Amtrak Northeast prices between New York and Washington are way too high. I have wondered if they simply added another two or three cars to the trains (even if the last two extended beyond the platform) to encourage ridership except at New York and Washington.
My question is could the current Amtrak locomotives handle any more cars, or would that mean adding another engine and crew?
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Amtrak Northeast prices between New York and Washington are way too high.
Way "too high" as compared to what other node of transportation?
I have wondered if they simply added another two or three cars to the trains (even if the last two extended beyond the platform) to encourage ridership except at New York and Washington.
I thought the trains are mostly full now, aren't they?
My question is could the current Amtrak locomotives handle any more cars, or would that mean adding another engine and crew?
Adding more cars may increase the schedule time, i.e. not being able to maine high speeds.
The ACS-64 is designed to take 18 amfleets (probably HEP system limit) to 120 MPH in 8 minutes. They can do the same feat with an 8 car train in 2.5 minutes. The problem is, there's not a platform on the NEC long enough to handle that 18 car train. Hanging off the end of the platform, or double stopping is horribly inefficient as it makes the stops longer, or makes the conductor fill the train based on destination.... not the easiest thing to do on a busy regional train. I'm also not sure they have the car inventory on hand to just throw extra cars on every train.
If you book 14 days or more out, WAS-NYP is $49. Driving is $20+ in tolls plus gas and aggravation. With ridership at record highs every year, it seems like everyone else finds the price to be just fine.
The problem is, there's not a platform . . .
We do some rail system engineering and consulting at work from time to time - doing one project out in the Pacific rim now - and it seems its always stuff like this, not the trains or their power or technical characteristics, that sets limits and defines how the RR really will operate.
"If you book 14 days or more out, WAS-NYP is $49. Driving is $20+ in tolls plus gas and aggravation. With ridership at record highs every year, it seems like everyone else finds the price to be just fine."
Amtrak prices have risen, but is the old saw - demand and supply. It still think its a good price, given everything.
Interesting. "Way too high" in comparison to the once-an-hour Chinese bus with air conditioning and wifi that costs ten bucks.
Interesting. "Way too high" in comparison to the once-an-hour Chinese bus with air conditioning and wifi that costs ten bucks.
, and occasionally swerves off the road?
Interesting. "Way too high" in comparison to the once-an-hour Chinese bus with air conditioning and wifi that costs ten bucks.
Although you may be willing to ride between Washington D.C. and New York City in a piece of crap like that, at probably twice the length of time, but I'll take the 120MPH Amtrak train any time at $50!
Amtrak Northeast prices between New York and Washington are way too high. I have wondered if they simply added another two or three cars to the trains (even if the last two extended beyond the platform) to encourage ridership except at New York and Washington.
My question is could the current Amtrak locomotives handle any more cars, or would that mean adding another engine and crew?
Does the bus take you where you want to be or does the train? The train from Toledo to Chicago takes me right downtown, exactly where I want to be. The Megabus from a suburban shopping mall parking lot to a mall parking lot. For me the train is better, the bus might be better for others.
Clem
Amtrak Northeast prices between New York and Washington are way too high. I have wondered if they simply added another two or three cars to the trains (even if the last two extended beyond the platform) to encourage ridership except at New York and Washington.
My question is could the current Amtrak locomotives handle any more cars, or would that mean adding another engine and crew?
The auto train maxes out at 17 Superliners, which is max HEP load, the rest of it is effectively freight train. It also makes no stops between the terminals, and to fit into the platform in Sanford, it needs to be split in two. Earlier this year, Amtrak decided to add another coach to the Auto Train, and as a result, have taken the Sleeper Lounge out of the train to accommodate it.
When Amtrak was still in the express package business, it wasnt uncommon for some routes to be 20+ express cars with a few passenger cars tacked on (look up the "Three Rivers").
I have used megabus. The doubledecker Van Hool buses mega uses are comfortable for 3-4 hour trip. Now you do board on a sidewalk like a transit bus. BTW, the "m" megabus uses IS small!
Amtrak Northeast prices between New York and Washington are way too high. I have wondered if they simply added another two or three cars to the trains (even if the last two extended beyond the platform) to encourage ridership except at New York and Washington.
My question is could the current Amtrak locomotives handle any more cars, or would that mean adding another engine and crew?
The auto train maxes out at 17 Superliners, which is max HEP load, the rest of it is effectively freight train. It also makes no stops between the terminals, and to fit into the platform in Sanford, it needs to be split in two. Earlier this year, Amtrak decided to add another coach to the Auto Train, and as a result, have taken the Sleeper Lounge out of the train to accommodate it.
When Amtrak was still in the express package business, it wasnt uncommon for some routes to be 20+ express cars with a few passenger cars tacked on (look up the "Three Rivers").
I rode the SW LTD with 19 cars. These were steam heated cars. Power was 3-4 SDP40F's.
Maybe Amtrak can order some intercity double deckers which can fit within the NJ Transit car "outline".
The maximum length of a train on the NE corridor is most likely set by the length of the platforms in Penn Station. These lengths were determined by the PRR when the station was built. Construction started in 1904. The station was opened in 1910. I doubt that there is room to lengthen the platforms in this station. I have a book that lists the consist of the Broadway Limited in 1959. The train had 14 cars. Another book lists the consist of the SCL's Miami-New York Florida Special at 18 cars in 1961 not including the GG-1. It appears that the length of the platform is about 18 cars plus enough room for a GG-1.
I remember reading somewhere that the maximum height of the cars is determined by the Hudson River tunnels leading to Penn Station. This tunnel was also built between 1904 and 1910. The overhead clearance is very close. This is one reason there are no domes or double deck cars on the NE corridor. The overhead wire is another reason.
One of the big capital problems facing Amtrak is to replace these tunnels that are over 100 years old. They have provided excellent service but their time may coming to an end. New tunnels will be needed.
Amtrak Northeast prices between New York and Washington are way too high. I have wondered if they simply added another two or three cars to the trains (even if the last two extended beyond the platform) to encourage ridership except at New York and Washington.
My question is could the current Amtrak locomotives handle any more cars, or would that mean adding another engine and crew?
I just took the Amtrak up to NYC a few weeks ago.... paid $176 round trip. ( reasonable ) If I would have booked the ticket earlier i could have probably gone for $100 round trip.
I drove to Queens from Columbia Maryland area in late 2012 and paid $76 round trip in tolls alone plus a tank and a quarter of gasoline. Also got the side window smashed out of my new Toyota while I was there ( cost $160 out of pocket to replace ... plus the frustration and gross inconvenience )
I also have taken the Chinatown buses from Baltimore to NYC round trip and have spent as much as 7 hours ( on several occassions over the years ) getting from point A to point B because of traffic. Ive also made it from point A to B in just over three hours too .... however, I could never rely on these buses. Sometimes they are very late to depart point A and sometimes they don't ever arrive at all. Yes they are a cheap fair but you get what you pay for. Although I no longer take theses buses, I understand that their fares have risen considerably and we must remember there have been issues with the bus companies skimping on maintainence .... some of these buses have lost their brakes resulting in deaths. From now on its Amtrak for me and Amtrak is a fine deal.
My June Amtrak trip to NYC had a train of 9 cars up and 9 cars back. Train was on time going up and 15 minutes late on arrival coming back, due to another train ( NJT) that broke down just outside the Hudson tube.
BTW back in the 60s the Pennsylvania RR ran weekend excursion trains from Baltimore to NYC Penn Station for various groups. Each early spring there would be a junior high school group trip to NYC, comprised of junior high schools from all over the state of Maryland. My junior high trip train consist was 23 cars pulled by two GG1 locos. We fit into Penn Station NY, detrained, and boarded just fine. 
Also a very good book to learn about Penn Station is " The Late Great Penn Station" by Lorraine B. Diehl. This book gives tons of information about the planning, engineering, building, and operation of Penn Station and the Hudson River Tunnel Tubes. Check it out its a great read!
Maybe Amtrak can order some intercity double deckers which can fit within the NJ Transit car "outline".
The problem with the NJT multilevels is, to fit through the Hudson/East River tunnels, (or the Baltimore ones, for that matter), the carbodies have only minimal luggage space on the upper level, and none at all on the lower level.
Removing enough seats to give adequate luggage space on both levels negates the capacity of multilevels. Besides, Amtrak is severely constrained as to how many new cars they can acquire at any given time--the 130 Vewliners were funded entirely out of higher-then-budgeted ticket revenue over the past few years, and the option for 70 more has not been exercised precisely because there isn't any additional money to be had (Thanks, Congress!).
The first "relief" for the Corridor will come from the double deckers the Midwest states and California have ordered (meaning, "out of their own money", not Amtrak's) for their corridor services. The Amfleets and Horizon cars used there would become available for NEC use (albeit, with manually operated doors), but would need rebuilding to be suitable for long-distance service.
Afterwards, the next priority is replacing the Acela trainsets (since they make money, an added capacity there means more revenue), and then the Amfleet II's which are individually posting seven-figure mileage totals.
---PCJ
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
