# Amtrak launching nonstop NYC-DC Acela (suspended 3/10-5/26)



## frequentflyer (Jul 25, 2019)

Time warp, Amtrak tried this before with the Metroliners. Will see how successful this will be.

https://www.businessinsider.com/amtrak-new-acela-express-nonstop-new-york-to-washington-dc-2019-7


----------



## NSC1109 (Jul 25, 2019)

frequentflyer said:


> Time warp, Amtrak tried this before with the Metroliners. Will see how successful this will be.
> 
> https://www.businessinsider.com/amtrak-new-acela-express-nonstop-new-york-to-washington-dc-2019-7



What was the original reasoning behind terminating the Metroliner service?


----------



## John Bobinyec (Jul 25, 2019)

It's just amazing at how much you can cut the running time down - if you don't stop anywhere.

jb


----------



## jis (Jul 25, 2019)

NSC1109 said:


> What was the original reasoning behind terminating the Metroliner service?


IIRC not meeting expected ridership and revenue targets.


----------



## AutoTrDvr (Jul 25, 2019)

And on what tracks? Because I'm not sure they have any that could be dedicated to this route and not be compromised by freight lines and/or commuter rails....


----------



## jis (Jul 25, 2019)

AutoTrDvr said:


> And on what tracks? Because I'm not sure they have any that could be dedicated to this route and not be compromised by freight lines and commuter rails....


On the NEC of course where such a schedule is actually quite feasible. Very little freight during daytime and well, we know how badly Amtrak screws commuter train if they get in the way of Acelas, even the stopping ones.

Besides why would you dedicate an entire route for a single round trip per day?


----------



## bretton88 (Jul 25, 2019)

I suspect this service will be more successful than the previous metroliner express. Business patterns have changed, and the Acela product is a better product. This will make the Acela the fastest trip on the NYC to DC corridor too.


----------



## Ryan (Jul 25, 2019)

John Bobinyec said:


> It's just amazing at how much you can cut the running time down - if you don't stop anywhere.
> 
> jb


A whole 15 minutes? (curiously the article claims more, but the Acela currently can do the trip in 2h50, and this run comes in at 2h35)

I'll boldly predict that this goes the same way that it did last time and that the train will return to making stops within a year.


----------



## chrsjrcj (Jul 25, 2019)

The 2007 version had the same running time, with a stop in Philly.

timetables.org/full.php?group=20071029&item=0045


----------



## jebr (Jul 25, 2019)

Ryan said:


> A whole 15 minutes? (curiously the article claims more, but the Acela currently can do the trip in 2h50, and this run comes in at 2h35)



Looking at the nearest Acela trains on the schedule, it's saving about 20 minutes (it's timetabled at 2hr 37min, and the ones immediately before/after are 2hr 56min and 2hr 59min.) There's probably shorter ones out there, but it seems fairer to compare it to the nearest timed alternatives.

That said, does the extra 20 minutes shave off enough to be fully time-competitive against the air shuttles? Right now, with traffic, from the Capitol to DCA is 12 minutes, and to Union Station is 6 minutes. LGA to Wall Street is 46 minutes, whereas Penn Station to Wall Street is 27 minutes (although only 17 minutes by subway.) Padding a bit for traffic, that's 45 minutes extra for travel (round-trip.) Assuming an extra 45 minutes for security formalities, and a 1:15 timetabled trip, it's already 2 hr 45 minutes for the air shuttle plus added travel time to/from the airport.

Perhaps being able to be just under instead of just over that will win people over, but it has to be enough and at the right time to win those passengers over. There might be enough latent demand that the frequency would fill up regardless, but I don't think the extra 20 minutes would be enough of a consideration to fill up a train on its own (the variability in travel time to/from the final destination would eat that up, I'd think.) That said, maybe this was one of the only ways to add the frequency at that timeslot (especially southbound you'd be hitting rush hour at many of the intermediate stations) and emphasizing the "nonstop" trip is just a way to make the added frequency look a bit more attractive than just noting that there's another train.


----------



## PVD (Jul 25, 2019)

Will it add enough new riders and at a high enough price point? If it just moves riders from existing trains, it probably won't last.


----------



## AutoTrDvr (Jul 25, 2019)

jis said:


> On the NEC of course where such a schedule is actually quite feasible. Very little freight during daytime and well, we know how badly Amtrak screws commuter train if they get in the way of Acelas, even the stopping ones.
> 
> Besides why would you dedicate an entire route for a single round trip per day?



I wouldn't. Not *just* for that service. But I note that in most other HSR systems around the world, what makes them so reliable, among other things, is a dedicated set of tracks, mostly on raised platforms. I know we have very little if any of that in this country, and that the Acela is, mostly, "at grade" and sharing tracks with other services (freight and commuter). So I wondered if an express service NYP --> WAS would work, given the tracks I know they'd have to use, and what might prevent the success of such a service without delays... I guess we'll see if Amtrak has the mojo you say they do to eliminate commuter and other rail services from interfering with that express train.....


----------



## bretton88 (Jul 25, 2019)

jebr said:


> Looking at the nearest Acela trains on the schedule, it's saving about 20 minutes (it's timetabled at 2hr 37min, and the ones immediately before/after are 2hr 56min and 2hr 59min.) There's probably shorter ones out there, but it seems fairer to compare it to the nearest timed alternatives.
> 
> That said, does the extra 20 minutes shave off enough to be fully time-competitive against the air shuttles? Right now, with traffic, from the Capitol to DCA is 12 minutes, and to Union Station is 6 minutes. LGA to Wall Street is 46 minutes, whereas Penn Station to Wall Street is 27 minutes (although only 17 minutes by subway.) Padding a bit for traffic, that's 45 minutes extra for travel (round-trip.) Assuming an extra 45 minutes for security formalities, and a 1:15 timetabled trip, it's already 2 hr 45 minutes for the air shuttle plus added travel time to/from the airport.
> 
> Perhaps being able to be just under instead of just over that will win people over, but it has to be enough and at the right time to win those passengers over. There might be enough latent demand that the frequency would fill up regardless, but I don't think the extra 20 minutes would be enough of a consideration to fill up a train on its own (the variability in travel time to/from the final destination would eat that up, I'd think.) That said, maybe this was one of the only ways to add the frequency at that timeslot (especially southbound you'd be hitting rush hour at many of the intermediate stations) and emphasizing the "nonstop" trip is just a way to make the added frequency look a bit more attractive than just noting that there's another train.


The points guy did a very unique comparison where they had 4 employees do the NYC to DC run. One on the air shuttle, one on the regional, one on the Acela, and one on the bus, meeting in downtown DC, so a good point to point comparison. The person on the shuttle won, but only by 4 minutes over the Acela. So this non stop definitely would make it faster than the air shuttles.


----------



## Ryan (Jul 25, 2019)

The precise location of your endpoints makes a huge difference.


----------



## jis (Jul 25, 2019)

AutoTrDvr said:


> I wouldn't. Not *just* for that service. But I note that in most other HSR systems around the world, what makes them so reliable, among other things, is a dedicated set of tracks, mostly on raised platforms. I know we have very little if any of that in this country, and that the Acela is, mostly, "at grade" and sharing tracks with other services (freight and commuter). So I wondered if an express service NYP --> WAS would work, given the tracks I know they'd have to use, and what might prevent the success of such a service without delays... I guess we'll see if Amtrak has the mojo you say they do to eliminate commuter and other rail services from interfering with that express train.....


But NEC is not an HSR system with dedicated tracks. We already know that so what is the point of belaboring the point? These non stop trains do not run any faster than the ones that stop five times on the way in terms of track occupancy and max speed.

Express service with infrequent stops works without dedicated tracks all over the world. It is not like non stop expresses over classic tracks were unheard of before and since the dedicated HSR lines were built.

Amtrak did not have any greater difficulty keeping to the 2:37 schedule that they had in the past with one stop in Philly, compared to the marginally slower schedules with multiple stops. They should have no problem doing so now either. The question is not whether they have the ability to stick to a 2:35 schedule (they do). The question is whether there is enough ridership given the limited stops, i.e. whether the 15-20 minutes run time difference is attractive enough for the end to end travelers to balance out the lost ridership on those trains to the intermediate points where they do not stop. In the past they did not. Maybe now they do.


----------



## AutoTrDvr (Jul 25, 2019)

jis said:


> But NEC is not an HSR system with dedicated tracks. We already know that so what is the point of belaboring the point? These non stop trains do not run any faster than the ones that stop five times on the way in terms of track occupancy and max speed.
> 
> Express service with infrequent stops works without dedicated tracks all over the world. It is not like non stop expresses over classic tracks were unheard of before and since the dedicated HSR lines were built.
> 
> Amtrak did not have any greater difficulty keeping to the 2:37 schedule that they had in the past with one stop in Philly, compared to the marginally slower schedules with multiple stops. They should have no problem doing so now either. The question is not whether they have the ability to stick to a 2:35 schedule (they do). The question is whether there is enough ridership given the limited stops, i.e. whether the 15-20 minutes run time difference is attractive enough for the end to end travelers to balance out the lost ridership on those trains to the intermediate points where they do not stop. In the past they did not. Maybe now they do.



Fair enough... perhaps, I shouldn't have compared it to HSR... But if all they're doing it for is a 15-20 minute improvement, then why bother at all? I guess you're right... if there is sufficient demand for such an express train between the two end points without stopping...


----------



## Anderson (Jul 25, 2019)

I posted some of this elsewhere, but:
(1) Origin and destination locations matter. Someone going from Crystal City to Queens is going to be in a different boat than someone going from Midtown Manhattan to K Street. Also, LGA is such a disaster right now that it isn't even funny.
(2) Vis-a-vis the 2007 experiment, Acela ridership has been blocked up against a corner for the last few years. There is a good case that 1630 will work markedly better than 1555 did (for the WAS departure time). I know it is only half an hour, but being able to leave the office at 1600 vs having to leave half an hour early is probably a big deal for this crowd. Versus their capabilities in 2007, Amtrak can probably also better use dynamic pricing to "nudge" WAS-NYP pax onto the express and keep space available on the other train for intermediate pax.
(3) This is a test bed as to what to do with the extra trainsets they're getting. In going from 20 sets to 28 sets, Amtrak should be able to add something like four peak-hour round trips in both the morning and the afternoon/evening. A situation where, over the course of two hours, they send out four expresses and two limited expresses seems entirely reasonable.
(4) Also, I fully expect them to use the nonstop to experiment with universal seat assignment (since there's no need to accommodate intermediate seat turnover).
(5) Probably the biggest shame is that with dropping PHL, the tracks aren't in the condition needed to be able to "showboat" a 2:29 timetable. If they could manage 2:35 in 2007, with tracks in good condition, dropping PHL, and the improvements that _should_ have happened in New Jersey by now, I suspect that pushing travel time under that 2:30 threshold would be a big deal, even if only psychologically.


----------



## Acela150 (Jul 25, 2019)

bretton88 said:


> The points guy did a very unique comparison where they had 4 employees do the NYC to DC run. One on the air shuttle, one on the regional, one on the Acela, and one on the bus, meeting in downtown DC, so a good point to point comparison. The person on the shuttle won, but only by 4 minutes over the Acela. So this non stop definitely would make it faster than the air shuttles.



I read their trip report. It was actually pretty interesting.  



Ryan said:


> The precise location of your endpoints makes a huge difference.



Ryan, in the case of The Points Guys trip... They all started at one place and ended at the same place. 

https://thepointsguy.com/news/racing-from-nyc-to-dc/


----------



## Acela150 (Jul 25, 2019)

Anderson said:


> I posted some of this elsewhere, but:
> 
> (3) This is a test bed as to what to do with the extra trainsets they're getting. In going from 20 sets to 28 sets, Amtrak should be able to add something like four peak-hour round trips in both the morning and the afternoon/evening. A situation where, over the course of two hours, they send out four expresses and two limited expresses seems entirely reasonable.
> 
> (4) Also, I fully expect them to use the nonstop to experiment with universal seat assignment (since there's no need to accommodate intermediate seat turnover).



The plan for the extra Trainsets has been explained as half hourly service during certain hours. 

I don't see Amtrak using these trains as a seat assignment test outside of First Class. Unless they number cars I just don't see it. But anything is possible.


----------



## Anderson (Jul 25, 2019)

I know what's been explained. I'm not going to go so far as to say that Amtrak _won't_ do that, but I'm not convinced that the plans won't end up getting altered.


----------



## west point (Jul 25, 2019)

It will enlighten us to see actual end point arrival times. There of course will be several pinch points that will possibly slow the service. Commuter rail of course is a problem So watch WASH - BAL, B&P tunnel, the draw ridges, getting thru BAL, PHL, & Newark stations.


----------



## Acela150 (Jul 25, 2019)

Anderson said:


> I know what's been explained. I'm not going to go so far as to say that Amtrak _won't_ do that, but I'm not convinced that the plans won't end up getting altered.



I can agree with that. 



west point said:


> It will enlighten us to see actual end point arrival times. There of course will be several pinch points that will possibly slow the service. Commuter rail of course is a problem So watch WASH - BAL, B&P tunnel, the draw ridges, getting thru BAL, PHL, & Newark stations.



True. As far as Commuter trains getting in the way, CTEC often calls trains on the radio asking if they can clear up so they can get a "high speed by". CTEC treats Acela like gold. Run anything in front of it, it's frowned upon.


----------



## Acela150 (Jul 25, 2019)

Just looked at tickets online. Normal Acela service used to show as "Acela Express" it now shows as "Acela" and the Nonstop Acela service shows as "Acela Nonstop". Even on legs north of NYP.


----------



## dlagrua (Jul 25, 2019)

Stupid idea. Currently the Acela makes only five or six stops. If we estimate that each stop averages only 3 minutes, the time savings to WAS is minimal and you lose the larger passenger load boarding or heading to PHL, BAL, WIL and BWA. The Acela is already faster than a NYP-WAS flight so advertise it as such and be done with it. I predict the direct service will have disappointing ridership numbers and will be cancelled within a year.


----------



## Bex (Jul 25, 2019)

dlagrua said:


> Stupid idea. Currently the Acela makes only five or six stops. If we estimate that each stop averages only 3 minutes, the time savings to WAS is minimal and you lose the larger passenger load boarding or heading to PHL, BAL, WIL and BWA. The Acela is already faster than a NYP-WAS flight so advertise it as such and be done with it. I predict the direct service will have disappointing ridership numbers and will be cancelled within a year.


But this is an additional train, correct? So you lose nothing and you make NYP-WAS pax happier while lessening the crowds on the ones that do make all the stops.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Jul 25, 2019)

Acela150 said:


> Just looked at tickets online. Normal Acela service used to show as "Acela Express" it now shows as "Acela" and the Nonstop Acela service shows as "Acela Nonstop". Even on legs north of NYP.


The app still lists all Acela trains as "Acela Express".


----------



## Ryan (Jul 25, 2019)

Acela150 said:


> Ryan, in the case of The Points Guys trip... They all started at one place and ended at the same place.



Yeah, I get that - By shifting those endpoints by a little bit, you can swing those times to favor one mode over another. At the end of the day, the fastest travel mode is deeply personal.


----------



## zethya (Jul 26, 2019)

Will this non-stop be a scaled down Acela train set, to support the lower passenger loads? Will this extra train (if it is), affect the financial success of the multi-stop Acelas? Is the actual intent of this "experiment" to test whether it draws passengers away from the DC-NYC air route?. IMO, NYC-DC commuters are not going to adjust their working schedules/patterns to take this non-stop. I give it 1 Year, unless they add PHL.


----------



## Anderson (Jul 26, 2019)

(1) Yes, it is an additional train.
(2) The train won't be scaled down. The sets are effectively fixed sets. Breaking up a set would require dedicating one of the sets to this service (and then you'd have a spare Acela car to do...something...with).

I think the test is more complicated than what you described. Yes, most of the ridership will be coming from planes (there's currently about 130-200 seats/hour on the DCA-LGA run between AA and DL; EWR and JFK add some to the mix as well) but there are also questions of induced availability and other dynamics (e.g. Is ridership being lost for want of available peak-hour seats? Does the faster timetable help? To what extent do added frequencies induce ridership?). 

There's likely to be some poking at pricing, etc. to see what the market will carry, but it is entirely possible that the limited express/Nozomi-style run (to the regular service's Hikari-style operation) will generate a reasonable load factor at a reasonable price point (especially if Amtrak nudges the neighboring trains up a bucket).

This does, by the way, seem to be what Amtrak is doing: On Sept. 23, the limited express has BC seats available for $130 NYP-WAS (the Saver fare). The 0600 out of NYP has no Saver fare but does have a $173 (low bucket) seat available while the 0700 and 0800 already locked to high bucket ($309 NYP-WAS). The dynamic is weaker NB, but the nonstop is still the only train with a $130 BC fare (and paid F is going for $276 vs $455 on the neighboring trains). Also, the nonstop's award pricing is, at the moment, behaving like a normal train (so pricing at 34.5 points/dollar off of the non-saver BC fare and off of the paid First fare); whether this is a bug, a promotional move, or a semi-permanent "nudge" is, of course, to be determined.

By the way, my guess on the 2:29 timetable is that if Amtrak can get the NJ work done in line with the rollout of the new trainsets they might well roll out such a run as a kick-off (since they could honestly claim that it is the fastest-ever timetabled train between New York and Washington even if it only snipes the Penn Central by a minute, and if I'm working on a longer-term strategy that's what I would do).


----------



## Anderson (Jul 26, 2019)

So, I've been poking at this and really the question is whether Amtrak is looking to expand the offerings here, potentially add a stop or two at each end for the "prevailing" direction, etc. Prevailing air fares on the DCA-LGA route, same-day round-trip, are $971 in the next seven days, $701 at 8-14 days, $551 at 15-21 days, and $331 from then onwards. Going to a one-or-two night stay does some "damage control", particularly starting at two weeks out (and with two airlines running the route there's room to do some "nesting" across AA vs DL), but the close-in Y fares are still far above the Acela. Pricing is a bit better at JFK, but frequencies are also thinner (and for reasons known only to God, folks from New York apparently prefer LGA to JFK).

As such, if they can get to the point that they can maintain a 2:30 timetable (+/-5 minutes), possibly with a sole intermediate stop (BAL would be my first choice as long as it remains in a slow patch) I would be not at all surprised if Amtrak could actually make a serious go of finally starting to drive the air shuttles under (they've already _seriously_ dented them, to the point that AA abandoned hourly service while both AA and DL are using Embraers instead of 737s or A320-family planes; I honestly don't think the air shuttles can take another hit on that scale).

By the way, I'm going to pretend I'm Richard Anderson for a moment (which is a horrifying thought). If I'm in his shoes, I might actually chose to run the expresses at, if not a loss, then at a _very_ marginal direct operating profit in a serious attempt to damage the air shuttles badly enough to try and force a frequency collapse or knock one of the airlines out of the shuttle part of that market (as opposed to with connecting traffic...which really makes more sense to run through airports without the relevant congestion problems). At that point I can turn around and try to jack my fares. It is a _brutally _predatory move, it is an aggressive gambit, but I think it has room to succeed (particularly, as indicated, if BAL/BWI were to be thrown in without having to add time to the run...but at least in the short term I think part of the pitch will be "look at the shiny nonstop").


----------



## railiner (Jul 26, 2019)

2 hours and 35 minutes? Sorry, I am underwhelmed...
With the millions (billion's?) they have spent improving the NEC over the last forty plus years since the original nonstop MU Metroliner's did it in 2 hours and 30 minutes (I rode it, and it actually arrived a minute early)...


----------



## JustOnce (Jul 26, 2019)

zethya said:


> Will this non-stop be a scaled down Acela train set, to support the lower passenger loads? Will this extra train (if it is), affect the financial success of the multi-stop Acelas? Is the actual intent of this "experiment" to test whether it draws passengers away from the DC-NYC air route?. IMO, NYC-DC commuters are not going to adjust their working schedules/patterns to take this non-stop. I give it 1 Year, unless they add PHL.



Based on past results, I feel it should be served with a reduced set but that's logistically impossible. This route would be better served by using a Sprinter and two or three coaches configured for business class and a lounge car and run under the Acela name since 125-mph operation is probably fine given the short available stretch of 135-mph track. However, that would dilute or at least add confusion to the Acela brand which Amtrak has done a great job of cultivating (and fortunately [IMHO] will continue to do so by naming the new sets 'Acela 21').

Are Acela stops really that short that only save 20 minutes here? I'd think that eliminating station dwell and eliminating the time needed to slow down and speed up would save more time.


----------



## drdumont (Jul 26, 2019)

Even were I not not an unrepentant Foamer - predjudiced towards Amtrak in the first place - I would still go with the Acela vice the hassles of air travel - TSA, Airports in general, airport location, TSA, uncomfortable accommodations, higher susceptibility to weather delays, and the higher survival rates in case of an unpleasantness. 
And you don't have to disrobe and take off your shoes to board a train.
Seems to me that downtown to downtown would be preferable, presents less traffic issues, and the stations are generally better connected to other mass transit. 
Now if Amtrak doesn't set the price point at some ridiculous level...


----------



## Bex (Jul 26, 2019)

It's interesting, the WSJ article on this doesn't even mention air travel, although it does quote Roger Harris as saying, "we believe the new product and new schedule will create demand." I assume that's where the demand would come from.

But it more focuses on Amtrak trying to decide what to do with the additional stock it will have in the near future. It says, "when the new fleet of Acela train sets is fully delivered, Amtrak will have 40% more trains to work with, offering greater flexibility to run limited stop service." That made me think of Metro-North, which is where I grew up, and has express trains at rush hour that stop at 3 or 4 different stops on one of various sections of the line.

Regarding demand from people already taking Acelas, I assume based on the many DC/NY people I follow on Twitter who seem over the top delighted, it will be great if it works with your schedule. I don't think it's just the 15 minutes, although honestly, that's close to what Acela yields you over the NER now and people go for that. And if you're a person like me who takes the Regionals, this saves you enough time to maybe make the cost worth it, especially at the current Saver fare. But there's also the annoyance factor of having to get up for people getting off as well as people getting on and asking you to move all your stuff to sit next to you (I am not a person who does this but plenty do, as we know). Just knowing when you snag a pair to yourself that it's yours for the whole trip is worth a premium, if they decide to charge it.


----------



## neroden (Jul 26, 2019)

Idiot airline mentality.

This wastes one of the primary economies-of-scale advantages of railroads. It can basically only do one thing: reduce revenue.

Now, there is a lot of logic to a superexpress which only stopped at Philladelphia, but there frankly isn't enough NY-DC traffic to justify a nonstop. It may be the most popular city pair, but not by enough. NY-Philladelphia is #3 and Philadelphia-DC is #6 (while #2,#4,and #5 are variants of NY-Boston). So NY-Philadelphia-DC probably works. NY-DC will be underutilized.


----------



## neroden (Jul 26, 2019)

Anderson said:


> (1) Yes, it is an additional train.
> (2) The train won't be scaled down. The sets are effectively fixed sets. Breaking up a set would require dedicating one of the sets to this service (and then you'd have a spare Acela car to do...something...with).
> 
> I think the test is more complicated than what you described. Yes, most of the ridership will be coming from planes (there's currently about 130-200 seats/hour on the DCA-LGA run between AA and DL; EWR and JFK add some to the mix as well)


Anyone flying out of Newark Airport would avoid this nonstop due to the backtrack to NY Penn; they'd want Newark-DC. So you can forget those.

It really is a pity that they're skipping Philadelphia. PHL-NYP is actually already as fast as any of the airlines, if you're going to Center City Philadelphia. PHL-DC would require some speedups to drive the airlines out of business, but it should be doable. Both are more marginal businesses for the airlines already, and Amtrak should be able to crush them without affecting their NY-DC traffic significantly. Assuming Amtrak is capable of loading and unloading a train efficiently, which they do seem to have weird problems with (they need to learn from the subways!)

Based on traffic patterns, if I were to only have one intermediate stop, it would definitely be Philadelphia, not Baltimore. I know trains have to slow down for both of them already (and can speed through the other intermediate stations), but the travel patterns point *strongly* towards a Philladelphia stop.


----------



## Anderson (Jul 26, 2019)

I disagree on EWR. If (airline-wise) you're tied to United or based out of Jersey City/Hoboken the backtracking isn't necessarily an issue. The question of why a given airport is being used is rarely so cut and dried...but I doubt that United is solely drawing pax from that far over.


----------



## jamess (Jul 26, 2019)

I think itll be successful.

Air traffic is at all time high. However, there has been zero increase in capacity in NYC airspace. That means delays. 

Amtrak doesnt do well in storms (worse than it should), but it does better than airlines. Newark was reporting 7 hour delays earlier this week. The 3pm flights weren't leaving until 10pm. Many were simply cancelled.

TSA has gotten better for frequent travelers. With pre-check, you can be inside in 5 minutes. However, LGA is a cluster and will remain a cluster until 2022. Getting in and out in a cab can add 20 minutes, at all hours. 

NYP is getting better. The new bathrooms are nice. The 7th Avenue side is getting redone as theye xpand the building above it. A new entrance to LIRR will reduce sidewalk congestion. The new terminal across 8th will be great, and I believe it will be delivered on time.


----------



## Ryan (Jul 26, 2019)

drdumont said:


> And you don't have to disrobe and take off your shoes to board a train.



Nor do I (and the frequent travelers that will patronize this train) to board an aircraft.

Last Sunday evening I walked into BWI, dropped my checked bag at the counter, stood in a ~10 person deep line at security, dropped my bag on the belt to go through the scanner, walked through a metal detector, picked up my bag and was at the gate in about 15 minutes. I fly roughly 1-2 times/month, and the routine is a typical one. Easy as pie with none of the alleged groping, stripping, or other unpleasantness that people that claim never to fly routinely complain about.


----------



## Trogdor (Jul 27, 2019)

I’m a little confused why some people think passengers with flights out of EWR is a target market for this nonstop run.


----------



## jis (Jul 27, 2019)

Trogdor said:


> I’m a little confused why some people think passengers with flights out of EWR is a target market for this nonstop run.


I agree. A very significant proportion of people flying to EWR from the catchment area for Washington Union Station are doing so for connecting flights, and those people are not going to change over to Acelas of any sort - no through ticketing, no through checked baggage etc. etc.). Those who are flying to EWR to go to Manhattan would be the target audience of the faster Acela service, though I am not sure 20 minute speedup will attract their attention that much.

But the fact of the matter is that the Acela capacity around that time slot is pretty saturated even if you don't worry about airline passengers. Maybe there is latent demand anyway to fill significant part of another train. The question is whether the existing latent demand has enough through WAS - NYP passengers or not. Or whether they will need to add at least a Philly stop like in the past capture enough of the latent demand.


----------



## jamess (Jul 29, 2019)

Ryan said:


> Nor do I (and the frequent travelers that will patronize this train) to board an aircraft.
> 
> Last Sunday evening I walked into BWI, dropped my checked bag at the counter, stood in a ~10 person deep line at security, dropped my bag on the belt to go through the scanner, walked through a metal detector, picked up my bag and was at the gate in about 15 minutes. I fly roughly 1-2 times/month, and the routine is a typical one. Easy as pie with none of the alleged groping, stripping, or other unpleasantness that people that claim never to fly routinely complain about.



Precheck is great.

Unless its 8pm, the precheck line is closed, and your sent through the big line with the masses, which means laptop out and more sensitive metal detectors


----------



## jis (Jul 29, 2019)

At Amsterdam Schiphol, there was of course no pre-check, but no one had to take anything out of their bag, or disrobe or any such. Everyone had to go through millimeter scanner. No magnetometer in sight anywhere. The flow was very smooth, orderly and quick. Just a data point from outside the US.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 29, 2019)

jamess said:


> Precheck is great. Unless its 8pm, the precheck line is closed, and your sent through the big line with the masses, which means laptop out and more sensitive metal detectors


Yep, Paidcheck is great...until it's not. Arbitrary lane closures and newbie confusion mean it's not always as fast and smooth as you'd think. When the Paidcheck lane is closed it's back to unpacking your private liquids and personal electronics into a series of grubby bins, clean socks on sticky floors, and millimeter wave scanners that seem to result in a contraband pat-down around 90% of the time (for me).


----------



## Anderson (Jul 31, 2019)

Yeah...I'd at least like to see a requirement that, if the precheck lane is closed then precheck benefits still have to be extended (I know some airports give you a card when you enter the security line to hand over and not have to do all of the who-struck-John). It was maddening as hell when, at Virgin America's terminal at LAX, precheck would be closed (or when I showed up at IAD one evening and they didn't have precheck open since most of the flights were in an international evening flight bank with non-participating airlines).

(This isn't to say that I have less contempt for the TSA even with said thing; if anything, I have greater contempt for having gone through the Nexus screening process and I still occasionally don't get what I paid for.)


----------



## AutoTrDvr (Jul 31, 2019)

Anderson said:


> Yeah..._*I'd at least like to see a requirement that, if the precheck lane is closed then precheck benefits still have to be extended *_(I know some airports give you a card when you enter the security line to hand over and not have to do all of the who-struck-John). It was maddening as hell when, at Virgin America's terminal at LAX, precheck would be closed (or when I showed up at IAD one evening and they didn't have precheck open since most of the flights were in an international evening flight bank with non-participating airlines).
> 
> (This isn't to say that I have less contempt for the TSA even with said thing; if anything, I have greater contempt for having gone through the Nexus screening process and I still occasionally don't get what I paid for.)



That would be a little risky for the TSA if some people in the "regular line" are treated differently than all the others in the same line, just because they are Precheck, card or no card. That might cause an "insurrection" if some passengers see others sailing through when they don't. At least, if it's a separate line, there's some distinction and everyone in one particular line is treated the same way...


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 31, 2019)

AutoTrDvr said:


> That would be a little risky for the TSA if some people in the "regular line" are treated differently than all the others in the same line, just because they are Precheck, card or no card. That might cause an "insurrection" if some passengers see others sailing through when they don't. At least, if it's a separate line, there's some distinction and everyone in one particular line is treated the same way...


Per-person Paidcheck Lite cards have been in circulation for at least a few years now. I've only experienced the worn shoes and metal detector benefit but that sill saves me from the disgusting floors and unwanted pat-down experience after the wave scanner puts a contraband target somewhere on my person. I think the main reason the card doesn't provide luggage benefits is because the TSA can't be bothered to keep carry-on luggage in sync with the progress of the passenger who brought it. Whenever the TSA asks me if my luggage has ever been out of my sight or in the possession of a stranger I try to explain that the _only_ time this _ever_ happens is when it's in _their_ possession.


----------



## Anderson (Aug 1, 2019)

I'm going to throw out another possibility regarding the 2007-08 experiment with the one-stop service: It was cut from the timetable about three weeks after Bear Stearns collapsed. It seems quite possible that expense account travel was already taking a hit prior to then (the YoY drop in Acela traffic was about 12.5% from FY08-FY09, versus 8.2% on the Regionals), and if the train was something of a marginal operation beforehand this probably tipped it over the edge into getting axed even if only by virtue of the writing appearing on the wall. Sadly, I do not have the monthly reports from this era so I cannot confirm.


----------



## ScouseAndy (Aug 5, 2019)

Does Amtrak believe they are currently losing revenue by one small section of a route selling out is preventing end to end passengers purchasing tickets resulting in a coach being 60% full for 80% of the trip and 100% capacity for 20% where as a none stop service could run at 90% capacity for 100% of the trip?


----------



## Anderson (Aug 5, 2019)

ScouseAndy said:


> Does Amtrak believe they are currently losing revenue by one small section of a route selling out is preventing end to end passengers purchasing tickets resulting in a coach being 60% full for 80% of the trip and 100% capacity for 20% where as a none stop service could run at 90% capacity for 100% of the trip?


Now that you mention it, I think there might actually be an issue with NYP-PHL crowding out NYP-WAS traffic. Ditto "overlap" traffic from BOS, etc. to Newark (knocking out NYP-WAS/NYP-PHL traffic due to a painfully short overlap).


----------



## jis (Aug 5, 2019)

Anderson said:


> Now that you mention it, I think there might actually be an issue with NYP-PHL crowding out NYP-WAS traffic. Ditto "overlap" traffic from BOS, etc. to Newark (knocking out NYP-WAS/NYP-PHL traffic due to a painfully short overlap).


Given how often I have found a seat at Philly while I couldn' at Metropark on southbound Acelas, I tend to agree with you that there is likely a problem between New York and Philly.


----------



## west point (Aug 5, 2019)

jis said:


> Given how often I have found a seat at Philly while I couldn' at Metropark on southbound Acelas, I tend to agree with you that there is likely a problem between New York and Philly.



You are probably well informed by your observations. We would expect that it will be even more pronounced in the future. When the Constant tension CAT is finished a reduced running time between Trenton and Newark may enable a schedule reduction NYP <> PHL. The French SCNF actually had to add some short distance TGVs between Paris and locations less than 1 hours for new commuters to Paris. This new train may allow for more NYP and WASH - WIL passenger commuters for PHL on the ACELAs bracketing this new ACELA .


----------



## Mystic River Dragon (Aug 6, 2019)

The observations about the NYP-PHL leg makes sense. When I've boarded a Regional at Trenton during the morning rush hour, there often have not been any seats in coach, because a lot of people use it as commuter rail between Philly and New York. So I can see the same thing happening with the Acelas.


----------



## Anderson (Aug 7, 2019)

On that basis, my thinking is that if they want to limit this issue, we're back to the idea of adding in BAL, BWI, and/or NCR (on the south end, at least) if they need to add a stop or two down the line (and when/if they're able to pull some time out of the timetable). Of course, it would probably make more sense to simply cut the posted time down instead...but both options seem viable.


----------



## neroden (Aug 8, 2019)

If you (Amtrak) are finding your seats filled between PHL and NYP, your only rational choice is to start running short hauls from NYP to PHL to take the pressure off. Not adding long hauls which skip PHL. I mean, this is basic math. Perhaps there should be an NYP-PHL nonstop.


----------



## ScouseAndy (Aug 8, 2019)

neroden said:


> If you (Amtrak) are finding your seats filled between PHL and NYP, your only rational choice is to start running short hauls from NYP to PHL to take the pressure off. Not adding long hauls which skip PHL. I mean, this is basic math. Perhaps there should be an NYP-PHL nonstop.



If NYP-PHL supply meets current demand what would then gain by adding an additional train between them? If NYP-WAS demand outstrips current supply then it makes sense to provide additional supply.

Alternately even if NYP-PHL demand isn't meet, given the finite resources available to Amtrak, If these resources can yield more profit by being utilised on a direct NYP-WAS compared to a direct NYP-PHL service then it makes perfect sense to run to WAS then PHL


----------



## Anderson (Aug 8, 2019)

@neroden While that is logical, that also presumes the availability of equipment _and slots_. Both constraints are at issue...equipment can be dealt with in the form of an order for new cars over the next few years, but particularly at peak hours Amtrak can only run so many trains through the Hudson tunnels. Moreover, if both markets can be supported (and PHL-WAS and the intermediate pairs can still support a train without as much through business) you achieve the same objective by pushing through pax to the express train and moving local pax to the stopping service.

In some respects, this feels like the equivalent of saying that the New York Central shouldn't have run the _Twentieth Century Limited _or that the ACL/SAL shouldn't have run their Northeast-Florida express trains, they should have laid on a few more multi-stop trains when the endpoint market _was_ big enough to accommodate the express service. In both cases, the cachet of non-stop/express service can be a significant selling point.

It is also worth noting that there have been mentions of alteration to the soft product (e.g. F&B). While I am definitely worried about this, I'd also note that up in F running something like this allows you to do some things as far as coordinating the service differently if everyone has the same destination (or, in theory, has one of a very small number of closely-timed city pairs to work with). On the new trains, it might let you serve marginally more pax with the same number of crew since the ordering would all happen in a coordinated pattern (rather than having to add orders as pax board and hurriedly feed pax who have earlier stops).


----------



## jis (Aug 8, 2019)

Amtrak VP of NEC service is on record saying that with the arrival of Acela 21 (yes that if the Amtrak name of the new sets for now), Amtrak will offer regular non stop service from New York to both Washington and Boston. There is also a hint that these trains will have a modified and upgraded soft product beyond the stopping service. Seems to me like they want to create an equivalent of Nozomi service on the Tokaido Shinkansen in Japan, while stopping Acelas take the role of Hikaris, for those familiar with that line.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 8, 2019)

jis said:


> Seems to me like they want to create an equivalent of Nozomi service on the Tokaido Shinkansen in Japan, while stopping Acelas take the role if Hikaris, fir those familiar with that line.


How about we update the NEC to Hikari speeds first and leave the Nozomi experience for later?


----------



## jis (Aug 8, 2019)

Devil's Advocate said:


> How about we update the NEC to Hikari speeds first and leave the Nozomi experience for later?


Well, if they can do a good improved soft product, I would not necessarily bemoan the lack of Hikari speed necessarily. The speed thing on the NEC is way beyond anything that they can easily do, if ever.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 8, 2019)

jis said:


> The speed thing on the NEC is way beyond anything that they can easily do, if ever.


Is it harder than building a mountain tunneling maglev line? Because that's where premium Nozomi style express service is already heading. I get where you're coming from but comparing Amtrak to Japan is so disparate that it sidetracks my focus.


----------



## jis (Aug 8, 2019)

Sorry for confusing you. I will try to be more careful the next time and say something like they are trying to create a non stop Duronto brand beyond Rajdhanis as in India. [emoji51]


----------



## west point (Aug 8, 2019)

At one time AMTAK did have a lot of NYP <> PHL trips known as clockers. That was when there was fewer services on to WASH. NJT was supposed to substitute but NJT quickly started to terminate at Trenton requiring those who wanted to go on to PHL to change at TRE to SEPTA.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 8, 2019)

jis said:


> Sorry for confusing you. I will try to be more careful the next time and say something like they are trying to create a non stop Duronto brand beyond Rajdhanis as in India. [emoji51]


_Touche!_ Upon further reflection you could make a strong case for Amtrak's slow and winding NEC needing premium cabins to a much greater extent than JRE's Tokaido.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Aug 12, 2019)

The hope is to remove some of the through passengers off the adjacent trains to provide space for the intermediate travel on the adjacent trains. I don't believe they are planning for these express trains to approach capacity particularly with a huge suburban market. 

The concern I have is equipment availability. You'll need 17 sets to operate weekday service. This was an issue before and was one of the reasons they killed it before. It was one of first trains canceled if equipment issues occurred. 

I'm not sure things have gotten better, although the interior refresh program is just about completed.


----------



## neroden (Aug 12, 2019)

ScouseAndy said:


> If NYP-PHL supply meets current demand what would then gain by adding an additional train between them? If NYP-WAS demand outstrips current supply then it makes sense to provide additional supply.


Think harder. If NYP-WAS demand outstripped supply and NYP-PHL demand didn't, you'd see empty seats from NYP to PHL which got filled from PHL-WAS. Instead you see full seats from NYP-PHL which are empty from PHL-WAS. This says that you need NYP-PHL short hauls to take the NYP-PHL customers (which will then open up seats on the NYP-PHL-WAS train).



> Alternately even if NYP-PHL demand isn't meet, given the finite resources available to Amtrak, If these resources can yield more profit by being utilised on a direct NYP-WAS compared to a direct NYP-PHL service


Mathematically that's impossible. Literally impossible. I won't leave it as an exercise to the reader; I'll explain:

First of all, the costs are obviously higher to run from NYP-WAS than from NYP-PHL.

As for the revenues -- whatever revenue you were hoping to make for NYP-WAS, you can instead raise ticket prices on NYP-PHL to collect the same (or more) revenue. If this price increase reduces NYP-PHL ridership, *then you opened up seats for NYP-WAS* and you get your NYP-WAS revenue. You end up with more profit.

I do financial analysis for a living.



Anderson said:


> @neroden While that is logical, that also presumes the availability of equipment _and slots_. Both constraints are at issue...equipment can be dealt with in the form of an order for new cars over the next few years, but particularly at peak hours Amtrak can only run so many trains through the Hudson tunnels. Moreover, if both markets can be supported (and PHL-WAS and the intermediate pairs can still support a train without as much through business) you achieve the same objective by pushing through pax to the express train and moving local pax to the stopping service.



It is true that if you have enough non-stop customers (I don't think there are enough) you can achieve the objective by running a non-stop. If you have unbalanced ridership where NYP-PHL is stronger than PHL-WAS (which you do), the nonstop will exacerbate that unbalanced situation on the other trains. Eventually some of the other trains will be running with low enough ridership from PHL-WAS that you'll want to cut them back to short turns from NYP-PHL, and you end up with the NYP-PHL short turns again.



> In some respects, this feels like the equivalent of saying that the New York Central shouldn't have run the _Twentieth Century Limited _or that the ACL/SAL shouldn't have run their Northeast-Florida express trains, they should have laid on a few more multi-stop trains when the endpoint market _was_ big enough to accommodate the express service. In both cases, the cachet of non-stop/express service can be a significant selling point.



And that may be the only purpose of this: advertising.

When the endpoint market for the Twentieth Century Limited dropped, the first thing the NY Central did was to have more intermediate stops. The limited-stops trains outlived the no-stop trains by decades. The Twentieth Century Limited, in its heyday, existed alongside a bewildering array of locals, limiteds, and semi-expresses departing many times per hour. And it *can't* exist without that sort of extremely high demand. While the NEC does have its MBTA, Metro-North, NJT, SEPTA, and MARC locals and limiteds and its Amtrak limiteds, semi-expresses and expresses, I don't actually think there's enough demand there to support a NYP-WAS non-stop on top of it. OK, I think there is enough to support an NYP-PHL nonstop, but the Washington leg is much, much weaker.

Thinking of it as a marketing scheme, I expect them to run non-stop just long enough to get a bunch of positive publicity in the newspapers. Because "non-stop" gets more marketing hoopla than "one stop".

Then, because I believe the endpoint market is *not* large enough to fill the train, they will quietly start stopping at Philadelphia. I believe that the market for a one-stop *is* large enough to fill the train, so that's probably what they'll stick with...

FYI. In order to fill one non-stop train each way every day, I calculate that they'd have to take roughly *30%* of the existing Acela NYP-WAS ridership onto that train. (And, BTW, Acela ridership has been dropping the past two years.) That... might be possible? But given that people will take the train which is on the most convenient schedule, it seems highly unlikely. The train will run underfull until they add an intermediate stop. Add enough intermediate stops and you can take a more reasonable 20% or 15% of the ridership and fill up.

I suppose Amtrak is trying to capture people who were taking the airline shuttles. That is a pretty small group at this point. I cannot find current numbers for shuttle ridership. Some people are actually plane-lovers. I believe the number who can be captured is not enough to fill a train (namely, for a nonstop in each direction, 221,920 per year)


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Aug 12, 2019)

That's a darn good analysis, Neroden and the bottom line is this train is to make room for the intermediate markets (think MET-PHL/ MET-BAL, WIL-MET/ BWI-NWK as examples) that are squeezed out during that time.

It is also advertising the potential and setting up for one thing that is overlooked.

There is a great deal of service on the NEC. You have the Keystones, NYP-WAS regionals, BOS-WAS regionals, Virginia Regionals and the LD trains plying the NEC.

When the all of the new Acela21 are fully in service, you may find that some of the existing regional trains are no more. You may find an Acela21 filling that slot.


----------



## Anderson (Aug 13, 2019)

I will say that I think there might be enough demand for the non-stop...during the absolute peak hour(s).

The only reasons I would be doubtful about slashing Regionals and adding Acela21s in their place are capacity and cost: IIRC the Acela21s have a cap of about 400 seats (with the potential to expand to something in the mid-500s). A ten-car Regional has a capacity of 638, and cutting Acela21 fares into the ballpark of the advance-purchase bucket for the Regionals would have a bad impact on perceived value.


----------



## PVD (Aug 13, 2019)

When we look at whether NYP to PHL or NYP to WAS is favorable, we have to consider what the set does on the turn. From WAS it can resume its regular route, that might be financially favorable to the PHL to NYP turn.


----------



## JustOnce (Aug 13, 2019)

Thirdrail7 said:


> It is also advertising the potential and setting up for one thing that is overlooked.
> 
> There is a great deal of service on the NEC. You have the Keystones, NYP-WAS regionals, BOS-WAS regionals, Virginia Regionals and the LD trains plying the NEC.


I think advertising the potential is a key factor here in them doing this. I've already seen Facebook advertisements for the new service. Even if this train runs mostly empty, pulls a set from regular service, or loses money it accomplishes several things:
a.) It gets people thinking about the shorter times and means they may consider Acela when they might otherwise wouldn't. Even if they go to book the non-stop and it's full or at the wrong time, they might still be willing to book a ride on Amtrak now that they've actually reached the Amtrak reservation page. 
b.) Don't underestimate the lobbying factor of this move. Amtrak just reduced the official shortest time between NY and WAS cutting even closer to the shuttle flight times. And Amtrak hasn't completed work on raising speeds in NJ past 135 mph or fielded 160-mph capable equipment yet. Once that happens there's an even shorter time (probably not much though). But now Amtrak can go to Congress and say we're even more competitive with airlines here's what it will cost to reduce the schedule further and start lobbying for NEC 2.0*, the Baltimore Tunnels, Elizabeth Curve elimination, etc.

My view: let it be a loss-leader and serve as a flagship train and marketing bullet point.

*=if we can't get Gateway funding lined up, I realize NEC 2.0 is a pipe dream.


----------



## jis (Aug 13, 2019)

Elizabeth Curve elimination ... Heh heh. Considering how much that will cost, it will be a phenomenal waste of money given other more pressing matters.

Gateway Tunnel by itself does not actually do much for real NEC 2.0, absent a whole slew of other things in NJ. It will not increase the speed of anything one iota. It will just reduce risk of infrastructure failure and decongest some allowing more reliable scheduling.

To get real HSR through NJ what needs to happen is a straighter two track underground ROW starting from around County Interlocking all the way to New York. This appears in the Tier I EIS as an alternative. Places like Japan, Europe and China have stomach for such. I doubt the US does. But it will among other things, eliminate the Elizabeth Curve and the more impactful Metuchen/Metropark Curves too.


----------



## ScouseAndy (Aug 13, 2019)

neroden said:


> Think harder. If NYP-WAS demand outstripped supply and NYP-PHL demand didn't, you'd see empty seats from NYP to PHL which got filled from PHL-WAS. Instead you see full seats from NYP-PHL which are empty from PHL-WAS. This says that you need NYP-PHL short hauls to take the NYP-PHL customers (which will then open up seats on the NYP-PHL-WAS train).
> 
> 
> Mathematically that's impossible. Literally impossible. I won't leave it as an exercise to the reader; I'll explain:
> ...



Your assumption that NYP-PHL is more profitable then NYP-WAS is flawed as you are ignoring the costs of running it to WAS empty for its next trip back North.

Amtrak have a finite number of trains, currently one or more is full between NYP and PHL and then with a low loading the rest of the trip. The train needs to complete its run to WAS in order for its next run back to NYP/BOS. By cutting PHL stop (among others) amtrak will be believimg it can create more revenue by having more seats filled all the way on a trip that train needs to make. Seats which are currently being blocked by short haul customers. 

This also excludes the amount of free publicity Amtrak will get from announcing none stop services from NYP to the capital. That will create custom and drive revenue on its own.

Unless you believe that Amtrak resources would be better utilised being sat in PHL until the next peak period service back to NYP when it can run with a profitable number of passengers?


----------



## jis (Aug 13, 2019)

I think PVD got it right. It depends on what overall links you are able to use for a set. Just like neroden used an assumption ScouseAndy used another assumption in so far as links go. Those are certainly not the only two possibilities, and depending on specific offered capacity goals one would go about designing a link for best utilization of equipment. It is hard to make an argument this way or that on the basis of which is more or less profitable voerall without knowing much much more about what the overall scheme is.


----------



## west point (Aug 13, 2019)

A thought. There will be 3 Acela trips originating at NYP weekdays within 1 hour. That means there will be 3 Acela sets arriving WASH within less than 2 hours. That give Amtrak a better chance of not having to cancel or delay an Acela leaving at maybe 1100 - 1300 ? Having an extra Acela at WASH certainly means better chance of maintain all Acela sets and if one of the early departures to WASH has a minor problem that will give time to correct a problem before the afternoon rush including the north bound non stop.
The flip side does mean it will be more likely an Acela trip from NYP or BOS might not make the NYP - WASH leg.


----------



## Acela150 (Aug 13, 2019)

Am I the only one who doesn't want to be the engineer on these trips? 2 and a 1/2 hours with no stops to use the bathroom? I'll pass.


----------



## west point (Aug 13, 2019)

Acela150 said:


> Am I the only one who doesn't want to be the engineer on these trips? 2 and a 1/2 hours with no stops to use the bathroom? I'll pass.



Well if the conductor is a qualified engineer then relief otherwise hope for a stop signal somewhere ?


----------



## Acela150 (Aug 13, 2019)

west point said:


> Well if the conductor is a qualified engineer then relief otherwise hope for a stop signal somewhere ?


Conductors are usually not cross qualified at Amtrak. Freight it's very common. But in Passenger Service it's one or the other normally. Engineers can keep Conductor qualifications normally. 

Hope that makes sense.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Aug 13, 2019)

They could do what Small Plane Pilots do Steve, use a Catheter!


----------



## Acela150 (Aug 13, 2019)

Bob Dylan said:


> They could do what Small Plane Pilots do Steve, use a Catheter!



My Dad would say a bucket and funnel. LOL!


----------



## railiner (Aug 13, 2019)

As for short haul bookings blocking ‘more lucrative’ longer haul bookings...
I had thought that long ago, Amtrak’s space and equipment control, along with best yield management practices could solve that problem with a sophisticated algorithm that would maximize any trains revenue potential?


----------



## keelhauled (Sep 12, 2019)

According to a a press release issued today, the nonstop train will have "complimentary coffee, tea water, and a light snack, “at seat” cashless cart service offering a limited menu of snacks and beverages and onboard phone charging kits for sale" on top of the standard Acela soft product.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 13, 2019)

So, a bit of analysis:
(1) It sounds like the on-board soft product in Business Class will be slightly above the Regional Business Class product. I'd argue this is a good thing, since "Acela Business" is the only Business Class product that doesn't include complementary F&B in any manner.
(2) It also sounds like the product otherwise aligns pretty smoothly with what you'd expect for an airline beverage cart (albeit plus the charging kits...which I'd note Brightline sells at its stations). Depending on the exact specs, this feels like a nice testbed for the Acela IIs if they're looking to go in this direction.
(3) Of course, this raises the question of whether there will be an effort to restrict cafe seating on the Acela IIs, etc.

Honestly, as it stands I'm somewhat pleasantly surprised by this at the moment. I'll be curious to see what, if anything, gets slipped in for F.


----------



## railiner (Sep 13, 2019)

keelhauled said:


> According to a a press release issued today, the nonstop train will have "complimentary coffee, tea water, and a light snack, “at seat” cashless cart service offering a limited menu of snacks and beverages and onboard phone charging kits for sale" on top of the standard Acela soft product.


Curious about the “phone charging kits for sale”...I don’t think they will charge you, just to plug in your phone, (they don’t currently), and all phones come with charging cords....so are they just hoping to sell to those that forgot to bring them?
Most curious item to sell....


----------



## PVD (Sep 13, 2019)

Small phone charging kits including a cigarette lighter to usb adapter, a plug in usb adapter, and an octopus cable with usb to various charging tip plug in in a little box are extremely popular giveaways at trade shows and conferences I attend. I think many people will leave a "setup" at home or at work, and like the extra kit to travel with. Small auxiliary batteries are popular also.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 15, 2019)

Also, the number of folks who end up short on power unexpectedly and without their charging cable (or without the adapter) is...quite significant, I think.


----------



## Acela150 (Sep 18, 2019)

A bird told me that the Engineer, AC, and Conductor will be the same on both Non Stop trips.


----------



## Palmetto (Sep 19, 2019)

Big split shift, then.


----------



## Acela150 (Sep 19, 2019)

Palmetto said:


> Big split shift, then.



Decent pay though. [emoji2]


----------



## Bob Dylan (Sep 19, 2019)

Railroaders, like Teachers, are Underpaid for what they do!


----------



## Acela150 (Sep 19, 2019)

Bob Dylan said:


> Railroaders, like Teachers, are Underpaid for what they do!



To an extent I agree. NS is so picky with claims that they approve. I put in for a "UA" Used of Assignment claim several times during my time there. Basically you get a second days pay for taking a second train. They would always deny it, and I would fight tooth and nail to get them to pay it. 

Outside of those issues I think I was paid fairly.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 23, 2019)

So, I am stating this for posterity: Regardless of what ASMAD says, we were one minute behind leaving NYP (we started moving at 0636) and we were a minute earlier into WAS than it indicates (we arrived at 0906, not 0907). Both were with my phone and there was no recalibration. We did the run in 2:30 flat, and that was even being stuck behind the Acela in front of us (which we could have, had the tracks been available, overtaken...but I think we basically caught up to them at the Bush River outside of Baltimore)


----------



## KnightRail (Sep 23, 2019)

Looks like the ‘Express’ branding has started to be removed, likely to avoid confusion with the nonstops. Acelas are now simply “Acela” or “Acela Nonstop”. Gone is “Acela Express”, which I believe has been used back since the days of “Acela Regional”.


----------



## jis (Sep 23, 2019)

KnightRail said:


> Looks like the ‘Express’ branding has started to be removed, likely to avoid confusion with the nonstops. Acelas are now simply “Acela” or “Acela Nonstop”. Gone is “Acela Express”, which I believe has been used back since the days of “Acela Regional”.


Yeah, and remember, they had plans for applying the "Acela Commuter" moniker to the Clockers and perhaps the Keystones. Of course then someone realized that dilution of the Acela brand was downright stupid, so all that fell by the wayside, and it was basically Acela and NE Regional. 

Notwithstanding what Amtrak thought the brand was it was uncommon to hear someone say they were taking the Acela Express to Washington. Colloquially they simply said they are taking the Acela to Washington.


----------



## KnightRail (Sep 24, 2019)

Agree, people say they are taking the Acela, or taking Amtrak. I see it as a positive change simply being Acela. Rarely do I hear someone say they are taking the “North East Regional”. Now if North East Regional changed to something more appealing such as Metroliner, then we’d really be getting somewhere.


----------



## Acela150 (Sep 24, 2019)

Anderson said:


> So, I am stating this for posterity: Regardless of what ASMAD says, we were one minute behind leaving NYP (we started moving at 0636) and we were a minute earlier into WAS than it indicates (we arrived at 0906, not 0907). Both were with my phone and there was no recalibration. We did the run in 2:30 flat, and that was even being stuck behind the Acela in front of us (which we could have, had the tracks been available, overtaken...but I think we basically caught up to them at the Bush River outside of Baltimore)



How was the PAX load?


----------



## Anderson (Sep 24, 2019)

Acela150 said:


> How was the PAX load?



Per talking with Jim Mathews, about 180 revenue pax plus a handful of Amtrak management, press, etc. It wasn't slam full, but it was definitely enough to justify running the service. Also, the vast majority seem to have been business travelers...so I'd guess that you're looking at a 50% "regular" load [1] accounting for that. Given the Acela's normal cost recovery numbers and load factors, I think it is fair to say that the new service is "in the black" from day one.


[1] In an email earlier I estimated 40% or so, but this was under the impression of the press, management, etc. being part of the 180.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Sep 27, 2019)

Anderson said:


> We did the run in 2:30 flat, and that was even being stuck behind the Acela in front of us (which we could have, had the tracks been available, overtaken...but I think we basically caught up to them at the Bush River outside of Baltimore)



You were no were near 2103. I'm not sure what makes you think you could have overtaken it without holding it for 10 minutes. The closest you got to 2103 is when you were next to it In WAS. O



Acela150 said:


> How was the PAX load?



It seems like the NYP departure is busier in the early part of the week while the WAS departure is busier in the later part of the week, which is natural. The WAS is going to be the heavy hitter and it should open up seats on 2172, a notoriously busy train. If they could have put it between 2170 and 2172, it be killer


----------



## Acela150 (Sep 27, 2019)

Thirdrail7 said:


> It seems like the NYP departure is busier in the early part of the week while the WAS departure is busier in the later part of the week, which is natural. The WAS is going to be the heavy hitter and it should open up seats on 2172, a notoriously busy train. If they could have put it between 2170 and 2172, it be killer



To me that seems normal. Heavier travel from NYP on a Monday. 

I've done 2172 on a Friday twice. Both times in FC. The one Friday when I got on in PHL FC was S/O. Oddly enough upon departure of NYP the FC Car only had about 10 pax including myself. Which astonished me and the LSA's. They thought more seats would sell. To make it even more odd it was the Friday before Christmas. 

But I do agree, push that up an hour to 3:30 on Friday's and you'd take a decent load from 2170 and 2172 and put that onto 2402. Which frees up seats between WAS and NYP for intermediate travel, especially the PHL-NYP pax. IIRC the last time they tried something similar to a non stop service it only stopped at PHL and that left WAS around 5 of 4. Which was still a decent slot, but I think 330 would have been much better.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 27, 2019)

(1) I am passing along what we were told while onboard in re a slowdown. To be fair, the issue might also have been clearing a track at WAS from the 0900 departure?
(2) The issue is that the last time around, the departure _was _1555...and I suspect that at least for now, Amtrak doesn't want to have the Nonstop at different times on different days.

(3) As a data point, I checked next Friday and 2402 is showing a higher price than either 2172 or 2122.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Sep 27, 2019)

Acela150 said:


> But I do agree, push that up an hour to 3:30 on Friday's and you'd take a decent load from 2170 and 2172 and put that onto 2402. Which frees up seats between WAS and NYP for intermediate travel, especially the PHL-NYP pax. IIRC the last time they tried something similar to a non stop service it only stopped at PHL and that left WAS around 5 of 4. Which was still a decent slot, but I think 330 would have been much better.



2170 and 2172 operate to BOS. You also free up additional space for travel to BOS, which would help. Even the 4:30 departure is pulling people fro, 2172 as it gives them another half hour but doesn't arrive too much later than 2172.




Anderson said:


> (3) As a data point, I checked next Friday and 2402 is showing a higher price than either 2172 or 2122.



Doesn't that defeat the purpose?


----------



## Acela150 (Sep 27, 2019)

Thirdrail7 said:


> 2170 and 2172 operate to BOS. You also free up additional space for travel to BOS, which would help. Even the 4:30 departure is pulling people fro, 2172 as it gives them another half hour but doesn't arrive too much later than 2172.



True, although how many folks get on 2170 and 2172 in WAS, BWI, and BAL and go all the way to PVD or past that? I can definitely see people going from WAS to STM or even NHV. But as far as travel between both ends of the corridor I'll have to look into that. Cause I actually am fairly curious to see what those numbers are like. But either way folks shifting to 2402 definitely frees up some seats for intermediate travel on 2170 and 2172 regardless of travel origin and destination.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 28, 2019)

Thirdrail7 said:


> Doesn't that defeat the purpose?



Not necessarily. It arguably suggests that the train might be achieving its purpose if it is being pushed into a higher bucket because of load factors. If the tickets on the nonstop are selling for an extra $30 due to the faster runtime (and incidental improvements in amenities) I would argue that the train is doing what it is intended to do (particularly if it is diverting WAS-NYP folks off of 2172 and thereby freeing up space for PHL/NWK-STM/NHV/BOS pax.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Feb 5, 2020)

I'm not sure 2401 is pulling its weight so I suspect they may tinker with the southbound schedule in the near future.


----------



## neroden (Feb 6, 2020)

We'll see how much tinkering they do before admitting that a nonstop is unlikely ever to pull its weight...


----------



## OBS (Feb 6, 2020)

neroden said:


> We'll see how much tinkering they do before admitting that a nonstop is unlikely ever to pull its weight...


Exactly...It didn't work the first two (or three) times they tried it.


----------



## the_traveler (Feb 6, 2020)

They think a non-stop will work, but having food service on eastern trains “costs too much”!


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 6, 2020)

I don't think express service is fundamentally flawed or undesirable. Japanese railroads charge a substantial premium for nonstop service, and many passengers are only too happy to pay the surcharge, but they also use genuine HSR trains on proper HSR tracks. My guess is that factors such as the NEC's winding route, the Acela's heavier weight, and the restricted-tilt track clearance are working against this service becoming viable. Maybe they'll get more traction with Acela 2.


----------



## chrsjrcj (Feb 6, 2020)

I agree. DC to NYC would need to be true HSR for Amtrak to make up a greater market share, and actually have the demand needed for non-stop service. It appears to just not be viable under existing conditions.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Feb 6, 2020)

I think the demand is there now. It is about timing and that is one thing about this airline group, they are not committed to traditional schedules. You may see a train moved to afternoons later in the week when people are leaving NY to WAS while keeping the morning train earlier in the week when a lot of people are heading to WAS.

It is similar to what they did with 151. It only runs in the morning to WAS on MON-TUE and 127 runs in the afternoon on WED, THU, and FRI. 

Part of the problem is a lot of business travelers don't necessarily travel downtown to downtown since they live in the suburbs. Another part of the problem is the price, which the average passenger probably wouldn't want to pay. You could easily run a regional nonstop or two if you didn't have to pay through the nose.

Meanwhile, 2402 manages on Mon-TUE and thrives on THU-FRI even though you have extra service out of WAS on train 134 (Thu-FRI only) and 80, which carries local travel on THU, FRI and SUN.


----------



## west point (Feb 6, 2020)

We are ignoring the possibilities of the non stops reducing their schedule times. There may be a reduction when the present constant tension CAT work is finished. That of course is subject to FRA approval and track up grades as well. The biggest problem for any significant reduction in times are WASH - PHL on the 2 and 3 track segments. There is always the problem of MARC slowing the non stops due to its operating in same direction as the non stops.


----------



## MARC Rider (Feb 7, 2020)

Devil's Advocate said:


> I don't think express service is fundamentally flawed or undesirable. Japanese railroads charge a substantial premium for nonstop service, and many passengers are only too happy to pay the surcharge, but they also use genuine HSR trains on proper HSR tracks. My guess is that factors such as the NEC's winding route, the Acela's heavier weight, and the restricted-tilt track clearance are working against this service becoming viable. Maybe they'll get more traction with Acela 2.


How much faster do you think a NEC service would have to be in order to be viable? The Nozomi on the Tokaido Shinkansen makes 4 intermediate stops and averages about 135 mph end-to-end for its 320 mile route between Tokyo and Osaka. Most Acelas make 4 intermediate stops between New York and Washington and average about 80 mph. 

Amtrak already had 75% of the public-transportation market between New York and Washington, which means that even the "slow" Acelas compete pretty well with airlines. They're already faster than driving; the limits to market share are probably the fact that most people live in suburbia and thus all trips involves cars, and that the fares (even for the Northeast Regionals) are kind of high compared to the incremental cost of driving, especially when more than one person is taking the trip.

I've always thought that increasing the top speed isn't the necessary improvement as much as removing bottlenecks and keeping the system in a state of good repair. And, of course, the more frequent, the better, plus more connections to suburban locations, which might encourage people to leave their cars closer to home.


----------



## neroden (Feb 9, 2020)

The financial comparison we're looking at here is how much you can charge for a non-stop train vs. how much you can charge for a *stopping* train. And I am quite certain that on the NEC the revenue you can get from business from Philadelphia, Trenton, Baltimore etc. (where the airlines are quite uncompetitive) ends up outweighing any additional surcharge you can get from the DC-NY passengers who have an airline alternative. Consider one DC-NY ticket vs. a NY-PHL ticket and a PHL-DC ticket, basically.

There are certainly places and times where nonstop service can be commercially viable. I don't think this is it. They've tried it before and it hasn't panned out, and I see no demographic change which would make it pan out.

Nonstop service starts to make sense when your service supply has saturated the demand from the intermediate points. Philadelphia demand is not saturated, from what I can tell.


----------



## west point (Feb 9, 2020)

Neroden: What access do you have to ridership figures ?. I would expect that we need to have the rider ships from the previous year for the 1/2 hour before and after the time for the now non stop. Take them this year and add in the non stop NYP <> WASH and see if they total more this year. Then also how many times previous year the 2 regular trips sold out compared to the present year's all 3 trips. 
If the present year's trips have less sold outs then maybe your intermediate stations pairs have more passengers ? Intermediate passenger trips need examination with a factor of overall Acela trips increase year over year.


----------



## neroden (Feb 9, 2020)

I don't have access to Amtrak's internal data, and I don't have data granular enough to know for sure.

Partly I'm working from the well-known phenomenon that buying a NYP-PHL ticket and a PHL-WAS ticket gives Amtrak more revenue than buying a NYP-WAS ticket (this is true for almost all city triplets in the country essentially always, for a number of reasons -- though the "long trip discount" varies in size).

if they can jack up the nonstop prices enough to counteract this effect *and* still fill the train, then fine, the non-stop is preferable.

Partly I'm working from the fact that they've tried this before, it didn't work out well, and the market hasn't changed that much. If, for instance, the Philly market had shrunk a lot, or Philly-DC had better airplane service than NYC-DC (it's the other way around) it might be plausible.


----------



## RebelRider (Feb 20, 2020)

Amtrak is mixing up the Acela Non-Stop schedule. Effective March 19, on Thursdays and Fridays only the Non-Stop will operate as 2403 departing New York at 3:25pm, arriving WAS at 6:01pm. No changes Monday through Wednesday to the morning non-stop service.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Feb 20, 2020)

RebelRider said:


> Amtrak is mixing up the Acela Non-Stop schedule. Effective March 19, on Thursdays and Fridays only the Non-Stop will operate as 2403 departing New York at 3:25pm, arriving WAS at 6:01pm. No changes Monday through Wednesday to the morning non-stop service.



How did I make such an accurate guess? 



Thirdrail7 said:


> You may see a train moved to afternoons later in the week when people are leaving NY to WAS while keeping the morning train earlier in the week when a lot of people are heading to WAS.



For my next bag of tricks, I'm going to guess that an Acela that used top leave BOS Mon-Fri will only operate Mon-Thu?


----------



## Bob Dylan (Feb 20, 2020)

Coming soon, a " Modified Non-Stop Schedule" with a Stop in Philly.

Then Express Acelas NYP-WAS with Limitred Stops on the NEC!( Willnington,Baltimore)


----------



## Acela150 (Feb 29, 2020)

Thirdrail7 said:


> How did I make such an accurate guess?
> For my next bag of tricks, I'm going to guess that an Acela that used top leave BOS Mon-Fri will only operate Mon-Thu?



Confirmed. 2151 will now operate Monday to Thursday. 2111 will fill it's NYP-WAS slot on Friday's and 2157 will operate on Friday's departing South Station at 8am. 2117 will also be Monday to Thursday with 2157 taking it's slot on Friday.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Mar 7, 2020)

The non-stop service is canceled from 3/10 to 5/26.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Mar 7, 2020)

Thirdrail7 said:


> The non-stop service is canceled from 3/10 to 5/26.


What a Shock!!


----------



## lordsigma (Mar 7, 2020)

Anyone care to place a wager on if it will actually return?


----------



## Bob Dylan (Mar 7, 2020)

lordsigma said:


> Anyone care to place a wager on if it will actually return?


Somewhere Far Far Away in an Alternate Universe....


----------

