Importance of national LD trains

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Paul Milenkovic

I don't buy the lifeline argument unless someone discusses case studies as to who are the lifeline riders and whether college students are commuting between home and school on weekends using the Empire Builder.

When I took the Three Rivers back in October, out of the 18 or so people in the car I was in 12 were college students. Six Penn State (four Penn State Altoona, two Penn State main campus), five girls from Temple, and one guy from UPenn. Two of the PSU-Altoona passengers were on the train because they don't own cars. The other four were just taking the train as something different (We had a three day weekend so the longer travel time wasn't burning as much of our weekend). The five girls from Temple were traveling to Pittsburgh for a wedding and just didn't want to drive. The UPenn guy figured the longer travel time was worth not paying for the toll on the Turnpike. Everyone except me and the other guy from State College was using the train largely because of its proximity to their point of origin.

[Paul Milenkovic]

I think that Silver Star-Silver Meteor-Crescent-Auto Train-Empire Builder, SW Chief and there success is part of the problem.

Let's look at the 3 Amtrak's -- NEC, other corridors, and LD trains. As said, the NEC is largely an electric-powered, concrete crosstied, gold-plated NY-Philly commuter line from the traffic numbers. And the part I don't get from a passenger perspective is that NY-Philly on Acela is about a hundred bucks while you can get commuter train tickets spanning that distance for about 12 bucks. Do they fill the Acela NY-Phily at that price? Are there other price points for that run? Is the price a good deal compared to other modes (dunno, does anyone fly NY-Philly or do they get in a car?).

As to the other corridors, can anyone fill me in on that? Which are worth keeping and which are failures?

Finally, the LD trains appear to be a success story -- their "operating ratios" depend a lot on accounting, and the story is that the NEC is such a money pit that passes costs on to other things that it is hard to tell. But the evidence is that they do OK.

Well, the LD trains function as rail-borne cruise ships -- people riding the train for the scenery, retired people taking long vacations, etc. Yeah, yeah, there is the life-line to the small towns along the route, but what kind of lifetime service comes once a day into your town at 2 AM plus or minus some hours depending on whatever Amtrak depends on? I don't buy the lifeline argument unless someone discusses case studies as to who are the lifeline riders and whether college students are commuting between home and school on weekends using the Empire Builder.

Now, if the LD trains are "cruise ships", and perhaps cruise ship is the proper role for the LD train just as the ocean liner was supplanted by the cruise ship, what role is proper for the Federal government is supporting cruise ships?

[CG9602]

AntonioFP45: So are the Empire Builder, the S.W. Chief, and (frequently) the Capitol Limited.

However, there are those who don't want to look for contradictory evidence to support conclusions they've already decided upon.

[AntonioFP45]

Silver Star
Silver Meteor
Crescent
Auto Train

Are those politicians blind? These trains are still running packed!

[Anonymous]

Regarding thoughts expressed here and elsewhere online contending that the corridors are much more important to Amtrak and that the long-hauls should be elminated, here is some analysis from the United Rail Passenger Alliance that shows the usage and load factors - and future for growth (it's in the LDs, folks!) for U.S. passenger trains.

This isn't saying the corridors aren't important, but according to this analysis, they appear to be overdeveloped and less used while the LD trains appear to be underdeveloped and more used.

This isn't to start an argument, but to provide ammo for those that support travel choice and to come up with info to counter the generalizations that passenger rail doesn't make sense outside of 300 mile corridors, etc.

Balance is what we need, both short and long-distance trains. I like and use both types of trains. Just like rural highways and Interstates and puddle-jumpers and big planes all play a role and are just as important in the scope of things.

The info comes in an email commentary. It's not yet on the group's Web site, this is excerpt of a 30-40 graf commentary stand.

http://www.unitedrail.org

The entire commentary is located on the Passenger Rail News list...

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Passenger_Rail_News/message/2637

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Passenger_Rail_News/

SUMMARY

AMTRAK SYSTEM OUTPUT
48% LDs
30% NEC
21% other corridors

PASSENGER LOAD FACTORS
69% LDs
45% NEC
37% other corridors


"In FY 04, the Northeast Corridor accounted for about 30.4% of system
output (long distance trains produced 48.3% and the other short distance
services about 21.3%). The NEC had 56% of system passenger revenue (based on the very high prices), while the long distance trains had 27.7% and the other short distance trains about 16.2%.
...
we do
have a remarkably consistent statement from Mr. Gunn to the effect of
where the federal subsidies go. He has said more than once that the
national system (I am not clear whether he means by that the long
distance routes, or ‘everything outside the NEC’) costs about $300
million in subsidy to run; by necessity, after transitional transactional
costs are excluded, that means the rest, probably just the NEC, costs
$900 million in annual subsidy.
...
We think the long distance trains are closer to $200 million in cash costs ...
the long distance trains consume about a quarter of the annual subsidy, to
produce about half the output, while the corridor services consume three
quarters of the subsidy to produce a third of the output (if we are
covering just the NEC) or, the other half of the output (if we are
covering everything other than the long distance trains).

"The load factors show that the long distance trains are heavily used
where offered, and the long distance market is sharply underdeveloped,
and the corridor services are lightly used (relative to the volume of
service offered) and somewhat overdeveloped relative to actual demand.
AND - the corridor and NEC load factors would be MUCH lower if the purely
New York/Philadelphia traffic were to be excluded (this traffic amounts
to somewhere between 35 and 45% of ALL NEC traffic!), so all of what I am saying overstates the value and performance of the NEC segment if we are measuring true intercity rather than 90-mile regional traffic.
...
Each capital dollar invested into a long distance market therefore
produces about five to seven times more revenue and output than the same dollar invested into any short corridor market, especially in the NEC.

"If you assume the role of an investment banker (which is the role played
by the Congressional appropriations committees), where would you direct
the bulk of your investment capital based purely on financial and
econometric returns on that investment, rather than sociopolitical or
intuitive factors?"