Railroad Forums 

  • The big ax just fell. Long distance to 3x/week.

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1545991  by gokeefe
 
And as noted previously he departed in BusinessClass no less. They could have blocked off FirstClass months ahead of time for that day (or just that train, or just those seats) and they didn't.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 #1545996  by SouthernRailway
 
David Benton wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:49 am Seems like there's a Trump version of the truth going on here. Or maybe short memories.
Obama / Biden started billions of $$ of rail spending, curtailed by lack of really shovel ready projects, then Republican success in the 2010 mid terms , and some key ( to the rail projects)governor elections.

https://qz.com/1761495/this-is-why-the- ... ed-trains/
If I recall correctly, the Federal government during the 2008 recession authorized a few billion dollars to be spent on rail projects. The funds were to be spent by state departments of transportation, in various states around the US (many of which were swing states). The states that were controlled by Republicans predictably refused to spend the money on rail projects. Examples: Florida, Wisconsin and Ohio. Result? The US got some track upgrades in various places, resulting in "higher-speed rail" in various places (largely around Chicago). Not much else.

The alternative would have been to focus the spending on building a true HSR system and have the Federal government, or a friendly state, do it. We didn't get that. Nor did Amtrak get much of anything in the Northeast.
 #1545997  by Matt Johnson
 
SouthernRailway wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 11:35 am The alternative would have been to focus the spending on building a true HSR system and have the Federal government, or a friendly state, do it. We didn't get that. Nor did Amtrak get much of anything in the Northeast.
The 110 mph running in central Connecticut on the newly double tracked Hartford line is a direct result of the stimulus funding. Not much, but it's more than they've gotten in Illinois so far for the $2 billion spent on Chicago - St Louis "high speed rail" upgrades.
 #1545999  by SouthernRailway
 
Matt Johnson wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 11:44 am
SouthernRailway wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 11:35 am The alternative would have been to focus the spending on building a true HSR system and have the Federal government, or a friendly state, do it. We didn't get that. Nor did Amtrak get much of anything in the Northeast.
The 110 mph running in central Connecticut on the newly double tracked Hartford line is a direct result of the stimulus funding. Not much, but it's more than they've gotten in Illinois so far for the $2 billion spent on Chicago - St Louis "high speed rail" upgrades.
Fair (and good) point; noted.

It's really unfortunate:

* Either we get an administration that tries to destroy Amtrak, and Amtrak limps along.

* Or we get an administration that wants to spend money on Amtrak, but does it in such a moronic way (sprinkling money on swing states controlled by Republicans who oppose rail spending) that Amtrak limps along.

Surely someone could have done a cost-benefit analysis of all projects available to be funded in 2008/2009 and could have decided that money should be spent on ones with the biggest bang for the buck. But, no, they decided to spend money on swing states, with merit irrelevant. And let Republicans who opposed rail spending be the ones to actually disburse the funds and proceed with the projects. Brilliant. Nothing much to show for billions of dollars.
 #1546001  by Pensyfan19
 
SouthernRailway wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 12:25 pm
Matt Johnson wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 11:44 am
SouthernRailway wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 11:35 am The alternative would have been to focus the spending on building a true HSR system and have the Federal government, or a friendly state, do it. We didn't get that. Nor did Amtrak get much of anything in the Northeast.
The 110 mph running in central Connecticut on the newly double tracked Hartford line is a direct result of the stimulus funding. Not much, but it's more than they've gotten in Illinois so far for the $2 billion spent on Chicago - St Louis "high speed rail" upgrades.
Fair (and good) point; noted.

It's really unfortunate:

* Either we get an administration that tries to destroy Amtrak, and Amtrak limps along.

* Or we get an administration that wants to spend money on Amtrak, but does it in such a moronic way (sprinkling money on swing states controlled by Republicans who oppose rail spending) that Amtrak limps along.

Surely someone could have done a cost-benefit analysis of all projects available to be funded in 2008/2009 and could have decided that money should be spent on ones with the biggest bang for the buck. But, no, they decided to spend money on swing states, with merit irrelevant. And let Republicans who opposed rail spending be the ones to actually disburse the funds and proceed with the projects. Brilliant. Nothing much to show for billions of dollars.
(Dare I say this, please don't throw tomatoes at me for this post...)
I feel that with this constant debating of whether to fund Amtrak within the Federal government and the states while nothing gets done, I feel, (*gulp*) that other private corporations should take over the LDs, so this way the government wouldn't have to debate about funding them. Even more so, maybe these LDs can be ran as *affordable* luxury services, similar to the American Orient Express, and/or broken up into other regional services which can be ran by in this case the state, like the midwest state corridors and the Piedmont, or private corporations, such as brightline (not counting Iowa Pacific before you go off about what happened the last time Amtrak allowed a private service to run their trains).
 #1546010  by John_Perkowski
 
Pensyfan19 wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:25 pm(Dare I say this, please don't throw tomatoes at me for this post...)
I feel that with this constant debating of whether to fund Amtrak within the Federal government and the states while nothing gets done, I feel, (*gulp*) that other private corporations should take over the LDs, so this way the government wouldn't have to debate about funding them. Even more so, maybe these LDs can be ran as *affordable* luxury services, similar to the American Orient Express, and/or broken up into other regional services which can be ran by in this case the state, like the midwest state corridors and the Piedmont, or private corporations, such as brightline (not counting Iowa Pacific before you go off about what happened the last time Amtrak allowed a private service to run their trains).
Two words:
RPSA ‘70.

The Class I (and what few Class IIs that might have had Passenger service) railroads were relieved in STATUTE LAW of the requirement to organize, sell, and operate interstate passenger service. What you propose first requires the 218, the 51, and the 1 to repeal that portion of the Act. The probability of any Congress putting together that legislation is vanishingly small.

As for me, if I heard Union Pacific (disclaimer: Long IRA position in UNP) were to want to restart revenue passenger service (vice contracted T&E crew supporting a METRA operation), I would be the first to organize a shareholder revolt against Mr Fritz, Mr Lischer, Mr Vena and Ms Hamann. I simply cannot see a business plan which allows a re-created passenger traffic department to make a profit in anything short of 50 years. REMEMBER, THE ENTIRE PASSENGER INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE CLASS ONE ROADS IS GONE. Commissary, shops (a one off Council Bluffs shop to care for 40 executive fleet cars isn’t the same as caring for 400 cars working daily service), and yes STATIONS are all or 90% gone.
 #1546014  by SouthernRailway
 
I agree with Pennsyfan.

Canadian Pacific and Brightline both run passenger trains.

Plenty of other for-profit companies do around the world, even though in most cases they get government funding of some type.

The US is one of the few First World (are we still?) countries where the national passenger rail operator hasn’t been restructured to allow for more private-sector participation.

If UP or another railroad decided to get back in the passenger business, whether with or without government help, feel free to start a stockholder revolt. A stockholder revolt would fail because UP’s board would be protected by the “business judgment rule” and there would be some plan for profit somehow in any event.

And anyone who wants to can compare post-1971 private passenger trains in the US vs. Amtrak. I've taken the Southern Crescent and Brightline, and they're both better than Amtrak's offerings; Brightline in particular is the sleekest, most customer-friendly and wonderful mode of transportation I've ever taken. I'd guess that the others (Rio Grande Zephyr, even Iowa Pacific's Indiana train) are better.

The private sector ought to be given more of a chance.
 #1546018  by John_Perkowski
 
SouthernRailway wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 3:53 pm I agree with Pennsyfan.

Canadian Pacific and Brightline both run passenger trains.

Plenty of other for-profit companies do around the world, even though in most cases they get government funding of some type.
Well, first
BRIGHTLINE IS NOT RUNNING

So, your dog does not hunt. Even today, Amtrak is running.

Second, CP is running one-off service with its executive fleet. It is not scheduled passenger service.

Your second dog doesn’t hunt.

Finally, subsidies? So you simply want another company to take over Amtrak? That was tried earlier this Administration. No one bit

You have three dogs, none of which hunt.

Care to try again?
 #1546019  by Pensyfan19
 
John_Perkowski wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 4:29 pm
Finally, subsidies? So you simply want another company to take over Amtrak? That was tried earlier this Administration. No one bit
When was this tried earlier this administration? Do you mean within Flynn's administration? If so which company tried to take over Amtrak?
 #1546021  by SouthernRailway
 
John_Perkowski wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 4:29 pm
SouthernRailway wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 3:53 pm I agree with Pennsyfan.

Canadian Pacific and Brightline both run passenger trains.

Plenty of other for-profit companies do around the world, even though in most cases they get government funding of some type.
Well, first
BRIGHTLINE IS NOT RUNNING

So, your dog does not hunt. Even today, Amtrak is running.

Second, CP is running one-off service with its executive fleet. It is not scheduled passenger service.

Your second dog doesn’t hunt.

Finally, subsidies? So you simply want another company to take over Amtrak? That was tried earlier this Administration. No one bit

You have three dogs, none of which hunt.

Care to try again?
Canadian Pacific's passenger trains are described at royalcanadianpacific.com. It runs its own passenger trains.

Brightline, like Amtrak, is temporarily eliminating service. Yet it's still moving forward on expanding to Orlando and Las Vegas. It's moving forward.

Let's look at what other countries have done for passenger rail:

https://www.tssa.org.uk/en/whats-new/ne ... and-beyond

The US is one of the few countries that has a national rail operator, publicly-owned without private-sector operators that compete with it.

And look at what happens when government gets out of the way and lets the private sector allocate resources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staggers_Rail_Act: "According to studies by the Department of Transportation's Freight Management and Operations, railroad industry costs and prices were halved over a ten-year period, the railroads reversed their historic loss of traffic "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_d ... tion#Price: "Base ticket prices have declined steadily since deregulation.[11] The inflation adjusted 1982 constant dollar yield for airlines has fallen from 12.3 cents in 1978 to 7.9 cents in 1997.[12] Along with rising US. populations[13] and the increasing demand of work-force-mobility, these trends were some of the catalysts for dramatic expansion in passenger miles flown, increasing from 250 million passenger miles in 1978 to 750 million passenger miles in 2005."

If you let the private sector act freely, it delivers lower costs and more supply of services.

That's exactly what the US rail passenger market needs. Clearly it will require government support, but there is a role for private operators and the private sector.

Dozens of countries in Europe have ditched their state-run monopoly passenger rail operators. Even Japan has. Why is the US the laggard, stuck in 1971?
 #1546023  by SouthernRailway
 
@John_Perkowski, when you took Brightline, what did you think of it? Did you go in Smart or Select class? What did you think of the staff and the stations, too? How did you like it compared to Amtrak?

Edited to add: Canadian National also operates this: http://www.agawatrain.com/the-train/ It seems to contradict my assertion of private operators running better service at lower cost, unless ticket prices are really low or the train is nicer than it looks like online.

Also, I don't care for arguing online. One more post with big bold red letters and insults from you will put you on my permanent "ignore" list. We all can do better than that.
 #1546025  by SouthernRailway
 
Everyone, I'm very disappointed in the behavior I've seen from a participant in railroad.net today. It's too bad that people with a shared interest in something cannot discuss something in a civil manner.

I'm not interested in taking part in a community that allows the behavior that I've seen today.

I am not posting anymore. It's been great being part of this. Farewell.
 #1546027  by Gilbert B Norman
 
John_Perkowski wrote: Sun Jun 21, 2020 2:59 pm Two words:
RPSA ‘70.

The Class I (and what few Class IIs that might have had Passenger service) railroads were relieved in STATUTE LAW of the requirement to organize, sell, and operate interstate passenger service.
Colonel, allow me to clarify the captioned quote.

What the Amtrak members did was to cede their FRANCHISE to market and operate intercity (defined within the Act) passenger trains. That they were operating passenger trains was pursuant to regulatory action.

I'm willing to bet that with the continuation of LD trains now almost fifty years after A-Day, C-Suites at OMA, FTW, JAX, and ATL have wondered "why did we ever...". The Act called for any road declining to join the NRPC to operate their intercity trains for five years, or May '76, before petitioning a regulatory agency to remove them. I'll further bet the "weaks" like "my" MILW and the RI would not have had to wait those five years and, lest we not forget, during '80, regulation of railroad rates and services were "finito".

Not even sure the roads would have waited for an order of Adios drumheads to be filled.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 34