Amtrak vs Flying

NE2 wrote:I'm still not clear on why Amtrak fares are generally equal to or higher than air fares. I'm starting with the assumption that moving people by train is inherently more efficient, mainly due to fuel costs, than moving them by air. If this is incorrect, I'd like to know why.
I understand how Amtrak wants to charge what the market will bear - ideally such that either dropping or raising fares will reduce revenue. But, given that their fares are not significantly below air fares, Amtrak should be making a profit (due to the efficiency of trains). Yet they're not.
Is this because of so-called "hidden subsidies" for airlines? Or is there a different reason?

A couple guesses, and that's all this is, is the cost to maintain tracks & ROW for trains. Sure, there are capital costs for flying, but there's no roads in the sky that need to be handled. There's no infrastructure between here and there. Amtrak sure spends a lot of time & money on track work.

Second, is economies of scale. There are far more planes in a given day at a certain airport than there are trains. Therefore, the cost to maintain & operate stations are possibly much higher 'per train' than the equivalent airport costs 'per plane'. This does have to do potentially also with the 'hidden subsidies' you mention because the governments tend to build & maintain airports, while railroads often use their own budgets on stations.

Anyway, those are just guesses. I'd be interested if anyone had done a formal comparison with actual budget details.

nyswfan wrote:

fredct wrote:

Greg Moore wrote: To a certain extent though, my understanding is that it's not quite as simple as letting the airlines choose. I Believe so many slots at the big eastern airports are reserved by law for regional flights. The bigger boys would dearly love to have those slots, but can't get them. This is one area where I suspect forcing social policy might in the long run be the best thing.

Regional airlines perhaps, but regional flights? I'm skeptical if that's true. And no, they're not the same thing. Regional airlines do plenty of mid-distance flights at least, and long too. I've done Boston to Baltimore (a most-of-the-day train ride) and Detroit to Seattle (a multi-day train ride) on regional airlines. So its not the same thing.

Both examples are train trips longer than 5 hours. Your better off flying.

Right, that's my point... that I believe Greg's mention of "slots reserved by law for regional flights", is actually for "regional airlines", many/most of whose flights are well beyond regions.