If Only Amtrak had the Money..... My plan to help Amtrak

re: regional Auto Trains: Hardly worth it. Loading and unloading would probably be 2 + hours at either end.

Good point. But is there a way to 'streamline' the process of loading and unloading the vehicles?

It takes approx. two hours to load/unload a fully occupied Auto Train at Lorton or Sanford. But that's assuming 200 cars or better and 500 - 600 passengers.

A smaller operation, e.g. 100 cars, would go a lot faster. Also, the process could go faster if there were more loading tracks and more people driving cars on and off the railcars.

My vision for expansion of Auto Train service would not be dedicated trains, but add-ons to existing long-distance trains. For example, the westbound SW Chief could add A-T cars at Chicago (or suburbs) (gateway to Milwaukee, Detroit, Cleveland, Indianapolis, Columbus and Cincinnati) and Kansas City (Gateway to St. Louis, Omaha, Des Moines and Twin Cities) and drop them at Flagstaff (gateway to Phoenix, Grand Canyon and Las Vegas) and San Bernardino (gateway to LA, San Diego and the rest of California). Passengers would ride in coaches and sleeping cars running through from Chicago to Los Angeles.

Operationally, coming out of Chicago (or suburban stop) would be blocked:
Chicago - San Bernardino
Chicago - Flagstaff

Auto carriers originating at Kansas City would be blocked:
Kansas City - San Bernardino
Kansas City - Flagstaff
and inserted between the two blocks that originated at Chicago so that the auto carrier section of the train would now be blocked:
Chicago - San Bernardino
Kansas City - San Bernardino
Kansas City - Flagstaff
Chicago - Flagstaff

The auto carriers destined for Flagstaff and San Bernardino would be cut off when the reach their respective stations. The switching moves are relatively straight-forward and should take 15 - 20 minutes per station, adding 1:00 to 1:20 in running time.

What is the revenue potential? Lets assume the following:
Autos per auto carrier = 12
Passengers per auto = 2
Auto carriers Chicago - San Bernardino = 2
Auto carriers Chicago - Flagstaff = 2
Auto carriers Kansas City San Bernardino = 1
Auto carriers Kansas City Flagstaff = 1

6 auto carriers
72 autos
144 passengers

At peak times, this load would probably require one additional coach and one - two additional sleepers.

LI Loco wrote: A smaller operation, e.g. 100 cars, would go a lot faster. Also, the process could go faster if there were more loading tracks and more people driving cars on and off the railcars.

My vision for expansion of Auto Train service would not be dedicated trains, but add-ons to existing long-distance trains. For example, the westbound SW Chief could add A-T cars at Chicago (or suburbs) (gateway to Milwaukee, Detroit, Cleveland, Indianapolis, Columbus and Cincinnati) and Kansas City (Gateway to St. Louis, Omaha, Des Moines and Twin Cities) and drop them at Flagstaff (gateway to Phoenix, Grand Canyon and Las Vegas) and San Bernardino (gateway to LA, San Diego and the rest of California). Passengers would ride in coaches and sleeping cars running through from Chicago to Los Angeles.

Operationally, coming out of Chicago (or suburban stop) would be blocked:
Chicago - San Bernardino
Chicago - Flagstaff

Auto carriers originating at Kansas City would be blocked:
Kansas City - San Bernardino
Kansas City - Flagstaff
and inserted between the two blocks that originated at Chicago so that the auto carrier section of the train would now be blocked:
Chicago - San Bernardino
Kansas City - San Bernardino
Kansas City - Flagstaff
Chicago - Flagstaff

The auto carriers destined for Flagstaff and San Bernardino would be cut off when the reach their respective stations. The switching moves are relatively straight-forward and should take 15 - 20 minutes per station, adding 1:00 to 1:20 in running time.

What is the revenue potential? Lets assume the following:
Autos per auto carrier = 12
Passengers per auto = 2
Auto carriers Chicago - San Bernardino = 2
Auto carriers Chicago - Flagstaff = 2
Auto carriers Kansas City San Bernardino = 1
Auto carriers Kansas City Flagstaff = 1

6 auto carriers
72 autos
144 passengers

At peak times, this load would probably require one additional coach and one - two additional sleepers.

You mean that they couldn't go with their cars so it would be non stop with no Passengers getting off with their cars? But it a nice idea but I would like 24 Auto Carriers with a concist of
3-4 AMD-103
1 Crew Dorm
5-6 Sleepers
1 Sleeper Diner
1 Sleeper Lounge-Seperate venlation system
1 Coach(Sterrage) Diner
5-8 Coaches
Note these cars would be ordered new if we had the money or if we could get wreck reapirs out.

AmtrakFan

The SW Chief would essentially operate with the same schedule, just allowing extra time to switch in/out auto carriers at Chicago (or Naperville), Kansas City, Flagstaff and San Bernardino. Regular passengers could board at any station along the route. "Auto Train" passengers could only board and disembark at those four stations (unless they didn't mind a long walk to retrieve their cars ).

LI Loco wrote:The SW Chief would essentially operate with the same schedule, just allowing extra time to switch in/out auto carriers at Chicago (or Naperville), Kansas City, Flagstaff and San Bernardino. Regular passengers could board at any station along the route. "Auto Train" passengers could only board and disembark at those four stations (unless they didn't mind a long walk to retrieve their cars ).

Oh now I agree with the idea. Also could we add ABQ to the stops for the Auto Train?

AmtrakFan

At some point, adding additional auto stops would make things too complicated. With three western destinations - there are six blocks to be handled. How do you get all the cars bound for Albuquerque, Flagstaff and San Bernardino grouped together without extensive rearranging cars en route. Since Albuqueque is only 360 miles east of Flagstaff, it is close enought for Auto Train travelers to double back (most likely they would make stops along the way).