Being realistic and assuming:
(1) I'd get $1bn/yr added in constant dollars for a decade (I see this as a realistic ask/hope for);
(2) I've got the ability to twist some arms for access on any given route as long as I'm not grossly disrupting freight operations;
(3) In order to add non-LD trains I'd need to get at least tacit state support. I'll assume a bit of flexibility with the strictures of PRIIA 209 (after all, it's been fudged once or twice) and the ability to allocate some amount of startup funding.
(4) Some flexibility on the EIS front.
(5) I don't have to independently cover the Acela IIs or the Hudson Tunnels.
I'm also assuming the following in terms of equipment costs:
One single-level car (sleeper, diner, coach, etc.): $2.5m
One bilevel coach: $3.5m (Amtrak used to assume $4.0m but the MSBL order came in well under this)
One diesel locomotive: $7.0m
One electric locomotive: $10.0m
===== ===== ===== ===== =====
With the above constraints, I'd look at the following:
(1) Equipment orders:
(1A) Replace the majority of the Amfleet fleet (which is closing in on 40 years old). The Amfleet I fleet would be replaced with 500 additional cars. Cost: $1.250bn
(1B) Replace the Amfleet II fleet with a set of 250 cars, aimed at expanding some of the eastern LD services (more on this later). Cost: $625m.
(1C) Eastern sleeper order. Purchase an additional 100 sleepers, 35 bag-dorms, and 15 diners. Cost: $375m.
(1D) Superliner III order. 250 cars in an indefinite mix of sleepers, coaches, diners, etc. Cost: $875m.
Total equipment cost: $3.125bn
Single-level equipment availability:
-45 bag-dorms (shared)
-225 "long distance" coaches (new order)
-450 "short distance" coaches (new order)
Do note that in most cases the equipment will be supplementing existing cars, not replacing them entirely (though I'd expect, for example, the Horizons to be squeezed out by the new stuff). For example, the existing Amfleets would be kept in service indefinitely, albeit moved to certain state corridors and operated with a discount to their capital charge...there are several hundred of these cars, so I see no compelling reason to ditch them entirely at the moment.
(2) Train additions/expansions/overhauls.
(2A) "Standard" Eastern Overnight trains:
Lake Shore Limited (2x daily). Consist for each train (5 sets total): 4 sleepers, 6 coaches, 1 diner, 1 cafe, 1 bag-dorm, 1 baggage car
-Total need: 20 sleepers, 30 coaches, 5 diners, 5 cafes, 5 bag-dorms, 5 baggage car
Silver Service (3x daily). "Average" consist for each train (11 sets total): 5 sleepers, 5 coaches, 1 diner, 2 cafes*, 1 bag-dorm, 1 baggage car
*1 cafe acting in its present capacity, 1 added to the Meteor in a PPC capacity, and possibly an extra batch of cafes to be held in Jacksonville.
-Total need: 55 sleepers, 55 coaches, 11 diners, 22 cafes, 11 bag-dorms, 11 baggage cars
--Note that I would add an FEC section, doing my best to cooperate with All Aboard Florida to make the service happen (I think they'd cooperate in exchange for covering some of the double-track costs on the northern section). Ideally all three trains would run sections both via Orlando and via Cocoa. Likely, the Star and Palm would be running with 4 sleepers and the Meteor with 7 or something to that effect.
Cardinal Service (2x daily). Consist for each train (6 sets total): 2 sleepers, 1 diner, 1 cafe, 4 coaches, 1 bag-dorm, 1 baggage car.
-Total need: 12 sleepers, 6 diners, 6 cafes, 24 coaches, 6 bag-dorms, 6 baggage cars
Crescent Service (2x daily). "Average" consist for each train (8 sets total): 4 sleepers, 1 diner, 1 cafe, 5 coaches, 1 bag-dorm, 1 baggage
-Total need: 24 sleepers, 8 diners, 8 cafes, 40 coaches, 8 bag-dorms, 8 baggage
Broadway Limited (1x daily). Consist for each train (3 sets needed): 3 sleepers, 1 diner, 1 cafe, 4 coaches, 1 bag-dorm, 1 baggage
-Total need: 9 sleepers, 3 diners, 3 cafes, 12 coaches, 3 bag-dorms, 3 baggage
Subtotal Eastern "standard" Long-Distance Equipment Need:
(2B) Eastern "Short" overnight trains.
Montrealer (2 sets). Consist per train: 2 sleepers, 1 cafe, 3 LD coaches*, 1 baggage.
Twilight Shoreliner (2x daily/4 sets). Consist per train: 2 sleepers, 1 cafe, 2 LD coaches*, 1 baggage. One trip would be the present 66/67; the other would run south as a late service from NYP (originating in BOS) and north as the 0315 from WAS (extending to BOS).
Niagara Rainbow (NYP-TWO) (2 sets). Consist per train: 2 sleepers, 1 cafe, 2 LD coaches*, 1 baggage.
*Coach need here will be drawn from a mix of short-distance and long-distance coaches and will be more variable than the other trains.
Subtotal Eastern "Short" overnight trains:
-8 baggage cars
(2C) Adjusted Western Services
I will summarize here, but I would add the North Coast Hiawatha and Pioneer/Desert Wind (which would operate separately from the California Zephyr, though sharing the same route as far as Denver). I would add a sleeper to almost every train out West (the possible exception being the Starlight, due to length issues, and with an asterisk on the Empire Builder considering the protracted issues there). The Starlight would probably go twice-daily (ideally with one daily run being extended to either Vancouver or San Diego).
I would make the Sunset daily. I would, in fact, add a Sunset East train...but there is a good chance that said train would be a single-level service. It would definitely be separate from the Sunset West (I simply do not trust a run that long involving a hand-off between freight railroads at the midpoint), and it would likely run a through sleeper from the CONO rather than from the Sunset (IIRC there was heavier business coming from the north than from the West).
I'd also add the extended Heartland Flyer, with a northern terminus in Chicago and a possible southern terminus in San Antonio (so you'd have doubled-up service CHI-KCY and FTW-SAS).
I would also seriously look into running cars through from the Capitol Limited to the Silvers (and/or to running the Cap through to Orlando a la the Sunset East pending a connection in Jacksonville). I'd like a daily Capitol Limited, but with the mix of service being added elsewhere I'd want to see how things played out as far as travel/demand patterns. Simply sticking an extra pair of sleepers on the Cap might do the trick (as much as I do want that additional train).
Finally, the Auto Train would recieve a major overhaul (including the addition of a power car of some sort to enable the train to run longer). I'd give serious consideration to buying a dedicated pair of bespoke sets for the train that would clock in somewhere in the range of 20-25 cars long.
(2D) Corridor Services
Again I will summarize, but I'd put a good deal of effort into diving into Virginia with as much money as I could, since there's little doubt that those services are massively revenue-incremental. I'd be looking at 3x daily out to Roanoke and 4-5x daily each to Newport News and Norfolk. I would also place a priority on developing SEHSR.
I would work to get a second train on the Adirondack's route once the Montreal facility is up and running (the Adirondack regularly sells out into Montreal, though this is partly due to artificial constraints). Ideally, you'd have two "day trains" each on the Vermonter/Montrealer, Adirondack, and Pennsylvanian routes (with an overnight supplement train on two of the three).
In the Midwest, I would work to get a 2x daily CHI-MSP service running (with MN's support) to supplement the now twice-daily LD service on that route. I would also work with WI and IL to double up the Hiawatha service, ideally converting the run to Surfliner-style cars (with higher capacity) and working with Metra to shuffle stops on a few runs. I would put a priority on CHI-DSM-OMA and increasing frequencies on the other Chicago Hub services.
Out West, I'd work to increase frequencies on the Cascades in line with pending plans, as well as adding a few more frequencies SEA-PDX (ideally moving towards hourly service). I'd want to do something on the Front Range, but I think valid congestion issues would preclude that. I'd seriously look at a second train between Grand Junction and Denver (Grand Junction/Glenwood Springs to Denver traffic being a major source of traffic for the Zephyr, and especially in the winter there seems to be enough demand to seriously support a service here as long as you still have snow to work with in the region).
To be blunt, CA gets sort-of stiffed for a few reasons, notably the CAHSR focus (basically that's "their problem"). The two extensions I'd want, namely extra service to Reno and/or Tehachapi service, aren't likely (freight congestion being at issue). I'd throw in for an extra San Joaquin or two, but that's really about all there.
===== ===== ===== ===== =====
Overall, I suspect the above mix adds no more than $50m to the actual operating losses of the system. In particular, a lot of overhead isn't affected. I suspect that the following trains are in the black:
-Lake Shore Limited (at least one of the two)
You'd also have a substantial reduction in losses on the Crescent, I believe (the combined service would probably have about the same loss-posting as at present, but the losses would be split over two trains; the overnight WAS-ATL train would likely be running with 5-6 sleepers while the train running during the day on that part would only have 2-3 sleepers).
Additionally, I'd expect a net improvement on the corridor front of about $25m or so (mostly off of increasing business to/from VA). The expansion of the equipment available to the NEC would probably throw another $25-50m on there as well.