AMTRAK: Do you support it?

[Anonymous]

My wife and I just returned from roundtrip between La Crosse Wisc and Emeryville, Ca via Cal. Zephyr Coast Starlight Empire Builder...includes necessary layover in Chicago because only one train per day on Builder and Zephyr and schedules don't match...also stuck in snow on Starlight in Cascades...12 hours late and enforce day layover in Portland, at Amtrak's expense of course...trains were full all directions...no complaints...roads were snowed over also...and as you say...not a lot of commercial air travel to Wolf Point MT anyway...People who fly CHI-LAX or wherever and are too arrogant to care about the rrest of us in the "Great Flyover" are the ones who glibbly come up with the response "It would be cheaper to pay everyones air fare between Chicago and Los Angles...since they assume that's the only place people want to go.

[Supermicha]

QUOTE: I support all passenger rail, including Amtrak. However I have a question.

I used to live in Germany. The Deutsche Bahn (their national railway) had a perfect network. Extremely high frequencies of regional and HSR long distance trains. Great service, too. On top of that, the ticket prices were dirt cheap! The most memorable example of the inexpensive price was the weekend pacakge. 1 family (2 adults and 3 children), any regional train (does not exeed the speed of 160km/h) in Germany, Saturday and Sunday...only 15 Deutsche Marks (less than 10 dollars!!!!!). My point is, how can they charge so little and work out fine, and passenger rail in North America cost so much and still have financial problems?

The only difference I can think of...Deutsche Bahn is private. But doesn't that mean Amtrak gets more government funding?

I know, I sound naive, but could someone please explain this to me?

I can i think. The family package was a very good idea when it was started. but german railway had massive porblems a few months after beginning. why? the regional trains were overflooded with passengers on weekends and the long distance trains where nearly empty, because everybody rides with the cheap family package. What was the consequence? The tiket costs today 28 euros, aprox 25 dollars, and you can use it only saturday or sunday, not on both days.

The german railway is nearly bankrupcy, only millions of money from the state let here alive. Since its privatisation in 1994, it must open it rails for other private railways, today in germany we have more than 100 private passenger and freight railways. The german railway has 95% of the traffic for it self, but espacially in regional service the new private rails are often cheaper. And so, the districts which pay for the trains chooses the most cheapest company to operate the commuters in there area. German railway has only a good chance in HSR service, but it serves only bigger citys, and closes many stations in smaller town. the people there now use the car to go to the city and so on and so on. A private operated passenger railway, such big as the german rail, can never exist without money from the state i think. When Deutsche Bahn will go to the stock exchange in a few years, it will be insolvent.

Amtrak has done a good job modernizing its fleet and owned tracks in the last years, but as long as it must use tracks from other railways and a passenger train must wait for a freight (impossible in germany) it can´t be succesful. The north east corridor is good way i think, they should make also other services more attrctive like this, then it will make money.

The otther problem are the brains of the most american people, which are only fixed on cars and planes.

micha

[Anonymous]

I would NEVER fly. I only ride cars because they're everywhere. I do most of my vacations behind Amtrak.

[rich747us]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rrnut282

rich747us
I did, 6 years ago, but then I was an airline employee.
Unfortunatly, the nearest AMTRAK stop is over an hour drive away, the next closest is 2 1/2 hours. If I've got to drive that far, I might as well drive the rest of the way. I would love to see AMTRAK survive and thrive, just like the rest of you, but I don't see it happening with the status quo. At least Bush is talking about something different, for a change. I just hope what comes out of this discussion is not like what the U.K. did.

Hey rrnunt28,

I see you're from Indiana. Have you ever had the chance to go railfan Wellsboro? If you've never heard of it, its about 15 minutes south of LaPorte. Its at a diamond where the CSX and CN cross. I've been there once myself and have also railfaned Ft. Wayne (well, actually it was at the east end of the NS yard in New Haven) a couple of times.

[tree68]

What's probably needed in discussions on the whole rail/air/highway issue is some measure of the cost per passenger mile.

For the Interstates, that's federal, state (The plow that clears the snow says NYS DOT here - that's out of my state taxes) and local (some of the law enforcement, all of the fire and EMS), not to mention the cost of operating the car or truck.

In the air, you have to consider the cost of the air traffic control system, the airports (usually run by some local authority - ie local taxes), plus the cost of operating the airline itself.

We're all pretty familiar the railroad aspects here in the forum.

On top of that is the time factor for the travel, and intrinsic value (convenience, mostly).

I can't even begin to guess the relative costs, so I won't try. Compiling them would be quite the task.

[rrnut282]

rich747us
I did, 6 years ago, but then I was an airline employee.
Unfortunatly, the nearest AMTRAK stop is over an hour drive away, the next closest is 2 1/2 hours. If I've got to drive that far, I might as well drive the rest of the way. I would love to see AMTRAK survive and thrive, just like the rest of you, but I don't see it happening with the status quo. At least Bush is talking about something different, for a change. I just hope what comes out of this discussion is not like what the U.K. did.

[rich747us]

AMTRAK: Do I support it?! HA! Is the Pope a Catholic?!

Getting there should be half the fun, and flying just isint enjoyable anymore. One thing I like is that I can bring my radio scanner with me and listen to the crews and dispatchers. With flying, you'd never get said radio scanner through the front door!

[Anonymous]

I model Amtrak in my model railroad. Of course I support Amtrak.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Doggy

I do 100% I hate to fly I love to see America by rail and it beats the hassel of driving

Just say NO to the airlines...and YES to travel by train! [:D] Seriously, if you just have to get somewhere fast, then the airlines clearly have the advantage. Myself, I don't care for plane travel, period. I'd be lost without AMTRAK.

[Anonymous]

I do 100% I hate to fly I love to see America by rail and it beats the hassel of driving

[jeaton]

TAG,SCF, others,

I suspect a lot of us would be on the same page in a discussion about the merits of many government expenditures, and it can be very frustrating to see 10's of billions go one way, and chicken feed spent on something else. The problem with saying let's take funds from here and put it there is that you have to get into two arguements-here is not merited, there is.

When I look at the merits of the AMTRAK funding, I see this. I don't see much to argue about the need for the Northeast Corridor. I don't live there, but I get the idea that that one could almost make better time WALKING down the median of your favorite freeway.
The need for the long distance trains is a little more iffy, but I see the usefulness of those trains making a dramatic growth in the near future. The last number I recall was about a $300 million deficit on those trains, but the things that are being done to improve that service and attract ridership probably ought to bring that down to a point where it could be called loose change.

My bottom line-I use AMTRAK when it meets my wants or needs, I put my two cents in on forums like this and I drop a note to my government representatives urging their support of favorable funding bills.

The guy now running the place is doing the job better than most anyone could. That is a bright spot for those of us who want rail passenger service, and actually not a bad thing for those who would like to see less government spending for governent service

Jay

[willy6]

i believe the northeast and california,s L.A. would fold without amtrak.............i support them because i love to ride a train............

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: A story: When Dave Gunn appeared before Senator McCain's committee on FY 2004 AMTRAK funding, the Senator asked Gunn why he wouldn't eliminate the "big money looseing" long distant trains. Gunn replied that to keep or drop those trains is a political decision. You don't have to be a high end political scientist to get that. Congressional reps fron NE corridor states might get in trouble is the service shuts down and those who work for us folks in the hinterlands say OK but we need something to take back to our folks. The Senator told Gunn to stop calling it politics, as there was no reason that a "business" decision could not be made to stop wasting government funds. Now you might wonder why Senator McCain, whom we can assume is pretty intelligent, would ignore the "It's politics" issue s well as some other items such as a whole bunch of costs associated with shut downs. Would his basic campaign pitch that he is fighting to cut government waste have anything to do with it?

Jeaton, I respect Senator McCain's stance on government waste, but it seems to me he lacks insight on what's 'waste' and what is not. I've argued with people whom seem to feel that AMTRAK is a waste of taxpayer dollars...yet they support the ridiculous notion that the airline industry's Federal bailout was money well spent. HUMPF! Something wreaks.

The notion of politicians and folks whom have no value for AMTRAK service...and whom support it's demise...is arrogant and selfish. For routes that are costly and show marginal ridership--yet is still needed for those whom reside in smaller, isolated communities--would it not be better to simply curtail the frequency of train service to these towns, rather than shut down the route completely? Has our government become so out of touch with the public that it doesn't hear the outcry of everyday folk whom not only ride the trains, but in many instances rely upon it?

If our so-called leaders were true visionaries, they would undoubtedly realize that if money was appropriated to completely overhaul and expand AMTRAK, America would have a jewel to tout to the rest of the world. And just think of the other benefits: we'd create thousands of long-term construction jobs across the nation for those whom would be in involved in improving right-of ways, for example. Bridges and tunnels could be retrofitted, rehabbed or replaced where absolutely necessary. High speed ACELA trains could provide healthy competion to the airlines in high traffic corridors beyond the NEC--and the NEC could see further improvements, too. The benefits--immediate and long term--far outweigh the perceived atrocity of cost the government has regarding AMTRAK.

I don't have a beef with those who enjoy and prefer flying. I just find it bogus to think that planes are all we need--or our automobiles. Senator McCain would be well advised to take this under serious consideration.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton

SCF & ATG. I woke up this morning wondering if I might be getting flamed for .....

ROTFLMAO!!! Such is the way I wake up most every day. [:D]

[Anonymous]

Currently train travel in America is slow compared to train travel in Europe. Of course, the governments of Europe have invested into high speed rail, and providing separate tracks for passenger trains and freight trains. We can easily do the same. All it takes is the will of the American people and its government.......

The real waste is the government program to build free interstate highways...... The real waste is the goverment programs to support aviation..... To even think that the crumbs Amtrak gets from our government is waste is ridicious. Counting all of Amtrak's customers and comparing Amtrak's ridership with the airlines nationwide, Amtrak comes in seventh place..... 24 million riders last year.....

Compare this cost to the government costs of keeping an army of customs located in Miami serving even fewer cruise line passengers...... We have a bargain with Amtrak.....

[jeaton]

SCF & ATG. I woke up this morning wondering if I might be getting flamed for agreeing to a statement suggesting a specific source for AMTRAK funding. Like most everybody, I question the merits of many government spending projects. In fact, there are times that I would like to begin my letters to my various government representatives with the question "Have you lost your mind???"

What I was basicly agreeing with was the point that a great deal of government action today is motivated by reasons of other than demonstrable need. (How is that for an understatement). I was reminded of the movie " A few Good Men" where the sort of bad guy Jack Nicholson screams at Tom Cruise (something like) "You can't take the truth".
For politics today, it is sort of forget the truth, i.e., the facts or evidence, because all we have to do is hit the right emotional chords, get some big bucks for the campaign and election is assured.

A story: When Dave Gunn appeared before Senator McCain's committee on FY 2004 AMTRAK funding, the Senator asked Gunn why he wouldn't eliminate the "big money looseing" long distant trains. Gunn replied that to keep or drop those trains is a political decision. You don't have to be a high end political scientist to get that. Congressional reps fron NE corridor states might get in trouble is the service shuts down and those who work for us folks in the hinterlands say OK but we need something to take back to our folks. The Senator told Gunn to stop calling it politics, as there was no reason that a "business" decision could not be made to stop wasting government funds. Now you might wonder why Senator McCain, whom we can assume is pretty intelligent, would ignore the "It's politics" issue s well as some other items such as a whole bunch of costs associated with shut downs. Would his basic campaign pitch that he is fighting to cut government waste have anything to do with it?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: As such, I'd probably make a more effective "back channel" operator. [:D] However, If YOU ever make it all the way, nd need a hard nosed, no BS minister of finance, I'd be honored to bring my pruning shears aboard.[^]

[(-D]Your nomination as Chief of Finance has been accepted and confirmed by me and the American People. Welcome aboard. Let's get to work! [:D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SuperChiefFan

[8D] AntiGates I respect what you're saying. I guess the only route to travel from here is to have you run for the Office of the President. Win the election. Select an intelligent administration to assist you. Perhaps then AMTRAK will have a chance. You've got my vote on the spot if you're willing to support the future of passenger train travel in the United States--and I don't mean the NEC only. [8D]

Dude, you are FAR too kind (thanks though)[;)] I've got this problem where I'm too straight forward, too convicted with the truth, and unwilling to shut up when think I'm right. I'd never make it, the "wimp network" would cut me to shreds.

As such, I'd probably make a more effective "back channel" operator. [:D] However, If YOU ever make it all the way, nd need a hard nosed, no BS minister of finance, I'd be honored to bring my pruning shears aboard.[^]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates

QUOTE: Originally posted by SuperChiefFan


I understand your point and it makes sense. Still--the amount approved for the purpose of humanitarian aid and the restructuring of a country was a staggering amount. AMTRAK hasn't asked for a third of that to cover both immediate and long-term improvements--and it has battled for it's share of what amounts to bandages for years, certainly long before the Iraq War ever started. Charity starts at home. We should cover the bases on our own turf first and then offer assistance abroad. We're $87B dollars late, but it can still be done.[:)]

Hey, I agree. I was out on the streets blabbering "Don't invade Iraq" with a passion, but did lil terpitude head listen to me? Of course not, he was too busy stroking the feathers of "good patriotic americans" with his war drums.

The amount of taxpayer dollars seeded into the economies of "aligned" nations is staggering, most of which will never produce 1 shed of true benefit to your average american citizen.

My opposition to HSR in this forum has been no little secret, but I'd go as far as to say if they could build the thing STRICTLY through roll backs in foreign "investment" aid, I'd be all for it, and the jobs it'd create ould turn this country around. "Sorry Ariel Sharon, we thought we'd lick our own wounds for awhile" etc

[8D] AntiGates I respect what you're saying. I guess the only route to travel from here is to have you run for the Office of the President. Win the election. Select an intelligent administration to assist you. Perhaps then AMTRAK will have a chance. You've got my vote on the spot if you're willing to support the future of passenger train travel in the United States--and I don't mean the NEC only. [8D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SuperChiefFan


I understand your point and it makes sense. Still--the amount approved for the purpose of humanitarian aid and the restructuring of a country was a staggering amount. AMTRAK hasn't asked for a third of that to cover both immediate and long-term improvements--and it has battled for it's share of what amounts to bandages for years, certainly long before the Iraq War ever started. Charity starts at home. We should cover the bases on our own turf first and then offer assistance abroad. We're $87B dollars late, but it can still be done.[:)]

Hey, I agree. I was out on the streets blabbering "Don't invade Iraq" with a passion, but did lil terpitude head listen to me? Of course not, he was too busy stroking the feathers of "good patriotic americans" with his war drums.

The amount of taxpayer dollars seeded into the economies of "aligned" nations is staggering, most of which will never produce 1 shed of true benefit to your average american citizen.

My opposition to HSR in this forum has been no little secret, but I'd go as far as to say if they could build the thing STRICTLY through roll backs in foreign "investment" aid, I'd be all for it, and the jobs it'd create ould turn this country around. "Sorry Ariel Sharon, we thought we'd lick our own wounds for awhile" etc

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates

QUOTE: Originally posted by SuperChiefFan
we would all do well to recognize that our government does so annually without so much as a blink on things that most American's have no vested interest in. Does the rebuilding of Iraq come to mind? Did you appreciate $87 Billion dollars been approved for the rebuilding of a country that most of us will never visit? Give me a break. Let's spend our money on deserving projects right here at home. AMTRAK qualifies. Once again, my two cents worth, adjusted for inflation.

I'd second THAT motion in a heartbeat.

Only trouble is, with Bush's blunder sanctioning the Invasion and destruction of a soverign nation in the first place, We're kinda strapped to the wall in Iraq, ...we leave too big a mess behind, people will never let us forget it.

Would *that* be all that bad? don't think so, a little isolationist posture might do us a world of good

I understand your point and it makes sense. Still--the amount approved for the purpose of humanitarian aid and the restructuring of a country was a staggering amount. AMTRAK hasn't asked for a third of that to cover both immediate and long-term improvements--and it has battled for it's share of what amounts to bandages for years, certainly long before the Iraq War ever started. Charity starts at home. We should cover the bases on our own turf first and then offer assistance abroad. We're $87B dollars late, but it can still be done.[:)]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SuperChiefFan
we would all do well to recognize that our government does so annually without so much as a blink on things that most American's have no vested interest in. Does the rebuilding of Iraq come to mind? Did you appreciate $87 Billion dollars been approved for the rebuilding of a country that most of us will never visit? Give me a break. Let's spend our money on deserving projects right here at home. AMTRAK qualifies. Once again, my two cents worth, adjusted for inflation.

I'd second THAT motion in a heartbeat.

Only trouble is, with Bush's blunder sanctioning the Invasion and destruction of a soverign nation in the first place, We're kinda strapped to the wall in Iraq, ...we leave too big a mess behind, people will never let us forget it.

Would *that* be all that bad? don't think so, a little isolationist posture might do us a world of good

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by PNWRMNM

Superhief,

Do not put much stock in the support Amtrak got in response to your question. This site is by definition a railfan site, and a lot of rail fans know nothing but Amtrak. If you were to ask the general public, I would guess that 50-70% do not even know that Amtrak exists, let alone what it does or how much it costs.

It's a good argument that the majority of people in America DO NOT, in fact, have any idea about costs, etc. in relationship to AMTRAK service. I suspect many of the people who replied to this question don't have an accurate idea either and we happily call ourselves railfans. However, one cannot discount the emotional attachment that many folks have for a visible passenger train network in America. If one takes the Empire Builder out of Chicago, for example to Seattle, there are many people who view AMTRAK as more than "the big passenger train that comes through town"; for many, AMTRAK is a lifeline for destinations that need to be reached. Even with bus service, many people just downright prefer a trip by train. We're all entitled to our opinions, but one thing should be painfully evident: as a nation, it is fooli***o think that the only ACCEPTABLE modes of transit are the airlines and the automobile. That's absurd. Not everyone cares for planes and though many have cars, we're not all inclined to jump behind the wheel to travel long distances if we don't have too. Further, AMTRAK keeps thousands of hard working men and women employed on a daily basis. Eliminate this 'headache' and you eliminate jobs. My feeling is if you're going to do this, then our government shouldn't be so eager to show how partial it can be in regard to the airlines either, courtesy of my tax dollars and your own. AMTRAK, if the politicians had their way, would be 'railroaded' out of existence--and that's a pathetic commentary on how our boys in the Capital think. It's not AMTRAK's fault that it's infrastructure is crumbling and in need of a massive overhaul...or that it has to play second fiddle to freight traffic (for the love of God--goods BEFORE people???). Give it what it desperately needs to not only survive but to also prove all of the naysayers wrong--that properly managed and maintained, it can become a worthwhile mass transit alternative. In my eyes, it is--but it needs continued TLC. And lest anyone complain and moan about throwing away precious tax dollars, we would all do well to recognize that our government does so annually without so much as a blink on things that most American's have no vested interest in. Does the rebuilding of Iraq come to mind? Did you appreciate $87 Billion dollars been approved for the rebuilding of a country that most of us will never visit? Give me a break. Let's spend our money on deserving projects right here at home. AMTRAK qualifies. Once again, my two cents worth, adjusted for inflation.

[Anonymous]

I'm sorry Jeaton, you were trying to be constructive, not sarcastic like many of the otherss, and caught me off guard [#welcome]. Yeah, I see your point about the daunting prospect of having to start up a business against heavily subsidized competitors, such would suck.

Our government operates in ways that are most backhanded, a great deal of the time, and the way most of the subsidies got themselves in place is best described as "subterfuge" or dirty tricks (the DEFENSE highway system , or "saving the airlines" as a patriotic gesture against terrorism etc) and in many ways the ideas I've seen floated around here seem to read like "hey guys, what we need is a dirty trick of our own" targeting a passive taxpayer for the "loot" required. Leading me to the presumption of "hey, they're talking about me!" and it simply becomes a matter of feathering another special interest's nest, with my hard earned dollars.

In terms of value engineering, the railroads lend themselves to the process "more poorly" than any of the rest, due to the same huge cost of capitalization that the railroads once gladly abandoned "in place" just to escape with their skins, and that tells me something.

Maybe if our government could be totally honest for once (I know, I'm dreaming) and put some hard trade offs on the table to choose from (I.E. "Keep supporting Israel, or spend that $800 million/year refurbishing Amtrak?" etc) I'd feel much differently.

[jeaton]

Well, yeah, nobody would be happy about that, but they might like the tax cut. My point was that it would be difficult, if not impossible for an entrepreneur to make a profit on a passenger train if the users of other modes pay rates that don't cover the full cost of the services or facilities that they use. Would you open a business and try to compete with a company that used plant and equipment that it did not have to pay for?

Do I think that there will ever be a change in the use of taxes to fund highway and air infrastructure? When pigs fly. What about more public funding of rail service? There is a better chance, since it is being found that adding to rail capacity can be much cheaper than adding highway lanes.

About Amtrak-I guess you could put different people in charge or change the name or both, or split it into a different structure or have the states pay more of the deficit, or shut it down and just pave over New Jersey (that might have some support), but I would like to see it around because I am no longer limited in time away from work, don't want to be bothered with the flying hassle and driving is a bore.

[Anonymous]

Uh, Michaelstevens, my train is still going both directions, and I have no control over it. The world is coming to an end, or not.

Anyone see the Acela style diesil in florida in the special edition Trains Mag recently? is this the next step up on non-electric Amtrak? will these replace the "Genissis" AMD-103s? Anyone care?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton

Ah yes, the old open access ideology. It worked quite well for electric power in California and nationwide electric rates are generating so much ca***hat the power grid is keeping years ahead of demand. At the same time security analysts are touting telephone companies as a must buy.

Based on worldwide evidence, including that of Great Britain with their failed effort to split off infrastructure and open access to private operators, there is no genuine regular passenger service making a real profit. Let me be more specific. Even if the railroads charged nothing for the use of their tracks, and there was no charge for use of station facilities, in todays competitive transportation environment it is not likly that passenger revenues would cover the costs of the equipment and all the other costs for running a train in regular passenger service. So, show me a potential entrepreneur who would be glad to operate passenger trains, and I'll identify a potentially bankrupt entrepreneur.

By the way, Amtrak is a private company.

In spite of this, the idea might have a chance. If airlines were required to surcharge passengers enough to pay for the full costs of airports used and the air traffic control system, and in lieu of the federal gas tax, the federal highway system was converted to a toll highway sysytem, it might be possible to set rail fares high enough to make the trains profitable.

Interesting, so if we just raise all the prices of transportation, then the railfans will be happy? Do I read you correctly in that presumption?

Well by all means then, lets not waste another second[:D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by tvb4848

Over the Thanksgiving holiday, my family rode the California Zephyr from Denver to Salt Lake City and back. For any railfan, this is a must trip. The accommodations - even in coach - were above average. The service was good, and the food was superior to anything the airlines serve these days. But, best of all, was the spectacular scenery. Colorado and Utah offer the best canyon and mesa views of anywhere in NA except possibly the Canadian Rockies. The 42 (?) tunnels were a marvel of engineering. Stops at scenic places like Glenwood Springs and Winter Park were mor enchanting that anything on the roadside equivalent. 16 hours each way can not be spent in any better way.

It will be a very sad day when the California Zephyr finishes its final run. I'm just glad my two children - ages 15 and 19 - had the experience. Don't miss this trip while it is still possible!

4848-

Did that take you past the Book cliffs in Utah? Thtough a little berg called Thompson Springs?

http://protophoto.com/picture.html?pic=3553

http://protophoto.com/subject.html?subject_id=313

[michaelstevens]

[8D]

Hey "trainheartedguy",

Back to serious issues.

Glad to see that you got pufffer's wheels & motion going the right way.

Happy Xmas !!

[:D][:D]