posted
I , also, am not "sold" on the idea of converting the Sightseer Loungers to "diner-Lite."
It is difficult for me to "visualize" how exactly the Lounges are to be converted----except for the UPSTAIRS.
I have already ridden a Sightseer Lounge with tables at one end----6 in all if memory serves me right. So I presume the "kitchen area" of the car would use the BOTTOM half of the present car , leaving the snack-bar area intact. Is this correct ?
I tried to use the "link" to get a better idea of the plans, but it did not work for some reason so I was attempting to envision the transformation myself.
Another "difficulty" with this set-up relates to COACH traffic through the car to get to the "regular" sight-seeing chairs. Particularly if the "dining" end of the car faced the COACHES, would not this create a great deal of traffic through the "dining" end of the car ? It seems to me this would drive the "servers" crazy.
I do not like this idea at all. It was always a "treat" to go to a separate dining-car to enjoy my meals.
Also, even in off-peak seasons, the limited number of "regular" seats available to enjoy the scenery will make them VERY difficult to come by. As it is now, at least a full half of the Sightseer Lounge car seats are "claimed" by coach passengers. What happens when these coach passengers "lay claim" to all the seats remaining in the car ?
Here is another point to ponder:
IF there are TWO of these converted Lounge-Cars , how many of you like the idea of ONE being reserved for First-Class passengers only ?---during the peak seasons, of course.
If there is only ONE converted Lounge-Car, should First-Class passengers have "preferred-access" to regular seating ? If so, how could the "process" work ?
Also, I presume that with the conversions , there would only be ONE table downstairs near the Snack Bar---or would there be none at all ?
Posts: 187 | From: Pittsburgh , PA | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
TALKrr, I can remember the days when the Capital Limited had a separate lounge for Sleeping car passengers.If you ordered drinks there were free "nibbles" to go with it. Also there was a separate section in the diner. While you were waiting for your dinner they served wine or soft drinks and an appetizer free of charge. "them days is far gone". I like your idea of switching diner-lite meals. I'd add the Cz. After all it is every bit as good and has even better scenery than the EB. I have a feeling the EB is getting such treatment because the senators and other officials from Montana raise such a fuss over the proposed changes.
Posts: 1577 | From: virginia | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
To tell the truth, I guess the Zephyr SHOULD be included in the "sharing" of full-service dining , if possible. It has a great history too.
I have often pondered the concept of whether or not Amtrak should actually HAVE a "preimier" train or not. I know when Brian Rosenwald (hopefully the name is correct) "directed" the Starlight route , he was responsible for a great many of the initial amenities that train had and thus most responsible for the "preimier" status that the train had.
Some time ago, I was "critical" about the Starlight's lone "claim" to the Parlor Cars. It was my thought that these cars could and should be "shared" throughout the system. My idea was not well received. Evidently, the Parlor Cars were purchased and refurbished with STATE funds from California, Washington and Oregon and thus HAD to remain on the Starlight's route. I was also told that the only "yards" capable of servicing these cars were in Los Angeles or Seattle. I do not know whether this is true or not.
Which brings me to the question:
ARE there certain yards where work can be done ONLY on specific cars ?
Related to my initial thought: I , personally , do not think Amtrak should have one particular "special" train , with all the newest equipment and all the specially trained staff.
Wouldn't it be nice for Amtrak to commit to sharing the Parlor Car with the Builder, Zephyr and Chief ?----even if only for a month or so each year ? Why should this be so impossible ?
Posts: 187 | From: Pittsburgh , PA | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
