Why not use spare commuter trains for discount service?

Given the following facts:

1. Amtrak allegedly breaks even on its Northeast Regional trains.
2. Bus lines are growing by offering very low cost service around the Northeast, and they are diverting at least some business from rail.
3. Commuter train operators such as NJ Transit are under severe budget pressure.
4. Other railroads in Europe offer discount train service, sometimes by using old, high-density equipment.
5. NJ Transit and Metro-North already cooperate by offering trains to football games in the Meadowlands.

Why don't Northeastern commuter railroads team up and offer discount train service all the way from Boston to NYC to Washington, at least on weekends, using spare commuter train equipment? Or why doesn't Amtrak offer this service, by leasing spare commuter train equipment on weekends?

If Comet railcars offer about 40% more seating than Amfleet Is do, and if "discount" train service could do without a café car, it seems to me that tickets could be priced at about 40% less than Northeast Regional tickets are, and the train operator could maybe make a profit.

I assume that capacity of the Hudson River tunnels would be an impediment to this, and so this type of service would just require extending existing NJ Transit service so that additional tunnel slots aren't used.

Thoughts?

thought regular commuter was already discount service, as cost is paid 40 to 50 % by tax payers ??

Not every commuter railcar has restrooms. So the number of commuter rail cars available for low cost Amtrak services is limited, even on weekends.
If Amtrak did offer such services regularly on every weekend, more passengers would choose to ride the cheaper fare trains than Amtrak's regular trains. Which would mean Amtrak would loose money on this service, as their regular trains would run emptier. Amtrak only runs this type of service on holidays today where their regular trains are sold out, so this additional cheaper service isn't taking business and profits away from their regular service. I don't believe Amtrak charges less in fares for rides aboard these Holiday trains using commuter equipment.
Which I believe is a wise business choice. Doing what you wish will only be good for business if you can guarantee their regular trains will remain sold out - which you can't.

On an additional point, does any of Amtrak services' fares compete with bus fares? I don't think so. Amtrak pricing point for fares is to compete with planes, not with buses. If Amtrak prices their fares for the NEC to compete with buses regularly, they will never ever earn a profit!

electricron wrote:Not every commuter railcar has restrooms. So the number of commuter rail cars available for low cost Amtrak services is limited, even on weekends.
If Amtrak did offer such services regularly on every weekend, more passengers would choose to ride the cheaper fare trains than Amtrak's regular trains. Which would mean Amtrak would loose money on this service, as their regular trains would run emptier. Amtrak only runs this type of service on holidays today where their regular trains are sold out, so this additional cheaper service isn't taking business and profits away from their regular service.
Which I believe is a wise business choice. Doing what you wish will only be good for business if you can guarantee their regular trains will remain sold out - which you can't.

On an additional point, does any of Amtrak services' fares compete with bus fares? I don't think so. Amtrak pricing point for fares is to compete with planes, not with buses. If Amtrak prices their fares for the NEC to compete with buses regularly, they will never ever earn a profit!

Right: Amtrak's fares compete more with planes than buses. For "discount" services, the cheap tickets could be just for the trains using spare commuter equipment; regular trains would maintain their regular fares.

Isn't Amtrak missing a market by not attracting the bus crowd? Maybe offer a discount service using commuter train equipment but make the tickets highly restricted and offer service without any amenities so that only people who don't take currently Amtrak would take such a service.

A discount service would grow the ridership pool, although I would certainly admit that it could siphon off some customers from its regular trains. France's SNCF has a "Ouigo" TGV service; apparently only 20% of its riders came from regular trains: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouigo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I for one wouldn't take such a "discount" train- just as I would never take Southwest Airlines- but plenty of people would.

SouthernRailway wrote:A discount service would grow the ridership pool, although I would certainly admit that it could siphon off some customers from its regular trains. France's SNCF has a "Ouigo" TGV service; apparently only 20% of its riders came from regular trains: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouigo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Talking about discount services, why even include seats? They could lower the fares and still maintain profits by squeezing more riders in by having them hanging off straps standing up. Take every amenity away.
SCNF's Ouigo service is still real HSR. 50% of their customers came from TGV services looking for lower fares. The trains are double decker HSR sets with 1200 passengers/train. The average fare is E35.

Amtrak runs both Acela and Regional trains at lower speeds. But Ouigo service matches up to Amtrak's regional services already - providing services at cheaper fares. About the only other things left for Amtrak to do is kill the cafe and lounge cars, which many believe Amtrak is heading towards anyways to lower costs. There are subsidized Amtrak trains in service today without them, for an example - the Hiawatha. Ordering a month in advance for a NYC to D.C. trip, there are standard coach seats available for $52, which is the equivalent E46. Maybe Amtrak regional trains could get there (as low a fare as possible) simply by dropping food service cars completely?
The other thing Amtrak would need to do to match Ouigo services is have 1200 seats per train. An Amfleet I train set would need to be 17 cars in length (at 72 passengers/car), a NJT Multilevel train set would need to be 9 cars in length (at 132 passengers/car with restroom). A double decker train would have to be in service to achieve 1200 passengers/train. Who knows, Amtrak has been slow to order new single level coach cars, maybe just maybe you will get what you wish in the near or distant future?
The last thing left for Amtrak to do to match Ouigo service is run to alternate station locations. Could not entering Manhattan at all be achievable for Amtrak on the NEC? Paris is not a city made up mostly by islands like New York. Could a station located in Yonkers or White Plains work? If we could eliminate the tunnels and the resulting restrictions cause by them, maybe just maybe Amtrak could implement an Ouigo service on the NEC?

Oops, you're right in that 50% came from existing TGV services.

However, doesn't an Amfleet I coach seat up to 84? And a NJ Transit bi-level seats 127 to 142 people. So a 10-car NJ Transit train could carry over 1200 people. Thus NJ Transit could just extend an existing Trenton-NYC train and add 1200 seats of capacity.

SouthernRailway wrote:Oops, you're right in that 50% came from existing TGV services.

However, doesn't an Amfleet I coach seat up to 84? And a NJ Transit bi-level seats 127 to 142 people. So a 10-car NJ Transit train could carry over 1200 people. Thus NJ Transit could just extend an existing Trenton-NYC train and add 1200 seats of capacity.

I believe the standard capacity of an Amfleet I regional coach is 72 seats.
http://on-track-on-line.com/amtk-roster ... #Amfleet-I

I'm not suggesting it isn't doable, just impractical. Amtrak's Amfleet regional services might be a poorer match to Ouigo in almost every point, but that's the rolling stock Amtrak has now. The future rolling stock Amtrak will have for regional services has not been determined yet. Anything could happen.

Sounds like I wasn't clear above; sorry.

What I propose is that:

1. Amtrak's existing services remain unchanged.
2. Whenever there is some spare commuter rail equipment available, such as on weekends, either a commuter railroad or Amtrak, using the spare commuter rail equipment, use that spare equipment to offer service from Boston-NYC-Washington, at deeply discounted prices, to attract mostly the lower-end clientele that currently does not take Amtrak.

Saturday is a slow day for Northeast Corridor travel, as you can see by checking fare availabilities. There is no real demand for additional capacity. Sunday afternoons are busy, but why should Amtrak undercut its own fare structure by offering cheaper fares on a spartan service when they can demand more on a busy travel day? I doubt they're any more charitable than the airlines in that regard.

People looking for the cheapest rail fares already have commuter alternatives between Boston and Providence, New London and Wilmington (including joint ticketing between New York and Philadelphia via New Jersey Transit and SEPTA) and Baltimore and Washington. (Yes, I know about Newark, DEL, and Perryville MD, but I assume we're talking larger markets here). Relatively inexpensive air fares between some major NEC points are available on Southwest ( such as Boston and Providence to BWI) and Jet Blue (such as Boston to Philadelphia) with advance purchase. And of course there are the buses. I really doubt that there's much of a bargain travel market left for Amtrak to pick up when they'd be offering cramped, non-reclining seats, limited rest rooms, and no food or beverage service.

At least a few years ago, Amtrak had 1.7 billion passenger-miles in the Northeast Corridor; bus companies had 2.4 billion. Since there is more bus ridership than train ridership, it should be possible to siphon off some bus riders and expand rail's overall market.

https://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/58485523" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I like that idea, SR. I'd be willing to ride a Multilevel from DC to Boston, even at 100 mph max and without a cafe - it's still faster than a Megabus or BoltBus. Frankly, I'm surprised Amtrak hasn't gotten into this style of service, since they have the fixed infrastructure to support it.

Thanks. I will definitely concede that there are arguments against what I propose. It just seems to me that since the way to make money running trains, given huge overhead, is just to run more trains, and since rail has only a portion of the total public transportation market in the Northeast, running more trains where space permits, at different price points than Amtrak currently offers, is something that should be considered.

mtuandrew wrote:I'd be willing to ride a Multilevel from DC to Boston, even at 100 mph max and without a cafe - it's still faster than a Megabus or BoltBus.

You obviously have a much higher threshold for physical discomfort than me! I suspect that most non-railfans would find the relatively soft semi-reclining seats of an intercity bus more comfortable for eight or ten hours. Or they'd buy a cheap advance purchase BWI-Boston seat on Southwest as I do at least once a year.

Frankly, I'm surprised Amtrak hasn't gotten into this style of service, since they have the fixed infrastructure to support it.

Maybe they've concluded that there is no economically viable market. The key words there are "economically viable" -- would it contribute to Amtrak's bottom line after expenses and whatever ticket sales are diverted from existing services? There is also no assurance that the commuter authorities want to lease out equipment on more than a one weekend a year basis.

TomNelligan wrote: Maybe they've concluded that there is no economically viable market. The key words there are "economically viable" -- would it contribute to Amtrak's bottom line after expenses and whatever ticket sales are diverted from existing services? There is also no assurance that the commuter authorities want to lease out equipment on more than a one weekend a year basis.

That certainly may be the case. If Amtrak or any commuter railroads have looked at this type of service, I'd be curious.

NJ Transit leased equipment to the Atlantic City Express service for a long time. I'd think that a commuter railroad itself could operate its own equipment or lease it to Amtrak.

NJ Transit was under contract by a Paper Company of several casinos to provide the ACES service, and said casino consortium purchased rail-cars for said service.