Revisiting the "more auto train" idea

[R&DB]

Last two times we took the Auto Train we went for a week. As we were planning to go multiiple places so a car was a must. We priced it all up and found it was cheaper than flying + car rental + additional luggage with 2 adults and 2 kids. And I was not about to think about driving with 2 kids for 24 hrs. We enjoyed the whole trip both ways. I agree that the cost of transporting the car is probably a little low at $208 (Class 1 is about $250) and a one-way coach seat is $115 (maybe about right for DC to Orlando). But remember you can pack what ever will fit in your car so no baggage fees.

[ryanch]

As is, the Auto Train is Amtrak's fastest train running on long distance mostly single track rails, mainly because it is a non-stop train. How are you going to make it 5 or 10 mph faster on average on tracks owned mostly by CSX? That's the biggest gorilla you have to overcome - please explain how you will accomplish that!

I'm wondering how much the Virginia plan (and the hints that NC will follow suit) will help the Auto Train a decade from now. It should get the train off freight roads for the first short segment, right? Would it be useful for Auto Train to take the S-Line to Raleigh once tracks are restored, or is the Raleigh-Columbia, SC-Savannah route too slow or busy? How much might these changes increase avg. speed?

My assessment of any Auto Train expansion is that it would be very hard to build a completely new Midwestern market from scratch, because of lack of awareness and the limits of any reasonable marketing campaign to find the few tens of thousands of people who might do this, amidst the many millions of people you would have to put the campaign in front of. The only way it works is through incremental expansion of the existing base. If better track speed and availability allows addition of a second train, you start to have a significant base of awareness both in the East Coast and in Florida; that might allow the creation of a second route to Florida, from the Midwest, helped along by Midwestern snowbirds hearing about it from their friends; and by the existence of the Sanford facility, lowering costs of a start-up.

I think any such train in the Midwest would have to serve a collection of cities, so it would need to be far enough south to be in a catchment zone, far enough north that the driving time it eliminates is sufficient to make it worthwhile. Indianapolis is interesting, but I actually think Cincinnati would be ideal. Cincy-Sanford is a 13-hour drive through Asheville; Cincy-Orlando 12:50 through Chattanooga. That is roughly actually a bit longer than Lorton-Sanford, so it seems like a sufficient route. Cincinnati's markets would be Detroit, Cleveland, Columbus, Toledo, Indy, Chicago and Milwaukee.

Perhaps there's no remotely viable route from Cincinnati. But we're kind of dreaming here anyway, so I thought I'd put it out there.

ElectricRon, I'm sympathetic with the idea that Amtrak shouldn't subsidize such service, but I would note a few things. My grandmother long drove to a winter trailer home in Florida from her very middling farm in Michigan, so there may be a wider range of retirees than you give credit for. I also note the comments suggesting the current subsidy is quite minimal, to the point that it might be "operationally" self-sufficient depending on how you do the accounting. How do you assess that calculation? How much in capital costs is being left out? How do you assess what looks to me like a significant growth trend for Amtrak on the east coast? Does that have the potential for pushing this train into truly black regions of the spreadsheet?

[electricron]

I'm wondering how much the Virginia plan (and the hints that NC will follow suit) will help the Auto Train a decade from now. It should get the train off freight roads for the first short segment, right? Would it be useful for Auto Train to take the S-Line to Raleigh once tracks are restored, or is the Raleigh-Columbia, SC-Savannah route too slow or busy? How much might these changes increase avg. speed?

I think any such train in the Midwest would have to serve a collection of cities, so it would need to be far enough south to be in a catchment zone, far enough north that the driving time it eliminates is sufficient to make it worthwhile. Indianapolis is interesting, but I actually think Cincinnati would be ideal. Cincy-Sanford is a 13-hour drive through Asheville; Cincy-Orlando 12:50 through Chattanooga. That is roughly actually a bit longer than Lorton-Sanford, so it seems like a sufficient route. Cincinnati's markets would be Detroit, Cleveland, Columbus, Toledo, Indy, Chicago and Milwaukee.

Perhaps there's no remotely viable route from Cincinnati. But we're kind of dreaming here anyway, so I thought I'd put it out there.

ElectricRon, I'm sympathetic with the idea that Amtrak shouldn't subsidize such service, but I would note a few things. My grandmother long drove to a winter trailer home in Florida from her very middling farm in Michigan, so there may be a wider range of retirees than you give credit for. I also note the comments suggesting the current subsidy is quite minimal, to the point that it might be "operationally" self-sufficient depending on how you do the accounting. How do you assess that calculation? How much in capital costs is being left out? How do you assess what looks to me like a significant growth trend for Amtrak on the east coast? Does that have the potential for pushing this train into truly black regions of the spreadsheet?

Amtrak should be concentrating its business expansion on moving people, not cars. The existing Auto Train existed before Amtrak assumed its operations, so in a way Amtrak was saving an existing service, not creating a new service.

As long as Amtrak runs autorack cars behind its passenger cars on Auto Trains, it is not going to go faster than 79 mph anyways. Almost all freight cars in the USA are limited to a top speed of 79 mph by FRA regulations.

Highway miles between Cincinnati and Sanford is 897.6 miles. Louisville to Sanford is 888 highway miles as well. Both routes would require this new Auto Train to cross over the Appalachian Mountains which will slow them down. I have no idea what the rail miles would be for either route, but since trains can not climb and descend mountains at the same grade as trucks and cars, there will be lots of curvature in the tracks, and therefore the rail miles should be longer than the highway miles. The existing Auto Train route has 855 rail miles, with no Appalachian mountains to cross over.
I do not see this new Auto Train maintaining a daily schedule.

Until taken out of service by Norfolk Southern in 2001, the steepest operating mainline grade in the USA was the 4.7% Saluda Grade south of Asheville, North Carolina. Since 2001, the steepest mainline grade has been the 3.3% Raton Pass grade in New Mexico. Amongst the steepest Interstate Highway grades is Interstate Highway 24 with 5%-7% grades between Chattanooga and Nashville, especially at Monteagle Mountain.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_24
Interstate 75 also sees some steep grades, especially near Knoxville, which are not as steep as those on Interstate 24.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_75

Of course train tracks in Tennessee are nowhere as steep as highways, they achieve that by adding miles of tracks with curvature to reduce the grades. An extra mile of track at 60 mph adds an additional minute to the schedule.

[east point]

1. Cannot go Raleigh - Columbia - Savannah as crew change is at Florence.
2. I-26 Ashville - Erwin is steeper especially in Tennessee. Has many runaway spots more than Mt Eagle.

[Arborwayfan]

This is not really about more auto trains, but it's related and I don't want to start a new thread for a minor question: When the Auto Train sells out all its vehicle space without selling out all its seats and sleeping spaces, does Amtrak open the remaining seats and spaces to passengers who are not bringing a vehicle, but who want to travel between Lorton and Sanford? If they don't, why do you think they decided not to? Or does this somehow never happen? Does the opposite ever happen: sold out on seats but not sold out on vehicle spaces? And in that case would it make sense for them to let people ship their cars to friends or relatives who would collect them at the other end?

[Arlington]

^ For all things concerning the Auto Train "as is"
Please see the Auto Train main thread:
http://railroad.net/viewtopic.php?f=46& ... 9#p1529629
(I have quoted your question there)

[Tadman]

Keep things in perspective... A million people each week go see the Mouse. Most already drive or fly and either rent a car or use public/private transportation. A small percentage use rail. Take away Autotrain and there's still very little impact.

A couple hundred more cars a day (spread across 24 hours no less) on I-95 is a rounding error and won't materially add wear to existing highways; those who still believe in rail can rent cars or use Uber and public transit...

This is an important point. The question it really begs is "why isn't there a shuttle train to Disney from ORL airport?". What sense does it make to rent a car for four days of chasing the mouse? Many of the Disney visitors stay on property.

[georgewerr]

I've wonder about a partnership with one of the Class 1 freight railroads. What about letting the freight carriers carry the cars and Amtrak carry passengers from the same location. I live in RI and we have a area that ships unload cars and they move to rail from there. I can see having a few car racks loaded and have them shipped through there normal route and have the freight dropped off at Sanford. The passenger's at this point could be bussed to Providence and catch and Amtrak train from there to Florida. Problems I see are the car and passenger do not arrive together. This could be done in other locations easily.

Geogre

[electricron]

I've wonder about a partnership with one of the Class 1 freight railroads. What about letting the freight carriers carry the cars and Amtrak carry passengers from the same location. I live in RI and we have a area that ships unload cars and they move to rail from there. I can see having a few car racks loaded and have them shipped through there normal route and have the freight dropped off at Sanford. The passenger's at this point could be bussed to Providence and catch and Amtrak train from there to Florida. Problems I see are the car and passenger do not arrive together. This could be done in other locations easily. Geogre

Few, if any, freight trains runs all the way from RI to FL. They run from pickup locales (warehouses, industrial sites, mines, etc) to freight marshalling yards. Then on freight trains between marshalling yards. Then from marshalling yards to drop off locales. Auto rack trains rarely run directly from point to point. It could takes several trains several days to move your car from RI to FL, definitely longer than placing the auto racks cars immediately behind passenger cars on an Amtrak train. That's why the Auto Train works as successfully as it does. Sorry it does not go all the way to RI.

[eolesen]

Keep things in perspective... A million people each week go see the Mouse. Most already drive or fly and either rent a car or use public/private transportation. A small percentage use rail. Take away Autotrain and there's still very little impact.

A couple hundred more cars a day (spread across 24 hours no less) on I-95 is a rounding error and won't materially add wear to existing highways; those who still believe in rail can rent cars or use Uber and public transit...

This is an important point. The question it really begs is "why isn't there a shuttle train to Disney from ORL airport?". What sense does it make to rent a car for four days of chasing the mouse? Many of the Disney visitors stay on property.

There is an express bus service already available which also include baggage handling. Get off the plane, on the bus, and Disney takes car of your checked bags...

https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/guest ... l-express/

Rail or monorail would be pretty expensive, and still would need buses for the last mile to individual resorts, and would probably eliminate the baggage transfer convenience the current system offers.

Sent from my SM-T290 using Tapatalk

[Jeff Smith]

IIRC, most of the auto train "what if" discussions have centered on different starting points, such as starting or ending farther north, or different routing s to Florida from different cities, i.e. could you put an AT around Chicago, Cincinatti, yada yada.

Has anyone considered or suggested a trans-continental routing? Say, Chicago to LA, SF, SEA? Or somewhere else in the midwest?

[bdawe]

I feel like suburban Chicago to Arizona over the Southern Transcon was the most common pitch we heard last time?

[electricron]

I feel like suburban Chicago to Arizona over the Southern Transcon was the most common pitch we heard last time?

There are no Disneyland, Disneyworld, Universal Studios, or other larger theme parks in Arizona. There are no cruise ships departing from seaports in Arizona because there are no seaports. The only seasonal travel to Arizona is by snowbirds. The vacationers and snowbirds on the existing Auto Train route are avoiding one night layover, and a second long day driving their personal vehicle. Snowbirds to Arizona would be avoiding a second and third long day driving their personal vehicle. The route would be at least twice as long, requiring at least twice as many trainsets including auto racks - or the same amount of rolling stock with half the service frequency. Will it ever get enough customers to even come close to breaking even? If it can't break even - how long do you think Congress will subsidize people moving their cars on a train so they can commute between two homes? Do you really believe Congress will fork up money for people rich enough to own two homes?

[east point]

How about Toledo = WASH - Lorton - Sanford. Could combine at Lorton except loads over AutoTrain limit ?

[mtuandrew]

Do you really believe Congress will fork up money for people rich enough to own two homes?

Yes, I very much believe that but not necessarily for Auto Train, which is a niche of a niche (train travel.)

I feel like suburban Chicago to Arizona over the Southern Transcon was the most common pitch we heard last time?

Yeah, we got a lot of advocates for Tucson-ish, though I was advocating for roundly Blue Island, IL (also suitable as a terminus for NEC-Midwest service) - roundly Victorville or Palmdale, CA (also suitable as a southern terminus for a Pacific Coast Auto Train.)

I don’t like the idea of Midwest terminals significantly east (Toledo) or south (Louisville) of Chicago. (Nor should they be north or west.) If you center in Chicago you’re close to Amtrak’s crew base, you’re centered around every city from Minneapolis to Cincinnati and Detroit to Kansas City, and if you locate on a terminal railroad like Belt Railway of Chicago, there’s no limit on which carrier to use between destinations.