September Report

The September report is out. Numbers are not final, but, preliminarily, FY16 Ridership was 31.275 million (vs. 30.882 million in FY15). More tasty nuggets to come.

Let's all note September is the close of Amtrak's FY, so comparisons between prior FY's are quite meaningful.

The uptick in ridership is indeed notable.

I leave the "dissection" of the Report to others.

For the year, nearly the entire increase in ridership can be attributed to 3 routes, 2 really, and all on the Northeast Corridor. The Acela trains are pretty well maxed out when departing or arriving NYP, so this year they merely held previous gains. Any meaningful growth will await the delivery of additional equipment several years off.
The Northeast Regionals were were the growth was, adding over 194,000 riders.
That was in addition to the 172,000 riders that used to be on a Northeast Regional train that got appended to the Palmetto.

I think you hit the nail on the head. It appears Amtrak is increasingly hit limits with not having enough equipment.

I suspect with say another 100 single-level fleet cars they could definitely increase ridership. That would be an increase of 8400 seats, if you can do 2-3 flips of a seat a day, you're talking 24,000 more rides a day, or 8 million more a year.

I believe Mr. Moore is correct that Amtrak needs a hundred single level coaches to grow ridership. In fact, the pent-up demand for expanded and new service suggests the need is already here. For example, NYS has asked for an expansion of the Empire Service coach pool from 62 to 68 for 2 years which Amtrak has denied. Also, it seems clear that a new daily train from NYC to Atlanta is needed. But the possibility new equipment in the immediate future seems dim. The only thing suggested is that once new bi-levels arrive in the Mid-west, old Horizon cars will be rebuilt and redeployed. For snow state lines (above Virginia) Horizons do not seem a good option. Even such a rebuild project may take a long time given the lack of companies building passenger coaches. God forbid the job is given to CAF which has joined the late Super Steel on the list of shame. Only Siemens seems a competent manufacture and their book of business already stretches to the end of the decade. I wish I could offer a suggestion on how to solve the problem, but I can not. I hope someone out there in the passenger rail community has a good way forward.

Just thoughts on a dark, rainy Albany afternoon.

Tony

Yeah, I keep forgetting the Horizons will free up cars. But like you say, they only help in fair-weather states.

And of course right now, there's no firm date on the new bi-levels replacing the Horizons.

Just dawned on me. I agree with the need for a daily WAS-ATL train.

That might not be a bad route for some new bi-level cars. Both ends (and I think all between) are low-level platforms.

Whereas a D.C. to Atlanta train may use a Superliner or Superliner derived cars, it's not going to happen. New York City provides so much traffic, just about every train on the east coast will have to visit it. Therefore, Superliners are out of the question, an Amfleet car or other single level car will have to be used for this service, just like the Palmetto to Savanah.

The only trains on the east coast not visiting New York City are the Auto Train and Capital Limited. I don't see a third such train being berth anytime soon.

When CAF gets done with the current View II order,hopefully a Viewliner II coach can be created,along with a Food service/
Business class/ Lounge type car as the "next gen" using a proven basic, the Viewliner carbody design.

If Amtrak had enough single-level coaches, you'd be absolutely right. But which would be a better scenario financially: running a single-level train between New York and Atlanta once a day; or using those same coaches to add top-bucket seats between New York and Washington several times a day, and running a bilevel train between Washington and Atlanta? I don't know, but I suspect the latter is the stronger option in the medium term.

Not only that, based on the Crescent's current schedule of 13+ hours Washington-Atlanta, a day train to and from New York would have either an inconveniently early departure from New York or an inconveniently late arrival in Atlanta, with the same problem in the opposite direction. However, a Superliner between Washington and Atlanta could leave either end about 8 am and arrive at the other end around 9 pm.

Mr Ex-Con, there is the issue: Lv WAS 8A Ar ATL 9P. It matters not what the equipment assigned. That is the schedule NS would allow - if they allow such train at all.

There's the issue; Ron immediately notes it, and I have as well discussing a possible CHI -WAS-MIA Capitol-Star, which was authoritatively "on the table" some twenty years ago. The through service from Corridor points is essential - so says Amtrak, so said the predecessor roads. King Pennsy always managed to get more tithe from the Vassals ACL, C&O, RF&P, SAL, SRY whenever His Majesty threatened to cut the interchange of their trains.

Originating from NY on 67 "won't cut it".

Gilbert B Norman wrote:King Pennsy always managed to get more tithe from the Vassals ACL, C&O, RF&P, SAL, SRY whenever His Majesty threatened to cut the interchange of their trains.

(Hey, the Pennsy took what the traffic would bear to make up for getting the short end of the North-South divisions.) But one difference may be that the South is a lot more prosperous and populous today than it was 60 years ago and thus better able to generate satisfactory traffic volumes within the territory south of the Potomac.

Given the turn-over I've seen in the WAS-ATL service, I think there would be little need for extending to NYP. This saves you that slot for Amfleet I or Acela trains.
And as noted, a 13 hour train is long, but not entirely unreasonable and gives a lot of the spots daytime service that right now only have middle of the night service. Leave WAS at 8:00 AM, arrive in ATL at 9:00 PM (give or take). You already have personal in the station because of the Crescent. Park the train South/west of the station overnight, turn and leave at 7:00 AM in the morning (I suggest an earlier time so you don't have a late SB Crescent getting in the way). Again, you already have staff at the station.

BUT, all in all, I think it's clear, that Amtrak needs more equipment.
There's a LOT of places I think Amtrak could run more or longer (I prefer more), the more often trains run, the more likely it fits into someone's schedule.

We'll see what Moorman does in the next year when it comes requesting more equipment.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Mr Ex-Con, there is the issue: Lv WAS 8A Ar ATL 9P. It matters not what the equipment assigned. That is the schedule NS would allow - if they allow such train at all.

There's the issue; Ron immediately notes it, and I have as well discussing a possible CHI -WAS-MIA Capitol-Star, which was authoritatively "on the table" some twenty years ago. The through service from Corridor points is essential - so says Amtrak, so said the predecessor roads. King Pennsy always managed to get more tithe from the Vassals ACL, C&O, RF&P, SAL, SRY whenever His Majesty threatened to cut the interchange of their trains.

Originating from NY on 67 "won't cut it".

Perhaps if the trains was part of 67, with a car / sleeper cut in at NYP( board at 11 p.m or so , it would "cut it" .seems to me it would be quite an attractive service. Sleeper from Boston/NYP to southern destinations.

Let's also get real about Atlanta. While it is the largest city in the old south, and should warrant better train services, it has one of the worse train stations in the country for a city of its size. I can't see Amtrak wishing to provide more services to what it has to work with in Atlanta.
Which brings up the old question, which came first, the chicken or the egg? Will it take another train for Atlanta to provide a better facility, or will I take a better facility for Amtrak to provide another train?