I would consider this as an option using their First Class bus........looks really nice.
https://www.redcoachusa.com/redcoach-experience/
That's more a competition for Brightline and, prospectively, Texas Central than for Amtrak, considering where these buses now run.
And unless you need that 21" seat width, the 18" Business Class seat has the same footrest and the same 140-degree sleeping recline.
But neither seems to have the 'hover-seat' active vertical and lateral suspension so necessary for LD buses (especially as highway infrastructure continues to deteriorate and traffic increases) and I wonder about the economy of the increased seat tracking (and probably number of seats per row) that buses with these seats would have.
I find myself wishing there were more-detailed reports on exactly how the Pickwick Nite Coach amenities were provided, particularly those with the coach in motion, and which of the Delta 'proposed' amenities would scale to bud transport.
Now this is not "competition for Amtrak" as much as it is a wake-up call for Amtrak Thruway to wake up and innovate this stuff not only for the routes it can't run with trains or railcars, but increased feeder and regional service to complement the trains it does run.
Long past time that Amtrak recognized that LD trains won't be any more financially successful at 'basic transportation' now than they were in the age of, say, Biaggini or Menk, and accept that any way to 'profitability' for them lies in making them more attractive than 'the competition'.
This topic sparks in me the book by Randal O'Toole, Romance of the Rails... Though a railfan himself, he pointed out the economic futility of operating passenger trains and light rail in our era. The many billions backlog of projects needed to restore infrastructure reveals how obsolete passenger rail is in our times. That buses would win hands down. That it goes back to Massachusetts governor Sargent back in the 70's. He got the Feds to allow road construction money to be used for transit. And it wasn't that these funds were too few, but too much. It would buy too many buses, so light rail and commuter-related construction was sought. Politicians could feed their constituent donors well. Passenger trains provided transport for the well-off at the expense of those who needed inexpensive transportation. There were only a couple of long distance routes that because of unique scenic beauty could support what we now see as the Rocky Mountaineer. I've had to agree with the assessment, as much as I love trains. To have bus travel start to become truly attractive because entrepreneurs are seeing what's needed and appealing is refreshing.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
GrampThere were only a couple of long distance routes that because of unique scenic beauty could support what we now see as the Rocky Mountaineer.
I and a number of other posters over the years see an intermediate niche for trains that are a luxurious or enjoyable experience, but provide reasonably reliable point-to-point transportation for 'all the little places' ... with neither the grand scenery in daylight or the expensive cuisine. The amenities are those in the good express or 'private jet experience' buses; the food can probably be cruise-ship standard, fixed in ghost kitchens if need be, possibly fully outsourced. Get it fun enough to ride and anything out the windows is just a bonus.
But the sleeping issue has to be solved at reasonable cost, shy of the sleeping-car coterie. In order for LD to be 'net positive' as Congress mandated, the take rate AND cost of the 'regular service' has to cover any shortfall in the fancy sleeping cars. That's going to take some doing, even if the entire capital cost of the 'amenities' can be kept out of the Congressional operating expense report.
Gramp This topic sparks in me the book by Randal O'Toole, Romance of the Rails... Though a railfan himself, he pointed out the economic futility of operating passenger trains and light rail in our era. The many billions backlog of projects needed to restore infrastructure reveals how obsolete passenger rail is in our times. That buses would win hands down. That it goes back to Massachusetts governor Sargent back in the 70's. He got the Feds to allow road construction money to be used for transit. And it wasn't that these funds were too few, but too much. It would buy too many buses, so light rail and commuter-related construction was sought. Politicians could feed their constituent donors well. Passenger trains provided transport for the well-off at the expense of those who needed inexpensive transportation. There were only a couple of long distance routes that because of unique scenic beauty could support what we now see as the Rocky Mountaineer. I've had to agree with the assessment, as much as I love trains. To have bus travel start to become truly attractive because entrepreneurs are seeing what's needed and appealing is refreshing.
I disagree and I think I can spot fairly easily good analysis from personal opinion when I see it. You can't predict the future by extending what is now into a flat trend line all the way to infinity for starters.
We also have Brightline and several various scattered attempts at private companies to enter both corridor and long distance passenger rail (not addressed above). Most all of them have failed so far but that does not mean they will continue to fail because to me it looks like the private sector is searching for the right formula here to enter the sector again. Maybe they will be successful and maybe they won't. Time will tell but I think the answer is we do not know yet.
As for the Economics of rail vs busses. I believe the London School of Economics hit the nail on the head of when High Speed Rail or Corridor rail (near high speed and less) is feasible and when it should be implemented. They didn't throw their arms in the air and state we should give up on all rail for hauling passengers. So I would question a lot of the premises that Randal O'Toole made and also inquire as to what his background is because from what you posted it sounds like a poster on the Trains Forum making wild presumptions without any scientific method. Which is OK because this is an opinion forum but still I can't buy into any of what you wrote without a lot more evidence that some deep analysis was done.
OvermodBut the sleeping issue has to be solved at reasonable cost, shy of the sleeping-car coterie. In order for LD to be 'net positive' as Congress mandated, the take rate AND cost of the 'regular service' has to cover any shortfall in the fancy sleeping cars. That's going to take some doing, even if the entire capital cost of the 'amenities' can be kept out of the Congressional operating expense report.
The biggest issue which will never be resolved via pricing in my view unless you limit long-distance trains to very wealthy. It's lack of frequency vs fixed costs of the infrastructure. Only an idiot would attempt the Amtrak long-distance business model and try to keep pricing low so that everyone could afford the single frequency.........it is complete fantasyland and the Private Railroads never did that before Amtrak. Which is why I always have to chuckle at turning the dining car into a Waffle House on wheels or less. Either you provide dining or drop the car. Watch what happens to the new vending machine cars that California is going to try and implement on the San Joaquins on brand new Siemens Venture cars.........or whatever that corridor is called these days. Does California really think that putting a group of vending machines on a train car is really a lot better than a staffed Cafe car? I have my bag of popcorn for that whole deal (WisDOT tried it with a push cart already......fixed costs increased for running the trains and most ate before they got on the train or after they got off because the options were a lot better). Which is also exhibit A on why the government should probably not try and operate passenger trains on their own without at least some counsel from the private sector. I give them credit for trying but I have not seen that concept succeed long term anywhere in the world. Maybe it is my lack of exposure, I don't know. We'll see.
You're unlikely to ever see an increase in service frequency for LD trains, unless net (i.e. Congressionally-accepted-and-approved) profitability warrants additional and highly-granular service frequency. You'd see longer consists either with defined 'doors open' or multiple stops at intermediate points long before you see more trains per week.
Yes, you need to maintain dining quality for the sleeper passengers commensurate with their expectations and the price they're paying for the accommodation (just as, historically, sleeper 'accommodation' was a surcharge over 'transportation')
But very few coach or business passengers are going to eat in an expensive diner by choice, so nearly the entire cost of the existing commissary-based dedicated-car diner system has to be charged to the sleeper revenue... and, please note, remain 'net profitable' for that part of the service. The problem being (as you and I and most everyone else here knows) that even in the days of railroad pride and cheap but devoted labor... diners were hideously unprofitable, run as loss leaders to draw clientele for what was supposed to be a nominally profitable train. That sure ain't Amdreck, and will never be again; even if you outsourced some of the diner on a nominal for-profit basis there's just too much problem with guaranteed profitability from the level of service required.
Likewise, effective and attractive means of providing onboard food and snacks for the 'little people' in coach have to be made. That sure won't be in the diner as long as current staffing practices continue, and having a lounge-cafe or whatever that is only open at restricted hours (and partly occupied by sprawled-out crabby train personnel) is a poor excuse. We've already noted that open self-serve provisions for drinks and heating or cooling of food aren't going to work, 'automats' to work right need continuous restock 'from behind', and any sort of Biaggini-style rest-stop vending -- probably outsourced with a hefty price 'premium' for the restricted business -- doesn't solve much more than drinks and snacks.
To me the only thing that would work is the ability to order (and pay for in advance), either via an app or by asking train staff, hot food 'to go' that is prepared and delivered relative to actual train time at various stops.
OvermodYou're unlikely to ever see an increase in service frequency for LD trains
You took what I said too literally. Where we operate LD trains over existing corridors on that specific segment their fixed costs are lower, because the stations are paid for in part by the other frequencies. So we do have it to a small extent. I get it your not going to have it over the whole route.
The other issue with Amtrak is there is no other revenue stream and the only real add-on they have is the poorly advertised Amtrak vacations. Look at all the add-ons that Brightline has just for corridor service.
Additionally, look how long it took Amtrak to figure out it might make some extra money via bike racks in the baggage car and even then..........no lift? Instead the owner has to wheel the bike all the way to the baggage car and hand it up to the person standing in the car. So just table that for a moment. What is Amtrak doing to promote use of bikes and trains? Almost zero. Look at the long bike paths just along the route of the Empire Builder. Granted a lot of train riders are obese and would probably blow out the tires of a regular moutain bike BUT they do make E-Bikes for heavy passengers too. Not that carrying bikes would ever be a major profit center but do at least some tie-in or advertising for it.
Understood that carrying express freight may or may not be an issue with the Frieght railroad but why not open negotiations there at least on hauling containerized freight behind LD trains and see if they go anywhere or have any potential even a joint rate would be better than nothing at all.
The new baggage cars are kind of a disappointment for me because the only real improvements there were bike racks and improved lighting. Nothing else. I think it was a lost opportunity to potentially use the baggage car for other train purposes or to carry other potential revenue generating items. No faster way of loading the baggage car then by hand? Really?
Well, I'm not going to copy and paste O'toole's materials. And one can't predict for certain what tomorrow's political economy will look like. It looks like "electronics and company" will continue to attract a lot of the resources available. I hope for Brightline. Amtrak and the Class Ones continue to live largely in the Industrial Age. How long will people really want to walk a long platform in inclement weather? Meanwhile the quest for driverless vehicles in some form continues. How might their use increase the utility of the road network?
As most posters note Amtrak is awarding bonus for the wrong reason(s). In 2022 Amtrak cut some trains to 5 a week or even 3 a week. The above rail costs to the class 1s did not go down as Amtrak was the one cancelling.
So the tevenue / cost ratio went down if revnue wis the numerator or up if it is the denominator. Cancel all trains on a route and the ratio is either zero or infinity by how one looks at the ratio. According to PRIIA adding ne coach to the Meteor would have incresed the pay back ~~ $700,000 a year. That would certainly made the ratio more favorable. Plus serving more potential passengers.
Cancel all trains on a route and you have a zero ratio.
GrampMeanwhile the quest for driverless vehicles in some form continues. How might their use increase the utility of the road network?
I've had drivers assist in my ML350 since 2013 so that part is 10 years old already. It's not 100% like the Tesla but it brakes the SUV to a stop if there is an object stopped in front of me, it takes control of the steering if I attempt to cross a solid line on the edge of the road unless I use the turn signal to override. It has adaptive cruise control and several other bells and whistles. Guess what? It all failed and stopped operating as soon as I hit a communications dead zone in Oklahoma. So hopefully that is fixed in the Tesla but I am not so sure. In a heavy downpour the adaptive cruise control doesn't work so well either as the gizmo is behind the Mercedes symbol on the grille and my guess is the excessive water obstructs it in some cases so it cannot judge distance......when that happens I get a warning and the system shuts down until the heavy rain lets up.
Lets say that all works flawlessly though. It's not within reach yet financially of most of the drivers on the road. Also, I don't think there will ever be enough space on the road for our continually expanding population.
blue streak 1 In 2022 Amtrak cut some trains to 5 a week or even 3 a week.
It's always a roll of the dice with Amtrak management. They are better now then they used to be but there are still issues with their management from time to time.
CMStPnP: Mr. O'Toole is a self-made economist. He apparently studied econ at University of Oregon, but did not graduate. He is a scholar of sorts, politically very conservative, anti-government type. He was attached to the Cato Institute, starting in 1995, but eas terminatedin 2021.
Your hunches about his "research" are likely true, as he mostly spouts petsonal opinions dressed up in academia-speak.
Auric Goldfinger is Congress and Bond is Amtrak
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Overmod, you really seconded my Station restaurant-with-take-out scheme. Thanks, it would work and cut costs while improving the menues.
BaltACDAuric Goldfinger is Congress and Bond is Amtrak
I think the current POTUS phrased it correctly when he was a Senator. "Without also including the long distance services, you can't get the votes to fund Amtrak".
So while I hear the argument on lack of profitability. Eliminating them I believe will significantly reduce the political support for Amtrak because the easiest sell to Congress is if you answer the question: "Whats in it for me?" prior to a vote. So in my view the best approach is the one Amtrak is now attempting. Segregate them from the rest of Amtrak and seek to fund them seperately......while at the same time, attempting to keep their deficit low.
CMStPnP BaltACD Auric Goldfinger is Congress and Bond is Amtrak I think the current POTUS phrased it correctly when he was a Senator. "Without also including the long distance services, you can't get the votes to fund Amtrak". So while I hear the argument on lack of profitability. Eliminating them I believe will significantly reduce the political support for Amtrak because the easiest sell to Congress is if you answer the question: "Whats in it for me?" prior to a vote. So in my view the best approach is the one Amtrak is now attempting. Segregate them from the rest of Amtrak and seek to fund them seperately......while at the same time, attempting to keep their deficit low.
BaltACD Auric Goldfinger is Congress and Bond is Amtrak
Backshop CMStPnP BaltACD Auric Goldfinger is Congress and Bond is Amtrak I think the current POTUS phrased it correctly when he was a Senator. "Without also including the long distance services, you can't get the votes to fund Amtrak". So while I hear the argument on lack of profitability. Eliminating them I believe will significantly reduce the political support for Amtrak because the easiest sell to Congress is if you answer the question: "Whats in it for me?" prior to a vote. So in my view the best approach is the one Amtrak is now attempting. Segregate them from the rest of Amtrak and seek to fund them seperately......while at the same time, attempting to keep their deficit low. Maybe the thing to do is spin Amtrak off as a bunch of independent regionals. The NEC could be one region, the 300 mile routes out of Chicago a second one, etc.
Maybe the thing to do is spin Amtrak off as a bunch of independent regionals. The NEC could be one region, the 300 mile routes out of Chicago a second one, etc.
Profitable - rail passenger transportation is not profitable anywhere in the 'free' world and probably not in the rest of the world.
Most other countries rail passenger transportation is not even expected to be profitable - no matter how the books get cooked. Most other countries view rail passenger transportation as a SERVICE for their populations - a service worthy of governmental investment on a continuing and unquestioning basis.
It is not in the psyche of the US to view Amtrak as anything other than a money pit without a bottom; and in the world of bits and bytes, one that is not percieved as providing any service to the populace. As long as that thought process continues to exist Amtrak will always be starved for investment to do anything to improve their perception with the population.
BackshopMaybe the thing to do is spin Amtrak off as a bunch of independent regionals. The NEC could be one region, the 300 mile routes out of Chicago a second one, etc.
I think Amtrak was seriously tempted to try that approach with the experience of the Southwest Chief but in the end it was the flexibility and generousity of the BNSF that really saved that train because Amtrak could not get the states involved to all pay for what was needed to keep the train on it's current route. So I think Amtrak is sold on Federal Funding for now.....far less effort and it's either pass or fail.
Look here, boys, the whole point of the original Amtrak was to preserve a NATIONAL system of railroad transportation. If it ain't national, the Government has little ethical basis for spending national tax revenue on it -- especially when so many of the cited excuses for maintaining LD trains only benefit relatively small regions of specific states they run through or to.
The principal methodological mistake made in the early Seventies was to define the mission of the 'quasi-public' entity as "transportation" -- the mere conveyance of people from point A to point B regardless of quality and often regardless of credible timeliness. Until that basic consideration is fixed, very few of the actual things that would improve LD trains -- or work toward making them practical by Congressional-mandate standards -- are going to be either design or implementation priorities.
I don't consider "Amtrak" to be a logical provider of corridor or regional services EXCEPT as a subcontractor, much like Keolis, and fully compensated by states for all the above-the-line and pro rata overhead. That probably won't keep paying for ranks of lawyers and lobbyists... but it might also relieve the need for so many levels of bureaucratic 'participation'. On the other hand, as noted a couple of days ago, a fairly coherent LD 'transportation' arrangement can be slotted into regionals as 'one of the scheduled trains' that just happens to run with national-level amenities over the extended LD routing between regions.
I take as dim a view of 'balkanization' as John Kneiling famously did. I already see a tendency for new services to have to run 'across the platform' when certain states either want to limit their being on the hook or want to be certain of preserving their 'investment' -- it remains to be seen whether passengers who otherwise expect a one-seat ride without a 'change at Jamaica' will actually tolerate this rather than, say, ride a Megabus with extended amenities where you might expect to change coaches at one of the 'rest' locations.
What would you substitute for "transportation" as the Amtrak mandate? Land cruises for the rich?
Goddamn Kalmbach has new popup ads on top of the jumping attack ads, that keep reloading the page. You'll have to wait for any kind of detailed reply.
But Amtrak LD being 'luxury cruises for the rich' is antithetical to what improvements in Amtrak service itself should be.
Congratulations, you horses' asses in Kalmbach Media marketing -- you have finally made even me have to go to ad-blocking to make this site functional.
charlie hebdo What would you substitute for "transportation" as the Amtrak mandate? Land cruises for the rich?
These ads are a nitemare.
Since only 15% of passengers are in the sleeping cars, I hardly think the other 85% consider themselves on a luxury land cruise.
OvermodThe principal methodological mistake made in the early Seventies was to define the mission of the 'quasi-public' entity as "transportation" -- the mere conveyance of people from point A to point B regardless of quality and often regardless of credible timeliness
Again I ask,with what would you replace "transportation" something else: cruising, joy rides, racing?
And yes, the pop ups, slide ads etc. have made this forum almost impossible. Largely a waste of anyone's time when these distractions are coupled with posts that are often devoid if information.u
From it inception, Amtrak was formed to fail. It was Congress' intent that Amtrak fail within its initial authorization period. It was only through the resourcefullness of Amtrak management, employees and lobyist that it has continued to exist past its 50th Anniversary.
Amtrak has never been budgeted to the level necessary for its operation to provide a Nationwide Service. It does provide a Service along the NEC as well as some State funded corridor operations.
To provide Service on the Nationwide routes requires AT LEAST two train operations operating twelve hours apart over their route, since on long distance routes one train will be traversing route segments at hours where people 'don't want' to utilize transportation. No one WANTS to catch or depart a train at 4 AM - 4 AM in the middle of nowhere!
Their definition of 'transportation' is getting passengers from an origin site to a destination site. 2:40 in the morning... eighteen hours late... overflowing toilets... being thrown off the train for 'insulting' a conductor... rattling ride motion... none of that appears to matter to them, just did someone get dropped off at the stop closest to wherever they were going.
That has to change, both to eliminate the intolerable and to make the experience more positive or even memorable. I doubt Amtrak could ever get to the 'raving fans' level of user engagement that my SBA seminars were advocating. But take-it-or-leave-it bus-grade service on that Amtrak budget ain't workable, if it's ever expected to pay its above-the-rail cost.
Overmod.... if it's ever expected to pay its above-the-rail cost.
That has been the lie about Amtrak ever since the legislation that created it was signed over 50 years ago.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.