Amtrak Auto Train Discussion

Whenever I rode the Auto Train the first thing upon checking in was the
issuance of a number, the inbound check in people would put it right on
the ticket envelope and that number was what was called out when my
car was ready for me to pick up.
Get in the car, re-install the radio antenna, adjust the seat if necessary
and bingo, on my way.
Noel Weaver

chuchubob wrote:Privacy considerations would preclude displaying passengers' names on monitors.

Then every major airport with a text paging system is in violation of these "privacy considerations".

even if there is no legal or ethical problem with using names I would expect that numbers would be used. It is much simpler that way and you don't risk offending with misspellings.

JimBoylan wrote:

Gilbert B Norman wrote:While Amtrak did pay the Estate (ATCorp) fair market for equipment and facilities (i.e. the Bobcats noted earlier), all the institutional expertise they got, including assumption of a separate operating agreement with SCL/CSX, as well as the name, the inherent goodwill - for $1.00.

I think Amtrak left something on the table, and later paid $200,000 for the mailing list!

Mr. Boylan, I am not prepared to refute that consideration was made for a mailing list and obviously (I know so) ex-ATCorp personnel were either employed or were offered consultancies (and accordingly remunerated), but what I am saying is that all the institutional expertise developed by ATCorp, such as how to settle a claim, the magnetic loading numbers to readily identify an auto, the Bobcats to quickly offload a disabled auto, the 'don't ask don't tell" so far as estimated time to get an auto back, how to hire, vette, and train valets, terminal design such as the "house tracks' face North at Lorton, South at Sanford and that autos ride backwards while in transit....need I go on?

ALL of that, Amtrak got for a buck.

With the passage of time, I'm not certain how many here are aware that Amtrak was set to inaugurate their own Auto Train, circa 1972. This service was to run between Indianapolis and a new facility built at Poinciana FL. Auto carriers were acquired, but after a few test runs with employees and their autos used as "guinea pigs" (want a week vacation on company time and dime?), Amtrak 'walked'. I learned that there was simply too much potential for claims, and Amtrak simply did not have the institutional expertise that Auto Train had carefully developed.

In closing, allow me to note that Eugene K Garfield, founder of Auto Train, was likely the last 'think out of the box guy' the railroad industry, class of service notwithstanding, has produced. While some ATCorp business practices I once learned of were deceptive in nature and scope, Mr. Garfield was the last in the later day tradition of Robert Young, Al Pearlman, and Pat McGinnis. True, those chronicled in "The Men Who Loved Trains" (ISBN: 0253347572), save one...hey Frosty, truly loved their industry. But they were not "think out of the box' in so far as services go. They were 'back to basics' i.e. you tell a shipper his carload will be delivered second morning?, just do it.

I watched the video noted at the start of this thread with much interest. I'd often wondered what the consist of the AT was. After viewing the mentined video...I still do.
I'd appreciate it, if someone could list the various cars in the consist as shown from the first to the last with any information unique to the AT.
Thanks,
Best regards,
Rodger

The Pentrex video, "Amtrak's Auto Train," is very enjoyable viewing for anyone who is interested in the Auto Train, or trains in general. There is footage taken onboard the train, and also of the switching operations at Lorton and Sanford.

http://www.pentrex.com/autotrn.html

I will probably get "hell" for this remark but I would NOT put McGinnis in
the class as Young and Perlman. McGinnis was a crook and ended up in
jail, Perlman under Young was a great railroader although not everything
he did was popular. He tried his best especially with the Penn Central but
the PRR people just plain did him in.
I haven't got much of anything good to say about McGinnis and I
remember him well.
Noel Weaver

Mr. Weaver, from the discussions over at NHRHTA, such as Villain or Visionary at which we both have participated, I think you know where I stand. In this instance, since it was off topic, I was only trying "to say something nice'. We both know there are people over there that seem to 'worship' Pat.

As I was preparing the post, I was trying to think of anyone in the RR industry who was a "think out of the box' type. Unfortunately the list is rather short.

As anyone here who has spent any time directly employed in the railroad industry knows, it is not exactly an environment in which "think out of the box' is engendered. But then, how often is such prevalent in any "top down" organization, such as the Armed Forces or the Roman Catholic Church?

With apologies to Mr. Perkowski...since I made three trips on the original Auto-Train and researched its business plan for an advertising firm that employed me in the early 1970s, let me offer this:

1) From its inception, Auto-Train was authorized to run at passenger train speeds by SCL. All equipment used graduated release braking (remember the original auto carriers were secondhand from CN). Auto racks ran on the head end, passenger cars on the rear. Scheduled running time Sanford to Lorton was 12 hours.

2) After a derailment in the early 70s, max speed was reduced to 70 MPH, auto racks went to the rear, and AT acquired cabooses to run on the rear of the consist (this was pre-FRED). Running time was increased to 15 hours, IIRC. The train ran this way until AT's demise in the late 1970s.

3) I have also ridden the Amtrak AT several times, both pre- and post-Superliner versions, and enjoyed it a lot. But there was a special flair to the privately operated AT, despite its problems. Long live Eugene Garfield, for having the b*lls to pull it off!

I've posted my opinion of Eugene Garfield on the other AT thread. I wholly agree with Mr. Norman.

As for the business of posting numbers, two comments:

1) There's no problem with posting names. Hertz does it every time I make a #1 Gold reservation. If there's a "privacy" issue I've never once heard anyone say anything about it. But...

2) ...why bother posting "how many minutes"? It'll be as long as it is, nothing can be done to change that, so why annoy people who are at the bottom of the list by telling them that fact? Make it a surprise (of course, last trip on AT, my car was one of the first off).

At another topic MudLake wrote:

The Auto Train concept is one that, for practical purposes, can only be accomplished by rail. Are there opportunities for Amtrak to broaden the scope of Auto Train? Mr. Norman, if you're out there, would you consider a Chicago to East Coast Auto Train as viable and desirable?

Since that topic was to discuss the 20th Century Limited, discussion of Auto Train service there would simply drag that topic "off". In this instance a new topic is warranted, and accordingly I have elected to initiate such.

If it were offered, I'd use a Chi-NY auto-train. New York and area is where I'm from and it is where my immediate family all reside (lest anyone wonder how did a kid from the "insular" Northeast end up in Chicago? I went to Univ of Illinois (yesterday? ) and, let's just say, Chicago was "where the jobs were' and where 'they came from to interview'.

There are no clearance issues regarding Superliners and tri-level racks as far as Albany, and possibly even Harmon.

But of course, there would be problems. Lest we note that much of the in-season Bennie-Caddy-Lex clientele is those "going down for the season" and want their own auto to move about. Drawing from many Diner table discussions I've had over the years, I am indeed a minority (maybe less so if I were to "go down" off season, I'd find a different passenger composite, But then, Fla is somewhere I'm never at earlier than Thanx nor later than Easter) with my one-week journeys.

Secondly, the existing Lake Shore schedule is some 19hours - if it makes it anything resembling OT. I have found that the AT client base is not comprised of railfans. The base is not even 'train lovers' (non-fans but persons who simply enjoy the relaxed style of a rail journey) - they are people who are looking for the most painless way to get their auto "down below' (that was Fatherese for Florida). Many are just like ocean going passengers noted by John Maxtone Graham in "The Only Way to Cross" ISBN: 0025823507 that simply did not leave their cabin other than for meals. To them "Getting There is Not Exactly Half the Fun" (parody of a Cunard Line slogan).

I find that 'arewethereyetitis' sets in very quickly if AT is not there before Lunch; that is why I have never been favorable towards any Midwest-Florida AT service, and both Amtrak and the ATCorp learned their lessons on that one.

Now that there are markers, as distinct from FRED, again at the rear of the LD's, the markets that I would think should be explored, handling passengers and autos aboard existing trains, and if there is any initiative to do so, would be;

Galesburg-Denver
Galesburg-La Junta
Albuquerque-San Bernardino

There is no point to consider markets in which it can be driven faster than the train, which simply means forget any use of the Starlight. Forget the Sunset as that travels through a leisure/vacation market, not from and to it.

Services in the Northeast over the Corridor, again forget it; the economics are simply not there if only bi-level auto carriers could be used.

Mr. Norman, please refresh my memory. Was the Louisville to Florida Auto train's demise more over lack of a market, bad routing, or poor timing?

I would think that a snobird route from the Midwest to Florida could be viable from Louisville, Cincinnati, or somewhere within one easy day's drive from the midwestern cities of Chicago/Milw, Detroit, Cleveland, St. L or such.

CarterB wrote:Mr. Norman, please refresh my memory. Was the Louisville to Florida Auto train's demise more over lack of a market, bad routing, or poor timing?

Best answer, all of the above

CarterB wrote:I would think that a snobird route from the Midwest to Florida could be viable from Louisville, Cincinnati, or somewhere within one easy day's drive from the midwestern cities of Chicago/Milw, Detroit, Cleveland, St. L or such.

Thst of course would require restoration of a route that has been gone almost 30 years. Further, even if CSX and/or NS were agreeable to hosting such, there is no way such could be time competitive with driving. On that point, the existing AT is quite competitive as I doubt if many, if any, passengers would contemplate driving that distance of 830 miles without an overnight stop.

I know I wouldn't.

Theoretically, how difficult would it be to restore over the City of Miami route with Carbondale as start point compared to either the old Auto train routing or via Atlanta? Even at that, not enough speed from C'dale to Sanford to be able to do overnight?