I wonder if facts like this are being taken to Congress. The Amtrak BOD seems clueless at the moment.
Railroad Forums
Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman
Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Wed Aug 05, 2020 7:52 amFor all the reason Bob Johnston notes in September TRAINS, reduction of the LD's to Tri-Weekly won't save much, if anything. But as I noted much earlier in the topic, "OPTICS".I’m sorry that you had such a bad experience with your last Auto Train trip, Mr. Norman. Why does your poor experience equate to a desire to permanently cancel LD service? I’ve never ridden a “lightly-patronized” LD, from the Crescent and Cardinal to the Builder and Chief. I have had indifferent experiences with rides and personnel (and Tadman has a perennial point with regard to boarding procedure). However, I have never been a first-class passenger on either Amtrak or an airline, let alone on a Golden Era postwar passenger train, so wouldn’t have a basis for comparison. Most of my Amtrak experiences have been the equal of my airline experiences, with poorer timekeeping compensated by more comfortable seating. Once you’re out of sleeper or business class I think you’d find a crowd that does consider Amtrak a very viable option between air and bus/driving - the luxocruise folks may be disappointed, but Congress never intended them to be Amtrak’s target audience.
What I think the "experiential" and advocacy communities are concerned about is that Tri-Weekly frequency is the stepping stone to being "rid of 'em".
...
Obviously, I'm of mind that the LD's should be gone. My January "more negatives than positives" Auto Train journey "did it" for me and Amtrak, unless I'm in the Northeast, or should I lose my Driver's License (they road test 80yo's biennially here) and wish to go to a concert in Ann Arbor (Detroit or Cleveland, whose orchestras I support, I'll just fly), I'll "think about it".
mtuandrew wrote: ↑Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:07 amMr. Stephens, it doesn't.Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Wed Aug 05, 2020 7:52 amObviously, I'm of mind that the LD's should be gone. My January "more negatives than positives" Auto Train journey "did it" for me and Amtrak...I’m sorry that you had such a bad experience with your last Auto Train trip, Mr. Norman. Why does your poor experience equate to a desire to permanently cancel LD service?
Gilbert B Norman wrote:It can be provided by busses operating on public highways.If there was ever a place where this was proven wrong it's probably Maine.
Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Wed Aug 05, 2020 1:02 pm But my "anti-LD" sentiments that I have consistently noted since joining this community during '99 are based on the needless providing of a service that was outmoded now some 60 years ago. If government sees some need to provide transportarion to the "can't drives won't fly" segment of the population choosing to reside in regions less populated, then so be it. But that provision need not interfere with operations of the Class I rail sysem to the extent they do - especially even more the case as Precision Railroading (PSR) is adopted. It can be provided by busses operating on public highways.Sadly, I agree with this.
So it's not just that "I'm done with 'em" it is the greater portion of society, and voters, are so done, or could care less.
electricron wrote: ↑Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:26 am I’ve avoided joining into this discussion until I could think and chew on it for a while.I think it might be a case of rural people take what they can get , and don't really have an avenue to complain.
It is a mix blessing. It still provides a passenger rail service to rural areas while at the same time making it possible to make more equipment available for more regional train services.
The very first response most new regional services gets is with what equipment, there is now an answer to that question now.
Most of the complaints I seen to the proposed tri-weekly service is not coming from the rural areas, but from the urban areas. Which reinforces my belief all along that the long distance services were not designed to provide services to rural customers, but to urban customers instead. Just like rural interstates, inter connecting large urban cities Is/was more important than servicing rural towns along the way. Rural and fly over cities receiving services as a coincidence, because the service has to go through them to inter connect the cities Amtrak really wants to serve.
I repeat, this development is/will be a mix blessin.
.Amtrak has released information on the measurements it will use to determine restoration of long-distance service after the service is cut to triweekly, which is currently planned for Oct. 1. The three metrics to be used are:WELL Volks, that's what they say. The windows are open and taking bets.
— Public health: .
— Future demand:
— Current performance:
If all three criteria are met for a given route, service will be restored to daily levels as early as May 2021 and no later than June 30, 2021
Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:51 am The "metrics":They need to add a fourth bullet point that has been true for every previous decrease in service, future state subsidies to increase service levels.
TRAINS Newswire
Fair Use:.Amtrak has released information on the measurements it will use to determine restoration of long-distance service after the service is cut to triweekly, which is currently planned for Oct. 1. The three metrics to be used are:WELL Volks, that's what they say. The windows are open and taking bets.
— Public health: .
— Future demand:
— Current performance:
If all three criteria are met for a given route, service will be restored to daily levels as early as May 2021 and no later than June 30, 2021
electricron wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 10:31 amThey need to add a fourth bullet point that has been true for every previous decrease in service, future state subsidies to increase service levels.For LD service? Unless you’re talking about station improvements or investment in host railroads, states aren’t giving money to Amtrak for those.