Expanding Some Exisitng Amtrak Routes Along the NEC?

I had written some posts as a guest but this is my first as a member.

I currently live in the Philadelphia area and am planning a cross country trip on Amtrak.

Right now, the only direct train from Philly to Chicago is the Cardinal which only travels three days a week and is very long. For my trip, I have to change trains in either New York or Washington (I could change in Pittsburgh but the change is late at night going west and in the early morning going east).

Philadelphia and Chicago are the 3rd and 4th, respectively, busiest Amtrak stations in the US. There should be a better direct link between the two cities than what they have.

I was thinking about ways to create a new direct route from Philly to Chicago. Then I was thinking why not try to expand other routes along the Northeast Corridor to improve other service from the NEC to other areas of the country?

Here are my ideas:

Expanding along NYP-WAS:

1. Expand the Capitol Limited north from Washington to New York (similar to the Cardinal) OR the Lake Shore Limited south from New York to Washington DC. This would give a better connection from Newark, Trenton, Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore directly to Chicago (and Cleveland although in the middle of the night) as opposed to the Cardinal.

To do this on the Capitol Limited, they would have to change from Superliners to Viewliners to fit the tunnels in the NEC. The Lake Shore Limited would be easier to switch but the Capitol is currently shorter in length/time so it would be easier to expand.

2. Expand one Empire Service train each way from New York to Washington (283 out of New York and 284 going into New York). This would give direct connections from Philly and DC to Buffalo/Niagara Falls and upstate New York.

Expanding along NYP-BOS:

1. Expand the Silver Meteor train north from New York to Boston. This would give direct service from Boston and parts of New England along the BOS/NYP route to Florida. The schedule for the Silver Meteor works better than the Silver Star.

2. Expand the Crescent train north from New York to Boston. This would give direct service from Boston/New England to Atlanta and New Orleans.

My proposals do not add trains, they simply extend trains along the NEC (the most popular Amtrak service). The added expense would be the extra fuel and staffing (4-5 hours for each train). The extra connections should be embraced by passengers in these areas and increase business along these routes. I believe the furthest south travelers from Boston can travel to directly is Virginia. Why can't they go to Florida and/or Atlanta/New Orleans?

Ideally the Carolinian and Maple Leaf are trains I would like to see expanded either north or south but they would probably require the schedule to change to be feasible as the trains either leave New York too early or get into New York too late.

It would be ideal to expand one of the Empire Service trains from Buffalo to Cleveland and possibly Chicago but there is no existing train that you can extend that would get into Cleveland at any better time than the Lake Shore Limited does now. Cleveland's Amtrak service times are in the middle of the night and I'm sure they'd love to have a train go through Cleveland during a reasonable hour.

How do you feel about these extensions? Are any of them feasible? If so, which ones?

The problem with trying to route the northbound nec trains onto the empire corridor is that the physical setup does not allow nb to nb without changing direction in the station or in sunnyside yard, same problem southbound from Albany to anywhere south of Manhattan.

I actually answered your guest post but then entire thread was deleted. This post is slightly smaller in scope and formatted differently than your previous post. As such,I will adjust my answer.

Philly Amtrak Fan said:

I had written some posts as a guest but this is my first as a member.

I currently live in the Philadelphia area and am planning a cross country trip on Amtrak.

Right now, the only direct train from Philly to Chicago is the Cardinal which only travels three days a week and is very long. For my trip, I have to change trains in either New York or Washington (I could change in Pittsburgh but the change is late at night going west and in the early morning going east).

Philadelphia and Chicago are the 3rd and 4th, respectively, busiest Amtrak stations in the US. There should be a better direct link between the two cities than what they have.

I was thinking about ways to create a new direct route from Philly to Chicago. Then I was thinking why not try to expand other routes along the Northeast Corridor to improve other service from the NEC to other areas of the country?

Here are my ideas:

Expanding along NYP-WAS:

1. Expand the Capitol Limited north from Washington to New York (similar to the Cardinal) OR the Lake Shore Limited south from New York to Washington DC. This would give a better connection from Newark, Trenton, Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore directly to Chicago (and Cleveland although in the middle of the night) as opposed to the Cardinal.

To do this on the Capitol Limited, they would have to change from Superliners to Viewliners to fit the tunnels in the NEC. The Lake Shore Limited would be easier to switch but the Capitol is currently shorter in length/time so it would be easier to expand.

2. Expand one Empire Service train each way from New York to Washington (283 out of New York and 284 going into New York). This would give direct connections from Philly and DC to Buffalo/Niagara Falls and upstate New York.

Expanding along NYP-BOS:

1. Expand the Silver Meteor train north from New York to Boston. This would give direct service from Boston and parts of New England along the BOS/NYP route to Florida. The schedule for the Silver Meteor works better than the Silver Star.

2. Expand the Crescent train north from New York to Boston. This would give direct service from Boston/New England to Atlanta and New Orleans.

My proposals do not add trains, they simply extend trains along the NEC (the most popular Amtrak service). The added expense would be the extra fuel and staffing (4-5 hours for each train). The extra connections should be embraced by passengers in these areas and increase business along these routes. I believe the furthest south travelers from Boston can travel to directly is Virginia. Why can't they go to Florida and/or Atlanta/New Orleans?

Ideally the Carolinian and Maple Leaf are trains I would like to see expanded either north or south but they would probably require the schedule to change to be feasible as the trains either leave New York too early or get into New York too late.

It would be ideal to expand one of the Empire Service trains from Buffalo to Cleveland and possibly Chicago but there is no existing train that you can extend that would get into Cleveland at any better time than the Lake Shore Limited does now. Cleveland's Amtrak service times are in the middle of the night and I'm sure they'd love to have a train go through Cleveland during a reasonable hour.

How do you feel about these extensions? Are any of them feasible? If so, which ones?

Click to expand...

There have been proposals to extend the two Florida trains to Boston for years and all I never heard a proposal for the Crescent, it will be hung up by the same reasons as the Florida trains.

Right now, the current limitations include a lack of reserve of equipment (for late turns), a lack of slots on Metro-North (which are at a premium as the rebuild there railroad), a lack of slots in the Boston S&I (which pinch hit as the main service facilities for the Virginia services), and a lack of slots on the Shore Line. The latter is up for reevaluation and consideration in 2018.

As for a direct connection from WAS to the Empire Corridor, this idea is not far fetched. It occurred years ago with Adirondack. It was train 180/69 and 68/139 WAS-MTR-WAS. It departed Washington at 6:20am and arrived NYP around 950am with a 10 car consist, 50/50 split seating configuration made up of 4 84 seaters (the red seaters) and 6 Metroliner style coaches. At NYP 180 pulled in, cut off the electric off the east end, held on to 4 and went to SSYD for servicing.They slapped a P32 on the west end of the remaining 6 car consist, performed a brake test, loaded the passengers and away the train went North as 69 to MTR. In the evening, the procedure was reversed. 68 pulled in, they cut off the P32 which went east to SSYD and they added an AEM-7 plus 4 on the west end. It went west as 139, the 9:20pm departure.

It didn't take that much time. The problem was 68. It often ran late and tied up 139. Although it had a significant amount of through ridership, the train became a multi-divisional nightmare. These days, it may be hard to make the moves in NYP due to congestion.

That being said, sending the Lake Shore to WAS accomplishes very little since you'd ow have to spend time performing a double drill on the train in one of the busiest terminals in the system. This also adds to the already congested high line which is overstuffed.

Let's assume there is single level equipment to convert the Capitol once the new viewliner IIs are on the beam (even though I'm not seeing a ton of coach options without altering a few state sponsored contracts.) Before I see the Capitol operate to NYP, I'd rather see the return of the Broadway Limited (or some variation of it.) This way you are actually adding a market/stops instead of duplicating existing services.

Welcome to AU, it's always good to have new members join us! And Philly is a great City, we had our Annual 2012 Gathering there.

We've discussed the PHL-CHI direct train topic many times, what is most likely to occur first is the run thru cars from the Pennsy to the Cap Ltd in PGH. This would allow one to have Dinner on the Train and eliminate hanging around the dungeon that is the PGH Station waiting on the Cap.

Once the equipment is available and it can be worked out with the Class I Roads, lots of us think a resumption of the Broadway Ltd. is the ideal way to roll but that is a longer term project!

Thirdrail7 said:

I actually answered your guest post but then entire thread was deleted. This post is slightly smaller in scope and formatted differently than your previous post. As such,I will adjust my answer.

There have been proposals to extend the two Florida trains to Boston for years and all I never heard a proposal for the Crescent, it will be hung up by the same reasons as the Florida trains.

Right now, the current limitations include a lack of reserve of equipment (for late turns), a lack of slots on Metro-North (which are at a premium as the rebuild there railroad), a lack of slots in the Boston S&I (which pinch hit as the main service facilities for the Virginia services), and a lack of slots on the Shore Line. The latter is up for reevaluation and consideration in 2018.

Click to expand...

Could they just combine one of the existing BOS-NYP trains and the Silver Meteor?

Philly Amtrak Fan said:

Thirdrail7 said:

I actually answered your guest post but then entire thread was deleted. This post is slightly smaller in scope and formatted differently than your previous post. As such,I will adjust my answer.

There have been proposals to extend the two Florida trains to Boston for years and all I never heard a proposal for the Crescent, it will be hung up by the same reasons as the Florida trains.

Right now, the current limitations include a lack of reserve of equipment (for late turns), a lack of slots on Metro-North (which are at a premium as the rebuild there railroad), a lack of slots in the Boston S&I (which pinch hit as the main service facilities for the Virginia services), and a lack of slots on the Shore Line. The latter is up for reevaluation and consideration in 2018.

Click to expand...

Could they just combine one of the existing BOS-NYP trains and the Silver Meteor?

Click to expand...

You can do whatever you want, but think about what you're saying: You're basically taking an 8 to 10 car regional train (which may be loaded to the gills) and combining it with a long distance train that is at least 9 cars long. Are we making double stops at each station? Additionally, if something goes wrong with a sleeper car (as an example) in the yard, you are now punishing the local travel.

Along those lines, what is the plan if (and when I say "if" I really mean "when") the northbound train is late? how do you combine it with the regional? Do you leave the regional for 3 hours to wait for its connection? If you run it as a separate train, you now need another crew, engine and a slot...which may not be available.

This fiasco played out a few years ago when Amtrak combined train 51 (the Cardinal) with train 183, the 710(ish) am train out of New York. On Sundays, it was combined with train 131. These trains took a major pounding collectively. On the return, 50 was supposed to combine with the 7:10 departure out of WAS.

It may have made its connection twice before they pulled the plug and ran them as separate trains.

There is a lot to consider when you make moves like this.

As I said in the last thread, there is a plan. Through cars from the Pennsy to the Cap.

Thirdrail7 said:

Philly Amtrak Fan said:

Thirdrail7 said:

I actually answered your guest post but then entire thread was deleted. This post is slightly smaller in scope and formatted differently than your previous post. As such,I will adjust my answer.

There have been proposals to extend the two Florida trains to Boston for years and all I never heard a proposal for the Crescent, it will be hung up by the same reasons as the Florida trains.

Right now, the current limitations include a lack of reserve of equipment (for late turns), a lack of slots on Metro-North (which are at a premium as the rebuild there railroad), a lack of slots in the Boston S&I (which pinch hit as the main service facilities for the Virginia services), and a lack of slots on the Shore Line. The latter is up for reevaluation and consideration in 2018.

Click to expand...

Could they just combine one of the existing BOS-NYP trains and the Silver Meteor?

Click to expand...

You can do whatever you want, but think about what you're saying: You're basically taking an 8 to 10 car regional train (which may be loaded to the gills) and combining it with a long distance train that is at least 9 cars long. Are we making double stops at each station? Additionally, if something goes wrong with a sleeper car (as an example) in the yard, you are now punishing the local travel.

Along those lines, what is the plan if (and when I say "if" I really mean "when") the northbound train is late? how do you combine it with the regional? Do you leave the regional for 3 hours to wait for its connection? If you run it as a separate train, you now need another crew, engine and a slot...which may not be available.

This fiasco played out a few years ago when Amtrak combined train 51 (the Cardinal) with train 183, the 710(ish) am train out of New York. On Sundays, it was combined with train 131. These trains took a major pounding collectively. On the return, 50 was supposed to combine with the 7:10 departure out of WAS.

It may have made its connection twice before they pulled the plug and ran them as separate trains.

There is a lot to consider when you make moves like this.

Click to expand...

When did they expand the Cardinal from DC to NY? I think the routes I suggested would be better to expand along the NEC than the Cardinal was. I know nobody wants to see the Cardinal trimmed back to DC but I certainly would do it if I could expand one of the other routes in its place.

I think there is precedent to idea of cutting service in some places and expanding it either. I was looking at the old timetables and remember seeing the Desert Wind and Pioneer while the California Zephyr and Empire Builder only traveled 3-4 days a week. They cut the Desert Wind and Pioneer and then made CZ and EB daily trains. Some areas gained (daily service from Chicago to San Fran) but others lost (LA-Vegas-SLC and Den-Sea). Were the old western routes better or are the new ones better?

If you can't increase your budget or train slots, sometimes you have to give something up to gain something else more attractive.

Ryan said:

As I said in the last thread, there is a plan. Through cars from the Pennsy to the Cap.

Click to expand...

How about the other routes I suggested?

The issues with them have already been described in detail. Through cars from the Pennsy could be put into place with significantly more ease.

I would like to vote "None", but can't since that is not an available choice. I think it is an utterly silly and idea to randomly extend trains for no quantified fiscal reason.

Ryan said:

As I said in the last thread, there is a plan. Through cars from the Pennsy to the Cap.

Click to expand...

I really, really, really hope it will happen. But the plan has been five years in the making. Also, they essentially cut this route twice so even if they restored it the next time Amtrak needs to cut something this route would be near the top of the list. I think the Chicago/Pittsburgh/Harrisburg/Philadelphia route is better than some of the routes they still have.

If I had my way, I would've made the Lake Shore Limited Chicago-Buffalo-Albany-Boston only and kept the Broadway Limited as Chicago-Pittsburgh-Philadelphia-New York. The passengers along the route between Albany and Buffalo would still be able to take the Lake Shore to Chicago and have other Empire routes to go to New York. The ones who would lose would be the passengers between New York and Albany who wanted to go to Chicago (they would have to transfer in Albany). But I think the route through Pennsylvania is more important.

Incidentally, there was an idea under Warrington to add a Boston-Chicago train, largely for moving mail and freight. It never happened of course, but I wish it had. There really needs to be another LSL frequency running six hours later to to give overnight service to Cleveland and Buffalo.

Philly Amtrak Fan said:

When did they expand the Cardinal from DC to NY? I think the routes I suggested would be better to expand along the NEC than the Cardinal was. I know nobody wants to see the Cardinal trimmed back to DC but I certainly would do it if I could expand one of the other routes in its place.

Click to expand...

Truncating the Cardinal to WAS would not affect the options for any of the LD train extensions in your poll. The only way it might would be to convert the Cardinal to Superliner equipment and the CL to single level equipment. Which might free up some CL Superliner equipment for deployment on other routes, as long as the Cardinal remained a 3 day a week train with 2 consists.
But the Cardinal has good business in VA and apparently WV to NEC traffic that it got when it switched to single level equipment and was extended to NYP. Why throw that away? Especially with Virginia investing some $25 million or so of state funding over a period of years in improvements to the Buckingham Branch Railroad that Cardinal will be able to take advantage of.

A major drawback with extending the CL northward to PHL or NYP, besides the need to switch to single level equipment and having to reverse the train at WAS, is that the WAS to PGH segment is very slow. Why not add pass-through cars at PGH to the CL for those traveling from NJ and Southeastern PA for a more direct route? As I wrote earlier, I think the better solution is to restore a Three Rivers/Broadway Limited LD train with a PGH to CHI route TBD (going through Michigan to take advantage of the 235 miles of 110 mph track should be considered for one of the LD trains running between CLE/TOL and CHI). Maybe if the pass-through cars get good business, that could make a case for restoring the TR/BL.

Extending one of the Silvers to BOS was one of the proposed changes in the Warrington era, IIRC. But it runs into the 39 trains a day restriction that Amtrak has to comply with on the Shore Line East. That is 39 trains a day total both ways. So on weekdays, Amtrak has 19 scheduled Regionals and Acelas each away between NYP and BOS. There are plans to raise that limit, but the EA for the Connecticut River bridge replacement in its 2030 traffic projection, shows all the additional slots going to the Acela. The Acela service is Amtrak's moneymaker, so if Amtrak were able to run 4 or 5 additional daily trains each way on the SLE, makes sense for most or all of the new slots to go the Acela. I think an additional NYP-BOS Regional should be in the mix, but additional Regionals may get send over the Inland Route. But an NYP-BOS LD train over the NEC? Is that a good use of a precious slot?

keelhauled said:

Incidentally, there was an idea under Warrington to add a Boston-Chicago train, largely for moving mail and freight. It never happened of course, but I wish it had. There really needs to be another LSL frequency running six hours later to to give overnight service to Cleveland and Buffalo.

Click to expand...

According to the Museum of Railway Timetables (timetables.org), there was supposed to be a "Skyline Connection" Amtrak train between Philly and Chicago (would not continue into New York). I believe it never was implemented.

The schedule would've been:

PHL 1:05am, HAR 3:05am/3:35am, PIT 8:53am/9:05am, CLE 12:38pm, TOL 2:41pm, CHI 6:47pm

CHI 1:30pm, TOL 7:02pm, CLE 9:15pm, PIT 12:43am/12:58am, HAR 6:17am/6:50am, PHL 9:08am

I probably would have never taken the 1:05am west (especially if the Three Rivers were still going) but the train going east would've been terrific for me!

Could you imagine the increased business between Cleveland/Toledo and Chicago if these trains ran?

afigg said:

Extending one of the Silvers to BOS was one of the proposed changes in the Warrington era, IIRC. But it runs into the 39 trains a day restriction that Amtrak has to comply with on the Shore Line East. That is 39 trains a day total both ways. So on weekdays, Amtrak has 19 scheduled Regionals and Acelas each away between NYP and BOS. There are plans to raise that limit, but the EA for the Connecticut River bridge replacement in its 2030 traffic projection, shows all the additional slots going to the Acela. The Acela service is Amtrak's moneymaker, so if Amtrak were able to run 4 or 5 additional daily trains each way on the SLE, makes sense for most or all of the new slots to go the Acela. I think an additional NYP-BOS Regional should be in the mix, but additional Regionals may get send over the Inland Route. But an NYP-BOS LD train over the NEC? Is that a good use of a precious slot?

Click to expand...

I would say I'd rather have 24 Acela trains and one train from Boston to Florida than have 25 Acela trains and no train from Boston to Florida.

All that is needed for BOS - Florida is

1. A bunch more rail cars enough for maintenance spares also recognizing other single level trains need more cars..

2. MNRR to complete its rehab of the bridges and CAT NY - New Haven to allow more Amtrak slots. ( any bets )

3. Double tracking New Haven - Springfield and maybe electrification. The delays during the electrification New Haven - Boston are well documented

4. Track improvements Springfield - Worchester

5. Then route train over inland route

So we've discussed the limitations and challenges surrounding my previous expansion plans.

Let me try this one then:

Expand the Crescent from New Orleans west to Houston/San Antonio. It would give direct service from New York and the Northeast to Texas.

The Crescent gets into NO at 7:32pm and leaves NO at 7:00am.

The Sunset Limited between NO and SA is 9:00am-12:05am and between SA and NO is 6:25am-9:40pm (roughly 13-14 hrs).

So if you add about 16 hrs to the Crescent it would get into San Antonio at 11:32am and would have to leave San Antonio at 3:00pm. It is roughly 5 hours between Houston and San Antonio on the SL so the train would get into Houston early in the morning (6:30am) going west and at night (8-9pm) going east.

What would have to happen in New Orleans to continue the train west?

Philly Amtrak Fan said:

I would say I'd rather have 24 Acela trains and one train from Boston to Florida than have 25 Acela trains and no train from Boston to Florida.

Click to expand...

You're leaving revenue on the table if you do that. Amtrak is a business, not a charity.

I think we should extend the Downeaster via Grand Junction and the Inland Route down the NEC, then to Jacksonville, then across the old SL-East route (to restore that) to Los Angeles and on up to Vancouver, BC. (Sounds like The_Traveler's last trip eh? )

Philly Amtrak Fan said:

So we've discussed the limitations and challenges surrounding my previous expansion plans.

Let me try this one then:

Expand the Crescent from New Orleans west to Houston/San Antonio. It would give direct service from New York and the Northeast to Texas.

Click to expand...

There was a plan floated circa 2000 when Warrington was President of Amtrak to split the Crescent at Meridian MS and send the new split train, the Crescent Star, to Shreveport and Dallas. I gather Amtrak even allocated some money for improvements to the Meridian to Dallas route. This was a valid proposal and one that has been discussed here several times in recent years. Today, I expect the plan would be for the train to run to Fort Worth to layover with the Heartland Flyer equipment for servicing.

Dallas is be a better destination for a passenger train than it was in 2000 as the city now has a 90 mile light rail system as a connecting transit system for the Crescent Star. Depending on the schedule, there could be connections at FTW from the Heartland Flyer and at FTW and DAL to the Texas Eagle. A Dallas to Atlanta to WAS-PHL-NYP LD train could do decent business. But this would take more Viewliner II equipment and Amfleet II coach cars than Amtrak will have available after the 130 Viewlner II CAF cars are delivered.

Weren't the Capitol Limited and the Southwest Chief once connected?

Philly Amtrak Fan said:

The schedule would've been:

PHL 1:05am, HAR 3:05am/3:35am, PIT 8:53am/9:05am, CLE 12:38pm, TOL 2:41pm, CHI 6:47pm

CHI 1:30pm, TOL 7:02pm, CLE 9:15pm, PIT 12:43am/12:58am, HAR 6:17am/6:50am, PHL 9:08am

...

Could you imagine the increased business between Cleveland/Toledo and Chicago if these trains ran?

Click to expand...

The westbound schedule would have been terrible for PHL business. The eastbound schedule is better, but should depart CHI later. I have proposed that a restored TR/BL westbound schedule could depart NYP circa 7-7:30 PM (after the peak rush hour), PHL circa 9:15 PM, HAR 11 PM, then do the overnight portion from HAR to CLE, get to CLE in the early morning to act as a CLE-CHI daytime corridor train. Eastbound depart CHI maybe 3 to 4 PM for an evening arrival at TOL & CLE, so like the westbound train the overnight segment is effectively from CLE to HAR and gets to PHL and NYP after the morning rush hours. This train would not have same day connections from the western LD trains. But still could connect to most Midwest corridor routes, so it still reaches much of the Midwest market.

I would prefer the option given in the Performance Improvement Plan -- cars from the Pennsyvlanian which are switched onto the Capitol Limited at Pittsburgh.

Philly-Chicago definitely needs direct service the "fast way".

Running the Cap up to NYP only makes but so much sense. Believe me, I've thought it over. Problem number one is that you'd have to re-equip the train; problem two is that you'd have to spin the train around in WAS. I forget how the B&O handled this back when the Cap was their train (it originally ran to NYP; when the access agreement into NYP expired, it ran to Hoboken), but they clearly did something about it (probably used a now-missing wye or something like that).

The LSL extension has its own issues (the NYP reversal comes to mind) but is more doable; however, I'm not sure how much of a point there is in this one since once you get south of about PHL it is simply quicker to go to WAS and transfer than it is to take a through train up to NYP.

The Meteor proposal has been looked at, though the proposed routing was the Inland Route (avoiding the NHV-BOS logjam). That being said, if the train were so extended then Amtrak would need to figure out what to do with seat sales onboard north of WAS, since running a train with 75%+ of its seats empty north of NYP is not a recipe for stunning fiscal results. If you jacked up the prices to nudge most NEC pax off but offered space for sale on a controlled basis (so as to avoid crowding out of thru pax), particularly when the Regionals were selling out then this might work well. Ditto sleeper spaces (which could probably be upsold given the ability to get lunch/dinner onboard southbound and breakfast/lunch northbound); the question is space management more than anything.

On the NEC-North bit: I don't disagree with adding Acelas, but I'm getting seriously worried that Amtrak has begun to look at "add Acelas" like a D&D player might look at "cast fireball": An all-use solution to the NEC at a bare minimum. Unfortunately, while numerous financial metrics of the Acela are impressive there is a significant niche and justification for adding Regionals, not least of which is not watching Amtrak become utterly unaffordable for folks either unable to get their businesses to spring for the Acela and potentially defecting to bus operators. If Amtrak does this, they're going to over-saturate the region with Acelas [which don't go much faster than Regionals north of NYP] and either pricing will become indistinct between the two (already happening) or quite a bit of traffic is going to get squeezed out. Both might happen if pricing becomes indistinct at too high of a price point, but at a bare minimum the Acela/Regional distinction will become a total muddle up there.

Why is that a bad thing? Well, the Acelas are never going to have much over 400 seats/train in capacity while a 10-car Regional can get to 638 (more if you tinker with the consist and sell seats in a half-cafe instead of having a full cafe). At 11 seats that becomes around 710 and at 12 it becomes either 782 (10 coach cars, 1 BC, 1 cafe) or 762 (10 coach cars, 2 BC/Cafe cars). If pricing distinction falls apart, then those Regionals start earning more than the Acela does on a per-slot basis: If a 700-seat Regional earns $0.50/seat-mile ($350/train-mile) then a 400-seat Acela has to earn $0.875/seat-mile to match (a 75% premium). If the Acela cannot command that premium over the Regional but you end up with similar load factors then the Regional is arguably a better deal for Amtrak. Put more plainly, there are clear situations where Amtrak would do better mass-selling cheaper seats than trying to force an upsell for less seats.