Passenger Trains > An opinion on the Cross Country Cafe

Posted to All_Aboard last night by "lonestarokie":
-----------------------------------

From: lonestarokie:

> Some thoughts on Amtrak's latest scam, the Cross Country Cafe.
>
> Amtrak has introduced a new dining experience on the City of New
> Orleans -- with a converted dining car named the "Cross Country
> Cafe." With great fanfare, Amtrak has outlined the benefits and
> wonders of this new service. Lets look a little further into the
> operation -- what sounds good, actually has a darker side.
>
> First, the car. The modified former dining car now has a series of
> tables designed to make sure the maximum number of people are facing
> the aisle of the car, away from the windows -- an odd arrangement for
> a car which is replacing the Sightseer lounge car. If you are
> seated in one of the tables that is still shaped like a traditional
> dining car table, you have a reasonable amount of table space to eat
> your meal. If, however, you are seated in one of the semicircular,
> aisle facing tables, you should hope that your other dining partners
> in the community seating are average or smaller size, because its
> going to be crowded under the best of conditions. If you, or some of
> your table mates are of a plus size, its going to be really tight,
> both in terms of seating, in terms of everyone having space for their
> feet under the table, and in terms of having sufficient table space
> for your food. And, when you are seated in these tables, don't try to
> look at the scenery, because what is featured for you is watching the
> people across the aisle eat, punctuated by counting the steady stream
> of butts at eye-level, as other passengers go to and from the cafe
> end of the car.
>
> Amtrak is spending over $200,000 per car to modify standard, full
> service dining cars into these fanciful aberrations, for the sole
> purpose of being able to cut one On Board Service job, never mind the
> decrease in service to the passenger. Given Amtrak's marginal
> funding, and the need to spend dollars maintaining the fleet and
> fixing wrecked cars, was this a good use of money, or was it an
> unnecessary solution for a problem that didn't exist?
>
> Virtually everything that Amtrak touts as an advantage of the Cross
> Country Cafe could AND SHOULD have been done with the standard
> Superliner dining car service. The great new things touted as
> service improvements are strictly management decisions, that could
> have been implemented with existing equipment, albeit with the need
> for one more OBS person than is currently assigned to the cafe car.
> Keep in mind that this car, which Amtrak describes as "similar to
> tavern or bistro cars in railroad history," is used on a route that
> once boasted the King's Dinner. So much for history. And, by the
> way, where would a student of history look in the old Official Guides
> to find a listing for a "bistro" car? Were they on the Santa Fe?
> GM&O? Southern Railway? Any operated by the Pullman Company?
>
> I think it was George Warrington's minions who thought up the concept
> in the USA, and their implementation was flawed, to say the least.
>
> Listing of some of the new benefits touted by Amtrak, followed by
> editorial comments:
>
> **Open for meals before departure--- could and should have been done
> with existing equipment, and had been done in the past; did not
> require a "new" car design to implement this change
>
> **Regional food--- was routinely done in the product line days on all
> routes -- so what's the big deal now?
>
> **Return of ice cream and fresh (?) scrambled eggs/omlets to the
> menu--- same as above, this is not a new amenity, it is the reversal
> of a stupid cutback made several years ago. Nothing on the old
> style cars precluded the serving of either eggs or ice cream.
>
> **Open extended hours for meals. The implication is that the diner
> is open 6am to 11pm, but you better read the fine print before going
> for more than a burger, salad or microwave junk food between meals.
> The "real" dining car meals like you would expect in a full dining
> car are only served at meal time, just like in the "real" dining car
> that this service replaced. In between meals, a limited menu is
> available. This is a glorified cafe car menu with the addition of a
> few other items that can be quickly zapped for you.
>
> **Improved ambiance and versatility of the car. About the best that
> you can say about this odd, dysfunctional, passenger unfriendly
> configuration is that it is different. Different, not better. Part
> of the improved ambiance is the loss of tablecloths (even paper table
> cloths) -- remember, this is "casual" dining.
>
> **Lounge service open until train stops at final terminal. Lets see
> how long this lasts, and how often the crew complies with this plan,
> but even if it really happens, its a function of a different
> management style, NOT a function dependent on any new interior car
> design. OBS crews do not have to count their stock at the end
> terminal, thus eliminating the laborious, time consuming task which
> was the previous excuse for closing early. The new car doesn't count
> the stock for the crew, management simply decided to go to 20th
> century (not yet 21st century) accounting, and have the crew count
> only money, not stock, with periodic audits to keep everyone honest.
> This could and should be the standard on all food service cars, it
> was not necessary to build a new car to incorporate this long overdue
> service standard.
>
> Now that we have identified all the "good" things about the Cross
> Country Cafe, what are the negatives? One big negative is the
> limited capacity. On a short train, or a short route, the cafe can
> perhaps be forced to work. When the train has more passengers than
> usual, however, its impossible to serve all the passengers. There is
> no seat space for lounge use, and forget trying to use any of the
> space for simply sightseeing, reading a book, visiting with other
> passengers, listening to a National Park Service "Rails to Trails"
> guide, or any of the other pleasant trip activities that were once
> possible with a Sightseer lounge car. Amtrak says they will add
> another food service car when ridership warrants. Anyone believing
> that will happen on a timely basis needs to save up to purchase beach
> front property in Arizona. Remember, this is the company that
> almost never responds by adding a coach or sleeper when existing cars
> fill up in advance, even when the equipment is available. Once a
> consist determination is made, no one wants to switch in another car
> -- too much expense incurred, might require another locomotive, the
> extra space might all have to be sold at a lesser rate, it might
> require another attendant, might require train to make double spot at
> some stations, the reasons are endless. Much better to just "make
> do" -- the passengers on the train can't do anything about it, and
> after all, not that many people ride the long-distance trains.
> Right?
>
> Another negative is the loss of extra space on the train to handle
> overflow passengers. While standees are undesirable at any time, it
> occasionally happens during heavy travel periods. Letting those
> people have a seat in the Sightseer lounge made their trip possible
> -- absent that car in the consist, they are left standing on the
> platform.
>
> The really "good" news is that Amtrak wants to butcher most of the
> Superliner I Sightseer lounge cars, turning them into another version
> of the cross country cafe. The cost? A mere $700,000 per car. For
> the number of cars Amtrak wants to modify, the ticket is about $37
> million dollars. When these cars are butchered, the wonders of the
> Cross Country Lounge can be spread to many other routes. Never mind
> that the single food service car concept was considered and discarded
> when the Superliners were first being designed. The idea -- then --
> was to run a long enough train that the volume of passengers would
> require two cars. Now, the idea seems to be to keep the train length
> as short as possible, at least short enough to be handled by one
> food car... (and too often, one broken-down locomotive). If you
> really want to enjoy the panoramic views from the Sightseer cars,
> ride them now, because when the new table design is inserted in part
> of the car, the tables (or seats facing AWAY from the windows) will
> block the lower third of these large windows. In other parts of the
> upstairs car, the upstairs cafe will totally block even more windows.
> And, while $37 million is being spent to destroy a reasonably
> functional interior configuration of lounge car, Superliner coaches
> and sleepers sit silently on the dead line at Beech Grove, unable to
> be repaired because of "lack of funding."

If it ain't broke, "fix" it til it(or you) is(/are).
They could probably spend another 50 grand sealing up the windows seeing (no pun intended) as they're not being used anymore ...


TCS - if they reinvent the wheel too often all they'll be left with is an axle

From: lonestarokie:
>
> > Some thoughts on Amtrak's latest scam, the Cross
> Country Cafe.
> >
because what is featured
> for you is <snip> watching the
> > punctuated by
> counting the steady stream
> > of butts at eye-level.
> >

There is a segment of the traveling public who would see this as an advantage. :D

Dave

Amtrak says they will add
> another food service car when ridership warrants.

Ya right, just like they told us (the dining car crews) that they would add another cook when the projected count goes over 120 for any meal period. This past Christmas season saw counts greatly exceeding 120 on the Southwest Chief and no extra cook was added because "we couldn't find anybody."

Amsnoop

See it to believe it when it comes to Amtrak. Words mean nothing - only action or physical appearance.

The writer of this lengthy analysis got it right.

I can see the diner/lounge combo car in use on certain long day light operations, such as:

- Palmetto
- Adirondack
- Niagara Rainbow
- Chicago/STL/KCMO

I realize the design is for Superliners, but the same thing will happen soon (I would guess) on the LakeShore or FL trains or the Crescent. Such cars will ruin those single-level long distance trains as well.

Worst yet - these cars already operate with a cafe/lounge that is not on par with the Superliner equivalent - Superliner Sightseer Lounge Car. I just don't see how there is enough room in an Amfleet II cafe for it to be converted into a "successful" diner and lounge car. Its bad enough, as riders on the single level long distance trains only get to enjoy their coach seat or sleeper and head to the diner! I just don't see how food and beverage sales are to increase if these cars are to serve both purposes without segregating the car off at certain times to accept those that want dinner or full meals. That means those doing the "sightseeing" will have to "return to your seats please so we can now serve diner in this car." Ridiculous. And again, Amtrak should look to be growing long distance passenger service, not limiting it with designing "diner-lite" cars such as these.