I was just looking at the tour of sleeping accommodations, and noticed that the designer has never been in such, for there are various mistakes in the descriptions--and the pictures.
https://www.amtrak.com/onboard/onboard-accommodations-for-all-your-needs/sleeping-accommodations/sleeping-car-virtual-tours.html
Johnny
Deggestythere are various mistakes in the descriptions
I didn't see them. Please advise what I'm not seeing. Of course, the Ice chests are gone as are other amenities.
The windows in the family room are described as being "picture windows;" they are half size of the windows in the other rooms. And, the description indicates that there are steps to be used to get into the upper child's berth--and the picture shows a ladder for that berth.
The floor plan includes one of the toilets with the "Shower and changing room"--and each room has its own door to the aisle, and there is no connection between them. The "changing room" is actually a part of the shower room.
The single seat in each bedroom is described as being a reclining seat; I have never seen that one reclines. In no way would I call it an "easy chair;" I have never sat in one that was really comfortable.
The accessible room has no bathtub or shower; it does have a toilet and washbasin; it should be called a "half-bath."
It is many years since Amtrak has described the small compartments as "bedrooms;" this is the first time I have seen one described as a "roomette bedroom."
Another item concerning the Viewliner: the diagram indicates that the shower area extends across the aisle--into what is actually the attendant's roomette.
Numerous passenger produced videos on YouTube are better.
Deggestythe diagram indicates that the shower area extends across the aisle--into what is actually the attendant's roomette.
Probably beyond the scope of his/her duties, so tip accordingly.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
So here is a deeper question! How come we call them sleeping cars.
Until middle age, when my income finally caught up with the lifestyle that had been intended for me, even if my employer did not see it, I rode coach when traveling by train. On the overnight trains from New York to Florida, as I remember it, most of us in coach slept.
So maybe we should refer to coaches as lite sleepers and room cars as deep sleepers!
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
PJS1 So here is a deeper question! How come we call them sleeping cars. Until middle age, when my income finally caught up with the lifestyle that had been intended for me, even if my employer did not see it, I rode coach when traveling by train. On the overnight trains from New York to Florida, as I remember it, most of us in coach slept. So maybe we should refer to coaches as lite sleepers and room cars as deep sleepers!
Ordinary coaches, with straight backs and no footrests were worse (even coaches built in the early 20th century were not really suitable for teen-agers and above for night travel--unless you were able to have the seat next to a washroom all to yourself, and could stretch out on it, as I did one night in 1953. Not much better were the reclining seats some roads, such as ACL and L&N (or was it NC&StL?), which had fixed center armrests and poor footrests. Also, the Amfleet 1 cars were not built for overnight comfort; I had the miserable experience in 1982 of spending the night in one from Providence to Wilmington--and it was just as bad as the immediatly aforementioned cars.
When Mr. Pullman determined how to provide beds that were comfortable, it became proper to call the cars with such "sleepers."
It is true that the "Sleepy Hollow" seats in the coaches of some roads were comfortable, and coaches with legrests are even better. However, with the custom of calling cars with berths available for sleeping "sleepers," and cars with only seats, however they have been improved as much as possible for night comfort, "coaches" is so well established thtat it may be confusing to change the terminology.
As it is, I would not really care to spend the night in an Acela first class car, nor in any Amtrak coach again.
DeggestyI refer to the account of "Pre-Pullman Sleeping Cars in 1860" that begins on page 89 of A Treasury of Railroad Folklore, edited by B.A. Botkin and Alvin F. Harlow (no, you may not borrow my copy, and I doubt that the other two posters who, I know, possess copies will consider lending their copies).
And this rather hard attitude is due, precisely, to what?
I can't imagine you think this is a rare book in any respect. Even copies of the 1953 edition are only a few bucks plus shipping. Here is a link to a few, and not from the cheapest online listing source, either.
(Now, I'll admit that packaging and mailing costs for a 'borrowed' copy, even at current USPS media rates, may exceed the cost for an interested reader to just buy their own and treasure it... so not much point in borrowing.)
The ACL and SAL reclining-seat coaches on the Florida trains, and the few PRR, RF&P, and FEC coaches built to match them, were comfortable enough for me to sleep when I did use them. The Southern had similar cars. The New York Central's were similar. A cut above these cars with less dense seating and greater reclining of the seats were the PRR coaches on the General, Trailblazer, Red Arrow, and Jeffersonian. And the UP and AT&SF cars, including the El Capitan high-levels. Otherwise, the crticism is correct. At least for me. A night in a crowded P-70 was not enjoyable. nor in a prewar "American Flyer." If the load was light and one could manage to get two double seats to face each other, put a suicase between, and stretch out, one could sleep well. Put a newspaper between one's shoes and the seat, of course.
The classic Pullman blankets were terrific and kept one reasonably warm even if the heat - air-conditioning was off. Terrible that Amtrak doesn't provide the equal.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.