Amtrak Pacific Parlor Car vs. Via Rail Park Car

[NS VIA FAN]

There were domes (of a sort) running out of NYP for a while....the power dome coaches on the United Aircraft Turbo Train which ran to Boston. These domes had true 'look up, look down, look all around' visibility. And you could sit behind the engineer in the front row and watch him operate. A railfans delight, to be sure.

That is right,in fact I rode it once. I did not realize until getting into it that there was seating space upstairs.I do not recall it being advertised or promoted as a dome, though it really was a "low" dome,but you did get to look all around.

Here's the Turbo Dome at Boston in 1975 and a view from the Dome between New Haven and New York:

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

Basically agree with all of Green Maned Lion's points, with the small caveat that Via really didn't make the rail cruise decision until about 1990 (also when the biggest single service contraction took place), some years after their formation in 1978. Up until then it was much like Amtrak (and a whole bunch cheaper. Before 1990, it was usually cheaper than Amtrak for equivalent distances).
But as to the cars, and I've ridden on both.

The Park car is round-end Budd short dome/obs. The short dome is widely considered to be the finest in sightseeing, with a great 360 degree view. It is also a round-end. classic obs, giving the train a clean, finished look. The car is staffed as a standard lounge car. Further, while the car has been mechanically modernized, the basic decor is original (they replaced the murals in the "Mural Lounge" with photo reproductions to save the original artwork). In most respects, it represents the penultimate moment of rail comfort in the "streamliner" era. And it is still running in the service is was purchased for and designed for by CP, first class lounge on the cross-country Canadian (despite the fact it is now running over CN, not CP).

The Pacific Parlour Car has only viewing to both sides, although with similar top wrapping as a Sightseer Lounge. The car is a Budd Hi-Level Lounge car built for Santa Fe's delux coach streamliner, the El Capitan. They were, in fact, the model for the Superliner Sightseer Lounge. The interior design is completely an Amtrak creation, at least the second since Amtrak's acquisition of the cars, that has nothing to do with the original decor and layout of the car as the "Top of the Cap" lounge" (upstairs) and "Katchina Coffee Shop" (downstairs where the movie theater is). The original was a Southwest Indian motif. Note the awful, standard Amtrak booths in the front end of the car. The car is likewise staffed as a lounge, although the last time I rode it, the lounge attendant was absent for extended periods (and not at meal times). So pretty much standard Amtrak "you take what you get" service. Sometimes great, sometimes awful, mostly mediocre.

The PPC is nice, and it is nice to have a sleeper only lounge (well, almost). However, in design, comfort, viewing it doesn't hold a candle to the Park car.

The lesson for Amtrak are:

1- that they should not have gotten rid of their fleet of Budd domes. Too late now.

2 - A first class lounge should be made available on the major LD trains. They actually have inadvertantly prepared for this, because they could use the CCCs for that, if not for much else.

3 - Improve staff professionalism.

Annoying nitpicking: A "Parlor Car" is first class seating for day trains. Acela First Class is the modern equivalent of parlor service. And the British spelling, "Parlour" of this inaccuracy is just plain affected. And yes, yes, I know almost no one knows that. But it isn't a parlor or a "parlour" car. It is a first class lounge.

The Southern Pacific ran real Parlor Observation Cars on the Coast Daylight between Los Angeles and San Francisco. I last rode the Parlor Car in the summer of 1970 and had a compfy swival chair "oceanside" near the observation end so I could look behind. The Parlor Car attendant would get food from the automat car or cocktails from the lounge car and bring them to passengers. Espee also ran a Parlor Observation Car on the Shasta Daylight from Portland to Oakland until it was discontinued a couple years prior to Amtrak. The Santa Fe High Level Lounge built for a coach train which is what the PPC is would have been considered a downgrade by regular patrons of Espee's Parlor Observation Cars.

Do you happen to know the exact date? I was on that parlor obs from SF to LA on 7/22/70.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I find that hard to believe. Very hard to believe. My observations of the passengers on LD trains is young people, students probably, older people with loads of time on their hands visiting family or taking a vacation, people with no airports nearby who can't be bothered to drive, tourists, geeky railfans and oddballs that live in caves and think flying steals your soul.... There might be the odd one or two widget salesmen from Ohio about, but I would think most of the passengers on LD train would fall into the 'leisure' bracket rather than the 'business' one.Not convinced.

I would agree that most LD passengers are not business passengers, over all. But I would say that the percentage of Business travellers on Amtrak's LD trains are higher than on VIA's. I'd also say that certain city pairs have higher percentages of business travelers than leisure travelers. WAS-CHI, WAS-ATL, ALB-CHI, CHI-DEN, and CHI-STP come to mind off-hand.

Again....you really don't know what you are talking about!

While Amtrak runs a hell of a popular and well patronized system, Via doesn't. Most Amtrak riders are Americans, and most Amtrak riders are business people. Even on its long-distance trains, Amtrak gets a good portion of its riders from the business sector

VIA carried 4.2 million passengers in 2007 (the last year figures are available for) and like Amtrak these would be mostly Canadians: individuals, students and business people actually using the trains for basic transportation. VIA is actually benifitting more Canadians than Amtrak does Americans......On a per capita basis (the US has about 10 times the population of Canada) Amtrak would have had to carry over 40 million passengers……they carried 25.8 million. (and 28.7 million in 2008……VIA would have had a similar % increase last year prior to the economic slowdown)

Of course, the U.S. also has more, and more effective, commuter/regional rail operators, such as NJ Transit, Metro-North, and LIRR- which operate trains 7-days a week and most of the day. That keeps Amtrak's numbers down. For example, there would be millions of additional Amtrak passengers if Metro-North didn't run NYC-NHV (Including cafe car service on some trains, in fact), or NY-PHL wasn't possible via NJT-Septa.

Further, I was pointful in exempting the Quebec City-Toronto-Windsor corridor, which while not as effective as Amtrak's NEC, is a pretty useful system. I think you will find that a higher percentage of VIA ridership comes from its corridors than its long distance system.

The train doesn't have to have decent ridership to be invaluable. Those are totally different. The Hudson Bay (excuse me, the "Winnipeg-Churchill") is invaluable to the residents of Tidal, Digges, Bylot, Lamprey, Chesnaye, Cromarty, Belcher, M'Clintock, Back, Oday, Kellett, ... you get the idea. 81 communities! A few, like Churchill, have other transportation options (Churchill has a local airport with flights only to Winnipeg... or further north to Nunavut). Most have nothing else. Most of the 81 communities appear to be flag stops on the schedule. For those people, having a connection to the outside world, a way to travel when they need it, is invaluable.

Alright, I concede the Hudson Bay is a valuable train.

I'll give you that Amtrak has more business riders than non-business riders on Corridor trains (not just the NEC, but also the other seven or eight corridors). And I'll give you that Amtrak has more non-tourist riders than tourist riders on LD trains. But I'd even dispute that "a good portion" of LD riders are business, unless you think 20% is a good portion. In my experience, business ridership on LD trains doesn't pass that. But tourist ridership also doesn't pass 20%. I'd say fully 60% of the ridership is American families visiting each other, students going to and from school, and in general travelers who prefer the train over the car or plane for any reason. They're not heading to business meetings. They're traveling for other reasons.

I'd say you're wrong- and Amtrak's statistics agree with me. The East Coast-Midwest trains, and the Crescent, carry about 35-40% business passengers, rather than pleasure. The Florida trains carry less, more about 20%. The CONO carries about 25% business passengers. The Western trains, overall, carry about 15%- but if you consider specific city pairs, the numbers are much higher, such as CHI-DEN, DEN-SLC, and SLC-EMY for the California Zephyr. CHI-DEN sleeper travel is something like 75% business. I don't think there is an overnight train in the VIA system that has a city pair approaching that number remotely.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Guys,guys! Both of yall have valid points! The age old question of "am I my brothers keeper?" applies here! (I am of this mindset but lots arent!) If trains are the only way for tiny villages in the middle of nowhere to get somewhere, then someone has to pay for it! Its never going to be cost effective, NO transportation system is! GML is correct about the biz travelers, Id also say that Canada has a very effective GO train and subway system for Toronto and Vancouver isnt bad either for commuters, not sure about Montreal or Calgary or Edmonton, I would think they are similar?

Its beensaid before, theres three kinds of lies: lies,damn lies and statistics! National pride enters into lots of these debates and its only my opinion but I think that both these grand lands have much to be proud about, I dont care how many bullet trains and all that that Europe and Japan has, Id still rather live here! Lets enjoy VIA and Amtrak, do our best to improve what we got, and try to prevent bean counters and political charaltans (are you listening John McCain,Bill Clinton,Jimmy Carter,George Bush) from gutting or disappering Amtrak or VIA! (Its quicker there, Parliment can move faster than our system!)

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Various people asked why passenger trains lose more money per passenger in Canada than in the US. Thus the answer lies in the geography, and specifically the lack of population density over much of the Canadian landmass. The Canadian government supports intercity passenger rail at a level that would be equivalent to Amtrak having an annual subsidy of about $2 billion, again roughly a third higher than the actual levels.

Simply not true. Amtrak runs their trains, CS excluded, with somewhere between 1 service car for every 4 cars or so, with the Diners staffed with 3 people and the lounge cars staffed with one.

VIA, on the other hand...

Latest Canadian Consist via YouTube:

2 Bag, 4 Coach, Dome, 2 Sleeper, Diner, 5 sleeper, dome, diner, 3 sleeper, observation

21 cars: 4 coaches. 10 sleepers. 2 diners. 3 lounge cars. 2 baggage cars.

14 revenue cars, 5 service cars, 2 support cars.

Coaches hold 60, sleepers hold 20. Max: 240 coach passengers, 200 sleeper passengers. 440 people.

Now, if I remember correctly, VIA puts 5 people into each of their diners, and 2 people into each of their lounge cars, and one person into the park car, a coach attendant per 2 coach cars, and a sleeper attendant per car. 39 personnel total for 440 passengers (I'm including the 2 people in the locomotives). 11.3 passengers per employee. Also, their diner holds 40 people, I believe, so they have 80 dining seats. And a total of 88 passengers per service car, 2.8 cars per service car.

Now, take the Empire Builder

Bag, dorm, 2 sleepers, diner, 3 coaches, lounge, 2 coaches, sleeper

1.5 support cars, 9 revenue cars, 2 service cars.

140 sleeper berths, 375 coach seats, 515 total passengers. 4.5 cars per service car, 257.5 passengers per service car.

Now, the Amtrak train has 3 coach attendants, 3 sleeper attendants, 2 chefs, 3 SAs, 2 LSAs. 13 service perople, a conductor, 2 ACs, 2 engineers. 18 employees, 28 employees per passenger. And 70 dining car seats.

When you get down to it, that is why the Canadian loses money. The level of over-service.

From what I've seen, VIA's corridor trains are well patronized, keep to schedule and are broadly similar to those run by Amtrak on similar corridors. There are some striking differences, especially in terms of boarding procedures in major stations and in terms of food service. However, I don't really think that the idiosyncrasies make VIA any more "inefficient" than Amtrak. From what I've seen, I like Amtrak's approach a little better, but I can also understand VIA's approach, and I could point to one area where VIA is far more efficient - and others where they seem to be less so.

I said as much, that the big corridor makes sense.

I find this last series of statements to be entirely inaccurate, and one statement in particular to be offensive.
For a person who likes to sleep with the homeless on the floor at Penn Station, I'm surprised you would make such a derogatory statement.

I can assure you that the people who "live in the middle of nowhere" have many admirable qualities.

I can also assure you that anyone who can survive in the wilderness, beyond any roads, paved or otherwise, is most likely very clever, ambitious and resourceful.

Most people who know me in person would agree than I am a pretty bright person. Tests put me in the top 1%, actually. That being what it is, I still make stupid decisions. I do dumb things, and so does anyone else. When I do dumb things, I am required to live with the effects of said stupid act. I think that is perfectly reasonable concept.

If I, for instance, attempt to buy a house on credit that I can't afford to pay for, it is reasonable that I lose my home and wreck my credit. It clearly was my mistake. I deserve the consequences for it.

If I chose to buy a home in the middle of nowhere, I have some transportation issues that I should have been aware of when I made the decision. They are my responsibility to take care of.

The Canadian and Ocean are tourist trains, just like our Western tains and the Adirondack and other NE corridor trains (@ least some of the states help pay the freight!),we are, as rail fans all the better for this!

Simply not true. Almost all of Amtrak's trains are cost competitive with the alternatives, such as Greyhound and airplanes. The NE Regionals are not, but they are primarily business transport, and certainly are used enough to justify their presence. They aren't tourist trains. VIAs trains are priced such that only a tourist is likely to ride them, outside of the specified corridor.

I would ride the Canadian for tourist purposes. I'd love to. But if I had some valid reason to go from Toronto to Vancouver, I'd be riding Amtrak (Maple Leaf -> Lake Shore Limited -> Empire Builder -> Thruway). It is both a lot cheaper and a little faster, despite the dogleg down into the US, and back up again, as well as an insanely long layover in Chicago. Regardless of everything else I said, this is demonstrative that VIA is a tourist road.

Does anyone know if Amtrak has any plans to have built any Superliner LD cars?If they plan on adding the Pioneer Route back on, or expanding existing service won't they need more rolling stock?

Definitely need them.

From what I heard, thats about six on the priority list:

1) Electric power

2) Viewliner Sleepers, Diners, Dorms, Baggage

3) Midwest Bi-levels

4) Additional Viewliner sleepers, diners, dorms, baggage.

5) Viewliner Lounge and Coach cars.

6) Additional bi-level long distance cars, probably based on the Midwest bi-levels.

 

[wayman]

If I chose to buy a home in the middle of nowhere, I have some transportation issues that I should have been aware of when I made the decision. They are my responsibility to take care of.

Many folks who live in the middle of nowhere didn't move there. They grew up there, their parents grew up there, and their parents grew up there. How did their ancestors get to the middle of nowhere in the first place, and why did they go? In many, many cases, they got there by heavily-government-subsidized railroads and they went because they got free land and encouragement from the government. Generations have passed, times have changed, and in many parts of the US highways now connect these small midwestern and western towns (some of which are still the "middle of nowhere" and others of which have become decent urban centers of their own right). But roads don't go everywhere, and they go fewer places in Canada than in the US--for some of these towns, rail is all they've ever had.

So for many of these folks, you're either faulting them for living in the community they were born into, and in which their family has lived for generations; or else you're faulting them for a decision their ancestors made generations ago in a different world. And you're asking a government which brought them out there in the first place to abandon them. That doesn't wash.

 

[NS VIA FAN]

Most people who know me in person would agree than I am a pretty bright person. Tests put me in the top 1%, actually. That being what it is, I still make stupid decisions. I do dumb things, and so does anyone else. When I do dumb things, I am required to live with the effects of said stupid act. I think that is perfectly reasonable concept.
If I, for instance, attempt to buy a house on credit that I can't afford to pay for, it is reasonable that I lose my home and wreck my credit. It clearly was my mistake. I deserve the consequences for it.

If I chose to buy a home in the middle of nowhere, I have some transportation issues that I should have been aware of when I made the decision. They are my responsibility to take care of.

You are certainly unaware of the demographics of Canadian society and the responsibility in providing access to these isolated areas......It has nothing to do with me (or you) buying a house there and expecting someone to provide transportation because I made a poor choice of location.

A lot of these are First Nation communities that have been there for hundreds of years. VIA once operated a train between The Pas and Pukatawagan, Manitoba. This operation has now been turned over to the First Nations owned Keewatin Railway but there are still numerous communities along the Churchill line that rely on VIA .

And the passenger service on the Quebec, North Shore & Labrador Railway (never operated by VIA) has also been turned over to a First Nation company: Tshiuetin Rail Transportation:

http://www.tshiuetin.net/index_an.html

http://www.tshiuetin.net/an_informations.html

 

[jphjaxfl]

Basically agree with all of Green Maned Lion's points, with the small caveat that Via really didn't make the rail cruise decision until about 1990 (also when the biggest single service contraction took place), some years after their formation in 1978. Up until then it was much like Amtrak (and a whole bunch cheaper. Before 1990, it was usually cheaper than Amtrak for equivalent distances).
But as to the cars, and I've ridden on both.

The Park car is round-end Budd short dome/obs. The short dome is widely considered to be the finest in sightseeing, with a great 360 degree view. It is also a round-end. classic obs, giving the train a clean, finished look. The car is staffed as a standard lounge car. Further, while the car has been mechanically modernized, the basic decor is original (they replaced the murals in the "Mural Lounge" with photo reproductions to save the original artwork). In most respects, it represents the penultimate moment of rail comfort in the "streamliner" era. And it is still running in the service is was purchased for and designed for by CP, first class lounge on the cross-country Canadian (despite the fact it is now running over CN, not CP).

The Pacific Parlour Car has only viewing to both sides, although with similar top wrapping as a Sightseer Lounge. The car is a Budd Hi-Level Lounge car built for Santa Fe's delux coach streamliner, the El Capitan. They were, in fact, the model for the Superliner Sightseer Lounge. The interior design is completely an Amtrak creation, at least the second since Amtrak's acquisition of the cars, that has nothing to do with the original decor and layout of the car as the "Top of the Cap" lounge" (upstairs) and "Katchina Coffee Shop" (downstairs where the movie theater is). The original was a Southwest Indian motif. Note the awful, standard Amtrak booths in the front end of the car. The car is likewise staffed as a lounge, although the last time I rode it, the lounge attendant was absent for extended periods (and not at meal times). So pretty much standard Amtrak "you take what you get" service. Sometimes great, sometimes awful, mostly mediocre.

The PPC is nice, and it is nice to have a sleeper only lounge (well, almost). However, in design, comfort, viewing it doesn't hold a candle to the Park car.

The lesson for Amtrak are:

1- that they should not have gotten rid of their fleet of Budd domes. Too late now.

2 - A first class lounge should be made available on the major LD trains. They actually have inadvertantly prepared for this, because they could use the CCCs for that, if not for much else.

3 - Improve staff professionalism.

Annoying nitpicking: A "Parlor Car" is first class seating for day trains. Acela First Class is the modern equivalent of parlor service. And the British spelling, "Parlour" of this inaccuracy is just plain affected. And yes, yes, I know almost no one knows that. But it isn't a parlor or a "parlour" car. It is a first class lounge.

The Southern Pacific ran real Parlor Observation Cars on the Coast Daylight between Los Angeles and San Francisco. I last rode the Parlor Car in the summer of 1970 and had a compfy swival chair "oceanside" near the observation end so I could look behind. The Parlor Car attendant would get food from the automat car or cocktails from the lounge car and bring them to passengers. Espee also ran a Parlor Observation Car on the Shasta Daylight from Portland to Oakland until it was discontinued a couple years prior to Amtrak. The Santa Fe High Level Lounge built for a coach train which is what the PPC is would have been considered a downgrade by regular patrons of Espee's Parlor Observation Cars.

Do you happen to know the exact date? I was on that parlor obs from SF to LA on 7/22/70.

Bill, Yes I was northbound on the Coast Daylight from LA to SF on Sat 8/29/1970 with parlor seat 24. Two officials from Espee were on their way to a function in SF. I guess the train had been running late quite a bit recently. These guys kept telling the conductor they needed to arrive at 3rd and Townsend on time so we arrived right on time. We were late at San Jose, but we flew up the Peninsula...there might have been 1 stop to discharge. It was a great trip.

 

[Neil_M]

I would agree that most LD passengers are not business passengers, over all. But I would say that the percentage of Business travellers on Amtrak's LD trains are higher than on VIA's. I'd also say that certain city pairs have higher percentages of business travelers than leisure travelers. WAS-CHI, WAS-ATL, ALB-CHI, CHI-DEN, and CHI-STP come to mind off-hand.

Sorry, just don't buy it. Granted, on routes to and from Chicago, for example, there well may be more business travellers than on the Coast Starlight, but more business than leisure?

I doubt it.

 

[zephyr17]

I would agree that most LD passengers are not business passengers, over all. But I would say that the percentage of Business travellers on Amtrak's LD trains are higher than on VIA's. I'd also say that certain city pairs have higher percentages of business travelers than leisure travelers. WAS-CHI, WAS-ATL, ALB-CHI, CHI-DEN, and CHI-STP come to mind off-hand.

Sorry, just don't buy it. Granted, on routes to and from Chicago, for example, there well may be more business travellers than on the Coast Starlight, but more business than leisure?

I doubt it.

I think the number of corporate business travelers on overnight LD services are probably pretty darn low. Airfare is usually much cheaper than sleepers, most corporate travel departments have policies against first class travel, which is how sleepers show, and they also have problems generally with the accomodation charge breakouts. It can be a real hassle trying to deal with overnight rail with corporate travel policies -- I've tried. Was actually successful once. Would have been successful more often had I been willing to eat the accomodation charge myself.

 

[Ispolkom]

Sorry, just don't buy it. Granted, on routes to and from Chicago, for example, there well may be more business travellers than on the Coast Starlight, but more business than leisure?I doubt it.

And you'd be right to doubt it. I've never noticed any large business clientele on the Washington-Chicago run or the Chicago-St. Paul run (I assume that Chicago-Clearwater, FL isn't meant). The Empire Builder is poorly timed for the Chicago-Twin Cities market, and basically wastes a day's travel each way, when United, Delta, and Southwest have hourly departures to Chicago airports. The Empire Builder *is* perfectly timed for a businessman who needs to travel between St. Paul and Minot, No. Dak., but that's hardly a major market, much as I personally find the timing useful.

Chicago to Denver is also very well served by United, Frontier, Southwest and I'm not sure who else, so why would a business waste 18 hours of an employee's time on the California Zephyr when United will get you there in 2.5 hours and cost only a little more than Amtrak coach fare? And let's not forget the generally high sleeper charges on that train.

Here's an anecdote: I can remember that several years ago a friend offered to take the train from Chicago to St. Paul for a convention to save her company money. This was greeted with about as much amazement as if she offered to hitch-hike.

I won't comment on other routes, as I have little personal experience on them, but I'd need to see hard numbers to believe that business travel is an important part of Amtrak's passenger load in any long-distance market.

Now if there was a "high-speed" line from St. Paul to Chicago that restored running times to those possible in, say, 1939, business travel might increase...

 

[jmbgeg]

Sorry, just don't buy it. Granted, on routes to and from Chicago, for example, there well may be more business travellers than on the Coast Starlight, but more business than leisure?I doubt it.

And you'd be right to doubt it. I've never noticed any large business clientele on the Washington-Chicago run or the Chicago-St. Paul run (I assume that Chicago-Clearwater, FL isn't meant). The Empire Builder is poorly timed for the Chicago-Twin Cities market, and basically wastes a day's travel each way, when United, Delta, and Southwest have hourly departures to Chicago airports. The Empire Builder *is* perfectly timed for a businessman who needs to travel between St. Paul and Minot, No. Dak., but that's hardly a major market, much as I personally find the timing useful.

Chicago to Denver is also very well served by United, Frontier, Southwest and I'm not sure who else, so why would a business waste 18 hours of an employee's time on the California Zephyr when United will get you there in 2.5 hours and cost only a little more than Amtrak coach fare? And let's not forget the generally high sleeper charges on that train.

Here's an anecdote: I can remember that several years ago a friend offered to take the train from Chicago to St. Paul for a convention to save her company money. This was greeted with about as much amazement as if she offered to hitch-hike.

LOL because I get the same reception when I travel long distance by Amtrak on business. Only distinction is that my business colleagues don't compare it to hitchhiking, but to taking Greyhound. I pay more than first class airfare on most trips when I get a deluxe bedroom, but only expense a coach airfare equivalent with the company. These trips are often 8 hours to 1.5 days and I get a lot of work done on the train in the quiet of my sleeper, and my Blackberry gets a good workout.

 

[Bob Dylan]

:lol:

Sorry, just don't buy it. Granted, on routes to and from Chicago, for example, there well may be more business travellers than on the Coast Starlight, but more business than leisure?I doubt it.

And you'd be right to doubt it. I've never noticed any large business clientele on the Washington-Chicago run or the Chicago-St. Paul run (I assume that Chicago-Clearwater, FL isn't meant). The Empire Builder is poorly timed for the Chicago-Twin Cities market, and basically wastes a day's travel each way, when United, Delta, and Southwest have hourly departures to Chicago airports. The Empire Builder *is* perfectly timed for a businessman who needs to travel between St. Paul and Minot, No. Dak., but that's hardly a major market, much as I personally find the timing useful.

Chicago to Denver is also very well served by United, Frontier, Southwest and I'm not sure who else, so why would a business waste 18 hours of an employee's time on the California Zephyr when United will get you there in 2.5 hours and cost only a little more than Amtrak coach fare? And let's not forget the generally high sleeper charges on that train.

Here's an anecdote: I can remember that several years ago a friend offered to take the train from Chicago to St. Paul for a convention to save her company money. This was greeted with about as much amazement as if she offered to hitch-hike.

LOL because I get the same reception when I travel long distance by Amtrak on business. Only distinction is that my business colleagues don't compare it to hitchhiking, but to taking Greyhound. I pay more than first class airfare on most trips when I get a deluxe bedroom, but only expense a coach airfare equivalent with the company. These trips are often 8 hours to 1.5 days and I get a lot of work done on the train in the quiet of my sleeper, and my Blackberry gets a good workout.

In the old days in WAS when I would take the Metroliner to Philadelphia,NYC or Boston instead of riding the old Eastern Shuttle (first time I ever saw a stewardess with a credit card machine! :lol: ) the crew I worked with thought I was nuts, a couple said stuff like: why not just walk?what the hell can you do on the train for 4 or 5 or 6 hours? I never told them the joke was on them, it was win/win, I got to ride trains and got away from the office longer!

(before cell phones and lap tops, Im ancient to you youngsters!

 

[Ispolkom]

In the old days in WAS when I would take the Metroliner to Philadelphia,NYC or Boston instead of riding the old Eastern Shuttle (first time I ever saw a stewardess with a credit card machine! :lol: ) the crew I worked with thought I was nuts, a couple said stuff like: why not just walk?what the hell can you do on the train for 4 or 5 or 6 hours? I never told them the joke was on them, it was win/win, I got to ride trains and got away from the office longer!(before cell phones and lap tops, Im ancient to you youngsters!

When I worked in Washington a decade ago, I occasionally had to travel to New York. Our organization's travel office (which in all fairness was very good at getting airline tickets to places like Ashgabat, Turkmenistan or booking a hotel in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso) could not handle Amtrak. I always had to fly.

 

[nferr]

Today, of course, business travel on the Northeast Corridor is robust and accepted by companies as legitimate travel expense because it compares favorably with air travel. Both speed and cost wise. I used to travel a lot to DC on business and it was easiest to take the Nightowl out of New Haven to arrive in DC in the morning with a decent amount of rest. This was of course when the Nightowl (and Twilight Shoreliner) had sleepers. Otherwise I had to get up in the middle of the night to drive to NYC to catch the air shuttle. The cost came out less with the Nightowl, especially when you factored in airport parking, etc. There was always a lot of business people in the sleeper on this train. Amtrak needs to bring sleeper service back to trains 66/67.

However it is one of the few trains that work well for business travel when you factor in time. Other than the Acelas and NE regionals.

 

[railiner]

There were domes (of a sort) running out of NYP for a while....the power dome coaches on the United Aircraft Turbo Train which ran to Boston. These domes had true 'look up, look down, look all around' visibility. And you could sit behind the engineer in the front row and watch him operate. A railfans delight, to be sure.

That is right,in fact I rode it once. I did not realize until getting into it that there was seating space upstairs.I do not recall it being advertised or promoted as a dome, though it really was a "low" dome,but you did get to look all around.

Here's the Turbo Dome at Boston in 1975 and a view from the Dome between New Haven and New York:

Thanks for those photos! The view out is from the 'rear' window, looking out over the length of the train to the other end, which also had a power dome coach. The train could be run from either end, so no need to wye the train. I don't recall if the seats were reversed, or simply had half facing each direction.

 

[jis]

Here are some of the sticking points that I have faced in vouchering an overnight sleeper travel at my company. The easier problem is in educating the accounting department that "Accommodation Charge" == "Lodging + Food" charge, or even just "Lodging" charge. The harder problem is that Amtrak makes the charge to the corporate credit card for the entire amount as a transportation charge. Fortunately, the web based electronic vouchering system that the company I work for uses allows you to force itemize such a charge, but then requires that the original bill be attached with the voucher. So then you have to convince accounting next that the ticket stub is the original paid up bill. After I have jumped through these hoops I have been able to voucher reasonable overnight trips say Newark to Jacksonville via 91. But it took a bit of footwork. I also had to document that the charge was less the best available fare EWR -JAX by air + one night in the hotel in JAX. Unless you have the lowest bucket fare on Amtrak this condition is almost impossible to meet, but I was lucky because the conference hotel was a somewhat expensive one.

 

[Philzy]

Of course, VIA Rail didn't have the height restrictions that Amtrak had to deal with, and the original Superliner order made all of the dome cars, whether coach sleeper or observation, largely incompatible with the future western trains. Dome cars could run out of Penn Station, or Grand Central, and they wouldn't run on the Superliner trains.

I'm not sure dome cars could run out of Penn Station either, in either direction--tunnel clearances. They put the dome on the Adirondack at Albany for that reason, and I believe the reason the Seaboard made those single-level solarium cars for the Silver Meteor was because domes wouldn't fit on the NEC and this allowed a "sightseeing" solution that didn't require an extra switching move. Southern at one point ran actual dome cars on the Crescent and other trains on that route, but those were added at or south of Washington.

A dome on the Silvers or Crescent would have to be added south of Baltimore (and maybe even south of Washington--I don't know what the clearance of that tunnel between WAS and ALX is). At WAS there are facilities to do it fairly easily, and a bit of time in the schedule, but if you can't run a dome south out of WAS you'd have to do it at, say, CVS (on the Cardinal/Crescent) or RVR (on a Silver). Then you'd need an engine crew for the switching operation and a cleaning crew to prepare the car for its next trip. And if it's a dome-observation, you have to turn it around too!

The one other place on the system where it would be easy to add a dome car is the Pennsylvanian--you have to change power at Philadelphia (or Harrisburg), so you could do the same thing you do at Albany. If Amtrak had more non-observation dome cars, they could consider this. But they don't.

Oh, and Boston to Chicago. But from Albany to Chicago is basically a night train, so there's not much point in a dome car....

I have always read that dome cars cannot run in Penn Station. And I never remember any doing so.

Southern at one time ran a dome on the Southern Crescent from ATL to NOL and from Salisbury to Asheville on the Asheville Special and also from Savannah to ATL on the Nancy Hanks (former Central of Georgia, taken over by Southern RR in it's latter years).

Atlantic Coast Line sometimes ran a dome from Richmond to Miami on the Florida Special during the winter I think Amtrak continued that practice for one or two winters.

As a kid (mid to late 80s or even early 90s) I remember dome cars or dome diners on the Auto Train before it was changed to superliner equipment. Does anyone remember this, or am I just not remembering correctly? Anyone know of pics of this? I took a quick look but not luck finding anything.

Today, of course, business travel on the Northeast Corridor is robust and accepted by companies as legitimate travel expense because it compares favorably with air travel. Both speed and cost wise. I used to travel a lot to DC on business and it was easiest to take the Nightowl out of New Haven to arrive in DC in the morning with a decent amount of rest. This was of course when the Nightowl (and Twilight Shoreliner) had sleepers. Otherwise I had to get up in the middle of the night to drive to NYC to catch the air shuttle. The cost came out less with the Nightowl, especially when you factored in airport parking, etc. There was always a lot of business people in the sleeper on this train. Amtrak needs to bring sleeper service back to trains 66/67.
However it is one of the few trains that work well for business travel when you factor in time. Other than the Acelas and NE regionals.

You are the third person in a weeks time that lives in that area and that I have heard mention this. Hopefully someone is listening. I would think that Amtrak is prob missing out on some actual business revenue where companies would pay up business fares for sleepers on that run.

 

[cpamtfan]

Philzy, you are remembering correctly. You did ride in a dome diner on the Auto Train. I think they were like the UPs old dome diners or something.

 

[Philzy]

Philzy, you are remembering correctly. You did ride in a dome diner on the Auto Train. I think they were like the UPs old dome diners or something.

ah ha! this old noodle still has some use left in it!

thanks!

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Philzy, you are remembering correctly. You did ride in a dome diner on the Auto Train. I think they were like the UPs old dome diners or something.

Ex-Milwaukee Road, I'm pretty sure, built by the Milwaukee as lounge cars and converted by Amtrak to diner service. They were pretty rotten mechanically by that point. I don't remember the exact details, but Amtrak bought them for the Auto Train. They were not conveyed to Amtrak until the mid 80s, IIRC.

 

[pismobum]

It's unbeleivable how much mis-information gets put up here when the facts are readily accessable.

i.e. earlier post

"Silver Penthouse is a BNSF Business car". It is a 'stuff and mount' snack bar

"Silver Sky is owned by VIA". It is owned by Gateway Rail and is in Illinois

"Ex-Milwaukee Road, I'm pretty sure, built by the Milwaukee as lounge cars and converted by Amtrak to diner service." - They were coaches with 66 seats upstairs and 22 seats downstairs. They were not diners

"They were pretty rotten mechanically by that point." Princess and Tour Alaska had spent a fortune refurbishing the cars for 'high end' tourism. The market (as part of the Coast Starlight) did not support them and they were sold to Amtrak.

I don't remember the exact details, but Amtrak bought them for the Auto Train. They were not conveyed to Amtrak until the mid 80s, IIRC." - 1990, and they were bought from Princess Tours.

"You did ride in a dome diner on the Auto Train. I think they were like the UPs old dome diners or something." no UP domes ever came to Amtrak, and UP's dome diners were the only ones ever built.

And FYI - Amtrak converted a series of ex GN/NP/CBQ "short" domes to HEP and some of those ran in coach/lounge service on Auto Train.

Over ten years has been spent documenting the details of all the domes ever built - info is readily available thru domecars.com

 

[Donctor]

It's unbeleivable how much mis-information gets put up here when the facts are readily accessable.Over ten years has been spent documenting the details of all the domes ever built - info is readily available thru domecars.com

Two things:

1) I find it very believable that incorrect information gets put up here. Not everyone has a perfect memory, and I'm sure that a number of posters on this forum have many things to worry about other than Amtrak stuff.

2) Good to know that the info is available. I had no idea that such a site existed.

 

[jphjaxfl]

It's unbeleivable how much mis-information gets put up here when the facts are readily accessable.
i.e. earlier post

"Silver Penthouse is a BNSF Business car". It is a 'stuff and mount' snack bar

"Silver Sky is owned by VIA". It is owned by Gateway Rail and is in Illinois

"Ex-Milwaukee Road, I'm pretty sure, built by the Milwaukee as lounge cars and converted by Amtrak to diner service." - They were coaches with 66 seats upstairs and 22 seats downstairs. They were not diners

"They were pretty rotten mechanically by that point." Princess and Tour Alaska had spent a fortune refurbishing the cars for 'high end' tourism. The market (as part of the Coast Starlight) did not support them and they were sold to Amtrak.

I don't remember the exact details, but Amtrak bought them for the Auto Train. They were not conveyed to Amtrak until the mid 80s, IIRC." - 1990, and they were bought from Princess Tours.

"You did ride in a dome diner on the Auto Train. I think they were like the UPs old dome diners or something." no UP domes ever came to Amtrak, and UP's dome diners were the only ones ever built.

And FYI - Amtrak converted a series of ex GN/NP/CBQ "short" domes to HEP and some of those ran in coach/lounge service on Auto Train.

Over ten years has been spent documenting the details of all the domes ever built - info is readily available thru domecars.com

I agree with you about the misinformation posted on this site. Some people post information that they really know nothing about. In most cases there are sources to verify information. I have kept notes on my train travels since I was a kid in the 1950s. Thank you for providing the correct information and references.

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

It's unbeleivable how much mis-information gets put up here when the facts are readily accessable.
i.e. earlier post

"Silver Penthouse is a BNSF Business car". It is a 'stuff and mount' snack bar

"Silver Sky is owned by VIA". It is owned by Gateway Rail and is in Illinois

"Ex-Milwaukee Road, I'm pretty sure, built by the Milwaukee as lounge cars and converted by Amtrak to diner service." - They were coaches with 66 seats upstairs and 22 seats downstairs. They were not diners

"They were pretty rotten mechanically by that point." Princess and Tour Alaska had spent a fortune refurbishing the cars for 'high end' tourism. The market (as part of the Coast Starlight) did not support them and they were sold to Amtrak.

I don't remember the exact details, but Amtrak bought them for the Auto Train. They were not conveyed to Amtrak until the mid 80s, IIRC." - 1990, and they were bought from Princess Tours.

"You did ride in a dome diner on the Auto Train. I think they were like the UPs old dome diners or something." no UP domes ever came to Amtrak, and UP's dome diners were the only ones ever built.

And FYI - Amtrak converted a series of ex GN/NP/CBQ "short" domes to HEP and some of those ran in coach/lounge service on Auto Train.

Over ten years has been spent documenting the details of all the domes ever built - info is readily available thru domecars.com

I agree with you about the misinformation posted on this site. Some people post information that they really know nothing about. In most cases there are sources to verify information. I have kept notes on my train travels since I was a kid in the 1950s. Thank you for providing the correct information and references.

Iphjaxfl I know what you mean about taking good notes. Only thing, I did not do so myself, and now I regret it. To this day I have certain equipment questions from the 50's which I do not think I will ever find out.

Any chance you know much about C&EI diner and lounge operations? Such as the origin of the coffee shop lounge which for about three winters ran on the Dixie Flagler? Or which trains recivd the ten new coaches in 1953. (btw I have most of the standard equipmnet books from the era,like Randall, Waynor)

I can try to justify my lack of more notes on two things: 1. I lived in denial refusing to believe the trains I grew up with would one day no longer exist,so what's to take notes about and 2. the lack of even one single friend who shared the hobby. Now, most of my friends were accepting of my hobby and most rode with me from Chattanooga to Atlanta and back---but just once. But they did not "get it".

And of course forget anything like the internet back then. Thank God for the internet, as I have said many times. NONE of us would know ANY of us with out that.

Yes, I am quite aware how certain questions keep coming up here which have been answered many times. I will not repeat them but I can rattle them off easily. But I try to keep in mind two things. One, as noted above by Amtking, many people have more things to worry about than train questions, and 2 two, not everybody has been on here nearly as long as I have and do not know how extensively certain questions have already been answered.

So, let us just be glad we have this forum and each other.

And think about how in our jobs most of have ( or had) to answer the same questions all day long from our public.

And last, but not least, there may have been a few times when I have asked the same question more than once!!! (you think?)