DutchRailnut wrote:impossble to do, US health code could never be satisfied.A repeat of that Amtrak/Subway disaster.
No wash facility, no bathroom with proper facilities for food establishment etc etc etc
Railroad Forums
Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, FL9AC, Jeff Smith
DutchRailnut wrote:impossble to do, US health code could never be satisfied.A repeat of that Amtrak/Subway disaster.
No wash facility, no bathroom with proper facilities for food establishment etc etc etc
Ridgefielder wrote:CarterB wrote:Tired of the Fri and Sat night stumbling drunks?That's more the 1:47 a.m. to New Haven-- a/k/a the Vomit Comet. From personal experience the rush-hour bar car patrons (self included ) tend to be a pretty well-behaved bunch. Businessmen going home to Darien, Westport or New Canaan aren't usually drinking like fraternity boys on spring break.
DutchRailnut wrote:What a lot of people do not understand is bar cars are underutilized money loosing cars.I am a little confused about that statement - what is meant by this?
yes bar service is profitable, but the bar car is NOT, so both MTA and CDOT are seeing less and less need for bar cars.
lirr42 wrote:With all the chaos going on with the scheduling changes and the bad train OTP's it was probably going to be too difficult to reliably get a bar car pair on a particular train every day.Good point. Perhaps they could have gotten around it by just sticking a bar car in whenever there was one available and not worrying too much about the timing. You might encounter one on the way home from work, but you could get a nice suprise in the morning sometimes too.
NH2060 wrote:Now has any independent group of say wealthy bankers, etc. ever proposed paying for their own MU bar car (including electricity usage, maintenance costs, etc.) to be used on select trains? This would satisfy the "wants" (MNR riders don't really "need" one as much as they need actual seats) of a bar car, but with the added benefit of exclusivity making it a true "club car" rather than a *public* bar car. Furthermore MNR would be reimbursed for any costs involved and could focus solely on maximizing seating capacity. IIRC the North Jersey Coast Line has had a similar car (albeit a rebuilt Comet IIM) in the past. Though the costs of paying for, maintaining, etc. a single MU car would be pretty steep, I don't think there aren't enough affluent commuters who'd be willing to pitch in to have their own car (though it wouldn't look good when word gets out to the press )
TomNelligan wrote:The New Haven and New York Central both ran a number of private membership-only commuter cars in the pre-Metro North era, as did the Lackawanna, Jersey Central, Chicago & North Western and probably other railroads that I'm forgetting at the moment. The former NH and NYC private cars came to an end as new MU and then standard coach equipment took over post-1970 but I don't have exact dates, and the Lackawanna's cars similarly lasted until the end of their DC MUs. These days, public railroads like MN and NJ Transit wouldn't run them because of the political correctness issue of allowing an elite group to have special service even if they were paying for it.IIRC the members of the Southport club car actually approached the MTA about doing exactly what NH2060 suggested when the M2s were coming online in the early 1970s. They were turned down, not sure of the precise reasoning but I think it was a car-usage issue.