I was wondering could somebody tell me why all the rr companies abandoned their passenger services. Does anyone think we will ever see a rise of the "old" passenger service again. I would love to travel on Union Pacific or Southern Pacific, or the Rio Grande Lines?
Of course you can ride Amtrak on the lines of SP (Starlight, Sunset,Zephyr and others) Rio Grande (Zephyr) UP is also available on the Eagle but not the transcon except for relatively small pieces
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
quote:
Originally posted by StonewallJones:
So, What Will YOU Do When Amtrak Shuts Down and discontinues cross country service?
The question should be "if" not "when". While this is a very real possibility, I don't consider it a high probability.
Polls have shown a fairly high level of public support for Amtrak. State governments are also looking to Amtrak to relieve the problems their transportation planners are facing. Many cities and towns served by long distance trains, especially those not near a major airport, depend on their trains to bring in tourists (Glenwood Springs, CO is a good example of a tourist town with no airport). Then there's the senior citizens and others who cannot fly for health reasons. Individually these groups don't have much clout, but taken together, a whole lot of people would be put out if the long distance trains were shut down.
If Congress were to pull the trigger and take Amtrak down, its members will have to answer to these people. That will put many members of Congress in a bind. Sure, some won't care, but others will. Add to that the fact that some influential Republicans are big Amtrak supporters.
If Amtrak goes down, it won't be without a messy political fight. It's easy for lazy members of Congress to criticize Amtrak, but unless they can come up with something better, Amtrak's opponents aren't likely to have much credibility when it comes down to the wire.
Our job is to keep the pressure on so they won't be able to kill Amtrak's long distance trains quietly, under the mistaken belief that nobody will miss them.
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
Thanks everybody
Amtrak President George Warrington has Said That They Applaud The Committee's Action, And Look Forward To Continuing to Work With Congress And The Bush Administration To Invest in a Revitalized Passenger Rail System That Helps Meet The Nations Transportation's Needs.
Amtrak Has Reduced it's Federal Operating Assistance From $318 Million in Fy 1999 To A Projected $59 Million This Year And A Projected $40 Millionin Fy 2002. on a Glide Path to it's Elimination in 2003. in the first 6 Month's of The Current Fiscal Year Amtrak Served 11.3 Million Passengers, up 7 Percent Over The Same Period in Fy 2000. Ticket Revenue, At $ 564 Million was up By 12.2 Percent Over The Previous Year's Period.
Now Amtrak's Guests enjoy Satisfaction-Guaranteed Service in More Than 500 communities in 45 States Througout a 22,000Mile Route Sytem. That's it
The real question is how Amtrak will survive - with a mandate (and budget!) to operate a proper, modern passenger rail system, or just barely enough money to merely keep "limping along". Long-distance trains do face a greater danger (some more than others), but operations in the Northeast Corridor, Chicago, North Carolina, Washington state, and California are probably safe. However, Amtrak still faces the possibility of a restructuring along the lines of the suggestions (many of which have already been discredited) of the Amtrak Reform Council.
Along those lines, there was a mid-80's proposal for Amtrak to sell the Northeast Corridor, under the argument that it was costing too much to maintain and improve. The ARC has made a similar argument recently, but Amtrak needs to control it's own tracks. For evidence, look at freight train interference across the nation to long-distance trains (the Sunset at Houston was nearly six hours late the other day).
quote:
Originally posted by DC2001:
Amtrak needs to control it's own tracks. For evidence, look at freight train interference across the nation to long-distance trains (the Sunset at Houston was nearly six hours late the other day).
The idea that Amtrak needs to control its own tracks doesn't really make sense to me, any more than the idea that airlines need to control their own airports. In fact, I tend to agree with those who say that Amtrak's financial and management commitment to the NEC is indeed dragging it down.
Turning over the NEC tracks to an infrastructure authority, much like port authorities that run airports, makes perfect sense to me. Amtrak would no longer have the financial burden of maintaining and upgrading it. Furthermore, It would not be in the hands of freight companies, so that comparison isn't valid.
In fact, I think state infrastructure authorities should take over all of the tracks in the country and let any operator run trains on them. Then we would have true transportation infrastructure parity, as the founder of this website advocates. But that ain't gonna happen in my lifetime.
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
[This message has been edited by Mr. Toy (edited 06-26-2001).]
[This message has been edited by DC2001 (edited 06-27-2001).]
What do you guys think? What would you like to see amtrak add/change?
Thanks
Reliable air conditioning in coaches.
Expanded business class (people are willing to pay).
Freedom to advertise individual trains & routes.
Continuing replacement of engines is useful too. It has been several years since I have been stuck behind a "dead" engine, but it does happen.
As far as the expanded routes, they need to do something..anything at this point
quote:
Originally posted by StonewallJones:
So, What Will YOU Do When Amtrak Shuts Down and discontinues cross country service?
In order of preference:
1. Ride charters, such as American Orient Express.
2. Fly.
3. Drive.
4. Take a bus.
5. Stay home.
------------------
- Kent Loudon, Somerville NJ
quote:
Originally posted by Kent Loudon:
In order of preference:
1. Ride charters, such as American Orient Express.
...
You mean to tell me that people actually take Amtrak just for TRANSPORTATION?
I would like to get back on topic if we could.
I won't fly on airplanes, so I guess it will be driving vacations for me if Amtrak shuts. My hubby and I have taken our young kids all over the place. They NOW like trains over airplanes anytime! YEAH! Becki
Complete with cinders and NO air conditioning ? Fifty years ago would be fine with me!
[This message has been edited by 20thCenturyLimited (edited 10-21-2001).]
"I won't fly on airplanes, so I guess it will be driving vacations for me if Amtrak shuts." If you won't fly on airplanes, how do you ever excpect to see the rest of the world?
[This message has been edited by 20thCenturyLimited (edited 10-22-2001).]
Well spoken. Truthfully, look at the makeup of first class traffic up to 1968, when the fledgling US Postal Service discontinued all their Railway Mail Service AND in-transit mail storage contracts. There were whole trains, scheduled on the employee and public timetables (thus First Class) that served the mail, express, and perishable markets. As I recall, if you dig through historic train numbers, the ATSF California Limited, once the premier train on the line, and the UP Los Angeles Limited, again once a premier train on the line, were the all-stops mail and express trains. Amtrak took as its legislative charter the remnant of passenger service ... BUT at the time in the 70s, the Interstate Commerce Commission and the railroads did not have a business model that supported high-end scheduled, advertised, "elite" freight traffic. Had that been part of the founding charter, Amtrak would not be where it is today. Just my $0.02. Your mileage may vary. John ------------------ In fact, they do it because they think it is the right and logical thing to do, not from a justifiable economic model. In the USA, it will not happen unless a majority of our legislators at the Federal level take the same mind set as Europe or Japan. Obviously, it is not happening quickly, if at all. On the other hand, there is sufficient strong national and regional support to keep hope and the fight alive. But it has not jelled into a consensus, thus we muddle along with a bleeding system that we can't quite dismantle, and can't manage to properly run. I agree with above comments in that I sense the backlash to AMTRAK's demise is sufficiently feared by the political structure that its crash will not come soon despite the dire predictions. Time will tell.
Five key things Amtrak should seek to do... 1) Obtain authority to do as Conrail did ... go private. 2) Run its own super-premium passenger tours, using Heritage equipment, a la AOE. (If you don't think folks would kill for a NY-whereever for the BCS Championship, the Super Bowl, or the Kentucky Derby, especially if there are tickets as part of the package ...) 3) At the other end of the service spectrum, expand mail and express operations. Do them the way AT&SF, UP, NP, GN, et al once did ... lots of M/E cars operating on razor thin profit margins. A rider coach. From my experience, a Superliner car reconfigured to 40 seats, 6 berth sections, and a lower lounge with one attendant probably would be all that's needed. 4) Note I said EXPAND M/E. Make it a two tier system. Tier One is sealed equipment West Coast-Chicago or West Coast-East Coast. Tier Two works the cities along the way. 5) Relook routings Nationwide, but especially west of the Mississippi. Go where passengers want/need to go! Would a LA-LV-SLC-Seattle run for M/E make sense??? What about combining routes for the SW Chief ... SF to Albuquerque; up to Denver, across to KC, SL, and up to Chicago? Someone REALLY oughta look at Southwest Airlines passenger-miles density maps. Make the trains go where the passengers need to go. OK, it's unrealistic. Thanks. I'll step back off the soapbox now. John ------------------ it just seems like amtrak is in this never ending spiral that will ultimately end with its liquidation and demise.
My question thus becomes, do we have a back up plan? Do we have an idea of a "whats next" should amtrak ever cease to be? Or do we just finaly say that it cant be done and go our separate ways?
I'd rather drive myself to Atlanta this august if Amtrak goes kaput. IM holding out for them tho, I want to take a long train ride!
Go back and look at the rail passenger business situation 1968-1970 (passage of NRPA)... As a fast review: - Railroads fully regulated by ICC. All that above was the historical environment of the 1970 law. Bottom line: Pure passenger operations are a hard way to make money. Look at airlines post 9/11. Amtrak will need a full suite of mail and express runs to get the revenue flow. If you've not seen the NRHS Spring 02 issue covering Pennsy's M/E traffic just before the merger, I suggest you look at it. Lots of First Class movements, but virtually no passenger space. Even with the advantage of deregulation, even with the advantage of a different labor environment, the start-up costs to replace the Passenger Traffic infrastructure of 40 years ago are beyond reach. Commissaries, coach yards, equipment ... they do not exist anymore. As we speak, the remnant of the Kansas City Terminal is building over the space once given to the west coach yards at Union Station. NOT EVEN THE LAND IS AVAILABLE NOW! Do not be deluded. If the BOD of Union Pacific Corporation asked me, a stockholder, to ratify a business decsion to bring back scheduled passenger operations in the same way they ran the Cities streamliners in the 1960s, my first questions would be "Show me the business model!?" and "Where does the capital infrastructure development come from?" If Amtrak goes, scheduled intercity passenger service will be in the same category as covered wagons and Civil War role playing units: Historical re-enactment only. Sadly, John John ------------------
Posted by StonewallJones (Member # 887) on :
Im going to take your comment as meant to be a funny response. If, however, it was meant to be rude or insulting then we are going to have a problem, needless to say there is no place for it on this board. I will apologize in advance if you feel you have been treated disrespectfully by my previous posts. It was not my intention.
Posted by StonewallJones (Member # 887) on :
It would sure help amtrak out a lot if they could get permission from the some of the freight lines to use their tracks. That could open up new lines everywhere.
Posted by MPALMER (Member # 125) on :
In (a serious) response to a previous post, people do use Amtrak for transportation. It serves many cities that lack regular air service.
On a recent trip a woman was traveling from her son's place in New Jersey to her home near Prince, West Virginia. She probably could have flown, but would have had to drive to Charleston first.
Amtrak will never be a major player in large western cities (Phoenix, Denver, etc.). But for many smaller cities it is a viable option, and a potentially enjoyable one too.
Posted by StonewallJones (Member # 887) on :
Why wont they ever play a major part in western cities MPALMER?
Posted by MPALMER (Member # 125) on :
Amtrak does not offer the routes, speed or frequency of service that business travelers need. The Southwestern US has several choices in low cost short hop airlines (Southwest, America West) and people have grown accustomed to traveling that way in spite of the crowding.
Tourists help fill the planes/trains but business travelers pay the bills.
Posted by StonewallJones (Member # 887) on :
man I just wish I could have lived 100 years ago just for the chance to ride the rails the way it was meant to be.
Posted by yummykaz (Member # 475) on :
stonewall:
Posted by Kent Loudon (Member # 902) on :
quote:
Originally posted by StonewallJones:
man I just wish I could have lived 100 years ago just for the chance to ride the rails the way it was meant to be.
Posted by StonewallJones (Member # 887) on :
Anything but the dull watered down gray version of today would be fine with me
Posted by 20thCenturyLimited (Member # 1108) on :
Amtrak needs to control it's own tracks as long as the freight railroads continue to control their own tracks. The NEC corridor a financial drain on Amtrak? It's one of the few places were lots of people actually TAKE the train. Take the NEC away from Amtrak and just watch Amtrak disappear tommorrow. The NEC is just about the only place in this country (with California and the Pacific Northwest catching up) were people actually THINK of passenger rail as a viable option. Amtrak needs that. Take the NEC away from Amtrak and leave it with only the long distance routes and it will die for sure.
Posted by 20thCenturyLimited (Member # 1108) on :
Posted by David (Member # 3) on :
Although it is getting increasingly difficult to travel by ship, it is still possible to get to Europe from the USA (from Boston at present, but normally New York)aboard Cunard's splendid vessel: the Queen Elizabeth 2. There are also several companies which carry passengers on their container ships from Canada and the USA to Europe, Africa, South America, etc. Several times per year there are re-positioning voyages on many cruise lines, which provide for trans-Atlantic travel. All world cruises accept passengers on a "point A to point B" basis. Whilst these voyages are certainly not as convenient as daily air service, it is possible to get around a great deal of the world by sea and rail. I know people who never fly; one friend has seen more of the world by ship than most people have by air.
Posted by 20thCenturyLimited (Member # 1108) on :
Yes I realise all that. Trust me. I love Ocean Liners. But who has the time and money to travel to Europe by QE2 roundtrip on a regular basis? That's two weeks in transit on the ship portion of the journey alone (especially since they slowed down the crossing from 5 to 6 days), not to mention train travel time to New York if you don't live in New York. And yeah sure you can book SOME but not all Point A to Point B travel on the QE2's world cruise. Not ALL Point A to Point B travel is permitted. I know, becuae I get those World Cruise brochures every year. Traveling on the QE2 is one of my life dreams. So you spend a Gazillion dollars to get from somewhere in the middle of the country to get to Los Angeles by train so you can pick up the QE2 on her way to Australia, your chosen vacation destination. A Gazillion dollars and how much TIME? Then how do you get back? Try to find a cargo vessel that takes on passengers? I know they exist, I've sought out that information too. But SOOOOOOOOO impractical to live your whole life never flying. Only the wealthiest people with the most free time on their hands could do it that way and it would get rather tedious. I mean, come on, this is NOT 1937 (when, once again, if you DID have the money and time, it would be much much more practical and comfortable). I'm not the most confident of flyers, and I will use an alternate form of transportation like a train or ship if I can, but I also realise you have to fly to see Australia, Japan, the Far East and every other overseas destination on a practical basis. Especially if you want to return more than once. "I'll never get on a plane" just strikes me as so....naive. Don't get me wrong I LOVE train travel and have a big passion for the great Ocean Liners of yesteryear (the Normandie is my favorite) but to say you will never fly.....? That doesn't seem to be living in reality....
Posted by StonewallJones (Member # 887) on :
Expanded routes are they way to go I think. The question is can amtrak ge tthe funding needed to do this?
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
quote:
Originally posted by jebradley:
The City of Saint Louis (UP, 1967) is still my standard for passenger operations
Posted by Peter Bowler (Member # 1232) on :
The debate rages on, while most of the country yawns. History around the world has proven time and again that passenger travel in the auto and jet age does not pay. The model that all continents/countries with successful rail travel use is government subsidy justified by the response of the citizens supporting those particular governments.
Posted by StonewallJones (Member # 887) on :
Another thing that has always bugged me is the lack od color on amtrak. Everyone I have talked to thinks amtrak is just really dull and characterless. I think I said above, albeit a year ago, I wish at least they could get more color on their trains.
Anything to keep the memory of the old days going!
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
Five months down the road...
The City of Saint Louis (UP, 1967) is still my standard for passenger operations
Posted by StonewallJones (Member # 887) on :
Those are good ideas..
Posted by StonewallJones (Member # 887) on :
But where do we go if it fails? I mean come on, if amtrak doesnt pull itself up and get it together, in all likelihood they will be liquidated. It may not happen today, tommorow or even 2-3 years from now. If History has shown us anything though about Amtrak, its that it has been a failed experiment no matter who has been in charge or what great plans they initially had to overhaul, upgrade, or modernize passenger rail service.
Posted by Buslady (Member # 1266) on :
Why would anyone take a bus...Greyhound's service sucks. My uncle had to take it from Boston to Anaheim, he said the buses looked like crap and the driver was brainless. Ive heard from others, drivers get lost also! I took a 'hound to Vegas, the driver was cool but the bus was underpowered with a 92 series engine and it was creepy.quote:
Originally posted by Kent Loudon:
In order of preference:
1. Ride charters, such as American Orient Express.
2. Fly.
3. Drive.
4. Take a bus.
5. Stay home.
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
Stonewall,
- Railroads operating using bad business and manpower practices ... because of a multitude of reasons, regulatory and contractual.
- Passenger operations losing money, but accounting practices do not yet include "goodwill"
- Loss of Postal contracts!!! Remember, the Passenger Traffic Departments handled:
-- People
-- Express perishables.
-- Express non-perishables.
-- Mail
- Declining express. I can remember being sidetracked ... even tho our train was in the "superior" direction of travel ... for freight. Who wants to ship using your line if you don't make your delivery times?
quote:
Originally posted by StonewallJones:
But where do we go if it fails? I mean come on, if amtrak doesnt pull itself up and get it together, in all likelihood they will be liquidated.
{snip}
My question thus becomes, do we have a back up plan? Do we have an idea of a "whats next" should amtrak ever cease to be? Or do we just finaly say that it cant be done and go our separate ways?
The City of Saint Louis (UP, 1967) is still my standard for passenger operations