Passenger Trains > any changed viewpoints from the latest LDT discussions?

Periodically we have a flurry of discussions about the future of LDTs. Typically the discussions are spread across several threads.

Let's try something different here. Has anyone changed their viewpoints even slightly about the topic from the latest round of Trainorders discussions?

In my case, I've altered my views a bit over time to not being so absolute about not subsidizing LDTs, but I do not think that I have had much change in opinions from the latest discussions.

Please do not start new arguments on this thread. Do not tell anyone that they are right or wrong from a changed opinion. I am just curious if the discussions have any effect.

Jack



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/04/18 09:31 by ts1457.

I am pondering the value of a national LD network (serving mainly rural areas and uniting us as a country) in relation to strategically programmed, more intense/frequency of service in targetted markets.

My thoughts have focused on the limitations of capital equipment costs and the image of regional versus national carrier.

I support retention of the existing long distance trains.

I just don't think there will be an additional ones, and that the network will be threatened in the future when the equipment wears out.

While I still support Amtrak's LDTs, I do appreciate some of the points made in the discussions. I'd like to know more about the profit/loss sheet for sleeping car passengers, but did not see anything in the discussions about that. (Perhaps I overlooked it.) I think that at least coach service should be preserved, given that many passengers are not traveling end-to-end, but rather to intermediate points that are often not served by airlines, etc. Perhaps Amtrak should not be subsidizing first-class passengers.

One of the things that is discouraging to me, and why I am considering not joining in on more discussions like this, is the lack of civility on the part of some TO members and their unwillingness to even try to understand another person's point of view. For example, in one discussion (on another board), I tried to carefully outline my position, and one member simply dismissed it as "bad logic" (without addressing the reasons for my position) and then went on to label the person who was the subject of the thread a "goon."

I also find that many times people make judgments without having all the facts, or worse, ignoring facts. A simple news story seems to generate all sorts of speculation on motives, the qualities of a person, etc. Also, some people are interested only "winning" an argument, even if "winning" means people interested in having a respectful and rational discussion finally give up.

Of course, this seems to be part of a larger problem in our society that the social media have only exposed and probably made easier.It's not surprising that we find it here on TO. At the same time, we have to keep trying...

I'd like to see more interest on the part of more states in preserving long distance trains within their borders. States like Colorado, Utah, etc have a vested interest in keeping rail as part of their tourism mix. It's not just a federal government opportunity.

That said, the absolute opposition to day trains by some folks is discouraging. Rocky Mountaineer, Skeena, etc do fine tying down at night and packing folks off to a local hotel. I have yet to see credible, convincing evidence that sleeping cars and diners are anything other than a deep financial hole.

On VIA Rail, the subsidy per passenger mile for the Maple Leaf, a once per day corridor train, is the highest of any in the VIA Rail system, averages 43 people per trip. Even the Quebec remote trains of a coach, a snack wagon, and a baggage car have a lower subsidy per passenger mile. The Canadian and Ocean do better than either of them. The Ocean is the only Amtrak-like LD train on VIA Rail. The Canadian generally has triple the amount of sleepers in the consist as coaches and has multiple cars to dine. The Quebec remote trains had longer consist, and probably better patronage, especially the Jonquire train, when it ran overnight, since time was not as serious a disadvantage given that it takes 11 hours.

The Rocky Mountaineer is not transportation. Its subsidiary in Montana and the Amercian Orient/European Express have gone out of business.
The Skeena is 2 or 3 cars. Unlike Amtrak LD trains, it has no major city along its route or western endpoint. There is no equivalent in the US.

Another post yesterday proved the non-NEC Amtrak corridor trains do not perform as well as the LDT overall considering several metrics and ratios. People forget that as they disregard state subsidies. If the LD trains go away, their allocated costs get dumped on the PRIAA trains, and some states will kill them as a result.

So no, the existence of sleeper cars doesn't correlate with anything about the financial success of the train.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/04/18 11:54 by joemvcnj.

colehour Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> While I still support Amtrak's LDTs, I do
> appreciate some of the points made in the
> discussions. I'd like to know more about the
> profit/loss sheet for sleeping car passengers, but
> did not see anything in the discussions about
> that. (Perhaps I overlooked it.) I think that at
> least coach service should be preserved, given
> that many passengers are not traveling end-to-end,
> but rather to intermediate points that are often
> not served by airlines, etc. Perhaps Amtrak should
> not be subsidizing first-class passengers.
>
> One of the things that is discouraging to me, and
> why I am considering not joining in on more
> discussions like this, is the lack of civility on
> the part of some TO members and their
> unwillingness to even try to understand another
> person's point of view. For example, in one
> discussion (on another board), I tried to
> carefully outline my position, and one member
> simply dismissed it as "bad logic" (without
> addressing the reasons for my position) and then
> went on to label the person who was the subject of
> the thread a "goon."
>
> I also find that many times people make judgments
> without having all the facts, or worse, ignoring
> facts. A simple news story seems to generate all
> sorts of speculation on motives, the qualities of
> a person, etc. Also, some people are interested
> only "winning" an argument, even if "winning"
> means people interested in having a respectful and
> rational discussion finally give up.
>
> Of course, this seems to be part of a larger
> problem in our society that the social media have
> only exposed and probably made easier.It's not
> surprising that we find it here on TO. At the same
> time, we have to keep trying...


Excellent, thank you!

Here is how you do a comparison of potential revenue from a Viewliner sleeping car versus a long distance coach:

Train: Silver Star, single level train, Viewliner sleeping car and Amfleet II long distance coaches. Since there is regrettably no dining car on the Silver Star, the sleeping car fare does not reflect the cost of sleeping car passenger meals in the dining car which are normally included in sleeping car fares.

City pairs: Terminal to terminal; Miami, Florida to New York City/New York Penn Station. For purposes of calculation, all passengers travel from terminal to terminal and there is no intermediate station entraining/detraining.

Two adult travelers, no discounts; full adult fares. Day of travel is departing Miami July 28, 2018.

Viewliner sleeping car: Three bedrooms, including the accessible bedroom; accessible bedroom fare is calculated as a regular bedroom fare. Twelve roomettes. Six passengers in bedrooms, 24 passengers in roomettes. The presumption for calculation is all berths are occupied.

Amfleet II long distance coach: 59 coach seats and one wheelchair tie-down space. The presumption for calculation is all seats and the wheelchair tie-down are occupied.

Viewliner sleeping car revenue: Three bedrooms, six passengers: $4,107. Twelve roomettes, 24 passengers: $6,828. Total Viewliner revenue: $10,935

Amfleet II long distance coach: 60 coach fares: $9,300

Difference: $1,635 greater revenue in Viewliner sleeping car

Car Attendants: Viewliner sleeping car will require one car attendant; coach will share a car attendant with another coach. However, the Viewliner sleeping car attendant, including 42% of salary cost for benefits calculation, will not amount to the difference of $1,635.

The way maintenance is calculated, the Viewliner sleeping car and the Amfleet II long distance coach will be billed equally for per car day maintenance costs.

The concept that all-coach trains perform better from an economic standpoint is false.

If you work the numbers based on Superliners, a similar outcome occurs.

johnpage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here is how you do a comparison of potential
> revenue from a Viewliner sleeping car versus a
> long distance coach:

I asked to limit this thread to posts about changed viewpoints from the recent discussions about LDTs.

Maybe your viewpoint just got harder so that is why you gave your "analysis", but I do not see how it adds to the thread.

Jack

The way I view LD Trains is the same view I always had, they cut just one, have fun getting that back as a "corridor" since it seems that's what the plan is, but how could it work, especially the way the freight railroads are anyway!

Sorry to have answered a question someone raised earlier in this thread and actually insert simple facts into the discussion. If you are unable to understand "analysis" of an issue, then at least don't gripe about others providing it.

johnpage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry to have answered a question someone raised
> earlier in this thread and actually insert simple
> facts into the discussion. If you are unable to
> understand "analysis" of an issue, then at least
> don't gripe about others providing it.

Yes, I understand analysis. Yours is pretty simplistic. I wonder how often a sleeping car fills up every berth or even how likely that is?

Yes, the analysis is simplistic for obvious reasons. It's not a question of how often a sleeping car fills up (the most expensive sleeping car space often is the first to be sold-out), although the answer to your question is: frequently.

It's a matter of comparison, using apples to apples. Without a full breakdown of various classes of ridership, fare buckets, zone pricing, etc., it is difficult to do anything but a simple comparison, so it's best to do something basic as a foundation.

If you dig deep, you will find sleeping cars on long distance trains and business class seats on state supported trains often sell out, where there are usually plenty of available seats in coach.

It's a business decision that Amtrak has erroneously made to stake its future on coach travel. Sleeping car travel provides higher revenue without necessarily higher associated costs when you break everything down into fine detail. Coach travel attracts low-end revenue, often sold at sale prices.

The important thing is there is a market for both, but those discrete markets must be serviced in proper proportion. To write off, or ignore higher end travel is to simply leave lots and lots of money on the table.

This also brings up the side issue of providing enough seats/berths for a particular train's peak segments. As an example, the Palmetto's peak segment is the short run of Petersburg, Virginia to Richmond, Virginia, of which both are in the same metropolitan area. But, the Palmetto is usually sold out in that segment, and, even with good yield management, a lot of business is lost for want of another car, be it a business class car or coach. The proper analysis for that would be how much revenue is lost versus the incremental cost of that additional car.

If you look at other forms of common carrier transportation, including some specialty intercity buses, you will see a trend towards catering to something other than basic coach travel. The reason for this is the economics work. Amtrak and Greyhound are probably the only two common carriers who don't understand this segment of the travel industry. Amtrak's enablers also don't understand it, nor choose to learn about it. They are too satisfied with anything that has a locomotive and a whistle, and always want to fight professionals who do this for a living and understand a full market picture. True students of passenger rail travel, and, those who are serious about providing a better passenger rail system in North America, understand the glory days of rail travel offered much more than just day coach travel. VIA Rail Canada understands this, and has been raking in buckets of revenue by providing extravagant first class service at even more extravagant prices on more than just The Canadian. The result has been a huge positive for VIA's bottom line.

John, I've been guilty of bending threads in the past and have been trying lately to refrain from that annoying behavior. My purpose in the thread was solely to see whether the discussions were pushing the needle one way or another. I wanted to avoid making any replies myself, so that it did not appear that I started the thread just to have a platform to launch my own views. Looks like most posters complied with that request, except for a couple. If this is so important to you, why don't you go start your own thread?

Jack

Sorry, I wasn't aware there was any particular ownership in any thread on a service we all pay an equal amount to use.

Jack,

Appreciate the thread.

I have read many if not all of the various threads about the long distance trains over many months now. I appreciate all of the various views and analyses that have been stated. Many are well-reasoned and compelling (both pro-LDT and con-LDT, or in favor of major LDT restructuring). Some have been not so well stated, but I've considered their viewpoints nonetheless.

That said, my view remains unchanged that the LDT trains are a very important part of the Amtrak system and deserve to be maintained as is (perhaps with some modifications). In the spirit of this thread, I'll leave out any statement as to why, and possibly save that for another time and thread.

Thanks for offering this opportunity.

MC
Muskegon, Michigan