why no business class on "the adirondack"?

[yarrow]

why just reserved coach and no business class on "the adirondack"?

 

[SubwayNut]

Historical reasons I think since it has always been a 403 train directly supported by the State of New York (north of Albany) and through the 1990s had its own special fleet of Adirondack branded Heritage Coaches.

I know this has been discussed before.

 

[the_traveler]

It was only very recent that the Adirondack got Amfleet II's. Previously, it only carried Amfleet I's.

 

[AlanB]

I've also heard that the CBSA doesn't want a BC car as they don't want to have BC pax watching what goes on when they bring people to the cafe for inspections. The Adirondack is the only train that still has onboard inspections. Not sure if that is indeed the reason; just something that I've heard.

 

[battalion51]

Alan, if that's the case that problem may be able to be solved when the contained border crossing station gets set up in Montreal.

 

[Blackwolf]

Personally, I'd be inclined to just put a BC car on the train and let CBSA simply deal with it. It's not their job to dictate what equipment gets run on a common carrier. This would be akin to arguing against a Boeing 767 but demanding an Airbus A-330.

After all, it's about service to the customers. Not the gatekeepers.

 

[battalion51]

I'd guess privacy concerns probably have something to do with it. The CBSA has a lot of power when it comes to what they want. In an environment like an airport or the facility in Vancouver they have separate interview areas where they can question people in private, and distance in between the queue line and the agents for initial processing. Hard to do that on board a train if people are sitting ten feet away...

 

[Anderson]

Well, nothing says it would have to be one of the BC/Cafe cars. Depending on what was provided in the package, I suspect the Adirondack could support a full BC car. Actually, given the length of the trip and the number of folks making the "endpoint trip" from NYP-MTR (from what I can tell, the Adirondack has the largest share of passengers traveling from end to end of any train in the system save the Auto Train), they could probably sell a class with something closer to "actual" meal service a la Acela First Class on the Adirondack and not do too badly with it. I ran the numbers at one point, but I forget what the "upcharge" would need to be to break even on something like this, with a car with 2-1 seating, etc.

 

[jis]

If New York State came into some additional money, then I believe food service between New York and Albany will take priority over BC on the Adirondack or at seat food service on any NY operated train. It's mostly a question of subsidy amounts. It has always been so. And what is feasible is always a function of the delicate regional balance between upstate vs. downstate and now the Adirondack region vs. the West. It is fascinating to watch these discussions about funding Empire Service and its various aspects even at an ESPA Meeting. The Adirondack requires much larger amount of subsidy per passenger when compared to the rest of Empire Service as it is. It has been on the verge of cancellation or truncation to Plattsburgh every 3 to 5 years in its entire existence under Amtrak. So we are generally happy that it has survived unscathed so far.

 

[railiner]

If the Adirondack has so many 'end-to-end' passenger's, why would they want to cut the service back to Plattsburgh? It would seem that it would lose even more money that way...

No service to Montreal would be a shocker, after all these years...

Only railfans would consider going New York to Montreal the looooong way (via Toronto with an overnite stop, to boot...)

 

[afigg]

If New York State came into some additional money, then I believe food service between New York and Albany will take priority over BC on the Adirondack or at seat food service on any NY operated train. It's mostly a question of subsidy amounts. It has always been so. And what is feasible is always a function of the delicate regional balance between upstate vs. downstate and now the Adirondack region vs. the West. It is fascinating to watch these discussions about funding Empire Service and its various aspects even at an ESPA Meeting. The Adirondack requires much larger amount of subsidy per passenger when compared to the rest of Empire Service as it is. It has been on the verge of cancellation or truncation to Plattsburgh every 3 to 5 years in its entire existence under Amtrak. So we are generally happy that it has survived unscathed so far.

If/when the Customs facility opens in Montreal and depending on if there are additional track improvements north of the border, the trip time for Adirondack should get cut by several hours as has been discussed. Given the ridership boost from the improved trip times, and the endpoint base of two cities with sizable populations of high income and wealthy people, I would venture that the Adirondack could support a full sized business class car. If the Palmetto can support a business class car, surely so can the Adirondack once the Customs inspectrion issue goes away.

The extra revenue from the business class car should reduce the needed subsidy, so it should not be a difficult sell to NY DOT to add a business class car. Or at least on a trial basis.

 

[JoeRids]

For a short time period not too long ago, it did have a BC car, but was available only from NYP to Rouses Point, so no cross border passengers. It also had business class (I rode in it) prior to the changeover to the Heritage coaches and lounge as mentioned above, which I think was around 1999 or 2000. Passengers were able to ride BC all the way at that time, and can do so on the Maple Leaf, so not sure why they can't have one in this case.

 

[AlanB]

Personally, I'd be inclined to just put a BC car on the train and let CBSA simply deal with it. It's not their job to dictate what equipment gets run on a common carrier. This would be akin to arguing against a Boeing 767 but demanding an Airbus A-330.

After all, it's about service to the customers. Not the gatekeepers.

And the CBSA could simply say to Amtrak, we won't clear the train. Turn around and go back to the US with everyone on board. Or they could try a stunt similar to what they tried to pull in Vancouver, and charge Amtrak to pay to clear the train.

 

[AlanB]

Passengers were able to ride BC all the way at that time, and can do so on the Maple Leaf, so not sure why they can't have one in this case.

The Leaf no longer has onboard inspections going into Canada. Everyone is required to get off the train with their luggage; stand in a cordoned off area at the Niagara Falls, ON station; and then slowly proceed into the stations to clear customs. Then they are again required to stand around waiting for the inspection team that boarded the train to look for stowaways, luggage left behind, etc. to clear the train before they can reboard to await the rest of those still working their way through customs.

 

[Anderson]

If New York State came into some additional money, then I believe food service between New York and Albany will take priority over BC on the Adirondack or at seat food service on any NY operated train. It's mostly a question of subsidy amounts. It has always been so. And what is feasible is always a function of the delicate regional balance between upstate vs. downstate and now the Adirondack region vs. the West. It is fascinating to watch these discussions about funding Empire Service and its various aspects even at an ESPA Meeting. The Adirondack requires much larger amount of subsidy per passenger when compared to the rest of Empire Service as it is. It has been on the verge of cancellation or truncation to Plattsburgh every 3 to 5 years in its entire existence under Amtrak. So we are generally happy that it has survived unscathed so far.

At least part of the subsidy is due to the suppressed fares to MTR and the lack of capacity at peak seasons (the latter due to the load at the border...I don't think anyone wants to think about how long it would take to clear 400 folks at the border). When you compare the rate per mile, the Adirondack comes in at $0.176/mile for a "standard" NYP-MTR ticket for tomorrow, on par with most LD trains. NYP-ALB runs between $41-79 tomorrow (between $0.291/mile and $0.560/mile). Basically, the Adirondack is cheap in no small part because NY makes it cheap, but its ridership is also capped off because of a lack of equipment and because of border issues.

There's also the sticky issue of the Regional connecting tickets: If I book 190 or 110 tomorrow morning WAS-NYP, the ticket costs $84 for the value ticket and $164 for the flexible ticket. If I book 110-69 WAS-NYP-MTR, it's $86 for the value ticket and $165 for the flexible ticket. I have no idea how the accounting on that works out between NY and Amtrak, but that arrangement can't be cheap.

(Also, though NARP's numbers are a bit off from what I can tell, per those sheets you have about 104k out of NYP and about 87k into MTR, source here: Amtrak's numbers have generally seemed to be a bit higher, in the 110k range, if I'm not mistaken, and Wikipedia gives numbers about 5-10% higher as well; their St. Lambert numbers also tended to come in higher than NARP's numbers, too)

 

[Blackwolf]

Personally, I'd be inclined to just put a BC car on the train and let CBSA simply deal with it. It's not their job to dictate what equipment gets run on a common carrier. This would be akin to arguing against a Boeing 767 but demanding an Airbus A-330.

After all, it's about service to the customers. Not the gatekeepers.

And the CBSA could simply say to Amtrak, we won't clear the train. Turn around and go back to the US with everyone on board. Or they could try a stunt similar to what they tried to pull in Vancouver, and charge Amtrak to pay to clear the train.

Sure, CBSA certainly could. And possibly would. Once. But when the international incident was all blown over, they'd have to deal with the likely fallout on the political front.

I know that the Montreal customs facility is part of the planning, but I have to wonder how other non-New York trains will be treated since I can very well imagine the two other routes with Canadian aspirations will indeed have BC; CABS-approved or not.

Nothing personal, Alan. Its simply that a foreign government agency dictating what a common carrier of this country does, with its own equipment and service, strikes something of a nerve with me.

 

[Alexandria Nick]

Personally, I'd be inclined to just put a BC car on the train and let CBSA simply deal with it. It's not their job to dictate what equipment gets run on a common carrier. This would be akin to arguing against a Boeing 767 but demanding an Airbus A-330.

After all, it's about service to the customers. Not the gatekeepers.

And the CBSA could simply say to Amtrak, we won't clear the train. Turn around and go back to the US with everyone on board. Or they could try a stunt similar to what they tried to pull in Vancouver, and charge Amtrak to pay to clear the train.

Sure, CBSA certainly could. And possibly would. Once. But when the international incident was all blown over, they'd have to deal with the likely fallout on the political front.

I know that the Montreal customs facility is part of the planning, but I have to wonder how other non-New York trains will be treated since I can very well imagine the two other routes with Canadian aspirations will indeed have BC; CABS-approved or not.

Nothing personal, Alan. Its simply that a foreign government agency dictating what a common carrier of this country does, with its own equipment and service, strikes something of a nerve with me.

And we tell foreign flag carriers who can't board flights originating in other countries bound for the US. That's just how international travel works.

 

[Anderson]

Personally, I'd be inclined to just put a BC car on the train and let CBSA simply deal with it. It's not their job to dictate what equipment gets run on a common carrier. This would be akin to arguing against a Boeing 767 but demanding an Airbus A-330.

After all, it's about service to the customers. Not the gatekeepers.

And the CBSA could simply say to Amtrak, we won't clear the train. Turn around and go back to the US with everyone on board. Or they could try a stunt similar to what they tried to pull in Vancouver, and charge Amtrak to pay to clear the train.

Sure, CBSA certainly could. And possibly would. Once. But when the international incident was all blown over, they'd have to deal with the likely fallout on the political front.

I know that the Montreal customs facility is part of the planning, but I have to wonder how other non-New York trains will be treated since I can very well imagine the two other routes with Canadian aspirations will indeed have BC; CABS-approved or not.

Nothing personal, Alan. Its simply that a foreign government agency dictating what a common carrier of this country does, with its own equipment and service, strikes something of a nerve with me.

Yes, but as I understand it both of those routes are largely predicated on the Montreal facility happening.

The main way to get around some of this nonsense would be to start cultivating support in Quebec for improved service, since I suspect you've got a lot of folks visiting Montreal on the train (especially when the weather gets bad, provided the tracks don't crack). Though the LD system in Canada is pretty much screwed six ways from Sunday, there's enough ridership in the Corridor (IIRC, it's in about the 3-3.5m range) that you can make a good case for connecting services. There's also the fact that with the present government in Quebec, every transportation connection going into the US is one that is not going into Ontario.