Trains.com

Inside Amtrak’s Dying Long-Distance Trains | WSJ

8273 views
141 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2008
  • 86 posts
Posted by MikeInPlano on Sunday, July 28, 2019 5:03 PM

daveklepper

The American people, if not the previous poster, do not expecdt the elderly and handicaipped to pay for the facilities they require in public accomodation places and venues.

Long-distance trains serve a number of purposes, and the American economy would suffer if they were removed.  But the primary purpose is to serve the specific elderly and handicapped who cannot fly.

 

And why can't busses serve this purpose? They're cheaper, much more flexible (compared to trains , which only operate over fixed routes), and much more efficient than trains. 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,530 posts
Posted by NKP guy on Sunday, July 28, 2019 3:32 PM

   Green.  Red.  Black.

   Regarding Nos. 29 & 30, each morning about 6, just before I open my newspapers, I  check my emails and look at my app asm.transitdocs.com to see how the Lake Shore Limited is doing, as well as the Capitol.  

   I have no numbers, only impressions from years of looking, that the Capitol Limited is not only never in Cleveland on time, it is often shown in red (up to 2 hrs. late) and not infrequently in black (over 3 hrs. late).  It is almost never shown in green, in either direction.

(Even as I write, #30 is 4 hrs. 9 min. late at Rockville, Maryland.  It left Chicago only 8 min. late, but lost an hour between South Bend and Elkhart, another hour before Sandusky, and a third hour between Connellsville and Martinsburg)

   

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, July 28, 2019 2:40 PM

charlie hebdo
 
BaltACD 
charlie hebdo
 He reiterated his disappointment with riding the Capital Limited : slow,  uncomfortable,  sitting in sidings waiting for freight trains to pass,  very late departure and arrival.  He said if any option is available in the future,  he will not use Amtrak LD trains.  

East or West of Pittsburgh?  Or is he geographically challenged? 

West of Pittsburgh to Chicago and no more challenged than you. 

Years ago (1986?) I rode the Amtrak  Broadway from NYC to Chicago.  Same deal: rough,  slow, multiple times sided, and six hours late to Chicago. 

NS is doing their best to discourage Amtrak where the operate over NS.  If you racall - a year or so ago NS was in virtual gridlock everywhere between Buffalo and Chicago - all from NS applying the wrong operating plan.  While Amtraks may have gotten delayed 6 to 8 hours - NS freights were getting delayed one to two or more DAYS.  NS has improved to some degree, how much is open to question.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2018
  • 865 posts
Posted by JPS1 on Sunday, July 28, 2019 1:37 PM

CMStPnP
 Wow, Amtraks Capitol Limited is among one of the fastest and most efficiently run Amtrak LD trains I have ever been on, last rode it about 2-3 years ago, Chicago to DC.    Much better than the Texas Eagle. 

Outcomes change over time.  In FY18 the Capitol Limited’s on-time percentage (OTP) at its end points was 30.8 percent.  The Texas Eagle’s OTP was 46.4 percent.  The Capitol Limited did not have the worst OTP in 2018.  The Crescent stole the show at 14.8 percent. 
  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Sunday, July 28, 2019 11:59 AM

BaltACD

 

 
charlie hebdo
 He reiterated his disappointment with riding the Capital Limited : slow,  uncomfortable,  sitting in sidings waiting for freight trains to pass,  very late departure and arrival.  He said if any option is available in the future,  he will not use Amtrak LD trains. 

 

East or West of Pittsburgh?  Or is he geographically challenged?

 

West of Pittsburgh to Chicago and no more challenged than you. 

Years ago (1986?) I rode the Amtrak  Broadway from NYC to Chicago.  Same deal: rough,  slow, multiple times sided, and six hours late to Chicago. 

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Sunday, July 28, 2019 11:24 AM

Wow, Amtraks Capitol Limited is among one of the fastest and most efficiently run Amtrak LD trains I have ever been on, last rode it about 2-3 years ago, Chicago to DC.    Much better than the Texas Eagle.    I would love to have a Texas Eagle run to the standards of the Capital Limited.   My Aunt rode it and liked it as well.   It was ontime when we rode it.    When I worked in Detroit I would drive to Toledo to take the Capitol Limited into Chicago and Change trains to Milwaukee.    It was up to an hour and 20 in faster than the regular Detroit to Chicago trains due to delays and all the stops the Chicago to Detroit trains made..........which covered the time it took to drive to Toledo from Dearborn.    Plus back then the Capitol had a dome car and you could board at 5 a.m. in Toledo, and watch the sun rise.    Be in Chicago at 8 or 8:30.   It really hauled azz on Conrail track back in the 1990's.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, July 28, 2019 10:47 AM

charlie hebdo
 He reiterated his disappointment with riding the Capital Limited : slow,  uncomfortable,  sitting in sidings waiting for freight trains to pass,  very late departure and arrival.  He said if any option is available in the future,  he will not use Amtrak LD trains. 

East or West of Pittsburgh?  Or is he geographically challenged?

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Sunday, July 28, 2019 9:06 AM

daveklepper

you can f1y       some can't

 

Additionally, after we arrived in Inverness we were able to see the Caledonian Sleeper, an overnight rail service between a number of points in Scotland and London (see
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian Sleeper).  It was attached to a diesel locomotive lettered for the Deutsche Bahn--why the DB, I don't know.

 

 

 

 

I spoke to  my older friend (Princeton,  class of '64) again.  He reiterated his disappointment with riding the Capital Limited : slow,  uncomfortable,  sitting in sidings waiting for freight trains to pass,  very late departure and arrival.  He said if any option is available in the future,  he will not use Amtrak LD trains. 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, July 28, 2019 7:58 AM

you can f1y       some can't

Additionally, after we arrived in Inverness we were able to see the Caledonian Sleeper, an overnight rail service between a number of points in Scotland and London (see
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonian Sleeper).  It was attached to a diesel locomotive lettered for the Deutsche Bahn--why the DB, I don't know.

 

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • 575 posts
Posted by alphas on Friday, July 26, 2019 1:09 AM

I'm now getting into the ederly catagory and the last thing I want is to be stuck on a train for 1+ or 3 days each way while visiting my children & grandchildren in Fl and TX.    Especially since I spend about 6 hours total traveling from my house to their nearest airport at a fraction of the price of a sleeper and a little less (sometimes considerably less) than coach fare.

I believe the best thing to ever happen to us LD traveling old folks is the SWA senior Want-to-Get-Away fares (still includes 2 free checked bags per person).   I've been a RR fan for over 70 years but I also appreciate progress, convenience, and saving money. 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,530 posts
Posted by NKP guy on Thursday, July 25, 2019 9:38 AM

daveklepper
For those who use it, it is working, far better than nothing, but not what it should be.

  italics mine (NKP guy)

How very true.

 

Also:  The elderly & the disabled are not "sick."  I strongly object to the disparagement in John Privara's use of the term.  The elderly & the disabled, to invoke a phrase from the movie "Boy's Town" and a song by the Hollies, ain't heavy; they're our brothers and sisters.

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 133 posts
Posted by JOHN PRIVARA on Wednesday, July 24, 2019 11:52 AM

It's nice what you can do with a train AFTER you've already got the basics covered.

https://www.jrailpass.com/blog/luxury-trains-japan

https://www.jrailpass.com/blog/seven-stars-kyushu-luxury-train

 

From one of the websites:

Even before the advent of the shinkansen bullet train in 1964, luxury trains, often called “blue sleeper trains,” were a common sight across Japan. These trains were designed, not only as an efficient mode of transportation but as an experience in themselves. Getting there truly was half the fun.

In recent years, however, the use of luxury trains has largely given way to the rapid travel offered by the shinkansen. The last of the “blue trains” ceased operation in 2015. While some have called this “the end of an era,” luxury seekers are not to be disappointed by Japan’s all-new line up of first-class rail accommodations. Beginning in spring 2017, JR East and JR West launched two “cruise trains” for your traveling enjoyment.

 

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/luxury/travel/twilight-express-mizukaze-japan-luxury-train/

 

(AND,  narrow-gauge, no less!)

 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, July 24, 2019 1:56 AM

For those who use it, it is working, far better than nothing, but not what it should be.  I compare it to the local city transportation during the era after they ripped up the streetcar tracks and had not even thought about light rail and/or new subways.  

You could use the buses, and people who remembered the better service the streetcars gave, which they did in many cities, were called old-fashioned.  But the buses were a lot better than nothing.

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Tuesday, July 23, 2019 6:01 PM

Victrola1
Wall Street Journal   "Published on Jul 16, 2019     SUBSCRIBE  1.5M   Amtrak’s proposals for altering or eliminating some of its long-distance train routes, in favor of more frequent service where the population is growing, is facing opposition among those who fear rural America would suffer. WSJ’s Jason Bellini reports." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-jP4vh3z_A

The first link that reads: "Wall Street Journal" takes me to Youtube. Which is a tad misleading.... is this place turning into 4chan? 

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 133 posts
Posted by JOHN PRIVARA on Tuesday, July 23, 2019 11:56 AM

Well, regardless of what it's intent WAS, NOW it ain't workin.

And, it's NEVER going to get better the way it's organized now.

The only Federal "government agency" trying to OPERATE a customer service transportation business. Passenger trains running at 1920's speeds, with 1950's service model, serving (roughly) 2% of the incorporated areas of country, with Congress as the board of directors.

Yup, sounds like a REAL winnin' combination there...

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, July 22, 2019 10:34 PM

Neither of you intended hostility, so you both can let this matter rest.   Yes and yes for both matters of information.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Monday, July 22, 2019 10:06 PM

7j43k

 

 
MidlandMike
 

 

Amtrak's mission is to provide a service citizens will use. 

 

 

Funny.  I thought it was to turn a profit in national passenger service. 

 

I was not specific enough in my follow-up question to this exchange.  My context was how Amtrak operates now (and coincidencly, the last 40 years or so.)  Originally Amtrak's function was to operate a national passenger system, and its form was as a for-profit corperation.  But there was obviously mission creep after a short time,  as evidenced by the fact that it has required constant subsidy.  So far Congress has considered its function was more important than its form.

Also I did not ingore or deny your answer, I simply pointed out how conditions had changed.

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Monday, July 22, 2019 1:33 PM

charlie hebdo

No need to get short with Mike.  I don't agree with him but his post is worthwhile and factual,  as was yours.

 

 

Short?  

He asked a question as if it were inconceivable that there could be an answer that he didn't want:

"Where was it ever stated that profit was an intent of Amtak's creation."

I gave him the answer.

His next response was to ignore the answer and to find evidence that made it seem irrelevant.

It may well be.  But that doesn't mean that the answer to his question was in such error as to be ignored.

 

Ed

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, July 22, 2019 11:21 AM

And we have the factualy mutually exclusive aspects of Amtrak's heritage.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Monday, July 22, 2019 11:18 AM

7j43k

 

 
MidlandMike

 

 
7j43k

 

 
MidlandMike

Where was it ever stated that profit was an intent of Amtrak's creation.

 

 

 

"In creating Amtrak, Congress sought to establish a single, FOR-PROFIT corporate entity that, with INITIAL Federal assistance..." 

[my caps]

("Initial", by the way, means "at the beginning".  It does NOT mean "until a miracle happens".)

and

"Amtrak was created by the RPSA as a private, for-profit, District of Columbia Corporation..."

 

Quoted from:

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/arc/materials/legsum.pdf

 

Ed

 

PS:  The above material is not copyrighted.

 

 

 

Amtrak was also created  "that it provide a balanced transportation system by developing, operating, and improving intercity rail passenger service. The Act also states that Amtrak will not be an agency or establishment of the United States Government. Amtrak thus is a corporation created by Congress to compete for the transportation business of the intercity traveller, to the end that the travelling public will have a choice of travel modes."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/700.2

Congress created an entity with multiple goals that were not necessarily mutually achivable.  So they provided subsidies to keep their creation's finances at break-even.

 

 

 

 

You asked a question.  I answered it.

 

Ed

 

No need to get short with Mike.  I don't agree with him but his post is worthwhile and factual,  as was yours.

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Monday, July 22, 2019 10:47 AM

MidlandMike

 

 
7j43k

 

 
MidlandMike

Where was it ever stated that profit was an intent of Amtrak's creation.

 

 

 

"In creating Amtrak, Congress sought to establish a single, FOR-PROFIT corporate entity that, with INITIAL Federal assistance..." 

[my caps]

("Initial", by the way, means "at the beginning".  It does NOT mean "until a miracle happens".)

and

"Amtrak was created by the RPSA as a private, for-profit, District of Columbia Corporation..."

 

Quoted from:

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/arc/materials/legsum.pdf

 

Ed

 

PS:  The above material is not copyrighted.

 

 

 

Amtrak was also created  "that it provide a balanced transportation system by developing, operating, and improving intercity rail passenger service. The Act also states that Amtrak will not be an agency or establishment of the United States Government. Amtrak thus is a corporation created by Congress to compete for the transportation business of the intercity traveller, to the end that the travelling public will have a choice of travel modes."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/700.2

Congress created an entity with multiple goals that were not necessarily mutually achivable.  So they provided subsidies to keep their creation's finances at break-even.

 

 

You asked a question.  I answered it.

 

Ed

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, July 22, 2019 8:06 AM

That's pure speculation.  I would agree that there would not have been the expansion, the Lake Shore, the Montrealer, the Hartland Flyer, the Sunset to Florida, the Desert Wind, the Pioneer, and others,  The contraction that occured when Carter was President would have come earlier.  But a national system would have remined.  But that is also pure speculation, and your speculation may be right.

  • Member since
    December 2012
  • 279 posts
Posted by A McIntosh on Monday, July 22, 2019 7:37 AM

CMStPnP

The best description above was Amtrak was created as a private company with Congress as the majority stockholder.    Private companies in receivership are allowed government subsidies under our Constitution as well as politically appointed board members and that basically is what we have with Amtrak.    Amtrak was created in a state of recievership with Congress as the appointed Trustee.......another way of looking at it.     The NIXON administration did not want to "Nationalize" the rail passenger system at the time and that is why Amtrak is not a government agency and that participation in Amtrak by private railroads was voluntary and not forced.   Idealogically, nationalization carries the tag Socialism along with it which was unpalitable to a Republican administration.

Further, Amtraks creation was viewed as both sides as only temporary.   The Republicans at the time viewed Amtrak as a company would fall apart in a few years anyway and didn't give it much thought beyond it being a placebo for the public at the time so that the Administration was not seen as standing by while the entire rail passenger system just collapsed into chaos.    For the Northeast at least the NEC collapse would have led to a rather nasty recession for the Northeastern states.    Democrats saw Amtrak as a stopgap until the company could figure out some kind of reorganization plan to put it's finances in order and once again stand on it's own feet.    Thats how I remember the history.

 

To follow up on this point, if the Arab oil embargo had not occured, Amtrak would have been largley dead by 1980 except for the NEC and maybe one or two other corridors. 

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Sunday, July 21, 2019 11:10 PM

The best description above was Amtrak was created as a private company with Congress as the majority stockholder.    Private companies in receivership are allowed government subsidies under our Constitution as well as politically appointed board members and that basically is what we have with Amtrak.    Amtrak was created in a state of recievership with Congress as the appointed Trustee.......another way of looking at it.     The NIXON administration did not want to "Nationalize" the rail passenger system at the time and that is why Amtrak is not a government agency and that participation in Amtrak by private railroads was voluntary and not forced.   Idealogically, nationalization carries the tag Socialism along with it which was unpalitable to a Republican administration.

Further, Amtraks creation was viewed as both sides as only temporary.   The Republicans at the time viewed Amtrak as a company would fall apart in a few years anyway and didn't give it much thought beyond it being a placebo for the public at the time so that the Administration was not seen as standing by while the entire rail passenger system just collapsed into chaos.    For the Northeast at least the NEC collapse would have led to a rather nasty recession for the Northeastern states.    Democrats saw Amtrak as a stopgap until the company could figure out some kind of reorganization plan to put it's finances in order and once again stand on it's own feet.    Thats how I remember the history.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Sunday, July 21, 2019 10:13 PM

7j43k

 

 
MidlandMike

Where was it ever stated that profit was an intent of Amtrak's creation.

 

 

 

"In creating Amtrak, Congress sought to establish a single, FOR-PROFIT corporate entity that, with INITIAL Federal assistance..." 

[my caps]

("Initial", by the way, means "at the beginning".  It does NOT mean "until a miracle happens".)

and

"Amtrak was created by the RPSA as a private, for-profit, District of Columbia Corporation..."

 

Quoted from:

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/arc/materials/legsum.pdf

 

Ed

 

PS:  The above material is not copyrighted.

 

Amtrak was also created  "that it provide a balanced transportation system by developing, operating, and improving intercity rail passenger service. The Act also states that Amtrak will not be an agency or establishment of the United States Government. Amtrak thus is a corporation created by Congress to compete for the transportation business of the intercity traveller, to the end that the travelling public will have a choice of travel modes."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/700.2

Congress created an entity with multiple goals that were not necessarily mutually achivable.  So they provided subsidies to keep their creation's finances at break-even.

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 133 posts
Posted by JOHN PRIVARA on Sunday, July 21, 2019 7:08 PM

Amtrak:   Welfare for old-fart train-nuts living in the past.

Which is fine by me.   I take a LD train once a year.   

It just too bad this pathetic organization (Amtrak) is preventing any advancement of trains in the US.   

Obviously,  it's going to be "fixed" by people other than us.   But, until Amtrak STOPS operating trains and becomes a loot distribution system (which is what the "defense" industry,  airport, highway, and waterway agencies are) this conversation will continue forever.  

 

I wonder how long those Superliners will lasts?

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Sunday, July 21, 2019 11:22 AM

MidlandMike

Where was it ever stated that profit was an intent of Amtrak's creation.

 

"In creating Amtrak, Congress sought to establish a single, FOR-PROFIT corporate entity that, with INITIAL Federal assistance..." 

[my caps]

("Initial", by the way, means "at the beginning".  It does NOT mean "until a miracle happens".)

and

"Amtrak was created by the RPSA as a private, for-profit, District of Columbia Corporation..."

 

Quoted from:

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/arc/materials/legsum.pdf

 

Ed

 

PS:  The above material is not copyrighted.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, July 21, 2019 1:38 AM

Error correction:  261 workdays per year did not allow for holidays.  250 per year is better.  So the corridor passenger's subsidy is reduced to $2500/year.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, July 21, 2019 1:32 AM

Again, I did not mean to doubt the figures, simply pointing out that the LDTs are far more useful than just subsidy per ride would indicate, that they benefit far more people than subsidiy per ride wouild indicate.

My station restaurant scheme would not remove food service from trains but convert loss into profit.  The station restaurants would provide the food instead of Amtrak commissaries, as part of a wide take-out and home-and-business delivery service, with the economies of scale involved.  Food in dining cars would both be brought onboard by some passengers boarding at stations where there are these restaurants, but mostly delivered by the restaurants. stored fozen or just refirgorated as appropriate, and microwaved and served by an attendant.

Food broght onboard by passengers would be allowed in dining cars, even including use of the microwave, only if brought from the Amtrak liscensed restaurant and brought onboard with the package unopened.

There is a separate thread devoted to this.  

Providing RDC service with overnight hotel stays does not provide LD transportation for elderly and handicapped who cannot fly.  I think the station restaurant scheme will solve the food-service cost problem.  But reducing the subsidy for sleeping accomodations still needs some creative thinking.  As a last resort, I'd go for business class plus one handicapped room in each car for the truly handicapped and his or her assistant.  Lots of people who cannot fly are still able to walk without a wheelchair or walker.  If the room is not taken, it would be auctioned off by the conductor to those already on the train.

I'm 87, and one morning I arrived at my desk in the Yeshiva's study hall to find a walking stick across my desk.  I still don't use it.

I freuently get trip reports from people who do not post here, and one most frequent Amtrak user tells me not to distribute his reports.  Charlie's friend's report is the first I've heard about Superliner seats being uncomfortable.  Jack May's reports have been posted.  He compared Ellis' Hoosier Land with Amtrak's SWC Chi - KC, and enjoyed both.

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • 575 posts
Posted by alphas on Sunday, July 21, 2019 12:04 AM

[quote user="CMStPnP"]

 
"alphas
No surprise, the greatest reason for LD rail & bus financal problems was the introduction of the discount airlines which brought air fares within reach of almost all the traveling public. " 

 

 

 

 

"The biggest item that doomed the passenger train was loss of the mail contract and the head end Express business. "  

CMStPnP:
You are correct of course as that was the most important reason the railroads wanted rid of all passenger service leading to Amtrak.      The academic study I mentioned wasn't that long ago and did not consider mail or Express at all as they are a settled matter.     What they were looking at was how can government, assuming it wants to, best help provide rural areas with some form of non-local public transportation that doesn't require overwhelming start-up costs, has the least subsidy, and is the most flexible in meeting rural population needs.    Their answer was subsidized bus service.    There was a lot more to their findings but that sums it up in a few words.

 

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