Amtrak taken to task on Fox last night

[AmtrakBlue]

For my First Class Sleeper fee of $75, I would like priority boarding, clean, nice smelling sleeper car bathrooms, cloth table cloths(if already available) daily local/national newspaper(if available) and good service. I am not an elitist. I come from humble beginnings. EVERY sleeper passenger I talked to at meal time on my round trip last Christmas agreed they would pay it for those services.

NAVYBLUE

I got all that without having to pay an EXTRA fee when I took my LD trip in November, so I don't see a need for an EXTRA fee. Sleeping car pax are already paying for first class service.

 

[henryj]

Alan,

However, if we restrict ourselves to the operating deficit (i.e. consider the capital account separately), that $75 would cut the LD operating losses by about 7-10%, or cut overall operating losses by about 10-15%. Still not half, but definitely a noticeable dent. Moreover, if you also omit the losses in the short corridors, the overall operating losses (LD losses less NEC profits) would likely be "bumped down" by 20% or so.

Unfortunately, it would also trash my favorite sleeper trip by hiking the cost about 40%, and seriously trash a lot of other trips for folks. LAX-WAS-LAX only gets a 3.5-5% hike, yes, but a low bucket ticket on the Cap or a Silver goes up by as much as 25%. Amtrak would lose riders at that point, I suspect.

Actually raising sleeper fares would do little as they are already high. The problem is Amtrak is charging less than the Greyhound coach fare on most LD routes. Train travel is a step above buses with their dining and lounge cars and more comfortable than flying. Raising the coach fares to at least higher than the bus would generate a lot of revenue and would make most of the LD routes close to covering their basic operating costs.

 

[rrdude]

Last night on John Stossels show they spent a segment talking about amtrak. I am not sure if this was a repeat and already discussed here or not but they went into how our gov't is basically keeping Amtrak afloat. I had no idea that our limited tax dollars were being used at a very high amount to keep Amtrak going. The pointed out a route from New Orleans to LA that is a very expensive route for the gov't and has very little ridership. After seeing what our gov't is spending on Amtrak I have to feel that in it's best interest the gov't needs to back off to the degree it is and work with Amtrak to become more self sufficent and if it means reduction in service so be it.

Drinking the Kool-Aid I see.

I'd be all for "privatizing" Amtrak too, IF, (and it ain't gonna happen) the railroad TRACK and infrastructure were like the Interstate Highway system, built by YOUR tax dollars btw, and maintained by YOUR tax dollars btw, and used by you, and all the other private citizens, AND by UPS, FedX, Greyhound, Snider, Central Transport, NEMF, Megabus, BOLTBus, Mayflower Moving & Storage,..........get the idea?

TWO sides to every store, FOX good at showing only one side.

 

[rrdude]

I am unclear the problem with removing unprofitable routes and privatizing Amtrak? The gov't doesn't need to be "helping" it to the degree it is and if private business can do it better why not give it a shot?

You might want to ask our friends across the border in Mexico.

LOL LOL LOL. Damn, I truly, REALLY, spit out my coffee onto the screen when I read that. OMG, so true.

I do have to AGREE, this has been one of the BEST THREADS in some time. Ryan, take your heart medicine, calm down, there may be a bit of trolling going on.......

 

[Bob Dylan]

Note to Youngsters that weren't around on A Day in 1971! (Want a Snack from the SP Automat Car? Just pay the Attendant for Change and have some Gourmet Fast Food! :giggle: !!!) Lets ask UP and BNSF if they want to run Passenger Trains like the Lines did up until the terrible 60s when they started using every Hook or Crook they could to run off passengers and cut Routes and Trains! The poster about Mexico nailed it, Mexico "Privatized" the Railroads and except for two Tourist Lines ( Copper Canyon and the Tequila Train)the Passenger Trains went away! Same thing would happen here , or even worse the Operators would get Huge Subsidies to run the Trains AKA Corporate Welfare!

 

[E Runs]

The routes are poor because of the lack of investment in them. Spend the money and see what happens with the ridership.

[

And who's responsible for that lack of investment? Oh that's right, the Class Is! The PRIVATELY owned Class Is who treat Amtrak like a red-headed stepchild. 90% of Amrtrak's deficiencies, real or preceived, are a direct result of not owning their own tracks (aside from the NEC and a stretch in MI). This fact can't be mentioned enough.

 

[Big Iron]

The routes are poor because of the lack of investment in them. Spend the money and see what happens with the ridership.

[

And who's responsible for that lack of investment? Oh that's right, the Class Is! The PRIVATELY owned Class Is who treat Amtrak like a red-headed stepchild. 90% of Amrtrak's deficiencies, real or preceived, are a direct result of not owning their own tracks (aside from the NEC and a stretch in MI). This fact can't be mentioned enough.

http://www.inboundlogistics.com/cms/article/improving-rail-infrastructure-on-the-right-track/

Just a very quick check on the internet and came up with the link above. Anyone that reads Railway Age knows that freight railroading is a growth industry and that Class I's spend billions annualy to grow and maintain their rights of way. To say that Amtrak's routes are poor due to lack of ROW investment is mostly false. To say Amtrak is treated like a red headed step child by the class I's is likely true but that is more of a dispatching issue than infrastucture. What's obvious in the article is that the Class I's are getting their subsidies as well, from local, state and federal sources.

 

[Ryan]

The fact the the Class I's have spent all that money doesn't disprove the fact that ROW issues are a huge factor in Amtraks's poor performance. Examples:

Cardinal lateness, due to lack of sidings on the BBRR

Daily Sunset, or lack thereof

Potential SwC reroute

Flooding on the Devils Lake sub

Mudslides on BNSF track in the PacNorWest

Just off of the top of my head...

 

[amtrakwolverine]

And even though the freight railroads ares supposed to give priority over amtrak they delay amtrak to force it to miss its window so they can delay it more to the point its hours late.If the host railroads don't want to deal with amtrak why delay it. That just makes them have to deal with amtrak that much longer. Give amtrak the priority even if it's late and you can go back you running your little freight trains sooner. It's a game the hosts like the play cause they know amtrak does not have the gonads to challenge it.

 

[jmbgeg]

Last night on John Stossels show they spent a segment talking about amtrak. I am not sure if this was a repeat and already discussed here or not but they went into how our gov't is basically keeping Amtrak afloat. I had no idea that our limited tax dollars were being used at a very high amount to keep Amtrak going. The pointed out a route from New Orleans to LA that is a very expensive route for the gov't and has very little ridership. After seeing what our gov't is spending on Amtrak I have to feel that in it's best interest the gov't needs to back off to the degree it is and work with Amtrak to become more self sufficent and if it means reduction in service so be it.

I risk possibly offending some of my AU friends, but I am a big Fox News fan.

That said, their piece on Amtrak is dead wrong. My arguments are twofold:

1) Consider train travel funding the same way government does highways and public transit.

2) Give Amtrak capital funding to modernize its fleet, then make the judgement.

 

[Big Iron]

The fact the the Class I's have spent all that money doesn't disprove the fact that ROW issues are a huge factor in Amtraks's poor performance. Examples:

Cardinal lateness, due to lack of sidings on the BBRR

Daily Sunset, or lack thereof

Potential SwC reroute

Flooding on the Devils Lake sub

Mudslides on BNSF track in the PacNorWest

Just off of the top of my head...

Just off the top of your head, what percent would that be of Amtrak's entire system?

 

[NAVYBLUE]

Last night on John Stossels show they spent a segment talking about amtrak. I am not sure if this was a repeat and already discussed here or not but they went into how our gov't is basically keeping Amtrak afloat. I had no idea that our limited tax dollars were being used at a very high amount to keep Amtrak going. The pointed out a route from New Orleans to LA that is a very expensive route for the gov't and has very little ridership. After seeing what our gov't is spending on Amtrak I have to feel that in it's best interest the gov't needs to back off to the degree it is and work with Amtrak to become more self sufficent and if it means reduction in service so be it.

I risk possibly offending some of my AU friends, but I am a big Fox News fan.

That said, their piece on Amtrak is dead wrong. My arguments are twofold:

1) Consider train travel funding the same way government does highways and public transit.

2) Give Amtrak capital funding to modernize its fleet, then make the judgement.

Here is my answer form another thread that I KNOW will offend some of my AU "friends"

NAVYBLUE

Mode of passenger transport Passenger-miles

(millions) Percent

 

Highway — total 4,884,557 88.79%

Passenger vehicles, motorcycles 4,520,810 82.18%

Trucks 222,836 4.05%

Buses 162,908 2.96%

 

Air Carriers 583,689 10.61%

 

Rail — total 30,972 0.56%

Transit 16,118 0.29%

Commuter 9,473 0.17%

Intercity/Amtrak 5,381 0.10%

All other modes (e.g., ferryboats) 2,091 0.04% Source: 2010 estimates by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics

All this being said, l am going to let you in on a secret. Of the people who are on various Transportation Committees and Sub Committees, my former home state(PA) has (3) Republicans and (2) Democrats on these committees. If you think those (5) people and the other members who have heavy interstate traffic going THROUGH their state and have 2-5 Metro areas NOT served by a MARC/NEC train system but BUSES gives a rats ass about AMTRAK, you are delusional.

My former reps care about fed/state roads and buses and will throw a token bone to AMTRAK as the ACELA (Philly), CL(Pittsburgh) and Keystone/Pennsylvania came through/to Pennsylvania. It has ALWAYS been like that in Pennsylvania. State/Fed roads and bus terminals in Pennsylvania are built by UNION workers and create more Union jobs than AMTRAK does. It is the sad truth as it where. PA has always had and tried to load up Transportation with PA people.

That being said, the PA reps and the other heavy Interstate traveled states are going to do their best to stop California HSR now projected to cost twice as what was originally projected and the Las Vegas, NV to somewhere in Califirnia HSR if it involves a lot of Fed money.

Roads ALWAYS need repair and there are plenty of Union workers to do the work. It is what it is.

NAVYBLUE

 

[Big Iron]

And even though the freight railroads ares supposed to give priority over amtrak they delay amtrak to force it to miss its window so they can delay it more to the point its hours late.If the host railroads don't want to deal with amtrak why delay it. That just makes them have to deal with amtrak that much longer. Give amtrak the priority even if it's late and you can go back you running your little freight trains sooner. It's a game the hosts like the play cause they know amtrak does not have the gonads to challenge it.

http://www.aar.org/~/media/aar/Industry%20Info/AAR-Stats-2011-0617.ashx

The stats above would suggest that the freight trains aren't so little. The 2010 profits for the class I's was roughly four times the annual government funding for Amtrak. Annual revenues are roughly twenty-five times the annual funding. The way I see it, the Class I's are thinking about the billions of products they need to deliver on time versus the millions of passengers Amtrak needs to deliver on time. I would imagine they are also thinking about the competition, stockholders, growing revenue, maintaing pysical plant, etc..

I expect Amtrak understands this as well and if they did sack up and go after them (they did sue the UP) that the collective power of the class I's would overrun them and Amtrak may come away with less power than they have now.

 

[Big Iron]

The fact the the Class I's have spent all that money doesn't disprove the fact that ROW issues are a huge factor in Amtraks's poor performance. Examples:

Cardinal lateness, due to lack of sidings on the BBRR

Daily Sunset, or lack thereof

Potential SwC reroute

Flooding on the Devils Lake sub

Mudslides on BNSF track in the PacNorWest

Just off of the top of my head...

Also, you, and others, have been pressing dn4192 to produce facts and figures to document his comments, how huge a factor are ROW issues an Amtrak OTP? What routes are affected and to what extent, how much revenue is lost due to lack of class I investment in their infrastructure? How much should the class I's spend and where?

 

[Chatter163]

Roads in the place where our in our society right now is a neccessaity, Amtrak isn't. Amtrak could stop operations tomorrow and our way of ife wouldn't have any change to it. Remove or stop the upkeep of our roads where the majority of individuals travel and goods are moved, you have problems.

But obviously it was not always that way. Without massive government expenditures that favored the auto and aviation industries, beginning in the 1920s and again in the 1950s, there would be no auto or airline industries as we know them, and therefore no need for roads, highways or airports--nearly all of which are financed by the government. Private industry was, of course, the spark that created these needs, but without governmnent expenditure propping them up (to many times the tune of Amtrak's budget), just as had been the case with railroads, these industries would not exist today. Ditto the cruise shop industry, whose ports are constructed and maintained by government funds. Where is your outrage about these industries having a huge part of their infrastructure being financed by the government? Shouldn't they be made to pay their own way, or cease to exist?

Roads in the place where our in our society right now is a So you are saying Amtrak trains stop and go at each stop within 10-15 minutes?

You really don't know anything about Amtrak or trains, do you? Most trains stop only for a minute or two at most stations. A few stop 3-4 minutes at large stations. The only 15-20 minute stops are the very rare service stops, when the train is rewatered and the enginers/conductors change. But most are only momentary stops.

Private industry used to operate commuter and regional trains, too, such as the New York Subway system, the Long Island Railroad, New York and New Haven RR, etc. But over time all of these proved unprofitable and government, usually local or state, stepped in and took them over, because transportation is seen as a necessary government function. Unlike local commuter trains, Amtrak is government-subsidized, but not government run.

According to your statements, the airlines should never have been bailed out after 9-11, nor should their airports be financed by the federal government, which supplies ninety percent of the finanacing, or local (the remainder). We pay air traffic controllers to guide private flights--why shouldn't the airlines do this? Should public bus terminals expel Greyhound and the many regional bus companies? After all, these are private companies and if they cannot afford to construct and maintain their own terminals, then obviously we don't need them. And why are we running federal port operations for pleasure cruise passengers?

 

[TimePeace]

And even though the freight railroads ares supposed to give priority over amtrak they delay amtrak to force it to miss its window so they can delay it more to the point its hours late.If the host railroads don't want to deal with amtrak why delay it. That just makes them have to deal with amtrak that much longer. Give amtrak the priority even if it's late and you can go back you running your little freight trains sooner. It's a game the hosts like the play cause they know amtrak does not have the gonads to challenge it.

I agree ... but - "Little freight trains"????? Haven't seen any Amtrak trains over a mile long lately!

 

[amtrakwolverine]

And even though the freight railroads ares supposed to give priority over amtrak they delay amtrak to force it to miss its window so they can delay it more to the point its hours late.If the host railroads don't want to deal with amtrak why delay it. That just makes them have to deal with amtrak that much longer. Give amtrak the priority even if it's late and you can go back you running your little freight trains sooner. It's a game the hosts like the play cause they know amtrak does not have the gonads to challenge it.

I agree ... but - "Little freight trains"????? Haven't seen any Amtrak trains over a mile long lately!

Being sarcastic about the freight railroads as they see their freight as more important then amtrak. Freights travel slower then amtrak. Let amtrak over take it's not going to kill you to hold a freight for 3 or 4 minutes etc while amtrak takes over but instead they will hold amtrak for hours just to let 3 or 4 trains pass amtrak in the same direction. then cause amtrak missed its "window" they delay it more. That makes sense how?

 

[ParrotRob]

Your first mistake was watching Faux News.

Yea. Fox News announced yesterday that the Supreme Court overturned "Obamacare". Later, much later, they finally corrected themselves, but never apologized for the error. hboy:

"Later, much later"? Seriously? Shannon Bream reported at 10:08 that the individual mandate was struck down, based on the initial reading that it was unconstitutional under the commerce clause. One minute later - ONE MINUTE - Megyn Kelly reported (correctly) that it was upheld as a tax. If you're going to blast the networks, at least get your OWN facts straight, please.

 

[Larry H.]

It's not the gov't job to keep business afloat if private business can do it better.

You keep saying that, yet failing utterly to make a case that private industry can do it better.

As Jishnu said, what has changed since A-day that would make that a true statement?

Until you can answer that, we're just talking about a fantasyland where the private industry fairies make everything A-OK.

The real problem is not who is running rail service its that it cost so much to operate that no matter who runs it there is going to be a loss. We have seen the prices go up and up with Amtrak. Many here seem just fine with that. Our trouble is were trying to charge fares that will cover the expenses and rarely has that worked with passenger rail on a large scale. As to the political tones of this thread, I am always amazed at how people can degrade one station they disagree with but more than likely flock to the majority to are in the tank with the administration.. No matter though, better to throw stones at others.

 

[Shawn Ryu]

Your first mistake was watching Faux News.

Yea. Fox News announced yesterday that the Supreme Court overturned "Obamacare". Later, much later, they finally corrected themselves, but never apologized for the error. hboy:

Like MSNBC ever does.

 

[rusty spike]

I didn't see the segment on Fox re John Stossel but I do know that Libertarians like Stossel don't want much of anything regulated. Some Libertarians proclaim, "Let the Iranians have a nuke, legalized marijuana etc.

 

Yes, it is true Amtrak is subsidized heavily, but name one airline that doesn't operate from a government-owned, taxpayer-supported terminal flying through government supplied airspace courtesy of a the Federal Aviation Admin. Name a trucking/bus line operating on other than government, tax-supported rights-of-way, or a river barge line operating on other than a waterway created and maintained by the government tax-supported Army Corps of Engineer. Private enterprise has it's place but public infrastructure, including public transportation, will always be subsidized for the "greater good" of the people.

 

Perhaps upgrading Amtrak, like making the SSL a daily train, that does not miss the 6th largest U.S. city by 35 miles without any connecting transportation, might actually increase ridership.

 

[Ryan]

The fact the the Class I's have spent all that money doesn't disprove the fact that ROW issues are a huge factor in Amtraks's poor performance. Examples:

Cardinal lateness, due to lack of sidings on the BBRR

Daily Sunset, or lack thereof

Potential SwC reroute

Flooding on the Devils Lake sub

Mudslides on BNSF track in the PacNorWest

Just off of the top of my head...

Also, you, and others, have been pressing dn4192 to produce facts and figures to document his comments, how huge a factor are ROW issues an Amtrak OTP? What routes are affected and to what extent, how much revenue is lost due to lack of class I investment in their infrastructure? How much should the class I's spend and where?

I still don't have power 37 hours and counting), but go look at Amtrak's monthly reports, which (if I recall correctly) break down delays by train and reason for delay. All the information you seek is right there.

OK, crashing at a friends place since we don't have any power - looking at the April Monthly Performance Report. Page E-1 breaks down delay minutes by cause, in April LD trains suffered 181,000 minutes of delay time. Of that, 36,000 minutes can be laid at the feet of Amtrak. 113,000 minutes can be laid at the feet of the railroads. Page E-3 has an excellent graph demonstrates that Freight Train interference is the leading cause of Amtrak delays. The second most common cause of delay minutes are slow orders. Both of these problems can be fixed by the host railroads making investments in their ROW to clear slow orders and increase capacity to reduce congestion.

All the data is there if you care to look.

 

[johnny.menhennet]

On my JetBlue flight last night and this morning, I was flipping through channels and what comes on? John Stossel was just beginning his Amtrak segment that started this thread. I watched it, and didn't like 1 minute of it. And the guest they had on was so vague in his insults. I'm forgetting them now because I got 1 hour of good sleep, but I remember how he was just trying to make the problem sound worse than it was. And they claimed that a ticket price is something like $437 for NOLA - LA. I don't believe this would ever be a coach ticket, high bucket or not. This huge misrepresentation of facts was just kind of frustrating to watch.

 

[johnny.menhennet]

Ryan, top Google News story:

"Power could be out for days"

Sorry about that

 

[NW cannonball]

I gave up my TV 25 years ago. Turned it on again to see the totally lame coverage of "Reagan shot"

Never looked again since. All the media make their money off their advertisers - and will kiss the advertisers parts to get the ads.

In an election year -- how much money do any of the media make off the hate ads? Will any media outlet even try to be "fair" "balanced" -- not likely when the money for hate ads lets their top people make a few million a year.

Ask your local media outlet to consider one of your most important local issues. Good luck

Ryan, top Google News story:

"Power could be out for days"

Sorry about that