Auto Train Extension

[Green Maned Lion]

Basically that, yes.

 

[Kramerica]

This type of opertion also takes up two things: large amounts of capital to create the facility and large amounts of space to operate the lengthy consist. I cannot imagine space in NY or Chicago that is available right now for this type of operation, nor can I imagine operating an intermediate facility to drop off and pick up cars.

The terminal wouldn't be IN New York City or Chicago. They'd be on the fringes of the metro areas, like Lorton and Sanford are. I can't speak for the NYC area, but there is PLENTY of open space south of Chicago. My suggestion would be the Peotone area (where there's a controversial plan to put a new mega-airport, so obviously there is plenty of land), which is situated on a current Amtrak route (CONO and Illinois regionals), is adjacent to I-57, and only 15 miles from I-80. Another good choice would be about at the same latitude, but on I-65 and the rail line to Indianapolis.

In the same way that DC to Florida is popular, I think that Chicago to Florida would be very popular for an Auto Train. The Chicago terminal would gather travellers from all of Wisconsin, Iowa, and Michigan, along with the northern parts of Illinois and Indiana, plus Minneapolis. That's certainly not as big a market as the NEC, but it is pretty darned big. And once you have a Chicago terminal, it only makes sense to at least try out the DC to Chicago Auto Train to see if there is demand.

As for a western route, I think Chicago to LA makes the most sense, with one or maybe two intermediate stops. Either Denver/Vegas or KC/ABQ. I don't know about frequencies, but perhaps every day, but only every other day would make the intermediate stop(s). So then there would be express Auto Trains every other day.

 

[WICT106]

Well, in order for Chicago Florida auto train to work, you would still have to work out how to improve the tracks along the route. Even back during the South Wind / City of Miami / Dixie Flagler era, the route was some 36 hours+ long. You would have to get the time down to where it was competitive with driving. That would involve considerable upgrades of the existing track, as well as new right-of-way, complete with use of eminent domain, condemnation of private property, straightening of track, new alignments in certain areas.

There is also the issue of the CHI metro area population being half of the NYC metro area, and that there are one third the flights CHI-FL as there are NYC-FL. In other words, the market is smaller, and has a lower proportionate predisposition/inclination to travel to FL.

There is also the issue of having more than one departure per day each way.

Sorry to rain on the parade here, but face facts. You aren't going to improve much upon the current offerings of CHI-FL service by rail unless you are willing to spend some mighty serious money.

 

[user 1215]

Multiple stops won't work with the Auto Train. Perhaps if there was one load/unload stop in Chicago or Dallas, that would work. But if you have multiple stops along any route, each stop would take 3-4 hours to uncouple, unload, rearrange, reload, recouple and go. Folks travelling through would never stand to sit around for four hours sitting around a station.

A single stop would be feasibile - racks 1-5 from NY to LA, racks 6-10 NY to CHI and CHI to LA. Have a ready set of racks in CHI available for loading, and just perform one switch when the train gets in. Max of about 45 minutes, and the train is off again. Folks disembarking can get their cars off the uncoupled racks long after the train leaves.

 

[AlanB]

Multiple stops won't work with the Auto Train. Perhaps if there was one load/unload stop in Chicago or Dallas, that would work. But if you have multiple stops along any route, each stop would take 3-4 hours to uncouple, unload, rearrange, reload, recouple and go. Folks travelling through would never stand to sit around for four hours sitting around a station.
A single stop would be feasibile - racks 1-5 from NY to LA, racks 6-10 NY to CHI and CHI to LA. Have a ready set of racks in CHI available for loading, and just perform one switch when the train gets in. Max of about 45 minutes, and the train is off again. Folks disembarking can get their cars off the uncoupled racks long after the train leaves.

First I don't believe that the market is there for a cross-country AT.

But that said it shouldn't take 3 to 4 hours per stop. As long as there are enough Auto Racks purchased, they can be loaded long before the train actually arrives enroute. It should take no more than half an hour to 45 minutes to stop the train, uncouple the AT carriers from the bottom, pull the train up to the station to exchange passengers, and allow the switcher to remove the AT carriers for that stop and add the new carriers. Then just rehook the carriers to the bottom of the passenger section.

 

[user 1215]

Agreed - and that was my point in the latter half of my post. The first paragraph was more tuned towards GML's post about having relatively frequent stops. It becomes a matter of rearranging vehicles within the carriers if you start dealing with folks that board in Cleveland who want to get off in Albuquerque and load in Chicago and get off in Flagstaff, etc. The more variables you introduce, the more time consuming it becomes.

An alternative would be to load only Westbound and unload only Eastbound (and switch the next week).

One stop is easily enough managed as I mentioned. I think a single set, going one way bi-weekly, could have some merit.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

It won't take much time to do it, unless the workers are "Working Safely". It would be best to have it in a place they already have a railyard of sorts.

 

[Amtrak OBS Employee gone f]

It won't take much time to do it, unless the workers are "Working Safely".

GML, please elaborate!

OBS gone freight...

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I'm sure you know what I mean. The method of protesting overworking by following every last little regulation down to the smallest t-cross and i-dot, such that you appear to be working but accomplish nothing.

 

[Amtrak OBS Employee gone f]

I'm sure you know what I mean. The method of protesting overworking by following every last little regulation down to the smallest t-cross and i-dot, such that you appear to be working but accomplish nothing.

Aight, thanks. We're on the same page.

OBS gone freight...

 

[had8ley]

Multiple stops won't work with the Auto Train. Perhaps if there was one load/unload stop in Chicago or Dallas, that would work. But if you have multiple stops along any route, each stop would take 3-4 hours to uncouple, unload, rearrange, reload, recouple and go. Folks travelling through would never stand to sit around for four hours sitting around a station.
A single stop would be feasibile - racks 1-5 from NY to LA, racks 6-10 NY to CHI and CHI to LA. Have a ready set of racks in CHI available for loading, and just perform one switch when the train gets in. Max of about 45 minutes, and the train is off again. Folks disembarking can get their cars off the uncoupled racks long after the train leaves.

Totally agree about not working with multiple stops; just look at the #448, #449 situation at Albany. It might take the carman half a day to walk an auto train every time the train is switched and needs an air test. And that's not counting how long the switch crew takes to do their job. Almost forgot. Wonder how long it would take to cut a bad order (defective car) out of the train?

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Doesn't seem to take them that long to do it on the LOR-SAN Auto Train.

 

[user 1215]

Doesn't seem to take them that long to do it on the LOR-SAN Auto Train.

When the Auto Train was delayed last week, it took a minimum of four hours to turn the train around.

Again, it's not so much the switching that is so time consuming (and it is), but when you get more than a couple of destinations, your sequencing gets all off. Let's take the example I gave about the NY - CHI - LA route. Let's add Cleveland and Albuquerque to the mix. Folks boarding at NY have a choice of 4 destinations now instead of two. Those boarding at Cleveland have a choice of 3 destinations. Chicago? 2. Now, instead of a possibility of three different possible itineraries along the route, you are up to 10 different potential bookable itineraries. If you had exactly the same number of folks on each itinerary (ie: 20 from NY to LA, 10 from NY to CHI, and 5 ea from NY to ABQ, and Cleveland), AND the number boarding at each of those stops matched those disembarking, then you might have a chance. Otherwise, you can't optimise the space, and your efficiency tanks.

One stop is doable with a switching loco and a prepared consist for when the train arrives, but even that can shoot your efficiency if one month 80% want to travel through and the next month 80% want to only go half way.

So many variables. The consistency of the Auto Train and it's simplistic schedule is part of its success.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I'm positive there are both switching models and a business model that can make this work. And the market is pretty large, I'd think.

 

[SUNSETLIMITED02]

Wish this was any simpler, but the auto train is a large consist compaired to other trains so there are flaws and kinks that need to be worked out in order for this to be a successful extension.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

There are flaws and kinks that need to be worked out with a 2 mile light-rail- certainly there are bugs and kinks for this.

 

[AlanB]

The biggest bug can't be worked out, that being ridership. There simply isn't enough demmand for such a cross country service to support such a train, much less the needed infrastructure expenses to operate such a train.

 

[GG-1]

Aloha

Reading this thread, no one has suggested that one car be added to each train. I would think that with only one car the loading would not require a complex loading facility. I have no idea of how many cars fit in an auto transport car for auto train use.

So would it be to Amtrak's advantage to set certain cities as Auto departure/arrival cities with advance reservation requirements?

Mahalo

 

[Green Maned Lion]

The biggest bug can't be worked out, that being ridership. There simply isn't enough demmand for such a cross country service to support such a train, much less the needed infrastructure expenses to operate such a train.

I think there would be enough demand for a once-a-week train.

 

[AlanB]

The biggest bug can't be worked out, that being ridership. There simply isn't enough demmand for such a cross country service to support such a train, much less the needed infrastructure expenses to operate such a train.

I think there would be enough demand for a once-a-week train.

First, I'm actually not sure that there will be enough demand even for that.

However even if there is enough demand, it wouldn't support the overhead expenses for maintaining the train and the facilities needed.

 

[haolerider]

The biggest bug can't be worked out, that being ridership. There simply isn't enough demmand for such a cross country service to support such a train, much less the needed infrastructure expenses to operate such a train.

I think there would be enough demand for a once-a-week train.

Can you tell me on what facts you base your thinking? Saying doesn't make it so!

Auto Train is Amtrak's highest individual train revenue generator. I can assure you that with the kind of revenue an Auto Train can generate, every possible location for a duplication of this service has been studied and the results indicate there is not a strong enough market - even for a once a week train. The East Coast market is unique (as I pointed out in an earlier post), since the northeast has a huge population from which to draw; many of the residents have second homes in Florida; Florida has many popular tourist destinations; I-95 is not a pleasant driving experience (hence the phone number: 1-877-SKIP-I95) and the facilities exist to make this train happen.

Let'smove on to another topic!

 

[transit54]

Honestly, if there is that much of a need for people towing their personal automobiles all over the country as they travel, I'd rather see whatever money Amtrak would be given for new auto carriers and terminals be devoted to improving transit in this country. Because of the migration of people for Florida and back I can see the auto train on that route, but really, if there is that much demand for shipping vehicles with their owners around this country, that's a pretty sad statement about the state of transit in our cities.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I wasn't talking about vacationers, I was talking about people moving house. I can tell you, you will separate me from Rudolf, my 1995 Mercedes diesel, when you pry my cold dead fingers from it. I don't drive when I don't need to, but I will not drive anything else.

 

[SUNSETLIMITED02]

Well if they ever do an Auto train service through the NEC to New York or somewhere they would need Viewliners,Amfleets,Horizon cars,and Heritage Diners. Now for the automobiles, what I'm about to say may sound crazy and wierd, but rather using autoracks they could use modified 90ft flat cars to put passenger's automobiles on. Before anyone says anything yes I know this sounds dumb and ********, but this is an option if Amtrak ever wants to send the Auto Train through the NEC on to New York or somewhere in the north.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I don't think people would be so interested in riding it if they used flatbeds.