Viewliner II Delivery/Production

I’ve never had the pleasure of riding in a Viewliner, so I would like some guidance here. Let’s say Amtrak was considering removing 6 double Roomettes in favor of 12 Slumbercoach modules; would the current window arrangement suffice? (Are the upstairs windows large enough for emergency access, and would passengers have enough height to properly see out of them without craning their heads?)

If the current windows could work without passenger discomfort, Amtrak really could operate these on the Corridor (looking at 66-67 and whichever daylight trains consistently sell out BusinessClass.) Otherwise, it would be prohibitely expensive to design a new carbody with staggered windows.

Well the old Slumbercoaches had staggered windows so I think it would not work.

Virgil Payne has some ideas and drawings , for staggered sleeping accommodation , but i have not seen him post for awhile.

bostontrainguy wrote:Well the old Slumbercoaches had staggered windows so I think it would not work.

That’s true, but no other modern single-level railcar has had two rows of windows. The lower row of windows (eye level for the lower roomettes) would be at about ankle level for the upper roomettes - would the upper row be at, below, or above eye level?

I'm not sure but thinking about my experiences, when you step on the toilet (about seat level?) to get to the upper bunk, I think you can pretty much see out the upper window.

However, if you check the diagram below, it appears that two slumbercoach rooms are 93" total length. If that is the case, I think a really well designed mini suite layout similar to the Delta One (http://www.travelandleisure.com/airline ... -one-suite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) I mentioned a few pages back, would actually be a better and cheaper alternative. I think the pitch for those would be about the same (89-95"). It's kind of doing the same thing having beds that overlap each other - the slumbercoach having beds that overlap OVER each other and Delta One having beds that overlap NEXT to each other.

gokeefe wrote:

EdSchweppe wrote:In particular, "higher-density sleeping car space" implies new oddball cars and all the operational challenges those entail. And once we're talking new equipment, why not more of the stuff that's already selling out?

In that case the real answer might just be an all Roomette Viewliner Sleeper. Move them around the system to follow seasonal peaks in demand.

Well, the 15 new Viewliner Dorm/Baggage cars could have lots of roomettes in them. We all are assuming they will be split close to 50-50 between Dorms and Baggage, but it could be 80-20 or even 90-10. If the latter , it will almost be a sleeper car that has a lot of roomettes in it. They would have 12 roomettes is that half remain the same as existing Viewliner sleepers. We also are assuming none of the roomettes will be used by passengers, but half the roomettes in Superliiner Transition Sleepers are used by passengers. And we are also assuming they will be roomettes and not slumber sleeping berths.

It will be interesting to see how these Dorm/Baggage cars will be designed, built, and used.

SouthernRailway wrote:* Since sleeping car space is priced at (1) a rail ticket for each occupant plus (2) a fixed charge for the room, Amtrak makes more per room if it sells a room to 2 people than if it sells a room to just one person.

Is this definitely true? I have so far twice unsuccessfully offered a second ticket in a roomette.

ApproachMedium wrote:the amfleet bodies dont have the vertical space i think to make good use of that style planning. They could call it, a slumberliner??? ViewSlumber?

throw a mattress on an amfleets luggage rack and have an instant economy sleeper

bostontrainguy wrote:

mtuandrew wrote:

bostontrainguy wrote:Well the old Slumbercoaches had staggered windows so I think it would not work.

That’s true, but no other modern single-level railcar has had two rows of windows. The lower row of windows (eye level for the lower roomettes) would be at about ankle level for the upper roomettes - would the upper row be at, below, or above eye level?

I'm not sure but thinking about my experiences, when you step on the toilet (about seat level?) to get to the upper bunk, I think you can pretty much see out the upper window.

However, if you check the diagram below, it appears that two slumbercoach rooms are 93" total length. If that is the case, I think a really well designed mini suite layout similar to the Delta One (http://www.travelandleisure.com/airline ... -one-suite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) I mentioned a few pages back, would actually be a better and cheaper alternative. I think the pitch for those would be about the same (89-95"). It's kind of doing the same thing having beds that overlap each other - the slumbercoach having beds that overlap OVER each other and Delta One having beds that overlap NEXT to each other.

SS_Siesta_floor_plan.jpg

The advantage of the "V-Slumbercoach" is individual private enclosed rooms with a sink and toilet.

F40CFan wrote:The advantage of the "V-Slumbercoach" is individual private enclosed rooms with a sink and toilet.

No in-suite toilet in the V-II double roomettes, which means probably none in a hypothetical single roomette either.

From Holiday Inn Express Boca Raton--

Oh well, until there be a report that #18 and 19 are on their way, this diversion into "Econosnooze" and "Econochow" will continue.

When the Budd 24-8 Slumbercoach was introduced "towards the end" mid-50's, there were still roads out there who believed passenger trains could be promoted. I think the major players all looked at the 24-8, and save the five roads, NYC, B&O, MP, CBQ, NP, all concluded that they would simply dilute revenue away from Standard Sleepers as distinct from attracting new business that would use other means.

So they stayed away.

Amtrak of course acquired both the 24-8 and 16-10 cars; the latter having been rebuilt for NYC from 22 RM cars that were duds when business travel "flew" away. But evidently when they wisely developed the two bed Roomette, that need went away.

So in short, Amtrak already has an "Econosnooze"; it's called the Roomette and is available Systemwide.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:
So in short, Amtrak already has an "Econosnooze"; it's called the Roomette and is available Systemwide.

You can say that but in reality Amtrak's sleepers are pretty damn expensive. You have your coach people and your rather-be-dead anti-coach people. You got your First Class sleeper people who will pay top dollar and expect service and meals. And there is a mid-price market that Amtrak has not addressed and could be satisfied with a Delta One type of setup. Why not take a Viewliner shell and at least try it on say 65/66/67? Wouldn't really cost much to do.

I think a Slumber-coach-liner (with sink but no toilet each) would be a fine lie-flat Business Class interior that could be slipped into a V-2 shell, particularly if the pod-sleeper bus running SF-LA proves the concept to hipsters.

Queensland (Australia) Rail's Spirit of Queensland has the Railbed concept - a large seat (looks much like an airline's first class seat) that folds into a bed. There are no partitions, so the whole car is open and you get to hear everyone's snoring. It's the only sleeping accomodations on the train. Other Queensland Rail overnight trains have normal sleeper rooms.

jcpatten wrote:Queensland (Australia) Rail's Spirit of Queensland has the Railbed concept - a large seat (looks much like an airline's first class seat) that folds into a bed. There are no partitions, so the whole car is open and you get to hear everyone's snoring. It's the only sleeping accomodations on the train. Other Queensland Rail overnight trains have normal sleeper rooms.

FYI, there’s plenty of photos of the Spirit of Queensland train at Google.
Yes, they have an example worth looking at closely. Their normal four abreast seating coach has 13 rows of seats, 52 seats total in the car. Their lay flat seats have 7 rows of seats, where the first and last have two seats, and five rows having three seats, 19 seats in total. Australian passenger cars are usually around 80 feet in length vs 85 feet in the USA. So it might be possible to squeeze in one additional row of seats and therefore have 3 more seats in a Viewliner, reaching 22 seats in total.
But check out the photos of the aisle where the three abreast lay flat seats are located, there’s no way anyone could suggest that meets the 30 inches width mandated by the FRA regulations. So, meeting FRA requirements, at most lay flat seats you could squeeze into a Viewliners would be 8 rows of two seats, 16 seats in total. That’s just one more seat than rooms and roomettes in the existing Viewliners. Amtrak would have to charge a higher fare for the lay flat seats than they do for rooms and roomettes to break even financially.