Sleeper pricing on Lake Shore Limited

[MikeM]

Slow day at the office today, thoughts turned to an upcoming trip in September from Kansas to the Boston area for a meeting. Got thinking, I wonder how much it'd cost to do Amtrak? SWC to Chicago, then Lake Shore to Boston, spend two days on the train, do the meeting, two days back more or less (getting into Newton in the middle of the night of day 3).

Loaded this all into the Amtrak website, and about died. Even several months out, the economy bedrooms were running around $400 for one night. By comparison, if I routed via Washington, economy rooms were about $200 or thereabouts. But even the economy BR on the SWC from CHI to NEW was $222 WB.

Think those are normal pricing for this train? Any suggestions? Has anyone heard if any new sleepers may be on line by then? I just ran through Expedia, and a one connection flight would run around $300. A bit of a challenge to pitch four times the cost to the significant other.

One special bonus question I'd like to toss out... I read somewhere there was some discussion about returning some old heritage sleepers back to service for crews use only. Is there anything to this, or just delusional rumblings?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Trogdor]

None of the new Viewliner cars are expected until the end of 2012.

 

[jis]

Loaded this all into the Amtrak website, and about died. Even several months out, the economy bedrooms were running around $400 for one night. By comparison, if I routed via Washington, economy rooms were about $200 or thereabouts. But even the economy BR on the SWC from CHI to NEW was $222 WB.

Think those are normal pricing for this train?

Pretty much. LSL is one of the most heavily patronized trains of the system

Any suggestions? Has anyone heard if any new sleepers may be on line by then?

No new sleepers will be on line by then

I just ran through Expedia, and a one connection flight would run around $300. A bit of a challenge to pitch four times the cost to the significant other.

Yes

One special bonus question I'd like to toss out... I read somewhere there was some discussion about returning some old heritage sleepers back to service for crews use only. Is there anything to this, or just delusional rumblings?

That is indeed the plan but they are unlikely to be on line by your travel date either.

I will be at the New England NARP meeting tomorrow and senior Amtrak folks will be there. I will see if I can find out anything more on the time lines on these and post if I find out something.

 

[the_traveler]

It's also called supply and demand. The more demand there is, the higher the fare. One suggestion is to check #48 or #448 and #49 or #449 between CHI and ALB for a roomette. (Trains #48 and #448 and trains #49 and #449 operate combined between CHI and ALB. #48 and #49 run between ALB and NYP with 2-3 sleepers, while #448 and #449 run between ALB and BOS with 1 sleeper. There may be different fares on "each train".)

 

[transit54]

I will be at the New England NARP meeting tomorrow and senior Amtrak folks will be there. I will see if I can find out anything more on the time lines on these and post if I find out something.

Keep your eyes open for me... I'll be there too...

 

[dlagrua]

Its a shame that sleeper prices on the LSL are going through the roof but in reality there are only two sleeper cars on most LD routes. That limits Amtrak to selling only about 2 dozen availabe rooomettes and 4 bedrooms. They could probably sell triple that number on that route but again (and we've heard it many times) there is no extra equipment to spare. Therefore you pay through the nose! Ouch!

 

[BobWeaver]

Its a shame that sleeper prices on the LSL are going through the roof but in reality there are only two sleeper cars on most LD routes. That limits Amtrak to selling only about 2 dozen availabe rooomettes and 4 bedrooms. They could probably sell triple that number on that route but again (and we've heard it many times) there is no extra equipment to spare. Therefore you pay through the nose! Ouch!

But yet they order only an additional 25 Viewliners in their order to CAF, an amount will basically put just one more Viewliner on per train, maybe 2 on some runs. I about hit the fan when I heard the news of this order because of the relative lack of future capacity planning, but any order is a good order I suppose.

However, isn't that kind of the max that Amtrak can do without creating a shortage of dining car/cafe car space? In other words, isn't the current amount of cars on an LD train (2-3 sleepers, 4 coach) a good balance for the food service space? How many more cars can be put into an LD train's consist without having these cars (and the baggage cars for that matter) begin to bust at the seams?

 

[AlanB]

Bob,

Yes I suspect that 3 sleepers is probably pushing things to the max for the dining car. The Meteor already struggles a bit with 3 sleepers, the LSL less so since it only serves dinner going west, and they tend to get the NY crowd done by Albany, then reset for the Boston sleeper and those boarding in Albany.

But even on trains like the Empire Builder, which has 3 full sleepers plus 4 rooms typically sold in the Trans/Dorm, it becomes near impossible to get a reservation as a coach passenger for dinner in the diner. And the EB isn't following SDS procedures, which means more staffing and filling the car to the max, plus of course the Superliner diner seats 68 while the best single level diners seat 48 and some only hit 40.

This is why the plan to add one of the wrecked sleepers to the EB to increase capacity also included putting a CCC on the EB, so as to increase dining capacity. It also served to provide dining car service to the Portland section between Portland & Spokane, as well as allowing the cafe in the Sightseer Lounge to go to Seattle so that they didn't have to run a cafe out of one of the booths in the dining car.

As for the small size of the order, I think that had as much to do with what Amtrak hoped they could actually get funding for out of Congress, as well as the size of the downpayment that Amtrak had to make to get the ball rolling. They do have an option for more cars, assuming that they can get the money to exercise that option.

 

[AlanB]

Ps. Besides the real purpose of this order was to get rid of the Heritage fleet, namely the dining cars and the baggage cars. While they were at it, they decided to ease the shortage of single level sleepers and give them some operating flexibility and additional maintenance time. Boosting capacity on the trains is really low on the totem pole.

 

[PerRock]

I just ran through Expedia, and a one connection flight would run around $300. A bit of a challenge to pitch four times the cost to the significant other.

Think about it this way: On Amtrak your higher price for a sleeper is including a hotel fare* (for the overnight) and all your meals in a restaurant, as well as access to the First Class (called Metropolitan Lounges on Amtrak) at the main terminals (Chicago & Boston, if Boston has one...) And you get a interesting view out your window.

Whereas your Expedia flight is most likely a small seat (economy I assume you quoted us), and a beverage or two (if your lucky a small bag of nuts as well).

Hence why I keep telling people that if they're gonna compare flights to trains, compare a coach seat to an economy ticket. and a Sleeper compartment with a 1st class ticket.

peter

*not actually a hotel, but the sleeper cars could be considered to be Hotels on wheels

 

[BobWeaver]

Bob,

Yes I suspect that 3 sleepers is probably pushing things to the max for the dining car. The Meteor already struggles a bit with 3 sleepers, the LSL less so since it only serves dinner going west, and they tend to get the NY crowd done by Albany, then reset for the Boston sleeper and those boarding in Albany.

But even on trains like the Empire Builder, which has 3 full sleepers plus 4 rooms typically sold in the Trans/Dorm, it becomes near impossible to get a reservation as a coach passenger for dinner in the diner. And the EB isn't following SDS procedures, which means more staffing and filling the car to the max, plus of course the Superliner diner seats 68 while the best single level diners seat 48 and some only hit 40.

This is why the plan to add one of the wrecked sleepers to the EB to increase capacity also included putting a CCC on the EB, so as to increase dining capacity. It also served to provide dining car service to the Portland section between Portland & Spokane, as well as allowing the cafe in the Sightseer Lounge to go to Seattle so that they didn't have to run a cafe out of one of the booths in the dining car.

As for the small size of the order, I think that had as much to do with what Amtrak hoped they could actually get funding for out of Congress, as well as the size of the downpayment that Amtrak had to make to get the ball rolling. They do have an option for more cars, assuming that they can get the money to exercise that option.

I was served breakfast as well when I was on the LSL 2 weeks ago. Do you think we'll see Amtrak run an LD train with 5-6 sleepers, 6-7 coaches, 2 cafes, and maybe 2 diners before they introduce a second daily frequency on a particular route? (Purely theoretical)

 

[the_traveler]

First Class (called Metropolitan Lounges on Amtrak) at the main terminals (Chicago & Boston, if Boston has one...)

BOS does not have a Metropolitan Lounge, but does have a Club Acela! IMO, it is probably the best CA!

 

[gswager]

I was served breakfast as well when I was on the LSL 2 weeks ago. Do you think we'll see Amtrak run an LD train with 5-6 sleepers, 6-7 coaches, 2 cafes, and maybe 2 diners before they introduce a second daily frequency on a particular route? (Purely theoretical)

That's what I was thinking about it, but you'll need a longer platform or double or triple stops at the platform.

 

[AlanB]

I was served breakfast as well when I was on the LSL 2 weeks ago.

Yes, in both directions one gets breakfast. I didn't mention that since that's an easier meal to do. First, not everyone comes to breakfast. And then you don't have salads & deserts, so turn over is faster. The food is easier and faster to cook, again increasing turnover in the dining car.

Dinner is the deciding meal if you will, it takes the most time and is hardest on the crew. It's also the one meal that most people will come to eat no matter what; they may skip one of the others. So you sort of have to set your total train capacity on how many people can you push through that dining car at dinner time.

Do you think we'll see Amtrak run an LD train with 5-6 sleepers, 6-7 coaches, 2 cafes, and maybe 2 diners before they introduce a second daily frequency on a particular route? (Purely theoretical)

Not without more cars.

I could see the LSL possibly growing to 4 cars; I see the Cardinal perhaps getting 1 more sleeper, especially if it goes daily; and then there is the plan for the Pennsy to carry a sleeper to attach to the Capitol in Pittsburgh between there and Chicago. I suspect that the rest of the new Viewliner sleepers will be used to free up Viewliner I's as protect cars and to allow for increased down time for maintenance.

And of course without more Superliner sleepers, I don't see much more happening on that side of things. This despite the fact that the AT could use 1 or 2 more; the EB easily 2 more, one Seattle one Portland; and the CZ needs another for sure. I suspect that both the Eagle and the Chief could use 1 more at least seasonally, if not year round; and the Coast Starlight could do with another seasonally, bringing it to 4. Based upon my one run on the Sunset, west of NOL, it could use one more too. However, I'm not sure if it needs it year round or just seasonally. And of course going daily would change things dramatically.

 

[afigg]

Ps. Besides the real purpose of this order was to get rid of the Heritage fleet, namely the dining cars and the baggage cars. While they were at it, they decided to ease the shortage of single level sleepers and give them some operating flexibility and additional maintenance time. Boosting capacity on the trains is really low on the totem pole.

The baggage dorms will add some capacity as well, of course, by freeing up roomettes used by the crew. The Viewliner order is a 5 year contract, presumably with the last cars delivered in 2015 or so. If ridership and the ticket revenue for the LD trains continues to increase, wonder how long the option is available to exercise the option order or some part of it? I think increased oil and fuel prices over the next 3-5 years are going to really start to hurt the airlines and Amtrak should be ready to take advantage of it - for both corridor and LD services.

 

[Anderson]

Ok, two segues off of the main topic here:

1) Is there a reason, other than age alone, that Amtrak is sufficiently hot to trot to ditch the Heritage cars? I know that most of the fleet that went in the '90s went in no small part due to ADA issues. Here, that's not as much of a problem, but at the same time I know there are other possible issues (maintenance is something I don't know the nuances of, but those cars still seem to be riding fine, and capacity has been mentioned as well).

2) On the sleeper front, I am beginning to wonder about two possibilities:

-When do the sleeper fares, as an aggregate, start verging into profitability? Looking back to that data I dug up, sleeper passengers are paying respectably close to the same total that a Pullman passenger would have at anything other than the low bucket in a roomette, and a low bucket bedroom is more expensive than the Pullman stuff was back in the late 60s. There's a line here somewhere; I just don't know where it is.

-Accepting that dining services are a loss leader as a whole, if you could pack a train full of sleeper passengers, when is it going to make more sense for Amtrak to simply deal with either a second diner or having dining services take over part of the cafe car (Yes, I know the latter is a mess waiting to happen, but it seems to be where the math is going with that mention on the Empire Builder)? For that matter, at what point would it make sense for Amtrak to start running an all-sleeper down to Florida?

Edit: And of course, a third question comes up: I believe that all of the Viewliner trains could, in theory, run as Superliners from "point X" onward: Washington for the southbound ones and Albany for the LSL (I do not know about the BOS-ALB route). Mixed consists appear yet again in my mind.

 

[Ryan]

On the Heritage cars, it's a maintenance issue. They worn out, and every part that needs to be replaces at this point likely has to be custom manufactured.

 

[Anderson]

A part of me is actually amused at an unintentional deduction from that: If Amtrak hadn't had to get rid of the rest of the Heritage fleet in the 90s due to the retention toilet issues, it would be easier to keep the diners around. Ahh, economies of scale.

 

[Ispolkom]

A part of me is actually amused at an unintentional deduction from that: If Amtrak hadn't had to get rid of the rest of the Heritage fleet in the 90s due to the retention toilet issues, it would be easier to keep the diners around. Ahh, economies of scale.

If you have to custom-make replacement parts how are there economies of scale?

 

[Anderson]

A part of me is actually amused at an unintentional deduction from that: If Amtrak hadn't had to get rid of the rest of the Heritage fleet in the 90s due to the retention toilet issues, it would be easier to keep the diners around. Ahh, economies of scale.

If you have to custom-make replacement parts how are there economies of scale?

A "custom make" implies that you're ordering them in ones and twos. If you've got lots of cars, then you can bulk order parts. VIA doesn't seem to be having this problem with their Budd fleet, but I suspect it's because they have a lot of the cars. If Amtrak had a hundred of the older Budd cars, they could put in an order for "20 X parts, 50 Y parts, and 25 Z parts" and have it make sense. Having only around 20 of the cars, however, makes it more expensive per-car to maintain.

In manufacturing, it's a good rule that the first of anything costs a lot while the second onward are far cheaper. If someone comes into my family's machine shop and wants one of a part that they have a copy of on hand, it'll cost them X. Once they do that, though, we can usually make 4-5 of X for a similar price (for something relatively simple...for something complicated, it might be 2-3 of X instead).

 

[dlagrua]

I don't see pricing on the LSL letting up any time soon. if they added another sleeper; maybe.

I see the Cardinal perhaps getting 1 more sleeper, especially if it goes daily

Alan: It is logical that the Cardinal is in dire need of an additonal sleeping car. As for daily; The Cardinal has an average 28+ hour schedule and that might make it impractical to maintain and utilize only one train for daily service.

 

[the_traveler]

I believe that all of the Viewliner trains could, in theory, run as Superliners from "point X" onward: Washington for the southbound ones and Albany for the LSL (I do not know about the BOS-ALB route).

Most passengers prefer a one seat ride. When the Cardinal was a Superliner train and only ran to WAS, then switched to Amfleet cars and ran to NYP, the ridership rose dramatically!

Also, with a mixed set, I don't think many passengers would be happy getting on (I know I wouldn't) being told that if you're going to CHW or WAS you can sit in the Superliner cars. If you're going to BAL or PHL, you must sit in the Amfleet Cars. Another thing is what kind of Dining Car would it carry, because they serve meals prior to WAS (Superliner) and also between WAS and NYP (Amfleet)?

Or would it carry 2 Dining Cars?

The same situation with the LSL. People boarding or going to NYP must sit in the Amfleet Cars, and BOS passengers can sit in the Superliner Cars! (And yes, the ALB-BOS route can take Superliners.) And the same with the Dining Car. The LSL serves dinner between NYP and ALB, so that must be Amfleet, but it also serves meals between BOS and ALB, so would they be Superliner?

And would the LSL carry 2 Dining Cars?

 

[AlanB]

I don't see pricing on the LSL letting up any time soon. if they added another sleeper; maybe.

I see the Cardinal perhaps getting 1 more sleeper, especially if it goes daily

Alan: It is logical that the Cardinal is in dire need of an additonal sleeping car. As for daily; The Cardinal has an average 28+ hour schedule and that might make it impractical to maintain and utilize only one train for daily service.

Even now the Cardinal requires two trainsets. I'm not sure if daily would require three or four sets, I've never looked at the schedule to figure that out. I suspect that 3 is possible, although it would be tight to do so in Chicago.

 

[Trogdor]

A daily Cardinal would require three sets. The train already turns same-day on Thursday and Saturday.

 

[Anderson]

I believe that all of the Viewliner trains could, in theory, run as Superliners from "point X" onward: Washington for the southbound ones and Albany for the LSL (I do not know about the BOS-ALB route).

Most passengers prefer a one seat ride. When the Cardinal was a Superliner train and only ran to WAS, then switched to Amfleet cars and ran to NYP, the ridership rose dramatically!

Also, with a mixed set, I don't think many passengers would be happy getting on (I know I wouldn't) being told that if you're going to CHW or WAS you can sit in the Superliner cars. If you're going to BAL or PHL, you must sit in the Amfleet Cars. Another thing is what kind of Dining Car would it carry, because they serve meals prior to WAS (Superliner) and also between WAS and NYP (Amfleet)?

Or would it carry 2 Dining Cars?

The same situation with the LSL. People boarding or going to NYP must sit in the Amfleet Cars, and BOS passengers can sit in the Superliner Cars! (And yes, the ALB-BOS route can take Superliners.) And the same with the Dining Car. The LSL serves dinner between NYP and ALB, so that must be Amfleet, but it also serves meals between BOS and ALB, so would they be Superliner?

And would the LSL carry 2 Dining Cars?

I get the one seat ride thing. On the LSL: I'd say do a Superliner diner for capacity's sake, but block a seating or two post-Albany off for the New York folks. Add another NYP sleeper, and have a "short" consist ALB-BOS that included just the diner, a coach, and a sleeper.

On the Cardinal, though it would require some footwork in WAS, honestly, I think they could merge its NEC consist with the Palmetto and add the full diner at WAS. Split the consists at DC and add a set of Superliners. The Crescent and one of the Meteors struck me as possible candidates for this as well; honestly, with some limited schedule shuffling, you could probably run two Viewliner trains to WAS which would then become four "mixed" trains, though the Palmetto and Cardinal could just as easily run as single-level trains the whole way, but with added cars on both.

Similarly, if Amtrak wanted to run through cars from the Capitol Limited onto one of the Silvers, you'd probably be better off with a "breakoff" train to go north (avoiding the loss of the NYP-WAS passengers that was lamented as a possibility), and if you used a Superliner diner, this wouldn't be the biggest issue in the world.

And yes, on that last one I do think that Amtrak could, if they chose not to re-establish the Silver Palm, they could run a train long enough to justify two diners down the coast. After all, it's diner capacity that's capping sleeper numbers on the Silvers more than anything.