Siemens Venture Single Level Cars for CA/IL/Midwest

eolesen wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2024 5:42 pm Devils advocate -- why should trains have food service when no other form of publicly subsidized transport does?

It's not like the time in transit is a surprise. Be prepared.

If we include ferry services, many of the ones that came immediately to my mind do in fact have onboard food services (often including beer!).

With one exception, all vessels of the Alaska Marine Highway System provide food service. The ferries of the Steamship Authority (between mainland Massachusetts, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket) all have vending machines and/or snack bars. The Staten Island Ferry vessels (New York City) all have onboard food concessions, as do many of the Washington State Ferries.

From the San Francisco Ferry Building to Vallejo via a roomy catamaran takes 55 minutes, and there's coffee and pastries in the morning (not from vending machines) and snacks and something stronger on the way home. If it covers its costs, and maybe attracts additional passengers, why not?

In the last days of the California Limited there was no diner west of Albuquerque or somewhere, but the AT&SF stations had Fred Harvey restaurants. The train made 30-minute stops at designated points, recalling many cartoons of the 19th century about "15 minutes for breakfast." Maybe something like that could work in towns where a suitable place is available at or near the station, but shlepping 2 or more days' worth of food on a transcontinental train isn't really practical. For shorter-distance trains, being able to grab a bite en route instead of having to pull in somewhere provides a reason to take the train.

What is the longest run without food service?

Tadman wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2024 8:29 pm What is the longest run without food service?

Empire Service that extends beyond Albany?

I've wondered about GrubHub/UberEats-style delivery at stations, with something in the Amtrak app allowing you to access relevant menus for a given stop and place orders, during an appropriate interval before the expected arrival, maybe 80 minutes to 40 minutes before arrival.

In my idea, it would limited to one or maybe two restaurants per stop, by some sort of bid process, possibly with a slot for chain/fast and a slot for local single-venue restaurants. There would be some standardized packaging to hand the delivery off to a conductor to bring to the cafe car for pick-up by passengers.

Or something. I'm sure my exact vision would run into problems, but it seems like there might be a way to make it work.

Jeff Smith wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 6:10 am

Tadman wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2024 8:29 pm What is the longest run without food service?

Empire Service that extends beyond Albany?

No, all trains (I believe) that extend past Albany have food service. It's only those that start or terminate in Albany that don't have any.

Where are the new California cars? I have a trip to LA next month and would like to find a few if possible.

The CA Venture cars operate on the San Joaquins services between Bakersfield and Oakland.

Today I learned that a 300-mile, 1 million rider train line runs from Oakland to a relatively small city 100 miles north of Los Angeles. Where if you want to go to the largest city west of the Hudson River, you can transfer to a bus.

Not that that's a secret. I've just never paid much attention to California. A brief google tells me why - heavily freighted single-track through the mountains being the only connection.

You'd still think someone would've tried to fix this before building HSR. Hmm. Looks like Caltrans funded significant double-tracking in the last decade, to improve freight movement.

But maybe I should search out a San Joaquin thread to continue understanding this.

Amtrak didn't run a train down the San Joaquin valley when it started, and ultimately began running that train at the behest of a Congressman in 1974, but since the route was "new", couldn't compel SP to allow it to use the line over the Tehachapi Pass. The state began subsidizing the line in 1979, and I suspect just decided there wasn't sufficient ROI to extend it south absent the HSR. If I recall correctly, the area served by the San Joaquins is the most impoverished area of California, and those communities were always more connected to the Bay Area and Sacramento than to LA as there are two mountain ranges and the high desert between LA and Bakersfield.

Correct. In order to avoid the mountains the railroad goes around three sides of a square, and the added distance renders futile any effort to improve the existing line for passenger service. A base tunnel from San Fernando to Bakersfield would probably be needed, and I don't think even the HSR plans include that. I believe plans for the CAHSR include a fair amount of tunneling for that stretch, but it'll be a long time coming.

ryanwc wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 8:05 am Today I learned that a 300-mile, 1 million rider train line runs from Oakland to a relatively small city 100 miles north of Los Angeles. Where if you want to go to the largest city west of the Hudson River, you can transfer to a bus.

It's a geography thing as much as a contract/legal thing. Would be like riding an NE Regional Washington to Newark, then going up to Newburgh to cross the river and back down the Metro North. The timing related to the mountains is rough.

RandallW wrote:Amtrak didn't run a train down the San Joaquin valley when it started, and ultimately began running that train at the behest of a Congressman in 1974, but since the route was "new", couldn't compel SP to allow it to use the line over the Tehachapi Pass.

Keeping in mind that SP was in rough shape in terms of money from 1980-on, you could easily incentivize them to allow the trains to run by paying market rate trackage rights. Neither the shareholders nor the ballast and rails know that's a passenger train paying to use the rails if the rates are in line with the market.

As much as the map visuals seem frustrating on this route, it's important to keep it in perspective. It is a huge success in terms of ridership. It does not require special equipment, and at one time just ran with a GP40 variant (the F40) and Comet coaches. Until recently the train ran with a GP60 variant and quasi-superliners, a 1950 design. It does not require higher speeds or amtrak-owned rails.

It works due to multiple frequencies and local management.

Tadman wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2024 6:29 pm It's a geography thing as much as a contract/legal thing... The timing related to the mountains is rough.

...

As much as the map visuals seem frustrating on this route, it's important to keep it in perspective. It is a huge success in terms of ridership. It does not require special equipment, and at one time just ran with a GP40 variant (the F40) and Comet coaches. Until recently the train ran with a GP60 variant and quasi-superliners, a 1950 design. It does not require higher speeds or amtrak-owned rails.

It works due to multiple frequencies and local management.

Thanks for the reminder about the terrain. I did come to realize that as I read more, but good to get it in thread.

And yes also on the success of the route. Part of my surprise was not just that it terminates in Bakersfield, but that a Bakersfield terminus would still generate such strong ridership.

Much as I dislike busses, I would pay good money to ride a nice coach bus over the hill and then board a train at Bakersfield for somewhere in the valley.

The Santa Fe did exactly that for a good many years; trackside transfer from bus to train at Bakersfield and then somewhere in Oakland to another bus to the "Santa Fe Depot" (a bus station) on 4th Street in San Francisco. Two trains a day in each direction designated the Golden Gates, with a coach-observation car. Apparently their ridership held up pretty well against SP's all-rail (as far as Oakland) San Joaquin Daylight, which went "around the horn" via Lancaster and took substantially longer.