Amtrak stations

During the post-WWII era, did private railroads keep their smaller stations as decent as airports generally are? If so, when did smaller train stations fall into decline?

If you compare non-major Amtrak stations to airports, the Amtrak stations often are at least a bit dodgy, particularly compared to local airports. For example, compare Amtrak stations in Charlotte and Greenville, SC with those cities’ airports (CLT is overcrowded, but it’s not unsafe or run-down).

Have any analyses been done, indicating how much revenue Amtrak misses because its stations can be dodgy?

I can’t imagine recommending that some relatives and coworkers who almost always travel first class and who have memberships to multiple airport lounges take Amtrak from, say, Charlotte, instead of flying.

Well, prior to Amtrak , the individual railroads owned and maintained small depots. Usually most airports are owned and operated by public agencies with little or no regard for profit .

I have been in commercial airports that make Greyhound bus stations that receive only a daily service feel upscale.

With few exceptions in the USA, airports are in a completely different market position and capitalized differently than Amtrak stations are (which really makes me think the answer is no to your question). There are two things about airports: hubs compete against each other, and they are typically owned by the city or cities they serve and are treated as "gateways" into the city.

Concerning hubs, I'll pick on CLT, DFW, and ORD by way of example (all are American Airlines hubs). When flying from Washington DC to Sacramento CA, I have many options (American, Delta, United, and others). There may be a direct flight that meets my needs, but let's assume not, and let's assume I pick American Airlines, and since usually single connection flight routes tend to cost about the same, let's assume I'm not forced to use whichever route is cheapest. This means I now have the choice of flying via CLT, DFW, or ORD--those three airports are competing to be my preferred layover point (and they know it). This competition means that these airports are trying to make themselves destinations in their own right (this is arguably more true of the large international terminals with competing services to Europe and the Middle East).

Conversely, with a couple of exceptions, Amtrak does not offer multiple comparable routings via multiple layover stations between any two destinations, which means stations don't compete with each other. To pick on that same Washington to Sacramento trip, I really have two trains from Washington (depending on the day of the week) to Chicago, and one train from Chicago to Sacramento unless I want to add days to my trip (and all but one route through the same station in Chicago).

To compound the station problem, for the most part, cities don't own their train stations, and therefor really don't get to make them "gateways" into the city, or destinations in their own right, and when they do own the stations, they tend to treat them as utilities instead of destinations.

I forgot to mention: some airports are profit centers for their owners (especially in Europe), and most large US airports are required to be self-sustaining (at least according to a quick Google search). Those airports in the USA that are subsidized as "Essential Air Service" can be as dingy and unappealing as any Amtrak station since they can only make essential investments.

Douglasphil wrote:Usually most airports are owned and operated by public agencies with little or no regard for profit .

Nearly every commercial air service airport around me (Pacific Northwest) is self-funded, meaning it is supported by airline and concessionaire rents, landing fees, Passenger Facility Charges, etc. Even smaller general aviation airports get very little taxpayer subsidy, often for things like firefighting (which isn't exclusive to the airport).

Every single "Amtrak" station, on the other hand, receives copious amounts of subsidy at various levels, from the State that paid for the capital expensive of the multi-million dollar renovation back to its former glory, to the continual rebuild of the parking lot every five years, the landscaping and the shiny new clock tower that nobody looks at, to the city (which technically is usually the owner of the depot) that pays for maintenance since it doesn't charge Amtrak anywhere close to the actual operating cost of the depot, much less one penny in Passenger Facility Charges for the riders who use the station.

To compound the station problem, for the most part, cities don't own their train stations, and therefor really don't get to make them "gateways" into the city, or destinations in their own right, and when they do own the stations, they tend to treat them as utilities instead of destinations.

You ought to come out to Oregon and Washington. Nearly every single station is owned by the city, a couple are owned by the State, and a very small few (i.e. Wishram, Washington) are owned by BNSF (Wishram's "station" consists of one single room at the far end of the building used by its train and section crews.) Portland Union Station? Owned by the City of Portland's Bureau of Development Services. And as much as Portland lots to make Union Station a "gateway" down to the historical HVAC system and seating arrangement, sadly when you walk out the station the Bureau of Development Services gives way to the Bureau of Transportation and the Joint Office of Homeless Services, whose missions are 180 degrees polar opposite that of catering to wealthy sleeping car passengers and their plush Metropolitan Lounge (courtesy of the City of Portland).

RandallW wrote: ↑Mon Dec 26, 2022 2:00 pm To compound the station problem, for the most part, cities don't own their train stations, and therefor really don't get to make them "gateways" into the city, or destinations in their own right, and when they do own the stations, they tend to treat them as utilities instead of destinations.

I'm not so sure that's true. There are some large stations that Amtrak owns and operates, but the remainder seem to be run by the respective cities or a regional transportation authority. St. Paul's station stands out as a destination

The entirety of the Metra system is municipality owned stations aside from the four downtown terminals (Millenium, Union, LaSalle and Olgilvie), and for the most part, they're good reflections of the economic shape of the communities they serve... Most are a good reflection, and a few are basket cases. I've seen the same elsewhere west of the Mississippi, particularly on the Metrolink, Coaster, Roadrunner, TRE and Sounder systems.

Salt Lake's depot stands out for different reasons... despite a new transportation hub, Amtrak is apparently still using an AmShack.