John WR oltmanndYou have it backward. The states work with Amtrak. The push (and money) come from the states. Amtrak does not go to the states and say, "Hey! Want to fund some new service here?" Well yes. But the states that are willing to fund service have that service. I cannot explain why Amtrak does not have another stop in Atlanta. Can you explain why the Acela stops at Back Bay which is one mile from South Station, Boston?
oltmanndYou have it backward. The states work with Amtrak. The push (and money) come from the states. Amtrak does not go to the states and say, "Hey! Want to fund some new service here?"
Well yes. But the states that are willing to fund service have that service. I cannot explain why Amtrak does not have another stop in Atlanta. Can you explain why the Acela stops at Back Bay which is one mile from South Station, Boston?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimmMaybe they stop at Back Bay because they always did before Amtrak, while adding a new stop in suburban Atlanta would represent a change from the past. Amtrak's problem seems to be an inability to adapt and change.
I agree with you, Schlimm, that the only reason to stop at Back Bay is the historical reason.
As far as Amtrak's "inability to adapt and change" I think Amtrak has made a conscious decision here. Joe Boardman has said that back in 1970 Congress made a contract with the American people to maintain a national rail network. That is what the long distance routes are and that is why Amtrak will not change them although Amtrak will seek to run them as efficiently as possible. Also, Amtrak's Board of Directors has just extended Boardman's contract for 2 years so the Board supports his statement. So as long as Joe Boardman is President there will be no change in Amtrak's long distance routes.
I don't suggest we should necessarily agree with that perspective but I do think we have to accept it as the way things are, at least for a while. I don't see any change as long as Barak Obama is President.
John
I would like for AMTRAK to add two suburban ATLANTA stops in the future on the exisiting CRESCENT route. My suggestions for NEW stops are DOUGLASVILLE or BREMEN between ATLANTA and ANNISTON oing toward BIRMINGHAM and NEW ORLEANS, I would also like to see at least ONE new stop at NORCROSS or DULUTH which is between ATLANTA and GAINESVILLE. Suburban ATLANTA has grown a lot since AMTRAK took over the CRESCENT from SOUTHERN RAILWAY (now NORFOLK SOUTHERN) in 1979. I also feel that AMTRAK needs a NEW route from CHICAGO to MIAMI through ATLANTA in the future.
"Joe Boardman has said that back in 1970 Congress made a contract with the American people to maintain a national rail network."
"Amtrak was initially created as a for-profit enterprise with common stock issued only to railroads, though only four chose to become stockholders./8 The law also charged the federal transportation secretary with choosing the metropolitan areas that would constitute the basic system of service. The initial plan was for lines radiating out from Chicago and New York, with routes chosen based on a set of clear criteria including cost effectiveness. However, once the plan was released for comment, “political resource allocation abounded through the system” and additional routes were added./9" This language was taken from Page 2 of A New Alignment: Strengthening America’s Commitment to Passenger Rail, which is a Brookings Institute study on the renaissance of passenger rail in America.
The Brookings Institute generally gets high marks for the thoroughness and objectivity of its studies. The quoted paragraph does not imply that Amtrak had a contract to maintain a system of long distance trains. It had a mandate to develop a cost effective passenger rail system. Given the costs of the long distance trains, it would have been impossible to have a cost effective passenger rail network as long as they were a part of it. On the other hand, one could claim that because of politics, i.e subsequent interventions by politicians to maintain their favorite routes, the long distance trains were baked into the mandate, although I don't see it that way.
If as Boardman maintains the Congress contracted with the American people to maintain a long distance passenger train network, then why was Amtrak permitted to discontinue the National Limited, the North Coast Limited, the Pioneer, etc. If one has a contract for a national train system, they should be required to keep it as originally intended. Or could the contract be satisfied if Amtrak, for instance, dropped the Sunset Limited, Southwest Chief, and Empire Builder, keeping only the California Zephyr, with connecting trains from Ogden to LA and Portland, where passengers could connect with corridor trains?
Precisely! Although it is quite clear that Amtrak was pressured into adding some ridiculous trains by powerful congressmen (the Staggers West Virginian / Potomac (Turbo) Special, aka, "Staggers Express" ), some LD trains have come and gone. The continuance of multiple LD routes seems less a function of a mandate or even political pressure, and more a function of inertia and lack of rational planning, the latter aspect as the OIG report makes clear. A reading of the original 1970 legislation establishing Amtrak does not suggest a "Contract with America" (a term from 1994 by Gingrich's GOP) to maintain LD services.
I think sam1's proposal represents the kind of progressive advocacy needed. Run one or even two trains to SF with connections up and down the coast. No one rides those trains for speed, so adding more hours to LA, SD, Portland or Seattle should not be a problem.
Sam1If as Boardman maintains the Congress contracted with the American people to maintain a long distance passenger train network, then why was Amtrak permitted to discontinue the National Limited, the North Coast Limited, the Pioneer, etc. If one has a contract for a national train system, they should be required to keep it as originally intended. Or could the contract be satisfied if Amtrak, for instance, dropped the Sunset Limited, Southwest Chief, and Empire Builder, keeping only the California Zephyr, with connecting trains from Ogden to LA and Portland, where passengers could connect with corridor trains?
At the outset I want to state I am trying to understand this from Joe Boardman and the Amtrak Board of Directors perspective. I neither support nor oppose the "contract" position.
To answer your question, in the early days of the contract it could be adjusted and it was. And an overwhelming storm like Hurricane Katrina could certainly be a reason for a further adjustment. However, for many years now Congress has been funding the current long distance trains so I think Amtrak can argue the "contract position is valid.
schlimmA reading of the original 1970 legislation establishing Amtrak does not suggest a "Contract with America" (a term from 1994 by Gingrich's GOP) to maintain LD services.
Schlimm,
For the record I never believed you would accept the "contract with America" argument and I certainly do not suggest that you should. To my mind there is an implicit acknowledgment in the argument that Amtrak does not operate in the best way possible and maybe not even in a reasonably good way. But, the argument would have us believe, this is necessary because this is what the Congress has traditionally support it. I offer it because I think it is something we all need to consider, not because I regard it as correct.
I would suggest reading Title II , Section 201 of Public Law 91-518, in which there is a clear reference to cost/benefit analysis:
https://bulk.resource.org/gao.gov/91-518/00005088.pdf
" In formulating such recommendations the Secretary shall consider
opportunities for provision of faster service, more convenient service,
service to more centers of population, and service at lower cost, by
the joint operation, for passenger service, of facilities of two or more
railroad companies; the importance of a. given service to overall
viability of the basic system; adequacy of other transportation facil-
ities serving the same points: unique characteristics and advantages
of rail service as compared to ether modes of transportation; the rela-
tionship of public benefits of given servicca to the costs of providing
such services; and potential profii.ibility of the service."
I think this is the sentence you refer to. To my mind it is typical of government bureaucratic language that can mean pretty much anything you want it to mean. It really doesn't tie down Amtrak to do anything at all.
I have been trying to understand and present Joe Boardman's position as well as I can. To add a personal note, I don't disagree with the things you and Don say about Amtrak could simply be supplying more transportation to more people for the government money spent on it. But the simple truth is that government simply does not do things the way the private sector does and it is not going to. Not Amtrak or any other part of government. But both government and the private sector are here to stay and we all will live with both of them for a long time to come. Change is not impossible for either; however no small group of individuals is going to secure that change. That is my own opinion.
I thought I posted this earlier, but may have failed to push the right button:
At Back Bay one has a better connection between corridor trains, both "T' and Amtrak, and the Lake Shore and "T" trains to Worcester, Framingham, and other western suburbs of Boston. It is an 8 minute Orange Line ride between Back Bay and North Station, with Downeaster servce to Maine and T service to northern suburbs. Back Bay is more conveniinet to hotels and the Convention Center.
John WRSo as long as Joe Boardman is President there will be no change in Amtrak's long distance routes.
I'm not talking about changing any ROUTES, just adapting the existing routes to current conditions!
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
oltmannd John WRSo as long as Joe Boardman is President there will be no change in Amtrak's long distance routes. I'm not talking about changing any ROUTES, just adapting the existing routes to current conditions!
I completely agree with your post. Even the part that LD trains could be altered or eliminated by Congress. In fact, with the current Congress I think that is a distinct possibility although I still believe it most likely will not happen during the Obama Administration.
John WR Schlimm, I completely agree with your post. Even the part that LD trains could be altered or eliminated by Congress. In fact, with the current Congress I think that is a distinct possibility although I still believe it most likely will not happen during the Obama Administration. John
John-
You seem to be confusing the notion that because Congress has directed long distance train routes, that it precludes Amtrak taking any action, or even making recommendations on routes or service within routes. It doesn't.
For example, Congress did not tell Amtrak which routes to employ Superliners first, How many sleepers to put on the CZ vs EB, or what kind of food service car the Boston section of the LSL should carry.
Amtrak is free to do quite a bit. My point is that they don't do it. They don't even try. They seem to have all they can do today, what they did yesterday - and it's not from a shortage of people.
This train proposal made the news in Charlotte today.
http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/new-plans-high-speed-rail-atlanta-charlotte/nYCJ3/
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/06/05/4087177/charlotte-atlanta-train-line-hearing.html
Transportation officials will hold a public hearing Thursday afternoon in Charlotte, on the proposed Charlotte-Atlanta passenger train line.
The hearing will be from 3-6 p.m. at the N.C. Department of Transportation office, 2327 Tipton Drive. That is off Statesville Avenue, near I-85 and I-77 in north Charlotte.
State and federal officials are proposing to extend the Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor, under development from Washington to Charlotte, into the Atlanta area. Six difference routes are being considered, but the train would connect with the Georgia Multi Modal Passenger Terminal and Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Dave: Quesstions to be asked.if you go.
1. Is this planned to be over 110 MPH and if not why isn't it called HrSR as the DOT / FRA defines it.?
2. Is (are) the route(s) planned for consistent maximum speeds ?
3. 3. How many grade crossing would be eliminated on each of the routes and how many would be left?
4. Estimated transit times on each route based on 0 -6 stops ?
5. Station tracks at each stop so high platforms can be used ?
For your information if route goes to the ATL Hartsfield airport there is already a location on the A&WP sub of CSX that is under a free people mover from the main terminal to the rental car terminal. CSX ROW is wide enough for station track(s)
oltmanndAmtrak is free to do quite a bit. My point is that they don't do it. They don't even try. They seem to have all they can do today, what they did yesterday - and it's not from a shortage of people.
Don,
As I understand your position you want Amtrak to give up sleeping car service along with the dining cars and baggage cars that go with it and run trains of coaches with at most a snack bar. However, Joe Boardman has said he believes sleeping cars and associated services have to be part of Amtrak on long distance routes. So it is true he doesn't even try to get rid of them. In fact, he wants to keep them.
If Amtrak were to get rid of sleeping cars on its long distance routes would there be backlash from the Congress? I suspect there would be but of course I cannot know for certain.
John WRJoe Boardman has said he believes sleeping cars and associated services have to be part of Amtrak on long distance routes. So it is true he doesn't even try to get rid of them. In fact, he wants to keep them.
I'm not doubting you, but where did he actually say that? In a speech or in print?
John WRIf Amtrak were to get rid of sleeping cars on its long distance routes would there be backlash from the Congress? I suspect there would be but of course I cannot know for certain.
I for Amtrak taking an active role in improving the performance of their LD routes, whatever form that takes. What I see from Amtrak is complete lethargy and disinterest.
Lets try a concrete example. Suppose you split the Crescent at Atlanta into two days routes with an overnight stay in Atlanta as the bridge. Which state would object and for what reason? Might some state actually like the change (SC for example) because they would have a train that stopped - and arrived at the other end - while people are normally awake?
Leaving Atlanta on the A&WP sub toward West Point and Montgomery, is there any GOOD way to get to Birmingham? If there is, then a decent Amtrak station under the Hartsfield Airport people mover is long long overdue, and agitation for the construction of one should start immediately! Airport parking and connections to downtown (doesn't WMATA rapid transit have an airport station?) make it a natural, and Peachtree can be kept as a second station, possibly unstaffed, for those for whom it remains convenient.
oltmanndLets try a concrete example. Suppose you split the Crescent at Atlanta into two days routes with an overnight stay in Atlanta as the bridge. Which state would object and for what reason? Might some state actually like the change (SC for example) because they would have a train that stopped - and arrived at the other end - while people are normally awake?
I think that is a reasonable idea and could well improve ridership on the Atlanta to Washington part of the trip. An alternative would be to move the New Orleans departure to early evening. That would allow a connection with the City of New Orleans which arrives at 3:30 pm. It would also be closer to Amtrak's practice of running sleeping cars although I know you want to run all coaches. It would, however, move the overnight part of the journey to the New Orleans Atlanta segment and give the Carolinas a day train to Washington DC.
I wonder if don's idea is predicated on whether or not most passengers ride the full route (DC to NOL) or more likely, several city pairs?
daveklepperLeaving Atlanta on the A&WP sub toward West Point and Montgomery, is there any GOOD way to get to Birmingham?
On the Crescent timetable it is about 175 miles between Atlanta and Birmingham. What would make sense to me is that the two states get together and operate their own low cost service (similar to commuter service) from Birmingham to the Atlanta Airport. Joe Boardman has pointed out that there are private companies that operate commuter service but these companies are not organized as railroads which means that a lot of the railroad labor legislation that Amtrak must follow does not apply to them. They can operate a lot more cheaply.
However, if I were an Alabama transportation planner I would want to keep the business at home and have service between Birmingham and the Mobile Airport which is about 211 miles.
John WRHowever, if I were an Alabama transportation planner I would want to keep the business at home and have service between Birmingham and the Mobile Airport which is about 211 miles.
Why?
"Birmingham–Shuttlesworth International Airport currently averages 301 daily aircraft operations, including 136 flights daily to 43 airports in 40 cities. BHM served 3,222,689 passengers in 2007, and is the largest and busiest airport in the state of Alabama."
Mobile has 22 flights daily and high airfares.
Dave Klepper asks about a good way to get from the Atlanta airport to Birmingham. The only reasonable way, since the A&WP (CSX) runs right by the airport, would be to go from College Park up to Atlanta and there connect with the NS at the site of the Terminal Station. This would, of course, bypass the current passenger station in Atlanta. Since I have not checked airline service to/from Birmingham in many years, I do not know how many passengers would prefer flying into/out of Atlanta. I do know that, many years ago, air service to/from Birmingham seemed to be something like a stepchild. Forty-one years ago, there was direct service to/from Chicago (my fianceé visited me, and flew back to Boise; she had a much better trip coming to see me–she flew to Chicago and rode the Floridian to Birmingham).
Do the NS and CSX still share the tracks between Atlanta and East Point?
Johnny
Looks like US Airways Express flies out of Birmingham using regional contractors to Charlotte for connections.
John WR oltmanndLets try a concrete example. Suppose you split the Crescent at Atlanta into two days routes with an overnight stay in Atlanta as the bridge. Which state would object and for what reason? Might some state actually like the change (SC for example) because they would have a train that stopped - and arrived at the other end - while people are normally awake? Don, I think that is a reasonable idea and could well improve ridership on the Atlanta to Washington part of the trip. An alternative would be to move the New Orleans departure to early evening. That would allow a connection with the City of New Orleans which arrives at 3:30 pm. It would also be closer to Amtrak's practice of running sleeping cars although I know you want to run all coaches. It would, however, move the overnight part of the journey to the New Orleans Atlanta segment and give the Carolinas a day train to Washington DC. John
I think a PM departure from NOL would be reasonable thing to try. Connections from the City of NOL and Sunset really can't matter much. Why not push it all the way to 7PM?
You would hear whining from Meridian and Tuscaloosa, and probably Birmingham but that should be drowned out by the cheers from Spartansburg and Greenville (and Charlotte and Atlanta, too)
Why not just split the route, depending on some good market research? Why run the Crescent the whole distance when probably most folks would not continue through Atlanta.
schlimm Why not just split the route, depending on some good market research? Why run the Crescent the whole distance when probably most folks would not continue through Atlanta.
Better, yet. And, at least anecdotally, I know that to be true - few through passengers at Atlanta.
Or, even better, two ATL to NYP trains and Thruway buses to the south. (Let Megabus stop outside the Amtrak station)
oltmannd I think a PM departure from NOL would be reasonable thing to try. Connections from the City of NOL and Sunset really can't matter much. Why not push it all the way to 7PM?
Right now the Crescent leaves New Orleans at 7 am and arrives in New York Penn Station at 1:45 pm. If connections are not an issue the question then is how late is acceptable to arrive in New York.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.