posted
Waddya expect Mr. Demuth; it is the news media!
I had observed #3-6 passing through here (Subn Chgo) on all to many an occasion withough a Sightseer in the consist - and this was "pre-Crescent City".
Amtrak simply must find the money to get the "seventysome" Superliners now out of service back on the rails. I'm sure "MR. EGM" and colleagues are ready to roll up their sleeves and get at it. "De-Silverservicing" #89-90, and removing Superliners from 50-51 is only the start. If not already the case, there will be "robbing Peter to pay Paul" instances such as holding #14 at LA to "snitch" a car off the consist of a late inbound #3.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Amtrak may have some dome cars still in inventory, I doubt however that they could be returned to service in a timely manner. They are low-level Heritage equipment & can't be used in the Boston to Philadelphia corridor. They could be & have been used outside of that area in the past. I personally have never seen one of the long distance trains operate without a sightseer car. I'm sure it may have happened, but seriously doubt it has been very often. Reggie
Posts: 462 | From: Bakersfield Ca., 93312 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
BTW Gilbert, I couldn't agree more that the far too many passenger cars now stored & rusting at the Beech Grove, must be given the highest priority to be repaired & returned to revenue service as soon as possible. I've seen the figure of 17 million dollars as a guesstimate of what that would cost. That figure was before the Florida derailment so I would imagine it's more than that now. When you consider many times that was spent on advertising Acela trains a very long time before they were even close to being operational, it seems like a very small amount to get a whole bunch of cars back in service. Reggie
Posts: 462 | From: Bakersfield Ca., 93312 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Reggie is right. There is no excuse for not repairing the wrecked cars. The next thing that will occur after an accident will either be blank sleepers on certain dates or reduce some more trains to less than daily service. None of that is acceptable. Amtrak is really hurting right now and management has never made a solid push to fix equipment and add new cars to the fleet. The answer is always just to nudge sleeper fares a bit higher to absurd levels. A few heritage sleepers and slumbercoaches are still rusting away at Miami's Hialeah Yard and probably are disgusting inside from years of disuse. The toilets would preclude using them anyway. But what irks me is that VIA Rail Canada would have taken care of that and used the cars by doing a total rebuild. They even had the sense to grab a bunch of new cars from Europe for next to nothing while Amtrak stands around and tries to just get by. Much of this is their leadership's fault. Legislative bodies seldom give more money than an agency needs so you ask for more than you need. Even now, Amtrak seems content to go for $1.2b when some are willing to ante up over $4b. They will be in the same jam next year assuming they even get there and much of it is their own fault.
Posts: 52 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Eric: Since when does the CZ have a DOME CAR in its consist!?
I believe the writer was simply not familiar with the specific terminology. I assume he was referring to a sightseer lounge with its wraparound windows.
I agree that Amtrak management has made a huge boneheaded blunder in failing to repair damaged cars. It costs money to store them when they could be out making money. Even if Amtrak had to take out loans to finance their repair, I'd bet that the cost of those loans would largely be offset by the revenue the cars would generate if put back in service. Having them sit idle, especially if they are making payments on them, is money down the drain. That's Junior High econmics.
------------------ Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth. -Mr. Toy
posted
"I believe the writer was simply not familiar with the specific terminology. I assume he was referring to a sightseer lounge with its wraparound windows."
I know, Mr. Toy. I was just joking with the media.
[This message has been edited by Eric (edited 04-26-2002).]
Posts: 553 | From: Flagstaff, AZ USA | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stainless doesn't rust. Your point was taken, however. I am thinking about sending a list of all the wreck-damaged equipment to my senators. I hope I could afford the postage.
Posts: 391 | From: Schenectady | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
