Way to cut down losses on long distance trains

[crescent-zephyr]

A lot of people would beg to differ on the first point. Amtrak also had a fairly decent record of running trains with slumber coaches back in the day.

On the second point, I have also mentioned that business class should be 2+1 system wide. Right now, on some routes, it's just long distance coach with some drinks.

On that note, it's not like Amtrak couldn't have two variants of business class, one for long distance and one for corridor service. They already do for coach. Corridor coach is 39 inch pitch and long distance coach is 50 inches. Having long distance business class be a lie flat option isn't a bad thing.

Did Amtrak ever want the slumbercoach? They took whatever they could get back then equipment wise and they never wanted to replicate them in any later equipment orders.

My biggest point is anything that takes up that much space is going to be priced higher than people think. A slumbercoach with no food would probably be close to the roomette prices on the silver star. Amtrak would be charging as much as they could for them. Same thing with a lie-flat seat. If a car with lay flat seats takes up as much space as a car full of roomettes, it’s going to priced around that price point.

 

[sttom]

Did Amtrak ever want the slumbercoach? They took whatever they could get back then equipment wise and they never wanted to replicate them in any later equipment orders.

My biggest point is anything that takes up that much space is going to be priced higher than people think. A slumbercoach with no food would probably be close to the roomette prices on the silver star. Amtrak would be charging as much as they could for them. Same thing with a lie-flat seat. If a car with lay flat seats takes up as much space as a car full of roomettes, it’s going to priced around that price point.

Amtrak didn't get enough Viewliners to replace it's heritage fleet cars. As for not replacing them, add that to the list of short sided decisions Amtrak has made over the years.

As for space:
Amfleet Car with 2+1 Business class ~45 seats.
Amfleet car with Delta 1 rip off ~34
Amfleet car with all roomettes +1 Accessible Room would be 16.

An overnight Delta One style business class would cost more than a corridor train, but not as much as a roomette would. Seeing as how you can cram twice the Delta One style seats into the same space as 16 roomettes. Demand at times would push the buckets up as it would for all seat types, but not to the point of a roomette all the time.

Also, putting standard business class on long distance trains shows how Amtrak thinks now, it likes gimmicks. And it's probably making ok money off of these gimmicks. It's only a matter of time before people realize business isn't worth the upgrade. I personally don't think a 2+1 business class on long distance trains would be a big upgrade if the seat pitch is the same in coach. A Delta One style option would be a big separation from corridor level business class and you could cram quite a few of them into a car.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Amfleet Car with 2+1 Business class ~45 seats.
Amfleet car with Delta 1 rip off ~34
Amfleet car with all roomettes +1 Accessible Room would be 16.

All roomettes would have a capacity of 34 (16 roomettes and 1 accessible). So same as delta 1 IF you could fit staggered 2+2 delta 1 seats. Yeah you could sell more seats with the delta 1 thing but the hard capacity is the same.

Also I’m not taking out a room for the attendant because that attendant should be in the dorm / baggage car. If we are talking theory here.

 

[sttom]

All roomettes would have a capacity of 34 (16 roomettes and 1 accessible). So same as delta 1 IF you could fit staggered 2+2 delta 1 seats. Yeah you could sell more seats with the delta 1 thing but the hard capacity is the same.

Roomettes don't have to be sold with double occupancy so assuming a car with 16 roomettes would carry 32 is going to be a stretch. That could happen if it were an open section, but everyone here is convinced that would fail.

A Delta One style product would check a few boxes.
1) It's an upgrade over standard 2+2 business class. More space, easy to sleep, semi private.
2) It would be a reason to upgrade from coach which would mean making more money off of people who would otherwise ride in coach.
3) It would potentially attract more people to Amtrak if it was more prolific since you could sleep on the way to somewhere where the schedule makes the trip an overnighter.

The soft product might need a bit of a revamp, but Amtrak wouldn't have to rely on people not doing the math and not knowing that only difference in the seat is it's made of leather (or pleather? Never had the chance to ride business class)

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Roomettes don't have to be sold with double occupancy so assuming a car with 16 roomettes would carry 32 is going to be a stretch.

As is assuming a car with 16 roomettes would be carrying 16. (it’s 17 double occupancy rooms including the accessible)

 

[crescent-zephyr]

A Delta One style product would check a few boxes.
1) It's an upgrade over standard 2+2 business class. More space, easy to sleep, semi private.
2) It would be a reason to upgrade from coach which would mean making more money off of people who would otherwise ride in coach.
3) It would potentially attract more people to Amtrak if it was more prolific since you could sleep on the way to somewhere where the schedule makes the trip an overnighter.

All of this is also true for the roomette. Honestly if Amtrak actually did a delta 1 style product they would probably charge as much as they charge for a roomette.

 

[sttom]

All of this is also true for the roomette. Honestly if Amtrak actually did a delta 1 style product they would probably charge as much as they charge for a roomette.

Based on your word, which isn't a business case. They wouldn't be able to charge the same for a scaled down product all the time. They also wouldn't have a reason to charge more than 50% of the upcharge since they could make the same revenue as they would in an all roomette configuration. That's also assuming it would be marketed as a sleeper and not business class. Which why would it be without being all inclusive? From the way the numbers and amenities would shake out, it would boost the average business class fare, entice more people into it and possibly be put into the NEC.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

To be fair, I’m inserting my own desires into this, I have 0 desire for a lie flat delta 1 style seat on a train. It’s my belief that if that product existed, it would be priced close enough to roomettes that I would choose the extra $ for a roomette.

In my mind, the Amtrak roomette is pretty much a perfect design. I like it better than heritage roomettes.

I’m not sure what business class should be on LD trains... in all honesty a decent soft product is all that is needed. While I would personally like 2-1 seating, it’s not necessaary. There’s a difference between what we want, and what makes any business sense. I don’t see how lie flat seats make any sense. But that’s me.

Same with slumbercoach. It was a way to fit more solo roomettes into a car. It made sense in that time for some railroads. It really doesn’t make sense now for Amtrak operations although I personally see the appeal for a slumbercoach more than a lie flat seat. I would certainly choose a cheaper slumbercoach over a roomette for my personal travels.

 

[drdumont]

The slumber coaches worked fine. Yes, reserve a few of the lower level ones for ADA/Creaky Old Seniors (I are one - no brickbats please).
The only issue I had with them was the aroma de toilette so pervasive throughout the car. The toilets were horribly cramped, didn't work well, and were an S O B to maintain. Hence the aroma, I suppose.
So put 4 bedroom style shower/thrones in each car. I'd ride one of these overnight any day (?).
Make it a Business class - maybe add reduced meal price, or perhaps a little optional upcharge for food or perhaps discount in the snack bar.
Simplify the design of the seat/bed. Shoot, I would make up my own, I usually do nowadays as I set my own timetable.

 

[railiner]

I loved the Slumbercoaches. Must have taken them more than 30 times.
I don’t recall any odor issues with the toilets, which drained right onto the tracks...no holding tanks or jammed vacuum lines. And you could use the toilet without having to raise the bed.

I will admit that the Roomette “murphy bed” was more comfortable...longer, wider, and since the mattress didn’t need to fold, much thicker. If I was on a transcontinental train, that was my choice, but for just an overnight, the SSC was for me, perfection.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

As an interesting note, there were only 28 slumbercoaches ever built, vs. 50 viewliner I’s.

 

[railiner]

I especially liked the former NYC Sleepercoaches, which had been converted from all-roomette cars...instead of the as-built 24-8 configuration, they offered 16 singles and10 doubles. They did have a “secret” anomaly...Single rooms 1,2,3, and 4, were not of the normal upper and lower duplex design like rooms 5 thru 16 were, but were actually the same size as the 10 double rooms, but only a single bunk was installed. So if you were lucky enough to score one of those, you paid the regular single room charge, but got much more space, including the much larger window.

Why were they built that way?
Don’t know, but speculate that at the time the cars were rebuilt, there might have been more demand for single rooms than originally forecast...

Some roads (Milwaukee?), didn’t buy Slumbercoaches, but competed by offering no frills regular roomettes at a competitive rate (coach fare plus room charge instead of requiring first class plus room)...

 

[sttom]

As far as the revenue for a lie flat option goes, someone pointed out earlier in the thread (sorry I don't remember your name) that business class tickets average $105. Amtrak already has 2+1 business class on some corridor trains and the gimmicky 2+2 business class factored into that pricing. For a 34 lie flat, long distance business product to make the same revenue as a 45 seat 2+1 car the tickets would need to be $126. I could easily see such a product going for $140 which is a 33% increase in revenue for only a 20% loss in capacity. Which would also wouldn't require extra amenities beyond a blanket in pillow which Amtrak already deals with in bulk, so the added cost would be minor. If anything, a lie flat, long distance business class is a no brainier if they can average ticket prices over $126 on an overnight trip. For example, taking the Starlight from Emeryville to Portland on March 14 cost $118 in business class if booked today, $126 isn't a stretch if you have a comfortable place to sleep. And as I've said many times, it's not a sleeper. You wouldn't have the same space, privacy or all included meals, pricing it as a roomette would he the same as calling long distance coach business class.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

If a seat and a bottle of water is $118, a lie flat seat is not going to be $126. It’s going to be $170.

 

[Larry H.]

I think Amtrak management needs to realize they are selling a product that demand some encouragement to sell well. Yesterday on NPR they interviewed a person who promotes rail use in European Countries. I wish I could recall the city connections and his name but I can't. But the jest of program was how in many countries now they are realizing that Sleeper trains with accommodations that encourage ridership create more demand. A number of overnight trains have been added back that were discontinued in the 80s. But now with environmental concerns many people are choosing rail. His comments were that basically a rail company needs to provide the passengers with and enjoyable trip, not one that just hauls you with no concern as to comfort or amenities.

 

[sttom]

If a seat and a bottle of water is $118, a lie flat seat is not going to be $126. It’s going to be $170.

And again you ignore my point, $126 would be the minimum to compensate for capacity loss and your point is based on your word, not looking at the numbers. And $140-$170 is better than roomettes on the same run which go for $350. I get it if you think having a budget option is stupid, but your criticism isn't making your point.

 

[jis]

On thing that a friend of mine who works for one of the major airlines that operate scads of lie flat seats mentioned to me once is that the lie flat seats are a significant factor more maintenance intensive. They require attention far more frequently for various reasons than mechanical reclining seats do, and even powered reclining seats do. I guess it stands to reason since they have way more moving parts, and way more nooks and crannies where passenger stuff can fall and gum up the works. I have no idea how this does or does not get reflected in the operating cost. But on the revenue side I note that each time a better seat is provided the fare goes up to reflect that to some extent. What proportion is to cover additional maintenance, I don't know.

Based on this I suspect that an Open Section type of accommodation would be mechanically less expensive than lie flat seats and will also provide a much more spacious sleeping space, based on experience on the Sections used on the Canadian, and basically have about the same capacity either way per car.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

And again you ignore my point, $126 would be the minimum to compensate for capacity loss and your point is based on your word, not looking at the numbers. And $140-$170 is better than roomettes on the same run which go for $350. I get it if you think having a budget option is stupid, but your criticism isn't making your point.

It’s your word against mine, and neither of our words mean much to Amtrak lol.

I never said a budget option is stupid. I said I don't personally see the appeal of a lie-flat seat on amtrak. Have you personally slept in a lie-flat seat on an airline? I haven't so maybe I'm missing something.

I wouldn't call this a budget option anyways, this is a mid-premium option.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Based on this I suspect that an Open Section type of accommodation would be mechanically less expensive than lie flat seats and will also provide a much more spacious sleeping space, based on experience on the Sections used on the Canadian, and basically have about the same capacity either way per car.

A pullman diagram I found shows 12 sections, a drawing room, and men's and women lounges. It seems reasonable you could fit 18 sections into a car and have enough room for restrooms. That's a capacity of 36.You might even get up to 40. Pretty good and about the same capacity of a slumbercoach.

I agree either of those options would be better than airplane style lie-flat seats.

 

[sttom]

It’s your word against mine, and neither of our words mean much to Amtrak lol.

I never said a budget option is stupid. I said I don't personally see the appeal of a lie-flat seat on amtrak. Have you personally slept in a lie-flat seat on an airline? I haven't so maybe I'm missing something.

I wouldn't call this a budget option anyways, this is a mid-premium option.

Lie flat seats are better than sleeping in a non reclining seats. It's an air mattress in the living room vs having a proper bed, but that's an improvement than not having a budget sleeping option. I would class this sort of seat as a business class seat or budget sleeper. One would be a lot less private than a slumber coach and they weren't a premium accommodation.

As for word vs word, I'm looking at the numbers and the amenities offered. A roomette is fully private with food included. A Delta One style seats wouldn't be completely private. Those are two things a roomette passenger would be paying for over a business class seat and those are worth something for now at least.

As for more maintenance, I'm sure there is a way to find "cost efficiencies" in the design of a seat. One being having the seat not have an electronic reclining system and having the seat fold down mechanically like a roomette seat would. Normally it's the electronics that breaks on those sort of things. A solution is making the system simpler rather than more complex.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

As for word vs word, I'm looking at the numbers and the amenities offered. A roomette is fully private with food included. A Delta One style seats wouldn't be completely private. Those are two things a roomette passenger would be paying for over a business class seat and those are worth something for now at least.

You’re looking at the numbers how you see them, I’m looking at the numbers how I see them.

Slumbercoaches and Sections would hold as many or more than a delta 1 style setup. I fail to see any case for a delta 1 style lie flat seat.

 

[jebr]

You’re looking at the numbers how you see them, I’m looking at the numbers how I see them.

Slumbercoaches and Sections would hold as many or more than a delta 1 style setup. I fail to see any case for a delta 1 style lie flat seat.

It's a far better experience during the daytime than a section, though perhaps equivalent to a slumbercoach. When traveling in a section on the Canadian, I found the seat itself to be less desirable than Amtrak coach, and there's also the issue that you can't sleep whenever you want (it's always in seat mode during the day.) A airline lie-flat seat, on the other hand, would still be an attractive upgrade for day use as well as the lie-flat bed at night. It still would allow the option for a nap whenever desired, semi-private quarters, etc.

Based on what I've read, a slumbercoach would have similar benefits, but if it carries the same capacity it might be easier to market an airline-style seat (out of familiarity) than a train-specific one.

 

[jis]

As for word vs word, I'm looking at the numbers and the amenities offered. A roomette is fully private with food included. A Delta One style seats wouldn't be completely private. Those are two things a roomette passenger would be paying for over a business class seat and those are worth something for now at least.

I think so far you have failed to make any cogent clincher argument in favor of Delta 1 seats over Sections, and have brushed aside concerns about mechanical complexity when compared to a simple fold out berth, with some hand waving wishful thinking.

 

[sttom]

I think so far you have failed to make any cogent clincher argument in favor of Delta 1 seats over Sections, and have brushed aside concerns about mechanical complexity when compared to a simple fold out berth, with some hand waving wishful thinking.

What you call hand waving I call coming up with a solution. I personally have no issue with either a Delta One or a Section, but I've accepted that most people here at least find Sections abhorrent for whatever reason.

 

[jis]

What you call hand waving I call coming up with a solution. I personally have no issue with either a Delta One or a Section, but I've accepted that most people here at least find Sections abhorrent for whatever reason.

And so you somehow came to the conclusion that they will not find Delta 1 abhorrent maybe for the same reason?

Besides, you have not come up with any solution. You have just stated a low effort hope that anyone can articulate. Whether and how it will work is a different matter. It is always easy to favorably compare something that is yet to exist with something that is known to work, since all potential problems are yet to be realized.