Overnight Coach Configuration Ideas

Is there a floor plan for this particular setup? I can't quite make out how it is done.

Another international idea that could be a good base is the Hard Sleeper on Chinese trains. It offers 60 berths (on 3 levels, the higher the cheaper, I was told), 18 foldable seats and 2 bathrooms each car. It has an open design and lacks privacy but otherwise it is low maintenance and quite comfortable, especially for one night.

This may help:

http://news.delta.com/worlds-first-all- ... -delta-one" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thank you, bostontrainguy. That helped a lot.

I was puzzled about how the person in picture was able to lay down and now I can see the seats are staggered, one left, one right and that's how the design gives enough length for a normal height person to lay down.

It looks like a very nice and comfortable design. The only issue I see is it does not look like it's an easy design to utilize height to fit in an upper pods. I wonder how many "pods" can fit in one car.

bostontrainguy wrote:This may help:
http://news.delta.com/worlds-first-all- ... -delta-one" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Except for the half height wall, I don't see much difference between the lay flat bed on the Delta jet and a roomette on an Amtrak sleeper train. While the jet is worried about weight, the reason for the half wall, the trains Amtrak uses are not as sensitive to extra weight a full height wall brings.
An Airbus 350 fuselage is ~18 feet wide, and Amtrak sleeper car is only ~10 feet wide.
Why is the conversation continuing, lay flat seats into bunks that work on planes don't and won't work on trains when there are better - more profitable options.

Edenver wrote:Another international idea that could be a good base is the Hard Sleeper on Chinese trains. It offers 60 berths (on 3 levels, the higher the cheaper, I was told), 18 foldable seats and 2 bathrooms each car. It has an open design and lacks privacy but otherwise it is low maintenance and quite comfortable, especially for one night.

That's similar to what India does on their third class sleepers, and if you include a sliding door into the compartment what India does on their first class sleepers.
Riders do not book compartments, they book individual berths or bunks.

While this provides little to no individual privacy, although it provides somewhat more than lay flat seats will.
60 berths is almost as many seats as on a long distance Amfleet II coach.
Therefore it'll be far more profitable for Amtrak than 30-40 lay flat seats in a business class coach.

electricron wrote:While this provides little to no individual privacy, although it provides somewhat more than lay flat seats will.

How can you possibly say that? Especially if the Delta-One suites concept is used with full-height walls? There would be complete privacy in your own personal enclosed space. The Delta-One setup is a lot more desirable than that triple-decker cattle car.

I was assuming no full height walls, leaving your space open to everyone in the car, just like in a regular coach.
Now, how is someone going to reach the second row of lay flat seats from the aisle at night when the first row of seats nearest the aisle is in flat bunk position? Are they going to have to climb over - well they can't because you now have placed a full height wall in between.

Using China's or India six bunks in a compartment, everyone can get to their bunks. It's more private - although not by much - because only five others share the same compartment. It's more profitable because there are more bunks on the train, almost as many as seats in regular Amfleet coaches. Any increase in fares is going to collect more revenues - that's of course assuming these bunks are sold.

It will come down to cost and preference.

The hard sleeper with triple bunks carries 60 people in a single level car and a similar soft sleeper with double bunks carries 40. Both have floor to ceiling dividers and the soft sleeper also has doors for privacy. If needed, a curtain can be added to the hard sleeper to provide privacy to each compartment.

How many "pods" can the pod design fit? If it's 40 or even only 30, that's comparable in numbers. The upper space throughout the car is a bit wasted unless there is a way to put in upper pods. Leave it as is, the wall can be made higher to offer more privacy but I imagine it would feel very claustrophobic with such a small area and higher walls, like an airplane washroom. Without full height walls privacy wise it will be also lacking, but at least it feels more "individual" and has a clearly defined personal space.

For leisure travel I personally prefer the more open and versatile sleeper design and would gladly take the "cattle car" especially since I believe it would be less expensive. For business travel if company pays the bill, I would take the pod.

Edenver wrote:It will come down to cost and preference.

For leisure travel I personally prefer the more open and versatile sleeper design and would gladly take the "cattle car" especially since I believe it would be less expensive. For business travel if company pays the bill, I would take the pod.

You're looking at it from the passenger point of view only. Tell the truth, wouldn't you rather have the privacy of a roomette over a pod?

From the train operator point of view, with the desire of increased revenues, wouldn't you rather sell more cheap seats and more highly priced bunks than a lower number of medium priced pods?

Absolutely. Speaking for myself I would take either the roomette or the Chinese or Indian design over a pod. Another favorite of mine would be the VIA berths section design, which is found in some international trains, and I have also seen it in some RV's. It offers decent privacy but requires an able and agile body.



However, the pod design does offer all floor level seats/beds, which might be crucial for some travelers, and a more individualized space and for the lack of better words, a more business feel rather than a dormitory, slumber coach feel.



As to the pricing, given it can only fit about 30 or 40 in a car at best, I imagine it would have to be more expensive than a hard sleeper style slumber coach. Some people, especially business travelers might be willing to pay for it.

I've traveled in section, roomettes, and rooms. I found the section fine for privacy. I haven't been in a shared compartment, but I think I would feel more shy there, especially without bed curtains.

I realize that sections, and esp. uppers, became unpopular in the US half a century ago, leading to roomettes, but it seems to me that the section is the most efficient way of getting beds and seats into a car that we're likely to find. Now that Amtrak sleepers are nearly always sold out, I wonder if sections would also sell out, and with higher pax counts because of the ability to have single travelers get just an upper or just a lower. I can't imagine how we could find out because it would make no sense to build section cars on spec... Maybe rent some from Via for a trial on the Lake Shore or the Crescent or a Florida train? Actually, a trial on the overnight train where the sleepers don't include meals might be a good idea. On that train, the more sleeper pax there are, the better for Amtrak; on all the other trains, Amtrak would actually prefer one passenger per room or roomette, so as to have only half as many meals to serve. Or maybe just ask Via how their sections do. Did I hear they were going to eliminate them?

Edenver wrote:However, the pod design does offer all floor level seats/beds, which might be crucial for some travelers, and a more individualized space and for the lack of better words, a more business feel rather than a dormitory, slumber coach feel.
...
As to the pricing, given it can only fit about 30 or 40 in a car at best, I imagine it would have to be more expensive than a hard sleeper style slumber coach. Some people, especially business travelers might be willing to pay for it.

Look at that photo of the airline lay flat seats again. Notice specifically that there are TWO aisles, allowing access to four abreast lay flat seas. On a train, there's only room for ONE aisle, allowing "easy" access to just two abreast lay flat seats. To get access to a THIRD abreast lay flat seat, there will have to be gaps between the lay flat seats closest to the only aisle. Assuming one could fit 10 lay flat seats in a row nearest the windows in a car, you might fit five lay flat seats nearest the aisle. That adds up to just 25 lay flat seats in a car. That's less seats than beds on an existing Viewliner sleeper car. Amtrak will have to charge more for your business class lay flat seats than it does now for first class sleeper berths to break even.

Will you business pay more for a lay flat seat than for a sleeping compartment? I didn't think so.

The whole purpose of providing the lay flat seat was to provide a cheaper fare option than traveling by sleeper. To do that Amtrak needs to be able to sell more seats than beds. I think we've proven that's impossible with lay flat seats. But there are many ways for Amtrak to provide more beds than they do on a Viewliner now.

Lest we forget, the lay flat seats in Business or First Class, are electro mechanical and do have a way of going "bad order", and not much the Flight Crew can do about it.

Last month, flying overseas in Business Class (paid for it; the alternative "unacceptable"), my lie flat seat "ditched", and the Attendants had no choice other than move me. This was annoying as I had picked the seat, 9K, so as to have good flightseeing. While departure from O'Hare was in the clouds (ceiling maybe 1000ft AGL), the approach to Munich was cloudless - and that I missed.

Oh well, at least the seat was OK through Dinner as a very attractive fortysomething was seated next to me and we had nice conversation - especially when she said my company sure beats the movie.

All told, anyone think Amtrak would be bothered with such a seat?

Arborwayfan wrote:I've traveled in section, roomettes, and rooms. I found the section fine for privacy. I haven't been in a shared compartment, but I think I would feel more shy there, especially without bed curtains.

I realize that sections, and esp. uppers, became unpopular in the US half a century ago, leading to roomettes, but it seems to me that the section is the most efficient way of getting beds and seats into a car that we're likely to find. Now that Amtrak sleepers are nearly always sold out, I wonder if sections would also sell out, and with higher pax counts because of the ability to have single travelers get just an upper or just a lower. I can't imagine how we could find out because it would make no sense to build section cars on spec... Maybe rent some from Via for a trial on the Lake Shore or the Crescent or a Florida train? Actually, a trial on the overnight train where the sleepers don't include meals might be a good idea. On that train, the more sleeper pax there are, the better for Amtrak; on all the other trains, Amtrak would actually prefer one passenger per room or roomette, so as to have only half as many meals to serve. Or maybe just ask Via how their sections do. Did I hear they were going to eliminate them?

That's unfortunate. I hope that's not going to happen.

And yes, I think train 66, 67 would be good candidates to test out the double bunk sleeper car concept, though I am not sure those cars exist in North America.

electricron wrote: Look at that photo of the airline lay flat seats again. Notice specifically that there are TWO aisles, allowing access to four abreast lay flat seas. On a train, there's only room for ONE aisle, allowing "easy" access to just two abreast lay flat seats. To get access to a THIRD abreast lay flat seat, there will have to be gaps between the lay flat seats closest to the only aisle. Assuming one could fit 10 lay flat seats in a row nearest the windows in a car, you might fit five lay flat seats nearest the aisle. That adds up to just 25 lay flat seats in a car. That's less seats than beds on an existing Viewliner sleeper car. Amtrak will have to charge more for your business class lay flat seats than it does now for first class sleeper berths to break even.

Will you business pay more for a lay flat seat than for a sleeping compartment? I didn't think so.

The whole purpose of providing the lay flat seat was to provide a cheaper fare option than traveling by sleeper. To do that Amtrak needs to be able to sell more seats than beds. I think we've proven that's impossible with lay flat seats. But there are many ways for Amtrak to provide more beds than they do on a Viewliner now.

I agree there can be only one aisle. But I think because of the staggering, there can fit more than 10 seats on each side of the aisle, maybe 15, making it 30 altogether. Maybe even more but I would need to see detailed dimensions. In comparison, below is a transition sleeper car, which only has room for 20 roomettes even if we take out the stairs, showers, etc. Without upper berths, it would only have room for 20 people.



I do believe a pod would be cheaper than a single occupied roomette, but be more expensive than a double level sleeper berth. The thing with the pod is, it offers an option between a seat and a bed and a little more individual privacy. Since business travelers are generally traveling by themselves, singular design seems more desirable.

electricron wrote:I was assuming no full height walls, leaving your space open to everyone in the car, just like in a regular coach.
Now, how is someone going to reach the second row of lay flat seats from the aisle at night when the first row of seats nearest the aisle is in flat bunk position? Are they going to have to climb over - well they can't because you now have placed a full height wall in between.

You don't get the concept. The window person does not climb over the aisle person. The two individual passengers aren't even in the same space and are completely separated at all times having their own space with a window, flat screen TV, entertainment system, table, etc.

The "wall" is a sliding door (which could have a window like the roomettes) and does not interfer with either person's seat access.