LD Dining Options That Could Work on Amtrak

shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

peconicstation

Service Attendant
Joined
Mar 21, 2015
Messages
124
With much said about the upcoming elimination of the full service diner on the Silver Star, there are (2) examples of seasonal dining options

from north of the border that culd work on Amtrak.

On VIA Rail, an enhanced coach class diner service is available on the Canadian, and Churchill trainls ONLY during the peak summer period.

http://www.viarail.ca/sites/all/files/media/pdfs/menus/111131341-33_VIA_5660-14_CafeExpress_BIL_8.5x11_v2.pdf

In Amtraks case, a service like this would make sense on the Star during it's peak period in the winter.

On the Alaska Rail Road, meal service is cashless, pre-pay, or pay on board with plastic, the menu, with food provided by a caterer, is not as

up market as Amtrak's standard LD menu (there is no steak), but this menu is way above cafe car fare.

http://www.alaskarailroad.com/Portals/4/pdf/SITDOWN%20MENU%20CROPPED.pdf

Ken
 
Amtrak is learning from internal research some ways to revise food service and get more bang for the buck. The Inspector General reports have similar findings. Here's some things I've come across with some of my own thoughts added:

1. Seasonal variation: Amtrak has already learned that services need to vary between the peak and non-peak seasons on the long-distance trains. The IG reports confirm that. Reduced services in the off-peak season can help contain costs while expanded services during the peak season can offer revenue opportunities.

We've seen a few examples in recent months. For example, taking the PPC off the Coast Starlight in the slow season then restoring it in late Spring. Replacing the Dining Car and Sightseer Lounge on the Capitol Limited with the Cross Country Cafe in the slow winter months. Running the Boston section of the Lake Shore Limited without the lounge car during January and February.

The City of New Orleans and the Texas Eagle currently run with a CCC and a sightseer lounge all year. Perhaps during the slow season the CCC is sufficient...just a thought.

If management sees that reduced food services during the slow travel season save money and have no visible impact on customer satisfaction, then it's truly a way forward. Likewise, if expanded services during peak seasons add revenue and increase customer satisfactions, then that too is a way forward.

Here's an idea...one that comes to my mind and not something I have read elsewhere: When and if the Empire Builder rebuilds to its previous ridership levels perhaps an expansion of dining options can be offered in the peak season. Say, adding a Cross Country Cafe to the Portland section to complement the dining car on the Seattle section and thus allow the Sightseer Lounge to stay on for Seattle during that time period.

2. A Different Dining Car Model: Amtrak has already investigated some different operating models for the dining cars. With the Viewliner II diners on the way we can expect some meaningful changes on the eastern single-level trains...we just hope the changes are good.

One revision is to offer all-day service as opposed to the current model that serves during traditional meal periods only. With that revision, Amtrak's own research identifies a need to offer some mid-priced meal options. It was mentioned somewhere the possibility of all-day breakfast and lunch options along with some higher-priced dinner options in the evening hours.

3. More off-sight options: Amtrak has already attempted some some options for meal services prepared off-site. We could see more of this in the future. In situations where a dining car is too costly to operate, Amtrak can contract with an off-site caterer for some attractive box-style meals, and these too could be done according to seasonal demand. For example, when and if the Capitol Limited switches to a later Chicago departure time, box meals can be loaded and served to sleeper car passengers rather than opening the dining car...at least during the off-peak season.

One thing we all can expect is change in Amtrak's food services. We can only hope that the changes result in Amtrak's bottom line improvement. And the bottom line is not only the finances but also the overall customer satisfaction level that results in repeat customers. It's a huge challenge...and also a mandate!
 
1. Can't speak for other meals, but riding in Europe, the included breakfast was a standard European breakfast consisting of breads/spreads and a hot beverage. The cost of running the breakfast must be ridiculously low, because the food was pre-boxed, and the beverage was just served by the cabin attendant. I realize that American tastes require the likes of eggs and meat, but perhaps Amtrak could do its part in lowering the national cholesterol level while also saving money by switching to a lighter breakfast.

1a. However, if you are going to already be having cooking facilities in the form of a restaurant car, I suppose you might as well grab the revenue available from the bacon-and-eggs crowd,

2. I think that restaurant cars are just really tough in terms of the underlying economics, especially on long-running trains. I suppose you could increase the hours of revenue generation by turning the restaurant car into a bar for the post-dinner hours. This would only require that there be liquor, soda and some bar equipment. I was also thinking you could turn the restaurant car into a coffee shop in the post-breakfast hours, but I don't know if you could justify the espresso machine, etc.
 
lepearso said:
Here's an idea...one that comes to my mind and not something I have read elsewhere: When and if the Empire Builder rebuilds to its previous ridership levels perhaps an expansion of dining options can be offered in the peak season. Say, adding a Cross Country Cafe to the Portland section to complement the dining car on the Seattle section and thus allow the Sightseer Lounge to stay on for Seattle during that time period.
Click to expand...
Actually part of the original plan when Amtrak got the Stimulus monies back in 2008 and decided to use some of that money to repair some of the most badly damaged Superliners called for just such an improvement to the EB.

The plan called for adding 1 more Seattle sleeper, 1 more Portland sleeper, and a CCC. The CCC was to go with the Portland section so as to provide full service dining to the sleeper pax as well as a cafe. The Sightseer was to go to Seattle so as to provide that section with a cafe car, rather than the meager attempt of selling a few cafe items out of one of the dining car booths like is currently done.

That plan sort of went by the wayside when Amtrak suddenly started pushing for a daily Texas Eagle that ran through to LA every day and a Sunset Limited that only ran between New Orleans and San Antonio. When that plan fell through the repaired cars just went where ever.
 
Seasonal adjustments might make some sense, but you have to be careful here. If the adjustment is a response to low seasonal ridership, then it makes sense to adjust equipment, supplies, and staffing to reflect the reduced number of meals served. If the "adjustment" means a downgrading of the quality or quantity or variety of food served, then it's entirely wrongheaded. People are just as hungry for good food, whether the train is heavily patronized or lightly patronized. Reducing the number of choices is particularly problematic for passengers who have allergies or other dietary restrictions. This is also a problem for onboard employees with these same medical conditions.

Tom
 
Would not any changes need to "fit" into the Viewliner II Dining car? I mean, its kitchen and service area is already designed and configured. Any menus would need to be able to be stored and cooked (warmed?) with that's already there. In other words, I doubt Amtrak would toss out their brand new dining cars for a new design concept, even if better.
 
Guest said:
Would not any changes need to "fit" into the Viewliner II Dining car? I mean, its kitchen and service area is already designed and configured. Any menus would need to be able to be stored and cooked (warmed?) with that's already there. In other words, I doubt Amtrak would toss out their brand new dining cars for a new design concept, even if better.
Click to expand...
While I agree in general that Amtrak isn't going to just toss away the equipment in the dining car, one does need to remember that the Viewliner cars are all a modular design. One just unplugs, unbolts, disconnects any pipes, and slides out the units and slides in new one.

So while the expense would still be considerable to convert a new dining car to say a cafe car or even a sleeper, one just throws away the modules and not the entire car.
 
Regarding turning the diner into a coffee shop/bar service it sounds like that could work alright. i've seen and been a part of the number of people who like to stick around in the diner after dinner with newly made friends and have another drink.

As for an espresso machine, something as simple as a Nespresso machine (under $200 for the machine, maybe another $75 for the steamer/milk frother option) would do the job just fine. At a unit cost of under $1, you could easily charge $2-3 for the espresso and make a small amount of money off of it. I know I'd be a massively happy customer if i could get a latte/espresso on board!!!
 
At $275 a pop for the machinery and $3-4 for a 'premium' coffee drink, the espresso machines would pay for themselves on the first hours in service on Northeast Regional/Acelas. (That's 79 beverages sold to break even.) Get them installed yesterday and start raking in the money on the NEC.
 
My fall train trip may be on a Canadian train after seeing that Via Rail Café Express Menu. Pot Roast or Salmon for dinner costs less than $10 USD. Breakfast and lunch for little more than $8 USD each. (not including beverages/desert).
 
That VIA menu looks appetizing. I don't have much experience with Amtrak dining car meals, but the one I did have was awful. The food on the VIA menu looks like it was chosen so that it can be easily batch-prepared or grilled to order, which leads me to believe that it probably tastes significantly better than Amtrak's frozen/microwaved options.

And the prices are very reasonable, comparable or even less than what you would pay at a nonmoving restaurant. How do they pull this off? Are they losing huge heaps of money on the diners?
 
The answer is Yes, VIA loses massive amounts of money on its few LD Routes and overall, even though the fares are higher and are taxed! ( so Ottawa and the Provinces get some of their subsidies back!)

The food and service is on a par with the old Class I Crack Trains ( Super Chief, Panama Ltd., Broadway Ltd., 20th Century Ltd. etc.) and with the 50% off and Express Fares are THE travel deal of North America!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I remember one time seeing a photo of a McDonalds on a SBB train in place of the diner on an IC. Of course a handful of the European trains I've been on as well the diner and lounge are the same car. Diner on one half. The kitchen. And it has a small portal where you can buy snacks from there. That might work for Amtrak. Them get rid of one car per train. Add a coach and you get more revenue
 
I wonder if Aramark would be able to take over food service on LD trains - and maintain some decent level of service and quality?

If I had to pick a random restaurant that I thought would best fit the needs of ALL passengers (as far as quality and price), I guess the first place that pops into mind is Denny's. Breakfast available all day, and affordably priced meals - with generic quality.

Looking at the other two options offered - I really like the choices and pricing of the VIA A=Cafe Express menu. While interesting - the Alaskan Railroad menu choices are a tad overpriced for me.

My interest was piqued in an above post where a daily TE to LA was proposed - having only three day a week SL service to NOLA. If they could adjust the schedule on each end, maybe then we could finally get a decent connection eastbound to NOLA from points in the lower Midwest. Imagine being able to board the Heartland Flyer in Oklahoma City, pick up the southbound TE (in FTW) and board a sleeper that is sectioned-off for through transfer to NOLA. After a night or two in Nawlins you can then jump on the Crescent to get to Atlanta or the the DC area.
 
jimhudson said:
The answer is Yes, VIA loses massive amounts of money on its few LD Routes and overall, even though the fares are higher and are taxed! ( so Ottawa and the Provinces get some of their subsidies back!)

The food and service is on a par with the old Class I Crack Trains ( Super Chief, Panama Ltd., Broadway Ltd., 20th Century Ltd. etc.) and with the 50% off and Express Fares are THE travel deal of North America!
Click to expand...
I calculated this a while back, using VIA 2013 numbers. Cost per passenger, USD:

SW Ontario $99

Quebec $109

Corridor $114

Niagara $241

Jonquiere $481

Senneterre $499

Ocean $616

Skeena $646

Sudbury-White River $713

Churchill $954

Canadian $1078

Of course that's cost. In terms of subsidy:

Corridor $44

Quebec $48

SW Ontario $54

Niagara $208

Jonquiere $437

Senneterre $455

Ocean $468

Skeena $566

Canadian $589

Sudbury-White River $675

Churchill $827
 
Interesting in that in terms of cost vs. subsidy, the best performers are the "mainline corridor" (I'm led to believe that a number of the Toronto-Montreal trains are actually in the black while others post losses), Quebec, SW Ontario...and the Canadian (which actually, in terms of cost recovery share, exceeds the SW Ontario figures). On the basis of those numbers, in fact, it is quite possible that the Canadian during the summer is the single best section of VIA's system (CR is 45.4% year-round; the Corridor proper's performance is 61.4%. It is not a stretch to expect that mid-winter iterations of the Canadian often run down into the 30s while summer iterations get up over 60%).

The Churchill, Sudbury, and Skeena numbers are not surprising (all arguably serve some rural service function with tourism as an added benefit...especially Churchill, which terminates one of its 3x weekly frequencies a long way from Winnipeg). Same thing with the two Quebec rural service trains.

Edit: To be fair, VIA probably has an overhead distribution of some sort...and I wouldn't be surprised if those numbers are somehow sandbagging the Canadian and/or Corridor. In the case of the Corridor, adjusting out a significant overhead allocation could easily kick CR there to something like 75% as well as putting the Canadian around 50% overall.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anderson said:
It is not a stretch to expect that mid-winter iterations of the Canadian often run down into the 30s while summer iterations get up over 60%).
Click to expand...
Subsidy per passenger-mile was 27 cents on the Canadian/56 cents on the Ocean in Q3 2014 (Canadian $)

These numbers were 122 cents and 156 cents respectively, in Q1 2014.
 
Like all rail operations, VIA has massive overhead, and allocating it makes all the numbers meaningless. Unlike Amtrak, VIA's reports give so little detail that it's impossible to figure out what they're doing with the overhead. I do not feel confident in making statements on the real (before-overhead) performance of most of VIA's trains.

But regardless of how the overhead is allocated, it's pretty obvious that the Jonquierre, Senneterre, Skeena, Churchill, and Sudbury-White River trains are *bleeding* money, and with really no hope for improvement. (Well, Sudbury-White River would improve if the Canadian was routed back onto it, rather than it being a separate train.) It's in some ways unfortunate that the "essential services" are kept in the same accounting block with the other trains -- whenever the VIA budget is cut, the useful trains get cut while the hopeless remote services continue to get paid for. The remote services should really be transferred to a completely separate government budget.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back to the Dining Car issue, my point is that Amtrak should be able to offer a "peak season" enhancement on a train like the Silver Star.

VIA Rail only has (3) trains that feature sleeping cars, Canadian, The Ocean, and the Churchill train, and they too have cut back on dining services.

The Ocean runs with a dining car that has catered food, and their website makes a point of stipulating NO CHEF ONBOARD.

Only the Canadian has a full service diner year round, and like The Ocean, the diner is primarily for Sleeper Plus Class, and Sleeper Class patrons.

Year round coach passengers on the Canadian and the Churchill train have a cafe car available, with a menu similar to Amtraks.

http://www.viarail.ca/sites/all/files/media/pdfs/menus/MENU-WINNIPEG-CHURCHILL_5661.pdf

As for the "prepared on board" Cafe Express menu, yes it sounds good, but I would check with VIA to see what their definition of "summer peak" is, so you know

the exact dates that it is offered.

Ken
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top