CMStPnP schlimm A station 34.8 miles from downtown Phoenix on the three-days-per week Sunset? If downtown is a rat hole and most of the Economic action is in the suburbs then...........yes. My Brother lives in Chandler, AZ measure from there. Before that he lived in Tempe. My grand folks used to live in Sun City but hell that is nowhere near downtown Phoenix station. Scottsdale is a weathy suburb, not going to net a lot of train riders there either. Would be interesting to apply the Demographic analysis to stations I mentioned earlier to downtown Phoenix station and see what it looks like as far as where most potential Amtrak riders live in and around Phoenix.
schlimm A station 34.8 miles from downtown Phoenix on the three-days-per week Sunset?
If downtown is a rat hole and most of the Economic action is in the suburbs then...........yes.
My Brother lives in Chandler, AZ measure from there. Before that he lived in Tempe. My grand folks used to live in Sun City but hell that is nowhere near downtown Phoenix station. Scottsdale is a weathy suburb, not going to net a lot of train riders there either.
Would be interesting to apply the Demographic analysis to stations I mentioned earlier to downtown Phoenix station and see what it looks like as far as where most potential Amtrak riders live in and around Phoenix.
The old SL did stop in Tempe.
http://www.timetables.org/full.php?group=19941030n&item=0030
schlimm CMStPnP: "If downtown is a rat hole and most of the Economic action is in the suburbs then...........yes." The Rathole, aka downtown Phoenix and its former station. http://urbanconnectionrealty.com/100-things-to-do-in-downtown-phoenix/
CMStPnP: "If downtown is a rat hole and most of the Economic action is in the suburbs then...........yes."
The Rathole, aka downtown Phoenix and its former station.
http://urbanconnectionrealty.com/100-things-to-do-in-downtown-phoenix/
I could be totally wrong on this and it is opinion based on my living in the burbs for short stints of time (Scottsdale & Chandler)
The pictures do not do it justice, walk around that area on a business day and count the pedestrian traffic if you see any. Most folks work and play in the suburbs of Phoenix, my Brother lives there and I've been there on more than one IT Project. Yet to hear anyone say to me "Hey afterwork, lets go downtown to....." Instead it's lets go to Tempe to see a game or Lets hit up a few bars in Chandler. I think predominantly and I am just guessing here very few live downtown compared to the other burbs.
My view of the city if you view the Map. West of Phoenix mostly Indian reservations and migrant workers, North of Phoenix, retired people in Sun City, Scottsdale is like Lake Forest is in Chicago area, mostly wealthy. Middle Class suburbs are Chandler, Mesa, Tempe and in my experience that is where most of the vibrant growth and nightlife is. Scottsdale / Fountain Hills is nice with nice houses but typically golfing get togethers, some museums, some really nice hotels but not a whole lot of stuff going on there. Believe there is also a major USAF base North of Phoenix somewhere..........so maybe some Amtrak riders there but again not convienent to a downtown Phoenix station and niether is Scottsdale / Fountain Hills.
So in my view over the next 20 years, moving the Amtrak station to Maricopa might end up being a smart move as Phoenix might build out more in that direction.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
IMO there needs to be a national network and I would say Amtrak does do a reasonable job of connecting the nation in its LD network. There are obvious areas that aren't served and other city pairs that Amtrak doesn't serve well at all but I'd rather keep what we have than cut it apart and either make it so an East Coaster can't take Amtrak to California (or vice versa) or have to change trains 4-5 times to do so. Last time I returned from California, the Capitol Limited was delayed, I missed my connecting train to Philly (Trenton), and had to wait in a long line in Union Station with all the other passengers who missed their connections.
Plus, with the exception of the less than daily trains, all have healthy ridership (over 200,000 passengers a year) and I would think it would be crazy to discontinue any LD daily train. I'd like to keep the Sunset as it is the only route between the two most populous states in the country. The only LD train it makes any sense to get rid of without creating a bigger hole in the LD map) is Byrd Crap so you can use that equipment for a daily train (extend the Hoosier State to Cincinnati). Or if you can find a way to get from Cincinnati to Pittsburgh (hopefully through Columbus to serve them) to Philly, reroute it. You'd have a better chance to run the train daily and would serve bigger markets and make it to the East Coast faster than diverting all the way through West Virginia.
MidlandMike 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.
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.
Well done, Mike!
There are many corridors, underserved today, that do suggest themselves (e.g., Cleveland-Chicago), but for development AS corridors -- as enhancements of a through route, not a replacement for it.
schlimmA station 34.8 miles from downtown Phoenix on the three-days-per week Sunset?
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...
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...
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.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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..
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.
Says the pot to the kettle.
Mac
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.
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.
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!
Mac McCulloch
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!
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!
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"
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~
~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).
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.
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.
blue streak 1There certainly a need for the present LD trains thru routes.
That is in contention.
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.
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!
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.