dakotafred On the one hand, JPS1 tells us above that the LD trains are "part of the national fabric" and "here to stay." On the other that we should turn them into combination bus-airliners by eliminating sleeping and dining cars "to placate the kill the long distance train sharks." Eliminate Chicago-Portland and Boston-Albany on the LSL in the bargain. What for, if the LD trains aren't going away? I agree with his first position. Thanks to the geographical setup of the U.S. Senate, a national system is the price Washington will continue to pay to maintain the NEC on our nickel. And damn well should.
On the one hand, JPS1 tells us above that the LD trains are "part of the national fabric" and "here to stay." On the other that we should turn them into combination bus-airliners by eliminating sleeping and dining cars "to placate the kill the long distance train sharks." Eliminate Chicago-Portland and Boston-Albany on the LSL in the bargain.
What for, if the LD trains aren't going away?
I agree with his first position. Thanks to the geographical setup of the U.S. Senate, a national system is the price Washington will continue to pay to maintain the NEC on our nickel. And damn well should.
If Amtrak were run like a real business, it would mold its long distance trains to what the majority of the people who use it show they are willing to pay for.
Eight-five per cent of the long distance train riders go coach. And for many if not most of them the meals in the lounge car seem to fill the bill.
For years the legacy airlines were convinced that they had the perfect passenger service model. Then PSA and Southwest Airlines showed them that most people wanted a different service model.
Southwest has become one of the most successful common passenger carriers in the world. While the legacy carriers all went through bankruptcy swearing that Southwest was playing unfair.
People who insist that the long distance trains should be run like it they were in the 1950s, i.e. sleepers, diners, etc., are providing ammunition for those who want to get rid of them. Change is the essence of any viable commercial enterprise. And Amtrak is a commercial enterprise.
I am selfish. I would like to see daily service in west Texas and eastern New Mexico. Making the Texas Eagle a daily train, as per my previous suggestion, would be one way to do it. I could care less if it has a traditional dining car and sleepers. So too could my few neighbors who might consider taking the train.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
"This is tough stuff to look at and requires full visibility of the data. The problem is that Amtrak is not good about making this information public, and it gets questioned a great deal even by those inside the organization."
When you tell us your educational qualifications, as well as the specific Amtrak projects that you worked on, including the dates, plus your current access to Amtrak's accounting books, I will take your comments seriously.
Who inside Amtrak is questioning the company's management (cost) accounting systems? Your comment reminds me of a favoriate ploy used by journalists. "According to my informed sources......"
At the end of the day, irrespective of Amtrak's management accounting shortcomings, there are two likely scenarios that will play out for passenger rail in the next decade.
Excerpt from article by Rush Loving, Jr., Trains, March 2009
At its birth, Amtrak was a foundling (and it remains so). In a secret pact with some railroads, the Nixon administration agreed to create the company on the condition that it be put to death after a couple of years. When Fortune magazine ran an expose of Amtrak's mismanagement in 1974, Louis W. Menk, chairman of the Burlington Northern Railroad, was irate, complaining off the record to this writer that the story was undermining their scheme to kill off the company.
Eighty-five percent of LD riders may use coach, per JPS1. Most of the time, those coaches are not full. The sleeping cars I ride on usually are, requiring reservations well in advance because of lack of capacity. If Amtrak were able to buy more sleeping cars, it would probably be able to sell more first-class tickets.
In any case, why give away the store? To me (and, I suspect many others), first class is Amtrak's whole franchise, literally impossible of duplication on any other public mode.
If you want a bus, ride a bus. But don't subvert what we have and call it Amtrak.
JPS1 Bartman-tn: What kind of real work did you do for Amtrak? When did you do it? Are you an accountant? Do you have access to Amtrak's current books?
Bartman-tn:
What kind of real work did you do for Amtrak? When did you do it? Are you an accountant? Do you have access to Amtrak's current books?
Uh, oh -- not another credentials checker, especially not one with 168 whole posts! We've had those in the past, and they're a royal P.I.A. We have only their word for their own expertise. We forum readers can decide for ourselves, over time, which orifice a poster is talking out of. No help needed from the peanut gallery.
dakotafred JPS1 Bartman-tn: What kind of real work did you do for Amtrak? When did you do it? Are you an accountant? Do you have access to Amtrak's current books? Uh, oh -- not another credentials checker, especially not one with 168 whole posts! We've had those in the past, and they're a royal P.I.A. We have only their word for their own expertise. We forum readers can decide for ourselves, over time, which orifice a poster is talking out of. No help needed from the peanut gallery.
Apparently several participants in these forums have solid backgrounds in engineering, railroad operations, etc. Their views on engineering or operating subjcts carry a lot more weight than those of a rail fan who teaches history, as an example.
Asking a person who professes to know how Amtrak's accounting systems work to tell us his professional skills, if any, is not unreasonable. It adds creditability to his or her views.
Lots of people seem to have an opinion about Amtrak's accounting systems, but I have yet to meet anyone outside of the company who has access to the company's books. Without it they are ignorant of the company's accounting practices. And even if they have access to the books, if they don't know how to read them, which requires some training in accounting and finance, their views are worthless.
I know how to analyze accounting and financial data. But all I know about Amtrak's accounting systems is what they publish. I don't have access to the company's books. They ain't going to give it to me. Nor should they!
Apparently we have had different experiences flying business class, which could serve most of Amtrak's first class passengers, and riding Greyhound. I have done both. I fail to see how business class on cross country and international flights compares to a Greyhound bus.
Having flow to and from Asia 28 times, as well as to England six times, in business class, I must have missed something. Next time I take the bus from El Paso to Tucson I'll have a closer look. Maybe it is a bit like business class.
JPS1 dakotafred JPS1 Bartman-tn: What kind of real work did you do for Amtrak? When did you do it? Are you an accountant? Do you have access to Amtrak's current books? Uh, oh -- not another credentials checker, especially not one with 168 whole posts! We've had those in the past, and they're a royal P.I.A. We have only their word for their own expertise. We forum readers can decide for ourselves, over time, which orifice a poster is talking out of. No help needed from the peanut gallery. Apparently several participants in these forums have solid backgrounds in engineering, railroad operations, etc. Their views on engineering or operating subjcts carry a lot more weight than those of a rail fan who teaches history, as an example. Asking a person who professes to know how Amtrak's accounting systems work to tell us his professional skills, if any, is not unreasonable. It adds creditability to his or her views. Lots of people seem to have an opinion about Amtrak's accounting systems, but I have yet to meet anyone outside of the company who has access to the company's books. Without it they are ignorant of the company's accounting practices. And even if they have access to the books, if they don't know how to read them, which requires some training in accounting and finance, their views are worthless. I know how to analyze accounting and financial data. But all I know about Amtrak's accounting systems is what they publish. I don't have access to the company's books. They ain't going to give it to me. Nor should they! Apparently we have had different experiences flying business class, which could serve most of Amtrak's first class passengers, and riding Greyhound. I have done both. I fail to see how business class on cross country and international flights compares to a Greyhound bus. Having flow to and from Asia 28 times, as well as to England six times, in business class, I must have missed something. Next time I take the bus from El Paso to Tucson I'll have a closer look. Maybe it is a bit like business class.
Yes sort of interesting that in another thread I had access to the books and described the situation, a fellow poster said I was confused and laid out a counter view of things that had nothing to do with the facts. Seems that's the nature of these forums and gets back to my posting rule IF YOU DON'T KNOW DON'T POST, or at least identify that it's your opinion or that your are guessing.
A little off topic but they have a real nice writeup on the Milwaukee Roads Buffeteria Cars in this quarter's Milwaukee Railroader produced by MRHA (Milwaukee Road Historical Association). The cars initially were meant to suppliment Diners at peak periods on the Hiawatha and other routes but ended up replacing the Diner Car entirely on some routes as they were deemed more cost efficient. They have color pictures and not surprisingly most of the car has a linoleum tile floor............which became common place Milwaukee Road flooring in the early 1970's. They also have a sample menu from one of the cars.
Immigrant Cars
Immigrant passage is the cheapest available on trains. The immigrant cars have plain seats or benches. Each has toilet facilities and a stove at the end of the car. The conductor will rent the passenger a straw‑filled mattress for $1.25 to $2.50. The mattress may be placed on the seat or the floor between the seats. Passengers can cook their meals on the stove. The immigrant cars are built like box cars. Ventilation is poor‑. However, an entire family can travel for $1‑00 or $2.00.
CLOTHING
If you plan to ride the coach or immigrant car, do not wear your best clothes. You will find after a few hours on the train, that your clothes are rumpled arid dusty.
http://www.uni.edu/iowahist/Frontier_Life/Railway_Guide/RailwayGuide.htm
Super low fares.
There certainly a need for the present LD trains thru routes. We do not need the "Balkinization" of train seat supply artifically constrained by state lines. How do we allocate in the future train service ? One item to recognize is that there are population shifts in the lower 48.
But maybe there could be a search of old ICC records for ridership of various routes. With some what difficulty competing routes services could be combined.
Then adjust those numbers for population shifts and plan future Amtrak service with thoses figures in mind. That of course is going to add more trains first to previous heavily traveled routes
Victrola1 Immigrant Cars Immigrant passage is the cheapest available on trains. The immigrant cars have plain seats or benches. Each has toilet facilities and a stove at the end of the car. The conductor will rent the passenger a straw‑filled mattress for $1.25 to $2.50. The mattress may be placed on the seat or the floor between the seats. Passengers can cook their meals on the stove. The immigrant cars are built like box cars. Ventilation is poor‑. However, an entire family can travel for $1‑00 or $2.00. CLOTHING If you plan to ride the coach or immigrant car, do not wear your best clothes. You will find after a few hours on the train, that your clothes are rumpled arid dusty. http://www.uni.edu/iowahist/Frontier_Life/Railway_Guide/RailwayGuide.htm Super low fares.
Sounds like the Ryanair business model.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
blue streak 1There certainly a need for the present LD trains thru routes.
That is in contention.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
PNWRMNM GERALD L MCFARLANE JR ~snip~ This Railroad Trust Fund could then be used for any public and/or public/private improvement to the overall transportation network, especially Amtrak. Actually a tax on freight railroad diesel to support ATK is a terrible idea. The freight carriers are already subsidizing ATK to the tune of a few hundred million dollars per year due to statutoraly mandated marginal cost pricing. There is no need for shippers to further subsidize ATK. All that will do is tend to drive freight to the highway and support anothert set of money sucking bureaucrats to launder the railroad's money. DUMB! DUMB! DUMB! ATK suffers the ill effects of marginal cost pricing of capacity to communter trains on the NEC, again to the tune of a few hundred million dollars per year. What congress should, but will not because it is too simple, is allow the freight carriers to charge ATK market rates, and allow ATK to charge commuters market rates. Then ATK could make actual-cost based decisions about all of its services. Mac McCulloch
GERALD L MCFARLANE JR ~snip~ This Railroad Trust Fund could then be used for any public and/or public/private improvement to the overall transportation network, especially Amtrak.
~snip~
This Railroad Trust Fund could then be used for any public and/or public/private improvement to the overall transportation network, especially Amtrak.
Actually a tax on freight railroad diesel to support ATK is a terrible idea. The freight carriers are already subsidizing ATK to the tune of a few hundred million dollars per year due to statutoraly mandated marginal cost pricing. There is no need for shippers to further subsidize ATK. All that will do is tend to drive freight to the highway and support anothert set of money sucking bureaucrats to launder the railroad's money. DUMB! DUMB! DUMB!
ATK suffers the ill effects of marginal cost pricing of capacity to communter trains on the NEC, again to the tune of a few hundred million dollars per year.
What congress should, but will not because it is too simple, is allow the freight carriers to charge ATK market rates, and allow ATK to charge commuters market rates. Then ATK could make actual-cost based decisions about all of its services.
Mac McCulloch
Apparently I have to highlight my own last statement, I specfically mention that the "Railroad Trust Fund" would be to improve all rail transportation modes, and that includes Amtrak. You seem to not realize that my proposed tax would not only be paid for by the railroads but also by Amtrak and the commuter services, it goes into a big pot and is doled out, just like the Highway Trust Fund, only a separate one for railroads.
JPS1 ~snip~ Having flow to and from Asia 28 times, as well as to England six times, in business class, I must have missed something. ~snip~
Having flow to and from Asia 28 times, as well as to England six times, in business class, I must have missed something. ~snip~
Well, you need to take into account the Airline you flew because you know what happens when you assume all business class is alike. I'm going to presume that business class on foreign airlines is different from business class on domestic carriers(aka the legacy carriers) for domestic service vs international service(and from what I've read, it is).
dakotafred JPS1 Bartman-tn: What kind of real work did you do for Amtrak? When did you do it? Are you an accountant? Do you have access to Amtrak's current books? Uh, oh -- not another credentials checker, especially not one with 168 whole posts!
Uh, oh -- not another credentials checker, especially not one with 168 whole posts!
Sigh, who cares about post count? Maybe JPS1 should have spent some time on the (RIP) diner thread, ordering make believe food to add to his/her post count, so they can have more clout in their postings. After all, those that order internet over easy eggs every morning, obviously would have more knowledge of railroad operations than someone who does not.
An "expensive model collector"
GERALD L MCFARLANE JR GERALD L MCFARLANE JR Apparently I have to highlight my own last statement, I specfically mention that the "Railroad Trust Fund" would be to improve all rail transportation modes, and that includes Amtrak. You seem to not realize that my proposed tax would not only be paid for by the railroads but also by Amtrak and the commuter services, it goes into a big pot and is doled out, just like the Highway Trust Fund, only a separate one for railroads.
You only need to highlight it to attempt to obscure your intent, which in the original post you made perfectly clear was to support ATK, by taxing the freight carriers.
The freight carriers are quite capable of managing their capital investments without the Federal Government, thank you. Your tax would divert funds that otherwise go to some constructive use, probably go to capital investment, so the first effect on both freight and passenger capacity would be negative.
Based on fuel consumption, the freight carriers would put in about 98% of the money. To accomplish your stated purposes, the vast bulk of the expenditures would benefit ATK. That is an additional tax on the freight carriers, and their customers, to support ATK. I use the word additional because the freight carriers are already being taxed some $400 to $500 million per year to support the ATK leach by being forced to charge less than market rate for the train slots ATK uses.
If congress wants to have a 12" to the foot model railroad/welfare program, they should pay for it, not the freight carriers. Your proposal is entirely wrong headed on an equity basis and would be a further dead weight loss to the economy. As I said before DUMB! DUMB! DUMB!
PNWRMNMIf congress wants to have a 12" to the foot model railroad/welfare program, they should pay for it, not the freight carriers. Your proposal is entirely wrong headed on an equity basis and would be a further dead weight loss to the economy. As I said before DUMB! DUMB! DUMB! Mac McCulloch
Pretty nasty tone there, as well as using the forum as a soapbox for your political ideology.
Says the pot to the kettle.
Mac
These proposals to split up the LD routes are a way to doom Amtrak. No politician wants "THEIR" train(s) to be less or why should (s)he support any of Amtrak. Lets quit trying to Balkanize the USA..
blue streak 1 These proposals to split up the LD routes are a way to doom Amtrak. No politician wants "THEIR" train(s) to be less or why should (s)he support any of Amtrak. Lets quit trying to Balkanize the USA..
Sure. Let's find a new rationale for NOT improving Amtrak. If we use our 'new word of the month' we can keep Amtrak stuck in the 1950s.
Frankly, I resent your attempt to portray folks who offer suggestions to improve passenger services as wanting to doom Amtrak. It's disingenuous. Apparently it is all you can do because you seem incapable of offering any positive suggestions beyond retaining the same old same old.
schlimm blue streak 1 These proposals to split up the LD routes are a way to doom Amtrak. No politician wants "THEIR" train(s) to be less or why should (s)he support any of Amtrak. Lets quit trying to Balkanize the USA.. Sure. Let's find a new rationale for NOT improving Amtrak. If we use our 'new word of the month' we can keep Amtrak stuck in the 1950s. Frankly, I resent your attempt to portray folks who offer suggestions to improve passenger services as wanting to doom Amtrak. It's disingenuous. Apparently it is all you can do because you seem incapable of offering any positive suggestions beyond retaining the same old same old.
I don't think there is a problem with LD trains although I do have problems with some of them. I personally would like to see more LD train service. There are no trains to Las Vegas, Phoenix, Nashville, Louisville, or Columbus. There is little service and/or service at bad times in the middle of the night (ex. Cleveland). You can't take a train from Chicago to Houston or a daily train from Chicago to Philadelphia (and the one train takes about nine hours longer than it should) but you can take a train from Chicago to Willston, North Dakota. Houston has only 3 trains per week while Willston has 7. Amtrak clearly has its priorities backwards. There was a train that Amtrak decided was not performing and canceled it but some senator meddled and demanded it return. Amtrak could've used the money on a better performing train but Congress wouldn't allow it. Ideally we can add services to the cities that are underserved or not served at all but that would cost more money. So if you have to cancel an underperforming train to add a train that would add more ridership/revenue, I'm all for it. Congress should just give Amtrak the money and butt out and let Amtrak decide which trains are worth it and which aren't.
Technically, Metro Phoenix has Amtrak service via the Maricopa stop. It is Downtown Phoenix that is missing a station.........and having seen the station location in Downtown Phoenix I really have to wonder aloud how convienient it was to use (in relation to Phoenix Demographics) for all the complaining in these forums that it is no longer used. Looked like it was in a slummy area to me, though I was just a visitor.
It's interesting to point out that the truncation of the California Zephyr to Emeryville doesn't get half the complaints that the new Maricopa, AZ station gets.
The termination point in Emeryville makes sense since it is closer to the east end of the Bay Bridge for the bus connections to San Francisco.
CSSHEGEWISCH The termination point in Emeryville makes sense since it is closer to the east end of the Bay Bridge for the bus connections to San Francisco.
I've used the bus connection to SF proper. It works pretty well.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Some of the discussion here is tail wagging the dog.
We railfans, myself included, like these LD trains. We like to have lots of choices, i.e., lines on the map. We like to have nice sleeping accomodations and dining car service, like the streamliners of old. We like trains. We are nostolgic.
We tend to come up with rationalizations for why all these trains exist and should continue to exist such as:
- Amtrak's original purpose
- Socail justice
- Amtrak's accounting slant
- Political necessity
- Political "fairness" - why should the NEC get all the $$
and on and on....
We don't like to hear that these trains, in the current form, are pretty much irrelevant. Except for the very few places these trains go - and those with bus or air survice, rural America does not have access to transport other than personal automobile.
The LD train could go away tomorrow and almost nobody would notice.
However, they are not going away - for a whole host of reasons that may or may not make much sense to anyone. So, what then? I say the goal should be to make them more useful. That is, to carry as many folks as possible, for as many purposes as possible (including us railfans) at the least possible cost.
We need to demand a "better Amtrak". Better isn't perfect and it isn't ideal and it doesn't necessarily fit anyones political views, but better is still better than status quo.
oltmanndWe need to demand a "better Amtrak". Better isn't perfect and it isn't ideal and it doesn't necessarily fit anyones political views, but better is still better than status quo.
One notion that has not been discussed here is putting Amtrak on a steady, non-political source of funding. That would mean not being subject to yearly appropriations requests to Congress and having to provide irrelevant trains in exchange for votes. Perhaps funding more akin to that for highways and waterways, linked to user fees? Or some other more reliable basis? Something to consider.
CMStPnPTechnically, Metro Phoenix has Amtrak service via the Maricopa stop.
A station 34.8 miles from downtown Phoenix on the three-days-per week Sunset?
schlimm oltmannd We need to demand a "better Amtrak". Better isn't perfect and it isn't ideal and it doesn't necessarily fit anyones political views, but better is still better than status quo. One notion that has not been discussed here is putting Amtrak on a steady, non-political source of funding. That would mean not being subject to yearly appropriations requests to Congress and having to provide irrelevant trains in exchange for votes.
oltmannd We need to demand a "better Amtrak". Better isn't perfect and it isn't ideal and it doesn't necessarily fit anyones political views, but better is still better than status quo.
One notion that has not been discussed here is putting Amtrak on a steady, non-political source of funding. That would mean not being subject to yearly appropriations requests to Congress and having to provide irrelevant trains in exchange for votes.
I suspect the steady, non-political funding amount would be close to zero.
But, politically based funding does stuff like keeping the SW Chief running through Kansas in the middle of the night. Rural southern Kansas gets a train. Rural South Dakota does not. Fair or not fair? Or, just the way it is...
oltmannd schlimm oltmannd We need to demand a "better Amtrak". Better isn't perfect and it isn't ideal and it doesn't necessarily fit anyones political views, but better is still better than status quo. One notion that has not been discussed here is putting Amtrak on a steady, non-political source of funding. That would mean not being subject to yearly appropriations requests to Congress and having to provide irrelevant trains in exchange for votes. I suspect the steady, non-political funding amount would be close to zero. But, politically based funding does stuff like keeping the SW Chief running through Kansas in the middle of the night. Rural southern Kansas gets a train. Rural South Dakota does not. Fair or not fair? Or, just the way it is...
It would be difficult to achiewve, granted, but it would permit Amtrak to be run in a more rational and creative fashion.
As to the SWC running through KS in the middle of the night? That was the schedule, more or less, of the AT&SF's Super Chief and El Cap 40+ years ago. As you've said on here before, Amtrak does things that way because that's the way it always has been done.
The OP seems to give the reason why replacing western LD trains with corridor trains would be problematic, i.e., the low population in that area of the country. To use the CZ as an example: Chicago to Omaha would probably make a good corridor (probably even better if it was routed as an expansion of the proposed Quad Cities train via Des Moines). However, Omaha to Denver does not look that promising as a corridor. For potential traffic I looked at flights between the endpoints, using Expedia non-stops, midweek, 3 months out. Chicago-Denver had 13 non-stop flights; Chicago-Omaha 8; Omaha-Denver 3. So Omaha-Denver has little potential traffic, and no big intermediate cities. Denver-Salt Lake City on CZ is already optimally scheduled for a corridor. SLC-Reno surprisingly has 3 non-stop flights, but again a corridor train would have sparse intremediate traffic. Reno-SFO used to have a "Fun Train"(?) but I believe that was weekends only. It seems obvious that some of these corridors would not be viable, and would be dropped. Similar gaps would develop in all the corridorized LD routes, so there would no longer be a national network. In essence, corridors are not a politically viable replacement for LD trains.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.