• All Things Empire Builder

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

  by ne plus ultra
 
The Metropolitan wrote:
wigwagfan wrote: But the train still operates at a significant loss. Does that justify the perpetual governmental subsidy of any business that operates at a loss, even though it can supposedly justify itself by having an increase in the number of customers? I know my local transit agency doesn't play that game; it still will chop a bus route for losing too much money per passenger, even if ridership goes up (but not enough).
Mr. Toy wrote:Based on your own figures, the Empire Builder had a farebox recovery of 80.7% for FY '06, which was up from 74.8% in FY '05. That's a significant improvement. Yet you seem to believe that the train should be dumped because better isn't good enough. What I see is potential for further improvement, while you would prefer to give up.
Most transit agencies typically operate at a 50% (+/- 10%) standard for Farebox recovery. If the EB is in fact running at over an 80% recovery rate, then I would attest it is doing quite handsomely, and as Mr. Toy mentioned, could conceivably find a break even point as well with some minor tweaking.

Where I live, out of 51 bus lines, *maybe* THREE have at least an 80% recovery rate, and there are a number in the 20-40% segment. A bus line with an 80% recovery is one you monitor to see if you need to add service to avoid overcrowding. :)
The EB doesn't have an 80% cost recovery rate. It covers 80% of its direct costs. We can all squabble about what share of the system costs to assign to a given train, but clearly some large share has to be allocated. You can't just wish the costs of ticketing, terminals, etc. away.

  by John_Perkowski
 
Moderator's Note:

The posts that were not related to the Empire Builder have been given their own thread.

Please stay on topic to the EB here.

  by John_Perkowski
 
Mr. Toy wrote: I have often wondered if that is really true. Do a handful of approximately 850' long Amtrak trains each day really make a noticable difference in the capacity of a 2,200 mile long route?
Remember that depending on the signalling system, a passenger train takes up ITS own and up to 3 other blocks depending on the RR signalling system in use. That means that 850' can actually be THREE TO SIX MILES of track, to support time-space gaps.

Here in Missouri, BNSF (ex CB&Q)has in the last ten years been working to make "about a mile" the standard block. They use Red, Yellow, and Flashing Yellow before setting a green for trains following one another.

Mr Halstead: Is that your experience for BNSF (ex NP and GN) up in your neck of the woods as well?
  by DonPevsner
 
I am riding the "EMPIRE BUILDER" from Seattle to Chicago on
October 27-29. Is it true that this one long-haul AMTRAK train still
has prepared-to-order diner food, and not microwaved pre-plated
items?

  by gprimr1
 
They still have traditional dinning service.
  by F40
 
I know that this route splits at Spokane into the routes that head to PDX (#27) and SEA (#7). On the schedule, it says "Thru Cars Chicago - Portland." What happens here? Do passengers change trains to #27?

I have a lot that I want to learn about the Amtrak routes, especially the "transcontinental" and West Coast routes. I guess I will start with this.

Thanks.

  by gprimr1
 
I believe this train and the Texas Eagle are the last two trains that feature switching with passengers on board and you don't have to change trains, but I default to other westerners.

  by wigwagfan
 
No, you do not change trains. Two or three coaches, one sleeper and the Sightseer are designated as the 27 consist and are coupled together as a group; at Spokane westbound the cars are simply removed from the remaining consist that goes to Seattle, one (or two) locomotives attached and the train goes to Portland. Reverse process in Spokane eastbound, the two trains are coupled together and sent on their way.

In other words, the definition of a "thru car" is that the car changes routes/trains; it is not a transfer that you as the passenger must complete.

<b>BE PREPARED FOR A LOSS OF HOTEL POWER</b>, however, especially if travelling between November and April. Have had this happen several times despite having hotel power boxes on the platform that are supposed to be in us. Nothing like waking up at 1:30 AM inside a freezing cold train and sitting around for two hours.

  by delvyrails
 
Loss of hotel power would not be the case if Amtrak would adopt VIA Rail's "J-train" concept used on its Toronto-Montreal/Ottawa trains. Essentially it's two trains coupled together: locomotive(s), cars, locomotive(s), cars. Of course, the first set of cars are equipped with "pass-through" control lines so that all locomotives are controlled from the first.

As on VIA Rail, the two trains could separate westbound at Spokane quickly and would likewise join quickly eastbound. No switch engine or switch crew is needed.

Is there any reason this can be done in Canada but not in the U.S.?

  by taoyue
 
Then there's then no walkthrough into the other consist. Toronto to Ottawa is a mere 250 miles. Chicago to Spokane is around 1500 miles. The alternative is to put the engine on the end, but can Genesis engines run backwards?

Coupling two entire trainsets together is frequently done in Europe on heavily-travelled corridor or high-speed routes. e.g. TGV. No need for walkthrough because of the short travel times made possible by high speeds, and because these are two entire trainsets, not three-car sections. Gives double the passenger capacity without having to increase the number of slots in an already-crowded timetable.

  by pgengler
 
taoyue wrote:The alternative is to put the engine on the end, but can Genesis engines run backwards?
They can run backwards, but without a cab on the other end from which to control it, you're not going to be moving very fast.

  by F40
 
What exactly is 'loss of hotel power'?

  by John_Perkowski
 
Amtrak decided, early on, to get rid of individual generator sets on each of its cars. It also got rid of steam heating.

All power for any given car is now provided from one of two sources:

- The Head-End Power generators aboard each locomotive (is it inverters for pure electric?)

- Power supply stands at trackside, when the train is in station or a coach yard. This is what folks often call hotel power.

HTH.

  by David Benton
 
or somebody could plug the train into the hep boxes . kiss .

  by EricL
 
"Hotel Power" is the 480v HEP - the lights, HVAC, toilets, etc.
  • 1
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 57