PIP's (sorta) out

[johnny.menhennet]

Obviously, Amtrak is moving backwards on the Auto Train proposal. What they should be doing is ripping out all the coach seats and replacing them with a lie-flat, packed-like-sardines troop train configuration, because everybody would obviously prefer that to a reclining coach seat on a 16-hour run.

Hahahaha so true! Who would ever pay for just an "economy" or "coach" option? They definitely never sell out.

...only because it's the only other option that's affordable?

*sarcasm*

Sorry if it wasn't apparent. It was a crack at every poster who says the Auto Train should go all sleeper, when at this point, the entire train is selling out.

 

[Anderson]

Obviously, Amtrak is moving backwards on the Auto Train proposal. What they should be doing is ripping out all the coach seats and replacing them with a lie-flat, packed-like-sardines troop train configuration, because everybody would obviously prefer that to a reclining coach seat on a 16-hour run.

Hahahaha so true! Who would ever pay for just an "economy" or "coach" option? They definitely never sell out.

...only because it's the only other option that's affordable?

*sarcasm*

Sorry if it wasn't apparent. It was a crack at every poster who says the Auto Train should go all sleeper, when at this point, the entire train is selling out.

I think there's been serious talk on the board as to whether or not some sort of couchette-style accommodation would work in the US and/or whether an intermediate accommodation (between sleepers and coach) might sell, be it on the Auto Train or elsewhere. With that said, I haven't seen much (if any) chatter to totally dump coach on the Auto Train, with the odd exception of a situation (not impossible, but definitely improbable) where you could sell out an all-sleeper section on a regular basis (i.e. 12-15 sleeping cars plus food/lounge cars) and also pack an all-coach section pretty close to full as well. But that would simply be splitting the accommodations between two trains, not getting rid of coaches)

 

[Nathanael]

A cut-off car in Memphis -- or perhaps Jackson, given the proposed Thruway connections -- might help the CONO's capacity/ equipment usage issues. I wonder if there's enough cars for that -- should take two cars.

The bigger problem would be finding a siding to store the cars on. It really looks to me as if there's enough room in Jackson, though!

 

[Ryan]

With that said, I haven't seen much (if any) chatter to totally dump coach on the Auto Train,

It was the topic of an entire misguided thread:

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/50992-yet-another-auto-train-what-if-thread/

 

[Anderson]

Ah, yes...I remember that fight (and it being between "all sleeper" and "offer something in the middle").

As to the "open section" bit, I think a lot of the problem there was the net cost of a private room versus an open section...there just wasn't much cost difference (I've seen it at about 10-15% of cost), so the marginal cost/marginal benefit numbers weren't going to come out in favor of the berths. I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't people who would seek to take a government travel voucher and just eat the cost of the difference between the berth the gov't would pay for and a private accommodation.

 

[VentureForth]

With that said, I haven't seen much (if any) chatter to totally dump coach on the Auto Train,

It was the topic of an entire misguided thread:

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/50992-yet-another-auto-train-what-if-thread/

And that is your personal opinion, even if shared by many. But misguided?

Seriously, I don't think many of y'all listen [read]. You dumped enough on me on that thread; it's pretty juvenile to bring it back up here.

So long, though, as we are being juvenile, there are no sold out auto Trains in the next 30 Southbound. One day has seats gone, more have sleepers gone.

 

[Ryan]

Making changes to a product that is among Amtrak's most successful is misguided. Doubly so when it involves capital expenditures that take the proposed changes from "maybe revenue neutral" to "no way we'll ever pay for these cars". Amtrak has plenty of things that they can spend their limited capital budget on that will actually increase revenue.

 

[Anderson]

While I know there's an "agree to disagree" point here, I think it does stand to reason that, given how the sleepers are more likely to sell out (in spite of the fact that it easily costs about $500 for a single person in a roomette on that train on low bucket one way), the question of adding sleepers of some sort is worthwhile. The other question is whether, if offered a "flatter" sleeping arrangement at a surcharge, people would pay enough for it to make up for the lost train capacity.

 

[VentureForth]

And that, sir, is a rational approach. Not just "Seats sell out. Any other plan is misguided".

 

[afigg]

So, basically assume about 60-75 seats in the order (12 seats x 5 cars to ensure at least a single backup is around, plus a few spares in the order)? That shouldn't be too bad.

Amtrak has converted several Amfleet I café cars to business class cars. So they have been purchasing or have extra Amfleet I BC seats. Another option might be to install Amfleet II seats if they have enough extra seats on hand, for better seats (IMO). Or install extra Acela FC seats in the space and sell them as FC seats with meals included in the diner? Rather than a small order for the Coast Starlight, I would think Amtrak would install seats that they already have in stock or from an add on to an existing supply order.

That proposal falls into the category of looking at how to increase capacity and revenue with existing equipment, because new equipment is a ways off. Add an extra row of seats into the Superliner coach cars, adding revenue roomettes to the lower level of the transition dorms, the Crescent PIP proposal to have the SCA cover 1 and a half Viewliner sleepers to free up a roomette (and use 1 less SCA), drop coach cars off in Atlanta, etc.

Maybe Amtrak should consider getting rid of the smoker's lounges on the AT. Fumigate them, replace all the fabric, and add coach seats. Sell nicotine patches to the smokers at a markup price.

 

[rrdude]

As to the reports themselves:

The improvement listed for the CS was to replace the Arcade with a Business Class with PPC privileges, and the challenge listed was the capital cost for that specific refurbishment.

-This seems comparatively cheap, all things considered. I'd actually think this could be buried in an overhaul budget of some sort. I do like this, though. One thing that I wonder is what the BC will involve, seating-wise.

Here I go again, sounding like a broken record...........

"Welcome to the new Business Class on Amtrak's Coast Starlight, brought to you exclusively by Apple Computer. You'll find nice wide reclining seats, a push-button to call the attendant, or you can TXT "Order Please" to 123456, and the attendant will bring down your order. There is private Wi-Fi for Biz class customers, and of course you have full access to the upper level of the PPC car. Thanks for traveling with us, and for choosing Amtrak and Apple's iClass of Business Travel............"

IT COULD HAPPEN..... hahahaha, (actually it should happen)

 

[jis]

Amtrak has converted several Amfleet I café cars to business class cars. So they have been purchasing or have extra Amfleet I BC seats.

I don't believe Amtrak has purchased any new BC seats. It already had what it had from the Metroclubs for the half BCs and it had enough Metroliner Coach seats to populate its entire current fleet of Amfleet I full BC cars. They are essentially Capstone covnersion of Metroliner Coaches using the seats that they already had. I believe that the seats that have been purchased are for Captsone covnersion of Amfleet Cafes to Coaches. But I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.

 

[afigg]

Amtrak has converted several Amfleet I café cars to business class cars. So they have been purchasing or have extra Amfleet I BC seats.

I don't believe Amtrak has purchased any new BC seats. It already had what it had from the Metroclubs for the half BCs and it had enough Metroliner Coach seats to populate its entire current fleet of Amfleet I full BC cars. They are essentially Capstone covnersion of Metroliner Coaches using the seats that they already had. I believe that the seats that have been purchased are for Captsone covnersion of Amfleet Cafes to Coaches. But I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.

If Amtrak has a stockpile of excess Metroliner coach seats or the seats used in the half BC café cars, would make sense for those to pit into the PPC. The Pacific Parlour Cars are supposed to be replaced by the end of this decade, so really would not make much economic sense to buy new seats to place into the PPC car space. But, if Amtrak has enough seats available in storage, then it should not cost much to reconfigure the space, insert the seats with new carpeting, and then sell them as BC seats to generate extra revenue.

There could be a good market for premium BC seats between LA <-> San Jose/Oakland and Seattle <-> Portland. I don't recall seeing revenue numbers ever broken out for Acela First Class, but my impression is that Amtrak is pulling in pretty good revenue from the FC seats between the major cities on the NEC. The key are major city markets with sizable well-off populations who would not blink at spending an extra $50 or $100 bucks for premium seats for a day trip. LA & the Bay area and Seattle & Portland qualify.

 

[Blackwolf]

If Amtrak has a stockpile of excess Metroliner coach seats or the seats used in the half BC café cars, would make sense for those to pit into the PPC. The Pacific Parlour Cars are supposed to be replaced by the end of this decade, so really would not make much economic sense to buy new seats to place into the PPC car space. But, if Amtrak has enough seats available in storage, then it should not cost much to reconfigure the space, insert the seats with new carpeting, and then sell them as BC seats to generate extra revenue.

There could be a good market for premium BC seats between LA <-> San Jose/Oakland and Seattle <-> Portland. I don't recall seeing revenue numbers ever broken out for Acela First Class, but my impression is that Amtrak is pulling in pretty good revenue from the FC seats between the major cities on the NEC. The key are major city markets with sizable well-off populations who would not blink at spending an extra $50 or $100 bucks for premium seats for a day trip. LA & the Bay area and Seattle & Portland qualify.

I don't recall seeing any plans to put this new BC section inside the PPC at all. No OBS has ever heard of this either, and while it may not be very well used, the movie theater is likely to remain. This new BC section is very real, has been mentioned in several places, and the OBS on the Starlight is aware of its impending arrival. The new section is planned to go into the lower level of the very first coach behind the SSL, in what was the Arcade or Kiddie Car until just a month or so ago. The old arcade machines are gone, and the space is ready to be converted. Considering that the car is already set up with seat rail on the wall and floor, all Amtrak needs to do at a minimum is install the seats. If they really want to go the distance, then putting in some of that faux wood paneling and new carpet in the cabin might also be in the works.

 

[Karl1459]

Regarding the BC idea on the CS we may be missing the obvious. Amtrak may be thinking of putting a full BC coach (upper and lower levels) between the PCC and the sleepers. This would explain the cost as a full 2/1 seating conversion upper and lower. It would also provide the existing separation between the royalty and the proles. The challange would be to find extra coaches to replace the BC conversions.

Personally I think going back to a rumpus room for the little kiddies would be the best idea.

And if equipment could be found for setout coaches SEA-EUG and LAX-SAC would be good candidates.

 

[guest in the west]

Could someone explain the logic of putting in seats that are less comfortable than the LD coach seats, calling them Business Class, and asking passengers to pay more than they would for the LD seats?

 

[Trogdor]

And if equipment could be found for setout coaches SEA-EUG and LAX-SAC would be good candidates.

What would be the point of having setout coaches on each end of the route? You wouldn't save any equipment vs. running them all the way through.

 

[jis]

And if equipment could be found for setout coaches SEA-EUG and LAX-SAC would be good candidates.

What would be the point of having setout coaches on each end of the route? You wouldn't save any equipment vs. running them all the way through.

There are so many advantages! You can spemd money more money employing more people to take care of the attaching and detaching of cars thus reducing unemplyment. All those railfans can hang out and watch the setout coaches being attached detached, keeping them off the streets and out of trouble. You would be saving an infinitisimal amount of energy in not hauling that one car all the way. Just imagine the amount of wear and tear that would be saved reducing the need for sefvicing that one car so often. We could think up a few more Juuuust kidding!

 

[Anderson]

Actually, with LAX-SAC, I think the schedule is such that you would save equipment. Mind you, if you also to a EUG-SEA setout, you won't save a car...but I think it's fair to point out that either/or doesn't mean both, and if you did one and then found the business on the other end, you could just axe the set-out car and run a longer train.

With that said, there's one plausible advantage: There seem to be power issues SAC-EUG because of steep tracks (there have been a few infamous cases of PV sets making the train un-haulable over some of the grades), so you might avert an operational jam. Not sure if the costs would allow this to make any sort of financial sense, but there might at least be an operational reason for this.

 

[jis]

With that said, there's one plausible advantage: There seem to be power issues SAC-EUG because of steep tracks (there have been a few infamous cases of PV sets making the train un-haulable over some of the grades), so you might avert an operational jam. Not sure if the costs would allow this to make any sort of financial sense, but there might at least be an operational reason for this.

I thought the alleged PV caused stall (or at least the one I am aware of that was discussed on this Forum) was on the Cuesta Grade between San Louis Obispo and Salinas. Was there a stall on the Shasta grade allegedly caused by PVs too?