Railroad Forums 

  • Do Long-Distance trains need sleepers?

  • 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

 #1543748  by Gilbert B Norman
 
bdawe wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 10:24 am
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 10:03 am
Obviously, CP decided that their scenically superior route (agree; ridden 'em both) had a price tag; and a private concern was willing to "outbid" one belonging to The Crown......By that same token, what keeps the Union Pacific from kicking Amtrak off the D&RGW (accommodating them on the Overland Route) and seeking a private operator willing to pay "a mite bit more" for the rights than Amtrak with their bargain basement remuneration?
.......My understanding is that the Rocky Mountaineer originated more in the bowels of VIA Rail...Isn't what keeps Amtrak on the d&rgw is their general intercity rights transfered from the D&RGW when they joined Amtrak? And probably the fact that Union Pacific is happier to not have Amtrak mucking up their priority freight schedules on the Overland Route?
Mr. Dawe, I certainly defer to you regarding "anything Canada". After all, your'e a citizen, and I have not set foot on your side of the 49th since 1988.

I also am inclined to agree with your thought regarding the Zephyr's routing. Likely no private operator would be willing to pay for the interference to the Overland's operations, where trains essentially run on "headway", that would result from a Zephyr reroute (nevermind the advocacy community's howls).
 #1543757  by gprimr1
 
Alphaboi wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 5:08 pm I don't think Amtrak should ditch their current sleepers; they need to add more sleepers they can be sold st a lower price point. Something economical for solo travelers. Open sections or couchette cars would work much better than parlor or 2:1 seating for overnight travel. Couchettes would also be a great option for families and small groups. Have a bistro car with a la carte food in addition (or instead) instead of a full service diner .

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Third Class on Russian Railways.
3rd_class_1.jpg
3rd_class_1.jpg (67.68 KiB) Viewed 1535 times
 #1543758  by CarterB
 
mtuandrew wrote: Sun May 24, 2020 10:38 pm
CarterB wrote: Sun May 24, 2020 7:08 pm I'd support your idea wholeheartedly!!
Price the slumbercoach on the routes as ratio of slumber havinng 40 berths vs the number of berths ratio on superliner total per car berths
Seems reasonable.

In the spirit of Mr. Maitland’s original post, let’s define the rules.
-I’m assuming that we won’t be able to fit 40 Slumbercoach compartments in a Viewliner due to modern regulatory and Amtrak-specific reasons, but we should be able to get 32 compartments, an Accessible Bedroom, a crew Roomette, and bathroom facilities. Likewise, we can plan for an equivalent Parlor car with 32 seats, an Accessible Bedroom, a crew office and bathrooms.
-For expediency and a truer comparison, the Slumbercoach compartments won’t have sinks or toilets. Neither will offer sheets or a turn-down service (all seats will be adjustable by passengers.) Meal service will be via a ticket upgrade at purchase or onboard. And, don’t expect an individual thermostat in your compartment.
-I’ll allow a microfridge (sized for a 2L soda, a six-pack, or a bottle of Mr. Norman’s grape juice) for each seat in both car types. Both will offer a prepacked complimentary blanket, pillow, eye mask and earplugs. Otherwise, expect a window shade, a 110VAC outlet & pair of USB-A outlets, an air vent, a tray table, a personal ambient/ceiling light and a spotlight.
-Any other differences - seat type & comfort level, sound deadening, temperature control & ventilation, etc - we’ll try to make pretty close. The main tradeoff seems like it’ll be privacy and possibly sound control versus headroom and at-seat luggage space.

How about we further set it up as a double-blind test? For the first couple months, Amtrak can sell “enhanced accommodations” with no guarantee of which type they’ll
get, and then surprise customers with their berth/seat when they come aboard. Call it Schrödinger’s Coach :wink: and get as much survey information from riders as possible.

Once Amtrak gets the first round of feedback, it can specifically assign types of cars to specific trainsets. Meaning, if you book for a given Tuesday you could get a Parlor seat but not a Slumbercoach; if you book for the following Wednesday you can get a Slumbercoach compartment but not a Parlor seat. These would rotate through the week, meaning some Fridays you could get a Slumbercoach and some others you could get a Parlor seat. See which day gets more bookings.

After the second round and as more cars come available, the final round would be to offer both on one train (or at least one type each on parallel trains, like the Cap & LSL or the Star & Meteor.) See which type gets more bookings and at what fare bucket, and see what the customer reviews are.

That’s a lot, but does it sound reasonable to you?
I'd follow more the European couchette model. supply sheets, blankets and a pillow, beds to be self made-up. Agreed on no meal vouchers. Rooms to have individual thermostats....all else seems dead on.
 #1543770  by mtuandrew
 
gprimr1 wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 12:46 pmThird Class on Russian Railways.

3rd_class_1.jpg
Yikes. Looks like the love child of a roller coaster and an Army barracks. I think our North American posters would agree that wouldn’t fly in America - I personally would be less willing to buy a ticket for one of those than for a regular LD seat.
 #1543771  by mtuandrew
 
CarterB wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 1:22 pm I'd follow more the European couchette model. supply sheets, blankets and a pillow, beds to be self made-up. Agreed on no meal vouchers. Rooms to have individual thermostats....all else seems dead on.
I can get behind including a sheet or two in a prepackaged courtesy set. Use them or don’t, it’s fine with me because it doesn’t require a crew member to fiddle with them.

I don’t agree on individual thermostats. A potential production Slumbercoach can include full climate control if desired (as long as you can make it plug-and-play with each car shell, we aren’t here to do major surgery) but I think electric seat/bed heaters and forced-air ventilation would be more than sufficient.
 #1543790  by David Benton
 
gprimr1 wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 12:46 pm


Third Class on Russian Railways.

3rd_class_1.jpg
Similar to Indian rail 2nd class non airconditioned in the 90's.
Not a bad layout. Add more padding, foldup handrests individual lights curtains and plexiglassdividers, usb etc , and you have a quite spacious acceptable setup. i 've been on a similar setup except narrow gauge in Malaysia . that was a bit crowded. Obviously not for current sleeper patrons, but there would be a market for it .
 #1543791  by urr304
 
Russian Third Class looks similar to a WWII Troop Sleeper, I know they were three high, but somewhat similar. Wouldn't be acceptable in US, Superliner Coach might be considered better.
 #1543810  by Tadman
 
I love how many guys here say that wouldn't be acceptable in the US. Says who? Compared to what? Greyhound? Amfleet coach? Megabus? Chevy Malibu backseat? A320 middle seat coach? Redeye in coach is bloody miserable. THE WORST. I do it 2-3x/year because it helps me keep a schedule, but I always sleep it off a few days later. It's like a hangover without the headache.

Can you really say you'd rather ride Superliner coach Chicago to LA than this three-tier sleeper configuation? With the dude next to you nodding off and rolling on to your shoulder?

Yes it's not optimal and it certainly doesn't fit the RR.net dream of 3x/day overnight all-drawing room full diner Spokane-Tulsa-Cheyenne-Altoona-Macon 21st Century Limited, but would you really rather redeye it NY-LA or Amfleet it NY-Miami than ride this? As long as you're not Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint isn't riding with you, is a private room always necessary? This could be a big upgrade for folks that are otherwise confined to coach for money reasons.

Doesn't pass the sniff test.

Also yall are missing the biggest real problem: Do you bed it all day and night or do beds fold up? And if the beds fold, how do you recline at all when there are 2-3 people sitting on that bench seat? I've run into that problem when riding sleeper in Sweden, and it's common to most Couchette applications. The backrest is straight up.
 #1543811  by mtuandrew
 
I, for one, would rather ride coach CHI-LAX than in that car. Those beds look less padded and less comfortable than a Superliner seat (and also look shorter than 6’, which is a no-go.) The interior looks like a playground and probably sounds like a barracks at night.

Mind you, I’m not dismissing all couchettes, even six-bed couchettes (or an eight-bed gallery couchette) but “Hard” class is a bridge too far. Even the old tourist sleepers and Troop Pullmans were more comfortable and more private.
 #1543813  by Tadman
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 10:03 am
By that same token, what keeps the Union Pacific from kicking Amtrak off the D&RGW (accommodating them on the Overland Route) and seeking a private operator willing to pay "a mite bit more" for the rights than Amtrak with their bargain basement remuneration?
I've often advocated for this. Cut the CZ into pieces. Now there's a DZ to Chicago and a Rocky-ish day train to Grand Junction or Salt Lake. And while we're at it, send the Rocky-ish train out for bid. It has to pay market rate, it has to fit UP's schedule, etc... and perhaps carry a few subsidized coaches for essential transport.
 #1543816  by bdawe
 
Tadman wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 9:04 am
. And while we're at it, send the Rocky-ish train out for bid. It has to pay market rate, it has to fit UP's schedule, etc... and perhaps carry a few subsidized coaches for essential transport.
What is the public benefit of this?
 #1543831  by Tadman
 
bdawe wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 9:06 am
Tadman wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 9:04 am
. And while we're at it, send the Rocky-ish train out for bid. It has to pay market rate, it has to fit UP's schedule, etc... and perhaps carry a few subsidized coaches for essential transport.
What is the public benefit of this?
The same as the public benefit of most western long distance trains. Lip service to essential transportation and a vote from congress. But perhaps this one makes money by operating on a different concept and thus doesn't drain the public coffers. Maybe it's a success and creates some jobs rather than just keeping people employed.
 #1543839  by bdawe
 
Tadman wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 10:15 am
bdawe wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 9:06 am
Tadman wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 9:04 am
. And while we're at it, send the Rocky-ish train out for bid. It has to pay market rate, it has to fit UP's schedule, etc... and perhaps carry a few subsidized coaches for essential transport.
What is the public benefit of this?
The same as the public benefit of most western long distance trains. Lip service to essential transportation and a vote from congress. But perhaps this one makes money by operating on a different concept and thus doesn't drain the public coffers. Maybe it's a success and creates some jobs rather than just keeping people employed.
Ok, but why are we just giving away the benefits of Amtrak's running rights to Union Pacific?
 #1543842  by Gilbert B Norman
 
First Mr. Dawe, some private sector party other than the UP themselves, need have expectations of making a buck/loonie from operating a passenger train over the D&RGW. They first need remunerate Amtrak for surrendering their "franchise" to them, and additionally to the UP for the interference the Amtrak additional Overland Route frequencies would cause (remember; this is not for the convenience of the UP when they do trackwork on the D&RGW). UP would continue to collect from Amtrak the trackage charges due under their Agreement.

Let's face it, Amtrak doesn't give a **** about LD trains, and would be rid of 'em all tomorrow if the political winds became "fairwinds". On that point, I have wondered why Canada's COVID lead was not followed with the "suspension" of the LD's. But then, Canadian provinces apparently are empowered to close their borders from one another, whereas the States, when joining the Union, gave up that right.

No doubt, a ride on this D&RGW route excursion train will cost "big time", and for that, it best be "Luxo+++" (maybe tying up in Glenwood with the overnight in Aspen). Maybe the likes of Belmond or Abercrombie & Kent could find a market amongst their clientele, but I doubt if Apple and their ilk could find same.
 #1543844  by Tadman
 
bdawe wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 11:18 am
Tadman wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 10:15 am
bdawe wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 9:06 am
Tadman wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 9:04 am
. And while we're at it, send the Rocky-ish train out for bid. It has to pay market rate, it has to fit UP's schedule, etc... and perhaps carry a few subsidized coaches for essential transport.
What is the public benefit of this?
The same as the public benefit of most western long distance trains. Lip service to essential transportation and a vote from congress. But perhaps this one makes money by operating on a different concept and thus doesn't drain the public coffers. Maybe it's a success and creates some jobs rather than just keeping people employed.
Ok, but why are we just giving away the benefits of Amtrak's running rights to Union Pacific?
\I think you're mistaking giving up the status quo for giving up rights. Right now, Amtrak runs a crummy and money losing train Chicago-Denver-Oakland. What if they ran a better Chicago-Denver train that was on time more often and lost less money? Coupled with a profitable private operator on the Denver-SLC run?

We keep making the fundamental error around here that a train from 1948, which is really a train from 1900, is "good". A train that carries more people and stimulates the economy is good, not a line on a map from 1900.

Imagine if we were considering buying an iPhone but said "oh crap what if my land line goes away?". Half of the country has dumped land lines and we are better for it.