That is great news. Inspite of the delays on some lines, it's good to see ridership this high.
I hope this sends a strong signal to the boys (and girls) in congress that Amtrak is not "pork" but a viable and valuable transporation option. The criticism that only 1% to 2% of the traveling public actually uses Amtrak would not be so true if Amtrak had the funding to be able to expand service. Amtrak still has fewer trains running and fewer passenger cars now then it did in the early 1980s.
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
My family and I just rode the Cardinal two weeks ago. Both ways the train was sold out. This was the first time since 2003 we rode Amtrak. I noticed that the coaches we rode in were nicer--especially the restrooms! Overall we had a good experience except for the fact that we had to wait 2.5 hours for dinner in the Cafe car. The Cardinal needs a Diner car, not a combo car.
We will probably do it again especially if gas prices remain high in the future.
You cited gas prices as a reason to take a family on the train. The reason I ask is that it would seem that in some cases the Amtrak fare would be a saving for a single person traveling by car, but for a family group, I am wondering if an auto remains lower cost given that multiple people are sharing one car.
What do Amtrak fares run for your group, what general type of vehicle are you leaving parked, what do you estimate the gas usage and gas cost and what do you estimate auto expenses beyond gas for this trip? Is Amtrak offering a family discount over what individually-purchased fares would run?
Are you saving money out-of-pocket by taking Amtrak over driving with a family sharing an automobile? Or if the train is not a saving in cost, does the high price of gas tip your decision towards the train because of other benefits -- roomier train seat, not having to drive, etc?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
The figure is that Amtrak accounts for .1 percent of total US passenger miles.
I don't think the concern is that people won't ride Amtrak. The concern is that the more people ride Amtrak, the more money required from taxpayers. The idea that increasing Amtrak service proportionately increases costs is borne out by the Vision Report proposals.
Other modes get subsidies, direct or indirect, but the Amtrak subsidy rate per passenger mile is 10 times that of other modes. The rate of subsidy is what makes Amtrak "pork", regardless of how viable and valuable it is to the people using it. All Congressional "pork" represents an undisputed benefit from the people receiving it -- the question is whether the social benefit to those not receiving or using the service justifies the tax money.
Paul: Costs will not increase if more equipment is not added and that has been a constant theme in various posts since more equipment is not available.
Why? Will the new equipment have zero maintenance costs? Can new equipment be added without adding to train crews?
Amtrak carries about 4 billion passenger miles/year with about 1 billion/year in subsidy. The Vision Report proposes carrying 40 billion passenger miles/year by spending 10 billion/year in public money over 40 years. The Vision Report appendices base the budget requirements on the EU experience where similar rates of public expenditure are required to generate proportionate levels of passenger miles.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.