'>>1974491
>ten-and-a-half hour schedule
That's a lot of sitting in sidings. I guess they figure they can make money by trackage rights but not necessarily priority on the mainline. Sounds like it is essentially the same priority as a regular manifest train. That's interesting if true. I presume they'd use the freight railroad's engineers and their own cabin crew.

No one's going to pay for a luxury overnight sleeper train, I think they're misreading the market entirely. Offering a basic service with low fares seems more feasible, or a multi-class arrangement like airlines and many regular passenger trains had or have.

Another problem is equipment - why do they want to use antique rolling stock in daily service? Even if they source enough vintage equipment it'll be such a mish-mash from various predecessor fleets that they'll spend a fortune and use a lot of man-hours restoring and modifying it to be fit for revenue service. A lot of the old stuff is still set up to flush toilets & dump grey waste onto the tracks, for example... it's just not permissible anymore. If they were serious, they'd be considering acquiring new or more modern used equipment that is compatible with Amtrak's fleet, at the least.

I don't think there's a market, I think their plan is flawed, and it's never going to get past the "This would be cool can we have your money?" stage.';

'>>1974496
>That's a lot of sitting in sidings

Nah, that's pretty par for the course on the Coast Daylight, which is unironically even longer (close to 12 hours, comparatively little of which is actually spent stopped).

>No one's going to pay for a luxury overnight sleeper train, I think they're misreading the market entirely. Offering a basic service with low fares seems more feasible, or a multi-class arrangement like airlines and many regular passenger trains had or have.

Honestly $300 doesn't sound that bad for the minimum ticket price. It's high enough to keep junkies and nigs off the train, but still within the spending limits of most professionals (lawyers, doctors, professors, etc.) or wagies who save up their money. Compare that to tourist companies on that usually charge $3,000+ for rides on private railcars.

>Another problem is equipment - why do they want to use antique rolling stock in daily service?

Well where the Hell are they gonna get new rolling stock? Literally no one in America makes it anymore. Pullman went under over 50 years ago and all of the European manufacturers with American customers like Bombardier, Alstom, and Stadler almost exclusively build commuter trains.

Acquiring retired Amtrak rolling stock is similarly ill-advised for three reasons.

1. It's been used and overused. The average Superliner car isn't that much younger than the Streamliners and has quite literally millions of miles to it.

2. A lot of Amtrak rolling stock is going to be in poor condition owing to aforementioned overuse, budget constraints that led to maintenance work being postponed or skipped entirely, and neglect on the part of Amtrak.';

'>>1974499

cont.

3. SOVL, unironically. Streamliner cars harken back to an age of mystique, beauty, and luxury that's basically UNKNOWN TECHNOLOGY (БЛЯTЬ)-tier compared to modern public transportation, and that brings in money. Tourists and railfans will pay out the ass to get to ride on a Pullman sleeper, I know because I've literally done it. Buying a bunch of retired Amtrak shitboxes whose hideous appearance was alone arguably a major contributing factor in the near-total collapse in the popularity of passenger rail travel post-1971 simply doesn't have that appeal.';

'>>1974499
>Honestly $300 doesn't sound that bad for the minimum ticket price.
Yeah, but that's one way. $600 (min) and almost 24 hours of travel time round trip. Who really wants this?

>Well where the Hell are they gonna get new rolling stock?
They have more options than Amtrak because they aren't limited to having them assembled and finished in the US. They could license a foreign design built in a foreign location and bring it into the US (so long as it meets FRA requirements).

>Streamliner cars harken back to an age of mystique, beauty, and luxury
Yeah and this company would gut the interiors of every single streamliner car they got their hands on';

'Lol, this is DOA. What equipment is being used? As in, which specific varnish is being purchased? Ex-Iowa Pacific shit?';

'>>1974603
>What equipment is being used? As in, which specific varnish is being purchased? Ex-Iowa Pacific shit?

I looked through some of OP’s sources and apparently they’re negotiating leasing private passenger cars from their owners.

Each range would be around six cars so in order to run a two-way service, they would need at least 12 cars at minimum, optimally more than 20 so that spares are available when cars are out of service for maintenance or during the holidays when trains are likely to be overbooked.

Keep in mind, the number of private rail cars in service today is around 100 so that would represent a significant portion of the remaining fleet.';

'>>1974499
>Where the hell are they gonna get new rolling stock
Good question but doesn’t the Rocky Mountaineer use like 30 year old luxury rolling stock? Where did they buy it from?';

'>>1976754

Rocky Mountaineer's original rolling stock was built by Canadian Car and Foundry for VIA Rail's Canadian Rockies by Daylight service and was heavily subsidized so that's probably not an option for any startup hoping to start a private sleeper service unless they're being co-financed by an outside source.';

'I'm thinking of emailing these guys directly and (likely futilely) getting some straight answers from them, what questions do you guys want me to ask?';

'>>1974491

This whole scheme sounds retarded desu';

'This sounds dumb. What's the point of an overnight sleeper just for the sake of having a sleeper. Going on a multiple day long distance train would be worth it, but just 10 hours is pretty pointless. The crowd who would actually use this for actual transit might as well just take a coach for the 10 hours it takes instead';

'they've been talking about this for years and it's not gonna happen because union pacific is so awful regarding scheduling

don't worry though, between the caltrain salinas extension and santa cruz being forced to unfuck their tracks it's likely usable coast daylight service will exist soon';

'>>1978601
>it's likely usable coast daylight service will exist soon

It literally takes more time to go from from Oakland to LA by rail now on the Coast Starlight than it the Coast Daylight did from SF to LA with steam engines 80 FUCKING YEARS AGO.

Amtrak service is also unambiguously utter garbage and their trains have about as much visual appeal as CWC so it's not even worth it for luxury experience.';

'>>1974496
>No one's going to pay for a luxury overnight sleeper train,

Why not? There’s plenty of those in Europe. Hell, there’s even a couple in Africa.';

'>>1982114
>Why not?
Interstate 5 and low cost airlines';

'>>1976944
You have an extra "nigger" in that address.';

'>>1982119

Neither of those is LUXURIOUS though, which is the main advantage of sleeper trains. The experience itself is a treat.';

'>>1974491

Honestly this scheme would only stand a chance of working if it was operated as a subsidiary of Nightjet or something.

I'm kinda surprised no one has tried bringing Nightjet or a service like it to the US yet.';

'They'd have to use a paint scheme like this to attract ridership.';

'>>1983796

Agreed, the utterly garbage paint schemes and general appearance of the their trains is one of the major reasons Amtrak consistently fails to turn anything resembling a profit. Their trains are soulless metal shitboxes on top of being unreliable, frequently late, and suffering from stale service.';

'>>1983770

The big problem with Nightjet is that's part of the Austrian national carrier so they can give their trains priority whereas private railroads seem to go out of their way to screw passenger services here.';

'>>1974496
>No one's going to pay for a luxury overnight sleeper train

I mean, they already do though.';

'>>1982119
>Interstate 5

LA traffic makes it take nearly as long to drive down as go by rail and it's suicide-inducing.

>low cost airlines
>wait in line for two hours to get fondled by the TSA
>to spend an additional three hours packed like sardines with non-whites
>jk, your flight got cancelled so you're gonna be here for at least another six hours lol';

'Dreamstar's got a wikipedia page now so I guess it's happening (maybe)?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamstar_Lines';