Pacific Parlour Car Permanently Retired February 2018

[Bob Dylan]

For what it is worth, I have already booked three trips(February, April, June) using portions or all of the Coast Starlight route in 2018 in roomette on each trip. No consideration was given to whether the PPC would be available. I did use it for meals last June on a trip LAX to Portland but literally froze and wore a light weight coat while eating in the PPC. I would not repeat that experience even if offered. The Coast Starlight is only third in my favorite LD routes. California Zephyr is number one and Empire Builder is number two. I always find adequate space available when passing through the sightseer lounge on those two trains but admit I don't travel in peak seasons.

It may sound like heresy to some, but even though I liked my two experiences with the PPC, I'd take the Surfliner business class over the CS with the PPC in a heartbeat, any day, if only it went to SJC.

Lots of truth here! It's a reminder that "Business Class" is an ongoing lottery @ Amtrak! California,Oregon/Washington and Maine do it well, the other Trains that Amtrak runs are all over the map!

 

[cpotisch]

TR7 pointed out that the operative word in your post was “unstaffed”, since the PPC obviously wasn’t unstaffed.

My poor joke was picking an obviously wrong operative word, but I guess that’s only funny if you understood the point he was making.

Got it. Thanks.

 

[TiBike]

It may sound like heresy to some, but even though I liked my two experiences with the PPC, I'd take the Surfliner business class over the CS with the PPC in a heartbeat, any day, if only it went to SJC.

Amen. Same with the Capitol Corridor, even though it doesn't have business class. Both the CC and the Surfliner have clean trains that can be relied on to be on time. There are exceptions, but there's a difference between occasional exceptions and business as usual. The cafe food (and beer/wine selection) on both is superior to what you get in the Starlight's dining car (and, in my experience, what you used to get in the PPC). And forget about the food in the Starlight's cafe.

There's also a big difference in onboard staff. Excellence is the norm. I've never had an unpleasant interaction with CC or Surfliner staff, or an experience that failed to meet good customer service standards.

Both respond to changing customer needs and demand. The Capitol Corridor for (my usual example is improving bicycle facilities on board and at stations, and bends over backwards to accomodate increasing demand while those upgrades are in progress. Another good example is the rapid response to the highway closure between Santa Barbara and Ventura. Extra equipment from the CC and San Joaquins was dispatched, and the Surfliner increased service as fast as possible -- they've even added another train.

Californians would be better served by eliminating the Starlight and extending the corridor trains north and south.

 

[Thirdrail7]

Amen. Same with the Capitol Corridor, even though it doesn't have business class. Both the CC and the Surfliner have clean trains that can be relied on to be on time. There are exceptions, but there's a difference between occasional exceptions and business as usual. The cafe food (and beer/wine selection) on both is superior to what you get in the Starlight's dining car (and, in my experience, what you used to get in the PPC). And forget about the food in the Starlight's cafe.

There's also a big difference in onboard staff. Excellence is the norm. I've never had an unpleasant interaction with CC or Surfliner staff, or an experience that failed to meet good customer service standards.

Both respond to changing customer needs and demand. The Capitol Corridor for (my usual example is improving bicycle facilities on board and at stations, and bends over backwards to accomodate increasing demand while those upgrades are in progress. Another good example is the rapid response to the highway closure between Santa Barbara and Ventura. Extra equipment from the CC and San Joaquins was dispatched, and the Surfliner increased service as fast as possible -- they've even added another train.

Californians would be better served by eliminating the Starlight and extending the corridor trains north and south.

Californians don't really pay much for the entire cost of the Starlight since it is part of the LD network so eliminating it doesn't really free up anything. Additionally, once you start extending your "regional" and "commuter" services, you start to to fall into the trappings (OTP/unreliability) and regulations (intermediate tests/ hours of services) of long distance trains.

 

[Anderson]

It may sound like heresy to some, but even though I liked my two experiences with the PPC, I'd take the Surfliner business class over the CS with the PPC in a heartbeat, any day, if only it went to SJC.

Amen. Same with the Capitol Corridor, even though it doesn't have business class. Both the CC and the Surfliner have clean trains that can be relied on to be on time. There are exceptions, but there's a difference between occasional exceptions and business as usual. The cafe food (and beer/wine selection) on both is superior to what you get in the Starlight's dining car (and, in my experience, what you used to get in the PPC). And forget about the food in the Starlight's cafe.

There's also a big difference in onboard staff. Excellence is the norm. I've never had an unpleasant interaction with CC or Surfliner staff, or an experience that failed to meet good customer service standards.

Both respond to changing customer needs and demand. The Capitol Corridor for (my usual example is improving bicycle facilities on board and at stations, and bends over backwards to accomodate increasing demand while those upgrades are in progress. Another good example is the rapid response to the highway closure between Santa Barbara and Ventura. Extra equipment from the CC and San Joaquins was dispatched, and the Surfliner increased service as fast as possible -- they've even added another train.

Californians would be better served by eliminating the Starlight and extending the corridor trains north and south.

Given the need, system-wise, for a train from California up to the PNW (I think there's a solid transportation argument for this), you're basically talking about going to what existed before A-Day (where SP's Coast Daylight terminated in the Bay Area and you'd have to change trains to proceed to Portland...and I think again from Portland to Seattle). I will say that I think you'd want to add some sort of tourist-oriented premium class on a daylight train on at least one run per day in peak season (though possibly reducing it in the off-season to weekends only or something), and you'd probably need to beef up food service a bit (since LAX or SAN to somewhere in the Bay Area is a long daylight run)...but something like this isn't actually a bad idea as long as you could also reliably guarantee the NB connection, either at OKJ, EMY, SJC, or SAC (though I think SAC would be getting a bit late no matter what you try to do; I'd probably put the legal transfer at OKJ/EMY but consider running the Daylight(s) to SAC depending on ridership patterns [1]).

[1] Running said Daylight to San Francisco is an option, with the transfer being at SJC; I'd really want to avoid multiple transfers (SJC/OKJ or 4th and King/OKJ).

Edit: I guess a serious question is whether most delays seem to crop up north of Sacramento or south of San Jose. Also, I thought the LD-ish regulations would probably only really require a crew change at Santa Barbara while intermediate tests don't kick in until something like 1500 miles (e.g. DEN/ABQ on the relevant trains).

 

[Thirdrail7]

Edit: I guess a serious question is whether most delays seem to crop up north of Sacramento or south of San Jose. Also, I thought the LD-ish regulations would probably only really require a crew change at Santa Barbara while intermediate tests don't kick in until something like 1500 miles (e.g. DEN/ABQ on the relevant trains).

Intermediate tests can still come into play if you exceed 1500 miles in a calendar day. As such, if you extend to an outlying/turnaround point without facilities, you may still need an intermediate test, particularly if the train equipment is "though" or becomes another train.

As for crewing, it depends on how you set up the runs. There are a lot of variables including scheduling, time of scheduled runs, how many runs you intend to have a crew complete with a cushion for hours of service and turnaround. Some of their runs already close in on double digits without and extension while others may stub end and cause held aways. Again, this is without an extension. These equal costs, particularly if you have to increase your manpower. One only has to look at Virginia to see how you have to constantly reevaluate the best ways to manage the costs of extensions.

 

[akbrian]

I've ridden the Coast Starlight down the west coast a few times, and really did enjoy the Pacific Parlour Car. Considering the cost of getting even a roomette is multiple times the cost of flying, a first class lounge is really a part of the experience that makes the cost of the trip worthwhile. It really is a beautiful trip, but who wants to be stuck in their roomette seeing only one side of the scenery all day? Having a nice place to socialize during the day is really part of the experience. This also means that sleeper car passengers will have to walk through the dining service to get to the Sightseer Lounge. I think this will have a negative impact on sleeper service desirability, and therefore viability. I can understand that perhaps the cars are at the end of their service life, but they need to be replaced some other kind of first class lounge.

 

[TiBike]

Californians don't really pay much for the entire cost of the Starlight since it is part of the LD network so eliminating it doesn't really free up anything. Additionally, once you start extending your "regional" and "commuter" services, you start to to fall into the trappings (OTP/unreliability) and regulations (intermediate tests/ hours of services) of long distance trains.

Agreed. It's not a matter of moving money or equipment from one spreadsheet column to another. But Richard Anderson has talked about the need to upgrade intercity corridor service and specifically mentioned SF to LA. So Amtrak and Caltrans might find themselves on common ground. Whether anything practical can come of it is another question.

And yes, the longer the run, the more it operates like long distance service. But the Surfliner already does a 350 mile run from San Diego to SLO, albeit much of it on dedicated Metrolink passenger track. LA to San Jose would be about 425 miles – that looks a lot more like a Surfliner run than the Starlight's 1,400 miles from Seattle to LA. Particularly if Caltrans is willing to pay for track upgrades -- that's been an ongoing element in the Coast Daylight discussions.

North of Sacramento, it's case closed. Even if on time performance (and cleanliness and food and...) were no better, simply changing the service from middle of the night to daytime would be a huge improvement.

 

[AmtrakBlue]

I've ridden the Coast Starlight down the west coast a few times, and really did enjoy the Pacific Parlour Car. Considering the cost of getting even a roomette is multiple times the cost of flying, a first class lounge is really a part of the experience that makes the cost of the trip worthwhile. It really is a beautiful trip, but who wants to be stuck in their roomette seeing only one side of the scenery all day? Having a nice place to socialize during the day is really part of the experience. This also means that sleeper car passengers will have to walk through the dining service to get to the Sightseer Lounge. I think this will have a negative impact on sleeper service desirability, and therefore viability. I can understand that perhaps the cars are at the end of their service life, but they need to be replaced some other kind of first class lounge.

On other trains sleeper pax have to walk through the diner to get to the lounge car. Why does the CS have to be special?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

 

[Ryan]

By "other trains", I think you mean "literally every other train in the system".

Only exception I can think of is if you're in the sleepers on the Auto Train that are on the diner side.

Edit: NYP section of the LSL, too?

 

[Thirdrail7]

Agreed. It's not a matter of moving money or equipment from one spreadsheet column to another. But Richard Anderson has talked about the need to upgrade intercity corridor service and specifically mentioned SF to LA. So Amtrak and Caltrans might find themselves on common ground. Whether anything practical can come of it is another question.

He did say that Tbike. Let's think. It may become practical...if you...let's say...invest money that you save by not propping up another type of service that is deemed to yield little return. You may even, divert resources from said service to a corridor type service....like making the CS into a 4 car train and taking the extra equipment and putting towards a better frequency in your area.

It certainly sounds plausible, particularly if you're trying to cover your expenses and comply with PRIIA while still maintaining the network.

I've ridden the Coast Starlight down the west coast a few times, and really did enjoy the Pacific Parlour Car. Considering the cost of getting even a roomette is multiple times the cost of flying, a first class lounge is really a part of the experience that makes the cost of the trip worthwhile. It really is a beautiful trip, but who wants to be stuck in their roomette seeing only one side of the scenery all day? Having a nice place to socialize during the day is really part of the experience. This also means that sleeper car passengers will have to walk through the dining service to get to the Sightseer Lounge. I think this will have a negative impact on sleeper service desirability, and therefore viability. I can understand that perhaps the cars are at the end of their service life, but they need to be replaced some other kind of first class lounge.

On other trains sleeper pax have to walk through the diner to get to the lounge car. Why does the CS have to be special?
Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

Blue, I would only suggest that there is an opportunity since the equipment exists, the premise exists for a better class of service. Amtrak has CHOSEN not to nurture this and the writing doesn't bode well. Remember when they cut the SSL from the winter Capitol Punishment? Remember when they cut the sleeper lounge from the Auto Pain? Only a loud outcry and a hit to the CSI scores brought those cars back. This smacks of "what next?" and the lack of public support for the LD network makes it a valid question.

 

[west point]

Well the cars could be temporarily assigned to the Surfliners going thru Santa Barbara ? Any capacity there is needed ?

 

[willem]

Passengers in the Portland section of the Empire Builder do not walk through the diner to get to the lounge.

 

[TiBike]

He did say that Tbike. Let's think. It may become practical...if you...let's say...invest money that you save by not propping up another type of service that is deemed to yield little return. You may even, divert resources from said service to a corridor type service....like making the CS into a 4 car train and taking the extra equipment and putting towards a better frequency in your area.

It certainly sounds plausible, particularly if you're trying to cover your expenses and comply with PRIIA while still maintaining the network.

More cars, greater frequency where there are more passengers. Fewer cars, less frequency where there are fewer passengers. Might make sense. Particularly to an airline guy.

 

[Chey]

Lots of truth here! It's a reminder that "Business Class" is an ongoing lottery @ Amtrak! California,Oregon/Washington and Maine do it well, the other Trains that Amtrak runs are all over the map!

I'd love to know how others like business class on the Starlight. I haven't tried it yet. But when I got on the Surfliner in Santa Barbara (to LAX) we were treated like gold. It was the most exceptional customer service I've ever experienced on Amtrak. The scenery was exquisite, as it would be [if I'd been in a roomette on the right side] on the Starlight. But the treatment we got from the staff was what made it for me.

 

[Blackwolf]

Lots of truth here! It's a reminder that "Business Class" is an ongoing lottery @ Amtrak! California,Oregon/Washington and Maine do it well, the other Trains that Amtrak runs are all over the map!

I'd love to know how others like business class on the Starlight. I haven't tried it yet. But when I got on the Surfliner in Santa Barbara (to LAX) we were treated like gold. It was the most exceptional customer service I've ever experienced on Amtrak. The scenery was exquisite, as it would be [if I'd been in a roomette on the right side] on the Starlight. But the treatment we got from the staff was what made it for me.

Rode it for the first time last week.

The biggest advantage, though it is not guaranteed since you are technically only purchasing a single seat just like in Coach, is that you're very likely to end up with an entire seat pair to yourself. The car itself is a standard Amtrak Superliner coach (the return trip on #14 from SJC to CIC had the leather seats in the downstairs portion only, and they were forbidden to anyone who could climb the stairs) with absolutely no additional amenities or features except paper signs on the end doors saying it was BC.

If you are using either PDX or LAX, access to the Met Lounges there would be a plus to me.

Personally, if it weren't for the low patronage/having a seat pair to one's self, I say it's really not worth the up-charge. Two bottles of water and a $6 food voucher for an added $25 to your rail fare.

The service was extremely lousy; standard grumpy, indifferent dragon-like Coach Attendant and a dirty car.

 

[TiBike]

But when I got on the Surfliner in Santa Barbara (to LAX) we were treated like gold. It was the most exceptional customer service I've ever experienced on Amtrak. The scenery was exquisite, as it would be [if I'd been in a roomette on the right side] on the Starlight. But the treatment we got from the staff was what made it for me.

The service was extremely lousy; standard grumpy, indifferent dragon-like Coach Attendant and a dirty car.

I've had it both ways in business class on the Starlight. Service might be excellent or it might be unpleasant. No consistency.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

That's the entire Amtrak system. I can't think of any train that I've gotten consistently great service.

I have had many Amtrak trains where I got incredible service... But none of them are consistently good. If only I could pick a train based on the assigned crews. Ha.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I have always thought TR7s posts to be a Triumph.

FOCLMAO.

 

[Anderson]

Agreed. It's not a matter of moving money or equipment from one spreadsheet column to another. But Richard Anderson has talked about the need to upgrade intercity corridor service and specifically mentioned SF to LA. So Amtrak and Caltrans might find themselves on common ground. Whether anything practical can come of it is another question.

He did say that Tbike. Let's think. It may become practical...if you...let's say...invest money that you save by not propping up another type of service that is deemed to yield little return. You may even, divert resources from said service to a corridor type service....like making the CS into a 4 car train and taking the extra equipment and putting towards a better frequency in your area.

It certainly sounds plausible, particularly if you're trying to cover your expenses and comply with PRIIA while still maintaining the network.

I've ridden the Coast Starlight down the west coast a few times, and really did enjoy the Pacific Parlour Car. Considering the cost of getting even a roomette is multiple times the cost of flying, a first class lounge is really a part of the experience that makes the cost of the trip worthwhile. It really is a beautiful trip, but who wants to be stuck in their roomette seeing only one side of the scenery all day? Having a nice place to socialize during the day is really part of the experience. This also means that sleeper car passengers will have to walk through the dining service to get to the Sightseer Lounge. I think this will have a negative impact on sleeper service desirability, and therefore viability. I can understand that perhaps the cars are at the end of their service life, but they need to be replaced some other kind of first class lounge.

On other trains sleeper pax have to walk through the diner to get to the lounge car. Why does the CS have to be special?
Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

Blue, I would only suggest that there is an opportunity since the equipment exists, the premise exists for a better class of service. Amtrak has CHOSEN not to nurture this and the writing doesn't bode well. Remember when they cut the SSL from the winter Capitol Punishment? Remember when they cut the sleeper lounge from the Auto Pain? Only a loud outcry and a hit to the CSI scores brought those cars back. This smacks of "what next?" and the lack of public support for the LD network makes it a valid question.

There have been some "interesting" exchanges on an email list I'm on over this. One thing that stands out? The LD network got effectively $0 when $10bn was put out for passenger rail in 2009/10. I think there's an open question as to what was the best use of the money when made available (I'm sure we've all got our opinions) but, especially given the studies done pursuant to the 2008 bill I think it is telling that absolutely no meaningful steps were taken on any of the LD proposals and that there appears to be a case that Amtrak tried to sandbag some of the LD studies.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

... Richard Anderson has talked about the need to upgrade intercity corridor service and specifically mentioned SF to LA. So Amtrak and Caltrans might find themselves on common ground. ...

The LD network got effectively $0 when $10bn was put out for passenger rail in 2009/10.

I'm not so down on how Amtrak fared with the Stimulus. Could have been better but it was only a lousy $10 or $12 Billion, after all.

Amtrak got a little something for the NEC. A big bridge in Connecticut. Rebuilt 90+ wrecked cars parked at Beech Grove. It got a new building in Seattle so not all the maintenance work there has to be done in the famous 'weather'. Other dribs and drabs.

Some of the money didn't make much of an effect. About $300+ million went to rebuild Harold Interlocking in Queens, touted to save 3 minutes for trains passing from the East River tunnels to Hell Gate bridge en route to Boston; but when the MTA can complete its work on the East Side Access project it will be 2022 or so. Purportedly to save 5 or 10 minutes, the segment around Quantico, VA, got an added 3rd or 4th track with a new bridge. This would shave time off the Meteor, Star, Palmetto, Carolinian, and most Virginia Regionals; but someone, maybe yourself? posted a recent report that the work was wrapping up, but no changes are expected to the schedules after all.

So Amtrak & the Stimulus was certainly a disappointing encounter, but that's not strong evidence that the powers hate the national system.

If we think back to 2009 or so, Amtrak had a terrible reputation: late, slow, a hopeless money sink. After eight years or so of accumulating modest improvements, it is no longer such a money sink. Notably, the Acelas and Regionals have enjoyed a striking performance on the NEC, which has made Amtrak's totals look better and better.

But back then Amtrak's poor reputation made it politically difficult to direct more money to improving it -- and Amtrak didn't have enuff shovel-ready projects to get funding. (It was no way ready to order cars to replace the aging fleet.)

The political factors led to an unfortunate over-emphasis and over-promising on HSR (which drained $3 Billion or so off to California) and to disbursing the money to state projects, seeming to favor corridor service over the LD system.

Still and all, remember there's much overlap of corridors and LD, so that improvements in one will also help the other.

In upstate NY, work north of Poughkeepsie thru Albany to Schenectady will benefit the many trains on the short NYC-Albany corridor on the one hand and the Lake Shore Ltd on the other. And a clutch of medium distance corridors trains -- the Maple Leaf to Toronto, the Adirondack to Montreal, the Ethan Allen to Vermont, and Empire service NYC-Buffalo will benefit too.

Likewise, work on the Piedmont corridor Raleigh-Greensboro-Charlotte benefits the medium distance Carolinian while upgrading the short Greensboro-Charlotte segment of the Crescent as well.

The Billion or so spent on the Lincoln corridor St Louis-Chicago, will help the Texas Eagle improve its On Time Performance and shave time (potentially up to 40 minutes or so) off its run.

The upgrades to the Cascades route Seattle-Portland is giving a solid benefit to the Coast Starlight, which is leaving 25 minutes later from Seattle but making the same arrival in Portland and points south. The LD train's On Time Performance will improve as well. Riders will enjoy the convenience of two added frequencies by the Cascades. In addition, the stops on the Starlight/Cascades and Eagle/Lincoln service corridors have new stations, or major restoration upgrades like King St in Seattle.

Even the work to upgrade the Wolverines service will help the LD lines out of Chicago. No LD train runs Detroit-Chicago, but better, faster Wolverines will feed more passengers to the other trains at Union Station.

Actually, besides the Michigan trains, it would be hard to find a place to spend money on corridors that would not directly impact LD service.

What was wrong with the Stimulus FY 2010 funding wasn't that the LD system was treated like the stepchild. The problem was not enuff money to go around.

 

[neroden]

There have been some "interesting" exchanges on an email list I'm on over this. One thing that stands out? The LD network got effectively $0 when $10bn was put out for passenger rail in 2009/10. I think there's an open question as to what was the best use of the money when made available (I'm sure we've all got our opinions) but, especially given the studies done pursuant to the 2008 bill I think it is telling that absolutely no meaningful steps were taken on any of the LD proposals and that there appears to be a case that Amtrak tried to sandbag some of the LD studies.

This isn't actually a fair statement; so-called long-distance trains benefited from many of the $10 billion in projects. The LSL benefitted substantially from the Schenectady-NYP upgrades, for the most obvious example. When the new Tacoma route reopens, the Coast Starlight will benefit. The Empire Builder is just as much a beneficiary of the mudslide fixes north of Seattle as the anemic Seattle-Vancouver service is. If Charlotte hadn't failed to reach agreement with ADM, the new Charlotte station would have benefitted the Crescent probably more than it will benefit the Carolinian. The bizarre situation where the Texas Eagle is prohibited from benefitting from the St. Louis-Chicago improvements because UP are jerks is an aberration, which can hopefully be fixed at some point.

The most accurate thing to say is that all $10 billion was allocated to capital, with *nothing* to operations. This is standard for politicians particularly in DC. So being able to show operating breakeven is very wise.

Obviously, most of the long distance trains are at operating breakeven or better (I'd estimate 9 out of 15).

All the capital improvements were in places which benefit multiple trains. Which also makes sense: economies of scale.

However, Amtrak does seem to have some people who are doing some really **** garbage with the LD studies. While I frankly understand sandbagging the ones which clearly showed increased operating losses and increased operating losses per passenger, there is no excuse for not implementing the recommendations in the LSL and CL PIPs, which would actually improve financial performance.

Footnote:

My current estimates, based on the best available information from Amtrak (some of which is sadly years out of date, but I used the most up to date where available) is that -- not including equipment maintenance which is allocated by arbitrary and capricious methods, but including host railroad access charges which amount to a capital charge for track -- the Auto Train, Palmetto, Star, Meteor, LSL, EB, Crescent, Coast Starlight, and CONO cover their costs. (In that order from most to least profitable.) It's notable that most of these (Star, Meteor, Crescent, CS) were using ultra-expensive-to-maintain Heritage cars during the last year I have data for (2017); while equipment maintenance is not allocated by Amtrak in any reasonable fashion, eliminating this cost center makes my estimates here more "legit" than before.

The trains which appear to actually run losses before "allocation" are (from smallest loss to largest loss) are the Cardinal (would be profitable if daily), SWC, CL, TE, CZ, and trailing far behind everything else, the Sunset Limited. The most which could be saved by cancelling these (you can't eliminate equipment maintenance...) is 37.1 million, which is bupkes; one third of that is the Sunset Limited.

The overhead which is arbitrarily allocated to the so-called long-distance trains is about $556.2 million, of which they cover a net 74.8 million from operating profits less operating losses. The total overhead is about a billion dollars. The state-supported trains have to cover the portion arbitrarily and capriciously allocated to them -- after lots of arguments, they got a relatively low percentage of it allocated to them. So it's about half a billion allocated to the so-called long-distance trains and about half a billion allocated to the Acela/Northeast Regional. Given this, you can see why Anderson predicted an operating profit in 2018; the Acela/Regional above-the-rails profit only has to be about 1 billion dollars, which it was close to before they stopped reporting any useful information this October.

 

[cpotisch]

There have been some "interesting" exchanges on an email list I'm on over this. One thing that stands out? The LD network got effectively $0 when $10bn was put out for passenger rail in 2009/10. I think there's an open question as to what was the best use of the money when made available (I'm sure we've all got our opinions) but, especially given the studies done pursuant to the 2008 bill I think it is telling that absolutely no meaningful steps were taken on any of the LD proposals and that there appears to be a case that Amtrak tried to sandbag some of the LD studies.

This isn't actually a fair statement; so-called long-distance trains benefited from many of the $10 billion in projects. The LSL benefitted substantially from the Schenectady-NYP upgrades, for the most obvious example. When the new Tacoma route reopens, the Coast Starlight will benefit. The Empire Builder is just as much a beneficiary of the mudslide fixes north of Seattle as the anemic Seattle-Vancouver service is. If Charlotte hadn't failed to reach agreement with ADM, the new Charlotte station would have benefitted the Crescent probably more than it will benefit the Carolinian. The bizarre situation where the Texas Eagle is prohibited from benefitting from the St. Louis-Chicago improvements because UP are jerks is an aberration, which can hopefully be fixed at some point.

The most accurate thing to say is that all $10 billion was allocated to capital, with *nothing* to operations. This is standard for politicians particularly in DC. So being able to show operating breakeven is very wise.

Obviously, most of the long distance trains are at operating breakeven or better (I'd estimate 9 out of 15).

All the capital improvements were in places which benefit multiple trains. Which also makes sense: economies of scale.

However, Amtrak does seem to have some people who are doing some really **** garbage with the LD studies. While I frankly understand sandbagging the ones which clearly showed increased operating losses and increased operating losses per passenger, there is no excuse for not implementing the recommendations in the LSL and CL PIPs, which would actually improve financial performance.

Footnote:

My current estimates, based on the best available information from Amtrak (some of which is sadly years out of date, but I used the most up to date where available) is that -- not including equipment maintenance which is allocated by arbitrary and capricious methods, but including host railroad access charges which amount to a capital charge for track -- the Auto Train, Palmetto, Star, Meteor, LSL, EB, Crescent, Coast Starlight, and CONO cover their costs. (In that order from most to least profitable.) It's notable that most of these (Star, Meteor, Crescent, CS) were using ultra-expensive-to-maintain Heritage cars during the last year I have data for (2017); while equipment maintenance is not allocated by Amtrak in any reasonable fashion, eliminating this cost center makes my estimates here more "legit" than before.

The trains which appear to actually run losses before "allocation" are (from smallest loss to largest loss) are the Cardinal (would be profitable if daily), SWC, CL, TE, CZ, and trailing far behind everything else, the Sunset Limited. The most which could be saved by cancelling these (you can't eliminate equipment maintenance...) is 37.1 million, which is bupkes; one third of that is the Sunset Limited.

The overhead which is arbitrarily allocated to the so-called long-distance trains is about $556.2 million, of which they cover a net 74.8 million from operating profits less operating losses. The total overhead is about a billion dollars. The state-supported trains have to cover the portion arbitrarily and capriciously allocated to them -- after lots of arguments, they got a relatively low percentage of it allocated to them. So it's about half a billion allocated to the so-called long-distance trains and about half a billion allocated to the Acela/Northeast Regional. Given this, you can see why Anderson predicted an operating profit in 2018; the Acela/Regional above-the-rails profit only has to be about 1 billion dollars, which it was close to before they stopped reporting any useful information this October.

Holy crap. You've got a lot of data.

 

[cpotisch]

If you try to book a Starlight ticket, it now shows a service alert, and guess what the alert says:

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Amtrak will retire the renowned Pacific Parlour Car from the Coast Starlight. The last day of service will be February 2 on Train 14 and February 4 on Train 11. Retiring the Parlour Car is part of Amtrak's ongoing work to modernize its fleet of equipment.

Due to high demand, an additional Parlour Car trip has been added on Wednesday, January 31 leaving Los Angeles and Friday, February 2 leaving Seattle.

The Parlour Car will continue to operate on Thursdays and Fridays departing Los Angeles and Saturdays and Sundays departing Seattle through February 4.

The Coast Starlight will continue to provide daily service from Seattle to Los Angeles. Amtrak is reviewing what amenities offered in the Parlour Car will be available in the future. Customers can continue to enjoy the trip and spectacular views from other areas of the train, including the Dining and Sightseer Lounge cars.

We appreciate your patronage and apologize for any inconvenience. For reservation and train status information check Amtrak.com, our free mobile apps, speak with station personnel or call 800-USA-RAIL (1-800-872-7245).

Thank you for traveling with Amtrak.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

So that seems pretty darn official.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Key words are "..Amtrak is reviewing what amenities offered in the Parlour Car will be available in the future.Customers can continue to enjoy the trip and the spectacular views from other areas of the train, including the Dining and Sightseer Lounge cars.."

Hopefully the wish that remodeled CCCs or Lounge Cars will eventually appear comes true, but Funding, as always, is the 18 Ton Gorilla in the room.