Ryan
Court Jester
Being in charge has nothing to do with the matter. Explain to me how Amtrak can work a Christmas miracle and spend money to make the lounges nicer without raising fares or getting more money from the government?
It is not my job to explain to YOU, on how to run a railroad. Amtrak employs people to try and attract customers to a comfortable and attractive mode of transportationBeing in charge has nothing to do with the matter. Explain to me how Amtrak can work a Christmas miracle and spend money to make the lounges nicer without raising fares or getting more money from the government?
If my expression of opinion discourages you from posting on this board, you have some real problems that have nothing to do with your opinions. I don't care for the court of public opinion- I am not looking to be elected to office.I find it amusing that my having the 'nerve' to have a thought or idea that certain people disagree with causes them to resort to tactics along the lines of implying I'm a cult loving spoiled brat. It may make them feel superior, but in reality they don't do their views any favor in the court of public opinion. I don't let the fact that they are obviously so unhappy bother me. In fact, I feel rather sorry for them. What is too bad is that such nonsense diminishes and discourages the exchange of ideas in a forum such as this. Merry Christmas to EVERYONE. Peace to all mankind.
Which is exactly what they're doing. If you propose that they make a change, it's your job to explain how that change would be in Amtrak's best interest. You forget that you're the one that's trying to change the status quo.It is not my job to explain to YOU, on how to run a railroad. Amtrak employs people to try and attract customers to a comfortable and attractive mode of transportationBeing in charge has nothing to do with the matter. Explain to me how Amtrak can work a Christmas miracle and spend money to make the lounges nicer without raising fares or getting more money from the government?
I have not fogotten anything. Many people on this forum have made comments or ideas of a better way to run Amtrak, but some clown keeps saying it's just not practical.Ah, Davey - forgot that GML posted on page 1.
Which is exactly what they're doing. If you propose that they make a change, it's your job to explain how that change would be in Amtrak's best interest. You forget that you're the one that's trying to change the status quo.It is not my job to explain to YOU, on how to run a railroad. Amtrak employs people to try and attract customers to a comfortable and attractive mode of transportationBeing in charge has nothing to do with the matter. Explain to me how Amtrak can work a Christmas miracle and spend money to make the lounges nicer without raising fares or getting more money from the government?
I am not a clown, I am a guy who spends more time dealing with the politics of rail/mass transportation than anyone I know on this board besides Jishnu. As such, I have some idea how things work, both financially and politically.I have not fogotten anything. Many people on this forum have made comments or ideas of a better way to run Amtrak, but some clown keeps saying it's just not practical.
GML, if you look at my post, I was not refering to you, butI am not a clown, I am a guy who spends more time dealing with the politics of rail/mass transportation than anyone I know on this board besides Jishnu. As such, I have some idea how things work, both financially and politically.I have not fogotten anything. Many people on this forum have made comments or ideas of a better way to run Amtrak, but some clown keeps saying it's just not practical.
Believe me, Amtrak implementing it on a positive-for-Amtrak basis is not practical. It will either spend money they don't have, or annoy its lords and masters in Congress with "wasteful luxury for the rich" nonsense. If you want luxury on a government subsidized service, you have to justify that luxury, and pay for it, in a way that either doesn't add to that subsidy or makes it look like it doesn't add to that subsidy. And then you might have a chance unless somebody who wants to make a name for themselves blows the thing out of proportion.
Thanks, Larry - I finally understand your point. I've also read Amtrak's fleet replenishment plan that says that Amtrak plans on running the current Amfleet II cars until 2022. So yeah, in 12 years when Amtrak starts bringing those replacements online, it'd be nice if they were able to come up with a different design that was a little more welcoming as I agree that the current "lounge" cars aren't anywhere that I'm interested in spending extended lengths of time. Lets come back in 10 years and discuss that when there's actually an opportunity to do something about it, shall we?when Amtrak is working on the plans for new consist the lounge car could without spending a fortune on luxuries make it a more interesting and cozy car.
Well, this is not true. Why has Amtrak been so desperate for sleeping cars and diners? Because they don't have enough of either one to meet demand. Both of these types of cars are for first class service (dining cars can be used by coach passengers, but they're mostly used by first class passengers).People will pay more for better service. The issue is, will enough people be willing to pay enough more for better service to make it worthwhile? The answer typically seems to be no.
I'm not sure where you're getting this either, and anyway it's not a valid comparison.It's the same thing in the airline industry. Airlines that tried to cater specifically to higher fare passengers with luxury accommodations have died and/or replaced their product with your typical coach and "first class" (which, when it comes down to it, is a bit like Amtrak business class or Acela first class for US domestic flights)
They got replaced with seats because seats generate revenue and lounges (on airplanes) don't. This is not the same as a train, because firstly, we're not talking about replacing a non-revenue generating car with a revenue-generating one. Lounges on trains are revenue-generating to begin with - we're just talking about the relative "niceness" of the lounge car.Airlines used to have lounges and piano bars on 747s, too. Those got replaced with seats.
Larry,The comparison made that the American land Cruise didn't make it was bogus as well. That train was extremely high end and over priced from anyones perspective. Limited scheduling as well.
I totaly agree, but some will say, it's just not practical.Hi Allan,
I checked those fares as well and it was still pretty steep. The improvements I am taking about are more cosmetic with reasonable touches of class that make the difference between a sterile looking cookie cutter car and one which is "friendly" and "inviting". That does not cost a bundle more, it just takes the right person to design the interior with those goals in mind. Once the cars are built then they are paid for over a very long running time. I am not talking about increased fares as the prices are to my way of thinking rather steep as it is. Just better passenger consideration that some of the "Lounges" on single level trains are now running. Somehow I don't think that this conversation used to break down along these lines when passengers trains were run by individual railroads. Its obvious from the attempts to have a inviting interior for the passenger in nearly all the history of long distance runs that it was a common practice and not considered pandering to the wealthy or out of touch as seems to be the way some today choose to see it.
Larry,Hi Allan,
I checked those fares as well and it was still pretty steep. The improvements I am taking about are more cosmetic with reasonable touches of class that make the difference between a sterile looking cookie cutter car and one which is "friendly" and "inviting". That does not cost a bundle more, it just takes the right person to design the interior with those goals in mind. Once the cars are built then they are paid for over a very long running time. I am not talking about increased fares as the prices are to my way of thinking rather steep as it is. Just better passenger consideration that some of the "Lounges" on single level trains are now running. Somehow I don't think that this conversation used to break down along these lines when passengers trains were run by individual railroads. Its obvious from the attempts to have a inviting interior for the passenger in nearly all the history of long distance runs that it was a common practice and not considered pandering to the wealthy or out of touch as seems to be the way some today choose to see it.
And the worst part is that it's not true! Sleeper passengers actually get less of a subsidy per mile than do coach passengers.This whole way in which train passengers are now seen as either taking advantage of the government and wanting something they shouldn't get is a more recent development. Another reason why its too bad that government had to play a role at all, things didn't break down along these lines before it became a public service.
I was going to give up this conversation since it is so difficult to express an opinion without being challenged. But here is another probably foolish try.
No one mentioned to my knowledge what Ryan is suggesting that magically lounges get redone this instant and at great cost. On the contrary I am trying to make a point which is somehow missed that when Amtrak is working on the plans for new consist the lounge car could without spending a fortune on luxuries make it a more interesting and cozy car. Rows of bench seats does not make a lounge no matter how you try to spin it. But I agree were stuck with it. I spent 50 years redesigning public spaces and I know full well how a few added touches and minor changes might make for a car that has a feel of welcoming that the Diner Lite or what ever the lake shore has been running as lounges are. I realize that its due to the government not spending money on equipment that is partially to blame. But as mentioned the superliner lounges are several steps better than what the interior of those Lake Shore cars are like.
A point mentioned already is the money spent on the CCC cars that for the most part no one seems to want. It appears that someone at least was thinking out of the box to create a variety of interior space. Sadly it isn't the best diner especially with the staffing issues that come with it. But a lounge that is being built from scratch could contain some interesting combinations of curved booths and swivel seating which at one point they ran. It would not be out of the box luxury but a few touches like well placed artwork, even if as in some cars amtrak posters greatly increases the softness of the hard furniture.
And while some dismiss the idea that passengers paying sleeper fares shouldn't expect more than a bed to sleep in or room to sit in, I have run into considerable passengers who felt the train did not live up to what they expected for the cost. Thats an argument that will continue I suspect.
I hope this is clearer since somehow what I have said is not understandable to this point.
Yes the whole thing has devolved into looking at a train from the position that its divided into classes of passengers. It used to be one train going to various destinations with choices of service that all fit within the cost of operating a whole train. Now every little thing is divided up and cost are juggled to make one set of passengers look like they are taking advantage of others. Its a sad thing.
Enter your email address to join: