Cohiba

A PDF of the official schedule for weekday and weekend Metroliner service in place of the Acelas has been posted at Amtrak.com. Follow the link: Metroliner PDF Schedule.

A couple of interesting things stood out at my first glance. There is no STM service on weekdays. The weekend departure times fit more with my request for an earlier day to Boston and later day from Boston, but not on weekdays. There are two services at 13:00 and 15:00 departing from WAS that make no stops on their way into NYP. Very interesting indeed.


Cheers.

Globehopper

Chris, thanks for posting!

Recent Acela Express schedules on Saturdays have been virtually unusable for NYP to BOS weekend trips, and alas, this schedule is no help.

There used to be a morning NYP to BOS train, but that has not run for some time. The earliest NYP Acela Express train to Boston is not untill Noon. This train arrives BOS around 3:30-ish, too late in the afternoon for those leaving New York for a weekend trip to Boston.

Returning from BOS on Sunday, the last Acela Express departs BOS around 16:00, which is rather early. By comparison, the air shuttles offer more frequent trips throughout the day and evening on Saturday and Sunday.

Amtrak's Acela Express equipment utilization on weekend is very poor, and IMO a terrible waste of resources. If Southwest Airlines utilized their aircraft so poorly, they would have long ago lasped into bankruptcy.

AlanB

I was surprised by the elimination of the 6:20 PM Sunday night Acela last fall, as that train always seemed to do a fair amount of business on the occasions that I rode it. I suppose that the run may have been cut because it left equipment out of position for Monday morning or perhaps ridership just wasn't as good as I thought.

However, I'm not surprised by the Saturday schedules at all. Supply and demand dictates everything. Acela Express is really geared and marketed as a business persons train. Most business people aren't traveling on Saturdays and ridership on those Saturday trains was never great.

Additionally the lighter weekend schedules may also have something to do with Amtrak trying to deal with maintenance and PM issues. Again these trains are orientated towards business people, so you don't take them out for PM on the busiest days to do that.

Globehopper

This is what my friends at/who worked for Amtrak say too.

IMO it is a waste of $$$ to run a train for a market segment that is used 5 out of 7 days, so of course business travel on weekends would be less. Since these shiny things are sitting around gathering dust on weekends, it represents $$$ lost.

It is not as if Amtrak can afford to turn away $$$.

Then there is the marketing aspect-- recast Acela Express services to appeal to weekend travelers, and they may even become your weekday Acela Express traveler in the future.

As for doing maintenance and PM, that is what the overnight periods are for.

Compared to the intensive use diagrammed for Shinkansen trainsets or even AirTrain JFK trainsets, Acela Express trainsets lead a fairly leisurely life with quite a bit of downtime. Time that could be better spent earning revenue.

AlanB

The Delta Shuttle schedule doesn’t have the same hourly schedule on the weekends that they do on weekdays. Those planes don’t get reassigned for 2 days.

Well Amtrak’s weekend travelers tend to be families more than anything, and most families don’t want to pay Acela’s higher prices just to save a ˝ hour. Especially for a family of 4 or more, it can get a bit steep. Amtrak can’t afford to cut the prices low enough to make it attractive, since there is more at play here than just an idle trainset.

You have salary costs, electrical costs, and of course wear and tear on the equipment to consider. Not to mention that most regional trains north of NY don’t even come close to selling out. If Amtrak can’t fill up the cheaper cousin, I can’t imagine how they are going to fill up the more expensive one.

While I can’t speak to the Shinkansen, the JFK Airtrain is hardly a fair comparison. First off the Airtrain barely covers 20 miles in distance, Acela covers over 400 miles from one end to the other. The Airtrain is a closed system, whereas the NEC is not. You have freight trains, regional trains, and various commuter trains all running on the same tracks.

The Airtrain is a brand new system where cost was not an issue, whereas Acela runs on infrastructure that is over 90 years old and hasn't seen a decent overhaul in 40 years. Finally the Airtrain has the luxury of taking a single car out for maintenance and/or PM. Acela does not; they must take the entire 6-car 2-power car train out of service for any maintenance and/or PM. Acela trainsets are fixed and would require hours of work to uncouple, exchange cars, and reprogram the computers for the changes.

There simply is no comparison between those two systems.

NovaEngr

The Delta Saturday schedule is cut about 50% from the weekday schedule. Acela is cut 80%. And no morning departures at all. For many, rattle-trap, slow Regionals are not alternatives.
Did not the taxes of families also pay for Acela? Were those grants only to provide a nice ride to weekday business travellers paying full fares and everyone else rides the old stuff? Why not run your best equipment as the base load? What is the relative operating cost of Acela compared to a Regional?

Delta does not park the 738's on the weekends and roll-out some 732 clunkers just because yields are lower. They fly the 738's because those are the best and most economical planes in the fleet for the route. If Acela has to be parked because it is more costly to operate than the 20 year old trains, then that is one more example of Amtrak's design incompetence. New equipment should be more economical than the old. CASM for a 738 might be 30% or more less than the comparable CASM of a 732. Acela should be Amtrak's first economic choice for operation, not it's last. It should run all the time, not only when necessary.
Maybe with modern, fast trains, the passenger count would go up?
The Northeast Corridor Improvement Project took place in the late 1970's and early 1980's and was a major upgrade of the trackwork and signalling of the NEC (NYC to WAS) including the complete realignment of some curves between Baltimore and Washington. Welded rail, concrete ties, and modern signalling are all improvements that occured onthe NEC over the last 40 years, and much of it over the last 20 years. Amtrak's often stated allegation that the NEC is falling apart is a myth. Is there room for improvement: sure. But, by and large, the NEC is the best maintained railroad in North America.

The fact is that Amtrak's utilization rate of Acela is abysmal. Any airline that flew it's best planes as little as Amtrak runs it's best trains would be out of business in a blink of an eye. Once you buy expensive equipment, you use it as much as possible and to spread the fixed costs over more seat miles and to attract new customers. Maybe that mindset that is so blind to economics and business sense is one reason Amtrak is in so much trouble.

Globehopper

We apparently have a difference of opinion.

My opinion is that Amtrak has invested in some 19 very expensive trainsets with 3 purpose built maintenance shops to coddle them and that unlike other "world class" railways and "high speed railways" that Amtrak compares Acela Express (AE hereafter) to, it essentially abdicates the North End weekend travel market by not running AE on the NYP to BOS segment--save for a few token trips.

I cannot think of any other rail service in the world that uses high speed trainsets to essentially serve a market for just 5 days out of 7 per week. The TGV, Shinkansen, ICE, AVE, X2000, Italian Eurostar, Virgin Pendolinos, GNER Mallards, KTX, etc. all use their trainsets to provide meaningful weekend service. In the case of the UK, the limiting factor tends to be the desire of the infrastructure company to carry out engineering works on Sundays. Worldwide, these high speed trainsets may not run at the same frequency M-F, but they do not abdicate the weekend market either.

Neither do the US or DL air shuttles. Both DL and US price their shuttle product cheaper on less traveled weekend days, with prices rising on the peak Sunday afternoon/evening periods. Fly BOS to NYC via those two shuttles on Sundays after 15:00 and fares are higher than before 15:00. Just as the shuttles fill to serve this busy time, for years the last AE departing Boston was around 16:00. Then next AE departure south would not be until Monday morning.

This is why airlines such as Southwest or JetBlue make money--they recognize that aircraft sitting on the ground do not generate revenues.

As for families of 4+ traveling Regional trains, I haven't seen all that many families of that size. Perhaps this is why Amtrak is now running their current companion promotions. Generally such families just drive, as it is cheaper. There is however, a good market for leisure travelers and apparently with the Regional trains now all reserved within the NEC, Amtrak thinks so too.

As for the comment about paying salaries, electrical costs, wear and tear on the train, those are incremental costs. Running more frequent peak period service is more expensive than offering off peak service as the incremental costs are higher.

My point about the Shinkansen and AirTrain JFK concerns equipment utilization. Both systems utilize their equipment much more intensively throughout the week, such that during peak periods AirTrain JFK has a very low spare factor. Additionally these systems operate their trainsets over a greater span of hours and spend more hours/day in service.

In terms of trainset utilization, it does not matters that the NEC is an old system or a new system (because the infrastructure does not impose limitations on trainset utilization) or that AE is a fixed formation trainset (because fleet planning took into account the fact that these cars would be maintained on a trainset basis). What matters is whether the fleet is used throughout the week more intensively to provide service.

Finally, construction cost was an issue for AirTrain JFK.

fastflyer

This is an interesting discussion.

I think both sides are making valid points:

Many passengers will take ACELA EXPRESS and ACELA EXPRESS only because of the condition of these new trainsets. Anecdotally, I can vouch for a dozen New Yorkers (mainly businesswomen BTW) who will only take AMTRAK if they are on an ACELA trainset.

There is a negative perception of the older trains, both the Metroliners and the Amfleet coaches.

However, AMTRAK prices ACELA at more than double the cost of the Amfleet equipment. Why? Partly because the ACELA trains do have higher costs, and higher labor costs. But, importantly, because they want to retain as much premium pricing power as possible with this premium equipment. And they can do this because people like my New Yorker friends exist.

AMTRAK has never bought into the argument of devaluing its product with excessive yield management pricing, for example. The cost is essentially the cost, with some exceptions (fire sales on the website or on-board upgrade charges; some advanced discounting of the sleepers). I personally think this is a valid business model. At least as valid as the Race-to-the-bottom yield management "perfected" by the airlines.

Result: AMTRAK actually turns a profit on the ACELA EXPRESS segment -- a significant profit (I leave out the costs outside of operations, as they are not reported as part of AMTRAK's income statements). AMTRAK loses money on the Regionals, and every other train line in the country (excluding state subsidies).

AMTRAK could run these ACELA trainsets more on weekends (probably not a full weekday schedule, as there is some weekend trainset maintenance), but would they have to lower the price to a point where they lose pricing power? I think that is a management question that has been under study for some time.

In any case, the re-introduction of the ACELA trainsets will provide AMTRAK another opportunity to see what works.

GoAmtrak

Not to condescend regular commuters who ride the NEC far more than I do, but these people are clearly ignorant in their perceptions. From an objective standpoint, the newly refurbished Metroliner cars are far superior to Acela Express! I make a point of it to AVOID Acela and its overpriced, marginal product offering. The new Metroliner Club cars are out of this world, quite possibly the most commodious chair cars on the entire continent. No one in their right mind would prefer Acela Express First Class, unless they desperately need tables.

On the whole, Acela Express disappoints. It has glaringly bright flourescent lights, diminishing the view. We all know how illogically the Bistro car is configured. The seats and tray tables are terrible, and there's ZERO difference between the seats in Business and First (just as there's no real difference between Coach and Business on the Pacific Surfliners, which use the same crummy seats). Yes, it's perceived as better/newer/etc. Yes, the lavs have backlit mirrors, chrome fixtures, and laptop trays. ( ) Yes, it goes 150 mph. Yes, it has 12,000 hp.

But I'd take a good old Metroliner ANY day!

AlanB

I won't debate all of what you've said here and having just taken a ride in one of those faux leather seat first class Metroliner cars, I will agree that they are very nice.

However, overall I still prefer the Acela first class car, especially for the large windows. And I've been in every car Amtrak has had in service on the NEC for the last 8 years.

That said two quick things. One, a good first class attendant will dim those flourecent lights at night. Some will do it upon request, assuming that it doesn't cause a revolt by the rest of the pax. Some just do it before the train ever leaves the station. Don't expect it to happen in business class.

Two, the seats are indeed different in first class from business class. In addtion to more leg room, they are a couple of inches wider than their counterparts in business class. Amtrak has taken down the original Acela site, but the dimensions of the two seats were listed on their and they were different.

Beyond personal space and the extra width however, there is no difference in the rest of the seat construction.

GoAmtrak

True as that may be, I still find the First Class seats to be insufficiently differentiated from Business. Heck, I think they're pretty crappy all around. At least on Metroliners the Business seats are usually acceptable, yet there remains a tremendous difference between Business and First -- the best of both worlds.

I've been completely spoiled having a newly reconditioned Horizon Club/Dinette as Business on Surfliners 798/799, which I do get to ride regularly! Amtrak really did a great job with these new First Class seats, and I'm glad more First Class customers on the NEC get to ride in them! ^

Cohiba

While I see your point, it has little impact upon my ridership. The difference that catches me between FC and BC is not the seat itself, but seat layout. Seat layout has as much, if not more IMO, to do with comfort than the actual seat. The seat itself just needs to be good, not great, for me and I think Acela's pass the test. The fact of the matter is, in First, I can sit by myself. Or, if with a companion, we have much more room between us. These two factors make for a much more enjoyable trip. The legroom is noticeably more too. Granted this applies to Metroliner as well.


Cheers.

Cohiba

I concur.

There is little doubt in my mind that when serviceable, the Acela fleet should be put to greater use on the weekends. In fact, I believe that under our current situation, the Metroliner fleet should be put to greater use on weekends and on the north end. Not having the best equipment available at a time and place convenient to the traveller (whether they be for business or family holidays) is bad for business. It gives the impression that the service provider is unreliable and does not want my/your/anyone's business.

That being said, comparisons should NOT be drawn between Amtrak's NEC operations and any other high-speed rail system in the world. This is purely an apples and oranges argument. For one, the NEC is not a dedicated high-speed rail line. It is a conventional rail line with some high-speed equipment. The potential exists for it to be, but making the comparison of Acela to TGV is only viable in my opinion if you are comparing Acela to TGVs operating in a world without LGVs.

Furthermore, I do not think you can just write off funding and infrastructure as being unrelated to the situation. What if Amtrak received the same level of governmental subsidies as some of those other rail companies? Better yet, what if Amtrak could count on the same level of "emergency" support as the US's legacy airlines? For example, more money, and therefore better infrastructure, allows the NEC to develop into what it should be. High-speed trains receive priority over all other services from DC to Boston and can cruise at top speed. Who would fly if Boston - NY took 2:15 and was reliable? That increased ridership would help pay for additional service and trains would become a practical choice for weekend fun.

That's how I see it!


Cheers.

lensman

I need a table. Desperately so? I'm not sure.

scootcha

I have a already switched back to flying for the southbound leg to NYC but have not decided on my reurn leg on 5/21. One major concern I have is what the load levels are like due to the fact that is looks like there are only the 12 and 3PM trains available on Saturday. I saw some thread right after the Acela cancellation which I can't find now mentioning uncomfotable crowd levels.

Has this calmed down or is it bad enough that one might as well deal with the airport hassles?

Thanks.