RailForum.com
TrainWeb.com

RAILforum Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

» RAILforum » Passenger Trains » Amtrak » labourcost versus number of passengers » Post A Reply

Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon: Icon 1     Icon 2     Icon 3     Icon 4     Icon 5     Icon 6     Icon 7    
Icon 8     Icon 9     Icon 10     Icon 11     Icon 12     Icon 13     Icon 14    
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

 

Instant Graemlins Instant UBB Code™
Smile   Frown   Embarrassed   Big Grin   Wink   Razz  
Cool   Roll Eyes   Mad   Eek!   Confused    
Insert URL Hyperlink - UBB Code™   Insert Email Address - UBB Code™
Bold - UBB Code™   Italics - UBB Code™
Quote - UBB Code™   Code Tag - UBB Code™
List Start - UBB Code™   List Item - UBB Code™
List End - UBB Code™   Image - UBB Code™

What is UBB Code™?
Options


Disable Graemlins in this post.


 


T O P I C     R E V I E W
dutchamtrakfan
Member # 3000
 - posted
In 2001 I was returning to Europe from a holiday of travelling amtrak (empire builder,coast starlight,california zephyr).While waiting for my connecting flight to Amsterdam in Paris (Charles de Gaulle-airport) and making a short look at the TGV-station I was thinking about the difference in how many people are involved in transporting a specific number of people by amtrak (two enginedrivers, sleepingcar attendants, coachcarattendants,all the people working in the diner and the lounge, the conductor,all the men and women doing their job at the about 30 stops of the zephyr between Chicago and Sacramento, all for only one train a day with about 200 passengers in average in a average train. What a contrast with the TGV I was watching: one driver,one or two conductors. one person in the bar, 400 passengers (or the double in two combined TGV-sets) and at least every hour one,two or three trains.Any thoughts or specific information about it? (I like the "romance of 'human'-amtrak more than the cold efficiency of the TGV)
 
Sheriff
Member # 2521
 - posted
That's exactly why congress is trying to get rid of the long distance trains. The shorter trains who carry passengers to and from work or on short one day trips are doing well because they are full and only have one Engineer, two Conductors, and one lounge attendent. Where as your intercity trains have two Engineers, two/three Conductors, five waiters, 3 cooks, a car attendent for each coach and sleeper car, a lounge attendent, and an on-board Chief. I've worked the Zephyr when we had more crew members than passengers upon leaving Sparks, NV headed east. The point is that you have to have the long haul trains because the train is the only form of transportation some of these cities and towns have to travel. Amtrak goes places where no roads are found. The beauty and romance and mistique of the trains is what you enjoy when going on an adventure across country.
 
espeefoamer
Member # 2815
 - posted
Several years ago,a friend and I went from Oakland to Winnamuca,Nv.on the Zephyr,and east of Sparks we only had 50 passengers aboard.The train runs quite empty between Sparks and Salt lake City.It is usually full the rest of the run.

------------------
Trust Jesus,Ride Amtrak.
 

boyishcolt
Member # 3001
 - posted
do you really need a car attendant for each coach car? and is it possible to sell a cheap fare between 2 small town with out the rider staying on?
 



Contact Us | Home Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2




Copyright © 2007-2016 TrainWeb, Inc. Top of Page|TrainWeb|About Us|Advertise With Us|Contact Us