It seems to me that with all the hubub about long waits at security gates and long delays on the tarmac that the airlines are suffering through right now. That the railroads (at least the ones of old) would be siezing on this as a rare opportunity to bolster passenger service and really market a 'serious' alternative to air travel. At least in the continental U.S.. Does Amtrak have a monopoly on interstate rail travel, or are the railroads so "stuck in the 70's" that they don't even want to venture into that arena any more.With all the gas prices that are sure to rise even more and the airlines overloaded, geez, what a golden opportunity this is to grab a piece of that travel pie.
I mean, maybe they should look into a city to city service that would save fuel, cut down pollution, ease congestion etc. etc. Can they do this if they wanted to? If they were able, and they are not siezing this moment to really grow competitive with their "old nemisis", the Airlines.
Is Amtrak the only alternative?Or could the class I roads have a shot at it. Growing beyond the coastline and few cities that Amtrak already services? Just a thought..........
Pennsy_fan is apparently unaware that Amtrak was formed to relieve the railroads of the burden of money-losing passenger obligations. A figure that's been mentioned is that passenger service collectively hadn't covered its solely related costs since 1953. The Class 1's are in no hurry to jump back into passenger service because they can't make money on it.
In a similar vein, there are those who are calling for the privatization of the Chicago Transit Authority, quite unaware that CTA took over in 1947 from private firms that were in receivership for years.
Amtrak will never be a "serious" alternative to air travel for most travelers. Why?
1) Short hauls are too expensive for families to afford. I recently considered Amtrak to Philadelphia from Newark NJ for my family (instead of driving the two hours on the congested NJ Turnpike) -- Amtrak wanted $400 for the roundtrip excursion. Cost for gas and tolls = $40. Bottom line = 10 times more expensive by train. Even renting a car would be less expensive than the train.
2) Business people would rather deal with security lines than spend twice as much (or more) time riding the train. Case in point: Newark to Chicago can be done in a day by plane for an important face-to-face meeting, but train would take three days of travel time for round trip. What a waste of productivity.
3) Long distance -- when the average employee has two weeks vacation, why use half of it just getting to the location? Unless, of course, the train trip is planned as part of the vacation fun time. The railfans in the family would enjoy it, the kids will zone out on their portable video games and the spouses would learn how much the really love their partner (or want to strangle them for conning them into another torture trip). Sleeping in coach is not fun, and the cost of sleepers (when available) makes it much more expensive than flying.
4) Business travelers do use ACELA in the NEC, and if I were traveling to Boston or DC, I use ACELA rather than fly. Once I tried to book a trip from Newark to Richmond for a convention. The connections to richmond made it impossible to book the trip in any logical manner, but by air there were ten times as many possibilities -- so I flew.
5) Local transportation (upon arrival) is complicated by trying to find a rental car, or relying on expensive taxi cabs. At least at the airport, there are dedicated shuttle pickups, shuttles to multiple rental car agencies, etc. There is planning and logistical support to make the transition easy for the air traveler. In the NEC, a traveler can immediately access rapid transit from the station, but outside the NEC? (listen to the crickets chirping at midnight -- no cabs, long walks through strange neighborhoods, etc.)
Amtrak has fundamental flaws that make it an unatractive choice for most travelers. I would love to see that change, but I don't think anyone in a position to make it change is interested.
My two cents, take it or leave it.
Paul F.
alphas wrote:I assume there is some type of exemption for governmental commuter services ( i.e., NJT can operate to Penn Station, SEPTA to Trenton, etc.) but someone more familar with the law than me will need to explain it in detail.
NJT took over the commuter rail operations in NJ that operated into Penn Station and SEPTA did the same for southern PA to Trenton. By not allowing these agencies to cross state linesw it could basically destroy the whole point of that commuter rail operation/line. Another example would be Metro-North operating lines in NY and CT.
I think we may be missing the boat, but consider this:
1. Airlines flying DC3s and two lane US highways are what knocked the stuffing out of long distance train travel as the primary mode of travel in the early 1950s. Now the competition is 737s and an intestate highway network.
2. The RRs infrastructure in the 1950s was a lot more passenger train friendly. The rail network is seriously capacity constrained in a lot of areas.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Well to go with what was just said, railroads realized that their best money makers was freight so they started concentrating on it. The current infrastructure of today's railroads is to move freight. A lot of the older handling facilites/capacities for passenger travel are gone.
Take this for example, the NewYork, New Haven, and Hartford Railroad ran hourly passenger trains from New York to Boston. While not the Super Chief, 20th Century Limit, etc... they offered reasonable service. Their passenger service was snuffed out by air and road travel. But do you see baggage cars on the northeast corridor? If you had extra stuff, it makes sense to check some of it in... otherwise its jammed pack in the passenger cars (those of you on Amtrak during holidays would know). But get this, you really can't. The personnel to handle it isn't there especially if you have to change trains. A red cap at Boston's South Station told me if you're changing trains and planning on checking a bag, come down the day before to make sure its on the same train as you.
This is an excellent analysis of why rail passenger service, outside of a few high density corridors, is not a viable competitor with the airplane and the car. The brief case trade left the railroads for the airplane because it is a time machine. And in business time is money. The coach trade left the trains for the car because of the economics.
The future for rail passenger service is high density corridors of 100 to 350 miles. The trains will have to be quick, dependable, frequent, safe, and economical. Moreover, the stations will have to offer ample parking and the amenities that people normally associate with airports.
I live in Dallas, Texas. Oklahoma City to San Antonio and Houston, as well as Dallas to Houston, are potentially viable passenger rail corridors. They will be developed eventually, although probably not in my lifetime.
Long distance trains, which I love to ride, are an anachronism. Only a tiny percentage of the traveling public uses them. And they take the focus, as well as resources, away from the future of rail passenger service, which is the high density corridors.
f14aplusfl wrote: alphas wrote:I assume there is some type of exemption for governmental commuter services ( i.e., NJT can operate to Penn Station, SEPTA to Trenton, etc.) but someone more familar with the law than me will need to explain it in detail.NJT took over the commuter rail operations in NJ that operated into Penn Station and SEPTA did the same for southern PA to Trenton. By not allowing these agencies to cross state linesw it could basically destroy the whole point of that commuter rail operation/line. Another example would be Metro-North operating lines in NY and CT.
Suburban rail operations are generally operated by transit authorities that are created under appropriate state laws. This generally makes it difficult to operate across state lines because of jurisdictional limits. However, Metro North's New Haven line is a joint operation between Metro North and the Connecticut DOT. Similarly, the former EL diesel lines into upstate New York are a joint operation between NJ Transit and Metro North. South Shore is operated by NICTD and also receives payment from the RTA to cover passenger service within Illinois.
Trenton has historically been the dividing line between the Philadelphia and New York suburban zones, even when PRR was running the operation.
CSSHEGEWISCH wrote:Suburban rail operations are generally operated by transit authorities that are created under appropriate state laws. This generally makes it difficult to operate across state lines because of jurisdictional limits. However, Metro North's New Haven line is a joint operation between Metro North and the Connecticut DOT. Similarly, the former EL diesel lines into upstate New York are a joint operation between NJ Transit and Metro North. South Shore is operated by NICTD and also receives payment from the RTA to cover passenger service within Illinois.Trenton has historically been the dividing line between the Philadelphia and New York suburban zones, even when PRR was running the operation.
I didn't know that last tidbit. Would you say its the same then for the MBTA to run from Boston to Providence, RI then? I was trying to look into that but I'm not really sure.
I like your signature by the way.
The MBTA owns the tracks from Boston to the State Line, Amtrak dispatches and maintains it (double track, Catenary Elecrtic, 150 MPH for Amtrak (Acela), 80 MPH for MBTA). R.I funds the extended service from the State Line to Providence. Boston to Providence is 44 miles.
The much delayed funding is now moving forward to extend another 8 miles to Warwick at Providence's T.F.Green Airport. Commuter service to downtown Providence and downtown Boston from Green Airport, a Southwest Airline hub, is a real answer to Boston's Logan Airport over growth.
Now, with the third track added south of Providence (for Providence & Worcester freight service without using the high speed Corridor), it has passed the talking stage to extend the Commuter Service still further south in R.I.
Don U. TCA 73-5735
Samantha wrote: This is an excellent analysis of why rail passenger service, outside of a few high density corridors, is not a viable competitor with the airplane and the car. The brief case trade left the railroads for the airplane because it is a time machine. And in business time is money. The coach trade left the trains for the car because of the economics. The future for rail passenger service is high density corridors of 100 to 350 miles. The trains will have to be quick, dependable, frequent, safe, and economical. Moreover, the stations will have to offer ample parking and the amenities that people normally associate with airports. I live in Dallas, Texas. Oklahoma City to San Antonio and Houston, as well as Dallas to Houston, are potentially viable passenger rail corridors. They will be developed eventually, although probably not in my lifetime. Long distance trains, which I love to ride, are an anachronism. Only a tiny percentage of the traveling public uses them. And they take the focus, as well as resources, away from the future of rail passenger service, which is the high density corridors.
The LD train might not be such an anachronism if there were many, well developed corridors, at least in the east. The LD trains would function to bridge the gaps between the corridors. But, you have to have the corridors developed, first. (And, the anchor cities on the corridors have to have some reasonable transit in place)
All forms of public transportation is subsidized in one way or another and some more so than others. Even before you discuss whether LD trains can survive or the formation of high speed rail corridors, you should ask the following.
By developing these corridors and LD trains, this will demand a significant investment in infrastructure and equipment. The high speed rail equipment probably will not be compatible for the requirements of the LD train. Therefore two sets of equipment will be in operation, LD equipment (baggage, sleepers, etc…) and high speed equipment. The only cross would be like today’s Amfleet cars behind AEM7s and HHP-8s. However, their top speed also does not match the top speed of the Acela trains.
CSSHEGEWISCH wrote:oltmannd sounds like he lifted his idea directly from Peter Lyon's "To Hell In A Day Coach".
Picasso: Good Artists Copy; Great Artists Steal
I'm not sure you get my point, though. I'm not saying the LD train only bridge the gap. They run the whole route. Let's say that several SE corridors are developed. Say, Atlanta - Charlotte - Raleigh - Richmond - DC and New Orleans - Mobile - Montgomery - Birmingham and Atlanta - Macon - Jacksonville and Atlanta - Chattanooga - Nashville.
The Crescent from NYP to NOL would be the LD train over the one route and a Chicago -Florida LD train could exist on the other.
Warning: Rant On
Ya know I just love that can do American attitude that says we can do anything...oh wait a minute, thats was 40 years ago, I forgot our motto today is, we CANT do it, and then we break out the whine and cheese about all the reasons we CANT do it, just like here and in previous threads before, we always get the arguement that long distance rail is dead, cant do it, dont want to pay for it, dont want to look at it...so instead why not take your gas-guzzling 10mpg Hummer Porkmaster at $3+ a gallon (oil hit $90 a barrel yesterday BTW) or why not just wait 6 hours in the airport, after have all of your carefully packed luggage rifled thru by an " I could give a s**t less about your belongings" TSA agent, for an overbooked 3 hour delayed flight that will get parked on the tarmack for a few more hours or simply get cancelled because the airlines knowingly overload airport takeoff and landing slots simply because theres no rule telling them not to....oh and want to add some real joy? just add a little snow or rain...
Jezzuzz Christmas cookies...how about a viable rail travel stratagy? Oh my! cant-wont-never will-I dont want to pay for it-not in my backyard! ...now I know why we are rocketing towards mediocrity and gridlock.
Meantime almost EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE FREAKIN WORLD has a viable often highly efficient rail transit system, so while the C.A.R.D.s here are no-no-noing any real attempts to fix any problems just because it might increase their taxes, meanwhile I can take a TGV from Paris to Lyon, 578 miles, which is about the same distance from Los Angeles to San Francisco, in about 2 hours. Last time we flew LA to SF with all the delays, body cavity searches, and such, it took 3 1/2 hours, for a 45 minute flight. Yeah air travel rules! ...if your a sado-masochist!
PS: C.A.R.D. = Citizens Against Rational Decision
OK...Rant off, back to your regular programming...
Have fun with your trains
vsmith wrote:Jezzuzz Christmas cookies...how about a viable rail travel stratagy? Oh my! cant-wont-never will-I dont want to pay for it-not in my backyard! ...now I know why we are rocketing towards mediocrity and gridlock.
I believe we can create and should invest in a viable passenger rail strategy and more importantly, implement it. The problem like you just said in your rant is convincing people to support such an strategy. The triard of transportation in America is air, car, and rail. Rail is often the black sheep when it comes to public support. It necessary to obtain the funds yes, but also it is needed to win the public's support for such investments. Long distance travel by rail isn't dead, it never has been. Since the 1960s its been hanging on by a thread, just think of the number of times its been thought Amtrak was going to die.
paulsafety wrote: Amtrak will never be a "serious" alternative to air travel for most travelers. Why?1) Short hauls are too expensive for families to afford. I recently considered Amtrak to Philadelphia from Newark NJ for my family (instead of driving the two hours on the congested NJ Turnpike) -- Amtrak wanted $400 for the roundtrip excursion. Cost for gas and tolls = $40. Bottom line = 10 times more expensive by train. Even renting a car would be less expensive than the train.
Amtrak doesn't want you from Newark to Phila. But NJT and SEPTA do. 2:01 travel time. $66 round trip for 2 adults and 2 kids. Or try NJT to NJT Riverline to PATCO. $30 round trip for 2 adults and 2 kids - trip time about 2:40.
paulsafety wrote: 2) Business people would rather deal with security lines than spend twice as much (or more) time riding the train. Case in point: Newark to Chicago can be done in a day by plane for an important face-to-face meeting, but train would take three days of travel time for round trip. What a waste of productivity.
Interestingly, this is actually less of an issue, as time marches on. A laptop, aircard and a cell phone and you're good to go from anywhere - except on an airplane. Toss in VPN and remote desk top, and you can always be "at the office".
paulsafety wrote: 3) Long distance -- when the average employee has two weeks vacation, why use half of it just getting to the location? Unless, of course, the train trip is planned as part of the vacation fun time. The railfans in the family would enjoy it, the kids will zone out on their portable video games and the spouses would learn how much the really love their partner (or want to strangle them for conning them into another torture trip). Sleeping in coach is not fun, and the cost of sleepers (when available) makes it much more expensive than flying.4) Business travelers do use ACELA in the NEC, and if I were traveling to Boston or DC, I use ACELA rather than fly. Once I tried to book a trip from Newark to Richmond for a convention. The connections to richmond made it impossible to book the trip in any logical manner, but by air there were ten times as many possibilities -- so I flew..
4) Business travelers do use ACELA in the NEC, and if I were traveling to Boston or DC, I use ACELA rather than fly. Once I tried to book a trip from Newark to Richmond for a convention. The connections to richmond made it impossible to book the trip in any logical manner, but by air there were ten times as many possibilities -- so I flew..
I don't understand. All the Richmond train go thru Newark. What connections?
There are 8 direct trains a day at 3:20AM, 6:32, 7:24, 10:52, 11:12, 2:22PM, 3:22PM and 3:38PM. And, only $77 one way on weekdays - a good deal. (the Newark to Philly fare is so high because that seat makes the whole trip and NYP to PHL is the choke point for the route. No sense filling the train up with NYP to PHL riders only to turf out higher paying NYP to WAS customers)
paulsafety wrote: 5) Local transportation (upon arrival) is complicated by trying to find a rental car, or relying on expensive taxi cabs. At least at the airport, there are dedicated shuttle pickups, shuttles to multiple rental car agencies, etc. There is planning and logistical support to make the transition easy for the air traveler. In the NEC, a traveler can immediately access rapid transit from the station, but outside the NEC? (listen to the crickets chirping at midnight -- no cabs, long walks through strange neighborhoods, etc.)
In the late 40s and early 50s there car rentals were pretty common at train stations, but when the business travel dried up, so did the car rentals. Even in a large city like Atlanta, getting a rental car is hassle. At least taxis meet the train...
paulsafety wrote: Amtrak has fundamental flaws that make it an unatractive choice for most travelers. I would love to see that change, but I don't think anyone in a position to make it change is interested.My two cents, take it or leave it.Paul F.
oltmannd wrote: paulsafety wrote:5) Local transportation (upon arrival) is complicated by trying to find a rental car, or relying on expensive taxi cabs. At least at the airport, there are dedicated shuttle pickups, shuttles to multiple rental car agencies, etc. There is planning and logistical support to make the transition easy for the air traveler. In the NEC, a traveler can immediately access rapid transit from the station, but outside the NEC? (listen to the crickets chirping at midnight -- no cabs, long walks through strange neighborhoods, etc.)In the late 40s and early 50s there car rentals were pretty common at train stations, but when the business travel dried up, so did the car rentals. Even in a large city like Atlanta, getting a rental car is hassle. At least taxis meet the train...
paulsafety wrote:5) Local transportation (upon arrival) is complicated by trying to find a rental car, or relying on expensive taxi cabs. At least at the airport, there are dedicated shuttle pickups, shuttles to multiple rental car agencies, etc. There is planning and logistical support to make the transition easy for the air traveler. In the NEC, a traveler can immediately access rapid transit from the station, but outside the NEC? (listen to the crickets chirping at midnight -- no cabs, long walks through strange neighborhoods, etc.)
A lot of small towns didn't or don't have rental car agencies... just the taxis or the folks you're visiting would meet you at the train station. Train stations aside from the town hall was a meeting place for the coming and going. I don't think people took vacations like we do today. If you went some where it was to visit family or so... not so much oh let's go to (insert city name) and see the sights. It's not until I think with the expansion of the interstate highway and air travel that we began to see the traditional, present day touristy things.
Getting rental cars at train stations is highly unlikely as they went with where their primary clients went... to the airports. And taxis in a small town, its a small town, rapid transit muchless taxis are very few and far in between.
f14aplusfl wrote: oltmannd wrote: paulsafety wrote:5) Local transportation (upon arrival) is complicated by trying to find a rental car, or relying on expensive taxi cabs. At least at the airport, there are dedicated shuttle pickups, shuttles to multiple rental car agencies, etc. There is planning and logistical support to make the transition easy for the air traveler. In the NEC, a traveler can immediately access rapid transit from the station, but outside the NEC? (listen to the crickets chirping at midnight -- no cabs, long walks through strange neighborhoods, etc.) In the late 40s and early 50s there car rentals were pretty common at train stations, but when the business travel dried up, so did the car rentals. Even in a large city like Atlanta, getting a rental car is hassle. At least taxis meet the train...A lot of small towns didn't or don't have rental car agencies... just the taxis or the folks you're visiting would meet you at the train station. Train stations aside from the town hall was a meeting place for the coming and going. I don't think people took vacations like we do today. If you went some where it was to visit family or so... not so much oh let's go to (insert city name) and see the sights. It's not until I think with the expansion of the interstate highway and air travel that we began to see the traditional, present day touristy things. Getting rental cars at train stations is highly unlikely as they went with where their primary clients went... to the airports. And taxis in a small town, its a small town, rapid transit muchless taxis are very few and far in between.
oltmannd wrote: paulsafety wrote:5) Local transportation (upon arrival) is complicated by trying to find a rental car, or relying on expensive taxi cabs. At least at the airport, there are dedicated shuttle pickups, shuttles to multiple rental car agencies, etc. There is planning and logistical support to make the transition easy for the air traveler. In the NEC, a traveler can immediately access rapid transit from the station, but outside the NEC? (listen to the crickets chirping at midnight -- no cabs, long walks through strange neighborhoods, etc.) In the late 40s and early 50s there car rentals were pretty common at train stations, but when the business travel dried up, so did the car rentals. Even in a large city like Atlanta, getting a rental car is hassle. At least taxis meet the train...
That sounds about right to me.
Here's an interesting idea. Enterprise says they have an office within 15 miles of 90% of the population - and they pick up and deliver. Why wouldn't Amtrak partner with them to provide a car on arrival at just about any train station? Make your car reservation thru the Amtrak web site, etc.
Just for fun, I just checked every location on the Crescent south of Toccoa, GA and they all have Enterprise franchises - even Picayune, MS. Even Toccoa, which is a flag stop, has an Enterprise.
The only drawback I can see is that any deal with Amtrak would have to include the frachise being able to supply a car to meet the train even when it's not during their normal hours.
oltmannd wrote:That sounds about right to me. Here's an interesting idea. Enterprise says they have an office within 15 miles of 90% of the population - and they pick up and deliver. Why wouldn't Amtrak partner with them to provide a car on arrival at just about any train station? Make your car reservation thru the Amtrak web site, etc.
That's cause Amtrak is partnered with
oltmannd wrote:The only drawback I can see is that any deal with Amtrak would have to include the frachise being able to supply a car to meet the train even when it's not during their normal hours.
Well good customer service would be when you place the reservation they know what time you'd be arriving and such. Thus I'd pick them up regardless of the hour and take them to the rental franchise, fill out the forms and go home. Maybe they even have a system to do it at the train stop and get someone else to get me home. People will remember that and tell people that. Its in there best interest to get tourists/visitors into their towns and if you're the agency known for going the extra mile, you'll get returning business.
Zipcar would be presently the best solution to that. The Zipcar drop off the car/pick it up point could be the rain depot in that area. Therefore, they could leave a car there as long as you reserved ahead of time. The only problem is sometimes people don't bring it back on time... so that's something that would need to be worked out in general. Zipcars are great in medium to highly populated areas (high utilization rate and hence more money for them) so I'm not too sure about Middleofnowheresville, USA if they'd enter that market.
oltmannd wrote: paulsafety wrote: Amtrak will never be a "serious" alternative to air travel for most travelers. Why?1) Short hauls are too expensive for families to afford. I recently considered Amtrak to Philadelphia from Newark NJ for my family (instead of driving the two hours on the congested NJ Turnpike) -- Amtrak wanted $400 for the roundtrip excursion. Cost for gas and tolls = $40. Bottom line = 10 times more expensive by train. Even renting a car would be less expensive than the train. Amtrak doesn't want you from Newark to Phila. But NJT and SEPTA do. 2:01 travel time. $66 round trip for 2 adults and 2 kids. Or try NJT to NJT Riverline to PATCO. $30 round trip for 2 adults and 2 kids - trip time about 2:40. paulsafety wrote: 2) Business people would rather deal with security lines than spend twice as much (or more) time riding the train. Case in point: Newark to Chicago can be done in a day by plane for an important face-to-face meeting, but train would take three days of travel time for round trip. What a waste of productivity.Interestingly, this is actually less of an issue, as time marches on. A laptop, aircard and a cell phone and you're good to go from anywhere - except on an airplane. Toss in VPN and remote desk top, and you can always be "at the office". paulsafety wrote: 3) Long distance -- when the average employee has two weeks vacation, why use half of it just getting to the location? Unless, of course, the train trip is planned as part of the vacation fun time. The railfans in the family would enjoy it, the kids will zone out on their portable video games and the spouses would learn how much the really love their partner (or want to strangle them for conning them into another torture trip). Sleeping in coach is not fun, and the cost of sleepers (when available) makes it much more expensive than flying.4) Business travelers do use ACELA in the NEC, and if I were traveling to Boston or DC, I use ACELA rather than fly. Once I tried to book a trip from Newark to Richmond for a convention. The connections to richmond made it impossible to book the trip in any logical manner, but by air there were ten times as many possibilities -- so I flew..I don't understand. All the Richmond train go thru Newark. What connections?There are 8 direct trains a day at 3:20AM, 6:32, 7:24, 10:52, 11:12, 2:22PM, 3:22PM and 3:38PM. And, only $77 one way on weekdays - a good deal. (the Newark to Philly fare is so high because that seat makes the whole trip and NYP to PHL is the choke point for the route. No sense filling the train up with NYP to PHL riders only to turf out higher paying NYP to WAS customers) paulsafety wrote: 5) Local transportation (upon arrival) is complicated by trying to find a rental car, or relying on expensive taxi cabs. At least at the airport, there are dedicated shuttle pickups, shuttles to multiple rental car agencies, etc. There is planning and logistical support to make the transition easy for the air traveler. In the NEC, a traveler can immediately access rapid transit from the station, but outside the NEC? (listen to the crickets chirping at midnight -- no cabs, long walks through strange neighborhoods, etc.)In the late 40s and early 50s there car rentals were pretty common at train stations, but when the business travel dried up, so did the car rentals. Even in a large city like Atlanta, getting a rental car is hassle. At least taxis meet the train... paulsafety wrote: Amtrak has fundamental flaws that make it an unatractive choice for most travelers. I would love to see that change, but I don't think anyone in a position to make it change is interested.My two cents, take it or leave it.Paul F.
A) Re: NYP to Philly -- how about $6 in tolls on the NJ Turnpike and $10 worth of gas -- $16 for 4 people -- half the river line jaunt of two hours and forty minutes (does that include transfers in Trenton and Camden?) I went to the King Tut exhibit a couple weeks ago by car after researching costs and times for transit alternatives from Bergen County. With parking in Philly ($20) it was a ton cheaper (parking at NWK would have been more expensive), I could go door step to within three blocks of the science museum and I didn't need to worry about potential missed connections in Trenton (Septa and NJT don't always work together in perfect harmony) or Camden (River Line to PATCO to Septa MFL). RE the higher number of WAS to NYP passengers, isn't that why the PRR invented the clockers (PHL to NYP)? What happened to the traditional clockers?
B) Re: Being productive via Aircard in Laptop. Potentially true if you are an author or executive or marketer, but what if you're a Construction manager or Accountant (are you going to spread out someone's receivables on the lunch counter to do an audit?) There are limits to the ability to work remotely, and most bosses are not so supportive of a two-three day jaunt (18 to 20 hours each way just for transportation, not including meeting time) when an 12 hour round trip (including meetings in Chicago) is possible at the same cost (coach to coach comparison -- not considering sleeper accomodations).
C) RE: Richmond to NWK. 3:20 AM departure. That's just silly. OK, the reservations system shows a bunch of thru trains, but with a Southbound trip at 5 Hours 17 Minutes and return at 5 Hours 51 Minutes, wow that's a looonngg trip. Also the trip I was trying to book was about five years ago. Maybe I just messed up with the reservation web page. I'll gladly concede this point about Richmond as entirely my mistake.
D) Rental cars and Taxis -- has been further discussed. Part of my comments were about vacationers and part about business travelers. Not all travelers expect to be met at the station by relatives -- sometimes it can be awkward to stand around waiting for a cab in a st
Most of the clockers became thru trains to WAS. The south end of the NEC is much busier than in PRR days. The traffic to DC has grown with the size of the gov't. The few that were left were rush hour Phila-NYP trains that mostly filled up in Trenton and PJ. They were low utiliztion/low revenue per pass-mile trains (one RT per day), so Amtrak gave their slots to NJT - which NJT filled with Trenton to NYP trains - and jacked up their monthly ticket prices.
The 3:20AM train from Newark is the old Night Owl, the overnight train from Boston to Newport News.
Flying to Richmond? I'd figure 1 hour to drive, park and get to terminal, 2 hours for security and checkin, 1:30 in the plane (of which about 40 minutes is actually flying), 30 minutes to get baggage and 30 minute to get seated in car rental. That's 5 - 1/2 hours for a 350 mile trip. Avg speed = 64 mph. And, no decent chunks of uninterrupted time to read a book or take a nap. Whoopee.
f14aplusfl wrote: oltmannd wrote:That sounds about right to me. Here's an interesting idea. Enterprise says they have an office within 15 miles of 90% of the population - and they pick up and deliver. Why wouldn't Amtrak partner with them to provide a car on arrival at just about any train station? Make your car reservation thru the Amtrak web site, etc.That's cause Amtrak is partnered withBudgetHertzZipcarAmtrak Guest Rewards Car Rentals oltmannd wrote:The only drawback I can see is that any deal with Amtrak would have to include the frachise being able to supply a car to meet the train even when it's not during their normal hours.Well good customer service would be when you place the reservation they know what time you'd be arriving and such. Thus I'd pick them up regardless of the hour and take them to the rental franchise, fill out the forms and go home. Maybe they even have a system to do it at the train stop and get someone else to get me home. People will remember that and tell people that. Its in there best interest to get tourists/visitors into their towns and if you're the agency known for going the extra mile, you'll get returning business. Zipcar would be presently the best solution to that. The Zipcar drop off the car/pick it up point could be the rain depot in that area. Therefore, they could leave a car there as long as you reserved ahead of time. The only problem is sometimes people don't bring it back on time... so that's something that would need to be worked out in general. Zipcars are great in medium to highly populated areas (high utilization rate and hence more money for them) so I'm not too sure about Middleofnowheresville, USA if they'd enter that market.
Looks like they partnered at the "earn points" level - you're still on your own for the details. Would be really cool if they'd have some sort of real operational partnership, like you suggest.
oltmannd wrote: Flying to Richmond? I'd figure 1 hour to drive, park and get to terminal, 2 hours for security and checkin, 1:30 in the plane (of which about 40 minutes is actually flying), 30 minutes to get baggage and 30 minute to get seated in car rental. That's 5 - 1/2 hours for a 350 mile trip. Avg speed = 64 mph. And, no decent chunks of uninterrupted time to read a book or take a nap. Whoopee.
A couple of minor flaws in your logic. Amtrak doesn't service my street in my town -- it takes as long to get to Amtrak as Newark's Liberty Airport. Both require parking and getting to the "terminal" -- so that's a wash either way.
Also, with very few exceptions (holidays or certain bizzarre airports) its a myth that security takes two hours. I use EWR regularly and I arrive in the parking lot one hour before flight time and end up waiting at the gate for them to call boarding.
When I use NEC at NWK, I am at the parking lot about 30 minutes prior to train time to allow for walking thru concourse, finding proper platform (maybe I'm the only one that needs this much time to board a train - go figure), getting tickets at the ticket machine, etc. So a thirty minute victory for Amtrak (which I love and use as often as possible).
Baggage is baggage -- I check bags once or twice out of every thirty-fourty flights so that's a wash. And I'll even consider the rental car to be a wash (even though airports make it much easier to get to the car than most train stations.)
In reality, it IS a big difference -- I love trains, but I love my family more -- if I can get home a little quicker, I'd rather spend time with them.
I do appreciate your comments and fervent support of using Amtrak.
paulsafety wrote:I would love to see more use of our rail network. I use ACELA whenever I can. I take regional service to Baltimore for meetings. I just don't know how a business person in Denver, Dallas, San Fransisco, Portland (ie. outside the NEC) can make Amtrak work for business. Also, while I'd love to use Amtrak to visit Florida or the Grand Canyon, I just don't see the practicality when my time is precious and flying gets me there so much faster at about the same cost (including transfers and door step to door step analysis.)
Yeah they probably could make a killing if they had Disney meet and greet the train too. Just think of all the tourists going to Disney World alone. But on getting from the northeast to Florida, just look at arguably the flagship for that regional travel, the Auto-Train. Might need to have a little talk with CSX about that!
paulsafety wrote: oltmannd wrote: Flying to Richmond? I'd figure 1 hour to drive, park and get to terminal, 2 hours for security and checkin, 1:30 in the plane (of which about 40 minutes is actually flying), 30 minutes to get baggage and 30 minute to get seated in car rental. That's 5 - 1/2 hours for a 350 mile trip. Avg speed = 64 mph. And, no decent chunks of uninterrupted time to read a book or take a nap. Whoopee. A couple of minor flaws in your logic. Amtrak doesn't service my street in my town -- it takes as long to get to Amtrak as Newark's Liberty Airport. . Both require parking and getting to the "terminal" -- so that's a wash either way. Also, with very few exceptions (holidays or certain bizzarre airports) its a myth that security takes two hours. I use EWR regularly and I arrive in the parking lot one hour before flight time and end up waiting at the gate for them to call boarding. When I use NEC at NWK, I am at the parking lot about 30 minutes prior to train time to allow for walking thru concourse, finding proper platform (maybe I'm the only one that needs this much time to board a train - go figure), getting tickets at the ticket machine, etc. So a thirty minute victory for Amtrak (which I love and use as often as possible).Baggage is baggage -- I check bags once or twice out of every thirty-fourty flights so that's a wash. And I'll even consider the rental car to be a wash (even though airports make it much easier to get to the car than most train stations.)In reality, it IS a big difference -- I love trains, but I love my family more -- if I can get home a little quicker, I'd rather spend time with them. I do appreciate your comments and fervent support of using Amtrak. Paul F.
A couple of minor flaws in your logic. Amtrak doesn't service my street in my town -- it takes as long to get to Amtrak as Newark's Liberty Airport. . Both require parking and getting to the "terminal" -- so that's a wash either way.
Newark must be a whole lot better than Phila, SF, Denver, Las Vegas or Atlanta! In Atlanta, from an off-site lot to the gate will take you an hour even if there is no TSA line.....and from the gate to putting your rear end in a rental car is about the same. In Atlanta, the break even point for fly/drive is around 300 miles
I flew out of Newark years ago...on People Express (remember them?)
Not so sure "baggage is baggage". A carry-on is a lot easier to deal with on train than a plane - wider aisles, more storage space - and the distance a checked bag has to move in a train station is typically a few hundred feet, not more than a mile. I haven't gotten a bag in less than 30 minutes at any airport anywhere in the past couple of years. Amtrak checked bags are typically available 5 or ten minutes after train arrival most places.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.