As much as I hate to find myself on the side of the usual food-service (and sleeping-car) bashers on this forum, in the case of the Florida commissary I can't disagree. Truly, this is something a private business would not have tolerated for a single month, let alone for (how many?) years and years. It's an example of inertia by a government agency, Amtrak, at its worst.
Elsewhere, Amtrak has sharpened up noticeably to this rider in recent years. (And I don't mean by getting rid of wine-tastings and other niceties.) Why so slow to reform the most obvious reproach to its otherwise exemplary AT?
ACYGood one, Balt!
And speaking of 'good one', let me be the first to applaud that new sig you have. Not only is it a vast improvement on its predecessor, it's often something of a good commentary in itself!
CMStPnP ACYIt's a matter of looking at the options available to the passengers, then guessing how many might choose which option. It means guessing how many Catholics are riding on a Friday in Lent, even though nobody asked them their religion (or how observant they are) when they made their reservations; how many are sensitive to glutens; how many just happen to be in the mood for chicken today even though they chose beef yesterday. If any statistician can predict that EXACTLY, then my hat's off to him. Just wanted to let you know that American Airlines changed their First Class tray service within the last few months. Passengers can now select the meals all the way from ticket purchase to the time they are sitting at their seat. American encourages them with Emails to select their tray meals prior to plane check-in so they have the selection on board before the plane departs.
ACYIt's a matter of looking at the options available to the passengers, then guessing how many might choose which option. It means guessing how many Catholics are riding on a Friday in Lent, even though nobody asked them their religion (or how observant they are) when they made their reservations; how many are sensitive to glutens; how many just happen to be in the mood for chicken today even though they chose beef yesterday. If any statistician can predict that EXACTLY, then my hat's off to him.
Considering the society we live in today, I am surprised that American isn't getting a backlash from their customers considering such a request as an invasion of their privacy.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
ACYIt's not an exact science.
Right. It's a statistical science.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Not sure that RoW and running trains, passenger and freight are vertical. In any case, separation allows freight lines to concentrate on what they do best, passenger lines to do likewise and track maintenance to have a separate concentration.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/about-us/
Schlimm,
FWIW, I could not get the network rail link to work despite three time separated tries.
The real issue is how splitting an operation that is vertically integrated for good reasons makes sense. The split itself will increase costs of coordination. Why do that?
Mac
PNWRMNM As I understand it the NEC has two problems. One is that ATK is forced by law to charge the commuter train operating entities on the basis of marginal costs which are far less than average costs on say a per train mile basis. The practical effect is that ATK is subsidizing the commuters, or more baldly Federal Taxpayers are subsidizing New Jersey taxpayers, who are subsidizing NJ residents who choose to ride NJT to NYC. The second is that the NEC needs big bucks to increase capacity, particularly at the Baltimore Tunnels and between NJ and NYC. For the sake of simplicity I will assume that the NEC is in a state of good repair, which many well not be true. The undercharging of commuters is a matter of Federal Law. As such Federal Law could/should be changed to eliminate the undercharging.
As I understand it the NEC has two problems.
One is that ATK is forced by law to charge the commuter train operating entities on the basis of marginal costs which are far less than average costs on say a per train mile basis. The practical effect is that ATK is subsidizing the commuters, or more baldly Federal Taxpayers are subsidizing New Jersey taxpayers, who are subsidizing NJ residents who choose to ride NJT to NYC.
The second is that the NEC needs big bucks to increase capacity, particularly at the Baltimore Tunnels and between NJ and NYC. For the sake of simplicity I will assume that the NEC is in a state of good repair, which many well not be true.
The undercharging of commuters is a matter of Federal Law. As such Federal Law could/should be changed to eliminate the undercharging.
1. Doesn't the latest law change require that an " EQUITABLE " charge system for railroads using the NEC are to be negotiated by the end of this FY ? Three charges might be all that is necessary for any line segment.? Examining the Frailey article in April's Trains shows commuters are much more frequent than Amtrak on most of the NEC.
a. A per train charge
b. A per axel count with motor ( Loco ) added in at a higher rate ?
c. Electric metering of CAT power consumption. Will cause regenerative braking equipment to be much more desirable. That will reduce total electric consumption needed.
2. Yes the need for infrastructure improvements is very evident.
a. The north end --- Hudson river tunnels, Penn station expansion, Portal and Dock bridges is the pressing need in NJ.
b. Easing of curves Trenton - PHL in Pennsylvania.
c. 4 tracking from Marcus Hook - WASH. Didn't Fred point out that commuter trains BAL - WASH had dropped to 2 RTs a day during PC days ?
d. B & P tunnels ( 4 track ) at Baltimore
e. 3 draw bridges in Maryland need replacing with 4 tracks and raised so the draw bridges no longer need opening
f. Expanding platforms for longer trains will keep number of new trains at a minimum until other improvements are completed.
g. Make full NYP -- WASH route 160 MPH capable thereby improving fluidity and reducing travel time to what ? 2:00 NYP - WASH.?
3. The CAT replacement needs to go forward now before any more trains are needed to operate on the NEC
a. The shut down of 2 tracks at a time between CP to do this work is imperative. Look at the problems MNRR is having trying to finish New Rochelle -- New Haven.
b. Ever location that are CP crossovers will take special work windows for the CAT changing tracks. Possibly weekends and / or night times with only one track open ( 1 or 4 ? )
c. Upgrading CAT in 2 track territory will be even more difficult ?
4. State of good repair. No maybe fair but whole NYP -- WASH needs undercutting.
.
PNWRMNMAnyone who favors this approach should study hard the series of wrecks in Britian that followed shortly after their implementation of this policy. Railroads are vertically integrated as between operations, maintenance, and capital investments because that is the most effective and efficient way to organize the business, even a loss making business like the NEC.
I may have this wrong, but the problems in the UK occurred when they privatized all rail, including track with a separate company. That error was corrected by semi-nationalizing all RoW so that it was properly maintained to higher standards. Since then, there have been much fewer track-related accidents.
It is a "not-for-dividend" company.
schlimm I also think capital costs of new corridors and the NEC should not count against Amtrak, but be born by a separate corporation that owns the track, as in the UK.
I also think capital costs of new corridors and the NEC should not count against Amtrak, but be born by a separate corporation that owns the track, as in the UK.
I have never understood the logic of those who think this is a good idea.
The undercharging of commuters is a matter of Federal Law. As such Federal Law could/should be changed to eliminate the undercharging. Do not need a new owner to do that, but I do see how a new owner might be a flag of convenience under which to make the case for charging the commuters fairly.
Creating a new entity to own and maintain the fixed plant in and of itself does nothing to address the investment needs. If the new entity is to be for profit, they need to raise everyone's charges to generate the cash flow to support the multi billions in debt they will incurr to fix just the two items I mentioned. If the new entity is just another Federal bureaucracy all we have done is provided fertile ground for fights between the "owner" and the "operators" and shifted the Federal capital spending from ATK to the NEW ENTITY. I really do not see the point. The expenditures will or will not be made. What difference does it matter if they are made thru ATK or the NEW ENTITY?
Anyone who favors this approach should study hard the series of wrecks in Britian that followed shortly after their implementation of this policy. Railroads are vertically integrated as between operations, maintenance, and capital investments because that is the most effective and efficient way to organize the business, even a loss making business like the NEC.
1.. If capitol costs were included, I believe the NEC would show just about as taxpayer subsidized as LD. If you add the state subsidies for commuter service, possibly a lot more so! The least subsidized by taxpayers are the other short distance corridors, and one or two (VA, NC) actually break even or make money if one does not count the hidden subsidy by the freight railroads.
2. I have zero problem with freight railroads subsidizing passenger service as long as the subsidy is a tiny part of operating expenses. The subsidy was part of the agreement for them to exit the passenger business, and the passenger business bought them eminent domain and other needed advantages that put them in business in the firstplace.
3. On a per-taxpayer basis, of course, things look differently. "I use Amtrak LD once a year for vacation travel. The Amtrak taxpayer subsidy to me is probably 1/20th the subsidy a Phily-NY commuter 2 times a week gets, Acela or regional." Or "I pay taxes, I want my train, even if I never use it."
PNWRMNMNEC where ATK has to support the whole railroad in marked contrast to the LD trains which are being subsidized by the freight carriers through "marginal cost" payment for train slots.
Yet another subsidy LD routes receive. I would like to see an equal level of subsidization on all product lines. I also think capital costs of new corridors and the NEC should not count against Amtrak, but be born by a separate corporation that owns the track, as in the UK.
Schlimm
The NEC contribution should not subsidize the rest of ATK. It should offset some of the corporate overhead costs. Anything left over after that should go to capital costs of the NEC where ATK has to support the whole railroad in marked contrast to the LD trains which are being subsidized by the freight carriers through "marginal cost" payment for train slots.
Who knows what ATK's books show? Not me. But if I were the boss and I want Congress to see the cost of LD trains, I would set my books up by product line, probably NEC, corridors, and LD.
daveklepper A-C, Shlimm and I know that Autotrain loses a lot less money per passenger than most if not all the long distance services. So it is logical to suspect that some other costs are being passed on to Autotrain to make make some real disaster elsewhere look better.
A-C, Shlimm and I know that Autotrain loses a lot less money per passenger than most if not all the long distance services. So it is logical to suspect that some other costs are being passed on to Autotrain to make make some real disaster elsewhere look better.
Better than any other LD train, losing only $0.14 ppm in FY 2013. However, the shorter corridors lost only $0.089 ppm. The NEC overall had a positive contribution of $0.20 ppm mile to help subsidize the rest of Amtrak. Acela by itself contributed $0.375 ppm, yet folks like henry imply it is overpriced. In fact, if Amtrak actually was forced to break even on all operations, the Acela fares would be cut and LD fares would be raised a large percentage.
We are told the A-T has an outsourced food service on the FL end with Aramark. Then we are told there is a commissary at Sanford serving only the A-T. It uses the Ivy City commissary on the north end. Is that shared with any other trains? Why use commissaries which serve few or zero other trains (to distribute overhead) if the train uses an outsourced supply? What a mess. In any case, the fare is insufficient to cover the food service costs. Underpricing.
oltmanndThis is not a particularly difficult problem to solve. The train has a long history and that history (in data) plus some simple statistical analysis could be used to predict rather closely what's needed by day of week, week of year, etc, etc.
As I was saying in an earlier post, but he and his chief think the past history is irrelevant. Sounds like totally over-matched management. But even that doesn't explain the ridiculous commissary costs for the A-T.
ACYSince we don't know in advance what each passenger will order, an extra factor is added to be sure we have enough for everybody. I have no way of knowing how much food is kept on hand at the Washington DC (Ivy City) Commissary in order to be prepared for the demand.
This is not a particularly difficult problem to solve. The train has a long history and that history (in data) plus some simple statistical analysis could be used to predict rather closely what's needed by day of week, week of year, etc, etc.
ACYEvery morning, they receive an order from the crew of inbound no. 52
The inbound crew orders for next outbound train? How do they know what the passenger count for the next outbound train is? Certainly, this could be done better from current bookings plus history....
It makes some sense to me. The Silver Florida trains share commisary and many other costs with many trains, particularly at the north end of their runs. These are two trains out of at least 50 requiring food service at Sunnyside, and possibly 100. The Auto Train's commisary and other costs are unique to it, since its endpoints must be located with very different criteria than all other passenger trains.
To reduce costs without dropping quality and one would have to work out a method where by the Washington, DC commissary, if there is one, could service Lorton. I am unsure if this is possible. Or possibly the Dulles Airport Sky Chefs operation. And Orlando Airport Sky Chefs at the south end.
ACYUnlike Schlimm, I do not see a crook under every rock.
Hardly. But if you think the contract with Aramark in the past for a food service that cost almost 10X the Silver Star commissary and served fewer passengers makes any sense, then you really need to take off your rose colored glasses and get real. IG reports use the figures from Amtrak, examined by skilled, experienced auditors. If you or V. Payne think they are in error, prove it.
"It is outsourced, so Amtrak cannot tack its overhead onto that..." take a look at the presentation to which I am showing a link. There is a discussion regarding Corporate costs, such as developing the point of sale system. Who is to say that the Commissary Cost is not just a catchall bucket of Aramark costs, Corporate cost, IT costs, that is allocated by prorating to revenue?
Further, the amount of Commissary cost does not make sense at the route level. I bet something got miscoded but the erstwhile IG didn't apply some basic back checking of numbers to figure this out.
We are getting pretty deep into Amtrak's internal cost allocation. I did however see that there are about $61 million worth of purchases (assume food and contract services) system wide per the PDF but $91 million in total costs for "Commisary Provision & Management".
Here are the Corporate Support functions, I wonder what is the cost of such?
Business Planning and Contract ManagementBusiness Analytics and Decision SupportInformation Systems Support (WIMS/POS)Regulatory Compliance – FDA, Amtrak Public Health, DOT, FMCSA, etc.Facility and Asset Management
This all gets back to the only way to really drive efficiency is to change the subsidy for Amtrak to a per passenger mile subsidy off the corridor at least.
V.Payne I would tend to believe Acy in regard to the peak numbers, which are not the average found in reports. "An answer to the ridiculously high commissary charge for the A-T ($13,969,000 vs only $1,450,000 for the Silver Star) should be found soon. It becomes very hard to take Amtrak seriously with such an obvious boondoggle going on." The answer may simply be that this is an artifact of an accounting system that allocates 80% of costs. In other words a host of overhead unrelated to production might be roled into these numbers atop the Aramark contract.
I would tend to believe Acy in regard to the peak numbers, which are not the average found in reports.
"An answer to the ridiculously high commissary charge for the A-T ($13,969,000 vs only $1,450,000 for the Silver Star) should be found soon. It becomes very hard to take Amtrak seriously with such an obvious boondoggle going on."
The answer may simply be that this is an artifact of an accounting system that allocates 80% of costs. In other words a host of overhead unrelated to production might be roled into these numbers atop the Aramark contract.
I do not doubt ACY's experience. But there must be either: 1. an extreme range in day-to-day loaded passenger numbers to arrive at the officially reported averages month after month. or 2. ACY's 550 passengers is an extreme outlier. In either case, it would mean the A-T either has a large reserve pool of equipment to use on those 500+ days or else most of the time there are a lot of 1/3 empty passenger cars, as well as a lot of unused food which eventually is discarded. Perhaps that explains some (not much) the high commissary cost.
As far as commissary cost being almost 10x that of the Silver Star, your speculation that it represent overhead makes little sense. 1. It is outsourced, so Amtrak cannot tack its overhead onto that. 2. Even if it were so, why would the overhead tacked on be so much higher than the Silver Star or any other LD food service. Until I see some official explanation, the hypothesis of corrupt practices (kickback on a sweetheart contract) looks quite possible
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.