posted
Amtrak came very very very close to dying this year. What is being done to improve Amtrak? What are your personal advice you would give David Gunn?
1.I think Amtrak should commited to an agreement with Greyhound and other bus lines to be partners. A code sharing partner like American airline to American Eagle. Amtrak does the long distant runs, Greyhound feed and get fed through Amtrak. The same concept using motorcoach currently, but on a bigger scale; All Greyhound. It would require Bus and Train stations combine into one station.
2. Amtrak's bedrooms are booked up for months. Why not add more sleepers. Increase Amtrak first class paying customers. Am I missing southing here?
Pojon Member # 3080
posted
Sounds logical--your two points should be acted upon. Greyhound is falling apart and a marriage to Amtrak might be just the right thing to save Greyhound on the costs of maintaining the smaller stops.
jgart56 Member # 3968
posted
"Why not add more Sleepers?"
An easy question to type gp35 and an easy one to answer: Amtrak does not have enough money to just up and order a whole bunch of new sleepers. Add to that the "tense relationship" they currently have with the Superliner patent holders: one Bombardier, and I'm not sure if they could even get an order in.
By the way, I like your handle: I saw a GP35 in the BNSF yard at Eola the other day.
Anyone out there know of any other North American Companies building passenger cars?
CoastStarlight99 Member # 2734
posted
#1--I agree with Jgart..Amtrak cannot just get as many cars as they wish.
#2--If people had to connect with buses alot, that would be really bad, When you make airplan reservations you travel in the air 100%, when you make train reservations, hopefully you are on the rails most of the time and only need a bus in the start or conclusion of your journey.
gp35 Member # 3971
posted
Amtrak has 70 coaches being built. They need not retire the coaches they are planning to retire.
MDRR Member # 2992
posted
That's news to me...who and where?
gp35 Member # 3971
posted
MDRR it was in a Amtrak spending file. I'll have to go look it up again.
Another Idea. Let the food industry take over the dining car. Let the hotel industry take over the sleeping car.
gp35 Member # 3971
posted
I was reading about Amtrak screwing up a good idea. Mail and express mail service. Amtrak hired a bunch of people, used stops to uncouple mail cars, etc etc... If this is true, dumb on Amtrak part. Solution, mail truck deliver mail in airplane style container. Load and unload in 5 minutes. Amtrak need not hire 1 person. Let UPS and Postal service handle their mail coach.
Gilbert B Norman Member # 1541
posted
Actually, Mr GP-35, your view of what Amtrak Mail & Express should be was reality during the seventies and eighties.
Palletized mail and express was loaded and unloaded at major stops but in volume limited to what could be handled during station time needed for other purposes such as fueling locomotives, watering cars, and the required 500 mile inspection. Trains were rarely delayed account this limited operation.
Well somehow "the pig became a hog", and apparently you are familiar with the rest of the story.
B.T.Rider Member # 3975
posted
Before Amtrak came into existence, mail was mostly carried between cities by passenger trains and sorted en route.
LBJ's secretary of the Post Office and a former Airline executive, ended that, ended the extra charge for "air mail", and shifted that business to the airlines. Reputable sources say that single action alone reduced passenger train revenue by 1/3. From then on, the RR's devoted a major effort to getting rid of passenger service.
On the subject of Amtrak priority. Most railroad s in the west ARE single track. Most sidings are too short for modern freight trains, therefore, the only trains to fit in sidings are passenger trains. Contracts with the RR's are only scraps of paper when the RR's dispatchers must put a long freight around a short passenger train.
North American Railroader Member # 3398
posted
I liked the idea of an Amtrak-Greyhound partnership, as long as I was assured that no Amtrak lines would be cut as a result, Amtrak service would not deteriorate, and finally, that Greyhound would improve its comfortibility, cleanliness, and service. There is no way, at present, that I'd ride Greyhound anywhere. Two other suggestions, one that I've made before, would be to: sell the naming rights of Amtrak cars to towns and cities to generate extra income for Amtrak and to promote tourism in those areas. Also, maybe Amtrak could raise more money in the dining industry onboard by offering fastfood by a select few companies in its lounge car, and then keeping a share of the profits for itself. Example: Chick-Fil-a sandwichs, Pizaa Hut Pizza, etc. However, lets not fool ourselves, Amtrak, like most any other long distance rail provider, will always lose money, the service is what really matters.
midwesthsr Member # 3981
posted
Sell naming rights - that would get $20 million in one year that would be blown in less time than it takes for Acela to breakdown. The answer is not to keep Amtrak from losing so much money, but for it to increase revenue. High Speed Rail is the key - without it Amtrak will and should die. If we have High Speed Rail, averaging 2x the speed of a car at a fraction of the cost of a flight for short hops - success. The revenue increases so the loss is not as great percentagewise. Then shift as much capital cost from Amtrak to Federal Rail Administration, so Amtrak runs like Greyhound - leeching off of government-subsidized highways.
George Harris Member # 2077
posted
I have a news flash: No high speed rail anywhere had achieved the ridership estimates projected for it. That is not to say it shouldn't be done, but that it should be done realitically, and incrementally to provide better service to a proven passenger base and without the expectation that it will solve all the world's transportation problems. Solid reliable service with reasonably good equipment on a schedule more or less equivalent to driving time does find ridership. We mainly need a fleshed out network instead of a skeleton. Short run trains are big time money losers in most areas. You need to have longer distance trains on multiple daily frequencies and they will serve multiple short-haul markets as well as the long haul market. Many times people will drive a short to medium distance almost regardless of alternatives because they want their car on the other end.
Tanner929 Member # 3720
posted
Yup Mr Harris its the car at the other end. If you traveling with kids or even 4 young people it would always be cheaper by taking a car. especially if your destination is outside a city. It would not be cost effective if you need to add the cost of a rental car.
dmwnc1959 Member # 2803
posted
quote:Originally posted by North American Railroader: I liked the idea of an Amtrak-Greyhound partnership, as long as I was assured that no Amtrak lines would be cut as a result, Amtrak service would not deteriorate, and finally, that Greyhound would improve its comfortibility, cleanliness, and service. There is no way, at present, that I'd ride Greyhound anywhere.
I get to ride Greyhound next week for my FIRST time ever so I'll let you how horrible it was...:-) From there I connect to Amtrak's 'Silver Star' to Tampa r/t.
It would be GREAT if I could send a copy of the Greyhound ticket to Amtrak Guest Rewards and get 'miles' for the $55 I spent, but...
P.S. When I bought my Greyhound ticket at the station it was pretty scarry. I know it is only a 4-5 hour ride, but...
:-(
RRCHINA Member # 1514
posted
B T Rider, you must have information that is not available to me regarding western RR's. The Empire Builder route is substantially single track but the sidings are certainly long enough for all trains, and the Builder is usually OT as certified by postings here.
The SWC travels on double track from Chgo to west of KC and from west of ALB to LAX and has a good OT record.
It makes no sense for railroads to have short sidings when they run many long freight trains. They must be able to handle their freight business and need to pass those trains with sidings also. AMTRAK only occupies a given segement of the RR for a short time each day and the remainder is busy with long freights.
Actually, the BNSF and UP are the only western RR's operating AMTRAKs CZ, SL, SWC and Empire Builder and they have so much freight business currently that both are adding capacity to their line over which AMTRAK operates.
If you have specific information supporting our statement, please share it.
George Harris Member # 2077
posted
BT Rider, I would suggest that you pause and think a while before coming up with your short siding / conspiracy theory. You will find that it does not really hold water. There are undoubably a few short sidings still out there, but reality is that the big problem faced is long freight train meeting long freight train. This requires multiple long sidings which really exist. In case of two trains arriving at a meet point at about the same time or if the passenger train arrives first, it actually saves time to put the passenger train in the siding.
George
Lee, Wonyoung Member # 2464
posted
Hi, folks.
I want to give our South Korea's experience on ridership estimates on High Speed Train(HST). We start to operate HST in April First, 2004. We have two HST lines. In one of two lines ridership was only about 40% of those of originallly estimated last year. You can easily expect the results. Huge loss and burden to my company and government. But no one of planning takes reponsibility for that or resign. As you know HST has many advantages. But It requires huge money. So before building it you need reality check on cost and benefit. From South Korea.
Tanner929 Member # 3720
posted
Have you ever checked the time differences between taking a train and a bus? wow you think an Amtrak with a track frieght delay! Greyhound from New Haven to Providence RI over 8 hours. Its two hours by car about the same by Amtrak.
posted ![[Smile]](smile.gif)