Acela Express Coach is missing

[Ryan]

They could get around the Arrow limitation by reducing the capacity of train 97 by 2 coaches, then creating and selling seats on a hypothetical train "970" that was two coaches from NYP-WAS and then a train "971"that ran WAS-MIA.

Of course, there's the other whole boatload of problems that will ensure that this'll never happen.

 

[transit54]

I suppose so, yes, though it should be noted that AirTran offers one free bag, so to say "first and second" is kind of misleading. Though, I suppose if put that way it might be worth it. The cab ride from LGA to the MN station in Harlem (I was heading to Yonkers) would have canceled that savings out though, as I would have just spent 2.25 on my MetroCard to get from NYP to NYG.

AirTran is a nice little airline, they are the primary reason CAK still operates at the capacity it does-- their pricing is fair too, as I only paid $137 for coach to LGA at the counter. Let me repeat that, I paid $137 at the counter two hours before departure.

The M60 bus will take you right from LGA to the MNRR in Harlem. Or, if you're not comfortable with an MTA bus, you can take NY Airport service for $12 to Grand Central. Just a future tip in case you find yourself in LGA again.

 

[the_traveler]

They could get around the Arrow limitation by reducing the capacity of train 97 by 2 coaches, then creating and selling seats on a hypothetical train "970" that was two coaches from NYP-WAS and then a train "971"that ran WAS-MIA.

Of course, there's the other whole boatload of problems that will ensure that this'll never happen.

Many people would be confused by taking "970" and "971" from NYP to MIA - because they would have to "change trains" at WAS. They would see that "97" is sold out and decide not to go at all!

I'm sure many chose "449" instead of "449" and "49" - because they do not want to "change trains" at ALB!

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Yeah, the way the cars are broken up into separate trains is just needlessly confusing for newbies in my view. All that stuff should either be hidden from the user or displayed in a more intuitive way that actually explains what's really going on. In this case they don't even need to change arrow so much as give the front end (the website) enough intelligence to handle those types of details behind the scenes.

 

[jis]

Many people would be confused by taking "970" and "971" from NYP to MIA - because they would have to "change trains" at WAS. They would see that "97" is sold out and decide not to go at all!

I'm sure many chose "449" instead of "449" and "49" - because they do not want to "change trains" at ALB!

Besides having an even numbered train running south/west would confuse the heck out of CSX and Amtrak too.

I think it is better the way it is. Run the corridor trains at regular clockface schedules and let the LDs be LDs and not confuse everyone every which way. In countries that have significant LD trains, often that is the way it is done for reserved trains, often requiring a minimum distance travel requirement to travel by the LD trains. For unreserved or partially reserved ones it is all a fair game.

 

[Ryan]

Many people would be confused by taking "970" and "971" from NYP to MIA - because they would have to "change trains" at WAS. They would see that "97" is sold out and decide not to go at all!

If I'm understanding the OPs proposal correctly, that wouldn't be a problem since those two coaches wouldn't be for through passengers.

Still a terrible idea for all the reasons elucidated above.

 

[NEC_Rider]

It is true that there isn't that much time saved on the acela. I think it only shaves 30 minutes off the time from NYP - PVD, for example, over the regional.

I see no point in adding coach to the acela.

As for eliminating BC from the NE regionals, there really isn't much of a difference between it and coach to begin with (the half size warm soda, anyone?). If anything, amtrak is making buckets of money off selling BC on the NE regionals so I don't see any incentive for them to discontinue the service.

I occasionally take business class on NEC trains. It's usually during crowded travel periods. What you get is more personal space in your seat, a less crowded car (usually), and pre-boarding. (That's especially worthwhile at the stations where you have the cattle line to board, e.g. Washington, Philadelphia, New York, Boston, etc.)

I definitely take business class on longer runs, such as the Vermonter (it has 2-1 seating), and the Carolinian. BC on the Carolinian was only $25 over coach, and the day I rode, the coaches were full and not very pleasant. I also ride BC if I take 66/67 between DC and Boston, as they have 2-1 seating, and are much more comfortable for sleeping than an Amfleet I coach. I'm not sure why 66/67 don't have Amfleet II LD coach seating, at least for people with Boston-DC tickets. When I rode the Night Owl in 1987, they had long-distance coaches aboard. The same holds for the Vermonter. A little more legroom for a 10 hour ride would be nice.

 

[Trogdor]

Whether the train was called 970 or 897 isn't really the point.

The bigger problem is what I already mentioned in the previous post in this thread. Passengers used to riding NE Regional trains will be confused by the long-distance trains which do not provide the same type of service (longer station dwells at each stop, slower rides, seating assigned in specific cars, etc.) and that will likely anger more passengers not used to that type of operation than it will gain in new revenue. With departures every hour between NYP and WAS, not including Acela (and, throw in Keystones, and you have more frequent service NYP-PHL), there's no real need to sell 120 more seats a couple of times per day. It would gain very close to 0 new riders, and take revenue away from other trains in surrounding timeslots. The next gain for Amtrak would be nothing.