Amtrak is a Hub System at its worst.. For those lucky to live in Chicago or New York you have a fairly reasonable amount of choices without spending endless hours, not to mention additional cost in order to go where your wishing to go. However when your in some location hours from the hubs you have to pay to get to the hub and then backtrack for hours or even days in order to arrive where you trying to get to. The biggest thing besides lousy sleeper conditions and food, not to mention excessive cost, is the sad fact that amtrak in the 70s decided to eliminate many of the routes that gave travelers a way to get to a location without going so far out of their way.
Will Americans ever take sleepers again?
- Thread starter northnorthwest
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
Pardon me as I have not the time to read every aspect of the previous comments.
The original question seems to be that if offered decent on time service will customers purchase sleepers in greater numbers. That included service that is at least sufficient to justify the price. What has happened over time with Amtrak is actually the reverse. They started out with equipment that was still from the era when quality of experience was a selling point. Dinners were still prepared to make the traveler feel like it was a selling point to taking the train. The cost of sleepers (no matter what many seem to think here) was quite reasonable and most long distance trains carried up to 5 sleepers, some all sleepers. The cost was a given on a schedule not some chance lottery which can vary wildly.
What we have now is an ever worsening pricing and at the same time many of the reasons for paying for a sleeper have been degraded to the point that many don't see the benefit of the extra cost. Much of this is due to Congress and its total ignorance of travel that takes several days or more. I noted in the thread on the cost of service on the cardinal that coach fares were several hundred where as the sleeper was over a thousand. Now that fare is one night with a limited service diner, and limited lounge service.
To my mind a thousand dollars plus is a rather expensive charge for one nights travel.
I doubt that adding cars would reduce the cost of sleepers due to the ever badgering to make trains pay for them selves, although no doubt it would increase revenue significantly. The biggest improvement to encourage travelers to take the train would be to go back to having rail connections that go in several directions from most major cities. Now to go overnight to Colorado from southern Illinois you have to travel up to 5 or 6 hours north, plus the charge for it, and then wait to get a sleeper to Denver. Not exactly convenient. A return of the National Limited route could pick up many passengers in the mid parts of the nation going east or west. That connection should be routed at least to Denver from Washington or New York. Florida travelers from almost anywhere by Chicago or New York are simply ignored by eliminating rail service from all points like Denver, Kansas City, St. Louis, Memphis, ext. In other words for overnight rail by sleeper to be really a success you need to have many more convenient points from which to go to your destination in a reasonable time, with reduced extra charge for mileage.
The original question seems to be that if offered decent on time service will customers purchase sleepers in greater numbers. That included service that is at least sufficient to justify the price. What has happened over time with Amtrak is actually the reverse. They started out with equipment that was still from the era when quality of experience was a selling point. Dinners were still prepared to make the traveler feel like it was a selling point to taking the train. The cost of sleepers (no matter what many seem to think here) was quite reasonable and most long distance trains carried up to 5 sleepers, some all sleepers. The cost was a given on a schedule not some chance lottery which can vary wildly.
What we have now is an ever worsening pricing and at the same time many of the reasons for paying for a sleeper have been degraded to the point that many don't see the benefit of the extra cost. Much of this is due to Congress and its total ignorance of travel that takes several days or more. I noted in the thread on the cost of service on the cardinal that coach fares were several hundred where as the sleeper was over a thousand. Now that fare is one night with a limited service diner, and limited lounge service.
To my mind a thousand dollars plus is a rather expensive charge for one nights travel.
I doubt that adding cars would reduce the cost of sleepers due to the ever badgering to make trains pay for them selves, although no doubt it would increase revenue significantly. The biggest improvement to encourage travelers to take the train would be to go back to having rail connections that go in several directions from most major cities. Now to go overnight to Colorado from southern Illinois you have to travel up to 5 or 6 hours north, plus the charge for it, and then wait to get a sleeper to Denver. Not exactly convenient. A return of the National Limited route could pick up many passengers in the mid parts of the nation going east or west. That connection should be routed at least to Denver from Washington or New York. Florida travelers from almost anywhere by Chicago or New York are simply ignored by eliminating rail service from all points like Denver, Kansas City, St. Louis, Memphis, ext. In other words for overnight rail by sleeper to be really a success you need to have many more convenient points from which to go to your destination in a reasonable time, with reduced extra charge for mileage.
neroden
Engineer
Of course any form of attractive service requires running on time. The core problem which Amtrak has had.
Just want to add a quick comment...
To answer the original question: Yes, but what percentage of Americans will ride them?
I am in my early 30's, my wife and I prefer train travel to air, or car(heaven forbid). We prefer rail travel for several reasons, mainly relaxation and comfort. If we must fly somewhere, we try to be loyal to Virgin...why? Relaxation and comfort. The majority of american airlines are cramped, over-crowded and in my experience, the flight crew is more annoyed that you are on the plane.
Americans seem to have lost the idea of relaxation and comfort when it comes to any type of travel. As a society, we tend to accept things as they are, or have turned out to become. Remember when we complained that gasoline was $1.39/gallon, now we rejoice at $2.99/gallon? Its because we have come to accept it.
Travel is no different. The airlines pack us in, remove our dining options and charge the same amount.
I am not wealthy by any means, Virgin tends to be a little bit more pricey than Southwest but is comparable to UAL or AA, but Virgin makes you feel welcome and offers many more comforts that make the price worth it.
Same goes for my train travel, I try to opt for roomette or bedroom on every trip that i take over 8 hrs and I will continue to do this because my relaxation and comfort is worth the money over speed and being hasseled by TSA.
Maybe i'm in a small percentage...
To answer the original question: Yes, but what percentage of Americans will ride them?
I am in my early 30's, my wife and I prefer train travel to air, or car(heaven forbid). We prefer rail travel for several reasons, mainly relaxation and comfort. If we must fly somewhere, we try to be loyal to Virgin...why? Relaxation and comfort. The majority of american airlines are cramped, over-crowded and in my experience, the flight crew is more annoyed that you are on the plane.
Americans seem to have lost the idea of relaxation and comfort when it comes to any type of travel. As a society, we tend to accept things as they are, or have turned out to become. Remember when we complained that gasoline was $1.39/gallon, now we rejoice at $2.99/gallon? Its because we have come to accept it.
Travel is no different. The airlines pack us in, remove our dining options and charge the same amount.
I am not wealthy by any means, Virgin tends to be a little bit more pricey than Southwest but is comparable to UAL or AA, but Virgin makes you feel welcome and offers many more comforts that make the price worth it.
Same goes for my train travel, I try to opt for roomette or bedroom on every trip that i take over 8 hrs and I will continue to do this because my relaxation and comfort is worth the money over speed and being hasseled by TSA.
Maybe i'm in a small percentage...
And falling gas prices will be lowest in places that aren't very supportive of trains.
The price drop is short-term, but getting politicians to think longer term is difficult, especially when they have to pony up the bucks for infrastructure improvements.
http://fortune.com/2014/12/02/gas-prices-will-soon-drop-below-2-per-gallon/
The price drop is short-term, but getting politicians to think longer term is difficult, especially when they have to pony up the bucks for infrastructure improvements.
Last edited by a moderator:
Outside of Texas and Oklahoma, the net result is probably no impact (of those states, TX has the Texas Central project; OK has OKC-Tulsa; and I don't think anyone else except MO has anything major, period).
The situations in TX, OK, and MO are more complicated: MO has been supportive of the River Runner and generally looking to expand service. OK seems up for expanding service but isn't willing to go it alone (and they're a bit of a reach for MO). TX has gone from the horrid hostility of the early 90s to ambivalence as far as I can tell (at least insofar as they're willing to let Texas Central happen and haven't walked away from the Heartland Flyer yet).
The situations in TX, OK, and MO are more complicated: MO has been supportive of the River Runner and generally looking to expand service. OK seems up for expanding service but isn't willing to go it alone (and they're a bit of a reach for MO). TX has gone from the horrid hostility of the early 90s to ambivalence as far as I can tell (at least insofar as they're willing to let Texas Central happen and haven't walked away from the Heartland Flyer yet).
I remember seeing $1.31 just under six years ago (at the bottom of the crash).
And you're not the only one...right down to Virgin actually having my business where I have to fly. Granted, I flew FC in both cases*, but on Virgin it was an amazing experience while...let's just say that if it wasn't so expensive to do so I would have dumped my Delta miles to a friend.
*The flight back from SLC, on Delta, was FC to begin with, but that's because FC was about $130 more than Coach...which basically meant that after baggage fees I was paying about $75 or so for legroom, drinks, and free IFE. IFE notwithstanding, I've paid less and gotten more on a Regional many, many times. Heading west, I flew Virgin IAD-SFO...mainly due to the Amtrak OTP collapse in Chicago (I was originally taking Amtrak RVR-WAS-CHI-SLC, but that became non-viable due to misconnects). I then caught the next morning's Zephyr. That was FC simply because FC was still cheaper than the Amtrak reservation I had scrapped.
Last edited by a moderator:
neroden
Engineer
The drop in gasoline prices should be interesting. I think many people still realize that this is temporary, so I don't think it's going to have much impact on the purchase of electric cars, hybrids, solar panels, etc.
One interesting question is how temporary the low gas prices are: the Saudis' stated goal is to drive the frackers and the tar sands guys out of the market, force them to lay everyone off and shut down their equipment. I'm not sure how long it takes for those guys to give up and shut their operations down; probably a year, but maybe several years, since they're crazy.
One interesting question is how temporary the low gas prices are: the Saudis' stated goal is to drive the frackers and the tar sands guys out of the market, force them to lay everyone off and shut down their equipment. I'm not sure how long it takes for those guys to give up and shut their operations down; probably a year, but maybe several years, since they're crazy.
I do not want to side track the topic, but....
"Low" gas prices are very temporary. Do you know why $2.99/gal is "low" to our society? Because we have come to accept it as a low price. Hence part of my previous post.
I can go on about domestic output and OPEC not cutting production, but again, i want to stay on track here. :giggle:
"Low" gas prices are very temporary. Do you know why $2.99/gal is "low" to our society? Because we have come to accept it as a low price. Hence part of my previous post.
I can go on about domestic output and OPEC not cutting production, but again, i want to stay on track here. :giggle:
Barciur
OBS Chief
OTOH, $4 a gallon is very cheap for Europeans so they think we have dirt cheap gas. That should be kept in mind when comparing European rail system and success to ours as well.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
As well as the quality of Western European highways too.
Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Ziv
Conductor
And yet the AutoBahn looks, and is, old fashioned as all get out. It is narrow and the ramps are short as heck. The only thing that makes it work as well as it does is the fact that the people that drive on it are more skilled and considerate than the drives on America's interstates.
They may spend money on the the AutoBahn but it is still 50 years out of date.
Their trains on the other hand are much more modern than American trains.
They may spend money on the the AutoBahn but it is still 50 years out of date.
Their trains on the other hand are much more modern than American trains.
Barciur
OBS Chief
neroden
Engineer
Yeah, one which scares the living daylights out of me every time I get on the road. Maniacs passing on the right, cutting me off without signalling... happened on a rural road recently.
Last edited by a moderator:
G
Guest
Guest
>>And yet the AutoBahn looks, and is, old fashioned as all get out. It is narrow and the ramps are short as heck.<<
Being an American who has lived two decades in Germany off and on over the years, I never, in any other context, heard someone describe the Autobahn as old fashioned and narrow with poor ramps. Most acceleration ramps tend to be the opposite, quite long to allow for merging by cars with small, fuel-efficient engines that don't accelerate swiftly but have high cruising speeds. Possibly the reference concerns some of the eastern German highways around Berlin and Leipzig before they were upgraded over the past couple of decades. Bear in mind that the majority of European towns and cities include many narrow streets. The cars themselves tend to be narrower as a result ... check out for example 5 and 7 series BMWs, which are long but narrow. Same with Volvo.
Being an American who has lived two decades in Germany off and on over the years, I never, in any other context, heard someone describe the Autobahn as old fashioned and narrow with poor ramps. Most acceleration ramps tend to be the opposite, quite long to allow for merging by cars with small, fuel-efficient engines that don't accelerate swiftly but have high cruising speeds. Possibly the reference concerns some of the eastern German highways around Berlin and Leipzig before they were upgraded over the past couple of decades. Bear in mind that the majority of European towns and cities include many narrow streets. The cars themselves tend to be narrower as a result ... check out for example 5 and 7 series BMWs, which are long but narrow. Same with Volvo.
Ziv
Conductor
I drove from Eindhoven to Koln, Siegen, Koblenz and then to Trier and the roads were better in the Netherlands than they were in most of western Germany, or rather, they were wider with longer ramps. I only spent the 9 or 10 days there, so I don't claim to be an expert but I was surprised by how much better the interstate system is here in the states than the Autobahn.
I'd just like to say that some average travelers have issues with flying (for whatever reason), these people still travel, but find other means to do it, such as train travel.
I travel extensively, well, I used to until I developed a pretty severe anxiety. I'm finally going out and traveling again but I cannot bring myself to go to an airport just yet, SO I've chosen a sleeper on a train. For a person that flies on international flights that average 11 hours in one way, I can say that I am willing to pay more for the sleeper, since I cannot sleep in upright seats (well, I can't sleep much in general but not going into that
)
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,669
I lived in the far south west of Germany for several years. The A3 autobahn section there is one of the oldest in existence in Germany and hence also in the world. It's construction was initiated by the ****s at a time that cars were fewer and slower than they are today. Furthermore, the work was driven by propganada considerations, with usefulness taking second place. This is why this section of autobahn has plenty of speed restrictions, but they are generally not well enforced or respected. They have upgrdaed the autobahn over the years and the major junctions have been eased if not totally rebuilt but if you leave or join the autobahn at one of the minor junctions you are indeed faced with extremely tight curves on the ramps followed by very short merging sections, requiring you to go from very slow to very fast very quickly, and that under very busy traffic conditions (the autobahn has only two lanes per direction, and they never managed to widen it depite the intense usage)
W
west point
Guest
Could it be that since Europe has gotten so much HSR its sleepers are no longer needed for many of the shorter routes. If that theory applies then until the USA can get faster service on routes that are presently sleeper served will persons still take sleepers?. As pointed out until the new Viewliner-2s are in service it cannot be determined if there is additional demand for sleeper berths? Maybe even more V-2s?
As well if Slumber coaches can work?
As well if Slumber coaches can work?
neroden
Engineer
Yeah. The two sleeper services in the UK are really almost too short in duration to run sleepers. High speed lines are causing the same situation with a bunch of Continental routes; the trips are just too fast for sleepers to make sense.
But also, the longer routes in Europe, which still should have sleepers, mostly cross national borders, sometimes several times. There is substantial bureaucracy involved in doing that. This has caused many of the rail operators to not want to deal with cross-border sleeping cars. (Russian Railways is the exception, and is still running sleepers all the way from Moscow to Paris.)
The main difference is that in Europe, those "shorter" routes are nothing compared to runs like NYP-CHI or WAS-ORL. Even if you dropped a full-blown bullet train averaging 150 MPH on some routes, you'd still be well-served by overnight service: New York-Miami is 1389 miles, and at 150 MPH it would still be a 9:15 trip. A lot of the routes in Europe are hovering around 500 miles (even Paris-Berlin is less than 700 miles, while NYP-CHI is 960; WAS-CHI is 780, but still about 100 miles more than Paris-Berlin).
The other point on the table is that even getting the average speeds in the US up to a consistent 60 MPH would be an improvement in a lot of cases.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
At 150 mph average speed, New york - Chicago would be 6 hours and change. Unless the overnight trains could use the HS line to do it in like 9pm to 7am kind of time, overnight trains would start losing out. Look at what is happening to overnight trains in Japan, even on a long run like Tokyo to Hakata.
OTOH, New York to Miami will really become a very viable overnight service market with high speed sleeper service!
OTOH, New York to Miami will really become a very viable overnight service market with high speed sleeper service!
Point taken. IIRC, a lot of the issue with the overnight services in Japan is that they were running at like half the speed of the HSR trains.
Edit: Yep, half the speed. Tokyo-Hakodate is a 5:22 trip with one transfer using JR-East's Hayabusa express. Using the overnight train you're looking at 13 hours for the same run (about 17:30 to Sapporo vs. 9:20 on the Hayabusa with two transfers; there's little time difference once you're on Hokkaido, but a massive one down on Honshu). I'd be willing to bet that if they could somehow run one of the last bullet trains through to Hokkaido overnight it would help (through cars or something like that), but that's just not compatible with the bullet train technology (not to mention, IIRC, the different loading gauges). The average speed is therefore somewhere just over 40 MPH (Tokyo-Sapporo is about 725 miles).
Over on the Osaka side of things, you're looking at a 24-hour trip...which is edging into "trouble" territory to begin with. Driving is actually faster on that one; the distance traveled is comparable to the LSL (at least, on the map; I'd need a more detailed railway table to work with an actual distance, but it seems to be somewhere in the 900-1000 mile range) but the trip takes about seven hours longer than the LSL...so not only is it not terribly competitive, but in that case you're getting down into "bad train" territory (the average speed is somewhere in the range of 40 MPH and might be below it, depending on the routing; for comparison, the California Zephyr averages just under 50 MPH and the SW Chief just over 50 MPH).
The Tokyo service does seem to have the more solid timetable of the two, but even there you have a connecting sleeper train out of Aomori to Sapporo that fills the slot better.
Finally, there's the fact that the shinkansen services are being extended through the tunnel to Hakodate, which is set to knock another few hours off the trip...which seems to be what's ultimately doing in some of those trains. For some reason, a 16-hour train ride averaging 40 MPH seems to have trouble competing with a 7-hour train ride. I rather suspect that an overnight run would actually have some success in that market, perhaps at 8-9 hours instead of 7 hours, but that would run afoul of the overnight maintenance work allowed by the current system.
Last edited by a moderator:
None the less the clue-less American driver can get easily rent a car and get a temporary permit for driving on German autobahns. The resulting chaos is well worth the price of admission. Driving Beyreuth to Munchen with a German friend, I almost cracked up when he said "I much prefer driving in America. There you don;t have to think." Oh so true!
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
VIA fare versus Amtrak fare between same city pairs.
- Latest: danasgoodstuff
