Various people asked why passenger trains lose more money per passenger in Canada than in the US. Thus the answer lies in the geography, and specifically the lack of population density over much of the Canadian landmass. The Canadian government supports intercity passenger rail at a level that would be equivalent to Amtrak having an annual subsidy of about $2 billion, again roughly a third higher than the actual levels.
Simply not true. Amtrak runs their trains, CS excluded, with somewhere between 1 service car for every 4 cars or so, with the Diners staffed with 3 people and the lounge cars staffed with one.
VIA, on the other hand...
Latest Canadian Consist via YouTube:
2 Bag, 4 Coach, Dome, 2 Sleeper, Diner, 5 sleeper, dome, diner, 3 sleeper, observation
21 cars: 4 coaches. 10 sleepers. 2 diners. 3 lounge cars. 2 baggage cars.
14 revenue cars, 5 service cars, 2 support cars.
Coaches hold 60, sleepers hold 20. Max: 240 coach passengers, 200 sleeper passengers. 440 people.
Now, if I remember correctly, VIA puts 5 people into each of their diners, and 2 people into each of their lounge cars, and one person into the park car, a coach attendant per 2 coach cars, and a sleeper attendant per car. 39 personnel total for 440 passengers (I'm including the 2 people in the locomotives). 11.3 passengers per employee. Also, their diner holds 40 people, I believe, so they have 80 dining seats. And a total of 88 passengers per service car, 2.8 cars per service car.
Now, take the Empire Builder
Bag, dorm, 2 sleepers, diner, 3 coaches, lounge, 2 coaches, sleeper
1.5 support cars, 9 revenue cars, 2 service cars.
140 sleeper berths, 375 coach seats, 515 total passengers. 4.5 cars per service car, 257.5 passengers per service car.
Now, the Amtrak train has 3 coach attendants, 3 sleeper attendants, 2 chefs, 3 SAs, 2 LSAs. 13 service perople, a conductor, 2 ACs, 2 engineers. 18 employees, 28 employees per passenger. And 70 dining car seats.
When you get down to it, that is why the Canadian loses money. The level of over-service.
From what I've seen, VIA's corridor trains are well patronized, keep to schedule and are broadly similar to those run by Amtrak on similar corridors. There are some striking differences, especially in terms of boarding procedures in major stations and in terms of food service. However, I don't really think that the idiosyncrasies make VIA any more "inefficient" than Amtrak. From what I've seen, I like Amtrak's approach a little better, but I can also understand VIA's approach, and I could point to one area where VIA is far more efficient - and others where they seem to be less so.
I said as much, that the big corridor makes sense.
I find this last series of statements to be entirely inaccurate, and one statement in particular to be offensive.
For a person who likes to sleep with the homeless on the floor at Penn Station, I'm surprised you would make such a derogatory statement.
I can assure you that the people who "live in the middle of nowhere" have many admirable qualities.
I can also assure you that anyone who can survive in the wilderness, beyond any roads, paved or otherwise, is most likely very clever, ambitious and resourceful.
Most people who know me in person would agree than I am a pretty bright person. Tests put me in the top 1%, actually. That being what it is, I still make stupid decisions. I do dumb things, and so does anyone else. When I do dumb things, I am required to live with the effects of said stupid act. I think that is perfectly reasonable concept.
If I, for instance, attempt to buy a house on credit that I can't afford to pay for, it is reasonable that I lose my home and wreck my credit. It clearly was my mistake. I deserve the consequences for it.
If I chose to buy a home in the middle of nowhere, I have some transportation issues that I should have been aware of when I made the decision. They are my responsibility to take care of.
The Canadian and Ocean are tourist trains, just like our Western tains and the Adirondack and other NE corridor trains (@ least some of the states help pay the freight!),we are, as rail fans all the better for this!
Simply not true. Almost all of Amtrak's trains are cost competitive with the alternatives, such as Greyhound and airplanes. The NE Regionals are not, but they are primarily business transport, and certainly are used enough to justify their presence. They aren't tourist trains. VIAs trains are priced such that only a tourist is likely to ride them, outside of the specified corridor.
I would ride the Canadian for tourist purposes. I'd love to. But if I had some valid reason to go from Toronto to Vancouver, I'd be riding Amtrak (Maple Leaf -> Lake Shore Limited -> Empire Builder -> Thruway). It is both a lot cheaper and a little faster, despite the dogleg down into the US, and back up again, as well as an insanely long layover in Chicago. Regardless of everything else I said, this is demonstrative that VIA is a tourist road.
Does anyone know if Amtrak has any plans to have built any Superliner LD cars?If they plan on adding the Pioneer Route back on, or expanding existing service won't they need more rolling stock?
Definitely need them.
From what I heard, thats about six on the priority list:
1) Electric power
2) Viewliner Sleepers, Diners, Dorms, Baggage
3) Midwest Bi-levels
4) Additional Viewliner sleepers, diners, dorms, baggage.
5) Viewliner Lounge and Coach cars.
6) Additional bi-level long distance cars, probably based on the Midwest bi-levels.