MikeF90 York1 ... One can fly much faster and in most cases, cheaper, than taking a train or bus. Please provide an example - in recent years I've never found cheaper airfare than bus fare. Despite California population growth the central valley towns still suffer from flightus interruptus. I was a good customer of BoltBus (Greyhound subsidiary) but they mysteriously pulled out of Cali at the end of 2018. Very strange because they seemed to have the demographic dialed in - students, recent grads or other lower net income folks with computer savvy (you could only buy tickets online). Another company (FlixBus) popped up around the same time with very similar routes and fares .... hmmm ....
York1 ... One can fly much faster and in most cases, cheaper, than taking a train or bus.
Please provide an example - in recent years I've never found cheaper airfare than bus fare. Despite California population growth the central valley towns still suffer from flightus interruptus.
I was a good customer of BoltBus (Greyhound subsidiary) but they mysteriously pulled out of Cali at the end of 2018. Very strange because they seemed to have the demographic dialed in - students, recent grads or other lower net income folks with computer savvy (you could only buy tickets online). Another company (FlixBus) popped up around the same time with very similar routes and fares .... hmmm ....
I just checked...
First week in July, I am headed for Dallas from Omaha. I will drive, but if I didn't want to drive, I can take a United flight, a little over 7 hours, with one stop, for $137. On Greyhound, it is 17 hours for $143.
I have a friend in Phoenix. I just checked. First week in July, I can fly from Grand Island, NE, (a little closer to me than Omaha) to Mesa, AZ, on Allegiant Airlines for $64, about two hours. Greyhound, 26 hours, $143.
York1 John
I asked my doctor if I gave up delicious food and all alcohol, would I live longer? He said, "No, but it will seem longer."
While certainly cheap airfares (if booked ahead) cut into the bus and train usage, I think the biggest factor is the ever increasing use of private automobiles. Used to be that most families only had one car, and often only the husband knew how to drive. Today it is not uncommon for the kids to be given their own car as a high school graduation present, and a three car garage still leaves a car or two parked outside!
Up here in western Canada Greyhound ceased operation last October, leaving no alternatives. So when a friend had car troubles 300 miles away, I drove out to bring him home. Last year he could have simply used the Dog. (A repeat drive is lined up for next week to recover his vehicle.) Airports are not always conveniently available when you need transportation!
Sorry NDG, didn't have time to hunt you up on Wednesday; picked up gas one way, never stopped coming back.
John
BaltACD Another company (FlixBus) popped up around the same time with very similar routes and fares .... hmmm .... Would that be collusion or obstruction?
Apparently neither. FlixBus is based in Europe and possibly came across this business opportunity. I have not yet tried them out.
York1I have a friend in Phoenix. I just checked. First week in July, I can fly from Grand Island, NE, (a little closer to me than Omaha) to Mesa, AZ, on Allegiant Airlines for $64, about two hours. Greyhound, 26 hours, $143.
Ouch - that Greyhound trip sounds like a violation of the Geneva Conventions. Thank you for making me appreciate my 'short distance' transportation options.
Links to my Google Maps ---> Sunset Route overview, SoCal metro, Yuma sub, Gila sub, SR east of Tucson, BNSF Northern Transcon and Southern Transcon *** Why you should support Ukraine! ***
[quote user="charlie hebdo"]
daveklepper daveklepper wrote the following post 7 hours ago: I believe your (plural) conclusions are faulty. The passengers who do not ride end-point - to - end-point still include a substantial number who ride almost end-point to end-point. People who ride the Chief Jolliette to Barstow, the Zephyr from Galesburg to Reno, the Empire Builder from Milwaukee to Spokane. The most important reason in my own opinion for Long Distance trains in the USA and Canada is to make continental mobility possible for the elderly and handicapped
1. Do you have any data to support this notion of almost-endpoint to almost- endpoint ridership being anything more than a drop in a small bucket?
2. If the LD trains' justification should be for the physically challenged, then get the subsidy for that from ADA appropriations.
[/quote (above)]
The theater and concert-hall owners are compensated for hard-of-hearing and mobility-limited features by the general revenue, not ADA appropriations.
If approximately 450 miles is the average coach passenger's travel it does mean a substantial number are above that. The same goes for the 950 for sleeper passengers. I don't know where hard data for a graph for the two types of passengers for numbers versus distance, possibly in blocks of 50 or 100 miles, could be found. Possibly things have changed in the 23 years since I last rode Amtrak long distance (last trips round-trip roomette, NY - W. Palm Beach), but most other travelers I met on trips on the Southwest Chief, CZ, Lake Shore, Capitol Limited, Cresent, Cardinal, and the Florida trains fit that catagory of long-distance, but not both end-points. Ditto nearly all my own trips, usually to and from New York or Chicago, with my own other end-point short of that of the train. The only frequent end-point-to-end-point trip was NY-Chicago to connect with the Chief or CZ. On the CZ, a stop-over for a few days in Denver in one direction was common, visiting a sister and niece, and Salt Lake City or neaby Provo was a frequent western destination. On the Florida trains, several NY - W. Palm Beach trips, also just Jacksonville, and points in the Carolinas and Georgia.
I did talk with other passengers.
I don't think you will find a less expensive way of giving true continental mobility to the Elderly and Handicapped than the present LS system because other riders need it and use it. Ideas expressed on alternative schemes seem highly expensive and not very customer friendly, essentially putting such citizens in long-distance ambulances.
I do believe my ideas on converting decent food service from a money drain to a profitable business through a station restaurant chain with substantial take-out and delivery business, with the on-board-train meals a faction of that busines would both cut losses and improve the passenger's experience. Possibly the matter of interior cleaning and restocking supplies also needs a new look.
Re: I don't think you will find a less expensive way of giving true continental mobility to the Elderly and Handicapped than the present LS system because other riders need it and use it.
I wonder how many years LD train supporters expect this train preservation effort to go on? As the existing obsolete LD equipment fails, are we going to spend billions on new (obsolete) 1950’s equipment? Do we expect trains with 1950’s amenities and 1920’s schedules with 1840’s frequencies to run into the 22nd century? Just for nostalgia?
Meanwhile, Amtrak is wasting its time with an obsolete form of transportation which creates a stigma amongst the rest of the population against all passenger trains, including modern short-distance trains that would be useful to the majority of the population.
Perhaps the disabled, and (primarily) rich old people, can get together with the bus foamers and steam-ship foamers and subsidize the preservation of long-distance buses and trans-Atlantic ocean liners. Surely we can’t have enough obsolete transportation.
(Time to daylight the LD trains, and get out of the 1950's).
daveklepper If approximately 450 miles is the average coach passenger's travel it does mean a substantial number are above that. The same goes for the 950 for sleeper passengers.
If approximately 450 miles is the average coach passenger's travel it does mean a substantial number are above that. The same goes for the 950 for sleeper passengers.
1. Comparing concert halls with passenger rail service is bizarre, to say the least.
2. Providing the median and standard deviation would tell us most of what is useful in any set of descriptive data
I think the comparison is amply justified. Along with National Parks and Public Libraries. You and most of my critics are younger than I am and still drive and probably own automobiles, with the freedom a personal car provides.
As a youngster, I had a partial scholorship for a private school, and my classmates and friends were from wealthier families that could afford cars, even in New York. At MIT, the situation was the same, with many students owning cars. So when I started earning my own money, and then the Army, a car was a real ticket to freedom, despite my interest in public transportation and railroads and passenger trains.
I am now 87, drove my own auto ages 21 - 38; rented cars when appropriate, 38 - 64. I have not owned a car or driven at all regularly (exceptions, move a car a short distance for a friend) since. So, I have some idea of the loss of mobility the handicapped and elderly encounter.
If you accuse me of being bazzar; I can acuse you of being cruel. The elderly and handicapped that woulc be serverely impacted by the loss of the LDPTs may be a small fraction of the total population, but such deprivation still is cruelty.
daveklepperThe elderly and handicapped that would be severely impacted by the loss of the LDPTs may be a small fraction of the total population, but such deprivation still is cruelty.
It's only 'cruelty' if knowingly and intentionally so imposed. Which I doubt even the most unflattering assessments of Anderson et al. could actually substantiate.
It might also be said that a large number of the potential 'elderly' users of Amtrak service are becoming more and more incapable of the critical on-the-spot thinking needed to figure out when to schedule for a three-day-a-week schedule of uncertain timing reliability. Is it worth spending the additional millions to provide effective daily service with more time reliability, or reasonable boarding times from any given station each day, or 'clean up' conditions in many of the areas where Amtrak has its LD passenger stations, to accommodate the 'elderly and handicapped' appropriately?
The point about Amtrak vs. theatre and concert hall owners is valid in context. Most of the requirements of the ADA as amended might as well be considered unfunded mandates as far as concerns 'owners and operators' of facilities. No one subsidizes venues for, say, making their restrooms accessible and ADA compliant for the latest round of 'do-gooder' required-or-else changes. So of necessity they must assign an appropriate part of the cost of compliance to 'their users' in some manner -- and presumably have enough of those users, contributing at least enough marginal revenue, to make the cost of the changes available above and beyond all the other costs of running the venue.
Amtrak only incidentally gets 'government money' for ADA and other compliance. As a 'quasi-public' company intended to operate as a business, and since 2015 explicitly tasked with transitioning to some definition of 'profitability' (however rigged that turns out to be in practice) the incremental cost of catering to what is likely a small contingent of 'differently-abled' with systemwide expensive modifications or operating procedures (the progress of the arguments over how to implement wheelchair access being a particularly applicable example, I think) may not be justifiable in terms of the mobility access that would be theoretically gained by those expenses.
One pejorative (and perhaps exaggerated) piece of propaganda from early Amtrak years (I think it might actually have been published in Trains) noted that it would have been possible for at least one train to buy everyone a Volkswagen and gas enough to run it for a year with the money saved by not running it. I would have to note that any 'paratransit'-like service for the cohort of elderly and handicapped prospective Amtrak passengers on any given day, whether or not they would consider a service like Angels Flight an alternative, would very likely be vastly cheaper as well as far better and more effective for all concerned. Such an approach would also be far less 'cruel' than forcing these people to suffer on mandatory-high-level Amtrak equipment with crappy bathrooms and possibly unmotivated employees ... or forcing employees to deal with some of the implications of special service requirement for the elderly and handicapped including whatever the Government du jour considers 'reasonable accommodation' at every stop in the middle of the night. As I've mentioned in other contexts, I find the provision of rational 'ad hoc' transit to the elderly, handicapped, and other 'differently-abled' who cannot drive to be one of the great shining uses for autonomous-vehicle technology, even for trips of considerable length. Better accomodations for, say, six to ten passengers in something the size of a van Hool shell with modern hybrid drive is a much better use of funding than jiggering a whole nationwide set of unprofitable trains to defectively approximate the same premise...
daveklepper I think the comparison is amply justified. Along with National Parks and Public Libraries. You and most of my critics are younger than I am and still drive and probably own automobiles, with the freedom a personal car provides. As a youngster, I had a partial scholorship for a private school, and my classmates and friends were from wealthier families that could afford cars, even in New York. At MIT, the situation was the same, with many students owning cars. So when I started earning my own money, and then the Army, a car was a real ticket to freedom, despite my interest in public transportation and railroads and passenger trains. I am now 87, drove my own auto ages 21 - 38; rented cars when appropriate, 38 - 64. I have not owned a car or driven at all regularly (exceptions, move a car a short distance for a friend) since. So, I have some idea of the loss of mobility the handicapped and elderly encounter. If you accuse me of being bazzar; I can acuse you of being cruel. The elderly and handicapped that woulc be serverely impacted by the loss of the LDPTs may be a small fraction of the total population, but such deprivation still is cruelty.
I think you need to read Overmod's post or consult a dictionary as to cruelty. Most elderly and challenged folks I encounter either personally or professionally prefer flying for any traveling much over 400 miles in length. Sitting on an often uncomfortable plane for 3-5 hours beats sitting on a train for 24-40 hours.
JOHN PRIVARA Re: A double-deck vehicle with Pickwickian amenities that is run up to 165mph on Personally, I’d rather have those “vista-dome” Greyhounds back. Trick it out with some bedrooms on top, and bathrooms and a lounge on the bottom… WOW! Plus, drive on the old US highways; like Rt 66. None of this modern Interstate stuff, we’ll go head to head with Amtrak for 1950’s nostalgia! I think a 1-B-$ subsidy would create a nice basic network. Go AmHound, and leave the driving to us... (Of course, we’d have to a connecting bus at Newton KS for Oklahoma City passengers from Chicago and KC, there’s real potential there).
What are you smoking? Route 66? How is that going to happen? There can't be more than 250 miles of it left and that is all city streets. For example in Arizona there are about b8 nmiles in Holbrook, 1 in Joseph city, 1 in Winslow, 71 between Seligman and Kingman. I am told that there is 165 miles that are claimed to be rt 66 but not all are original. Driving on I 40 is not driving on Rt 66, even when they are the same piece of real estate.
I don't get the fascination with Rt 66. It was a crappy roundabout way of connecting 2 s--thole cities, Chicago and Los Angeles. US 80, the Ocean to Ocean highway was much more direct, connected many more people and cities, running from Coronado Island Ca to Tybee Island GA.
OvermodAs I've mentioned in other contexts, I find the provision of rational 'ad hoc' transit to the elderly, handicapped, and other 'differently-abled' who cannot drive to be one of the great shining uses for autonomous-vehicle technology, even for trips of considerable length. Better accomodations for, say, six to ten passengers in something the size of a van Hool shell with modern hybrid drive is a much better use of funding than jiggering a whole nationwide set of unprofitable trains to defectively approximate the same premise...
Perhaps you could supply a cost comparison of special buses vs. train. The closest example I see is dial-a-ride small buses, which require big subsidies. I looked at the van Hool website and noted that their hybrid buses cost $400,000 more than a regular bus. Also I don't believe we will ever see a driverless bus. Are these buses going to stop and unload everyone every few hours for meals/hotels, or will they have a bus host to serve food? Perhaps these people will have family members/attendants along, so you are going to need a bigger bus.
tdmidgetWhat are you smoking?
Mr. MG -- you've been whooooshed with almost devastating effect.
Did you actually look at the clip describing the 165mph bus service? None of the stuff John Privara added was any more serious.
Ocermod, the "cruelty" refers to lack of long-distance travel capability, to visit children and relatives and for vactions, not the hassles and discomfort associated with air travel.
There are medical reasons for elderly not flying, even if we have the ability to walk and climb stairs.
And it was C-H that forced a comparison of LDTs and concert halls. I was merely pointing out that concert halls don't get paid for their hard-of-hearing and handicapped-access expenses by any government agency. So why should the oveall transportation agency get ADA funds for such purposes?
for me, municipal libraries, national parks, concert halls and theaters, and long distance trains, are all part of the civilized America, but C-H and you are certainly entitled to your opinions.
There are very, very few people who can't actually fly. Those same people probably couldn't take a train, either. Airline cabins are pressurized to 7-8000 feet, so that's no different than i.e. Raton Pass. The restrooms may not be available, but that is less of a problem for a 1-3 hour flight than a 1-2 day train trip.
daveklepper And it was C-H that forced a comparison of LDTs and concert halls.
And it was C-H that forced a comparison of LDTs and concert halls.
I did nothing of the sort. You seem to want to justify the continuation of long distance devices on the basis of providing alternative transportation for the some of the elderly and/or challenged. ADA mandates access to existing public services, a very different matter. It seems to me that your justification is absurd.
Not true. Much more of a problem, Urinary problems vs. "Fasten Seat Belt" AND usually too few Johns to avoid waiting, inability to eat or drink at a precise schedule, and, yes, Raton Pass and possibly even the Moffat may not be included in some elderlies' cross-country rail trips. They may be forced to use the Eagle-Sunset route. but will be happy it is available.
All airports have restaurants with carryout food. I see plenty of people eating their own food on planes. Waitng on restrooms isn't a problem. I've never had to wait for more than one person, and they were only doing #1 :), so it was fast.
At the risk of sounding condescending, I think that with you living in another country, you've lost touch with the US of 2019.
daveklepperAnd it was C-H that forced a comparison of LDTs and concert halls. I was merely pointing out that concert halls don't get paid for their hard-of-hearing and handicapped-access expenses by any government agency. So why should the oveall transportation agency get ADA funds for such purposes?
I was actually agreeing with you ... but since you bring this up, yes, I think it is fully appropriate to direct Federal funding to make concert halls, theatres and the like fully "ADA compliant", precisely because they are to be considered resources beneficial to an intelligent civilization and it is fair to allocate 'general funds' from taxation of the whole to make them accessible to the whole.
I should probably add that I think there is good socialism and bad socialism, and I further think reimbursing private owners out of tax money for things the Government required them to do at their expense is in the prior category.
Part of the elephant-in-the-room larger question regarding LD Amtrak service is whether the benefit per actual elderly 'customer' is worth the pro rata amount of tax 'diversion' from other laudable Government efforts that provides it. I fear the prospective societal cost-benefit is far less than that from cultural resources.
Some one of our aircraft experts will know, better than I do, how practical it is to increase ambient cabin air pressure if flying with 'reasonable accommodations' for elderly who are intolerant of the economic level of reduced pressure. Surely the technical requirement is easily handled with additional air bleed and perhaps a little more heat exchanger capacity. Is the cumulative stress on the airframe dangerously greater with the higher static internal pressure and greater cycling pressure excursion?
I would also want to see some accelerometric data as to whether the incidence of actual CAT or other issues in most current high-altitude flying is a greater impediment to 'bathroom access' than much current rough track poses to Amtrak passengers. A fall is just as dangerous from a 79mph resultant as it is from a 500kt one, and perhaps operationally and statistically more likely.
daveklepper Not true. Much more of a problem, Urinary problems vs. "Fasten Seat Belt" AND usually too few Johns to avoid waiting, inability to eat or drink at a precise schedule, and, yes, Raton Pass and possibly even the Moffat may not be included in some elderlies' cross-country rail trips. They may be forced to use the Eagle-Sunset route. but will be happy it is available.
Since LD trains serve so few cities, you seem to be pushing it more for land cruises than for actual transportation.
Apparently FirstGroup (the same company that runs passenger trains in the UK) is selling Greyhound.
Overmod Some one of our aircraft experts will know, better than I do, how practical it is to increase ambient cabin air pressure if flying with 'reasonable accommodations' for elderly who are intolerant of the economic level of reduced pressure. Surely the technical requirement is easily handled with additional air bleed and perhaps a little more heat exchanger capacity. Is the cumulative stress on the airframe dangerously greater with the higher static internal pressure and greater cycling pressure excursion?
https://aerosavvy.com/aircraft-pressurization/
airline cabins are closely monitored for maximum number of pressurization cycles. Cycles are what killed the British comet early models. FAA regulations say only need to keep cabin altitude at 8500 feet or less.
azrail Apparently FirstGroup (the same company that runs passenger trains in the UK) is selling Greyhound.
According to Reuters, Greyhound was put up for sale today, May 30, 2019. First Group is also seeking to sell its UK bus operation(s).
Apparently the company plans to focus its attention on its North American contract bus services. It operates more than 42,000 school buses in North America.
Greyhound could be sold as an entity or in pieces. If I were a betting person, I would put a little money on the company being sold in pieces to regional operators or to new operators to be operated as regional carriers.
As is true for our so-called national passenger rail system, a nationwide bus company does not make much sense in this day and age.
Backshop There are very, very few people who can't actually fly. Those same people probably couldn't take a train, either. Airline cabins are pressurized to 7-8000 feet, so that's no different than i.e. Raton Pass. The restrooms may not be available, but that is less of a problem for a 1-3 hour flight than a 1-2 day train trip.
Are you a health professional? There are many medical reasons that restrict flying. It is not just the reduced pressure, but also the potential of sudden loss of pressure. That's not a problem with train travel. These medical problems are not unique to the elderly. Air passengers needing oxygen must use airline supplied oxygen equipment and make arrangements on lay-overs, while Amtrak passengers can carry their own oxygen equipment. Problems are also caused by limited mobility on planes.
No, I'm not a "medical professional" but I don't need to be. Just like I don't need to be a fireman to know that a building is burning or a railroad engineer to know a train has derailed.
Sudden loss of cabin pressure is a non-event. It happens more in the movies than in real life. Limited mobility is usually not a problem on shorter domestic flights. DVT and the like usually only happen on very long international flights. Like others have mentioned, what is the percentage of train passengers that even have these needs? Since trains really don't go that many places, how many of these people do they really serve. What do the elderly who live in Columbus, OH, Nashville, TN and many other places without Amtrak service do? They hop on the plane and are there in 2 hours, with no ill effects.
Just want to state I'm with David Klepper 100%. Too tired to argue at the moment.
If Amtrak on-board service, food, etc., isn't what it should be, every effort should be made to restore it. Track quality is something that impacts freight as well as passenger service, with greater wheel and rail wear as opposed to smooth track.
My last Amtrak LD trip was in Jan. 1996. May 1971 - Jan 1996 I never had a complaint, not once, about an Amtrak meal. Nor sleep deprevation from rough track. If things are worse, lets get them back to where they should be.
I believe my scheme for on-board meals would work well. And cut turn food losses into profit.
Backshop Sudden loss of cabin pressure is a non-event.
Sudden loss of cabin pressure is a non-event.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.