Another Ridership Record for Amtrak

[transit54]

March marked 17 consecutive months of year-over-year ridership growth for Amtrak, was the best March ever for the company and puts America’s Railroad on track to set another annual ridership record.

See here: http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobkey=id&blobwhere=1249224661906&blobheader=application%2Fpdf&blobheadername1=Content-disposition&blobheadervalue1=attachment;filename=Amtrak_ATK-11-046_17_Months_Ridership_Growth.pdf

 

[busboy]

So why can't Amtrak make money? Do they need to raise fares or cut costs or both? It seems ridership is robust.

 

[Anderson]

This summer is going to be one hell of a ride. Let's start placing bets on how badly routes start selling out, particularly on the sleeper side. Frankly, I think finding a sleeper on the Florida routes is going to be nearly impossible, and that's not going to be the only "bad" route for finding a bunk.

Looking at just the numbers, the only routes not showing YoY gains were mostly snowbound (the CZ, the Cascades, and the EB) or seem to be at capacity one way (the Auto Train). The outlier here is the Pennsylvanian...can someone tell me why that route has had trouble growing ridership? It seems to be stuck in park.

As to why it can't make money...the short version of the story is that there's red ink all over the place, but I suspect that we're looking at a better FY2011 in those terms as well. The problem is the fixed costs on LD routes, which are extremely high...and making things worse is the fact that Amtrak can't run twelve-car or fifteen-car trains on routes because of equipment shortages (which largely stem from lower demand in the past)...if Amtrak could run (reasonably full) long trains on some of those LD routes, there'd be a lot less red ink to pass around.

 

[Spokker]

So why can't Amtrak make money?

They make more money than freeways.

I believe that it was the Texas DOT who finally admitted that no road in Texas pays for itself. 51% of its road funding came from the gas tax in 2007. Looking at federal highway statistics, this trend is widespread.

If trains on the Northeast Corridor recover 100% of their operating costs and then some, then the fares should be lowered because there are positive externalities that are not captured by train riders that benefit non-riders.

Provide fast service between major cities and trains can make money. That's happening in at least one place in the country, and could happen in Southern California with a bit of tender, loving care (i.e. capital investment). I'm just not sure why they are expected to make money.

 

[GlobalistPotato]

Geez, imagine Boardman telling Congress "Our ridership is exceeding our capacity and our cost recovery is about 80%. If you order more cars for us, we'll turn profitable!", and the congress critters would be like "HOLAH S*** ITS THE SECOND COMING!!!". :giggle:

"Amtrak turns profitable, cats and dogs sleep with each other!" :lol:

Of course, one of the reasons why Amtrak "makes" more money than the freeways is because there's so many miles of interstate that go where Amtrak would never go, even with Montana Senators...

In the example of Texas... I-27... between Lubbock and Amarillo... very scarce traffic. Probably doesn't "pay for itself". Yet there are many advocates who want to to extend I-27 through west Texas down to Del Rio and up to Alberta... Right... :wacko:

 

[The Davy Crockett]

So why can't Amtrak make money? Do they need to raise fares or cut costs or both? It seems ridership is robust.

For the same reason "freeways" are not actually free. :blink:

Still, one has to admire the disingenuousness of the marketing person who coined the word freeway... :lol:

 

[Gratt]

Geez, imagine Boardman telling Congress "Our ridership is exceeding our capacity and our cost recovery is about 80%. If you order more cars for us, we'll turn profitable!", and the congress critters would be like "HOLAH S*** ITS THE SECOND COMING!!!". :giggle:

"Amtrak turns profitable, cats and dogs sleep with each other!" :lol:

While it would certainly be a lot of fun to make such a statement can you imagine if they call that bet :unsure: they might think it means Amtrak will be able to cover capital costs as well. :help:

But maybe Boardman can argue to keep the subsidies the same but say with more equipment they can provide more services. This could either mean additional LD routes or making longer trains and IMO adding another class of service on some trains. (making first class nicer, and making a second class)

 

[Oldsmoboi]

The outlier here is the Pennsylvanian...can someone tell me why that route has had trouble growing ridership? It seems to be stuck in park.

lack of a readily usable schedule.

Pittsburgh station is less than 100 yards from my office and I have a frequent need to get to Philly, NJ, and NYC. I try to take the Pennsylvanian as much as I can as I prefer the trip to flying... but the scheduling doesn't always play well with my needs.

The only way to get from NYC to Pittsburgh is to leave at 10:10 am... and that isn't always possible.

I've said before that the Pennsylvanian's route should be shortened and run more frequently. Cut off the east end of the Pennsylvanian at PHL, turn the train, and run it back the same day. People who need to get to points beyond can transfer to one of the many North East Regionals.

 

[transit54]

The outlier here is the Pennsylvanian...can someone tell me why that route has had trouble growing ridership? It seems to be stuck in park.

Pittsburgh-State College-NY and Pittsburgh-Philly are new routes by Megabus, sometime within the last six months or so. I wonder if ridership from Pittsburgh has been diminished because of this. My sister (who lives in Pittsburgh) will occasionally take Megabus to New York - she won't take Amtrak because there isn't WiFi, which the bus has. She says she'll consider the train again once it is equipped with WiFi, but until then she isn't interested.

 

[busboy]

This summer is going to be one hell of a ride. Let's start placing bets on how badly routes start selling out, particularly on the sleeper side. Frankly, I think finding a sleeper on the Florida routes is going to be nearly impossible, and that's not going to be the only "bad" route for finding a bunk.

Looking at just the numbers, the only routes not showing YoY gains were mostly snowbound (the CZ, the Cascades, and the EB) or seem to be at capacity one way (the Auto Train). The outlier here is the Pennsylvanian...can someone tell me why that route has had trouble growing ridership? It seems to be stuck in park.

As to why it can't make money...the short version of the story is that there's red ink all over the place, but I suspect that we're looking at a better FY2011 in those terms as well. The problem is the fixed costs on LD routes, which are extremely high...and making things worse is the fact that Amtrak can't run twelve-car or fifteen-car trains on routes because of equipment shortages (which largely stem from lower demand in the past)...if Amtrak could run (reasonably full) long trains on some of those LD routes, there'd be a lot less red ink to pass around.

Sounds like they need more cars so they can expand seats on LD trains. With the recent order of new cars, will they be using them to increase capacity or simply replace older cars being retired?

 

[afigg]

Sounds like they need more cars so they can expand seats on LD trains. With the recent order of new cars, will they be using them to increase capacity or simply replace older cars being retired?

Pretty much both, although it depends on the age & state of the equipment being retired, according to the recently updated V2 of the Fleet Strategy Plan which can be found at Amtrak document webpage: http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?c=Page&pagename=am%2FLayout&p=1237608345018&cid=1241245669222. Amtrak is getting some increase in capacity with the stimulus wreck repairs to put 60 Amfleets and 21 Superliner cars back into service. 20 of Amfleet Is are cafe cars that are being converted to coach cars so that will increase coach capacity that they did not have before.

But there is no big order for coach cars at the moment. The equipment orders have been for 130 Viewliner 2s for the eastern LD fleet and 70 electric locomotives, which are their most immediate needs. Amtrak needs more funding to buy new rolling stock. California, Illinois, NC have received funding to buy rolling stock, so if Illinois teams with CA to buy bi-levels, Amtrak may team with them to buy bi-levels for the western and mid-West routes. In the Fleet Strategy plan, the priority purchases in the coming years are replacement of 145 Amfleet IIs, 250 Superliner Is, 40 Acela cars to expand the Acela trainsets, develop a new diesel locomotive. But these are years away from service, and only if Amtrak and the states can get funding to buy more rolling stock. In the meantime, enjoy riding on the "empty" trains because nobody rides trains anymore in the US.

 

[busboy]

Sounds like they need more cars so they can expand seats on LD trains. With the recent order of new cars, will they be using them to increase capacity or simply replace older cars being retired?

Pretty much both, although it depends on the age & state of the equipment being retired, according to the recently updated V2 of the Fleet Strategy Plan which can be found at Amtrak document webpage: http://www.amtrak.co...=1241245669222. Amtrak is getting some increase in capacity with the stimulus wreck repairs to put 60 Amfleets and 21 Superliner cars back into service. 20 of Amfleet Is are cafe cars that are being converted to coach cars so that will increase coach capacity that they did not have before.

But there is no big order for coach cars at the moment. The equipment orders have been for 130 Viewliner 2s for the eastern LD fleet and 70 electric locomotives, which are their most immediate needs. Amtrak needs more funding to buy new rolling stock. California, Illinois, NC have received funding to buy rolling stock, so if Illinois teams with CA to buy bi-levels, Amtrak may team with them to buy bi-levels for the western and mid-West routes. In the Fleet Strategy plan, the priority purchases in the coming years are replacement of 145 Amfleet IIs, 250 Superliner Is, 40 Acela cars to expand the Acela trainsets, develop a new diesel locomotive. But these are years away from service, and only if Amtrak and the states can get funding to buy more rolling stock. In the meantime, enjoy riding on the "empty" trains because nobody rides trains anymore in the US.

Thanks for they synopsis. Forgive me for asking a dumb question, but what are "viewliner 2" cars? Aren't those coach seating cars? Also, when you say 70 electric locomotives, do you mean they are totally electric or are you talking about the diesel powered electric locomotives? I thought the true electric locos only ran from Washington to Boston.

 

[afigg]

Thanks for they synopsis. Forgive me for asking a dumb question, but what are "viewliner 2" cars? Aren't those coach seating cars? Also, when you say 70 electric locomotives, do you mean they are totally electric or are you talking about the diesel powered electric locomotives? I thought the true electric locos only ran from Washington to Boston.

The 130 Viewliner 2 order is to replace the Heritage baggage, diner, crew dorm cars and expand the number of single level sleeper cars. The order is, IIRC, 55 baggage cars, 25 diners, 25 baggage-dorms, 25 sleeper cars to replace the 50-60 year old baggage & diner cars and expand the sleeper capacity for the single level fleet by more than 1/2 because the crew will use the baggage-dorm cars. No coach cars in the order - so far. The baggage cars get used across the LD fleet including the western LD trains.

The electric locomotives are the 70 ACS-64 locomotives ordered to replace the AEM-7 and HHP-8 electric locomotives that are used on the electrified NEC and Keystone East corridors. The first units get delivered in 2013. The HHP-8s may stick around as a reserve and expansion fleet for some time.

 

[Eric S]

As to why it can't make money...the short version of the story is that there's red ink all over the place, but I suspect that we're looking at a better FY2011 in those terms as well. The problem is the fixed costs on LD routes, which are extremely high...and making things worse is the fact that Amtrak can't run twelve-car or fifteen-car trains on routes because of equipment shortages (which largely stem from lower demand in the past)...if Amtrak could run (reasonably full) long trains on some of those LD routes, there'd be a lot less red ink to pass around.

Which LD costs are you defining as fixed? (Not trying to be argumentative, just want to make sure I understand your statement.)

 

[GlobalistPotato]

Thanks for they synopsis. Forgive me for asking a dumb question, but what are "viewliner 2" cars? Aren't those coach seating cars? Also, when you say 70 electric locomotives, do you mean they are totally electric or are you talking about the diesel powered electric locomotives? I thought the true electric locos only ran from Washington to Boston.

The 130 Viewliner 2 order is to replace the Heritage baggage, diner, crew dorm cars and expand the number of single level sleeper cars. The order is, IIRC, 55 baggage cars, 25 diners, 25 baggage-dorms, 25 sleeper cars to replace the 50-60 year old baggage & diner cars and expand the sleeper capacity for the single level fleet by more than 1/2 because the crew will use the baggage-dorm cars. No coach cars in the order - so far. The baggage cars get used across the LD fleet including the western LD trains.

The electric locomotives are the 70 ACS-64 locomotives ordered to replace the AEM-7 and HHP-8 electric locomotives that are used on the electrified NEC and Keystone East corridors. The first units get delivered in 2013. The HHP-8s may stick around as a reserve and expansion fleet for some time.

Will these Viewliner cars also have the "double windows" that the current Viewliner sleepers have?

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

Honestly if Amtrak managed the market better I think they could make a profit on more individual routes, quite a few are very close to breaking even. When trains are selling out months in advance any business person will tell you to raise prices to maximize revenue.

Amtrak really needs to work on an ARROW replacement, and the new system needs to be able to flex the prices to ensure maximum revenue is achieved while keeping the trains as full as possible. Ideally a train should not sell out until a few hours before departure. Amtrak could jack up prices when seats/rooms sell very quickly to control the rate of sale and lower prices when ticket sales get sluggish, this is essentially what the airlines do.

Of course the other solution to sold out trains is to add capacity, but we all know that is not possible in the short term with the equipment shortages.

 

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

As to why it can't make money...the short version of the story is that there's red ink all over the place, but I suspect that we're looking at a better FY2011 in those terms as well. The problem is the fixed costs on LD routes, which are extremely high...and making things worse is the fact that Amtrak can't run twelve-car or fifteen-car trains on routes because of equipment shortages (which largely stem from lower demand in the past)...if Amtrak could run (reasonably full) long trains on some of those LD routes, there'd be a lot less red ink to pass around.

Which LD costs are you defining as fixed? (Not trying to be argumentative, just want to make sure I understand your statement.)

I think he is referring to infrastructure and other physical plant costs as well as some labor costs. No matter how many trains or how many cars are on those trains, you will still pay the same for the station and platform maintenance and for the agents at the station. Why pay for an agent to work 8hrs a day for one train each way, when you could pay an agent the same amount for the same hours and run 2 trains? Same thing goes for 10 car trains vs 15-20 car trains.

 

[afigg]

Will these Viewliner cars also have the "double windows" that the current Viewliner sleepers have?

Since the new cars are based on the Viewliner modular design, the double windows are expected to be on the new cars - except for the baggage cars which don't need windows - but there have been no drawings or much information released about the new Viewliners. The first units are to be delivered in the fall of 2012 and probably won't enter service until 2013.

 

[afigg]

I think he is referring to infrastructure and other physical plant costs as well as some labor costs. No matter how many trains or how many cars are on those trains, you will still pay the same for the station and platform maintenance and for the agents at the station. Why pay for an agent to work 8hrs a day for one train each way, when you could pay an agent the same amount for the same hours and run 2 trains? Same thing goes for 10 car trains vs 15-20 car trains.

Fixed costs per train also includes trackage fees to the freight railroads, the cost of the fuel, depreciation and maintenance on the equipment, and how the overhead is allocated to the LD train.

 

[transit54]

Amtrak really needs to work on an ARROW replacement, and the new system needs to be able to flex the prices to ensure maximum revenue is achieved while keeping the trains as full as possible. Ideally a train should not sell out until a few hours before departure. Amtrak could jack up prices when seats/rooms sell very quickly to control the rate of sale and lower prices when ticket sales get sluggish, this is essentially what the airlines do.

I just don't know how much Amtrak could benefit from raising prices. Airlines can do it because they are vastly faster than all other modes of transportation. Need to get there quickly? You don't have much of a choice.

I think non-NEC riders (and NEC riders for longer segments like BOS-WAS) are much more price sensitive than fliers, partly due to the longer travel times. This may not apply to LD sleepers, I'm more discussing this is reference to corridor routes.

I've been increasing my use of the Vermonter lately, namely it's gotten cheaper since the State began offering 20% off on some days with a promotion they've been running the past year or two. At $40 per trip to southwestern Connecticut, that's a lot cheaper than $85-$90 to fly JetBlue and then pay about $12-$15 in costs to get from the airport. At $60 or $70 a trip, I'll fly - from origin to final destination I can do the trip in 4-5 hours versus 9+ on the train. I love taking the train, but there's one train a day and it takes a while - it's also a train I've been on upwards of 35 times, so the scenery is not exactly new.

I think a lot of people are in my position - they see the train as a great value versus flying or driving. Raising prices substantially is going to hurt ridership figures (which help build political support for additional trains) and I think push many riders to other modes of travel. The only time Amtrak has substantial price flexibility it's when it's the fastest (certain NEC segments) or when it's offering something very unique (sleeper travel, for instance). I just don't see it being advantageous to substantially raise prices. Amtrak is only at 55 or 60% capacity on average across all trains - I'd rather see efforts focused on bringing additional frequencies online (funding, equipment) that will drive even more people to take the train.

 

[Anderson]

As to why it can't make money...the short version of the story is that there's red ink all over the place, but I suspect that we're looking at a better FY2011 in those terms as well. The problem is the fixed costs on LD routes, which are extremely high...and making things worse is the fact that Amtrak can't run twelve-car or fifteen-car trains on routes because of equipment shortages (which largely stem from lower demand in the past)...if Amtrak could run (reasonably full) long trains on some of those LD routes, there'd be a lot less red ink to pass around.

Which LD costs are you defining as fixed? (Not trying to be argumentative, just want to make sure I understand your statement.)

I think he is referring to infrastructure and other physical plant costs as well as some labor costs. No matter how many trains or how many cars are on those trains, you will still pay the same for the station and platform maintenance and for the agents at the station. Why pay for an agent to work 8hrs a day for one train each way, when you could pay an agent the same amount for the same hours and run 2 trains? Same thing goes for 10 car trains vs 15-20 car trains.

Bingo. Look at the four LD trains out west: They all share Chicago (or New Orleans, in the case of the Sunset) and their West Coast terminals with other trains. The EB also shares Milwaukee with the Hiawathas; the others share stations out to St. Louis, Kansas City, and the IA border, the CZ shares a corridor in CA, and you've got the Heartland Flier with one overlap in Texas. On the intervening routes, though, it's one train per day each way, so all of those costs go to that one train. Yes, I know that some stations are unstaffed Amshacks, but even then you often still have to maintain the station and parking lot, and it all accrues to your lone LD train.

Running a longer train probably won't affect rent from the RRs...that's fixed per-train but an additional frequency will require additional costs there. Also, I don't think going from eight cars to nine (plus the engines) increases the train's fuel consumption by 10%...I think a lot of the fuel consumption is consumed just to run the engine at a given speed, period.

 

[afigg]

Pittsburgh-State College-NY and Pittsburgh-Philly are new routes by Megabus, sometime within the last six months or so. I wonder if ridership from Pittsburgh has been diminished because of this. My sister (who lives in Pittsburgh) will occasionally take Megabus to New York - she won't take Amtrak because there isn't WiFi, which the bus has. She says she'll consider the train again once it is equipped with WiFi, but until then she isn't interested.

Makes sense if Megabus is in the market. The slow trip times from Harrisburg to Pitt with a single daily train makes it difficult for the Pennsylvanian to compete. Can't do much about the trip times in the near future, but if/when Wi-Fi is added to the Pennsylvanian, it will be interesting to see if there is a ridership bump for it after that happens.

If PA and Amtrak can get the funding they applied for the Keystone East, the 20 minute HAR-PHL trip time improvements and speed increases to 125 mph in the Keystone service trains should in the long term should help build support for first making some improvements in the current Harrisburg-Pitt service while getting started on a new real HSR ROW to Pittsburgh. Someday maybe.

 

[AlanB]

Honestly if Amtrak managed the market better I think they could make a profit on more individual routes, quite a few are very close to breaking even. When trains are selling out months in advance any business person will tell you to raise prices to maximize revenue.

Amtrak really needs to work on an ARROW replacement, and the new system needs to be able to flex the prices to ensure maximum revenue is achieved while keeping the trains as full as possible. Ideally a train should not sell out until a few hours before departure. Amtrak could jack up prices when seats/rooms sell very quickly to control the rate of sale and lower prices when ticket sales get sluggish, this is essentially what the airlines do.

Amtrak's revenue management team already does all of what you suggest. Perhaps a newer, updated system might make things a bit easier for them; but they currently make adjustments to the number of rooms/seats in any given bucket for any given train all the time as demand and sales change.

 

[AlanB]

Will these Viewliner cars also have the "double windows" that the current Viewliner sleepers have?

Since the new cars are based on the Viewliner modular design, the double windows are expected to be on the new cars - except for the baggage cars which don't need windows - but there have been no drawings or much information released about the new Viewliners. The first units are to be delivered in the fall of 2012 and probably won't enter service until 2013.

The dining cars and the new sleepers will have the same double row of windows that the current Viewliner I sleepers have. The baggage/dorms will have the double row of windows only on the dorm end; the bag end will not have any windows other than those in the outside loading doors. I presume based upon that, the the full bags will not have the double row of windows also.

And as has been noted in other threads, the new sleepers will not have the in-room toilets for the roomettes. This will see the attendant's room which is currently room #14 move to room #12 and room #14 across from the shower will become 2 public bathrooms.

 

[jis]

Will these Viewliner cars also have the "double windows" that the current Viewliner sleepers have?

Since the new cars are based on the Viewliner modular design, the double windows are expected to be on the new cars - except for the baggage cars which don't need windows - but there have been no drawings or much information released about the new Viewliners. The first units are to be delivered in the fall of 2012 and probably won't enter service until 2013.

Though no drawings have been released to the public, some of us have had an opportunity to review the drawings through various sources. Yes they do have two rows of windows like in the old Viewliners. And yes, whether you like it or not the roomettes do not have toilet facilities in them, and they do have fluted sides.