Experience on the "Nightowl" Trains?

[cpotisch]

Yep, Ignorance is Bliss as the old saying goes, but Bigotory is Forever!

Both those guys are a disgrace to the American way! YMMV

Amen brother! Couldn't have said it better myself (as is often the case)!

 

[railiner]

The open section beds are wider, because you gain access to the upper berth from the outside (the aisle), rather than inside the room.

The other disadvantage of the section sleeper, is customarily, the person in the cheaper upper berth occupies the rear facing seat during the day. And...you have to give up that seat when the 'official' bedtime occurs...typically 10:00 PM to 6:00 AM, I believe. Then if you want to sit up and read, you have to do it seated in bed.

As for the privacy issue...the upper and lower have separate sets of heavy drapes, so you can keep them open or closed, with no effect on the other person. And as I stated earlier, they can replace those heavy curtains with sliding panels instead...IIRC, The Pullman Company had experimented with something like that on a few cars around the end of the section era.

 

[railbuck]

Upon further reflection here are some thoughts. I think this pod arrangement is workable. I think all the points about tapered sides etc. are mostly red herrings. What matters is the "waist level" width, which makes the current configuration work. It will allow this configuration to work too.

Slice a Delta A350 down the middle, and you get a center aisle with a row of suites on each side, just like the Viewliner Delta One sketch by cocojacoby. The cabin interior width is 221", so half of that is 110.5".

Viewliners are 125" outside. I haven't found any numbers on the interior width, but it has to be really close to what Delta is working with for one side of the plane. I think the dimensions are about right.

From a revenue perspective, instead of being able to sell 15 accommodation charges and 15 to 30 railfares, there are now 34 suites for sale. Each one could be priced a little lower than a current roomette so that a single traveler pays a little less and a couple pays a little more than the current fare structure. Overall revenue should go up since the "wasted" space in a single-occupant roomette can be sold. And since the charge is per person rather than per room, it's easier for people unfamiliar with Amtrak to figure out how the pricing works. No more threads about open sleeper tickets or how many people can use a day room.

The seats would have to be much simpler and less maintenance-intensive than the airline seats, though.

 

[cpotisch]

From a revenue perspective, instead of being able to sell 15 accommodation charges and 15 to 30 railfares, there are now 34 suites for sale. Each one could be priced a little lower than a current roomette so that a single traveler pays a little less and a couple pays a little more than the current fare structure. Overall revenue should go up since the "wasted" space in a single-occupant roomette can be sold. And since the charge is per person rather than per room, it's easier for people unfamiliar with Amtrak to figure out how the pricing works. No more threads about open sleeper tickets or how many people can use a day room.

I disagree. Why would a couple buy two berths in a section if it's cheaper to get a private room. Since they can sell individual berths with a section, I think each berth should sell for about half of what a roomette would cost. That way, more single passengers will be willing to upgrade from coach, and on average, they wouldn't lose any revenue compared to roomettes. I also think it might make sense to have the sections designated for single passengers up until a certain number of days from departure. That way, the people who are able to share a roomette, won't be using up the berths, which can be sold individually and relatively cheaply to individual passengers.

 

[jis]

If American phobias were not what they are, the Open Sections really seem to make the most sense and maximize comfort.

But given the phobias, we just have to live with narrower berths and more expensive tickets.

 

[cpotisch]

If American phobias were not what they are, the Open Sections really seem to make the most sense and maximize comfort.

But given the phobias, we just have to live with narrower berths and more expensive tickets.

It's frustrating, considering I'm sure there are a lot of people in the train community who would happily take sections as a less expensive and possibly more comfortable option than a sleeper. Especially when you consider that you have way less privacy in coach, and you're around more people. But I guess a lot of people just don't like the concept of having a bed in a somewhat public car. Maybe it just brings home the idea of sleeping on a train with other people around you, but you'd be doing the exact same thing in coach.

 

[jis]

They have no problem doing so in Intercontinental Business Class in airplane. It is just a stodgy train thing.

 

[railbuck]

From a revenue perspective, instead of being able to sell 15 accommodation charges and 15 to 30 railfares, there are now 34 suites for sale. Each one could be priced a little lower than a current roomette so that a single traveler pays a little less and a couple pays a little more than the current fare structure. Overall revenue should go up since the "wasted" space in a single-occupant roomette can be sold. And since the charge is per person rather than per room, it's easier for people unfamiliar with Amtrak to figure out how the pricing works. No more threads about open sleeper tickets or how many people can use a day room.

I disagree. Why would a couple buy two berths in a section if it's cheaper to get a private room. Since they can sell individual berths with a section, I think each berth should sell for about half of what a roomette would cost. That way, more single passengers will be willing to upgrade from coach, and on average, they wouldn't lose any revenue compared to roomettes. I also think it might make sense to have the sections designated for single passengers up until a certain number of days from departure. That way, the people who are able to share a roomette, won't be using up the berths, which can be sold individually and relatively cheaply to individual passengers.

You're assuming multiple types of accommodations would be available on a given train. More likely they'd convert a route to exclusively offer Contemporary Sleeping.

 

[jis]

From a revenue perspective, instead of being able to sell 15 accommodation charges and 15 to 30 railfares, there are now 34 suites for sale. Each one could be priced a little lower than a current roomette so that a single traveler pays a little less and a couple pays a little more than the current fare structure. Overall revenue should go up since the "wasted" space in a single-occupant roomette can be sold. And since the charge is per person rather than per room, it's easier for people unfamiliar with Amtrak to figure out how the pricing works. No more threads about open sleeper tickets or how many people can use a day room.

I disagree. Why would a couple buy two berths in a section if it's cheaper to get a private room. Since they can sell individual berths with a section, I think each berth should sell for about half of what a roomette would cost. That way, more single passengers will be willing to upgrade from coach, and on average, they wouldn't lose any revenue compared to roomettes. I also think it might make sense to have the sections designated for single passengers up until a certain number of days from departure. That way, the people who are able to share a roomette, won't be using up the berths, which can be sold individually and relatively cheaply to individual passengers.

You're assuming multiple types of accommodations would be available on a given train. More likely they'd convert a route to exclusively offer Contemporary Sleeping.

Why would you assume that? Currently there are multiple types of sleeping accommodation available.

I do agree though that they will probably avoid having multiple types of Sleeping Cars. Currently single levels effectively have a single type, soon going to two types until the V-Is can be converted. Superliners currently have two types, with one of those types captive to the Auto Train. I doubt they will go to a more complexs Sleeper fleet than they currently have.

Frankly I would be pleasantly surprised if the order more Sleepers of any type, at the rate things are going.

 

[west point]

Frankly I would be pleasantly surprised if the order more Sleepers of any type, at the rate things are going.

Until Amtrak has enough equipment of the present various types it is foolish to get additional types of equipment especially one off types. You need spares for each type and at the present lack of funding from Congress one off spares waste precious capital funds. As well the lack of storage space at many terminals limit parking one off cars. The ability to book V-1 and V-2 sleepers + AM-1 & Am-2 coaches reduces need for as many spares both for service and parking at yards.

 

[cpotisch]

and at the present lack of funding from Congress one off spares waste precious capital funds.

Lack of funding? Amtrak got almost $2B this year.

 

[Ryan]

How much of that $2B is available for new equipment purchase, or the overhaul/conversion of existing equipment?

 

[PVD]

There is no long term commitment that enables the type of multi year large batch capital purchases most of us would like to see.

 

[jis]

As well the lack of storage space at many terminals limit parking one off cars.

Can your provide any credible citation or other verifiable facts to support this theory of yours about shortage of storage space? I know you have been repeating this mantra, but repeated assertion does not constitute a proof.

 

[west point]

JIS: It has been stated by others that BOS. SSY, Ivy city are all already at capacity due mainly to MBTA, NJ Transit and VRE-MARC respectively.. There have been posts on VRE several times listing that they are trying to build their own storage tracks in WASH so they do not have to dead head equipment back to L'enfant for mid day storage. MBTA is still dickering over another location for train storage and will not allow any more Amtrak equipment to be stored at South Hampton. Also there is the length limitation at BOS for Regional and Acela equipment.

Now Sunnyside might get some room if Amtrak could require NJ Transit to dead head more equipment back to NJ. NJY already does D/H a few trains. But that is not possible to D/H more with the present capacity limits of the North River tunnels. Additionally the NJT crew shortages would disrupt NJT with disastrous political results.

CHI. The short sighted Amtrak closing of the AT&SF yard that Amtrak used for a while has constrained What the status of the facility that Amtrak used in CHI for the turbos is unknown?.

MIA, NOL, LAX. EMY-OAK, SEA will leave to others

 

[jis]

So you actually just have a lot of anecdotes. I was looking for something more concrete like which yard has how much trackage to store equipment and how much of it is used to store what at present what etc. That's fine. I think I got my answer. Thanks.

 

[ehbowen]

I disagree. Why would a couple buy two berths in a section if it's cheaper to get a private room.

Since the section berth beds are quite a bit wider, I can think of at least one reason why a couple might buy one berth in a section...