I am not sure if this topic has been discussed, but why is the so much hate towards Amtrak?
I don't think it is hate I think it is frustration. Amtrak has made significant accomplishments over it's life despite limited funding including:
1. Centralized and automated reservation system with a internet component.
2. Standardization of HEP Power vs Steam.
3. Standardizatiion of Passenger Car Specs.........even though it seems they can never seem to stick with one style of car or builder.
4. Formation of a National Brand that everyone recognizes.
5. Accomodations for the Physically Challenged (though I think Congress had more to do with this).
6. Centralization of maintenence depots and maintenence functions nationwide.
7. Station rehabilitation program.
8. Preservation of the Long Distance Passenger Train in a mostly standardized form.
However, the frustration I think arises at the simple stuff that would make a big difference such as:
1. Marketing packages.
2. Train Charters.
3. Dining Car service that doesn't blow the bank but provides for decent meals.
4. Surge capacity with enough spare equipment to cover surges in public use and /or Holiday Travel..........this could be lack of money, not sure.
5. Customer Service and a better onboard experience.
6. True High Speed Rail and honestly this has zero to do with money and more with management with the Tens of Billions they spent on the NEC by now with their incrementalist approach they could have had a nice and short high speed train either via LA to San Diego or Chicago to Milwaukee on a short corridor. They didn't even try though.
BTW, here are a few examples of how Amtrak Management attempted to screw up the Chicago to Milwaukee service which is the reason why it is now under direct WisDOT supervision for service standards.
1. Attempted to sub in Chicago Commuter Gallery Cars over the Bombardier Cars.
2. Would assign a locomotive on the fritz to the consist because of close proximity to Chicago maintenence base and sometimes the loco would breakdown en route, requiring a rescue.
3. Customer service of onboard personell would vary widely from snotty to nice. It's fairly consistent now and everyone is happy.
4. On some runs tickets were never collected.
5. On some runs waaay back when they had the food service cart, it never moved from the last car and they would ask the Passengers to walk back.
6. Crappy cars from the surge fleet being assigned which would have electrical, heating or AC issues in route.
7. Not enough seats during peak periods, passengers standing in the aisles. They have mandated a fixed consist to fix this.
8. PA system crappy, could not hear whatever it was the Conductor was saying or the announcement of stops.
During Milwaukee Mayor Norquists term in office the City of Milwaukee actually paid someone to ride each Amtrak train and report back on services not performed or trains delayed and why. Something Amtrak management was getting paid to do but frequently fell short. They fixed a lot of equipment issues by mandating the same equipment be used and only switched out if there was a problem. I do not know how they monitor it now but on a recent ride, seems everything is still OK.
I wouldn't call it hate--more like dismay at so much of its operations. For those of us that had the opertunity to ride pre-Amtrak it just doen't come close in its non-NEC service. It definitely needs to change but I see a combination of management inepitude and unions unwillingness to change anything. I know many of its supporters believe all its non NEC operations problems can be fixed with lots more money but I'm with those that believe it has to demonstrate it actually can perform to certain standards before it deserves more for its national operations (as opposed to the NEC). For example, I'd really like to see it try contracting out the food service now that its been revealed how much Amtrak is paying its own food staff. I don't think contracting it out will automatically bring in a significant amount of new passengers but I suspect it would reduce the overall food deficit and produce a better, uniform quality. It also has to have better decision making--spending a lot of money on baggage cars when there are other more pressing needs never made sense to me.
Amtrack was a political created operation to prevent an immediate total collapse of the passenger rail network and it has been mired in politics ever since. Its biggest problem is outside of the NEC and a few other corridors, it just isn't a factor in enough people's travel plans--for which it currently seems to lack a plan to try and change that.
alphas Amtrack was a political created operation to prevent an immediate total collapse of the passenger rail network and it has been mired in politics ever since. Its biggest problem is outside of the NEC and a few other corridors, it just isn't a factor in enough people's travel plans--for which it currently seems to lack a plan to try and change that.
Alphas is correct in his characterization. He neglects to mention that the US Government worked dilligently from 1916 forward to support auto and air transport in direct competition to the privately owned, tax paying, railroads and passenger trains. Having succeeded at killing the business, they should have done nothing and let the trains expire, which they would even under the horribly biased train-off system then in effect. There was never any rational reason for ATK, and congress picked the worst possible structure to perform the unnecessary task, which is a whole separate discussion.
Second, ATK is an unfunded mandate on the freight carriers to the tune of about $400-500 million dollars per year. In addition it consumes capacity, which on some lines is constrained. This leads to the rediculous situation of unnecessary passenger trains shifting freight traffic that should/could/would move by rail in the absence of the passenger trains eating up capacity they do not adequately pay for to the more expensive and more risky highways.
ATK probably makes sense in the NEC, but here ATK is generally subsidizing the commuter operators, that is rich commuters to NYC in particular, who can certainly afford to pay the real cost of their commute. The end result is that freight shippers subsidize ATK and ATK subsidizes rich commuters in the NEC.
ATK is an example of terrible public policy with so many layers of political bull wrapped around it that almost no one knows what is going on, and frankly most people don't care. It only wastes a few billion dollars per year and is only a problem to those who think.
Mac McCulloch
I have never seen any statistically valid surveys that suggest Amtrak is hated. A more likely outcome would be a question. What is Amtrak? Outside of a few corridors I suspect most people don't have a clue about Amtrak.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
Congress created Amtrak to fail, in their minds, within 5 years. The fact the Amtrak has celebrated 45 years is a testament to the men & women of Amtrak and their political supporters for continuing to fund the operation.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
I don't hate Amtrak. I am frustrated by Amtrak - and it's not all totally Amtrak's fault.
The problem I see is that they are a hide-bound organization whose top goal is self-preservation. Congress has raised and fed them to value this behavior.
There are too many circumstances where Amtrak sees their job as just running the same train today that they ran yesterday with little regard for whether what they are doing best fits the markets they are in.
Still, good leadership from Amtrak should be able to break out of this type of behavior and flip the relationship between the railroad and Congress. Instead of always reacting to pressure and critisism from Congress, they could deliver results - including their goals and how they measure them and why they are the right goals. (Clearly, it isn't always about dollars and cents)
I don't beleive Amtrak employees, for the most part, don't "try hard". The problem is "trying hard" to do what?
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
The basic concept of a passenger rail service run by a quasi-government corporation is not the problem. There are two majot ones. One is, as many have suggested, the year-to-year dependence on Congress for funding. No organization, whether public or private, can achieve its mission with such restraints. The consequence is a very short-term vision, basically limited to what Oltmann has said. The second is micro-managing intermittently by Congress and the need to "please" certain pols by running pointless trains that are not not congruent with a rational mission.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I didn't want to make my original post to this topic too long so I left out points that others have covered. I would like to add that LD US public transportation has greatly changed since the time of Amtrak's creation. Not only has the Interstate Highway system grown dramatically, many US and State highways are now "Interstate Quality". Trailways as a national operation has disappeared and Grayhound is much reduced but more modern bus operations have emerged serving most major markets--think Mega Bus. Traditional airlines have experienced their own problems once competition opened up [due to the growth of the non-traditional carriers with Soutwest as the prime example] and we now have the mergers of the many traditional carriers into only a few survivors. Yet Amtrak non-corridor service is still operating in too many ways as it was when Congress created it.
There is another development that I suspect is not considered by the supporters of Amtrak's current LD train operations. Back at the time of Amtrak's creation, there was a significant amount of the US population that was afraid to fly. Today, that percentage is greatly reduced and it will continue to drop as my generation dies off.
alphas I would like to add that LD US public transportation has greatly changed since the time of Amtrak's creation.
That's the frustration. The world moved and Amtrak didn't. The big changes that occurred since Amtrak's creation are airline deregulation, increased vehicle ownership and at least 50% increase in population.
Amtrak's reaction to these changes has been nearly nil outside the NEC (and state-driven initiatives). Same routes, same ridership, same level of losses.
schlimm The second is micro-managing intermittently by Congress and the need to "please" certain pols by running pointless trains that are not not congruent with a rational mission.
Probably a political necessity, but not a killer unless Amtrak just rolled over too easily or there wasn't quid pro quo.
A government supported commercial entity - Amtrak is a commercial operation - is hobbled by the need to please its political supporters. So it runs long distance trains, as an example, to garner support from as many politicians as possible.
Amtrak's executives probably know that they cannot bite the hand that feeds them. If Amtrak were free of government control, other than for health and safety regulations, I suspect Mr. Moorman would mold Amtrak into a market driven entity. He probably would ditch the long distance trains or at least force the states to take them over. What remains could become a dynamic, market driven entity.
Most of the people that I know along the Northeast Corridor - I lived in New York City for decades - have a positive view of Amtrak.
As a retired high school history teacher, I think I'd enjoy reading essays on this point about "hate" directed toward Amtrak. Imagine that after studying American history you face the following essay question. I invite you gentlemen here to posit your answers.
Question: Compare and contrast the Tennessee Valley Authority with Amtrak.
alphas, you and oltmann make some astute observations. Speaking clinically, in over 35 years, I only saw one patient with fear of flight (aviophobia) and that was about 32 years ago. However, I saw many more with acrophobia, which made driving across bridges difficult to impossible for them prior to treatment.
Schlimn,
I have some cousins in their late 60's or 70's scattered throughout my family that have never flown and never will because of their fear. They've never sought any help for it as they simply won't fly. They will drive everywhere no matter if it means 2 days travel each way instead of a 2 or 3 hour plane trip each way, even for a family funeral that usually involves only a 2 night stay at the funeral location.
One thing I have noticed in my personal experiences is that individuals who are afraid of heights tend to be more worried about flying--do the 2 fears sometimes go together?
alphas Schlimn, I have some cousins in their late 60's or 70's scattered throughout my family that have never flown and never will because of their fear. They've never sought any help for it as they simply won't fly. They will drive everywhere no matter if it means 2 days travel each way instead of a 2 or 3 hour plane trip each way, even for a family funeral that usually involves only a 2 night stay at the funeral location. One thing I have noticed in my personal experiences is that individuals who are afraid of heights tend to be more worried about flying--do the 2 fears sometimes go together?
Acrophobia and/or claustrophobia are often seen together with aerophobia, according to the NIMH and CDC. Also comorbid with generalized anxiety disorder. Aerophobia is less prevalent in younger generations because of more exposure, among other protective factors.
Don't have a fear of flying, but avoid flying like the plague because of the incredibly poor experience of flying today.
The long lines for security, overcrowded cabins with ever tinier seat space, ever sillier rules about charging for everything you may need to bring along – the list goes on. Add to that the fact that I frequently must travel with computer and/or video/photography equipment and if I can get there in a day by driving, I'll do that rather than flying (especially as flying will undoubtedly entail flying to some hub I didn't want to go to in the first place so I can make a connection to my final destination).
Flying time is nearly worthless for getting any work done anyway (especially with the person next to you overflowing into your seat space, the person in front leaning their seat back as far as possible and the person behind you alternately kicking your seatback or pulling on it to lift themselves up or whatever).
If a train can get me to my destination, I'll take the train over driving any time as my time on the train is solid work time or solid rest time.
So all very practical reasons for electing not to fly whenever I don't absolutely have to.
CJtrainguy Don't have a fear of flying, but avoid flying like the plague because of the incredibly poor experience of flying today. The long lines for security, overcrowded cabins with ever tinier seat space, ever sillier rules about charging for everything you may need to bring along – the list goes on. Add to that the fact that I frequently must travel with computer and/or video/photography equipment and if I can get there in a day by driving, I'll do that rather than flying (especially as flying will undoubtedly entail flying to some hub I didn't want to go to in the first place so I can make a connection to my final destination). Flying time is nearly worthless for getting any work done anyway (especially with the person next to you overflowing into your seat space, the person in front leaning their seat back as far as possible and the person behind you alternately kicking your seatback or pulling on it to lift themselves up or whatever). If a train can get me to my destination, I'll take the train over driving any time as my time on the train is solid work time or solid rest time. So all very practical reasons for electing not to fly whenever I don't absolutely have to.
The future of flying not what was promised.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7P63MneJ7o
The same applies to the hype when Amtrak was created.
I've been an Amtrak rider for over 40 years, and at one time, had ridden every mile on Amtrak at least twice. Two months ago, I achieved AGR Select Plus status for the first time, primarily due to getting most of my onboard mileage on the NEC.
I don't hate Amtrak. If I did, I wouldn't use them. There's a couple of airlines I refuse to fly because I was mistreated multiple times, even after achieving 'gold elite' frequent flier status. Like others, flying today is borderline Gestapo tactics in the inspection lines, and sardines packed into a can on the plane, with ensuing crowding caused tantrums. I'll stick to my 8" legroom in NEC coach and 16" (maybe more!) legroom in business class, thank you.
Perhaps my biggest complaint with Amtrak is inconsistency. We have all read reports of surly OBS crews, dining cars closed when they should be open, and food that tastes more like military ready to eat meals (MREs) than 'first class'. In short, Amtrak needs to be consistent in everything. I redeemed 70K AGR points (AGR old system) for a cross-country vacation a couple of months ago - roomette all the way except in the NEC. Sleeping car attendants varied from scarce to quite attentive and friendly. Dining car food wasn't what it was 5 years ago, but still good. And meals in the Pacific Parlor car on the Starlight were outstanding! The Cardinal could use some help in the microwave meals department, though. And a recent trip in Acela First Class resulted in a breakfast that was barely paletable.
Amtrak conductors are another wide spectrum from friendly to Gestapo-like. Maybe assigned seats on LD trains from originating stations make sense, if there's a group boarding along the way. But if that's the case, then simply placing a sign on an appropriate group of seats would be more easily accomplished and not the hassle of waiting in line, in overheated, unairconditioned station areas, for seat assignment. Perhaps my biggest aggrevation is conductors checking tickets at intermediate stops on the ground, rather than getting the train one its way in minimum time. On the postive side, I fully understand the need for 'gate dragons' at the larger stations to ensure people get on the right train. I have no idea how many passengers previously got on the wrong train, going the wrong way, but I'm sure they would be some very upset passengers that expected Amtrak to foot the bill to get them to their destination as originally planned.
Simply put, consistency in delivery of service is more important than train punctuality. Regardless of where in the world I go to McDonalds, a Big Mac will always taste exactly the same. Regardless of where I go on Amtrak, consistent, people-friendly, company-minded people would go a long, long way towards winning more friends to Amtrak...both passengers and Washington bureaucrats.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.