blue streak 1 The Feb 2009 Trains magazine had an article on Auto Train and its operation. It was stated that "Adding an extra couch when demand peaks would help raise revenue without adding significant cost"
The Feb 2009 Trains magazine had an article on Auto Train and its operation. It was stated that "Adding an extra couch when demand peaks would help raise revenue without adding significant cost"
It would be interesting to know whether the author of the article had access to Amtrak's reservation information for the Auto Train. Does he or she know how many times the train was sold out and, equally important, how many people were turned away who did not book on another date.
For FY 2008 the Auto Train had an average load factor of approximately 62 per cent and a median of 60.8 per cent. The standard deviation was 9.5 per cent. I assumed six sleepers and four coaches, with 40 spaces in the sleepers (I eliminated the special bedroom) and 70 seats in the coaches.
The average train load was 322 passengers with a median of 316. The maximum train average was 400 passengers in July, whilst the minimum was 223 in September. The maximum load factor was 76.8 per cent whilst the minimum was 42.9 per cent. These numbers, plus the magnitude of the standard deviation, which predicts the probability and degree of straying from the mean, suggest that the train did not sell out on many occasions.
It is possible to drown in an average of six inches of water. Therefore, statistics are not a substitute for on the ground conditions. But they suggest that Amtrak would want to take a hard look at actual booking data before adding additional capacity.
I suspect given Amtrak's capital problems, it does not have a "spare" coach, sleeper, etc sitting around & waiting to be used. It would be nice to be able to add a car for "weekend" service, but the car would come back empty on the "weekday". As a practical matter, there is a point where the extra coach would require an extra unit, extra crew, and other costs that make it not as smart as it would appear.
I'm disappointed that no one took this post and ran with it. Several points needed to be made. One is the Florence SC service stop and crew change allocated into Auto Train's costs? Next the addition of not one but several coaches and additional auto transporters has not been addressed by anyone.
Now this application to long distance trains needs thought. 1. Most western LD terminals can handle long trains either by split track loading or long platforms. However Seattle King street station has capacity and length problems. 2. Eastern trains would not work except at Washington Union Station on the lower level tracks. NYP just couldn't take the time to split a train or combine it and do the brake test and have the approach tracks tied up. For those llocations requiring a back-up move the conductor in the back locomotive is a plus. At many locations the splitting of a train gives the possibility of a new route without rearraging the locomotives and cars.An example would be the cresent arriving at the old downtown location of the stations in Atlanta and the main train going to Birmingham - New Orleans and the split going to Montgomery - Mobile - New Orleans Or Jacksonville. This setup allows for the quick reduction enroute of excess passenger cars. This type of operation could reduce the number of excess cars enroute.
A downer is that no longer could a fan watch out the rear of the train except from the upper door of superliners over the top of the locomotive (just a minor down in the grand scheme of getting more service)..
Of course all this is predicated on AMTRAK GETTING ENOUGH FUNDING to repair all of their out of service cars and purchase new cars. That is not a given.
Unfortunately, I can find only the numbers to calculate the average load factors, which as I stated are just that. More meaningful statistics would be the mode, median, and standard deviation. The median, which is the point where half the data points are above it and half are below it, can be worked out if I am willing to take the ridership for each month and do the calculations. The median is almost always lower than the average at least when calculating arrival times or minutes late in Texas. I may do that.
Your point about the Sunset is well taken. One of the keys to success in business, indeed most activities, is to concentrate your resources where there is likely to be a big payoff. General Robert E. Lee understood this point; it is one of the reasons he was so successful for a long period of time, even though he was almost always out numbered on the battlefield.
Instead of running a skelton long distance train system, which I recognize is political as opposed to logical or demand driven, think how much better a system we could have if Amtrak was permitted to concentrate its resources where there is a better market demand for them. Like the Auto Train! And more joint venture corridors (Amtrak and State).
Paul: To elaborate on your post. All passenger transportation suffers from load factor slop. Either airline, train, Auto-Train, commuter train, intercity bus, transit bus, light rail, cable car, ferry boat, etc. Why? Because there are more people who want to go in one direction than the other at any certain time. Once while flying on a thanksgiving wedensday 200+ seats we had 3 people on an airplane leaving Miami. These examples can be applied to any of the above modes. One of the few exceptions I know is Miami's tri-rail which has loads fairly equal both ways through out the day.
Whether adding another coach to meet peak demand is a good option would depend on how often it occurs and the number of incremental passengers turned away. If only one or two passengers are being turned away, adding capacity is probably not a good idea.
There are times when the railfan/enthusiast/advocacy community comes up with weak ideas. You have WisARP going on in their newsletter about adding a stop to the Hiawatha and about the "dozens" of people who would board at that stop. Apart from the arguments about whether the extra passengers would be "worth it", the whole concept the of the Hiawatha is as a limited express, and if you add a stop here and a stop there, it turns into a milk run where the Hiawatha takes a whole lot longer to get there, and you might as well put in KRM and have people take 2 1/2 hours getting from Milwaukee to Chicago on the commuter trains.
For FY 2008 the average load factor on the Auto Train was 63.5 per cent. For FY 2007 it was 58.3 per cent. These numbers suggest that on average the AT is running with plenty of spare capacity, although there are undoubtedly periods when it is higher than the average, and occasions when the train is sold out.
There are rare times too when such averages don't give the "big picture" either. If Auto Train is running at 63.5 percent load factor, most of the people riding that thing are experiencing a full train, and if people are not turned away, they are experiencing difficulty travelling at the times of their chosing instead of when there is a free booking.
It is the fallacy "how can the load factor be only 63.5 percent, it is full every time I have been on it." Every time I fly anyplace it seems the plane is packed full, but airline load factors are nowhere near 100 percent. That is because when the Auto Train/airplane/whatever is full that is because that is when people want to ride the thing, and the times it is not full, there are fewer people on it to tell the tale about how they could stretch out and lie down on a bank of seats.
Not saying that it would be economic to run extra cars on the Auto Train. But this is perhaps an example of the cost of hanging on to the Sunset Limited -- those cars on the low load factor Sunset are not available for the high load factor Auto Train.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
blue streak 1 The Feb 2009 Trains magazine had an article on Auto Train and its operation. It was stated that "Adding an extra couch when demand peaks would help raise revenue without adding significant cost" "but we are already pushing the head-end power limit pulling 988 amps............"
The Feb 2009 Trains magazine had an article on Auto Train and its operation. It was stated that "Adding an extra couch when demand peaks would help raise revenue without adding significant cost" "but we are already pushing the head-end power limit pulling 988 amps............"
Presumably some of the increase in the load factor during FY 2008 was caused by the dramatic run-up in the cost of gasoline. Now that gasoline has fallen back to less than $1.50 per gallon, plus the recession, it will be interesting to see what happens to the load factor in FY 2009. My guess is that adding extra capacity will be a moot question.
The Feb 2009 Trains magazine had an article on Auto Train and its operation. It was stated that "Adding an extra couch when demand peaks would help raise revenue without adding significant cost" "but we are already pushing the head-end power limit pulling 988 amps............" Also noted was that there is a consist limit of 50 cars.. Now if AMTRAK could place a locomotive at the end of the passenger consist and in front of the car carriers then the HEP load could be split between two locomotives and not overload the HEP. I believe that most superliners already have wiring for pass through of engine connections. Anyone know about the Auto Train cars? If not maybe DPU could be installed in the locomotives. The article states the normal consist of 6 sleepers, 4 coaches, 3 dinners, 2 lounges, and 1 dorm sleeper. Total of passenger cars 16 - Superliners. So to add to revenues additional cars could greatly add to Auto Train's bottom line. The consist limit might have to be renegoitated with CSX and the lead tracks in Lorton and Sanford extended. Anyone know?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.