Missouri Amtrak Service

Farebox recovery on the Piedmonts was 40% in Q4 2021 - only a little better than the Missouri River Runner at 35%.

If you want farebox recovery data for state supported routes the only way to find it is here: https://railroads.dot.gov/elibrary/fy21 ... al-metrics

Amtrak’s reports include state payments in passenger revenue so if they’re ahead in their reports it doesn’t require any federal subsidy from the national network account.

lordsigma12345 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 05, 2022 8:45 pm Farebox recovery on the Piedmonts was 40% in Q4 2021 - only a little better than the Missouri River Runner at 35%.

Yeah, I'm talking pre-COVID.

There is nothing preventing bus lines from providing very comfortable seats, such as 2+1 seating with long pitch. Commuter Rail in my area gives tight 3+2 seating, not much better than 2+2 bus seats, and airplanes are even worse. I'm not accepting of the "trains good, buses yucky" arguments. If trains have higher costs per passenger it has to do with factors like more costly equipment, underutilization, sometimes the cost of personnel or work rules, and not going where passengers need to go, etc.

How much are the host railroad payments for Missouri? Is there a breakdown of what Amtrak charges for state subsidized service?

BandA wrote: ↑Wed Apr 06, 2022 1:26 pm There is nothing preventing bus lines from providing very comfortable seats, such as 2+1 seating with long pitch. Commuter Rail in my area gives tight 3+2 seating, not much better than 2+2 bus seats, and airplanes are even worse. I'm not accepting of the "trains good, buses yucky" arguments. If trains have higher costs per passenger it has to do with factors like more costly equipment, underutilization, sometimes the cost of personnel or work rules, and not going where passengers need to go, etc.

How much are the host railroad payments for Missouri? Is there a breakdown of what Amtrak charges for state subsidized service?

If this was directed at my comments - I'm really more talking about intercity rail. When I say the ridership isn't identical it isn't to imply that buses are bad. It's more that I just don't think they're directly interchangeable (that your Missouri River Runner passengers are just going to accept a transition to intercity busses rather than just switching to driving themselves.) Part of the appeal of rail is its alternative to highway travel (at least to me) when you switch to a intercity bus well now I'm on the same highway I'd be driving on and potentially caught in the same traffic so what's the point. It's not to say that intercity buses don't have a place and their own base of customers (to be honest I think your "don't have a car" crowd is more likely to be on the bus as the cost is less.) They do and my only point about irrelevancy is because intercity busses already exist here. So the question here is - does the economic benefit of the Missouri River Runner justify the cost - yes or no. If the answer is no - then the trains go away. The state doesn't really need to think or talk about subsidizing busses as they will be available regardless. And most of the former Amtrak customers will switch to driving. It's like when I get bus-stituted - a bus-stitution for me means trip canceled. I don't book train tickets to ride a bus - if I wanted to ride a bus I'd buy bus tickets.

lordsigma12345 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 06, 2022 8:50 pm So the question here is - does the economic benefit of the Missouri River Runner justify the cost - yes or no. If the answer is no - then the trains go away.

The only honest way to measure this is to figure out how much tourism is generated by the "don't have a car" crowd.

Back of the napkin puts that at 18% and 11% for STL and KCI respective as a demographic market. Show me.

I don't really understand why there is so much anti-Amtrak sentiment on an Amtrak board.

River Runners fill a niche that Greyhounds don't duplicate. A quick check of Greyhound schedules between STL and KC shows trips that can last as long as over 8 hours or the quickest at just over 4 hours, however, often the shorter trips are sold out and unavailable. (Amtrak is carded at 5:40).

Aisle and seat room on most intercity buses is far smaller than on Amtrak and food service is not available. If you want to take a Greyhound to an intermediate place in MO (say STL to Jeff City) you are looking at almost 4 hours vs 2.5 on Amtrak.

Picture yourself not as a member of the middle class but perhaps as visually impaired and unable to drive; or a veteran in a wheelchair; or a religious person who doesn't drive or fly as a matter of faith; or a college student who isn't old enough to rent a car and doesn't have the money to fly; or a senior who is somewhat frail and no longer able to drive a long distance--which mode would you choose? Driving a private car is a luxury that is not available to all. For many, Amtrak is the only real option.

I support and pay for my local schools even though I do not have any school age children. Paying for public transportation is the same way. It is a government good. Having the service available improves the quality of life in Missouri.

StLouSteve wrote:I don't really understand why there is so much anti-Amtrak sentiment on an Amtrak board.

I'm pro-Amtrak but more pro-responsible spending, and this isn't responsible use of limited resources e.g. locomotives, cars and crew.

What service won't have equipment if the dozens daily who use the Mule get their second train back?

I'd much rather see something added from STL to MEM, or CHI to OMA.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

StLouSteve wrote: ↑Thu Apr 07, 2022 7:28 am I don't really understand why there is so much anti-Amtrak sentiment on an Amtrak board.

I’ve travelled the Mule, and I call it that malice aforethought. The Missouri River Eagle of 1946, the genesis of the mule, did the run in 5:20. It had coaches, a parlor, and a diner.

Now look at the mule. It has DIRTY coaches, a C&O FFV 2+1 coach (that is NOT a parlor car), and a really crappy food counter. It does the trip 20 minutes slower.

Oh. The Colorado Eagle did the trip in 5 hours flat.

Neither the MoPac nor the Wabash routes support modern Missouri populations.

Witness:



In the 21st Century, do the Mules really add value to the State’s transportation needs?

John_Perkowski wrote: ↑Thu Apr 07, 2022 12:05 pm Now look at the mule. It has DIRTY coaches, a C&O FFV 2+1 coach (that is NOT a parlor car), and a really crappy food counter. It does the trip 20 minutes slower.

What? You're saying this train is currently running with a heritage coach?

An Amclub, Mr. Rohr

That was the delivered name for the Amfleet with that configuration.

I certainly understand an Amfleet cafe + business class car (not sure they're labelled 'Amclub' any more.) But what is the reference to C&O FFV?

John_Perkowski wrote: ↑Thu Apr 07, 2022 12:05 pm
I’ve travelled the Mule, and I call it that malice aforethought. The Missouri River Eagle of 1946, the genesis of the mule, did the run in 5:20. It had coaches, a parlor, and a diner.

Now look at the mule. It has DIRTY coaches, a C&O FFV 2+1 coach (that is NOT a parlor car), and a really crappy food counter. It does the trip 20 minutes slower.

Oh. The Colorado Eagle did the trip in 5 hours flat.

Neither the MoPac nor the Wabash routes support modern Missouri populations.

In the 21st Century, do the Mules really add value to the State’s transportation needs?

So, there should be no investment in the service, because the service is poor due to lack of investment (for 75 years!)?

StLouSteve wrote: ↑Thu Apr 07, 2022 7:28 am I don't really understand why there is so much anti-Amtrak sentiment on an Amtrak board.

There are other boards that are totally "pro-Amtrak" where members hold that "if it ran during 1952, it should be restored". From personal experience at one such, if you are not, they will run you off.

I personally am not "pro-Amtrak" I participate here because I think my eleven years in railroad management (not high up, but "there") can bring useful insight to the participants. Amtrak is a means of transportation that I will next use when it represents the most convenient means to get from here to there. I have taken "joyrides" in the past, but "the past is the past".

As a railroad security investor (long UNP), I want to see my investment prosper, and interference from Amtrak trains, particularly the LD varietal, do not help that cause.

Therefore, I hold the only places that Amtrak should be in business is where they provide unquestioned needed transportation; and I'm afraid that only means the Corridor. They should also be there when Localities choose to sponsor and pay for intercity services. Apparently, a locality, the State of Missouri, is questioning the continued need for a service. That is the prerogative of their Legislature and Governor, so it's a "come what may", regardless of what arguments Mr. St Louis Steve is presenting here with maturity and respect.