How can Amtrak obtain more sleeping cars?

Something that the Eastern Long Distance Trains despartely lack is (a) descent lounge car for comfortability and enjoying scenery (ala the Superliner Sightseer Lounge) and (b) adequate "Deluxe" bedrooms. I have only once in my travels booked a "Deluxe" bedroom on a Viewliner - only because it was ironically cheaper than a rommette. This was some sort of computer snafu for sure, as the "Deluxe" bedrooms are usually extremely over priced and often more than double the price than a roomette (or standard room). When I travel West of Chicago, either by myself or with someone, I always get a "Deluxe" bedroom.

Course Amtrak was smart in reducing bedrooms in favor of rommettes on the Viewliners, considering the order was decreased from 100 Viewliners to 50 Viewliners. A "Deluxe" Viewliner - or Viewliner with bedrooms versus roommettes if using the new terminolgy - would certainly be a good offering.

But I would be interested in (a) sleeper sellout rates - percentages by train (b) at what point does a sleeper sellout prior to departure and (c) average sleeper revenue per train.

Amtrak, unfortunately, does not have the flexibility to add sleepers, whether Superliners or Viewliners, as demand warrants - as they don't have the extra sleeper or have gotten into the habit of "fixed consists" and won't add the flexibility. This is a money loser.

After returning from a trip across Canada, I am even more convinced that one attendant can cover more than just one sleeper - even considering VIA Rail Canada operates single level equipment with less capacity per car. They do it quite superbly. Interestingly enough, VIA has put forth plans to renovate its Budd stainless steel equipment, again, with additional double bedrooms. They have done a market study that proves they need more double bedrooms. Course they are still dealing with open berths and single occupancy roomettes (which I am conviced are the same dimensions of the Viewliner roomette).

Given current political environment,

IMO, Amtrak needs revenue space far more than non-revenue space.

John Perkowski

I would enjoy looking over the study that VIA performed.

VPayne wrote:I would enjoy looking over the study that VIA performed.

I wish it was a public report - b/c I would be interested in reading it as well. I obtained this info verbally from a reputable marketing rep riding on a VIA Rail Canada train. We happened to talk about a LOT of other things about VIA and Amtrak.

One observation from persuing the timetables . Most long distance train equipment overnites at the end of the run . this means a sleeper is losing a revenue nite every turn .
my solution would be , either to adjust timetables so that trains spend the day aty the end of each run been serviced , ( arrive in the morning , depart at nite ) so maximising sleeper revenue . but this would inconvience coach passengers , who would probably prefer to travel during daylight hours .
The second , and i think best option , is to cut the sleepers out a big station near the end of the run in the morning , ( say Washington on the crescent and florida trains ) , and add them to the opposing train that evening . Through passengers would transfer to coach for the remainder of thier journey .
This has often been said to be unappealing to say new York first class passengers . but if its a choice between a sleeper at nite , coach for the day segment , versus no sleeper at all , then they will take it . And with the shortage of sleepers , then if they dont , theres plenty more that will .

I know this thread has not had anything in over 17 years, but I ran across this quote from somewhere else and wondered if it was true.

[cars] were owned by banks and insurance companies and leased to railroads until paid for. This is against the law for Amtrak to do today. To limit them having equipment to run or open lines.

I am sorry to see that much of what was discussed many years ago is still true, even with several changes in administrations and congresses since then.

On the side of a car would be a plate reading along the lines of "car owned by a trust or [bank name] pursuant to agreement on file with Interstate Commerce Commission".

NJT still does this, as some of its fleet (ALP44/ALP4s and MCI coaches) are financed by foreign banks and lenders, with ownership by a bank or trust and leased to the agency.

If certain equipment was purchased by a state or local agency under a bond act, it is not uncommon for ownership to remain in a trust until the bonds are fully paid off. MTA and PANYNJ regularly use bonds authorized by their states and issued on agency credit for financing as well as the State of New Jersey Transportation Fund and Illinois RTA as other examples.

Yes, I understand equipment trusts [think car loans, house mortgages], but this statement came from someone else who was saying that Amtrak was barred from using this device so they couldn't get replacement equipment or have additional equipment to expand services without having to pay the entire purchase amount all at once. The person believed it was a conspiracy against expanding rail passenger service.

Thanks for updating that services in NJ and NY were using equipment trusts and bonds to acquire equipment.

urr304 wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 11:43 am . The person believed it was a conspiracy against expanding rail passenger service

Mr. URR, the statement you note regarding Equipment Trusts was likely made by someone who holds, that because the Amtrak National Network has not expanded to include any and all services existing during 1953 (end of the Korean War), there has to be a conspiracy in place.

Amtrak has, COVID notwithstanding, adequate means to obtain private sector equipment financing. But why go there if you can get interest free appropriated funds.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 2:52 pm Mr. URR, the statement you note regarding Equipment Trusts was likely made by someone who holds, that because the Amtrak National Network has not expanded to include any and all services existing during 1953 (end of the Korean War), there has to be a conspiracy in place.

Amtrak has, COVID notwithstanding, adequate means to obtain private sector equipment financing. But why go there if you can get interest free appropriated funds.

I am reminded of the latest issues going through Disney and Florida, but at a deeper level explored by specialist lawyers who deal with property and covenant law in Florida. Disney's "Reedy Creek Improvement Special District" as part of Epcot City that Walt wanted to create enabled Disney to borrow money at dirt-cheap interest rates via government bond issues... but they forgot that some folks had to live in the city that never was created.

Amtrak is a quasi-corporation operating under a federal mandate (aka it's doing things right) and thus can legally borrow under those cheap rates.

I always assumed the inability for Amtrak to use equipment trusts was centered in the inability to repossess equipment for payment default.

The People's Republic of Illinois is one of those states that does not allow repossession from private property, so all Amtrak would need to do is store equipment trust equipment in a privately owned storage yard, and it would be unreachable by the owners.

This isn't a problem for airlines, where airports are typically public property. Arguably storage yards for state-owned agencies like njt and Metra are also public property. Amtrak being only quasi government gives them private property rights that others don't have.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

I wonder if any of this is related to when Amtrak was on their "glidepath to recovery" and as I understood it, sold a bunch of their equipment and then leased it back with the overall goal of showing a short-term profit to reach their then legally mandated goal of being profitable in X years.
That said, aren't some of the Acela units currently held in a trust this way?

eolesen wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 9:45 am This isn't a problem for airlines, where airports are typically public property.

While this is unrelated to the topic at hand - let alone railroad industry affairs, the point Mr. Olesen makes is vividly related in the former airline pilot John J. Nance's book "Splash of Colors" (ISBN 0-668-03586-8).
The book covers the decline and fall of Braniff Airways, which in addition to their DFW hub and "splashy" (today they'd be called "sexist") marketing campaigns, had routes extending throughout South America.

The airline was simply "hemorrhaging" cash; and there was no way out other than a bankruptcy petition. However, the Trustee-designates knew that any aircraft parked out of the US would simply never be available to satisfy creditor claims. So after assuring that there were no aircraft in foreign airspace, is when they chose to file the Petition".

This is a beautifully written book, and for someone who can claim first hand experience with a similar matter (I was in Harlowton, MT when Lines West of "my MILW" were shut down during November '79), very poignant with the reader feeling the pain of the employees who simply had no idea of what was to transpire.

Greg Moore wrote: ↑Wed May 24, 2023 7:43 pm I wonder if any of this is related to when Amtrak was on their "glidepath to recovery" and as I understood it, sold a bunch of their equipment and then leased it back with the overall goal of showing a short-term profit to reach their then legally mandated goal of being profitable in X years.
That said, aren't some of the Acela units currently held in a trust this way?

I know the Hippos were leased from phillip Morris.

Maybe; IF Amtrak gets a proper, legal Board of directors?'