Tadman wrote:Funny, I had the same thought this AM. Think about your dog. He's perfectly happy in life despite not knowing what cable TV is, what a sports car is, what good food is... Because he has no frame of reference for what that stuff is. He's just happy if he gets let out regularly and fed regularly.
The same goes for your average NEC business traveler. He or she has no concept of what a sleeping car is. They're happy if the train has good service and arrives on time so that they can get to their meeting and get home. No need for theatricals like sleeping compartments. Compared to the Delta or US shuttle, the seats are bigger and the stations closer to downtown, so you've got a winner. But I bet 1 in 1,000 business travelers on the NEC doesn't think "man I'd like a private compartment", because that's not even on their radar screen.
Couple that with Ron's statement that there's 37 corridor trains/day on the NEC, and you've got a lot of room to work with before reverting to selling sleeper compartments NYP-WAS. 37 trains/day is commuter-like frequency. CHI-MKE only has seven corridor trains and they still don't let you ride the Builder between those points (for good reason).
I'd like to propose we move on from this topic unless we have some fresh material, be it historic in nature or upcoming plans. Thanks guys.
Not so fast guys. Everyone that has expressed why this isn't good idea has made extremely valid points (particularly Mr Gilbert B Norman and Mr Noel Weaver) that mirror why Amtrak has shied away from this past practice.
However, I think this is the perfect place for continuing a discussion some of us had in the
Capacity Management/Revenue Enhancement thread.
I think it is time to revisit the past practice and perhaps expand it. First, we have to consider what we are considering Long Distance trains. Obviously train with sleepers are long distance trains. However, operationally The Pennsylvanian, The Vermonter, The Palmetto and The Carolinian are long distance trains.
It is worthwhile to note that while the Pennsylvanian and Vermonter are scheduled carry local traffic over the NEC, The Palmetto doesn't and the Carolinian only carries southbound traffic...despite being scheduled close to a regional.
The reason why this should be reconsidered is the condition of the corridor trains. They are running quite full. Additionally, a lot of them have gone beyond the scope of NYP-WAS. This has stated becoming a problem. Take a close look at the NEC WAS-NYP. Once 172 cuts loose at 0725hrs, 4 out of your next 5 regional trains departing from DC come from OFF Corridor. Out of the 5, 3 come from CSX territory. If there's any type of problem on CSX, you're screwed it you don't know about it far in advance. Sure, you can help the PHL-NYP passengers by shepherding them to the Keystones if one is in the picture. But what becomes of the Washington passengers? Even the late morning. mid day Acela trains are running full at this point. This is where having a long distance train like 20 in the picture (which comes off the N&S along with train 176, the 5th train) can help the cause.
Same thing from NYP. After 185, aside from the Keystones, the regionals and the Acelas come from NHV. If things go south on Metro-North, you quickly run out of bullets.
Additionally, this could help with revenue. If you could fill your unused seats with major city local travel, it frees space on the corridor trains for the intermediate travel. This was the intent with train 50 when it shadowed 96. It took passengers from WAS and NCR headed for northern destinations off 96, which allowed more local seats to be sold (Bal-Met, Bwi-Phl as examples.) You could utilize coach seats on 92 (as an example) for PHL-NYP travel to free up seats for through travel on train 178 or 148.
Train 95 departs NYP for NPN at 1035am and train 125 departs NYP for NFK at 1135am. Train 91 to FlA leaves NYP at 1102am. If you look carefully, 91's NYP-WAS running time is only 3 minutes longer than 95 and 125. Being able to generate for sale seats NYP-WAS on train 91 would undoubtedly help with through and imtermediate passengers on once a day NPN train 95 and once a day NFK bound 125 by absorbing NYP passengers destined south of PHL. The reason for using 91 for passengers south of PHl is train 43 absorbs the PHL passengers at 1045am.
Finally, OTP has improved over the years. 90's OTP is in the 90% range and so is 80's. As I previously mentioned, mixing your reserved corridor and non corridor trains which have underutilized capacity on certain legs yields equipment. Trains 79/80 and 89/90 north/east of DC are perfect examples. You could add local coaches to those trains and free up at least 12 cars by canceling the two parallel trains (181/183 and 138/198.) With that kind of equipment, you could run another train or give yourself flexibility if some off corridor impacts the corridor.
When Amtrak restored 2128, it was because of the lack of service between 7:10p and 8:45pm. However, 90 is in the picture. It could have been retimed as the 845pm departure and you'd have an extra engine, an extra Acela and a free set of equipment.
Let me put this one more way. You're in WAS and you just miss 66 at 1000pm. The next scheduled train is 190 at 3:15am. However, 50 is 5 hours late and will depart DC at 11pm. Why not have the means to sell a few seats on it?
I don't know guys. I fully understand why the process was stopped. I used to be dead set against commingling LD trains with corridor traffic. However, things are getting a little crowded on the NEC and more trains are venturing off the "NEC proper." Wwe do have coach cleaners at DC that can do a blitz if needed.
I'm not 100% sold, but I'm no longer 100% against it.