Sleeper pricing on Lake Shore Limited

[PerRock]

why not just position them with a transition sleeper (or convert some to trans-coachs) between the Supers & single-level stuff?

peter

 

[Anderson]

Peter,

I considered that implied. If nothing else, a transition sleeper gives you a carload of roomettes.

Another thought that leaped to mind: Would it be theoretically possible to extend, either through hook or crook through cars or an extended train a FL run to BOS? I'd be thinking a through coach and through sleeper out of Boston if you just stuck it on the back of a Regional.

 

[BobWeaver]

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.

Well obviously I know it's not possible to do that right now with the current number of cars in the fleet, hence why I said "purely theoretical." My main question was asking opinions on if you thought Amtrak would be more inclined to extend an extending once-daily LD train to the above size if they had sufficient cars in the fleet versus instituting a second-daily train of current length.

 

[Ryan]

I think that Amtrak would absolutely go for a single longer train over a second frequency. It'll be much cheaper, as you wouldn't have to pay for a second operating crew. Amtrak would also have to negotiate for a second operating slot from the host RR's and likely extend the operating hours of stations along that route.

 

[jis]

All this talk about converting parts of eastern trains to Superliner is significantly disconnected from a few pieces of reality:

1. After the Viewliner order is delivered relatively speaking there will be a greater Superliner shortage specially of Sleeper and food service kind than single level LD equipment shortage, even more so if the option on the Viewliner order is exercised, which is under very serious consideration.

2. No plans at present to order more Superliner Sleepers and food service cars in the near future. Corridor services Coaches is what is contemplated first.

3. If more Superliners were to become available, would you use them in eastern trains or would you deploy them for system expansion with the restoration of the likes of the Pioneer, Desert Wind, Lone Star and North Coast Hiawatha - figuratively speaking?

All in all it does not make sense to deploy Superliners on eastern trains that must run part of their distance to the largest O/D locations in the east coast by an order of magnitude, using single level only and be able to use high level platform stations, and where there will be a significant drop in patronage if two seat ride is imposed.

 

[afigg]

Another thought that leaped to mind: Would it be theoretically possible to extend, either through hook or crook through cars or an extended train a FL run to BOS? I'd be thinking a through coach and through sleeper out of Boston if you just stuck it on the back of a Regional.

I don't think Amtrak would want to do car switching in NYP. Now if they could set up a cross platform transfer in NYP from a BOS-NYP Regional to some of the LD trains, that might work. But the scheduling and management of the track assignments in a very busy NYP along with the narrow crowded platforms would present a challenge. Also, more reliable BOS to NYP service would be a must because they would not want to hold up a LD train and miss a slot because the Boston origin regional got jammed up in Metro-North territory.

 

[jis]

Another thought that leaped to mind: Would it be theoretically possible to extend, either through hook or crook through cars or an extended train a FL run to BOS? I'd be thinking a through coach and through sleeper out of Boston if you just stuck it on the back of a Regional.

I don't think Amtrak would want to do car switching in NYP. Now if they could set up a cross platform transfer in NYP from a BOS-NYP Regional to some of the LD trains, that might work. But the scheduling and management of the track assignments in a very busy NYP along with the narrow crowded platforms would present a challenge. Also, more reliable BOS to NYP service would be a must because they would not want to hold up a LD train and miss a slot because the Boston origin regional got jammed up in Metro-North territory.

If such were to be done at all, the logical switching place would be in Washington DC (where at least engine switching has to be done anyway), and not in New York for reasons that afigg mentions. But this won't be feasible until 125mph capable Viewliners become available anyway, since doing so before that would cause a Regional in the middle of the day to have to slow down and require a different sort of slot, which would be a bad thing.

 

[Anderson]

Doing it at WAS would make sense, too; honestly, the switch is very much six-of-one, half-a-dozen-of-the-other. You might want to lock in NYP-WAS and below at a higher bucket on the Boston cars. WAS has one other advantage: The schedule is already "buffered" by the engine switch, so you could probably slip an extra 15 minutes in on the schedule to guard against delays on the Boston side, as well as just "planning" on it coming in on an earlier Regional (the 173 leaps to mind as a "decent" connection with the Meteor; it would probably have to be 95 for the Star, though that has a lousy departing time...both offer a respectable buffer against delays, too, though a lengthy delay would naturally present issues...though when does it not?).