Auto Trains for Everyone?

[RobertB]

This is a topic I've bounced around before on a local forum (dallasmetropolis.com), but I still don't fully understand: why doesn't Amtrak expand the Auto Train concept beyond the one East Coast route? It seems like the most logical thing: if Americans are so in love with their cars that they can't leave them behind, let them take the cars with them.

One reason I was given was that Auto Train loading requires a lot of real estate. That wouldn't be a problem in Texas -- you could easily build car loading areas near Cleburne, Terrell, and Denton to serve Dallas, another around San Marcos to serve Austin and San Antonio, and Houston has plenty of flat spots around it too (to say the least). But that suburban-loading concept, I was told, would go counter to the stated mandate that inter-city trains should support urban transit infrastructure. A laudable goal that I agree with, but one that (IMHO) will require gas to stay over $5 for an extended period to make happen. Why not ease the folks who are new to train travel into the concept?

I'm also curious about the technical issues. Is there something about the Auto Trains that makes them impossible to run outside of that one corridor? It seems like the perfect solution for long-distance routes (like anything between Texas' major cities), and I don't see any problems with running a train with passengers and car haulers on rails that currently carry passengers, and also carry car haulers.

(I'm entirely certain that my post reveals a severe lack of knowledge on my part, and I look forward to enlightenment!)

 

[Anderson]

I think the market is too risky. There is nothing, I repeat nothing saying that BNSF, CN, CP, KCS, or (I shudder to say) UP couldn't run operations over their lines. If they needed to, they could even run a joint operation...but the setup cost is prohibitive. More importantly, the Auto Train does not turn a consistent profit: It pops into the black during good quarters, but it runs in the red as well, and no freight company is going to drop the money on loading facilities, cars, and so forth (not to mention disrupting their freight timetables) for something that is at best a crapshot operation right now.

If gas sustains above $5 a gallon, I could see one of the RRs (or another private sector company...do remember that the Auto Train came about initially through the Auto-Train Corporation) giving it a shot in some form, but not unless there's almost a guaranteed profit in the program.

 

[Ryan]

Try the search - this has been beaten to death here in the past.

 

[Rumpled]

It's been done from the Midwest before. The only reason that the Auto Train works now is that there is a huge population in the NEC of snowbirds and others that travel to essentially one place; being namely, Florida.

With extended stays and spread out over that one place, they want their cars. So, it works.

No other run in the US would have such demographics.

 

[TransitGeek]

As I understand it, the Auto Train is a BIG train. 6 sleepers, 4 coaches, three diners and two lounges- and I believe they need two of these consists to manage daily service in both directions. Furthermore, you'd need more auto carriers and you'd need to actually *build* the specialized terminals for any new route to begin. Right now, Amtrak doesn't have the rolling stock laying about to start a service like this, nor the money to build the auto terminals. The Lorton-Sanford Auto Train was built by a private company, and bought by Amtrak for not a whole lot. (There was also a Louisville-Sanford operation, but neither Amtrak nor the private corporation could make it profitable, though I don't fully understand why.)

Short story- money. There's not nearly enough cash laying about to try to start a new service right now.

 

[Anderson]

As I understand it, the Auto Train is a BIG train. 6 sleepers, 4 coaches, three diners and two lounges- and I believe they need two of these consists to manage daily service in both directions. Furthermore, you'd need more auto carriers and you'd need to actually *build* the specialized terminals for any new route to begin. Right now, Amtrak doesn't have the rolling stock laying about to start a service like this, nor the money to build the auto terminals. The Lorton-Sanford Auto Train was built by a private company, and bought by Amtrak for not a whole lot. (There was also a Louisville-Sanford operation, but neither Amtrak nor the private corporation could make it profitable, though I don't fully understand why.)

Short story- money. There's not nearly enough cash laying about to try to start a new service right now.

Well, if it was a solid moneymaker that could return its cost of capital at a good rate, I think that one of the freights might have taken a swing at it.

Also: The reason the Auto Train does so well for an LD train is that massive consist: They run enough passengers at least one way on the train to offset lower traffic loads the other way and to cover a lot of the running costs (including trackage rent, etc.) that are fixed.

 

[WhoozOn1st]

this has been beaten to death here in the past.

So have various Sunset issues, but that never stops anybody.

 

[Oldsmoboi]

I was looking at auto train prices and it's almost all high(er) bucket for a room all the way out to November.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I'm also curious about the technical issues. Is there something about the Auto Trains that makes them impossible to run outside of that one corridor?

No technical reasons I can think of. It's mainly about finding, negotiating, and funding a route that can eventually become profitable or at least break even and can maintain a strong level of ridership throughout the year. The customer base needs to be huge on both ends and the travel time needs to be competitive. The freight railroads need to be willing to negotiate in good faith. Venture capitalists need to be on-board. There are other issues but those are the big ones that come to mind.

It seems like the perfect solution for long-distance routes (like anything between Texas' major cities), and I don't see any problems with running a train with passengers and car haulers on rails that currently carry passengers, and also carry car haulers.

I don't see intrastate transit as being a serious contender for Auto-Train style service. The two big long distance vacation spots most Texans frequent are Disney World and Las Vegas. Considering that Amtrak has completely abandoned Vegas and has discontinued the Sunset Limited's route east of New Orleans for several years I would imagine that these routes are considered unworkable under the current conditions.

 

[Oldsmoboi]

What about a second route that also terminates in Sanford? Say suburban Chicago to Sanford?

Somewhere in the triangle between Chicago, St. Louis. and Indy. maybe to catch as many travelers as possible. Something like Lafayette IN or Campaign ILL

 

[Ryan]

this has been beaten to death here in the past.

So have various Sunset issues, but that never stops anybody.

Clearly the Sunset east just needs to be replaced by an Auto Train that starts at Henryj's driveway.

 

[RobertB]

this has been beaten to death here in the past.

So have various Sunset issues, but that never stops anybody.

Yeah, but I'm a complete noob here, so I have an excuse. (I'll use the search next time, sorry!)

It would be interesting, though, if that proposed OKC-Rio Grande Valley line ever actually happened, whether it would be an appealing Auto Train route for the large number of Winter Texans. Some of them bring their RVs, and won't be potential customers... but others have permanent homes in the Valley as well as up north. But that's probably a non-starter, too, because the demand is highly seasonal and uni-directional.

 

[dlagrua]

The Autotrain market is unique in that its passenger traffic is made of of vacationers, students, Seniors/Snowbirds and a few casual travelers.

On the East Coast there is a big population of seniors that maintain summer residences in the NE and winter residences in Florida. The migration of seniors that go South for winter and their return North at the end of winter represents a large portion of the A/T passenger base and is a phenomenon that you don't find in many other areas. Add in the Disney vacationers, college students going to school/returning home, the casual travelers and you have a train 3/4 mile long that is always very busy.

In its private years the Autotrain Corp. tried adding another route from Florida to the midwest (from Louisville, KY to Sanford). In theory the idea sounded good but the route was lightly used and lost money. Trackage in spots along the route were in poor condition, limited travel to 30 mph in those areas and when a major derailment resulted it was a key factor in putting the Autotrain corporation out of business. The yard in Lousiville where the A/T boarded is still there but the limiting factor to restarting service is the slow/poor freight trackage, lack of equipment and above all Amtraks belief that the market is not viable.

 

[MrFSS]

. . . . (from Louisville, VA to Sanford). . . ..

While Kentucky use to be part of Virginia, now over 200 years ago, Louisville is in Kentucky, not Virginia.

 

[Ryan]

above all Amtraks belief the fact that the market is not viable.

 

[henryj]

this has been beaten to death here in the past.

So have various Sunset issues, but that never stops anybody.

Clearly the Sunset east just needs to be replaced by an Auto Train that starts at Henryj's driveway.

LOL, finally a reasonable idea. But as you say this has been beaten to death on here, but so have many other issues. I just looked through Thomas Cook's European rail timetable and there are six pages of auto trains, or as they call them Car Carrying Trains or Motorail. Many of these are probably seasonal. In the US there are plenty of markets such as Chicago to Florida and Colorado. Texas to Colorado, Texas to Florida, Midwest to Phoenix, and I am sure many more you can think of. To work they probably have to be terminal to terminal and overnight. That is how the European ones work. Some of the European trains haul the cars in separate trains from the passengers. There are lots of ways to make it work. Why doesn't Amtrak do it? Because they have no vision, no plans for expansion, and no money. They are perpetually in the hunker down mode trying to avoid budget cuts and preserve their jobs.

 

[dlagrua]

above all Amtraks belief the fact that the market is not viable.

We are then assuming that there are no snowbirds, Disney vacationers and travelers in the Mid West that would find the Autotrain service convenient. IMO it was a mistake making Louisville KY the midwest terminus. The main market is Chicago and had the A/T terminal been within a 2 -3 hour drive for residents of Chicago, things might have worked out differently.

 

[alanh]

Is there really that big of a chunk of people in the Chicago area that drive down I-75 to Florida, at least vs. the number from the BOS/NYC/PHL/WAS area that drive I-95?

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Because those who like their cars would rather drive them to their destination. The AT works because I95 is not a pleasure to drive.

 

[DET63]

Living on the West Coast, I've wondered if there would be a market for a train circulating between the Pacific Northwest and California. One question of such a service would be: Where in California? Would it be desirable to have two terminals in California--one in the Bay Area, and another near L.A., with southbound trains discharging passengers in the Bay Area, then continuing on to L.A.? Another would concern how to handle traffic at the northern end, would there be a suitable location between Portland and Seattle that would serve those two areas (as well as other Pacific Northwest cities)? Or would it also be desirable to have two pick-up and drop-off points, one in Oregon and the other in Washington?

 

[zephyr17]

Living on the West Coast, I've wondered if there would be a market for a train circulating between the Pacific Northwest and California. One question of such a service would be: Where in California? Would it be desirable to have two terminals in California--one in the Bay Area, and another near L.A., with southbound trains discharging passengers in the Bay Area, then continuing on to L.A.? Another would concern how to handle traffic at the northern end, would there be a suitable location between Portland and Seattle that would serve those two areas (as well as other Pacific Northwest cities)? Or would it also be desirable to have two pick-up and drop-off points, one in Oregon and the other in Washington?

As a former Californian who has lived in Seattle for 20 years and go to California frequently, I can say that there probably would not be enough demand for such a service. It simply is not a parallel situation to the Northeast and Florida. People up here don't snowbird to California to the winter, the way people from the Northeast do to Florida, and that is a major part of the Auto Train's market. There is some snowbirding, but retirees typically either live here year round, or flat up and move to the Southwest. The leisure traffic to California is well entrenched with cheap flights, and generally California is a destination for a extended 3 or 4 day weekends, not week long or two week long vacations, so the costs versus car rental don't pencil out. Interstate 5 may be boring once you get south of Redding, but it is fast and not the painful drive that 95 is.

The travel patterns between here and California simply do not support it. It would resoundingly crater.

 

[George Harris]

Is there really that big of a chunk of people in the Chicago area that drive down I-75 to Florida, at least vs. the number from the BOS/NYC/PHL/WAS area that drive I-95?

This subject has been beaten to a complete pulp. The short answer is NO.

The long answer is that it has been experimentially proven at great expense that the market is simply not there. The east coast Auto Train aproximates driving time and is one night with enough day on either side to have a good meal on each end of the train ride and leave a reasonable portion of the day on both ends for completion to any reasonable destination. This does not apply for the midwest version. The rail run time is such that there will ve very little day left on at least one end of the trip, if not both. the population density and proximity on the north end is simply not there either.

Let's give the idea a decent burial.

 

[Ryan]

Exactly. The horse is dead, shipped off to the glue factory and even all ofnthe glue is used up and used. The failure of the original Auto-Train says it all, unless someone can make a compelling case that the demographics and geography have changed. Maybe after billions of dollars of track improvements that Gould allow the train to run 70 MPH nonstop.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

The real answer is that none of us armchair theorists knows for certain what would happen if the Auto-Train concept were attempted elsewhere under a revised and updated business plan more in line with today's consumers and travel patterns. Many of the assumptions that are typically cited are often based on a handful of data points that are decades old at this point. Anyone who thinks the issue completely is resolved is free to move along to another thread. Folks who are still interested in discussing the possibilities should be free to do so without having to hear that somebody they don't know already discussed it before they found this site and decreed in their infinite wisdom that the topic should never be broached again. If you don't want to discuss it any more then go start another topic more to your liking.

 

[RobertB]

I agree about the need to stop beating the dead horse, unless there's a need to grind the bones into powder to thicken soup, or something. But one last chicken noodle from me:

Because those who like their cars would rather drive them to their destination. The AT works because I95 is not a pleasure to drive.

I love road trips and driving. But $5+ gas will change the road trip vs. train ride calculation for a lot of folks, especially if they like their car but hate the price of gas.

Currently, riding the train is a luxury compared to driving yourself... the future price of gas will make driving a luxury. I wonder if that was in the back of Warren Buffet's mind when he bought BNSF? Perhaps as an earlier poster suggested, someone in the freight sector will see beyond the next quarter's shareholder report, and do something innovative?