# VIA announces new cars, amenity upgrades



## CHamilton

VIA Rail unveils new rail cars, service amenities for 'Canadian' train



> Last week, VIA Rail Canada Inc. displayed new rail cars and train equipment for its "Canadian" train...The railroad also unveiled its new "Prestige Class" of travel amenities...
> 
> The cars displayed include the Canadian's new Prestige Class sleeper; new and renovated cars, including Dining, Manor, Château, Park, Skyline and Economy; and the recently inaugurated Business Class cars used on the popular Corridor route between Québec City and Windsor.
> 
> Prestige Class features include personalized dedicated service by a concierge; a more spacious cabin; larger windows; private washroom with shower; flat-screen TV with video selection; and a minibar.


----------



## OBS

They obviously didn't get the amenity "memo" that Amtrak issued....


----------



## jis

For the price they plan to charge even Amtrak would consider withdrawing the amenity memo I should think


----------



## Anderson

This has been in the works for a few years. I actually thought it might have been quietly scuttled amid the funding mess over the last year or two since they went dark on this for quite a while.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Another article has some photos...












Link: http://www.jaunted.com/story/2014/6/1/20955/56979/travel/VIA+Rail+Canada+Unveils+New+'Prestige+Class'+Train+Cabins

Although the Canadian is a very nice train the every few days schedule in winter is rather unfortunate and the summer rates were already sky high. I can only imagine what these tickets will be going for in 2015 when they eventually start rolling out the new hardware. One thing that should be included in the ticket price is a memo to Canada's clueless customs officers explaining that these train passengers are not any sort of threat and are in fact dumping thousands of dollars into their trips.


----------



## NS VIA Fan

Devil's Advocate said:


> .........One thing that should be included in the ticket price is a memo to Canada's clueless customs officers explaining that these train passengers are not any sort of threat and are in fact dumping thousands of dollars into their trips.


Copy US CBP on the same memo!


----------



## jerichowhiskey

Amtrak likes to note maintenance (parts availability?) issues with their heritage fleet. What is different with how VIA is handling their fleet?


----------



## Anderson

There are two key differences between Amtrak's position and VIA's position:
(1) Amtrak has about 80 Heritage cars, give or take a few. I believe the breakdown is around 20 diners, 60 baggage cars, and one dome. VIA, on the other hand, has nearly 200 cars on the roster (188 "regular" cars, 28 miscellaneous cars, and a few RDCs). At some point, economies of scale kick in. They do with VIA, they don't with Amtrak. I would posit that were Amtrak still running a few hundred Heritage cars, they would have sufficient equipment/parts orders to keep the per-unit cost under control.
(2) More importantly, Amtrak has had major periods of mistreating its equipment. VIA has not had the same degree of this mistreatment. Equipment that is well-cared-for will last a long, long time. Equipment that is mishandled and not kept up will die prematurely. This applies to cars (as my parents taught me), to locomotives (as the Katy apparently learned the hard way back in the 50s), and to passenger cars alike.

Basically, VIA did what they needed to in order to keep the old stuff rolling. Amtrak did not. Amtrak would have replaced the old diners about 20 years ago but for a lack of follow-through funding on the Viewliner I order (remember, there was an option for something like 600 cars on that initial order of 50). Basically, Amtrak made a decision to replace their old equipment but got cut off halfway through doing so, and therefore got caught with an undersized fleet that has been problematic to keep up.


----------



## jis

Relatively low overall fleet utilization must help a lot in that arena.

Also VIA started with a predominantly uniform Heritage fleet and made it even more so by getting rid of most of the ex-CN stuff and retaining the ex-CP stuff. Amtrak got an incredible mish mash of stuff over half of which suffered from very significant deferred maintenance or no maintenance at all for several years prior to 1971. Even what they finally picked and kept in the HEP Heritage fleet was a very mixed bag of stuff. It must have been an inventory nightmare to keep all that going.


----------



## Anderson

My understanding has always been that Amtrak was able to get down to a decently coherent fleet once they brought the Amfleets in and were able to retire at least some of the Heritage stuff. Remember, Amtrak got rid of something like 2/3 of the equipment that was available to it on A-Day...much of it Penn Central "Roach Coaches" and the like, of course. But once you got to the early 80s, you were mostly down to equipment that was from Southern, Seaboard, ATSF, and Burlington Northern which was in decent-to-good shape (as well as some pool equipment from the Penn Central which had survived in decent shape...after all, the _Broadway Limited_ had still been all-Pullman into the late 60s, so there was only so much time for the equipment to go to pot at the end). The Superliners and Amfleets had taken up most of the slack from the other mish-mash of cars...and most of the survivors were Budd equipment.

Amtrak ditched a batch of the Heritage stuff in the 90s because of the toilet issues (the dump toilets were expensive to replace and couldn't clear NYP), but they also pretty much killed what was left on their own with deferred maintenance in the late 90s.

But you're definitely right about low utilization...even in peak season, doesn't the _Canadian_ lay over for a day or so at each end?


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Amtrak has always run the wheels off their equipment. VIA has 200 some pieces, much of it restricted to one bi/tri weekly showcase. Amtrak has 80 some pieces, all but one of them in motion for probably 5 full days out of seven.

VIA has no capacity constraints. They don't run any trains!


----------



## Amfleeter

Saw this on google images while looking for pictures of Prestige class - now this raises my eyebrows. It kind of feels like cheapening to me, totally redoing the Park car like this and it disrupts the 'classic' feel of the Canadian, and I really wish they'd have kept the bullet lounge like it was, or at least given it something still fitting with the rest of the train.

Actually met the VIA Rail media relations person traveling there for this event while traveling on the Canadian, and happened to ask them whether it'd be Prestige-only - they haven't decided yet apparently whether Sleeper Plus will still be able to access the Park Car - it may be Prestige only.


----------



## TVRM610

Amfleeter said:


> Saw this on google images while looking for pictures of Prestige class - now this raises my eyebrows. It kind of feels like cheapening to me, totally redoing the Park car like this and it disrupts the 'classic' feel of the Canadian, and I really wish they'd have kept the bullet lounge like it was, or at least given it something still fitting with the rest of the train.
> 
> Actually met the VIA Rail media relations person traveling there for this event while traveling on the Canadian, and happened to ask them whether it'd be Prestige-only - they haven't decided yet apparently whether Sleeper Plus will still be able to access the Park Car - it may be Prestige only.


ewwww. I'm glad I rode the Canadian when I did. actually when does this roll out? Perhaps I need to make another trip ASAP...

I didn't realize they were messing with the Park cars like this.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Include me in the "if it isn't broken don't fix it club!" when it comes to the Park Cars and Budd Equipment!

Modern isn't always an improvement!

Hopefully all Sleeper pax on the Canadian will still be able to utilize the Park Car!!!


----------



## Amfleeter

It doesn't roll out officially til' 2015 apparently, but the converted Park Car is already running intermittently from what articles say. I'm guessing some Cabin for 3 purchasers will be getting a surprise upgrade.

I'm going to be honest, if they had done the lighting different, made the windows sturdier looking and framed with plain metal, used different seating, and using a darker, less fine grained wood like cherry, and not plastered the whole wall with wood, this might have actually looked good.

Personally glad Amtrak hasn't pulled any stunts like this - they still seem to attempt to be 'America's Railroad' instead of a luxury tourist service - sometimes even to the detriment of luxuries, like the lessening of Sleeper benefits and the desire of some within Amtrak to ditch the PPC, which is up there in luxury with VIA's Park cars in my opinion.


----------



## Anderson

Oh, God, that is ugly.

*sighs*

I'll probably do one more run on the Canadian this winter...and then there is a _very_ good chance I do not touch that train ever again at this rate except to try and hit up the Hudson Bay train (albeit for more reasons than just bad decor).


----------



## MikefromCrete

I think that interior looks pretty nice. Certainly looks more comfortable than the 1950's stylings in the other Park cars which always struck me as stark and plain.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Looks like a President Obama's Prevost motorhome, probably.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

You lost me there, Swad.


----------



## rrdude

After riding Alaska RR's train from Anchorage to Seward earlier this month, it convinced me further that Amtrak is "missing the boat" when it comes to LD service, I know, I know, I know, that Amtrak must "listen" to Congress, but in my dream, Congress would let Amtrak run without micro-managing. Don't like China plates? Then replace the CEO, otherwise, let the CEO, and his soldiers do what they think is best.

I know Amtrak is supposed to provide "basic transportation to all", but when a company tries to please everybody, they end up pleasing no one. (low fare riders complain about high rates, first class pax complain about lack of amenities, everyone complains about food quality)

I'd like to see a division or department within Amtrak that CATERS to the luxury traveler, on many different levels, but alas, that won't happen. I'm just gonna have to save my bucks, and travel VIA, and or others. Sorry for the rant.........


----------



## railiner

Amfleeter said:


> It doesn't roll out officially til' 2015 apparently, but the converted Park Car is already running intermittently from what articles say. I'm guessing some Cabin for 3 purchasers will be getting a surprise upgrade.
> 
> I'm going to be honest, if they had done the lighting different, made the windows sturdier looking and framed with plain metal, used different seating, and using a darker, less fine grained wood like cherry, and not plastered the whole wall with wood, this might have actually looked good.
> 
> Personally glad Amtrak hasn't pulled any stunts like this - they still seem to attempt to be 'America's Railroad' instead of a luxury tourist service - sometimes even to the detriment of luxuries, like the lessening of Sleeper benefits and the desire of some within Amtrak to ditch the PPC, which is up there in luxury with VIA's Park cars in my opinion.





Anderson said:


> Oh, God, that is ugly.
> 
> *sighs*
> 
> I'll probably do one more run on the Canadian this winter...and then there is a _very_ good chance I do not touch that train ever again at this rate except to try and hit up the Hudson Bay train (albeit for more reasons than just bad decor).





MikefromCrete said:


> I think that interior looks pretty nice. Certainly looks more comfortable than the 1950's stylings in the other Park cars which always struck me as stark and plain.


"Beauty Is In The Eye Of The Beholder"......these posts a good example of that expression.

IMHO, yes, I do like to preserve old equipment, be it trains or automobiles in "original" condition, mainly for nostagia.

But in this case, I have to agree with MikefromCrete, that the new interior does look rather sumptuous and inviting, while at the same time preserving the general pleasure of sitting in a round-end observation car.


----------



## jis

I just think it is generally silly to install unmovable seats facing inwards next to windows. But that is just me probably. I am told by some experts from railroads that passengers really don't care to look outside while traveling as much as I do. 

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## TVRM610

jis said:


> I just think it is generally silly to install unmovable seats facing inwards next to windows. But that is just me probably. I am told by some experts from railroads that passengers really don't care to look outside while traveling as much as I do.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


Well the seats in these cars always faced away from the windows... true they were technically movable, but in practice they always faced toward the center of the cars.

The problem I have is the design does not take into account the curved end of the train.... why be on the back of the train if you don't have a clear view out the back? That was the whole idea I thought.


----------



## TVRM610

MikefromCrete said:


> I think that interior looks pretty nice. Certainly looks more comfortable than the 1950's stylings in the other Park cars which always struck me as stark and plain.


I agree the Park Cars as is are very plain and sterile. In my opinion more sterile than the newly refurbished Amtrak lounges. But they could be upgraded without disturbing the historical nature of the car.... ala Pullman as pictured below. THAT is what an observation lounge should look like.


----------



## siberianmo

Not trying to introduce redundancy in commentary - but when it comes to _VIA Rail,_ I too have many, many fond experiences going back to the _Atlantic_ from Montreal to Halifax (where relatives are). My most FAY-VOR-IYTE trips were with my bride aboard the _Ocean_ in the Park Car - bedroom of course when the entire consist was of the corrugated stainless steel beauties. What a treat and back in those times (1990s) the fare was right and the service far better than anything experienced down this way (USA). I'm guessing we (I) logged at least 3 dozen round trips between those cities. Ahhhhh, memories.

Those upgraded Budd cars (yeah - Budd cars inanely called HEP by who-knows-what-the-mentality)? pretty much convinced me that my cross-Canada (actually Toronto to Vancouver) days are done. Will not spend that kind of money nor will I (or we) put up with the reduced scheduling and fare gouging going on with _VIA_ these days. Yeah, I know - don't let the door hit me in my stern section as I remain below the 49th parallel for my rail "fix."

I cannot figure out Ottawa anymore than WashDC when it comes to subsidizing _VIA/Amtrak_ . . . spend a bundle for renovations then cut scheduling along with pricing out so many short of being affluent. Oh yeah, makes sense . . . not.

Finally for VIA Rail: bring back the _Chaleur_ (Montreal to Gaspe) and restore the names to all long-distance trains!!


----------



## Green Maned Lion

What's not to understand? They want LD rail dead.


----------



## Amfleeter

Green Maned Lion said:


> What's not to understand? They want LD rail dead.


Is it that harsh up in Ottawa?

From what I've seen in the US, it's not generally that DC is anti-rail, it's more there's a quite large pro-rail and rail subsidy lobby, a large semi pro-rail lobby, who oppose Amtrak's current state of unprofitability, but don't necessarily oppose Amtrak itself, even the LD routes, but support the freight railroads, usually strongly, and a fairly small, but vocal, anti-rail lobby, more than a few of whom are in the pockets of bus and trucking companies.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Amfleeter said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's not to understand? They want LD rail dead.
> 
> 
> 
> Is it that harsh up in Ottawa?
> From what I've seen in the US, it's not generally that DC is anti-rail, it's more there's a quite large pro-rail and rail subsidy lobby, a large semi pro-rail lobby, who oppose Amtrak's current state of unprofitability, but don't necessarily oppose Amtrak itself, even the LD routes, but support the freight railroads, usually strongly, and a fairly small, but vocal, anti-rail lobby, more than a few of whom are in the pockets of bus and trucking companies.
Click to expand...

Make no mistake, trucking companies, maybe, but bus companies, no. The fact that Greyhound routes generally don't parallel Amtrak LD's means there is no reason for the bus industry to be lobbying against Amtrak. More like car fans and airplane fans. For example, go on www.airliners.net and you will find plenty of people who say "Screw trains, I'll just fly and get there faster." Now the bus fan boards are usually friendly to rail fans and many of them like riding trains, including me, but not vice versa.

This is why rail support has turned into a weird game that I'm dropping out of. Doesn't mean I don't like trains, I'm just not going to talk about trains much anymore. Sorry, guys. And again, just because I like trains doesn't mean I have to like Amtrak or support Amtrak. If you need a LD rail "fix" you can always go to China, India, or Russia, somewhere I can actually afford a train ticket with regularity instead of splurging every time. Same problem with VIA just amplified.


----------



## Amfleeter

Swadian Hardcore said:


> Amfleeter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's not to understand? They want LD rail dead.
> 
> 
> 
> Is it that harsh up in Ottawa?
> From what I've seen in the US, it's not generally that DC is anti-rail, it's more there's a quite large pro-rail and rail subsidy lobby, a large semi pro-rail lobby, who oppose Amtrak's current state of unprofitability, but don't necessarily oppose Amtrak itself, even the LD routes, but support the freight railroads, usually strongly, and a fairly small, but vocal, anti-rail lobby, more than a few of whom are in the pockets of bus and trucking companies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Make no mistake, trucking companies, maybe, but bus companies, no. The fact that Greyhound routes generally don't parallel Amtrak LD's means there is no reason for the bus industry to be lobbying against Amtrak. More like car fans and airplane fans. For example, go on www.airliners.net and you will find plenty of people who say "Screw trains, I'll just fly and get there faster." Now the bus fan boards are usually friendly to rail fans and many of them like riding trains, including me, but not vice versa.
> 
> This is why rail support has turned into a weird game that I'm dropping out of. Doesn't mean I don't like trains, I'm just not going to talk about trains much anymore. Sorry, guys. And again, just because I like trains doesn't mean I have to like Amtrak or support Amtrak. If you need a LD rail "fix" you can always go to China, India, or Russia, somewhere I can actually afford a train ticket with regularity instead of splurging every time. Same problem with VIA just amplified.
Click to expand...

I was more referring to Megabus in the bus lobbying statement - in the NEC area, they do often compete with Amtrak, especially for the youth market (Which I am part of), not so much the LD and business market (who Amtrak and the airlines firmly have control of).

Sorry if I offended you with the statement - I didn't intend to say anything about the bus fans, who, from what I've seen, are very supportive of Amtrak, I was more talking about the corporate entities who compete with Amtrak heavily in the Corridors, especially the Northeast Corridor - my area of interest is more the Corridor service than LD service. And of course, this is all just my perspective from what I've seen of the competition between Amtrak and people like BoltBus and Megabus, who have very cheap fares that appeal to youth. Greyhound, from what I've seen, caters more to the in-betweens, and I agree, doesn't compete with Amtrak. Price-wise, I've seen them be fairly close, actually. The bus is a great way to get to places it's just inconvenient and expensive to put rail - and it will continue to be.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

It's OK, I wasn't offended, but I mean, you mentioned LD's yet Megabus doesn't run LD's. But I agree that airlines are firmly in control of LD travel, buses, cars, and trains are all secondary. Cars are all over the place but IMO most car miles are probably driving to/from work or shopping, road trippers should be targeted by trains and buses, which is unfortunately only done by buses and not by trains, because trains are often too expensive and inconvenient to challenge road trippers. That's why I often suggest going to China, India, or Russia for a train ride, I mean, per-mile fares are just so much lower in those countries, and you still get the LD train experience. And goes to much more places, much more frequently, you know? Hence why I'm a railfan that's not an Amtrak fan.

I know politics have to do with all this but I think we should just forget about politics and just ride trains. To me, constant lobbying about trains (anti-rail vs pro-rail) really isn't worth the time when we could spend that effort actually riding trains. Same thing with all other forms of transport.


----------



## Amfleeter

Swadian Hardcore said:


> yet Megabus doesn't run LD's.


I was referring to Megabus in the context of the NEC and the youth market, where they *do* compete - especially from Hampton Roads to DC, since there's several large schools down here with students from Northern Virginia being the majority. Was trying to say they don't so much compete in the LD market. (though nor does Amtrak except on certain routes like the CHI-NYP and CHI-WAS runs, and the Auto Train). But yeah, I mostly lobby because I use Amtrak to commute between Norfolk and DC - in addition to seeking employment with Amtrak - Amtrak's useful to commute because it's closer than the Megabus stop, and actually cheaper or the same price as Greyhound sometimes.

Anyway, back on the topic of the Canadian, it does seem that VIA's staying in the direction of making more money from it. I wonder if they'll convert any of the Chateaus, when they finally go in for overhaul, into a more luxurious configuration as a full-length Prestige sleeper. I did see the Park they were displaying hooked up to a Chateau, since I arrived in Vancouver the day they actually did the unveiling event for Prestige, along with a Business class LRC coach - which, from the pictures, looks very, very nice inside. Better than Acela FC, I'd say.

I do wonder what VIA's going to do with the Chateaus, though - haven't they not gone through the same recent interior overhauls the Manors did?

Here's the new Business Class, for reference.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

I think VIA Rail is doing the WRONG thing with the Canadian. The Canadian, along with other VIA Rail Budd trains, has long been known as the last remaining classic streamliner trains. They had the service and the equipment of a bygone era. This no longer exists with VIA's Prestige Class. When people ride the Canadian, people expect the kind of train ride seen in "North by Northwest" or the "Silver Streak", the latter being filmed with the real Canadian trainset. This is now diminishing rapidly. What a shame to turn classic Budds into motorhomes on rails.

I hope VIA will keep the Skeena and Hudson Bay right. Will they turn all the Park Cars into Prestige Class?

This is what people want to ride: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=482470&nseq=37.


----------



## railbuck

Swadian Hardcore said:


> ... That's why I often suggest going to China, India, or Russia for a train ride, I mean, per-mile fares are just so much lower in those countries, and you still get the LD train experience.


Once you add in the LD plane experience, is the effective per-mile train fare even close to being competitive?


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

railbuck said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... That's why I often suggest going to China, India, or Russia for a train ride, I mean, per-mile fares are just so much lower in those countries, and you still get the LD train experience.
> 
> 
> 
> Once you add in the LD plane experience, is the effective per-mile train fare even close to being competitive?
Click to expand...

Yes, it is definitely competitive, because of all the flight miles must count too, but more importantly, you're experiencing other countries. In China, a Soft Sleeper ticket costs roughly $0.07 per mile. Travelling by day? A hard seat costs you only $0.016 per mile. That's per mile, not kilometer. SWC-equivalent in China: $136 in Soft Sleeper. Do that three times in a triangle, add on the food costs and airfare, that's still no more than $2000 MAX and you still beat riding Amtrak and HEAVILY beat VIA Rail prices without even counting the air miles. As for the flight, well it's not that bad.

And what if the person is an airplane fan who might actually enjoy a long flight, given it is in his/her favorite plane. Don't underestimate the number of airplane enthusiasts.

Even from the railfan perspective, you can ride a few types of trains or you can ride many types of trains.

So really, if VIA Rail wants to be a cruise train, be a cruise train, but don't be a motorhome consist on rails. That's my opinion.


----------



## railiner

Amfleeter said:


> Saw this on google images while looking for pictures of Prestige class - now this raises my eyebrows. It kind of feels like cheapening to me, totally redoing the Park car like this and it disrupts the 'classic' feel of the Canadian, and I really wish they'd have kept the bullet lounge like it was, or at least given it something still fitting with the rest of the train.
> 
> Actually met the VIA Rail media relations person traveling there for this event while traveling on the Canadian, and happened to ask them whether it'd be Prestige-only - they haven't decided yet apparently whether Sleeper Plus will still be able to access the Park Car - it may be Prestige only.





TVRM610 said:


> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think that interior looks pretty nice. Certainly looks more comfortable than the 1950's stylings in the other Park cars which always struck me as stark and plain.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree the Park Cars as is are very plain and sterile. In my opinion more sterile than the newly refurbished Amtrak lounges. But they could be upgraded without disturbing the historical nature of the car.... ala Pullman as pictured below. THAT is what an observation lounge should look like.
Click to expand...

Aside from the big difference in the fixed vs. movable seats, the view out is basically the same....the angle of the shots may make the older style appear to have more visibility, but the window arrangement is the same...only the framing and paneling are different....


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Swadian Hardcore said:


> When people ride the Canadian [they] expect the kind of train ride seen in "North by Northwest" or the "Silver Streak". This is now diminishing rapidly. What a shame to turn classic Budds into motorhomes on rails.


 That was my take as well. It may be comfortable but it's not very classy. Although to me the bigger issue is that they're considering kicking sleeper passengers out of the park car. Oh well it was fun while it lasted. At least I don't have to argue with Canada's customs and immigration officers about what constitutes a legitimate tourist attraction.



jis said:


> I just think it is generally silly to install unmovable seats facing inwards next to windows. But that is just me probably. I am told by some experts from railroads that passengers really don't care to look outside while traveling as much as I do.


When I rode in the rear of the Park Car several of the other passengers were glued to their iPhones and iPads and didn't seem to notice or care about anything going on outside. Even in the dome some folks would just be sitting up there reading books or drawing or what have you. Seemed they could have been almost anywhere and never even noticed the difference.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

I think the worst thing you can do in a dome is sleep. You're supposed to view the scenery, not sleep. No wonder people think it's "bad luck". I hope they will not convert all the Park Cars because of the Skeena.


----------



## jis

I think the three day Canadian schedule was the last time that train was really attractive to me. Since then it has been steady downhill trudge while supported by more polished marketing. That is again just me of course. I am currently not particularly attracted to travel by the Canadian again. I'd rather explore the more remote other trains in Canada, which I will start next year once the house buying and move is behind me.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

VIA has cut frequencies on all their trains, jacked prices, and has refused to buy vaguely sensible equipment. They should have replaced their LD fleet in the early 90s when Bombardier, a Canadian company for god sakes, had the Superliner production line running again.

They could have, with the insane savings the Superliner efficiency would grant, ran all their trains daily. They could have built Superliner diners with dome upper levels. They could build a PPC style lounge for sleeper passengers. They could have built rounded end dome lounges for the first and last car on the train and maintained dome style views even.

But they didn't. They insist on running at relatively high capital cost, relatively high (uneccsarily so) labor costs, and low frequencies. They have consistently demonstrated a lack of desire to provide transportation function on anything but mandated trains and the Toronto Montreal corridor trains- which they still run only very infrequently.


----------



## jis

Shhhhh.... Don't say the obvious. You will grossly offend the Budd cheering section.


----------



## Amfleeter

Green Maned Lion said:


> VIA has cut frequencies on all their trains, jacked prices, and has refused to buy vaguely sensible equipment. They should have replaced their LD fleet in the early 90s when Bombardier, a Canadian company for god sakes, had the Superliner production line running again.
> 
> They could have, with the insane savings the Superliner efficiency would grant, ran all their trains daily. They could have built Superliner diners with dome upper levels. They could build a PPC style lounge for sleeper passengers. They could have built rounded end dome lounges for the first and last car on the train and maintained dome style views even.
> 
> But they didn't. They insist on running at relatively high capital cost, relatively high (uneccsarily so) labor costs, and low frequencies. They have consistently demonstrated a lack of desire to provide transportation function on anything but mandated trains and the Toronto Montreal corridor trains- which they still run only very infrequently.


A fun little fact about the Canadian - some of the crew have no rooms onboard, and sleep in one of the domes. Wouldn't have that problem with Superliners.

Honestly, I would've loved a Superliner roomette on the Canadian. The seats are more plush, and with the folding table and coat rack, along with the downstairs luggage rack, much more a room I can stay in during the day.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

I'm sorry, but last time I rode a Superliner Roomette two years ago, the lower berth broke and I had to sleep on the HORRIBLE upper berth. I would rather sleep in a boxcar.


----------



## jis

Swadian Hardcore said:


> I'm sorry, but last time I rode a Superliner Roomette two years ago, the lower berth broke and I had to sleep on the HORRIBLE upper berth. I would rather sleep in a boxcar.


I agree. Superliner upper berths are the closest thing to a coffin that I have ever had the pleasure of sleeping in. Well perhaps the upper berth in an Indian Railways three tier sleeper is worse, I'll admit.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Oops, duplicate post! "Out damn spot!"


----------



## Bob Dylan

While the coffin in Superliner Roomettes is very confining and uncomfortable, I think back to the thread where Navy types ( including me) discussed how really cramped the berthing areas are aboard ships! Submarines take the Grand Prize by far!

As for Roomettes(Cabins for one) on the Canadian, they are smaller but the mattress and bedding is much better! For that matter the Sections also have very comfortable beds with first rate bedding! Storage space is @ a Premium,except in the Bedrooms, resulting in Checked Baggage for larger bags!


----------



## TVRM610

jimhudson said:


> As for Roomettes(Cabins for one) on the Canadian, they are smaller but the mattress and bedding is much better! For that matter the Sections also have very comfortable beds with first rate bedding! Storage space is @ a Premium,except in the Bedrooms, resulting in Checked Baggage for larger bags!


Agreed. The Amtrak Roomette has a far superior design in my opinion. The seats facing the double window, the table, some (not much but some) storage space etc. But when bed time comes VIA is wayyyyyyyyyy more comfy.


----------



## jis

I know I will get thoroughly crucified for saying this probably, but I actually like the VIA Renaissance sleepers much more than the old Budd ones. Now I shall duck.


----------



## Bob Dylan

"Everyone to their own taste!" said the Old Maid as she kissed the cow! 

The Ren Cars are nice too, its just that we oldsters tend to look on the Budd Cars as how Rail Cars should be!


----------



## Amfleeter

TVRM610 said:


> jimhudson said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for Roomettes(Cabins for one) on the Canadian, they are smaller but the mattress and bedding is much better! For that matter the Sections also have very comfortable beds with first rate bedding! Storage space is @ a Premium,except in the Bedrooms, resulting in Checked Baggage for larger bags!
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed. The Amtrak Roomette has a far superior design in my opinion. The seats facing the double window, the table, some (not much but some) storage space etc. But when bed time comes VIA is wayyyyyyyyyy more comfy.
Click to expand...

Oh, I will agree on the comfy bed, but that's not intrinsic to the Superliner, it's just Amtrak's choice of how they set the beds up. They could honestly have better sheets, and they _could _have a mattress to put on the lower bed, and improve the one on the upper (which would be pretty nice for the lower, the mattress, and the seat cushions below). It would just be a matter of money and willpower on Amtrak's part, which they've occasionally shown. The Superliners are excellent sleepers, save how Amtrak does the bedding - which is basically a cost cutting measure. The seats are _very_ comfortable in my opinion during the day though, since they double as beds. Not particularly a fan of the seats in the Budd sleepers, frankly.

Though I have to say, the Viewliners are superior, though I've never actually ridden one, on account of that second window and the spacious, Superliner-style accommodations.


----------



## Anderson

I've actually ridden in the new BC on the Corridor. I'm not much of a fan nor much of an opponent; I like the 2-1 layout but I don't really like the seats. As much as I hate to say it, my biggest gripe is that they gave away 1/4 of the seating and didn't get much in return.


----------



## William W.

I'm considering flying to Toronto next summer, taking the Canadian to Vancouver, and then taking the Empire Builder back. Is the Canadian still worthwhile? My backup is to take the SWC, and then the CS to Seattle. I'd really like to take the Canadian, but I know that the cost may be hard to swallow. What do you guys think?


----------



## Green Maned Lion

YOLO.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

William W. said:


> I'm considering flying to Toronto next summer, taking the Canadian to Vancouver, and then taking the Empire Builder back. Is the Canadian still worthwhile? My backup is to take the SWC, and then the CS to Seattle. I'd really like to take the Canadian, but I know that the cost may be hard to swallow. What do you guys think?


Worthwhile compared to the Empire Builder? Yep. Worthwhile compared to the SWC/CS? Yep. The Canadian is moving in directions I'm not happy with (limited schedule and generic hotel refurbishing) but it's still among the best rail services available in North America at any price. Even if you were comparing the Canadian with Eurostar or TGV or ICE or JRX I'd still say it's worth it. The old time trains are vanishing. There's no Orient Express anymore. Better to see the old trains now while they're still around. That's my advice anyway.


----------



## rrdude

Jump, dont think about it, JUST JUMP IF U HAVE THE CHANCE!


----------



## jis

The _Canadian _is trying to slowly become more like the_ Indian Pacific_ or the _Ghan _in Australia. This is a completely different direction when compared to Amtrak's LD network, so comparing the two is a bit of apples and oranges I am afraid.

As far as Amtrak goes, I as a taxpayer would be stridently opposed to it trying to run a luxury service like the _Ghan _or the_ Indian Pacific_. Indeed in Australia those are not run by a government subsidized outfit either. Those operations were sold off to the _Great Southern Rail_. AFAICT, the only subsidy it gets from the government is for funding discounts for seniors (pensioners) and certain other categories of travelers amounting to some $30 million for a period of four years.

For providing such service in the US, the Iowa Pacific model may be the right way to go, if it can be made to work.


----------



## Bob Dylan

William W. said:


> I'm considering flying to Toronto next summer, taking the Canadian to Vancouver, and then taking the Empire Builder back. Is the Canadian still worthwhile? My backup is to take the SWC, and then the CS to Seattle. I'd really like to take the Canadian, but I know that the cost may be hard to swallow. What do you guys think?


 As was said, catch it while you still can!
Remember that summer comes late in the Great White North so the Express and 50% Fares on VIA are excellent deals, they usually are on offer from Nov to the Christmas Holidays, then Jan to May, I've even seen a few in June!

Keep up @ via.ca and if you set up an account they'll even email you like AGR does! Worth doing if you're flexible in your travel plans, the hundreds of dollars in savings will pretty much pay for some of the rest of your travel expenses!


----------



## lyke99

I just returned from a trip that included both the Empire Builder and The Canadian. It is tough to compare them.

The Empire Builder and Amtrak are providing a service. They go daily and a number of people ride it regularly. You meet people in the dining car who say things like "I take this to and from (wherever)." or "I don't like to drive/fly so I use the train to visit (family members/friends)"

With "The Canadian" VIA Rail provides a service to some people, but in the sleeping cars you mainly find people who are making the trip just this once or maybe they do it every few years. My wife and I met a lot of people from a lot of places, but not many Canadians and of the Canadians, most were taking an "I've always wanted to do this" trip. Those of us who considered ourselves railfans all said our trips were prompted by Fred Frailey's January 2014 article in Trains Magazine.

So here we were, Minnesotans at "train camp" on The Canadian with people from Australia, England, Northern Ireland, British Columbia, Ontario, Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, and California. We had a great time and nearly free reign in the Park Car for the entire Vancouver to Toronto journey. Those of us who'd traveled Amtrak before were impressed by the amount of public space there was for sleeping car passengers. On Amtrak, my wife and I are generally in our room if it is not meal time. On The Canadian we spent very little time in our rooms (we did two Cabins for 1 [roomettes] instead of a Cabin for 2) during the days.

The Australian in this band of "train campers" had traveled extensively on Amtrak and said, "Amtrak is like the hotel you stay in while traveling on business. It's good, few complaints, if any, and you'll stay there again the next time you're in town for business. The Canadian is like the resort you visit to celebrate an anniversary."


----------



## jebr

As an American taxpayer, I'm glad that we're subsidizing a service instead of a vacation. If the Canadian is mainly a land cruise, I can see why some people are trying to cut VIA (and why the cuts I hear for frequency worry me.) Amtrak often presents itself as a transportation option, and it's worthy of support as a transportation option. However, if Amtrak were to try and emulate VIA (reducing frequency and catering to vacationers instead of as a basic transportation option) I would be much more skeptical of subsidizing them from a governmental perspective.

I would like to see both Amtrak and VIA stay around, but as an American taxpayer, I'm glad I'm subsidizing Amtrak and not VIA.


----------



## TVRM610

I've only ridden the Canadian once and have ridden Amtrak... well alot more but my experience was similar to lyke99 although I did meet a few Canadians who really were using VIA for transportation. I agree on the Amtrak hotel vs. VIA Resort comparison.. pretty spot on.


----------



## the_traveler

Devil's Advocate said:


> When I rode in the rear of the Park Car several of the other passengers were glued to their iPhones and iPads and didn't seem to notice or care about anything going on outside. Even in the dome some folks would just be sitting up there reading books or drawing or what have you. Seemed they could have been almost anywhere and never even noticed the difference.


A few years ago, I rode the Adirondack when it had Ocean View on. 2 or 3 of the tables had groups sitting there - playing cards! I don't even think they noticed they were in a DOME!


----------



## railiner

Years ago, when the Rio Grande Zephyr ran, if the chair car attendant noticed any passengers either reading or sleeping in the packed dome seats, he would politely ask them to return to their regular seat, so that the queue of passenger's waiting to enjoy the scenery got a chance to sit in the dome seats. This was usually on the sold out train on weekends between Denver and Glenwood Springs....


----------



## neroden

*sigh*.

I consider anything which runs less than daily to be good only for cruise service. I'll make an exception for the Queen Mary II. 

I just planned out a vacation where I had very flexible dates and a lot of time. I *could not make* the Texas Eagle/Sunset Limited route work; it wasn't the extra day in transit, it was that *plus* the three-a-week schedule. Not long before that, I attempted to plan out a trip to Indianapolis to a convention; again, I could not make the Cardinal work, partly because of the speed (which also made the Hoosier State a problem), but mostly because of the three-a-week schedule. The Canadian? Again, impractical even for a vacation trip: four nights and a full day, and the two-a-week schedule makes it unusable.

Even with the Empire Builder's current delays, the Canadian is sloooow. It appears to be faster to take VIA from Toronto to Windsor, stay overnight in Detroit, and take Amtrak from there to Vancouver. Which is absurd, but it would probably be tolerable if the train was daily, which it isn't. And of course the Amtrak route is cheaper!

I like my amenities, but I'm not ridiculous. I always have some schedule flexibility and can afford to take a slower and more scenic route, but I don't want to pay extra for hotels just in order to get the right day of the week for the train schedule. Amtrak still has a lot of the market for people like me. VIA is driving my market off the Canadian (and the Ocean), because of the lack of daily service. There are no amenities which can compensate for the restricted list of departure dates.


----------



## Bob Dylan

railiner said:


> Years ago, when the Rio Grande Zephyr ran, if the chair car attendant noticed any passengers either reading or sleeping in the packed dome seats, he would politely ask them to return to their regular seat, so that the queue of passenger's waiting to enjoy the scenery got a chance to sit in the dome seats. This was usually on the sold out train on weekends between Denver and Glenwood Springs....


Still that way on the Zephyr between Denver and Grand Junction and between Reno and Sacramento! Some Conductors make announcements about sharing the SSL when in the Mountains!
The PPC has the sane problem with thecSwivel Chairs on the Starlight Route when the Sleepers are Full!

Sharing is Caring! Its a good motto to live by!


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Sharing is caring. Weren't we discussing how apathy is a major problem in this country?


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Reno-Sacramento?! That explains the HUGE fares!


----------



## sldispatcher

I will be in the minority on this one, but that doesn't necessarily make me wrong.

I really like the changes VIA is making and it will make for a much broader appeal to the general public. In addition, it will go right at the high end fare paying people that can make a difference on the bottom line. You want broader support of rail transport, then put people on the train. 50's style accommodations and lack of tasteful modern amenities is not going to do it.

I'm in a profession/age group/etc. that tends to be regarded as having expendable income and often will do it on higher end items. That's a bit of a stereotype, but it is what it is. Vacations are often where that money goes.

I believe, with the right lure of accommodation, that higher discretionary income can be brought to use in rail. In turn, a very positive exposure will lead to broader support.

This change will very likely lead to new life being pumped into the _Canadian_. What if the demand was so great for the PRESTIGE service that it prompted a return to 3 days a week in winter? A new car order? If there is money in it, the rest will follow.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Foolish fooling follying foolishly.


----------



## sldispatcher

Name some service industries where keeping things exactly the same way for 50 years from the public face of their operations has resulted in that company's uncontainable success.

Airlines didn't do it.

Hotels didn't do it.

Stores haven't done it.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Some hotels have. Not always in a bad way.


----------



## sldispatcher

I just worry that if the only way any of us think that long distance travel by rail can be done should be circa 1950's, we will just be tightening the screws of doom.

I would never presume or think that rail transportation should be a break even proposition. Only the fools think that. What I want is more service not less. Same as you and the rest of the folks on here.

I just don't want more of the same. I want better.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

The only way to change it whole cloth is a thorough overhaul of our political system. If you want to make a difference focus on a single useful project. Push with all your might. Maybe before you die it will become so.


----------



## jis

And yet the real appeal of the Canadian appears to be that it gives a wonderful 1950's experience over even one additional day over what one got in the 50's!

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Amfleeter

http://www.julien.ca/railsolutions/en/

Here's the company upgrading the 4 Park cars - they will only be in service during the Summer peak, and probably not on every run. 8 Chateau cars as said previously will also be converted. There's some 360 views of the new Park there.

By the way, this is the same company that designed the Talgo bistro car, the service counter for the Superliner diners, along with the galley for Superliners and some of the luggage racks in Superliners and Amfleets. They also designed the Viewliner inspection car's interior and the interior for the ACES service/First Class car. They've got credentials in railroad design, that's for sure. Not exactly as great as whoever designed the Acela interior, but still pretty good.


----------



## Lawdude

Devil's Advocate said:


> Another article has some photos...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link: http://www.jaunted.com/story/2014/6/1/20955/56979/travel/VIA+Rail+Canada+Unveils+New+'Prestige+Class'+Train+Cabins
> 
> Although the Canadian is a very nice train the every few days schedule in winter is rather unfortunate and the summer rates were already sky high. I can only imagine what these tickets will be going for in 2015 when they eventually start rolling out the new hardware. One thing that should be included in the ticket price is a memo to Canada's clueless customs officers explaining that these train passengers are not any sort of threat and are in fact dumping thousands of dollars into their trips.


I've read a number of threads here about the prices charged by VIA. VIA is, as best I can tell, charging closer to cost for their services. Sleeping car services on Amtrak are enormously subsidized. You can see that from the fact that every study on Amtrak subsidies shows the western 2 day long distance routes have the largest subsidies, from the fact that food service (with the most expensive dining car meals comped to sleeping car passengers) has huge losses, etc. Amtrak also has a frequent rider program that gives out free sleeping car trips to people who have accumulated points purchasing other trips in sleeping cars that Amtrak lost tons of money providing.

My best guess is that the Amtrak pricing strategy is to keep sleeping car passengers (mostly railfans) happy in the hope that they supply a constituency to advocate for continued Amtrak funding. Then, when periodic budget cuts happen, they cut services to sleeping car passengers as best they can (substituting reheated food for traditional fresh-cooked dining car food, removing amenity kits, etc.) while not making that constituency too mad.

VIA, in contrast, charges sleeping car passengers something like what it costs to transport them across Canada and feed them. If Amtrak adopted VIA's pricing, they would probably lose a lot less money. On the other hand, they'd also price a lot of railfans out of the market and could lose their political constituency.


----------



## rrdude

Get your armor out, you're gonna get drilled, and rightfully so, your "hypothesis" is wrong on several counts.........But it's too late for me to get specific.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Fact of Life: Amtrak ( and VIA) could Double the Cost of Tickets ( Sleeper and Coach)and would end up Losing Even More Money due to declining ridership!

Check out every " for profit" Luxury/Cruise Train that has tried to operate in this country by following that business model!

EVERY Form of Transportation in this Country and Canada would Vanish without Government Subsidies!


----------



## Lawdude

rrdude said:


> Get your armor out, you're gonna get drilled, and rightfully so, your "hypothesis" is wrong on several counts.........But it's too late for me to get specific.


I'm fine with that, but let's start here-- I realize a lot of railfan advocacy groups have all sorts of "explanations" about how sleeping car passengers aren't the problem, but instead of going there (which has been debated endlessly on the Internet), let's start at a different place: if Amtrak sleeper fares (including the free dining and the AGR points) are not significantly subsidized, does that mean that VIA is making a gigantic profit on their higher fares? And if so, is VIA charging a market-clearing price and Amtrak isn't?

In other words, I think I know what the price DIFFERENCE between VIA and Amtrak is telling us. If it's not telling us what I think it is, what IS it telling us?


----------



## Lawdude

rrdude said:


> Get your armor out, you're gonna get drilled, and rightfully so, your "hypothesis" is wrong on several counts.........But it's too late for me to get specific.


I'm fine with that, but let's start here-- I realize a lot of railfan advocacy groups have all sorts of "explanations" about how sleeping car passengers aren't the problem, but instead of going there (which has been debated endlessly on the Internet), let's start at a different place: if Amtrak sleeper fares (including the free dining and the AGR points) are not significantly subsidized, does that mean that VIA is making a gigantic profit on their higher fares? And if so, is VIA charging a market-clearing price and Amtrak isn't?

In other words, I think I know what the price DIFFERENCE between VIA and Amtrak is telling us. If it's not telling us what I think it is, what IS it telling us?


----------



## Ryan

Sleeping car passengers are less subsidized than coach passengers, they're not the problem.

The problem is expecting passenger rail to make a profit. It doesn't, and it won't. Neither do highways or airplanes. Everything is subsidized.

VIA charges a lot more, but their costs are a heck of a lot higher as well.


----------



## jebr

Considering that the Canadian (Toronto-Vancouver) had a $54M shortfall ($99M in costs, $45M in revenue) and the Empire Builder had roughly the same shortfall ($56M) but also had $72M in revenue but $129M in expenses, I think Amtrak is giving us the better "ROI" overall. This is especially true when considering that VIA required 46 cents per passenger mile of a subsidy, where Amtrak only requires 15.5 cents per passenger mile of a subsidy. I couldn't find a breakdown between sleeper subsidy and coach subsidy for VIA rail, but Amtrak requires slightly less subsidy per passenger mile for a sleeper passenger than a coach passenger (though it's only a couple cents' difference per mile...this is not in the monthly report, but I think NARP calculated this out somewhere.) However, this tells me that, unless somehow VIA is just making piles of money off of sleeper passengers and losing all their money on coach passengers, VIA is costing more than Amtrak, even on sleeper service.

(For sources, VIA Rail's annual report, page 7; Amtrak's September 2013 Monthly Report, page C-1.)

Also, VIA gives free sleeper rides too. So there's that.

As for "what it's telling us," I think it's telling us "it's a lot more expensive to do VIA's way than Amtrak's way." Because it sure isn't making more money. If you have actual facts to the contrary, "Lawdude," I'd be happy to see them.


----------



## Guest

Interesting discussion. Here are a few points to consider:

1. The difference in the ratio of sleepers to coach passengers on the Canadian transcontinental trains versus the US western long distance trains is nothing new. It goes back at least to the post-World War II streamliner era, if not to the beginning of service in the late 19th century. The 1950s Canadian carried 11 sleepers in the summer ( 3 of which ere tourist class) versus only 2 coaches.

2. The very high levels of subsidy required to run the Canadian transcontinental is also not new. It is a refection of the extremely seasonal market and low population density. Transcontinental trains have not been economic since the express and LCL freight business dried up, which dates in Canada to a very early decision to move all first class mail by air.

3 In the early 1960s the major sources of the losses on passenger services in Canada were the transcons. By the late 1960s 80 per cent of the operating losses were being subsidized by the Canadian government. In the early 1970s the government cut back its subsidy to CP by limiting sleeping car capacity to what could be accommodated by a single diner, two diners having been the norm in the peak season in the late 1960s. So at that time maximizing premium passengers evidently did not lower the total subsidy required

4. But the situation appears to be different today. VIA's land cruise strategy appears to produce enough incremental revenue to lower the subsidy compared to what it otherwise would have been. That is to say, if you look at the quarterly pattern of revenues and costs for the Canadian you will see that the premium sleeper traffic in the summer keeps the losses down compared to other times during the year. But it is a very short season, and the total traffic has never recovered tot he press 2008 recessions levels, due to the impact of the recession on overseas tourism. Hence the advice to ride while you can.


----------



## neroden

Lawdude said:


> I've read a number of threads here about the prices charged by VIA. VIA is, as best I can tell, charging closer to cost for their services. Sleeping car services on Amtrak are enormously subsidized.


Not actually true. Amtrak sleeping car service is a tale of two systems: east of the Mississippi and west of the Mississippi. Typically, the price for a sleeper from New York to Chicago is higher than the price for a sleeper from Chicago to LA. NY-Chicago sleepers are definitely a profitable addition to a train (we're talking incremental cost here). I'm somewhat more suspicious of Chicago-LA sleepers.
Dining cars are never directly profitable, but you need them on long overnight runs even for coach service (50% of the LSL diner patronage is from coach), and you can only eliminate them by making the trains run faster or making them run on time.

The key thing one needs to understand when analyzing train service is that most of the costs are fixed costs. The cost is, largely, in running the train *at all*. Generally, the more full cars (sleeper or coach) you can tack on to the train, the better off you are. The more frequently you can run trains over the same route, the better off you are. Adding new infrequent-service routes, by contrast, is really problematic.

Given that VIA's losses on the Canadian are much worse than Amtrak's losses on any service, there's a big difference. Most likely, VIA simply can't get the passenger volume which Amtrak can.

The Canadian is currently a really long train at 16 or so revenue cars (counting the domes), but it's only running twice a week; if you divided that ridership over a daily route, it would only have 5 revenue cars (and that's optimistic). This is less capacity than the *shortest* of the daily Amtrak trains with sleepers (some have 4 cars in the off season, but they're bilevel), and is substantially shorter than the 9 revenue cars a day routinely travelling on the Lake Shore Limited.

Basically, the Canadian just doesn't seem to have the ridership. How much of this is chicken-and-egg (remove service, lose ridership) and how much is fundamental (it's empty out there!) I can't say for sure, though my bet is on the fundamentals.


----------



## Amfleeter

New info on the Canadian's new class that's coming this summer - VIA just released a pamphlet for Prestige.

http://www.viarail.ca/sites/all/files/media/pdfs/prestige/Rockies-Pacific_Toronto-Vancouver-Canadian_classes-and-trains-cars_pre-launch.pdf

Also, Sleeper Plus pax _will _continue to have access to the Park Car. +1 to VIA for not succumbing to over-classification with amenities. The relative inclusiveness of service and amenities compared to what came before is what I personally love about VIA and Amtrak, as someone who can't always afford to be in full price first class, except when it's on sale or I can catch a low bucket. It's something good that came out of government-owned passenger railroads.


----------



## NorthCoastHiawatha

Glad I got to ride the Canadian in its unadultrated form.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Too Rich for my blood, I'll stay with the 50& off/Express Fares in the off Season and keep on enjoying the Budd Cars in their original form!

Hopefully Amtraks Suits dont think this is a good idea and try it thus pricing even more out of the Sleepers!


----------



## Anderson

jimhudson said:


> Too Rich for my blood, I'll stay with the 50& off/Express Fares in the off Season and keep on enjoying the Budd Cars in their original form!
> 
> Hopefully Amtraks Suits dont think this is a good idea and try it thus pricing even more out of the Sleepers!


Nah, that's what Iowa Pacific is there for.

Honestly, if Amtrak could get a bunch of cars to run something like this on a few trains it would be a net positive (and indeed, in season there are some trains this sort of thing would work well on). There's a reason that you've had operators like AOE (which ran for about two decades before the company was shut down due to problems outside their travel business) and IP around for a long, long time. Amtrak has, for a host of reasons (relating more to politics than anything, though for more than just the most obvious reasons) fought back against working with such a market...there was an attempt to establish regular excursions, I believe by American Express on the _Crescent_ in the mid-80s, that Amtrak blocked once they started becoming too frequent. Iowa Pacific has dealt with similar issues.

There are several concerns that have come up:

(1) The "others" could "show up" Amtrak in terms of service quality.

(2) The "others", if they turned a profit, would trigger pressure on Amtrak with respect to their own sleeper service (i.e. "If they can turn a profit why can't you?").

(3) Working with the "others" might trigger attacks over Amtrak being subsidized for their benefit.

(4) The "others" might provide viable competition and you could get into a bid-out situation on some routes (i.e. could you imagine what would happen if Iowa Pacific successfully bid on running, say, the Empire Builder?).

Number 4 is probably the most irritating since _that_ concern has, quite bluntly, been informing Amtrak's handling of old rolling stock (wanting to scrap it instead of selling it to other operators). It is also causing other issues (in a nutshell, in the Fleet Strategy Plan Amtrak claims they want to build up a domestic passenger rail equipment market...while implicitly trying to remain the only operator around).


----------



## CHamilton

Via rolls out rooms with double bed on Vancouver-Toronto train



> Via Rail is beginning to offer its new Prestige service on its flagship Vancouver-Toronto train, The Canadian. It’s Via’s version of first class.
> 
> The biggest reasons why you might want this option: a double bed and your own private shower.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

For $5k one-way? Not sure why anybody would do it unless they are filthy rich! I'd say a Section, Roomette, Bedroom, or Drawing Room would be fine for me.

The article is attempting to compare fares with Air Canada Victoria-Toronto instead of Vancouver-Toronto...


----------



## jebr

Honeymoon. That's what this appears to be geared towards.


----------



## jis

jebr said:


> Honeymoon. That's what this appears to be geared towards.


They'll now need to boost the wedding industry to boost ridership


----------



## Blackwolf

Nuptuals in the Park Car?


----------



## Anderson

I got the pleasure of enjoying the new accommodations this past weekend (ok, _I _didn't get to use them, but they were given a dry run). I've been informed (by Those Who Know) that the main target is Asian tourists with way too much money to spend. That explains a _ton_ about the decor, among other things.

As I understand it, Via's _hope_ is to use the new service to cross-subsidize increased frequency on the route. Bear in mind that a full Prestige service (7 BRs plus the Master Room) equates to something $45,000 one-way ($5k/room plus $10k for the Master Room), which is likely a non-trivial boost in revenue (and the number likely gets juicier if they can sell it on both sides of Jasper).


----------



## Bob Dylan

Won't Canada's version of John Mica in Parliament have a hissy fit? ( all countries have these self appointed show boats!)

And that's some pricey train ride, I'd rather put that kind of money into several different trips but alas will never have that kind of bucks!


----------



## Anderson

jimhudson said:


> Won't Canada's version of John Mica in Parliament have a hissy fit? ( all countries have these self appointed show boats!)
> 
> And that's some pricey train ride, I'd rather put that kind of money into several different trips but alas will never have that kind of bucks!


Surprisingly not...though there's always an outside risk it gets "Rocky Mountaineered".


----------

