# Viewliner II Part 3: Bag/Dorm Car Production, Delivery, Speculation



## Thirdrail7

Well, we have this thread that deals with the history and the baggage cars:

Viewliner II - Part 1 - Initial Production and Delivery

We have the ongoing thread that deals with the dining cars:

Viewliner II - Part 2 - Production and Delivery

We'll need Part 2 since we haven't received all of the first class lounge cars.....errrr, I mean dining cars, but it seems natural that we have part three deal with the third member of the new viewliner fleet: The Bag Dorms.



should join a trio of dining cars to HIA next week. I'm not sure what the plans are for these cars. Then again, I'm not sure of much these days.

Whatever happens, the car is coming. Will this usher in a new day of contemporary baggage service...meaning you'll do it yourself, since a great deal of the stations are losing their staff?


----------



## TiBike

Thirdrail7 said:


> Whatever happens, the car is coming. Will this usher in a new day of contemporary baggage service...meaning you'll do it yourself, since a great deal of the stations are losing their staff?


If that means I can get a bike on an LD train at Paso Robles, Truckee, Redding, Chico and Burbank, sign me up


----------



## west point

Next week ? The usual Monday or Tuesday ? Since this is SATurday ? ? ?


----------



## Ryan

Almost guaranteed to be within a few days, as I'm leaving town for the week in the morning. TR7 seems to know my travel schedule and schedules deliveries when I'm unavailable.


----------



## cpotisch

You did it Thirdrail! You finally beat Blue to it!


----------



## Acela150

Ryan said:


> Almost guaranteed to be within a few days, as I'm leaving town for the week in the morning. TR7 seems to know my travel schedule and schedules deliveries when I'm unavailable.


That sounds like a personal problem...


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

So the end use for these 10 cars are what?

A) Axle count cars.

B) Sliver Meteor Service (4)

C) Crescent Service (4)

What other train still has crew?


----------



## cpotisch

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> So the end use for these 10 cars are what?
> 
> A) Axle count cars.
> 
> B) Sliver Meteor Service (4)
> 
> C) Crescent Service (4)
> 
> What other train still has crew?


More like:

A) Axle count cars (though I doubt that's going to be the focus in the long run)

B) Silver Meteor (4)

C) Silver Star (4)

D) Crescent (3)

E) Cardinal (2) - 3 if it's daily

F) Lake Shore Limited (3)

I personally feel like the ideal routes for the bag-dorms would be the Boston section of the Lake Shore Limited and the Cardinal. Both have very limited sleeper capacity and don't need much baggage capacity, so I think it would be pretty easy to replace the baggage cars with bag-dorms and free up some rooms. The Silver Star is also not a very long train, so I could see them putting extra bag-dorms on that route.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Amtrak cut the order from 25 to 10.

So only 10 Crew-Bagged Cars order. The 15 other were converted to straight bagged cars.

Such a odd number.


----------



## west point

If the Bag dorms are acccepted and finished at HIA first only then would any be available before Aug 31st. If diners first same date. and if another 3 not before September 30th.


----------



## cpotisch

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Amtrak cut the order from 25 to 10.
> 
> So only 10 Crew-Bagged Cars order. The 15 other were converted to straight bagged cars.
> 
> Such a odd number.


I know that. But if you put them on the Cardinal and LSL, you'd only be using up five cars. And if you put them on the Star as well, you'd be using nine. Considering they could likely swap the bag-dorm out with a spare sleeper and baggage car, if necessary, I think they'd all be doable.


----------



## PVD

If the Cardinal moves the Cafe Lounge LSA and the DC LSA and 2nd person as well as the (is it 2, not sure ?) coach attendants rooms to a bag dorm, you get 5 more potential revenue rooms without an added SCA it's probably 6 on the Lake. These are rooms that become available for sale without adding staff.


----------



## blueman271

How about putting a bag dorm on 66 and 67 and returning sleeper service to the NEC? I’m not sure how much baggage those trains carry but the dorm portion of the car would all be revenue space with the exception of one room.


----------



## PRR 60

Please keep this topic only on the Baggage Dorm cars. Any posts concerning the dining cars will be moved to that topic.


----------



## cpotisch

blueman271 said:


> the dorm portion of the car would all be revenue space with the exception of one room.


redacted


----------



## blueman271

cpotisch said:


> blueman271 said:
> 
> 
> 
> the dorm portion of the car would all be revenue space with the exception of one room.
> 
> 
> 
> At least two rooms. You have the cafe attendant and SCA, and union rules usually forbid having employees share rooms.
Click to expand...

Why would the cafe attendant need a room? They don’t have one now and if I understand it correctly the cafe is open the entire trip.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

cpotisch said:


> blueman271 said:
> 
> 
> 
> the dorm portion of the car would all be revenue space with the exception of one room.
> 
> 
> 
> At least two rooms. You have the cafe attendant and SCA, and union rules usually forbid having employees share rooms.
Click to expand...

The cafe is open all night on 65/66/67, so the attendant would not need a room.


----------



## cpotisch

blueman271 said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blueman271 said:
> 
> 
> 
> the dorm portion of the car would all be revenue space with the exception of one room.
> 
> 
> 
> At least two rooms. You have the cafe attendant and SCA, and union rules usually forbid having employees share rooms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would the cafe attendant need a room? They don’t have one now and if I understand it correctly the cafe is open the entire trip.
Click to expand...

Sorry. In my head I was sort of thinking of the Cardinal and the LSA in the diner-lite.


----------



## neroden

I think we can guarantee that one is going on the LSL; it very rarely needs two full baggage cars, and sleeper space on the LSL is super expensive (though the thoughtless trashing of food service is probably reducing those profits).


----------



## Palmland

How many dorm rooms does the bag-dorm have? Also, are the dorm rooms the same as a roomette and can they be used for revenue space?

Assuming the answer to that last question is no, then it would seem to me it would be used on the trains with the largest crew size that now occupy revenue space.

So, that eliminates the Cardinal and Star. Next question, will diner lite spread to the Meteor and Crescent. If not, those two trains would be the likely candidates with a full service diner crew as well as lounge car attendant. If those trains do succumb to diner lite (perhaps more accurately called a lounge car with light refreshments) then the trains with the most sleepers would be candidates: Meteor and LSL. That would leave a couple extra.


----------



## PVD

It is not just dorm space. A very important question is whether the baggage capacity is sufficient to swap for a full bag and not pull more cars or if a single b/c train is close to capacity, especially with the increasing bike services. The LSL (when the NYP section is running) pulls 2 bags, You would need to work out Albany logistics because the crew going to the end not served by the B-D would need to move in/out of the rooms.


----------



## cpotisch

PVD said:


> It is not just dorm space. A very important question is whether the baggage capacity is sufficient to swap for a full bag and not pull more cars or if a single b/c train is close to capacity, especially with the increasing bike services. The LSL (when the NYP section is running) pulls 2 bags, You would need to work out Albany logistics because the crew going to the end not served by the B-D would need to move in/out of the rooms.


I'm suggesting you replace the Boston section baggage car with a bag-dorm, but keep the full baggage car on the NY section. Then put the Boston section crew in the bag-dorm and keep the NY section crew in an NY sleeper. That way no one would have to switch rooms during the trip, and you'd get extra sleeper space on the Boston section, which I highly doubt needs a full baggage car.


----------



## cpotisch

Palmland said:


> How many dorm rooms does the bag-dorm have? Also, are the dorm rooms the same as a roomette and can they be used for revenue space?


It has eight roomettes. They are the same as the ones in the full V-II sleepers. I imagine they could be used for revenue space. However it might make sense to have bag-dorm pax use the SCA from the adjacent sleeper since it's probably not practical to have another SCA for only a few passengers. Sort of like what they do in the Superliner trans-dorms.


----------



## cpotisch

neroden said:


> I think we can guarantee that one is going on the LSL; it very rarely needs two full baggage cars, and sleeper space on the LSL is super expensive (though the thoughtless trashing of food service is probably reducing those profits).


Exactly. It has two baggage cars because there are two sections. It's not because they need the capacity of two baggage cars.


----------



## Palmetto

cpotisch said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think we can guarantee that one is going on the LSL; it very rarely needs two full baggage cars, and sleeper space on the LSL is super expensive (though the thoughtless trashing of food service is probably reducing those profits).
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. It has two baggage cars because there are two sections. It's not because they need the capacity of two baggage cars.
Click to expand...

But the Empire Builder has only one baggage car for its two sections. So????


----------



## blueman271

Palmetto said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think we can guarantee that one is going on the LSL; it very rarely needs two full baggage cars, and sleeper space on the LSL is super expensive (though the thoughtless trashing of food service is probably reducing those profits).
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. It has two baggage cars because there are two sections. It's not because they need the capacity of two baggage cars.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But the Empire Builder has only one baggage car for its two sections. So????
Click to expand...

The Portland section runs with a coach-baggage car which has no equivalent in the single level fleet. Therefore, only one baggage car required for the EB.


----------



## ehbowen

blueman271 said:


> The Portland section runs with a coach-baggage car which has no equivalent in the single level fleet. Therefore, only one baggage car required for the EB.









(Tee hee!)


----------



## blueman271

ehbowen said:


> blueman271 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Portland section runs with a coach-baggage car which has no equivalent in the single level fleet. Therefore, only one baggage car required for the EB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Tee hee!)
Click to expand...

I stand corrected lol


----------



## cpotisch

Palmetto said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think we can guarantee that one is going on the LSL; it very rarely needs two full baggage cars, and sleeper space on the LSL is super expensive (though the thoughtless trashing of food service is probably reducing those profits).
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. It has two baggage cars because there are two sections. It's not because they need the capacity of two baggage cars.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But the Empire Builder has only one baggage car for its two sections. So????
Click to expand...

Checked bags are put in the coach-baggage car.


----------



## PVD

If one were to accept the not having to move at Albany scenario, which may or may not be realistic, you would need to look at which rooms freed up would provide the greatest yield pattern (added rooms to sell against revenue if buckets are influenced) The NY section has more crew members, would those rooms bring in more than the BOS rooms? I don't know what the numbers are in terms of percent filled and yield. Is it easy enough for BOS OBS to move, as opposed to NY since the dining car is serving at that time? It is not really worthwhile to have these cars if you can't get a good added yield.


----------



## Thirdrail7

west point said:


> Next week ? The usual Monday or Tuesday ? Since this is SATurday ? ? ?


Next week. The usual days.



Ryan said:


> Almost guaranteed to be within a few days, as I'm leaving town for the week in the morning. TR7 seems to know my travel schedule and schedules deliveries when I'm unavailable.


Believe me, Fleets One and Two will not want much to do with this move. Due to track work and the Empire outage, the moves are taking place in the middle of the night. Even the move to WAS will occur on the Night Owl. Fleets Three and Four will find the cars in the usual spots, but on a Saturday.



Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Amtrak cut the order from 25 to 10.
> 
> So only 10 Crew-Bagged Cars order. The 15 other were converted to straight bagged cars.
> 
> Such a odd number.


It is an indeed an odd number. The only thing I can surmise is:

Lake Shore Limited=3

Silver Star or Crescent=4

The Cardinal=2

Protect=1

I figure the Meteor already has three revenue sleepers so that train is out. The Crescent currently has more staff so it will yield more rooms. We don't know how long that will remain the case. However, they continue to close more stations along the routes, eliminating the need for bag dorms.

Maybe Just Thinking was on to something when he said axle count cars. Logically, it would free up 10 coaches. Maybe they swap bag dorms for full baggage cars and send the bags as axle count cars.

I DO like the idea of putting them on the 67&66. Why not? it is pure revenue.


----------



## LookingGlassTie

It would be cool if at least some of the roomettes in the bag-dorm cars were sold to passengers. Based on where I live, I'd be more likely to ride a single-level LD train as opposed to a Superliner LD train (where I might have the opportunity to ride in a transdorm).

But it all remains to be seen, though.


----------



## cpotisch

LookingGlassTie said:


> It would be cool if at least some of the roomettes in the bag-dorm cars were sold to passengers. Based on where I live, I'd be more likely to ride a single-level LD train as opposed to a Superliner LD train (where I might have the opportunity to ride in a transdorm).
> 
> But it all remains to be seen, though.


It would be cool but on any full LD train, I don't think that it would be logical. You can only fit eight crew members in the bag-dorm, so it's unlikely that you would have any appreciable capacity for passengers as well. On trains like the Boston section of the LSL, the overnight Regionals, and the Cardinal, which don't have much crew and are often in need of more sleeper space, putting passengers in a bag-dorm might make a lot of sense. I guess we'll find out soon.


----------



## PRR 60

Will the bag/dorm have a toilet room?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

PRR 60 said:


> Will the bad/dorm have a toilet room?


If it’s bad, then it’s probably in a corner.


----------



## railiner

PRR 60 said:


> Will the bag/dorm have a toilet room?


I would sure think so...plus a shower.

But not ever seeing a Viewliner version, I have to wonder if the dorm rooms would be finished the same way as a revenue room...hard to be more 'spartan', but they could be...plus the crew rooms would probably ony have a single bunk, unless they were built with the same modules as the revenue sleepers...not sure...


----------



## Seaboard92

They have the same modules.


----------



## Maglev

Speaking of modules, what is the status of the modules? Are they made slowly to order, or are have they already been mass-produced?


----------



## railiner

Seaboard92 said:


> They have the same modules.


So in that case, no reason why some couldn't be sold as revenue space, just as they are in the Superliner trans-dorms....

In either example, they are a far cry from the heritage bag-dorms or in some cases, kitchen-dorms, where they had up to 15 bunks, stacked three high!


----------



## cpotisch

railiner said:


> Seaboard92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They have the same modules.
> 
> 
> 
> So in that case, no reason why some couldn't be sold as revenue space, just as they are in the Superliner trans-dorms....
Click to expand...

Trans-dorms have way more roomettes than the bag-dorms, so they have plenty of space to sell to passengers. The bag-dorm has eight roomettes, and once you put crew in there, it just might not be worth it to sell revenue space. Let's say there are seven crew members on a given LD train. Would it really be worth it to sell one room in the bag-dorm? With such limited capacity, it just often wouldn't be practical to bother putting revenue passengers in there.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

cpotisch said:


> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seaboard92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They have the same modules.
> 
> 
> 
> So in that case, no reason why some couldn't be sold as revenue space, just as they are in the Superliner trans-dorms....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trans-dorms have way more roomettes than the bag-dorms, so they have plenty of space to sell to passengers. The bag-dorm has eight roomettes, and once you put crew in there, it just might not be worth it to sell revenue space. Let's say there are seven crew members on a given LD train. Would it really be worth it to sell one room in the bag-dorm? With such limited capacity, it just often wouldn't be practical to bother putting revenue passengers in there.
Click to expand...

I think it would be worth REVENUE.


----------



## PVD

The RailPlan (company that builds the modules) website shows quite a few of them on the warehouse floor packed for shipment and that is an old picture.They are the largest supplier to CAF for this project. I don't know present stauts, but obviously, if they were built, they would want to get paid. I have not looked at their financials, a major deferral of delivery would have to have been noted. I believe it is a privately held company, so it is not as easy to see numbers as with a publicly traded company.


----------



## railiner

PVD said:


> The RailPlan (company that builds the modules) website shows quite a few of them on the warehouse floor packed for shipment and that is an old picture.They are the largest supplier to CAF for this project. I don't know present stauts, but obviously, if they were built, they would want to get paid. I have not looked at their financials, a major deferral of delivery would have to have been noted. I believe it is a privately held company, so it is not as easy to see numbers as with a publicly traded company.


Thanks for posting that...I had no knowledge of this company until I read your post....

http://www.railplan.com/caf---amtrak-viewliner-ii.html

https://www.caf.net/en/productos-servicios/proyectos/proyecto-detalle.php?p=189


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

railiner said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> The RailPlan (company that builds the modules) website shows quite a few of them on the warehouse floor packed for shipment and that is an old picture.They are the largest supplier to CAF for this project. I don't know present stauts, but obviously, if they were built, they would want to get paid. I have not looked at their financials, a major deferral of delivery would have to have been noted. I believe it is a privately held company, so it is not as easy to see numbers as with a publicly traded company.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting that...I had no knowledge of this company until I read your post....
> http://www.railplan.com/caf---amtrak-viewliner-ii.html
> 
> https://www.caf.net/en/productos-servicios/proyectos/proyecto-detalle.php?p=189
Click to expand...

I see the new, toilet-less, roomettes will still have the storage cubby over the hallway ceiling.


----------



## cpotisch

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> The RailPlan (company that builds the modules) website shows quite a few of them on the warehouse floor packed for shipment and that is an old picture.They are the largest supplier to CAF for this project. I don't know present stauts, but obviously, if they were built, they would want to get paid. I have not looked at their financials, a major deferral of delivery would have to have been noted. I believe it is a privately held company, so it is not as easy to see numbers as with a publicly traded company.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting that...I had no knowledge of this company until I read your post....
> http://www.railplan.com/caf---amtrak-viewliner-ii.html
> 
> https://www.caf.net/en/productos-servicios/proyectos/proyecto-detalle.php?p=189
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I see the new, toilet-less, roomettes will still have the storage cubby over the hallway ceiling.
Click to expand...

Dear god. Thanks for that image!


----------



## Mystic River Dragon

I love the storage cubby over the hallway ceiling!





However, the pictures of the modules do look a bit depressing--just like large storage boxes til they get fitted into the train. (A box in which to enjoy your picnic in a box....



)


----------



## cpotisch

Mystic River Dragon said:


> I love the storage cubby over the hallway ceiling!


I think you might have missed the joke...


----------



## cpotisch

Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

cpotisch said:


> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?


Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.


----------



## PRR 60

AmtrakBlue said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
Click to expand...

He might mean eta of the first bag/dorms (aka, bad/dorms



). My guess is a long-running ABC news show.


----------



## cpotisch

AmtrakBlue said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
Click to expand...

I'm looking through the diner thread and I couldn't find any hints about the day. It's probably right there and I'm just blind but could you link or multiquote it?


----------



## cpotisch

PRR 60 said:


> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He might mean eta of the first bag/dorms (aka, bad/dorms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). My guess is a long-running ABC news show.
Click to expand...

20/20? Where'd you see that that's the date of delivery?


----------



## PRR 60

cpotisch said:


> PRR 60 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He might mean eta of the first bag/dorms (aka, bad/dorms
> 
> 
> 
> ). My guess is a long-running ABC news show.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 20/20? Where'd you see that that's the date of delivery?
Click to expand...

Personal guess not based on any facts. On the other hand, pessimism regarding Viewliner II production has generally been rewarded.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

cpotisch said:


> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm looking through the diner thread and I couldn't find any hints about the day. It's probably right there and I'm just blind but could you link or multiquote it?
Click to expand...

Sorry, it’s in this thread. I would be out there now to catch it, but it’s headed to WAS on a different train this time.


----------



## cpotisch

AmtrakBlue said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm looking through the diner thread and I couldn't find any hints about the day. It's probably right there and I'm just blind but could you link or multiquote it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, it’s in this thread.I would be out there now to catch it, but it’s headed to WAS on a different train this time.
Click to expand...

Thanks. So it's this week but I guess we don't know the date yet.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

cpotisch said:


> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm looking through the diner thread and I couldn't find any hints about the day. It's probably right there and I'm just blind but could you link or multiquote it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, it’s in this thread.I would be out there now to catch it, but it’s headed to WAS on a different train this time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thanks. So it's this week but I guess we don't know the date yet.
Click to expand...

If I got it right, it leaves on 67 tonight. Will hang out in DC tomorrow. Then hop on 97 on Friday.


----------



## cpotisch

Thanks.


----------



## Acela150

AmtrakBlue said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm looking through the diner thread and I couldn't find any hints about the day. It's probably right there and I'm just blind but could you link or multiquote it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, it’s in this thread. I would be out there now to catch it, but it’s headed to WAS on a different train this time.
Click to expand...

You don’t wanna be up for 67 to go by Newark a little after 5am? [emoji23]


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Acela150 said:


> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm looking through the diner thread and I couldn't find any hints about the day. It's probably right there and I'm just blind but could you link or multiquote it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, it’s in this thread.I would be out there now to catch it, but it’s headed to WAS on a different train this time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don’t wanna be up for 67 to go by Newark a little after 5am? [emoji23]
Click to expand...

Nope, but I am considering catching 67 on my way to the Gathering. Figure that one out.


----------



## PVD

On most folks list of "where I'd like to be at 5 AM" I'm betting Newark Penn Station doesn't turn up that often.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

PVD said:


> On most folks list of "where I'd like to be at 5 AM" I'm betting Newark Penn Station doesn't turn up that often.


He's referring to Newark, DE. And he's a bit off since 67 leaves WIL at 5:22. So, more likely whiz by Newark around 5:30-5:45.


----------



## cocojacoby

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> I see the new, toilet-less, roomettes will still have the storage cubby over the hallway ceiling.


Yeah but the rod that goes across the opening restricts the size of the luggage you can put up there and makes it difficult to access it. I wish they came up with a better solution.


----------



## PVD

My bad, I should have realized that. I've actually taken both 66 and 67 and instead of trying to be funny I should have thought first and typed second.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

PVD said:


> My bad, I should have realized that. I've actually taken both 66 and 67 and instead of trying to be funny I should have thought first and typed second.


Join the others who give DE no respect.


----------



## Thirdrail7

cpotisch said:


> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm looking through the diner thread and I couldn't find any hints about the day. It's probably right there and I'm just blind but could you link or multiquote it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, it’s in this thread.I would be out there now to catch it, but it’s headed to WAS on a different train this time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thanks. So it's this week but I guess we don't know the date yet.
Click to expand...


My goodness. Is this what happens when I'm actually direct?



Thirdrail7 said:


> west point said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next week ? The usual Monday or Tuesday ? Since this is SATurday ? ? ?*
> 
> 
> 
> *Next week. The usual days.*
> 
> 
> 
> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Almost guaranteed to be within a few days, as I'm leaving town for the week in the morning. TR7 seems to know my travel schedule and schedules deliveries when I'm unavailable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Believe me, Fleets One and Two will not want much to do with this move. Due to track work and the Empire outage, the moves are taking place in the middle of the night. Even the move to WAS will occur on the Night Owl. Fleets Three and Four will find the cars in the usual spots, but on a Saturday.
Click to expand...


----------



## Acela150

AmtrakBlue said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm looking through the diner thread and I couldn't find any hints about the day. It's probably right there and I'm just blind but could you link or multiquote it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, it’s in this thread.I would be out there now to catch it, but it’s headed to WAS on a different train this time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don’t wanna be up for 67 to go by Newark a little after 5am? [emoji23]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, but I am considering catching 67 on my way to the Gathering. Figure that one out.
Click to expand...

I've been on 66 way to many times from PHL to BOS.


----------



## railiner

AmtrakBlue said:


> Join the others who give DE no respect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My bad, I should have realized that. I've actually taken both 66 and 67 and instead of trying to be funny I should have thought first and typed second.


Delaware, no respect???

Why....I spent a week there, one night....


----------



## PVD

I have a cousin who worked for Gore for many years. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.......


----------



## Palmetto

PVD said:


> I have a cousin who worked for Gore for many years. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.......


That's "an inconvenient truth".


----------



## PVD

Ouch....


----------



## bms

'e,<a


----------



## cpotisch

bms said:


> 'e,<a


Huh?


----------



## Triley

TR7 - Not going to quote the giant post to reply to one line.

I would love to see any type of sleeper back on 67/66, but it's certainly not pure profit. Boston has no one that is trained in the sleepers who can go back to working them, without giving up their LSA seniority, due to the contact. So unless we'd have WAS or NYP crew it and do a crew change at their respective crew base, we'd have hirings to be done in Boston, then the expense of crewing the car. At least now we already know what "meals" could be easily provided to the cafe to feed the sleeper.

Anyway, I had talked to a higher up manager on the corridor "MD" who at the time said they were interested in getting a sleeper back on 67 at some point, once the sleepers came in.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?


----------



## jebr

Bob Dylan said:


> Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?


Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.


----------



## cpotisch

Because the staff would have to swap out halfway through the trip.


----------



## cpotisch

Hah! Great minds think alike!


----------



## me_little_me

cpotisch said:


> PRR 60 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He might mean eta of the first bag/dorms (aka, bad/dorms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). My guess is a long-running ABC news show.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 20/20? Where'd you see that that's the date of delivery?
Click to expand...

I get it - 20 months after 2020 ends. Or is it 20 years later?


----------



## cpotisch

me_little_me said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRR 60 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He might mean eta of the first bag/dorms (aka, bad/dorms
> 
> 
> 
> ). My guess is a long-running ABC news show.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 20/20? Where'd you see that that's the date of delivery?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I get it - 20 months after 2020 ends. Or is it 20 years later?
Click to expand...

Well played.


----------



## railiner

jebr said:


> Bob Dylan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?
> 
> 
> 
> Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.
Click to expand...

Why not just cut the sleeper in and out at Washington, and use a Washington based attendant thru to Boston, and return?


----------



## Maglev

If the bag/sleeper is cut in and out at Washington, couldn't the beds already be made up such that no attendant is necessary?


----------



## cpotisch

Maglev said:


> If the bag/sleeper is cut in and out at Washington, couldn't the beds already be made up such that no attendant is necessary?


But then you've got the issue of there being one train that offers sleeping accommodations without an SCA. And what if passengers don't want to have their room made down? It just seems impractical. If they can't make it work with an attendant, they probably shouldn't do it at all.


----------



## PVD

I would think it would be a legit safety issue....probably a CBA issue as well


----------



## Triley

Maglev said:


> If the bag/sleeper is cut in and out at Washington, couldn't the beds already be made up such that no attendant is necessary?


Careful what you suggest. Next thing you know, maybe that'll become the standard.

In addition to the other responses that have been given, I'm sure the union would have something to say about it.



railiner said:


> jebr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bob Dylan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?
> 
> 
> 
> Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why not just cut the sleeper in and out at Washington, and use a Washington based attendant thru to Boston, and return?
Click to expand...

I would say lost revenue. The car will be sitting unused in WAS waiting for 66 to come in. May as well leave it in the consist and bring in some revenue.


----------



## railiner

Triley said:


> Maglev said:
> 
> 
> 
> If the bag/sleeper is cut in and out at Washington, couldn't the beds already be made up such that no attendant is necessary?
> 
> 
> 
> Careful what you suggest. Next thing you know, maybe that'll become the standard.
> In addition to the other responses that have been given, I'm sure the union would have something to say about it.
> 
> 
> 
> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jebr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bob Dylan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why not just cut the sleeper in and out at Washington, and use a Washington based attendant thru to Boston, and return?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I would say lost revenue. The car will be sitting unused in WAS waiting for 66 to come in. May as well leave it in the consist and bring in some revenue.
Click to expand...

It might lose some, I'll admit. But it would be during mostly daylight hours. If the car cut in and out at Washington, it would have a lot more time to be properly serviced and maintained, as well as having its linens and supplies restocked.

And it could allow early occupancy at Washington, sort of like the 'Executive Sleeper' that set in/out at New York.


----------



## Bob Dylan

railiner said:


> Triley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maglev said:
> 
> 
> 
> If the bag/sleeper is cut in and out at Washington, couldn't the beds already be made up such that no attendant is necessary?
> 
> 
> 
> Careful what you suggest. Next thing you know, maybe that'll become the standard.
> In addition to the other responses that have been given, I'm sure the union would have something to say about it.
> 
> 
> 
> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jebr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bob Dylan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why not just cut the sleeper in and out at Washington, and use a Washington based attendant thru to Boston, and return?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I would say lost revenue. The car will be sitting unused in WAS waiting for 66 to come in. May as well leave it in the consist and bring in some revenue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It might lose some, I'll admit. But it would be during mostly daylight hours. If the car cut in and out at Washington, it would have a lot more time to be properly serviced and maintained, as well as having its linens and supplies restocked. And it could allow early occupancy at Washington, sort of like the 'Executive Sleeper' that set in/out at New York.
Click to expand...

This.


----------



## tommylicious

So when are these supposed to start hitting the system?


----------



## cpotisch

tommylicious said:


> So when are these supposed to start hitting the system?


Assuming they're delivered within the next couple days, I would expect about a month from now for the diners. I don't know what the bag-dorms need to undergo before entering service, so I have no idea when we'll first see 69000 out on the rails.


----------



## west point

Explain something : If it is cut off at WASH how is baggage handled NPN <> WASH ?


----------



## cpotisch

west point said:


> Explain something : If it is cut off at WASH how is baggage handled NPN <> WASH ?


Oh right. Good point. I guess there really aren't any good spots on a Regional to put even a small number of checked bags?


----------



## PVD

The overnights are unique in that they are the only *NER* trains to have checked baggage. And since the Carolinian, Palmetto, Crescent, Cardinal, and Silvers don't go to Boston, they are the only checked bags past NYP on the corridor.


----------



## railiner

I think I 'missed' something here...are we talking about putting a bag dorm on 66 and 67, or a full sleeper? If the former, then I will have to re-think this.

Sorry, if I misunderstood the proposal....


----------



## PVD

People have long advocated for return of a sleeper to the overnights. There was just some thoughts tossed around by some folks as to whether a bag dorm would be sufficient. and how it might be implemented. Unanswered of course is whether the rooms could be sold as revenue rooms, and if so, how would the car be staffed (as an example, an SCA would leave you with 7 rooms for sale, and how could it be staffed in a logical fashion. Would I consistently generate enough additional revenue to pay for an additional crew member? Even though WAS is a good place to add/drop a car since there is a power change anyway, it doesn't solve the problem of baggage South of WAS, and you know they aren't going to work 2 cars.


----------



## Thirdrail7

PVD said:


> People have long advocated for return of a sleeper to the overnights. There was just some thoughts tossed around by some folks as to whether a bag dorm would be sufficient. and how it might be implemented. Unanswered of course is whether the rooms could be sold as revenue rooms, and if so, how would the car be staffed (as an example, an SCA would leave you with 7 rooms for sale, and how could it be staffed in a logical fashion. Would I consistently generate enough additional revenue to pay for an additional crew member? Even though WAS is a good place to add/drop a car since there is a power change anyway, it doesn't solve the problem of baggage South of WAS, and you know they aren't going to work 2 cars.


Which is why the night owl is good place to test the bag dorm. You can test the market for reinstating sleeping service on the corridor. Additionally, 67/66 doesn't carry a ton of luggage although it has a decent share of express.



Triley said:


> TR7 - Not going to quote the giant post to reply to one line.
> 
> I would love to see any type of sleeper back on 67/66, but it's certainly not pure profit. Boston has no one that is trained in the sleepers who can go back to working them, without giving up their LSA seniority, due to the contact. So unless we'd have WAS or NYP crew it and do a crew change at their respective crew base, we'd have hirings to be done in Boston, then the expense of crewing the car. At least now we already know what "meals" could be easily provided to the cafe to feed the sleeper.
> 
> Anyway, I had talked to a higher up manager on the corridor "MD" who at the time said they were interested in getting a sleeper back on 67 at some point, once the sleepers came in.





jebr said:


> Bob Dylan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?
> 
> 
> 
> Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.
Click to expand...

What is wrong with doing a crew change in NYP or an around the world out of WAS? That's why we have crew bases.....to provide crews. If the demand is there, the cost of the attendant(s) shouldn't be a hindrance as two fares would likely pay for their presence. Besides, with chef positions being eliminated, I'm willing to bet some of them would appreciate the opportunity to have something else to bid on.


----------



## Heading North

No idea how occupancy levels worked back in the Twilight Shoreliner era, but I imagine there would be some through traffic south of WAS in sleeper (and not just because I would benefit in ALX). From Boston, the train overnight would be a better connection to morning NY departures like the Palmetto/Carolinian/Cardinal and (for the first two) the transfer could even be in RVR for folks wanting to sleep in. It also makes the New York calling times a little more doable for the Peninsula compared to losing a whole day on the train. I havent taken it north in years, but recall coach being sold out often from WAS to PHL and sometimes at other points too.

Re: staffing, unless I am missing something, a crew change in WAS wouldnt be the end of the world. The Virginia shift would be easy, returning to WAS each night, while the WAS-BOS shift would be kinda wonky. Or could crews deadhead to PHL and do a handoff there? That seems closest to halfway.


----------



## PVD

I'd be happy to have it available. I'm pretty sure I was in a slumbercoach up to Boston in 96 for the World Hockey Summit. Ran a practice in Long Beach, had the 2nd assistant drop myself and another coach at Penn, got off at Back Bay and walked over to the Sheraton Boston.


----------



## railiner

How would this work, for an "around-the-world" assignment?

Day one Chicago to Boston Train 448

Day two Boston to Newport News Train 67

Day three Newport News to Boston Train 66

Day four Boston to Chicago Train 449

Day five Home

If too intense, the Chicago attendant could layover an extra day at Newport News to rest. No longer than a west coast turn.....


----------



## Acela150

railiner said:


> How would this work, for an "around-the-world" assignment?
> 
> Day one Chicago to Boston Train 448
> 
> Day two Boston to Newport News Train 67
> 
> Day three Newport News to Boston Train 66
> 
> Day four Boston to Chicago Train 449
> 
> Day five Home
> 
> If too intense, the Chicago attendant could layover an extra day at Newport News to rest. No longer than a west coast turn.....


I just did some quick planning.. That's about 8 days on the road. When 448 would arrive into BOS they'd have to stay in Boston until the next day. Same with 66 to 449. The train arrives way to late for someone to hop on 67. The LSA on 67/66 already lays over for a day in NPN. So technically the run would look like this.

Day 1: Depart Chicago

Day 2 Arrive Boston

Day 3: Layover until night time departure of 67

Day 4: Arrive Newport News goto Hotel

Day 5: Depart Newport News in the evening

Day 6: Arrive Boston and goto Hotel

Day 7: Depart Boston on 449

Day 8: Arrive Chicago.

Long Distance trains are 6 on 4 off I believe. So you'd have to do 8 on and at least 5 off for a job like this. Not to mention they'd either have to hire quite a few people to work these jobs. It'd be easier to train BOS LSA's and hire a few for BOS.

Bottom line.. Chicago LSA's won't be going to Newport News.


----------



## Triley

Thirdrail7 said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> People have long advocated for return of a sleeper to the overnights. There was just some thoughts tossed around by some folks as to whether a bag dorm would be sufficient. and how it might be implemented. Unanswered of course is whether the rooms could be sold as revenue rooms, and if so, how would the car be staffed (as an example, an SCA would leave you with 7 rooms for sale, and how could it be staffed in a logical fashion. Would I consistently generate enough additional revenue to pay for an additional crew member? Even though WAS is a good place to add/drop a car since there is a power change anyway, it doesn't solve the problem of baggage South of WAS, and you know they aren't going to work 2 cars.
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why the night owl is good place to test the bag dorm. You can test the market for reinstating sleeping service on the corridor. Additionally, 67/66 doesn't carry a ton of luggage although it has a decent share of express.
> 
> 
> 
> Triley said:
> 
> 
> 
> TR7 - Not going to quote the giant post to reply to one line.
> 
> I would love to see any type of sleeper back on 67/66, but it's certainly not pure profit. Boston has no one that is trained in the sleepers who can go back to working them, without giving up their LSA seniority, due to the contact. So unless we'd have WAS or NYP crew it and do a crew change at their respective crew base, we'd have hirings to be done in Boston, then the expense of crewing the car. At least now we already know what "meals" could be easily provided to the cafe to feed the sleeper.
> 
> Anyway, I had talked to a higher up manager on the corridor "MD" who at the time said they were interested in getting a sleeper back on 67 at some point, once the sleepers came in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jebr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bob Dylan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is wrong with doing a crew change in NYP or an around the world out of WAS? That's why we have crew bases.....to provide crews. If the demand is there, the cost of the attendant(s) shouldn't be a hindrance as two fares would likely pay for their presence. Besides, with chef positions being eliminated, I'm willing to bet some of them would appreciate the opportunity to have something else to bid on.
Click to expand...

In the long run there would be too much deadheading involved. If not deadheading BOS <-> NYP, then you'd have to add a hotel room in Boston for the SCA to make the 66/67 turn.
Either way, hopefully we see this happen, even as a test.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Triley said:


> In the long run there would be too much deadheading involved. If not deadheading BOS <-> NYP, then you'd have to add a hotel room in Boston for the SCA to make the 66/67 turn.
> Either way, hopefully we see this happen, even as a test.


Again, if there is enough revenue generated, it will pay for the cost of the attendant and there is no reason for anyone to deadhead. You can either split the job at NYP

66 NYP-BOS

67 BOS-NYP

67 NYP-NPN

66 NPN-NYP

or if you want to push it, open a position (like they did for the Cardinal) and around the world them at WAS.

67-WAS-NPN

66-NPN-BOS

67-BOS-WAS

This isn't that much different than some of the regional runs. I prefer the around the world over the full split. After all,you'll have the same problem if they ever reinstate a full sleeper.


----------



## Triley

Thirdrail7 said:


> Triley said:
> 
> 
> 
> In the long run there would be too much deadheading involved. If not deadheading BOS <-> NYP, then you'd have to add a hotel room in Boston for the SCA to make the 66/67 turn.
> 
> Either way, hopefully we see this happen, even as a test.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, if there is enough revenue generated, it will pay for the cost of the attendant and there is no reason for anyone to deadhead. You can either split the job at NYP
> 
> 66 NYP-BOS
> 
> 67 BOS-NYP
> 
> 67 NYP-NPN
> 
> 66 NPN-NYP
> 
> or if you want to push, open a position (like they did for the Cardinal) and around the world them at WAS.
> 
> 67-WAS-NPN
> 
> 66-NPN-BOS
> 
> 67-BOS-WAS
> 
> This isn't that much different than some of the regional runs.
Click to expand...

Either way, by contract, they'd be adding a hotel room in Boston, something we know they're trying to cut back on.
I'm assuming that an SCA would turn with the equipment in NPN, making it more cost effective long term to use someone from Boston. I mean...it wasn't all that long ago they tried to suggest the LSA turn and come back...


----------



## railiner

Acela150 said:


> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> How would this work, for an "around-the-world" assignment?
> 
> Day one Chicago to Boston Train 448
> 
> Day two Boston to Newport News Train 67
> 
> Day three Newport News to Boston Train 66
> 
> Day four Boston to Chicago Train 449
> 
> Day five Home
> 
> If too intense, the Chicago attendant could layover an extra day at Newport News to rest. No longer than a west coast turn.....
> 
> 
> 
> I just did some quick planning.. That's about 8 days on the road. When 448 would arrive into BOS they'd have to stay in Boston until the next day. Same with 66 to 449. The train arrives way to late for someone to hop on 67. The LSA on 67/66 already lays over for a day in NPN. So technically the run would look like this.
> 
> Day 1: Depart Chicago
> 
> Day 2 Arrive Boston
> 
> Day 3: Layover until night time departure of 67
> 
> Day 4: Arrive Newport News goto Hotel
> 
> Day 5: Depart Newport News in the evening
> 
> Day 6: Arrive Boston and goto Hotel
> 
> Day 7: Depart Boston on 449
> 
> Day 8: Arrive Chicago.
> 
> Long Distance trains are 6 on 4 off I believe. So you'd have to do 8 on and at least 5 off for a job like this. Not to mention they'd either have to hire quite a few people to work these jobs. It'd be easier to train BOS LSA's and hire a few for BOS.
> 
> Bottom line.. Chicago LSA's won't be going to Newport News.
Click to expand...

I don't know the contractual terms regarding layovers, etc...I just assumed that if an attendant can work a west coast turn with just one layover, and no full day off between, that they could do what I proposed. I did not take into account what would happen if a train was running late, jeopardizing the connection.

Thanks for your answer...and I agree, the best scenario would be to have a Boston based attendant. Perhaps they could base one line of the Lake Shore at Boston, as well, to make a better use of having a Boston crew base?


----------



## Thirdrail7

The bag dorm is supposed to dh on 448(24) with Concorde to BOS.


----------



## KnightRail

Thirdrail7 said:


> The bag dorm is supposed to dh on 448(24) with Concorde to BOS.


Both are well on their way to Boston, confirmed by vision, audition, olfaction, and somatosensation. If there was food to cook, gustation may have also been possible.


----------



## John Santos

Thirdrail7 said:


> The bag dorm is supposed to dh on 448(24) with Concorde to BOS.


If that's the diner named after the capital of New Hampshire, it is "Concord". One the other hand, I saw a pair of 737 fuselages on a siding from the EB in northern Washington a couple of years ago. That was very impressive, a Concorde would be astounding!


----------



## sitzplatz17

Just spotted 97 at WAS with a Diesel in tow behind a ACS-64 and the usual consist. So for no sighting of the bag-dorm.


----------



## KnightRail

sitzplatz17 said:


> Just spotted 97 at WAS with a Diesel in tow behind a ACS-64 and the usual consist. So for no sighting of the bag-dorm.


One day too early. Sunday out of Washington, Monday through Florida.


----------



## Acela150

sitzplatz17 said:


> Just spotted 97 at WAS with a Diesel in tow behind a ACS-64 and the usual consist. So for no sighting of the bag-dorm.


It’ll be added in DC. And I believe that the diners and Bag Dorms were supposed to be moved to DC together which they weren’t. The diners were on the back of 161 today. Which is due into WAS around 530pm. So it’s possible they made it onto 97.


----------



## sitzplatz17

KnightRail said:


> sitzplatz17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just spotted 97 at WAS with a Diesel in tow behind a ACS-64 and the usual consist. So for no sighting of the bag-dorm.
> 
> 
> 
> One day too early. Sunday out of Washington, Monday through Florida.
Click to expand...

As mentioned in the Diner conversation, I did spot Springfield and Tallahassee last night at WAS being pulled back to Ivy City late last night. So you're right about those two probably heading out of WAS today (Sunday 7/29) Didn't see the Bag-Dorm with them though. It did look like an additional deadhead Diner might have been added to the front of 97 (28) but I couldn't see the engine switch from where I was.



Acela150 said:


> sitzplatz17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just spotted 97 at WAS with a Diesel in tow behind a ACS-64 and the usual consist. So for no sighting of the bag-dorm.
> 
> 
> 
> It’ll be added in DC. And I believe that the diners and Bag Dorms were supposed to be moved to DC together which they weren’t. The diners were on the back of 161 today. Which is due into WAS around 530pm. So it’s possible they made it onto 97.
Click to expand...

They (the diners) did not make it on the back of 97 yesterday. Will try and keep an eye out for the Bag-Dorm this evening if anyone has intel on that movement.


----------



## Acela150

Thanks.


----------



## Palmland

I saw the diners and the bag-dorm on 97 last night about 9:30 on the Ashland cam. Should be in Hialeah this evening, CSX willing.


----------



## jis

I guess I will have to carefully time my ride on first day of service on SunRail South, so as to meet 97 at Orlando, Kissimmee or Poinciana.


----------



## sitzplatz17

Palmland said:


> I saw the diners and the bag-dorm on 97 last night about 9:30 on the Ashland cam. Should be in Hialeah this evening, CSX willing.


Of course, the one day I'm not home around the time 97 leaves is the day the bag-dorm comes through.


----------



## KnightRail

Bag Dorm layout


----------



## Acela150

What’s the source of that photo layout? It could be an older one.


----------



## bratkinson

Seeing there's 9 roomettes on the BD cars, the lounge car attendant and lone 'contemporary choice' first class lounge car attendant will have the place to themselves!!!


----------



## jis

So an opportunity to sell some more revenue rooms, eh?


----------



## Thirdrail7

bratkinson said:


> Seeing there's 9 roomettes on the BD cars, the lounge car attendant and lone 'contemporary choice' first class lounge car attendant will have the place to themselves!!!


Don't forget the SCA and CA.

9 rooms is still a lot, which is why I suggested utilizing them on 65/66/67 as a test bed for sleeper service. Sell 8 of the rooms and see how it goes.


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

There's a record player, located at each end of the dorm/baggage car ?


----------



## PVD

only for those of us who either still have one, or at least remember what they look like......


----------



## Dakota 400

PVD said:


> only for those of us who either still have one, or at least remember what they look like......


Vinyl records are making a comeback, I understand.


----------



## jis

PVD said:


> only for those of us who either still have one, or at least remember what they look like......


I have an active high quality one - part of my A/V setup. I also have a large collection of classic LPs and even a few 12” 78s!


----------



## ehbowen

My mother has an antique 100-year-old Victrola which she bought from, I believe, a real estate client. It came with a full selection of 78 RPM records...several of which are single sided (the flip side simply has the company logo or is blank).

She has asked me if I want it after she's gone. Oh yes!


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Back on topic what is that pic-gram suppose to mean?


----------



## Thirdrail7

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Back on topic what is that pic-gram suppose to mean?


Communications (PA/IC), if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## Palmland

In the early days of Stereo there was some very good LP recordings of railroad sounds. My favorite was called Rail Dynamics and was recorded near Peekskill, NY. It was described as ‘rainy night along the New York Central’. Mostly steam with a few diesel streamliners as it was done in 1950. Another was ‘Railroad Sounds - steam and diesel’ and described as ‘sounds of a vanishing era.’ It was recorded along the IC.


----------



## KnightRail

Acela150 said:


> Whats the source of that photo layout? It could be an older one.


Photo of the emergency exit instructions inside a room on 69002.


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

jis said:


> I also have a large collection of classic LPs and even a few 12” 78s!


I remember 10" 78s, but not 12".


----------



## PVD

JIS is spot on. 4-5 minutes instead of 3.. It was around as both 10 and 12 inch Mostly shellac and brittle, but when shellac was scarce (like WW2) some 12 inch vinyl was pressed. Obviously vinyl took over for LP anyway, as did 33 1/3.


----------



## railiner

jis said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> only for those of us who either still have one, or at least remember what they look like......
> 
> 
> 
> I have an active high quality one - part of my A/V setup. I also have a large collection of classic LPs and even a few 12” 78s!
Click to expand...

I suppose you have one of these, too... https://www.mcintoshlabs.com/products/amplifiers/MC275B

Or want one....


----------



## OlympianHiawatha

With all that has been going on under Anderson, I wonder if the Sleepers will ever materialize as I would not be surprised if Sleeper service is terminated before all is said and done. We've already seen the beautiful Viewliner Diners downgraded to nothing more than table cars.


----------



## PVD

Still love the sound of a tube amp, but I don't listen to enough music to justify it. Nice to see a beautifully made product can still come from the Southern Tier of NY.


----------



## Acela150

KnightRail said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whats the source of that photo layout? It could be an older one.
> 
> 
> 
> Photo of the emergency exit instructions inside a room on 69002.
Click to expand...

Thanks.


----------



## frequentflyer

railiner said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> only for those of us who either still have one, or at least remember what they look like......
> 
> 
> 
> I have an active high quality one - part of my A/V setup. I also have a large collection of classic LPs and even a few 12” 78s!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I suppose you have one of these, too... https://www.mcintoshlabs.com/products/amplifiers/MC275B
> 
> Or want one....
Click to expand...

Drool..........Worth the money in high end unlike some other stuff.


----------



## railiner

PVD said:


> Still love the sound of a tube amp, but I don't listen to enough music to justify it. Nice to see a beautifully made product can still come from the Southern Tier of NY.


Ha ha...I 'get' the subtle shot at CAF.....


----------



## cpotisch

railiner said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still love the sound of a tube amp, but I don't listen to enough music to justify it. Nice to see a beautifully made product can still come from the Southern Tier of NY.
> 
> 
> 
> Ha ha...I 'get' the subtle shot at CAF.....
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't get it...


----------



## railiner

cpotisch said:


> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still love the sound of a tube amp, but I don't listen to enough music to justify it. Nice to see a beautifully made product can still come from the Southern Tier of NY.
> 
> 
> 
> Ha ha...I 'get' the subtle shot at CAF.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, I don't get it...
Click to expand...

Where are the Viewliner's being made?


----------



## cpotisch

railiner said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still love the sound of a tube amp, but I don't listen to enough music to justify it. Nice to see a beautifully made product can still come from the Southern Tier of NY.
> 
> 
> 
> Ha ha...I 'get' the subtle shot at CAF.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, I don't get it...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where are the Viewliner's being made?
Click to expand...

Elmira, but that's not what I don't get. How is that "a subtle shot at CAF"? Just sounds like he's explicitly complimenting CAF, rather than making some sort of subtle insult.


----------



## jis

I guess today is the day for acting dumb


----------



## cpotisch

Never mind.


----------



## PVD

I try......


----------



## railiner

cpotisch said:


> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still love the sound of a tube amp, but I don't listen to enough music to justify it. Nice to see a beautifully made product can still come from the Southern Tier of NY.
> 
> 
> 
> Ha ha...I 'get' the subtle shot at CAF.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, I don't get it...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where are the Viewliner's being made?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Elmira, but that's not what I don't get. How is that "a subtle shot at CAF"? Just sounds like he's explicitly complimenting CAF, rather than making some sort of subtle insult.
Click to expand...

If you looked at the link for that McIntosh Amp, you would see that it was made in Binghamton--also in the "Southern Tier" of NY....he was being sarcastic, inferring that not everything made their is not good....


----------



## cpotisch

railiner said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still love the sound of a tube amp, but I don't listen to enough music to justify it. Nice to see a beautifully made product can still come from the Southern Tier of NY.
> 
> 
> 
> Ha ha...I 'get' the subtle shot at CAF.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, I don't get it...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where are the Viewliner's being made?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Elmira, but that's not what I don't get. How is that "a subtle shot at CAF"? Just sounds like he's explicitly complimenting CAF, rather than making some sort of subtle insult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you looked at the link for that McIntosh Amp, you would see that it was made in Binghamton--also in the "Southern Tier" of NY....he was being sarcastic, inferring that not everything made their is not good....
Click to expand...

Ohhhhhh. Thank you!


----------



## cocojacoby

railiner said:


> If you looked at the link for that McIntosh Amp, you would see that it was made in Binghamton--also in the "Southern Tier" of NY....he was being sarcastic, inferring that not everything made their is not good....


Yeah interesting that Alstom and CAF are both located there. Politics have something to do with it too. Unfortunately the things I have read say the skill level of the local population is lacking and that is hurting the quality of the products coming out of that area.


----------



## PVD

Hornell has a rail history back 160 years. The CAF site is also not new to rail cars. The lack of workers with modern manufacturing skills is a nationwide problem with a number of contributing factors, certainly not restricted to that area. Government incentives to lure business to a depressed area particularly where suitable space exists is pretty typical.


----------



## neroden

PVD said:


> If one were to accept the not having to move at Albany scenario, which may or may not be realistic, you would need to look at which rooms freed up would provide the greatest yield pattern (added rooms to sell against revenue if buckets are influenced) The NY section has more crew members, would those rooms bring in more than the BOS rooms? I don't know what the numbers are in terms of percent filled and yield. Is it easy enough for BOS OBS to move, as opposed to NY since the dining car is serving at that time? It is not really worthwhile to have these cars if you can't get a good added yield.


OK. This is what I actually expect. I expect the Boston sleeper and the Boston baggage car to be replaced with a bag-dorm -- the Boston sleeper routinely has significantly lower demand than the NY sleeper, and two full baggage cars is overkill except in the very busiest days of the year. Then I expect the "Boston" sleeper to be reassigned to the New York side, where there is *plenty* of demand. Yes, this means the train into NY is one car longer, but it'll still fit on the platform, so that's fine.

And to the person who asked, yes, the rooms in the bag-dorm are saleable roomettes.


----------



## neroden

Thirdrail7 said:


> It is an indeed an odd number. The only thing I can surmise is:
> 
> Lake Shore Limited=3
> 
> Silver Star or Crescent=4
> 
> The Cardinal=2
> 
> Protect=1
> 
> I figure the Meteor already has three revenue sleepers so that train is out. The Crescent currently has more staff so it will yield more rooms. We don't know how long that will remain the case. However, they continue to close more stations along the routes, eliminating the need for bag dorms.
> 
> Maybe Just Thinking was on to something when he said axle count cars. Logically, it would free up 10 coaches. Maybe they swap bag dorms for full baggage cars and send the bags as axle count cars.
> 
> I DO like the idea of putting them on the 67&66. Why not? it is pure revenue.


 What's the baggage load like on 66/67? Will it fit in a bag-dorm?

If so, then maybe:

66/67 - 2 bag-dorms

448/449 - 3 bag-dorms

Cardinal - 2 bag-droms

Protect at Boston

Protect at Chicago

One saved for the daily Cardinal

I know, I can dream...

On another topic, there's already a Boston-based cafe / business car attendant on 448/449. They can hire a Boston-based sleeper attendant for 66/67; this is not a problem.


----------



## cocojacoby

neroden said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> If one were to accept the not having to move at Albany scenario, which may or may not be realistic, you would need to look at which rooms freed up would provide the greatest yield pattern (added rooms to sell against revenue if buckets are influenced) The NY section has more crew members, would those rooms bring in more than the BOS rooms? I don't know what the numbers are in terms of percent filled and yield. Is it easy enough for BOS OBS to move, as opposed to NY since the dining car is serving at that time? It is not really worthwhile to have these cars if you can't get a good added yield.
> 
> 
> 
> OK. This is what I actually expect. I expect the Boston sleeper and the Boston baggage car to be replaced with a bag-dorm -- the Boston sleeper routinely has significantly lower demand than the NY sleeper, and two full baggage cars is overkill except in the very busiest days of the year. Then I expect the "Boston" sleeper to be reassigned to the New York side, where there is *plenty* of demand. Yes, this means the train into NY is one car longer, but it'll still fit on the platform, so that's fine.
> 
> And to the person who asked, yes, the rooms in the bag-dorm are saleable roomettes.
Click to expand...

But isn't the whole idea of the baggage/dorm to put the crew in there to open revenue space in the regular sleepers?


----------



## cpotisch

cocojacoby said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> If one were to accept the not having to move at Albany scenario, which may or may not be realistic, you would need to look at which rooms freed up would provide the greatest yield pattern (added rooms to sell against revenue if buckets are influenced) The NY section has more crew members, would those rooms bring in more than the BOS rooms? I don't know what the numbers are in terms of percent filled and yield. Is it easy enough for BOS OBS to move, as opposed to NY since the dining car is serving at that time? It is not really worthwhile to have these cars if you can't get a good added yield.
> 
> 
> 
> OK. This is what I actually expect. I expect the Boston sleeper and the Boston baggage car to be replaced with a bag-dorm -- the Boston sleeper routinely has significantly lower demand than the NY sleeper, and two full baggage cars is overkill except in the very busiest days of the year. Then I expect the "Boston" sleeper to be reassigned to the New York side, where there is *plenty* of demand. Yes, this means the train into NY is one car longer, but it'll still fit on the platform, so that's fine.
> 
> And to the person who asked, yes, the rooms in the bag-dorm are saleable roomettes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But isn't the whole idea of the baggage/dorm to put the crew in there to open revenue space in the regular sleepers?
Click to expand...

That was the original idea, however if they have spares and there's a train that doesn't need a regular sleeper or a full baggage car, a bag-dorm could serve both purposes well. As was said, this would make sense on trains like the Cardinal, Boston section of the LSL, and the overnight Regionals (65/66/67). If they replaced the baggage car on those trains with a bag-dorm, they would probably still have enough baggage space, while increasing (or introducing) sleeper space.


----------



## west point

neroden said:


> Then I expect the "Boston" sleeper to be reassigned to the New York side, where there is *plenty* of demand. Yes, this means the train into NY is one car longer, but it'll still fit on the platform, so that's fine.


There will not be platform length problems even with Empire NYP train lengths 4 cars longer. Remember that the present NYPS work is adding new crossovers so empire trains can reach all the way to track 15 with many tracks what 12 cars long..


----------



## PVD

If you move the sleeper off of Boston and place it on NY and sub the Bag-dorm you will have no ADA/H room to Boston. Doubt that will fly. A good thought perhaps, but likely a non-starter.


----------



## Thirdrail7

neroden said:


> What's the baggage load like on 66/67? Will it fit in a bag-dorm?


Definitely. The only this is VA wants bike service. I don't know if the bag dorm has bike racks. I believe they were supposed to but it has been so long, I've almost forgotten who makes these cars, when they were ordered, when they were due.

Perhaps Knight Rider can help us from here.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Thirdrail7 said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's the baggage load like on 66/67? Will it fit in a bag-dorm?
> 
> 
> 
> Definitely. The only this is VA wants bike service. I don't know if the bag dorm has bike racks. I believe they were supposed to but it has been so long, I've almost forgotten who makes these cars, when they were ordered, when they were due.
> 
> Perhaps Knight Rider can help us from here.
Click to expand...

Yep, wasn't Downs or Warrington CEO back when this sorry Deal was done?


----------



## OBS

Bob Dylan said:


> Thirdrail7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> neroden said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's the baggage load like on 66/67? Will it fit in a bag-dorm?
> 
> 
> 
> Definitely. The only this is VA wants bike service. I don't know if the bag dorm has bike racks. I believe they were supposed to but it has been so long, I've almost forgotten who makes these cars, when they were ordered, when they were due.
> 
> Perhaps Knight Rider can help us from here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yep, wasn't Downs or Warrington CEO back when this sorry Deal was done?
Click to expand...

I believe Claytor was.....


----------



## RPC

Ordered in July 2010, so that would have been under Boardman. So, any bag/dorm news out of Florida?


----------



## Bob Dylan

RPC said:


> Ordered in July 2010, so that would have been under Boardman. So, any bag/dorm news out of Florida?


That was "tongue in cheek", since its been too long since this never ending saga began!


----------



## RPC

Bob Dylan said:


> RPC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ordered in July 2010, so that would have been under Boardman. So, any bag/dorm news out of Florida?
> 
> 
> 
> That was "tongue in cheek", since its been too long since this never ending saga began!
Click to expand...

Sorry, should have added the "Bronx cheer" emoticon! But, (more) seriously, any news out of Hialeah? (I assume CAF will hold further bag/dorm construction until Amtrak blesses the first article...)


----------



## cpotisch

I thought that the first bag-dorm delivered was 69000, not 69002?


----------



## MikefromCrete

cpotisch said:


> I thought that the first bag-dorm delivered was 69000, not 69002?


I believe 69000 was part of the initial delivery of cars, including diner Albany, which went back to CAF after an medial tour, for repairs and updates. So it's still there awaiting release in upstate New York. You, my young friend, may actually see these cars in service in your lifetime.


----------



## cpotisch

Well Thirdrail explicitly said 69000 in the Part 3 thread.


----------



## KnightRail

cpotisch said:


> Well Thirdrail explicitly said 69000 in the Part 3 thread.


Where? The first post of that thread? The one that has a giant 69000 image and then a giant +2?


----------



## cpotisch

KnightRail said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well Thirdrail explicitly said 69000 in the Part 3 thread.
> 
> 
> 
> Where? The first post of that thread? The one that has a giant 69000 image and then a giant +2?
Click to expand...

Yes. Looked to me like he was saying that 69000 was being delivered, and another two cars are incoming or something. Otherwise, why not just write 69002?


----------



## B&Ofan

If the add a Baggage dorm to the Boston section of the LSL I hope they don't remove the sleeper as I have to disagree about the demand for sleeper space to Boston. In my last trip returning to Boston and my next two upcoming trips I am changing from the Boston sleeper to the NY sleeper (or the other way around for my return trip) because it is substantially cheaper to make the move (even though they double charge me for my bike making the switch). This sounds to me like demand for the Boston section is high, though it may be with the limited space that the low bucket prices go quickly.


----------



## KnightRail

cpotisch said:


> Yes. Looked to me like he was saying that 69000 was being delivered, and another two cars are incoming or something. Otherwise, why not just write 69002?


Probably because only a clip art of 69000 was found. Follow that up with a +2 and you get 69002. Its totally plausible to interpretate it a second way as you did thinking it meant three bag-dorms but that was not the case. Its meaning back then was 69000+2=69002, which of course was delivered at this point.


----------



## neroden

PVD said:


> If you move the sleeper off of Boston and place it on NY and sub the Bag-dorm you will have no ADA/H room to Boston. Doubt that will fly. A good thought perhaps, but likely a non-starter.


Oh, you're right about that. :sigh: Maybe they'll add a bag-dorm to the NY side then (it sometimes has more luggage than the full baggage car can handle).

Regarding bike service, the "baggage" side of the bag-dorms has the same bike rack facilities as the full baggage cars (or at least it's trivial for it to have it), so that's not an issue.


----------



## PVD

Another possibility is adding the B-D to BOS and dropping the full bag.


----------



## neroden

PVD said:


> Another possibility is adding the B-D to BOS and dropping the full bag.


Makes sense but they'd have to make the NY baggage car the "live one" for much of the rest of the trip, since a half-bag can't handle the baggage traffic from Utica to Chicago.

Anyway, it doesn't matter too much, there are lots of options, they just need to have enough rooms and enough baggage capacity. And they ought to restore the dining car service, since the LSL's dining car brought in more coach passengers than any other on the entire system. (Anderson doesn't understand Amtrak's finances, which is sad.)


----------



## cpotisch

PVD said:


> Another possibility is adding the B-D to BOS and dropping the full bag.


IMO, that's the way to go. The Boston section doesn't need the full baggage car, and sleepers frequently sell out. Replace the full bag with a bag-dorm and you get an extra eight roomettes of capacity and you could almost certainly still fit all the bags.


----------



## west point

cpotisch said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> Another possibility is adding the B-D to BOS and dropping the full bag.
> 
> 
> 
> IMO, that's the way to go. The Boston section doesn't need the full baggage car, and sleepers frequently sell out. Replace the full bag with a bag-dorm and you get an extra eight roomettes of capacity and you could almost certainly still fit all the bags.
Click to expand...

It may be we need to study the BOS <>ALB traffic during the time of cancellation this summer . A BD might not be enough ?/ AAlso was just one regular Baggage on west of ALB ?


----------



## cpotisch

west point said:


> Also was just one regular Baggage on west of ALB ?


West of Albany there are currently two baggage cars - one in each section. I can't imagine that one and a half baggage cars would not be enough.


----------



## west point

Was wondering how many baggage cars this summer during the NYP cancellations.


----------



## PVD

I rode it BUF-CHI in June, and I remember one bag, but I could be wrong, it was after midnight.....


----------



## Seaboard92

This is a picture of the inside of the New York baggage car. And for those wondering how I got it my car is adjacent to it. So I walked to my glass door and peaked in.


----------



## KnightRail

Seaboard92 said:


> ImageUploadedByAmtrak Forum1536634746.365192.jpg
> 
> This is a picture of the inside of the New York baggage car. And for those wondering how I got it my car is adjacent to it. So I walked to my glass door and peaked in.


This is why a bag-dorm would be used on the NYP section of the LSL. All baggage except bags destined to/from NYP would go in the BOS baggage car. Crew would be moved out of the revenue sleepers making more rooms available for sale. Also the bag dorms would be cycling through NYP where swaps could be made with the one other service that is likely to get bag-dorms. With only 10 of them, what ever services they do go on they are going to have to share a common layover facility as there wont be a large protect margin.


----------



## cpotisch

west point said:


> Was wondering how many baggage cars this summer during the NYP cancellations.


It was one bag this summer in the abbreviated consist.


----------



## cocojacoby

Seaboard92 said:


> ImageUploadedByAmtrak Forum1536634746.365192.jpg
> 
> This is a picture of the inside of the New York baggage car. And for those wondering how I got it my car is adjacent to it. So I walked to my glass door and peaked in.


Looks kind of empty to me.


----------



## Dakota 400

Seaboard92,

I appreciated seeing your picture of the baggage car. Never have seen the inside of one and have wondered what they might be like.

Your photo leads to a question: How is the baggage organized when placed in the baggage car? The luggage has to be boarded and removed so quickly at most stations, i.e. Fort Lauderdale, and there is no baggage car employee to do this (I am fairly sure). The fact that Amtrak can do this so well with few complaints (as far as I know) of missing luggage when a traveler arrives at her/his destination is impressive to me.


----------



## me_little_me

At the rate Amtrak is dumping baggage handling locations (and agents), I'm surprised nobody has proposed a speculation topic on possible uses for all that space with the already-delivered baggage cars and the soon-to-be-delivered bag dorms?

Storage for the unnecessary cooking equipment from the new diners?

Coach lounges?

New standee-only "economy coach"?

New economy sleeper class with User-provided sleeping bags?

Storage for all that uneaten food from the "fresh choices" meals?

Bus storage for the bus bridges?


----------



## cpotisch

me_little_me said:


> Bus storage for the bus bridges?


What would that even be?


----------



## PVD

sarcasm.....


----------



## cpotisch

PVD said:


> sarcasm.....


I know. I'm just curious as to what he meant by that hypothetical and sarcastic thought.


----------



## ainamkartma

cpotisch said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> 
> sarcasm.....
> 
> 
> 
> I know. I'm just curious as to what he meant by that hypothetical and sarcastic thought.
Click to expand...

In the event of a bus bridge, Amtrak will obviously have to somehow transport the buses to each end of the bridge, duh. So since ridership and baggage checking will be way down, there will be plenty of room to transport the buses in the new baggage car capacity coming on line. I envision one bus parked in each of those "bays" visible in Seaboard's photo, or maybe even two buses stacked up to the ceiling. I hope Amtrak restores the vital amenity of cleaning the windows of PV cars riding on Amtrak trains at every stop, though (this was standard practice for _exactly_ 11 months from A-day, 1971), so that we can get better pictures next time around.

I hope this makes the situation crystal clear,

Ainamkartma


----------



## Seaboard92

I cleaned our windows yesterday morning they are clear as it gets now. So no need to worry about that.


----------



## neroden

KnightRail said:


> Seaboard92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ImageUploadedByAmtrak Forum1536634746.365192.jpg
> 
> This is a picture of the inside of the New York baggage car. And for those wondering how I got it my car is adjacent to it. So I walked to my glass door and peaked in.
> 
> 
> 
> This is why a bag-dorm would be used on the NYP section of the LSL. All baggage except bags destined to/from NYP would go in the BOS baggage car. Crew would be moved out of the revenue sleepers making more rooms available for sale. Also the bag dorms would be cycling through NYP where swaps could be made with the one other service that is likely to get bag-dorms. With only 10 of them, what ever services they do go on they are going to have to share a common layover facility as there wont be a large protect margin.
Click to expand...

The only issue is: is a half-bag enough for the massive baggage demand out of and into NYP? During peak times I'm pretty sure it's not, but maybe they can add an extra baggage car around Thanksgiving...


----------



## PVD

It is an interesting question, do we have a read on what the actual baggage load is? The VL sleepers and AM-2 coaches are certainly not luggage friendly in the manner of a SL


----------



## neroden

We only have isolated data points: the evidence is that the baggage load is *usually* low, but has some massive peaks on high-travel days.


----------



## PVD

That's sort of what I thought. Unfortunately, the extra rooms help most when the full bag is probably most useful. I guess there really isn't a reason the full bag can't be added when demand is expected to be high. Lots of double spots already.


----------



## cpotisch

IMO, here's what it comes down to. The Boston section of the LSL is typically two AM-II coaches, a split AM-I 2x1 business/cafe, and one sleeper. If say the train were sold out, with coaches and business class full, and every room is occupied by 2 passengers, you'd have 165 passengers. That is the theoretical maximum number of Boston section passengers currently. I highly doubt that that would ever happen (especially having two people in every room), but if it did, you would probably need a full baggage car. But again, that would only happen if every single seat and berth were occupied between Boston and Albany. I don't know what percentage of passengers check their bags or how many bags can fit in a baggage car (or bag-dorm), but I just doubt that they will virtually have enough passengers checking bags to and from stops between Boston and Albany such that a full bag would be required. And as PVD said, if really necessary, they could possibly scrounge up a couple full bags during peak season if it does become an issue,


----------



## PVD

The bags already exist, the train runs with 2 full bags now. If the NY bag were changed to usually be a B-D, the former full bag would be in reserve unless it was repurposed to add bag service to a train that does not currently have it. No need to scrounge.


----------



## MARC Rider

My experience is that the percentage of people who check thier bags is pretty low. The baggage carousels at Chicago and Washington have never been crowded for me, and even in Baltimore and Boston where there's only one baggage handler, I rarely have to wait behind any other passengers with bags. I typically only check baggage when I have my ski gear and the big roller duffle, or once when both my wife and I were traveling in a viewliner roomette. Otherwise, there's plenty of room for carry on, both in coach and the sleepers. I suspect most Amtrak LD travelers don't check bags.


----------



## cpotisch

Ok, so its been like like three months since 69000 was delivered. Any more bag-dorms coming along or has CAF just shut down production?


----------



## Acela150

Well considering ThirdRail is missing who knows.


----------



## cpotisch

Acela150 said:


> Well considering ThirdRail is missing who knows.


We still have multiple Amtrak employees on the forum. Knightrail is one of them and he’s been keeping the “Just the facts” thread updated. So I don’t think the lack of Thirdrail makes it impossible to figure this stuff out.


----------



## PVD

Not impossible, but harder. I don't know why he is MIA, I only hope all is well, and there is nothing beyond a personal choice to take a break.


----------



## jis

PVD said:


> Not impossible, but harder. I don't know why he is MIA, I only hope all is well, and there is nothing beyond a personal choice to take a break.


It may be corporation induced personal choice, is my guess. I know that I would have been shown the door at my workplace quite a while back if I posted the type of stuff he was posting about his employer. Maybe his cover was blown by someone.


----------



## PVD

Sadly, you may be right. I certainly hope the "no good deed goes unpunished" force is at work.


----------



## cpotisch

I feel like even if his “cover was blown” and he had to stop posting on AU, I feel like he could still say that he has to leave. It just seemed a bit “abrupt”, it that makes sense...


----------



## jis

cpotisch said:


> I feel like even if his “cover was blown” and he had to stop posting on AU, I feel like he could still say that he has to leave. It just seemed a bit “abrupt”, it that makes sense...


After you have worked in the industry a year or two and been warned by your boss, then come back and say if you would take the risk of posting a goodbye message or not, specially if the threat involved impacting your retirement. I am not saying that this is what happened, but it is well within the realm of possibilities. Insubordination is somewhat looked down upon, more so if you are already in a bit of trouble.


----------



## cpotisch

jis said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> I feel like even if his “cover was blown” and he had to stop posting on AU, I feel like he could still say that he has to leave. It just seemed a bit “abrupt”, it that makes sense...
> 
> 
> 
> After you have worked in the industry a year or two and been warned by your boss, then come back and say if you would take the risk of posting a goodbye message or not, specially if the threat involved impacting your retirement. I am not saying that this is what happened, but it is well within the realm of possibilities. Insubordination is somewhat looked down upon, more so if you are already in a bit of trouble.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.


----------



## Dakota 400

jis said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> I feel like even if his “cover was blown” and he had to stop posting on AU, I feel like he could still say that he has to leave. It just seemed a bit “abrupt”, it that makes sense...
> 
> 
> 
> After you have worked in the industry a year or two and been warned by your boss, then come back and say if you would take the risk of posting a goodbye message or not, specially if the threat involved impacting your retirement. I am not saying that this is what happened, but it is well within the realm of possibilities. Insubordination is somewhat looked down upon, more so if you are already in a bit of trouble.
Click to expand...


What happened to freedom of speech?


----------



## Palmetto

Doesn't apply to "proprietary information".


----------



## cpotisch

Dakota 400 said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> I feel like even if his “cover was blown” and he had to stop posting on AU, I feel like he could still say that he has to leave. It just seemed a bit “abrupt”, it that makes sense...
> 
> 
> 
> After you have worked in the industry a year or two and been warned by your boss, then come back and say if you would take the risk of posting a goodbye message or not, specially if the threat involved impacting your retirement. I am not saying that this is what happened, but it is well within the realm of possibilities. Insubordination is somewhat looked down upon, more so if you are already in a bit of trouble.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What happened to freedom of speech?
Click to expand...

If you're leaking "secret" info about your employer, they can fire you. The information is that company's property and they completely have the right to fire someone who leaks it. So while I miss Thirdrail and really appreciate the information he provided and his take on Amtrak's operations, they do have plenty cause to fire him if he continues posting. Sad, but true.


----------



## me_little_me

Dakota 400 said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> I feel like even if his “cover was blown” and he had to stop posting on AU, I feel like he could still say that he has to leave. It just seemed a bit “abrupt”, it that makes sense...
> 
> 
> 
> After you have worked in the industry a year or two and been warned by your boss, then come back and say if you would take the risk of posting a goodbye message or not, specially if the threat involved impacting your retirement. I am not saying that this is what happened, but it is well within the realm of possibilities. Insubordination is somewhat looked down upon, more so if you are already in a bit of trouble.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What happened to freedom of speech?
Click to expand...

Prevents the government from limiting you, not an employer.


----------



## cpotisch

me_little_me said:


> Dakota 400 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> 
> I feel like even if his “cover was blown” and he had to stop posting on AU, I feel like he could still say that he has to leave. It just seemed a bit “abrupt”, it that makes sense...
> 
> 
> 
> After you have worked in the industry a year or two and been warned by your boss, then come back and say if you would take the risk of posting a goodbye message or not, specially if the threat involved impacting your retirement. I am not saying that this is what happened, but it is well within the realm of possibilities. Insubordination is somewhat looked down upon, more so if you are already in a bit of trouble.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What happened to freedom of speech?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Prevents the government from limiting you, not an employer.
Click to expand...

For the most part. There are definitely exceptions to that, but those have really come out of court cases and rulings, and not out of the First Amendment itself. This is not one of those cases.


----------



## jis

Specifically, read the conditions of employment (I know very few people who actually go through the voluminous document  - usually). You have very little freedom of speech, actually close to none, when it comes to disclosing company information outside the company, except in limited whistle-blowing circumstances, and that too is not exactly free of consequences.


----------



## Seaboard92

I'm pretty sure I cracked third rail's cover a few months ago but I've never revealed who I think it is. And if I'm right he is still with the company. So there is nothing to worry about on that front. 

I figured it out by piecing together bits and pieces of different conversations. But again I didn't expose him.


----------



## jis

That is consistent with him going abruptly off the web. Maintaining ones job is usually first priority, and if that is the case everything else becomes secondary. Been there, done that in the past, though not involving anything on the web. If you want to know more we can talk about it over a beer at a Gathering some day.


----------



## west point

Maybe he can get some one here who can relay his information and not by the internet !


----------



## jis

west point said:


> Maybe he can get some one here who can relay his information and not by the internet !


Why the hell should he care so much so as to risk his job for satisfying the idle curiosity of a bunch of railfans anyway if he cannot participate in the discussion himself. I know I wouldn't.


----------



## cpotisch

jis said:


> Why the hell should he care so much so as to risk his job for satisfying the idle curiosity of a bunch of railfans anyway if he cannot participate in the discussion himself. I know I wouldn't.


This! I mean, if you're at the point where continuing to post here could cost you your job, you should probably bail on posting/leaking to this site, altogether. Too much risk and not enough reward (if any).

However, we're now nearing a full page of Thirdrail7 discussion in the V-II thread, which seems a bit excessive, so maybe a moderator could move these posts?


----------



## pennyk

cpotisch said:


> However, we're now nearing a full page of Thirdrail7 discussion in the V-II thread, which seems a bit excessive, so maybe a moderator could move these posts?


.... or maybe all of you could stop discussing why Thirdrail7 is no longer posting as such.


----------



## cpotisch

pennyk said:


> .... or maybe all of you could stop discussing why Thirdrail7 is no longer posting as such.


Yeah, that actually seems fair.


----------



## jis

I guess if a VII would show even a teeny weeny smidgen of its face out the door of CAF, we'd all rush off to it and stop discussing Thirdrail :hi:

BTW, back in Miami Boardman did make an off the cuff statement about consequences of the lowest bid requirement in the passing, not specific to CAF per se, but a general one. None of us pressed for any further discussion and it was dropped. This was during the evening reception. That left me wondering whether they spent all this time arguing about what is it that CAF was actually supposed to deliver or not, over and above the previously reported problems with finding welders and what not.


----------



## neroden

Perfectly possible.  Even if you don't have a lowest bid requirement, I can say from experience that you can end up with contractors who want to argue with you that they don't have to deliver functional work.


----------



## PVD

The most expensive ship ever built, the new aircraft carrier Gerald Ford is a perfect example of that very statement...


----------



## cpotisch

PVD said:


> The most expensive ship ever built, the new aircraft carrier Gerald Ford is a perfect example of that very statement...


Yep, $37.3 billion program cost and $13 billion unit cost.

Of course IMHO, the F35 Lightning II holds the true crown for absurdly expensive and stupid military projects, at a total program cost of more than $1.5 trillion, and each of these single-engine single-seat units costing at least $100 million. Point is, military projects can get pretty dumb. hboy:


----------



## PVD

I singled out the Ford, because despite all the press showings and politicking, it is not ready for use. There are no working elevators to bring munitions up to arm the planes, and both the catapults and arresting gear still have major issues. It is also the product of a single source procurement since at present, in the US, there is only one builder capable of building that ship.

The fighter competition at least had multiple entrants....


----------



## Ziv

John Glenn said:


“I guess the question I'm asked the most often is: "When you were sitting in that capsule listening to the count-down, how did you feel?" Well, the answer to that one is easy. I felt exactly how you would feel if you were getting ready to launch and knew you were sitting on top of two million parts -- all built by the lowest bidder on a government contract.”  

Also credited to Alan Shepard


----------



## me_little_me

cpotisch said:


> Yep, $37.3 billion program cost and $13 billion unit cost.
> 
> Of course IMHO, the F35 Lightning II holds the true crown for absurdly expensive and stupid military projects, at a total program cost of more than $1.5 trillion, and each of these single-engine single-seat units costing at least $100 million. Point is, military projects can get pretty dumb. hboy:


In defense of the military, their weapons system need to be state of the art and between the time of writing the specs and the delivery, there are technology changes, threat changes, etc. On the other hand, the biggest change for Amtrak is that they can't decide what they want or what they want to do with what they get. witness that some diners are no longer diners, but "diner lounges".


----------



## jis

Not Diner Lounges. The official designation is Sleeper Lounges. [emoji57]


----------



## cpotisch

me_little_me said:


> In defense of the military, their weapons system need to be state of the art and between the time of writing the specs and the delivery, there are technology changes, threat changes, etc. On the other hand, the biggest change for Amtrak is that they can't decide what they want or what they want to do with what they get. witness that some diners are no longer diners, but "diner lounges".


There's a difference between being state of the art and trying to do too many things while being unnecessarily complex and expensive. And it doesn't seem like the F-35 is a particularly good aircraft either, with low reliability, relatively low range, and limited weapon capacity. $1.5 trillion for that is just dumb.


----------



## jis

cpotisch said:


> There's a difference between being state of the art and trying to do too many things while being unnecessarily complex and expensive. And it doesn't seem like the F-35 is a particularly good aircraft either, with low reliability, relatively low range, and limited weapon capacity. $1.5 trillion for that is just dumb.


Seems like there is a lot of technology for technology's sake rather than the capabilities actually linked with any specific plan of engagement with any real enemy in a really likely battle of the future. I don't think any of these whiz-bang things will help win us anything in Afghanistan engagement for example.

To some extent I think it is our plan to bankrupt ourselves and turn our own people into paupers over time. As they say, the seeds of collapse are built into the fabric of success.

But all this has precious little to do with Viewliner IIs other than that we appear to be having equivalent levels of difficulty getting working versions of VL-IIs and F-35s and several other military wonders of late.


----------



## KnightRail

1st off, the discussion about a certain member’s posting activity or lack there of is extremely inappropriate, unprofessional, and uncalled for. What’s even more disconcerting is that those comments have been allowed to stay here and haven’t been deleted. No member should have a spotlight shined on them like that for simply not posting. The real answer is ITS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. MYOB! 

For the silent majority who’s benefit is reuined by the obnoxious few, Tomorrow: Dover & Frankfort


----------



## MARC Rider

me_little_me said:


> In defense of the military, their weapons system need to be state of the art and between the time of writing the specs and the delivery, there are technology changes, threat changes, etc. On the other hand, the biggest change for Amtrak is that they can't decide what they want or what they want to do with what they get. witness that some diners are no longer diners, but "diner lounges".


Why do they have to be state of the art? All they have to be is as good as, or maybe a bit better than the stuff deployed by potential adversaries.  And it would be helpful if they were reliable and idiot proof.  And a cheaper unit price so we could have more of them, if needed.

I believe we managed to win WW2 with a bunch of junky weapons systems in the inventory.  In fact, the Germans deployed jet fighters before we did.  Fat lot of good it did them.


----------



## west point

MARC Rider said:


> Why do they have to be state of the art? All they have to be is as good as, or maybe a bit better than the stuff deployed by potential adversaries.  And it would be helpful if they were reliable and idiot proof.  And a cheaper unit price so we could have more of them, if needed.
> 
> I believe we managed to win WW2 with a bunch of junky weapons systems in the inventory.  In fact, the Germans deployed jet fighters before we did.  Fat lot of good it did them.


Good point.  The German air force was overwhelmed by a high ratio of P-51s that over whelmed the Germans that had too many different state of the art airplanes.  Too few ME-262s


----------



## JRR

west point said:


> Good point.  The German air force was overwhelmed by a high ratio of P-51s that over whelmed the Germans that had too many different state of the art airplanes.  Too few ME-262s


A German Squadron of Jets surrendered at a German airbase occupied by the Army Air Corps on a Sunday when my father happened to draw “Officer of the Day” duty even though he was a doctor.

The Commanding brought in his jet and explained that the Russians had overrun their base and were looking for a place to surrender.

The Commander radioed his Squadron under the guard of a Sgt. who spoke German and one by one they landed and surrendered (a total of six). The Commander explained that they had not been able to effectively deploy the jets against the Russians as they had little fuel and the little they had was saved to make their escape to the US lines.

Attached is a picture of the wings and shoulder cord of the Commander.

[attachment=10943:IMG_6015.JPG


----------



## cpotisch

JRR said:


> A German Squadron of Jets surrendered at a German airbase occupied by the Army Air Corps on a Sunday when my father happened to draw “Officer of the Day” duty even though he was a doctor.
> 
> The Commanding brought in his jet and explained that the Russians had overrun their base and were looking for a place to surrender.
> 
> The Commander radioed his Squadron under the guard of a Sgt. who spoke German and one by one they landed and surrendered (a total of six). The Commander explained that they had not been able to effectively deploy the jets against the Russians as they had little fuel and the little they had was saved to make their escape to the US lines.
> 
> Attached is a picture of the wings and shoulder cord of the Commander.
> 
> [attachment=10943:IMG_6015.JPG
> 
> [/QUOTE]
> The attachment didn't work. :wacko:


----------



## Maglev

[attachment=10943:IMG_6015.JPG]


----------



## JRR

cpotisch said:


> The attachment didn't work.


Here it is again:


----------



## Triley

west point said:


> Maybe he can get some one here who can relay his information and not by the internet !


If guest posts were still allowed in any forum, this wouldn't be as much of a problem. Just saying, admins...


----------



## jis

Triley said:


> If guest posts were still allowed in any forum, this wouldn't be as much of a problem. Just saying, admins...


I don’t think you understand what westpoint was referring to. The problem he was addressing has nothing to do with guest posts. I’ll just stop there since we have been adequately spanked and chastised by another Amtrak employee poster for even discussing the issue at hand [emoji57]


----------



## cpotisch

Triley said:


> west point said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe he can get some one here who can relay his information and not by the internet !
> 
> 
> 
> If guest posts were still allowed in any forum, this wouldn't be as much of a problem. Just saying, admins...
Click to expand...

This has been discussed multiple times, and the amount of spam and non-restrictable content that comes through when guests can post anywhere really means that it's not worth it.


----------



## Triley

cpotisch said:


> This has been discussed multiple times, and the amount of spam and non-restrictable content that comes through when guests can post anywhere really means that it's not worth it.


You weren't even around during that time, so as usual you're going on what others have said instead of personal experience. Maybe the admins and mods were really on top of things, but I can think of relatively few times where I had seen any major issues. And I'll admit I used the guise of 2 different guest accounts to make certain posts.
Obviously there's drawbacks to allowing guest posts everywhere, but to brush it aside as mostly negative isn't correct.


----------



## jis

Could this n-th rehash of the "Guest Post discussion" be moved out of the Viewliner II thread to somewhere else more appropriate please? It just gets tiresome for some of us who lived through it all.


----------



## cpotisch

Triley said:


> You weren't even around during that time, so as usual you're going on what others have said instead of personal experience. Maybe the admins and mods were really on top of things, but I can think of relatively few times where I had seen any major﻿ issues. And I'll admit I used the guise of 2 different guest accounts to make certain posts.
> 
> Obviously﻿ there's drawbacks to allowing guest posts everywhere, but to brush it aside as mostly negative isn't correct.


I've read *a lot* of old threads discussing this, so while I wasn't here back then, I think I've gotten a pretty good sense of what it was like. But I could be wrong so I won't speak to this any more.


----------



## neroden

To get back on topic, the bag/dorms and sleepers are basically cash factories which spew piles of cash.  Do we have *any* leaks regarding when Amtrak is going to get them and put them into service?  Because it should have happened years ago.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Seem we can *not *even get the first Bag/Dorm car to pass a Amtrak acceptance inspection.  Has Amtrak canceled this order yet?


----------



## cocojacoby

Yeah, I thought the concept of a Bag/Dorm was a brilliant idea.  Get the crew out of revenue space and greatly increase revenue.  This is just unconscionable.  What the hell are they doing all this time?


----------



## Amtrakfflyer

I wrote the Board again last week asking that same question or more specifically has the order been cancelled. 

CC’D same letter to my reps in Congress.


----------



## cpotisch

It really seems like CAF and Amtrak have jumped ship on the order. We still have one diner left, nine bag-dorms (and the one that has been delivered has yet to enter service), and all 25 sleepers. What a shame.


----------



## Amtrak706

cocojacoby said:


> This is just unconscionable.  What the hell are they doing all this time?


It’s Amtrak. This should be their slogan.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Yep, is there ANY info on *** is going on?


----------



## DSS&A

Okay,  now that the first sleeper is on the way to Florida, it's been just over six months since the single baggage-dorm went "south for the winter... ". At least it has not been sent back north to New York for repairs.  Does anyone have information about this car other than it's getting a suntan?


----------



## Thirdrail7

it is receiving modifications.


----------



## GBNorman

I would suggest to be prepared for another dearth of car deliveries. The 70 Bags and 25 Diners are all on the property (that Amtrak can't figure out how to use 'em is not CAF's concern).

Amtrak now has their "tinker toys" - Bag-dorm and Sleeper - that you can be sure every department, save maybe accounting, will be doing their tinkering.


----------



## DSS&A

Thirdrail7 said:


> it is receiving modifications.


Thank you very much  for your information.  I look forward to when we can officially hear about the modifications.   While it's  almost a 50/50 coin toss, I would think that since the baggage-sleeper has been looked over and worked on for a while, that the next cars leaving the CAF plant may be more baggage-sleeper cars.  Time (and possibly a highway sign) will tell......


----------



## Amtrak706

What modifications could they possibly be making? The prototype sleeper and bag dorm were delivered FIVE years ago, and I would have thought Amtrak made any modifications then before they sent them back to CAF.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

One thinks it quality control issues.

As before you make a final payment on a house you need to crawl around and make sure it done, and works correctly.  Joints, baseboards, electrical, and HVAC issues.  

Sure think Amtrak is going over the quality of the railcar with a magnifying glass, as GBNorman stated above.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Amtrak706 said:


> What modifications could they possibly be making? The prototype sleeper and bag dorm were delivered FIVE years ago, and I would have thought Amtrak made any modifications then before they sent them back to CAF.


There are modifications that are only done in Hialeah, like installing the WiFi.


----------



## RebelRider

The first baggage-dorm car, 69002, is deadheading north on 98 today. No, it isn't going back to the factory. Looks like it is starting a training/familiarization tour.


----------



## cocojacoby

RebelRider said:


> The first baggage-dorm car, 69002, is deadheading north on 98 today. No, it isn't going back to the factory. Looks like it is starting a training/familiarization tour.


This is the car that can change everything. Good news!


----------



## Thirdrail7

cocojacoby said:


> This is the car that can change everything. Good news!



Yes...all ten of them.


----------



## neroden

Well, obviously if they can get the bag-dorms working, they can get the sleepers working. Unless there's a problem with the bedrooms or the accessible room. The roomettes and bathrooms and shower are the same.


----------



## cocojacoby

Thirdrail7 said:


> Yes...all ten of them.



This is probably the most important and consequential car of the order. Yeah, I still don't understand that stupid decision to go with more baggage cars which are now being ELIMINATED on some trains (e.g., 448). This just doesn't make sense. It won't take long to see how adding these cars is going to effect the bottom line of the trains to which they are assigned.

I think Amtrak is really going to regret reducing the number of bag/dorms and
that decision infuriates me. What the hell were they thinking? Am I overreacting?


----------



## looshi

cocojacoby said:


> This is probably the most important and consequential car of the order. Yeah, I still don't understand that stupid decision to go with more baggage cars which are now being ELIMINATED on some trains (e.g., 448). This just doesn't make sense. Someone on this site once said "Amtrak only needs 11 single level full service diners to outfit the Silver Meteor, Crescent and Lake Shore". If that's the case I guess the same applies to baggage/dorms. It won't take long to see how adding these cars is going to effect the bottom line of these trains.
> 
> I think Amtrak is really going to regret reducing the number of bag/dorms and
> that decision infuriates me. What the **** were they thinking? Am I overreacting?



I heard the decision was made to add space for additional bike storage due to the popularity of the bike aboard program.


----------



## dgvrengineer

I hope that the bag-dorm hitting the road for training/familiarization is an indication that more should be expected soon.


----------



## Thirdrail7

I hope that it means that since the car is half bag and half sleeper, when the full sleeper emerges, a training and familiarization tour will not be necessary.

After all, everyone is already trained on the baggage portion.


----------



## daybeers

cocojacoby said:


> This is probably the most important and consequential car of the order. Yeah, I still don't understand that stupid decision to go with more baggage cars which are now being ELIMINATED on some trains (e.g., 448). This just doesn't make sense. It won't take long to see how adding these cars is going to effect the bottom line of the trains to which they are assigned.
> 
> I think Amtrak is really going to regret reducing the number of bag/dorms and
> that decision infuriates me. What the **** were they thinking? Am I overreacting?


You're not overreacting at all: I feel the same way.



looshi said:


> I heard the decision was made to add space for additional bike storage due to the popularity of the bike aboard program.


Right, because the present bike program is so accommodating.


----------



## Thirdrail7

looshi said:


> I heard the decision was made to add space for additional bike storage due to the popularity of the bike aboard program.



It also had to do with mail contracts, some of which came to fruition, some didn't.


----------



## cocojacoby

Thirdrail7 said:


> It also had to do with mail contracts, some of which came to fruition, some didn't.



I thought that was the main reason and a serious possibility after it was recommended by the USPS Attorney General if I remember right, but I never heard that anything came of it. Did Amtrak actually secure any mail contracts?


----------



## me_little_me

cocojacoby said:


> I thought that was the main reason and a serious possibility after it was recommended by the USPS Attorney General if I remember right, but I never heard that anything came of it. Did Amtrak actually secure any mail contracts?


USPS Attorney General? Did you mean Inspector General?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

The US mail no longer uses Amtrak and United States Post service has sold all their rail/mail facilities.


----------



## cocojacoby

me_little_me said:


> USPS Attorney General? Did you mean Inspector General?



Yes I did!



Dutchrailnut said:


> The US mail no longer uses Amtrak and United States Post service has sold all their rail/mail facilities.



Just have to deliver the mail by truck in that case or in some places like Boston just roll it out the back door (at least for now). Is part of Moynihan Station going to still serve as a postal facility in New York? Then that's right there too.


----------



## jis

The New York area main sorting facility is not at Moynihan. All that will remain are customer service windows and some associated functions. 

The main sorting office in Manhattan is the Morgan facility on 9th Ave few blocks south near 29th St. 

So bottom line is. There is little remaining in the old PO building that is relevant to bulk mail handling.


----------



## PVD

Morgan was originally equipped with a link to the high line. My father transferred over there towards the end of his career with the P.O. He spent most of his time at Grand Central and GPO. Morgan was the site of one of the biggest fires in NYC history, in Dec 1967....The FDNY SuperPumper was in full use for that one.....


----------



## neroden

Thirdrail7 said:


> I hope that it means that since the car is half bag and half sleeper, when the full sleeper emerges, a training and familiarization tour will not be necessary.
> 
> After all, everyone is already trained on the baggage portion.


I expect a full training and familiarization tour anyway, if only to show everyone the details of the new bedroom and accessible bedroom. It didn't take that long for the baggage cars, so whatever.

What I'm HOPING is that the delays for "Modifications at Hialeah" will be much shorter, because they will be used to doing all the modifications, having perfected them on the bag-dorms. (RailPlan seems to have made perfectly good interior units so I doubt those need modifications.)


----------



## jis

If you look at the budget asks for the Viewliner II program you can sort of guess the it will be 2021 before the V-2 deliveries are completed and paid for. Unfortunately.


----------



## Amtrak706

jis said:


> If you look at the budget asks for the Viewliner II program you can sort of guess the it will be 2021 before the V-2 deliveries are completed and paid for. Unfortunately.


At least they describe getting the cars in service as a priority. I think many of us had the feeling that they didn’t really care about the order anymore.

The quick mention of “lease and/or storage” as an option for how to deploy the V2s, though, is slightly infuriating.


----------



## neroden

Amtrak706 said:


> At least they describe getting the cars in service as a priority. I think many of us had the feeling that they didn’t really care about the order anymore.
> 
> The quick mention of “lease and/or storage” as an option for how to deploy the V2s, though, is slightly infuriating.



This part is written by some dumbass idiot (maybe Gardner). They claim that they're not sure there will be enough profitable demand for additional sleepers on the Eastern routes, which is just ridiculous. Probably another artifact of their defective, fraudulent accounting.


----------



## juanee

Dutchrailnut said:


> The US mail no longer uses Amtrak and United States Post service has sold all their rail/mail facilities.



Why did the post office decide not to use Amtrak anymore for mail, or even slow mail like media mail or parcel post packages? I don't remember the reason...


----------



## jis

I thought it was Gunn who killed all remaining postal business when he got rid of all other non-passenger business other than limited retaining of package business. His claim was that it cost more to run that business than the revenue it produced.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Postal business was and is a hassle. Requires effort. Use to haul Bulk Mail between DC to Denver. Would stage north awaited the post office to load a trailer. The waiting could take a day, or two, or three. Then it’s a rush rush load. Never made sense from the driver view. Of course the view from the driver windshield does not take in account the money, just the drive time and rest work cycle needed. The post office bulk loads are not planned departure, there a load and go type. Regular mail leave in a predictable way, just not the bulk.


----------



## cocojacoby

looshi said:


> I heard the decision was made to add space for additional bike storage due to the popularity of the bike aboard program.


So what is it $25 to bring your bike? Wouldn't the roomettes bring in more like thousands?


----------



## juanee

jis said:


> I thought it was Gunn who killed all remaining postal business when he got rid of all other non-passenger business other than limited retaining of package business. His claim was that it cost more to run that business than the revenue it produced.



I somewhat remember Mr. Gunn did that. I still remember seeing those Mail and Express cars on the train in the 2000s. Which leads to another thought (to remain on topic)... when it comes to the Viewliner II baggage car order, why couldn't Amtrak have used the Mail and Express cars in storage for baggage cars? (Those cars already have HEP pass through.) Or if Amtrak wanted _new _cars, just order box cars from a traditional box car vender and add HEP pass through?


----------



## jis

Because they don’t have gangways to connect to the rest of the train.


----------



## OBS

jis said:


> Because they don’t have gangways to connect to the rest of the train.


Also no climate control.


----------



## gswager

And speed restriction.


----------



## juanee

So the constraints are gangways, climate control and speed restrictions, but...

1. Gangways could be added, but I figure the box car would have to go through additional design and testing because of the requirement of humans being in the car when the train is moving, correct? Of course, to eliminate this requirement (and also save time and money), no gangways.

2. Climate control... we have all see freight box cars that have climate control (refrigeration) (and Amtrak's own Express Trak Refrigerated Box Cars).

3. Speed restriction? I don't recall the train going slower (on Sunset Limited / Texas Eagle, my home train) when the Mail and Express cars were being used.

Just curious why Amtrak just didn't go with something similar to the old Mail and Express cars. I don't remember there being any huge delay concerning deliver of the old Mail and Express cars, or even the current version of the Amtrak Auto Carriers.


----------



## west point

Empty cars MAS slower. SWC never carried empty cars. Amtrak would gather up a bunch and run a slower 2nd section of #4


----------



## Amtrak706

There were several different types of mail and express cars. All were put into service with an MAS of 90. The original Material Handling Cars, or MHCs, were the only ones with HEP pass-through. They had a speed restriction of 60 plopped onto them around 2003 because of some issues with their trucks, and this was the beginning of the end of the program. The issue was never resolved, so if Amtrak was to gather up the handful they still own for conversion to baggage cars, the costs would include (but not be limited to) conversion back from MOW service, climate control, vestibules, new or re-engineered trucks, and probably a general rebuilding since they are all about 30 years old. The result would be a small fleet of dated, oddball cars that couldn’t run on the NEC, Empire Corridor, or Keystone Corridor without impacting schedules, and would have far less baggage capacity than what they would be replacing since they are only something like 60’ long. All of this not even mentioning the fact that Amtrak already has a surplus of brand new purpose built baggage cars. Does that sound worth it?

The other express cars have long since been sold, and the ExpressTrak reefers are also a very small fleet and would require everything the MHCs would plus HEP pass through. And they would be restricted to Superliner routes only due to their height.


----------



## Amtrak706

west point said:


> Empty cars MAS slower. SWC never carried empty cars. Amtrak would gather up a bunch and run a slower 2nd section of #4


I’ve never ever heard of Amtrak running a second section like this.


----------



## Thirdrail7

A few things before thsi thread spirals entirely off topic:



cocojacoby said:


> I thought that was the main reason and a serious possibility after it was recommended by the USPS Attorney General if I remember right, but I never heard that anything came of it. Did Amtrak actually secure any mail contracts?



Despite the naysayers, I fully stand by my statement:



Thirdrail7 said:


> It also had to do with mail contracts, *some of which came to fruition, some didn't*.



Not every mail contract needs to be centered in a city or have a facility in specific area. There are plenty of things that are capable of being delivered, particularly between certain remote city pairs, where trucking isn't cost effective. You can take it for what it is worth. 



OBS said:


> Also no climate control.



The new cars do not have really climate control. They only have a roof vents to help in hot temperatures. 



juanee said:


> So the constraints are gangways, climate control and speed restrictions, but...
> 
> 1. Gangways could be added, but I figure the box car would have to go through additional design and testing because of the requirement of humans being in the car when the train is moving, correct? Of course, to eliminate this requirement (and also save time and money), no gangways.
> 
> 2. Climate control... we have all see freight box cars that have climate control (refrigeration) (and Amtrak's own Express Trak Refrigerated Box Cars).
> 
> 3. Speed restriction? I don't recall the train going slower (on Sunset Limited / Texas Eagle, my home train) when the Mail and Express cars were being used.
> 
> Just curious why Amtrak just didn't go with something similar to the old Mail and Express cars. I don't remember there being any huge delay concerning deliver of the old Mail and Express cars, or even the current version of the Amtrak Auto Carriers.



The modified mail cars were good for 110 the NEC but as Amt706 mentioned, most railroads placed a 60mph restriction on them. You may not recall it or maybe the track speed was already low on your route so you didn't notice it. However, it existed. As part of the CAF order, you received a car that is capable of 125mph operation and is new. 

Seems like a no brainer.


----------



## juanee

Ok, I was curious about mail handling cars and the reasons why something similar to them were not chosen instead of opting for the Viewliner II type baggage car build. My questions were answered, thank you for those that chimed in with your thoughts and with the facts.


----------



## cocojacoby

OBS said:


> Also no climate control.



Yeah, I once thought that maybe the Baggage/Dorms would have climate control in the baggage area and then Amtrak could add a new pet transportation service for larger dogs who don't fit under your seat.


----------



## Siegmund

Several times the need for vestibules has been mentioned in this thread... this makes me ask: why bother? How often do onboard crew actually need to access the baggage car in that way? 

The Alaska Railroad actually had a need for access to the baggage car - stopping to unload canoes and such at flag stops - but Amtrak has never offered checked baggage service at stations that didn't have ground crew. I had always assumed the loading and unloading was done entirely by the ground crew at each station.


----------



## StriderGDM

I can't say how often the crew really needs access, but on my last trip on the Crescent, the sleeping car attendant definitely took advantage of the access to store an oversized suitcase a couple had brought with them not realizing how small the roomettes were.

I suspect access ends up being very useful more often than many of us realize.


----------



## Siegmund

@StriderGDM: Yeah, I can see that happening, on single-level trains. Must be my Western bias: on a Superliner the suitcase would just go on the luggage rack downstairs; I've never seen a Superliner attendant take luggage to the baggage car. In fact not heard one offer to. That sort of made me assume he couldn't. I will have to ask my attendant next time I'm on the Seattle section of the Builder.


----------



## jis

The Conductor very often accesses the baggage car from the train to open the door. This is so specially at stations with low level platforms. For this s/he uses the gangway.

And specially now that the possibility of trainside checked baggage the need for such access may become even more of a necessity going forward what with station unstaffing and such. It would bee foolhardy to remove this facility in a rapidly changing world of baggage service.

In Superliner trains, because there is so much storage at the lower level in each car, there should seldom be any need to take anything to the baggage car, if the train has one at all. Some Superliner trains simply use a Coach-Baggage car as their baggage car.


----------



## Seaboard92

Conductors can and sometimes do use the ladders on the sides of the baggage car body as well. The old vestibules on the 17xx series I’ve never seen used. Not saying they weren’t but I’ve never witnessed.


----------



## Thirdrail7




----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Yes it’s nice the radar is working, but what employment will these cars have?


----------



## Thirdrail7

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Yes it’s nice the radar is working, but what employment will these cars have?









The first one has made a few training runs but hasn't really been seen since....let alone in revenue service.

At any rate, two more will join it.


----------



## zephyr17

Palmetto said:


> But the Empire Builder has only one baggage car for its two sections. So????


Not really true. The Portland section has a Coach-Bag, but not a full baggage car.

Amtrak never had an equivalent Viewliner or Amfleet equivalent to the Superliner Coach-Bag, which would have been what used to be called a combine.


----------



## neroden

Glad to hear something's on the radar. If they can stop violently screwing with the LSL (maybe, keep it running to NYC for a full year, don't make the food worse for a whole year, stop damaging it) that they can sell more roomette space than they have right now. They really should restore Boston & Springfield baggage.


----------



## Seaboard92

Well I wouldn’t say Amtrak never had a combine in single level service. As I seam to recall seeing a few ex Amtrak combines over the years. I looked at purchasing one that was still in Phase III a couple years back.


----------



## zephyr17

Seaboard92 said:


> Well I wouldn’t say Amtrak never had a combine in single level service. As I seam to recall seeing a few ex Amtrak combines over the years. I looked at purchasing one that was still in Phase III a couple years back.


Did not say Amtrak never had a combine in single level service. They "inherited" many from the railroads and ran many, especially in the early years. I do not know how many were HEP'd when they created the HEP Heritage fleet. What I said was that Amtrak never had an Amfleet or Viewliner version of a combine. Which is true. They did not see fit to order any new ones in the Amfleet or Viewliner I orders.


----------



## RebelRider

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Yes it’s nice the radar is working, but what employment will these cars have?



69002 is back in Hialeah sitting there looking all shiny and new. Earlier this year I was speaking with someone about the dorms and they said, "Marketing still has no idea what they're going to do with those once they're ready for service."

Tick, tock...


----------



## JoeBas

RebelRider said:


> 69002 is back in Hialeah sitting there looking all shiny and new. Earlier this year I was speaking with someone about the dorms and they said, "Marketing still has no idea what they're going to do with those once they're ready for service."
> 
> Tick, tock...



This makes little to no sense to me. 

Hey Marketing, here's an idea - _put the crew in them, and sell the extra rooms at some profit!!!_ 

That'll be $250,000 for my fee as a marketing consultant... ... ...


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

The problem was and is the people who place the order have since moved on. Then new people cut the order to 10 combine cars, which is a very odd number. Those who cut the order have also moved on. Now those in charge have no clue what to do, again such a small number (10) of cars to find work for.

The other issue is the price bucket system need to be managed. Just add sleeper capacity will cause the price per room to drop as there is a higher level of inventory that has not been sold. One get the impression that this is a manual process.

Now I want my consultant fee too..


----------



## jis

There was a time when people jokingly said that Air India would use a Dakota to fly from Bombay to Lagos if they could so that they could charge higher fares due to limited seat inventory.

If that is what Amtrak's approach is to make their numbers short term maybe they should bench a bunch of Viewliners so that they could charge higher fares on the rest. Seems like that may be their going forward strategy for the entire LD network, not only for Sleeper but also for Coach

Afterall, unlike at Delta, you don't even have to worry about American, Southwest and United under cutting you... but WAIT!


----------



## Thirdrail7

JoeBas said:


> This makes little to no sense to me.
> 
> Hey Marketing, here's an idea - _put the crew in them, and sell the extra rooms at some profit!!!_
> 
> That'll be $250,000 for my fee as a marketing consultant... ... ...



I think they need to wait until there are enough of them in service to reliably cover a train. One car on its own doesn't really do any good. Once the next two get here in a few weeks, they MAY be able to start assigning them to a set of equipment. 

The Lake Shore and the Cardinal are easy targets. However, after watching them demote the sleeping cars on the Silver Starvation to day room service (RVR-NYP is a huge city pair for the sleepers) I wouldn't mind some out of the box thinking like putting them on corridor type trains. Maybe the Pennsylvanian (which has desperately needed a baggage car for years) could take a set. Maybe the Vermonter?


----------



## Thirdrail7

Ok, picture take on the NEC. Wednesday is your day (which means Ryan must be out of town) . Same as usual. Two on the rear.

Ms Penny? Your day is Thursday.


----------



## WalterIII

Hi, I have not been on since last year. Having too much fun since retiring from CSX in 2017 and embarking on consulting this past year. While on the freight side for 32+ years I have been all over the US on Amtrak over that time and do clinics at prototype modeler meets on passenger trains, cars etc. I also have some knowledgeable contacts. 

Great discussion, I have some comments and observations.

1 - MHCs
There were two series of MHC's built for Amtrak, the 1400 series followed by the 1500 series. The 1400 series rode on overhauled express reefer trucks cast in the 1950's/1960's while the 1500 series rode on new GSI G70 trucks (same as Horizon, Superliner II, Viewliner I/II). I believe the cars on which the speed restriction was placed on were the 1400 series with the older trucks after a nasty derailment of the Lake Shore limited. 

As far as I know all of the 1400 series car gone, I did see a number of 1500 series in MOW service in the NEC in January but they are now quite old. Using a box car design or MHC for baggage service is problematic. You need access through an end door, which they do not have, and modifying them can be a structural issue. Then there are the doors, which are harder to open and close. While you can add snubbers and spring packages to allow running freight trucks up to 90 (as was the case of the box express cars Amtrak added in the 1990's), you cannot go 110 let alone 125. On the plus side, going with 70 Viewliner shells for the baggage cars gave them some practice and probably reduced the per unit cost for all of the shells. 

Of note, the original spec for the current Auto Train auto carriers was for a speed of 90 MPH. I was working with Johnstown (now Freight Car America) on some new cars for the CSX phosphate service (we did not build them) and a Johnstown rep meeting with me in Tampa in 1999 was going to Sanford and showed them to me. He did not understand that speed as Auto Train ran at 70. I suggested that Amtrak was still probably fantasizing on running some on the Southwest Chief from Chicago to Arizona (which of course never happened). I do not know if the cars actually built several years later have that capability. 

2 - The Viewliner II order, cars, changes and deployment
While this order has moved slower than a glacier, at least the cars are being built (unlike the CA and Mid-west bi-levels). The original order had a base of 130 cars: 25 each of sleepers, diners, baggage dorms and 55 baggage cars. There was a 70 car option: 15 diners, 15 baggage dorms, 10 sleepers and 30 baggage cars.

Intent - who knows now, as noted earlier in this forum we are two or three generations of Amtrak managers removed from the original orders. But I can add this, the Star, Meteor, Crescent and Lake Shore require 16 sets to cover, the Cardinal 2 (Tri-weekly), plus spare reserve. So, that's 18 sets, and 7 spares (enough to cover a daily Cardinal). 

The base order would have covered those 18 sets with new diners, baggage dorms and add a sleeper to each, with 7 spares. As for the options, they would have allowed for the Palmetto to be extended to Miami (again) as a revival of the Silver Palm (which was part of a plan to add service to the FEC by re-routing the Silver Meteor over the FEC from Jacksonville to West Palm Beach), 4 sets of diners/sleepers would have been required, and perhaps revival of the Broadway or conversion of the Capital to single level cars (3-4 sets). With the long delays, these were not exercised.

As for the baggage cars. The 55 car base order would have barely covered the long haul trains equipped with heritage baggage cars and none of the regional trains. The 30 options would have covered the rest and would have allowed addition of checked baggage service to select NEC trains (that was their plan). With the options gone, they still needed to retire all the heritage baggage cars. The 15 obtained by cutting the baggage dorm order covered all existing assignments, long distance and regional (barely), but bailed on the NEC addition.

Baggage dorms were common prior to 1994 on all long hauls (of course out west the steam heated ones were replaced in 1981 by ex-Santa Fe hi-level transition coaches which had dorm space added to half the car). With only 10 left on the base order, and the dwindling number of onboard service people, one wonders where they will go. They were intended to house the diner and lounge staff, and as a place for the coach attendants to take a break (the sleeper attendants have a room in their car). I think the original plan was for 4 to be assigned to the Lake Shore (perhaps to Boston), and 2 assigned to the Cardinal makes sense to me. That would be 6 of the 10, but who knows now. Another odd thing I heard was that since there was no accessible bedroom on the cars they could not sell any of the roomettes as revenue space. Do not know if that is true, after all while they sell roomettes in the Superliner crew-dorms they never sell the accessible room in that car as far as I know. 

Well, I guess we will all find out sometime this year! I was startled yet pleased to see the diner Albany on 97 Palatka, FL in March, so all the diners have arrived, finally.

Walter


----------



## Acela150

Thirdrail7 said:


> Ok, picture take on the NEC. Wednesday is your day (which means Ryan must be out of town) . Same as usual. Two on the rear.
> 
> Ms Penny? Your day is Thursday.



I needed an excuse to get out on Wednesday. This is it.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Acela150 said:


> I needed an excuse to get out on Wednesday. This is it.



Come down to Fox Point.


----------



## Acela150

AmtrakBlue said:


> Come down to Fox Point.



I'll probably end up somewhere like Prospect Park. Try to stay close to home during rush hour.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Thirdrail7 said:


> Ok, picture take on the NEC. Wednesday is your day (which means Ryan must be out of town) . Same as usual. Two on the rear.
> 
> Ms Penny? Your day is Thursday.



[emoji848] no word from Ryan, so maybe he is out of town, and possibly on the high seas. Seems like someone is coordinating deliveries around his schedule [emoji14]


----------



## Ryan

Nope, I’m home, just hair on fire busy. Tonight is a complicated dance of two kids doing three activities (confirmation, rugby, and Girl Scouts) overlaid with a church board meeting for me. Happy shooting to those with the time.


----------



## Acela150

97 (15) O/S Prospect Park 5:03 with 2 bag dorms on the rear.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Acela150 said:


> 97 (15) O/S Prospect Park 5:03 with 2 bag dorms on the rear.



17:12 passing Fox Point Park


----------



## Acela150

I got some photos. But the lighting was god awful thanks to the Anti-Railfan cloud. So I'll hold off posting them for now.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Lighting was good down my way.


----------



## g28646

Some photos at King St.


----------



## mgl1978

Here's some more from ALX.


----------



## mgl1978




----------



## gaspeamtrak

Thank you everybody for sharing with us up here in Canada !!!


----------



## mgl1978

Does anybody have in depth knowledge of the weight limits of the Bag/Dorm cars? In one of the photos I took it states a weight limit of 5,200lbs. This is 10% of a full baggage car.


----------



## JustOnce

Acela150 said:


> I got some photos. But the lighting was god awful thanks to the Anti-Railfan cloud. So I'll hold off posting them for now.


https://www.facebook.com/groups/craptrainphotography/ would welcome your photos.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Here come two more cars to stare at. The 05/06 are supposed to be picked.


Fleets one, two and three:

Two on the rear of 97(17)

Fleet 4: Same train on the 18th.

Get good shots because who knows when we'll see them again...outside of test trains of course.


----------



## jis

Maybe they will show up in the Midwest as axle count cars [emoji849]


----------



## AmtrakBlue




----------



## neroden

If Amtrak had real management rather than someone who can't even understand when he's reading fraudulent accounting, these would be in service today, probably on the Cardinal.

Hopefully we'll see Mr. Anderson fired soon; he has ticked off a lot of Senators, which is always a bad move, and being a complete fool who can't understand the accounting he's looking at puts him in a weak position.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Thirdrail7 said:


> I wouldn't mind some out of the box thinking like putting them on corridor type trains. Maybe the Pennsylvanian (which has desperately needed a baggage car for years) could take a set. Maybe the Vermonter?



So, we see that they've opened up sleeper service for the NEC. Using these cars on trains that currently lack baggage cars and sleeping cars would likely bring in additional revenues. What trains do you think would benefit from these bag dorms in the capacity of a day tripper train? The Pennsylvanian is a no brainer to me. The Night Owl would benefit assuming they don't devote an entire sleeping car to it. 

How about the BOS-Norfolk Trains?


----------



## JustOnce

Possibly just equipment moves, but bag-dorms have been showing up more frequently on 97 and 98.


----------



## TiBike

Send them to California. We can use them as combination bike cars and homeless shelters. We'll call 'em bike-bums.


----------



## Ryan

Thanks, solid list.

What's 61043 doing stored? Wrecked already?


----------



## pennyk

I recently saw 97(18) at a crossing in Winter Park. It appeared to have a new Bag/Dorm ahead of the baggage car. I was in an automobile stopped at a red light before the crossing and I "think" that is what I saw. I do not drive that often and am always thrilled when I see a Silver.


----------



## JustOnce

pennyk said:


> I recently saw 97(18) at a crossing in Winter Park. It appeared to have a new Bag/Dorm ahead of the baggage car. I was in an automobile stopped at a red light before the crossing and I "think" that is what I saw. I do not drive that often and am always thrilled when I see a Silver.


There was definitely a bag-dorm when 97-18 passed the Ashland camera. It seems every 97 & 98 has had one the last few days. Latest rumbling is they're letting the crews "test" the cars. 98 had one this morning looking at youtube scrollback.


----------



## chrsjrcj

I rode 97-17 and there was a bag-dorm in front of the baggage car, but the bag-dorm was not being used. It did have a liquid tote container, which I assume was to add weight to the car.


----------



## Ronbo

I saw two of these cars today leaving Chicago on the #5 Zephyr, between the locomotives and the regular baggage car. Where are they going, I wonder?


----------



## Thirdrail7

It is on hold due to the accident in Cayce.


----------



## Thirdrail7

pennyk said:


> I recently saw 97(18) at a crossing in Winter Park. It appeared to have a new Bag/Dorm ahead of the baggage car. I was in an automobile stopped at a red light before the crossing and I "think" that is what I saw. I do not drive that often and am always thrilled when I see a Silver.



97(19) also has one. As JustOnce and Knightrider mentioned, they are live testing. I suspect they are getting them ready for passenger use.



Ronbo said:


> I saw two of these cars today leaving Chicago on the #5 Zephyr, between the locomotives and the regular baggage car. Where are they going, I wonder?



They are dining cars heading out west for extra cars on a test train.


----------



## Ronbo

Thirdrail7 said:


> 97(19) also has one. As JustOnce and Knightrider mentioned, they are live testing. I suspect they are getting them ready for passenger use.
> 
> 
> 
> They are dining cars heading out west for extra cars on a test train.



Thanks for the correction of my post, I didn’t realize that I had viewed the wrong cars.


----------



## Thirdrail7

2 on the rear of the usual suspects on the usual days next week.


----------



## Acela150

I'm guessing that means they will be on the rear of 97 this upcoming Wednesday?


----------



## Anderson

Ran into 69004 the other night (on 97/21). It definitely had the appearance of being in use for at least one crew member, the roomettes seemed fully appointed, etc. Note that I only realized the car was on the train upon disembarkation at RVR so I only got a look from one side looking in.


----------



## PaulM

This was in between the last sleeper and the baggage car on 97(19). It sure looked like it was being used by Amtrak personnel. It seemed to be a strange train to employ it given that a lot of the people are supposed to be gone by Oct 1.


----------



## JP1822

Makes little sense to use them on the Eastern Long Distance trains after October 1st with the reduced onboard crew takes affect for F&B service. Your looking at TWO (2) LSA's occupying this car as crew members! Sleeper car attendants stay with their sleepers, and coach attendants stay with the coach cars. Best would be the long distance western long hauls that still have dining car staff. Frees up the Superliner Trans Dorm Sleeper to be an all roomette revenue sleeper.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

JP1822 said:


> Makes little sense to use them on the Eastern Long Distance trains after October 1st with the reduced onboard crew takes affect for F&B service. Your looking at TWO (2) LSA's occupying this car as crew members! Sleeper car attendants stay with their sleepers, and coach attendants stay with the coach cars. Best would be the long distance western long hauls that still have dining car staff. Frees up the Superliner Trans Dorm Sleeper to be an all roomette revenue sleeper.


The coach attendants do not stay in their cars overnight; they get a roomette in one of the sleeping cars.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

And they could sell those spare rooms - more revenue.


----------



## PVD

We still have the question of whether or not the extra space can be sold since no accessible space is available in the car.


----------



## PaulM

JP1822 said:


> . Best would be the long distance western long hauls that still have dining car staff. Frees up the Superliner Trans Dorm Sleeper to be an all roomette revenue sleeper.


They are already opening more transdorm space to passengers. I recently boarded the Capital Limited booked in room 2, car 3009. I was surprised to see I was in the transdorm because I thought those room numbers were 15 and above.

Room 2 was located to the front of where barrier between revenue and employee space used to be. Soon it will be just another sleeper, minus bedrooms


----------



## PVD

The SL transdorms I have ridden have an H room, even though I've never seen one in use.


----------



## jis

PVD said:


> We still have the question of whether or not the extra space can be sold since no accessible space is available in the car.


Does FRA and ADA say that each car on the train must have commercially available accessible space?


----------



## railiner

jis said:


> Does FRA and ADA say that each car on the train must have commercially available accessible space?


Yes...I wonder about that too...as long as there are H rooms on the same train, shouldn't that be sufficient? Is there some written H room to non_H room ratio?


----------



## PVD

https://www.access-board.gov/guidel...part-f-intercity-amtrak-rail-cars-and-systems

I read it and I'm still not sure.....I see the requirement for wheelchair spaces by train, but the sleeper stuffI don't see stated except as to the car itself...maybe a sharper eye ill pick it up...


----------



## jis

PVD said:


> https://www.access-board.gov/guidel...part-f-intercity-amtrak-rail-cars-and-systems
> 
> I read it and I'm still not sure.....I see the requirement for wheelchair spaces by train, but the sleeper stuffI don't see stated except as to the car itself...maybe a sharper eye ill pick it up...


Indeed it appears that each car has to have at least one compartment that meets ADA requirements. So forget about Slumbercoaches or any other reasonable dense packed sleeping accommodation in the entire car. Each car must have an H room like appointment irrespective of what the sleeping accommodation in the rest of the car looks like.

I suppose one could pull off an airline lie flat layout with one seat at the end of the car designated for handicapped use located right next to the door of the large restroom, with adjacent space for parking a wheel chair, should the passenger wish to sit in his wheelchair instead of in the seat, and this should be adjacent to the vestibule with the wide enough door for ingress/egress.


----------



## PerRock

jis said:


> Indeed it appears that each car has to have at least one compartment that meets ADA requirements. So forget about Slumbercoaches or any other reasonable dense packed sleeping accommodation in the entire car. Each car must have an H room like appointment irrespective of what the sleeping accommodation in the rest of the car looks like.
> 
> I suppose one could pull off an airline lie flat layout with one seat at the end of the car designated for handicapped use located right next to the door of the large restroom, with adjacent space for parking a wheel chair, should the passenger wish to sit in his wheelchair instead of in the seat, and this should be adjacent to the vestibule with the wide enough door for ingress/egress.



But then what about the Coach-Baggage cars? They don't have lower-level seating.

peter


----------



## PVD

Those were built before this took effect, and the space available in the other cars probably makes up for it.


----------



## jis

I suspect they fall under the “at least one or two cars” exception for older cars.


----------



## Acela150

Two new Bag Dorms were on train 234 today for NYP. 

Photo Credit to "Riverrail photo" 

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/708195/


----------



## Acela150

The same two bag dorms made it onto today’s Train 97. Betty blue caught them just outside of Wilmington. [emoji4]


----------



## Dakota 400

Acela150 said:


> The same two bag dorms made it onto today’s Train 97. Betty blue caught them just outside of Wilmington. [emoji4]



Are they being tested?


----------



## Acela150

No. They are going to Hialeah for acceptance.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

There were 3 bag-dorms, one in service and the 2 new ones. And 1 deadhead VL in addition to it's normal consist...long train.


----------



## Anderson

Dang...that would have been...what, 14-15 cars?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Anderson said:


> Dang...that would have been...what, 14-15 cars?



I think someone on FB said 14.
Just looked at my video. 15. Was hard to count the last cars because SEPTA photobombed my video.


----------



## Pere Flyer

PaulM said:


> View attachment 14897
> This was in between the last sleeper and the baggage car on 97(19). It sure looked like it was being used by Amtrak personnel. It seemed to be a strange train to employ it given that a lot of the people are supposed to be gone by Oct 1.



Double “nice.” [emoji6]


----------



## twropr

Are any trains besides the SILVER METEOR operating with a Viewliner II Baggage Dorm?
Andy


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

No train has a Viewliner Baggage Dorm car assigned. The Dorm cars can be found on the Sliver Meteor are for testing purposes.
Remember there only going to be 10 build. Assignment have never been formal communicated.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> No train has a Viewliner Baggage Dorm car assigned. The Dorm cars can be found on the Sliver Meteor are for testing purposes.
> Remember there only going to be 10 build. Assignment have never been formal communicated.



I’m pretty sure I’ve read on FB that the bag dorm is being used on the Meteor.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Agree, but does ever train set have one?

My understanding is there still testing them. Have the few crew members use them is part of the testing.

Still awaiting assignment of these 10 cars to be announced. Would think there going into axle count service.


----------



## JustOnce

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Agree, but does ever train set have one?
> 
> My understanding is there still testing them. Have the few crew members use them is part of the testing.
> 
> Still awaiting assignment of these 10 cars to be announced. Would think there going into axle count service.


Is it really testing when they've replaced the baggage cars?

Amtrak really needs 15* to reach a critical mass to assign them to two LD routes (usually 6 trainsets per route). Four trainsets can cover the eastern routes, but with crew size reductions on the East, they really should be used out west, with a possible reconfiguration of the trans dorm to accomodate more passengers. They might make sense for adding baggage to the Boston segment of the LSL.


*= 6 to one train set, 6 to the other, a protect at Chicago, a protect at each western terminal, and a spare for when one is shopped. And I think that's optimisitic.


----------



## me_little_me

JustOnce said:


> Is it really testing when they've replaced the baggage cars?
> 
> Amtrak really needs 15* to reach a critical mass to assign them to two LD routes (usually 6 trainsets per route). Four trainsets can cover the eastern routes, but with crew size reductions on the East, they really should be used out west, with a possible reconfiguration of the trans dorm to accomodate more passengers. They might make sense for adding baggage to the Boston segment of the LSL.
> 
> 
> *= 6 to one train set, 6 to the other, a protect at Chicago, a protect at each western terminal, and a spare for when one is shopped. And I think that's optimisitic.


Not necessarily. A sleeper and a baggage car can substitute for a bagdorm but not vice versa.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

The sad fact is only ten have been order.

Find me a home for those 10 cars.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Here comes another bag dorm. If nothing dramatic occurs, the usual plan executes on Mon. Fleets one, two, and three will photograph 97 on the 30th. Fleet 4 will photograph 97 that passes through on the 31st

PS: The bag dorms are being used in lieu of baggage cars when they show up on trains. The crews utilize them as well. They've been used on the Meteor and the Star but since there are only a few, I don't think they're scheduled to a particular train.


----------



## lordsigma

I’d love to see 448/449 get them. Could move the full Boston sleeper to the New York section and put a bag dorm on the Boston section. Would still have some sleeper capacity on Boston section and would return baggage service. Seems like that’s a possibility where the bag dorm may make sense. But not giving my hopes up on that one.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

lordsigma said:


> I’d love to see 448/449 get them. Could move the full Boston sleeper to the New York section and put a bag dorm on the Boston section. Would still have some sleeper capacity on Boston section and would return baggage service. Seems like that’s a possibility where the bag dorm may make sense. But not giving my hopes up on that one.



Lack of ADA sleeper space would be a issue. Adding sleeper space on either section would be nice.


----------



## mgl1978

2 New viewliners headed south on #97 tonight at long bridge park. 1 bag/dorm. 1 sleeper


----------



## twropr

If my records are correct, 8 of the 10 V2 Bag Dorms have been released. The two that are unaccounted for are 69000 and 69001. Anyone wager as to what the status of these two are?
Andy


----------



## KnightRail

Deploying soon to crescents, and then cardinals.


----------



## lordsigma

KnightRail said:


> Deploying soon to crescents, and then cardinals.


Sounds like they are removing the full baggage car on these and going with the bag dorm only. This should chew up half the Bag Dorms. Given the small F&B crew with FlexDining on both routes I wonder if the plan is to also house the sleeping car attendants in the dorm..it only makes sense to use a bag-dorm on a train with FlexDining if you are also going to include the SCAs (or sell whatever unused roomettes are left in the bag dorm.)


----------



## Thirdrail7

lordsigma said:


> Sounds like they are removing the full baggage car on these and going with the bag dorm only. This should chew up half the Bag Dorms. Given the small F&B crew with FlexDining on both routes I wonder if the plan is to also house the sleeping car attendants in the dorm..it only makes sense to use a bag-dorm on a train with FlexDining if you are also going to include the SCAs (or sell whatever unused roomettes are left in the bag dorm.)



That's the whole premise of the bag dorms. You can move the crew out of the revenue rooms. I don't think they can sell leftover space in the dorms though.


----------



## PVD

Since the bag dorms do not have an H room, and are not grandfathered, they probably can not be sold.


----------



## JustOnce

PVD said:


> Since the bag dorms do not have an H room, and are not grandfathered, they probably can not be sold.


Knowing how FRA implements ADA (example non-ADA bathrooms closed to all passengers on the Hartford Line), I would sadly agree with this. We aren't going to see them adding the sleeper capacity back to the Night Owl.


----------



## Palmetto

Someone pointed out that the Superliner transdorms where the crew sleeps don't have an H room either, but they still sell accomodations to passengers. So I suppose the same would hold true for the new bag dorms.


----------



## lordsigma

JustOnce said:


> Knowing how FRA implements ADA (example non-ADA bathrooms closed to all passengers on the Hartford Line), I would sadly agree with this. We aren't going to see them adding the sleeper capacity back to the Night Owl.


Ah yes, the restrooms on the Hartford Line. Can't blame Amtrak for that one though...the restrooms on the Amtrak Hartford Line trains were open the whole time!


----------



## PVD

In this case it seems pretty straight forward. A new sleeper needs an accessible space, and even if a roomette module could be made accessible, lack of accessible "facilities" or even the ability to get a wheelchair down the aisle to where they would be located is a stopper.


----------



## PVD

The Superliners pre date the requirement. But, I have seen H rooms on trans dorms I've ridden, not sure if they all have them, and honestly I've never seen one occupied.


----------



## Palmland

On a recent trip our SCA took care of the 6 roomettes that were for sale in the Transition sleeper. Aside from that our train, no. 2, had only the sleeper we were in and two coaches half full at most.


----------



## daybeers

JustOnce said:


> Knowing how FRA implements ADA (example non-ADA bathrooms closed to all passengers on the Hartford Line), I would sadly agree with this. We aren't going to see them adding the sleeper capacity back to the Night Owl.


At least one restroom per train on the MBB-built CTrail cars leased from the MBTA were reopened about two months after service launch after another ADA complaint to the FRA claiming that the closure of the on-board restrooms was discriminatory towards those with bowel issues, ex. Crohn's disease.

https://www.courant.com/breaking-news/hc-br-train-bathrooms-re-opened-20180810-story.html


----------



## neroden

With only 6 roomettes per bag-dorm, the cafe attendant, "lounge" attendant, and at least 2, probably more, coach attendants does not leave much in the way of spare rooms to sell. I do not think the FRA will get after Amtrak for selling 1 room.


----------



## PVD

I thought it was 8 (10 - shower + toilets)


----------



## Palmetto

Do coach attendants have an accomodation in the crew quarters car [for want of a better term right now]? I thought that they did not.

I also think there are 8 roomettes. Regardless, even if there are only two left for passengers, there is money to be made in that.


----------



## OBS

Palmetto said:


> Do coach attendants have an accomodation in the crew quarters car [for want of a better term right now]? I thought that they did not.
> 
> I also think there are 8 roomettes. Regardless, even if there are only two left for passengers, there is money to be made in that.


Coach attendants are given a room just like rest of the OBS employees...


----------



## Thirdrail7

There are 8 rooms, a shower and toilet compartments.


----------



## PVD

Potential revenue or not, I am reasonably certain that they can not be sold. All new sleepers require an accessible accommodation, these cars in their present form can not provide it, there would be no legal basis with which to defend any possible ADA complaint. FRA waivers for car construction/utilization issues are requested before the cars go into service, too late now....


----------



## Thirdrail7

PVD said:


> Potential revenue or not, I am reasonably certain that they can not be sold. All new sleepers require an accessible accommodation, these cars in their present form can not provide it, there would be no legal basis with which to defend any possible ADA complaint. FRA waivers for car construction/utilization issues are requested before the cars go into service, too late now....



Not only that, there needs to be an accessible bathroom.



> (6) Sleeper cars shall comply with §§1192.113(b) through (d), 1192.115 through 1192.121, and 1192.125, and have at least one compartment which can be entered and used by a person using a wheelchair or mobility aid and complying with §1192.127.
> 
> Sleeper cars are fully subject to all sections except portions of those pertaining to doorways (1192.113) and wheelchair seating and storage spaces (1192.125(d). *Although the section on restrooms is not referenced by this provision, the section on sleeping compartments (1192.127) requires that accessible compartments contain a restroom complying with 1192.123 which can be entered from the compartment.*


----------



## PVD

I believe I mentioned that previously in post #378


----------



## west point

since there are accessible rooms in other cars why would one b needed in the Bag - dorm ?


----------



## Palmetto

They sell rooms to the public in Superliner crew cars. Are those grandfathered vis-a-vis the ADA requirement?


----------



## RPC

west point said:


> since there are accessible rooms in other cars why would one b needed in the Bag - dorm ?


In this case ("Night Owl") there would be no other sleepers. Same would go for using a bag/dorm as the sole sleeper on 448/449.


----------



## PVD

The regs say you can't have a new revenue sleeper without accessibility in that car. The bag dorms were not designed as revenue sleepers so they don't. The fact that circumstances have changed and it might be beneficial to Amtrak to sell a few rooms now, changes nothing.


----------



## Anderson

west point said:


> since there are accessible rooms in other cars why would one b needed in the Bag - dorm ?


Because instead of, say, promulgating a rule that "there must be X portion of disability-accessable rooms", the rule is "there must be at least one per car". Now, I suspect that Amtrak could probably defend selling space in the bag-dorm on a theoretical train with four full Viewliner sleepers on the grounds that said train would, in fact, have more accessible rooms than any other overnight Amtrak train (save for the Auto Train)...but that would basically involve defending an attack on the regulations in question.

Now, I'm not saying that doing so would be _impossible_...but seeing all of the effort done to provide an accessible booth in the Viewliner diners so that, quite literally, one room can access the diner (a wheelchair can't make it from any sleeper but the 10 sleeper because of the corners) and given the overarching history of Amtrak's dubious compliance at times, I'm not sure how that would go.

If Amtrak _did_ want to push that envelope, my guess is that they'd let some space out for a few days at a go during the major holidays (Thanksgiving, Christmas) and simply not make a big deal about it. If they did that, I think there's a decent chance it would be at least a year or two before anyone with standing would notice and Amtrak could probably hide under cover of a booking system "error".


----------



## PVD

Not make a big deal about it? Amtrak is under scrutiny by many groups already because they have not done a good job in accessibility. The ADA lawsuits would come fast and furious, and the likelihood of Amtrak prevailing is near zero. We should just let this go already.


----------



## west point

Just whose rule is this one assessable per car ? Is it law or just an interpretation ?Or just some agency outlier ? Would like link to read the rule ?


----------



## Thirdrail7

Anderson said:


> Now, I'm not saying that doing so would be _impossible_...but seeing all of the effort done to provide an accessible booth in the Viewliner diners so that, quite literally, one room can access the diner (a wheelchair can't make it from any sleeper but the 10 sleeper because of the corners) and given the overarching history of Amtrak's dubious compliance at times, I'm not sure how that would go.
> 
> If Amtrak _did_ want to push that envelope, my guess is that they'd let some space out for a few days at a go during the major holidays (Thanksgiving, Christmas) and simply not make a big deal about it. If they did that, I think there's a decent chance it would be at least a year or two before anyone with standing would notice and Amtrak could probably hide under cover of a booking system "error".





PVD said:


> Not make a big deal about it? Amtrak is under scrutiny by many groups already because they have not done a good job in accessibility. The ADA lawsuits would come fast and furious, and the likelihood of Amtrak prevailing is near zero. We should just let this go already.



I have to side with PVD. This is a recipe for disaster. Did everyone see the link in @daybeers' post? One side of the ADA filed a lawsuit which resulted in the bathrooms being closed. Then, another group filed a lawsuit based upon ADA requirements to get them opened. Who'd want to tangle with that when it is entirely unnecessary.



west point said:


> Just whose rule is this one assessable per car ? Is it law or just an interpretation ?Or just some agency outlier ? Would like link to read the rule ?


Even though I referenced it above, here is the link to the ENTIRE subpart of the CFR, which covers ADA regulations for coaches, dining cars, sleeping cars, lighting, communications, etc. 


https://www.access-board.gov/guidel...part-f-intercity-amtrak-rail-cars-and-systems


----------



## railiner

I think that when stipulating fair accessability, the entire train should have been considered as a single unit, and as long as a fair percentage of the different accommodations were accessible, that should have been the way to write the regulations, and not “micro-manage” each individual car.


----------



## neroden

In practice I believe nobody will sue if Amtrak tacks on a couple of bag dorm room sales to a train which already has two or more full sleeper cars. Others are correct that nobody would tolerate using a bag dorm as the only sleeper car on a train.

Disability groups have so many egregious problems to sue Amtrak over they are not going to worry about a couple of roomette sales on a train which already has accessible rooms. On a train which does not, that is different.


----------



## neroden

I should add that I suspect one room may become the conductor's office, to empty out lounge car space...


----------



## cocojacoby

neroden said:


> I should add that I suspect one room may become the conductor's office, to empty out lounge car space...



God I hope so. It's not very customer friendly having an entire table taken up by the paperwork and personal items of the crew.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

There was a bag dorm in addition to two standard sleepers on the eastbound Cardinal leaving Chicago tonight. That route could be an effective use for them since there are few stations with baggage service and it often has only a single sleeper.


----------



## Thirdrail7

The last two will emerge and should be in their usual locations on the usual days next week.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Next step figure out what to do with them. Only 10 railcars.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Next step figure out what to do with them. Only 10 railcars.



My guess is based upon their desire to tinker with the Silver Meteor. If they go through with it, you'll only need three for the Meteor, two for the Pigeon and four cars will go into the Crescent. That leaves one for a protect. That is hardly ideal but it is a possibility. 

Maybe they'll just use them as axle cars.


----------



## toddinde

Anderson said:


> Because instead of, say, promulgating a rule that "there must be X portion of disability-accessable rooms", the rule is "there must be at least one per car". Now, I suspect that Amtrak could probably defend selling space in the bag-dorm on a theoretical train with four full Viewliner sleepers on the grounds that said train would, in fact, have more accessible rooms than any other overnight Amtrak train (save for the Auto Train)...but that would basically involve defending an attack on the regulations in question.
> 
> Now, I'm not saying that doing so would be _impossible_...but seeing all of the effort done to provide an accessible booth in the Viewliner diners so that, quite literally, one room can access the diner (a wheelchair can't make it from any sleeper but the 10 sleeper because of the corners) and given the overarching history of Amtrak's dubious compliance at times, I'm not sure how that would go.
> 
> If Amtrak _did_ want to push that envelope, my guess is that they'd let some space out for a few days at a go during the major holidays (Thanksgiving, Christmas) and simply not make a big deal about it. If they did that, I think there's a decent chance it would be at least a year or two before anyone with standing would notice and Amtrak could probably hide under cover of a booking system "error".


Playing that kind of game gets people fired, fined or face criminal charges. I don’t think anyone would be stupid enough to do it, and nobody is going to be dumb enough to lie to regulators to cover it up. That’s a serious federal crime. More likely, somebody would report it to the IG immediately.


----------



## Anderson

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Meteor uses 4 trains set, since you stated 3 train set and a desire to change it. One thinks we’re going back to a schedule that permits a same day turn around in NYC.
> 
> Now off to the schedule website to find out when that last occurs and what a same day turn looks like for connects, and major stops.


My guess would be three for the LSL (pick your section), two for the Cardinal, and four for the Meteor. That's nine, presumably with one shop/protect in New York.


----------



## jis

If the rumblings turn out to be true it will be three for the Meteor.


----------



## neroden

jis said:


> If the rumblings turn out to be true it will be three for the Meteor.


OK, how are they planning to run the Meteor with three trainsets? Doesn't appear to be possible based on the timetable. They already know that the traffic is largely from NYC (from previous experience with the Cardinal) and there aren't enough NE Regionals to take the traffic from NYC to DC, so they can't cut it back to DC. What else is there to cut? Could cut to Orlando if Brightline opened, but that'll be years from now.


----------



## Thirdrail7

neroden said:


> OK, how are they planning to run the Meteor with three trainsets? Doesn't appear to be possible based on the timetable.



From earlier in the thread:



Thirdrail7 said:


> My guess is based upon their desire to tinker with the Silver Meteor. If they go through with it, you'll only need three for the Meteor, two for the Pigeon and four cars will go into the Crescent. That leaves one for a protect. That is hardly ideal but it is a possibility.
> 
> Maybe they'll just use them as axle cars.



A thread-jacking conversation ensued and PennyK wisely moved it to its own thread:

Possible Schedule Change to SB Silver Meteor - train 97


----------



## jis

neroden said:


> OK, how are they planning to run the Meteor with three trainsets? Doesn't appear to be possible based on the timetable. They already know that the traffic is largely from NYC (from previous experience with the Cardinal) and there aren't enough NE Regionals to take the traffic from NYC to DC, so they can't cut it back to DC. What else is there to cut? Could cut to Orlando if Brightline opened, but that'll be years from now.


If the Meteor departs NY late enough to give enough time in NY to turn a consist the same day then you can run it with three consists. that is how it used to run before it was changed to the way it is now. Look at any timetable before the change to the current schedule was made. In all those cases only three consists were used. You don’t need to cut anything.


----------



## mgl1978

Dorms headed south on the RF&P 1/29/2020:


----------



## neroden

jis said:


> If the Meteor departs NY late enough to give enough time in NY to turn a consist the same day then you can run it with three consists. that is how it used to run before it was changed to the way it is now. Look at any timetable before the change to the current schedule was made. In all those cases only three consists were used. You don;t need to cut anything.



Thanks for the quick answer. That's cool. I approve of a late departure from NY (makes it way easier and more reliable to connect from upstate NY), so I hope they do that. The freed-up equipment will hopefully go to a daily Cardinal (I can dream, right?).


----------



## me_little_me

neroden said:


> Thanks for the quick answer. That's cool. I approve of a late departure from NY (makes it way easier and more reliable to connect from upstate NY), so I hope they do that. The freed-up equipment will hopefully go to a daily Cardinal (I can dream, right?).


Fantasize?


----------



## mgl1978

Bag/dorm on shortened 19 3/20


----------

