posted
I am writing this after reading many recent posts to this forum. Having taking a respite from railfanning for a few years, I am worried and disappointed by all the changes in Amtrak services. I didn't know so many changes had occurred! The Sunset doesn't run all the way to Orlando or connect with The Crescent. The Boston section of The LSL has become a day train without through sleepers. The Owl no longer has sleepers. The Pennsylvanian has a ridiculous connection with the Capitol Limited. I mean, how could Amtrak even publish that Pittsburgh layover as a connection? What happened to the Three Rivers or for that matter the Broadway Limited? The Florida trains both arrive Miami between 6-7 PM, instead of 12 hours apart. What happened to spreading out the service? There's even some trouble at Amtrak's biggest hub. Some major LD connections in Chicago are just too tight. I'm sure many of you can cite more examples. I really get the feeling that Amtrak is being pared down, in just the same way railroads brought about train offs in the 50's and 60's. They curtailed amenities and made schedules inconvenient for travelers. Sure makes me wonder whether or not there will be any LD trains 10-20 years from now. I understand Amtrak depends on Federal funding and granted as a lay person I don't know all the logistics involved. But somehow things just don't seem right.
-David Sommer
Gilbert B Norman Member # 1541
posted
Mr. Sommer, I can recall when you were active at this Forum; welcome back.
I cannot overlook that all of your comments regarding "downgraded" service relate to LD's. By comparison, Corridor services, which is what 21st Century intercity passenger railroading is all about, are definitely on the "upswing'. Acela service has been expanded to such extent that 17 of the 20 sets are now used to protect scheduled service, when you were last active only 13 of the 20 were on the road in any given day. All amenities of Acela First Class have been maintained. Markets such as NYP-WAS that had previously been ceded to air transport are again viable.
I'm quite convinced that regardless of whether Barry or Johnny raise their right in now "118 and a wake-up', an order for new Corridor Regional Coaches (A-III's for lack of a better term at present) will soon be on the books. There may even be additional Acela cars added to the existing sets.
Here in the Midwest, the additional trains added as part of the 2006 Illinois initiative are "doing well'. I was skeptical at first as it appeared an unpopular (some also say incompetent) Governor was buying a few votes - I'm very pleased to note that skepticism on my part has proven unfounded.
But now we address the thrust of your inquiry - the LD trains. There is only one reason LD trains have existed in the Amtrak era - and that is political expediency. "No Yuma no moolah" is simply how the game is played. The Incorporators of Amtrak, despite all the "for profit" bluster' knew the enterprise was either going to be funded or it was kaput. Those of us in the industry knew it as well. Those in Congress learned it about a year later.
Amtrak was "sold' to the industry on the strength that there would be immediate relief from passenger train deficits, but that in about five years the LD system would be gone.
Obviously that little timeline proved fallacious. While I was never "privy" to the reaction "on the Eighth Floor (Mahogany Row)", I'm certain when it was learned that Amtrak had ordered the Superliners, the reaction was "grief, we're going to stuck with these trains for another thirty years".
But let us consider that Amtrak LD during the Bush administration has survived relatively unscathed when compared with the preceding Clinton. During Bush, only the Sunset East and the Three Rivers were lost. Under Clinton (the so-called Mercer Cuts) all service over the "traditional UP", namely Pioneer and Desert Wind, was lost.
So long as Amtrak gets its Federal appropriation, which in large part goes towards NECorridor infrastructure, then the level of LD service is quite adequate. But even though "I ride 'em' when convenient and come away with "more positive than negatives" travel experiences, I'm at a loss, and have been so throughout the entire Amtrak era, to see how LD trains can hold relevance to 21st century passenger rail.
dnsommer Member # 2825
posted
Thank you for welcoming me back, Mr. Norman! And, doncha know, now I have an authentic Amtrak Trainman cap to wear when I'm sitting here typing! (I got it from ebay)
I appreciate the information. It sounds as if the thirty year estimate is proving to be somewhat accurate. I wonder what the last skeletal remains will look like on a map before the guillotine falls: NYP-BUF-CHI; CHI-DEN-EMY; SEA-EMY-LAU; NYP-MIA
I read somewhere here that 50+ passenger cars are under or awaiting repair at Beechgrove. I wonder how many are lounges, diners, sleepers?
One can't deny that the corridor services appear to be thriving.
Thanks again for your comments!
-David Sommer
PS - Who are Barry and Johnny?
MDRR Member # 2992
posted
Barry and Johnny is Normanese for John McCain and Barack Obama
smitty195 Member # 5102
posted
I can't help but think of the El Debarge song from the 80's, "Who Is Johnny?".
I agree that things don't seem right, but I have a slightly different angle on things. As a frequent AmPassenger for the last 28+ years, things have gone way downhill at Amtrak in the last year or so. I can't put my finger on it......but I have a weird feeling that something will eventually become public knowledge in short order---say in the next year or so. I think the CEO (Alex Kummant) will be fired, and there will be a big "change" mantra (Hmmm...I've heard that somewhere before. LOL!). But without getting into all of the nitty gritty, I have seen things go downhill at Amtrak in roughly the last year. Service is down, mechanical reliability is down, food service is down, everything seems to be down. I could be wrong (and I hope I am) that something is afoul at Amtrak. I will gladly eat crow if I'm wrong.
notelvis Member # 3071
posted
And you won't have to go far to find crow to eat.......I'm sure by then that will be the new special in the Amdiner.
But of course, if crow is on the menu, I guess that would actually proove your point correct and you'll get to pass on the crow altogether!
mpaulshore Member # 3785
posted
At some point in the near future, when I have a little more time, I'll make a detailed response to Mr. Norman's well-known contemptuous opinion of Amtrak's long-distance trains. For the moment though, I'll just ask, how seriously do we want to take the views of someone who makes such a thoroughly cretinous use of quotation marks?
zephyr Member # 1651
posted
quote:Originally posted by mpaulshore: ...how seriously do we want to take the views of someone who makes such a thoroughly cretinous use of quotation marks?
Well, ah, gosh, gee, I actually "like" Mr. Norman's posts. And I take him "seriously."
Does that make me "thoroughly cretinous?"
wayne72145 Member # 4503
posted
I am a late Amtrak rider. Starting in '03 with multiple coast to coast trips. The food has been better in the past, however it is still very good on the Empire Builder, the train I ride most often. The Lake Shore Limited connection and Silver Service connection haven't gotten better and as far as service goes it can be hit and miss from terrible to excellent but most of the time very good. Rolling stock is on a long downward slide and needs up grading, I am so much happier on the train than in the sky even with the down sides.
train lady Member # 3920
posted
I"m with you Zephyr. And no, what it does is make us look highly "educated".
Henry Kisor Member # 4776
posted
I would happily apply to Mpaulshore a certain pejorative epithet, but GBN would probably bring me up short for using it. And I wouldn't contradict him, because he is GBN, a valuable and endangered species.
train lady Member # 3920
posted
I can thnk of a few myself, Henry but I am too much of a lady to put them in writing. You know I really think personal attacks should not be allowed on the forum We certainly don't have to agree with everyone on everything but one of the joys of this forum is it's civility.
Dan Adams Member # 1177
posted
You know, whenever I turn to this site I never fail to read GBN's comments, because I know he's thought things through and can always express himself clearly. I think mpaulshore needs a session in charm school. He's like that kid in high school who went to the prom with his mother.
Mike Smith Member # 447
posted
I was going to respond to the mpaulshore creature, but Mr Norman's non-response response on the other thread was priceless, so I let it go...
Mr. Toy Member # 311
posted
While I have no trouble with "GBN's" use of quotation "marks," and I thoroughly enjoy his writing style, I agree with mpaulshore that GBN's derision of long distance services is misguided. His bias is clearly oriented towards "freight interests," having repeatedly identified himself as a stockholder of same.
I will only say what I have said many times before, I believe the long distance and corridor services complement each other, and that each is stronger as interconnected components of the "national network" than either would be in isolation. I also believe that the freight railroads, should not expect to maintain virtual monopolies in their respective markets without providing some benefit to the broader public interest in return, that benefit being access for Amtrak trains.
Though we disagree on this matter, I still think Mr. Norman is a wonderful, thoughtful and interesting guy and I would love to have him as a next-door neighbor.
As to the original question, many of the changes at Amtrak are the result of micromanaging Congresscritters who legislated mandates to cut costs rather than increase revenue by selling tickets.
dnsommer Member # 2825
posted
I discovered another strange Amtrak schedule abberation. Maybe it has come to light before. Maybe I'm reading the schedule wrong. The westbound Lake Shore Limited stops at Albany - Rensselaer from 4:15 PM to 7:05 PM. That's almost three hours! The eastbound LSL stops at Albany - Rensselaer from 3:40 PM to 4:05 PM. That seems a little more reasonable.
Dave S
RRRICH Member # 1418
posted
Hmmm -- right you are, David -- we took the W-bd LSL over the summer, and I certainly don't remember stopping in ALB for 3 hours. I know when we took the LSL, there was a schedule change, but that was only a 15 minute later departure from New York.
RRRICH Member # 1418
posted
So what is "wrong" with "GBN's" use of "quotation marks" for "everything?" I too often "use quotation marks" for "many reasons" in my "writings."
And I for one, do value Mr. Norman's opinions, knowing his RR background. Even though many of us (including this contributor) don't agree with him on the LD's, so be it -- we are all civilized, and all have different opinions!!!!
So, "keep posting," Gil!!!
smitty195 Member # 5102
posted
Volks, lest we forget, with a "nickel and a cup" along the "transcontinental thoroughfare" many times can be seen a "resting passenger" in the old "Pullman Club".
(I have no idea what I just said, but imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, right? )
irishchieftain Member # 1473
posted
quote:Originally posted by MDRR:
Barry and Johnny is Normanese for John McCain and Barack Obama
Not originally. "Barry" was Obama's nickname in high school. And as for "Johnny", a plethora of blogs are using that, if not any of his close friends.
quote:Mr. Toy wrote:
I will only say what I have said many times before, I believe the long distance and corridor services complement each other, and that each is stronger as interconnected components of the "national network" than either would be in isolation
I personally don't like the attempt at strong delineation between so-called corridor (what does that mean?) and long-distance trains. All trains travel on corridors; if they aren't on corridors, they must be on branch lines instead. There is no difference between trains depending on distance, because they all have seats (as well as diners and beds, one would hope) and they all stop at stations. It's the speed that lends train travel to being more competitive than it currently is, both top speed and average speed. It's also arguable that volume is another vital aspect, because the more trains you run, the more passengers they tend to attract (you can't ride a train that is not there). However, the only unique aspect about the Northeast Corridor (the first amalgamation of main lines to get stuck with the erroneous name; originally it referred to the passageway between two cars) is the top and average speeds. The more main lines that have passenger trains operating at similar speeds, the less that particular set of main lines will seem in any way special. (And hopefully, Congress won't impose any more unfunded mandates on the railroads in that respect.)
mgt Member # 5479
posted
As a fairly inexperienced Amtrak user and relative newcomer to this group, as well as being a non-US national, making no fiscal contributions to Amtrak finances, I know I must be circumspect in my contributions. Suffice it to say since 2005 my wife and I have had very positive experiences on Amtrak. We have travelled the full routes on the CZ, LSL, EB and CS and have encountered only one less than enthusiastic employee, and she was adequate and polite. Most of the others in the sleepers and dining cars have shewn an enthusiasm beyond the call of duty, and if we are being cynical, beyond looking for tips. They seemed to have genuinely enjoyed their work and contact with passengers. This also applied to the Maple Leaf and Acela this summer. Amtrak cannot be held responsible for that abominable two hours immigration delay at the border. I know our requirements as holidaymakers are different from those of business travellers and people using the train purely as a means of transport but what has surprised us is the number of passengers travelling part-route in coach-class simply to get from point A to B, regular Amtrak users, enjoying the experience. We have also encountered many US citizens using Amtrak as part of their vacation, as well as holidaymakers from Europe, Australia and New Zealand, most of these with previous Amtrak experience. These must make a positive contribution to Amtrak finances. The alternatives on holiday are car, plane or bus. I am not an enthusiast of long-distance bus travel having frequently used it when taking pupils abroad from the UK. I think most people have similar views on the sheer tedium and hassle of modern plane travel. I would never dream of travelling in the UK by plane. With the car, relatively cheap in the US until recently, the driver has little opportunity to relax and enjoy the drive. My wife didn't particularly enjoy the passenger experience of Independence Pass either, unfenced roads at 11,000 feet with a sheer drop! We experienced pre-SDS food on the CS in 2005 and it was very good. The more restricted menus on LSL and CS last year were enjoyable, but I suppose for frequent travellers could become boring. The food on the EB last year was excellent and contributed greatly to the pleasure of our journey. It must be difficult for Amtrak to plan ahead where food is concerned when they are under constant attack to penny-pinch. Most regular travellers will always place eating in a dining-car as one of the real pleasures. At a party last year in San Francisco our enthusiasm for Amtrak was questioned, and the fact that we had used it more than once received with incredulity by those involved in business. But these same gentlemen seemed to have little idea of the Amtrak services available in Calfornia or the airline challenging Northeast Corridor. How well does Amtrak publicise its services in the US? I know my views do not coincide with those of several members of this group but I can only judge as I have found. The much vaunted european long-distance high-speed routes have all received vast amounts of government support as a matter of course in various forms and guises; the French government even takes pride in the technical accomplishments of the TGV. In some parts of Britain which suffered under the "Beeching-Axe" of the early 1960s there are moves afoot to restore rail services between rural and urban areas, which I know is a different matter from US LD services, but certainly there has been a steady upturn in passenger rail travel, which now seems to be reflected in the US. Surely diversification of means of travel can only be a good thing in this day and age.
Gilbert B Norman Member # 1541
posted
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Toy: ....I agree with mpaulshore that GBN's derision of long distance services is misguided. His bias is clearly oriented towards "freight interests," having repeatedly identified himself as a stockholder of same.
No question whatever, Mr. Toy, I tend to hold industry positions on matters of Amtrak/industry conflicts; lest we forget some one third of my adult working life was within the industry. Further, I believe that any railroad security investor here has an obligation to disclose they hold "a position' in such. This is simply the same standard applicable to any CNBC or Fox Business "talking head".
While by no means whatsoever, did I, as an entry-level "Management Trainee" participate in the decision process resulting in my road, the MILW, joining Amtrak, I do know first hand we were losing "real $$$" operating passenger trains - and Bankruptcy protection was only six years away.
In short, Amtrak was rammed down an industry "financially on the ropes" with needless regulation that was constraining the roads from doing what any unregulated industry would have done - kill 'em all likely during the later '50's when roads such as NYC PRR and SP "threw in the towel". Had the industry not been in such a state of weakness at that time (several of the "strongs" such as ATSF and SCL darned near declined to join; UP had a chance to be "out" - no passenger trains Amtrak or otherwise - and hence joined), the outcome could have been different with roads saying "thanks but no thanks' and taking their chances to get rid of 'em when the statutory five year wait period under RPSA '70 expired.
Quite simply though, any trains that were left (be assured the Corridor would have been "safe"; the Conrail enabling legislation - RRR'73 - which said "no passengers', could have just as easily said "and passenger") would have unilaterally been gone when the "Staggers" deregulation legislation was enacted then implemented during 1980.
Finally by contrast, lets review what I understand occurred "South of the Border". While I obviously contend here that not much of a case for perpetually continuing a system of Long Distance trains can be made in the US, I think much more of a case could have been made in Mexico for continuing such. However, the Mexican government wanted "out" of the railroad business and sought to "privatize" the State owned rail system. Here two US roads, the UP and KCS, recognizing that Mexico had the potential of developing West Coast maritime ports through which Asian trade could be handled, considered making an investment FROM A POSITION OF STRENGTH. It is my understanding that a condition precedent was simply the existing passenger trains were to be killed, and "don't even think of a Mextrak".
RR4me Member # 6052
posted
I enjoy the LD trains more than any other on Amtrak, but I also have to admit that expediency or efficiency, or time or any other business-type reason for travel is always going to favor air travel on all the current western LD routes. It seems that the equation for shorter route travel decision can be created with variables for speed of travel, location of start/stop points, number of trains on the route, and alternatives. Train travel always compares favorably for short trips, a la BART to SF from the Bay Area, and is growing comparable for longer trips, certainly from Modesto to Sacramento, for example. There, the primary alternative is auto travel. Even now, without high speed rail, I can make a case that going from the valley (Modesto) to certain locations in So. Cal., where alternatives are auto or air, there are situations where the train is a practical alternative. Should investment in the form of high speed rail come to pass, the train would look even better. Right now, I can't think of a time where a LD train such as the CZ would be the selected alternative over air for travel from Calif. to Chicago if business concerns were paramount. Even when I have taken that route on a business trip, I had to make sure it encompassed a weekend, to give my employer full benefit of my time. All that being said and assumed, I will still support the LD trains anytime I can, because I like them! It may not be logical, but that's the way I feel about it.
posted ![[Smile]](smile.gif)