I was booked on the Canadian twice in recent years and both times had to cancel at the last minute due to family emergencies.
My first trip on Canadian was February 1968 eastbound on the original train as built and operated via Calgary Regina Thunder Bay and on to Vancouver. Two years later traveled west on Canadian to Vancouver from Toronto. Returned east to Toronto on CN Super Continental. The Canadian was half empty at that time and Super was full. Also the Canadian was looking kind of threadbare but still an enjoyable trip on both trains. Repeated the trip in opposite direction two years later using both the Super Continental westbound and Canadian eastbound. Last time I was able to ride the Canadian was under Via Rail and there were a mixture of former CN and CP cars in the consist, There was two former CN Day-Niter coaches a step up from ordinary coach and they really did look quite comfortable. and the Super Continental was carrying a Park car Budd Dining car and a couple of CP Sleepers the rest were former CN cars. The next round trip on the Canadian was over the all CN route and was also a mixture of equipment. Have not rode the train since but will try for next year.
My problem this year is the number of tax clients on extension. In twekve years I have never had as many clients go on extension as I have this year. So my tax season this year is running from January to October 15 instead of the usual January to April 15. So it looks like any vacation time is going to be after April 15. Thats to late for a fall trip across Canada so instead wiill take a cruise this year from San Francisco to Miami on one of the ships that traveled to Alaska all summer where I really wanted to go this year. Never been through the Panama canal on a ship and may not transit the canal on the ship this time as there is an optional train trip across the Canal that uses former SP 3/4 length domes and you re
Excuse the error I meant to say any vacation time I get this year will have to be after October 15 not April 15, thats what I get when up at 3:00 in morning. I was originally planning an Alaska cruise this summer with the ARR trip all of the way to Fairbanks as well but was able to cancel by booking the transition trip through the Panama Canal instead in October. Have not decided yet if I will stay on ship as it transits canal or take the optional train trip. Have to go next week and get some shots for the October trip for malaria etc.
I have previously expressed my disdain for these cars… My main complaint is that too much space and clutter (and certainly expense) is dedicated to the roomette toilet and sink. The beds are uncomfortable because they are so narrow at one end. Plumbing fixtures, instructions, and warning lights are very distracting, and give a cramped “lunar module” feel to the room.
Honestly, I think it is rude to have to poop right there in the room with your travelling partner. I would much rather use a spacious, common toilet.
I have previously suggested that open sections might be an alternative. Advances in materials for curtains and sound-proofing might alleviate some of the objections to primitive open sections.
(NB–I have been re-hired by the hotel here, so cannot follow threads as I did for the past several months–I’m sure that will make some of you happy. I am still hoping to take a “Sustainable Transportation” course on-line from University of Washington this Fall.)
Maglev: Your comments about the toilets in the Viewliner roomettes are interesting, to say the least!
I disagree about the common toilets, though I see your point. One must remember that often, maybe most often, roomettes are occupied by just one person. To have to go way down the hall every time I want to, well, you know, would be highly inconvenient, to say the least. It makes utter sense to offer single travelers the convenience of in-room toilet facilities. Besides, ever notice how common toilet facilities (think lower-level Superliners) get nasty right away because no one has any ownership of the space? Frankly, I despise them. Amtrak might as well offer an outhouse.
May I offer a suggestion about using the toilet when sharing the room? It’s rather obvious: One person goes and sits in an unoccupied roomette for a while, or goes to the diner, or to the lounge, in order to give the other person some privacy and the room a decent airing (well, you brought the subject up! lol). From personal experience this works very well…and then single travelers won’t have to go down the hall all those times.
Best luck in your studies and in your career. Make sure to leave time to continue writing good comments like you just did.
And, except for in the drawing rooms, which had annexes, this was a feature of the early compartments and bedrooms in the heavyweight sleepers.
I agree. Two years ago, when we were going from Jacksonville to NYC on the Silver Star, we had the use of the roomette across from mine after its occupant(s) detrained in Raleigh (I had a roomette in one car and she had a roomette in the other car out of Jax), and we used one as our sitting room and the other as our retiring room. Going down from Washington to Jax on the Silver Meteor, we had one roomette, and we decided that we are too old for such cramped quarters for the two of us.
It’s twenty years since I have used the lower-level toilets on a Superliner, but we have had several occasions in the last two years or so to use the upper level toilets. My wife has difficulty with stairs, and when we travel by day on Superliner-equipped trains, we reserve a roomette (it, so far, has always been on the upper level), and we have not noticed any particular disarray or mess. Perhaps the animals know nothing of the facility on the upper level?
Al, I hope that you will soon be able to make the trip all the way across Canada and back riding in good cars (you are aware, I am sure, that two out of three trips on the Ocean are made with Renaissance equipment; I do have the impression that in the summer season Budd-built cars are operated for the use of people with money to spend).
In these times with the concern for privacy and security, I would think that open sections would be impossible to sell, even with the improvements suggested by maglev. An enclosed section (rare, but they did exist) might work as an economy accomodation.
Lest we forget Budd in the mid 1950s built the Slumbercoaches that accommodated 40 passengers in a single level car. Rode once in the NP NCL and once in the Mainstreeter in one of these cars and maybe it was because I was young was able to sleep quite comfortably in these small rooms. I can’t help but believe in this day and age we cannot come up with something better than the Viewliners. And there is no reason that we can’ t build them to be self contained as far as the waste goes. If Via Rail Canada was able to do it with there Budd cars then I see no reason we can’t build cars today that can be enviromentally proper.
The enclosed sections were much like the “roomettes” on the Superliners–a narrower berth than that in an open section, but you did have a wall and a “pantagraph door” (it looks like an accordion door in the illustration) between you and the aisle. I have not been able to find a floor plan of the enclosed sections operated on the UP’s early streamliners, but it may well have been essentially the same as that of Plan 2412-J (two cars, Hawthorne & Pinewold), which had 12 open sections and 4 enclosed sections (two at each end of the car). This information comes from Kratville’s Passenger Car Catalog, 1968, p. 11.
Eighteen cars were rebuilt to Plan 2412-H, which had ten open sections and four private sections. A private section looked just like an open section, but each one (all at the same end of the car) had its own half-bath–but you had to go into the aisle to get to your section’s facility. (same citation)
My wife and I have spent a night on two of our trips across Canada in an open section. She fell in love with rail travel when she, as a little girl, was taken from Miami to NYC on one of the overnight trains (she hasn’t the slightest idea as to whether it was an ACL or SAL train), and, “when night came, the seats turned into beds.” We both agree that, just as overnight in a “roomette” is not for us, overnight in a section is not for us any more.
Al, you did intend, “I can’t help but believe in this day and age we can come up with something better than the Viewliners,” didn’t you? I know it is possible, if the powers that be would acknowledge that they are midgets sitting on the shoulders of giants.
IMO, Amtrak’s spending one dime on new sleeping cars seems a waste of limited resources. The long-distance cruise trains should be eliminated and/or farmed out to private operators, if any exist. Long-disatnce could be retained, but only as coach trains
Having travelled on every Amtrak long distance train except for the Auto Train I believe long distance service with sleeping cars is necessary. Many people are unable to sit up and sleep for many reasons. The fare for sleeping car is far less than first class round trip by plane. Why shouldn’t we have an alternative to flying. Personally I think it is great way to travel and meet people and really see the country we live in.You sure can’t see much from 35,000 feet in the air. And now with all of these problems with airspeed indicators on Airbus planes I am not sure I want to fly again.
I understand that many people want to fly to there vacation destinations, me I prefer to take the train and make that part of the vacation.
If this President can spend 3 Billion on a cash for clunkers program, a trillion for healthcare, bail out GM and Chrysler, bail out the banks etc. I don’t have any qualms about the taxpayers subsidizing my prefered means of travel. It was just on our local news that probably somewhere between 40 and 45% of the new cars sold in the cash for clunkers program will be repo’ed in the next four to six months. I guess that means there will be some low mileage used cars driving down the price of the rest of the used cars.
Gentlemen: Although not as many passsengers are carried in a sleeper as a coach the ridership figures for June would seem to contradict your position. It is the sleeper traffic that seems to be staying the same with the exception of the Florida trains which are down 4% including Auto Train. LD Coach raffic NATIONWIDE is down 4%. The NEC is down 10% although Acela stayed the same but last year the Thames River bridge was out of serrvice. This seems to indicate that maybe extra coaches on existing routes are not yet needed. I would hate to be the predictor of ridership when the new cars will be delivered because that will set the order of the construction of various types.
The operating costs of the Auto Train are essentially covered by revenue. .If this revenue model could be duplicated on new routes or maybe an additional train set Lorton - Sanford in winter then the use of Superliners on those routes is well justified for the fewer total number of passenger cars needed to carry the same number of passengers. New routes could enable a balancing of rolling stock dependent on the time of the year. With more people buying smaller fuel efficient cars the desire to ride Auto Train may be enhanced?
The demand for sleeper space so far seems elastic? The 6 sleepers to be repaired are designated as an additional car on each Empire Builder train set with one as a spare. I would like to see a revenue analysis of a SL coach vs a SL sleeper. That may give some idea of
“Bluestreak1: I would like to see a revenue analysis of a SL coach vs a SL sleeper. That may give some idea of First and Coach mixes but remember the high dollar revenue passengers may give more support to AMTRAK if they can use a sleeper. We don’t know how many last minute people do not travel because of no sleeper space. When I was at an Airline we always checked to see where demand exceeded supply. I don’t know how to quantify that intangible. SAM1?”
Yes!! Sam1, we need your analytical skills. It seems like LD travel in general is a loser, but the sleepers are the real loss leaders. Of course the whole passenger rail deal needs subsidy; the question is which parts can we get the most bang for? Perhaps the viewliner cars and superliner sleepers could be converted to LD coaches until the wheels fall off (not literally, of course).
Yes, Al, my wife and I agree that going by train is great. Do you remember the railroad’s inducement, “Getting there is half the fun,” complete with a picture of a barrel of monkeys?
How much conversation can you have while flying? How much conversation can you have in a diner or a lounge car, or even a coach? We always enjoy meeting people at meals (every now and then, our tablemates have been uncommunicative, but we put that as being their problem), and we have had good conversation with people while riding coach (actually, Business Class, but we were able to over seat backs).
And, enjoying scenery without having to crane your neck is almost impossible by air. Where, but by train, can you enjoy the sight of looking out one side and looking straight up the side of a canyon and looking out the other side and looking down into a river (as in Gore Canyon) but by train?
Gentlemen: Although not as many passsengers are carried in a sleeper as a coach the ridership figures for June would seem to contradict your position. It is the sleeper traffic that seems to be staying the same with the exception of the Florida trains which are down 4% including Auto Train. LD Coach raffic NATIONWIDE is down 4%. The NEC is down 10% although Acela stayed the same but last year the Thames River bridge was out of serrvice. This seems to indicate that maybe extra coaches on existing routes are not yet needed. I would hate to be the predictor of ridership when the new cars will be delivered because that will set the order of the construction of various types.
The operating costs of the Auto Train are essentially covered by revenue. .If this revenue model could be duplicated on new routes or maybe an additional train set Lorton - Sanford in winter then the use of Superliners on those routes is well justified for the fewer total number of passenger cars needed to carry the same number of passengers. New routes could enable a balancing of rolling stock dependent on the time of the year. With more people buying smaller fuel efficient cars the desire to ride Auto Train may be enhanced?
The demand for sleeper space so far seems elastic? The 6 sleepers to be repaired are designated as an additional car on each Empire Builder train set with one as a spare. I would like to see a revenue analysis of a SL coach vs a SL sl
Al:: Actually I agree with you assestment of the NJT car however I still wonder about “we did not invent this wheel” . Notice I did say Viewliner or equivalent>