Green Maned Lion
Engineer
Amtrak should offer good quality food. The level provided at a decent diner or family restaurant. You are right about "fine dining" if by fine dining you mean 5-star meals.
What trains are you riding? I think Amtrak does provide that, definately on the Empire Builder, and my recent experiences with the Crescent, Capitol, and Lake Shore (before Diner Lite) have been great as well.I don't think it's about refurbishment.D. P. - Are you saying you want amtrak to provide something nicer than a refurbished deluxe bedroom? More of them sure, but I'm not sure how much nicer a room can get, without getting into gold sinks or something.
I rode the Southern Crescent on one of its last trips. The rooms were old, paint was worn off
from repeated cleanings, no fancy anything to be found.
BUT
The train was clean. Every employee was pleasant, polite, and helpful. The food was excellent, served on china with tablecloths, etc. And we got there on time.
If AMTRAK could provide that, I'd be satisfied.
For example, see this virtual tour:D. P. - Are you saying you want amtrak to provide something nicer than a refurbished deluxe bedroom? More of them sure, but I'm not sure how much nicer a room can get, without getting into gold sinks or something. I think that Amtrak should continue to refurbish there cars, and then keep them maintained to the level that you see on trains like the Empire Builder, but I don't think much is needed beyond that. I see the pictures, and honestly I don't see what your getting for your money, maybe thats just me though.
Not trying to argue here, more just trying to understand your point of view, you say Amtrak should aspire to this, but to what? What about the Indian Pacific is that much better than the Empire Builder or Coast Starlight? I of course know that there is room for amtrak to improve in many areas, but I'm trying to see exactly what you see in the accomodations of the I-Pacific.
The PPC's don't pay for themselves at all, unless one considers that perhaps it helps to sell out the sleepers more often than they otherwise would. The old operating procedures saw some revenue being generated in the PPC, but no where near what would be needed to actually pay for the car. The current operation to my knowledge generates no revenue, since the car's run unstaffed.On a basic level, I'd like to see what many others have already said: all LD trains at the level of the CS or the EB. I've not ridden either one of those, although I hope to rectify that problem this summer. I have been on Superliner cars, and I must say they're a step up from the single-level cars I've ridden on commuter rails. I think it would be great if all Superliner cars were refurbished so they're sparkling new, & finished with quality materials, as the refurbished EB cars apparently are. Pacific Parlour Cars for first class passengers on all trains (if it increases ridership enough to the point where it pays for itself, as it apparently does on the CS, why not add them to other lines?). Add on more cars to actually meet demand.
First, I applaud both Amtrak and Grand Luxe for thinking out of the box. It was a good idea and a bold experiment!As I stated before - if Amtrak cannot currently compete for speed on its overnight LD routes, it must be competitive in the areas where it CAN compete. Cost is one - if people ride LD trains in coach because it's cheaper, than Amtrak should certainly continue offering a competitive coach experience. But if some people are willing to pay more to ride in luxury vs. a fast but uncomfortable plane ride, then perhaps Amtrak ought to look at that market as well. The current Grand Luxe experiment shows that Amtrak management is at least considering the idea. If they can subcontract this sort of service to a private contractor like Grand Luxe, all the better.
My point was not that I think those are necessarily GOOD things (I, for one, can't imagine watching TV on a train. Why bother?). I'm just saying perhaps Amtrak should give the people what they want. Yes, everything needs to be built like a tank, & ought to last many decades. Cars should definitely be built in a modular way, so that as tastes change and people want new features, Amtrak has the ability to change them.I disagree with you, D.P. ...I don't want all kinds of technological rubbish in the train car. Want to make it a luxury train? Ok, put in planks of fine wood, inlayed, hand carved, and unique. Put in hand woven wool carpets. Make the whole thing have the solidity of a bank-vault (or an old-school Mercedes-Benz, your pick). Put it together with the quality and solidity that allow Budd streamliners to still be in regular revenue service on dozens of trains 60 years after they were built. But don't fill crap with garbage and call it luxury.
It wasn't just the expense of converting them to retention toilets that led to the retirement of the hertiage sleepers. It was the expense of their needing a general overhaul of the interior furnishings, the expense of an FRA mandated overhaul of the exterior workings on the cars (like new trucks), as well as the expense of needing to have many of the replacement parts for the cars manufactured from scratch.Some of the Heritage sleepers from the mid-90s were horror shows on wheels, seriously. They had the symptoms that a lot of things get when they are about to be replaced. I've seen it in old cars, on Amtrak, in older buildings- this is going to be replaced soon, so lets not waste money fixing it. Sadly, they probably wish they had done a better job maintaining them such that it would justify the expense to convert them to non-direct-dump now. They could really use their capacity right now.
anyone who feels that Amtrak provides "fine dining" has never eaten at a good restaurant! the quality is on par with Denny's (somwhat tasty, won't kill you, but in no danger of a Michelin star), the prices only slightly more than that, and the service is only as solicitous as the physical environment can accommodate.ExplainGovernment Subsidies.
Well fine dining is not a service the government should be paying for. Regardless of the effect it has on ridership.
Keeping them in better condition would have helped the interior upgrades and perhaps reduced costs there. It would do nothing to help with the FRA's major overhaul requirements, which are based on miles traveled by the cars. For example replacing the trucks a year earlier than mandated by the FRA only means that the next time they have to replace the trucks comes a year earlier than it would have.As I was saying, had they kept them in better condition through the 80s and periodically did such overhauls as they started to be needed, it wouldn't have been so hard to justify, as all that expense at once for cars that were older than most of the employees manning them.
I hold the highly un popular view here that if any routes have food dedicated cars they should be limited to self seating and order at counter affairs. And as for the fine dining comment it was an assault on the idea that american rail should be a subsidized luxury trip, as that is the only way many think it can compete with the other modes. If that turns out to be true and the only way it can survive is via what I consider luxury service in combination with government subsides then I will be glad to see passenger rail die. In my defense I have never eaten at a Denny's, my company pays for a good portion of my fine dining.anyone who feels that Amtrak provides "fine dining" has never eaten at a good restaurant! the quality is on par with Denny's (somwhat tasty, won't kill you, but in no danger of a Michelin star), the prices only slightly more than that, and the service is only as solicitous as the physical environment can accommodate.ExplainGovernment Subsidies.
Well fine dining is not a service the government should be paying for. Regardless of the effect it has on ridership.
Well interestingly enough according to Amtrak it is the very type of food service car that you want, the cafe car, which requires the highest level of subisdy. That's why for example, cafe cars were removed from all Empire service runs that don't go north or west of Albany. It's also why you see Amtrak trying to marry the dining car with the cafe car, rather than just cutting the dining cars.I hold the highly un popular view here that if any routes have food dedicated cars they should be limited to self seating and order at counter affairs. And as for the fine dining comment it was an assault on the idea that american rail should be a subsidized luxury trip, as that is the only way many think it can compete with the other modes. If that turns out to be true and the only way it can survive is via what I consider luxury service in combination with government subsides then I will be glad to see passenger rail die. In my defense I have never eaten at a Denny's, my company pays for a good portion of my fine dining.
I am genuinely surprised if that is true. I have however read in other places that the sleepers do not cover their cost, only require less subsidy and if I remember correctly Amtrak does not have an accounting model that represents true costs, but that should change soon. Now the cafe cars do not have the same food quality of the Dining cars, I agree with Amtrak in consolidating the two. However I do not believe that waiting service is needed, especially with convection ovens. Hence why I spoke of self seating and counter service.Well interestingly enough according to Amtrak it is the very type of food service car that you want, the cafe car, which requires the highest level of subisdy. That's why for example, cafe cars were removed from all Empire service runs that don't go north or west of Albany. It's also why you see Amtrak trying to marry the dining car with the cafe car, rather than just cutting the dining cars.I hold the highly un popular view here that if any routes have food dedicated cars they should be limited to self seating and order at counter affairs. And as for the fine dining comment it was an assault on the idea that american rail should be a subsidized luxury trip, as that is the only way many think it can compete with the other modes. If that turns out to be true and the only way it can survive is via what I consider luxury service in combination with government subsides then I will be glad to see passenger rail die. In my defense I have never eaten at a Denny's, my company pays for a good portion of my fine dining.
The full service dining cars on most routes seem to actually cover most of their costs.
Additionally as I mentioned before in this forum, the sleeping cars do cover their above the road costs and actually help to reduce the needed subsidies for all passengers carried by Amtrak. Since most people riding in a sleeping car currently expect that they are getting meals in the dining car, dropping the dining cars might result in lower ridership in the sleeping cars. That in turn would require higher subsidies overall for Amtrak.
So if reducing subsidies is your goal, then you may have to reevaluate your position on dining cars.
I believe that would be a fundamental violation of the purposes of government, which goes beyond profit. It is just my philosophy that if the government has to provide a direct service it should it should be a minimal service that does not price discriminate via offering luxury services. I don't even believe they should be in the sleeper business, or even transportation business to be honest. I believe the government should be limited to infrastructure, but you make do with what you got.Added money spent does not mean and increase in the amount of money lost. Lets say the government spent $3,000,000 upgrading a diner into a "Parlour Diner" or something like that which offered find 5-course meals the likes of witch the worlds great chefs would envy. Now, over the next 5 years, the car consumes another $2 million in servicing, salaries, food, wine, maintenance, and so forth. As a result of this service, Amtrak brings in $4,950,000 in revenues. That makes them lose $50,000.
And let us assume that the standard diner brings in a loss of $100,000 on that train. Therefore, by improving the service, you are cutting losses by 50%. Is cutting losses, and reducing the needed subsidiary as a result, bad? If providing the high-end luxury service ends up saving money, is that improper?
Check out the analysis done by NARP in this report, which shows that the sleepers bring an incremental profit of at least $40 million a year.I am genuinely surprised if that is true. I have however read in other places that the sleepers do not cover their cost, only require less subsidy and if I remember correctly Amtrak does not have an accounting model that represents true costs, but that should change soon. Now the cafe cars do not have the same food quality of the Dining cars, I agree with Amtrak in consolidating the two. However I do not believe that waiting service is needed, especially with convection ovens. Hence why I spoke of self seating and counter service.
Then take the government out of the airline business, and the interstate business and we will see what happens. Government owned airports have first class lounges, I mean in theory what you are saying is a lovely idea of everyone being treated the same regardless of money but that is just not true in the real world.I believe that would be a fundamental violation of the purposes of government, which goes beyond profit. It is just my philosophy that if the government has to provide a direct service it should it should be a minimal service that does not price discriminate via offering luxury services. I don't even believe they should be in the sleeper business, or even transportation business to be honest. I believe the government should be limited to infrastructure, but you make do with what you got.
What do you consider to be "luxury service"? What you consider to be "luxury" might be "basic transportation" to somebody else - and vice versa.If that turns out to be true and the only way it can survive is via what I consider luxury service in combination with government subsides then I will be glad to see passenger rail die.
Well in principle the government represents all, social contract 101, making any government sponsored accommodation based on any criteria fundamentally illegal. I did say that the government should provide indirect subsidies when I said they should be limited to infrastructure, as that prevents regional monopolies and allows private competition to operate without a large obstacle of fixed cost. As for infrastructure management which would allow higher than 79 mph trains, that does not conflict with what I have said, just a continuation of government function to provide non discriminatory, quality of life increasing, interstate commerce such as the internet, interstates and FAA.Then take the government out of the airline business, and the interstate business and we will see what happens. Government owned airports have first class lounges, I mean in theory what you are saying is a lovely idea of everyone being treated the same regardless of money but that is just not true in the real world.I believe that would be a fundamental violation of the purposes of government, which goes beyond profit. It is just my philosophy that if the government has to provide a direct service it should it should be a minimal service that does not price discriminate via offering luxury services. I don't even believe they should be in the sleeper business, or even transportation business to be honest. I believe the government should be limited to infrastructure, but you make do with what you got.
I have no problem with Amtrak providing first class services, but I think that if Amtrak spends extra money on items on the Empire Builder (like full wait staff linens etc.) they should be able to justify the costs by showing they make more money. (Which the Builder has done fully!)
Is it not a luxury that some trains travel over 79MPH, should the government not pay for the in-cab signalling required on many routes that need it? Why is providing cafe service not a luxury, but providing table service is? Should we not have any food served on board? Or only vending machines (unfortunately some people think thats a great idea!).
Enter your email address to join: