I
Isaac Grove
Guest
Hi,
I haven't taken the liberties of registering as of yet, so look out for me as Isaacg. I'm actually from the Tampa Bay Area, which is a pretty large area. I'm very involved locally, especially when it comes to Amtrak, Tranport, etc. I've heard many people mention Amtrak, along with the words "reform". I think it would be a good idea for Amtrak to reform, but it has to reform slowly, as rapid decisions could cause damage to the reformation of Amtrak. I think that the British Rail scenario is what the US is going through at the moment. Way back when, the "Big Four" comprising of LNER, GWR, LMS, and Southern Rlys were about ready to file bankruptcy, they merged. After all the rail services merged, the national government felt it had the duty to take on the railways, nursing them back to health for re-launching into privitisation. Around the 1940s, dieselisation had spread throught Britain, and the railways became more efficient again. Jumping another two decades, in the 1960s, there was a need for nationalisation and bringing on a more corporate service, rebranding themselves as the British Rail, or known as BR. The success of nationalisation brought the demand for rail, what with the motorways filled to the gills and the less need for air travel, people looked for the train. The greatest success of the BR Corporate years was the introduction of the HST, or otherwise known as HST. They took on a uniformed appearance, and they were the workhorse of BR's fleet. After a more conservative government jumped in with the election of PM Thatcher, there was less support for the railways from the government, respectivly. They believed that the service funding should be up to the counties/shires. Then sprung up the birth of sectorisation. The British Rail was categorized into several groups: Intercity, Regional Railways, Railfreight, Network Southeast, ScotRail, and TransPennine. Into the 90s, a labour government moved in, and they decided that the railways were healthy enough to go back to private enterprise, and were launched into privatisation with the births of GNER, Virgin, Great Western Trains, Anglia Railways, etc. Since then, every 5/10/20 years, each company gets back into the nomination process and is determined by the people and the government whether or not they keep the bid for service on that particular route/region. I think its a great idea for the United States to adopt. I do realise that we are a bigger nation, and all, but I don't think its much of an excuse really, to be honest. Amtrak should nationalise, then split up into a National, Regional, State-wide service, then move into privatisation safely and without too many scars and scratches.
Give your input on how Amtrak should reform/ manage/ operate/ and serve the consumer. Try not to flame the thread if possible, we all have our differences
I haven't taken the liberties of registering as of yet, so look out for me as Isaacg. I'm actually from the Tampa Bay Area, which is a pretty large area. I'm very involved locally, especially when it comes to Amtrak, Tranport, etc. I've heard many people mention Amtrak, along with the words "reform". I think it would be a good idea for Amtrak to reform, but it has to reform slowly, as rapid decisions could cause damage to the reformation of Amtrak. I think that the British Rail scenario is what the US is going through at the moment. Way back when, the "Big Four" comprising of LNER, GWR, LMS, and Southern Rlys were about ready to file bankruptcy, they merged. After all the rail services merged, the national government felt it had the duty to take on the railways, nursing them back to health for re-launching into privitisation. Around the 1940s, dieselisation had spread throught Britain, and the railways became more efficient again. Jumping another two decades, in the 1960s, there was a need for nationalisation and bringing on a more corporate service, rebranding themselves as the British Rail, or known as BR. The success of nationalisation brought the demand for rail, what with the motorways filled to the gills and the less need for air travel, people looked for the train. The greatest success of the BR Corporate years was the introduction of the HST, or otherwise known as HST. They took on a uniformed appearance, and they were the workhorse of BR's fleet. After a more conservative government jumped in with the election of PM Thatcher, there was less support for the railways from the government, respectivly. They believed that the service funding should be up to the counties/shires. Then sprung up the birth of sectorisation. The British Rail was categorized into several groups: Intercity, Regional Railways, Railfreight, Network Southeast, ScotRail, and TransPennine. Into the 90s, a labour government moved in, and they decided that the railways were healthy enough to go back to private enterprise, and were launched into privatisation with the births of GNER, Virgin, Great Western Trains, Anglia Railways, etc. Since then, every 5/10/20 years, each company gets back into the nomination process and is determined by the people and the government whether or not they keep the bid for service on that particular route/region. I think its a great idea for the United States to adopt. I do realise that we are a bigger nation, and all, but I don't think its much of an excuse really, to be honest. Amtrak should nationalise, then split up into a National, Regional, State-wide service, then move into privatisation safely and without too many scars and scratches.
Give your input on how Amtrak should reform/ manage/ operate/ and serve the consumer. Try not to flame the thread if possible, we all have our differences