Viewliner II Part 3: Bag/Dorm Car Production, Delivery, Speculation

[cpotisch]

Because the staff would have to swap out halfway through the trip.

 

[cpotisch]

Hah! Great minds think alike!

 

[me_little_me]

Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?

Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.

He might mean eta of the first bag/dorms (aka, bad/dorms

). My guess is a long-running ABC news show.

20/20? Where'd you see that that's the date of delivery?

I get it - 20 months after 2020 ends. Or is it 20 years later?

 

[cpotisch]

Thirdrail, can you give us a cryptic ETA of the new cars?

Hmm, he already did let us know when the 1st one is headed south. See diner thread.

He might mean eta of the first bag/dorms (aka, bad/dorms

). My guess is a long-running ABC news show.

20/20? Where'd you see that that's the date of delivery?

I get it - 20 months after 2020 ends. Or is it 20 years later?

Well played.

 

[railiner]

Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?

Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.

Why not just cut the sleeper in and out at Washington, and use a Washington based attendant thru to Boston, and return?

 

[Maglev]

If the bag/sleeper is cut in and out at Washington, couldn't the beds already be made up such that no attendant is necessary?

 

[cpotisch]

If the bag/sleeper is cut in and out at Washington, couldn't the beds already be made up such that no attendant is necessary?

But then you've got the issue of there being one train that offers sleeping accommodations without an SCA. And what if passengers don't want to have their room made down? It just seems impractical. If they can't make it work with an attendant, they probably shouldn't do it at all.

 

[PVD]

I would think it would be a legit safety issue....probably a CBA issue as well

 

[Triley]

If the bag/sleeper is cut in and out at Washington, couldn't the beds already be made up such that no attendant is necessary?

Careful what you suggest. Next thing you know, maybe that'll become the standard.

In addition to the other responses that have been given, I'm sure the union would have something to say about it.

Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?

Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.

Why not just cut the sleeper in and out at Washington, and use a Washington based attendant thru to Boston, and return?

I would say lost revenue. The car will be sitting unused in WAS waiting for 66 to come in. May as well leave it in the consist and bring in some revenue.

 

[railiner]

If the bag/sleeper is cut in and out at Washington, couldn't the beds already be made up such that no attendant is necessary?

Careful what you suggest. Next thing you know, maybe that'll become the standard.
In addition to the other responses that have been given, I'm sure the union would have something to say about it.

Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?

Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.

Why not just cut the sleeper in and out at Washington, and use a Washington based attendant thru to Boston, and return?

I would say lost revenue. The car will be sitting unused in WAS waiting for 66 to come in. May as well leave it in the consist and bring in some revenue.

It might lose some, I'll admit. But it would be during mostly daylight hours. If the car cut in and out at Washington, it would have a lot more time to be properly serviced and maintained, as well as having its linens and supplies restocked.

And it could allow early occupancy at Washington, sort of like the 'Executive Sleeper' that set in/out at New York.

 

[Bob Dylan]

If the bag/sleeper is cut in and out at Washington, couldn't the beds already be made up such that no attendant is necessary?

Careful what you suggest. Next thing you know, maybe that'll become the standard.
In addition to the other responses that have been given, I'm sure the union would have something to say about it.

Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?

Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.

Why not just cut the sleeper in and out at Washington, and use a Washington based attendant thru to Boston, and return?

I would say lost revenue. The car will be sitting unused in WAS waiting for 66 to come in. May as well leave it in the consist and bring in some revenue.

It might lose some, I'll admit. But it would be during mostly daylight hours. If the car cut in and out at Washington, it would have a lot more time to be properly serviced and maintained, as well as having its linens and supplies restocked. And it could allow early occupancy at Washington, sort of like the 'Executive Sleeper' that set in/out at New York.

This.

 

[tommylicious]

So when are these supposed to start hitting the system?

 

[cpotisch]

So when are these supposed to start hitting the system?

Assuming they're delivered within the next couple days, I would expect about a month from now for the diners. I don't know what the bag-dorms need to undergo before entering service, so I have no idea when we'll first see 69000 out on the rails.

 

[west point]

Explain something : If it is cut off at WASH how is baggage handled NPN <> WASH ?

 

[cpotisch]

Explain something : If it is cut off at WASH how is baggage handled NPN <> WASH ?

Oh right. Good point. I guess there really aren't any good spots on a Regional to put even a small number of checked bags?

 

[PVD]

The overnights are unique in that they are the only NER trains to have checked baggage. And since the Carolinian, Palmetto, Crescent, Cardinal, and Silvers don't go to Boston, they are the only checked bags past NYP on the corridor.

 

[railiner]

I think I 'missed' something here...are we talking about putting a bag dorm on 66 and 67, or a full sleeper? If the former, then I will have to re-think this.

Sorry, if I misunderstood the proposal....

 

[PVD]

People have long advocated for return of a sleeper to the overnights. There was just some thoughts tossed around by some folks as to whether a bag dorm would be sufficient. and how it might be implemented. Unanswered of course is whether the rooms could be sold as revenue rooms, and if so, how would the car be staffed (as an example, an SCA would leave you with 7 rooms for sale, and how could it be staffed in a logical fashion. Would I consistently generate enough additional revenue to pay for an additional crew member? Even though WAS is a good place to add/drop a car since there is a power change anyway, it doesn't solve the problem of baggage South of WAS, and you know they aren't going to work 2 cars.

 

[Thirdrail7]

People have long advocated for return of a sleeper to the overnights. There was just some thoughts tossed around by some folks as to whether a bag dorm would be sufficient. and how it might be implemented. Unanswered of course is whether the rooms could be sold as revenue rooms, and if so, how would the car be staffed (as an example, an SCA would leave you with 7 rooms for sale, and how could it be staffed in a logical fashion. Would I consistently generate enough additional revenue to pay for an additional crew member? Even though WAS is a good place to add/drop a car since there is a power change anyway, it doesn't solve the problem of baggage South of WAS, and you know they aren't going to work 2 cars.

Which is why the night owl is good place to test the bag dorm. You can test the market for reinstating sleeping service on the corridor. Additionally, 67/66 doesn't carry a ton of luggage although it has a decent share of express.

TR7 - Not going to quote the giant post to reply to one line.

I would love to see any type of sleeper back on 67/66, but it's certainly not pure profit. Boston has no one that is trained in the sleepers who can go back to working them, without giving up their LSA seniority, due to the contact. So unless we'd have WAS or NYP crew it and do a crew change at their respective crew base, we'd have hirings to be done in Boston, then the expense of crewing the car. At least now we already know what "meals" could be easily provided to the cafe to feed the sleeper.

Anyway, I had talked to a higher up manager on the corridor "MD" who at the time said they were interested in getting a sleeper back on 67 at some point, once the sleepers came in.

Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?

Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.

What is wrong with doing a crew change in NYP or an around the world out of WAS? That's why we have crew bases.....to provide crews. If the demand is there, the cost of the attendant(s) shouldn't be a hindrance as two fares would likely pay for their presence. Besides, with chef positions being eliminated, I'm willing to bet some of them would appreciate the opportunity to have something else to bid on.

 

[Heading North]

No idea how occupancy levels worked back in the Twilight Shoreliner era, but I imagine there would be some through traffic south of WAS in sleeper (and not just because I would benefit in ALX). From Boston, the train overnight would be a better connection to morning NY departures like the Palmetto/Carolinian/Cardinal and (for the first two) the transfer could even be in RVR for folks wanting to sleep in. It also makes the New York calling times a little more doable for the Peninsula compared to losing a whole day on the train. I havent taken it north in years, but recall coach being sold out often from WAS to PHL and sometimes at other points too.

Re: staffing, unless I am missing something, a crew change in WAS wouldnt be the end of the world. The Virginia shift would be easy, returning to WAS each night, while the WAS-BOS shift would be kinda wonky. Or could crews deadhead to PHL and do a handoff there? That seems closest to halfway.

 

[PVD]

I'd be happy to have it available. I'm pretty sure I was in a slumbercoach up to Boston in 96 for the World Hockey Summit. Ran a practice in Long Beach, had the 2nd assistant drop myself and another coach at Penn, got off at Back Bay and walked over to the Sheraton Boston.

 

[railiner]

How would this work, for an "around-the-world" assignment?

Day one Chicago to Boston Train 448

Day two Boston to Newport News Train 67

Day three Newport News to Boston Train 66

Day four Boston to Chicago Train 449

Day five Home

If too intense, the Chicago attendant could layover an extra day at Newport News to rest. No longer than a west coast turn.....

 

[Acela150]

How would this work, for an "around-the-world" assignment?

Day one Chicago to Boston Train 448

Day two Boston to Newport News Train 67

Day three Newport News to Boston Train 66

Day four Boston to Chicago Train 449

Day five Home

If too intense, the Chicago attendant could layover an extra day at Newport News to rest. No longer than a west coast turn.....

I just did some quick planning.. That's about 8 days on the road. When 448 would arrive into BOS they'd have to stay in Boston until the next day. Same with 66 to 449. The train arrives way to late for someone to hop on 67. The LSA on 67/66 already lays over for a day in NPN. So technically the run would look like this.

Day 1: Depart Chicago

Day 2 Arrive Boston

Day 3: Layover until night time departure of 67

Day 4: Arrive Newport News goto Hotel

Day 5: Depart Newport News in the evening

Day 6: Arrive Boston and goto Hotel

Day 7: Depart Boston on 449

Day 8: Arrive Chicago.

Long Distance trains are 6 on 4 off I believe. So you'd have to do 8 on and at least 5 off for a job like this. Not to mention they'd either have to hire quite a few people to work these jobs. It'd be easier to train BOS LSA's and hire a few for BOS.

Bottom line.. Chicago LSA's won't be going to Newport News.

 

[Triley]

People have long advocated for return of a sleeper to the overnights. There was just some thoughts tossed around by some folks as to whether a bag dorm would be sufficient. and how it might be implemented. Unanswered of course is whether the rooms could be sold as revenue rooms, and if so, how would the car be staffed (as an example, an SCA would leave you with 7 rooms for sale, and how could it be staffed in a logical fashion. Would I consistently generate enough additional revenue to pay for an additional crew member? Even though WAS is a good place to add/drop a car since there is a power change anyway, it doesn't solve the problem of baggage South of WAS, and you know they aren't going to work 2 cars.

Which is why the night owl is good place to test the bag dorm. You can test the market for reinstating sleeping service on the corridor. Additionally, 67/66 doesn't carry a ton of luggage although it has a decent share of express.

TR7 - Not going to quote the giant post to reply to one line.

I would love to see any type of sleeper back on 67/66, but it's certainly not pure profit. Boston has no one that is trained in the sleepers who can go back to working them, without giving up their LSA seniority, due to the contact. So unless we'd have WAS or NYP crew it and do a crew change at their respective crew base, we'd have hirings to be done in Boston, then the expense of crewing the car. At least now we already know what "meals" could be easily provided to the cafe to feed the sleeper.

Anyway, I had talked to a higher up manager on the corridor "MD" who at the time said they were interested in getting a sleeper back on 67 at some point, once the sleepers came in.

Why not staff the 66/67 Sleeper out of NY or WAS Triley? No need to use New Hire Boston Crew for one car right?

Because the SCA would have to either deadhead or switch at NYP or WAS. 66/67 goes all the way to Newport News, so you'd either have to switch crews at an existing base, deadhead staff, go without a SCA for a portion of the route (if that's even allowed) or hire new staff to start at one of the endpoints.

What is wrong with doing a crew change in NYP or an around the world out of WAS? That's why we have crew bases.....to provide crews. If the demand is there, the cost of the attendant(s) shouldn't be a hindrance as two fares would likely pay for their presence. Besides, with chef positions being eliminated, I'm willing to bet some of them would appreciate the opportunity to have something else to bid on.

In the long run there would be too much deadheading involved. If not deadheading BOS <-> NYP, then you'd have to add a hotel room in Boston for the SCA to make the 66/67 turn.
Either way, hopefully we see this happen, even as a test.

 

[Thirdrail7]

In the long run there would be too much deadheading involved. If not deadheading BOS <-> NYP, then you'd have to add a hotel room in Boston for the SCA to make the 66/67 turn.
Either way, hopefully we see this happen, even as a test.

Again, if there is enough revenue generated, it will pay for the cost of the attendant and there is no reason for anyone to deadhead. You can either split the job at NYP

66 NYP-BOS

67 BOS-NYP

67 NYP-NPN

66 NPN-NYP

or if you want to push it, open a position (like they did for the Cardinal) and around the world them at WAS.

67-WAS-NPN

66-NPN-BOS

67-BOS-WAS

This isn't that much different than some of the regional runs. I prefer the around the world over the full split. After all,you'll have the same problem if they ever reinstate a full sleeper.