Amtrak East Coast single level consist possibilities

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
C

ctim2

Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
4
Given the size and consist of the late '70s and '80s eastern Amtrak trains, Silver Service, Crescent, Lake Shore Limited, Cardinal, etc., with an appropriate or unlimited availability of passenger cars and types, why would those trains look like today? That is to say, how many cars, what types, and how utilized? Your thoughts?

An example of what I mean is the Crescent of the late 1980s, which appeared to have good car utilization, including sleeper and coach pickup and drop-off in Atlanta, which reflected and accommodated its higher traffic and demand to and from Atlanta north.
 
At a minimum, the (FRA, I think) workshops & planning on new long-distance routes should be complete before Amtrak orders new LD fleets, single-level or bi-level.

Ideally, Congress should adopt a dedicated revenue source for Amtrak capital investments so multi-year planning can be done with confidence.

My belief is that Amtrak upper management is neither anti-(passenger, LD, non-NEC, whatever) nor particularly incompetent but skittish, and IMHO understandably so. Even when the President supports Amtrak and Congress votes Amtrak reasonable funding, a few years and a new election can change that tune to the old Profit!-and-Waste! Rag. Ambitious equipment orders having to be pared back for lack of funds is not unknown in Amtrak history.

Either way, Amtrak has to know (1) how many routes, trains (will some routes have 2 or even 3 services a day?) and thus trainsets it will be operating, and (2) how much firm, no-backsies, funding it has for new equipment, before it can make a firm contract for an appropriate number of cars/trainsets.
 
The Silvers and Palmetto would all originate at MIA. They would be 18 cars -= 2 diners, lounge,^ bag. The 14 revenue cars would split coach / sleeper between even to a 9 and 5 mix.. At WAS or PHL 4 cars will be removed to allow a 14 car fit at NYP. The Crescent would arrive northbound at ATL with about 7 cars and have the same layout as the Silvers northbound to WAS with 4 removed at WAS.

The only problem would be the present ATL station as the platform is way too short for 18 cars. However, maybe most passengers boarded before on the additional cars before inbound arrival and stick them on the front of #20.

BTW Palmetto probably would only have one diner serving 24/7.
 
Last edited:
This single level sleeper situation is just nuts. Of 75 V- sleepers 60 should be always available. 4 for LSL and 3 for Crescent, Meteor, Floridian, + 2 for each Cardinal and 2 more if Cardinal ever becomes daily operational that would mean 57 in operation with 3 spares. It is time for cut off sleepers at WAS and ATL. The price of sleeper space being what it is paying for the cut off operation is a winner.
 
The traditional leg rest coach had 48 seats, IIRC. The Amfleet II long-distance coaches have at least 60 seats and are longer than the heritage fleet cars. The heritage sleepers were most 10 roomettes 6 bedrooms versus a viewliner that has 12 roomettes, 2 bedrooms and one handicapped room. I think the conversion to longer with greater seating capacities somewhat shortened the consists. The significant change has been the reduction in sleeping car space. I am sure those 18-car trains had a couple of more sleeping cars. There were probably more non-revenue cars, such as a snack car for coach passengers and a lounge car on the rear.
 
Steve4031 said:
The traditional leg rest coach had 48 seats, IIRC. The Amfleet II long-distance coaches have at least 60 seats and are longer than the heritage fleet cars. The heritage sleepers were most 10 roomettes 6 bedrooms versus a viewliner that has 12 roomettes, 2 bedrooms and one handicapped room. I think the conversion to longer with greater seating capacities somewhat shortened the consists. The significant change has been the reduction in sleeping car space. I am sure those 18-car trains had a couple of more sleeping cars. There were probably more non-revenue cars, such as a snack car for coach passengers and a lounge car on the rear.
Click to expand...
Almost all postwar Heritage sleepers and coaches are the same 85 feet in length, as the newer Amtrak cars are.
Amfleet II coaches have 59 seats, IIRC. Heritage long-distance coaches with full leg-rests had anywhere from 40 to 48 seats.

Most Heritage First Class sleepers contained about 22 total berths, but budget Slumbercoaches had as many as 40 total berths.
 
Steve4031 said:
The traditional leg rest coach had 48 seats, IIRC. The Amfleet II long-distance coaches have at least 60 seats and are longer than the heritage fleet cars. The heritage sleepers were most 10 roomettes 6 bedrooms versus a viewliner that has 12 roomettes, 2 bedrooms and one handicapped room. I think the conversion to longer with greater seating capacities somewhat shortened the consists. The significant change has been the reduction in sleeping car space. I am sure those 18-car trains had a couple of more sleeping cars. There were probably more non-revenue cars, such as a snack car for coach passengers and a lounge car on the rear.
Click to expand...
railiner said:
Almost all postwar Heritage sleepers and coaches are the same 85 feet in length, as the newer Amtrak cars are.
Amfleet II coaches have 59 seats, IIRC. Heritage long-distance coaches with full leg-rests had anywhere from 40 to 48 seats.

Most Heritage First Class sleepers contained about 22 total berths, but budget Slumbercoaches had as many as 40 total berths.
Click to expand...
As to coaches, remember that the heritage long distance coaches had large "lounges"/restrooms at both ends of the car that I think took up considerably more space than today's much less generous restrooms.
 
zephyr17 said:
As to coaches, remember that the heritage long distance coaches had large "lounges"/restrooms at both ends of the car that I think took up considerably more space than today's much less generous restrooms.
Click to expand...
I do remember those lounges. The doglegs to get around them made the seating area smaller, and that caused me to think those cars were smaller. IMHO, those cars were the golden age of coach travel.
 
Steve4031 said:
I do remember those lounges. The doglegs to get around them made the seating area smaller, and that caused me to think those cars were smaller. IMHO, those cars were the golden age of coach travel.
Click to expand...
Indeed! Many featured those supremely comfortable Heywood-Wakefield “Sleepy Hollow” reclining seats. Good window shades or in some cases venetian blinds and curtains. Many offered pillows, sometimes for a fee.
 
I just had my first ride in a Venture seat, from Chicago to Milwaukee on the 20th.

I’d take an Amfleet or Horizon seat anytime over the Venture. Even on an hour and a half ride, I found them narrow and uncomfortable. I disliked the recline mechanism as well.
 
railiner said:
I just had my first ride in a Venture seat, from Chicago to Milwaukee on the 20th.

I’d take an Amfleet or Horizon seat anytime over the Venture. Even on an hour and a half ride, I found them narrow and uncomfortable. I disliked the recline mechanism as well.
Click to expand...
Ironically, people complained about the amfleet and superliner seats when they replaced the steam-heated equipment. The heritage fleet and Santa Fe Hi-levels had better seats than the amfleet cars. I am not sure if they were sleepy.
 
Steve4031 said:
Ironically, people complained about the amfleet and superliner seats when they replaced the steam-heated equipment. The heritage fleet and Santa Fe Hi-levels had better seats than the amfleet cars. I am not sure if they were sleepy.
Click to expand...
The Santa Fe Hi Levels also had very comfortable seats, but they were manufactured by Karpen, not Heywood-Wakefield.


The original Amfleet/Superliner seats I believe were manufactured by Aircraft Seating International…not sure…🤔
 
west point said:
What builders made the different various Heritage fleet seats?
Click to expand...
I mentioned the two I was familiar with (Heywood-Wakefield, who made the “Sleepy Hollow” brand, and Karpen), but there were probably some others. Heywood-Wakefield provided the majority, to my knowledge.

I don’t think any of the original manufacturers are still in the transportation seating business today, but I could be wrong…🤷‍♂️
 
One trick of the Amtrak Heritage fleet coaches is that they started out with the first two digits of the car number indicating how many seats the car had.

On March 26, 1973, Train 14 at Salem had these cars behind the diner and observation lounge, all in Amtrak livery:

4432, 4865, 4536, 8380 cafe, 4881, 4853, 4869, 4511. (The odd number 45's were because they had so many 44-seat cars.)

The reason that I had this handy was that as we entered the Energy Crisis there were people who wanted to make comparisons with 1973 intercity bus efficiency:

MC-5 (35-footer, 8½ ft width) 39 seats.
MC-7 (40-footer, 8½ ft width) 47 seats originally in a Super 7.

In the 85-foot long, 10½-foot railcar width, installing bus seating would have resulted in LIRR "comfort." It turned out that it was pointless to compare the public modes; the real issue was with autos.
 
Willbridge said:
The reason that I had this handy was that as we entered the Energy Crisis there were people who wanted to make comparisons with 1973 intercity bus efficiency:

MC-5 (35-footer, 8½ ft width) 39 seats.
MC-7 (40-footer, 8½ ft width) 47 seats originally in a Super 7.
Click to expand...
Just a minor correction…the MC-5 and -7 were only 8 feet wide.
(The rare MC-6 was 8’ 6” wide.)
 
railiner said:
Just a minor correction…the MC-5 and -7 were only 8 feet wide.
(The rare MC-6 was 8’ 6” wide.)
Click to expand...
Right. I was writing too fast. In the context of this thread, that makes the space per passenger even less.

The MC-6 subfleet was used on US101 in California and was used in Western Canada. Were there other places where they were used? They weren't street-legal on the Interstates.
 
Willbridge said:
The MC-6 subfleet was used on US101 in California and was used in Western Canada. Were there other places where they were used? They weren't street-legal on the Interstates.
Click to expand...
The two prototype MC-6X pair, ran with wide load permits on the New York City - Chicago nonstop express, via the Chicago Skyway, the Indiana Toll Road, the Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey Turnpikes, and the Lincoln Tunnel during Autumn of 1967.
When the 100 production version's debuted in 1969, they were used where allowed...on the New York City -Philadelphia nonstops, on the New York City to Buffalo nonstops a couple of those trips continued on to Toronto, Sudbury, and Calgary), operated by pool partner Gray Coach Lines, Buffalo to Sudbury, thence Greyhound Lines of Canada. Gray Coach was the only non Greyhound company to operate those MC-6's in their initial life, although Greyhound owned all of them. Greyhound of Canada owned 15 in total. Some were used on trips as far as Vancouver, BC. In addition, some were used in Florida, some were used on the lowly San Diego - San Ysidro local, even having a cash fare box installed. One, was used on a Fargo-Pembina-Winnipeg local run, linking the two cities of its birth. I believe they also used a couple on the Baltimore - Washington local run, via US-1.

At the same period, 1969, Continental Trailways acquired 45 Eagle Model -07's, which also were 102" wide. Most of those held down the New York City - Philadelphia run, bus several others ran between Pueblo, Colorado Springs, Denver, Cheyenne, and then either Rapid City or Billings. I believe they also had one or two on their Baltimore -Washington local.

These coaches paved the way for the eventual legalization of 102" wide buses, nationwide, and that is the standard today.
 
Anderson said:
They might want/need to redo the measurements. Americans in 1950 had...different...dimensions.
Click to expand...
The Wakefield and Sleepy Hollow seats were a lot more comfortable than any current Amtrak seats, speaking as a full size 2024 American. They were plenty roomy and well cushioned. They were like Lay-Z-Boys, especially the Wakefield ones on the El Capitan. You could bring them back tomorrow and no one would complain.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top