"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
QUOTE: Originally posted by Valleyline Those who harp about airways subsidies should check out the FAA budget. They will find that the vast majority of FAA funds come from user fees, and not from general tax revenues as does the Amtrak subsidy.
QUOTE: Originally posted by donclark I think this time Amtrak is going to lose its transcontintentals and some other long distance lines.... Oh, the NEC will survive, possibly with a cash infusion from the states it serves..... and possibly the Auto Train.... However, I still see no vision from Amtrak about its future.... The future of passenger railroads in America is not the status quo of running out of date equipment on out of date tracks..... Now is the time to move on HSR, and convince the nation it can afford a up to date HSR system from New York to Chicago, and further south on the eastern seaboard, plus a line from Northern California to Southern California..... All of these HSR lines if properly funded and built could turn a profit....something the airlines are failing to do......
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Pump
QUOTE: Originally posted by klahm A few thoughts: I ride Amtrak often for biz trips in the NE corridor, it being so much more efficient and productive than flying or (shudder) driving. But these are 60-to-200 minute ventures. It would be just as useful elsewhere if (a) the time frame were the same and (b) it were readily possible to reach my street destination from the station, either by rental car or public transport. I used European railways similarly when on biz there during the '90s. I doubt that I'm alone at this. Rail makes a lot of sense when the density of major metro areas is high and the connecting infrastructure extensive. Otherwise, it's not very practical (even in Europe, with the possible exception of TGV). The "car culture" has ensured this. During the great blackout in '03, I rode Amtrak CHI-ALB, revisiting the stations on the Water Level Route that I passed on the Empire State Express during my youth. Seeing the weed-overrun and dilapidated was a real eye-opener. Though the Empire Corridor seemingly has the metro density, it appears to lack the connective infrastructure that it had in the days of the Great Steel Fleet. Hence, JetBlue thrives. I frequently commute to downtown Chicago on Metrarail, passing Amtrak's service facilities. Most of that rolling stock goes to smaller, faraway places that I would never travel to by rail. Places I need to go, e.g., Cleveland, it doesn't, at least not at any biz-friendly hour, nor at any useful speed. The political necessity of serving "everywhere" collides with the economic reality of limited demand for long-distance services through comparatively lightly-populated regions. Congress has denied this paradox for 34 years. That's why Amtrak is in its current state. If the Shrub's budget proposal can get Congress to think "outside the box" (doubtful), perhaps some good will come of it. Many consider it heresy (especially politically so), but careful devolution of Amtrak from federal control to consortiums of states, with transitional block-grant funding, might well create a larger variety of useful short-haul routes that would provide better service at lower cost. California and Washington/Oregon have shown potential within an adaptation of the current Amtrak structure. Perhaps such changes won't save much money. But I would wager that the money spent would move more people.
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
QUOTE: Originally posted by vandenbm I seem to recall an article in Trains a few months back (sometime last year) that spoke to exactly what Don is asking about in regards to their fleet. On a different note: After returning from a recent trip to England and Scotland I was so disappointed at what pass. rail travel is offered in the U.S. Now, I understand the very good arguments on size of the US vs England and infastructure currently in place. But still, it was so wonderful to be able to travel all of England and Scotland just with my backpack and shoes, no car needed! To me it seems to be a real shame to have our country going backwards in my mind toward pass. rail travel. If anything it needs to expand, and I also understand the arguments toward what gets the funding first, but still in principle we need more rail pass. rail networks with more destinations that will appeal to all of us gas hogs. I tried to counter all the arguments I would receive first, and mainly state my opinion on principle.
QUOTE: Originally posted by amtrak-tom Garr - ummmm, not sure about the Amtrak/Conrail birth dates, I was just going on what was told to me by the employees I worked under when I was hired in 1979 with Amtrak. These guys were the former PRR, Penn Central, then Amtrak employees, and, about how they were then approached to join Amtrak or remain Conrail because Congress then still wanted a passenger service. One history note, when Eastern airlines was still around, they were the #1 carrier of passengers from Wash. DC to New York. Amtrak took that #1 spot away from the airline and this was before Eastern had ended its operations.
QUOTE: Originally posted by O.S. Don, that's more clarity than I've seen in many years. Your suggestions are congruent with the goals you set out. Some minor observations: 1. Your rationale #1 is what is keeping Amtrak l-d service afloat. Political bacon for largely rural states, who figure that dropping Amtrak will be a substantial net negative, because the tax money it would save (if any!) wouldn't be enough to buy anything of equal value. 2. Your rationale #2 is basically the same as the National Parks argument. It resonates well with the suburban middle-class, and Amtrak marketing goes directly to this rationale. 3. The most difficult part of getting muncipalities to pay for the station will be in large cities, not small. 4. How would you propose getting around the losses on food and sleeper service? I don't think the concessionare can make money on it, even if the equipment was furnished and maintained without charge. How would you propose to enforce service levels? Concessionaires in places like airports, national parks, toll-road islands often have an enormous price-value spread and once in, seem to be cemented in place. 5. What about pension obligations? Could those that exist be severed into a separate funding mechanism? OS
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.