Passenger Trains > Starlight Parlour car removed Jan 12-March 12 2015

From a Amtrak post Nov 20.

Coast Starlight Trains 11 and 14: Parlour Car Temporarily Removed

Effective January 12 through March 12, 2015
Beginning January 12 through March 12, 2015, the Pacific Parlour Car will be removed from the Coast Starlight trains for maintenance. During this period, the Dining Car and Sightseer Lounge Car will continue to be available for passengers.

We appreciate your patronage and apologize for any inconvenience. Reservation and train status information is available on Amtrak.com, our free mobile apps and at 1-800-USA-RAIL (1-800-872-7245).

Thank you for traveling with Amtrak.

PSN 1114-34

I haven't seen one in some time... maybe they pulled 'em early.
Got all excited deadheading home the other night hoping to catch a Pac Parlor, and had to ride the "cross country cafe" which to me translated into "Hey, I'm back to 1969 and landed in the Auto-Mat!"
It has all the personality of that Espee abomination... very strange train, the current "Coast Stoplight"! Glad I can ride it for free... wouldn't think about paying for it...
Read Don Phillips' article in TRAINS about Boardman to get an idea where it's all headed... Photobob, are you out there to insert your trademarked quote?!?

Well, let's just hope that the Pacific Parlour Cars do indeed get their rehab and maintenance and SURVIVE this process? Keep our fingers crossed, I guess. On the one hand, it is good that in the press release it stated that they were indeed heading for Beech Grove for rehab/mainenance. As these cars are good basically for "forever" as long as such is done. But you all know what I mean: in today's environment, one never knows what to expect. Let's just hope that they get through the process soon and back out running before some IDIOT bean counter decides that he/she can earn some Brownie Points by scrapping the damn things by putting a "Stop Order" on their rehab work right in the middle of it. As has been the fate of a lot of equipment.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force continues to fly Boeing B-52H Heavy Bombers, now on their 3rd set of wings!!!...and which are projected to remain in service to at least the year 2040...for those of you that think that certain items of equipment are "just too old" to keep going. As I certainly think that a heavy bomber--the newest of which was built in 1962--still in hard usage over Afghanistan and God knows where else, not to mention VIA Rail's 1950's Era Budd cars--if that's good enough to keep going, then I certainly think AMTK can keep the remaining few ex-ATSF Pacific Parlour Cars without "busting the budget."

Red Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force continues to fly Boeing B-52H Heavy Bombers, now on their 3rd set
> of wings!!!...As I certainly think that a heavy bomber--the newest of which was built
> in 1962--still in hard usage over Afghanistan and God knows where else, not to mention VIA Rail's
> 1950's Era Budd cars--if that's good enough to keep going, then I certainly think AMTK can keep
> the remaining few ex-ATSF Pacific Parlour Cars without "busting the budget."

The Air Force and VIA Rail WANTED to extend the service lives of B-52s and Budds as a cost-effective choice.
Based on past history, I doubt Amtrak (Marketing) shares that sentiment, and the manufacturers of new equipment certainly do not.

hazegray Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Red Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force continues to fly
> Boeing B-52H Heavy Bombers, now on their 3rd set
> > of wings!!!...As I certainly think that a heavy
> bomber--the newest of which was built
> > in 1962--still in hard usage over Afghanistan
> and God knows where else, not to mention VIA
> Rail's
> > 1950's Era Budd cars--if that's good enough to
> keep going, then I certainly think AMTK can keep
> > the remaining few ex-ATSF Pacific Parlour Cars
> without "busting the budget."
>
> The Air Force and VIA Rail WANTED to extend the
> service lives of B-52s and Budds as a
> cost-effective choice.
> Based on past history, I doubt Amtrak (Marketing)
> shares that sentiment, and the manufacturers of
> new equipment certainly do not.

A Budd Car is one of the best products ever built.
With stainless steel skin and framing, they are as
forever as things get. They are one piece of
equipment where the saying, "They don't build 'em
like they used to" is correct in my estimation.

I, too, hope these great cars actually get rebuilt; but, Amtrak's future will soon be in the hands of those who wanted to eliminate ALL dining cars--remember?

Also, remember all the grief dealt out to Amtrak over hamburgers; then flowers in the dinner; and then insisting dining cars make money?

This is why I can only assume that those who proposed stripping all dining service from long haul trains; will have no problem with killing attempts to restore 60 year old ATSF cars. It will be sooo easy to call fixing up very old cars "wasteful spending" (even though they probably don't know what a "Pacific Parlour Car" is).

But, hope springs eternal; and we might actually see these cars again.
Joe

Not really. They are built from what is probably the best material for the application. But not necessarily the best product, nor the best *BUILT* product. Other cars were built better, but with inferior materials - materials, incidentally, mostly demanded by the customer. Budd cars had a pronounced issue with sub-floors, and leaks in certain areas. If the weld didn't apply, you could have a rather insidious leak - hard to locate exactly. Openings - vents, doors and windows - cause problems if not properly sealed.

Trucks too were an issue, but again, they were customer requested. Budd, Pullman and CB&Q *ALL* knew that the CZ trucks were nto the best riding available, not the best to maintain, they *STILL* ordered the same trucks on the 1956 DZ - for the same reason Southwest sticks with 737s - fleet interchangeability.

There is a trade off too, with the material. If stainless cracks, it is a LOT harder to maintain it (than a similar steel issue). Various other areas and maintenance issues arise specifically due to the material. It requires care and maintenance to retain its properties. Not as much as some steel cars to be sure, but, a Budd car sitting with water coming in through leaky windows is not a pretty sight. Metra claims that the CB&Q Budd Gallery cars are a problem because the doors are such that water, ice and snow often get blow through the meeting point (of the side doors). They would like to replace them (also at issue are certain ADA issues, that really shouldn't be issues, given the years the cars were built).

Budd equipment is great. To a point, and as long as cared for. But like any structure, leaks can be deadly, more so (in some ways) for a stainless car because it is not always obvious until too late. In the late 50s, ACL replaced the sub-floor in all their Budd cars due to rot. ACF cars had a tremendous issue with roof joints. Pullman-Standard's issues can usually be found to be customer request (applique siding) or leaks from windows. And leaks from windows affects every type / builder of car.

Most people haven't a clue as to the amount of materials specified by the railroad, and the amount of parts supplied by the railroad to the builder for use on cars. Nor, the number of drawings that the railroad supplied for a builder to follow. Budd actually did something incredibly smart - they negated a lot of the railroads' ability to specify every aspect of the car's construction, making them more standard throughout than the products of Pullman-Standard. A builder could and did tell the railroad that a specified material, method, or part would be insufficient or cause life issues, but at the end of the day, the railroad's requirements were usually met - oft-times with fatal (to the car's long life) results.

SR2 Wrote:
> A Budd Car is one of the best products ever
> built.
> With stainless steel skin and framing, they are
> as
> forever as things get. They are one piece of
> equipment where the saying, "They don't build 'em
> like they used to" is correct in my estimation.

I really liked your post. You presented some knowledgeable comments on the pro and cons of various building techniques and builders. I appreciate seeing this on Trainorders. It is one of the reasons I keep subscribing. This is so much more enlightening than the various cliches and "ain't it awful" posts from a handful of people that like to grind their axes on a daily (hourly) basis. Thank you.

Thank you for injecting a bit of sense of reality in the conversation. Very often people tend to have very strong opinion about something being the best or worst, when they know little otherwise about the engineering, science and art involved in their construction and maintenance. :)

A Pacific Parlour Car crossing the Willamette River at Westfir Oregon.

Robert Morris Photography
http://www.snowcrest.net/photobob/index1.html

---

We had a Pacific Parlour Car southbound from Seattle to Emeryville October 11; as pleasant as in the past 10 years....... Hope to see them back in March!

IC_2024 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I haven't seen one in some time... maybe they
> pulled 'em early.


Was on #14 Wednesday and we one....same for #11 we passed at SLO.

Dave

Red Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, let's just hope that the Pacific Parlour
> Cars do indeed get their rehab and maintenance and
> SURVIVE this process? Keep our fingers crossed, I
> guess. On the one hand, it is good that in the
> press release it stated that they were indeed
> heading for Beech Grove for rehab/mainenance. As
> these cars are good basically for "forever" as
> long as such is done. But you all know what I
> mean: in today's environment, one never knows what
> to expect. Let's just hope that they get through
> the process soon and back out running before some
> IDIOT bean counter decides that he/she can earn
> some Brownie Points by scrapping the damn things
> by putting a "Stop Order" on their rehab work
> right in the middle of it. As has been the fate of
> a lot of equipment.
>
> Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force continues to fly
> Boeing B-52H Heavy Bombers, now on their 3rd set
> of wings!!!...and which are projected to remain in
> service to at least the year 2040...for those of
> you that think that certain items of equipment are
> "just too old" to keep going. As I certainly think
> that a heavy bomber--the newest of which was built
> in 1962--still in hard usage over Afghanistan and
> God knows where else, not to mention VIA Rail's
> 1950's Era Budd cars--if that's good enough to
> keep going, then I certainly think AMTK can keep
> the remaining few ex-ATSF Pacific Parlour Cars
> without "busting the budget."



If the cars are heading to Beech Grove, I would not hold my breath on all them getting finished in 3 months.

Dear Amtrak Management:

I know you are reading this.

Riding the Coast Starlight and the Pacific Parlor car this past August was by far the most pleasant Amtrak experience I and my family have had other than perhaps riding Acela first class.

Please make sure these cars come back so that I can reccomend this train to other people.

This is a concept you should figure out how to spread to other trains with heavy first class ridership and great scenery. You know which trains these are - Empire Builder, Zephyr, Chief, Lake Shore, Capitol.

I did a work-up on how to convert a Sightseer Lounge car into a Pacific Parlour car (almost) and the job is just too damn difficult. It would be easier to "tunnel" a coach and use it as the foundation.

The $$$ involved put it out of reach, so forget anything new along these lines. If by some miracle Amtrak EVER grunts out a "Superliner III" build, that would be the time to look at adding Parlour cars to the entire LD fleet.

(Dream on...)

When they used to simply add another Superliner lounge in place of the PPC it wasn't that bad. Not as plush but at least it was functional.

KA7008 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When they used to simply add another Superliner
> lounge in place of the PPC it wasn't that bad.
> Not as plush but at least it was functional.

That would work if only one Parlour Car at a time is removed for refurbishment. But if all five are taken away at the same time, there are not five extra Superliner lounge cars available to replace them. I do, however, think that doing all the refurbishments at the same time during the slow travel season makes sense in terms of staffing levels and consistent rather than hit-or-miss passenger expectations. I also suspect that there are some economies of scale in doing them all at once.

I like the Parlor Cars since I always ride in the sleeper section.

Breakfast-Lunch and Dinner...wine tasting and relaxing. Even have a great view!

Reminds me riding the El Capitan in 1965 Pasadena to Chicago


Jay

---

---

I think I speak for many when I say that the Parlour Cars make a whale of a difference in the Amtrak experience. When one comes off the Empire Builder and onto the Starlight, the atmosphere for sleeping car passengers improves 1000 percent. Here's hoping they make a strong return. It's a shame management can't see what a gold mine they have there and spread the idea to other trains.

Loud and clear Andy Thanks

abyler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dear Amtrak Management:
>
> I know you are reading this.
>
> Riding the Coast Starlight and the Pacific Parlor
> car this past August was by far the most pleasant
> Amtrak experience I and my family have had other
> than perhaps riding Acela first class.
>
> Please make sure these cars come back so that I
> can reccomend this train to other people.
>
> This is a concept you should figure out how to
> spread to other trains with heavy first class
> ridership and great scenery. You know which
> trains these are - Empire Builder, Zephyr, Chief,
> Lake Shore, Capitol.