# Superliner Room Layout



## Hanno (Sep 19, 2008)

I have booked a room via the internet for an Auto Train trip to FL in December. I have Bedroom K. However when I look at the room layout of Superliners shown on various websites it does not show a Room K, only Rooms A thru E and then roometts. What am I missing?


----------



## access bob (Sep 19, 2008)

Hanno said:


> I have booked a room via the internet for an Auto Train trip to FL in December. I have Bedroom K. However when I look at the room layout of Superliners shown on various websites it does not show a Room K, only Rooms A thru E and then roometts. What am I missing?


the auto train has some all bedroom cars.

Bob


----------



## sky12065 (Sep 19, 2008)

printman2000 said:


> Here ya go...


Here ya go again!


----------



## the_traveler (Sep 19, 2008)

access bob said:


> Hanno said:
> 
> 
> > I have booked a room via the internet for an Auto Train trip to FL in December. I have Bedroom K. However when I look at the room layout of Superliners shown on various websites it does not show a Room K, only Rooms A thru E and then roometts. What am I missing?
> ...


Correction - some with all bedrooms on the upper level. (There are roomettes on the lower level.)

See the diagram above. (#11 to #14 are roomettes. #15 is the family bedroom.)


----------



## Hanno (Sep 19, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> printman2000 said:
> 
> 
> > Here ya go...
> ...



Now I understand! Thank you very much.


----------



## sky12065 (Sep 19, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> access bob said:
> 
> 
> > Hanno said:
> ...


I would bet that access bob was just thinking about the upper level. Also, the bottom level seems to look just like the bottom level of the Superliner except that there seems not to be a shower like in the SL, but rather a 4th bathroom instead!


----------



## access bob (Sep 19, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > access bob said:
> ...


sorry I was, although my plans for the deluxe sleeper shows an identical lower level including a shower.

Bob


----------



## AlanB (Sep 20, 2008)

There is a shower on the lower level of the Deluxe Sleeper as it's still called, even though Amtrak no longer calls the larger bedroom a Deluxe bedroom.

The lower level of the Deluxe sleeper is identical in all ways to the lower level of any Superliner II sleeper. It's only the upper level that is different. There were originally six of these cars used exclusively by the Auto Train. Thanks to that bad derailment in Florida back in April of 2002, they're down to five now. They are the Palm Bay #32500, W. Graham Claytor, JR. #32502, A. Phillip Randolph #32503, Palm Harbor #32504, Palm Springs #32505.

The Palm Springs #35501 is still listed as wrecked and out of service. Considering how valuable these cars are to Amtrak and the number of years that it has been out of service, I'm betting that this car is beyond repair and just being used for parts before eventual scrapping.


----------



## sky12065 (Sep 20, 2008)

AlanB said:


> There is a shower on the lower level of the Deluxe Sleeper as it's still called, even though Amtrak no longer calls the larger bedroom a Deluxe bedroom.
> The lower level of the Deluxe sleeper is identical in all ways to the lower level of any Superliner II sleeper. It's only the upper level that is different. There were originally six of these cars used exclusively by the Auto Train. Thanks to that bad derailment in Florida back in April of 2002, they're down to five now. They are the Palm Bay #32500, W. Graham Claytor, JR. #32502, A. Phillip Randolph #32503, Palm Harbor #32504, Palm Springs #32505.
> 
> The Palm Springs #35501 is still listed as wrecked and out of service. Considering how valuable these cars are to Amtrak and the number of years that it has been out of service, I'm betting that this car is beyond repair and just being used for parts before eventual scrapping.


So you're saying that I posted a sleeper diagram with abridge (pun intended - sorry)

Anyway, I do have a few questions! Is the autotrain a money maker and self supporting? If it is a self supporting money maker, then why wouldn't they obtain a new car and car carrier if necessary.? It would seem that it would pay for itself in due time!

I reciently counted the number of units on an autotrain consist (a Youtube video) and it came to about 50 units. Could there be a maximum number of units mandated (or crossing time limits) because of local or state laws - preventing further expansion? I know it's happened here locally as well as other restrictions on trains that complicate RR operations.


----------



## Ryan (Sep 20, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> I reciently counted the number of units on an autotrain consist (a Youtube video) and it came to about 50 units. Could there be a maximum number of units mandated (or crossing time limits) because of local or state laws - preventing further expansion? I know it's happened here locally as well as other restrictions on trains that complicate RR operations.


Since the Auto Train runs on the same tracks that much longer freight trains operate, I'd think that this isn't the case.


----------



## AlanB (Sep 20, 2008)

sky12065 said:


> Anyway, I do have a few questions! Is the autotrain a money maker and self supporting? If it is a self supporting money maker, then why wouldn't they obtain a new car and car carrier if necessary.? It would seem that it would pay for itself in due time!


The AT is the only long distance Amtrak train that covers its operating expenses, what they call avoidable costs. But once you factor in other overhead costs, what they call attributed costs; it still looses money, about $12 Million last year.

However, even if it were making money, one can't just run down to the corner store and order 1 replacement car. Most manufacturers wouldn't even consider such an order, as it would cost too much to gear up to produce one car. Even if they did consider it, the cost to Amtrak would be so high that it wouldn't be practical.

Playing devils advocate even further, let’s just say that they did move past all the above, now you'd have a single car with all new parts and systems that may or may not be fully compatible with the older cars. You'll need new tools, new training on how to use and repair the car, and so on.



sky12065 said:


> I reciently counted the number of units on an autotrain consist (a Youtube video) and it came to about 50 units. Could there be a maximum number of units mandated (or crossing time limits) because of local or state laws - preventing further expansion? I know it's happened here locally as well as other restrictions on trains that complicate RR operations.


Freight trains often operate with over 100 cars, so there are no laws that would stop Amtrak. In fact local laws don't even apply to trains, freight or passenger. Trains operate under Federal law. Now specifically I'm not sure about the AT, but most freight RR's limit Amtrak to 30 car trains IIRC. Not sure if that rule grew out of the failed Express Trak freight business or if it existed even before Express Trak. It was that rule that lead to Amtrak's extending the Pennsylvanian to Chicago, since they couldn't move enough freight on the LSL and the Three Rivers. So they sent the Pennsy to Chicago as a way of getting another 20 or so roadrailers and box cars to Chicago.


----------



## Tony (Sep 21, 2008)

AlanB said:


> However, even if it were making money, one can't just run down to the corner store and order 1 replacement car. Most manufacturers wouldn't even consider such an order, as it would cost too much to gear up to produce one car. Even if they did consider it, the cost to Amtrak would be so high that it wouldn't be practical.


I certainly don't order/buy railroad cars, but I would think that ordering just one, and order just six, isn't all that different. It isn't like with six, an assembly line would be set up. In other words, for just six, I would think that they would still be built, basically, one by one.

Plus, there is usually a difference between building just one, and building one more. A lot of the fixed costs would have been covered by the original/previous order (plans, BOM, jigs, fixtures, etc). Of course, that all assumes they were kept.

However, this all dances around a reoccurring topic here, that Amtrak sooner or later will have to face buying replacement or additional equipment.


----------



## the_traveler (Sep 21, 2008)

Tony said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > However, even if it were making money, one can't just run down to the corner store and order 1 replacement car. Most manufacturers wouldn't even consider such an order, as it would cost too much to gear up to produce one car. Even if they did consider it, the cost to Amtrak would be so high that it wouldn't be practical.
> ...


Yes, the cars would be built 1 by 1, but think about it. If you wanted to buy a new Edsel or Corvair (or any other car not made), I very much doubt that Ford or GM or Dodge or ... would redesign new tools and build a new plant and hire and train new workers - and still sell you *ONE* new car for *$1,500*! 

Don't forget, there are currently *NO* passenger car manufactures in the US! *THEY* would have to do all that to build Amtrak *ONE* new car! That's why Amtrak places an order for something like 25-40 cars (or more) at once.


----------



## Tony (Sep 21, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> Yes, the cars would be built 1 by 1, but think about it. If you wanted to buy a new Edsel or Corvair (or any other car not made), I very much doubt that Ford or GM or Dodge or ... would redesign new tools and build a new plant and hire and train new workers - and still sell you *ONE* new car for *$1,500*!
> Don't forget, there are currently *NO* passenger car manufactures in the US! *THEY* would have to do all that to build Amtrak *ONE* new car! That's why Amtrak places an order for something like 25-40 cars (or more) at once.


Well, if you really want examples, Ford did exactly that for their 100 year anniversary model T's. 

And I thought it was mentioned by Alan that Amtrak placed an order for only *SIX* of these all-top-level bedroom cars, and not something like 25-40 of them as you claim.


----------



## access bob (Sep 21, 2008)

Tony said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, the cars would be built 1 by 1, but think about it. If you wanted to buy a new Edsel or Corvair (or any other car not made), I very much doubt that Ford or GM or Dodge or ... would redesign new tools and build a new plant and hire and train new workers - and still sell you *ONE* new car for *$1,500*!
> ...



the Deluxe sleepers were part of a much larger order and were effectively only minor interior modifications to the existing car, it is the shell of the car and running gear that are expensive and must be tooled up for.

Bob


----------



## AlanB (Sep 21, 2008)

access bob said:


> Tony said:
> 
> 
> > the_traveler said:
> ...


Exactly, the six cars were part of the Superliner II order, not a seperate and special order.

And even then, the biggest difference was not installing 10 roomettes and one bathroom on the upper level in favor of 5 more Bedrooms. And those Bedrooms weren't any different than the 5 at the other end of the car.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Sep 21, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Exactly, the six cars were part of the Superliner II order, not a seperate and special order.
> And even then, the biggest difference was not installing 10 roomettes and one bathroom on the upper level in favor of 5 more Bedrooms. And those Bedrooms weren't any different than the 5 at the other end of the car.


Yes they are. They are mirrored (specifically the ones at the end) and therefore must be different.


----------

