Overnight Coach Configuration Ideas

You are all assuming people prefer a traditional closed in roomette style, which is probably true for your traditional rail passenger. I think there is possibly as many who would prefer the airline style open pod , and pay as much for it as they would a roomette . The challenge is to use the extra height available in a railcar to advantage, without boxing people in .

Like my byline says..."Bring back the slumbercoach"
Even the old Budd 52 seat LD coach with reclining seats, that really reclined, and had legrests was reasonably comfortable.
I have also ridden the European Liegewagen/couchette for many years, and find the 4 berth configuration quite comfortable...the 6 berth...no way!

This is one of the most interesting sleeper trains that I never knew existed. It's tricky to move around the website (Chrome translates most of it) but worth a visit or search for it on Youtube. I really think that something like this would generate a world of excitement for new rail sleeper service.


http://www.jreast.co.jp/cassiopeia/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.alphabetcityblog.com/2015/11 ... rough.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvUJTqD2_pI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Tl4iILTD00" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One thing worth considering is durability of the seats. I have never seen an Amtrak seat, sleeper or coach, that wouldn't recline. I have seen quite a few airline business class seats that are controlled by touch-pad (not like an ipad, but the buttons-under-membrane) that don't work properly or at all. There's something to be said for a simple level or foot-pedal reclining mechanism. There is little hope to fix a power seat in midair, but there is a good chance a level mechanism can take a good whack and go back to working properly.

The points regarding improved sales through full occupancy in the open cabin configuration are very compelling.

Amtrak does not have enough cars to meet the present demand for the standard sleeper. So why buy a unique type car that may or may not be successful until Amtrak has met the demand for present services. We have no idea what the eventual demand will be. Amtrak also needs extra equipment for present services due to some very late routes . Those among bad on times are the Builder & Crescent. Other routes occasionally. As well the need for additional yard storage of unique equipment that is waiting to return to service. That unique equipment will by necessity occupy the same yard space that commuter equipment is stored during day light times...

Can anyone share the dimensions of current Amtrak LD, Business Class, and First Class seats? If possible, including width, seatback height, seat cushion dimensions, and footrest length? I’m interested in mocking up an Amfleet-style* open pod parlor car but don’t have the necessary information.

* as modules to be installed in Amtrak’s choice between heritage Amfleets, Horizons, and Superliners for 5-10 years before their end-of-life date, in V-Is coming for heavy rebuild, in V-IIs as an extended CAF order, or on the new Amtrak SDSL, LDSL, and possible S-III.

David Benton wrote:You are all assuming people prefer a traditional closed in roomette style, which is probably true for your traditional rail passenger. I think there is possibly as many who would prefer the airline style open pod , and pay as much for it as they would a roomette . The challenge is to use the extra height available in a railcar to advantage, without boxing people in .

gokeefe wrote:The points regarding improved sales through full occupancy in the open cabin configuration are very compelling.

CarterB wrote:Like my byline says..."Bring back the slumbercoach"
Even the old Budd 52 seat LD coach with reclining seats, that really reclined, and had legrests was reasonably comfortable.

Been thinking about these points, and I realized I've been trying to play checkers when we should be playing 3-D chess. Let's say we can fit 32 single roomettes in a car, which would drop to 30 with a full handicap-accessible bathroom and a conductor's office. This is the idea behind both the Slumbercoach and the LIRR MP70. -----
I've also mocked up a 32-seat lie-flat configuration in an Amfleet I (not the car Amtrak should necessarily use) which would again drop to 30 with an ADA bathroom and conductor's table. This is seen on many modern airliners, as we've noted. -----
For Amtrak, I'm suggesting angled sleeper seats that both nest alongside and alternate above and below each other. Something like this would require a Viewliner, but should meet Colonel Perkowski's 48-seat minimum with 12 seats up/12 seats down per side. I think it would also accommodate a wheelchair-accessible alcove with privacy curtain, a conductor's desk, and ADA bathrooms. My problem is that it's hard to visualize without a good 3-D model, and I have neither time nor software to create something - can any of you help?

I would also note that if Amtrak is going to consider experimenting with something like this it should be when they do the Viewliner I rebuild. That will be the best opportunity possible for many years to come ...

I don't see how it could be more cost-effective to go with an open floor plan, given that these are modular cars.

ryanov wrote:I don't see how it could be more cost-effective to go with an open floor plan, given that these are modular cars.

More beds equals more revenue per car. Simple as that.

bostontrainguy wrote:More beds equals more revenue per car. Simple as that.

It's not that simple. You have to look at the prices Amtrak could charge for the different types of seats or bunks....
I haven't the idea what the actual real world price would be, so some speculation follows with some simple math.....
Given the following facts:
Amfleet 1 has 84 seats per car.
Amfleet 2 has 60 seats per car.
Viewliiner sleeper has 30 bunks per car.

Using the Amfleet 1 as the standard unit, lets call it 84 seats/84 seats = 1
What would Amtrak have to charge for the others cars to break even.
Amfleet 2 = 84 / 60 = 140% more per seat per trip
Viewliner 1 = 84 /30 = 280% more per bunk vs seat per trip
Now, if Amtrak charge less than 140% for an Amfleet 2, lets say 120%, they would be loosing revenue per seat than an Amfleet 1. But if Amtrak charge more than 140%, they would be earning more revenue per seat than an Amfleet 1.

Of course, there are variables than can affect individual fares on a train; like time of day, trip length, initiating and terminating stations, day of week, in season or out of season - so for the above example we must consider all the other variables were the same except for car type.

So, having extra seats or bunks on a train doesn't necessarily mean you can make more profits than with the other car with fewer seats or bunks, it all depends upon what the various fares are. Additionally, sleeper cars have additional costs for services render than coach passengers pay, so an additional % increase will be needed per bunk vs per seat to break even.

Take note, I already responded earlier about handicapped restrooms being omitted from the various plans for lay-flat type airliner first class seats/bunks, but I would also like to point out that they have omitted a shower stall as well - that passengers paying a higher fare for overnight travel expect. There's a reason why all Amtrak sleeper cars have showers.

So much effort has gone in to squeeze as many lay-flat seats into a rail car they have forgotten to include other things a rail car must have. Once you put these other things back in to their designs, it's hard to find the additional capacity they suggest, much less overcome the fare differentials Amtrak could charge first class passengers for additional privacy sleepers provide in rooms and roomettes than with an open car setup.
32 lay-flat seats vs 30 traditional bunks..
Per my simple math above, 30 / 32 = 94%. I doubt Amtrak would pass all of the 6% fare savings back to its' passengers. If you expected a larger savings on fares with an open layout, Amtrak would loose money everything else being equal as discussed earlier.

The reason why airlines have installed these seats is because they charge much much more than 6% increase fares for them. Few airlines have bunks on their planes, so they can charge significantly more for them than Amtrak could because Amtrak offers something better, roomettes and rooms.....

electricron wrote:

bostontrainguy wrote:More beds equals more revenue per car. Simple as that.

Given the following facts:
Amfleet 1 has 84 seats per car.
Amfleet 2 has 60 seats per car.
Viewliiner sleeper has 30 bunks per car.

.

Like I have said before BRING BACK THE SLUMBERCOACH. 24/8 configuration = 40 beds...using your math and the overnight Amfleet II analogy, you'd have to only have 150% upcharge...AND each room totally private, no open seating a la airline lay flats.

CarterB wrote:

electricron wrote:

bostontrainguy wrote:More beds equals more revenue per car. Simple as that.

Given the following facts:
Amfleet 1 has 84 seats per car.
Amfleet 2 has 60 seats per car.
Viewliiner sleeper has 30 bunks per car.

.

Like I have said before BRING BACK THE SLUMBERCOACH. 24/8 configuration = 40 beds...using your math and the overnight Amfleet II analogy, you'd have to only have 150% upcharge...AND each room totally private, no open seating a la airline lay flats.

Just quickly thinking out loud here . . . If you check out that Cassiopeia sleeper above and also some of the European sleepers, you will find that they have our equivalent to high-level floor height for the corridor but you go up a little staircase or down a little staircase to the stacked bedrooms.

Haven't explored it at all, but wonder if some cleaver design work could produce a triple-level sleeper with upper, mid and lower bedrooms nested together as in a slumbercoach configuration?

Might just work but needs more exploration.

CarterB wrote:Like I have said before BRING BACK THE SLUMBERCOACH. 24/8 configuration = 40 beds...using your math and the overnight Amfleet II analogy, you'd have to only have 150% upcharge...AND each room totally private, no open seating a la airline lay flats.

There's a reason why Pullman favored the 24/8 configuration for most of its' sleeper cars, pure business economics....
I think Amtrak swayed away from it mainly because it didn't work that well with two level Superliners. Therefore when Amtrak designed the single level sleepers with Viewliners, they followed what became standard in the Superliners; some rooms and mostly roomettes.