yarrow
Engineer
why just reserved coach and no business class on "the adirondack"?
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.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 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.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.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.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.
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.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.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.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.
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.
Enter your email address to join: