Will passengers be more attracted by price or speed?

[neroden]

Yeah, but flying is simply not an option for a lot of us. Frankly, until they get rid of the abuses of the TSA, I simply refuse.

*14%* of the population admits to being afraid of flying in polls. I don't know the percentage who are avoiding the TSA, but even if it's only 1%, it's a LOT of people. Then there are people like my fiancee, who are actually injured by flying (due to arthritis) -- another large population.

Because of all of this, Amtrak simply doesn't need to beat flying. If it can beat driving, that's enough people.

I know people who drove from New York to New Orleans *for a weekend*. Which is crazy. They did it largely because they wouldn't fly. They would have been better off on a train, but weren't really aware of the option.

P.S. Also, I just checked. Ithaca-Minneapolis? Flying is more expensive than driving OR taking the train, though it is quicker.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

But aren't there tradeoffs, ie, even though Amtrak might be limited to 79mph, and yes, in some places one can drive faster (Utah posts I-15 at 80, which means it runs closer to 90), an important point is: that one has to drive the car, but one can merely be a passenger on the train. So; maybe one can get there minutes faster by car, in theory one should be more rested by train.

Plus, depending on the distance, you have to stop to sleep while driving. On Amtrak, you can sleep while the train is still moving.

We've weighed the pros and cons of driving to ABQ instead of taking the train, since driving would actually be a lot faster if we drove straight through, but neither of us like the idea of sitting in a car for 21 hours or trading driving/sleeping shifts. It's just so much easier to take the train.

Driving: 20 hours, 41 minutes with no stops

Train: 32 hours, 30 minutes with the transfer in Chicago

Winnebago.

 

[SarahZ]

But aren't there tradeoffs, ie, even though Amtrak might be limited to 79mph, and yes, in some places one can drive faster (Utah posts I-15 at 80, which means it runs closer to 90), an important point is: that one has to drive the car, but one can merely be a passenger on the train. So; maybe one can get there minutes faster by car, in theory one should be more rested by train.

Plus, depending on the distance, you have to stop to sleep while driving. On Amtrak, you can sleep while the train is still moving.

We've weighed the pros and cons of driving to ABQ instead of taking the train, since driving would actually be a lot faster if we drove straight through, but neither of us like the idea of sitting in a car for 21 hours or trading driving/sleeping shifts. It's just so much easier to take the train.

Driving: 20 hours, 41 minutes with no stops

Train: 32 hours, 30 minutes with the transfer in Chicago

Winnebago.

We have neither the money for one nor space to store it.

Some day, though.

 

[jis]

Note that very few European lines carry the freight tonnage that many of the lines traversed by Amtrak do.

Russian lines routinely carry those levels of freight tonnage, and have frequent, on-time passenger service. The advantages of a nationalized vertically-integrated monopoly.

And might I add - adequate investment in infrastructure. The US railroads are notorious for skimping on building and maintaining their infrastructure because of financial pressures brought upon them by Wall Street.

 

[neroden]

And might I add - adequate investment in infrastructure. The US railroads are notorious for skimping on building and maintaining their infrastructure because of financial pressures brought upon them by Wall Street.

Yeah. Whereas in Russia, the railroads are considered a military necessity and get the sort of open pocketbook that the military gets here... (well, ok, that's an exaggeration, nobody gets as much money as the US military gets, but you get the idea).

 

[afigg]

Thinking a bit about the original question asked in the article "Will passengers be more attracted by price or speed?". IMO, the question should be along the lines of "Will passengers be more attracted by price, speed/faster trip time, reliability, service frequency, convenient schedule, on-board comfort, amenities or transit options at the (origin and destination) stations?".

The correct answer would be yes.

 

[me_little_me]

Driving: 20 hours, 41 minutes with no stops

Train: 32 hours, 30 minutes with the transfer in Chicago

Winnebago.

As a former owner of an RV, I know how really expensive these things are to own. Not only high gas costs but parking, tires, cleaning, cooking (she hated that - said it was no vacation for her), campground costs, storage, etc.

We bought an RV used for $30K in the '80s. Sold it 7 years later for $14K. That $16K (not counting all the actual travel costs) would have paid for a lot of hotels while driving or a lot of train trips.

 

[neroden]

I know some people whose preferred method of travel is long-distance hiking. (Not for me. Definitely not for my fiancee with *arthritis in the knees*.) The hiking lobby is actually very effective at getting funding for these very long trails, which are then used by a truly miniscule number of people.

 

[gmushial]

I know some people whose preferred method of travel is long-distance hiking. (Not for me. Definitely not for my fiancee with *arthritis in the knees*.) The hiking lobby is actually very effective at getting funding for these very long trails, which are then used by a truly miniscule number of people.

;-) ... though that miniscule number isn't that small: something like 10000 end to end hikers on PCT (over the decades), with millionish that use parts of it... with lots of the upkeep done by us weekend warriors and volunteer work. ;-) ... funded once back in the 1970's, and only getting better

 

[VentureForth]

I would never take the train for speed - over, say, 200 miles or so. Who would? What difference does 90 mph vs 79 mph make when you're seeing multi hour delays over several days of travel?

The only thing that would make Amtrak WAY more inviting would be a reliability in service (with help from the freights, of course).

 

[WoodyinNYC]

I know some people whose preferred method of travel is long-distance hiking. (Not for me. Definitely not for my fiancee with *arthritis in the knees*.) The hiking lobby is actually very effective at getting funding for these very long trails, which are then used by a truly miniscule number of people.

;-) ... though that miniscule number isn't that small: something like 10000 end to end hikers on PCT (over the decades), with millionish that use parts of it... with lots of the upkeep done by us weekend warriors and volunteer work. ;-) ... funded once back in the 1970's, and only getting better

Wonder what or where is a PCT?

 

[tricia]

I know some people whose preferred method of travel is long-distance hiking. (Not for me. Definitely not for my fiancee with *arthritis in the knees*.) The hiking lobby is actually very effective at getting funding for these very long trails, which are then used by a truly miniscule number of people.

;-) ... though that miniscule number isn't that small: something like 10000 end to end hikers on PCT (over the decades), with millionish that use parts of it... with lots of the upkeep done by us weekend warriors and volunteer work. ;-) ... funded once back in the 1970's, and only getting better

Wonder what or where is a PCT?

Pacific Crest Trail, running north to south along mountains in California, Oregon, and Washington.

 

[PRR 60]

I know some people whose preferred method of travel is long-distance hiking. (Not for me. Definitely not for my fiancee with *arthritis in the knees*.) The hiking lobby is actually very effective at getting funding for these very long trails, which are then used by a truly miniscule number of people.

;-) ... though that miniscule number isn't that small: something like 10000 end to end hikers on PCT (over the decades), with millionish that use parts of it... with lots of the upkeep done by us weekend warriors and volunteer work. ;-) ... funded once back in the 1970's, and only getting better

Wonder what or where is a PCT?

Pacific Crest Trail

 

[Paulus]

I know some people whose preferred method of travel is long-distance hiking. (Not for me. Definitely not for my fiancee with *arthritis in the knees*.) The hiking lobby is actually very effective at getting funding for these very long trails, which are then used by a truly miniscule number of people.

;-) ... though that miniscule number isn't that small: something like 10000 end to end hikers on PCT (over the decades), with millionish that use parts of it... with lots of the upkeep done by us weekend warriors and volunteer work. ;-) ... funded once back in the 1970's, and only getting better

Wonder what or where is a PCT?

15 seconds with Google says:

The Pacific Crest Trail (commonly abbreviated as the PCT, and occasionally designated as the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail) is a long-distance hiking and equestrian trail closely aligned with the highest portion of the Sierra Nevada and Cascade mountain ranges, which lie 100 to 150 miles (160 to 240 km) east of the U.S. Pacific coast. The trail's southern terminus is on the U.S. border with Mexico, and its northern terminus on the U.S.–Canada border on the edge of Manning Park in British Columbia, Canada; its corridor through the U.S. is in the states of California, Oregon, and Washington.

 

[tricia]

I know some people whose preferred method of travel is long-distance hiking. (Not for me. Definitely not for my fiancee with *arthritis in the knees*.) The hiking lobby is actually very effective at getting funding for these very long trails, which are then used by a truly miniscule number of people.

;-) ... though that miniscule number isn't that small: something like 10000 end to end hikers on PCT (over the decades), with millionish that use parts of it... with lots of the upkeep done by us weekend warriors and volunteer work. ;-) ... funded once back in the 1970's, and only getting better

Really large numbers of people, both tourists and locals, take shorter hikes along various long-distance trails. And for towns near a major trail, it can be a major generator of tourist $$$.

For example: Nearest town to my home is Hot Springs, NC, where the Appalachian Trail crosses a river. Both thru-hikers and day hikers are important contributors to the tourism part of our local economy.

 

[gmushial]

I know some people whose preferred method of travel is long-distance hiking. (Not for me. Definitely not for my fiancee with *arthritis in the knees*.) The hiking lobby is actually very effective at getting funding for these very long trails, which are then used by a truly miniscule number of people.

;-) ... though that miniscule number isn't that small: something like 10000 end to end hikers on PCT (over the decades), with millionish that use parts of it... with lots of the upkeep done by us weekend warriors and volunteer work. ;-) ... funded once back in the 1970's, and only getting better

Wonder what or where is a PCT?

And after spending five plus months walking it, living on it: it's part of one's person, one's psyche

 

[WoodyinNYC]

;-) ... though that miniscule number isn't that small: something like 10000 end to end hikers on PCT (over the decades), with millionish that use parts of it... with lots of the upkeep done by us weekend warriors and volunteer work. ;-) ... funded once back in the 1970's, and only getting better

Wonder what or where is a PCT?

And after spending five plus months walking it, living on it: it's part of one's person, one's psyche

I'm glad that it is part of your person and psyche.

But to me, PTC is jargon. And if a writer is not willing to explain

things to his reader, I'm one reader who will not do that lazy or

indifferent writer's job.

You were doing D.A.R.K.

D.A.R.K. is insider term used by my former editor at Time-Life.

Do you want to google it's meaning?

D.on't

A.ssume

R.eader

K.nows.

 

[gmushial]

;-) ... though that miniscule number isn't that small: something like 10000 end to end hikers on PCT (over the decades), with millionish that use parts of it... with lots of the upkeep done by us weekend warriors and volunteer work. ;-) ... funded once back in the 1970's, and only getting better

Wonder what or where is a PCT?

And after spending five plus months walking it, living on it: it's part of one's person, one's psyche

I'm glad that it is part of your person and psyche.

But to me, PTC is jargon. And if a writer is not willing to explain

things to his reader, I'm one reader who will not do that lazy or

indifferent writer's job.

You were doing D.A.R.K.

D.A.R.K. is insider term used by my former editor at Time-Life.

Do you want to google it's meaning?

D.on't

A.ssume

R.eader

K.nows.

Suspect it's less part of the local lexicon in NYC than here on the west coast... but then again, maybe a different point of view or set of expectations: there are many here that are hugely knowledgeable w/re Amtrak and the train culture and routinely use jargon that I have to google, eg, double spot, transdorm, consist, hep, etc, but find doing such part of the magic of the forum, ie, an opportunity to learn, to stretch the brain in new directions.

 

[Dan O]

My understanding re the Pacific Crest Trail was that there was some of the trail already in place before it was started. So some of the work was joining trails together that already had existed. So not quite like building a 2500 mile trail from scratch.

Dan

PS I have been on it in a few small sections.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Driving: 20 hours, 41 minutes with no stops

Train: 32 hours, 30 minutes with the transfer in Chicago

Winnebago.

As a former owner of an RV, I know how really expensive these things are to own. Not only high gas costs but parking, tires, cleaning, cooking (she hated that - said it was no vacation for her), campground costs, storage, etc.
We bought an RV used for $30K in the '80s. Sold it 7 years later for $14K. That $16K (not counting all the actual travel costs) would have paid for a lot of hotels while driving or a lot of train trips.

I was essentially joking. The only reason to own an RV is an intent to travel very extensively. Actually when I was doing transient markets I was seriously thinking if buying a "toterhome" which is a type of semi truck with a full RV instead of a sleeper. It starts to make sense when you spend six days a week in hotels and the seventh at your moms and you are sick of the two hour round trip to your moms.

 

[gmushial]

My understanding re the Pacific Crest Trail was that there was some of the trail already in place before it was started. So some of the work was joining trails together that already had existed. So not quite like building a 2500 mile trail from scratch.

Dan

PS I have been on it in a few small sections.

Absolutely correct. ... though some of the construction was an intellectual construction, ie, beginning to look at that collection of smaller sections as a larger entity.

 

[Barciur]

Is it safe to assume that AMTRAK will never be able to be reliable because of the tracks being owned by freights, or is it possible to circumvent that somehow?

 

[gmushial]

Is it safe to assume that AMTRAK will never be able to be reliable because of the tracks being owned by freights, or is it possible to circumvent that somehow?

Clearly, if Amtrak were to become so profitable that they were able to buy their own set of tracks, then such would no longer be a problem... but the likelihood of that is about the same as the proverbial snowball's... but one does have to ask/wonder: if there weren't some smaller/shorter sections of track that if they owned, that such wouldn't help significantly? ... from The Art of War one of the tenets is: that the enemy isn't attacking everywhere all the time, ie, generally 90% of one's problems are in 10% of the area... one wonders what additional, exclusive use rail would improved OTP the most? Along the high line? What about on the CZ?

 

[neroden]

Is it safe to assume that AMTRAK will never be able to be reliable because of the tracks being owned by freights, or is it possible to circumvent that somehow?

Amtrak acquired most the Northeast Corridor (Boston-DC), the Springfield Branch (Springfield-New Haven CT), and the Keystone from Pennsylvania to Harrisburg during the formation of Conrail. Metro-North acquired the lower part of the Hudson Line and part of the NEC shortly before the formation of Conrail. The state of Massachusetts acquired its part of the NEC shortly before the formation of Conrail; acquired nearly all the lines of the Boston & Maine railroad during its bankruptcy; acquired many additional lines of the New Haven railroad over the years; and has purchased many additional lines from CSX and PanAm just in the last few years, including Worcester-Boston. Massachusetts is currently negotiating to purchase Springfield MA to just short of the Vermont border. Vermont acquired a number of lines from bankrupt railroads. Amtrak acquired the "Post Road branch" near Albany NY when Conrail stopped using it, and acquired the Niagara Falls Bridge tracks and approach tracks quite recently when CN & CSX stopped using them. NY leased Poughkeepsie-Schenectady just a couple of years ago. Amtrak acquired the Porter-Kalamazoo part of the Michigan Line from Conrail; the state acquired the Kalamazoo-Dearborn part from NS quite recently. NCTD purchased the southern half of the Surf Line from Southern Pacific, while Metrolink's member agencies purchased the northern half (as well as most of the other lines in the LA area). LA Metro purchased LA Union Station from Catellus Development. Amtrak acquired New Orleans Union Terminal at some point. Amtrak got partial interests in DC Union Station and Chicago Union Station (and its approach tracks) from the Penn Central bankruptcy, and then bought out the minority interests (years later). North Carolina noticed that they already owned nearly the entire line from Raleigh to Charlotte and took action to reclaim their rights. Metra purchased the line from Chicago most of the way to Milwaukee from another bankrupt railroad a while back. TriRail purchased Amtrak's Miami-area trackage from CSX, and SunRail purchased its Orlando-area trackage.

You ask whether there is hope for Amtrak to be running on tracks which are not controlled by freight operators. I think this catalogue is a pretty clear indication that there is a lot of hope for that.

If you want a grander and more dramatic example of purchases, look at what GO Transit has been doing in the Toronto area. They initially owned *none* of their tracks; now they own nearly all of them. The exceptions are short segments of very heavy freight corridors where they plan to their own parallel tracks which they will own. (Amtrak, if it ever gets the funding, will probably do this from Chicago to Porter, Indiana.)

 

[neroden]

one wonders what additional, exclusive use rail would improved OTP the most?

(1) Chicago-Porter Indiana. This cleans up most of the sources of delay on the Michigan services and benefits the CL and LSL very substantially as well. It could also be leveraged to benefit the Cardinal. This is the single most valuable segment possible.(2) Empire Corridor West. CSX consistently maintains track poorly here; benefits Empire Corridor trains, Maple Leaf, LSL, CL.

(3) DC Union Station through Alexandria (well, through the junctions south of Alexandria); well-dispatched now, but would still benefit humungous numbers of trains.

(4) LA Union Station - Fullerton. Effectively, this is getting built, since the area's being quad-tracked IIRC.

(5) Glenview-Milwaukee. There's no reason for the Hiawathas to be dispatched by CP.

(6) Albany NY-Saratoga Springs-Vermont -- this short section of CP-dispatched track causes major delays to the Adirondack and Ethan Allen Express.

(7) Albany NY (end of Post Road branch) - Springfield MA - Worcester MA... not super useful now, but pretty soon it's going to be a glaring gap of "freight ownership" in a passenger-operator-controlled area, especially if my earlier-listed suggestions are taken up.

(8) The Illini-Saluki line. It's dead straight and should be high-speed but for being controlled by CN.

one wonders what additional, exclusive use rail would improved OTP the most? Along the high line? What about on the CZ?

The greatest benefit to OTP comes from exclusive use rail on routes shared by several passenger trains (for fairly obvious reasons). The Capitol Corridor and the Chicago-Aurora "racetrack" are both quite well-dispatched and well-maintained, so I don't see much benefit for the CZ from exclusive tracks in either of those areas. I suppose it might benefit from running on Denver or Salt Lake City commuter tracks rather than the freight tracks, but the commuter systems were not designed to facilitate that (particularly in Denver).

Along the Empire Builder, there are really no places north of Milwaukee where exclusive use rail would be helpful (unless something like the Madison route were built). The route is largely single-tracked, and honestly double-tracking will make a huge difference.