June 14 is the 80th anniversary of the second-oldest continuously operated name train in America (the Sunset Limited was inaugurated in 1894). Although the days of tudor decor and on-board barber are long gone, Superliner accommodations rival those available at any other time in history or place on the globe.
"One can't help but look at this train, the people and places it serves, and the effort its crew and managers put into its operation, and bet that if any Amtrak long-distance survives for another generation to enjoy, it'll be this one. Roll on, Empire Builder!" (Joe Welsh, Trains special issue, June, 2004).
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham
Never rode the GN version of the Empire Builder but we did ride the Amtrak version from Vancouver Wn. To Milwaukee Wi. five years ago. The service was excellent. We went first class with a bedroom.
The food was top notch and the dining car employees great folks. BNSF kept us mostly on timeeastbound arriving Milwaukee only ten minutes late.
The best pre Amtrak train I rode was NP's North Coast Limited. Others have included the San Francisco Chief, Rio Grande Zephyr and BC Rail's Cariboo Dayliner to Prince George from the other Vancouver.
It has been 40+ years since I last set foot on a airliner. With the hassle and poor service I will never fly again.
I rode the eb EB on its 60th anniversary from Glacier Park East to Columbus, WI. It arrived GPE 25 minutes late. An hour late into the Twin Cities. We were 10 minutes early into Columbus. I rode coach on a Superliner. Very enjoyable. Neat to see elk and coyote along the route in Montana. Milepost after milepost in 45 seconds. Smooth, quiet ride except for stick rail Fargo to Grand Forks.
I have only been on the Empire Builder from Seattle to Sand Point. But after enjoying ONE wonderful, $400 night on the Coast Starlight shortly after we met, my wife-to-be decided to bring her best friend--who will not fly--and husband from Virginia to Seattle by train for our wedding. Well, do the math: they were on trains EIGHT nights. It was the most expensive part of our wedding!!
But for them it was the trip of a lifetime. They took the Crescent to DC where her friend was able to pay last respects to Ronald Reagan. But the big treat was being on the Empire Builder for its 75th anniversary run. There were festivities and dignitaries all along the way! At one station, they asked some guy to take their picture--turned out he was the Governor of North Dakota!!
I rode the Empire Builder from Milwaukee to Portland in December 2006. It was one of my better trips on Amtrak. The winter scenery was spectacular. I had a roomette, which was OK. The Superliner roomettes are not the most comfortable accommodation in the world, but they are passable. The service was good. The wine tasting for first class passengers was very enjoyable. The only real downer was that approximately half of the toilets on the train froze up and the crew could not free them.
In FY08 the Empire Builder lost 9.9 cents per passenger mile before interest, depreciation, and other charges. For the first six months of FY09 it lost 17.8 cents per passenger mile before interest and depreciation. Part of the increase in the loss in FY09 is due to an accounting change.
A passenger traveling from Chicago to Seattle during the first six months of FY09 received a federal subsidy payment of $392.67 before interest and depreciation or approximately $491.93 including all allocated items. In FY08 the subsidy would have been $218.39 and $240.23.
The financial performance of the Empire Builder is better than any of Amtrak's long distance trains save the Auto Train. Taxpayers should ride the train; they are paying for it irrespective of whether they use it.
If Amtrak was a real business, it would fly each passenger from Chicago to Seattle for an average fare of $164, thereby saving the federal treasury $327.93 for each passenger carried end point to end point.
Long distance trains are a 1950s anachronism. They should be discontinued and the funds wasted on them should be re-directed toward the enhancement or development of moderate speed corridors where they make sense.
Okay, Sam, I'll be honest here. Superliner roomettes are NOT the finest accommodations on the third rock from the Sun; indeed, for two people they are downright cramped. I'd take an open section any day (and be even happier at night!). But in my opinion, room F is something really special because it has windows on both sides (only possible on a bi-level sleeper); deluxe rooms are great, and the coach seats--where most passengers ride--are unbeatable. The lounge cars are fantastic, especially when they had the upstairs bar open.
And speaking of subsidies, I had an interesting experience on our trip from Sand Point to Seattle. We had booked a roomette, but asked on-board to upgrade to a deluxe room. Space was available, but they made me deboard at Spokane and get new tickets. Due to load management marketing, the ticket agent gave me a $5.00 REFUND for the upgrade! Service on that trip was okay; the porter made us vacate our room for cleaning before arrival. But that was a good excuse for my wife and I to act out a fantasy in the downstairs shower... I was in fact rather distracted by the fact that the shower drains directly onto the tracks, and couldn't keep my mind out of the gutter...
I am not sure why this train showed a 16% drop in ridership for April (see "AMTRAK APR 09 Performance" thread). The weather up here has been chilly, and the economy is experiencing an ice age.
First trip on Empire Builder was in February 1947 when the first streamlined version of the train was brand new. Traveled with my mother and brother from Seattle to St. Paul. This became an every year trip beginning in 1950 until I departed for the Navy in 1960. I rode most other name trains in the west but the EB always held a special place in my memories. I even enjoy the Amtrak version. Happy birthday to a great train. And as for the subsidy by the taxpayers the last time I looked I am still one of those also. If that is the only way I can get some of my money back from the government so be it. It's not like the government doesn't waste any money on many other things.
Al - in - Stockton
Sam1 I rode the Empire Builder from Milwaukee to Portland in December 2006.
I rode the Empire Builder from Milwaukee to Portland in December 2006.
Sam1, why did you choose to take the EB from Milwaukee to Portland instead of flying from Chicago to Seattle?
jclass Sam1 I rode the Empire Builder from Milwaukee to Portland in December 2006. Sam1, why did you choose to take the EB from Milwaukee to Portland instead of flying from Chicago to Seattle?
For the same reason that I take two or three Amtrak trips a year. It is there, and I am paying for it irrespective of whether I use it. I like trains, but I am not blind to the fact that Amtrak's long distance trains generate a small percentage of its revenues while consuming the lion's share of its operating expenses.
During FY08 the long distance trains generated 22.49 per cent of Amtrak's revenues whilst accounting for 209 per cent of the operating expenses before interest, depreciation, and other charges. In other words, they wiped out the $369 million generated by the North East corridor and then some. They had an average load percentage of 58.9, which means that they operated well below capacity, except for the heavy vacation and holiday periods. Less than 15 per cent of Amtrak's passengers were carried on the long distance trains. And less than 4/10s of one per cent of intercity travelers choosing a commercial carrier opted for Amtrak's long distance trains. The financials associated with the long distance trains are abysmal.
I'll continue to ride them as long as they run. And I will continue to write to my Congressional representatives urging them to stop funding Amtrak's long distance trains.
Gee Willikers, Sam. I don't really get your reasoning but let me try to get it straight. You don't want Amtrak/the Government to offer a service that you enjoy riding. Now I also enjoy trains and do see a purpose for LD trains because they provide a safe, affordable way both to see the country and to provide service to small and medium towns that wouldn't have public transportation if the trains didn't exist. But it is because of riders like you that raise passenger numbers and make Amtrak and other passenger rail advocates believe that there actually are people out there who need LD trains.
Doesn't the total cost of owning/running the NEC dwarf the rest of Amtrak operations? Individual states partially fund shorter distance trains elsewhere. For the most part, Amtrak rents track space and in many cases stations?
I to rode amtrak from Milwaukee,Wi to White Fish,Mt going to a wedding in Missoula,Mt.In August of 05' we rode first class for 3 adults 1 toddler, and 1 baby.On the return we went into Chicago,Il. And then toke the Hiawatha to Sturavant,Wi,Do to track work between Minnesota and Milwaukee,Wi. BLAST AWESOME RIDE!!!! Minus riding with our occomadater
lattasnip9 Gee Willikers, Sam. I don't really get your reasoning but let me try to get it straight. You don't want Amtrak/the Government to offer a service that you enjoy riding. Now I also enjoy trains and do see a purpose for LD trains because they provide a safe, affordable way both to see the country and to provide service to small and medium towns that wouldn't have public transportation if the trains didn't exist. But it is because of riders like you that raise passenger numbers and make Amtrak and other passenger rail advocates believe that there actually are people out there who need LD trains.
I don't need long distance trains, nor do most Americans, as indicated by the fact that less than one per cent of intercity travelers use them. They are safe and enjoyable, but they are not affordable. If they were Amtrak could charge enough to cover their costs. As it is, Amtrak cannot charged enough to cover the operating expenses, let alone the fully allocated costs, associated with the long distance trains. If they did, they would lose most of their passengers.
To think that one train a day, stopping in many instances in the middle of the night, is a viable service for most communities is a stretch of the imagination. Moreover, in most instances, people have a viable alternative.
In Texas, for example, only one of the communities served by Amtrak is more than a 2 hours drive from an airport with reasonable commercial air service. All of them have reasonable intercity bus service.
There may be a few cities served by Amtrak that would incur a hardship if their one train a day was eliminated, but they are only a handful.
I doubt there are many riders like me. How many do you think urge their Congressional representatives to discontinue funding the long distance trains and use the monies to enhance existing corridors or develop new ones? Better yet, how many people who ride Amtrak have the foggiest idea how it is funded or how much money it loses each year?
Oh, come on Sam. Americans value nostalgia, and just for that reason we should keep long-distance trains running.
Why else would the Smithsonian Institution receive $2.5 billion per year?
Maglev Oh, come on Sam. Americans value nostalgia, and just for that reason we should keep long-distance trains running. Why else would the Smithsonian Institution receive $2.5 billion per year?
There is more than one side to the issue of whether Amtrak should continue to run long distance trains. I could just as easily argue that the amount of money lost by them, indeed Amtrak, is very small compared to the federal budget and deficit and, therefore, we should not worry about it. But this is a mindset that I don't agree with. Losing a little bit of money here and there is not a smart way to run a business or the government.
Amtrak could save approximately $515 million per year if it discontinued the long distance trains. Using 2050 as a target date, the annual savings would equal $21.1 billion on a straight line basis and $103.1 billion compounded. This would pay for the relocation of the UP's trains around Austin and a whole lot more.
Getting back to the Empire Builder--
I rode several Amtrak Superliner trains on a cross-country trip at the end of 1977, but the special issue of Trains for the EB's 75th anniversary says the first use of Superliners on that train was October 28, 1979. It was still using "heritage" equipment for its 50th anniversary. Why was this so?
Sam1 I rode the Empire Builder from Milwaukee to Portland in December 2006. It was one of my better trips on Amtrak. The winter scenery was spectacular. I had a roomette, which was OK. The Superliner roomettes are not the most comfortable accommodation in the world, but they are passable. The service was good. The wine tasting for first class passengers was very enjoyable. The only real downer was that approximately half of the toilets on the train froze up and the crew could not free them. In FY08 the Empire Builder lost 9.9 cents per passenger mile before interest, depreciation, and other charges. For the first six months of FY09 it lost 17.8 cents per passenger mile before interest and depreciation. Part of the increase in the loss in FY09 is due to an accounting change. A passenger traveling from Chicago to Seattle during the first six months of FY09 received a federal subsidy payment of $392.67 before interest and depreciation or approximately $491.93 including all allocated items. In FY08 the subsidy would have been $218.39 and $240.23. The financial performance of the Empire Builder is better than any of Amtrak's long distance trains save the Auto Train. Taxpayers should ride the train; they are paying for it irrespective of whether they use it. If Amtrak was a real business, it would fly each passenger from Chicago to Seattle for an average fare of $164, thereby saving the federal treasury $327.93 for each passenger carried end point to end point. Long distance trains are a 1950s anachronism. They should be discontinued and the funds wasted on them should be re-directed toward the enhancement or development of moderate speed corridors where they make sense.
I've had two enjoyable trips on the Empire Builder - one from the Twin Cities to Glasgow, Montana back in '78 (when it still used the former GN mainline between Minneapolis and Fargo) and then again in '81 from La Crosse, Wisconsin to Glasgow; by this time Amtrak was operating on the former NP mainline between the Twin Cities and Fargo.
You know what, Sam, you're right. Let's just rip it all up; pull em' all up. This country doesn't need passenger trains. I mean, SO WHAT if passenger rail is environmentally friendly and highway gridlock is increasingly worsening. And I guess we can just ignore the success stories of operations such as New Mexico's Rail Runner Express and the new commuter rail service that's set to start here in Minnesota later this year. And all those efforts to try and get Amtrak service re-established between Chicago and Dubuque and hopefully extended to Waterloo can just be abandoned now, too. Thank you so much, Sam, for bringing your anti-passenger train, anti-rail garbage on a thread that celebrates the history, tradition, and heritage of a cherished American icon.
Idiot.
You have broken the first commandment of ranters. "Read first, then rant."
Los Angeles Rams GuySO WHAT if passenger rail is environmentally friendly and highway gridlock is increasingly worsening.
The EB helps neither of these even a meaningful, small amount.
There are no traffic jams on I-94 in North Dakota. Or Montana. Or western Minnesota. Or the Idaho panhandle. Or accross Washington to the Cascades.
The EB uses virtually the same amount of fuel per passenger mile as a car or a plane. In fact, a minivan with 4 people in it uses less fuel than the train.
Los Angeles Rams Guyfor bringing your anti-passenger train, anti-rail garbage on a thread
Sam is most certainly not anti-passenger rail, if you've read any of her many, many posts, you'd know this.
Los Angeles Rams Guy Amtrak service re-established between Chicago and Dubuque and hopefully extended to Waterloo
Just what American needs. Passenger service to the middle of nowhere. Dubuque + Cedar Falls + Waterloo < 250,000 people.
The vehicle that will make the biggest improvement in congestion and fuel economy on that route is a bus (a small one!)
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Los Angeles Rams Guy Sam1 I rode the Empire Builder from Milwaukee to Portland in December 2006. It was one of my better trips on Amtrak. The winter scenery was spectacular. I had a roomette, which was OK. The Superliner roomettes are not the most comfortable accommodation in the world, but they are passable. The service was good. The wine tasting for first class passengers was very enjoyable. The only real downer was that approximately half of the toilets on the train froze up and the crew could not free them. In FY08 the Empire Builder lost 9.9 cents per passenger mile before interest, depreciation, and other charges. For the first six months of FY09 it lost 17.8 cents per passenger mile before interest and depreciation. Part of the increase in the loss in FY09 is due to an accounting change. A passenger traveling from Chicago to Seattle during the first six months of FY09 received a federal subsidy payment of $392.67 before interest and depreciation or approximately $491.93 including all allocated items. In FY08 the subsidy would have been $218.39 and $240.23. The financial performance of the Empire Builder is better than any of Amtrak's long distance trains save the Auto Train. Taxpayers should ride the train; they are paying for it irrespective of whether they use it. If Amtrak was a real business, it would fly each passenger from Chicago to Seattle for an average fare of $164, thereby saving the federal treasury $327.93 for each passenger carried end point to end point. Long distance trains are a 1950s anachronism. They should be discontinued and the funds wasted on them should be re-directed toward the enhancement or development of moderate speed corridors where they make sense. I've had two enjoyable trips on the Empire Builder - one from the Twin Cities to Glasgow, Montana back in '78 (when it still used the former GN mainline between Minneapolis and Fargo) and then again in '81 from La Crosse, Wisconsin to Glasgow; by this time Amtrak was operating on the former NP mainline between the Twin Cities and Fargo. You know what, Sam, you're right. Let's just rip it all up; pull em' all up. This country doesn't need passenger trains. I mean, SO WHAT if passenger rail is environmentally friendly and highway gridlock is increasingly worsening. And I guess we can just ignore the success stories of operations such as New Mexico's Rail Runner Express and the new commuter rail service that's set to start here in Minnesota later this year. And all those efforts to try and get Amtrak service re-established between Chicago and Dubuque and hopefully extended to Waterloo can just be abandoned now, too. Thank you so much, Sam, for bringing your anti-passenger train, anti-rail garbage on a thread that celebrates the history, tradition, and heritage of a cherished American icon. Idiot.
Had you taken the time to read a representative sample of my posts, you would have learned that I favor passenger rail in relatively short, high density corridors. My recent post on the New Mexico Rail Runner is a good example.
Long distance trains, however, are a loser, and they should be discontinued. The funds wasted on them could be re-directed to the enhancement of existing corridors or the development of new ones.
By your definition, the only people who should write a post to these forums are those who see only the positive side of passenger rail and ignore its negative aspects, including cost issues. Intemperate language is not likely to dissuade me from offering critical comments (positive and negative) on various aspects of passenger rail.
oltmannd You have broken the first commandment of ranters. "Read first, then rant." Los Angeles Rams GuySO WHAT if passenger rail is environmentally friendly and highway gridlock is increasingly worsening. The EB helps neither of these even a meaningful, small amount. There are no traffic jams on I-94 in North Dakota. Or Montana. Or western Minnesota. Or the Idaho panhandle. Or accross Washington to the Cascades. The EB uses virtually the same amount of fuel per passenger mile as a car or a plane. In fact, a minivan with 4 people in it uses less fuel than the train. Los Angeles Rams Guyfor bringing your anti-passenger train, anti-rail garbage on a thread Sam is most certainly not anti-passenger rail, if you've read any of her many, many posts, you'd know this. Los Angeles Rams Guy Amtrak service re-established between Chicago and Dubuque and hopefully extended to Waterloo Just what American needs. Passenger service to the middle of nowhere. Dubuque + Cedar Falls + Waterloo < 250,000 people. The vehicle that will make the biggest improvement in congestion and fuel economy on that route is a bus (a small one!)
Attack me for ranting I guess but actually I'm quite aware of Sam's previous posts and her apathy towards long-distance trains. I guess the question to ask here is would this country really be better off if we decided to - right now - just simply pull the plug on ALL long-distance trains; I mean just pull the plug on everything outside of the Northeast Corridor. I mean, if Sam's right, then there won't be any repercussions if we simply kept rail passenger service relegated to the Northeast Corridor and also for a few glorified commuter services here and there. If nobody squawks about it, hey, fine by me. But my guess is there's a lot of cities and smaller communities that would throw a sh**fit if we just decided to scrap all long-distance trains.
Actually, saying that Dubuque and Waterloo/Cedar Falls is "the middle of nowhere" is not quite accurate. True, it may not be the second coming of the Northeast Corridor but I can tell you that the proposed service between Chicago and Dubuque is getting a hard and heavy push by Rockford, Freeport, Galena, and Dubuque. And now eastern Iowa communities along the CN's mainline are getting in on the act as well now, too.
Los Angeles Rams GuyAttack me for ranting
No attack. Nothing personal. No name calling. Just calling a rant a rant.
All LD <> everything except the NEC.
LD = Capitol, LSL, Silver Svc, Crescent, City of NOL, Sunset, Cal Zephyr, SW Chief, EB, Coast Starlight, Eagle. That's it. They are the money suckers. It think they are wonderful and fun to ride and I'd like to see them reformed rather than killed, but in their present form, they are money pigs.
If they all went away, would we be any worse off? How many people would even notice?
Amtrak California, Empire Service, Cascades, Wolverine are "glorified commuter service"? Really? How so?
I've been to Waterloo. It IS the middle of no place. Anybody developed any cost/benefit info for the service? I'd settle for a ridership projection based on the service area travel demand. Or, is this just a lot of happy talk?
A Chicago-Dubuque-Waterloo turn would not be all that different than the various round trips from outlying points into Chicago just prior to May 1, 1971. As a general rule, they ran into Chicago in the morning and returned in the evening and consisted of one or two coaches and maybe a snack bar-coach with minimal ridership (about a busload). There are better places for Amtrak to spend its money.
oltmannd Los Angeles Rams GuyAttack me for ranting No attack. Nothing personal. No name calling. Just calling a rant a rant. All LD <> everything except the NEC. LD = Capitol, LSL, Silver Svc, Crescent, City of NOL, Sunset, Cal Zephyr, SW Chief, EB, Coast Starlight, Eagle. That's it. They are the money suckers. It think they are wonderful and fun to ride and I'd like to see them reformed rather than killed, but in their present form, they are money pigs. If they all went away, would we be any worse off? How many people would even notice? Amtrak California, Empire Service, Cascades, Wolverine are "glorified commuter service"? Really? How so? I've been to Waterloo. It IS the middle of no place. Anybody developed any cost/benefit info for the service? I'd settle for a ridership projection based on the service area travel demand. Or, is this just a lot of happy talk?
I never met to imply that the CZ, Empire Builder, or Wolverine service were commuter services. I met to imply those LD trains along with the "money suckers" you mentioned. If we got rid of all those, then all that would be left outside of the N.E. Corridor would be commuter service.
If you REALLY want to go to the middle of nowhere, try Enderlin, North Dakota on the CPRS. I was an Agent/Operator there for two years. Trust me. It's time that my native northeast Iowa gets Amtrak service and the extension of the proposed service between Chicago and Dubuque to Waterloo on the CN's Iowa Division mainline would be a huge not only for Waterloo/Cedar Falls but also for Dyersville, Manchester, and Independence. Ditto for the proposed service to the Quad Cities, Iowa City, and possibly Des Moines on the IAIS mainline as well (although I still think any new service should be on the UP's "Overland Route" mainline).
Los Angeles Rams GuyI never met to imply that the CZ, Empire Builder, or Wolverine service were commuter services. I met to imply those LD trains along with the "money suckers" you mentioned.
You've read trains wrong and/or are not familiar with the routes.
Amtrak California - not the CZ. It's the Pacific Coastliner, Capitols and San Joaquin day trains.
Empire Service - not Empire Builder. It's day train service in New York State and not part of the NEC
Wolverines are the 3 day trains from Chicago to Detroit/Pontiac. They are not LD trains.
If you got rid of the trains I listed (I forgot the Cardinal, too), you'd still have lots of service to lots of places. Chicago to Milw, Carbondale, Quincy, St Louis and KC, Detroit, Port Huron, and Grand Rapids.
You'd still have service to Pittsburgh, Toronto, Charleston SC, Charlotte NC, Montreal, Burlington VT and Rutland VT out of NY.
You'd still have service from Eugene OR to Vancouver BC.
You'd still have service from SD to SLO and San Jose to Sacramento and Bakersfield.
And Boston to Portland ME.
None of these routes - with the possible exception of Chicago - Milw and Harrisburg - Phila, operate glorified commuter trains.
40% of the US and Canada live within 500 miles of Harrisburg PA. Most of the rest live in FL, TX, CA and Chicagoland. This is where the trains need to be. This is where the congestion is. This is where we can save some energy. Not outside these areas and certainly not connecting these areas. We already have enough choices and capacity elsewhere to do that.
I stand corrected on your train designations.
Still, though, how do we justify killing off service in Chicago - Twin Cities corridor? Or, for that matter in the Chicago - Omaha corridor; regardless of which route it's on? If a CHGO hub is your vision, then how can you not have service to these two locations? How do you justify having service then to both KCITY and STL and not the Twin Cities and Omaha?
I had the opportunity to ride Amtrak's Empire Builder in 2003-all the way from Chicago to Portland.
I had the bedroom with bath and everything about the trip was spectacular. The scenery, staff, and food. Our sleeping car attendant opened the half door so another couple and I could take pics going thru Glacier Park, which was very nice. He told us to wave at the people on the porch at one of the Inns, someone is always there to wave back. We arrived in Portland on time, but since I was making connections to Coast Starlight, I had made arrangements to stay overnight, just in case we ran late.
It was the annual Rose Fest weekend in Portland which was an added attraction. A friend flew out to meet me in San Fran, where we spent a week sightseeing and flew home together. That's my last time on a plane and I don't really care if I never fly again. Nothing can compare with seeing the US by train.
Years ago, I rode with my parents on Dad's Frisco pass on many different RR's. But the only crack train we were able to ride was UP's City of St. Louis for l/2 fare. I did take a tour with a friend that included the original California Zephyr and later the City of Los Angeles all Pullman train with dome diner. But Amtrak does a comparable job with service to these "name" trains.
I also took Southwest Chief in 2005 to Grand Canyon and that was another great trip.
So Happy Birthday Empire Builder. I'm glad I finally got to ride this train and hope to take more Amtrak trips in the future.
Maglev Getting back to the Empire Builder--
Ok, people. I think we have screwed up here. Regardless of whether we are right or wrong here about the future of LD passenger rail in the U.S., I am a bit sick of the debate. According to the first post, I believe that the intent of the thread was to celebrate the 80th birthday of the Empire Builder. Here's my story:
I've ridden the Builder twice in my life; both times from the Twin Cities out to Whitefish for some hiking in Glacier National Park with my old man.
The scenery is always terrific in the mountains but I also think that the vastness of the plains is beautiful. Since I've never been past Whitefish, I wonder what watching Puget Sound rolling past the windows is like.
Over my approximately ten meals aboard, we've met some incredible people travelling every which way (at breakfast on the westbound, if one is sitting on the correct side of the dining car, a sign that says "Rugby says hi" can be seen, always an interesting conversation piece).
The attendents have always been kind and helpful.
Despite tardiness being an issue of most LD trains, the Empire Builder seems to be one of the more punctual.
In my opinion, night is always the best time aboard the train, especially if you're in the sleeping car. As the train rumbles through the northern suburbs, the gentle rocking of the car puts me to sleep. I love travelling aboard the Empire Builder.
Happy 80th Birthday!
lattasnip9 Maglev Getting back to the Empire Builder-- Ok, people. I think we have screwed up here. Regardless of whether we are right or wrong here about the future of LD passenger rail in the U.S., I am a bit sick of the debate. According to the first post, I believe that the intent of the thread was to celebrate the 80th birthday of the Empire Builder. Here's my story: I've ridden the Builder twice in my life; both times from the Twin Cities out to Whitefish for some hiking in Glacier National Park with my old man. The scenery is always terrific in the mountains but I also think that the vastness of the plains is beautiful. Since I've never been past Whitefish, I wonder what watching Puget Sound rolling past the windows is like. Over my approximately ten meals aboard, we've met some incredible people travelling every which way (at breakfast on the westbound, if one is sitting on the correct side of the dining car, a sign that says "Rugby says hi" can be seen, always an interesting conversation piece). The attendents have always been kind and helpful. Despite tardiness being an issue of most LD trains, the Empire Builder seems to be one of the more punctual. In my opinion, night is always the best time aboard the train, especially if you're in the sleeping car. As the train rumbles through the northern suburbs, the gentle rocking of the car puts me to sleep. I love travelling aboard the Empire Builder. Happy 80th Birthday!
The point is that the Empire Builder is about scenery and dining and making friends with strangers in the lounge car and being rocked to sleep in a Roomette. The reason this train and others inspires such passion is on account of the experience. It is part of our national heritage as much as the National Parks, the Statue of Liberty, and the Smithsonian.
The Empire Builder is not about any meaningful saving in oil, reduction in Global Warming, or reduction of traffic congestion. It is not about a meaningful Chicago-Minneapolis corridor service -- such a thing would be for than once a day in each direction. It would also have a more usable schedule, and it is not only a matter of convenience: if you think that travelling on business and arriving around 10 PM in a major city downtown without being met at the station is not a concern, you haven't spoken with many women about their travel needs.
The Empire Builder could be about providing lifeline transportation to the remote communities up and down its route. But if that is what the Empire Builder is about, the hated Inspector General Mead report pretty much called out the bluff of the advocacy community on that one, reasoning that this need could be met and considerable reduction in public expense with a corridor consist -- essentially a bus on rails.
The I G Mead report called for stripping the LD trains of the baggage car, the diner, crew dorm and lounge, and of all of the sleeping cars along with the second locomotive, and returning the couple hundred million in cost savings to the Treasury, presumably for more military spending or whatever we believe the government wastes money on. Suppose the argument was to keep the funding level the same, and in giving up the diner, lounge, and sleeping cars we would be getting twice-daily day trains along all of the corridors up and down the LD routes. What would the reaction of the advocacy community to that trade? If we opposed that trade, what does it say about what the advocacy community stands for with regard to the energy, congestion, and alternative-to-cars-and-planes argument we keep making?
Its easy to be "sick of the debate" when the critics have a point, that this part of our national heritage that is near and dear to us in the advocacy community requires a substantial amount of public money. But if national heritage is the concern, the budget for the Empire Builder needs to be compared against expenditures for parks, museums, the arts, and perhaps even sports stadiums, and the complaints about large military expenditures that are often brought up are completely irrelevant. And if we are making the comparison to the sports stadiums, those folks are claiming "economic multiplier" effects of tourism and business brought to a community, and the case could be made for trains but we need to do our homework and make it.
The reasoning of the advocacy community is that the Empire Builder is multi-purpose in that it serves the lifeline function along with the national heritage and having a memorable train trip function, and it is an integral part of a rail network that we would like to believe has some effect if not on reducing road and airline congestion as to at least provide an alternative to those who don't want to stand in TSA screening lines or fight traffic.
We like to think that by paying first class fares we are paying our incremental cost over the bus-on-rails lifeline function of the train, but the I G Mead Report pretty much refuted that line of reasoning.
Personally, I think Canada has the right model -- they have just the one intercontinental train, they charge high fares to cover the incremental costs, but they provide a high level of service and run long consists to meet the demand. They serve the national heritage function with less public cost.
Celebrate the anniversary of the Empire Builder, but don't make claims about saving energy and relieving traffic that the critics can refute. Celebrate the Empire Builder, but don't let our love for that train sink the nascent resurgence in commuter and corridor travel by putting at risk the entire enterprise of Federal support of intercity rail.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Good points, Paul.
I think that because the EB does serve transportation needs beyond being just a "rolling park" is part of its essence and is part of the heritage that is being preserved. I have wondered if the "key" LD trains were operated under the auspices of the Park Service, would they get a better shake and at the same time allow and bring clarity to the role and potential of commuter and "short distance" rail service?
Los Angeles Rams GuyStill, though, how do we justify killing off service in Chicago - Twin Cities corridor? Or, for that matter in the Chicago - Omaha corridor; regardless of which route it's on? If a CHGO hub is your vision, then how can you not have service to these two locations? How do you justify having service then to both KCITY and STL and not the Twin Cities and Omaha?
I don't think you kill off the useful daylight portions of the the routes. You take the assets and put them to better use. How about a couple Chicago - Minneapolis round trips a day instead of one EB a day? How about a couple NY - Atlanta trips a day instead of one Crescent? Silver Service gets transformed into FL corridor service and Carolina corridor service (connecting to the NEC). Eagle and Sunset into Texas corridor service. Capitol and LSL into Ohio-IN-IL corridor service.
Result should be same subsidy yielding more service.
But, I doubt it will happen. The LD trains appear to be a political reality that isn't changing any time soon.
Personally, that makes me feel good. I like having them around. But, I can't defend them any cold, measured fashion. I hope that if useful corridors are developed at the "ends" of the LD routes, that the "gap" filling nature of the LD trains will make them less of a burden.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.