Anything could happen. Yep.
kevin
Let's hope so.
Amtrak never should have been a "flag" to begin with.
mkt_fan wrote:down with amtrak
Your friendly neighborhood CNW fan.
either revise amtraks entire way of thinking ,and spending money. or let some new group of investers take over. airlines spend more than amtrak. northwest is 3 billion dollars in the red! and still losing. they need to do something before no one can ride the rails except for rail excursions!
i like riding the rails. but i regret, are only option is goverment rundowned amtrak
Can't see myself waxing nostalgic over a broken arrow. - a.s.
the feed wrote:I kinda don't want it to die. Its supporting caltrain with dough I believe. And I don't know what the SF peninsula will do without caltrain.And no more cheap train rides for me.
The state pays Amtrak to operate CalTrain. If Amtrak were to disappear, other provisions would be made for the operation of CalTrain.
mkt_fan wrote: they need to do something before no one can ride the rails except for rail excursions!
Where?
http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/Letters/articles.asp?articleID=5931
(Can't get the link to work right - if you want to go to the site, you'll have to cut and paste it in the address block of your browser)
Bike path beside train tracks is a boondoggle
The bike path that is to run between Lake Placid and Saranac Lake in the rail corridor is screaming for common sense and environmental protection. It looks like the APA will allow this disaster to go unchecked only because the user group is politically correct.Since I read a story in another paper on how the trail was going to follow the elevated section next to the power lines from Ray Brook to Lake Placid, I was wondering what fantasy world the planners of this trail were living in. I have traveled this corridor hundreds if not thousands of times and have never seen this elevated section. As a matter of fact, I would bet 50 percent of the power poles are under at least some amount of water. And those that are not are on a hill so steep that a trail will be impossible to construct. So those are the areas where they plan building long boardwalks (more than 1,000 feet of them), basically cantilevered out from the railroad bed, thereby segmenting large populations of wildlife from thousands of years of natural egress and ingress.When you add more than 6 miles of fencing to keep the train and bicyclers apart, you realize this plan will be devastating to the wildlife population. Don't get me wrong; the first few years, the coyotes will have their fill of fawns who will attempt to flee with their mothers but will be unable to get through the fence. It will be like a buffet.It's sort of ironic, considering the APA and the rest of the environmental watchdogs are complaining that the project in Tupper Lake is going to "segment the forest," yet this project will be approved instantly. Where is Peter Bauer when we need him? I wonder, if we were building 6 miles of fencing next to a snowmobile trail, what their reaction would be?I am for a recreational trail through this area, but we should be removing the tracks instead of creating a whole new trail. I have found such little support for the train in this community that it is mind-boggling that we have spent $50 million and created just 11 year-round jobs. We should ask the question, would a bank lend this amount of money for the "scenic railroad" operations? I've had two large hotel owners tell me a recreational trail would actually draw people to the area instead of being just something to do on a rainy day. The thoughts that the trip to Tupper will be big will end when people have spent three hours watching trees go by, and within several years without Governor Waste-Our-Money there to subsidize, the railbed will not be able to be maintained, and the railroad will be done.Before the train groupies start throwing a fit over the fact that I am a snowmobiler, remember, Tony Goodwin has advocated for the very same thing. Maybe Governor Spitzer can halt the transfer of the last $5 million and start the removal of the tracks for the good of the entire region. (My emphasis)
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
cr6479 wrote:Could Amtrak become a fallen flag like other railroads before them????
The only wind keeping this particular flag flying is the hot air expelled within the Beltway keeping it weakly waving as a symbol of inertia. I cringed when I first heard the moniker, it reminded me of Amway, or some madison avenue's think tank's version of a railroad name..I remember when some older stations were bypassed in favor of what were referred to as Amshacks...ugh..
Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.
Sheez!
No disrespect, but some of these anti-Amtrak responses seem pathetic.
So, in essence: get rid of Amtrak and that's it. Don't replace it. Right?
Come on, do you all REEEEEALLY THINK that if Amtrak is done away with, Uncle Sam is going to come up with a brilliant new strategy for passenger rail? Talk of medium distance corridors have been ongoing since the 1970s, but the costs to implement these systems far exceed what it costs to fund Amtrak.
Are your solutions realistic? Is it better to add more cars and buses to already burdened interstate highways?
Amtrak should be viewed and funded as a beneficial service, not a taxpayer burden. If it helps take cars off of the interstate highways, even if a few, then that's fewer auto crashes and congestion bottlenecks to deal with.
I honestly doubt Amtrak will become a fallen flag anytime soon. It's almost comical that inspite of the delays caused by the freight railroads prioritizing freights over passenger schedules, Amtrak is still showing good ridership numbers. So apparently there is still support for it.
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
Speaking strictly for myself, it is not the concept of public passenger rail but how it is funded, how it is managed, how accountable it is....Amtrak in my view fails on all these areas and more. In order for improvement or growth, if you will, this current incarnation must be replaced and the flag put up in the attic along with those of the ICC, WPA, etc...it's outlived it's band aid origin...
mkt_fan wrote: airlines spend more than amtrak.
airlines spend more than amtrak.
So what does that have to do with Amtrak.
Bert
An "expensive model collector"
What monicker would replace it? USARail? RailPax?
The era of the private passenger train is over. There will not be any BNSF Zephyr or Super Chief. Amtrak will continue on in it's sorry state. Never get enough invetment to provide a reliable service. What else can you expect from a railway using 10yr old diesels & 30yr old cars. There may be a few bold states like CA or IL willing to spend some on state-owned trains.
If you want to count all the lines like the Pioneer or Desert Wind, you may already count Amtrak as a fallen flag. That train dosen't come to my town anymore. Feel lucky if you get any service.
Wdlgln005 wrote:What monicker would replace it? USARail? RailPax? The era of the private passenger train is over. There will not be any BNSF Zephyr or Super Chief. Amtrak will continue on in it's sorry state. Never get enough invetment to provide a reliable service. What else can you expect from a railway using 10yr old diesels & 30yr old cars. There may be a few bold states like CA or IL willing to spend some on state-owned trains. If you want to count all the lines like the Pioneer or Desert Wind, you may already count Amtrak as a fallen flag. That train dosen't come to my town anymore. Feel lucky if you get any service.
I could be wrong, but I think the chief is a fairly reliable train. Do you know how muc, if any, travels on the BNSF transcon?
Is there a pathological hatred of passenger trains which exists in the US? Or parts of it?
bemused.
devils wrote: Is there a pathological hatred of passenger trains which exists in the US? Or parts of it?
More like a delusion that passenger service could be self supporting so should not get a public subsidy. The railroads came to hate passenger service, which is why Amtrak came to be in the first place.
devils wrote:Is there a pathological hatred of passenger trains which exists in the US? Or parts of it?
I would say that train travel (other than commuting) does not enter the consciousness of the average American. When a decision needs to be made about travel, the question that gets asked is, "Should we fly or drive?" It isn't so much that train travel is looked down upon, it is that people don't even think about it as an option.
devils wrote: Is there a pathological hatred of passenger trains which exists in the US? Or parts of it? bemused.
1) Freight railroad employees that see Amtrak as a parasite that screws up their work day.
2) Armchair railroad tycoons that don't remember how awful things were before Amtrak.
Mark
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.