FY 2012 Ridership by Station

gokeefe wrote:

Woody wrote:Not to mention that Amtrak would need more locomotives and rolling stock. Maybe it will get more fleet renewal equipment soon. Sigh.

The potential for the changes you mention really isn't that far off. Amtrak is going to be getting this new equipment and deploying it around their single level routes. The number of cars, matched against the number of routes and the fact that they are only removing 25 cars from service (the Heritage Diners) implies a substantial expansion of both capacity in existing service and most likely some new additional service as well, even when counting only the initial order. There's an option for more after that and of course if things go really well Amtrak could simply execute another order after that as well. We will know rather quickly if this will all happen.

As mentioned elsewhere the Silver Service trains were profitable until literally "the last hour" pre-Amtrak. I think there is a very good chance that could happen again if Amtrak has enough sleeper and diner cars to accommodate the demand for travel to Florida.

The new order consists of 130 cars; 25 sleepers, 25 diners, 25 dorm/baggage, and 55 baggage cars. Considering they already have 50 sleeper cars with most existing trains in the single level fleet using 2 sleepers, an additional 25 sleepers will generally give every train one more additional sleeper than they have now. That's one replacement diner and baggage car, and one additional dorm car per existing train. Giving the Cardinal an additional train set or two for daily service could probably be done because of efficiencies arising from a larger fleet. I'm not so sure there would be sufficient new cars to start a new train service requiring more than two new train sets, like re-establishing the Broadway Limited, the Century, or the Sunset Limited east.

The option for 70 more cars on the 130-car order from CAF could be a very sweet thing. Why wouldn't CAF be happy to offer another option upon exercising the first option, for say another 70 cars at a good price.

With the prolonged economic slump, CAF can't be suffering from price increases for materials or from suppliers. With their factory set up and running, their employees now experienced, their costs per car should be going down. Now they can try to get a contract for more and more cars to extend their profits several years into the future. And I don't see many other orders coming their way from commuter agencies or others. So they have every reason to make a very nice deal for Amtrak.

The problem I see is the lack of coaches and locomotives. A few coaches could cascade down from the Lincoln (St Louis-Chicago) and Wolverine (Detroit-Chicago) services when they get their new bilevel equipment. But the Midwestern states could claim those for additional routes or frequencies out of Chicago.

To have enuff coaches and engines to take two trains daily, 'restore' service, and then actually add new trains, Amtrak will have to soon start its planned program of buying 100 cars a year for six years. Or it will have to admit defeat by the Austerians and crazies in Congress and order some coaches from CAF to go with the new sleepers, diners, dorms, and baggage cars it's getting.

electricron wrote:The new order consists of 130 cars; 25 sleepers, 25 diners, 25 dorm/baggage, and 55 baggage cars. Considering they already have 50 sleeper cars with most existing trains in the single level fleet using 2 sleepers, an additional 25 sleepers will generally give every train one more additional sleeper than they have now. That's one replacement diner and baggage car, and one additional dorm car per existing train.

True, but only if you assume even distribution. Amtrak may very well end up concentrating the sleeper cars where they are most needed and most consistently sold out. They could also adopt a flexible deployment plan that pushes the sleepers cars towards Florida service in the winter and a more even distribution during the summer.

electricron wrote:Giving the Cardinal an additional train set or two for daily service could probably be done because of efficiencies arising from a larger fleet. I'm not so sure there would be sufficient new cars to start a new train service requiring more than two new train sets, like re-establishing the Broadway Limited, the Century, or the Sunset Limited east.

As mentioned above, if simple incremental distribution isn't used then we could indeed have potential for a plan where these cars go into service on a new route. The baggage dorm cars would be crucial to this plan as they would effectively increase revenue Roomette capacity on trains that have some of the lowest sleeper space availability anyways. If that space doesn't sell out already why tack on an empty sleeper car when you've got trains heading to Orlando that are booked solid for three or four months straight from December to April?

Woody wrote:The option for 70 more cars on the 130-car order from CAF could be a very sweet thing. Why wouldn't CAF be happy to offer another option upon exercising the first option, for say another 70 cars at a good price.

My thoughts exactly. Remember, remember, remember, anything that cuts losses on Long Distance trains brings revenues back into Amtrak at ratios far greater than 1:1. The losses on these trains are so deep and they are in fact so expensive to run that Amtrak ends up getting disproportionate returns should they find a successful operations formula for any of these trains. Obviously the Sunset Limited is the biggest anchor of them all but the single level Long Distance trains as a combined group form a substantial portion of the loss as well.

Woody wrote:With the prolonged economic slump, CAF can't be suffering from price increases for materials or from suppliers. With their factory set up and running, their employees now experienced, their costs per car should be going down. Now they can try to get a contract for more and more cars to extend their profits several years into the future. And I don't see many other orders coming their way from commuter agencies or others. So they have every reason to make a very nice deal for Amtrak.

I strongly concur and believe that an order would potentially offer substantial savings in price. If Amtrak ends up adjusting consist lengths based on demand for sleeper service they're going to need more diners anyways.

Woody wrote:The problem I see is the lack of coaches and locomotives. A few coaches could cascade down from the Lincoln (St Louis-Chicago) and Wolverine (Detroit-Chicago) services when they get their new bilevel equipment. But the Midwestern states could claim those for additional routes or frequencies out of Chicago.

I'm not so sure about that. The Midwestern states seem to be very strongly committed to using bi-levels cars for a number of different operational and logistical reasons. They want to get rid of single level rolling stock that is better used on the Northeast Corridor with its high level platforms. The Horizon cars alone would give Amtrak a surplus fleet of close to 100 cars.

Woody wrote:To have enuff coaches and engines to take two trains daily, 'restore' service, and then actually add new trains, Amtrak will have to soon start its planned program of buying 100 cars a year for six years. Or it will have to admit defeat by the Austerians and crazies in Congress and order some coaches from CAF to go with the new sleepers, diners, dorms, and baggage cars it's getting.

That is true assuming they retire the 'venerable' Amfleet coaches as planned. I doubt very much they would turn down the opportunity to expand service, especially as the new funding formulas guarantee that they will be able to cover their costs. Again, "remember" they are currently at an annual loss of $300M+ before the new PRIIA formulas are adopted. Depending on how much of an adjustment takes place we could see that figure fall again next year to something closer to $200M or perhaps even less than that.

As far as Equipment orders,the midwest/Ca order is starting up in Rochelle Il,Amtrak has yet to order 3rd gen Superliners.
As for replacement coaches,a possibilty of a Viewliner II coach/lounge has yet to be developed,unless BBD stil has the jigs
to create a 3rd gen Amfleet shells.

gokeefe wrote: True, but only if you assume even distribution. Amtrak may very well end up concentrating the sleeper cars where they are most needed and most consistently sold out. They could also adopt a flexible deployment plan that pushes the sleepers cars towards Florida service in the winter and a more even distribution during the summer.

As mentioned above, if simple incremental distribution isn't used then we could indeed have potential for a plan where these cars go into service on a new route. The baggage dorm cars would be crucial to this plan as they would effectively increase revenue Roomette capacity on trains that have some of the lowest sleeper space availability anyways. If that space doesn't sell out already why tack on an empty sleeper car when you've got trains heading to Orlando that are booked solid for three or four months straight from December to April?

The 50 existing sleepers aren't evenly distributed now, they won't be in the future. I still believe these 25 new sleeper cars will be used to increase the supply of sleeping compartments on the existing trains, whether distributed evenly or not. The existing sleepers are often sold, so every existing train needs more sleeping capacity. Maybe a dorm/baggage car will suffice, maybe both dorm and sleeper cars will be needed.
A second New York City to Chicago train, wherever it is ran or whatever it is called, is going to need the same number of train sets as the Lakeshore Limited. That's at least 3, maybe 4 train sets. That's 8 to 12 sleeper cars, 3 or 4 diners, baggage, dorm/baggage, cafe-lounge, and 8 to 12 Amfleet II coaches. That could be half of the new sleeper cars being built today, leaving little left to expand sleeper services on the existing trains. That's why I believe to start a new single level long distance daily train will require ordering more than the original 130 new Viewliners.

electricron wrote:

gokeefe wrote: True, but only if you assume even distribution. Amtrak may very well end up concentrating the sleeper cars where they are most needed and most consistently sold out. They could also adopt a flexible deployment plan that pushes the sleepers cars towards Florida service in the winter and a more even distribution during the summer.

As mentioned above, if simple incremental distribution isn't used then we could indeed have potential for a plan where these cars go into service on a new route. The baggage dorm cars would be crucial to this plan as they would effectively increase revenue Roomette capacity on trains that have some of the lowest sleeper space availability anyways. If that space doesn't sell out already why tack on an empty sleeper car when you've got trains heading to Orlando that are booked solid for three or four months straight from December to April?

The 50 existing sleepers aren't evenly distributed now, they won't be in the future. I still believe these 25 new sleeper cars will be used to increase the supply of sleeping compartments on the existing trains, whether distributed evenly or not. The existing sleepers are often sold, so every existing train needs more sleeping capacity. Maybe a dorm/baggage car will suffice, maybe both dorm and sleeper cars will be needed.
A second New York City to Chicago train, wherever it is ran or whatever it is called, is going to need the same number of train sets as the Lakeshore Limited. That's at least 3, maybe 4 train sets. That's 8 to 12 sleeper cars, 3 or 4 diners, baggage, dorm/baggage, cafe-lounge, and 8 to 12 Amfleet II coaches. That could be half of the new sleeper cars being built today, leaving little left to expand sleeper services on the existing trains. That's why I believe to start a new single level long distance daily train will require ordering more than the original 130 new Viewliners.

I should have been more clear, "distributed in accordance with current sleeper service ratios and on trains with sufficient demand" would probably have been a better way to state the point. My suggest was essentially a more 'pure', "limited only to trains with sufficient demand" with no proportional distribution at all. Regardless your point is very well taken. It simply isn't realistic to think of new routes in places that would require three or four new trainsets for startup.

Re: FY 2012 Ridership by Station
by electricron » Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:59 pm

A second New York City to Chicago train, wherever it is ran or whatever it is called, is going to need the same number of train sets as the Lakeshore Limited. That's at least 3, maybe 4 train sets. That's 8 to 12 sleeper cars, 3 or 4 diners, baggage, dorm/baggage, cafe-lounge, and 8 to 12 Amfleet II coaches. That could be half of the new sleeper cars being built today, leaving little left to expand sleeper services on the existing trains. That's why I believe to start a new single level long distance daily train will require ordering more than the original 130 new Viewliners.

===================================

This is a clear and helpful analysis of the problem. And why so much depends on the 70-car option, or options that may come from CAF, before we can hope for any real growth. Or Amtrak gets its 100-a-year fleet replacement plan going.

Amtrak may want to get the option,but must wait for political buget wangling to be over,
the "congress critters" set a deadline for April 15th for a buget,wonder if it gets done.

Apologies if this map was posted. However I think it's a great example of a map and really illustrates where the riders are.

Greg Moore wrote:Apologies if this map was posted. However I think it's a great example of a map and really illustrates where the riders are.

I saw that--very cool.

Backshophoss wrote:As far as Equipment orders,the midwest/Ca order is starting up in Rochelle Il,Amtrak has yet to order 3rd gen Superliners.
As for replacement coaches,a possibilty of a Viewliner II coach/lounge has yet to be developed,unless BBD stil has the jigs
to create a 3rd gen Amfleet shells.

An order of Horizon IIs, anyone?

Amtrak wants to expand its sleeper lines, which makes sense assuming they are more profitable than coach service. However, those 25 new sleepers will have to cover for the Viewliner I fleet's overhaul and reconfiguration. A few cars can probably be added right away (Cardinal and Federal maybe), but I doubt the full 25 cars can be used to expand service off the bat.

Station Aficionado wrote:

Greg Moore wrote:Apologies if this map was posted. However I think it's a great example of a map and really illustrates where the riders are.

I saw that--very cool.

And here's another cool map. Perhaps you've seen those dollar bills marked "Where's George?" Well, someone has tracked the movement of those dollar bills as they tend to be carried by real people from place to place. Here are the travel patterns they found.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi ... argerimage

jstolberg wrote:

Station Aficionado wrote:

Greg Moore wrote:Apologies if this map was posted. However I think it's a great example of a map and really illustrates where the riders are.

I saw that--very cool.

And here's another cool map. Perhaps you've seen those dollar bills marked "Where's George?" Well, someone has tracked the movement of those dollar bills as they tend to be carried by real people from place to place. Here are the travel patterns they found.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi ... argerimage

Holy smoke , that looks like Australia. !