An Auto-Train Chicago to Denver RT (including a roomette)would also be very expensive, probably more than renting a vehicle one week and airfare combined.
MidlandMikeI go out west (from Michigan) for a ski week every winter, generally to Colorado. I would love an auto-train CHI-DEN. I hate to rent cars nowdays since they became so expensive, sometimes more than the airline ticket. The problem is that ski weeks usually run Saturday to Saturday, so the route would be a once-a-week round-trip. Also, the local Ski-Train is a weekend thing.
The Louisville to Sanford Auto-Train only ran one day a week in each direction and never ran daily. Fixed costs must have been high but I suspect Auto-Train was using all it's spare equipment to pull just that one train off because as soon as they had one or two derailments and wrecked a bunch of equipment, they cancelled the Louisville train. Contrary to what others may state, they did not invest a lot of money in the Louisville terminal, it was built on cheap land on the outskirts of the downtown area and looked roughly like a large parking lot with a small terminal building for waiting passengers. So the money lost on the service was primarily just in paying for operations of the train.
Likewise you have two choices I think with Chicago to Denver. One would be a weekend from Chicago Train.
I might also add, it's a little silly to run out to the Amtrak website and get a price quote and state that Auto-Train is not feasible in a specific market because your comparing the Amtrak Auto-Train which has much higher fixed costs to the train ran by Auto-Train Corporation. One big difference is the initial trains train run by Auto-Train Corporation that made profits for them so fast was 112 cars long and only had 15 crew members (NY Times article from 1973). It was Amtrak or the Class I railroads that imposed the current 50 car limit on Amtraks version of Auto-Train. I really have my doubts the 50 car limit is hard and fixed but is rather more due to Amtraks lack of propensity to work to make LD trains more efficient and just settling for whatever becomes of them over time.
With the 112 car long Auto-Trains, Auto-Train business was so good from Lorton, Va to Sanford, FL they were planning on adding a second freuency (NY times article below). Thats a lot of business if you ask me. Much has been probably lost due to how Amtrak runs the Auto-Train remnant. Some probably lost to Airline deregulation and rental car deals that the airlines forged with the rental car companies at the time in Orlando in order to protect their market.
Auto-Train charged $40 more each way for a Sleeper, compare that to what Amtrak charges now. Auto-Train's onboard services were also a little more robust than what Amtrak offers as well. So in my view apples and oranges when comparing the two and expecting that a privately run Auto-Train would be the same as Amtrak's Auto-Train.
Read the attached article, very informative....
Oh and I have to gloat because it is fun to do so sometimes........Oh look....Auto-Train Chicago to Denver was on the mind of the CEO of Auto-Train back in 1973 (what a smart guy he was). Go Figure.
Also note how Amtrak due to it's setup worked to hamper Auto-Trains plans.....haven't we seen this before on the Indianapolis Iowa Pacific Service?
Just bring that last point up because of all the doom and gloom around Amtrak being forced to abandon LD Train service. You never really know what the outcome of that might be and it very well could be very positive for the country to remove Amtrak from that market.
Here is the article...
https://www.nytimes.com/1973/06/17/archives/louisvilleflorida-autotrain-is-set-many-sold-out.html
charlie hebdoAn Auto-Train Chicago to Denver RT (including a roomette)would also be very expensive, probably more than renting a vehicle one week and airfare combined.
No doubt with current Amtrak mangement. Though I think as a potential future route after the company was spun off from Amtrak it could be attractive.
CMStPnP charlie hebdo An Auto-Train Chicago to Denver RT (including a roomette)would also be very expensive, probably more than renting a vehicle one week and airfare combined. No doubt with current Amtrak mangement. Though I think as a potential future route after the company was spun off from Amtrak it could be attractive.
charlie hebdo An Auto-Train Chicago to Denver RT (including a roomette)would also be very expensive, probably more than renting a vehicle one week and airfare combined.
Your assumptions are inaccurate, based on a careful comparison of the private, for-profit Auto-Train of 1979. Back then, RT in December for a family of four (2 adults and 2 children) cost $592, including their mid-size sedan, in coach. That would be $2061.20 today, allowing for inflation. But Amtrak's Auto Train would only charge $1129 for the same people in coach this December. The 900 mile distance is only 100 mile less than CHI-Denver. Pretty clearly Amtrak is pretty efficient (and subsidizing the travel) and a private company would probably charge a lot more than Amtrak to make a profit. So the fare to Denver would have to be pretty high. For a four week stay, it probably works. But for the more typical on-week stay of a fmily for skiing, flying and renting an SUV makes more sense.https://www.nytimes.com/1979/12/02/archives/the-pros-and-cons-of-taking-the-autotrain-to-florida-pros-and-cons.html
charlie hebdoyour assumptions are inaccurate, based on a careful comparison of the private, for-profit Auto-Train of 1979. Back then, RT in December for a family of four (2 adults and 2 children) cost $592,
Get serious....
I think my 1973 assessment was closer to reality. So during this period Auto-Train was very near bankruptcy or already in it, Prime Rate was somewhere above 15%....which of course impacts prices on Auto-Train negatively in 1979.
Amtrak today is not running the train at break-even or even attempting to so you have to add to their current fares at least a 1 to 2 million annual loss. And with Amtrak accounting who knows if that even gets you close. Auto-Train was attempting to pay all it's costs which of course also included more onboard service than Amtrak currently provides.
CMStPnP charlie hebdo your assumptions are inaccurate, based on a careful comparison of the private, for-profit Auto-Train of 1979. Back then, RT in December for a family of four (2 adults and 2 children) cost $592, Get serious.... I think my 1973 assessment was closer to reality. So during this period Auto-Train was very near bankruptcy or already in it, Prime Rate was somewhere above 15%....which of course impacts prices on Auto-Train negatively in 1979. Amtrak today is not running the train at break-even or even attempting to so you have to add to their current fares at least a 1 to 2 million annual loss. And with Amtrak accounting who knows if that even gets you close. Auto-Train was attempting to pay all it's costs which of course also included more onboard service than Amtrak currently provides.
charlie hebdo your assumptions are inaccurate, based on a careful comparison of the private, for-profit Auto-Train of 1979. Back then, RT in December for a family of four (2 adults and 2 children) cost $592,
I really don't know what your point is, other than to be contentious and mistaken. Not sure if you really understood. In 1973, Auto Train Corporation charged according to your NYT article "Passengers pay $190 for a one‐way trip on the Auto Train. This pays for transporting one car and two per sons. Others in a family can go along for $20 apiece."
So that works out to $460 RT for the family of four. In 1979, six years later they paid $592 RT, according to my NYT article from that year. In both cases, they traveled in coach. Did you think prices would not increase in six years, during a period of several inflationary episodes? Adjusting the 1973 rate for inflation, it should have been $742.60 in 1979, so the actual price in 1979 of $592 was quite a bargain.
The Auto Train in 1973 and 79 did not provide much in the way of frills if you actually read either article. Food was not as good as today's menu on the Amtrak version. In 1979: baked chicken, Salisbury steak (ground beef in gravy) or red snapper. Today: FLAT IRON STEAK, PANKO CRUSTED POLLOCK, ROASTED CHICKEN BREAST or LASAGNA in coach; BEEF PETITE TENDER FILET, LEMON PEPPER COD, THYME ROASTED CHICKEN or MUSHROOM BOLOGNESE LASAGNA in sleepers.
Auto Train failed because of over-expansion to the Midwest service and costly derailments because of old equipment.
The point of all of this was to show that an Auto-Train CHI-DEN would have limited appeal. The drive is easier, with a lot less traffic than I 95 parallel to the current East Coast version. For a minimum month's stay, maybe, but Midwest snowbirds don't winter there. Maybe summer? And for skiers, why spend so much for an uncomfortable overnight train ride when you can fly, even directly to some of the ski places, rent a car and ski for a week and have more time on the slopes?
I doubt that Amtrak holds a patent on the auto train concept, so what is to stop a private company from negotiating with BNSF or UP for a CHI-DEN auto carrying train?
In 2016 there were 8.2% of the 410.963 passengers on the California Zephyr or about 33,700 people who traveled between Chicago and Denver, the second most popular destination pair. About 35% used the sleeper at an average of $321 or about $3.8 million, and the rest went coach at an average $93 or $2.0 million for a total of about $5.8 million.
Using a distance ratio of 1038/855 times $204 car charge on the Auto Train would make $248 the charge from Chicago to Denver. In 2010 there were 47.6% cars to people on the Auto Train. If all 33,700 people needed a car, then there would be 16,041 cars and revenue of about $3.9 million, which added to the previous revenue totals $9.7 million.
How many people would want to use a Chicago to Denver auto train is a good question. There are a lot of cars going that way, and perhaps a ratio of I-80 to I-95 traffic would give an idea. In FY2018 the Auto Train had 224,800 passengers and revenue of $72.0 million. This is a downward trend from a high in FY2014 of 273,628 passengers and revenue of $78.8 million.
MidlandMikeI doubt that Amtrak holds a patent on the auto train concept, so what is to stop a private company from negotiating with BNSF or UP for a CHI-DEN auto carrying train?
Nothing and private companies already do this. I think where you run into a problem is marrying a passenger train to the service which involves capital costs and dedicated facilities beyond what the railroads already have in place. So costs of entry is one obstacle. I doubt you could use the "Auto-Train" name as Amtrak owns that aready as a TM more than likely.
UP, BNSF, and CSX all haul private automobiles and you can get your car put on the rails if you wish. UP has a seperate subsidiary dedicated to filling empty auto racks with private cars for shipping (forget the name), they do not deal with the public either. The caveat is you have to work via a freight consolidator as the railroads will not deal with the public directly.
The railroads sell their private auto transport capacity in bulk in lots to whomever steps forwards with the cash. So availability varies by rail route. There are auto-transport companies that work with the railroads (see link below for detailed info). If auto shipping consolidator can't get your car on a train they are going to haul it themselves probably. They guarantee 14 day delivery though which isn't too bad for nationwide service but would make a pairing with a passenger train only really economical for those that were relocating to an area for several months. And folks in Florida already do this and fly there. My Parents did this yearly when they had a home in Florida. Call an auto-transport company 1-2 weeks prior to leaving by air and they will pickup the car at the home with a truck transport. If you think about it........nothing stopping Amtrak from doing the same on it's past explored Auto Train routes as an additional amenity where it gets a referral charge or commission from the shipper but.....lo and behold Amtrak doesn't do so......maybe fear of conflict with freight railroads or Amtrak does not feel it is part of their business charter?
More info here:
https://www.americanautoshipping.com/auto-transport-rail/
All this palaver is mighty cute, but nowhere do I see the discussion of how many trips on this putative Chicago-to-Denver train should be 'costed' as round trips (as substantially all the 'snowbird' traffic should be). I think very few people will take their cars one-way only to sell them at destination, or leave them as 'winter rats' or whatever at a second house. In my opinion this tends to amplify charlie hebdo's points, perhaps considerably.
Likewise, much of the appeal of "family" travel to extended-vacation destinations in large vehicles goes away when individual coach fares become substantial -- let alone sleeper/food accommodations. That quickly outweighs the cost of bunking at Motel 6 and eating roadfood.
One place there IS a potential market for 'vehicle service' is in transport of larger vehicles, specifically the larger classes of motorhome, and most significantly in periods of possible bad weather (including high wind). This would almost certainly not constitute enough volume for a complete "auto-train" but wouldn't require more than a couple of added special cars in the consist of any particular train, perhaps involving little more than cars already designed for van trailer service upgraded for the expected service speeds and braking (this being nothing new even in the days of the Super C).
OvermodOvermod wrote the following post 20 minutes ago: All this palaver is mighty cute, but nowhere do I see the discussion of how many trips on this putative Chicago-to-Denver train should be 'costed' as round trips (as substantially all the 'snowbird' traffic should be). I think very few people will take their cars one-way only to sell them at destination, or leave them as 'winter rats' or whatever at a second house. In my opinion this tends to amplify charlie hebdo's points, perhaps considerably.
ALL the numbers I cited or calculated/converted for inflation for the east coast train were for RT, coach, 2 adults, 2 kids: 1973, 1979, 2019.
OvermodI think very few people will take their cars one-way only to sell them at destination, or leave them as 'winter rats' or whatever at a second house. In my opinion this tends to amplify charlie hebdo's points, perhaps considerably.
They can't take their cars one-way and keep them at their resort home stored in the garage as an option, they just have to sell them before they return...........why is that? I don't understand why it is only a one way shipment to Colorado but it is a two way shipment to Arizona and Florida? That doesn't make any sense.
charlie hebdoThe Auto Train in 1973 and 79 did not provide much in the way of frills if you actually read either article.
Movies in the lounge, magic show, etc mentioned.
charlie hebdoFood was not as good as today's menu on the Amtrak version.
Completely subjective statement there was no comparison made only that the clients could tell the meal was catered. Marriott does an OK job with catering. They were lamenting that the former passenger trains prepared all their food on board (Amtrak does not do this either despite your assurances it is a vast improvement and runs counter to your arguement elsewhere that Amtrak should countract food supply via offboard contractors)
charlie hebdoFor a minimum month's stay, maybe, but Midwest snowbirds don't winter there.
Yeah so here your getting caught up in the "snowbirds" terminology because the unproven statement was made elsewhere that this concept would only work NE to Florida. Unproven statement and if it was so obvious that was the case why was AT looking at trains to Mexico, trains to Denver from Chicago as well as Amtrak exploring a Seattle to LA train before SP said No. You had two seperate companies looking at other possibilities besides NE to Florida.
charlie hebdoAdjusting the 1973 rate for inflation, it should have been $742.60 in 1979, so the actual price in 1979 of $592 was quite a bargain.
Exactly the point I was trying to make. In 1973 they were making money. Were they making money in 1979? Is Amtrak making money now on the service? So your comparing at least a financially troubled company attempting to make money to one that is failing to make money on the service. How much disparity in the loss per passenger was there between the two companies? I'll bet you could calculate what AT Corp overhead costs were. Can you do the same for Amtrak?
Which marketed the service better and had better onboard amenities for the money spent?
CMStPnPI don't understand why it is only a one way shipment to Colorado but it is a two way shipment to Arizona and Florida? That doesn't make any sense.
I should have put a /sarc tag in there for the comment.
There are two broad types of snowbird wealthy enough to keep this service patronized at necessary volume. One is rich enough to keep two cars, in this example one in Chicago and the other in Denver. The other has a nice car, and wants to 'take it with them' to the vacation house in the winter and then back to the 'primary residence' at the end of the season. The operative point is that I do not expect very much traffic from 'nonrepeating' car ferrying from one end to the other... category A may take one car one time, and category B by necessity will have to budget for two trips a year...
... although there will certainly be *some* (and Amtrak might in fact find that running special limited-time Auto-Train service, or even a coordinated car-shipping option, would pay ... of course that'll require Anderson to come off his 'no special train' ukase.
A potential additional squeeze is that 'one-car' snowbirds may be more picky about how they keep their expensive car ... and not want to subject it to being sent across country in a typical carrier, or become litigious over relatively little, or imaginary, damage to the vehicle at the 'other end' of a trip. I do not see this as being a positive for Amtrak in any real respect over the long run.
I confess I would like to see this tried, at least on an experimental basis, to see if any real traffic develops. But I don't think the infrastructure or the will to set up and do it right on the scale the likely clientele would demand would be present.
As noted earlier, extended-stay travel is the 'niche' here, not ordinary vacationers who would otherwise consider renting or Ubering during their stay.
Was there not a discussion, back in the glory days of HPIT/Iron Highway, of a roll-on roll-off 'train ferry' operation for folks with campers and mobile homes? Much of the potential advantage goes away, of course, when you have to enclose the carriers, and I don't know which would happen first, the rush to increase insurance premium costs or the rush for plaintiff's attorney firms to start bulk mailing research. But the general idea seemed to work in special cases in Europe, and I can easily see it working from places in the Northeast to 'get around' the traffic horror in, say, the New York or Washington, DC regions. You would need to wire the trains for shore power, but arguably transverted HEP would be all that would be required...
How about a dream of mine, but I know it's not possible with today's lawsuits.
The old Copper Canyon train with campers parked on flat cars. People could sit on lawn chairs riding on the flat cars riding the train through scenic country. Sleep, eat, and use bathroom in their own camper.
I know that the train was discontinued, not because of lack of business but because of liability.
It's too bad. I wish I could have done this just once.
York1 John
Auto-train on the EC has two clientels - Snowbirds December-April. Family vacations May-November. Florida winter weather is the draw for the snowbirds. The house of mouse and the Florida vacation attractions draw the family vacation crowd. Both of those clientels will normally pack their vehicles to the 'gills' with items that would 'bankrupt' them if they processed as air line baggage.
I drive Central Maryland to Jacksonville multiple times a year. I drive 'hard' - only stops are to fill one tank and empty the other. A 'good' trip is 11 hours of actual driving. Sanford is two hours driving beyond Jacksonville, and Lorton is about one hour from my starting point in Maryland. So John Q Public is looking at - at best - a 12 hour drive from Lorton to Sanford and considering how those clientels typically drive it is more likely 14-15 hours on the road, with nature breaks and food stops included - IF it is done as a one day drive. 16 hours on Amtrak plus time for loading and unloading at the terminals is much less stressful than the time on I-95 and I-4.
Don't see where Denver and Arizona have the mixed clientel that Florida does as to my limited knowledge they only have single attractions. The skiing attraction of the Denver area doesn't have that much of a draw for retirees - they get enough broken bones without really trying let alone going skiing. All I have heard about Arizona is 'its a dry heat'. To that extent both locations are 'one trick ponies'.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
York1The old Copper Canyon train with campers parked on flat cars. People could sit on lawn chairs riding on the flat cars riding the train through scenic country. Sleep, eat, and use bathroom in their own camper.
Alaska railroad used to have a shuttle train between Portage and Whittier which consisted of flatcars with inter-car plates for tires and end cars having side extensions for drive on and then drive up to the vehicle space. Train then took you to the other terminal and in the process took you through a tunnel. We had rented a class C camper in Anchorage which we were taking on a circle trip via the Alaska Marine Highway (Ferry) to Valdeze and back around to Anchorage. It was a neat operation. We arrived at Portage and were directed into a line that included many different vehicles, trucks, sedans motor homes, tour busses. Train arrived, wyed and pulled up to the side of the ramp. Vehicles drove onto the end flat car and the followed the vehicle in front of them until directed to stop. After all loaded, the train pulled out and we rode at a speed that I don't thing exceeded 20-30 mph. After exiting the tunnel, the train stoped at the ramp in Whittier and we followed the vehicle to the front of the train and then of the train and onto the ramp and then proceeded to go to the ferry dock. This train doesn't operate any more as Alaska paved the tunnel and now cars are batched through the tunnel as it is a single lane and trains still ue it. Don't know how it is "dispatched".
And on another vacation, we rode the Copper Canyon train and passed the camper train previously discussed with people riding on the flat cars in lawn chairs and their camper on the car. Our train had a dining car with good food, and armed guards though when not on the train, we had no security and all the people we met were friendly. The train speed might have been as fast as 40 mph, but it was relatively smooth. Don't think I would want to ride on a lawn chair at that speed so wonder if it ran at a slower speed.
Here are the latest Auto Train numbers: 131,500 October thru April, 93,300 May thru September 2018.
Here are the monthly totals in thousands:
16 --February 2018 (not given with tenths place)
19.6-March
20.9-April
18.7-May
20.6-June
22.1-July
21.8-August
10.1-September, Hurricane Florence caused cancellations
17.5-October
18.7-November
20.4-December
20.3-January 2019
It looks like there are also a good number of "summer birds ".
I also tried to get a handle on possible Chicago to Denver auto train passengers using interstate traffic data. I-76 previously known as I-80S had the lowest average daily traffic of 5800 near the western Nebraska border, or a yearly total of 2,117,000. It should be noted that I-80 in Wyoming had daily traffic of 10,000 to 20,000, suggesting a lot of traffic bypasses Denver. The lowest average daily traffic on I-95 in Georgia was 49,000 or 17,885,000 yearly. By multiplying the ratio 5800/49,000 times 224,800 FY 2018 passengers on the Auto Train gives 26,609 possible passengers Chicago to Denver. This is just a ballpark number, since some may want to travel beyond Denver and skiing, and summer might be a more important season.
Jim200I also tried to get a handle on possible Chicago to Denver auto train passengers using interstate traffic data. I-76 previously known as I-80S had the lowest average daily traffic of 5800 near the western Nebraska border, or a yearly total of 2,117,000. It should be noted that I-80 in Wyoming had daily traffic of 10,000 to 20,000, suggesting a lot of traffic bypasses Denver. The lowest average daily traffic on I-95 in Georgia was 49,000 or 17,885,000 yearly. By multiplying the ratio 5800/49,000 times 224,800 FY 2018 passengers on the Auto Train gives 26,609 possible passengers Chicago to Denver. This is just a ballpark number, since some may want to travel beyond Denver and skiing, and summer might be a more important season.
Personal observation - I-95 through Georgia is from my vantage point in driving it - the highest traffic portion of my trip on a state wide basis. I-95 in Georgia is three lanes in each direction and is 'crowded' between Savannah and the Florida/Georgia line.
I-95 in Northern Virginia approaches gridlock daily during rush hours despite being three and more 'free' lanes in each direction and a pair of toll lanes that are directional during rush hours. Richmond is nominally three lanes in each direction as far South as Petersburg with a nominal three lane bypass from Atlee to Petersburg - the final 10 miles on the South end are two lanes in each direction.
The Carolina's are two lanes in each direction except for a few miles in the Florence area of South Carolina. I think SC may be going to add some third lanes as I saw a lot of 'timbering' in the 'forest' that defines the median in a number of areas.
SC definitely needs to at least 3 lane the stretch of I-95 from where I-26 joins it to the Georgia Line. I-26 picks up the traffic from I-77 joining it at Columbia and really needs 3 lanes from Columbia to I-95. [In SW Virginia I-77 also picks up considerable traffic from I-81. I call I-81 "the road of never ending trucks"].
Electroliner 1935This train doesn't operate any more as Alaska paved the tunnel and now cars are batched through the tunnel as it is a single lane and trains still ue it. Don't know how it is "dispatched".
They described the operation in Alaska's report to the State. The Whittier Tunnel was built by the State DOT for the railroad. Later determined to pave for dual use. The trains are not dispatched through the tunnel.
The tunnel uses a dual road vehicle railroad train occupancy system on either end that indicates currently who has right of way in the tunnel. Once a freight train enters the tunnel the system indicates to motorists there is a oncomming train in the tunnel and they need to wait. Vice versa for frieght trains as they approach the tunnel they also need to stop if motorists are in the tunnel until the tunnel is clear. You would think the trains would be waiting indefinitely due to this arrangement but apparently the vehicle traffic is not that heavy so the delays to railroad operation are minimal.
The train through the tunnel carrying vehicles was abandoned because it was determined the traffic control system was far more efficient for all involved. I believe also that the trains generally do not need the tunnel during peak vehicle usage and use it primarily after dark as well.
Traffic control system is shown at mark 2:16 in video below. Railroad uses signal lights, vehicle traffic uses a crossing gate. The crossing gate stays down until the train has cleared the block that is the tunnel. The rail signal stays red until the last car has cleared the tunnel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8rT5xibJQE
Back in my motorcycle riding days, I would not have enjoyed that ride thru the tunnel.
I rode the ARR Whittier branch thru the tunnel on a 2013 NRHS excursion. At that time, each hour was divided into three 20 min segments, where the autos went one way for 20 min, then the other way for 20 min, and then the train had rights for 20 min. On our trip out we had a photo stop while waiting for our turn in the tunnel, and on the return trip they were able to time it so we got to the tunnel at about our time slot.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.