Sure fire fix for Amtrak..

[Anonymous]

You make a good point. Now that I think about it I have flown on some Airplanes that were of equel quality. Maybe we hold Amtrac to a higher standard from listening to the old timers talking about rail travel back in the 50's. My Father used to travel alot on business. He would talk constantly about which railroad gave the best service.
TIM A

[GerFust]

Add to that the local and state taxes spent on roadways, building airports, and other infrastucture that Amtrak doesn't see. Airlines must receive way more than 10 times the funding in tax revenue.

[Anonymous]

I agree...if you can't run it right, don't run it! I always disagreed with "dirty window railroading".

[Anonymous]

Any transportation project such as that would have to come from Goverment spending. I traveled alot in Europe by rail. All of there Hi speed rail services are funded by the Goverments. The difference being, they provide very good service at a resonable price. I believe no passenger rail service in today's world could ever turn a profit.But that should not be used as a excuse for poor service.
TIM A

[Anonymous]

And who's going to pay for all this, and in whose back yard will it be?

[Anonymous]

At least you were able to clean your window. From my experience with airliners, their little windows are dirty too. At least Amtrak offers a nice large window!

As far as I can tell Amtrak keeps their cars as clean as any bus or airliner.

Quite frankly, Amtrak needs to modernize as quickly as possible. High speed trains with dedicated passenger tracks averaging 125-150 mph could cover the distance of Dallas to Chicago and Dallas to Atlanta in less than 9 hours at 125 mph, and in 6 hours at 150 mph.
This is about the time it takes to drive out to the airport, find a parking space, wait in line to get throught security, fly the distance, wait for luggage, get a rental car, and drive to your destination in the other city. There would be no need to run trains at night, and more than likely depending on the speed, Amtrak could offer double or triple the daily service it offers now.

[Anonymous]

Even if Amtrak were to get Hi speed trains with concrete ties and welded rail between high population centers I do not believe it would make it.The service is still bad. The food is bad. The cars are dirty. The tickets expensive.Example, on the trip to Denver I got out at the first stop to clean the window so I can see out of it.
TIM A

[Anonymous]

One could carry this to the next step. Shut down the airlines and save me much more tax money.

Out of the Department of Transportation's annual budget highways get $33 billion, airports $12 billion, and Amtrak might get $1.2 billion (last year $562 million).

Keep this in mind when you protest against the pity sum Amtrak receivess. We could save at least ten times as much if we shut off the airlines subsidies.

But I will agree with you about one thing. The Amtrak of today won't survive in the long run. A modern Amtrak running TGV high speed rail trains along a few corridors can compete with the airlines, for half the airlines subsidy.

A high speed rail network connecting the four largest population centers east of the Rockies can compete with the airlines: New York City to Chicago, New York City to Miami, Dallas and Houston to Atlanta or Jacksonville, And Dallas and Houston to Chicago. A nice parralegram of four high speed trains capable of reaching the end of their legs in about 9 hours.

Considering that the state of Texas Trans Texas Corridors plan quotes the cost of building electrified double track high speed rail lines at $20 million per mile, this 4,000 mile parralegram would cost around $80 billion. $80 billion is a little more than twice what the DOT spends on highways each year.

Doubling this plan to include more mileage and destinations with branches off this main line of the parralegram would be nice too. If we are going to support Amtrak with subsidies, we might as well get a state of the art modern system. As it is today we are getting an aged middle of the 20 century system.

[Modelcar]

....One wouldn't make much difference to adjust the truck speed to 80 MPH on interstates as many of them are doing that now...

Does anyone remember when car speed limits WERE 35 MPH during WWII.

QM

[Anonymous]

Another sure fire fix would be to adjust the speeds on the interstates to 35 m.p.h. for cars and 80 m.p.h. for trucks. Fines for exceeding the limits would be $100 for each mile over the posted speed for autos.

[Anonymous]

Took two trips on Amtrak. One to Califonia the other to Denver.Found service to be poor. For the same money could have flown and got there faster.Amtraks wounds are self inflicted.I do not care if Amtrak shuts down tomarrow.Save me some tax money.

[Anonymous]

Mr. Gunn,

So, you wi***o save Amtrak? I'm afraid that no amount of expertise in "railroading" is gonna help you do "that", you need to master the art of the venue where that victory can be "won".

When in Rome...etc

What you need to do, is increase your next budget request by $800 million dollars, citing the need to be able to make "campaign contributions" in a competitive environment....

I'd love to hear the windbags in congress adress that one....