One for the amtrack Fans!!!

[Anonymous]

WASHINGTON - Amtrak’s board of directors on Wednesday fired President David Gunn, saying the debt-laden rail carrier needs “a leader with vision and experience.”

Gunn has struggled to maintain Amtrak service amid a sinking financial picture and a push by the White House and some in Congress to recraft it as a group of regional inter-city companies.

“Amtrak’s future now requires a different type of leader who will aggressively tackle the company’s financial, management and operational challenges,” Amtrak Chairman David Laney said in a statement.

“The board approved a strategic plan in April that provides a blueprint for a stronger and more sustainable Amtrak. Now we need a leader with vision and experience to get the job done.”

Rep. John Mica said Gunn was fired because of a clash over the board’s vote in September to authorize splitting off the Northeast Corridor, an idea backed by the Bush administration. The corridor accounts for the largest share of the railroad’s ridership.

“David Gunn bucked that idea, so that was the straw that broke the camel’s back,” said Mica, R-Fla. “He’s a very capable operational manager, but he wasn’t willing to go along with the dramatic changes that need to be made.”

Gunn, who assumed the post in 2002 after having headed transit systems in New York City, Washington and Toronto, could not be reached for comment.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who has fought against a Bush administration effort to end subsidies for the struggling passenger rail service, praised Gunn as “a brilliant manager.”

The senator called Gunn’s removal “a crushing blow to Amtrak’s hopes for success and reform.”

Other lawmakers said Gunn had become a roadblock to overhauling national rail service.

“I am hopeful that new leadership can open the door for Amtrak to work closely with Congress to achieve meaningful reforms,” said Rep. John Sweeney, R-N.Y.

Amtrak has never made money in its 34-year history and an operating loss of more than $550 million was expected for the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30. The railroad has a debt of more than $3.5 billion.

The White House has called for an end to subsidies for Amtrak, but the House has approved an appropriation of nearly $1.2 billion for this budget year.

In recent months, Amtrak has been besieged by problems up and down the line, from equipment breakdowns to big-ticket budget woes.

Earlier this year, Amtrak suspended all high-speed Acela service between Washington, New York City, and Boston, due to cracks discovered in the brakes.

A report issued last week by the Government Accountability Office, the auditing arm of Congress, said the company needs to improve the way it monitors performance and oversees its finances in order to reach firm financial footing.

“The company is likely to need outside help in developing a comprehensive approach to address internal control weaknesses and improve the financial information for management and external stakeholders,” the report found.

The GAO recommended that the transportation secretary direct the Federal Railroad administrator to: require Amtrak to submit a plan laying out specifically how it will improve its financial operations; provide Amtrak with direction on how to do so; and monitor the railroad’s performance and report to Congress on Amtrak’s progress.

Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta, who also sits on Amtrak’s board, called the report “unusual, if not unprecedented, in the scope of its review and the severity of its indictment.” He urged the board to “stop and take a fresh look on how to proceed in the face of this nonpartisan, objective report of systemic failure.”

[Anonymous]

Its sad, but it needed to be done. So in honor of David Gunn, ill post a pic from my layout. Nothing was getting done. Does this mean that, the paint schemes will change again with a new leader?

[Anonymous]

probbally

[trainboyH16-44]

It might finally die altogether....boo...
Matthew

[Jetrock]

Now watch Amtrak get sliced up like the proverbial Thanksgiving turkey...book you trips on the California Zephyr, Southwest Chief, Coast Starlight or Empire Builder NOW, since it looks like you may not have a chance once those "unprofitable" passenger runs are taken out of service!

Amtrak has a better cost-recovery rate than just about any passenger rail system in the world--news flash, folks, public subsidy for rail transit is the standard, and if we didn't subsidize the airline industry they'd shut down tomorrow--and what are federal highway funds but a subsidy of the auto industry?

Norman Mineta, what a joke...the guy was an airline lobbyist! At this rate, considering the bankruptcy bill written by credit card companies, the prescriptions bill written by pharmaceutical companies, and the energy bill written by oil companies, figure that between the car companies and the airlines our railroads will be gutted and we'll end up paying them a lot more than $1.2 billion to take up the slack! Following this theme, we should probably let organized crime networks write US policy on dealing with criminals!!

[Anonymous]

seems like lots of amtrak trains have crashed or caught fire lately I'm not a huge amtrak fan but they need to improve. my [2c] worth.

[Tracklayer]

I'm just as curious as everyone else to see how things are going to go now. We need a national passenger rail system that we can count on that's on time, has a good safety record and isn't a tax payer bottomless pit...
I model Amtrak back in the good old phase III days of the mid 80s to mid 90s.

Tracklayer

[Anonymous]

Did the passenger runs make money when they were run by the railroads? If so why not privatise passenger rail service like it used to be?

[Javern]

I say let UP take over Amtrak

[exPalaceDog]

Why do Amtrak cars look so good being pushed into a scrap yard by a Shay? or any other steam engine!

Have fun

[Anonymous]

Now that the Government will stop funding Amtrak just mabe this will all but DIE soon.

[BRAKIE]

The question still remains after 34 years..Why did people believe the big lie of 1971 when it was reported AMTRAK would become profitable? [?][?]

[Paul3]

A little history lesson here, folks. The New Haven RR was the Number 3 railroad in passengers carried, and it's mainline makes up about half of today's Amtrak NEC. On the New Haven in the good ol' days of the 1940's and early-1950's, passenger revenues totalled 45% of all income, yet was 55% of all expenses (the NH Dining Car Dept. was famous for almost breaking even...see old Trains magazines). In 1951, the NH hauled around 1.7 million passengers between Boston and NY. By 1968 it had dropped to 300,000.

The point of all this is that passenger trains in the private automobile era were practically a break even affair without Interstate highways even on the most travelled railroads. To actually try to run them as a "for-profit" business in the modern era is about as realistic as flapping your arms to fly to the moon. The only way you could get a private business to invest in passenger rail is to make it profitable for them, as in drop real estate taxes for BNSF, UP, CSX, NS, etc. until the cost of passenger trains are covered. At that point, you might as well pay them.

About Amtrak wrecks, few have been caused by Amtrak or Amtrak employees. People tresspassing, breaking the traffic laws, deliberate acts of sabotage, out-of-control river barges, intoxicated freight road engineers, incompetant host railroad track gangs, forgetfull commuter line engineers, etc. None of those have been Amtrak's fault. Yet they are made out to be ridiculed by the likes of Jay Leno over-and-over again. The only Amtrak wrecks I can think of that can be blamed on Amtrak employees or the railroad itself is the Back Bay wreck (engineers "fell asleep"), and a few SPADs (signal passed at danger).

Finally, just remember folks that Congress controls Amtrak's fate, and the House is already going to support it for the next FY.

Paul A. Cutler III
*****************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
*****************

[CP5415]

Sorry to hear about David Gunn being sacked.

but in his defense...

I don't think there has ever been a totally self supportive passenger train operation on the North American Continent. To think that a passenger train could make money in the time of jet travel is ludicrous.
VIA is still funded by the Government of Canada.
GO Transit is still partially funded by the Government of Ontario.

I think the Bush Administration needs to think about the future.
Sure Amtrak is in need of a strong leader to guide it past the current hurdles in front of it but that's not going to happen unless that individual has complete support of Amtrak, all levels of Government & the Public.
If Amtrak stops running intercity trains, what's going to happen if the airlines are grounded again?
How many people are going to be stranded 100's or 1000's of miles away from home?
The Bush Administration needs to think of the future instead of right now as many governments like to do.

Just my 2 cents.

Gordon

[Anonymous]

if amtrak only lost money how did they survive this long---also does BNSF railway have passenger trains

[Jetrock]

dingoix: No, BNSF does not have passenger trains--neither do Union Pacific, CSX, etcetera. American passenger lines all went away in 1971 with the introduction of Amtrak. Why? Because they were all losing money!

As Paul3 points out, passenger service was already of marginal profitability even without much competition from interstate highways and the airlines. Mail contracts (via the Railway Post Office system) subsidized the costs of a lot of passenger runs--mail is profitable, and it makes it worthwhile to drag some passengers along with the mail. After the RPOs were phased out, passenger service was nothing but a drag on business.

That 1.5 billion in subsidy may seem shocking until you consider the 16.5 or so billion in federal subsidies the airlines get!

[SteelMonsters]

Airlines are inefficient. Most people do not realize how much of their ticket is for fuel alone. This summer I paid $350 for a last minute flight to Florida because of a death in my family. I did the caclulations against approximate fuel costs for the plane I was in verses the number of passengers. The average cost per passenger was on each of the 4 flights sumed up was nearly $500. They are having their financial troubles lately with petroleum prices being so high. I've notice that diesel prices are still very high.

1956 was the year that air passenger traffic surpassed train passenger traffic. Passenger rail traffic's profitability dropped off and vanished not too long after. Freeways are another major contributer to this problem. To be honest, I would rather hop into my car than go somewhere and be left without personal transportation. (my two feet excluded)

I've rode Amtrack once in my life. I enjoyed the trip throughly, but it's not very practical for me once I get to the destination.

[Jetrock]

I suppose that depends on the destination--when I take the train across the country to visit family, I'll typically rent a car once I am there. When I take the Capitol Corridor trains to San Francisco, I'm happy to take public transit--driving to, from and in San Francisco is way more hassle than it is worth, and costs MORE than the train ticket!

[AntonioFP45]

Tragic news indeed.

IMHO, David Gunn has been Amtrak's strongest president in its history.

Since the 2000 the Bush Administration has been hard poised to eliminate Amtrak's long distance trains. Norm Mineta (a Democrat), a weak Transportation Secretary and a puppet is the hatchet man.

For a man of his education, its mind boggling that he continued to compare Amtrak to the Alaska Railroad as far as efficiency, which is like comparing a Boeing 747 to a Cessna 182 propeller plane.

Gunn's firing was purely political. The man was competent, had a vision, a strong backbone, and would not be intimidated. So now the "Big Gun" has been left without bullets.

Amtrak ridership has been growing. Contrary to popular belief, most riders are not railfans.

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dingoix

if amtrak only lost money how did they survive this long---also does BNSF railway have passenger trains

This is a very complicated question that needs to be studied..All major railroads wanted out of the passenger business as the passenger train was losing money hand over fist..So,one by one railroads thin their passenger trains and of course the public started a out cry of "needing" their passenger trains.So,in order to "SAVE" the passenger train AMTRAK was born by the Federal Government to take over the failing rail passenger business..All but one railroad gladly let AMTRAK take over their passenger train business..Then the big lie of AMTRAK was born..That lie? Simply put AMTRAK would become self sufficient and profitable this of course never happen.Was the passenger train saved? In a sense no..You see passenger miles keep dropping every year as the Federal dollars was tighten over the years by-guess what?-public out cry of Federal dollars being wasted!!.Yes AMTRAK is a long sad story and one that needs to be studied..I suggest starting with back issues of TRAINS magazine for a in depth study of the plight of AMTRAK..

[cnw4001]

QUOTE: Originally posted by JPM335

Did the passenger runs make money when they were run by the railroads? If so why not privatise passenger rail service like it used to be?

Brief answer, no.

That's why Amtrak was created to keep passenger service which was being discontinued a train at a time by the railroads as they tired of loosing money.

Dale

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by cnw4001

QUOTE: Originally posted by JPM335

Did the passenger runs make money when they were run by the railroads? If so why not privatise passenger rail service like it used to be?

Brief answer, no.

That's why Amtrak was created to keep passenger service which was being discontinued a train at a time by the railroads as they tired of loosing money.

Dale

And all to sadly the major cities that once had passenger service has lost it due to AMTRAK dropping trains and cutting rail milage...So we can see AMTRAK has failed to make a profit even after cutting trains and milage.

As far as privatization what corporation would want to pour billions of dollars into a service that has prove time and again it can not be profitable? [?]

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

QUOTE: Originally posted by cnw4001

QUOTE: Originally posted by JPM335

Did the passenger runs make money when they were run by the railroads? If so why not privatise passenger rail service like it used to be?

Brief answer, no.

That's why Amtrak was created to keep passenger service which was being discontinued a train at a time by the railroads as they tired of loosing money.

Dale

And all to sadly the major cities that once had passenger service has lost it due to AMTRAK dropping trains and cutting rail milage...So we can see AMTRAK has failed to make a profit even after cutting trains and milage.

As far as privatization what corporation would want to pour billions of dollars into a service that has prove time and again it can not be profitable? [?]

Unfortunately, the cutting of trains was a result of Congressional mandate and lack of funding. It had little to do with ridership figures. To say Amtrak was a political football from day one is an understatement.