Definitely. It was only cut when the Cardinal got switched to being a single-level train and needed two sleepers...and that was about the only place to get them.
Ideas for Additional "Night Owl" Train Service
- Thread starter Philly Amtrak Fan
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
Yet another train that got screwed over by Byrd Crap. I used to say if you're wondering where your train is, it's in West Virginia right now. In this case, if you're wondering where your sleeper car is, it's in West Virginia right now. Considering how much Cardinal traffic is not overnight (CHI-IND, CVS-WAS/NYP), you can argue the Night Owl had more overnight passengers per train.
Night trains were very popular for business travelers going between major cities back in the day. The issue is that not everyone along the route gets to board at 10 or 11PM. Some along the route would need to board at 3 or 4 AM. Way back when there were multiple departures of the same train each day this was not a problem but IMO today it would be. I believe that's one point that holds back the Cardinal from profitability on its long 28 hr trip NYP to CHI. It does leave in the morning but by nightfall you are not even out of WV.
Last edited by a moderator:
WoodyinNYC
Conductor
Let's get back to a useful discussion. Anderson found paperwork supporting an estimate that a single-level sleeper could be good for $650,000 to $850,000 contribution to Amtrak's operations.
Let me take the midpoint of that range, so $750,000 per single-level sleeper. From CAF we expect to get, eventually, 25 Viewliner II sleepers and 10 bag-dorms (half sleeper modules, half baggage space), for an equivalent of 30 new sleepers.
That should add one more sleeper to equip 4 Silver Meteor, 4 Silver Star, [correction: 4, not 6] Crescent, 3 Lake Shore Ltd, and 2 Cardinal consists now in use, for a total of [correction: 17, not 19]. Then 1 or 2 more to take the Cardinal daily with another consist. And 2 more for the 66/67. That leaves few spares on standby for protection, or to cover ongoing annual servicing. Maybe one of the trains will have to settle for adding a bag-dorm or two to each consist.
(I'd really love to see at least 5 more Viewliner sleepers tacked on to the production, er, run, but 10 more would be even better.)
With [correction: 20, not 22] added Viewliners in revenue service, each clearing roughly $750,000 a year, I'm hoping to see the Eastern trains as a group reducing their operating losses by some [correction: $15,000,000, not $16,500,000].
No point in killing off LD trains that are not even losing money.
[[Edit: Corrected overcount of Crescent consists. Thanks, jis.]]
Let me take the midpoint of that range, so $750,000 per single-level sleeper. From CAF we expect to get, eventually, 25 Viewliner II sleepers and 10 bag-dorms (half sleeper modules, half baggage space), for an equivalent of 30 new sleepers.
That should add one more sleeper to equip 4 Silver Meteor, 4 Silver Star, [correction: 4, not 6] Crescent, 3 Lake Shore Ltd, and 2 Cardinal consists now in use, for a total of [correction: 17, not 19]. Then 1 or 2 more to take the Cardinal daily with another consist. And 2 more for the 66/67. That leaves few spares on standby for protection, or to cover ongoing annual servicing. Maybe one of the trains will have to settle for adding a bag-dorm or two to each consist.
(I'd really love to see at least 5 more Viewliner sleepers tacked on to the production, er, run, but 10 more would be even better.)
With [correction: 20, not 22] added Viewliners in revenue service, each clearing roughly $750,000 a year, I'm hoping to see the Eastern trains as a group reducing their operating losses by some [correction: $15,000,000, not $16,500,000].
No point in killing off LD trains that are not even losing money.
[[Edit: Corrected overcount of Crescent consists. Thanks, jis.]]
Last edited by a moderator:
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Crescent has four consists, not 6. So total 17 not 19.
@Woody:
First of all, you're off by a factor of two on net income: We projected $650-850k over a two-car service (so $325-425k/car), which (as part of the report) suggested that the investment would pay off in about six to eight years for the cars in use. Granted, we intentionally made sure to be conservative with our estimates (I think we could have safely estimated closer to $500k/yr per car, particularly if we presumed some pax "cascading" upwards and freeing up space as well as some turnover at Washington).
With that said, you're over-simplifying a far more complex picture. The net income situation which we projected had as much to do with controlled costs (we were looking at the Shoreliner, Palmetto-with-sleeper, and Three Rivers-with-sleeper as comparisons) as it did with revenue. We were looking at trains with vaguely comparable runtimes and no dining car, and there isn't a "dead end" on the train revenue-wise nor lots of "away time" for the crews, etc. For example, the Crescent and Silver Star both run around 30 hours each while the Meteor and Cardinal run 27 hours each. The Shoreliner would run about 16 hours each; the only vaguely comparable run is the LSL, and even it runs close to 20 hours NYP-CHI/22 hours BOS-CHI.
I'm sort-of reverse-engineering the work we did here, but what I'm thinking is the following:
-I will presume that the added car will generate per-sleeper revenue at 80% of the prevailing rate on each train per the December 2016 Monthly Performance Report. This is to account for the fact that Q1 of Amtrak's fiscal year is usually quite strong as well as some downward pressure on overall fares from added capacity.
-I will presume that we're looking at a load factor of about 60% of space occupied in a Viewliner II, with 1.5 passengers per roomette and 2 per bedroom (so, 13.5 pax/sleeper). I'm going to presume about 1.4 sales per space available as well, except in the case of the Star: In the case of the Star I am presuming 2.0 sales per space both due to what I've observed (lots of turnover at RVR) and in light of the fact that the Star is, through December, running at 85% of the Meteor's sleeper pax count despite running with around 70% of the space.
This would give us the following:
-Lake Shore Limited: FY17's PPR was $248, so we're looking at $198.40/passenger times 13.5 pax/sleeper times 1.4. Revenue per frequency is thus $3750, or $2.737m/yr (or $912k/car).
-Crescent: FY17's PPR was $288, so we're looking at $230.40/passenger. Per the above math this gives us $4355/frequency or $3.179m/yr (or $795k/car). NB I think this may be a bit high due to extreme pricing pressure north of Atlanta.
-Silver Meteor: FY17's PPR was $317, so we're looking at $253.60/passenger. Per the math above this gives $4793/frequency or $3.499m/yr (or $875k/car).
-Silver Star: Starting figure is $190, giving us $152/passenger. Per the adjusted math above this gives $4104/frequency or $2.996m/yr (or $750k/car).
-Cardinal: Starting figure is $236, giving us $188.80. Per the math above this gives us $3568/frequency; presuming that we're sticking with 3x weekly, this gives overall revenue of $1.116m (or $558k/car). I suspect the Cardinal's space turnover may be a bit higher as well, but I also suspect that per-passenger revenue may take a little bit more of a hit due to pricing pressure.
So, across 17 sleepers we'd generate $13.527m in additional revenue on these figures (or about $796k/car). Costs are a lot harder for me to estimate, and I'd have to treat all of the trains a little differently in theory...but the bottom line is that said costs won't be $0. In our report, I think we came up with $300k/year in maintenance costs, but that was split over two cars, and there's also arguably adding an SCA to the mix. I'm thinking we'd be looking at $400-500k/car in overall costs (depending on how much is actually incremental; again, we were having to look at work being done at BOS/NPN, not NYP/CHI/MIA which already do a lot of this work), so this would bring the total overall costs to around $6.8-8.5m. This leaves a net of about $5-7m (or a little under what we came up with in our report on a per-car basis...but that's largely down to the Cardinal sandbagging the overall numbers, which in turn is down to its operational situation). There's still the question of spares, etc., too.
Now, do I think there are ways to massage those estimates? Of course I do: There's nothing saying that you have to run every car on every train, and a coordinated schedule of not running a few cars (say, in the middle of the week or in the deep off-season) could help trim expenses (if not improve overall revenue by allowing another few cars to be deployed overall). The 80% figure is also strictly a spitball number since I'm working with a three-month period, etc. Bumping that to 90%, increasing presumed turnover, or adjusting load factors could help. On the other hand, we also might have a lousy estimate on costs and that could break either way.
Edit: One downside not considered above is the per-passenger cost of added OBS expenses. I simply don't have a good way to estimate that sort of thing. It's not likely to be that much, but it's also not $0.
First of all, you're off by a factor of two on net income: We projected $650-850k over a two-car service (so $325-425k/car), which (as part of the report) suggested that the investment would pay off in about six to eight years for the cars in use. Granted, we intentionally made sure to be conservative with our estimates (I think we could have safely estimated closer to $500k/yr per car, particularly if we presumed some pax "cascading" upwards and freeing up space as well as some turnover at Washington).
With that said, you're over-simplifying a far more complex picture. The net income situation which we projected had as much to do with controlled costs (we were looking at the Shoreliner, Palmetto-with-sleeper, and Three Rivers-with-sleeper as comparisons) as it did with revenue. We were looking at trains with vaguely comparable runtimes and no dining car, and there isn't a "dead end" on the train revenue-wise nor lots of "away time" for the crews, etc. For example, the Crescent and Silver Star both run around 30 hours each while the Meteor and Cardinal run 27 hours each. The Shoreliner would run about 16 hours each; the only vaguely comparable run is the LSL, and even it runs close to 20 hours NYP-CHI/22 hours BOS-CHI.
I'm sort-of reverse-engineering the work we did here, but what I'm thinking is the following:
-I will presume that the added car will generate per-sleeper revenue at 80% of the prevailing rate on each train per the December 2016 Monthly Performance Report. This is to account for the fact that Q1 of Amtrak's fiscal year is usually quite strong as well as some downward pressure on overall fares from added capacity.
-I will presume that we're looking at a load factor of about 60% of space occupied in a Viewliner II, with 1.5 passengers per roomette and 2 per bedroom (so, 13.5 pax/sleeper). I'm going to presume about 1.4 sales per space available as well, except in the case of the Star: In the case of the Star I am presuming 2.0 sales per space both due to what I've observed (lots of turnover at RVR) and in light of the fact that the Star is, through December, running at 85% of the Meteor's sleeper pax count despite running with around 70% of the space.
This would give us the following:
-Lake Shore Limited: FY17's PPR was $248, so we're looking at $198.40/passenger times 13.5 pax/sleeper times 1.4. Revenue per frequency is thus $3750, or $2.737m/yr (or $912k/car).
-Crescent: FY17's PPR was $288, so we're looking at $230.40/passenger. Per the above math this gives us $4355/frequency or $3.179m/yr (or $795k/car). NB I think this may be a bit high due to extreme pricing pressure north of Atlanta.
-Silver Meteor: FY17's PPR was $317, so we're looking at $253.60/passenger. Per the math above this gives $4793/frequency or $3.499m/yr (or $875k/car).
-Silver Star: Starting figure is $190, giving us $152/passenger. Per the adjusted math above this gives $4104/frequency or $2.996m/yr (or $750k/car).
-Cardinal: Starting figure is $236, giving us $188.80. Per the math above this gives us $3568/frequency; presuming that we're sticking with 3x weekly, this gives overall revenue of $1.116m (or $558k/car). I suspect the Cardinal's space turnover may be a bit higher as well, but I also suspect that per-passenger revenue may take a little bit more of a hit due to pricing pressure.
So, across 17 sleepers we'd generate $13.527m in additional revenue on these figures (or about $796k/car). Costs are a lot harder for me to estimate, and I'd have to treat all of the trains a little differently in theory...but the bottom line is that said costs won't be $0. In our report, I think we came up with $300k/year in maintenance costs, but that was split over two cars, and there's also arguably adding an SCA to the mix. I'm thinking we'd be looking at $400-500k/car in overall costs (depending on how much is actually incremental; again, we were having to look at work being done at BOS/NPN, not NYP/CHI/MIA which already do a lot of this work), so this would bring the total overall costs to around $6.8-8.5m. This leaves a net of about $5-7m (or a little under what we came up with in our report on a per-car basis...but that's largely down to the Cardinal sandbagging the overall numbers, which in turn is down to its operational situation). There's still the question of spares, etc., too.
Now, do I think there are ways to massage those estimates? Of course I do: There's nothing saying that you have to run every car on every train, and a coordinated schedule of not running a few cars (say, in the middle of the week or in the deep off-season) could help trim expenses (if not improve overall revenue by allowing another few cars to be deployed overall). The 80% figure is also strictly a spitball number since I'm working with a three-month period, etc. Bumping that to 90%, increasing presumed turnover, or adjusting load factors could help. On the other hand, we also might have a lousy estimate on costs and that could break either way.
Edit: One downside not considered above is the per-passenger cost of added OBS expenses. I simply don't have a good way to estimate that sort of thing. It's not likely to be that much, but it's also not $0.
Last edited by a moderator:
west point
Engineer
Anderson -----Generally you have a pretty good handle on the costs and revenues. However
1. On all my travels on the Crescent south of ATL there never has been even one sleeper full of Passengers. Granted have never traveled on it during Thanksgiving, Christmas holiday, or Mardi Gras. Now did not ever check BHM <> ATL.
2. If Crescent could have 3-4 sleepers north of ATL and cut all but one that help on costs.
3. Several years ago someone calculated the per mile costs of a car to be about $4.00 + per mile. That believe came from the extra sleepers figures of PRIIA for Meteor ?
4. The extra costs of having to maneuver cut off cars probably be less in ATL than running them to NOL ?
5. There had been plans for Amtrak to assign one OBS per 2 V-2 sleepers and V-1s once they are modified to allow the non obs to call the OBS. Still the plans ? ?
1. On all my travels on the Crescent south of ATL there never has been even one sleeper full of Passengers. Granted have never traveled on it during Thanksgiving, Christmas holiday, or Mardi Gras. Now did not ever check BHM <> ATL.
2. If Crescent could have 3-4 sleepers north of ATL and cut all but one that help on costs.
3. Several years ago someone calculated the per mile costs of a car to be about $4.00 + per mile. That believe came from the extra sleepers figures of PRIIA for Meteor ?
4. The extra costs of having to maneuver cut off cars probably be less in ATL than running them to NOL ?
5. There had been plans for Amtrak to assign one OBS per 2 V-2 sleepers and V-1s once they are modified to allow the non obs to call the OBS. Still the plans ? ?
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Atlanta is a hot mess right now, and there is absolutely no chance of dropping/picking up cars there on a regular basis until significant track work revision is done around Peachtree Station or the station is moved somewhere else.
brianpmcdonnell17
Conductor
Yeah, I think it would take a long time to make up the initial investment of building the facilities to drop cars, especially considering the only benefit would be lower operating costs. However, if Atlanta did ever get a new station with potentially more trains and a yard and servicing facility, then it would make sense to drop cars off of the Crescent.
Philly Amtrak Fan
Engineer
The PRIIA for the Crescent suggests cut off cars but can't be implemented because of the hot mess there.
Are there any places that cut off cars work and where are the cutoff points? Are there places cut off cares should be but can't be implemented (like Atlanta)?
Are there any places that cut off cars work and where are the cutoff points? Are there places cut off cares should be but can't be implemented (like Atlanta)?
west point
Engineer
Absolutely it is a mess. If you want to seethe main problem click on the link below and zoom in about 10-12 times to Atlanta Peachtree station. Then follow line WSW to Howell interlocking. Study the track layout and note how CSX crosses the NS two double tracks. CSX fouls this CP because of yard work at their Atlanta Tilford yard + old SAL line.
http://fragis.fra.dot.gov/GISFRASafety/
Station work at the Amtrak station would probably take $1,4 - 2.0 M to fix
I think the most successful addition of an overnite train, would be on the Empire route.
There is fairly frequent service over it during the day, but a pretty significant gap between the last train of the day, and the first of the next day. People on that corridor are constantly moving around, there are a huge number of colleges and universities that contribute heavily to the traffic, and if there was an extension on to Toronto, it would do very well....
I do recall they ran a weekly overnite train, with a connection to Toronto some years ago, but for some reason, it didn't last very long...perhaps people did not like transferring at Niagara Falls...
People who use the bus on that corridor much prefer the overnite for thru travel....
There is fairly frequent service over it during the day, but a pretty significant gap between the last train of the day, and the first of the next day. People on that corridor are constantly moving around, there are a huge number of colleges and universities that contribute heavily to the traffic, and if there was an extension on to Toronto, it would do very well....
I do recall they ran a weekly overnite train, with a connection to Toronto some years ago, but for some reason, it didn't last very long...perhaps people did not like transferring at Niagara Falls...
People who use the bus on that corridor much prefer the overnite for thru travel....
WoodyinNYC
Conductor
Anderson, Great thanks for these calculations and explanations.
I'll have questions and points to make, soon, I hope. But it's too late at night now for me to make any sense!
Thanks again.
I'll have questions and points to make, soon, I hope. But it's too late at night now for me to make any sense!
Thanks again.
ainamkartma
Service Attendant
- Joined
- May 26, 2015
- Messages
- 137
Isn't the obvious place to drop cars from the Crescent not Atlanta, but Anniston, AL, where the cars could sit for seven hours before being picked up by the northbound Crescent and there is what appears to be an unused two ended siding with existing turnouts right next to the Amtrak station?
(Or Birmingham, for that matter, where there would only be a two and half hour layover for the cars, but there are scads of idle platform tracks. I imagine Amtrak could not reliably make a two point five hour connection, though.)
Ainamkartma
ainamkartma
Service Attendant
- Joined
- May 26, 2015
- Messages
- 137
Maybe this is completely naive, but is not the obvious conclusion from your figures that the best* use of the new sleepers would be to:
1) Add cars to the LSL until you can't fill them any more without dropping prices;
2) Add any cars left over to the Meteor until you can't fill them any more without dropping prices;
3) And so on down the line?
Thanks,
Ainamkartma
* Where "best" is some combination of transporting the most passengers and adding the most operating profit to Amtrak's bottom line.
I believe Amtrak has, at times recently, dropped/added cars at Denver (to/from Chicago), Reno (to/from Emeryville), St. Louis (to/from Chicago), and St. Paul (to/from Chicago).
How much does it really add costs, though, to just let the "extra" cars tag along all the way to New Orleans? Anniston as a drop point is thinking outside the box, and Amtrak could do with more of that, but of course the idea is the additional capacity is only needed north of Atlanta. Amtrak has previously had cars basically just 'along for the ride" all the way from Chicago to New Orleans when the Empire Builder used to run through as southbound train 59. Given that cutting equipment anywhere from Atlanta or beyond would only save one partial set of cars (of four required), it does seem an open question just how much effort should be put into this.
The Gulf Breeze used to provide a remedy for all this; Rather than look at ways to reduce capacity nearer the Gulf coast, perhaps the better option regardless is to find a way to use or market these excess seats to carry more passengers or serve more destinations again (split at Meridian as proposed, or alternately even to Mobile again).
Last edited by a moderator:
Seaboard92
Engineer
The Crescent Star is your most likely new service that would come in the SE. Partially because it's cash positive in Amtrak's study and you should be some sort of Amtrak equipment on that route this summer. With the new route being Meridian to Fort Worth.
@West Point:
I'll run down these in order:
(1/2) I can't comment on load factors there from a position of data, but this is consistent with a lot of things: Amtrak's ticket pricing, reading between the lines on some reports, observations, and the fact that Southern only ran the Crescent daily as far as Birmingham (only running it through to New Orleans on days that connected with the Sunset via the overnight sleeper). As you indicated there are probably seasonal exceptions.
(3) I'd have to look through the report, but IIRC that proposal was to add a coach. Moreover, I'd be curious as to what they were looking at in terms of those costs...was this in terms of direct costs? Was this covering maintenance, etc.? Did this involve adding a crew member and was that rolled in? FWIW I don't find that number to be /utterly/ unreasonable...it feels a bit high but I cannot quantify my feeling any further. One thing to bear in mind: The Meteor uses four sets, and those four sets travel a combined 1,013,970 miles/year...so each individual car travels a shade over a quarter-million miles per year.
(4) Cutting cars in Atlanta would make sense. You'd still need three cars allocated (the NB Crescent doesn't get into NYP in time to return the car south on the same day) but that's still a savings of a car and a crew member. At present, you'd probably be better off looking at dropping part of the crew at Anniston or Birmingham (I'd vote for ATN over BHM due to timing...1000 to 1600 is a lot safer than 1150 to 1424) and just running the cars through. In this context you could probably drop an SCA and at least one diner crew member. You might also be fairly well-off by cutting a car in Washington, where IIRC you've got quite a few boardings due to the presence of the Capitol Limited as your "acceptable connection" westbound: 0953-1830 wouldn't be too far off of the "old Meteor" timings for NYP (which allowed a same-day turn), but there are obvious logistical issues there.
(5) The plan was actually to go to two attendants per three sleepers (though I think this effectively meant one attendant on the Crescent since the Crescent has only two sleepers and some of that space has to go to crew). Is that still the plan? Hell if I know.
@Ainamkartma:
The answer to this is complicated. Basically, the LSL and Meteor are arguably your best trains for this. However, the LSL is space-limited in New York due to the track configuration (IIRC the train can only be about ten or eleven cars long but it has been a while since I looked at the track diagrams for NYP). Right now I think the train runs nine cars and the locomotive into NYP at peak season, so it's close to capacity.
Moreover, there's the question of the impact of /massively/ adding capacity on a given train. The Meteor is not so constrained, so let's assume that we just dumped all of the sleepers onto the Meteor as a thought exercise. The Meteor, which presently runs with three sleepers, would now be running with 8-9:
(1) It isn't clear how much demand there would be for throwing that many cars at the train all at once, so you'd ding your yield factors (probably pretty heavily).
(2) Let's say you've filled eight sleeping cars with pax, at about 22 people to a sleeper. All of those passengers are owed a dinner. That is 176 passengers, give or take. With full use of a 48-seat diner you'd need four seatings to have a shot at feeding them all. Now, you could probably use cafe space for some spill-over and pack it down to three (very full) seatings but I don't even know if the diner could fit that much food.
(3) Even if you manage that side of things, with eight or nine sleepers you're either burying the dining car deep in sleeper-land or you've got some sleeping car passengers who have a heck of a walk (and I can say from doing this on the Canadian that nine-car walks suck).
Realistically you would probably need a second dining car for such a train. We had a discussion on here a while back and IIRC the practical limit for a single dining car is somewhere in the range of 4-5 sleepers. Back in "the day" trains could run with more sleepers per diner, but that's because the the meals weren't included (which meant that some pax would take a pass), the sleepers had a lower capacity (a 10-6 sleeper had a passenger limit of 21 while a Viewliner I has a limit of 30 and would be able to fit 32 if you didn't need the shower; a Viewliner II has a limit of 28 due to the restrooms), and the crews were held to more aggressive standards (witness the Pullman manuals, which gave highly detailed instructions on how to, for example, serve a martini.
The result is that Amtrak's best bet is probably to add a car to each train and then see where the demand settles out. It is very possible that after doing so for a season someone does the numbers and figures out that the car on the Star isn't yielding as much as the one on the Meteor (or the Crescent) and that switching them out would make sense.
Edit: "Splitting the damn train" is another valid option IMHO. The problem is that IIRC when the Gulf Breeze ran the service was something of a bust (Wikipedia cites ridership in 1994 as 7,737, or about 10.5 pax/train). Now, this might have been down to the train terminating at Mobile instead of New Orleans (which may have had operational reasons for being the case) but basically on those numbers the train wasn't even running with a single car full most of the time.
I'll run down these in order:
(1/2) I can't comment on load factors there from a position of data, but this is consistent with a lot of things: Amtrak's ticket pricing, reading between the lines on some reports, observations, and the fact that Southern only ran the Crescent daily as far as Birmingham (only running it through to New Orleans on days that connected with the Sunset via the overnight sleeper). As you indicated there are probably seasonal exceptions.
(3) I'd have to look through the report, but IIRC that proposal was to add a coach. Moreover, I'd be curious as to what they were looking at in terms of those costs...was this in terms of direct costs? Was this covering maintenance, etc.? Did this involve adding a crew member and was that rolled in? FWIW I don't find that number to be /utterly/ unreasonable...it feels a bit high but I cannot quantify my feeling any further. One thing to bear in mind: The Meteor uses four sets, and those four sets travel a combined 1,013,970 miles/year...so each individual car travels a shade over a quarter-million miles per year.
(4) Cutting cars in Atlanta would make sense. You'd still need three cars allocated (the NB Crescent doesn't get into NYP in time to return the car south on the same day) but that's still a savings of a car and a crew member. At present, you'd probably be better off looking at dropping part of the crew at Anniston or Birmingham (I'd vote for ATN over BHM due to timing...1000 to 1600 is a lot safer than 1150 to 1424) and just running the cars through. In this context you could probably drop an SCA and at least one diner crew member. You might also be fairly well-off by cutting a car in Washington, where IIRC you've got quite a few boardings due to the presence of the Capitol Limited as your "acceptable connection" westbound: 0953-1830 wouldn't be too far off of the "old Meteor" timings for NYP (which allowed a same-day turn), but there are obvious logistical issues there.
(5) The plan was actually to go to two attendants per three sleepers (though I think this effectively meant one attendant on the Crescent since the Crescent has only two sleepers and some of that space has to go to crew). Is that still the plan? Hell if I know.
@Ainamkartma:
The answer to this is complicated. Basically, the LSL and Meteor are arguably your best trains for this. However, the LSL is space-limited in New York due to the track configuration (IIRC the train can only be about ten or eleven cars long but it has been a while since I looked at the track diagrams for NYP). Right now I think the train runs nine cars and the locomotive into NYP at peak season, so it's close to capacity.
Moreover, there's the question of the impact of /massively/ adding capacity on a given train. The Meteor is not so constrained, so let's assume that we just dumped all of the sleepers onto the Meteor as a thought exercise. The Meteor, which presently runs with three sleepers, would now be running with 8-9:
(1) It isn't clear how much demand there would be for throwing that many cars at the train all at once, so you'd ding your yield factors (probably pretty heavily).
(2) Let's say you've filled eight sleeping cars with pax, at about 22 people to a sleeper. All of those passengers are owed a dinner. That is 176 passengers, give or take. With full use of a 48-seat diner you'd need four seatings to have a shot at feeding them all. Now, you could probably use cafe space for some spill-over and pack it down to three (very full) seatings but I don't even know if the diner could fit that much food.
(3) Even if you manage that side of things, with eight or nine sleepers you're either burying the dining car deep in sleeper-land or you've got some sleeping car passengers who have a heck of a walk (and I can say from doing this on the Canadian that nine-car walks suck).
Realistically you would probably need a second dining car for such a train. We had a discussion on here a while back and IIRC the practical limit for a single dining car is somewhere in the range of 4-5 sleepers. Back in "the day" trains could run with more sleepers per diner, but that's because the the meals weren't included (which meant that some pax would take a pass), the sleepers had a lower capacity (a 10-6 sleeper had a passenger limit of 21 while a Viewliner I has a limit of 30 and would be able to fit 32 if you didn't need the shower; a Viewliner II has a limit of 28 due to the restrooms), and the crews were held to more aggressive standards (witness the Pullman manuals, which gave highly detailed instructions on how to, for example, serve a martini.
The result is that Amtrak's best bet is probably to add a car to each train and then see where the demand settles out. It is very possible that after doing so for a season someone does the numbers and figures out that the car on the Star isn't yielding as much as the one on the Meteor (or the Crescent) and that switching them out would make sense.
Edit: "Splitting the damn train" is another valid option IMHO. The problem is that IIRC when the Gulf Breeze ran the service was something of a bust (Wikipedia cites ridership in 1994 as 7,737, or about 10.5 pax/train). Now, this might have been down to the train terminating at Mobile instead of New Orleans (which may have had operational reasons for being the case) but basically on those numbers the train wasn't even running with a single car full most of the time.
Last edited by a moderator:
WoodyinNYC
Conductor
Seems the bag-dorms could be used to add capacity by half steps. That is, add half a sleeper's worth of roomettes, then when the added bag-dorm is filling up pretty well, replace it with a full sleeper. (Another reason to build the 10 bag-dorms before the 25 full sleepers. Amtrak could add these half-sleepers to the trains first, then replace them with full sleepers as they are accepted.)
Meanwhile, to complicate our calculations and speculations, I'm expecting that the new Viewliner II cars will attract more riders by simply being new and better, and out of service less. How many more riders from 'shiny and new' and how many more riders from 'it's not sold out every time I want to ride' are imponderables to me. But I'm sure a nice number of passengers will be coaxed into giving the new stuff a try.
The Texas Eagle and Sunset Ltd. currently drop a Sleeper and Coach in San Antonio on the three times a week Sunset days, and there usually is a protect Sleeper and Coach on the siding by the Station on most days that the Sunset Ltd. doesnt run.
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess I didn't think about mentioning the places where trains are split/joined - Albany, San Antonio, Spokane.
I didn't include Spokane and Albany since the cars don't layover, they are switched almost upon arrival and leave fairly quick.
One other thing about the 321/322 Coaches is that lately they run deadhead between St. Louis and San Antonio on the Eagle and are not switched in St. Louis.
One other thing about the 321/322 Coaches is that lately they run deadhead between St. Louis and San Antonio on the Eagle and are not switched in St. Louis.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm sort-of ignoring any "shiny" effects from the new sleepers, etc. It's probably worth a few riders here and there but nothing worth really taking into account.
On the other hand, I do think less sold-out sleepers (or less horridly unaffordable sleepers) will have a positive impact on ridership...but I suspect that will also play into some modest downward pressure on PPR (hence my presumptions in my earlier post). Overall I figure that load factors will be fairly steady or drop slightly...but that is in the context of sleepers going for very high rates and frequently selling out at present, so I figure that if we're not maxed out there at present we're close to it on many routes.
As to the bag-dorms, I really wish Amtrak had been able to order a full slate of them so they could make the Transdorms into full "normal sleeper" cars, moving most of the relevant crew members into a bag-dorm.
Last edited by a moderator:
Seaboard92
Engineer
Well there is another private passenger lesson that could be applied in a way. Certain trains has dining cars but they didn't run the entire route. That would basically be like giving the Silver Star a Hamlet Washington dining car and removing it in both cities. Which saves you space in the crew dorm. But the switching of the consist makes it impractical. But a lot of trains back in the day did switching like that
