Trains.com

Dog Gone Greyhound

10882 views
161 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, July 3, 2019 11:25 AM

David Gunn or Reistrup could be doing it if alive and active today.  But you have to believe in the product to sell it.   Including selling it to law makers.  Including selling it to Trump, even.

There are also parallels with our situation here in the Mideast, if anyone wishes to contact me at daveklepper@yahoo.com.  And, yes, railroads are a critical part of the solution.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Wednesday, July 3, 2019 11:17 AM

Call me a cynic,  but in the current climate,  Amtrak is beyond repair.  Fundamentals need to be changed,  such as funding on a longer basis,  personnel,  and dedicated ROWs,  thanks name three. 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, July 3, 2019 11:15 AM

Ditto other aspects of their operations:  What does it cost to attatch a private car to a train at a terminal?  Then how much more at an intermediate station where  probably a freight railroad will be involved?  Or at an intermediate point on the NEC?   Then don't refuse the business, just publish what the appropraite price is to more than break even. 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, July 3, 2019 11:05 AM

100 percent correct.  I agree with you  completely, and that is exactly the point I wished to make with my story.

One step necessary for any business to be successful is to use its opportunities and facilties constructively.  I am certain my station resdtaurant scheme can turn a money sinkhole into a profit center.

In my letter to Anderson, I do point out that even a dark railroad, one dispatched only by train orders, is still safer than any public highway.  (Without specifically meantioning the idea of a "bus bridge.")

I hope that starts him thinking about just what he had been doing.

Positivity has to start at the top.

And again, today's bsby boomers will be tomorrow's senior citizens and there will be a lot more of them.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, July 3, 2019 9:35 AM

daveklepper
Possibly, but where is the happy ending?

List the changes that would be necessary at Amtrak to bring it about (comparable to the example in the story).  We've already discussed several severe difficulties.  I'm tempted to note that better vetting, training, and supervision are prerequisites in a number of vital senses, even for commodity-level "hospitality"...

Once the problems with the culture are fixed, we can start addressing how the deck chairs are best arranged, and so forth.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, July 3, 2019 9:22 AM

Possibly, but where is the happy ending?

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Wednesday, July 3, 2019 8:35 AM

I understood what you were attempting in your long post but it is a poor analogy.  If you were looking for a parallel in the hospitality business, Howard Johnson's would have been more pertinent. 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, July 3, 2019 7:41 AM

I think most readers understood the parallel beween broken-down, poor-service trains and broken-down poorly-maintained apartments.  Sorry if you do not.

Hope to learn others' response.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Tuesday, July 2, 2019 11:44 AM

What does your post have to do with busses or trains or current times? 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, July 2, 2019 7:55 AM

The old man was pathetically glad for their
> company and didn't want to let them go but they had a schedule to adhere to
> if they were going to find a place that day.
>
>          It became a discouraging search. They checked off apartment after
> apartment, each seemingly more broken down than the last. When they thought
> they might have to call that farmer after all, they arrived at the Braun's
> house. It was on Main Street and had a nice, middle class look about it.
> Mrs. Braun was a tall, thin elderly lady with a pince nez and a forbidding
> expression. She interviewed them in her parlor. When she learned that Len
> was a PhD candidate at Cornell she nodded, signifying that they qualified
> for being given a look at the quarters that she and her late husband had
> fixed up above their own. She led them up the stairs (which were newly
> carpeted) and took out a key which opened the door to a freshly painted
> living room, clean and equipped with nicely upholstered furniture, unlike
> the sprung, broken backed monstrosities they had been shown elsewhere. The
> kitchen was small but modern, the bedroom large and airy.
>
>          The place was perfect but how much would it cost? They couldn't
> afford much on the $4500/yr that Len's assistantship and GI bill benefits
> would give them. He tried to act like a man of the world used to bargaining
> but he ended up asking resignedly what the rent would be. Surprisingly it
> was the same sum that the owners of the ramshackle apartments had demanded.
> This was a real find! Len tried to hide his excitement when he said that
> they'd take it. Mrs. Braun was no more subtle than they were. She took out a
> rental contract, looked at it through her pince nez, and pointed out where
> they should sign. She was willing to allow them to store whatever they
> wished for the month until they came to occupy it and she almost forgot to
> get them to leave a deposit as a tender of their seriousness.
>
> When they left the house Rose let out a chirp of joy. Len gave her a firm
> kiss and hug.  This wasn't a dream. They really were going to live together
> as husband and wife. They had an address. Now they ought to go out to
> celebrate!
>
>

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, July 2, 2019 7:51 AM

On this hospitality business, here is a story from the pen of my fellow MIT and ROTC classmate (he served in Europe during Korea) and fellow American Israeli, Larry Lewin:

 LEN AND ROSE FIND AN APARTMENT
>
>          In the Spring of 1958 Len and Rose took a day off and drove from
> Ithaca , the scene of their courtship, to Geneva , where the NY State
> Agricultural Experiment Station stands. Len had started his PhD research
> there with Dr Gunderson. It should take another year to finish. The couple
> (it was hard for him to really believe that they would soon be a couple)
> would have to find a place to rent for that time. They had circled ads in
> the Geneva Times for what might be suitable accommodations. Their first stop
> was at a farmhouse just out of town.
>
>  The farmer was waiting as they drove up. The house was white clapboard,
> just like conventional farmhouses on Xmas cards. A pitchfork leaned against
> the wall at a crazy angle. A pile of manure stood, cone-shaped, in the
> middle of the lawn.
>
>          "Hi," the farmer said, "I hope that you had a pleasant drive from
> Ithacky."
>
>          He spit a wad of tobacco juice on the lawn. (At least I hope that
> it was tobacco juice. If it was saliva then he was a very sick
> man.)
>
>          "Come with me. " he said, "I'll show you the place. The rooms was
> let to an airforce couple until they moved down to Texas somewheres."
>
>          They were shepherded into a narrow corridor and up a stairway. The
> outside windows were grimy and the stairs uncarpeted.
>
>          "Here it is!" he said, as he opened a door. They looked into a
> large, sunny room with a rag rug spread on the floor between a sofa, an
> overstuffed chair and a floor lamp. He entered and looked back at the young
> couple.
>
>          "Through here's the bedroom."
>
>          There was another door that led to another sunny room sparely
> furnished with a double bed, an old chest of drawers, with an empty closet
> open to show us how capacious it was.
>
>          "And the kitchen?" Rose asked.
>
>          "It's off the living room. I'll show you."
>
>          The kitchen wasn't the large kind you associate with a farmhouse.
> It was a little kitchenette, an afterthought the farmer had added when he
> had decided to rent out the apartment. Rose didn't look pleased.
>
>          "And the bathroom?" Len asked, feeling that he should show a
> masculine interest in the facilities.
>
>          "That's out in the hall." the farmer said, shamefacedly, "You'll
> have to share that with the hired man. He has a room off the hall there."
>
>          Rose and Len looked at each other, then at the farmer.
>
>          "Thanks for showing us the place." Len said, "We'll call you for
> further details after we've looked around a little more -- if we're
> interested."
>
>          When they had gotten into the car Rose asked, "Did you smell that
> manure?"
>
>          Len nodded.
>
>          "And did you see the cow patty on the driveway?" he asked. "How
> would you like to come home on a dark night and step into that?"
>
>          "Well, it was a kind of a city girl's dream, living on a farm."
> Rose said softly, and then she laughed and then, "Imagine sharing a shower
> with the hired man!"
>
>          The next apartment on the list was on the periphery of the town,
> near the Experiment Station. When they rang the bell the owner, a retired
> Experiment Station worker, was glad for their company. He was a garrulous
> old fellow and he gave them the inside info on the rental situation, much to
> his own disadvantage. Until the Air Force base had closed down it was hard
> to find a place to live anywhere nearby. People had rented out any storeroom
> they could put an old bed in. Now the situation had changed for the worse
> (from the landlord's point of view). Rents had dropped drastically and there
> were lots of places on the market. The old fellow was nice but his apartment
> wasn't. It was dark and gloomy and Len'spracticed biologist's eye detected

> rat droppings in the kitchen. The old man was pathetically glad for their

> company and didn't want to let them go but they had a schedule to adhere to
> if they were going to find a place that day.
>
>          It became a discouraging search. They checked off apartment after
> apartment, each seemingly more broken down than the last. When they thought
> they might have to call that farmer after all, they arrived at the Braun's
> house. It was on Main Street and had a nice, middle class look about it.
> Mrs. Braun was a tall, thin elderly lady with a pince nez and a forbidding
> expression. She interviewed them in her parlor. When she learned that Len
> was a PhD candidate at Cornell she nodded, signifying that they qualified
> for being given a look at the quarters that she and her late husband had
> fixed up above their own. She led them up the stairs (which were newly
> carpeted) and took out a key which opened the door to a freshly painted
> living room, clean and equipped with nicely upholstered furniture, unlike
> the sprung, broken backed monstrosities they had been shown elsewhere. The
> kitchen was small but modern, the bedroom large and airy.
>
>          The place was perfect but how much would it cost? They couldn't
> afford much on the $4500/yr that Len's assistantship and GI bill benefits
> would give them. He tried to act like a man of the world used to bargaining
> but he ended up asking resignedly what the rent would be. Surprisingly it
> was the same sum that the owners of the ramshackle apartments had demanded.
> This was a real find! Len tried to hide his excitement when he said that
> they'd take it. Mrs. Braun was no more subtle than they were. She took out a
> rental contract, looked at it through her pince nez, and pointed out where
> they should sign. She was willing to allow them to store whatever they
> wished for the month until they came to occupy it and she almost forgot to
> get them to leave a deposit as a tender of their seriousness.
>
> When they left the house Rose let out a chirp of joy. Len gave her a firm
> kiss and hug.  This wasn't a dream. They really were going to live together
> as husband and wife. They had an address. Now they ought to go out to
> celebrate!

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, June 30, 2019 4:10 PM

I'm still wondering how she was allowed to board without a companion, where was the wheelchair (checked baggage or in the coach), and just what did happen?

I don't think it is wise for me to recommend discontinuance of any long distance train, but I can point out that the Texas Eagle does not perform as well as the Southwest Chief, neither does the Sunset Limited, and then leave it at that.  Further commenets in the next fiew hours appreciated.

Even a transit authority is in the hospitality business.  Even a commuter railrioad.  One should not feel like he or she is riding a prisoners' train.  And most of us have had that unfortunate experience at least once in our train riding.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Sunday, June 30, 2019 11:13 AM

daveklepper
I will write Richard Anderson. We do not know the full story.

I was struck by the line about Amtrak crews not rendering personal assistance to passengers.  And by the invocation of 'policy' as an excuse to dump Alice and her luggage on the platform of a strange city and take off ... leaving the Albuquerque police, highly miffed if the story is accurate, holding the bag, as it were.

Perhaps the best part is that, after dropping her in a strange city without further assistance, Amtrak is only returning PART of her fare -- doubtless basing this on having performed 'transportation service' to get her that far.

I suspect Anderson's hands are somewhat tied here ... there's an Amtrak attendant's side of this story, too, and I can't see him throwing them under the bus to score sympathy points when he has to deal with them long-term, in ways that I expect will highly involve unanticipated attrition.

What is needed instead may be Congressional legislation that mandates changes in some of the Amtrak procedures, specifically involving forced 'detraining' as an option for passengers crews don't like.

  • Member since
    December 2018
  • 865 posts
Posted by JPS1 on Sunday, June 30, 2019 9:52 AM

daveklepper
Anyone wish to suggest additions? 

 

Tell Anderson to recommend discontinuance of the Texas Eagle.  It has been steadily losing riders during an otherwise robust economy.  Tell him to support better passenger rail service along the I-35 corridor between DFW and San Antonio.
 
The number of Eagle riders in FY18 was down 2.95 percent compared to FY17.  It was down 1.26 percent from FY13.  If the rate of decline for FY19 continues the pattern shown for the first eight months of the year, the numbers for FY19 will have declined 6.32 percent from FY18; 9.19 percent from FY17, and 7.51 percent from FY13.  During a robust economy, when one would expect the number of riders to be growing, the Eagle’s riders have been falling off. 
 
Multiple reasons probably have been responsible for the decline of Eagle ridership.  At the top of the list is surely its tardiness.  In FY18 it was on time at its end points just 46.4 percent.  Even worse, it was on time at its intermediate stations just 33.5 percent.  Today, June 30th, the Eagle is marked-up 4 hours, 13 minutes late for Dallas  This is not atypical; it is typical.
 
There probably is a market for better passenger rail in Texas between DFW and San Antonio.  It is one of the most congested corridors in Texas.  If Amtrak were not shackled by overseers hobbled by an out-of-date perspective, it could partner with Texas to improve service along the I-35 – DFW to San Antonio – corridor.
 
The coaches and lounge cars devoted to the Eagle could be repositioned to Fort Worth or San Antonio.  I believe there would be enough equipment to run three trains a day between DFW and San Antonio.  Moreover, because of the shorter distance, the heavy padding of the current schedule could be reduced and the running time shortened significantly. 
 
The I-35 corridor is ideally suited for better passenger train service.  Its intermediate cities – Waco, Temple, Austin, San Marcos - are too close for commercial air service; they are a bit too far for many people to drive.  Instead of meeting this need, Amtrak is forced to run a long-distance train that is used by a very small percentage of the population, and because of its tardiness it is steadily losing passengers. 
 
Ideally, the state along with Amtrak or Virgin Trains USA could upgrade the UP line between DFW and San Antonio to allow up to 125 mph running, which would make the trains competitive with driving and/or buses.  Running along the UP line would provide direct service to Waco.  
  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Sunday, June 30, 2019 9:35 AM

I suggest you get hold of the foundational legislation for Amtrak.  The mission is transportation for people,  not "hospitality" for a small segment of our population who want to take a one off land cruise. Most seniors I know, including moi, do not consider using Amtrak except for under five hour journeys. 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, June 30, 2019 4:24 AM

 I will write Richard Anderson.  We do not know the full story.  If the  -year-old normally uses a wheel chair, I believe Amtrak's policy is that she would only travel with a comopanion.  If the wheelchair was checked baggage and she lied about its use, Amtrak might have a case.  Or perhaps she was abusive when she did not get help precisely when whe wanned it.  Were there any  passengers who volunteered to help her?

I've been intending to write Richard Anderson for some time, and this incident galvanizes me into action.  The letter should:

Open on a positive note, pointing out the new markets, particularly Colonial Williamsburg, that can be tapped by the new NEC sleeper service.

Amtrak in the hospitality business, not just transportation

Main purpose of long-distance trains, and that present youngsters will become oldsters, and there will be more of them.

Other purposes of long distance trains.

PTC for track just used by the Chief each way a terrible waste of money and why.  (For safety, better spend the money on more grade-crossing upgrades or elimination)

Grab any still usable AEM-7 available and preserve it as Sunnyside's switcher.  Far less expensive than trying to quietly ventilate an underground yard with diesel switchers.

Railroading is a geographically specific industry, not like airlines.

Anyone wish to suggest additions?

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: The 17th hole at TPC
  • 2,283 posts
Posted by n012944 on Friday, June 28, 2019 4:15 PM

daveklepper

 

The elderly and handicapped that woulc be serverely impacted by the loss of the LDPTs may be a small fraction of the total population, but such deprivation still is cruelty.

 

 

It doesn't sound like Amtrak wants them on board, but the airlines will take them!

 

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/82-year-old-booted-from-amtrak-train-gets-a-helping-hand-from-apd-officers/

 

"The officers said Amtrak staff told them the 82-year-old was “unfit for travel,” and that she was continuously asking for help getting up from her seat to use the restroom."

"The officers reached out to Hopeworks, a non-profit in Albuquerque, which helped collect enough money to buy her a flight the same day."

An "expensive model collector"

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, June 17, 2019 8:11 AM

Elderly and handicapped access to the continent may be the most important reason for continued operation, but it is not the only reason.  At the time of the WTC-Pentagon horror, Amtrak did provide travel arrangements for important individuals for defense and security when, because of all commercial air being grounded, the alternatives would have been costly separate  miliary transport for each individaul.  A tourist is by far best served by LDTs where one can meet the natives as well as see the country.  The Empire Builder is of course a special case with its serving some communities that would otherwise be isolated for much of winter.

But the elderly and handicapped is the most important.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, June 15, 2019 10:45 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH
That is basically Uber's aim.  Their goal is a ride service with self-driving cars and the hope that it happens before the money runs out from paying drivers.

Let's hope not, for their sake.

We realized back in the late '70s, in connection with what was then called PRT, that even if the liability issues associated with unpiloted vehicles (which were then under full "computer control" on dedicated guideways, not 'autonomous' in the current sense) could be solved or 'addressed away', the problems of crime associated with unattended vehicles likely couldn't be.  These start with vandalism (or theft of expensive components) and proceed upward through various 'offenses against the person' that become easy when there's no driver involved to mediate or 'rat out' the folks involved all the way up to the full analogue of carjacking.

If you have any doubts where this ends up, look at rental electric bicycles in places like London.

(Be fun to see if the insurance companies learned their lesson about providing feel-good flight insurance when the time comes for autonomous regional aircraft to start operating ... if you take my meaning.)

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, June 15, 2019 10:02 AM

That is basically Uber's aim.  Their goal is a ride service with self-driving cars and the hope that it happens before the money runs out from paying drivers.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Saturday, June 15, 2019 9:46 AM

MidlandMike

 

 
charlie hebdo
Many towns and counties already provide low-cost (subsidized) individual transport door to door for seniors and the disabled. 

 

Yes, my small town does that also, along with dial-a-ride for the general public.  The subsidies on its losses are always an issue.

As far as Uber, it is labor intensive, and their labor is becoming restless.

 

Uber seems an obvious candidate for automation. 

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Friday, June 14, 2019 9:35 PM

charlie hebdo
Many towns and counties already provide low-cost (subsidized) individual transport door to door for seniors and the disabled. 

Yes, my small town does that also, along with dial-a-ride for the general public.  The subsidies on its losses are always an issue.

As far as Uber, it is labor intensive, and their labor is becoming restless.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Friday, June 14, 2019 8:19 AM

MidlandMike

 

 
Overmod
... and I'm surprised that a service like Uber or Lyft hasn't set up a 'pro bono' incentive program to establish that sort of thing with low-floor vehicles with adaptive suspension ... but who's going to pay for all the unfunded millions or billions to provide it if it has to be done in a way that recovers its costs ...

 

Uber has never shown a profit, and last year lost $1.8 billion.  Maybe their bigger concern is survivability.  Where is any data that says it would be less expensive than the incremental cost to Amtrak?  Plus you would lose the alternative transportation option for all those other people who choose to travel by train.

 

Many towns and counties already provide low-cost (subsidized) individual transport door to door for seniors and the disabled. 

Yes,  Uber cut it's loss to under two billion dollars , but the important part is continued growth of  revenue to over $11 billion.  This is the same pattern seen in many successful monster companies in  the last twenty five years.

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 80 posts
Posted by ROBIN LUETHE on Thursday, June 13, 2019 10:38 PM

Uber has majorly raised prices over the last two years.  Friends have gone from commuting via Uber to back to their SUV. (large to boot!)

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Thursday, June 13, 2019 10:32 PM

Overmod
... and I'm surprised that a service like Uber or Lyft hasn't set up a 'pro bono' incentive program to establish that sort of thing with low-floor vehicles with adaptive suspension ... but who's going to pay for all the unfunded millions or billions to provide it if it has to be done in a way that recovers its costs ...

Uber has never shown a profit, and last year lost $1.8 billion.  Maybe their bigger concern is survivability.  Where is any data that says it would be less expensive than the incremental cost to Amtrak?  Plus you would lose the alternative transportation option for all those other people who choose to travel by train.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Thursday, June 13, 2019 9:22 AM

Very true.  Since there are limits on funding, the Utilitarian meme "the greatest amount of good for the greatest number" seems to  apply fully as a guiding principle.  

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, June 13, 2019 9:03 AM

daveklepper
When today's youngsters become oldsters, they will have the same reasons to use LDTs as today's oldsters.

The advantages of LDTs for the elderly, in principle, are not in question.

The question is whether the elderly are a sufficient reason to retain Amtrak's version of LD 'service', at its likely future cost.  It would be a lovely thing to have full chauffeured service as 'paratransit' for the elderly and disabled ... and I'm surprised that a service like Uber or Lyft hasn't set up a 'pro bono' incentive program to establish that sort of thing with low-floor vehicles with adaptive suspension ... but who's going to pay for all the unfunded millions or billions to provide it if it has to be done in a way that recovers its costs ... as Amtrak since 2015 has been mandated to achieve not later than 2022?  I doubt we'll have a Bellamy-style mass attitude change toward senior travel accommodation, especially as the current 'young' generations become the key decision-makers.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Thursday, June 13, 2019 7:51 AM

daveklepper

 

3.   When today's youngsters become oldsters, they will have the same reasons to use LDTs as today's oldsters.

 

Nope, I'll continue to fly.  I'll just get an aisle seat closer to the restrooms.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, June 13, 2019 1:35 AM

1.   Church not in Parish or Winter Garden.  Still searching.

2.   Not in the pix, holding the camera taking the photos.

3.   When today's youngsters become oldsters, they will have the same reasons to use LDTs as today's oldsters.

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,515 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Wednesday, June 12, 2019 4:55 PM

Backshop
The average age of Amtrak’s sleeping car passengers is 61.  Assuming a normal distribution, many of them will be dead in the not too distance future.

I am long passed (+22) that age and depending where I need to be, I mostly drive or fly. No way to get to Washington Island WI by train or plane. Cincinnati, Central Kentucky (Corbin) are drive. However, two years ago, our granddaughter graduated from USC and we flew there, and returned via Amtrak's Southwest Chief. Time was not the issue, nor was cost. the choice was made for the experience. Wife tolerated the need to get into upper bed account I had to use the lower for power for my CPAP machine. Otherwise, we both enjoyed the almost on time (about a half hour late into Naperville) trip home. Have not had a bad experience on Southwest Airlines.  

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, June 11, 2019 2:18 PM

Backshop
I'm just slightly younger than the Amtrak norm (I'll be 60 in 2 weeks) and I much prefer to fly. In fact, I'll be going to Amsterdam in 8 days and my wife and I are first on the upgrade list for Delta One Suites. We're flying back from Rome two weeks later and purchased the "old" Delta One seats. Maybe I'll write a trip report... I'd like to take a "land cruise" train but have no desire to ride a regular LD train. Life's too short to be stuck on a train that long.

Yes, the Rome trip on Amtrak is particularly long, and the view can be impaired dramatically by blown spray at this season of the year.  I'm not sure if the FRA-mandated 79mph limit applies when PTC is not present (as I suspect it won't be in international waters) but that's not even Zeppelin-range speed, so the effects of Anderson's 'cuisine choices' might become almost mind-numbingly paramount by the time you got where you were going.  I'm not surprised you prefer to fly.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Tuesday, June 11, 2019 7:46 AM

[quote user="JPS1"]

[quote user="Overmod"I can't imagine most of the people who currently choose to ride Amtrak embracing this sort of accommodation.  At all.  [/quote]

The average age of Amtrak’s sleeping car passengers is 61.  Assuming a normal distribution, many of them will be dead in the not too distance future.  They are not the future.  Praise be!
 
Amtrak’s challenge is to scope its services to the next generation's preferences.  Their perspectives of what is acceptable is likely to be much different than the perspectives of most of the people that participate in Train’s forums, which in some impolite circles would be know as the over the hill gang.
 
Anyone that has traveled recently in first or business class on an international flight knows that the first class and/or business class pods, which could be an alternative to Amtrak’s room cars, are nothing like the pictures shown above.   [/quote]
 

[/quote]I'm just slightly younger than the Amtrak norm (I'll be 60 in 2 weeks) and I much prefer to fly.  In fact, I'll be going to Amsterdam in 8 days and my wife and I are first on the upgrade list for Delta One Suites.  We're flying back from Rome two weeks later and purchased the "old" Delta One seats.  Maybe I'll write a trip report...  I'd like to take a "land cruise" train but have no desire to ride a regular LD train.  Life's too short to be stuck on a train that long.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Tuesday, June 11, 2019 7:24 AM

MidlandMike

 

 

You might notice that the 3 stations that serve Glacier Nat'l Park (East Glacier, Essex, West Glacier) combined had slightly more passengers than Milwaukee.  Also, Whitefish, the developed tourist town just outside Glacier NP, had more than double the passengers of Milwaukee.  Milwaukee is not even in the top ten of city pairs on the EB.  It's more important that transportation goes where people want to go, reather than just where people live. 

Which is why Kalispell, the local airport is served by United, Delta, American and Alaska, all to multiple destinations, with departures and arrivals throughout the day.  Much more convenient.

https://iflyglacier.com/major-cities-served/

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Monday, June 10, 2019 9:02 PM

charlie hebdo

 

 
MidlandMike
Modern passenger service is what is well used and exists today, anything else is interpretation.

 

It is not a matter of interpretation. Modern passenger service is what exists in many other countries in the world, but sadly not here, with a few exceptions.  Perhaps you should try riding some contemporary overseas passenger rail services instead of referring to a time 50+ years ago.

 

I have ridden in Switzerland, and some equipment was up-to-the-minute, and some was of typical Amtrak age. However I was not talking about equipment, but I was responding to your LD vs. corridor operations.  I had pointed out that daylight trains were nothing new (and many disappeared as railroads tried to combine as much of their service into fewer longer trains.)  I am all in favor of having daytime corridor trains serving routes that LD trains serve overnight, however, under present law, states would have to support them, and few have done so far.  Also, I don't subscribe to Classic Trains.

  • Member since
    December 2018
  • 865 posts
Posted by JPS1 on Monday, June 10, 2019 8:29 PM

[quote user="Overmod"I can't imagine most of the people who currently choose to ride Amtrak embracing this sort of accommodation.  At all.  [/quote]

The average age of Amtrak’s sleeping car passengers is 61.  Assuming a normal age distribution, many of them will be dead in the not too distance future.  They are not the future.  Praise be!
 
Amtrak’s challenge is to scope its services to the next generation's preferences.  Their perspectives of what is acceptable is likely to be much different than the perspectives of most of the people that participate in Train’s forums, which in some impolite circles would be know as the over the hill gang.
 
Anyone that has traveled recently in first or business class on an international flight knows that the first class and/or business class pods, which could be an alternative to Amtrak’s room cars, are nothing like the pictures shown above.  
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, June 10, 2019 7:56 PM

Jones1945
LD Sleeper in Japan:

From the nation that brought us the capsule hotel and Ginza-style real estate prices to make such things attractive.

I happen to like the idea of a padded bunk I can roll into, with a window and amenities at my fingertips, presumably including a swing-down multimedia screen I can easily work -- navigation and all -- from my comfortable posture whether on back, front, or sides.  The idea here is to maximize the salable 'sleeper' accommodation by dividing the car volume into these modules, far beyond what any 'Slumbercoach' or tourist sleeper could provide, and then presumably providing enough stand-up accommodation elsewhere in the train that 'getting out of bed' and walking around, eating, etc. can be accommodated -- it's that you don't go back to a seat instead of the capsule berth afterward, unless it is something like a 'business center' seat where you only occupy it a limited time, or for a fee, before relinquishing it to another.

I can't imagine most of the people who currently choose to ride Amtrak embracing this sort of accommodation.  At all.  Even if they're in physical shape to use it, which a great many really aren't.

It does occur to me that the idea of putting this into a modular CAF Viewliner shell might be an interesting thing for youth hostel type operations, or some tour or special-interest companies that can provide enough on some scheduled basis to fill the car to operating profitability.  Anderson would have to bend some of his present ukases -- but I suspect if you had at all reasonable numbers he'd try it.  Hell, I'd ride it instead of sitting in short-track coach all night or spending many times the alternative 'bus budget' for a stinky Superliner ride.

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,618 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Monday, June 10, 2019 6:44 PM

Deggesty

 The first upper berth in which I rode (in the car American Sailor), had a window. 60 of these cars (6-6-4) were built in 1942. I rode in it from North Cairo to Birmingham in 1965. It was not just the Illinois Terminal that had sleepers with windows in the upper berth. Granted, the idea did not catch on more more roads.

 

Did you note the statement in the vdeo about the Chinese overnight service that traveling by night gives another day of sightseeing? Is that service or what?

I agree that this accommodation is not suitable for day travel. 

From what I can find on YouTube, there are at least two different types of "High-Speed" sleeper train in China's HSR network, this one showing the older model with "traditional layout":

I guess these sleepers were originally designed for long-distance routes ( >500km) and for the traveler who prefers to depart at night and arrive their destination on the next morning (same logic like the 20th Century and the Broadway limited). But I can see they are running between Beijing and Shanghai which is only a six hour ride. Maybe it is a tradition of mainland China since sleeper (long distance train and buses) is part of the mainland Chinese's collective memories.

IIRC, there are at least four options of HSR/HST service between Beijing and Shanghai (and many cities); third-class (coach),  second-class (coach) and business class or Sleeper train.

 Coffee

LD Sleeper in Japan:

 

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Monday, June 10, 2019 3:11 PM

BaltACD

 

 
Jones1945
"High-speed" (95mph) sleeper in China:

 

Look like US Section sleeper without the ability to be configured for day travel.  In the day Pullman had curtins that were more privacy enhancing, however, in the Pullman days the Upper Section did not have its own window on the world.

 

The first upper berth in which I rode (in the car American Sailor), had a window. 60 of these cars (6-6-4) were built in 1942. I rode in it from North Cairo to Birmingham in 1965. It was not just the Illinois Terminal that had sleepers with windows in the upper berth. Granted, the idea did not catch on more more roads.

Did you note the statement in the vdeo about the Chinese overnight service that traveling by night gives another day of sightseeing? Is that service or what?

I agree that this accommodation is not suitable for day travel.

Johnny

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Monday, June 10, 2019 3:03 PM

BaltACD

 

 
Jones1945
"High-speed" (95mph) sleeper in China:

 

Look like US Section sleeper without the ability to be configured for day travel.  In the day Pullman had curtins that were more privacy enhancing, however, in the Pullman days the Upper Section did not have its own window on the world.

 

The first upper berth in which I rode (in the car American Sailor), had a window. 60 of these cars (6-6-4) were built in 1942. I rode in it from North Cairo to Birmingham in 1965. It was not just the Illinois Terminal that had sleepers with windows in the upper berth. Granted, the idea did not catch on more more roads.

Johnny

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, June 10, 2019 2:46 PM

I don't know if anyone remembers but we had an amusing thread here a few years ago when a Chinese student attempted to patent that exciting new HSR amenity, the open section.  So don't laugh if you think it looks familiar...

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, June 10, 2019 2:32 PM

Jones1945
"High-speed" (95mph) sleeper in China:

Look like US Section sleeper without the ability to be configured for day travel.  In the day Pullman had curtins that were more privacy enhancing, however, in the Pullman days the Upper Section did not have its own window on the world.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,618 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Monday, June 10, 2019 11:51 AM

"High-speed" (95mph) sleeper in China:

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Calgary
  • 2,047 posts
Posted by cx500 on Monday, June 10, 2019 11:51 AM

charlie hebdo
One or two overnight,12-hour sleeper trains daily over a 400 to 444 mile route is not a service.

It forms part of a service that is mostly comprised of day trains on the route.  Some of those day trains likely also see relatively light patronage, but are still important to retaining overall credibility and use of the system. 

It will also provide a service for those folks connecting from other trains.  When the overnight train ran between Montreal and Toronto I would use it to connect to the Toronto-Chicago train the next morning.  Once the overnight train was dropped, using the rails was no longer an acceptable option.

As an aside, some years later when VIA reintroduced the overnight train, they slowed it down so it arrived in Toronto several hours after the single daily train to Chicago had departed.  Still completely useless for me!

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,515 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Monday, June 10, 2019 11:40 AM

Dave, Is that you and your equipment in the picture?

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, June 10, 2019 11:32 AM

charlie hebdo
One or two overnight,12-hour sleeper trains daily over a 400 to 444 mile route is not a service.

Why not?  That is the service.

No one really needs a whole train's worth of sleeping accommodations during the day, nor in this case is serving intermediate points 'in the middle of the night' the point of running the train.  

Like so many other 'residual' sleeper services in Europe, there is little perceived need for more than one train to accommodate people who want to nap in their own room during 'express' travel rather than ride a high-speed bullet service.  If there is additional demand it should be little more on any particular day than could be accommodated by adding cars (and if necessary power) right up to platform capacity.  (And it isn't likely that point would be often if ever reached, which I think is one of your primary points -- but that still doesn't provide any evidence for, let alone reason for, getting rid  of that one daily train.)

Yes, there are special considerations for running any kind of sleeper train in this modern HST age in Europe.  And to a significant extent we have seen the great dying-off of both sleeper and night trains as the HST revolution becomes more and more institutionalized (heck, in France the economy trains are 186mph TGVs).  But that doesn't mean that where demand actually warrants, a night/sleeper service shouldn't exist, perhaps even if it doesn't quite 'make its nut' every day in every way.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Monday, June 10, 2019 10:31 AM

When trsveling in comfort overnight means that you have more time for sightseeing and do not have to arrange overnight accommodations, the overnight sleeper trains are a service.

Johnny

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Monday, June 10, 2019 9:49 AM

daveklepper
Note that Scotland continues to subsidize sleepers from London to Inverness, Aberdeen, Edinbugh, and Glasgow.  New sleepers just were put into service this past year. 

One or two overnight,12-hour sleeper trains daily over a 400 to 444 mile route is not a service. There are also faster (8 hour) coach trains during the day. I see no overnight trains from London to Cardiff (Wales), 130 miles. Why would there be, when 62 trains take only about 2 hours, four take 3 hours?

A few isolated examples do not prove your desire when compared with thousands of fast day trains. You should know better.

There are other overnight services on the continent offering a variety of accomodations. When I last rode one (9 hours) four years ago from Munich to Venice, most of the passengers in couchettes and compartments (not just coaches) were young people, not seniors or handicapped.  They chose this rather than taking the faster ( 6 hour) day trains to save on lodgings and get to Venice very early, spend most of the day there, and then move on to Florence or Rome.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, June 10, 2019 8:37 AM

daveklepper
And can anyone remind me just where this church was or is located?

Could this be the church on 301 in Parrish, Florida?  

 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, June 10, 2019 6:53 AM

Photos from a typical NY - Florida business trip.  Could carry my test equipment with me with no hassle.

And can anyone remind me just where this church was or is located?  Possibly expanded so the architecture is now hidden?

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, June 10, 2019 6:07 AM

Note that Scotland continues to subsidize sleepers from London to Inverness, Aberdeen, Edinbugh, and Glascow.  New sleepers just were put into service this past year.  Older sleepers continue to  serve Wales.  These are all-room cars.  Snack and beverage is served in a lounge car on each train.   I think two trains each way handle the Scottish service, and one Wales.

Are the new sleepers modern or not?

I think my proposal for on-board meals and beverages still beats anything else, but it takes somebodies who can invest and have faith in its success.

As a person who usually used a roomette or single slumbercoach for many overnight and two-night rail trips, I'd settle for your proposed business class rather than fly.  Especially if the food was decent.   And no smell,  please, decent maintenance.

But there still should be a handicapped room.  Possibly a doctor's recommendatin would be necessary for a reservation.  Then, if unoccupied, business class pasengers can bid on occupying it.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Sunday, June 9, 2019 9:36 PM

MidlandMike
Modern passenger service is what is well used and exists today, anything else is interpretation.

It is not a matter of interpretation. Modern passenger service is what exists in many other countries in the world, but sadly not here, with a few exceptions.  Perhaps you should try riding some contemporary overseas passenger rail services instead of referring to a time 50+ years ago.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Sunday, June 9, 2019 9:20 PM

charlie hebdo

So Amtrak ran a legacy train through Columbus briefly over 40 years ago?  Hardly a service or at hours convenient for actual people coming from and going there. You really don't understand what modern passenger rail service is. Most of the discussions on here belong in the Classic Trains forums. 

 

Modern passenger service is what is well used and exists today, anything else is interpretation.  I rode a daytime train between Dayton and Cleveland (passing thru Columbus) over 50 years ago that diaappeared before Amtrak.  A Cleveland-Cincy train could be established tomorrow of Ohio wanted it.  Go complain to Ohio.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Sunday, June 9, 2019 8:52 AM

So Amtrak ran a legacy train through Columbus briefly over 40 years ago?  Hardly a service or at hours convenient for actual people coming from and going there. You really don't understand what modern passenger rail service is. Most of the discussions on here belong in the Classic Trains forums. 

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Sunday, June 9, 2019 7:54 AM

MidlandMike

 

 
charlie hebdo

The proponents of LD services ignore the facts that throughout Amtrak's history  there has been no service to large cities like Columbus, Ohio. They focus on service to small towns in places in Montana,  etc.   Amtrak's mission is to provide service to people,  not empty places with huge distances that make rail uncompetive on time and cost. I hypothesize that surveys of small towns served by Amtrak in the plains,  mountain areas and intermountain region would show they would prefer to drive or fly to destinations over 700 miles away. 

I think their real desire is to maintain a heavily subsidized nostalgia land cruise for a small segment of our society. 

 

 

 

Amtrak definatly historically had service to Columbus in the 70s.  See the current (July) issue of Trains for the story of the NY-KC National Ltd.  The line was not a priority for Conrail, ridership suffered, and the train was eventually removed.  Under the Pres.Obama stimulus program, Ohio was offered about $100 million for a Cleveland-Columbus-Cincy HrSR line but turned up there nose at it.  I don't think you can blame Amtrak for that.  Pheonix is another city that lost service beyond ATK's control.

As far as small places in Montana see this fact sheet on the Empire Builder:

https://www.railpassengers.org/site/assets/files/3441/25.pdf

You might notice that the 3 stations that serve Glacier Nat'l Park (East Glacier, Essex, West Glacier) combined had slightly more passengers than Milwaukee.  Also, Whitefish, the developed tourist town just outside Glacier NP, had more than double the passengers of Milwaukee.  Milwaukee is not even in the top ten of city pairs on the EB.  It's more important that transportation goes where people want to go, reather than just where people live.

 

Thank you, Mike, for catching that about the National Limited. I should have immediately remembered that I rode it from Washington to Jefferson CIty in July of 1971, and passed through Columbus. I next saw the train, in Harrisburg, in 1978 as I was on my way from Chicago to Washington--and it seemed to me that Amtrak had put the worst-looking equipment it could find on it.

Johnny

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Saturday, June 8, 2019 11:46 PM

zardoz

 

 
BaltACD

The optimal Amtrak car according to many - 

 

 

 

or....

 

 

We can probably suspect that each of the passenger car's gross weight with those passenger loads are twice normal empty weight?  

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Saturday, June 8, 2019 10:59 PM

charlie hebdo

The proponents of LD services ignore the facts that throughout Amtrak's history  there has been no service to large cities like Columbus, Ohio. They focus on service to small towns in places in Montana,  etc.   Amtrak's mission is to provide service to people,  not empty places with huge distances that make rail uncompetive on time and cost. I hypothesize that surveys of small towns served by Amtrak in the plains,  mountain areas and intermountain region would show they would prefer to drive or fly to destinations over 700 miles away. 

I think their real desire is to maintain a heavily subsidized nostalgia land cruise for a small segment of our society. 

 

Amtrak definatly historically had service to Columbus in the 70s.  See the current (July) issue of Trains for the story of the NY-KC National Ltd.  The line was not a priority for Conrail, ridership suffered, and the train was eventually removed.  Under the Pres.Obama stimulus program, Ohio was offered about $100 million for a Cleveland-Columbus-Cincy HrSR line but turned up there nose at it.  I don't think you can blame Amtrak for that.  Pheonix is another city that lost service beyond ATK's control.

As far as small places in Montana see this fact sheet on the Empire Builder:

https://www.railpassengers.org/site/assets/files/3441/25.pdf

You might notice that the 3 stations that serve Glacier Nat'l Park (East Glacier, Essex, West Glacier) combined had slightly more passengers than Milwaukee.  Also, Whitefish, the developed tourist town just outside Glacier NP, had more than double the passengers of Milwaukee.  Milwaukee is not even in the top ten of city pairs on the EB.  It's more important that transportation goes where people want to go, reather than just where people live.

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Saturday, June 8, 2019 7:23 PM

BaltACD

The optimal Amtrak car according to many - 

 

or....

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,515 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Saturday, June 8, 2019 5:54 PM

Deggesty
The substitutes are somewhat better than the newsbutches of days gone by (there wer still some in the fifties;

 

Shortly befor the Monon ended its passenger service,(1967?) I took the "Thoughbred" from Chicago to Lousiville and it had a "newsbutch" who rode, if I recall correctly,  to Crawfordsville. He had a portable cooler in a vestibule where I watched him take two slices of bread, slather butter on them, take a leaf of lettuce, two slices of ham, put tnem in a waxed bag and there was your ham sandwich. He had a box with many items, candy, cigarettes, etc. Don't know how much $ he made. But there was food service on the train. Health inspections did not exist as far as I know?

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Saturday, June 8, 2019 1:17 PM

I am amazed that I had not seen any more about these cars lately. Has all mention of them been censored? Laugh

Johnny

  • Member since
    December 2018
  • 865 posts
Posted by JPS1 on Saturday, June 8, 2019 1:16 PM

blue streak 1
 JPS1    And many of them, I suspect, have experienced business class on the airlines, so similar pods on Amtrak’s long-distance trains might be an acceptable alternative to a room car.   

It is a shame that this proposal is an indication of the desire of most people including this poster to place  all persons into one big common pool.  Instead there are many persons who all want different ways of doing a function.  And in many cases each different ways at different times. 

First or business class, especially on an international flight, does not have anything in common with coach or premium coach.  Moreover, the pods in first and business class offer a reasonable degree of privacy.  Or at least for most people, I suspect.   

For those who insist on a private room, no problem!  Pay for it.  The problem, however, is that most sleeping car passengers cannot or will not pay the fully allocated cost of a room.  

The name of the game for a competitive business is to scope its product to the market, i.e. what people want and are willing to pay for. 

Private rooms are not high on the agenda for most of Amtrak's passengers.  Only  2.2 percent of system passengers buy a room, but they cannot or will not pay the fully allocated cost of it.  Or at least I have not seen any studies to refute the findings of the 2005 IG study on long-distance train subsidies, which showed that the subsidies for first class passengers was substanially higher than those for coach passengers. 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, June 8, 2019 12:40 PM

BaltACD
The optimal Amtrak car according to many - 

That's only if you get the military discount.  Others get this popular option with Superliner double-deck for the 'attendants'.  Or this:

 

If 11 million paperclips fit into only HALF this car, imagine how spacious the remainder will be!

Balt, I know you remember better about Cinder Dick and the white boxcars with shackles and sound insulation.  Everyone knows those AutoMax cars only had the attach points for the shackles installed with the Obama FEMA stimulus funds, right nest to the hardpoints for the boxes of armor-piercing ammunition.  Look it up! 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, June 8, 2019 12:17 PM

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Saturday, June 8, 2019 12:04 PM

JPS1
  And many of them, I suspect, have experienced business class on the airlines, so similar pods on Amtrak’s long-distance trains might be an acceptable alternative to a room car.  

It is a shame that this proposal is an indication of the desire of most people including this poster to place  all persons into one big common pool.  Instead there are many persons who all want different ways of doing a function.  And in many cases each different ways at different times. 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, June 8, 2019 10:22 AM

The optimal Amtrak car according to many - 

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2018
  • 865 posts
Posted by JPS1 on Saturday, June 8, 2019 9:28 AM

MidlandMike
So you cut out the sleepers, lounge, and diners (don't coach riders eat?) and just carry coaches. 

Or implement an intermediate path!  Drop the sleepers and substitute business class cars equipped with pods similar to those found on oversees flights.  Drop the dining cars and enhance the offerings in the lounge cars.
 
Given the reality of American politics, Amtrak’s executive management team does not have the clout to persuade the Congress to allow it to discontinue the long-distance trains or significantly reduce the offerings.  But the aforementioned steps could reduce the financial foot prints of the long-distance trains and make the losses less of a flashpoint.
 
Eight-five percent of the customers on the long-distance trains ride coach.  Most of them, I suspect, would be happy with good eats and drinks in a lounge car, especially if the crew did not take up the tables.  According to Amtrak, they rode an average of 497 miles in 2017. 
 
The average distance traveled by a sleeping car passenger in 2017 was 991 miles, which means many if not most of them were on the train just one night.  And many of them, I suspect, have experienced business class on the airlines, so similar pods on Amtrak’s long-distance trains might be an acceptable alternative to a room car. 
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Saturday, June 8, 2019 8:02 AM

Amtrak has already cut the diners out of day-only trains. The substitutes are somewhat better than the newsbutches of days gone by (there wer still some in the fifties; I knew one who worked between Bristol and Chattanooga on the Pelican--and there was a diner on the train), except that you have to go to the car that has the food in it; no one comes by your seat to offer you his wares.

Johnny

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Friday, June 7, 2019 11:22 PM

Paul Milenkovic
The counter-intuitive thing is that a long-distance Amtrak service, the Empire Builder is cited as the prime example, is a lifeline to all the communities up and down its rail line, communities that are in many cases not served by adequate airline service or good highways.  The question is, "Who even embarks or disembarks from an Amtrak stop served at 2AM", and there is evidence that a lot of people do.  However inconvenient the sparse train service, the alternatives may even be more inconvenient. That infamous Inspector General report pointed this out and also pointed out the "land cruise" aspect of the first-class sleeping car service provided on these trains.  The report observed that the long-distance trains have heavy coach-class patronage, from passenger travelling between intermediate points and recommended that Amtrak could save a great deal in operating expense by leaving the dining, lounge and sleeping cars along with the second (or third) locomotive back in the coach yard or the Diesel service facility.  The report claimed that the revenue from the higher-priced first-class service far from covered even the incremental cost of the extra cars and extra locomotive. ...   At the time I suggested, "Maybe this isn't such a bad idea?  We could give up the sleeper service in trade for trains on the pattern of the Cascades Talgos up and down the Intermountain West?"  What I suggested was for the train advocates to be open to "horse trading", that is, if day-training the long-distance routes could save substantial money, some of that money could be used to expand service frequency (such as the long talked-about Chicago-St Paul "2nd train" day train on the Empire Builder route).

So you cut out the sleepers, lounge, and diners (don't coach riders eat?) and just carry coaches.  Did the IG also say just run in daylight, or is that your proposal?  Only operating the train 12 hours a day cuts utilization in half.  So you will need twice the number of coaches, but only get half the revenue to support that capital cost.  Of course you will not need so many coaches, because passengers who need to travel beyond the daily endpoints will probably not stick around.  And some of the segments (someone suggested Salt Lake City-Reno) will fail like the previous WP Zephyrette which could not even fill a RDC.  Some states will not support these now corridor trains.  With the national system falling apart there is no hope for continued federal support of passenger rail.  You would end up with a Balkanized disconnected passenger rail collection of fragments.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Friday, June 7, 2019 10:06 PM

Backshop

Those are for-profit private companies.  The Alaskan State Ferries are mainly used to transport vehicles and cargo to small communties, many of which don't have airports.

 

Yes the cruise lines are private companies, but I answered your original question, if there needs to be some sort of alternative to flying over water.  Alaska State Ferries provide auto ferry service to communities with isolated road systems, and I suppose to people who don't want to fly.  Towns without an airport are pretty rare in Alaska, and if they have a port, then they have a seaplane landing area.

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Friday, June 7, 2019 12:45 PM

charlie hebdo

The proponents of LD services ignore the facts that throughout Amtrak's history  there has been no service to large cities like Columbus, Ohio. They focus on service to small towns in places in Montana,  etc.   Amtrak's mission is to provide service to people,  not empty places with huge distances that make rail uncompetive on time and cost. I hypothesize that surveys of small towns served by Amtrak in the plains,  mountain areas and intermountain region would show they would prefer to drive or fly to destinations over 700 miles away. 

I think their real desire is to maintain a heavily subsidized nostalgia land cruise for a small segment of our society. 

 

 

The counter-intuitive thing is that a long-distance Amtrak service, the Empire Builder is cited as the prime example, is a lifeline to all the communities up and down its rail line, communities that are in many cases not served by adequate airline service or good highways.  The question is, "Who even embarks or disembarks from an Amtrak stop served at 2AM", and there is evidence that a lot of people do.  However inconvenient the sparse train service, the alternatives may even be more inconvenient.

That infamous Inspector General report pointed this out and also pointed out the "land cruise" aspect of the first-class sleeping car service provided on these trains.  The report observed that the long-distance trains have heavy coach-class patronage, from passenger travelling between intermediate points and recommended that Amtrak could save a great deal in operating expense by leaving the dining, lounge and sleeping cars along with the second (or third) locomotive back in the coach yard or the Diesel service facility.  The report claimed that the revenue from the higher-priced first-class service far from covered even the incremental cost of the extra cars and extra locomotive.

The people in the passenger-train advocacy community I would "hang with", online and in my community, "popped a cork" over these recommendations.  "What do you mean, they would have Amtrak run the train with a single locomotive" as if Delta would fly out across an ocean with a single-engine aircraft.  The shock of a single locomotive on a long-distance train from veteran riders supports the hypothesis that Amtrak Diesels are not all that reliable and that often times the extra locomotive units are a necessary redundancy like the time where you wouldn't fly any distance over water without four engines?

At the time I suggested, "Maybe this isn't such a bad idea?  We could give up the sleeper service in trade for trains on the pattern of the Cascades Talgos up and down the Intermountain West?"  What I suggested was for the train advocates to be open to "horse trading", that is, if day-training the long-distance routes could save substantial money, some of that money could be used to expand service frequency (such as the long talked-about Chicago-St Paul "2nd train" day train on the Empire Builder route).

My advocacy associates would have none of this because long-distance trains always meant sleeping cars and on-train amenities and who wants to turn the Empire Builder into a stainless-steel Greyhound bus?

Which brings around to the original topic of this thread, Whither Greyhound?  It used to be that Greyhound was "stealing" traffic from the passenger trains, but it seems that Greyhound and Amtrak passengers are in the same sad situation of sparse service.

There is a social need for a surface ground-transportation option, but the most vocal community supporting trains are the "land cruise" patrons, hence some of the political resistance to trains from outside the train-riding public.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Friday, June 7, 2019 9:07 AM

The proponents of LD services ignore the facts that throughout Amtrak's history  there has been no service to large cities like Columbus, Ohio. They focus on service to small towns in places in Montana,  etc.   Amtrak's mission is to provide service to people,  not empty places with huge distances that make rail uncompetive on time and cost. I hypothesize that surveys of small towns served by Amtrak in the plains,  mountain areas and intermountain region would show they would prefer to drive or fly to destinations over 700 miles away. 

I think their real desire is to maintain a heavily subsidized nostalgia land cruise for a small segment of our society. 

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Friday, June 7, 2019 4:44 AM

Those are for-profit private companies.  The Alaskan State Ferries are mainly used to transport vehicles and cargo to small communties, many of which don't have airports.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Thursday, June 6, 2019 10:27 PM

Backshop

Should we also bring back ocean liners for those that don't want to fly transocean?

 

There are liners/ferries to Alaska.  There are cruise ships to Hawaii.  Trips beyond to foriegn countries would not be a federal concern.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, June 6, 2019 8:42 AM

Overmod.  Your ideas about paratransit and supplemental bus service make great sense.  In a way, they are applied today, by people who know how to make the arranements which are not always obvious or easy to arange.   Thanks. 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, June 6, 2019 8:37 AM

Should not be rough-riding, and was not when I rode LDTs regularly.  Most LDT riders I met and knew, and cerainly myself, regarded LD train trips as a pleasurable mini-vacation and certainly no bringer of medical problems.

 

Elderly and infirm people would not regrard transpotation by ambulance as a mini-vacation, and your cost comparisons are just plain reduculous.  And others use the LDTs, many in ways that directly bnefit the economy.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 7:24 PM

charlie hebdo
I think with the miniscule number of people who would be served by these services, we might well be better off (cost and convenience) flying them on demand in private medical evacuation-equipped jets at altitudes under 8,000 feet with a few exceptions.

Autonomous jets.  Hybrid-electric autonomous jets.  Operating out of the extended FAA general-aviation system (about 4200 improved airports with staffed control facilities) and, presumably, connecting with appropriate paratransit or other high-amenity road service at either end.

See Zunum for enough of a good operating model to see how the trick could be done.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 4:36 PM

I think with the miniscule number of people who would be served by these services, we might well be better off (cost and convenience) flying them on demand in private medical evacuation-equipped jets at altitudes under 8,000 feet with a few exceptions.  

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 3:39 PM

Overmod

 

 
JOHN PRIVARA
Re: People not served directly can access [LD service] by a 2 or 3 hr drive.

 

John, can you edit this post?  It appears to be missing considerable information or its formatting is perturbed. 

He was quoting Dave Klepper a few posts above.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 1:22 PM

JOHN PRIVARA
Re: People not served directly can access [LD service] by a 2 or 3 hr drive.

John, can you edit this post?  It appears to be missing considerable information or its formatting is perturbed.

It's easy for many people to ride even a couple of hours in a car, or more comfortable vehicle, to get to a train that has room and amenities for them.  It might be interesting to see how the necessary or desirable amenities increase with trip time or vehicle type, too.

By extension providing shuttle service, or even shuttle buses of suitable type, between intermediate towns on the railroad to reduce the necessary number of stops for a LD train might (probably 'would') improve service quality, and reduce some of the problems inherent in middle-of-the-night dropoff at unattended facilities, in perhaps very dangerous weather conditions.

Likewise, providing even 'paratransit'-like assistance to get the registered handicapped the 'last mile' or even many miles to a train is a sensible public priority, one that could be argued to have 'better bang for the buck' than many alternative methods of demonstrable reasonable accommodation provision.

This is far from 'grasping at straws'; it's developing the greatest potential passenger 'generation' from cohorts that are currently only technically served, or potentially very underserved.  Whether there is adequate new traffic to justify the cost of the service, let alone allow it to cover above-the-line expenses or whatever, is a different discussion. 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 1:08 PM

Paul of Covington
Deggesty
charlie hebdo:

Or Zeppelins?

Only if we use helium, and not hydrogen to lift them.

   Where's your sense of adventure?

Hydrogen is reasonably fine ... with reasonable care taken in its use ... as long as you don't dope the skin with thermite.

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 133 posts
Posted by JOHN PRIVARA on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 12:17 PM

Re:  People not sesrved directly can access it by a 2 0r 3 hr drive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unless they're handcapped.   Seems your "logic" is variable.   

 

 

 

(I get it tho.   Grasping at straws is all the LD supporters have left.  I've been there too, I used to be with ya...  But, after 50 years of no progress, I've changed my mind).

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 11:52 AM

Paul, I'm sorry, I lost my sense of adventure.Big Smile

Johnny

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 11:28 AM

Deggesty

 

 
charlie hebdo:

Or Zeppelins?

 

Only if we use helium, and not hydrogen to lift them.

 

 

   Where's your sense of adventure?

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 10:16 AM

charlie hebdo

 

 
Backshop

Should we also bring back ocean liners for those that don't want to fly transocean?

 

 

 

Or Zeppelins?

 

Only if we use helium, and not hydrogen to lift them.

Johnny

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 7:37 AM

Backshop

Should we also bring back ocean liners for those that don't want to fly transocean?

 

Or Zeppelins?

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 7:26 AM

Should we also bring back ocean liners for those that don't want to fly transocean?

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 6:59 AM

Belated answer to:  "should LDTs be subsidized for the minscule number of people who cannot fly?"  The answer I give is YES.  1.  The number is not that minscule, and (2) that, to me, is what a cvilzed society is all about, minority rights.  but LDTs serve other inportant putpses also, and I have discussed them many times before.

People not sesrved directly can access it by a 2 0r 3 hr drive.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Monday, June 3, 2019 10:16 AM

Sam, the January, 1930 issue of the Guide has the schedule of the Tat-Maddux Airline (ever hear of it elsewhere?) that shows its connections with the PRR and Santa Fe which provided coast-to-coast service with two overnight trips by train.

Lv NYC   6 05 pm ET on the PRR's Airway Limited; arrive at Port Columbus, O. at 7:35 the next morning.

Lv Poert Columbus at 8:15 amon Tat-Maddux for Waynoka, Okla, arriving at 6:24  pm CT .

Lv Waynoka at 11:00 pm on SFe's Missionary, and arrive in Clovis, N.M. at 8:20 am CT.

Lv Clovia at 8:10 am MT on Tat-Maddux, ariving in Los Angeles at 4:54 pm, and San Francisco at 7:45 pm.

The eastbound service was similar.

Johnny

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Monday, June 3, 2019 10:03 AM

MidlandMike

 

 
charlie hebdo

It seems the nostalgia buffs, who often oppose a modern passenger rail system (HSR, HrSR, and conventional), are so desperate to preserve an archaic, miniscule portion of what we have that they now justify it with service for folks with medical conditions who cannot or won't fly (and probably shouldn't travel), along with the handicapped, Scouts, graduating high school students.  Who's next?  Those folks with a fear of flying? 

 

 

 

Not sure who you are talking about.  I don't oppose HSR, and hope to see it here some day.  Judging from the people I have talked to on the trains, if Amtrak only hauled nostalgia buffs, it would have gone out of business long ago.

 

I was not referring to you, but generally to others on here. There seems to be little support for HSR on the Trains Forum.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,530 posts
Posted by NKP guy on Monday, June 3, 2019 9:12 AM

 

[/quote]

JPS1
No one knows how the savings from discontinuing the long-distance trains might be redirected.  No one!

   I do.

   That's my point:  It wouldn't be "redirected" at all; it would simply be absorbed into the federal budget.  So much for improving the corridors or anything else.  Do I "know" this?  How can anyone know the future?  Nevertheless, I'm confident that I can predict what Congress will do in any given situation.  Give them a choice of a) Progress; b) doing nothing; or c) doing the wrong thing, and they will almost never choose a).  

   Any purported savings could only happen after all the current debts are paid for, employees laid-off with severence, lots of equipment sold (at a loss to the taxpayer), real estate disposed of, etc.

   The American public would then have no national LD service, and shortly afterward the truncated Amtrak probably would be gone too.  

   Mission accomplished?

 

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Sunday, June 2, 2019 11:00 PM

Well, with R. Anderson, currently heading AMTRAK; you could maybe see a 're-hash' of an air travel from the postWWII era. Whistling

Pennsy RR and AT&SF had a joit rail/flight service from coast to coast(?). TATA AIRLINE...[ Chas. A. Lindberg was part of their Corprate management(?).]           I am not sure of the routing it took, but I imagine, it was mostly on PRR at the time(?). Passengers would fly ATA during the day, and land to take the sleeper train overnight.

About that same time frame AT&SF fielded their 'Santa Fe Skyway' airline, same principle as PRR/TATA. It might even have been a continuation of the PRR's service(?).  There is not a lot of information collected to lay out either operaton, on the 'Net.  'Santa Fe Skyway' utilized soime surplus aircraft, avail after WWII. Several converted C-54's and Curtis C-46's. Their operations were primarily West Coast from Midwest (Wichita was their Midwest terminal area.) They met their overnight passenger trains out in Northern Okla for the overnight run to the next aircraft filight West leg.

It did not last too long (less than a couple of years) the CAA shut them down as being too monopolistic.

I think that the Southern Pacific RR's 'Daylight Service' between SFO and LA  suffered a similat fate at the hands of the CAA at the time(?)

It is a pretty interesting aspect of the railroad/flight intractions, oand one that is not too well documented.

 

 

 

 


 

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Sunday, June 2, 2019 9:40 PM

charlie hebdo

It seems the nostalgia buffs, who often oppose a modern passenger rail system (HSR, HrSR, and conventional), are so desperate to preserve an archaic, miniscule portion of what we have that they now justify it with service for folks with medical conditions who cannot or won't fly (and probably shouldn't travel), along with the handicapped, Scouts, graduating high school students.  Who's next?  Those folks with a fear of flying? 

 

Not sure who you are talking about.  I don't oppose HSR, and hope to see it here some day.  Judging from the people I have talked to on the trains, if Amtrak only hauled nostalgia buffs, it would have gone out of business long ago.

  • Member since
    December 2018
  • 865 posts
Posted by JPS1 on Sunday, June 2, 2019 9:13 PM

NKP guy
 Even if Amtrak were to break its contract with the American public, which has been supporting & subsidizing its existence for nearly half a century, and drop the LD trains, does anyone really believe that Congress would apply those funds, let alone more, toward the corridors so dear to some here?  Really?  With a liftime's experience of following the news and the way Congress operates, do you really believe your much-vaunted corridors would consequently be infused this way by so much cash they would be what you want them to be?

My prediction is that the result would be both no LD service and no improvement on the corridors. 

                                            * * * * *

"For what shall it profit a national passenger railroad system to gain nothing in the whole world at the price of its own soul?" 

No one knows how the savings from discontinuing the long-distance trains might be redirected.  No one!  

If Amtrak has a contract with the America public to provide long-distance passenger train service, how come the people in Amarillo, Abilene, Brownsville, Corpus Christi, Harlingen, Lubbock, McAllen, Midland, and Odessa, all of which have sizeable populations, as examples, were left out?  Are they not part of the public?
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,530 posts
Posted by NKP guy on Sunday, June 2, 2019 7:38 PM

   Even if Amtrak were to break its contract with the American public, which has been supporting & subsidizing its existence for nearly half a century, and drop the LD trains, does anyone really believe that Congress would apply those funds, let alone more, toward the corridors so dear to some here?  Really?  With a liftime's experience of following the news and the way Congress operates, do you really believe your much-vaunted corridors would consequently be infused this way by so much cash they would be what you want them to be?

   My prediction is that the result would be both no LD service and no improvement on the corridors. 

                                            * * * * *

"For what shall it profit a national passenger railroad system to gain nothing in the whole world at the price of its own soul?"

 

   

 

 

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Sunday, June 2, 2019 7:38 PM

So it's a temporary condition that you could've postponed the trip for?  I guess that I'll keep supporting the long distance train network just for you.  I'll write to my friend Richie and ask him to keep a fully staffed train on call just in case you ever need to use it.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Sunday, June 2, 2019 10:47 AM

Backshop

So we have to keep a national long distance network for the occasional person who can't fly?  How many people can't fly for medical reasons and how often do they actually travel somewhere?

 

This person.  Am taking the Crescent as my medical condition has discharge instructions to not fly for 10 weeks.  Ufortunately could not scan it to post here.  Suspect it is to allow internal healing of viens and arteries?

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Sunday, June 2, 2019 9:34 AM

It seems the nostalgia buffs, who often oppose a modern passenger rail system (HSR, HrSR, and conventional), are so desperate to preserve an archaic, miniscule portion of what we have that they now justify it with service for folks with medical conditions who cannot or won't fly (and probably shouldn't travel), along with the handicapped, Scouts, graduating high school students.  Who's next?  Those folks with a fear of flying? 

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Saturday, June 1, 2019 11:09 PM

So we have to keep a national long distance network for the occasional person who can't fly?  How many people can't fly for medical reasons and how often do they actually travel somewhere?

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Saturday, June 1, 2019 7:31 PM

charlie hebdo

From my search, looks like less than 10 incidents with loss of air pressure in the cabin on all the scheduled commercial flights in the USA in 2018. Very rare.

 

I don't doubt that it is rare, however, if I had a medical condition that a doctor told me not to fly, I would not take a chance.  Last year I had a friend who had such a condition as I mentioned in a previous post (sudden pressure loss could have caused an embolism) and stumbled onto Amtrak.  She took the Zephyr, no problem with gradual rise to Moffat Tunnel at 9000'.  She enjoyed the trip, but in a few weeks when her lung problem had healed, she took a plane back home.  I imagine that people not near Amtrak, would need to find another land option.

https://www.merckmanuals.com/home/special-subjects/travel-and-health/specific-medical-conditions-and-travel

 

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Saturday, June 1, 2019 2:32 PM

From my search, looks like less than 10 incidents with loss of air pressure in the cabin on all the scheduled commercial flights in the USA in 2018. Very rare.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Saturday, June 1, 2019 7:02 AM

MidlandMike
 

 

FAA shows over 27,000 scheduled flights per day, so your brother's experience represents less than a day's statistical sample.  You previously said you are not a health professional, but it does not seem to prevent you from giving medical advice that in a sudden loss of pressure you should be fine with a drop down air mask.  This might result in people with certain lung problems (like air getting into blood stream) ending up as a well oxygenated corpse.

 

Okay.  How many times has this happened?  You're just making up extremely rare or nonexistant scenarios now. You still haven't answered how people with no Amtrak service do just fine flying.
  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Friday, May 31, 2019 11:33 PM

Backshop

 

 
Backshop

 

Sudden loss of cabin pressure is a non-event.  

 

 

 

Okay, my brother just got back with me on a question.  He is a soon to be retired Captain for a major US legacy airline.  He has over 22,000 hours of flight time.  For those without calculators, that's over 2.5 YEARS of flight time.  He has never had a cabin depressurization or had the oxygen masks deploy.  That shows you how rare of an occurence it is.  Besides, even if it does happen, so what?  You put the mask on and breathe normally.

 

 

FAA shows over 27,000 scheduled flights per day, so your brother's experience represents less than a day's statistical sample.  You previously said you are not a health professional, but it does not seem to prevent you from giving medical advice that in a sudden loss of pressure you should be fine with a drop down air mask.  This might result in people with certain lung problems (like air getting into blood stream) ending up as a well oxygenated corpse.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Friday, May 31, 2019 9:00 AM

Sitting and stumbling around on a train, often rough riding,  for 20-40 hours has a constellation of medical/health problems. 

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Friday, May 31, 2019 7:35 AM

Backshop

 

Sudden loss of cabin pressure is a non-event.  

 

Okay, my brother just got back with me on a question.  He is a soon to be retired Captain for a major US legacy airline.  He has over 22,000 hours of flight time.  For those without calculators, that's over 2.5 YEARS of flight time.  He has never had a cabin depressurization or had the oxygen masks deploy.  That shows you how rare of an occurence it is.  Besides, even if it does happen, so what?  You put the mask on and breathe normally.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Friday, May 31, 2019 6:31 AM

If Amtrak on-board service, food, etc., isn't what it should be, every effort should be made to restore it.  Track quality is something that impacts freight as well as passenger service, with greater wheel and rail wear as opposed to smooth track.

My last Amtrak LD trip was in Jan. 1996.  May 1971 - Jan 1996 I never had a complaint, not once, about an Amtrak meal.  Nor sleep deprevation from rough track.  If things are worse, lets get them back to where they should be.

I believe my scheme for on-board meals would work well.  And cut turn food losses into profit.

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 6,199 posts
Posted by Miningman on Friday, May 31, 2019 12:57 AM

Just want to state I'm with David Klepper 100%. Too tired to argue at the moment. 

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Thursday, May 30, 2019 9:57 PM

No, I'm not a "medical professional" but I don't need to be.  Just like I don't need to be a fireman to know that a building is burning or a railroad engineer to know a train has derailed.

Sudden loss of cabin pressure is a non-event.  It happens more in the movies than in real life.  Limited mobility is usually not a problem on shorter domestic flights.  DVT and the like usually only happen on very long international flights.  Like others have mentioned, what is the percentage of train passengers that even have these needs?  Since trains really don't go that many places, how many of these people do they really serve.  What do the elderly who live in Columbus, OH, Nashville, TN and many other places without Amtrak service do?  They hop on the plane and are there in 2 hours, with no ill effects.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Thursday, May 30, 2019 8:46 PM

Backshop

There are very, very few people who can't actually fly.  Those same people probably couldn't take a train, either.  Airline cabins are pressurized to 7-8000 feet, so that's no different than i.e. Raton Pass.  The restrooms may not be available, but that is less of a problem for a 1-3 hour flight than a 1-2 day train trip.

 

Are you a health professional?  There are many medical reasons that restrict flying.  It is not just the reduced pressure, but also the potential of sudden loss of pressure.  That's not a problem with train travel.  These medical problems are not unique to the elderly.  Air passengers needing oxygen must use airline supplied oxygen equipment and make arrangements on lay-overs, while Amtrak passengers can carry their own oxygen equipment.  Problems are also caused by limited mobility on planes.

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 133 posts
Posted by JOHN PRIVARA on Thursday, May 30, 2019 5:40 PM
Re:  Since LD trains serve so few cities, you seem to be pushing it more for land cruises than for actual transportation.
 
It seems to me this is the only type of LD train that would appeal to a larger population.  But it would have to have completely different amenities and service than Amtrak is capable of providing.  A “cruise” doesn’t equate to camping; which is what Amtrak is like.  “Cruise people” don’t do camping; “cruise people” do comfort.   I’m also not sure most normal people (meaning:  non train-foamers) would actually like sleeping in a moving passenger car; which means we’re back to the LD trains which only run during the day (ala Rocky Mountaineer service).  I doubt, too, that US railroads are equipped to deal with passenger trains in any form on most of their rail-network.   The railroads have a tough time just dealing with the intermodal vs bulk train difference.
 
Doesn’t mean it can’t be done, but Amtrak couldn’t do it.  That’s the problem with LD trains now.  Amtrak is stymied by the existence of the current 1950’s LD trains.   They can’t switch to daily-light corridors, they can’t experiment,  they can’t do anything; or every nostalgia loving special-interest group (especially the passenger-train foamers) jumps on them and demands they only run 1950’s trains on 1920’s schedule (oh, and that Oklahoma City connection from Newton KS – it has allot of potential,  seriously.   Do that first.) 
 
  • Member since
    December 2018
  • 865 posts
Posted by JPS1 on Thursday, May 30, 2019 4:44 PM

azrail
 Apparently FirstGroup (the same company that runs passenger trains in the UK) is selling Greyhound. 

According to Reuters, Greyhound was put up for sale today, May 30, 2019.  First Group is also seeking to sell its UK bus operation(s).

Apparently the company plans to focus its attention on its North American contract bus services.  It operates more than 42,000 school buses in North America.  

Greyhound could be sold as an entity or in pieces.  If I were a betting person, I would put a little money on the company being sold in pieces to regional operators or to new operators to be operated as regional carriers. 

As is true for our so-called national passenger rail system, a nationwide bus company does not make much sense in this day and age.  

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Thursday, May 30, 2019 4:01 PM

airline cabins are closely monitored for maximum number of  pressurization cycles.  Cycles are what killed the British comet early models.  FAA regulations say only need to keep cabin altitude at 8500 feet or less.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Thursday, May 30, 2019 3:06 PM

Overmod

 

Some one of our aircraft experts will know, better than I do, how practical it is to increase ambient cabin air pressure if flying with 'reasonable accommodations' for elderly who are intolerant of the economic level of reduced pressure.  Surely the technical requirement is easily handled with additional air bleed and perhaps a little more heat exchanger capacity.  Is the cumulative stress on the airframe dangerously greater with the higher static internal pressure and greater cycling pressure excursion? 

This will answer some of your questions.  Airplane cabins are pressurized at between 6000-8000 feet.  The greater the difference between outer and inner pressure, the stronger (and usually heavier) the fuselage has to be built.  The newer A350 and B787 have carbon fibre fuselages, so they normally operate closer to 6000 feet pressure, since they are stronger for their weight.

https://aerosavvy.com/aircraft-pressurization/

  • Member since
    January 2007
  • 599 posts
Posted by azrail on Thursday, May 30, 2019 2:50 PM

Apparently FirstGroup (the same company that runs passenger trains in the UK) is selling Greyhound.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Thursday, May 30, 2019 2:10 PM

daveklepper

Not true.  Much more of a problem,  Urinary problems vs. "Fasten Seat Belt" AND usually too few Johns to avoid waiting, inability to eat or drink at a precise schedule, and, yes, Raton Pass and possibly even the Moffat may not be included in some elderlies' cross-country rail trips.  They may be forced to use the Eagle-Sunset route. but will be happy it is available.

 

Since LD trains serve so few cities, you seem to be pushing it more for land cruises than for actual transportation.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, May 30, 2019 11:53 AM

daveklepper
And it was C-H that forced a comparison of LDTs and concert halls.  I was merely pointing out that concert halls don't get paid for their hard-of-hearing and handicapped-access expenses by any government agency.  So why should the oveall transportation agency get ADA funds for such purposes?

I was actually agreeing with you ... but since you bring this up, yes, I think it is fully appropriate to direct Federal funding to make concert halls, theatres and the like fully "ADA compliant", precisely because they are to be considered resources beneficial to an intelligent civilization and it is fair to allocate 'general funds' from taxation of the whole to make them accessible to the whole.

I should probably add that I think there is good socialism and bad socialism, and I further think reimbursing private owners out of tax money for things the Government required them to do at their expense is in the prior category.

Part of the elephant-in-the-room larger question regarding LD Amtrak service is whether the benefit per actual elderly 'customer' is worth the pro rata amount of tax 'diversion' from other laudable Government efforts that provides it.  I fear the prospective societal cost-benefit is far less than that from cultural resources.

 

Some one of our aircraft experts will know, better than I do, how practical it is to increase ambient cabin air pressure if flying with 'reasonable accommodations' for elderly who are intolerant of the economic level of reduced pressure.  Surely the technical requirement is easily handled with additional air bleed and perhaps a little more heat exchanger capacity.  Is the cumulative stress on the airframe dangerously greater with the higher static internal pressure and greater cycling pressure excursion?

I would also want to see some accelerometric data as to whether the incidence of actual CAT or other issues in most current high-altitude flying is a greater impediment to 'bathroom access' than much current rough track poses to Amtrak passengers.  A fall is just as dangerous from a 79mph resultant as it is from a 500kt one, and perhaps operationally and statistically more likely.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Thursday, May 30, 2019 9:41 AM

All airports have restaurants with carryout food.  I see plenty of people eating their own food on planes.  Waitng on restrooms isn't a problem.  I've never had to wait for more than one person, and they were only doing #1 :), so it was fast.

At the risk of sounding condescending, I think that with you living in another country, you've lost touch with the US of 2019.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, May 30, 2019 7:42 AM

Not true.  Much more of a problem,  Urinary problems vs. "Fasten Seat Belt" AND usually too few Johns to avoid waiting, inability to eat or drink at a precise schedule, and, yes, Raton Pass and possibly even the Moffat may not be included in some elderlies' cross-country rail trips.  They may be forced to use the Eagle-Sunset route. but will be happy it is available.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Thursday, May 30, 2019 7:41 AM

daveklepper

 

And it was C-H that forced a comparison of LDTs and concert halls. 

I did nothing of the sort. You seem to want to justify the continuation of long distance devices on the basis of providing alternative transportation for the some of the elderly and/or challenged. ADA mandates access to existing public services,  a very different  matter.  It seems to me that your justification  is absurd. 

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Thursday, May 30, 2019 7:25 AM

There are very, very few people who can't actually fly.  Those same people probably couldn't take a train, either.  Airline cabins are pressurized to 7-8000 feet, so that's no different than i.e. Raton Pass.  The restrooms may not be available, but that is less of a problem for a 1-3 hour flight than a 1-2 day train trip.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, May 30, 2019 5:14 AM

Ocermod, the "cruelty" refers to lack of long-distance travel capability, to visit children and relatives and for vactions, not the hassles and discomfort associated with air travel.

There are medical reasons for elderly not flying, even if we have the ability to walk and climb stairs.

And it was C-H that forced a comparison of LDTs and concert halls.  I was merely pointing out that concert halls don't get paid for their hard-of-hearing and handicapped-access expenses by any government agency.  So why should the oveall transportation agency get ADA funds for such purposes?

 

for me, municipal libraries, national parks, concert halls and theaters, and long distance trains, are all part of the civilized America, but C-H and you are certainly entitled to your opinions.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, May 27, 2019 9:20 PM

tdmidget
What are you smoking?

Mr. MG -- you've been whooooshed with almost devastating effect.

Did you actually look at the clip describing the 165mph bus service?  None of the stuff John Privara added was any more serious.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Monday, May 27, 2019 7:47 PM

Overmod
As I've mentioned in other contexts, I find the provision of rational 'ad hoc' transit to the elderly, handicapped, and other 'differently-abled' who cannot drive to be one of the great shining uses for autonomous-vehicle technology, even for trips of considerable length.  Better accomodations for, say, six to ten passengers in something the size of a van Hool shell with modern hybrid drive is a much better use of funding than jiggering a whole nationwide set of unprofitable trains to defectively approximate the same premise...

Perhaps you could supply a cost comparison of special buses vs. train.  The closest example I see is dial-a-ride small buses, which require big subsidies.  I looked at the van Hool website and noted that their hybrid buses cost $400,000 more than a regular bus.  Also I don't believe we will ever see a driverless bus.  Are these buses going to stop and unload everyone every few hours for meals/hotels, or will they have a bus host to serve food?  Perhaps these people will have family members/attendants along, so you are going to need a bigger bus.

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • 707 posts
Posted by tdmidget on Monday, May 27, 2019 9:32 AM

JOHN PRIVARA
Re:  A double-deck vehicle with Pickwickian amenities that is run up to 165mph on
Personally,  I’d rather have those “vista-dome” Greyhounds back.  Trick it out with some bedrooms on top, and bathrooms and a lounge on the bottom…   WOW!   
Plus, drive on the old US highways; like Rt 66.    None of this modern Interstate stuff,  we’ll go head to head with Amtrak for 1950’s nostalgia! 
I think a 1-B-$ subsidy would create a nice basic network. 
 
(Of course, we’d have to a connecting bus at Newton KS for Oklahoma City passengers from Chicago and KC,  there’s real potential there). 
 

What are you smoking? Route 66? How is that going to happen? There can't be more than 250 miles of it left and that is all city streets. For example in Arizona there are about b8 nmiles in Holbrook, 1 in Joseph city, 1 in Winslow, 71 between Seligman and Kingman. I am told that there is 165 miles that are claimed to be rt 66 but not all are original. Driving on I 40 is not driving on Rt 66, even when they are the same piece of real estate.

I don't get the fascination with Rt 66. It was a crappy roundabout way of connecting 2 s--thole cities, Chicago and Los Angeles. US 80, the Ocean to Ocean highway was much more direct, connected many more people and cities, running from Coronado Island Ca to Tybee Island GA.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Monday, May 27, 2019 8:53 AM

daveklepper

I think the comparison is amply justified.  Along with National Parks and Public Libraries.  You and most of my critics are younger than I am and still drive and probably own automobiles, with the freedom a personal car provides.

As a youngster, I had a partial scholorship for a private school, and my classmates and friends were from wealthier families that could afford cars, even in New York.  At MIT, the situation was the same, with many students owning cars.  So when I started earning my own money, and then the Army, a car was a real ticket to freedom, despite my interest in public transportation and railroads and passenger trains.

I am now 87, drove my own auto ages 21 - 38; rented cars when appropriate, 38 - 64.  I have not owned a car or driven at all regularly (exceptions, move a car a short distance for a friend) since.  So, I have some idea of the loss of mobility the handicapped and elderly encounter.

If you accuse me of being bazzar; I can acuse you of being cruel.  The elderly and handicapped that woulc be serverely impacted by the loss of the LDPTs may be a small fraction of the total population, but such deprivation still is cruelty.

 

I think you need to read Overmod's post or consult a dictionary as to cruelty.  Most elderly  and challenged folks I encounter either personally or professionally prefer flying for any traveling much over 400 miles in length.  Sitting on an often uncomfortable plane for 3-5 hours beats sitting on a train for 24-40 hours.  

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, May 27, 2019 7:57 AM

daveklepper
The elderly and handicapped that would be severely impacted by the loss of the LDPTs may be a small fraction of the total population, but such deprivation still is cruelty.

It's only 'cruelty' if knowingly and intentionally so imposed.  Which I doubt even the most unflattering assessments of Anderson et al. could actually substantiate.

It might also be said that a large number of the potential 'elderly' users of Amtrak service are becoming more and more incapable of the critical on-the-spot thinking needed to figure out when to schedule for a three-day-a-week schedule of uncertain timing reliability.  Is it worth spending the additional millions to provide effective daily service with more time reliability, or reasonable boarding times from any given station each day, or 'clean up' conditions in many of the areas where Amtrak has its LD passenger stations, to accommodate the 'elderly and handicapped' appropriately?

The point about Amtrak vs. theatre and concert hall owners is valid in context.  Most of the requirements of the ADA as amended might as well be considered unfunded mandates as far as concerns 'owners and operators' of facilities.  No one subsidizes venues for, say, making their restrooms accessible and ADA compliant for the latest round of 'do-gooder' required-or-else changes.  So of necessity they must assign an appropriate part of the cost of compliance to 'their users' in some manner -- and presumably have enough of those users, contributing at least enough marginal revenue, to make the cost of the changes available above and beyond all the other costs of running the venue.

Amtrak only incidentally gets 'government money' for ADA and other compliance.  As a 'quasi-public' company intended to operate as a business, and since 2015 explicitly tasked with transitioning to some definition of 'profitability' (however rigged that turns out to be in practice) the incremental cost of catering to what is likely a small contingent of 'differently-abled' with systemwide expensive modifications  or operating procedures (the progress of the arguments over how to implement wheelchair access being a particularly applicable example, I think) may not be justifiable in terms of the mobility access that would be theoretically gained by those expenses.

One pejorative (and perhaps exaggerated) piece of propaganda from early Amtrak years (I think it might actually have been published in Trains) noted that it would have been possible for at least one train to buy everyone a Volkswagen and gas enough to run it for a year with the money saved by not running it.  I would have to note that any 'paratransit'-like service for the cohort of elderly and handicapped prospective Amtrak passengers on any given day, whether or not they would consider a service like Angels Flight an alternative, would very likely be vastly cheaper as well as far better and more effective for all concerned. Such an approach would also be far less 'cruel' than forcing these people to suffer on mandatory-high-level Amtrak equipment with crappy bathrooms and possibly unmotivated employees ... or forcing employees to deal with some of the implications of special service requirement for the elderly and handicapped including whatever the Government du jour considers 'reasonable accommodation' at every stop in the middle of the night.  As I've mentioned in other contexts, I find the provision of rational 'ad hoc' transit to the elderly, handicapped, and other 'differently-abled' who cannot drive to be one of the great shining uses for autonomous-vehicle technology, even for trips of considerable length.  Better accomodations for, say, six to ten passengers in something the size of a van Hool shell with modern hybrid drive is a much better use of funding than jiggering a whole nationwide set of unprofitable trains to defectively approximate the same premise...

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, May 27, 2019 3:14 AM

I think the comparison is amply justified.  Along with National Parks and Public Libraries.  You and most of my critics are younger than I am and still drive and probably own automobiles, with the freedom a personal car provides.

As a youngster, I had a partial scholorship for a private school, and my classmates and friends were from wealthier families that could afford cars, even in New York.  At MIT, the situation was the same, with many students owning cars.  So when I started earning my own money, and then the Army, a car was a real ticket to freedom, despite my interest in public transportation and railroads and passenger trains.

I am now 87, drove my own auto ages 21 - 38; rented cars when appropriate, 38 - 64.  I have not owned a car or driven at all regularly (exceptions, move a car a short distance for a friend) since.  So, I have some idea of the loss of mobility the handicapped and elderly encounter.

If you accuse me of being bazzar; I can acuse you of being cruel.  The elderly and handicapped that woulc be serverely impacted by the loss of the LDPTs may be a small fraction of the total population, but such deprivation still is cruelty.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Sunday, May 26, 2019 9:20 PM

1. Comparing concert halls with passenger rail service is bizarre,  to say the least. 

2. Providing the median and standard deviation would tell us most of what is useful in any set of descriptive data

  • Member since
    December 2018
  • 865 posts
Posted by JPS1 on Sunday, May 26, 2019 2:00 PM

daveklepper

If approximately 450 miles is the average coach passenger's travel it does mean a substantial number are above that.  The same goes for the 950 for sleeper passengers.  

And a substantial number would have traveled less than the average.  A better outcome would be a quintile frequency distribution, but Amtrak does not publish frequency distributions of distances traveled by its long-distance passengers.    
 
Whether one rode Amtrak 23 years ago or last week, an individual’s experience is not transferable to the population as a whole.  It would only be indicative of the whole by coincidence.
 
If the justification for Amtrak’s long-distance trains is to facilitate travel for the mobility challenged and/or people needing to travel to medical centers, then more people are left out than served.  In Texas, where I live, people in Amarillo, Abilene, Brownsville, Corpus Christi, Harlingen, Laredo, Lubbock, McAllen, Midland, and Odessa, all of which have sizeable populations, are out of luck.  They don’t have any passenger rail service.  Moreover, people in Beaumont, Del Rio, El Paso and San Antonio better plan way ahead if the want to use Amtrak to get to MD Anderson in Houston.  Their choo-choo only runs three days a week. 
 
Irrespective of the purpose of their travel, anyone riding one of Amtrak’s long-distance trains better take something to read, watch, or play with.  Last year the on-time percentage for the long-distance trains at their end points was 48.6.  The Texas Eagle, as an example, was within 15 minutes of its schedule end point arrival times just 37 percent of the time. 
 
The situation was even worse for passengers at many of the intermediate stations.  The all stations on time percentage for the long-distance trains was 41.9 percent, with the Texas Eagle coming in at 33.5 percent.   
  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 133 posts
Posted by JOHN PRIVARA on Sunday, May 26, 2019 11:32 AM

Re:  I don't think you will find a less expensive way of giving true continental mobility to the Elderly and Handicapped than the present LS system because other riders need it and use it.

I wonder how many years LD train supporters expect this train preservation effort to go on?   As the existing obsolete LD equipment fails, are we going to spend billions on new (obsolete) 1950’s equipment?   Do we expect trains with 1950’s amenities and 1920’s schedules with 1840’s frequencies to run into the 22nd century?   Just for nostalgia?  

Meanwhile, Amtrak is wasting its time with an obsolete form of transportation which creates a stigma amongst the rest of the population against all passenger trains, including modern short-distance trains that would be useful to the majority of the population.

Perhaps the disabled, and (primarily) rich old people, can get together with the bus foamers and steam-ship foamers and subsidize the preservation of long-distance buses and trans-Atlantic ocean liners.   Surely we can’t have enough obsolete transportation.

(Time to daylight the LD trains, and get out of the 1950's).

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, May 26, 2019 8:29 AM

[quote user="charlie hebdo"]

daveklepper
daveklepper wrote the following post 7 hours ago: I believe your (plural) conclusions are faulty.  The passengers who do not ride end-point - to - end-point still include a substantial number who ride almost end-point to end-point.  People who ride the Chief Jolliette to Barstow, the Zephyr from Galesburg to Reno, the Empire Builder from Milwaukee to Spokane.  The most important reason in my own opinion for Long Distance trains in the USA and Canada is to make continental mobility possible for the elderly and handicapped

 

1. Do you have any data to support this notion of almost-endpoint to almost- endpoint ridership being anything more than a drop in a small bucket?

2. If the LD trains' justification should be for the physically challenged, then get the subsidy for that from ADA appropriations.

 

[/quote  (above)]

The theater and  concert-hall owners are compensated for hard-of-hearing and mobility-limited features by the general revenue, not ADA appropriations.

If approximately 450 miles is the average coach passenger's travel it does mean a substantial number are above that.  The same goes for the 950 for sleeper passengers.  I don't know where hard data for a graph for the two types of passengers for numbers versus distance, possibly in blocks of 50 or 100 miles, could be found. Possibly things have changed in the 23 years since I last rode Amtrak long distance (last trips round-trip roomette, NY - W. Palm Beach), but most other travelers I met on trips on the Southwest Chief, CZ, Lake Shore, Capitol Limited, Cresent, Cardinal, and the Florida trains fit that catagory of long-distance, but not both end-points.  Ditto nearly all my own trips, usually to and from New York or Chicago, with my own other end-point short of that of the train.  The only frequent end-point-to-end-point trip was NY-Chicago to connect with the Chief or CZ. On the CZ, a stop-over for a few days in Denver in one direction was common, visiting a sister and niece, and Salt Lake City or neaby Provo was a frequent western destination.  On the Florida trains, several NY - W. Palm Beach trips, also just Jacksonville, and points in the Carolinas and Georgia.

I did talk with other passengers.

I don't think you will find a less expensive way of giving true continental mobility to the Elderly and Handicapped than the present LS system because other riders need it and use it.  Ideas expressed on alternative schemes seem highly expensive and not very customer friendly, essentially putting such citizens in long-distance ambulances.

I do believe my ideas on converting decent food service from a money drain to a profitable business through a station restaurant chain with substantial take-out and delivery business, with the on-board-train meals a faction of that busines would both cut losses and improve the passenger's experience.  Possibly the matter of interior cleaning and restocking supplies also needs a new look.

 

 

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: San Francisco East Bay
  • 1,360 posts
Posted by MikeF90 on Saturday, May 25, 2019 5:33 PM

BaltACD
Another company (FlixBus) popped up around the same time with very similar routes and fares .... hmmm .... Would that be collusion or obstruction?

Apparently neither. FlixBus is based in Europe and possibly came across this business opportunity. I have not yet tried them out.

York1
I have a friend in Phoenix. I just checked. First week in July, I can fly from Grand Island, NE, (a little closer to me than Omaha) to Mesa, AZ, on Allegiant Airlines for $64, about two hours. Greyhound, 26 hours, $143.

Ouch - that Greyhound trip sounds like a violation of the Geneva Conventions. Thank you for making me appreciate my 'short distance' transportation options.

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: Calgary
  • 2,047 posts
Posted by cx500 on Friday, May 24, 2019 5:15 PM

While certainly cheap airfares (if booked ahead) cut into the bus and train usage, I think the biggest factor is the ever increasing use of private automobiles.  Used to be that most families only had one car, and often only the husband knew how to drive.  Today it is not uncommon for the kids to be given their own car as a high school graduation present, and a three car garage still leaves a car or two parked outside!

Up here in western Canada Greyhound ceased operation last October, leaving no alternatives.  So when a friend had car troubles 300 miles away, I drove out to bring him home.  Last year he could have simply used the Dog.  (A repeat drive is lined up for next week to recover his vehicle.)  Airports are not always conveniently available when you need transportation!

Sorry NDG, didn't have time to hunt you up on Wednesday; picked up gas one way, never stopped coming back.

John

  • Member since
    February 2018
  • From: Flyover Country
  • 5,557 posts
Posted by York1 on Friday, May 24, 2019 3:35 PM

MikeF90

 

 
York1
... One can fly much faster and in most cases, cheaper, than taking a train or bus.

 

Please provide an example - in recent years I've never found cheaper airfare than bus fare. Despite California population growth the central valley towns still suffer from flightus interruptusBang Head.

I was a good customer of BoltBus (Greyhound subsidiary) but they mysteriously pulled out of Cali at the end of 2018. Confused Very strange because they seemed to have the demographic dialed in - students, recent grads or other lower net income folks with computer savvy (you could only buy tickets online). Another company (FlixBus) popped up around the same time with very similar routes and fares .... hmmm ....

 

I just checked...

First week in July, I am headed for Dallas from Omaha.  I will drive, but if I didn't want to drive, I can take a United flight, a little over 7 hours, with one stop, for $137.  On Greyhound, it is 17 hours for $143.

I have a friend in Phoenix.  I just checked.  First week in July, I can fly from Grand Island, NE, (a little closer to me than Omaha) to Mesa, AZ, on Allegiant Airlines for $64, about two hours.  Greyhound, 26 hours, $143.

York1 John       

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, May 24, 2019 3:06 PM

MikeF90
I was a good customer of BoltBus (Greyhound subsidiary) but they mysteriously pulled out of Cali at the end of 2018. Confused Very strange because they seemed to have the demographic dialed in - students, recent grads or other lower net income folks with computer savvy (you could only buy tickets online). Another company (FlixBus) popped up around the same time with very similar routes and fares .... hmmm ....

Would that be collusion or obstruction?

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: San Francisco East Bay
  • 1,360 posts
Posted by MikeF90 on Friday, May 24, 2019 2:58 PM

York1
... One can fly much faster and in most cases, cheaper, than taking a train or bus.

Please provide an example - in recent years I've never found cheaper airfare than bus fare. Despite California population growth the central valley towns still suffer from flightus interruptusBang Head.

I was a good customer of BoltBus (Greyhound subsidiary) but they mysteriously pulled out of Cali at the end of 2018. Confused Very strange because they seemed to have the demographic dialed in - students, recent grads or other lower net income folks with computer savvy (you could only buy tickets online). Another company (FlixBus) popped up around the same time with very similar routes and fares .... hmmm ....

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Friday, May 24, 2019 10:25 AM

Two more changes from the old days. You now buy a ticket for a particular trip--and there are no more ighway flag stops on Greyhound--I benefited from such a stop one night when it seemed that no one was going to stop and pick a hitchhiker up; as it was, the driver that night was one whom I had known for many years.

The last time I rode with that driver, I was going from my home town to Charlotte, When I saw who the driver was, I reached inside, took the crank for the baggage compartments and put my suitcase inside, and took the suitcase out in Charlotte.

Johnny

  • Member since
    February 2018
  • From: Flyover Country
  • 5,557 posts
Posted by York1 on Friday, May 24, 2019 9:57 AM

Victrola1
Who killed the long distance passenger bus? 

 

While other posters have pointed out various issues, I think the main reason is the same as is true for trains:  One can fly much faster and in most cases, cheaper, than taking a train or bus.

And as also pointed out, even smaller cities have connecting flights, directly competing with bus service.

York1 John       

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Friday, May 24, 2019 8:05 AM

ah, yes, the good old days when there were several Greyhound lines and several Trailways lines. At one time or another, I rode on three different Greyhound lines--Atlantic, Teche, and Southeastern. And, I rode on two different Trailways lines whose names I remember--Carolina Scenic Stages and Queen City (Charlotte, N.C.) Trailways--and another one whose name I do not recall--Continental?

Johnny

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, May 24, 2019 6:55 AM

The Greyhound system eventually merged the various operating companies into one corporate entity.  Trailways had some mergers of operating companies but tended to remain an association of independent operators sharing the Trailways name for marketing purposes.  There were also a fair number of independent regional operations of various sizes throughout the country.

Greyhound shrank in part due to corporate machinations but both national systems and some of the regionals shrank due to de-reg in the 1980's.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Thursday, May 23, 2019 8:15 PM

Yes, Johnny, those were some big time operators before Corporate machinations took them out of the LD Bus business. 

Greyhound fielded their Scenicruisers and Super Senicruisers, while Continental Trailways had their high-powered 8V-71 and double 8V-71 Detroit Diesels versions of their Silver Eagle, and their Golden Eagles. That Golden Eagle was the Express version, and was hinged to the rear; with 'Stewardesses' who served the passengers drinks and sandwiches. They were pretty plush rides in their day. The bus bodies were made in Germany and shipped to the USA for their drivetrains. The route thru Memphis went West and East. The Silver Eagles were used on most other route than the Express Routes.  They, both models were designed to get out there, and 'burn a hole in the wind'. We heard stories of automobiles that had tried to stay with the Golden Eagles and wound up blowing their gas motors up(?)  Some of those buses lasted into the era of the Double Nickle.  And they, like the Scenicruisers got shaggier, and shaggier as they ran out their miles.  In their primes they were some pretty snertzy rides. Mischief 

Here is a linked photo of one of the  articulated bus version @http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Eagle_Bus

 

 


 

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Thursday, May 23, 2019 7:55 PM

samfp1943

 

JPS1 wrote the following post[in part]:
Backshop
 "Since JPS1 said that the average coach passenger rode only 497 miles on an LD train, I doubt it. "

JPS1 "...isn’t smart enough to come up with the number by himself.  It can be found on Page 66 of the Amtrak Service Line Plans | FY 2018 - 2023.  It is for 2017; it probably has changed little if at all..."

Further, from JPS1: "...If Greyhound went away, there are several regional bus systems that could fill the void.  One line that comes to mind is Peter Pan, which is based in Springfield, Massachusetts.  It provides an excellent service throughout New England.  Or new lines probably would popup..."

Convenience and Price: [ Long time ago in another part of my life]  I worked for several years, in Memphis,Tn; sleping bags. and bus freight to earn money to go to school. In the 1580's/60s, there were two major bus operators, Greyhound and Continental Trailways. In Memphis the two terminals were across the street from each other. Sort of a Hatfield and McCoy relationship; were traded some freight, back and forth, and passengers when one line did not meet their needs.

 Eventually, they both seemed to dry up and go away...Corporate decisions being what they were; Greyhound back then was a division of Dial [Soap?]Corp.  C/T was a victim of its own(?).  The Regionals seemed to pick up[Cherry pick(?)]  and take on the better paying routes. going long distances became problematic, and a nightmare of putting a routing together.  Particularly, out in the areas of 'fly-over America.

Out here in Kansas, the urge to see other parts of the country; are the perview of a couple of  Long Distance'TOUR' Operators, and some that could be called 'wildcatters'(?). The latter seem operate between large hispanic populations and up and down I-35. They seem to operate regularly and probably have scheduled published within their ridership community (?)Whistling 

There may even be some new Greyhound franchises; Saw what apeared to be a fairly new coach Southbound today on I-35, that was all black, but had the famous 'running hound' on its sides. Who knows?

  Local hope for some, in So. Central Kansas, is that AMTRAK will extend its Dal-FtW to OKC service North thru Wichita to Newton to connect with the SW Chief there(?) Or maybe, all the way to KC (?)  Long shots, BUT the local politicians seem to blow hot and cold on that Idea? It seems to be anyone's guess.Whistling 

 

Sam, you mentioned Trailways. About two weeks ago, I was in Birmingham, Albama, waiting for my train at what used to be the L&N station, and now is the intermodal station (way back, there were two railroad stations and two bus stations in town; now there is the one intermodal station). I was surprised to see that Continental Trailways still has a presence there, along with Greyhound and Amtrak.

Incidentally, Greyhound used to check two bags per adult ticket at no cost if you bought the highest price ticket; recently I received an e-mail note from Greyhound, telling me the Good News that I may now check three bags--if I pay about (as I recall) $10.00 each for the second and third bags.

I  wish I had kept the last copy of Russell's Bus Guide that I had; there is no longer any such thing available.

Johnny

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Thursday, May 23, 2019 7:26 PM

 

JPS1 wrote the following post[in part]:
Backshop
 "Since JPS1 said that the average coach passenger rode only 497 miles on an LD train, I doubt it. "

JPS1 "...isn’t smart enough to come up with the number by himself.  It can be found on Page 66 of the Amtrak Service Line Plans | FY 2018 - 2023.  It is for 2017; it probably has changed little if at all..."

Further, from JPS1: "...If Greyhound went away, there are several regional bus systems that could fill the void.  One line that comes to mind is Peter Pan, which is based in Springfield, Massachusetts.  It provides an excellent service throughout New England.  Or new lines probably would popup..."

Convenience and Price: [ Long time ago in another part of my life]  I worked for several years, in Memphis,Tn; sleping bags. and bus freight to earn money to go to school. In the 1950's/60s, there were two major bus operators, Greyhound and Continental Trailways. In Memphis, the two terminals were across the street from each other. Sort of a Hatfield and McCoy relationship; were traded some freight, back and forth, and passengers when one line did not meet their needs.

 Eventually, they both seemed to dry up and go away...Corporate decisions being what they were; Greyhound, back then, was a division of Dial [Soap?]Corp.  C/T was a victim of its own(?).  The Regionals seemed to pick up[Cherry pick(?)]  and take on the better paying routes. going long distances became problematic, and a nightmare of putting a routing together.  Particularly, out in the areas of 'fly-over America.

Out here in Kansas, the urge to see other parts of the country; are the perview of a couple of  Long Distance'TOUR' Operators, and some that could be called 'wildcatters'(?). The latter seem operate between large hispanic populations and up and down I-35. They seem to operate regularly and probably have scheduled published within their ridership community (?)Whistling 

There may even be some new Greyhound franchises; Saw what apeared to be a fairly new coach Southbound today on I-35, that was all black, but had the famous 'running hound' on its sides. Who knows?

  Local hope for some, in So. Central Kansas, is that AMTRAK will extend its Dal-FtW to OKC service North thru Wichita to Newton to connect with the SW Chief there(?) Or maybe, all the way to KC (?)  Long shots, BUT the local politicians seem to blow hot and cold on that Idea? It seems to be anyone's guess.Whistling 

 

 


 

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 133 posts
Posted by JOHN PRIVARA on Thursday, May 23, 2019 6:34 PM
Re:  A double-deck vehicle with Pickwickian amenities that is run up to 165mph on
Personally,  I’d rather have those “vista-dome” Greyhounds back.  Trick it out with some bedrooms on top, and bathrooms and a lounge on the bottom…   WOW!   
Plus, drive on the old US highways; like Rt 66.    None of this modern Interstate stuff,  we’ll go head to head with Amtrak for 1950’s nostalgia! 
I think a 1-B-$ subsidy would create a nice basic network. 
 
(Of course, we’d have to a connecting bus at Newton KS for Oklahoma City passengers from Chicago and KC,  there’s real potential there). 
  • Member since
    December 2018
  • 865 posts
Posted by JPS1 on Thursday, May 23, 2019 5:24 PM

Backshop
 Since JPS1 said that the average coach passenger rode only 497 miles on an LD train, I doubt it. 

JPS1 isn’t smart enough to come up with the number by himself.  It can be found on Page 66 of the Amtrak Service Line Plans | FY 2018 - 2023.  It is for 2017; it probably has changed little if at all since 2017. 

According to the same source, the average trip length in 2017 for a sleeper class passenger was 991 miles, which suggests that most of the long-distance sleeping car passengers are on the train for just one night.  

Most Americans traveling across the country or over significant distances fly.  Some of them, if traveling with the family on vacation, may choose to drive.  

Whether Greyhound is a national system is debatable.  I would argue that it is really a linked set of regional operations, with very few passengers traveling beyond one region and even fewer riding across the country.

If Greyhound went away, there are several regional bus systems that could fill the void.  One line that comes to mind is Peter Pan, which is based in Springfield, Massachusetts.  It provides an excellent service throughout New England.  Or new lines probably would popup. 

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Thursday, May 23, 2019 1:08 PM

The whole premise of the article is wrong.  

"what would happen if Greyhound buses suddenly disappeared from American roads, and Amtrak became the only provider of passenger transportation with a nationwide reach?"

All of the Big 4 airlines provide nationwide service and serve more communties than Amtrak LD trains.  For example, Amtrak in Michigan doesn't serve any communties north of Lansing/Grand Rapids.  The airlines serve 9 airports with a catchment of the entire northern part of the state that are north of there.

  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Thursday, May 23, 2019 12:59 PM

Since JPS1 said that the average coach passenger rode only 497 miles on an LD train, I doubt it.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Wednesday, May 22, 2019 3:56 PM

daveklepper
daveklepper wrote the following post 7 hours ago: I believe your (plural) conclusions are faulty.  The passengers who do not ride end-point - to - end-point still include a substantial number who ride almost end-point to end-point.  People who ride the Chief Jolliette to Barstow, the Zephyr from Galesburg to Reno, the Empire Builder from Milwaukee to Spokane.  The most important reason in my own opinion for Long Distance trains in the USA and Canada is to make continental mobility possible for the elderly and handicapped

1. Do you have any data to support this notion of almost-endpoint to almost- endpoint ridership being anything more than a drop in a small bucket?

2. If the LD trains' justification should be for the physically challenged, then get the subsidy for that from ADA appropriations.

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 133 posts
Posted by JOHN PRIVARA on Wednesday, May 22, 2019 11:43 AM

Re:  But the elderly and handicapped is the most important.

If it's a transportation subsidy for the elderly and handicapped there are FAR better ways than 1950's trains running on 1920's schedules.

The long distance trains are ruining any chance of having useful trains for the rest of the population.    It's time to eliminate them; break the routes into daylight segments (that everybody could use) and try to move Amtrak out of the 1950's and (at least) into the 1980's.  It's a waste of money perpetuating the 1950's.

Do this instead (it's a PDF):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T2HT7l79BiHvZtaOTXpew8_5-rz-Q0tH/view

 

 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, May 22, 2019 10:56 AM

daveklepper

I believe your (plural) conclusions are faulty.  The passengers who do not ride end-point - to - end-point still include a substantial number who ride almost end-point to end-point.  People who ride the Chief Jolliette to Barstow, the Zephyr from Galesburg to Reno, the Empire Builder from Milwaukee to Spokane.  The most important reason in my own opinion for Long Distance trains in the USA and Canada is to make continental mobility possible for the elderly and handicapped who cannot either fly or endure long bus or auto trips.  The transportation equivalent of the handicapped access ramps and hard-of-hearing listening systems in theaters and concert halls.  They need both through service and comfort.  And decent food.  There are other reasons for LDS, tourism, emergencies, and, for the Empire Builder and Canadian, winter mobility for certain communities.  But the elderly and handicapped is the most important.

An example of a bus having mostly corridor passengers is not a good analogy.  Another purpose and mainly different clientele.

Dave is right -- but what I think is needed is a different paradigm for the bus service that would 'replace' what Amtrak thinks it's doing with the through LD train "transportation service".

The immediate thing would be to get the Megabus/Stagecoach people up to speed with the attractive "Velocibus" technology promoted by "Obama" a few years ago.  A double-deck vehicle with Pickwickian amenities that is run up to 165mph on 'dedicated' parts of the road system looks like it offers much the same sensibility as current LD service.

And then there is the Interstate Traveller approach -- see details as mentioned in this post..  With the rise of the 'autonomous' bubble, this begins to represent as useful a target for billions of Keynesian-style stimulus 'and all that implies' as anything restricted to someone else's railroads.  

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, May 22, 2019 8:44 AM

I believe your (plural) conclusions are faulty.  The passengers who do not ride end-point - to - end-point still include a substantial number who ride almost end-point to end-point.  People who ride the Chief Jolliette to Barstow, the Zephyr from Galesburg to Reno, the Empire Builder from Milwaukee to Spokane.  The most important reason in my own opinion for Long Distance trains in the USA and Canada is to make continental mobility possible for the elderly and handicapped who cannot either fly or endure long bus or auto trips.  The transportation equivalent of the handicapped access ramps and hard-of-hearing listening systems in theaters and concert halls.  They need both through service and comfort.  And decent food.  There are other reasons for LDS, tourism, emergencies, and, for the Empire Builder and Canadian, winter mobility for certain communities.  But the elderly and handicapped is the most important.

An example of a bus having mostly corridor passengers is not a good analogy.  Another purpose and mainly different clientel.

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Tuesday, May 21, 2019 1:48 PM

JOHN PRIVARA

Re:  The Marie Antoniette strategy - let them get automobiles.

Seems to me the "Marie Antoniette strategy" is - let them ride on substandard rail transportion.   Who wants to ride something designed for the 1950's, with speeds from the 1920's, and train-frequency from the 1860.

It's time to daylight the LD trains, and convert them into short segments that would be useful to people other than rail-enthusiast and (mostly rich) old-people with lots of time on their hands.

 

+1

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 133 posts
Posted by JOHN PRIVARA on Monday, May 20, 2019 5:33 PM

Re:  The Marie Antoniette strategy - let them get automobiles.

Seems to me the "Marie Antoniette strategy" is - let them ride on substandard rail transportion.   Who wants to ride something designed for the 1950's, with speeds from the 1920's, and train-frequency from the 1860.

It's time to daylight the LD trains, and convert them into short segments that would be useful to people other than rail-enthusiast and (mostly rich) old-people with lots of time on their hands.

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 133 posts
Posted by JOHN PRIVARA on Monday, May 20, 2019 12:53 PM

I hope someone is going to push for Federal Legislation to create a national long-distance bus network.  It's hard to imagine a country as great as ours abandoning the long tradition of fast and convient long-distance buses.

I would suggest they call is AmHound.   

There should be one bus per day on EACH of the interstates serving every Denny's in the country.   

Tags: AmHound
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, March 3, 2019 3:30 PM

JPS1
 
Victrola1
 The question is becoming will any form of surface, long distance passenger service exist in America.  
Part of the answer depends on what you mean by long-distance.  Moreover, I assume you mean commercial surface transportation as opposed to personal vehicles.
 
Assuming Amtrak does not cut all of the long-distance trains, it probably will be possible to ride a train from Chicago to the west coast for decades to come. 
 
According to Amtrak, in 2017 the average ride for a coach class passenger on the long-distance trains was 497 miles.  The average for a sleeping car passenger was 991 miles.  Only four to ten percent of the passengers on the trains from Chicago to the west coast ride end point to end point, which shows that very few people want to travel “long distances” by surface mode. Most Americans prefer to fly long distances.
 
Greyhound has six schedules a day from Dallas to Los Angeles.  I have taken the bus from Dallas to El Paso just for the experience.  If it was indicative of that for most travelers, very few people ride a bus from Dallas to Los Angeles or from end point to end point for the routes that cover "long distances".  Most of them ride from one intermediate point to another.  I expect these services to be around for a long time, but few people will opt to ride end point to end point.
 
Megabus and Greyhound compete vigorously for passengers between Dallas and Houston, as well as Dallas and San Antonio.  The distances are roughly 250 miles.  If this is what is meant by long-distance surface commercial transport, I believe it will be viable for a long time to come. 

Which is what LD trains are all about.  Not the Origin-Destination passengers, but all the intermediate locations served.  The mind set about 'public transportation' in todays world views anything other than O-D passengers as being 'fly over' in nature and not worth of service - either rail or bus.  The Marie Antoniette strategy - let them get automobiles.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2018
  • 865 posts
Posted by JPS1 on Saturday, March 2, 2019 5:13 PM

Victrola1
 The question is becoming will any form of surface, long distance passenger service exist in America. 

Part of the answer depends on what you mean by long-distance.  Moreover, I assume you mean commercial surface transportation as opposed to personal vehicles.
 
Assuming Amtrak does not cut all of the long-distance trains, it probably will be possible to ride a train from Chicago to the west coast for decades to come. 
 
According to Amtrak, in 2017 the average ride for a coach class passenger on the long-distance trains was 497 miles.  The average for a sleeping car passenger was 991 miles.  Only four to ten percent of the passengers on the trains from Chicago to the west coast ride end point to end point, which shows that very few people want to travel “long distances” by surface mode. Most Americans prefer to fly long distances.
 
Greyhound has six schedules a day from Dallas to Los Angeles.  I have taken the bus from Dallas to El Paso just for the experience.  If my experience was indicative of that for most travelers, very few people ride a bus from Dallas to Los Angeles or from end point to end point for the routes that cover "long distances".  Most of them ride from one intermediate point to another.  I expect these services to be around for a long time, but few people will opt to ride end point to end point.
 
Megabus and Greyhound compete vigorously for passengers between Dallas and Houston, as well as Dallas and San Antonio.  The distances are roughly 250 miles.  If this is what is meant by long-distance surface commercial transport, I believe it will be viable for a long time to come. 
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, March 1, 2019 7:21 AM

Intercity bus service was as overregulated as railroading at both the state and interstate levels.  Look at Greyhound or Trailways timetables from the 1960's-1970's era and review all of the conditional stops, reference marks and special notices.  As an example, you could ride Greyhound locally between downtown Chicago and Hammond but not between Chicago and Chicago Heights.  The distances are similar but one route is interstate while the other is intrastate.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,530 posts
Posted by NKP guy on Thursday, February 28, 2019 7:16 PM

Victrola1
The question is becoming will any form of surface, long distance passenger service exist in America.   

"I second that emotion."

 

 

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Thursday, February 28, 2019 6:16 PM
  • Losing all those art deco Greyhound passenger terminals was a shame...they were cool looking buildings.
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 1,486 posts
Posted by Victrola1 on Thursday, February 28, 2019 5:15 PM

The question is becoming will any form of surface, long distance passenger service exist in America. 

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, February 28, 2019 4:43 PM

Victrola1
You used to see Railway Express cars on the head end of long distance passenger trains. You used to see a lot express packages under the bus seats with passengers' luggage. 

The express package business has left the bus for Fed Ex and UPS.

Greyhound Express is much more affordable for items that 'cube out' than are UPS or FedEx.  Send a fiberglass piece of bodywork to my son - Florida to Kansas.  UPS wanted $150 based on the boxed dimensions of the part, it went Greyhound Express for about $30.  Drawback, I had to deliver the box to Greyhound and my son had to pick it up from Greyhound on his end.

UPS and FedEx have their pick up issues (UPS Store etc) and both deliver to the door on the destination end.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 1,486 posts
Posted by Victrola1 on Thursday, February 28, 2019 4:33 PM

You used to see Railway Express cars on the head end of long distance passenger trains. You used to see a lot express packages under the bus seats with passengers' luggage. 

The express package business has left the bus for Fed Ex and UPS. 

  • Member since
    December 2010
  • From: Kansas City Mo.
  • 58 posts
Posted by Muralist0221 on Thursday, February 28, 2019 4:19 PM

Knew a retired Greyhound driver who ran between Kansas City and Colby Kansas in the glory days wherein another driver brought the bus into Denver. Met a modern- day Greyhound driver who does the whole run by himself. He talked about how tiring the 600 mile trip was. Safety!

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy