# Reequiping the EB



## norfolkwesternhenry (Jan 20, 2017)

I was thinking about Via and how their Canadian is the cleanest, finest, most luxurious, and best looking train I've been on, yet it's also the oldest, including the Acela. I was wondering if reequiping the EB with all new stainless steel single level cars, and domes, running much longer consists to accomodate needs, like the 26 car beheamoth that Via runs during the summer. Domes should be a definite, along with the high class "Prestige" type service. This would have the side effect of relieving the "Superliner shortage", which could help boost ridership, by always having the ability to add more cars. I think the EB should be picked for this partly because I live in MSP, and partly because there first day (out of CHI) isn't just corn and wheat, it runs along the very scenic ex Milw line. It also has the highest ridership of any east/west LD train, competing with the CS for highest ridership all around. I am guessing that there are some of you out there that will disagree and say the CZ is the train to reequip, but here's the thing, if it's a better train, why does it have less riders, like why the Green Bay Packers are better than the Minnesota Vikings, they have won 4 superbowls, comparing to the Vikings ZERO, same with CZ vs EB


----------



## norfolkwesternhenry (Jan 20, 2017)

I might be more inclined to reequip the CZ again if it was rerouted along the original Feather River route, rather than Donner Pass


----------



## Ryan (Jan 20, 2017)

I want to live in the fantasy world that you live in where Amtrak is going to get the money to reequip either train.


----------



## zephyr17 (Jan 20, 2017)

I want to live there, too. As long as we in a fantasy world, how about one where the railroads made money on and kept passenger service and I could still ride Santa Fe's Super Chief?


----------



## SarahZ (Jan 20, 2017)

I want to live in the fantasy world where football statistics are relevant to train ridership and preferred scenery.


----------



## Carolina Special (Jan 20, 2017)

In this fantasy world, the trade offs that allowed passenger trains to keep on making money:

1) The interstate highways were never built. 2) Passenger jet service never became practical. 3) The Internet never happened, so passenger trains kept the lucrative mail contracts from the USPS.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Jan 20, 2017)

If its luxury and length you're looking for, why stop at a 26 car VIA train? The Red and Blue RRBB circus trains should be up for sale in a few months. They are at least 60 cars each. If they're good enough for elephants, they should be good enough for you!


----------



## neroden (Jan 21, 2017)

The USPS simply made a mistake in cancelling the mail contract. Now that quick package delivery is displacing brick-and-mortar shopping, and the USPS small-parcel business is BOOMING, the USPS's reliance on trucks is hurting them terribly. UPS and FedEx are using intermodal (freight rail).

Anyway, so much for that topic.

Does anyone actually know what the consist of the Ringling Brothers Barnum & Bailey Circus Trains is? I've been curious. Obviously nobody has much interest in the animal carriers, and there are an awful lot of boxcars for equipment which have next to no value, but the cars for the actual human performers are probably quite valuable on the private car market...


----------



## CCC1007 (Jan 21, 2017)

Each of the two sets is about half and half flat cars and passenger cars, with all but four of them are either sleepers or "pie cars." The pie cars are equivalent to a buffet car.


----------



## zephyr17 (Jan 21, 2017)

Carolina Special said:


> In this fantasy world, the trade offs that allowed passenger trains to keep on making money:
> 
> 1) The interstate highways were never built. 2) Passenger jet service never became practical. 3) The Internet never happened, so passenger trains kept the lucrative mail contracts from the USPS.


It's my fantasy world, so it has planes, too, in case I need to get someplace fast. Kind of an old highway buff so we'll leave off the interstates.

Hey, fantasies don't have to make sense. Sort of like making the Empire Builder a Budd streamliner.


----------



## ScouseAndy (Jan 21, 2017)

Just get VIA to run a circuit over the Canadian route west bound and the EB east bound, yeah the journey time between Vancouver to Casper will be slighted longer (10 or so days compared to a few hours Casper to Vancouver but seeing as we are now in some crazy dream world where anything is possible why not?


----------



## Carolina Special (Jan 21, 2017)

I'm sure somewhere in the multiverse those parallel Earths exist. Personally, I'd prefer the ones with dirigibles instead of airplanes. Along with the passenger trains, of course.


----------



## zephyr17 (Jan 21, 2017)

Carolina Special said:


> I'm sure somewhere in the multiverse those parallel Earths exist. Personally, I'd prefer the ones with dirigibles instead of airplanes. Along with the passenger trains, of course.


I am all for that one. And with Route 66, too.


----------



## zephyr17 (Jan 21, 2017)

ScouseAndy said:


> Just get VIA to run a circuit over the Canadian route west bound and the EB east bound, yeah the journey time between Vancouver to Casper will be slighted longer (10 or so days compared to a few hours Casper to Vancouver but seeing as we are now in some crazy dream world where anything is possible why not?


Casper? The Friendly Ghost? Well, fantasy, so anything's possible, I guess. Personally, I preferred Rocky and Bullwinkle.


----------



## SarahZ (Jan 21, 2017)

zephyr17 said:


> Carolina Special said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure somewhere in the multiverse those parallel Earths exist. Personally, I'd prefer the ones with dirigibles instead of airplanes. Along with the passenger trains, of course.
> ...


Seconded.


----------



## jebr (Jan 22, 2017)

Coming somewhat back on topic:

There's no reason to run 26-car consists if Amtrak can't fill them. And, frankly, they probably won't without losing even more money than they do now, with no appreciable gain in connectivity.

If we did somehow have enough money to re-equip a train (and the operational room to run it like the Canadian) I'd much rather see that money spread out across the system to bring food service and training up to a consistent, decent level, and leave the luxury trains to private car companies. The scenery through the Canadian Rockies, in my opinion, beats the US equivalent, and the Canadian has a large international market that I just don't see the Empire Builder (or any Amtrak train) easily gaining that. (A fair amount of the international passengers I spoke with on the Canadian were from other Commonwealth countries, which the US can't leverage as a selling point.)

Even if the scenery was still good, though, I'd much rather have my tax money spent on a way to improve frequency and access to Amtrak and related services than to focus on making a "vacation train" that serves more to slowly trudge along for people to gawk and not really be effective in connecting people to the places they want to go.


----------



## jphjaxfl (Jan 22, 2017)

To show how times have changed, the Great Northern Railway, along with the Burlington and SP&S built completely new Empire Builders in 1947 and then again in 1951 and in the mid 1950s added the Dome Coaches and Great Domes Lounges. I believe there were 5 or 6 complete sets of equipment each time.

Amtrak re-equipped the Empire Builder in 1979 with Superliners and built some additional cars in the early 1990s. Nothing new since then.


----------



## Lonestar648 (Jan 27, 2017)

The ND oil boom that helped fill the EB seats and rooms has dwindled substantially. The CZ and CS could handle additional sleepers in season. The cost and time required to totally rebuild a new train like the EB with 5 consists would be nearly prohibited without major Congressional capital improvement funds allocated. I think using available capital to supplement existing consists during peak times so there are very few people turned away would help to increase needed revenue. Also, spend money to make the travel experience more pleasurable. Word of mouth is the best advertising and it is free. Remember it takes 100 positive comments to negate a real negative comment when dealing with average people.


----------



## norfolkwesternhenry (Feb 6, 2017)

How much would such a feat cost, if we contracted the cars and engines to Siemens, on board catering to some nice restaraunt based in CHI or SEA, and have a prestige option, only however many cars are needed, plus regular sleepers, and coaches, with proper lounges, with domes, a cafe, and a nice paint job


----------



## jis (Feb 6, 2017)

Way more than it costs to run the current service. There is no proverbial free lunch.


----------



## Lonestar648 (Feb 13, 2017)

Not only would you have the capital expense for five consists but there is the subsidizing the outsourcing of services that you don't want Amtrak to provide. Problem you will find is that businesses will find much more lucrative opportunities than the limited maximum revenue possibility on this train. The bi-level sleepers have the opportunity for more revenue with 14 Roomettes verses 12 on the Viewliner, and 5 Bedrooms verses 2 on the Viewliner, and a family bedroom with none on the Viewliner. Thats 44 passengers on the Superliner verses 30 on the single level Viewliner. So if you made the EB a single level train, to cover the current three Sleeping Cars you would require five single level sleeping cars. What about the Dining Cars, are you going with a Kitchen car and the Dining Car in order to have a decent kitchen to attract maybe a few food operators? Now the length of the train becomes an issue for many of the smaller station platforms. Having the Conductors having to coordinate three or four stops delays the train and the desired efficiency.


----------



## dlagrua (Mar 15, 2017)

The future may be that Amtrak will start leasing rolling stock and not buying it. In this case equipment can be replaced and added at a lower cost. In the next year we should be able to see the direction that the current administration in Washington will take on passenger rail.


----------



## jphjaxfl (Mar 15, 2017)

dlagrua said:


> The future may be that Amtrak will start leasing rolling stock and not buying it. In this case equipment can be replaced and added at a lower cost. In the next year we should be able to see the direction that the current administration in Washington will take on passenger rail.


What company is going to build this rolling stock that would replace Amtrak'so current aging equipment.


----------



## A Voice (Mar 15, 2017)

dlagrua said:


> The future may be that Amtrak will start leasing rolling stock and not buying it. In this case equipment can be replaced and added at a lower cost. In the next year we should be able to see the direction that the current administration in Washington will take on passenger rail.


Amtrak has been leasing much of its equipment for about the last twenty years. The Acela train sets, HHP-8 locomotives, Superliner II cars, and certain of the P-42 diesels are (or were) under lease agreements; The HHP-8's are only sitting in storage because the lease terms haven't expired yet.


----------



## neroden (Mar 20, 2017)

Leasing is consistently more expensive than buying. How do you think the lessors make their money?

The only times you lease are (a) when you don't plan to use the equipment for its full useful lifespan, so you lease for less than the full term -- an operating lease in the upcoming GAAP standards -- or (b) when you don't have enough cash to buy, a financing lease in the upcoming GAAP standards.


----------

