to be looked at.

I;ll shorten this: WHy have a XCorridor if I can;t go anywhere?

Amtrak classifies the Hoosier State as a State Supported and Other Short Distance Corridor Train.  If Amtrak discontinued the Cardinal, Indiana could run the Hoosier State as a daily train.

The overwhelming majority of Amtrak's passengers have shown that they do not want to ride a train across the country.  They take the train for relatively short distances.  For FY 2007 the average distance traveled by an Amtrak passenger was approximately 220 miles.  However, this figure is distorted by the relatively small number of people who rode one of the long distance trains.  Most passengers travel less than 150 miles on Amtrak.

I am a retired CPA.  A railroad is not a restaurant.  The railroads, which are equity companies, shed branch lines, giving up the traffic to truckers or turning it over to short line operators, because they were losing money operating the branch lines.  This also is the reason why they gave up passenger service.  

Most commercial activities in the United States, indeed the western world, are operated by private enterprise.  The objective of a business is to cover all of its costs and return something to the owners, i.e. shareholders in the case of a corporation.  

Accountants don't tell management what products and services to offer.  They don't tell them what business they should be in.  They don't advise management on marketing strategies.  But the do tell them how much it costs to run the business, product line by product line, and how much they have to charge to cover their costs and provide a return to the shareholders.  How much management prices the service is a management decision, although most managers and executives turn to their accountants for advice on pricing.    

Amtrak, interesting, is a government sponsored business.  However, it has never come close to covering its costs, and it probably never will.  It came into existence because the privately owned railroads could not make money on their passenger service; in fact, it was killing them, and they told the government that they were going to get out of the railroad passenger business.  The Nixon Administration stepped in and formed the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) as a quasi government business because it perceived that it would be politically unpopular to allow the nation's remaining passenger trains to be discontinued.  Thus, they opted to turn a commercial enterprise into a social service.  Most insiders at the time knew that Amtrak would never turn a profit.    

One can make a reasonable case for trains as a social service in high density corridors where the cost of building additional highway and airway capacity is prohibitive.  There is, however, no case for long distance passenger trains as per Amtrak's classification. 

It's actually worse than that!  The expectation by insiders at the creation of Amtrak was that LD trains would be pared down as corridors ramped up.  I cited a gov't paper to that details this in another thread. As Casey Stengel would say, "You could look it up!"

Here: https://www.policyarchive.org/bitstream/handle/10207/1446/RL31473_20020626.pdf?sequence=1

[Grand Ave]

HI DAVE,HAVENT BEEN ON FOR SMETIME AS I WAS DOING EXTENSIVE TRAVEL ON AMTRAK AND TEN WENT TO EUROPE FOR SOME COMPARISONS.EVEN THOUGH AMTRAK IS EXPERIENCING RECORD NUMBER OF PASSENGERS DUE TO HIGH GAS PRICES ETC,STILL IT DOESNT COMPARE TO MOST OF THE ICE TRAINS IN GERMANY,FRANCE ETC.I FLEW INTO BERLIN AND AVAILED MYSELF AND SPOUSE OF THE ANY TRAINS OPERATING OUT OF THE "NEW" TERMINAL THERE.AS MUC AS I LOVE TRAVELING ON AMTRAK,FOR THE MOST PART THE ICE TRAINS IN EUROPE OUTPERFORM AMTRAK 5-1.IM SURE THIS IS GOING TO CUSE SOME NEGATIVE COMMENTS ,AND ILL BE GLAD TO PATICIPAE IN THEM,BASED ON MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE,

THANKS,GRAND AVE,

[henry6]

  In railroading, accountants told railroads that branch lines and terminal operations were not self paying and in essance to get out of the business of branch lines and picking up and delivering cars.  This of course overlooked the fact that in order to have a mainline train from one end of the railroad to another, the train, and the railroad, needed the cars from the branch lines and the terminal operations. 

That would be incorrect!

You don't know what you're talking about.

 

My wife tells me that.  And when my son was a teenager he often said that.  So what is your authority and reasoning?  I don't mind being told I'm wrong but not the way you have posted it. Thank you for confirming what I have already been told, though.

[oltmannd]

  In railroading, accountants told railroads that branch lines and terminal operations were not self paying and in essance to get out of the business of branch lines and picking up and delivering cars.  This of course overlooked the fact that in order to have a mainline train from one end of the railroad to another, the train, and the railroad, needed the cars from the branch lines and the terminal operations. 

That would be incorrect!

You don't know what you're talking about.

 

My wife tells me that.  And when my son was a teenager he often said that.  So what is your authority and reasoning?  I don't mind being told I'm wrong but not the way you have posted it. Thank you for confirming what I have already been told, though.

My wife and teenagers tell me that, too!

Branchlines got sold or abandonded by the class ones for a couple reasons.  No traffic and/or no available capital.

In the northeast, it was often that most of the customers went away as manufacturing departed the region for other locales.  The branchlines then got triage.  If the traffic base left was sufficient for someone to operate at a decent profit, the RR might hang on to it for a while, at and defer any maintenance in order wring out the last few bucks.  If no, the line would get put up for sale.  The RR usually couldn't hang on to it because it was competing for scarce capital and could maintain all the mainline track and the branchline track.  A buyer often could operate the line at lower cost and have access to capital money not available to class 1s.  If the traffic back.  Failing a buyer, the line would be abandonded.

Don't think for a minute that the RRs don't undertand the relationship between mainline traffic and branchlines.  The keep/sell decision isn't executed until a whole "RR with"  vs. "RR without" scenario is analyzed.  Allocated cost/profitablity models are used to figure out where to look first, but aren't the end of the analysis.

I have a few years in on a class one......that's how I know these things...

[oltmannd]

I would eliminate all of them.  They bring in only 23 per cent of Amtrak's revenues while racking up 142 per cent of the operating expenses before other charges.  After other charges they eat up 48 per cent of the federal subsidy required to cover Amtrak's loses, as per the 2007 operating and annual reports.  Although ridership is up in 2008, so are expenses.  As a result, some of the long distance trains are losing even more per passenger mile than the lost in the first eight months of 2007.   

 You sound like an accountant!   Many businesses have suffered under such thinking.  When you order a sandwich in a resturant they could elimiate the pickle or chips, the lettuce, the mayo, even the plate because they are all extra to the two pieces of bread and a piece of meat!  I know Amtrak is not a sandwich, but I have enounterd so many businesses who have suffered with that kind of thinking.  Railroads who had shed branch lines and local services because there was a cost attached lost the business to trucks thus they had no cars to put on their long distance trains so they elminiated the whole railroad.  So when you are providing a service, such as a rail passenger service, you have to look at the whole of the operation and know that this train or that feeds into the system so that the whole system somehow succeeds.  Maybe what we really should be looking at is what I have advocated over the past several years and that is rationalize groups of regional systems inter linked with services.  Maybe there would be one train that linked it all from Portland, ME to Portland, OR, maybe not; but some kind of model based on regional needs coupled with inter regional needs has to be looked at.

I;ll shorten this: WHy have a XCorridor if I can;t go anywhere?

 

Accountants don't tell management what products and services to offer.  They don't tell them what business they should be in.  They don't advise management on marketing strategies.  But the do tell them how much it costs to run the business, product line by product line, and how much they have to charge to cover their costs and provide a return to the shareholders.  How much management prices the service is a management decision, although most managers and executives turn to their accountants for advice on pricing.    

 

HA! That;s the funniest thing I've heard all day. My Dad's in rehab, and right now is being told they're going to end his stay soon. Not because the Doctors think he's ready, although he;s close. The word is coming from Insurance Agents. People with the money, but little to no idea oin the individual case OR much of any experence in Medical stuff. We the Western World left not being governed by wallets a LOOONNNGGG time ago, probably even before Amtrak was formed.

And Indiana could currently care less about the Hoosier State under this government. zA lot of people would like a Rail System, but they aren;t holding the stirngs.

You (or somebody) paid for your father's insurance policy.  It has a given set of conditions in it.  Perhaps a policy with a more generous coverage would cost more? 

As for Indiana... Do they still vote for their government there?  Representative gov't  that gets the "represent" part wrong usually wind up getting voted out!

Jamestown and Plymouth were founded money making operations that sold stock to shareholders.  I'd say they were governed by their wallets way back then!

[HarveyK400]

One telling comment I heard or read about Amtrak to begin to understand the business was that the corporation started with a lot of long-distance equipment. 

• This was the inherited product and the service for the national system outside the NEC.
  
• One public expectation was that the remaining, often premier, services would continue.
• Economies of scale would reduce costs with consolidated operations.
  

I know Amtrak selected what they wanted; but that was from what was available.  No Budd coach was left behind.  Amtrak also picked up the "El Capitan" Hi-Levels and "400" Bi-Levels.

[henry6]

The biggest problem about Amtrak is that it was taken out of a private enterprise system which is designed and whose purpose is to make money, a profit.  As a ward of the Federal government it was expected to follow the path of making money like the private enterprise it was taken from.  The question is, then, if it didn't make money for private enterprise, (and hadn't for years being a PR piece, an advertising venue, a loss leader) how and why should it make money under government ownership?

 And since one of the arguements always raised by Amtrak supporters that governments, not private enterprise, own and operate airports in this country thus supporting the airline industry, I was amused at best to learn that in Europe, England anyway, airlports as big as Heathrow, are owne and operated by private enterprise!!!

[Wdlgln005]

This post has drifted far from it's origonal purpose.

Given the rapid increase in ridership, Amtrak is in dire need of new equipment to meet demands for service. Having been cash starved for 18years puts Amtrak in this position. THere can be some debate weher enough parts are available for 30+ year old cars to get some back into service. You still get a 30yr old car, even if rebuilt.

Another problem is the demise of the coachbuilding industry. As a government agency, the rules for procurement are different from a private company. Durbin's bill will require the US industry to be rebuilt from ground zero.

IMHO Amtrak needs to puchase readily available cars. That means some foreign builders. There is a use for California type coaches to be used in other short distance markets. It's past time for the Chicago Corridor to get some new cars. Adding a coach or 2 to the Illinois Service trains may ease some congestion. Creative scheduling could get the trains out to the next destination. Amtrak did run some St Louis-Chicago- Milwaukee runs. Having some trains reload & go from CUS would be a smart use of resources.  Perhaps a trainset could be freed for the new Iowa trains once trackwork is done.

It may not be "sexy", but Amtrak needs to use proven & reliable designs. IIRC that's how the Mighty Mouse was born, since GM built it for the Swedes. Now even GM's need to be imported.
We're not ready for high speed service yet. The bulk of the funds IMHO must come from the states in a CA or IL type program. I'd love to see a 80/20 federal/state match, but with local control a 50/50 split may be better.

 

[Flashwave]

This post has drifted far from it's origonal purpose.

Given the rapid increase in ridership, Amtrak is in dire need of new equipment to meet demands for service. Having been cash starved for 18years puts Amtrak in this position. THere can be some debate weher enough parts are available for 30+ year old cars to get some back into service. You still get a 30yr old car, even if rebuilt.

*Caff* Indy is usung the ORIGINAL Budd Stainless ATSF cars for our Fairtrain on regular service. BNot quite as long as Amtrak's schedule, but the 71 yr old cars are holding up more than admirably in theirt lifetimes as ATSF, NJ Commuter, and ITM to name a few. Old is not always outdated.  

[oltmannd]

This post has drifted far from it's origonal purpose.

Given the rapid increase in ridership, Amtrak is in dire need of new equipment to meet demands for service.

I think it's fair to say that "Given the rapid increase in ridership, Amtrak's load factors are up".  But, given the system avg load factor was about 50% and that there are still at least 70 Amfleet stored unserviceable, how can you say they are in dire need of new?

[henry6]

I think it's fair to say that "Given the rapid increase in ridership, Amtrak's load factors are up".  But, given the system avg load factor was about 50% and that there are still at least 70 Amfleet stored unserviceable, how can you say they are in dire need of new?

Because Amtrak is not given a budget that allows it to repair the cars...it has been trying since back when Gunn was Amtrak head!

[oltmannd]

I think it's fair to say that "Given the rapid increase in ridership, Amtrak's load factors are up".  But, given the system avg load factor was about 50% and that there are still at least 70 Amfleet stored unserviceable, how can you say they are in dire need of new?

Because Amtrak is not given a budget that allows it to repair the cars...it has been trying since back when Gunn was Amtrak head!

If the load factors on any route were in the 80s, then you could say Amtrak has a dire need.

If they could even crack 70% load factors, you might even be able to make a case for "dire"

Which route has load factors that high?

When the incremental revenue from adding a coach to an exiting train won't pay for putting an out of service, non-wreck damaged coach back in service, that doesn't speak very well of the value of the service, the cost of the service, or both.

And, are you saying Congress won't appropriate capital to fix existing equipment, but they will appropriate for new?

[henry6]

  

And, are you saying Congress won't appropriate capital to fix existing equipment, but they will appropriate for new?

 

I am more "insinuating" based on what money has been allotted.  But, yes, others (in TRAINS) have stated it the same way.

[daveklepper]

No case whatsoever except for:

1. Making the country reasonably accessable for people who cannot fly.

2. Promoting tourism.

3. Standby for emergencies.

4. Accessability for areas without any other intercity public transportation, especially in the  northwest in winter, but elsewhere as well.

5. Providing connectivity reinforcement for the necessary corridors.

 

[henry6]

No case whatsoever except for:

1. Making the country reasonably accessable for people who cannot fly.

2. Promoting tourism.

3. Standby for emergencies.

4. Accessability for areas without any other intercity public transportation, especially in the  northwest in winter, but elsewhere as well.

5. Providing connectivity reinforcement for the necessary corridors.

 

 

But those points can be and should be applied to all transportation services' rationalizing and planning for a universal, intermodal, transportation policy.

[passengerfan]

This post has drifted far from it's origonal purpose.

Given the rapid increase in ridership, Amtrak is in dire need of new equipment to meet demands for service. Having been cash starved for 18years puts Amtrak in this position. THere can be some debate weher enough parts are available for 30+ year old cars to get some back into service. You still get a 30yr old car, even if rebuilt.

Another problem is the demise of the coachbuilding industry. As a government agency, the rules for procurement are different from a private company. Durbin's bill will require the US industry to be rebuilt from ground zero.

IMHO Amtrak needs to puchase readily available cars. That means some foreign builders. There is a use for California type coaches to be used in other short distance markets. It's past time for the Chicago Corridor to get some new cars. Adding a coach or 2 to the Illinois Service trains may ease some congestion. Creative scheduling could get the trains out to the next destination. Amtrak did run some St Louis-Chicago- Milwaukee runs. Having some trains reload & go from CUS would be a smart use of resources.  Perhaps a trainset could be freed for the new Iowa trains once trackwork is done.

It may not be "sexy", but Amtrak needs to use proven & reliable designs. IIRC that's how the Mighty Mouse was born, since GM built it for the Swedes. Now even GM's need to be imported.
We're not ready for high speed service yet. The bulk of the funds IMHO must come from the states in a CA or IL type program. I'd love to see a 80/20 federal/state match, but with local control a 50/50 split may be better.

 

Having traveled on everything Amtrak has owned except the Acela equipment, I would like to say that the Amtrak California cars used on the Capitals, San Joaquins and Surfliners are great and there ride is certainly an improvement over Superliner1. The cost is considerably less than Superliner II coaches as well. It is a proven design that is compatible with Superliner equipment so I see no problem with buying additional California cars for everything west of Chicago. The California cars can be configured anyway that is needed and that includes sleeping cars as needed. There is no reason to reinvent the horse.

Where it is necessary for the single level equipment to be operated let sanity prevail and no more Amtrak designed equipment. I for one like the ride of the Northwest Talgos except for there fixed consists. That is probaby there major drawback just as it was with the early Zephyrs. It seems history has away of repeating its mistakes. I don't see any reason that long distance Talgos with cars in groups of five could not be used and add sections as needed. They could even have sleeping cars built using the Talgo design for Florida Services and the other eastern long distance services. Or maybe even Acela design cars. I'm sure they could be built in a sleeper configuration if needed.

Al - in - Stockton

[HarveyK400]

I am in the camp of those that think the flexibility of independent cars is over-rated in consideration of new equipment.

Consists are determined mostly by the average maximum load during the day and week.  Switching cars in and out on a day-to-day or run-by-run basis is pretty unusual, even with substantially higher fuel costs and a tight equipment supply.

Fixed trains usually have some provision for adding or dropping units in response to sustained changes in load levels.

Limited capacity is exploited, for better or worse, with demand pricing.  The usual practice is to offer low fares for advance reservations, perhaps guaranteeing minimum revenue.  Wouldn't a higher fare locking in an advance seat reservation; and lower fares to fill the train before departure, risking not getting a seat, maximize revenue?

The second set of doors on the California Car takes away from seating capacity that I think is more critical than boarding time.  At this time, capacity of single-level equipment is not much of an issue for Midwest corridors except possibly for peak period Hiawatha trains.  

[passengerfan]

I am in the camp of those that think the flexibility of independent cars is over-rated in consideration of new equipment.

Consists are determined mostly by the average maximum load during the day and week.  Switching cars in and out on a day-to-day or run-by-run basis is pretty unusual, even with substantially higher fuel costs and a tight equipment supply.

Fixed trains usually have some provision for adding or dropping units in response to sustained changes in load levels.

Limited capacity is exploited, for better or worse, with demand pricing.  The usual practice is to offer low fares for advance reservations, perhaps guaranteeing minimum revenue.  Wouldn't a higher fare locking in an advance seat reservation; and lower fares to fill the train before departure, risking not getting a seat, maximize revenue?

The second set of doors on the California Car takes away from seating capacity that I think is more critical than boarding time.  At this time, capacity of single-level equipment is not much of an issue for Midwest corridors except possibly for peak period Hiawatha trains.  

Re the California Cars second set of doors I would have to disagree with you. They are certainly necessary on all coaches. That is one of the problems with Superliners is the single exit door. At larger stops the single door exits sometimes contribute to the train being delayed leaving the stations.  I have heard some of the passengers of the California Cars is they are noisier than Superliners. That problem is easily cured with additional insulation. Look at the weight difference between Superliners and California Cars. California Sleeping cars, Dining Cars and Lounge Cars would not need two doors.

What I would like to see on the next generation of Double deck cars is an elevator for the handicapped passengers. This would allow them full access to the entire train. Only one car per train would have to be so equipped. As it is now and having talked to handicapped riders they are restricted to the lower level of the coach they board or the sleeping car. Meals have to be brought to them. If one coach and one sleeper per consist had a small elevator such as some of the domes built in Colorado for Alaska Cruise Line service than this would allow those in wheelchairs access to the entire train. After all those passengers pay the same fares as you and I yet they have limited use of the trains facilities.

The Northwest Talgos have given handicapped wheelchair bound passengers access to first class, coach, dining and lounge facilities by making just four cars accessible in each consist.

More pressure needs to be put on Amtrak to make the trains accessible to the handicapped. I have heard several of my handicapped clients complain that they are unable to book the Superliner Handicapped Sleeper space as it is generally sold for families. This is a violation of the ADA act and needs to be addressed by Amtrak immediatly. To restrict long distance handicapped coach passengers on the Superliners to the lower level seating is also a violation of the ADA act. They pay the same fare but are unable to enjoy the same features of the train as everyone else. I talk up Amtrak to all of my clients as I enjoy travel at ground level and yes there is an alternative to flying. All of this talk about most of the west being flyover country is nonsense. Once people board one of the western trains and experience the beauty of the west and arrive reasonably on time they are hooked and will ride those trains again.

As to fares I would rather see Amtrak open up fares to companies like Travelocity or others like them to find lower fares and this also would increase Amtraks load factor. Many times I have booked an Amtrak trip on the Sunset, Southwest Chief, California Zephyr and Coast Starlight two and three months in advance only to be told all bedrooms were sold out. Yet in most instances I have been able to get a bedroom once on the train. Many times I have seen empty sleeping car space on the above mentioned trains for the entire journey. Its almost as if Amtrak on board personel are afraid to let passengers know that they can upgrade to first class as there is space available. And stop selling that one decent ADA compliant space on the Superliners to families until the last minute. I realize they are the government and can't be brought up on ADA suits but they should be.

Al - in - Stockton

I 

[HarveyK400]

With respect to boarding, I would go with a single vestibule and double-stream doors; but definitely not two.  Boarding from a single door would not be that big a deal if it wasn't the only door on the train being used. 

Railroads and Amtrak typically designated cars for travel to and from certain stations.  This is aggravated by checking tickets during boarding which slows the process as passengers and crew fumble with tickets, photo ID, and luggage.  Boarding at Springfield, Illinois to return to Chicago, it's taken 5-8 minutes for two crew to process ~100 passengers at two doors on a 4-car train.  If two adjacent doors and traps were opened with tickets collected on board or checked before boarding, the stop may have taken only 1.5 minutes.  It would take 17-33 miles of 110-mph running instead of 79 just to make up for the long Springfield stop, let alone save any time - thanks to Homeland Security.

100 passengers, evenly divided and assuming all trudge to the upper level, might board 3 California cars in 50 seconds while it would take 100 seconds for 3 Superliners with remote-controlled doors.  That is about a one minute difference and represents 4 miles of 110 mph running.

The Lincoln Service between St Louis and Chicago uses 68-seat Horizon coaches.  With two crew checking tickets and ID, the type of car is academic.  The only differences are in the weight of the train for the number of passengers.

Two each staggered high (for Horizon) and low (for Superliner) mini-platforms with retractable bridge plates and enclosed for security could be used for boarding the trains.  The 255-foot distance would fall within a city block.  The mini-platforms would be accessed from a secure waiting area in an existing station or a new annex with access controlled by the agent.  With sufficient volume, electronic and chemical screening and TSA staff could be added.

I certainly agree that elevators are as essential as a ramp/lift device for double-deck cars.  This is even more complicated for a tri-level car.  I thought the California lounge or diner had an elevator, or was that just for food racks? 

[Wdlgln005]

This post has drifted far from it's origonal purpose.

Given the rapid increase in ridership, Amtrak is in dire need of new equipment to meet demands for service.

I think it's fair to say that "Given the rapid increase in ridership, Amtrak's load factors are up".  But, given the system avg load factor was about 50% and that there are still at least 70 Amfleet stored unserviceable, how can you say they are in dire need of new?

Simple. The old cars are 30+ years old. There must be a point where it is cheaper to build new than rebuild old. Superliners are a proven design, but could be updated with new mechanicals. If I had my way, there would be an order for some California style cars to be sent to other midwestern markets. New viewliners may be needed for Eastern Diners & sleepers. 

There seem to be plans by DOT's to add a train here & there. Ordering 100 cars should allow some cars to be used to promote the new services.  Having some new cars available every Fall for the Holiday Rush is a no brainer. Those new cars should be easier to maintain in the tough winter conditions. 

The new mechanicals can include items like more efficient lighting, A/c etc. There may be other options to include cell phone, wifi, & other items not heard of 30 years ago. How about a lounge car with wide screen video for the onboard movies? How about a GPS system that will tell a passenger where the train is? (For security reasons, the authorities are waiting at the next crossing should they be required?) 

[oltmannd]

This post has drifted far from it's origonal purpose.

Given the rapid increase in ridership, Amtrak is in dire need of new equipment to meet demands for service.

I think it's fair to say that "Given the rapid increase in ridership, Amtrak's load factors are up".  But, given the system avg load factor was about 50% and that there are still at least 70 Amfleet stored unserviceable, how can you say they are in dire need of new?

Simple. The old cars are 30+ years old. There must be a point where it is cheaper to build new than rebuild old.

Amfleet is not nearly to that point.  Age is meaningless.  The cars are stainless and are in no danger of rusting out and have an infinite fatigue life.  There is no new technology that renders them economically obsolete.  Amtrak has over 400 in the active fleet, many of which have been thru the Capstone freshening.  The mechanicals can be brought back to "like new" condition easily and cheaply.

A real, honest go goodness, for profit company could get those store unserviceable cars back in service in a matter of months - and pay for it out of incremental revenue from those cars.