>>1974496>That's a lot of sitting in sidingsNah, 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.
