A fascinating reflection on the cost of travel

[Green Maned Lion]

I have, in PDF form, a 1966 New York Central timetable.

Let us consider a trip from New York to Chicago. Now, I am assuming travel by two passengers on any train but the extra-fare Twentieth Century Limited in a bedroom.

...............CoachRF....Bedroom RF....CoachRF'10$.....SleeperRF

1966:.......$143.53*1...$312.17*2.........$938.57........$2041.34

11/1971:...$205.00*3...$439.17*4.........$1073.92......$2300.66

2010LB:....$352.00......$1090.00

2010HB:....$660.00.....$2078.00

I find this amusing, as I have been hearing the recurring mantra, "Amtrak has raised fares. Amtrak has placed sleeping cars out of the reach of people. Less service, more money!"

Yeah, sure. At the lowest bucket, Amtrak coach in this example is... 37.5% of what it was in 1966... and 32.7% of what it was when Amtrak took over service. At the highest bucket, it is only 61.5% of what it was when Amtrak took over. Raising coach fares indeed!

And sleeper? At low bucket, this trip costs 53.4% of what it cost in 1966, and 47.9% (less than half!) of what it cost just after Amtrak took over. At the highest bucket, the trip costs 1.7% more than it did in 1966 (and only one person on the Lake Shore Limited will pay that!), and 9.7% LESS than what it cost when Amtrak took over. And those are the highest buckets.

So at least between New York and Chicago, my friends, you can rest assured that when accounting for inflation, you are paying less than they did when Amtrak assumed service.

By the way, just a FYI, in 1966 it cost $193.96 for two people to go Chicago to New York round-trip in a Double Slumbercoach, about the equivlant of a Viewliner Roomette. About $1268.34 adjusted for inflation. At low-bucket today, it costs $728 to do so today. At high bucket prices, it costs $1214. Which is 4.3% less than it cost in 1966. And as a bonus, your room includes meals- they never did back then.

Amtrak's prices might be rising right now... but it will take a good long time before the average traveller pays more for their Amtrak trip than it cost on New York Central in days gone by.

 

[dlagrua]

I don't believe that its a matter of what it cost now as opposed to what it cost then but a matter of the competitiveness of rail travel vs other forms of transportation. The whole sleeper thing is over rated. if you can get more than 3 hours of sleep in them, you are doing pretty good. They are noisy, bumpy to stay in and not all that fantastic.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I don't believe that its a matter of what it cost now as opposed to what it cost then but a matter of the competitiveness of rail travel vs other forms of transportation. The whole sleeper thing is over rated. if you can get more than 3 hours of sleep in them, you are doing pretty good. They are noisy, bumpy to stay in and not all that fantastic.

Personally, I sleep like a baby. I've contemplated giving the SCA a cattle prod with which to help wake me up in the morning.

 

[jis]

I don't believe that its a matter of what it cost now as opposed to what it cost then but a matter of the competitiveness of rail travel vs other forms of transportation. The whole sleeper thing is over rated. if you can get more than 3 hours of sleep in them, you are doing pretty good. They are noisy, bumpy to stay in and not all that fantastic.

Well do not project your own insomnia on others I don't have any problem of getting solid 8 hours sleep in an Amtrak Sleepers.

 

[PaulM]

I don't believe that its a matter of what it cost now as opposed to what it cost then but a matter of the competitiveness of rail travel vs other forms of transportation. The whole sleeper thing is over rated. if you can get more than 3 hours of sleep in them, you are doing pretty good. They are noisy, bumpy to stay in and not all that fantastic.

Well do not project your own insomnia on others I don't have any problem of getting solid 8 hours sleep in an Amtrak Sleepers.

The problem here is the choice of pronouns. If a poster says "I ....", then who could argue. But if they say "You .... " meaning the rest of the world, then the statement become preposterous on its very face. Obviously, the ability to get to sleep is personal, and even for an individual it is dependent on many factors.

 

[JayPea]

I sleep longer and deeper in sleeper cars than I do at home in bed.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Hmm. I actually sleep pretty good on sleepers. The only thing that sometimes screws that up is when the diner staff keeps announcing that another fifteen minutes have passed or the snack bar guy from the lounch car keeps reminding us how much time is left before he goes on his break. Do they think we don't know those cars exist? If someone isn't hungry enough to keep track of their reservation with their own watch then they probably don't really need to be eating any more anyway. Coach seats are nearly impossible for me to sleep in though, at least not without some help.

 

[contemplation]

I have, in PDF form, a 1966 New York Central timetable.
Let us consider a trip from New York to Chicago. Now, I am assuming travel by two passengers on any train but the extra-fare Twentieth Century Limited in a bedroom.

...............CoachRF....Bedroom RF....CoachRF'10$.....SleeperRF

1966:.......$143.53*1...$312.17*2.........$938.57........$2041.34

11/1971:...$205.00*3...$439.17*4.........$1073.92......$2300.66

2010LB:....$352.00......$1090.00

2010HB:....$660.00.....$2078.00

I find this amusing, as I have been hearing the recurring mantra, "Amtrak has raised fares. Amtrak has placed sleeping cars out of the reach of people. Less service, more money!"

Yeah, sure. At the lowest bucket, Amtrak coach in this example is... 37.5% of what it was in 1966... and 32.7% of what it was when Amtrak took over service. At the highest bucket, it is only 61.5% of what it was when Amtrak took over. Raising coach fares indeed!

And sleeper? At low bucket, this trip costs 53.4% of what it cost in 1966, and 47.9% (less than half!) of what it cost just after Amtrak took over. At the highest bucket, the trip costs 1.7% more than it did in 1966 (and only one person on the Lake Shore Limited will pay that!), and 9.7% LESS than what it cost when Amtrak took over. And those are the highest buckets.

So at least between New York and Chicago, my friends, you can rest assured that when accounting for inflation, you are paying less than they did when Amtrak assumed service.

By the way, just a FYI, in 1966 it cost $193.96 for two people to go Chicago to New York round-trip in a Double Slumbercoach, about the equivlant of a Viewliner Roomette. About $1268.34 adjusted for inflation. At low-bucket today, it costs $728 to do so today. At high bucket prices, it costs $1214. Which is 4.3% less than it cost in 1966. And as a bonus, your room includes meals- they never did back then.

Amtrak's prices might be rising right now... but it will take a good long time before the average traveller pays more for their Amtrak trip than it cost on New York Central in days gone by.

Dlagrua is correct. It is the comparison with other forms of transportation that influence the choice of the traveler.

In 1968, I flew from Los Angeles to Boston for $152 coach.

Today, I have booked an LA-Boston ticket on Southwest for $147.

So obviously air fare is cheaper today than four decades ago, in many cases. But if Amtrak was offering a transcontinental coach fare of $100, that would make the air fare seem high.

Additionally, economists say that trends are as important as the actual price in influencing consumer choices. Amtrak's prices are trending up. And most rail riders will compare the latest price to the price they last paid for rail travel in deciding whether or not Amtrak is a great bargain these days----or not.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

For my part, flying is a non-option. Its Amtrak or Greyhound.

But that's besides the point.

Its not how the prices are moving. Its the people whining that trains were "so much cheaper in the old days" And they weren't. As for flying... Well yeah, Amtrak isn't cheaper. But you have to pay for the privilege of not being clusterf*cked.

 

[AlanB]

Hmm. I actually sleep pretty good on sleepers. The only thing that sometimes screws that up is when the diner staff keeps announcing that another fifteen minutes have passed or the snack bar guy from the lounch car keeps reminding us how much time is left before he goes on his break. Do they think we don't know those cars exist? If someone isn't hungry enough to keep track of their reservation with their own watch then they probably don't really need to be eating any more anyway. Coach seats are nearly impossible for me to sleep in though, at least not without some help.

The cafe attendant is required to make those announcements, and yes, there are people who don't know that those cars exist or where to find them. Likewise the LSA in the dining car is required to announce each 15 minute seating. It's not their choice, it's their job.

Additionally part of the point of the diner announcements is two-fold. One, not everyone's watch is set to the same time and as I'm sure you're aware, there is no really convienent place for people who arrive early to wait. Two, the dining car does sometimes run behind, which would once again leave people standing around or having to trek back to their seat/room to wait for the "new" time.

This is not something dreamed up by the crew just to annoy you.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

The cafe attendant is required to make those announcements, and yes, there are people who don't know that those cars exist or where to find them. Likewise the LSA in the dining car is required to announce each 15 minute seating. It's not their choice, it's their job.

Yeah, I get that they're not doing it out of their own free will, but that doesn't make it any less annoying or disruptive if you're trying to take a nap. Leave the intercom for emergencies, that's why it can't be turned off or down. It shouldn't be used for endlessly reminding the cattle to come to the feeding trough. Why do people need to eat so much on a train anyway? It's not like we're burning many calories on there. I would prefer to have the meals unbundled from the sleeper service so I'm not paying for food I don't really need or want.

Additionally part of the point of the diner announcements is two-fold. One, not everyone's watch is set to the same time and as I'm sure you're aware, there is no really convienent place for people who arrive early to wait. Two, the dining car does sometimes run behind, which would once again leave people standing around or having to trek back to their seat/room to wait for the "new" time.

There are a few other ways this could be handled. They could use pagers like stationary restaurants do. There are products that work over a distance that would cover most Amtrak trains. They could have screens in each car with updates. The SCA's could update their car's pax. And I'm sure there are many other ways to avoid having to abuse the intercom.

This is not something dreamed up by the crew just to annoy you.

I'm pretty sure it is. ;-)

Yeah, I know I don't say a lot of positive things about Amtrak, but I'm starting to realize that even though I strongly support passenger rail service I really don't have much love for Amtrak itself. There are just so many inherited restrictions and kludges from so many sources that there is virtually no way Amtrak won't keep falling further and further behind the rest of the industrialized world. I know it's an extremely unpopular thing to say, but maybe Amtrak really does need to be cut loose. The more layers I try to peel back the more convoluted the picture becomes and the more I realize that maybe it's simply time to start over. I don't have any ill-will toward Amtrak employees and I try to treat them as nice as possible. I just don't think they have what it will take to convince Americans that passenger rail is a serious contender for the millions of folks who currently choose cars and planes.

 

[Contemplation]

For my part, flying is a non-option. Its Amtrak or Greyhound.
But that's besides the point.

Its not how the prices are moving. Its the people whining that trains were "so much cheaper in the old days" And they weren't. As for flying... Well yeah, Amtrak isn't cheaper. But you have to pay for the privilege of not being clusterf*cked.

In your case, then, the choice is not a matter of economics and prices are irrelevant. However, your case also undercuts the effort for Amtrak to try and become a true alternative source of transportation rather than a boutique offering.

In other words, Amtrak will continue to be a pale representative of what Canadian Rail does, providing a high-priced niche service for those willing to shell out lots of money, or who figure out how to game the AmtrakRewards system for maximum exploitation. BTW, economic research shows that rewards programs like the AmtrakRewards system,drive up prices for individuals not using them because the program costs i.e. economic distortions, have to be paid by someone.

In the meantime, the effort to build rail service in the US along European lines apparently is going to be left to states and private operators who are more nimble and more cognizant of how to offer consistent service and streamlined management. In that way, perhaps prices can actually come to help improve their chances of boosting ridership.

 

[haolerider]

I don't believe that its a matter of what it cost now as opposed to what it cost then but a matter of the competitiveness of rail travel vs other forms of transportation. The whole sleeper thing is over rated. if you can get more than 3 hours of sleep in them, you are doing pretty good. They are noisy, bumpy to stay in and not all that fantastic.

It seems that a lot of people woudl disagree with you on this point. I have no problem in a sleeper and generally get a full nights sleep.

 

[acelafan]

Yeah, I know I don't say a lot of positive things about Amtrak, but I'm starting to realize that even though I strongly support passenger rail service I really don't have much love for Amtrak itself. There are just so many inherited restrictions and kludges from so many sources that there is virtually no way Amtrak won't keep falling further and further behind the rest of the industrialized world. I know it's an extremely unpopular thing to say, but maybe Amtrak really does need to be cut loose. The more layers I try to peel back the more convoluted the picture becomes and the more I realize that maybe it's simply time to start over. I don't have any ill-will toward Amtrak employees and I try to treat them as nice as possible. I just don't think they have what it will take to convince Americans that passenger rail is a serious contender for the millions of folks who currently choose cars and planes.

I totally get where you are coming from; I've been hugely disappointed (and annoyed) with Amtrak on some trips but then on other trips I can't imagine having to take a plane again. I think it's a combination of what your trip is about - if it's to get from A to B and very sensitive to travel delays then Amtrak is going to give you an ulcer. If you have the ability to build in wiggle room around the schedule it's much better. I think the most important aspect of the trip is getting a great staff that treat you right and is personable. I just got off the Coast Starlight and the SCA assigned to my car (Louis) was fantastic - very prompt, very attentive, and he really knew how to treat the customer well. When compared to other SCAs I've had, it makes me mad to remember I actually gave them a decent tip. I think service or no service should be rewarded appropriately.

In any case, Amtrak has it's flaws...no doubt. But it does seem like there have been bona fide improvments in recent years - the meals are actually served on real china on some routes (and I hope it expands) and passengers are given the chance to pay for wine & cheese tasting - some wouldn't want to partake, obviously, but it's a nice option. I do wish the surly attendants on much of the NEC would either find a job they'd rather do or get an attitude adjustment...the western trains offer better customer service, in my (limited) experience riding the trains.

 

[acelafan]

I don't believe that its a matter of what it cost now as opposed to what it cost then but a matter of the competitiveness of rail travel vs other forms of transportation. The whole sleeper thing is over rated. if you can get more than 3 hours of sleep in them, you are doing pretty good. They are noisy, bumpy to stay in and not all that fantastic.

It seems that a lot of people woudl disagree with you on this point. I have no problem in a sleeper and generally get a full nights sleep.

Agreed with you on that too....I find the cars remarkably quiet with the doors closed and the PA speaker shut off (just discovered how to shut that off, can't believe I didn't realize there was a switch!) Our car had a few creaks as it went slowly around curves, but otherwise it was pretty serene.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

In the meantime, the effort to build rail service in the US along European lines apparently is going to be left to states and private operators who are more nimble and more cognizant of how to offer consistent service and streamlined management. In that way, perhaps prices can actually come to help improve their chances of boosting ridership.

Outside of a few rare instances I don't think most states are going to get very far with this. When Texas tried to establish a new passenger rail network to connect our major cities it went nowhere. Our local airlines (American, Continental, Southwest) shut it down completely with nothing more than a few thinly veiled threats and some minor lobbying. The airlines lifted a finger and supposedly mighty Texas quickly reversed the plan. In Florida the voters approved funding for more passenger rail and then went back and immediately repealed that same funding before anything could be completed. Now Florida is suddenly pro-rail again in order to get access to the Federal teat and will probably just shut down whatever they get funding for once the mandate expires. Outside of some blue states along the West Coast, the Northeast and Great Lakes regions I don't see state funding as the answer.

 

[AlanB]

The cafe attendant is required to make those announcements, and yes, there are people who don't know that those cars exist or where to find them. Likewise the LSA in the dining car is required to announce each 15 minute seating. It's not their choice, it's their job.

Yeah, I get that they're not doing it out of their own free will, but that doesn't make it any less annoying or disruptive if you're trying to take a nap. Leave the intercom for emergencies, that's why it can't be turned off or down. It shouldn't be used for endlessly reminding the cattle to come to the feeding trough. Why do people need to eat so much on a train anyway? It's not like we're burning many calories on there. I would prefer to have the meals unbundled from the sleeper service so I'm not paying for food I don't really need or want.

Actually in your room you can indeed turn down the volume and even turn the speaker off using the volume controls found in every room.

As for the other half of your statement, most people that I know eat 3 meals per day. Perhaps they don't eat quite as rich of a meal at home as they do on Amtrak, but still most people eat 3 meals a day. Amtrak isn't serving more than 3 per day per pax.

Additionally part of the point of the diner announcements is two-fold. One, not everyone's watch is set to the same time and as I'm sure you're aware, there is no really convienent place for people who arrive early to wait. Two, the dining car does sometimes run behind, which would once again leave people standing around or having to trek back to their seat/room to wait for the "new" time.

There are a few other ways this could be handled. They could use pagers like stationary restaurants do. There are products that work over a distance that would cover most Amtrak trains. They could have screens in each car with updates. The SCA's could update their car's pax. And I'm sure there are many other ways to avoid having to abuse the intercom.

Great lets spend money for pagers that we don't even have anyhow, rather then fixing that seat you were complaining about in another post. As for screens, yet more money we don't have and no you've got to keep leaving your room to see the screen.

As for the SCA's, aside from the fact that they've already got enough other jobs, they'd have to keep running to the diner every 15 minutes to see if they're still on schedule, before they could tell their pax to go to the diner. Additionally they'll have to go looking for the pax, as many times they might not be in the sleeper car. Way too complicated and impractical.

Announcements are easiest and best.

Yeah, I know I don't say a lot of positive things about Amtrak, but I'm starting to realize that even though I strongly support passenger rail service I really don't have much love for Amtrak itself. There are just so many inherited restrictions and kludges from so many sources that there is virtually no way Amtrak won't keep falling further and further behind the rest of the industrialized world. I know it's an extremely unpopular thing to say, but maybe Amtrak really does need to be cut loose. The more layers I try to peel back the more convoluted the picture becomes and the more I realize that maybe it's simply time to start over. I don't have any ill-will toward Amtrak employees and I try to treat them as nice as possible. I just don't think they have what it will take to convince Americans that passenger rail is a serious contender for the millions of folks who currently choose cars and planes.

And yet they are doing just that, convincing more and more Americans to take Amtrak. Ridership continues to go up year after year, and not just on the short haul commuter-like routes. It's going up on the LD's too.

 

[AlanB]

In Florida the voters approved funding for more passenger rail and then went back and immediately repealed that same funding before anything could be completed. Now Florida is suddenly pro-rail again in order to get access to the Federal teat and will probably just shut down whatever they get funding for once the mandate expires.

They can't do that; that is shut down whatever once the madate expires. The mandate is something like 20 years or more that they have to operate the service. Failure to do so requires repaying the Fed every dime spent with Federal monies. After 20 years it's highly unlikely that the service wouldn't be so heavily used that they could get away with shutting it down. And if it's not used enough to prevent a shutdown, then it probably does need to be shut down. But that's highly unlikely to happen.

And at least for those 20 years we won't have needed to spend Billions on widening the highways and then maintaining those wider highways, something that we already cannot afford.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

There are a few other ways this could be handled. They could use pagers like stationary restaurants do. There are products that work over a distance that would cover most Amtrak trains. They could have screens in each car with updates. The SCA's could update their car's pax. And I'm sure there are many other ways to avoid having to abuse the intercom.

Or you could simply press your attendant call button and ask if you can shut off the volume in your compartment, which you can. Instead of just making bold and inaccurate accusations publicly and making yourself look like something of an ignoramus in the process.

Yeah, I know I don't say a lot of positive things about Amtrak, but I'm starting to realize that even though I strongly support passenger rail service I really don't have much love for Amtrak itself. There are just so many inherited restrictions and kludges from so many sources that there is virtually no way Amtrak won't keep falling further and further behind the rest of the industrialized world. I know it's an extremely unpopular thing to say, but maybe Amtrak really does need to be cut loose. The more layers I try to peel back the more convoluted the picture becomes and the more I realize that maybe it's simply time to start over. I don't have any ill-will toward Amtrak employees and I try to treat them as nice as possible. I just don't think they have what it will take to convince Americans that passenger rail is a serious contender for the millions of folks who currently choose cars and planes.

Daxomni, I spend much of my life fighting for passenger rail and other public transit. I don't just sit in front of my computer and type about it. I spend my time out of the house doing this stuff. It is a lot of work, and I know a hell of a lot more about this stuff than you do, so please listen. In my time, I can't think of any operator who operates as efficiently as Amtrak does. I'm not saying Amtrak is efficient. I'm just saying the expectation that anyone could be more efficient is naive.

Amtrak has been spending its years attempting to be killed. It spent several years being run by one of the biggest egotistical liars ever to work in Washington- and that's saying something. It has been starved for funds, threatened with extinction, and tasked with doing things it was never intended to do. Like maintain the Northeast Corridor.

Amtrak spends their time repairing pieces of equipment that belong in museums. In fact, you can find several of its current baggage cars' sisters from the same orders sitting in said museums. It is currently fixing uneconomical to repair equipment because god only knows when they will be able to get enough money to buy new equipment. Amtrak's single level diners are over 60 years old, and most will be eligible for Social Security before they are retired.

You want a good rail system? Then stop sitting on a rail forum and whining about what Amtrak doesn't do well, and go take a look at why they can't do it better. I personally think it is something approaching a miracle that Amtrak manages to run a rail system as good as we currently have with the hilariously limited resources they have to work with.

Their employees aren't overpaid. Next time you get a chance, take a real look at just how hard they work. It is a fallacy perpetuated by people who don't want to fund Amtrak. Amtrak is not unsafe- among U.S. rail services, its safety record it nonpareil. Amtrak doesn't chronically skimp on equipment repair- Amtrak chronically has to make a choice between fixing the things that matter (i.e. safety related) and things that don't.

What you perceive with your own two eyes is one of the most unreliable methods of information gathering.

In your case, then, the choice is not a matter of economics and prices are irrelevant. However, your case also undercuts the effort for Amtrak to try and become a true alternative source of transportation rather than a boutique offering.

*blinks* Dude, I am not discussing this subject in my post. I am merely complaining about local whining.

Now Florida is suddenly pro-rail again in order to get access to the Federal teat and will probably just shut down whatever they get funding for once the mandate expires. Outside of some blue states along the West Coast, the Northeast and Great Lakes regions I don't see state funding as the answer.

State governments change. Different governments favor different things. In anycase, by the time their mandate to operate the service expires, the politician who attempts to kill the service would do so at his peril.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Actually in your room you can indeed turn down the volume and even turn the speaker off using the volume controls found in every room.

In the first bedroom I had the controls did absolutely nothing and I didn't bother with them again after that. I will say though that I soon learned just how resourceful Amtrak pax can be. When I tried to tape a cover over the speaker the whole housing came off and dumped a bunch of schedules on my head that someone had stuffed in there in order to deaden the sound a bit. Even if the controls work perfectly you'll still hear the PA from other rooms and other speakers. It's not something you can block out completely, even with earplugs. On my most recent trip the SCA for my car was convinced we couldn't hear the train's PA so he would randomly get on and repeat some of it just for us. In all fairness he was just trying to be nice, but I was on a "sleeper" and I couldn't even sleep because there's so many announcements during mealtimes and snacktimes, which is seems like all the time on Amtrak.

Great lets spend money for pagers that we don't even have anyhow, rather then fixing that seat you were complaining about in another post. As for screens, yet more money we don't have and no you've got to keep leaving your room to see the screen. As for the SCA's, aside from the fact that they've already got enough other jobs, they'd have to keep running to the diner every 15 minutes to see if they're still on schedule, before they could tell their pax to go to the diner. Additionally they'll have to go looking for the pax, as many times they might not be in the sleeper car. Way too complicated and impractical.

Yeah, I hear you. Nothing can be done and the intercom must be in constant use to notify everyone when it's time for less than one percent of the pax to run to the dining car, lest they become dangerously famished from sitting all day. Some of the employees do know what they're doing. I was first asked to check-in about fifteen minutes prior to my reserved time to see if they were about ready for me. I'm fully mobile under my own power so that was fine. If they weren't ready they had the lounge right next to the dining car so I could just hang out there until they had a free spot. But then things took a turn for the worse. Someone else was running the PA and spent their shift constantly reminding each reservation to hurry up or to wait a little longer, as the case may be, and used the PA as a whip when folks either changed their minds or got sidetracked on other things. Why not just tell people that if we didn't show then we might get bumped? It's so simple, but instead of letting people change their mind the PA guy just kept on berating them. "Will all parties with a one-thirty reservation please come to the dining car now?!" I wish he could have just let their no-show status do the talking for them instead. Maybe a compromise would be once every hour they give a PA update. Or maybe they just sit and wait for the next set of reservations to show up at the previously scheduled time instead of trying to rush everyone to show up earlier because someone else didn't show. These are just ideas that would improve service for me in particular, Amtrak can still just do what they've always done if they so choose.

And yet they are doing just that, convincing more and more Americans to take Amtrak. Ridership continues to go up year after year, and not just on the short haul commuter-like routes. It's going up on the LD's too.

Ridership is definately up, but not anywhere near enough to get or keep Amtrak solvent. Under the status quo solvency is still Amtrak's supposed goal and I'm not sure they're that much closer to achieving solvency now than before. If I understand correctly there are parts of Amtrak that might become solvent if they were sufficently spun off from the longhaul operations but if that were possible I assume it would have already happened by now. As for why Amtrak has more passengers, I have yet to see anything imply it's due to the persuasive abilities Amtrak employees. I'm far more inclinded to credit increases in gas prices and several years of additional airline restrictions on everything from baggage fees to award availabilty. Amtrak hospitality would rate pretty low in my estimation.

 

[Ryan]

Even if the controls work perfectly you'll still hear the PA from other rooms and other speakers.

Actually, you can't - especially if the door is closed. Of course, don't let actual facts get in the way of your rant.

These are just ideas that would improve service for me in particular, Amtrak can still just do what they've always done if they so choose.

Thanks for your permission to do so. That'd work just great for me and just about everyone else on the train.

 

[leemell]

I don't believe that its a matter of what it cost now as opposed to what it cost then but a matter of the competitiveness of rail travel vs other forms of transportation. The whole sleeper thing is over rated. if you can get more than 3 hours of sleep in them, you are doing pretty good. They are noisy, bumpy to stay in and not all that fantastic.

I don't believe that GML was talking directly about competitiveness with other transportation modes, but rather the rants about how Amtrak has increased the fares and decrease the services.

 

[Ryan]

I don't believe that its a matter of what it cost now as opposed to what it cost then but a matter of the competitiveness of rail travel vs other forms of transportation. The whole sleeper thing is over rated. if you can get more than 3 hours of sleep in them, you are doing pretty good. They are noisy, bumpy to stay in and not all that fantastic.

I don't believe that GML was talking directly about competitiveness with other transportation modes, but rather the rants about how Amtrak has increased the fares and decrease the services.

Bingo.

 

[dlagrua]

I don't believe that its a matter of what it cost now as opposed to what it cost then but a matter of the competitiveness of rail travel vs other forms of transportation. The whole sleeper thing is over rated. if you can get more than 3 hours of sleep in them, you are doing pretty good. They are noisy, bumpy to stay in and not all that fantastic.

Well do not project your own insomnia on others I don't have any problem of getting solid 8 hours sleep in an Amtrak Sleepers.

When I post it is usualy not from opinion but from fact. First off I do not suffer from insomnia. I regularly get 7-8 hours of uninterrupted sleep every night and have no trouble sleeping at home.

In the past three years we have taken over 12 Amtrak trips. On all those trips I always converse with other travelers in the lounges, over dinner and in the sleeping car halls. I would say that of the 40 or 50 people that I have spoken with only one has reported getting a good nights sleep. Additionally my uncle Larry and his girlfriend just returned from an AutoTrain trip and they were able to sleep 1-2 hours. My friend Lee from Florida who meets up with us twice yearly reports that 3 hours of sleep is the limit for him , his wife and his daughter. I would say that with a sampling of 40 people and only getting one postive response from a single traveler would indicate a trend. As such we must take credence with the polling numbers.

No one can say that everyone aboard Amtrak is only able to get a few hours of sleep but our experience seems to mirror that of most travelers that we have spoken with. Sleeping in a bedroom or a roomette is not the same as sleeping in a quiet bedroom, on a pillow top bed where it is completely quiet and free from any motion. The beds in a sleeper are not soft, the pillows are flat as a pancake, they are noisy, and you get jarrred from end to end all through the trip. It is still better than sitting up in coach as you are lying down but to get a good nights sleep seems the exception and not the norm.

On our Capitol Limited trip last week and this week we were able to get maybe 3 hours of sleep each way.

Hats off to you if you can sleep 8 hours on Amtrak but so far the evidence that I can gather about the average traveler appears to indicate otherwise.

 

[Ryan]

credence with the polling numbers.

That's no poll and it has no credence. Count me among those who sleeps better on a train than I do at home.