Auto Train Cuts

[Paulus]

FormerOBS, a polite and reasonable response, though they did just that - come up with two new coaches.

I've stated over and over again in my previous threads that you can ween into a slumbercoach/sectional type of coach over time. One at a time. Not go off and buy 10 brand new purpose built superliners at once and replace them. Someone else already mentioned that there are "spares" for maintenance being held in Sanford...

You do need to start with probably half a dozenish cars at once in order to have them available for all sets, protection, and maintenance scheduling.

I suspect you need three - one per train with one in the shop. Don't even need the one in the shop so long as spares are available.

Only if you really like canceling a bunch of sleeper fares when you get a bad order car that can't be fixed in time.

What's indefensible is having an overnight train where half the riders have to sleep sitting half way up. Let's not mess with "The forumla". So what do they do? They mess with the formula.

Half of the endpoint to endpoint riders on the Western LDTs ride in coach, multiple nights each. What exactly is indefensible about having half of the riders sitting halfway up on a single overnight?

I've been a big advocate on having 2nd class sleepers on all LD routes, but I understand that there are cost implications. The beauty of the AT is that EVERY rider is end to end. There is no NEED for coach because everyone is riding from end to end, and the trip is overnight.

Sure there's a need for coach: 120 additional revenue seats. Even with higher seating density thanks to open berths or slumber coaches or something, you're looking at a major potential loss in income.

Remember, Amtrak is limited to a 50 car maximum on the Auto Train. Anything which increases the number of seats that they can sell is for the better as far as they're concerned. If they could get away with cutting the sleepers, diners, and running nothing but Superliner coach cars and auto carriers, they would be fools not to jump on the opportunity to do so.

 

[user 1215]

First of all the members that you criticize are very knowledgeable, and their ideas are supported by another member that has actual working knowledge of the day to day situation, not weaning nostalgia for 40+ years ago. I can also speak from 35+ years of work experience on Amtrak mechanical equipment.

You're right. I'm not knowledgeable as I am a nitwit and indefensible. But if it's ME criticizing them by reacting to the way they just talked to me, I'm NOT sorry. I didn't critize anything about any of their very knowledgeableness.

Let me end my rant now, and name calling has been done by many people with a political objective. Liberal is a dirty word to many with that political point of view. There are political guidelines set out by our founder, Anthony, many need to read them please.

Yes Sir. I'm sorry.

 

[oldtimer]

First of all the members that you criticize are very knowledgeable, and their ideas are supported by another member that has actual working knowledge of the day to day situation, not weaning nostalgia for 40+ years ago. I can also speak from 35+ years of work experience on Amtrak mechanical equipment.

You're right. I'm not knowledgeable as I am a nitwit and indefensible.

Let me end my rant now, and name calling has been done by many people with a political objective. Liberal is a dirty word to many with that political point of view. There are political guidelines set out by our founder, Anthony, many need to read them please.

Yes Sir.

Thank You for the Sarcasm!

 

[Ryan]

What's indefensible is having an overnight train where half the riders have to sleep sitting half way up. Let's not mess with "The forumla". So what do they do? They mess with the formula.

I already told you. There's no money to get the rolling stock to make this happen. Unless you can come up with a funding source, your "solution" is completely impractical.
If you've got a problem with my posts, contact the moderators. If they agree, I'm sure they'll let me know. but until that happens drop the faux outrage and the wannabe moderator act because your stupid "solution" got called out as stupid.

 

[Ryan]

I'm not sure what's being suggested about the pool of spare equipment. It's there so that the train will always have enough equipment available to run fully equipped every day. The "spares" are not just sitting there. They undergo routine maintenance so they can be cut in when it's time for another car to be cycled through maintenance. Is somebody suggesting that 100% of the equipment should be on the road 100% of the time, without any down time for maintenance? If so, I'm glad you're not in charge.

What's being suggested is that a fleet of "second class sleepers" with either old-school sectionals or airplane-style lie flat seats be magically conjured into existence to replace the coach seats on the Auto Train.
I'm sure it would be a great service that makes people happy and would be well patronized if it were to happen, but here in the real world where Amtrak can't afford flowers and newspapers, it's a completely impractical non-solution

 

[Ryan]

You're right. I'm not knowledgeable as I am a nitwit and indefensible.

Point of order: I said you're acting like a nitwit and that this idea is indefensible. I said nothing about you as a person, I'm sure you're a lovely human being that's nothing rainbows and unicorn farts to get along with.

But instead of trying to defend your idea with a funding source, you resort to "Woe is me, I'm being attacked by mean people" arguments.

Edit to add: And the irony to decrying while name calling while subsequently doing the same thing "Resort to calling names & attacks. That's the liberal way..." is delicious. Treat others with respect if you want to be treated with respect.

 

[user 1215]

but until that happens drop the faux outrage and the wannabe moderator act because your stupid "solution" got called out as stupid.

Source?

 

[user 1215]

You're right. I'm not knowledgeable as I am a nitwit and indefensible.

Point of order: I said you're acting like a nitwit and that this idea is indefensible. I said nothing about you as a person, I'm sure you're a lovely human being that's nothing rainbows and unicorn farts to get along with.

But instead of trying to defend your idea with a funding source, you resort to "Woe is me, I'm being attacked by mean people" arguments.

Edit to add: And the irony to decrying while name calling while subsequently doing the same thing "Resort to calling names & attacks. That's the liberal way..." is delicious. Treat others with respect if you want to be treated with respect.

No you didn't. GML said "Don't be a nitwit, which you were so eagerly ready to respond with sarcasm and attacks yourself with "It's easier to be a nitwit than to defend the indefensible." The word "acting" never came from your posts.
Since you continue to treat me with DISrespect, I hope you understand that you are reaping what you have sowed.

BTW, I don't run Amtrak. Neither do you. I didn't know it was a requirement for posting in this forum to come up with a funding source to make a suggestion.

Quite frankly, with the exception of some moderate bit of success with bad LSAs and AGR issues, just about NO idea or comment that is made in this forum affects Amtrak one iota. Not ONCE in any of my posts until I was attacked did I ridicule anyone else's ideas or suggestions. Not ONCE have I called someone a nitwit or an ***** because of an idea they had. I'm just really sorry that there are people here who can't disagree without the other party being stupid.

 

[Ryan]

I see a lot of whining, but still fail to see a viable source of funding for your "solution". Do you have one, or is this just all smoke and mirrors to try and derail the conversation?

Sent from my iPhone

 

[George Harris]

I've stated over and over again in my previous threads that you can ween into a slumbercoach/sectional type of coach over time. One at a time. Not go off and buy 10 brand new purpose built superliners at once and replace them. Someone else already mentioned that there are "spares" for maintenance being held in Sanford...

. . . .

What's indefensible is having an overnight train where half the riders have to sleep sitting half way up.

Before going down this road, it would be advisable to learn if the conditions that lead to dissapearance of the section sleeper in the few years following WW2 still apply. Yes, I know that section sleepers are still found in many parts of the world, but that does not mean that they will go over in the US. Thre are also many trains in other parts of the world where 50% or more, and in some places ALL of the riders are sleeping sitting up, and in seats that recline a lot less than those on Amtrak. Then, how about the overnight flights, where one night of relative discomfort is tolerated because of the money saved over more comfortable conditions.

 

[rrdude]

On the Auto Train, all onboard service attendants are qualified to work all positions with one exception: Chef. Even so, many are qualified for Chef as well. Those who work the Lead Service Attendant (LSA) positions in the sleeper lounges on the five crews will continue in their positions until the jobs (and the lounge cars) are abolished. This will happen around the time that all jobs go up for semiannual re-bid. All will bid on the jobs they want on the crews they prefer, and the person with the highest seniority gets the job he/she wants. Since there won't be so many lounge LSA jobs, those who are displaced will get their second, third, fourth, etc. choices. Ultimately, some will end up on the extra board. I don't know whether they will stay on the board, possibly working less often, or if they will be furloughed. Until recently, the crew size has been adjusted when the passenger count goes over a certain number. Crews have been told from now on there will be no increase in crew size, no matter what the passenger count.

And the insanity continues! Who is responsible for this idiocy? The AT, and most LD's with diners, actually need add'l staff, in order to provide proper service. What a friggin Cluster-F@#$

I'm just so over this crap.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

You know, perhaps we are not being fair to VentureForth. George, I disagree. Todays youth are not quite as anti-public as the Greatest Generation and Baby Boomers. I think such cars would indeed be a success if priced appropriately. And I think in that light, I will give Ventureforth some numbers. Please keep in mind when I give you these numbers that I do tend to assume the high end of cost metrics, because it is safer to assume high costs when working out numbers, and it is likewise safer to assume low returns. I'm not making that up, its accounting 101, and its called "conservatism", and is a major facet of accounting theory.

A Superliner coach seat on the AutoTrain in what I assume is the current peak direction sells for $160 Value and $250 flexible. Current roomette price (the date is the 11th of this month, by the by) is $528 for one person, an up charge of of $278 for the flexible fare if you are riding single, or $139 per person if you are riding double, or $368/$229 single/double if your basis is the Value fare.

A Superliner Coach carries 74 passengers. At a price of $160/$250, that means that a fully loaded Superliner coach brings in somewhere between $11,840 and $18,500 for a full run. A Superliner with a old style sectional sleeper configuration could handle 52 passengers (just 8 more than a sleeper, by the by)

Let us assume the conversion would cost ~ $1,500,000, and whats a fair investment recovery period? 5 years? Ok, 5 years it is. We need three cars so one can sub in for maintenance and protect people riding in it, so the cost is $4,500,000. Based on this, you need to bring in at least $450,000 extra in revenue a year, or $616 a run. Seems like a small amount of money, but lets see.

Assuming a halfway point between those two numbers we've seen, the full coach car averages $15,000, or a run, or $202 a passenger. We need to make it do, to be fair, $16,000 a run, with a reduced passenger amount, it ends up at at a minimum price of $307, or $105 more than the sleeper per passenger.

That means that the minimum price for this bare-bones, low privacy sleeper is $173 less than that for a single person, of which there are few on the AutoTrain. It would work for them, most likely, and provide a market, if you can get enough single people on an AutoTrain to fill the car- frankly, you might be cannibalizing sales from the more profitable sleeper. For the pair of people traveling on the auto train the cost for two Sectional seats would be $614, versus a price of $630 for a private roomette at current prices. Frankly, I'd spend the $16, and so would anybody else who was given the option between a section and a roomette for an extra $16 on a $818 ticket (when you factor in the car price).

So might make sense financially, although I'd say the numbers are perhaps a bit marginal to commit to the investment. We are not talking about a huge revenue boost either way.

 

[Bob Dylan]

As for the decision not to increase the crew size in response to higher passenger counts, I'm just repeating what the crews have been told by Management. I can't accurately predict how this will work out.

Unbeliebable! This is pure Idiocy on the part of Amtrak Managment! Stupid as Simplified Dinning, CCC Cars and 3 Day a Week LD Trains!

Imagine what the Folks that pay over $1,000 for an Overnight Trip will say when they find out they will not be able to find a Seat in the Lounge, be Eating a "Standardized" Dinner @ 10PM -11PM-and Paying for what used to be included (ie Wine etc.) in the Higher than the Fares that are Charged on the other LD Trains! And to expect an already Short Handed Crew to handle an additional 80-100 Passengers! Bet the Route Manager on this One and the Suits @ 60 Mass will have Burning Rear Ends to match their Faces when the Complaints roll in to Congress, CR and to Big Joes Office!

It's not to Late to Modify this Idiotic Idea before the Mess Hits the Fan! :help:

 

[Bob Dylan]

FWIW I like Venture Forths Slumber Coach Idea! If it was done as a Tria on the Auto Train, I think Coach riders would be willing to Pay a Little More for the Bed w/o Meals since it is an Overnight Route! Those that pay for the Sleeping Cars aren't Poor and IMO would continue to utilize the AT in Sleepers! This is the Route with the Most Repeat Riders of all the LD Trains!

Also what would be wrong with putting on a CCC as a Coach Lounge/Overflow Diner (Amtrak DOES have Spares siting in the yards)and Reserve the Sightseer Lounge for the Sleeping Car Passengers?

 

[Ryan]

So might make sense financially, although I'd say the numbers are perhaps a bit marginal to commit to the investment. We are not talking about a huge revenue boost either way.

And that Mil and a half has got to come from somewhere, and there's a couple dozen places that it could go before this dubious investment.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Indeed. But if I was the loan officer being consulted on this, I'd be dubious to say the least.

 

[FormerOBS]

They found TWO coaches --- TWO! In your mind, does that mean they have fifty more just sitting around gathering dust? That's quite a leap of logic. I don't want to attack anybody, and I certainly don't want to vilify anybody. But two coaches is hardly a fleet.

 

[Karl1459]

The HEP limitation comes from the current limitations on the wires that run from car to car.

The only way to fix it is to put a locomotive (or generator car) in between the passenger cars and the auto racks and have part of the consist fed from the front and part of the consist fed from the back.

However, FRA regs say that you have to be able to cut off HEP from the operating cab, which you can't do if you're running the train on two separate systems. MU cables aren't set up to control HEP, so you'd have to either rig up some type of alternative control mechanism or pay someone to ride in the locomotive/generator car to cut off the HEP if needed.

Neither one of which is cheap, which is why it hasn't happened yet.

A fairly simple idea (in my mind... obviously there are hundreds of reasons it wont work) for a solution would be to develop a control link at the separation of the front/remote HPE which adds a high frequency trace to the remote HEP side. Then have the remote HEP unit monitor for the presence of the high frequency. If the signal is interrupted for any reason the remote HEP is cut off, if signal is restored the remote HEP is re-energized. This would not require any additional in train wiring, as I envision the signal generator within a special between car connector cable. This RF signal is somewhat the concept that is used for some remote light/appliance control devices on household current.

 

[FormerOBS]

It was getting pretty uncivil and petty and downright childish there for a while. I'm glad everybody seems to have calmed down. VentureForth, your Slumbercoach suggestion involves equipment Amtrak doesn't even own, so I can't address it. ANY suggestions that involve ANY outlay of money are probably D. O. A. in the current climate. The deal is to cut expenditures --- not to increase them ---and to maximize revenue. Anything else is wishful thinking.

 

[user 1215]

I would like to reiterate...

I don't want Slumbercoaches, and I don't want Sectionals. I would like to see existing coaches phased out and replaced with refurbished coaches that incorporate some sort of high capacity sleeping arrangement. My mentioning of Slumbers and Sectionals was meant as a "for instance". I appreciate the aesthetics of a good consist, and reusing stock that's not been in inventory for decades tacked onto a Superliner consist is my first idea of ugly.

I appreciate GML's number crunching... I wonder if they did that sort of thing when they purchased all those new Viewliners.

So - what are cheaper alternatives that could raise the cost of a ticket (because a customer is willing to pay more for comfort) without losing existing customers and honestly without having to add new cars?

And I would like to get an answer to this - They say that the Auto Train can run up to 50 cars. I've never counted more than around 36, but obviously I don't count them every day. If this is the case, are there really 28 (14 x 2) coaches/sleepers/car carriers "laying around" Sanford or Lorton?

One final point back on the topic of this thread. It has been mentioned that the AT has the most number of repeat customers than any other train in the LD system. You don't muck around with repeat customers by increasing their prices and decreasing their services. The most prolific AT rider that I'm aware of is AlanB and he's been unusually quiet. Would HE continue to take the AT as often as he has with these changes?

 

[Ryan]

I don't want Slumbercoaches, and I don't want Sectionals. I would like to see existing coaches phased out and replaced with refurbished coaches that incorporate some sort of high capacity sleeping arrangement.

1. Where do the coaches come from for conversion?

2. Where does the money to do those conversions come from?

3. Is that the best use of that money and "found" coaches, or would it be better served going towards increasing capacity (and therefore revenue potential)?

 

[rrdude]

They say that the Auto Train can run up to 50 cars. I've never counted more than around 36, but obviously I don't count them every day. If this is the case, are there really 28 (14 x 2) coaches/sleepers/car carriers "laying around" Sanford or Lorton?

VF, I "think" CSX's 50 car limit includes the Auto-Racks, so I wud guess "no" there is NOT "really 28 (14 x 2) coaches/sleepers/car carriers "laying around" Sanford or Lorton?...."

 

[FormerOBS]

rrdude: BINGO! Up till now, the standard consist has been 16 passenger cars plus however many auto carriers it takes to accommodate that day's vehicles. Sometimes the passenger count is low due to seasonal fluctuations. Sometimes the ratio of passengers to vehicles is high, such as mid-summer when a lot of large families put Mom, Dad, & six kids into a van. Currently we have 17 passenger cars, plus however many auto carriers we need. As for your idea of modifying coaches into some kind of ersatz sleeper, the passenger capacity would decrease, the price would increase, and Amtrak doesn't have the money to do the conversions anyway. I have to go to work now.

 

[user 1215]

1. Where do the coaches come from for conversion?

2. Where does the money to do those conversions come from?

3. Is that the best use of that money and "found" coaches, or would it be better served going towards increasing capacity (and therefore revenue potential)?

1. Same place they found two coaches to add to the current consist starting in two weeks.2. Same place they found the money to build 120 new Viewliners - 80 of which arguable lose money (diners/baggage).

3. Never said it was. My idea was simply a way to generate conversation about how to KEEP AT passengers rather than lose them.

Initial ideas are rarely perfect. Each idea produces pros and cons that then generate new ideas. Eventually, a workable solution is discovered and implemented. Even that final solution is rarely perfect, but rather a compromise of need, logistics, performance and effectiveness.

In my business, there are stupid, nitwitted ideas all the time - and some from very experienced, highly trained people. If we dismissed them immediately we would lose the ingenuity that comes from baby steps that are made from ideas to solutions.

 

[user 1215]

They say that the Auto Train can run up to 50 cars. I've never counted more than around 36, but obviously I don't count them every day. If this is the case, are there really 28 (14 x 2) coaches/sleepers/car carriers "laying around" Sanford or Lorton?

VF, I "think" CSX's 50 car limit includes the Auto-Racks, so I wud guess "no" there is NOT "really 28 (14 x 2) coaches/sleepers/car carriers "laying around" Sanford or Lorton?...."

FoamerOBS answered the question. That's why I laid out my question. There ARE 28 cars lying around, but most (if not all) are car carriers and not sleepers/coaches.