Amtrak moving forward to stop all, most LDT

shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
The problem is some people will use "innovation" et all assorted/associated buzzwords to justify either killing long distance service or making Amtrak the contract operator of a glorified commuter service. Amtrak needs more money and money for capital improvements, but it needs to be seen holistically rather than 3 market segments fighting each other for relevance. Corridor service is needed to drive up ridership and interest that will feed into long distance trains. Along with the LDs having other options like a budget sleeper and potentially regional coach for a discounted fare on shorter trips or other such services. 

Amtrak advocacy comes off as "protect LDs and the NEC and to hell with the rest of them!" to Southerners so their politicians have no qualms about cutting Amtrak. This could easily be alleviated if part of the Silver Service got corridor service from DC to Atlanta (yes I know the Silver Service trains don't go there) would eventually get enough ridership if regional trains hooked into Atlanta and connected with the Piedmont. Another politically motivated, but useful "Corridor" would be to have a Heartland Corridor run from Kansas City to Houston. It would serve the same purpose of getting increase public buy in and therefore less pressure to cut Amtrak and eventually pressure to expand it. 

As for subsidies, all forms of transportation are subsidized from us the tax payers. The railroads just get the least amount compared to airlines and roads. The capital expenditures for major airports is more than twice what Amtrak gets to operate a year. Highways get billions which supports bus and shipping companies that directly compete with Amtrak and the railroads. Our gas taxes barely cover half the cost of road expansion, let alone expansion. Hell in California we are spending an extra $5 billion to keep our roads in a state of tolerable deficiency. $165 billion got spent on highways in 2014, gas tax revenues covered about half of that. Amtrak's farebox recovery is over 90%. 
 
bretton88 said:
Maglev said:
This map was posted on Facebook:
/monthly_2019_02/53423770_10156191949377916_2183567369060745216_n.jpg.4028dfb1fb5c3d01f0f52843a7b086b3.jpg
Click to expand...
I've seen this float around. I wonder about it's validity. No OKC to Wichita (one that's probably the closest to being able to start)? SLC to Boise? It seems to be a good overview of what Amtrak is aiming for, but doesn't seem to be entirely accurate.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that fairly realistic objectives and distant pipe dreams have been bundled together, to the detriment of credibility.

Also, non Amtrak operations or planned operations such as Brightline in Florida and X-train Vegas and even Texas Central, are all being treated as if they were somehow Amtrak operations.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maglev said:
This map was posted on Facebook:

View attachment 12686
Click to expand...
Ok, now I've seen the mythical map ;-)

The only "super shocker" is wanting to do a corridor through southern Iowa instead of via Des Moines and the Quad Cities (since that's basically passing up a midsized city to serve a rural area).

My basic read is that if this were in addition to retaining the existing LD network (more or less), I'd be fine with it.  But that's a major if.

Edit: Also, I think they're gonna get pushback in FL.  If you notice, the Miami-Orlando line on that map is the existing Star/Meteor line, not Brightline (which runs up the coast and then turns inland).  That aspect, at least, will probably get pushback from the state as well as Brightline (I think there would be a lot of pressure to simply throw money at Brightline in exchange for adding some limited-frequency stops).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cirdan said:
Also, non Amtrak operations or planned operations such as Brightline in Florida and X-train Vegas and even Texas Central, are all being treated as if they were somehow Amtrak operations.
Click to expand...
I don't believe Brightline in Florida appears in that map at all, so it is being treated more like nonexistent, than as an Amtrak or any other operation. What appears in the map is the CSX line, and presumably some corridor service on it. How it will compete meaningfully with Brightline, and more interestingly how they will manage to get 40% farebox recover running two or three corridor trains, below which Florida won't fund anything (not clear they will fund even above that, but that number has been mentioned in discussions). So as far as Florida goes, this is like a fantasy of a fantasy at present.

I agree with what Anderson says in the quote below. That is exactly my position too, and it is not clear that CEO Anderson rules it out either, specially after Congress carries out brain surgery on him. :lol:

Anderson said:
My basic read is that if this were in addition to retaining the existing LD network (more or less), I'd be fine with it.  But that's a major if.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Building off of that, I could see the state supporting a Jacksonville-Tampa train (since Brightline isn't going to be set up for that set of markets anytime soon) if the cost recovery numbers look right.

Of course, there also seem to be a few "strategic holes" in the map.  OKC-Wichita comes to mind, as does Charlotte-Charlottesville (which VA and NC have expressed at least some interest in building up) as well as (I think) Nashville-Chattanooga (I don't recall if there's an intact route there).  Of course, at that point there's a funny string of city pairs as well (Roanoke-Knoxville-Nashville-Memphis-Little Rock) that all seem to have a generalize threat of creating a proposal for an interconnected system.

Finally (well, for now) it would be very interesting to see how they see that segment in southern Ontario playing out...
 
cirdan said:
It seems to me that fairly realistic objectives and distant pipe dreams have been bundled together, to the detriment of credibility.

Also, non Amtrak operations or planned operations such as Brightline in Florida and X-train Vegas and even Texas Central, are all being treated as if they were somehow Amtrak operations.
Click to expand...
All of the routes shown on that map are in some sort of planning/lobbying. Even when Texas Central gets up and running, there will still be demand for local service that it won't be providing. Also, Brightline isn't on that map. It was only a matter of time before someone put all of the potential lines on a map and started circulating it. 
 
If you think Anderson will get a free ride for any of his stupid grand plans, think again.

Here is a letter he received from Congress in the recent past...

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/7c8e6b_eee64e5f666340a986eb501785146e9f.pdf

We will presumably get to see th response soon after March 8.

The sad thing is that a few reasonably good ideas have gotten entangled with this hot mess of Anderson's creation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I read the entire text of that letter directed to Anderson.  It really says it all. To destroy the national Amtrak network , in numerous cases will eliminate the only practical form of transportation that residents in hundreds of small towns and cities across the country rely upon. . Many of these locations have little to no access to airports that even have minimal airline services. In some cases accessing  even regional airports would represent a slow drive hundreds of miles on back roads. On our Western route trains we have encountered travelers who use Amtrak for exactly this very reason.

When Anderson came up with the bright idea to put a bus bridge from Albuquerque to Dodge city. The  Senate passed a funding bill amendment 92-6 to keep the SWC running. Point is that there is strong bipartisan support for Amtrak in the House and Senate. The House and Senate run the show as Anderson will soon find out.  IMO, no politician  in Washington believes that its good policy to cut Amtrak to pieces. That would be political suicide and while we are at it lets thank Joe Boardman for speaking out.
 
Where I see the potential advantage of hiring airline exceutives into Amtrak roles is that they know the airline industry from the inside, and know precisely where the soft spots in the fattened underbelly of the airline industry are and can exploit those to the advantage of Amtrak in those corridors where Amtrak has a fighting chance of taking market share off airlines. I think that is the NEC more than anything else. 

I'd rather anderson started his tinlkering there, rather than on the LD and on regional corridors.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cirdan said:
Where I see the potential advantage of hiring airline exceutives into Amtrak roles is that they know the airline industry from the inside, and know precisely where the soft spots in the fattened underbelly of the airline industry are and can exploit those to the advantage of Amtrak in those corridors where Amtrak has a fighting chance of taking market share off airlines. I think that is the NEC more than anything else. 

I'd rather anderson started his tinlkering there, rather than on the LD and on regional corridors.
Click to expand...
I disagree, getting the money to start a new major corridor would be a a better for experimentation rather than start with the NEC. People on the NEC are going to be more picky with any changes than would an area without an existing major corridor. Yes it would cost more money to get going, but it would fulfill Anderson's goal of expanding corridor service and making Amtrak more politically entrenched in the minds of the public. If they were to get a Southeast Corridor going, useful corridor service would be expanded to 4 states that presently have either no corridor service or sparse corridor service that makes few connections out of state. A Heartland Flyer Corridor would bring service to 3 states, including the second biggest state in the country. And since people there would not be used to Amtrak, they would be a little more forgiving of policy or schedule changes. People in the Northeast know they have the busiest and most notable Amtrak route and the Congressional representation to make a stink over anything Amtrak were to try to change. 
 
cirdan said:
Also, non Amtrak operations or planned operations such as Brightline in Florida and X-train Vegas and even Texas Central, are all being treated as if they were somehow Amtrak operations.
Click to expand...
To be fair, it shows current and "potential" corridors.  They've never made a real effort to Vegas or to connect Houston to Dallas directly.  Seeing as they are being actively engineered (well, at least Houston to Dallas) it's probably really just on Amtrak's "wish list" - hoping they'll take over what someone else builds. 

The route they show from Miami to Orlando is the current routing, and it doesn't appear as if they are taking credit for Brightline's effort.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sttom said:
I disagree, getting the money to start a new major corridor would be a a better for experimentation rather than start with the NEC. People on the NEC are going to be more picky with any changes than would an area without an existing major corridor. Yes it would cost more money to get going, but it would fulfill Anderson's goal of expanding corridor service and making Amtrak more politically entrenched in the minds of the public. If they were to get a Southeast Corridor going, useful corridor service would be expanded to 4 states that presently have either no corridor service or sparse corridor service that makes few connections out of state. A Heartland Flyer Corridor would bring service to 3 states, including the second biggest state in the country. And since people there would not be used to Amtrak, they would be a little more forgiving of policy or schedule changes. People in the Northeast know they have the busiest and most notable Amtrak route and the Congressional representation to make a stink over anything Amtrak were to try to change. 
Click to expand...
So far, Brightline have been making a very spirited effort at how you can build a corridor service. I think it should be sufficiently clear that in principle, and possibly given sufficient state support, this sort of thing can be made to work in any comparable corridor (assuming that not every corridor can get an unsupported service on the back of a real estate investment as in FL, which is why the state needs to finance it in a more generic situation).

The present Heartland Flyer is a totally diferent beast, just a single daily train, pretty much useless for commuting, and pretty much dependent on state support.  To transform it into something like Brightline would require a lot of money, and it is unlikely that anybody is going to step up with that money. The best they can hope for is that somebody says, what is the cheapest minimal service you can knock together and we'll give you some money towards that.

Not even California, with its clearly rail-friendly policies has got anywhere near close to getting something like Brightline. So i don't really see how much less rail frienldy states will be falling over one another to give Anderson money. 

If that was the case, these corridors would be happening already. It's not as if Anderson can do something that his predecessors could not.

The NEC is just about the only place where money can be made available and that has received several very large investments over the last years (new Acela trains coming soon, new locomotives) so if Anderson can't pull off some magic there, he can't do it in a place with much more adverse conditions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cirdan said:
The present Heartland Flyer is a totally diferent beast, just a single daily train, pretty much useless for commuting, and pretty much dependent on state support.  To transform it into something like Brightline would require a lot of money, and it is unlikely that anybody is going to step up with that money. The best they can hope for is that somebody says, what is the cheapest minimal service you can knock together and we'll give you some money towards that.

Not even California, with its clearly rail-friendly policies has got anywhere near close to getting something like Brightline. So i don't really see how much less rail frienldy states will be falling over one another to give Anderson money. 
Click to expand...
My recommendation with the Heartland Flyer would be to extend it to connect from Kansas City to Houston/San Antonio with federal, as a demonstration/pilot route of an entirely Amtrak planned route. As for experimentation, I am not sure what exactly could be done other than implementing things that are already common practice in other rail systems. As for a "Heartland" corridor, it would be long enough to have both local and express service. I am also not saying we should expect the states to pay for it. That it should be a federally funded route. Advocating for it along would change the discussion around rail in this country. 

As for Brightline, at its present form its an approximately 70 mile express line. As for why California hasn't implemented express service along any of its existing routes I would chalk down to it taking nearly a decade for new cars to even begin to be built. And in that time all 3 routes have become overcrowded at peak times and decently full off peak. Along the buses getting used as well and most of them are candidates to become rail lines. 

As for the administrative reason for not starting express service, the lines are still locally planned and local government here in California are incredibly shortsighted when it comes to transportation. Personally, I don't think the local governments should have a say in how the lines operate. The state wouldn't have to balance out the petty desires of local politicians when it comes to planning out what could become a statewide rail system. We'd have to deal with the stupidity of the legislature, but they are usually to buys doing other things. 
 
jis said:
If you think Anderson will get a free ride for any of his stupid grand plans, think again.

Here is a letter he received from Congress in the recent past...

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/7c8e6b_eee64e5f666340a986eb501785146e9f.pdf

We will presumably get to see th response soon after March 8.

The sad thing is that a few reasonably good ideas have gotten entangled with this hot mess of Anderson's creation.
Click to expand...
Oh geez.  That is the hammer being dropped.  Amtrak will probably have to restore LSL meal service among other things.
 
neroden said:
Oh geez.  That is the hammer being dropped.  Amtrak will probably have to restore LSL meal service among other things.
Click to expand...
Yeah, they really aren't being shy in that letter. Sounds like Anderson went too far, and now he has to go in the exact opposite direction.

I don't want to jinx things, but I doubt the LSL and CL are going to have boxed meals for much longer. I do hope they can hold onto some sort of a Sleeper Lounge on the LSL (so sleeper passengers still have a nice place to stretch out and take in the views), but oh, how wonderful it would be to have full meal service back. I've said it before and I'll say it again, a boxed Asian Noodle Bowl can not replace a veggie burger with Swiss cheese, tomatoes, lettuce, onions, a pickle, and kettle chips.
 
Even if Congress does say no, Amtrak still needs to have a national vision that includes regional services along with long distance services. And dare I say it, some corridors should be started using federal money. There is no reason why a lot of Southern cities lack corridor service beyond the state doesn't see a reason to fund it and no one at Amtrak advocates for funding local corridors. If creating a Southeast Corridor is successful, the local populace will eventually push their states to pay for more train service. I know that putting federal money into regional service is basically heresy to some, but Amtrak won't be able to function in the long run without more local services and there is a long list of states that want nothing to do with public transportation. Wisconsin is the biggest example of this. We could have corridor service to Minneapolis if using federal money was a possibility. There should be limits on to what extent federal money can be used in one state, but multi state corridors need to be planned and funded at the federal level as well as the state level. Amtrak needs a shake up and a national plan. 
 
Ryan said:
Amtrak works for Congress.  They do what they're told and funded to by Congress.  

If Congress says no, the answer is no. Don't like the answer?  Lobby Congress, don't expect Amtrak to step outside the box and do what they've been told not to.
Click to expand...
The thinking you exemplify is why a lot of Congress has no qualms against hurting Amtrak. Amtrak needs to expand beyond the vestiges of a by gone era. Coming up with an expansion plan that builds the system out and selling it to Congress is needed. But if that is too out of the box, then what future does Amtrak have? I am not apologizing for Anderson, I am advocating for Amtrak to get built out using federal money, Anderson just wants to reshuffle the deck from the looks of it. I don't really consider what Anderson is proposing is thinking outside the box. 
 
sttom said:
The thinking you exemplify is why a lot of Congress has no qualms against hurting Amtrak. Amtrak needs to expand beyond the vestiges of a by gone era. Coming up with an expansion plan that builds the system out and selling it to Congress is needed. But if that is too out of the box, then what future does Amtrak have? I am not apologizing for Anderson, I am advocating for Amtrak to get built out using federal money, Anderson just wants to reshuffle the deck from the looks of it. I don't really consider what Anderson is proposing is thinking outside the box. 
Click to expand...
IMHO... Congress is not hurting Amtrak and  long distance trains are not a bygone era.  Amtrak needs more corridor service, but not at the expense of the national network. 

Most of us see great potential in Amtrak’s national network I think. 

The corridors we have show how well they can work.  Michigan, Illinois, cascades, California, North Carolina... a lot to be learned by all of them.  
 
crescent-zephyr said:
IMHO... Congress is not hurting Amtrak and  long distance trains are not a bygone era.  Amtrak needs more corridor service, but not at the expense of the national network. 

Most of us see great potential in Amtrak’s national network I think. 

The corridors we have show how well they can work.  Michigan, Illinois, cascades, California, North Carolina... a lot to be learned by all of them.  
Click to expand...
Hurting, indifferent, letting die on the vine, not matter what you want to call Congress's attitude towards Amtrak it has led to a system that is in a lot of cases just limping along until a state kicks in some funds and starts planning a halfway useful route. What Amtrak needs is a national plan that builds on the foundation it has and markets that vision to Congress to get funds. That vision will largely include more corridor service because Amtrak needs to get more people on trains. Amtrak is also being faced with my generation being less likely to drive and we are looking to other forms of transportation. Bus companies are modernizing, along with new ones starting up. Amtrak needs more local services and if we wan't Amtrak to survive, it needs a plan to add regional services and advocate for the extra money to do that. Waiting around for the states to do something isn't leading to a robust system, that means there needs to be a plan at the national level. 
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts

Back
Top