Amtrak apologists

[Anonymous]

Thank you for the referral. It sounded like it could work. The freight lines (in my opinion) could run passenger service better than a lot of inexperienced Amtrak executives because the freight lines had passenger service until about 25 - 30 years ago (and was fairly profitable) because they did not have to pay for trackage rights like Amtrak does in the South and West. My point is, LEAVE IT TO THE EXPERTS - THE FREIGHT LINES.

[Anonymous]

I urge everyone following this discussion to check out the WWW.Railwayage.com website and read the editorial about how the freight railroads could take over long distance passenger service(subsidized by tax breaks). There is also an interview with the President of CN in which he discusses how this might be feasible. Intriguing.

[Anonymous]

there needs to be more than one train a day to major stops that end up in another city. you can't make money when you only work one hour a day, so more than one train a day needs to be operated for each major route.

by the way, amtrak needs competition.

[Anonymous]

My understanding is that the railroads pay taxes on every mile of Right-of-Way and extra if there is track on it. This is why the railroads have ripped up all the track they cannot justify.

In response to another posting, I don't think it would be good for anyone to have the government own the Right-of-Way and lease it to the railroads. I believe it would be better to crack down on the abuses in the trucking industry. This won't do anything for the passenger rail business, but would help freight rail increase their margin.

In the end, I don't think it is possible to operate a passenger rail service at a profit except in some dense urban areas without government interference. I imagine this will inspire a few challenges, but remember, without government interference I don't think Amtrak could negotiate a reasonable lease for the use of another company's rail.

Incidently, acording to the engineers I have talked with Amtrak gets priority on the former RF&P route all the time. Something about the dispatchers getting fined if they allow a train to come within a half hour of an Amtrak movement. I have no way to authenticate this but the two fellows both appeared credible.

Interesting thread. - Ed

[Anonymous]

Trucks run over weight a lot and get away with it. They also cheat on there log.That is why they are faster than a train.I trained with a driver and when his ten hours was up i said it is my time to drive he said go back to sleep.He was takeing pills also.I got out at the next town that had Amtrak service.

[Anonymous]

I agree; any removal of rail at this point is shortsited for the long-term good of transportation in this country. The government needs to step in, buy these rail routes, maintain them and charge railroads a usage fee. This is the only way passenger rail is going to be able to compete. The gov. pays for roads and airports, why not rail routes?

[REDDYK]

I am a railfan and thought traveling by rail seemed like such a good idea. Then I caught the Cardinal from Lafayette, In. to Chicago and return. Now I know that passenger trains wait on the movement of freight. Seemingly, every freight anywhere in the area had priority over Amtrak.
As long as passenger trains run on borrowed rail, the system is flawed. Sadly, parallel routes have been ripped up all over the eastern half of the country. Wasnt that rather short-sighted?

[Anonymous]

I like your new paradigm a lot. In fact, it is almost precisely what the Amtrak Reform Council intends to present to the Congress next month in its reorganization plan for Amtrak.

[Anonymous]

I like your new paradigm a lot. In fact, it is almost precisely what the Amtrak Reform Council intends to present to the Congress next month in its reorganization plan for Amtrak.

[PaulWWoodring]

I used to work for Amtrak in On-Board Service out of DC, and currently work for one of the remaining Class I's in T&E service, and I hold a degree in Political Science, so I think I have some idea of what I'm talking about. I used to think that Amtrak screwed up because it's a government formed and backed bureaucracy. Having moved over to a private sector RR, I have come to believe mismangement and waste has more to do with the size of the operation than being a creature of the government. Major railroads and also those in other sectors also seem to waste tons of money on nonsense, more from a lack of communication than any other reason.

A lot Amtrak bashers are really akin to Libertarians who don't want the government to perform any role other than national defense. I think it's important to point out a couple of things. First, Amtrak was originally formed as a way of letting the frieght railroads get out of the passenger business, and was set up with the intention of having it fail miserably within 5 years and doing away with passenger trains in this country altogether. They never thought that Amtrak would have the public and political support that it has shown over time. Second, Most pre-Amtrek passenger service made money on hauling U.S. mail, and went belly up when the mail contracts were lost to truck and air. The federal government made a conscious decision in the 1930's to use mail contracts as a way to develope the commercial airline industry, and without those mail contracts, most airlines would go broke.

Whatever your feelings on the competence of Amtrak's management, and it can be really bad, I don't think you have to throw the whole thing out to get decent rail passenger service in this country. Every big company has it's share of political in-fighting, nepotism (RR's more than most) and promotions based on personal relationships more than competance (or knowledge of railroading). Amtrak's just stands out more because of their high public profile. I also think you need a national system so you can coordinate travel in a seamless fashion. Amtrak has the name recognition, physical facilities, and institutional knowledge to run the passenger rail system if the national will is there to have one. Maybe it will be now.

As to Amtrak's handling of increased traffic due to Sept.11, this is traditionally a slow ridership time of year for them and is used as a chance to withdraw equipment for maintenance in preparation for the holiday travel season. They were caught totally off-guard and probably did the best they could under the circumstances.

I think if you read Don Phillips' column on a regular basis that you will realize what a nearly impossible situation Amtrak has been handed, and that many of those problems stem from the Company's need to survive from one crisis to the next, without having the luxury to engage in much long-term planning, let alone allocate funds for needed improvcments.

And finally, a note about labor costs, which I am sure will be pointed out as a way of cutting expenses. I, and most of the other folks who staff or staffed Amtrak trains stay as long as we do to accumulate the skill and knowledge necessary to be proficient at the job because they pay a living wage. If you want to pay OBS and T&E crews half as much, then you will get people at the level of airport security personnel. Do you really want that?

[Anonymous]

In my opinion, the only way to resolve the problem is to end government involvement and let free market economics decide what should be done.

I don't think Amtrak would survive a week without government support because I think the home roads would dump 'em. And I don't think the major carriers would be intrested in restarting passenger service given the current econimics of the problem. They may keep the local service going which is fine with me as long as it doesn't involve subsidies.

Having said all that ... The railroads are required to construct and maintain their own right-of-way. Trucks, buses, etc. don't even begin to pay for the construction and maintanence of their roads. I know they pay fuel taxes, but in no proportion to the actual costs. If the railroads run an overweight load, they have to pay for the damage to the roadbed (eventually). Overweight trucks don't pay except when they get caught. That's not very often even though the technology exists to realy crack down.

Still, the only way to find out if an industry deserves to survive is to get the government out of the way and see what happens.

Just my $0.02. - Ed

[Anonymous]

While Anthony raises some good points I think we need to accept one thing as fact-commuter trains like Amtrack do not make money on passenger service alone. The last Amtrack I saw had 18 cars, and 4 of these were freight, one was baggage and another mixed post and baggage. Only 10 at the most appeared to be passenger cars (ie with windows, doors, etc). And I counted about 8 visible passengers as this train creeped through my city. Perhaps more than I give credit for were in the upper levels or on the side I couldn't see, but I doubt it was many. I think with the congestion and chaos of our cities, that traveling without your own vehicle is very difficult and unerving. Also, people today have the money and resources for long vehicle commutes thanks to better quality vehicles, nicer roads and better gas mileage. If you disagree with me, than please state your thoughts.

[Anonymous]

You guys ignore the point. Amtrak has a an unsuccessful track record and I believe a new paradigm is needed. Amtrak was established at the ebbtide of the concept that big government progerams were the only way to solve problems.
The ignoring of the development of additional Auto-train routes (such as Chicago-Denver, a guaranteeded winner - Louisville-Florida was handicapped by bad track and schedule)only points out the lack imagination.

Let Amtrak, or better yet cut out the middle man and have US DOT, be the oversight agency (like MTA in NYC or RTA in Chicago). Let several competing private or regional public sector manage the service provision. This is the case already in California, where Amtrak has contributed no leadership to the upsurge in ridership on the Capital, San Joaquin and Surfliner Corridors. The credit fully belongs to the State DOT and the succesor corridor authorities.

Greg stated that no one makes money on passenger trains, howver individual corridors in Europe or Japan and individual lond-distance trains (AOE, the Canadian Mountaineer, the Montana Daylight, etc.) make money. Indeed, Amtrak partisans are divided into two camps: the NEC partisans say their corridor covers costs and it's the national system that's dragging it down. THe fans of the western Superliner trains insist that their trains are the winners and the Corridor is the loser.

Here is my list again, with one addition, and comments on why they deserve a look:

Herzog Transportation Services, Inc manages the commuter train systems in Miami, Dallas, the Altamont Corridor, and recently began managing the operations of NJT's Atlantic City line. Why not intercity rail also?

Cruise ships operate private cars on the Alaska RR, and AOE, Montana Daylight and other such firms are naturals for the western transcontinentals, and the Florida trains. Almost certainly, they would take the leadership for additional Auto-Trains and probably devise a faster loading and unloading procedure.

If the freight railroads have to operate passenger trains, they'd likely run them with their own personnel. As support for that I offer the following: A major BNSF executive told me that the firm greatly regretted selling its right-of-way in the LA area for development ofthe Metrolink system. That's why the new Sounder commuter rail system in metropolitan Seattle is operated by BNSF employees. A continuation of this trend among the other major RRs makes this scenario more plausible. It should be noted that Amtrak's most unheralded accomplishment - the elimination of the 100 mile day for road service employees - is a factor in this scenario. The freight RRs have benefited from this in their own operations.

A regional corridor authority or multi-state high-speed compact directly managing its own operation is a natural. As noted above, Amtrak stood on the sidelines in the biggest success story for intercity passenger trains in recent years (California). They don't deserve to be the operator.

My new alternative is the airlines (multimodal pasenger transportation firms!). High-speed rail can be dove-tailed into an airline hub and spoke system seamlessly.

C'mon guys Damntrak is the ultimate in passenger rail operation.

[thirdrail1]

Your questions about the auto-train service need an answer, First, the service was originally privately operated. The Lorton, Va, location was selected for two reasons - first, it would attract drivers from Boston to Washington and all the cities in between going to Florida, and second, the trackage north of Washington had too much traffic and inadequate clearance for auto carriers, plus land expenses were too high. The service was also offered from Louisville, KY, to Sanford, FL to garner the Milwaukee, St. Louis, Chicago and other midwestern cities market, but the demand was not there. The amount of time it takes to unload and load a train prevents intermediate stops from being offered, so trains can only operate from a single origin-destination pair. It appears there is only one of these with sufficient demand today.

[jsanchez]

I would like to see Amtrak improved upon instead of discarded. Look at the mess that is going on in England since Brit-Rail was broken up. Yes you have a few successes such as Virgin Rail, but their seems to be far more negative results from this policy. Even though passenger services have been privatized they still need heavy subsidies in most cases. The problem in England now is the system is very fragmented in stead of being united as a nation wide system. Too much money was spent on highway construction in the U.K. while the railways received minimal improvements, even with ridership soaring.
I think we can learn a lot from the U.K. The lack of funding is a major problem, when 70 times more has been spent on highways and airlines, that's a fact that can't be ignored. We need Airlines and highways, but I wish for the good of the nation the government would have do more to develop higher passenger rail usage, especailly since we are very dependent on foriegn oil, the highways are over crowded, and until the terroist attack the air system was at or exceeding capacity. The other benefactor is that railways are the cheapest most of transport for large quantities of people and goods.
On another,I think more auto-trains would be a great idea. Why does Auto-train end way down in Virginia, there should be extensions to Penn. , N.J. N.Y.. Auto train totally misses the most congested part of the country, the North East. this is also the part of the country were people are most likely to use this kind of service. Why not try midwest or west coast services, many other countries have auto-trains services throughout, why not the U.S.A.

[jamesedwbradley]

I can remember when passenger trains were America's basic public transport - and would like to see something of the sort again; even our rail passions aside, trains make a lot of sense in many cases. I'd like to see Amtrak go into the future as a strong part of that basic transport. A Dec. 2000 coast-to-coast round trip yielded comfort, very good food/service, 6 of 7 trains on-time. But poor communication with 'guests' when things went wrong (Three Rivers cancelled, then run Pgh-NY w/no announcement of the 'stub' run to en-route passengers). Re alternatives: would moveable platforms permit self-drive on/off auto-trains over more routes? Un/loading could be as simple as paralled parking your car; even 1% of auto travel for a given city-pair would be a tidy business! Has Amtrak overlooked this? What other ideas overlooked?
Jim Bradley Natl. Director Hawk Mt. Chapter NRHS

[thirdrail1]

I have never thought that "Trains" was afraid to criticize Amtrak. Perhaps the writer cannot tell the difference between criticism and mindless defamation. The appellation "sharpshooter" should be more accurately described as "hand grenade". I am by no means defending Amtrak - which has an impossible task - but calling it "Amsuck" certainly does not contribute to solving the country's transportation problems.

NO ONE can make money running passenger trains, and it seems no one can make money running airplanes either, even though the airlines have always received a subsidy of at least 35 dollars per passenger, ten dollars more than Amtrak.

I hate to think of how many private passenger train operators have lost their "anerosities" in the past quarter century thinking the only problem was Amtrak's mismanagement. The most recent was "Florida Fun Train".

[Anonymous]

Is there a groundswell out there that is disgusted by TRAINS magazine and its inability to criticize Amtrak and propose alternatives for the operation of intercity passenger trains?

The recent posting on the webpage that sought to offer excuses for the politically dictated Chicago-Janesville train was the last straw. It was almost as bad as the recent Rail Travel issue of a few months ago that said never mind the liklihood that the train you'll be riding will be hours late. The delay of the Acela start-up, and the abandonment of the 3 hour NYC-Boston schedule had no criticism.

The apologists always insist that Amsuck is starved for capital but it doesn't manage the assets it has. Except for Metroliners/Accela Expresses that originate in NYC, my observation is that most depatures from Penn Station are late (NJT trains are screwed by Amtrak dispatchers in particular.) All passengers, commuter and intercity alike, can not board trains in a timely manner; but are herded down the stairs like cattle at the last minute. The escalators invariably are not functioning or are going in the wrong direction.

I rode the Three Rivers from Phil. to Chicago on 9-14. The train was loaded with refugees from the airlines. I can assure you that Amtrak did not make any new friends.

Let's brainstorm some alternatives to Amsuck. Here are some potential competitors to the Amtrak monopoly: Herzog Transporatation Services Inc, a cruise train or ship firm, the freight railroads, self-operation by a regional rail authority (like Capital Corridor) or multi-state high-speed compact.