The United States need a national passenger rail system?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Does.
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
Does, most certainly.
There should also be state/regional rail services, and support for urban rail and light rail systems.
There should also be two types of national 'private' support: A well-established and defined way for private trains or consists to be operated effectively as part of the national system's trains -- I'm thinking here of the Cardinal and Greenbrier Express in particular, and support for a private company's efforts to provide 'comparable' service... perhaps via some kind of 'voucher' that provides some amount that would have been spent on a particular national service to a private entity.
I admit that I think at least the operational fiction that the national system ultimately be "profitable" should be continued, although that shouldn't be an excuse for various doctrinaire politicians to grill the executives of the national system every year over all the jots and tittles of seagull micromanagement...
RME
....because? .......
Murphy Siding ....because? .......
... there are some services -- just as there are for regionals or locals -- that need to be assured regardless of the profitability net of all capitalization, stranded cost, etc. that would otherwise 'not be present'.
I leave out discussions of national pride, make-work subsidies, pork-barrel setasides, pandering to underserved constituencies, and the other 'all that implies' things that have characterized some of the recent "discussions" on this general subject... ;-}
Because I despise the invasive search and useless nonsense the TSA forces you to tolerate when flying.
Because I love trains, especially long, flashy fast passenger trains.
Because it is hard to hijack then fly trains into the Twin Towers.
Because the cost of flying with my family is about equal to 2 months of my salary.
Because a lot of other people feel the same way.
23 17 46 11
I am fortunate to live in a country that sports a quite extensive passenger rail network, although it is only a shadow of what it once was. Traveling by train has turned into the fastest and most comfortable mode of transporting people in my country, making domestic flights nearly obsolete. Traveling time from all the way north to all the way south (Hamburg to Munich) takes the same time, if you add all the times, yet taking the train is much more convenient. Trains arrive and depart in the center of the cities, and not in dingy industrial districts. Public transport by light rail or bus takes you anywhere within the cities.
With the gas prices the way they are in my country (how does $ 8.50 a gallon sound to you?) traveling by train is also much cheaper these days.
I am perfectly aware that one cannot compare Germany and the US, as our distances are much shorter, but i still think that your country could do with a better passenger train system than it now has.
Does
Our roads are strangling us economically not to mention all of the injuries and deaths we suffer from automobiles.
And our roads, especially limited access highways are crumbling. We will have to find money to rebuild them.
And far too many lives have been lost in our wars to keep petroleum products flowing to us.
I would say does. My visits to Utica when working on our trains there show that people do ride the train - there are plenty of folks getting on and off virtually every train.
While the price tag is out of this world, methinks the extension of what is evidenced in the NEC (which echos Sir Madog's comments on rail travel in Europe) could be accomplished by HSR in select markets.
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...
Depends.
To have one "because we used to"? No. If there's a demonstrated need to be met or to reasonably expand existing services then sure.
Ed, you brought up the cost of flying...when I was looking at trips for my wife and the cost to travel by train was 5x the cost of airfare. I'll grant you that may not be the case in every instance though.
Personally I doubt I would ever ride a passenger train.
Dan
edblysardBecause I despise the invasive search and useless nonsense the TSA forces you to tolerate when flying.
Last time I had to travel to another state was in 2004. I went by plane. NEVER AGAIN!! Next time I'll go by bus or train.
CNW 6000Ed, you brought up the cost of flying...when I was looking at trips for my wife and the cost to travel by train was 5x the cost of airfare. I'll grant you that may not be the case in every instance though.
Actually, in this way planes are similar to trains may years ago.
Because privately owned trains and planes have traditionally had high fixed costs (much of which is debt) and these costs must be paid whether you tun then or not companies have to do everything they can to fill their seats. If this means running at a loss it is better to run at a loss rather than not run at all because by not running at all you have higher losses.
For planes this means that on competitive routes you can, by shopping around, get very low fares. However if a plane has a monopoly on a route you cannot get these low fares. In fact there is a lot of pressure to raise fares to cover the costs of your competitive routes.
Charles Francis Adams points out that this kind of competition ultimately led to increased costs for the consumer rather than lower costs as many people naïvely believe. It also means that many places are left with no transportation at all.
So yes, some airlines have super low fares between competitive points and while they do it is possible to take advantage of those fares. But if you want to travel between places served by one or very few airlines you will pay a lot more. And maybe you will find that you just can't get they by plane unless you charter one.
jeffrey-wimberlyLast time I had to travel to another state was in 2004. I went by plane. NEVER AGAIN!! Next time I'll go by bus or train.
These days it is easy to find horror stories about flying. For example, people denied entry to their flight because they have implanted medical devices. And a lot of people just don't like the intrusiveness of TSA officers. But I have to wonder if these problems will persist. Over time most likely the TSA will become better at its job. And for the foreseeable future planes will simply be faster than trains for many destinations even allowing for extra waiting time at the airport for security.
Of course we have such a spare passenger railroad systems trains are often not an option. And our airline system is also becoming increasingly spare so often planes are not an option either.
This country does NOT have a national rail passenger system. We have a national skeleton system, that pays its "host" carriers a pittance for the use of its ifrastructure.
Rational public policy, now there is an oxymoron for you, would shut down ATK outside of the NEC and require that if anyone, ATK or independent, wanted to run passenger trains anywhere they have to negotiate with the host railroad on a market basis. The practical effect of this would be to free up the capacity ATK effectvely steals. The freight carriers would market that restored capacity which would divert freight off the highway and making a real reduction in fuel use and pollution. ATK is a missallocation of resources, not the worst by far, but among the clearest.
I believe that a case can be made that the Northeast Corridor provides enough service in a very congested area that its subsidy needs are considerably less than the public costs/subsidy needs of road and air alternatives in the markets it serves. Passenger rail advocates should fight where they have a case, the NEC.
One day, obviously not this administration, we will have to get serious about spending or the Chinese will quit buying our debt. When either of those events happen your iron stagecoaches will be gone.
Mac McCulloch
In a Trailer Trains thread, which is no longer with us, it was suggested that moving vehicles south on the train helped out on the cost of infrastructure, and reduced the amount of petroleum products required to get Ma, Pa, the SUV and the family to Disney World. Could a case be made, that if those same trains were hauling freight off the highway instead, it would help out the infrastructure cost and fuel use situation even more?
Murphy,
Yes, and it would be true.
Mac
CSX already makes such a case in their advertisements.
PNWRMNMshut down ATK outside of the NEC and require that if anyone, ATK or independent, wanted to run passenger trains anywhere they have to negotiate with the host railroad on a market basis. The practical effect of this would be to free up the capacity ATK effectvely steals.
1. This arguent presupposes that every single host railroad operates at maximum capacity and, were Amtrak to leave, could immediately replace it with a freight train. Is there evidence to support that contention?
2. Host railroads had a choice. They could continue independently to operate their own passenger service or they could stop their own passenger service and allow Amtrak trains on their tracks. The Southern Rail Road continued the Southern Crescent for several years. Shouldn't we respect the decision that the host railroads themselves made?
3. Realistically it would be impossible to maintain the Northeast Corridor as a national passenger railroad if all of the rest of Amtrak were abandoned. Is there support in Congress to abandon even the western long distance trains?
Murphy SidingCould a case be made, that if those same trains were hauling freight off the highway instead, it would help out the infrastructure cost and fuel use situation even more?
I'm afraid I don't follow your argument. Do you propose to convert the passenger cars to freight cars of some kind?
Let me offer an outsiders' view that tries to look to the future.My suspicion is that in a few decades, the market for passenger travelwill be substantially less than now. My reasoning is that electroniccommunication - real presence on a screen - will obviate most trips.Business travel? Not necessary - you can have any meeting you like byturning on the communications.What travellers will be left? Tourists to National Parks, grandparentvisits, scouting out a job somewhere, probably others. My projection:those travelers won't ever be numerous enough to repay the capital therailroad would need.There is no call to covet China, in my opinion. They have built afine solution to an old-time problem.This brings me no joy to predict. I'm going to ride train 5 in acouple weeks.John
jpwoodruff Let me offer an outsiders' view that tries to look to the future.My suspicion is that in a few decades, the market for passenger travelwill be substantially less than now. My reasoning is that electroniccommunication - real presence on a screen - will obviate most trips.Business travel? Not necessary - you can have any meeting you like byturning on the communications.What travellers will be left? Tourists to National Parks, grandparentvisits, scouting out a job somewhere, probably others. My projection:those travelers won't ever be numerous enough to repay the capital therailroad would need.There is no call to covet China, in my opinion. They have built afine solution to an old-time problem.This brings me no joy to predict. I'm going to ride train 5 in acouple weeks.John
Video conferencing may convey information between parties in different locations - but business meetings are about much more than just then interchange of information - they are about building working relationships and trust between the parties involved in 'up close & personal' interaction. Interactions where you see who you are dealing with as a person - not as a image on a video screen.
East of the Mississippi airlines and roadways are approaching gridlock during normal high traffic periods - and the non-high traffic periods grow closer to gridlock each passing year. Since I put 25 to 30K miles on the Interstate System East of the Mississippi - it is a accurate observation. There is a need for increased transportation options.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD jpwoodruff Let me offer an outsiders' view that tries to look to the future.My suspicion is that in a few decades, the market for passenger travelwill be substantially less than now. My reasoning is that electroniccommunication - real presence on a screen - will obviate most trips.Business travel? Not necessary - you can have any meeting you like byturning on the communications.What travellers will be left? Tourists to National Parks, grandparentvisits, scouting out a job somewhere, probably others. My projection:those travelers won't ever be numerous enough to repay the capital therailroad would need.There is no call to covet China, in my opinion. They have built afine solution to an old-time problem.This brings me no joy to predict. I'm going to ride train 5 in acouple weeks.John Video conferencing may convey information between parties in different locations - but business meetings are about much more than just then interchange of information - they are about building working relationships and trust between the parties involved in 'up close & personal' interaction. Interactions where you see who you are dealing with as a person - not as a image on a video screen. East of the Mississippi airlines and roadways are approaching gridlock during normal high traffic periods - and the non-high traffic periods grow closer to gridlock each passing year. Since I put 25 to 30K miles on the Interstate System East of the Mississippi - it is a accurate observation. There is a need for increased transportation options.
How about just building some more of the most preferred option?
jpwoodruffMy suspicion is that in a few decades, the market for passenger travelwill be substantially less than now.
There are two groups you don't mention but who are a significant proportion of travelers: People in the military and college students. Do you see video conferencing as influencing these groups?
John WR Murphy SidingCould a case be made, that if those same trains were hauling freight off the highway instead, it would help out the infrastructure cost and fuel use situation even more? I'm afraid I don't follow your argument. Do you propose to convert the passenger cars to freight cars of some kind?
John WR jpwoodruffMy suspicion is that in a few decades, the market for passenger travelwill be substantially less than now. There are two groups you don't mention but who are a significant proportion of travelers: People in the military and college students. Do you see video conferencing as influencing these groups?
I think there will be a contraction of transportation forced upon us by its rising cost against a falling wage base. Transportation will soon become a luxury that is best avoided. Video conferencing can work for the face to face stuff. Individuals working as a service corporations will offer the same productivity as a direct employee with no other strings attached. Everyone engaged in independently performing some vital function in the whole endeavor, will remove a lot of the need to commute into a big central corporate hub.
It is about time! What a waste to just roll into town every day to gather under a big tent so the boss can keep an eye on you. We are technologically beyond that. Every player is responsible for adding to the output, and we have the technical means to monitor exactly that. It is absurd for an employee to spend one quarter of his or her production in just transporting their bodies to and from the big tent.
Murphy Siding I'm not proposing anything. I'm asking if the train that hauls freight off the highway is doing more for the infrastructure and petroleum issues than the passenger train that is running now in that spot.
But were Amtrak trains suddenly to be abolished what evidence to show that their places would be taken by freight trains?
BucyrusI think there will be a contraction of transportation forced upon us by its rising cost against a falling wage base. Transportation will soon become a luxury that is best avoided.
Perhaps you are right. However, clairvoyance is not one of my skills. We shall have to wait and see.
John WR BucyrusI think there will be a contraction of transportation forced upon us by its rising cost against a falling wage base. Transportation will soon become a luxury that is best avoided. Perhaps you are right. However, clairvoyance is not one of my skills. We shall have to wait and see.
Are we now seeing a contraction in transportation?
For nearly 30 years now, we are discussing how to employ information technology to rid us of the need to be physically available at our place of work, yet all attempts have utterly failed. All business finally is people business. A quality issue you may have with your manufacturing resource in China will not be solved by a bunch of emails or a series of video conferences - you will have to go there.
For a number of reasons, the modes of transport we currently use start failing to meet our transportation needs. These reasons may be safety, comfort, cost, time, ecology and even political reasons. Rail transport will be the only answer to that, be it light rail for commuting purposes or fast trains for intercity transport.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.