I propose that the mentioning of union rules is the equivalent of Godwin's Law. Once you mention union rules you lose the argument. Just kidding!
Without First Class/Sleeping car passengers, all LD trains would be losers. We, the hoi polloi, subsidize the "cattle car" class. At four (+) times the coach fare, we pay for the dining car and the lounge cars, although I can't believe the lounge cars lose money at $4.50 to $5.50 for a beer! My last southbound trip on the "City of New Orleans" was delightful. I got the last filet mignon on board, unless some were reserved for the crew. My tablemates ate some rusty-looking rice, with critters in it! I was happy! They were happy! Oh, joy!!!
My last three trips on the "Empire Builder", this summer, although short-hops, were not as delightful. I couldn't get the vaunted Buffalo Meatloaf westbound. I couldn't get an American beer on two, of the three, trips. Amtrak serves swill from "Anheuser-Busch InBev" (Belgian-owned Budweiser and Bud Light) and "SABMiller" (South African-owned Miller Lite and Leinenkugel), almost to the exclusion of American beers. I finally did get a Samuel Adams (Boston Brewing) on my last trip. I am going to speak, harshly, with Amtrak, about that! I think Amtrak should only serve beers made by American-owned companies. How much do Belgium or South Africa contribute to their bottom line? Why should we contribute to theirs?
Bill Hays -- wdh@mcn.net
Uh, oh! I see a couple of problems with the "pan on the dining car" idea. Off goes the 480 v. AC, in comes the 11,000 v. AC. "How would you like your fires? Burned, or incinerated?". Having on-board personnel raise a dining car pantograph would give the union officials appoplexy. Maybe an on-duty "Pan Man", from the Teamsters (BLE) could do the job, but, in the winter, he'd get cold, waiting for the next LD train.
We had Operating Engineer "oilers" on construction jobs in NYC. They would come in an hour early and 'oil around' (even on greaseless electric hoists) and spend the rest of their 8 + 1-hour (OT) day in a bar. Nice job, if you were related to the Business Agent! The next-best job was "operator" of elevators, that would punch buttons, even after the elevators were fully-automatic. They were from the Elevator Constructor's union. Again, nepotism ruled! At least, he had to stay on the job, mostly.
Bill -- wdh@mcn.net
CSSHEGEWISCHWhile rapid transit cars and some MU cars in suburban service do have couplers that include electrical connections, I doubt that any of the electrical lines carry 480 volts. A live line with 480 volts is a safety hazard and will create a pretty good arc (I speak from experience) before a positive connection is made. The 480 volt line would have to include a switch near the coupler to ensure that the connector is dead when a coupling or uncoupling is made. So you're back to the original situation.
While rapid transit cars and some MU cars in suburban service do have couplers that include electrical connections, I doubt that any of the electrical lines carry 480 volts. A live line with 480 volts is a safety hazard and will create a pretty good arc (I speak from experience) before a positive connection is made. The 480 volt line would have to include a switch near the coupler to ensure that the connector is dead when a coupling or uncoupling is made. So you're back to the original situation.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Back in "the old days", the New York Central's change from steam/Diesel to electric power (and v. v.) at Harmon and North White Plains, NY was a thing-of beauty! Two guys, on-the-ground, and the replacement locomotive in a "holding/pocket" track. Didn't take two minutes, I think, even with steam line re-hook-up. Up, and away, in no time, and the guys were all unionized, too! They didn't know about FDR's "shovel-leaner" policy and sure didn't get paid well.
I much prefer the "Viewliner" sleeping cars to our local ("Empire Builder") Superliners! I would suggest removing the silly TV in the rooms. ***! There is so much to look at, 'out there', even in the dark. My "Viewliner" experiences have only been on the "Lake Shore Limited" and my biggest complaint is of the "Georges". Too bad they can't get attendants from, for example, Portland, OR or Seattle crew-bases.
Actually, I think the "Viewliner" shower is better than that in the "Superliners".
I have never been on a train with a "Viewliner" dining car (do they exist?) and look forward to the experience. Too bad O'Bama's "Cash-for-Clunkers" deal didn't encompass "Amfleet" cars, a.k.a.: "Sardine Cans"!
Bill Hays -- wdh@mcn.net in Montana
The alternative to the locomotive change is the dual-power locomotive, but those are expensive and have a spotted history of reliability.
I've got it. How about some kind of automated coupler that makes and breaks the air and electrical connections? Don't they have those such things on some mass transit equipment?
Yes, it would require a special coupler on some locomotives and passenger equipment. You would not need this throughout the fleet, only for locomotives and head-end cars on the trains involved. But would this be more expensive or difficult to implement than, say, a dual-service locomotive with its 3rd rail shoes?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
A couple of observations: Way back in 1982, I was in South Amboy watching the engine change during PM rush on the NY&LB. Two carmen were assigned to break the air, steam and signal connections and pull the pins to cut off the electric and then made the same connections to the replacement diesels. It took about five minutes, as noted above. The carmen also saved the air on the passenger consist. No HEP at the time.
Even further back, about 1965 or so, I was riding the Peninsula 400 from Chicago to Marinette WI. The train was long haul bi-levels and HEP equipped. We sat in the dark for about 10-15 minutes in Green Bay while short-haul coaches, the parlor-coach, coach-lounge and dining car were cut from the consist. For the limited time involved, standby HEP power would have been a nuisance due to safety considerations (480 volts AC can create a pretty good arc if the line isn't dead when it's plugged into the car).
Currently, on Metra's Southwest Service, our consist is in the dark for about 2-3 minutes while it is cut over from standby power to the locomotive starting about 10 minutes prior to departure time.
Deggestyblue streak 1 Easier, much cheaper, and more reliable way would be to have 480V cables to plug into train as soon as inbound engine shuts off HEP. And, this will work at any station at which engines are cut off from the trains. Johnny
blue streak 1 Easier, much cheaper, and more reliable way would be to have 480V cables to plug into train as soon as inbound engine shuts off HEP.
Easier, much cheaper, and more reliable way would be to have 480V cables to plug into train as soon as inbound engine shuts off HEP.
Johnny
schlimm Sam1: The Australian tilt train is interesting; $310.00 (Aus) for a one-way business seat fare. 1681 km in 23h 55 min. (1041 mi.) They call it high speed, 43mph, but it does sound very pleasant on a scenic coastal route. Getting rid of the worst offenders on LD travel would be a very positive first step, but I agree, the few riders of the Cardinal, Sunset and other poorly patronized trains will try to stop that.
Sam1: The Australian tilt train is interesting; $310.00 (Aus) for a one-way business seat fare. 1681 km in 23h 55 min. (1041 mi.) They call it high speed, 43mph, but it does sound very pleasant on a scenic coastal route.
Getting rid of the worst offenders on LD travel would be a very positive first step, but I agree, the few riders of the Cardinal, Sunset and other poorly patronized trains will try to stop that.
The Queensland Railway is a 3 foot, six inch gage railroad. It is a big time operation; it completely changed my mind about narrow gage railways.
Whilst the average speed on the Tilt Train is not spectacular, it gets near the 100 mph mark on certain stretches of the route. Moreover, at least in business class, passengers can view the track ahead through a display screen in the front of the car. The camera is mounted in the noise of the power car. It is a hoot.
Bldu I frequently ride the Florida trains, and I would really like to see the new food service cars equipped with pantographs so the train doesn't have to be cold and dark while they change engines in DC. It would be a small price to improve the quality of the "on board experience." In the 1970's German railroads had manually operated pans under the control of the dining car steward. It should be easy enough to duplicate this procedure .
I frequently ride the Florida trains, and I would really like to see the new food service cars equipped with pantographs so the train doesn't have to be cold and dark while they change engines in DC. It would be a small price to improve the quality of the "on board experience." In the 1970's German railroads had manually operated pans under the control of the dining car steward. It should be easy enough to duplicate this procedure .
BlduI frequently ride the Florida trains, and I would really like to see the new food service cars equipped with pantographs so the train doesn't have to be cold and dark while they change engines in DC. It would be a small price to improve the quality of the "on board experience." In the 1970's German railroads had manually operated pans under the control of the dining car steward. It should be easy enough to duplicate this procedure .
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm Paul: I'm saying I was surprised by the metrics. "Passengers" means head count, not passenger miles. I don't know where to find the metrics that analyze expenses, but even without that info I have to begrudging admit that the sleeper passenger makes a substantial contribution. The data Amtrak publishes (it's on their website) breaks it down for different routes. Some are obviously a waste (Cardinal, Sunset, to name a few) while others look sustainable (EB). So the original premise that you and I and others hold about moving on from the nostalgia, though true, needs to be carefully applied. Some LD service is probably a given. Which routes and what mix of coach and sleeper needs analysis. Also should it remain a mission of Amtrak or be left to cruise lines?
Paul: I'm saying I was surprised by the metrics. "Passengers" means head count, not passenger miles. I don't know where to find the metrics that analyze expenses, but even without that info I have to begrudging admit that the sleeper passenger makes a substantial contribution. The data Amtrak publishes (it's on their website) breaks it down for different routes. Some are obviously a waste (Cardinal, Sunset, to name a few) while others look sustainable (EB). So the original premise that you and I and others hold about moving on from the nostalgia, though true, needs to be carefully applied. Some LD service is probably a given. Which routes and what mix of coach and sleeper needs analysis. Also should it remain a mission of Amtrak or be left to cruise lines?
Unfortunately, Amtrak's Monthly Operating Reports, as well as quarterly and annual financial reports, do not present a detailed breakdown of the expense side of the accounting equation. Thus, it is not possible to determine whether sleeping car passengers are covering their proportional share of the operating expenses associated with hauling them in first class comfort.
Sleeping cars are more expensive to buy, maintain, service, and overhaul. They are probably more expensive to haul because of heavier weights, although I don't know how much more costly. If I remember correctly, a report published in 2005 or thereabouts showed that sleeping car passengers actually receive a larger subsidy than coach passengers. In any case, only about 2.2 per cent of Amtrak's passengers can afford to pony up the money to travel in Amtrak's sleeping cars, which means the service is used largely by upper income people.
My first choice would be to scrap the long distance trains, in which case sleeping cars would not be an issue, and devote the resources to enhancing high density corridors or developing new ones. However, given the political constraints that Amtrak must operate with, discontinuance of the long distance trains is not likely. Shoot, I would be surprised if they could even eliminate the biggest money losers, e.g. Cardinal, Sunset Limited, etc.
A better solution, instead of replacing the sleeping cars, would be to develop a business class car configured along the same lines as the business class section of Boeing's and Airbuses' long distance airplanes. For my money the business class section on a Boeing 747-400 is more comfortable for an overnight journey than a Superliner roomette. I have flown between the U.S. and Australia 22 times, so I have some experience on which to make this statement.
Queensland Railway's Tilt train does not have any sleeping cars. It has business and coach class cars along with at your seat food service. The business class seat is more than adequate for one night on the train. I have taken the train from Brisbane to Cairns twice.
Most of Amtrak's sleeping car passengers are only on the train for one night. Accordingly, a comfortable business class seat would probably accommodate most of them, with a corresponding savings for Amtrak. Savings! Now that's a unique word for a politically driven entity.
It seems counter-intuitive, but I guess they are subsidizing long distance service.
By passengers, do you mean passenger boardings or passenger miles? Sleeper passengers typically travel twice the distance as coach passengers, and as such account for more passenger miles than suggested by the passenger count, and as such, their contribution to revenue per passenger mile is not as strong as suggested.
OK, so sleeping car service accounts for 36% of revenue on the LD trains. What if sleeping car service accounted for 50% of cost in locomotives, fuel, crew, and train car expenses of maintenance, interest, and amortization?
Suppose the "typical" LD train has 2 locomotives, 4 non-revenue cars (baggage, crew-dorm, lounge, diner), 4 coaches, and 4 sleepers. The controversial suggestion had been to ascribe the cost of the second locomotive, all four non-revenue cars, and the four sleepers to first-class service -- do without, and you are down to a "corridor" consist of 1 locomotive and 4 coaches. If that is too Spartan, how about the Pacific Cascades Talgo consist of one locomotive, coaches (the Talgos are half-length -- do they run a 12-car consist?) plus the NPCC -- a mix of coach and "business class" service with some kind of "cafe" food service taking up one Talgo car or half a conventional coach?
If the sleeping passenger were paying their way and then some, I would say "build more sleeping cars to improve the bottom line of the LD trains." But it is not entirely clear this is the case, only the suggestion that this is not the case has elicited protest from portions of the advocacy community.
from the Amtrak report 6/09:
for the 9 months, Oct. 08 thru June 09:
Passengers all trains =19998170 Revenue = $1,189,563,554
Passengers on long distance = 3,031,929 Revenue = $ 295,136,330
Passengers (Sleeper only on long distance trains) = 436,588 Revenue = $106,180,500
So it seems that the passengers in sleepers are a small percentage of the passenger load (2% overall; 14% LD), but a make significantly larger contribution to revenue, especially of the long distance trains (36% LD;8.9%overall). It seems counter-intuitive, but I guess they are subsidizing long distance service. Maybe we should be talking a return of all-Pullman luxury!!
blue streak 1 Al:: Actually I agree with you assestment of the NJT car however I still wonder about "we did not invent this wheel" . Notice I did say Viewliner or equivalent>
Al:: Actually I agree with you assestment of the NJT car however I still wonder about "we did not invent this wheel" . Notice I did say Viewliner or equivalent>
That does not preclude using the NJ Transit designs in the future. We need the cars now although I hope they operate better and are quieter!!
passengerfanYou mentioned the Viewliner sleepers once again. My argument is clearnces in the east why not try the NJT double deck cars they would have no clearance problems. I'm quite sure they could be equipped as sleepers, coaches and dining lounge cars and in that way the train lengths would remain the same and at the same time increase capacity substantially. The Viewliners with there cost overuns etc. have been a waste of taxpayer money in my opinion.
blue streak 1 oltmanndschlimm IMO, Amtrak's spending one dime on new sleeping cars seems a waste of limited resources. The long-distance cruise trains should be eliminated and/or farmed out to private operators, if any exist. Long-disatnce could be retained, but only as coach trains I share your opinion, though I'm OK with repairing what's already owned and then running the wheels off it. Gentlemen: Although not as many passsengers are carried in a sleeper as a coach the ridership figures for June would seem to contradict your position. It is the sleeper traffic that seems to be staying the same with the exception of the Florida trains which are down 4% including Auto Train. LD Coach raffic NATIONWIDE is down 4%. The NEC is down 10% although Acela stayed the same but last year the Thames River bridge was out of serrvice. This seems to indicate that maybe extra coaches on existing routes are not yet needed. I would hate to be the predictor of ridership when the new cars will be delivered because that will set the order of the construction of various types. The operating costs of the Auto Train are essentially covered by revenue. .If this revenue model could be duplicated on new routes or maybe an additional train set Lorton - Sanford in winter then the use of Superliners on those routes is well justified for the fewer total number of passenger cars needed to carry the same number of passengers. New routes could enable a balancing of rolling stock dependent on the time of the year. With more people buying smaller fuel efficient cars the desire to ride Auto Train may be enhanced? The demand for sleeper space so far seems elastic? The 6 sleepers to be repaired are designated as an additional car on each Empire Builder train set with one as a spare. I would like to see a revenue analysis of a SL coach vs a SL sleeper. That may give some idea of First and Coach mixes but remember the high dollar revenue passengers may give more support to AMTRAK if they can use a sleeper. We don't know how many last minute people do not travel because of no sleeper space. When I was at an Airline we always checked to see where demand exceeded supply. I don't know how to quantify that intangible. SAM1? One last thought 25 new Viewliner ( or equivalent) sleepers will only enable an average of one additional sleeper for each low level train.
oltmanndschlimm IMO, Amtrak's spending one dime on new sleeping cars seems a waste of limited resources. The long-distance cruise trains should be eliminated and/or farmed out to private operators, if any exist. Long-disatnce could be retained, but only as coach trains I share your opinion, though I'm OK with repairing what's already owned and then running the wheels off it.
schlimm IMO, Amtrak's spending one dime on new sleeping cars seems a waste of limited resources. The long-distance cruise trains should be eliminated and/or farmed out to private operators, if any exist. Long-disatnce could be retained, but only as coach trains
IMO, Amtrak's spending one dime on new sleeping cars seems a waste of limited resources. The long-distance cruise trains should be eliminated and/or farmed out to private operators, if any exist. Long-disatnce could be retained, but only as coach trains
Gentlemen: Although not as many passsengers are carried in a sleeper as a coach the ridership figures for June would seem to contradict your position. It is the sleeper traffic that seems to be staying the same with the exception of the Florida trains which are down 4% including Auto Train. LD Coach raffic NATIONWIDE is down 4%. The NEC is down 10% although Acela stayed the same but last year the Thames River bridge was out of serrvice. This seems to indicate that maybe extra coaches on existing routes are not yet needed. I would hate to be the predictor of ridership when the new cars will be delivered because that will set the order of the construction of various types.
The operating costs of the Auto Train are essentially covered by revenue. .If this revenue model could be duplicated on new routes or maybe an additional train set Lorton - Sanford in winter then the use of Superliners on those routes is well justified for the fewer total number of passenger cars needed to carry the same number of passengers. New routes could enable a balancing of rolling stock dependent on the time of the year. With more people buying smaller fuel efficient cars the desire to ride Auto Train may be enhanced?
The demand for sleeper space so far seems elastic? The 6 sleepers to be repaired are designated as an additional car on each Empire Builder train set with one as a spare. I would like to see a revenue analysis of a SL coach vs a SL sleeper. That may give some idea of First and Coach mixes but remember the high dollar revenue passengers may give more support to AMTRAK if they can use a sleeper. We don't know how many last minute people do not travel because of no sleeper space. When I was at an Airline we always checked to see where demand exceeded supply. I don't know how to quantify that intangible. SAM1?
One last thought 25 new Viewliner ( or equivalent) sleepers will only enable an average of one additional sleeper for each low level train.
Another problem is try booking space on the Superliner sleepers three and 4 months in advance and btold that all space is sold out. But after purchasing coach tickets I have been able to purchase sleeper space on the train everytime this has happened. I travel with my wife and we like the Superliner bedrooms they are quite nice..The Viewliners are quite noisy and I personally preferred the old 10-6 sleepers.
Al - in - Stockton
passengerfan Personally I think it is great way to travel and meet people and really see the country we live in.You sure can't see much from 35,000 feet in the air. And now with all of these problems with airspeed indicators on Airbus planes I am not sure I want to fly again. I understand that many people want to fly to there vacation destinations, me I prefer to take the train and make that part of the vacation.
Personally I think it is great way to travel and meet people and really see the country we live in.You sure can't see much from 35,000 feet in the air. And now with all of these problems with airspeed indicators on Airbus planes I am not sure I want to fly again.
I understand that many people want to fly to there vacation destinations, me I prefer to take the train and make that part of the vacation.
How much conversation can you have while flying? How much conversation can you have in a diner or a lounge car, or even a coach? We always enjoy meeting people at meals (every now and then, our tablemates have been uncommunicative, but we put that as being their problem), and we have had good conversation with people while riding coach (actually, Business Class, but we were able to over seat backs).
And, enjoying scenery without having to crane your neck is almost impossible by air. Where, but by train, can you enjoy the sight of looking out one side and looking straight up the side of a canyon and looking out the other side and looking down into a river (as in Gore Canyon) but by train?
"Bluestreak1: I would like to see a revenue analysis of a SL coach vs a SL sleeper. That may give some idea of First and Coach mixes but remember the high dollar revenue passengers may give more support to AMTRAK if they can use a sleeper. We don't know how many last minute people do not travel because of no sleeper space. When I was at an Airline we always checked to see where demand exceeded supply. I don't know how to quantify that intangible. SAM1?"
Yes!! Sam1, we need your analytical skills. It seems like LD travel in general is a loser, but the sleepers are the real loss leaders. Of course the whole passenger rail deal needs subsidy; the question is which parts can we get the most bang for? Perhaps the viewliner cars and superliner sleepers could be converted to LD coaches until the wheels fall off (not literally, of course).
Having travelled on every Amtrak long distance train except for the Auto Train I believe long distance service with sleeping cars is necessary. Many people are unable to sit up and sleep for many reasons. The fare for sleeping car is far less than first class round trip by plane. Why shouldn't we have an alternative to flying. Personally I think it is great way to travel and meet people and really see the country we live in.You sure can't see much from 35,000 feet in the air. And now with all of these problems with airspeed indicators on Airbus planes I am not sure I want to fly again.
If this President can spend 3 Billion on a cash for clunkers program, a trillion for healthcare, bail out GM and Chrysler, bail out the banks etc. I don't have any qualms about the taxpayers subsidizing my prefered means of travel. It was just on our local news that probably somewhere between 40 and 45% of the new cars sold in the cash for clunkers program will be repo'ed in the next four to six months. I guess that means there will be some low mileage used cars driving down the price of the rest of the used cars.
MaglevHonestly, I think it is rude to have to poop right there in the room with your travelling partner. I would much rather use a spacious, common toilet.
I am submitting this for Trains.com Forum Post of the Year.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.