23 17 46 11
Originally posted by cjoldham [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Richard A Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Western New York 193 posts Posted by Richard A on Friday, April 8, 2005 8:09 AM cjoldham, Welcome to the forum! Unfortunately, we here in the US have a very long history of being reactive rather than proactive. I am afraid our passenger rail system and overall rail infrastructure will have to suffer a complete meltdown and/or a catastrophic event for the general public to force government to truly support rail. We've been limping along for 50 years or so with a slowly deteriorating patient who has lost its effective voice. Thanks for youir comments! Whether your life is good or bad, trains will make it better! Reply JoeKoh Member sinceApril 2003 From: Defiance Ohio 13,289 posts Posted by JoeKoh on Friday, April 8, 2005 8:28 AM Yes welcome to the forums! You went right by my workplace although you were probably sleeping. stay safe Joe Deshler Ohio-crossroads of the B&O Matt eats your fries.YUM! Clinton st viaduct undefeated against too tall trucks!!!(voted to be called the "Clinton St. can opener"). Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,790 posts Posted by mudchicken on Friday, April 8, 2005 5:57 PM Joe, he was incognito. He got by just a few of us while he was here. Little Raton, NM would be pleased to be mentioned in the company of the other 5 big burgs. Hopefully he did not get caught there in one of those recent snow dumps over Raton Pass and Southern Colorado.....on the other hand he did get to see some of the Great Wide Open and I wonder what he would thought of the great emptiness of Wyoming and Nevada? Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply GMS-AU Member sinceMay 2004 From: Australia 56 posts Posted by GMS-AU on Saturday, April 9, 2005 4:58 AM Definitely a comparison of chalk and cheese, apples to oranges. After a quick search of the web I find England is about the size of Alabama, Wales is about the size of Massachusetts and Scotland is about the size of South Carolina so the US suffers from the same problem we have here in Australia, distance. The highest point in Great Britain is Ben Nevis at at a bit over 4000 feet(1,343 m) so this little hill is dwarfed by even Salt lake City let alone any number of mountain passes on the main trunk rail routes. What this equates to is that Britain has enjoyed superbly built lines some of which were built along old canal routes so gradients would almost be non-existent. Most of this trackage still follows the original alignment where as in the US many lines have been realigned over the years and distances such as LA to San Francisco are similar to London to Edinburgh. On these shorter distances Rail can compete with air but any longer and cost of rail travel increases to cover onboard costs such as meals and accommodation. Britain is almost the opposite of the US in that passenger trains seem to have the lead and freight has to wait in second place. Also most of the British rail gauge can't even support standard shipping containers and knuckle couplers aren't even used. I think that when Ed Burkardt moved into Britain there where even some wagons still with vacuum brakes. Add to this the fact that many British rail loco's cannot MU with other classes, although not a major problem as freight trains cannot not be too long anyway and rail in Britain seems more geared for passenger, an almost direct opposite of US rail. So rail in the US has blossomed to some extent in the shorter hauls such as NE corridor, California and Washington State, but in the long hauls yes the Government may have to support it if it is to survive at all. G M Simpson There is no replacement for displacement! Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Saturday, April 9, 2005 7:38 AM Under GWB my opinion is that no monies from the US Treasury will reack A/trak. [:p][:)][:D] Originally posted by GMS-AU Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply jeaton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Rockton, IL 4,821 posts Posted by jeaton on Saturday, April 9, 2005 7:40 AM cjoldham Glad you enjoyed the trip. The long answer to your question would fill a good sized book. A short answer is probably found in the general attitude of a slim majority of the American public toward the role of government. The perception is that highways and airports are "free", because the taxes that support these are somewhat hidden as "user fees". On the other hand, financial support for our rail passenger service comes from general revenues derived from income taxes. There is hardly an elected official who has won office without a claim that taxes are too high and and a promise to reduce government expenditure and taxes. Of course we still maintain a military force as if we were facing a Soviet Union type super power. Go figure. Jay "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics Reply oubliette Member sinceMarch 2003 From: Lancashire - UK 74 posts Posted by oubliette on Saturday, April 9, 2005 9:21 AM I am also from UK but I have to comment that I found the whole experience great. The problem in the US is the long distances between places and flights between these places can be as cheap as rail tickets. The passenger network in the US will never really reach the levels it has in Europe because the distances travelled are relatively shorter here. Most train passengers are not enthusiasts and want to get between A and B quickly and not because they have some bond to the railroad, so flights are a real alternative. It's a shame but that's the way it is. I like the US railroad scene because it is so different and the trains are so big, this is the attraction. I travelled coast to coast last October and yes some parts of the track were a bit rough but nothing dangerous. We in Europe don't have 14,000 ton trains pounding the rails with 7 to 8 hundred ton of loco at the point. I can't wait to get back to the US soon and also I will be spending time in Canada in December. Reply TH&B Member sinceJuly 2003 964 posts Posted by TH&B on Saturday, April 9, 2005 9:39 AM European countries have a much higher population densities then the USA, wich you need for passenger trains to make sense. That is why New York has alot of passenger trains. National policies will reflect how the country is as a whole though, even if there may be a densly populated state here or there. So if you realy want frequent and fast passenger trains you have go where it's crowded. Don't go broke running empty trains through thinly populated country. I still support better passenger trains, with some foresite parts of the USA will get populated enough soon. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 9, 2005 11:14 AM cjoldham, Regarding fuel prices, most of the taxes the U.S. puts on fuel are considered user fees which go to the Highway Trust Fund. Most of this money is returned for the use of highway construction and maintenance, with some going to non-highway usage such as transit. By constrast, most of the tax money on fuel in European countries goes into the general tax collection fund. If European countries only used fuel tax moneys for the purpose of transportation, your fuel prices would not be that much higher than ours. Since you are from Great Britain, can you give us your view of the open access rail system e.g. in your view is it better, worse, or about the same as when the tracks were nationalized? Is freight railroading making any headway in terms of national freight market share compared to road and barge? Reply Edit martin.knoepfel Member sinceDecember 2003 400 posts Posted by martin.knoepfel on Saturday, April 9, 2005 12:53 PM priority for passengers over freight is common practice not only in the UK but in whole Western Europe. However, with the EU wanting to bring more freight onto the rails, the competition between passenger and freight-trains for the same slots will become a problem in the next years. The traditional scheme - passenger-trains at daytime, freights at night - does not work for long-distance freight trains with competitive schedules. Reply DSchmitt Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: California - moved to North Carolina 2018 4,422 posts Posted by DSchmitt on Saturday, April 9, 2005 12:56 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton cjoldham Glad you enjoyed the trip. The long answer to your question would fill a good sized book. A short answer is probably found in the general attitude of a slim majority of the American public toward the role of government. The perception is that highways and airports are "free", because the taxes that support these are somewhat hidden as "user fees". On the other hand, financial support for our rail passenger service comes from general revenues derived from income taxes. There is hardly an elected official who has won office without a claim that taxes are too high and and a promise to reduce government expenditure and taxes. Of course we still maintain a military force as if we were facing a Soviet Union type super power. Go figure. Jay Actually some of the money comes from the "Mass Transit Account" of the Highway Trust Fund" The Highway Trust Fund money comes from higway related fees and taxes (user fees). The highways subsidize rail. I have seen figures for the percentage of highway money that goes to the Mass Transit Fund, but I haven't yet found what percentage of the highway user fees has been actually spent on rail as opposed to other forms of mass transit, or what percentage it is of the total rail expendature. History of Gasoline Tax http://www.artba.org/economics_research/reports/gas_tax_history.htm I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it. I don't have a leg to stand on. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 9, 2005 5:25 PM Many thanks for all the comments from across the Pond! I completely agree that we only have small hills unlike the mountains you have, but they still manage to cause a lot of trouble. We have a great many small hills and in the Autumn (Fall) our leaves create a huge problem with slipping. With regard to whether it was better in the UK when the railways were nationalised, there were many pros and cons to this. British Rail was too big and there was a great deal of apathy among some employees, but then there was also a great deal of pride among others. Privatisation has led to many situations where connections can't be made because one company simply isn't interested in holding connections for a train operated by another, unless there is some likely financial gain from doing so. At least there was some obligation to make connections with British Rail. Freight is influenced by the Channel Tunnel these days, which has stimulated the market, but traffic internal to the UK is often better going by road throughout, due to the shorter distances. A final comment for now, think of the distance between LA and San Francisco which presently takes 11 hours (plus a bus ride!). It's just about exactly the same distance as Paris to Marseille in France, which has many trains every day, taking exactly three hours for the fastest, and not much more for those which stop once or twice on the way. Although New York to LA by train will never compete with flying, SF to LA in 3 hours (and of course there are other examples) would surely be an incentive for business passenger traffic. Investing in fast trains between cities this far apart could be a good thing for America, and one day the conscience of the rest of the world on pollution might even convince you that such incredibly cheap car travel (and subsidised - ie. you don't pay directly for using the roads except for the occasional toll routes) really isn't good for the environment!!! Reply Edit TH&B Member sinceJuly 2003 964 posts Posted by TH&B on Saturday, April 9, 2005 6:30 PM That is a good example comparing California to France. So what is the population of these city pairs. Half way between Paris and Marseille is Lyons, wich is the second largest city in France I beleive and the TGV only ran Paris to Lyons for many years and is a huge source of traffic, Marseilles is an extension. LA is not very cenralized as Paris, also importent for a railway network. Reply Hugh Jampton Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: Southern Region now, UK 820 posts Posted by Hugh Jampton on Saturday, April 9, 2005 6:32 PM plus the high speed lines are dedicated to the TGVs and was paid for by the French Government Generally a lurker by natureBe AlertThe world needs more lerts.It's the 3rd rail that makes the difference. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 9, 2005 6:56 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by cjoldham think of the distance between LA and San Francisco which presently takes 11 hours (plus a bus ride!). It's just about exactly the same distance as Paris to Marseille in France, which has many trains every day, taking exactly three hours for the fastest California's High-Speed Rail Authority has been planning a 2.5 hour SF to LA line since 1996. In 2006 California voters will be asked to approve a $9.5 Billion bond to build the system. Which isn't going to happen unless oil prices double. Reply Edit edblysard Member sinceMarch 2002 9,265 posts Posted by edblysard on Saturday, April 9, 2005 9:14 PM WE HAVE A OAA IN PROGRESS.... Open Access Alert... Open Access Alert... All Ilk report to your stations.... DING DING DING 23 17 46 11 Reply ValorStorm Member sinceMarch 2002 From: MRL 3rd Sub MP117 "No defects, repeat, no defects" 360 posts Posted by ValorStorm on Saturday, April 9, 2005 11:37 PM I've said it before, Amtrak should be supported out of the same funds that build highways & airports. And someone who usually offers more than their 2-cents-worth in Amtrak themed threads is noticably silent. You know who you are... Reply Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
Deshler Ohio-crossroads of the B&O Matt eats your fries.YUM! Clinton st viaduct undefeated against too tall trucks!!!(voted to be called the "Clinton St. can opener").
Originally posted by GMS-AU Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply jeaton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Rockton, IL 4,821 posts Posted by jeaton on Saturday, April 9, 2005 7:40 AM cjoldham Glad you enjoyed the trip. The long answer to your question would fill a good sized book. A short answer is probably found in the general attitude of a slim majority of the American public toward the role of government. The perception is that highways and airports are "free", because the taxes that support these are somewhat hidden as "user fees". On the other hand, financial support for our rail passenger service comes from general revenues derived from income taxes. There is hardly an elected official who has won office without a claim that taxes are too high and and a promise to reduce government expenditure and taxes. Of course we still maintain a military force as if we were facing a Soviet Union type super power. Go figure. Jay "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics Reply oubliette Member sinceMarch 2003 From: Lancashire - UK 74 posts Posted by oubliette on Saturday, April 9, 2005 9:21 AM I am also from UK but I have to comment that I found the whole experience great. The problem in the US is the long distances between places and flights between these places can be as cheap as rail tickets. The passenger network in the US will never really reach the levels it has in Europe because the distances travelled are relatively shorter here. Most train passengers are not enthusiasts and want to get between A and B quickly and not because they have some bond to the railroad, so flights are a real alternative. It's a shame but that's the way it is. I like the US railroad scene because it is so different and the trains are so big, this is the attraction. I travelled coast to coast last October and yes some parts of the track were a bit rough but nothing dangerous. We in Europe don't have 14,000 ton trains pounding the rails with 7 to 8 hundred ton of loco at the point. I can't wait to get back to the US soon and also I will be spending time in Canada in December. Reply TH&B Member sinceJuly 2003 964 posts Posted by TH&B on Saturday, April 9, 2005 9:39 AM European countries have a much higher population densities then the USA, wich you need for passenger trains to make sense. That is why New York has alot of passenger trains. National policies will reflect how the country is as a whole though, even if there may be a densly populated state here or there. So if you realy want frequent and fast passenger trains you have go where it's crowded. Don't go broke running empty trains through thinly populated country. I still support better passenger trains, with some foresite parts of the USA will get populated enough soon. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 9, 2005 11:14 AM cjoldham, Regarding fuel prices, most of the taxes the U.S. puts on fuel are considered user fees which go to the Highway Trust Fund. Most of this money is returned for the use of highway construction and maintenance, with some going to non-highway usage such as transit. By constrast, most of the tax money on fuel in European countries goes into the general tax collection fund. If European countries only used fuel tax moneys for the purpose of transportation, your fuel prices would not be that much higher than ours. Since you are from Great Britain, can you give us your view of the open access rail system e.g. in your view is it better, worse, or about the same as when the tracks were nationalized? Is freight railroading making any headway in terms of national freight market share compared to road and barge? Reply Edit martin.knoepfel Member sinceDecember 2003 400 posts Posted by martin.knoepfel on Saturday, April 9, 2005 12:53 PM priority for passengers over freight is common practice not only in the UK but in whole Western Europe. However, with the EU wanting to bring more freight onto the rails, the competition between passenger and freight-trains for the same slots will become a problem in the next years. The traditional scheme - passenger-trains at daytime, freights at night - does not work for long-distance freight trains with competitive schedules. Reply DSchmitt Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: California - moved to North Carolina 2018 4,422 posts Posted by DSchmitt on Saturday, April 9, 2005 12:56 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton cjoldham Glad you enjoyed the trip. The long answer to your question would fill a good sized book. A short answer is probably found in the general attitude of a slim majority of the American public toward the role of government. The perception is that highways and airports are "free", because the taxes that support these are somewhat hidden as "user fees". On the other hand, financial support for our rail passenger service comes from general revenues derived from income taxes. There is hardly an elected official who has won office without a claim that taxes are too high and and a promise to reduce government expenditure and taxes. Of course we still maintain a military force as if we were facing a Soviet Union type super power. Go figure. Jay Actually some of the money comes from the "Mass Transit Account" of the Highway Trust Fund" The Highway Trust Fund money comes from higway related fees and taxes (user fees). The highways subsidize rail. I have seen figures for the percentage of highway money that goes to the Mass Transit Fund, but I haven't yet found what percentage of the highway user fees has been actually spent on rail as opposed to other forms of mass transit, or what percentage it is of the total rail expendature. History of Gasoline Tax http://www.artba.org/economics_research/reports/gas_tax_history.htm I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it. I don't have a leg to stand on. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 9, 2005 5:25 PM Many thanks for all the comments from across the Pond! I completely agree that we only have small hills unlike the mountains you have, but they still manage to cause a lot of trouble. We have a great many small hills and in the Autumn (Fall) our leaves create a huge problem with slipping. With regard to whether it was better in the UK when the railways were nationalised, there were many pros and cons to this. British Rail was too big and there was a great deal of apathy among some employees, but then there was also a great deal of pride among others. Privatisation has led to many situations where connections can't be made because one company simply isn't interested in holding connections for a train operated by another, unless there is some likely financial gain from doing so. At least there was some obligation to make connections with British Rail. Freight is influenced by the Channel Tunnel these days, which has stimulated the market, but traffic internal to the UK is often better going by road throughout, due to the shorter distances. A final comment for now, think of the distance between LA and San Francisco which presently takes 11 hours (plus a bus ride!). It's just about exactly the same distance as Paris to Marseille in France, which has many trains every day, taking exactly three hours for the fastest, and not much more for those which stop once or twice on the way. Although New York to LA by train will never compete with flying, SF to LA in 3 hours (and of course there are other examples) would surely be an incentive for business passenger traffic. Investing in fast trains between cities this far apart could be a good thing for America, and one day the conscience of the rest of the world on pollution might even convince you that such incredibly cheap car travel (and subsidised - ie. you don't pay directly for using the roads except for the occasional toll routes) really isn't good for the environment!!! Reply Edit TH&B Member sinceJuly 2003 964 posts Posted by TH&B on Saturday, April 9, 2005 6:30 PM That is a good example comparing California to France. So what is the population of these city pairs. Half way between Paris and Marseille is Lyons, wich is the second largest city in France I beleive and the TGV only ran Paris to Lyons for many years and is a huge source of traffic, Marseilles is an extension. LA is not very cenralized as Paris, also importent for a railway network. Reply Hugh Jampton Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: Southern Region now, UK 820 posts Posted by Hugh Jampton on Saturday, April 9, 2005 6:32 PM plus the high speed lines are dedicated to the TGVs and was paid for by the French Government Generally a lurker by natureBe AlertThe world needs more lerts.It's the 3rd rail that makes the difference. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 9, 2005 6:56 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by cjoldham think of the distance between LA and San Francisco which presently takes 11 hours (plus a bus ride!). It's just about exactly the same distance as Paris to Marseille in France, which has many trains every day, taking exactly three hours for the fastest California's High-Speed Rail Authority has been planning a 2.5 hour SF to LA line since 1996. In 2006 California voters will be asked to approve a $9.5 Billion bond to build the system. Which isn't going to happen unless oil prices double. Reply Edit edblysard Member sinceMarch 2002 9,265 posts Posted by edblysard on Saturday, April 9, 2005 9:14 PM WE HAVE A OAA IN PROGRESS.... Open Access Alert... Open Access Alert... All Ilk report to your stations.... DING DING DING 23 17 46 11 Reply ValorStorm Member sinceMarch 2002 From: MRL 3rd Sub MP117 "No defects, repeat, no defects" 360 posts Posted by ValorStorm on Saturday, April 9, 2005 11:37 PM I've said it before, Amtrak should be supported out of the same funds that build highways & airports. And someone who usually offers more than their 2-cents-worth in Amtrak themed threads is noticably silent. You know who you are... Reply Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton cjoldham Glad you enjoyed the trip. The long answer to your question would fill a good sized book. A short answer is probably found in the general attitude of a slim majority of the American public toward the role of government. The perception is that highways and airports are "free", because the taxes that support these are somewhat hidden as "user fees". On the other hand, financial support for our rail passenger service comes from general revenues derived from income taxes. There is hardly an elected official who has won office without a claim that taxes are too high and and a promise to reduce government expenditure and taxes. Of course we still maintain a military force as if we were facing a Soviet Union type super power. Go figure. Jay
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
QUOTE: Originally posted by cjoldham think of the distance between LA and San Francisco which presently takes 11 hours (plus a bus ride!). It's just about exactly the same distance as Paris to Marseille in France, which has many trains every day, taking exactly three hours for the fastest
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.