Helping Amtrak Survive

[Anonymous]

Who will ride it?? The businessmen will not. Time is money to them, even with high speed rail, trains are still slower. Businessmen do 60% of all the everyday travel. Without there support high speed rail will not make it. The airlines have the business traveler locked in. High speed rail is not going to attract them back. Long distant rail travel is dead. let it die and save us taxpayer's some money.
TIM ARGUBRIGHT

[Anonymous]

The problem with Amtrak is a lack of vision of and for the future. The Senate keeps bailing out Amtrak, at least for operational funds, but the House attempts to kill Amtrak every year. Why? Obviously, Amtrak does not provide the proper service in enough House districts. Why should Congressmen vote for Amtrak if Amtrak does not provide the proper service in their district?

Fortunately, Amtrak does provide service in enough states, but is the service proper? Along the northeast corridor, Amtrak's service is proper. However, in states like Texas, the service is not proper! Amtrak's attempts to run an improper service to most of the states with obsolete equipment is the reason why so many are opposed to Amtrak in the Congress and the reason why Amtrak does not turn an operational profit.

The sooner Amtrak gets the vision of high speed rail, the better Amtrak will be in relation to Congressional funding and operational profits. Americans do want to take the train when the train is fast and the service is proper. The northeast corridor ridership levels prove this point.

Amtrak needs to sell the Congress and the American people high speed rail. To do so will require a ten to twenty year plan of expanding high speed rail to all areas of the country, similar to the interstate highway system. The costs are insignificant to the costs of adding more lanes to interstates or building new interstate highways. The costs will be less than what the DOT spends on airports each year, much less highways. In fact, the costs of building a 7,000 mile network of high speed rail will decrease the costs of airports and highways significantly, so much that we will actually be cutting DOT's budget in the long run.

A half century ago, the Pennsylvania and Santa Fe railroads ran ads promoting transcontinental service in 48 hours. Notice it takes Amtrak three days to do the same today. Therefore, we have lost one days service in half a century. On the other hand, with high speed rail, we could have transcontinental service in one day! "That's right, from New York City to Los Angeles in one day." Imagine how long it would take to get to Chicago from New York City, or to Dallas from New York City.

While the airlines have the Congress baffooned today, frankly, the airlines are running out of air space, terminal gates, and runways at the major airports, not to mention the fact the airlines are having problems financing new aircraft. Eventually, the Congress will be forced to build high speed rail. Why not now?

[Anonymous]

The problem with Amtrak is a lack of vision of and for the future. The Senate keeps bailing out Amtrak, at least for operational funds, but the House attempts to kill Amtrak every year. Why? Obviously, Amtrak does not provide the proper service in enough House districts. Why should Congressmen vote for Amtrak if Amtrak does not provide the proper service in their district?

Fortunately, Amtrak does provide service in enough states, but is the service proper? Along the northeast corridor, Amtrak's service is proper. However, in states like Texas, the service is not proper! Amtrak's attempts to run an improper service to most of the states with obsolete equipment is the reason why so many are opposed to Amtrak in the Congress and the reason why Amtrak does not turn an operational profit.

The sooner Amtrak gets the vision of high speed rail, the better Amtrak will be in relation to Congressional funding and operational profits. Americans do want to take the train when the train is fast and the service is proper. The northeast corridor ridership levels prove this point.

Amtrak needs to sell the Congress and the American people high speed rail. To do so will require a ten to twenty year plan of expanding high speed rail to all areas of the country, similar to the interstate highway system. The costs are insignificant to the costs of adding more lanes to interstates or building new interstate highways. The costs will be less than what the DOT spends on airports each year, much less highways. In fact, the costs of building a 7,000 mile network of high speed rail will decrease the costs of airports and highways significantly, so much that we will actually be cutting DOT's budget in the long run.

A half century ago, the Pennsylvania and Santa Fe railroads ran ads promoting transcontinental service in 48 hours. Notice it takes Amtrak three days to do the same today. Therefore, we have lost one days service in half a century. On the other hand, with high speed rail, we could have transcontinental service in one day! "That's right, from New York City to Los Angeles in one day." Imagine how long it would take to get to Chicago from New York City, or to Dallas from New York City.

While the airlines have the Congress baffooned today, frankly, the airlines are running out of air space, terminal gates, and runways at the major airports, not to mention the fact the airlines are having problems financing new aircraft. Eventually, the Congress will be forced to build high speed rail. Why not now?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Willy2

Union Pacific has TV ads. I think that it may increase ridership if Amtrak also advertised on TV.

Willy

I actually did once see a very short Amtrak commercial on TV several months ago, never seen it again since. I don't remeber what station. The airlines have plenty of commercials, why doesn't Amtrak? I agreee that congress should also be more supportive of rail passenger transport instead of giving so much ca***o the airlines. It's like a saying I once heard. If the opposite of pro is con, then is the opposite of progress congress?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Willy2

Union Pacific has TV ads. I think that it may increase ridership if Amtrak also advertised on TV.

Willy

I actually did once see a very short Amtrak commercial on TV several months ago, never seen it again since. I don't remeber what station. The airlines have plenty of commercials, why doesn't Amtrak? I agreee that congress should also be more supportive of rail passenger transport instead of giving so much ca***o the airlines. It's like a saying I once heard. If the opposite of pro is con, then is the opposite of progress congress?

[Anonymous]

There is no profit in rail travel. Why take a train that could take 12 hours to get to your destination when flying will get you there in 4? The profit out look is far better for airlines then for rail. Rail travel is not convenent. The rails do not go to every city. The price for a train ticket is not cheaper then a air ticket. (Rail tickets can be more expensive and in most cases are.) I believe long distance rail travel is dieing and should be allowed to do so.
TIM A

[Anonymous]

There is no profit in rail travel. Why take a train that could take 12 hours to get to your destination when flying will get you there in 4? The profit out look is far better for airlines then for rail. Rail travel is not convenent. The rails do not go to every city. The price for a train ticket is not cheaper then a air ticket. (Rail tickets can be more expensive and in most cases are.) I believe long distance rail travel is dieing and should be allowed to do so.
TIM A

[Willy2]

Another thing that Amtrak could do is come in on time. The eastbound Amtrak train from Denver Colorado to Omaha Nebrska was supposed to come in at 5:35 AM this morning. It is 5:00 PM and the train has not yet arrived.

[Willy2]

Another thing that Amtrak could do is come in on time. The eastbound Amtrak train from Denver Colorado to Omaha Nebrska was supposed to come in at 5:35 AM this morning. It is 5:00 PM and the train has not yet arrived.

[Willy2]

Union Pacific has TV ads. I think that it may increase ridership if Amtrak also advertised on TV.

Willy

[Willy2]

Union Pacific has TV ads. I think that it may increase ridership if Amtrak also advertised on TV.

Willy

[Anonymous]

I don't know what will help. It seems to me that congress means to let Amtrak die, at least as far as long distance travel is concerned. They bend over backwards for the airlines, why not make them pay for all expenses concerning air travel like maintaining an running airports etc and the truckers, make them pay for the entire costs of maintaining the interstates. I just can't believe that passenger rail travel will be allowed to fade away {except in the northeast corridor maybe} and be lost forever.

[Anonymous]

I don't know what will help. It seems to me that congress means to let Amtrak die, at least as far as long distance travel is concerned. They bend over backwards for the airlines, why not make them pay for all expenses concerning air travel like maintaining an running airports etc and the truckers, make them pay for the entire costs of maintaining the interstates. I just can't believe that passenger rail travel will be allowed to fade away {except in the northeast corridor maybe} and be lost forever.

[ironhorseman]

See Canadian Cool-Aid thread which I started. Ads on Amtrak, just like NASCAR, would help. This isn't the cure-all solution, but think of the millions that pumped into the autoracing business. If it weren't for sponsors that sport wouldn't exisit.

I don't think public transportation needs to remain sterile, heck, city buses have all kinds of ads all over them all the time. Sponsors on trains: I think it's worth at least a try (but be cautious where Target stores advertise, that could be disastrous! [:0])

[ironhorseman]

See Canadian Cool-Aid thread which I started. Ads on Amtrak, just like NASCAR, would help. This isn't the cure-all solution, but think of the millions that pumped into the autoracing business. If it weren't for sponsors that sport wouldn't exisit.

I don't think public transportation needs to remain sterile, heck, city buses have all kinds of ads all over them all the time. Sponsors on trains: I think it's worth at least a try (but be cautious where Target stores advertise, that could be disastrous! [:0])

[kenneo]

We have had two topics lately about Amtrak and its costs. We have discussed a bit about the costs and why they are as they are.

Why not put together a thread about what Amtrak can do to help itself? I think we should focus on the positive revenue producing things, but cost savings should not be excluded. Important also would be things that can be done to encourage repeat ridership. And where they are doing good now, that should be emphasized where appropriate.

I would think that the rational behind our suggestions would be appropriate.

Nothing reasonable should be out of bounds and the inventive should be entertained. Where problems arise that are the result of Congress doings, legislative or other workable solutions should be provided.

If we can get a good enough collection of suggestions and rationals, perhaps we could forward them on to Mr. Gunn. I am sure that he will have heard about most, if not all, of our suggestions, but sometimes it's looking at the same old thing in a new way that brings a working solution.[^]

I will be gone until Aug 16, and look forward to seeing the results of my little grenade upon return! Keep those flanges between the rail heads! [8D]

[kenneo]

We have had two topics lately about Amtrak and its costs. We have discussed a bit about the costs and why they are as they are.

Why not put together a thread about what Amtrak can do to help itself? I think we should focus on the positive revenue producing things, but cost savings should not be excluded. Important also would be things that can be done to encourage repeat ridership. And where they are doing good now, that should be emphasized where appropriate.

I would think that the rational behind our suggestions would be appropriate.

Nothing reasonable should be out of bounds and the inventive should be entertained. Where problems arise that are the result of Congress doings, legislative or other workable solutions should be provided.

If we can get a good enough collection of suggestions and rationals, perhaps we could forward them on to Mr. Gunn. I am sure that he will have heard about most, if not all, of our suggestions, but sometimes it's looking at the same old thing in a new way that brings a working solution.[^]

I will be gone until Aug 16, and look forward to seeing the results of my little grenade upon return! Keep those flanges between the rail heads! [8D]