What should Amtrak change?

[jis]

It was not unusual back in the days for trains to get a Diner only during daytime hours, and the Diner and its staff taken off after dinner, and hooked back on for Breakfast. That is feasible when you have relatively high density of trains since the Diners can then be shared among multiple trains. It is harder to pull off in a sparse trains situation with ever increasing schedule unreliability though.

 

[TheCrescent]

It was not unusual back in the days for trains to get a Diner only during daytime hours, and the Diner and its staff taken off after dinner, and hooked back on for Breakfast. That is feasible when you have relatively high density of trains since the Diners can then be shared among multiple trains. It is harder to pull off in a sparse trains situation with ever increasing schedule unreliability though.

Good point. That makes sense.

Southern Railway trains 35 and 36 seem to have lacked a dining car or other food service car (1) southbound starting at 9:20am, for an all-day and all-night trip, and (2) northbound at any time prior to 6pm (thus running all night and until 6pm without food).

I find that to be pretty bad and maybe it was just a mail train with a coach that few people used.

 

[jis]

I find that to be pretty bad and maybe it was just a mail train with a coach that few people used.

Or, if it had frequent stops, maybe lots of people used it for short hops that would not require food service.

A side story ... there used to be a train called "Upper India Express" which ran between Kolkata and Delhi in India. It followed the most convoluted route and it stopped so frequently that it was easier to keep track of the few stations where it did not stop. It took almost three days to travel between the two cities which normal trains covered in anywhere between 18 and 36 hours. And yet it was a heavily used train! Of course hardly anyone traveled the entire length of its journey, and most traveled less than 100km (the distance between Kolkata and Delhi by the shortest route is 1440km).

It is possible to run such trains when it is one of a dozen trains on a route and they tend to be very useful. Since then this train has been discontinued and replaced by an army of shorter distance DEMU services covering those popular short hops.

If Amtrak had multiple trains on the Washington DC - Atlanta route, it could conceivable run a day train which started from Washington early in the morning and got into Atlanta late in the evening, stopping at every possible station on the way. In the current situation on that route it would have to provide some access to food on board, since stations no longer are located in areas where one can just hop off and pick up some food easily near the station if needed. But a California style automat car would most likely suffice.

If we expect to deploy large number of trains we have to figure out how to create a class of trains that incurs minimal labor and operational cost. That is how it is done everywhere else to serve large number of places in the boonies.

 

[MisterUptempo]

Since there are low-cost airlines and, in Europe, low-cost railroads, why doesn’t Amtrak do the same and add a low-cost affiliate?

Run long trains of retirement-age commuter train cars, with 3x2 seating, and pack them full at low fares. And maybe have low-fare couchette cars as well, for night trains.

Didn’t private railroads basically do that even through the 1960s- key routes would have local trains without amenities, in addition to premium trains?

Amtrak is a relatively comfortable, but not super-luxury, mode of transportation (even coach class is roomy). It’s missing out on revenues by not offering additional classes of service.

I can see the idea of a low-cost rail carrier making sense on the shorter regionals primarily. One good way to reduce costs in order to cut the fares would be better utilization of rolling stock and crews. If an extra round trip could be squeezed out of each trainset and crew each day, you could probably lower fares. Plus, extra round trips mean more options for riders, increasing rail's utility.

Packing them in 3 + 2? Not sure how that would fly. Folks are already whinging about the 19.1-inch seats in the Venture cars. I'm not sure there's a scenario in which an extra seat could be wedged into each row, while keeping the typical American traveler happy and maintaining a safe width down the aisle. Yes, I know there is 3 + 2 seating on some commuter rail in the US, but there are much lower expectations for commuter rail. But if it were tried out, again, shorter regional routes would be the place to test the idea.

 

[TheCrescent]

Fair enough on no 3-2 seating, but just leave the seats as they are on NJ Transit and Metro-North cars. The 3-seat side could still fit 2 people and have space left over: that could be sold as a “premium” seat for a fee.

 

[MARC Rider]

Good points.

A 1964 Southern Railway timetable shows trains 35 and 36, overnight trains between NY and New Orleans with only coaches- no food service- between Washington and Atlanta.

That sounds rough but if it was offered then, maybe it would work now. Or at least for short trips.

It was offered, but it's not clear whether it worked for the Southern Railway in the long run. Were those trains still being run on April 31, 1971?

 

[MARC Rider]

Well, in the NEC, at least, it would be easy enough to work with the commuter rail agencies to run through trains that make more stops than the Northeast Regional and less stops than the commuter trains. The entire NEC has commuter service, except for a small gap between Perryville, MD and Newark, DE, and another between New London, CT and Wickford Jct., RI. If they can't schedule them due to traffic congestion, they could tack a few commuter cars on to the consist of a Northeast Regional and sell the seats as "steerage class" (or maybe "3rd class" is better.)

 

[TheCrescent]

It was offered, but it's not clear whether it worked for the Southern Railway in the long run. Were those trains still being run on April 31, 1971?

One ran from Lynchburg, Virginia to DC in the 1970s, after Amtrak started. Coach only, no food service.

 

[west point]

One ran from Lynchburg, Virginia to DC in the 1970s, after Amtrak started. Coach only, no food service.

It was a single heavyweight coach pulled by a single F-7. My time on it AC did not work.

 

[Kimo]

Amen, Amen, Amen to #3: Return to printing National Timetables. IT is so difficult to plan a several segment trip when you can't look at a national map/timetable.

Amtrak timetables are all on Rail Passengers Association (NARP) web site.

 

[TheCrescent]

It was a single heavyweight coach pulled by a single F-7. My time on it AC did not work.

What a horrid experience. Were there many passengers on the train? I’d think that plenty of newer coaches would have been available so it seems poor form to use an old heavyweight.

 

[rs9]

The business case for a 3x2 car would be interesting to examine.

For a current Amfleet II LD coach, the seat increase would be from 59 to 75 (ish). Not sure how many seats are on a Siemens Venture Amtrak coach at the moment, but using their offered max of 74, that would increase to 92 seats.

If Amtrak were to offer a "basic economy" offering, the challenge becomes actually filling a basic economy car. On the LSL or Cardinal for example, would there be 75 people willing to do so? I have no qualification to answer that one.

 

[TheCrescent]

The business case for a 3x2 car would be interesting to examine.

For a current Amfleet II LD coach, the seat increase would be from 59 to 75 (ish). Not sure how many seats are on a Siemens Venture Amtrak coach at the moment, but using their offered max of 74, that would increase to 92 seats.

If Amtrak were to offer a "basic economy" offering, the challenge becomes actually filling a basic economy car. On the LSL or Cardinal for example, would there be 75 people willing to do so? I have no qualification to answer that one.

Good points.

I figure that Amtrak could buy a Comet commuter car for maybe $25,000 and the marginal costs of adding it to a train would be minimal: probably just insurance and maintenance and a bit more fuel. And advertising.

So as long as Amtrak covers those costs and has a decent rate of return (maybe a 6% return on the cash that it used to pay those costs), and this doesn’t subtract from Amtrak’s regular coach business, this is worth doing.

 

[jis]

Good points.

I figure that Amtrak could buy a Comet commuter car for maybe $25,000 and the marginal costs of adding it to a train would be minimal: probably just insurance and maintenance and a bit more fuel. And advertising.

Most of the remaining Comet cars will require significant rehabilitation before Amtrak would allow them on their trains. First of all they will need to be upgraded to 125mph before they will get on a Regional. So the costs will be much higher than just acquiring them.

Other than that, if funding can be found, it could be worth a try.

 

[neroden]

Again, there are a lot of options which become possible if you're running more trains per day. Trains thrive on economies of scale.

 

[TheCrescent]

Again, there are a lot of options which become possible if you're running more trains per day. Trains thrive on economies of scale.

Sure, I was thinking that the train to hell of a string of retirement-age Comet cars could be on a corridor that has plenty of bus traffic.

 

[Northwestern]

Regarding changes Amtrak should make, a couple of changes I would like to see, while completely brushing off the obvious problem with economic reality.

First of all, make all meals cooked freshly on board, and of good to premium quality. Add a variety of food cars including traditional dining cars, bistro and cafe cars, and food available in lounge cars. Have a variety of prices from average to expensive. Require all sleeping car passengers to pay for their meals. When your sleeper costs more than a 5 star hotel room, the additional cost for meals, I would think, should not seem extravagant compared to what you already are paying for the sleeper. With Amtrak long distance trains, where some passengers may be on the train for 1-2 days, it is inexcusable to provide second-rate or third-rate meals on board. If Amtrak can't provide quality food on any given route, I think that route should be eliminated.

I would like to see a change with roomette and bedroom configuration. Replace the fold down beds with lie-flat beds like they have in some European overnight trains. Have one comfortable easy chair in each roomette and have a sink and toilet in each roomette. With bedrooms, have 2 lie-flat beds and 2 easy chairs, as well as a sink and toilet in each bedroom. It would mean new sleeper cars with expanded space. Probably will never happen.

My 25 cents worth.

Richard

 

[jis]

If one is aware of the history of Sleeper fares on Amtrak one would know that Sleeper passengers used to pay for their meals until, with much fanfare Amtrak included the price of food in the ticket and raised the fares substantially to achieve that. The fare difference was quite apparent to those that lived through that period.

So Amtrak requiring Sleeper passengers to pay for food now should be achieved by lowering Sleeper prices to compensate for it rather than just getting them to pay even more. So I think that proposed change will be strenuously opposed by most rail advocates who have been around for that long, unless fares are reduced to say the level that was tried on the Silver Star when the Diner was removed, and together with it the inclusion of food in the Sleeper fare.

I also do not think quality of food should be the determining factor for whether a route should exist or not, and for that matter even availability of Sleepers should not be a determining factor for the existence of a route. Remember, the Pioneer and the Desert Wind started as Coach and Cafe trains.

 

[Joe from PA]

Count your blessings. I'm old enough to remember soot on the window ledge while a Long Island RR steam locomotive pulled your very warm coach car. However, as a 9 year-old, I LOVED it.

 

[TheCrescent]

Amtrak should change its Wi-Fi so that it works in sleeping cars.

I have a 700-mile trip, nearly each week. And no Wi-Fi? So much for getting urgent work done.

 

[west point]

You are braver than I am . Public Wi-Fi? only non identifiable actions separate password and laptop.

 

[TheCrescent]

You are braver than I am . Public Wi-Fi? only non identifiable actions separate password and laptop.

Wi-Fi on planes and trains is common.

But Amtrak does not have it on the Crescent.

 

[BlackDiamond]

You are braver than I am . Public Wi-Fi? only non identifiable actions separate password and laptop.

If you are worried about security you could use a VPN. At my job it was required anyway for working remotely.

 

[TheCrescent]

If you are worried about security you could use a VPN. At my job it was required anyway for working remotely.

Yes, using wifi is just the first step; in mine, it requires logging in to a few more programs, using two-factor authentication, etc.

My irritation is with Amtrak for not having working wifi.

 

[MARC Rider]

Wait, I was on the Lakeshore Limited last October, and we had wifi in the sleepers. I even attended a Zoom meeting while riding in my room.