To see if there is a conflict of intrest. Same goes for the board members.
Amtrak and Netjets don't compete in the same league, so there is no need.
An "expensive model collector"
Netjets is a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway. However, they have several competitors.
CandOforprogress2 To see if there is a conflict of intrest. Same goes for the board members.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
CandOforprogress2To see if there is a conflict of intrest(sic).
+1
It was the US Post Office who in about 1968 or so decided that mail was to moved from passenger trains to airplanes and trucks. It took a couple of years for the ICC to approve abadonement of passenger trains that sometimes made money with passengers or at least broke even but with the mail gone now lost way more money then they made. Had IM Containers happened sooner then passenger trains mixed with mail intermodal would have been the norm today.
runnerdude48The airlines could care less about Amtrak
LD trains, anyway. Did a little back of the envelope calculation. The Crescent might have 1/2% market share between Atlanta and Philly.
As Jim McClellan once said, the LD routes are irrelevant (but politically necessary)
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
CandOforprogress2 It was the US Post Office who in about 1968 or so decided that mail was to moved from passenger trains to airplanes and trucks. It took a couple of years for the ICC to approve abadonement of passenger trains that sometimes made money with passengers or at least broke even but with the mail gone now lost way more money then they made. Had IM Containers happened sooner then passenger trains mixed with mail intermodal would have been the norm today.
Flexivan and RoadRailers (the first incarnation) were around soon enough, but too little too late.
runnerdude48The airlines didn't kill the passenger train the American people did, by choosing a quicker, cheaper, safer and more efficient travel option.
It was a triple whammy with the RRs the willing fall guy.
WWII airfields, pilots and planes got commercial aviation off the ground on the cheap. That stole the businessman.
The Good Roads movement culminating with Parkways, tollways and finally Interstates, allowed for suburban, auto-centric living. Family vacations were now by highway to Holiday Inns built everywhere to accomodate (Kids eat free!) The leisure traveller was gone.
Railroads spend a bloody fortune on equipment trying to keep LD riders to no avail. The splendid streamliners were a poor investment force to keep running by the ICC regardless of ridership or cost, sometimes "in case it snowed".
The game was over by the mid-1950s. The mail thing was just the last blow.
azrail CandOforprogress2 It was the US Post Office who in about 1968 or so decided that mail was to moved from passenger trains to airplanes and trucks. It took a couple of years for the ICC to approve abadonement of passenger trains that sometimes made money with passengers or at least broke even but with the mail gone now lost way more money then they made. Had IM Containers happened sooner then passenger trains mixed with mail intermodal would have been the norm today. It was actually the Kennedy Administration that decided to move mail shipments from rail to plane and truck.
It was actually the Kennedy Administration that decided to move mail shipments from rail to plane and truck.
No. The cancellation of all "mail by rail" contracts occurred in Sept. 1967 when LBJ was president. The decline had been going on since the 1940s. However, the last RPO ran on June 30, 1977 between NY and DC.
runnerdude48The airlines could care less about Amtrak.
We had at least one HSR proposal in Texas overtly obstructed by the Southwest Airlines CEO. The Airlines do care in markets where they might compete directly or markets where HSR might threaten flight frequency. In the case of Southwest, prior to the lifting of the Wright Amendment. DFW to Houston to San Antonio and Austin...........the so called Texas Triangle, represented a lot of traffic to the airline. When a HSR was proposed over the same route to be built at state expense. Southwest howled and launched a anti-HSR PR campaign.
In regards to Amtrak, if the airlines of the NE could kill Amtrak in the Boston-Washington, D.C. Corridor.......and bring back a profitable Eastern Shuttle service, they would. Last guy to try the Eastern Shuttle on that route sits in the Oval Office and he did not do so well.
CandOforprogress2passenger trains that sometimes made money with passengers or at least broke even but with the mail gone now lost way more money then they made. Had IM Containers happened sooner then passenger trains mixed with mail intermodal would have been the norm today.
Mostly false. The reality is most passenger trains lost money even with the mail contracts by the late 1960's. They continued to run some trains with a mail contract not because they were raking in the dough but because they had a contract to do so and no real alternate means that would be less expensive or would be legally tolerable (say if they shifted to trucks for example....think the Feds would get agitated over that based on anti-trust concerns).
Very much doubt we would have private passenger trains today if the USPS held their rail contracts the way they were. Certainly we would have more abandonment of the USPS though because the rails can't compete with an airliner over LD time wise.
CMStPnP The reality is most passenger trains lost money even with the mail contracts by the late 1960's.
The revenue numbers I have start in 1936. Even then all passenger trains together made a loss of about $233,000. Only during the war years there were some profits.Source George W. Hilton, Amtrak page 10: http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-hiltonamtrack-1980_09162912196.pdfRegards, Volker
VOLKER LANDWEHROnly during the war years there were some profits.
One could argue because that was due to gasoline and rubber being rationed by license plate number and so people could not purchase gasoline on specific days and since it was based on license number and calendar dates........easy to see if you were cheating. So folks were forced out of their cars during the war years. Additionally the DoD was buying train tickets like candy to move troops around the country.
CMStPnP VOLKER LANDWEHR Only during the war years there were some profits. One could argue because that was due to gasoline and rubber being rationed by license plate number and so people could not purchase gasoline on specific days and since it was based on license number and calendar dates........easy to see if you were cheating. So folks were forced out of their cars during the war years. Additionally the DoD was buying train tickets like candy to move troops around the country.
VOLKER LANDWEHR Only during the war years there were some profits.
And even during the war years - physical plant, passenger equipment, freight equipment and motive power for both were being used well beyond their economic replacement levels and depreciation values to the bottom line.
To steal the well known line from a advertisement - 'You can pay me now or you can pay be later.' After the war the railroads ended up paying much more than if they had been able maintain themselves at proper levels during the war. The war was a period of deferred maintenance that enhanced the bottom line.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
With a steep excess profits tax in place as a wartime practice, Im doubtful as to how enhanced the bottom line was.
As I recall, during WWII, ability to purchase gasoline depended upon your occupation, which determined the class of permitssion to buy gasoline that you had. Someone whose work depended upon automobile transportation could purchase more gasoline than someone whose work did not depend upon automobile transportation, and thus such a depender had a different sticker on his windshield. I was unaware of limitation set by the calendar and license plate number, such as we had in the seventies.
Johnny
Deggesty As I recall, during WWII, ability to purchase gasoline depended upon your occupation, which determined the class of permitssion to buy gasoline that you had.
As I recall, during WWII, ability to purchase gasoline depended upon your occupation, which determined the class of permitssion to buy gasoline that you had.
During WWII motorists were issued a rationing sticker showing how much gasoline they could buy, which was based on their occupation. They were required to place the sticker on the windshield. Doctors, clergymen, etc. could get more gasoline than many others. I can understand docotors; clergymen not so much.
But many people cheated. My father, who was a lawyer, got more gasoline than many other people because he was counsel to the local Selective Service Board. I suspect his sticker had more to do with politics than need.
Civilians were not supposed to travel for pleasure during the war. But I can remember my mother telling me about some of her acquaintances that ignored the restrictions and took the train from Altoona to New York to see a show or two.
Studies have found that there was a thriving Black Market in the U.S. during the war for people who knew how to find the stuff they wanted and could pay for it.
DeggestyAs I recall, during WWII, ability to purchase gasoline depended upon your occupation, which determined the class of permission to buy gasoline that you had.
Anyone who remembers Bugs Bunny and the Gremlin miraculously coming to a halt just above the ground will remember him pointing to the reason for the 'save'...
Someone whose work depended upon automobile transportation could purchase more gasoline than someone whose work did not depend upon automobile transportation, and thus such a depender had a different sticker on his windshield.
Interestingly enough, clergy had an unlimited ("X") priority. Suspect this was sentiment more than objective 'best use' of domestic fuel. Doctors only had a "C" priority (presumably to optimize making house calls more than 'getting to surgery quickly' although I do not know if the 35mph national speed limit was relaxed for doctors 'when required'.
I was unaware of limitation set by the calendar and license plate number, such as we had in the seventies.
Having lived through this, I remember the rigmarole.
In almost all states, fuel was still State-regulated at the time, which meant that the price of a gallon was rigidly dictated, and this was not relaxed or adjusted depending on demand ... or supply. Certainly there would have been political screaming if the price had been allowed to float up to accord with actual physical supply restrictions, as we are now familiar with outside New Jersey. As a result, the only things that could be "controlled" were the amount that could be purchased, and the days that customers could go to stations.
Now, when this started, many cars had engines in the 440/455/460 range, and by the time you'd driven to the gas station, waited in what might be a very substantial line, and gotten your three dollars or gallons or whatever it was of gas, quite a bit of what you got to buy had essentially already gone up in smoke by the time you got home. The odd/even plate restrictions were a (reasonable, I thought at the time) way to reduce the line traffic, waiting, pollution, etc. roughly by half while still preserving the artificially-pegged price.
This was the time I first saw artificial opportunistic price jacking with teeth for vehicles. If you had a Volkswagen diesel Rabbit and a home-heating oil tank, you could easily bypass all the gas silliness (as well as theoretically driving coast-to-coast nonstop, which is another set of stories). Perhaps unsurprisingly the sticker price of a diesel Rabbit at our local dealers in northern New Jersey went north of something like $9950 (in 1974 dollars!) which I still look back on with some wonderment. Of course this appeared on the sticker as 'dealer price adjustment' just like the overage on a Buick GNX when a dealership had one.
[/quote]
PJS1 But I can remember my mother telling me about some of her acquaintances that ignored the restrictions and took the train from Altoona to New York to see a show or two.
This was the British poster designed to discourage rail travel 1939-45:
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.