You will need Adobe; 5.1 does it. Scroll to Page 878
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- The City of Saint Louis (UP, 1967) is still my standard for passenger operations Posts: 1404 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks, Mr. Norman, for bringing this to our attention.
I'm reading that each quarter, AMTRAK has to submit a business plan outlining, among other things, cost savings, ridership projections, etc. and that the plan has to be posted on its website for us to read. I'm also reading that AMTRAK is specifically instructed to show cost savings in food and beverage service and sleeping car operations. None of that sounds too good for my travel enjoyment.
Posts: 518 | From: Maynard, MA, USA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
When was the last time Congress adopted the white house proposals for Amtrak's budget? I haven't seen it happen in the six years I've been following it. So my response to this is....yawn.
Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Toy: When was the last time Congress adopted the white house proposals for Amtrak's budget? I haven't seen it happen in the six years I've been following it. So my response to this is....yawn.
I was thinking something similar. Last year fight started at $0, this year fight will start at $900 million.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The fight started at $900 million the year before last too......roughly 48% of what Amtrak was asking for at that time.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The fight SHOULD be about the ridiculous micro-management of food and sleeper service on the LD's, and the administration's strategy of making the LD's an unmarketable product.
Posts: 1572 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for posting that, Gilbert. I didn't read through the whole NRPC (AMTRAK) part, but I did notice that the feds are granting $10 million to the Alaska Railroad also, which is a STATE-OWNED short line (how long is the Alaska Railroad? Maybe 300 miles maximum?) -- interesting........
Posts: 2428 | From: Grayling, MI | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, Mr. Rich, the Alaska Railroad is somewhat larger with 525 miles of road operated.
Also of interest; of its 2004 Total Railway Operating Revenues of $103.6M, $16.8M is Passenger Revenue, or 16.3%. Save Amtrak and the Long Island (Metro North and New Jersey Transit as well, if those two agencies are formally recognized as railroads), nobody else can make that claim. Industry wide, passenger revenues comprise 2% or less of the total.
posted
I think the grant to the Alaska railroad is for a line relocation, or an extension, not operating subsidy.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
$10 million isn't so much (I guess! I could sure use it) but if they will grant $10 million to Alaska for a railroad that is largely a seasonal tourist train (or is it? I'm not sure but I know a lot of cruise ship passengers take excursions on it), maybe states like Colorado & Utah, New Mexico & Arizona, Montana & Idaho & Washington, and others too, could ask for similar grants to help them build and run extra day trains for tourists in season on some of the more scenic Amtrak routes. I know there already is a little ski train to Winter Park out of Denver; would be nice if it were extended some; then another could run into Utah past the red rocks; and so on. I for one wouldn't mind taking a series of little day trains and staying over in (Amtrak-sponsored, of course) hotel/motels (located near the train stops, and that give a percentage back to Amtrak) instead of sleepers when I'm touristing (esp if the service in sleepers is going to deteriorate). (This would not replace those using the trains for transportation, not touristing, of course.)
Posts: 2642 | From: upstate New York | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
One reason behind the Alaska Railroad's high passenger revenues may be their high ticket prices. Regular one-way coach fare from Anchorage to Fairbanks, a distance of around 350 miles, ranges from $105 in the winter to $185 in the summer.
I'm not sure I like to measure the success of passenger trains by how much revenue they earn. Not until we start shutting down HOV lanes or city bus services because they don't make a profit. I'd like to see restored, improved, and expanded rail passenger service. Then the cost of operating our whole transportation system would be less than what it is now.
Posts: 144 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The rates you note, Mr. 4020, are right in line with what Amtrak wants for a Wash-New London journey. I'm not sure why there is a problem if the "traffic will bear it"; simply because a business entity is owned by the State does not mean they should be obligated to charge any less than the market allows for their service.
In short, if you can get it, go for it. If you are a socialist, Mr. 4020, then I guess that sounds ugly. If you are a capitalist, I would think such would be "music'. If that fare level is simply more than you are personally willing to pay, then that is a "sorry 'bout that'.
The above is simply the American Way.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
The Alaska Railroad passenger service is "cruise oriented" and that is where most of it's money comes from. I agree, passengers are paying what the market can bear. However, the AR is not in my mind a real choice for Alaskans. How many actually use AR for getting from point A to point B?
I am guessing not too many. And how many people head north during the dead of winter to ride the train? Again I am guessing here, but I think not many. I could probably run a nice shiney train for that amount of money also. Once a day, small crew, same amount of mileage, and best of all dispatched by my own system! How could I lose?
Posts: 171 | From: Aurora, Illinois | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sojourner: [ I for one wouldn't mind taking a series of little day trains and staying over in (Amtrak-sponsored, of course) hotel/motels (located near the train stops, and that give a percentage back to Amtrak) instead of sleepers when I'm touristing (esp if the service in sleepers is going to deteriorate). (This would not replace those using the trains for transportation, not touristing, of course.) [/QB]
I have been trying to make this work on my annual trip to AZ ---- but the current schedule does not lend itself to doing that. So to make such an idea work ---- then Amtrak would have to do a serious re-do of it's National Rail Schedule.
Posts: 460 | From: North Central CT | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
When I was last in Fairbanks, and visited the ARR yards, there was a moderate amount of freight equipment for moving STUFF from Anchorage up to Fairbanks, for further movement into the bush.
We see the passenger, but it's a working railroad, with working tasks. It also has two fairy god-Senators, and if you think Ted Stevens is going to let ANYTHING in Alaska come off Feddybux, you are sadly mistaken
Posts: 1404 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've never ridden on the Alaska Railroad, but have seen it in various RR videos. I don't think it is sold as a "land cruise," but it certainly has its share of vacation-oriented passengers in the summmer going to Denali, etc. But I believe the Alaska Railroad also provides an ESSENTIAL transportation link to many people who live in "the bush" far from paved roads and airports. The AR also delivers mail, I believe. Not everyone in Alaska can afford a seaplane, so the railroad does provide an essential service to the people of Alaska.
I didn't really mean to start an "Alaska Railroad" thread on this (originally posted as)"FY 07 budget" thread, but I guess we railfans get carried away now and then, don't we?
Posts: 2428 | From: Grayling, MI | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Alaska Railroad passenger service is "cruise oriented" and that is where most of it's money comes from.
Far from it...the ARR is a year round full service railroad that has over 1,600 freight cars providing freight service to the US Department of Defense and the oil and gas industry. They may have 500,000 passengers a year, including cruise ship folks, but they also haul 7.5 million tons of freight. Hardly a cruise ship only provider.
Posts: 21 | From: Huntington, WV USA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
Notice I said "passenger service," I'm well aware that they haul a goodly amount of freight!
Posts: 171 | From: Aurora, Illinois | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, in the coming Budget season, do y'all think there may be more? or less Micromanaging of the Amtrak System? Do you think it'll make it through?
Posts: 143 | From: Richmond, VA | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
