Silver Star Downgrade and Diner Discussion

I am not an employee. Just a guy who reads Performance Reports line by line and says: where is it worst? where is it best? why is it worst? where and how could you fix it? And so's Joe Boardman: he's given pretty compelling testimony on this. That we'd sometimes agree would happen because there just aren't that many ways of taking an honest look at the numbers. Given that the sleepers are mostly under-utilized, there's no way to grow them into profitability *except*:

- that new sleepers will be cheaper to operate because they'll have fewer toilets and facilitate better diner-to-sleeper and staff-to-passenger ratios
- that diners are where most of the trouble is (they're pure cost and produce very little additional revenue), so putting more sleepers per diner is a way to get diner productivity up (spread the costs across more sleeper passengers....kind of how the Auto Train does it)
- if you could cut them in and out at ATL on the Crescent (which runs as a day train south of ATL anyway) and maybe other midpoints

And Boardman's done a great job of isolating the LD's and saying: this is a service you (politicians) want, then you should pay us the $1b it costs to run them, just like a big defense contractor running a service or building a weapon (and not ask NEC passengers to pay for them with money that's needed to re-invest in depreciating NEC infrastructure).

Barring that, the LDs are really the only "broken" part of Amtrak left. It shouldn't surprise anyone that they're crunching the numbers harder in that area than they've ever done before.

OK; so if Amtrak is moving in direction of some kind of NYP-SAV "Starlinian", then why in the devil did they order at least six extra Diners and Sleepers?

Can't this "Clown Alley" @ 60 Mass ever get inside the same VW Bug?

Gilbert B Norman wrote:OK; so if Amtrak is moving in direction of some kind of NYP-SAV "Starlinian", then why in the devil did they order at least six extra Diners and Sleepers?
Can't this "Clown Alley" @ 60 Mass ever get inside the same VW Bug?

I've never liked the V-II order because it risked creating a "sunk cost" mindset, over-committed to night trains, and dumping too much sleeper capacity on the market. But I would't call its placement or modification clownish.

Who says the new V-IIs are 100% for growth? Baggage sure isn't. Somewhere there's always going to be a "worst" diner from an operating cost and reliability standpoint, but you can't retire it without a replacement. Same goes for sleepers, particularly with the possible savings of swapping out sleepers with too many toilets (or even just being free to take them out of service to re-fit them with LEDs)

Arlington wrote:I am not an employee. Just a guy who reads Performance Reports line by line and says: where is it worst? where is it best? why is it worst? where and how could you fix it? And so's Joe Boardman: he's given pretty compelling testimony on this. That we'd sometimes agree would happen because there just aren't that many ways of taking an honest look at the numbers. Given that the sleepers are mostly under-utilized, there's no way to grow them into profitability *except*:

- that new sleepers will be cheaper to operate because they'll have fewer toilets and facilitate better diner-to-sleeper and staff-to-passenger ratios
- that diners are where most of the trouble is (they're pure cost and produce very little additional revenue), so putting more sleepers per diner is a way to get diner productivity up (spread the costs across more sleeper passengers....kind of how the Auto Train does it)
- if you could cut them in and out at ATL on the Crescent (which runs as a day train south of ATL anyway) and maybe other midpoints

And Boardman's done a great job of isolating the LD's and saying: this is a service you (politicians) want, then you should pay us the $1b it costs to run them, just like a big defense contractor running a service or building a weapon (and not ask NEC passengers to pay for them with money that's needed to re-invest in depreciating NEC infrastructure).

Barring that, the LDs are really the only "broken" part of Amtrak left. It shouldn't surprise anyone that they're crunching the numbers harder in that area than they've ever done before.

Roger!! I didnt realize these reports were also available to the public to read. Heh, ive been with amtrak 8 years and didnt even know that. Learn something new everyday. Haha

Amtrak67 of America wrote:Roger!! I didnt realize these reports were also available to the public to read. Heh, ive been with amtrak 8 years and didnt even know that. Learn something new everyday. Haha

My Chrome browser knows me too well: all I have to do is type "am" and it suggests:
http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?c=Page&pagename=am%2FLayout&cid=1241245669222, which is where the performance reports are posted.

Thanks arlington for the link. I suggest maybe some of the members here read these reports to have a better understanding as to what the railroad mindset is, cost etc.

Arlington, in a variety of threads, you've been coming up with one self-created reason after another to claim that the demise of long-distance trains with sleeping cars is upon us, or should be. None have panned out. I recall, for example, that you claimed that the growth of budget airlines was killing the Crescent--even though budget airlines in the Crescent's trade area weren't having any impact whatsoever, and weren't growing anyhow.

To add: the Florida trains can even have 3 sleeping cars on them during some periods, indicating that they do more sleeping car business than some other routes, although the business is seasonal. Just why would Amtrak start by making them coach-only, instead of other routes?

I'll wait for Amtrak's explanation.

Arlington wrote:And Boardman's done a great job of isolating the LD's and saying: this is a service you (politicians) want, then you should pay us the $1b it costs to run them, just like a big defense contractor running a service or building a weapon (and not ask NEC passengers to pay for them with money that's needed to re-invest in depreciating NEC infrastructure).
Barring that, the LDs are really the only "broken" part of Amtrak left. It shouldn't surprise anyone that they're crunching the numbers harder in that area than they've ever done before.

I'll agree that long distance trains are financially broken, but they're needed politically.
I disagree NEC passengers aren't being served by long distance trains. Every single-level long distance train on the east coast, serves the NEC including NYC. I wouldn't be surprised that more than half the single-level long distance customers don't originate or terminate their ride in an NEC city.
The NEC may operate profitably, but its profits aren't going to rebuild the NEC's infrastructure. Amtrak will need political support from the rest of the country to rebuild it. Therefore, long distance trains will still need to be around for awhile.

Arlington is absolutely correct that diners are where the most trouble is. They have a lot of staff and limited hours. All amtrak food service is problematic but dining car service is a bottomless pit, particularly on single night services. The best thing they could do to the silver service is put it on the fec and shave four hours off.

Rumor on another site says that the Star is losing one of its sleeprs and its dining car.

chrsjrcj wrote:Rumor on another site says that the Star is losing one of its sleeprs and its dining car.

If cafe car food wasn't so atrocious it wouldn't be a big deal. You can get restaurant quality food at a bar why does cafe car food have to be so awful?

electricron wrote:I'll agree that long distance trains are financially broken, but they're needed politically.
I disagree NEC passengers aren't being served by long distance trains. Every single-level long distance train on the east coast, serves the NEC including NYC. I wouldn't be surprised that more than half the single-level long distance customers don't originate or terminate their ride in an NEC city.
The NEC may operate profitably, but its profits aren't going to rebuild the NEC's infrastructure. Amtrak will need political support from the rest of the country to rebuild it. Therefore, long distance trains will still need to be around for awhile.

In the case of LDs in SC, they won Amtrak exactly 0 Republican votes out of 6. In what way is excess SC LD service necessary or helpful? Better politically to lose that money in some swing districts in VA or NC if we are talking political expediency.

The LDs mostly gum up the NEC and do not carry local NEC traffic.As NEC slots get rare and valuable it may make better money to devote them to, for example, more Acela frequencies WAS-NYP, and start more Southern LDs from WAS.

In a similar way, the Silver Star is hogging a truly rare and valuable Long Bridge slot only to lose $40m annually with it, whereas were it devoted to a VA train (LYH or RVR or NFK or NPN) it might make $3m...a $43m improvement in the use of that slot. Amtrak has got to focus on making more from the assets it has.

I must admit. I am fascinated at the thought of Amtrak cutting their remaining operating deficit by 30% through changes to a single route. Amazing if true.

Arlington wrote: In the case of LDs in SC, they won Amtrak exactly 0 Republican votes out of 6. In what way is excess SC LD service necessary or helpful? Better politically to lose that money in some swing districts in VA or NC if we are talking political expediency.

The LDs mostly gum up the NEC and do not carry local NEC traffic.As NEC slots get rare and valuable it may make better money to devote them to, for example, more Acela frequencies WAS-NYP, and start more Southern LDs from WAS.

In a similar way, the Silver Star is hogging a truly rare and valuable Long Bridge slot only to lose $40m annually with it, whereas were it devoted to a VA train (LYH or RVR or NFK or NPN) it might make $3m...a $43m improvement in the use of that slot. Amtrak has got to focus on making more from the assets it has.

Amtrak runs on a normal weekday at least 22 trains across the Long Bridge. VRE, if my numbers are right, runs 30 trains on weekdays. VA is seeking to extend a second Regional to Lynchburg. The Silver Star slot is not that valuable. And there is spare capacity on the southern NEC outside of the peak rush and commuter periods.

As for South Carolinia, how does dropping service to the state make a long term case for improving passenger rail service to it? By keeping the LD trains running, it leaves the door open for the state and the local governments to see the benefits of the service as new Governors, Congressmen and Senators come on the scene.

I hope we get an explanation of the reason for the block-out of sleeper sales for the Silver Star soon. It is resulting in a lot of crazy stuff on the railroad forums.

I am pretty sure that between Amtrak and VRE, they have exhausted the weekday, "working hour" slots that were negotiated with CSX on the Long Bridge c. 2007, and there are no new ones in sight cause CSX rightly demands a new bridge to go with the new Virginia Ave tunnel it is building out of its own pocket.

Virginia can extend the LYH train to ROA, but what the state would really like is a second LYH train-now or by 2017--but no slot can be created at any price--what if it bought or rented the Silver Star's slot for the same kind of price (or more) that they are paying CSX ($75M) for LYH-ROA? If rented, $10M a year for 10 years looks like a reasonable interagency transaction value for the Long Bridge slot. It isn't $0, and it sure isn't -$40m. Maybe $1M or $3M or $5M would do if it gave Amtrak cover for reconfiguring the Silvermettos.

And how much do NEC slots earn when a NER or Acela runs in them? You could easily afford throwing in a connecting Acela or NER business ticket to every sleeper customer in exchange for having the freedom to run a money maker in that NEC slot.