AMTRAK: Do you support it?

[Anonymous]

All too often we hear people lamenting the possible demise of Amtrak, yet I wonder how many of those same people actually support it via ridership. Do you value Amtrak? Or, if it suddenly faded into oblivion, would you shed not a tear over it's passing?

[Anonymous]

I certainly do! If it goes where I want ot go, I will use it.

[Anonymous]

Authough I myself do not ride AMTRAK, I support it all the way. I believe that someday, people will realize that the railroad is still the best way to travel, and Highways will be lined with rail. OK, I'm dreaming, but AMTRAK may be our last chance at keeping passenger rail alive. Hey, if they can do it in France, Germany, Japan, Canada, and Britain, So can the United states.

AMTRAK - Antonym~ American Made Trains Real And Clean[:p]

[Modelcar]

....Sure I want rail travel..such as Amtrak to survive, but I believe we can all agree if it is agreed that we will continue with it, it does need some tuning up and changes to the system to do a better job of moving passengers. We all know it needs a solid method of funding too. Surely there are enough smart minds in this country to figure out how to bring that about. Perhaps it could be structured to be morphed into high speed rail when society and the country is ready for it too....

[Granny74]

I fully support Amtrak. I know it has its problems I am looking forward to feeling better so that I can take my trip to Seattle on the Coast Starlight.
Bob from AZ

[Anonymous]

For the record: when I posed this question, I wasn't questionning the legitimacy of Amtrak by any means. I'm a big supporter of passenger train travel in America, and I really want Amtrak to succeed. When you look at the congestion on our interstate system, plus factor in the hassle (and, for some of us, fear) of flying, Amtrak shines. Improvements are needed of course--and if given the funds necessary to implement changes, Amtrak could prove itself a most attractive option to other modes of transportation. Right now, it's a diamond in need of polish. Let's hope the government recognizes the gem it has in it's grasp and opts to restore the luster it deserves. Come what may, I'll be a loyal supporter to the very end.

[Anonymous]

I support it. That doesn't matter though. Becasue Amtrak cannot survive if only readers of this forum support it. We need to get message through to all Americans. We if they have good enough resons to give up their RVs, motorhomes or air travel they will use our pasenger rail system.

[PNWRMNM]

I would be happy to see Amtrak go.

[Anonymous]

Do I support Amtrak?

YES, YES, AND YES.

If Amtrak dies there will be no other passenger service in this country. The railroads won't allow it. We must continue to have Amtrak and improve its funding so it can compete with bus and air travel.

I have ridden Amtrak and look forward to this coming summer. (John get ready.)

[Willy2]

YES! I do support Amtrak 100%. Where would our country be without Amtrak? Amtrak is the last remaining passenger service that can get you from one end of this country to the other. It's late sometimes, that's true, but so what?! Without Amtrak railfans would be heartbroken ( at least I would be ) and we would all have to fly. Do we all want to fly everyplace we go? NO! There is a terrorist threat, and some people would rather watch the scenery go by the window in a dome car then watch the scenery go by thousands of feet below them. I happen to be one of those people. Amtrak can make it with the help of all of its loyal supporters! Support Amtrak!

[Anonymous]

I support AMTRAK and will ride it when I can. I hate flying anymore. The hub system has taken me miles and hours out of my way and the arilines pack you in like sardines. The last time I flew down to Houston from Chicago, I spent the return trip with my back bent at a 45 degree angle because the guy next to me resembled Jobba the Hut and the seats on airplanes are designed for anorexics! By the time we landed at O'Hare, I was in serious pain and didn't stop hurting until the next day.

I do think that the track and ROW maintenance ought to be publicly funded and improved substantially. I'd also like to see some more high speed corridors in other parts of the country. Right now it takes me 4 hours or so to get to the Des Moines area to visit my sis and the train station is in some little tank town. It would be so much better if the train could average 90 mph and stop in downtown Des Moines!

[michaelstevens]

I use Amtrak regularly, here in the North East -- e.g the Acela between Phila and NY.
Increasingly, I perceive, rail is becoming the preferred mode anywhere between DC and Boston.
Almost certainly, a majority of North Eastern voters support Amtrak and/or publicly subsidized passenger rail transportation.
Its a cultural thing, however, because elsewhere (e.g. Pittsburgh) people don't even consider taking the train. There are two each day, to Philadelphia -- but Amtrak takes over 7 hours, when flying only takes 1 hour.
Now if Pittsburghians, Harrisburgians, Lancastrians, Altoonans etc. were to agree with me, in sufficient numbers, that
(i) It actually takes at least 4 hours to fly, by the time you've got to & from the airports, checked in 2 hours early etc.
(ii) I don't want to risk being hi-jacked to save 3 hours
(iii) Politicians might be persuaded to invest in faster trains.
Then Pennsylvanians and other Americans might have the option -- as do Europeans, everywhere -- of travelling 350 miles (by train) in well under 4 hours.

[Anonymous]

Why would anyone, who does not support Amtrak as our only remaining passenger service, write or even visit these forums? Surely Amtrak is as much a part of railroading as any freight. It astonishes me.

[kenneo]

I think the original question, when it was asked "do you support", support was intended to me RIDE the National Railroad Passenger Corporation's products.

Do I? Yes. Have since inception. Have introduced others to the pleasure of riding a train as opposed to driving a car, riding a bus or an airplane.

At the end of October, I took a group of 11 from Posrtland to Seattle roundtrip on the TALGO. UP split a switch in Albany and delayed the train (#500) which originated in Eugene by 1.5 hours. They all thought that it was a really great experience - I was mortified by what was going on. AMTK bussed as many of the Portland passengers as they could to Seattle since most of them were going to a Mariners game. (Mariners and Seahawks stadiums are next to Kink Street Station in Seattle) Still, the train was SRO out of Portland and return from Seattle (#509) with about another trains capacity on AMTK charted busses.

On our return, we were spiked by the Columbia Draw for a tow to pass and arrived back in Portland 15 minutes late. Had we been able to leave Vancouver OT we would have been 10 minutes early.

Point of all this? We have a situation in the US at this time of "Run the Train - THEY WILL COME" as long as the schedules are reasonable and that service is advertised and otherwise promoted well.

Where there was .5 (as in every-other-day 6 days per week) trains per day in 1972 between Eugene and Seattle and none between Seattle and Vancouver BC, there are now 12 per day - 12 PORT-SEA (includes the 6 Eugene trains), 6 EUG-SEA, 2 continue on the EVerett and one more on to BC. That is the same number of trains running in 1960. Sparse ridership in 1960, full most of the time now. State supports (US, WA and OR) is close to break-even at $11 per seat, and the runs earn their costs when they are full.

I rest my case.


YES, I ride AMTK. So do a whole lot of others.

[jchnhtfd]

Better believe I do! In both senses -- as probably the best approach (in general -- see below!) to have passenger transportation in the US, and as a way to get from place to place -- if there is a train going my way, I'll take it in preference to any other mode.

Michael's comment on the real time involved in flying is right on -- particularly from the centre of any sizable city. You have to get to the airport. You have to get your boarding pass. You have to clear security. You have to be there ahead of time. Your plane is late leaving. Then you have to do the whole thing in reverse at the other end (assuming you don't fly to Chicago to get from New York to Miami, for instance) (does anyone but me know the airline hub joke: when you die, you have fly to Atlanta to change planes to get to heaven or hell!)

Passenger trains, however, do not and never have made money (so far as I know, anywhere in the world!). Therefore, they need public support. At the present the funding for Amtrak -- not Amtrak itself, but the funding for it -- is a continuing bad joke. That aspect of it I do NOT support!

[jeaton]

Yes, for my mother, who is now in her late 80's and for which there is no other means of long distance travel to visit family and friends. For myself, age 63 and retired, because I have the time and no longer find ANY pleasure in driving long distances. For any of the 75 million baby boomers who will reach retirement age in the next decade and be in a situation somewhere between mine and my mother's.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton

Yes, for my mother, who is now in her late 80's and for which there is no other means of long distance travel to visit family and friends. For myself, age 63 and retired, because I have the time and no longer find ANY pleasure in driving long distances. For any of the 75 million baby boomers who will reach retirement age in the next decade and be in a situation somewhere between mine and my mother's.

I have brought up this same thing in other threads about Amtrak and passenger service. My mother is in her mid 80s, had never flown and NEVER WILL. We must keep and improve Amtrak. I believe where the tracks are crowded that the government should help add trackage. This not only would help Amtrak stay on schedule but would help the freight railroads as well.

We must do something and start now for the furute or it will just get worse.

[PNWRMNM]

Scottydog,

I visit this forum because I am interested in railroading. Amtrak is a hidden tax on the railroad system that never should have happened, and never would if the railroads had been allowed to quit the business in the 1960's which would have been the case if we had a rational transportation policy, which we do not.

Now you have the government taking private property, the railroads' capacity, without compensation. That is theft, sanctioned by your US Congress of course. Meanwhile the govt provides right of way for highways, barge operators and airlines with massive subsidies and nobody even knows what is going on.

Further, if you really want decent passenger service you will never get it from Amtrak. It is a political creature. As such its mission is to spend your tax dollars, not to provide a service that people will buy. Amtrak must go.

[JoeKoh]

I hope not.i was hoping to take matt to chicago on it from toledo bryan or Fostoria.
stay safe
Joe

[Anonymous]

I ride Amtrak often. With my inner ear condition, I hate to fly. I am of an age where driving across the country isn't a kick anymore. When I ride the trains I get rest and relaxation. When I drive I need to take a day of rest when I get there, with the trains I rest on the way there.

Of course I could take a bus. Well that's what the folks who want to kill Amtrak say. However, Greyhound no longer serves my town with a scheduled service of once a week anymore, much less every day. So much for the bus...... At least Amtrak offers daily service in both directions in a town nearby. The closest airport with a scheduled service is two hours away. The train depot is a half an hour away.....

Yes, I ride Amtrak often. It happens to stop nearby, The service may not be the best, but it beats the bus.

[Anonymous]

What theft PNWRMNM? Amtrak pays a fee to the private freight companies to use their railroad tracks, and a very nice bonus if the trains arrive on time 90% through the private's dispatching. Yes, the privates could earn more if they dispatched their own freight train through a slot instead of an Amtrak train. However, I don't see the railroads giving back any FRA funds provided by the feds.... I don't see the railroads giving back their federal gasoline tax exemptions either....

Have you seen Amtrak's budget? Take a look at it..... Amtrak spends millions to use the right of way of the private railroads. Amtrak spends millions leasing former private railroads depots and stations. Amtrak spends millions contributing to the railroad workers retirement fund, the same one the privates use.

Amtrak also owns some right of way, the all important NEC. Amtrak needs to spend billions to get this track up to snuff, including rebuilding some tunnels and draw bridges along that route. Congress was supposed to have funded this ten years ago when Amtrak contracted out to lease the Acelas. Well, Congress hasn't.....

Since you are so opposed to funding the upkeep of Amtrak's own tracks, I supposed I will have to be opposed to funding the maintanence of any highways you use daily..... WE'LL SEE HOW LONG YOUR ROADS LAST!

Those opposed to Amtrak funding like to show a myth about how much cheaper it is to fly from Phoenix to Orlando. What they never show is how much cheaper it is to ride a train from Alpine Texas to Orlando...... Frankly, it is more expensive to fly into small towns than it is to ride Amtrak half way across America...... And I don't see the airlines changing their ticket prices policies any......

[PNWRMNM]

Don,

Amtrak pays only avoidable costs to freight railroads. The on time bonus is peanuts compared to what Amtrak costs in freight train delays. They made no contribution to the joint costs of keeping the railroad in business. They are robbers!

Imagine the Government told you you had to take in a boarder. They will get one of your bedrooms which you do not need because your kid just left for college. They get to use the kitchen whenever they want and use the phone whenever they want and invite in whomever and whenever they want. For this you will be paid avoidable cost. What is your avoidable cost?? You are already paying the mortgage and taxes so that is not avoidable. Maybe they use a few more gallons of water and a bit of electricity, so the govt will pay you $25 a month. Of course if you dont keep the house clean enough for them, they will female dog and moan and all thier friends will call you a dirty rotten, you fill in the rest. How would you like that deal? Amtrak is in the position of the favored family and the freight railroads are in your shoes.

On the NEC the shoe is on the other foot. The commuters pay Amtrak only avoidable cost. That was one of the things the commission, sorry I forgot the name, that formally declared that Amtrak would never make money pointed out. They claim Amtrak gets stuck for $500 million a year on this account. That is probably true and probably in the ball park of what the freight railroads get stuck supporting Amtrak.

I think an honest case can be made for the NEC. I can see no case for robbing the freight railroads to support Amtrak.

Second point. Amtrak will never be able to do the high speed rail that you so ardently desire. They have neither the skill nor the will. If that is what you want, make an honest case for the NEC with a new owner who can charge the commuters market rates. Then you have a chance to expand on a rational basis. Amtrak is an albatros.

[Anonymous]

The comments you make about maintenance cost and facilities/ plant rental is 100% true, but I wouldn't go so far as to call the travel cost differential a "myth", case in point, the "LA.- Ft Wayne Indiana" trip we talked about earlier.

Ft Wayne IS a smaller town, and the round trip airfare was $350.00 and connected my ACTUAL destinations within that price.

Amtrak wanted $325.00 rountrip for coach (add a sleeper and the cost skyrocked) took 6 days instead of 2, and dropped me off 32 miles out in the boonies.

This latter item gives thekiss of death to your representation, as even if I give it the most liberal of ground, that add on of roundtrip shuttle adds more than $25 to the farebox price, andall you will find at the Waterloo In "amtrak station" is a concrete ramp, a rain shield, and a pay phone (with no phonebook) just try and turn *that* into a rental car at 11 PM, I dare ya. No cab service in Waterloo, they roll up the sidewalk at sundown and put it away in this town of 2,200 people, so you are literally stuck in a corn field at midnight, unles you contract ahead with a shuttle, (hint for more than $25.00 round trip)

So, it's not exactly a myth...

[Willy2]

PNWRMNM: I, happen to think that Amtrak does have the skill and the will to do highspeed rail service. What would be useful to them and help them greatly would be the boost of money that they need from the government. If they had the money that they need they could fix track, upgrade service, and create a very efficient highspeed rail network throughout the northeast. If only they could get it I would be plenty happy, although I'm sure you would be spitting nails, since you're so ready for Amtrak to just leave this country and never come back.

I assure you that without Amtrak this country would not be the same. Railservice is essential in my opinion and in the opinions of many others. We should do everything we can to save Amtrak instead of saying that we wouldn't mind if it went away.

[Anonymous]

Those who wi***o kill Amtrak have done their very best to underfund it. They will probably get their wish when the bridges fall from a lack of maintanence on the NEC. Amtrak has to purchase/lease specially made electric locomotives because the electric lines of the NEC have 3 different voltages. Any other country with high speed rail would have already made necessary changes to operate on only one voltage.

Yes, Fort Wayne is a small city. However, in your presentation Los Angeles isn't. If I were you I would check the airfares from say Santa Barbara to Fort Wayne to understand what I meant about flying to and from small cities. Obviously, you haven't a clue..... In my internet search, Expedia, the cheapest fare is $570 on the redeye with connections in Los Angeles and Chicago for a 9 hour flight later this week without a Saturday night layover, short notice. Ahhhhhhhhhh, big cities have cheaper rates than smaller cities and towns........ Makes you wonder what the price of a flight from Salt Lake City to Fort Wayne is....the cheapest I found was $530...... Just living in Los Angeles provides airfares $200 less than living in Salt Lake City or Santa Barbara....... We can play this game forever...... Notice that those opposed to Amtrak always use flights connecting the big cities..... never the smaller cities in both cases....

[michaelstevens]

Just like American politicians, you are avoiding the question and thereby withholding the "support" which a nationalized passenger rail system (AMTRAK) urgently needs.
Its starting to be gridlock out there on the Interstate highways. Probably the "post 911" consciousness is the biggest cause -- people are driving instead of flying.
AMTRAK exists. It needs fixing. It presently has its first decent manager in years. With adequate funds for modernization, added equipment and improved bribes for the class 1s, America could restore a decent passenger rail network, in pretty short order.
Note that Florida is moving ahead with its Tampa to Orlando system -- but it will take the Feds (i.e. AMTRAK) to bring that to e.g. Atlanta -- which makes all the sense in the world.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by donclark

Those who wi***o kill Amtrak have done their very best to underfund it. They will probably get their wish when the bridges fall from a lack of maintanence on the NEC. Amtrak has to purchase/lease specially made electric locomotives because the electric lines of the NEC have 3 different voltages. Any other country with high speed rail would have already made necessary changes to operate on only one voltage.

Yes, Fort Wayne is a small city. However, in your presentation Los Angeles isn't. If I were you I would check the airfares from say Santa Barbara to Fort Wayne to understand what I meant about flying to and from small cities. Obviously, you haven't a clue..... In my internet search, Expedia, the cheapest fare is $570 on the redeye with connections in Los Angeles and Chicago for a 9 hour flight later this week without a Saturday night layover, short notice. Ahhhhhhhhhh, big cities have cheaper rates than smaller cities and towns........ Makes you wonder what the price of a flight from Salt Lake City to Fort Wayne is....the cheapest I found was $530...... Just living in Los Angeles provides airfares $200 less than living in Salt Lake City or Santa Barbara....... We can play this game forever...... Notice that those opposed to Amtrak always use flights connecting the big cities..... never the smaller cities in both cases....

Don, I think you are being unkind in your assesment of my "not having a clue" and I'll tell ya, if it's really a flame war ya want, pack a lunch, as I have formidable skilz as a troll. Don't threaten me with a good time.(Just let me know, I'll be *there*)

And, you are extremely misguided in your innuendo that I might be "anti Amtrak" as I assure you that is not the case, I am anti-nonsense. And the pricing policy I experianced with Amtrak when first hoping to book a trip via rail with sleeper service WAS PURE NONSENSE. Sorry I can't hold a grudge against only parties you deem fit, but that's your job, not mine.

There is no way in hootin' holler that the cramped quarters in an Amtrak sleeper merit higher cost than a night in a standard Holiday Inn, You see, it was overnight sleeping accomodations I desired, not an opportunity to buy into an accelerated depreciation schedule, for which I'd abandon my equity in the second i stepped off the train (talk about giving a new meaning to time share) but that's what the nonsense (pricing policy)from Amtrak seems to reflect.

I'd like Amtrak to get it's act together with value related pricing, comensurate with what I receive, rather than what some boneheaded congressman thinks I might be willing to pay, if I were not adverse to nonsense.....

But adverse to Amtrak? I assure you, most certainly not!!

[jchnhtfd]

Relax, gentlemen (and ladies)![:D]

I think a quick read of the various posts above will illustrate one thing, and, in truth, one thing only: moving people from point A to point B is a very highly political, and very highly personal, topic.

It is impossible, or virtually so, to obtain a dollar figure for each mode of transportation mentioned above (highway, rail, air) on a fully comparable basis. The various financing arrangements are complex beyond belief; the various hidden subisdies boggle the imagination -- in ALL the modes. Where it is most obvious is with air fares: is the 'true' cost of a flight from city A to city B (pick any pair, large or small) what you can find on Travelocity three months out? What you can get on Orbitz, a week out (but with a Sunday stay)? What you would pay if you showed up at the terminal three hours in advance for a business trip? You tell me, gentlemen -- I haven't a clue. But I can tell you the numbers differ by a factor of 10... and how much of my income tax should I add in for support of the air traffic system? And my local property tax (or somebody else's) for the airport? And highway to get to the airport?

Is the 'true' cost of my bus ticket what Greyhound charges me? Or should I add in the subsidies for the highway and fuel?

The same thing is true of Amtrak -- except, of course, that it pays taxes to local communities, rather than being paid by them (in most cases!) -- either directly or indirectly -- but there are lots of subisidies there, too.

You will never get agreement on the economics. You will probably never get agreement on the value to the community.

Further, it is unlikely that any amount of shouting or pulpit pounding will change the minds of most folks.

So, as I say, relax, gentlemen.

[Anonymous]

I support all passenger rail, including Amtrak. However I have a question.

I used to live in Germany. The Deutsche Bahn (their national railway) had a perfect network. Extremely high frequencies of regional and HSR long distance trains. Great service, too. On top of that, the ticket prices were dirt cheap! The most memorable example of the inexpensive price was the weekend pacakge. 1 family (2 adults and 3 children), any regional train (does not exeed the speed of 160km/h) in Germany, Saturday and Sunday...only 15 Deutsche Marks (less than 10 dollars!!!!!). My point is, how can they charge so little and work out fine, and passenger rail in North America cost so much and still have financial problems?

The only difference I can think of...Deutsche Bahn is private. But doesn't that mean Amtrak gets more government funding?

I know, I sound naive, but could someone please explain this to me?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd

Relax, gentlemen (and ladies)![:D]

[:I] LOL! *this* is relaxed for me.....I just have a strict set of ethics when it comes to someone trying to hardnose me, and frame concepts as mine of origin when such is not at all the case [;)]