Lower priced Sleeper for single travelers

[jpakala]

I'd never realized any airplanes were all frist-class, but I do remember late 1950s United Airlines timetables showing flights only for men. The one I recall specifically was to Chicago from an east coast city (probably NYC and perhaps more than one city, but I cannot recall).

 

[west point]

In the recip engines airline business many of the flights were first class only. Especially NEC to Florida.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

In the recip engines airline business many of the flights were first class only. Especially NEC to Florida.

What is recip engines airline business?

 

[jis]

What is recip engines airline business?

I suspect "reciprocating engines", the rest is what it is.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

I suspect "reciprocating engines", the rest is what it is.

Oh I see. I guess the questions then (to the OP of course) when was this and was it a public flight or private for employees.

 

[ehbowen]

There was at least one startup airline in the deregulation era (which name I cannot recall at the moment) which tried to make a go of all-first-class service. Didn't fly for very long (pun intended). Seems the high-up muckety-mucks who could authorize themselves to use such a service would rather go by private jet...but they enjoy relegating the people under them, the ones who actually do the work, to cattle-car class. The days in which a newly hired Harvey Girl could look forward to a company-paid first class Pullman ticket for the trek westward to begin her new career as a waitress are long, long in the past.

 

[Dakota 400]

Oh I see. I guess the questions then (to the OP of course) when was this and was it a public flight or private for employees.

The SAS DC-7C flights to which I referred was a public flight. Boeing stratocrusers operated by Pan Am were certainly public flights.

 

[jis]

As I vaguely remember original plan was an option that would have increase the number of V-2 sleepers to 75 for a total car buy of 130 V-2s of various configurations. Believe money was a problem?.

The total car buy was 130 cars - 70 Baggage, 10 Dorm Baggage, 25 Diner, 25 Sleeper. The original order was for 55 Baggage, 25 Dorm Baggage, Diner and Sleeper. 15 Dorm Baggage cars got converted to Baggage for the final breakdown of the 130 car order.

In effect it added 10 lower priced roomettes per Sleeper, since one is now blocked for storage in each car. Assuming all cars deployed that would be a net addition of 250 lower priced rooms. Actually 17 of the 25 are on trains in service each day, so that is 170 net additional less expensive rooms, with a potential capacity of 340 customers, but many operate with a single customer per room. The remaining 8 cars are in Protect, PM/BO and overhaul. They have an unusually high level of BOs, which will hopefully go down as teething troubles are resolved. As far as one can surmise none are in Mothballs at this time, since pretty much all of them have been seen on the road over the last several months. All Mothballed single level Sleepers are V1s.

 

[Stremba]

It has probably been suggested before, but would it not be pretty simple from a logistical perspective to offer two classes of sleeper accommodation, one including meal service as is currently offered and one that does not? Presumably Amtrak would be able to offer the non-dining sleeper options at a lower price.

 

[joelkfla]

It has probably been suggested before, but would it not be pretty simple from a logistical perspective to offer two classes of sleeper accommodation, one including meal service as is currently offered and one that does not? Presumably Amtrak would be able to offer the non-dining sleeper options at a lower price.

That would be the end of dining cars on the Eastern trains, because nobody would pay an upgrade for Flex meals.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

It has probably been suggested before, but would it not be pretty simple from a logistical perspective to offer two classes of sleeper accommodation, one including meal service as is currently offered and one that does not? Presumably Amtrak would be able to offer the non-dining sleeper options at a lower price.

It would be simple to offer a first class seat on an airline or Acela with no meals / alcohol as well.
(Edit for intent: there is a reason this isn’t done.)

I feel like money wise, Amtrak just needs more sleepers - since they don’t have enough supply.

 

[Bonser]

Unusual, but they do exist, or have existed.

I once flew on a Lufthansa flight operated by PrivatAir from Stuttgart to Newark which was all business class in a Boeing 737 BBJ. It was one of the most wonderful flights I have been on. The other was the Newark - Singapore nonstop by Singapore Airlines in its previous incarnation using a special performance Airbus 340-500. That was another out of this world flight for me.

Coming back to railroads, India has dozens of overnight trains that are Sleeper only, with no Coach style sitting accommodation and often they are 20+ cars, all Sleepers. So they do exist and are not really all that odd. Of course there are different classes of Sleepers in those trains.

And the pre Amtrak era countless trains were all sleeper, e.g. The B'way Limited, 20th Century, etc.

 

[MccfamschoolMom]

It has probably been suggested before, but would it not be pretty simple from a logistical perspective to offer two classes of sleeper accommodation, one including meal service as is currently offered and one that does not? Presumably Amtrak would be able to offer the non-dining sleeper options at a lower price.

Back around 40 years ago or so, I rode in Slumbercoach from Boston to Chicago, which sounds like the non-dining sleeper accommodations you'd like to see. Since I booked the Slumbercoach ticket at the last minute, I got a 2-person Slumbercoach compartment (basically like a Viewliner I roomette nowadays, with sink & toilet in the compartment). A colleague heading home from the same conference who had booked in advance was in a 1-person Slumbercoach compartment, and those were kind of stacked in 2 layers along the corridor (like Lego bricks) _-_ .

 

[Ragman]

Back around 40 years ago or so, I rode in Slumbercoach ...

I just looked at the Wikipedia page about it. Interesting concept..... I would consider it if it was still around.

 

[zephyr17]

Back around 40 years ago or so, I rode in Slumbercoach from Boston to Chicago, which sounds like the non-dining sleeper accommodations you'd like to see. Since I booked the Slumbercoach ticket at the last minute, I got a 2-person Slumbercoach compartment (basically like a Viewliner I roomette nowadays, with sink & toilet in the compartment). A colleague heading home from the same conference who had booked in advance was in a 1-person Slumbercoach compartment, and those were kind of stacked in 2 layers along the corridor (like Lego bricks) _-_ .

Called a "duplex". Slumbercoach singles were usually duplexed, but full Pullman "First Class" roomettes could be duplexed as well. There are still duplex roomettes up in Canada on the unconverted Chateau series sleepers. They were never Slumbercoaches.

 

[railiner]

Called a "duplex". Slumbercoach singles were usually duplexed, but full Pullman "First Class" roomettes could be duplexed as well. There are still duplex roomettes up in Canada on the unconverted Chateau series sleepers. They were never Slumbercoaches.

There was also a relatively rare accommodation for one that was a step above a regular Pullman Roomette...the Duplex Single Room. It had the bed crosswise in the car. You can think of it as sort of a "Deluxe Bedroom for One".

 

[zephyr17]

There was also a relatively rare accommodation for one that was a step above a regular Pullman Roomette...the Duplex Single Room. It had the bed crosswise in the car. You can think of it as sort of a "Deluxe Bedroom for One".

Never seen one of those. Closest I've ever come is the duplex roomette on VIA's Chateaus (which I dislike and much prefer the "standard" roomettes in the Manors).

 

[railiner]

Never seen one of those. Closest I've ever come is the duplex roomette on VIA's Chateaus (which I dislike and much prefer the "standard" roomettes in the Manors).

Yes…the Duplex Roomette was considered a notch below the standard Roomette in the Pullman heirarchy…

 

[Larry H.]

When we traveled across Canada in the 70s they still had upper and lower births, seats during day and beds with curtains at night. That seemed to work pretty well for those who wished them.

 

[Bob Dylan]

When we traveled across Canada in the 70s they still had upper and lower births, seats during day and beds with curtains at night. That seemed to work pretty well for those who wished them.

Still does on the Canadian!

 

[crescent-zephyr]

The Open Section doesn't take up much (if any) less room than a roomette, an Amtrak Roomette is basically an enclosed section after all. The one benefit for solo passengers is that you are only paying for 1/2 the section and one berth and indeed an upper berth section on the Canadian is significantly cheaper than a roomette when riding the Canadian.

Of all of the ideas thrown around, open sections would probably make the most sense since there wouldn't be any major changes to the structure of the car (so no new design fees) and open sections on a Viewliner would actually be very apealling since the upper berth would have a window.

I wouldn't want to travel long distances in a section when there wasn't an actual lounge though, as sharing space facing a complete stranger isn't always ideal. On the Canadian, you have the Park Car and at least one other lounge car and/or dome to spend your time in but on a few amtrak trains, you really have nowhere to go when it's not mealtime.

 

[zephyr17]

When we traveled across Canada in the 70s they still had upper and lower births, seats during day and beds with curtains at night. That seemed to work pretty well for those who wished them.

They still do.

 

[lstone19]

The Open Section doesn't take up much (if any) less room than a roomette, an Amtrak Roomette is basically an enclosed section after all. The one benefit for solo passengers is that you are only paying for 1/2 the section and one berth and indeed an upper berth section on the Canadian is significantly cheaper than a roomette when riding the Canadian.

It wasn't until I rode the Canadian and saw both sections and real roomettes ("Cabin for One" in ViaSpeak) that I realized that the Superliner Roomette is just an enclosed section where the single traveler has the entire space (a product which Pullman did offer for sections). For the single traveler, the true roomette was a far superior product to what Amtrak calls a roomette.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

For the single traveler, the true roomette was a far superior product to what Amtrak calls a roomette.

I disagree, I prefer the Amtrak roomette.

 

[jpakala]

We will reserve an Amtrak Viewliner roomette for two but not a Superliner roomette because its lower ceiling means very tight space for the upper berth, no window, and less luggage space in the roomette, not to mention no sink (Viewliner I also have toilet). Pullman & other former roomettes and duplex roomettes were for one person, included sink, toilet, and ample luggage space.