IMO, Mr. Gunn was one of the better presiding officers at Amtrak in quite some time. He re-started the repair line at Beech Grove, and was just plain forthright and straightforward regarding the conditions in which Amtrak has to operate. Like it or not, many of the current crop of Our Elected Representatives has never ridden aboard a LD intersity train, and have no idea that much of the traffic for the LD routes is from the INTERMEDIATE stops,not the end points. An entire generation has grown up never having rodden aboard a train before, and Amtrak just has the rep (due in part to the conditions it encounters on the rails of the private RRs - conditions to which the general public is usually oblivious and ignorant). He spoke the truth regarding Amtrak, and it wasn't what the powers that be wanted to hear. Anybody here want to step forward and take the Amtrak president's job? I'm reminded of the folks who I've encountered aboard my several trips on the Empire Builder, who exclaimed surprise on just how busy the LD routes were, especially the folks who lived the the Northeast. The folks who identified themselves as being from the Northeast or California were almost always surprised at the levels of ridership on the lng distance routes, and at the amount of freight traffic. They were almost totally clueless as to the issues that surround the RR industry as a whole, and how these affect Amtrak.
This is really a sad day. Looks like we'll have to either get your tickets now, or get used to just flying and driving (yuck!) Posted by Tanner929 (Member # 3720) on :
If Chuck Schummer liked his management style well enough said Time for new blood. AND A NEW BUSINESS PLAN!
And for all those who complain about the frieght lines remember all those rail cars could be strapped on an eighteen wheeler barreling down behind the Family van.
Posted by Tanner929 (Member # 3720) on :
If Chuck Schummer liked his management style well enough said Time for new blood. AND A NEW BUSINESS PLAN! For the Northeast lets call it METROTRAK.
And for all those who complain about the frieght lines remember all those rail cars could be strapped on an eighteen wheeler barreling down behind the Family van.
Posted by chrisg (Member # 2488) on :
Somebody has a lot of explaining to do, preferably before a congressional committee. I expect Mineta had a role in this. Can't have anyone running Amtrak who actually understands the business of running a business. After all, nobody at the head of any other department in this administration knows what they are doing. Why should Amtrak be any different?
I suggest Amtrak should have a full board of directors and get their own act together before firing the guy who DOES have his act together.
Posted by irish1 (Member # 222) on :
i know he wanted to keep the long distance trains. i think amtrak will survive but i dont know if ant of us will recognize it. i hope i am wrong.
Posted by goduckies (Member # 3885) on :
I don't know if this is a bad thing. It seemed like Gunn was always fixated only on the Nec, and 90% of Amtrak is the LD routes. We need someone in there who can find a way to make it profitable. It shouldn't be that hard to do if it is done right. If you put half of what is going into the NEC into the LD's, they would get upgrades. Brad
Posted by EmpireBuilder (Member # 2036) on :
This whole thing just makes me, well not sick, but just upset in general. I think any of the people in the past who attacked me for criticising this administration (it was probably over a year ago so no one will remember) perhaps owes me an apology. How anyone can take Bush & Co. seriously is beyond me. Let's see, Gunn is good for Amtrak but criticizes the president's views on it, he gets canned. Harriet Miers in the past called Bush the greatest governor ever and she got nominated for the Supreme Court despite not ever being a judge. Bush just can't handle anyone who doesn't stroke his ego.
Posted by jgart56 (Member # 3968) on :
Suddenly,
All the Republicans who have been interviewed about this are claiming Gunn was a roadblock to reform. Funny none of them said anything about this before. Now it's fall in line with Normie like good little duckies!
And Goduckies, I don't agree with you at all. How many Superliners were repaired and refurbished under Gunn's watch? Wasn't the Empire Builder just fitted out with refurbished equipment? Doesn't sound to me like a man totally focused on the NE Corridor!
PS: hasn't Normie been sitting on the Amtrak board for the last 5 years? Where was his leadership (if I may ask) in regards to the so called budget problems? Shouldn't throw stones at glass houses Normie!
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
What has Sen. Schumer to do with Mr. Gunn's dismissal, Mr. Tanner?
A reread of the early material will show Sen Schumer's office learned of the imminent dismissal and, I guess, "leaked' the news.
Like it or not, Mr. Gunn "had it coming', a CEO is expected to implement policies set forth by the Board. The Board, now comprised of all too many Bush-loyal appointees clearly is not interested in promotion of rail passenger service. The Board, right or wrong, simply reflects the Administration position that the best off-Corridor Amtrak is a dissolved Amtrak. Gunn clearly was pandering to Congress, and in effect was walking around the Board that hired him, for he knew 'that's where the money is".
However, if he valued his job (I don't think he really cared for it anymore; I think his ride over Tehachapi was simply his "Victory Lap"), he would have done more to spread the Board's party line and state "I'm here to ensure an orderly shutdown of off-Corridor Amtrak. If local level agencies choose to operate passenger trains, I'm here to ensure an orderly transition of the service to them'.
All told, not a good day for proponents of rail passenger service.
Posted by notelvis (Member # 3071) on :
This is the worst news I have heard in some time.
The one most experienced and competent RAILROAD executive with any involvement at Amtrak is the one who is let go.
A hand-picked Board of Directors apparantly taking their marching orders from the white house.
Gasoline prices at record highs and the oil companies AGAIN showing record profits....actually their largest profit gains ever.....
A DOT secretary who is either ignorant or a liar (and which would you rather have?)
Things are grim folks. Really grim.
I disagree with the poster who suggests Gunn had no interest in anything beyond the Northeast Corridor. His efforts on behalf of the new Empire Builder and the Superliner rebuilding program suggest otherwise.
To the poster who suggested that being too competent in the current administration is a bad thing that will get you canned.....particularly if you disagree with the W.....man, I would like to think that you're wrong but......well. I woke up the other morning thinking about issues other than Amtrak and became very depressed when I realized that the current administration still has more than three years to go.
That, my friends, is time enough to do a whole lot more damage.
Posted by Amtrak207 (Member # 1307) on :
Please stop misspelling my Senator's last name (Schumer). My views: Gunn was forced out by the board. Gunn did pay enough attention to maintenance of the long-distance trains. Gunn received criticism earlier this year for repairing desperately-needed sleeping cars instead of replacing desperately-needed NEC bridges. Also, per the NARP release, Amtrak's seven-member board has two members and one is Norman Y. Marionetta. I am extremely upset about this event. I refuse to rant in public about it, althogh letters to my elected officials are already being drafted. Having an engineer at the helm for the time being could improve other things. Yes, freight railroads are still a problem. Just because they perform a necessary service does not mean that passenger trains should have to be intentionally delayed or treated as though they do not belong. Gunn did more to help Amtrak's bottom line than anyone realizes right now. He was like a latter-day W. Graham Claytor Jr. Gunn fired substandard employees, communicated with the rest of them, and made it easier and safer for them to do their jobs. Warrington never communicated with employees, fudged the financial reports and proposals, and didn't even ride trains. And finally, even though I've gotten flak for saying this before, the ongoing situation here and in other areas makes me ashamed to admit my citizenship. What does every other foreigner think about American passenger trains? They are the laughingstock of civilization, more like souped-up motorcoaches. I count the days before someone else with the title of President is fired. Firing Gunn is like taking out the cork plugging a hole in the side of a sinking ship. Most states cannot afford to pay for passenger train services without large matching grants from the federal government. The idea of competition is imbecilic. What is wrong with what he did? Are the RoadRailers coming back? Is Amtrak going to have 84 vice presidents on the payroll again? Are most of the wrecked Superliners going to keep rusting to the rails instead of having the dents pounded out now? Are there going to be fifteen different styles of Amfleet food service cars? Will Dinner in the Diner be replaced by vending machines full of junk food? What's his home address? Somewhere in Nova Scotia or did he relocate to Virginia?
David Gunn for President, 2008
Posted by gp35 (Member # 3971) on :
Amtrak LD has less than 1 year to exist. By this time next year all non-nec trains will be heading for the junk yard. Everyone plan to take your last trip.
Posted by JONATHON (Member # 2899) on :
And I could have seen him in person....
Posted by goduckies (Member # 3885) on :
I guess I was wrong, but it just seems that the lines that I go on are getting worse. I use the Starlight all the time, and it is now late every day. It used to be the best, but now it is one of the worst. I guess I just see that and I see that he hasn't done a good job on that train. Plus I see the NEC gets so much money, and I think that should have been spun off to the states to run. He only did think out of the box until after congress told him to. Not before. Brad
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
It didn't help that ABC Radio news portrayed Gunn as a troublemaker who lost a billion dollars a year and threatened to shut the system down twice. ABC implied that this was why he was fired.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
What a kick in the gut to open up to ! (9:00am Taipei time.) I feel like Gunn did a gread job with the hand he was dealt. The current board wants a puppet on a string and Gunn was not, and best of all, did not have to be. Remember, he has no career to protect, no need to secure his retirement, no worried about unintentionally burning bridges. He has all that without Amtrak, so he could tell these people what he though and what they needed to hear, not what they wanted to hear.
I also disagree with those who think he was unreasonably fixated on the Northeast. He has done as much for the long distance system that money and contractual situations permitted. The need to get more participation from the northeast states is a political problem beyond Gunn's control, not an operational problem.
George
Posted by Capltd29 (Member # 3292) on :
Well guys,
We are simply going to see how this all plays out, it may be time for someone new... I hope it all works out, dont move to canada or europe yet.
Posted by vline (Member # 1132) on :
Hi Folks, reading between the lines of this CNN article below gives me no confidence for the future of Amtrak as we know it today. Time now I believe to lobby the Democrats in the time available before the mid-term congessional elections
Mike in Australia.
Posted by notelvis (Member # 3071) on :
quote:Originally posted by Capltd29: Well guys,
We are simply going to see how this all plays out, it may be time for someone new... I hope it all works out, dont move to canada or europe yet.
This could really affect where my disposable travel dollars are spent though.
I could be reduced to an annual trip to Chama, NM and a week or so in Canada every other year. My interest in US travel plummets if I can't get there by train.
Grim.
Posted by JONATHON (Member # 2899) on :
SAVE AMTRAK Posted by CoastStarlight99 (Member # 2734) on :
quote:Originally posted by gp35: Amtrak LD has less than 1 year to exist. By this time next year all non-nec trains will be heading for the junk yard. Everyone plan to take your last trip.
Thats not for sure, heard it a million times. But this is a real sad one, what do we know about David Hughes? He is going to fill in until a successor is found.
I'll join Goduckies (though I'm actually more gobeavers) and not sing along with the choir.
Though most on this forum (and others) have bestowed Gunn with sainthood, I'm not sure the statue of St. Gunn is worthy of dangling from the rear-view mirror of my 84 Ford F-150.
Like Goduckies, I'm a frequent passenger on the Coast Starlight (as well as other Western LD trains). And I also have observed a steady decline in performance and service during Gunn's tenure. I know it's heresy around here, but my rides during the Warrington era (and earlier) were much, much better.
And I haven't seen much "thinking outside the box" by Gunn (again, a point made by Goduckies). Nor do I see much of this heretical thinking on this (and other) Amtrak forums.
With all the verbiage around here, the litany simply is: Gunn good, Bush bad, Mineta bad, Warrington bad, Republicans evil, and Mr. Plane and Mr. Car get more money than Mr. Train (sadly, no one ever mentions the unfairness to Mr. Stagecoach).
The glowing eulogies to St. Gunn have been duly recorded. But my question is: Is Amtrak critic Joseph Vranich right? Are we just a bunch of rail romantics who want the taxpayers to fund our beloved 1940's era transportation technology forever and ever?
Well, Vranich has me pegged. Unabashedly a rail romantic, the never-ending taxpayer subsidy would be cool. But I have difficulty defending it intellectually.
For many of you, I know it's much more fun to bash Bush and bemoan St. Gunn's excommunication. But do you have any "outside the box" thoughts to change and improve rail pax? Or is Amtrak, just as it is (other than that pesky tithing problem), sacrosanct?
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
Zephyr makes a number of valid points, and a few I don't quite agree with, but he brings a dose of reality check to the discussion.
The CNN article linked above suggested Gunn was fired because of his opposition to the board's decision to make the NEC a subsidiary of Amtrak. I've made no secret of the fact that I feel the idea does have some merit, and that it does not mean the end of long distance trains, as some believe. If Gunn was actively blocking further consideration of the plan, then he may indeed have been an impediment to progress, despite his competence in other areas. However, one can still question whether this was a good move at this time.
I haven't always agreed with Gunn, but I always admired his good sense. He was no visionary, but he was a rock-solid manager. He will be mighty hard to replace.
Posted by dmwnc1959 (Member # 2803) on :
quote:Originally posted by zephyr: Are we just a bunch of rail romantics who want the taxpayers to fund our beloved 1940's era transportation technology forever and ever?
I do not own a car. I rely soley on Amtrak to get me anywhere I am going outside of my own hometown. Even if I decide to catch a plane out of Charlotte, I absolutely HAVE to take Amtrak to get there. However I do not fly, I take trains. I use them not as a romanticized form of transport, but my only intercity form of transport...
Amtrak is essential to Americans other than those in the NEC. From coast to coast and border to border LOTS of people use Amtrak as their ONLY form of intercity transportation.
Take away this, and many Americans will suffer the consequences and hardships of 'No Alternate Transportation Provided'...
Posted by zephyr (Member # 1651) on :
quote:Originally posted by dmwnc1959: Amtrak is essential to Americans other than those in the NEC. From coast to coast and border to border LOTS of people use Amtrak as their ONLY form of intercity transportation.
I'm not sure what your definition of "LOTS of people" who use Amtrak as their "ONLY form of intercity transportation" is. I suppose it's an anecdotal concept, but it doesn't jive with my experience. I take Amtrak several times a year, and I can say I've never met a fellow passenger who uses rail as their "only" form of intercity transportation. Anecdotal, I know. And apparently your anecdotal mileage varies (Ah, come on, you've never hitched a ride with a friend?).
Now, that is not to say that I haven't met numerous people where you and I might agree "Amtrak" and "essential" might be rightly used in the same sentence. But, without exception in my experience, those people are using corridor trains (Cascades, Captiol Corriodor, etc.). Those people depend on these trains to get to work, meetings, or whatever. They're timely, frequent, and mostly dependable.
But, in my area, to depend on the Coast Starlight or Zephyr to get you to whatever? In a dependable, timely fashion? Walking might be a better alternative (since Mr. Stagecoach doesn't get any respect in the Congressional budget process).
The question in my mind is could monies spent for LD trains be better spent on corridor and alternative forms of public transportation.
My heart (the romantic side) wants to say no. Keep the LD's (because I really like them). My mind says "get a life."
As far as the "romantic" issue, that tag is one Vranich lays on many of us Amtrak supporters. Love him or hate him, there's some truth in the tag. I've admitted I'm guilty.
Posted by EmpireBuilder (Member # 2036) on :
Well, to counter what you're saying, Zephyr, who says our rail system has to operate with that 1940s technology? Why can't we do what France, Germany, Japan, and countless other nations have done, to make their rail systems use very modern technology and be very relevant in the lives of everyday people? I guess if there really is an oil crisis you think the least we could do is use the most fuel efficient form of transportation available and embrace it, not shun it.
Posted by dmwnc1959 (Member # 2803) on :
quote: I take Amtrak several times a year, and I can say I've never met a fellow passenger who uses rail as their "only" form of intercity transportation. Anecdotal, I know. And apparently your anecdotal mileage varies (Ah, come on, you've never hitched a ride with a friend?).[/QB]
I must be the exception to the rule. I really do not own a car and use AMTRAK and city bus service heavily to get around. I travel AMTRAK an average of 40 times a year, a lot of local mileage from SAL-CLT, and then public transport or by foot in CLT. I have purchased the NC Multi Rider Ticket on several occasions to help with cost of ridership. My few friends here in 'Mayberry' have family and lives of there own so I do not bother them with hitching a ride, and they rarely go out of town and almost never to Charlotte, and not when I need to, so AMTRAK is my only way to get around. The bulk of my friends are in Charlotte and they arent willing to drive 120 miles r/t just to come get me :-(
I do see quite a few folks that travel often b/t RGH-CLT and back and know their faces from other local trips. The 'Piedmont' is our local version of a once-daily commuter train.
I am sure there are unspoken numbers of folks in other parts of the country (other than the NEC) that rely on local and L/D AMTRAK services in one form or another as a primary means for intercity travel, whether for business or out of necessity due to a lack of any other convenient form of getting around (bus or plane).
It would be interesting to see some statistics as to the percentages of folks that use AMTRAK as their primary form of intercity transport as opposed to the percentage of riders that use it only as a vacation. Any guesses?
Posted by zephyr (Member # 1651) on :
EmpireBuilder, good point. We don't have to operate with "that 1940's technology."
But France (now, there's a Utopia), Germany, and Japan are different from US. We do have some high speed rail in the works (LA to SF for example), but don't they have more of the character of corridor trains?
To build out a high speed rail replacement for long-distance routes (for example, LA to Seattle) would be (to say the least) costly. If just the time it's taking to build the LA to SF HSR corridor is lengthy, can you imagine what we're talking here in time to extend it to Seattle?
For sake of argument (and not to be mistaken as my position), let's say our goal is to HSR the country. We're talking decades. Big Dig Time Plus. What do we do with Amtrak LD's in the interim? Can we manufacture enough duct tape to keep those Superliners functional during this period? (Ah, there's an idea. Chocolates on the pillow disappeared during the reign of St. Gunn. Maybe his replacement can replace this amenity with a roll of duct tape on the pillow).
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
Most of the talk about high speed rail, maglev, other even more utopian schemes are the equivalent of the stage magician waving his arms around while the trap door opens. All these places just mentioned (Japan, German, France, et al) have huge investments and train miles running of everyday bread and butter trains banging off the miles at average speeds well within the range that Amtrak now runs. Every last one of these high speed services were built to provide better service on routes already having multiple trains per day. Yes, the demand jumped, but it was not from a zero base.
These places are not running 1940's technology, and we are not doing so in the US either. If you think so, better read up on the 1940's.
The big difference is that all these places began funding new equipment and track improvemetns on their existing services about the time that the private companies threw in teh towel in the US because they realized that the deck was hoplessly stacked against them, and our governments, on all levels ran around moaning and groaning rather than doing something about it.
If this doesn't change, we might as will contact China and India and see if they want to make bids on our passenger equipment.
George
Posted by mikesmith (Member # 447) on :
Upgrading track and adding double track is WAY cheaper than adding a new road, or even adding a new lane to an existing freeway; and the new track can be done in much less time.
From San Antonio to Dallas, the average track speed is 35 mph. Upgrading that track to 79 mph would {obviously} cut down on the travel time. Fortunately, Texas just passed amendment 1, allowing the State to get involved with track upgrades and relocations. (Yea, everyone heard about amendment 2. The press ignored the other 8 amendments)
Who in the world will want the Superliners? VIA didn't and once the LD trains are gone...the talent at Beech Grove that keeps all the passenger cars on the move will be gone!
Again to Normie: what private company will want to take over running these trains without parts, and especially the expertise to keep it going? To save the discussion, answer: "No Company in their right mind!"
Was Gunn truly fighting against the concept of spliting off the NEC, or was he possibly reminding everyone of the expense and time involved to do it. Does Normie think that all the States along the NEC are just going to gather in a love fest and put together a plan to run trains in 2 days, find the proper funding and then do it?
I believe that the next President of Amtrak HAS TO sit down with each of the CEO's of the railroads on which Amtrak runs it's trains and figure out a way to keep them reasonably on time.
I STILL WONDER where new equipment is going to come from? In the interview he had in Trains Magazine in November, Gunn said Amtrak was having problems even finding replacement wheelsets for their passenger cars. The intimation: where was new eqiupment going to come from? From Bombardier, not bloody likely...after the Acela debacle they'll probably stay far away from Amtrak.
Posted by zephyr (Member # 1651) on :
quote:Originally posted by George Harris: These places are not running 1940's technology, and we are not doing so in the US either. If you think so, better read up on the 1940's.
George, let's stipulate the obvious. There have been a tremendous amount of rail technological advances since the 1940's (as well as just about anything else I can think of). But I had in mind the utility of various means of travel as seen from the eyes of the user (the passenger).
Let's say you and I fire up our time machine and transport a passenger on a 1949 California Zephyr to today's Amtrak version.
Our time traveling friend will certainly see some differences (What do you mean I can't light up a Lucky Strike?). He can now flush at stations; he'll wonder why no other passengers are wearing coats and ties; and may note the absence of that clickity-clack sound of the rails. And so forth.
Despite the changes, I think our time traveler will adapt very quickly to his train of today. It's really not that much different from that 1949 train we yanked him out of.
At the end of his trip, I suspect he might rate the 1949 Zephyr higher than today's. Today's train is actually a bit slower than the original CZ; there's less amenities; and it's not as punctual (and, oh, did I mention that issue with the Lucky Strikes?).
But now let's fly our time traveler from Oakland to Chicago. Or drive him there. The changes our buddy will notice in these modes of transportation will probably leave his mouth in a perpetual state of agape.
The improvements since the 1940's in the utility of using other major modes of LD transportation have been much greater than those made in rail.
Sure, the U.S. took it's unique fork in the road in developing ways of "getting there." But the past is past. Today, long distance rail travel (what's left of it) is not really much different from what we had a half century ago.
So the question is simply where do we go from here? With the cards as dealt.
And the real big problem is: I can't get our time machine to work. I've been desperately trying to return our time traveling buddy back to where we found him. I need some technical support here, George.
He's getting on my nerves. His incessant smoking, constant complaining about "that complete stranger (a lady, no less) insisting on rummaging through his luggage" at the airport, and whining about the lack of a "real" Life magazine is driving me crazy.
Got an extra room over there in Taiwan, George? Anyone? Help.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
A great piece, Mr. Zephyr.
May I add to it; the morning shower available for all Amtrak Sleeper passengers?
On the 1949 'as delivered' Zephyr, only one room offered a shower. That was the Drawing Room beheath the Dome in the Obs-Lounge.
Posted by MontanaJim (Member # 2323) on :
zephyr said: "Our time traveling friend will certainly see some differences (What do you mean I can't light up a Lucky Strike?). He can now flush at stations; he'll wonder why no other passengers are wearing coats and ties; and may note the absence of that clickity-clack sound of the rails. And so forth." ------------------------ I know this is a little off topic, but why isnt there the "clickity clack" off the rails anymore? Is it because there is better suspension on the passenger cars? If i take 1950's style trains like VIA's Canadian, will I hear the clickity-clack? I would really like to experience the way railroading was in the old days.
Posted by CG96 (Member # 1408) on :
The main reason for no more "clickety-clack" is the use of welded rail. Instead of being pieces of 88 ft long rail, the rail is now welded into pieces that are as much as 400 yards (365 meters) long.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:Originally posted by CG96: The main reason for no more "clickety-clack" is the use of welded rail. Instead of being pieces of 88 ft long rail, the rail is now welded into pieces that are as much as 400 yards (365 meters) long.
Don't know where you got your numbers, but they are not US standards or common practice so far as I know. The standard rail length in the US (and Canada and Mexico) for many years was 39 feet. Some mills began to roll 78 foot and then 85 foot lengths, but both of these came along well after "everybody" had decided to go to welded rail, so it mainly served to reduce the number of welds required to create a weld string. The standard length of a string of CWR in the US (etc.) is nominally 1440 feet (=480 yards = 439 meters), but will vary some depending upon whether you have "shorts" or have to cut out welds that do not pass inspection. This would be 37 pieces at 39 feet each. Obviously, 78 foot lengths required the string to be either longer or shorter, either around 1400 feet or around 1478, but seventeen 85 foot lengths works nicely for a 1440 foot string. You also lose a little length (normally about 3/4 inch) in each weld. Therefore, 8 strings gets you right at one mile of track, both rails. The strings are then usually connected by field welds, so that the end product is continuous between insulated joints and turnouts.
Welding of rail was first done in the 30's but did not become commonly done until the 1950's, with the last major system to adopt it being Union Pacific in 1969 or therabouts. Since rail has a very long life, once the decision is made it still takes about 50 years for complete welding up to occur. I believe a lot of the former ATSF passenger main across Kansas and Colorado used by the Southwest Chief is still in jointed rail.
George
Posted by John J. Poshepny (Member # 4088) on :
I am saddened to see Gunn go. The good news is apperntly Congress isn't going without a fight hearings on Tuesday. Oh Yes there is rumor that there is no Diner/Sleepers assigned to 3,4,5,6,7,8,21, and 22.
Posted by Chucky (Member # 2263) on :
With the exception of my yearly pilgrimage from Albuquerque to Santa Fe to celebrate my College Reunion at St. John's College, Amtrak is (with all due respect, Zephyr) the only way I travel from city to city.
I just returned to Albuquerque from Chicago on Nov. 9th and was shocked to read about the illegal firing of Mr. Gunn. He gave Amtrak a face and a personality. He was able to explain to the layman, through the use of humorous language, the reason why we would never be riding Maglevs.
This last train trip on the Southwest Chief may have been one of my best. Although we left Union Station an hour late due to mechanical problems, we managed to arrive in Albuquerque more than an hour early. The rotisserie chicken, potatoes and broccoli that I ate in the dining car the previous evening was to die for. The white meat was moist and every bite transported me to heaven.
The Raton Pass never looked or felt so good: No clickety clack there for a good long while. The rails seemed to all be welded and the ride felt as smooth as butter.
The train, as usual, was packed and I recognized many Amish who, with the exception of an occasionaly buggy ride, also use Amtrak to get to distant cities. I noticed an unusual number of college aged students and little children. The lower level handicapped section was filled with people who also have their reasons for not getting on a plane.
My understanding is that David Gunn is being fired for a few absurd reasons. First off, he is being fired for having succeeded in making Amtrak a safe, comfortable and on-time means of transportation, using obsolete equipment. He ran a 30,000 mile national train network for the price of the tiny Bay Area Rapid Transit System (BART) and he did an excellent job.
Another reason Mr. Gunn was fired was because he did not try to break up the system. Time after time, Amtrak was there to provide assistance during national catastrophes. Unlike many government agencies, Amtrak has done its job well during the past five or six years. And this level of outstanding service that was provided for a couple percent of the overall transporation budget was embarrassing to an administration consisting of oil men.
Well, perhaps Mr. Gunn needs a break. We all need a break sometimes. He has performed sterling service. He isn't going particularly quietly and he may have stirred up a hornet's nest upon leaving.
So, I remain cautiously optimistic that things will turn out OK in the end. What we are seeing now is probably just a feeble attempt by the administration to distract the American public from all the naughty things going on on Capitol Hill.
Posted by DeeCT (Member # 3241) on :
[Oh Yes there is rumor that there is no Diner/Sleepers assigned to 3,4,5,6,7,8,21, and 22.] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Where did you hear this --- please provide a link or at least a reputable source.
Posted by Pojon2 (Member # 4048) on :
I didn't like Pres. Bush to begin with, NOW I have no respect at all for him and his Republican appointees on the Amtrak Board. It's time to fire Pres. Bush!
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)