I didn't say no one would take the train between those destinations. The fact that there is already daytime rail service proves otherwise. I'm just positing that the demand for overnight rail service would be blunted by the fact that travelers have faster, more frequent options that don't require sleeping in a train overnight. Certainly there may be places where it could work.
Between sleeping in a bed that dose not bounce around every which way in a spacious room, vs. in a bed that bounces around in a closet? Well, I guess everyone has different ideas about what is good.
As I said in a previous post, the alternative is spending 8-10 hours stuck on a train during awake hours when you can be doing a lot of other things instead (like posting to this board). They still don't have wi-fi on Superliner trains, right?Between sleeping in a bed that dose not bounce around every which way in a spacious room, vs. in a bed that bounces around in a closet? Well, I guess everyone has different ideas about what is good.
No. The alternative is a less than two hour flight which is usually quite cheap followed by a hotel room at a price point of ones choice, for most people.As I said in a previous post, the alternative is spending 8-10 hours stuck on a train during awake hours when you can be doing a lot of other things instead (like posting to this board). They still don't have wi-fi on Superliner trains, right?Between sleeping in a bed that dose not bounce around every which way in a spacious room, vs. in a bed that bounces around in a closet? Well, I guess everyone has different ideas about what is good.
A great deal depends on the individual circumstances of a particular trip and one's personal preferences, obviously, but to reiterate, there are often downsides to that inexpensive two hour flight and hotel which make the rail option more attractive. The business person with a morning meeting but who cannot leave work early faces an evening or (very) early morning flight; Head to the airport after work, and possibly not be in your chosen hotel room until midnight or 1 a.m. (maybe five hours sleep). Or, you can go home to your own bed, up at 2 or 3 to catch your flight. You still prefer to fly; That's fine, but you have to realize there are many - perhaps most - people who would possibly be interested in another option (but usually, there isn't one).
Between most any two business destinations, there range from several to several dozen flights to choose from, each with perhaps hundreds of seats. Even in a railfan "pipe dream", we are generally talking about being able to sell one "overnight" train on each route (in many cases, this would double frequencies from the current one train per 24 hours!). You don't need a megapolis such as the Northeast Corridor to fill some 236 coach seats and 15 sleeper rooms (typical eastern capacity). Virtually everyone could stick to the airlines and you would still have a sold-out train. You don't even need to make a significant dent in market share; You just need enough passengers to fill your 250 or so seats. Amtrak's existing overnight long-distance trains already do this, and they are only incidentally "overnight services" between major (business) destinations.
Europe is not a valid comparison, and we cannot draw meaningful conclusions about what would or would not work in the United States from such observations (that doesn't stop many persons from making the comparison, of course). There are too many fundamental differences between American and European transportation infrastructure (lack of high speed rail, auto usage, generally poor public transportation, extent of transportation mode integration, etc.) to draw any real conclusions, let alone societal, cultural, and geographic differences (among others).As you can see, i challenge you to show that "perhaps most - people who would possibly be interested in another option". There is considerable evidence in Europe that such is not the case. I doubt that it is any different in the US. It is a pipe dream of rail lovers IMHO, and of course I am entitled to one.
I don't disagree at all. In fact, I would assume this would ordinarily be a prerequisite for regional short/medium distance corridor operations. When there is currently but a single train (per 24 hours), however, I would expect that a second train would attract some intermediate point passengers regardless of the time scheduled (as current overnight long-distance trains already do).
When a comfortable fixed-in-place room costs a minimum of $300 (I'm looking at NYC here), and you have to fly into one of the infamous NYC airports, and get a taxi to get back downtown?Between sleeping in a bed that dose not bounce around every which way in a spacious room, vs. in a bed that bounces around in a closet? Well, I guess everyone has different ideas about what is good.
I would say to have a "cheaper" overnight train, you could go no sleeper (Night Owl works without sleepers) or have sleepers and no diner car (the Three Rivers to my knowledge never had one). Do diner cars pay for themselves? How about sleepers?
Say, are you new around here?
We've had exhaustive discussions on these matters. Diners make no money. Amtrak uses diners because of the hallowed railroad tradition to supply better food service for the passengers paying more to ride in sleepers on the overnight LD trains.Which it generally has in the Erie Canal Corridor of upstate NY, at least at current train speeds, with the Empire Service... but not in Ohio and Indiana. Which is why I like my idea so much.
For marketing it to Amtrak it needs a better name than "TWO A DAY" though, I suspect.Ah, yes. I think California is a much less fertile area for overnight service.
Try the attached report on for size. It's almost three years old but I got some very good numbers to work with at the time. I think the average profit per car comes in a little below what you're estimating, but this was in a very specific context as well (VA-NYP/BOS service). I think there's a good case that my collaborators and I also used almost farcially lowballed yield estimates.
Definitely.
