Amtrak to Reevaluate Long-Distance Routes

[Save Our Trains Michigan]

Amtrak's chairman on Thursday said the railroad will scrutinize all of its long-distance routes this year for efficiency and could scrap, reconfigure or add lines as it tries to prove to Congress and the Bush administration that the rail system is reforming itself.

"There's nothing, as far as I'm concerned, that's off the table," David Laney told reporters following an abbreviated Senate hearing on Amtrak's funding request for the 2007 budget year.

Amtrak operates 15 long-distance trains over 18,500 route miles in 39 states and Washington, D.C. These trains provide the only rail passenger service to 23 states, according to Amtrak statistics.

Laney said Amtrak will study every route and decide on how efficient they are.

"What we're trying to do is make it succeed, not take it apart," he said.

Story

 

[Save Our Trains Michigan]

Amtrak's chairman on Thursday said the railroad will scrutinize all of its long-distance routes this year for efficiency and could scrap, reconfigure or add lines as it tries to prove to Congress and the Bush administration that the rail system is reforming itself.
"There's nothing, as far as I'm concerned, that's off the table," David Laney told reporters following an abbreviated Senate hearing on Amtrak's funding request for the 2007 budget year.

Amtrak operates 15 long-distance trains over 18,500 route miles in 39 states and Washington, D.C. These trains provide the only rail passenger service to 23 states, according to Amtrak statistics.

Laney said Amtrak will study every route and decide on how efficient they are.

"What we're trying to do is make it succeed, not take it apart," he said.

Story

Now is the time to contact your people that you put into office and tell them not to reduce any Long Distance trains.

 

[WICT106]

Well, thanks to board members OBS & Trainboy, this site has had plenty of advance warning. I mean, we have been given plenty of advance warning from those two members. If it is decided to terminate certain routes, such as the one through my area, I would be inclined to tell my reps to terminate ALL service. If people want to spend my taxes on trains in their area, then be prepared to support trains in other parts of the nation, like "Fly-over" country.

I have some issues with these and similar statements being made by the Amtrak board. One issue is with the Route Profitability System. What happens when the system which generates the financial numbers has considerable flaws? See "The high cost of Amtrak accounting." See also this article. One can't make accurate dicisions when the management is reacting to numbers that are inaccurate or incorrect.

I also strongly suspect that the Amtrak board would have a different perspective if the corporate HQ were relocated to someplace like MSP, or Charleston, WV. It might make them change their perspective regarding long distance trains. I think the board, as well as our Elected Representatives, should take a trip or two on one of the LD trains from DC to their respective districts. It might be a real eye-opener to have to deal with the results of their budget choices, for one thing.

While I disagree with some of the assertions that URPA makes, I think that they raise salient points that Amtrak management should consider.

 

[trainflyer]

Well, thanks to board members OBS & Trainboy, this site has had plenty of advance warning. I mean, we have been given plenty of advance warning from those two members. If it is decided to terminate certain routes, such as the one through my area, I would be inclined to tell my reps to terminate ALL service. You want trains in the NE? Better make sure to offer service for those of us out in "fly-over" country.
I have some issues with these and similar statements being made by the Amtrak board. One issue is with the Route Profitability System. What happens when the system which generates the financial numbers has considerable flaws? See "The high cost of Amtrak accounting." See also this article. One can't make accurate dicisions when the management is reacting to numbers that are inaccurate or incorrect.

I also strongly suspect that the Amtrak board would have a different perspective if the corporate HQ were relocated to someplace like MSP, of Charleston, WV. It might make them change their perspective regarding long distance trains. I think the board, as well as our Elected Representatives, should take a trip or two on one of the LD trains from DC to their respective districts. It might be a real eye-opener to have to deal with the results of their budget choices, for one thing.

While I disagree with som of the assertions that URPA makes, I think that they raise salient points that Amtrak management should consider.

Many people in New England and the Northeast do in fact want a strong national network -- both corridors and long-distance trains. (Many -- 90%+ -- of us also disapprove of this "flyover" terminology, which I had never heard anyone in New York use until the term became more common because of TV).

 

[conductorchris]

I predict you'll see something that will echo some of the proposals in Warrington's unrealized plans for expansion. I do see expansion, not contraction . . . but not in big ways.

Except that two vulnerable trains are the former Boston section of the Lake Shore Limited and the Palmetto.

The following is all speculation, of course . . . but that's what makes it fun. I predict:

1. Sunset limited eastern terminal moved to Dallas, via the T&P

2. New Dallas-Houston-New Orleans-Jacksonville-Orlando train (rather than reinstating the Sunset Limited)

3. Dallas section of the Crescent

4. Split the Silver Meteor and Silver Star with Miami sections using FEC

5. California Zepher extended from Emeryville to San Jose to Los Angles

All of these just make too much sense and could probably be handled with existing equipment.

We'll see, I guess.

Christopher

 

[Ben]

Why are they only evaluating the LD routes but not any corridors? Sounds kind of fishy if you get my drift. I'm afraid they'll cut more routes than they will add. But with this plan, are they kind of "starting with a clean slate" and looking at what LD trains are possible? I wonder if there'll be any major additions, like a Chicao-Florida train, or a LA-Washington train through Dallas and Atlanta. Probably not I assume. Also when Laney said they are looking to utilize equipment more efficiently, does that mean taking cars off some trains and adding them to others or what?

 

[jccollins]

5. California Zepher extended from Emeryville to San Jose to Los Angles

Extending it from Emeryville to San Jose would make the most sense from a practical passenger standpoint since the region is just as large as the Emeryville/San Francisco base and it is only another hour and a half down the line.

The only problem is that the train is turned and serviced at the Oakland facility between the Emeryville and Oakland-Jack London Square stations. For it to continue being serviced there the train would need to deadhead one way between Oakland and San Jose in the morning and evening. This would add about 3 1/2 hours to the trains operating time each morning when it started and evening when it ends in San Jose and deadheads back.

The Zephyr's OTP is nearly as bad as the Starlate's and often arrives into Emeryville/Oakland several hours late as it is now. Sometimes the crews have to bend over backwards just to get the train turned, serviced, and to depart eastbound from Emeryville on time with the currently scheduled turnaround of 16 hours since it is often really much less time. Take away another 7 hours the train would be moving and they would have just 9 hours to turn and service it... if it arrived on time, which it rarely does.

Finally, we have to consider the big bad YouPee Railroad's restrictions on how many passenger trains Amtrak can operate over the clogged line between Oakland and San Jose. The State of California has just spent quite a bit of money expanding capacity so that more Amtrak Capitol Corridor intercity passenger trains can operate between Oakland and San Jose each day; the number of those trains operating between OKJ-SJC will be increased from 8 to 14 on August 28, 2006 when construction is complete.

If the Zephyr were to operate through to SJC it would take 4 slots (one down/one back every morning and same at night). The Capitol Corridor managing board would throw a fit and it would never be allowed to happen. They fought for the increased capacity for their busy corridor trains and would never give away those slots to one of the longhaul trains.

As much as I would personally love to see the Zephyr's western terminus be SJC instead of Emeryville, I just can't realistically see it happening due to the current time and capacity constraints on the line.

 

[Trogdor]

I predict you'll see something that will echo some of the proposals in Warrington's unrealized plans for expansion. I do see expansion, not contraction . . . but not in big ways.
Except that two vulnerable trains are the former Boston section of the Lake Shore Limited and the Palmetto.

The following is all speculation, of course . . . but that's what makes it fun. I predict:

1. Sunset limited eastern terminal moved to Dallas, via the T&P

2. New Dallas-Houston-New Orleans-Jacksonville-Orlando train (rather than reinstating the Sunset Limited)

3. Dallas section of the Crescent

4. Split the Silver Meteor and Silver Star with Miami sections using FEC

5. California Zepher extended from Emeryville to San Jose to Los Angles

All of these just make too much sense and could probably be handled with existing equipment.

We'll see, I guess.

Christopher

I don't see why the Boston-Albany train, or the Palmetto would be vulnerable. They both do decent business. In fact, the Palmetto recently got an extra coach added (and business class has been upgraded from a standard long-distance coach to a club-dinette).

As for the other ideas you list, they all would require extra equipment. Extending the Crescent to Dallas would require more cars (or diverting existing cars from the New Orleans section, but that wouldn't leave very much for NOL). Splitting the trains would have similar issues.

Extending the Zephyr to Los Angeles would require a full extra trainset.

Amtrak simply does not have the equipment available (especially single-level sleeper equipment).

 

[Save Our Trains Michigan]

To tell you the truth i think there will be train offs not routes being added. :angry:

 

[railrookie/novice]

Sorry, but being a Democrat and living in Nebraska (a very red state and not just football but politics) I haven't put "very many people" in elected office in a long time! (smile) Who do I write about my good 1st experience on Amtrak? I just got an idea last night....... Living in Lincoln Nebraska, I can take the Zephyr to a Colorado Rockies game, the station is beside the ballpark and take the Zephyr back to Lincoln all in the same day. I'm thinking about doing it just for the heck of it. I think it was $132.00 RT and $4 or $9 bucks for the cheapest ticket in the ballpark. I think it sounds like fun. Depart LNK around midnite, arrive DEN at 8am, and then leave around 7:30pm and arrive back at LNK at 4am! What the hey!?! I think I'm gonna do it!

 

[MrFSS]

Another interesting article can be found here.

Here are a few interesting comments:

Crews are being trained to address passengers by name, to stay awake when on duty and generally to be on their best behavior, though many of Amtrak's 17,000 unionized workers are in no mood to be nice to anybody. Two-thirds of them haven't had a new contract for five years. While workers grumble about pay and working conditions, Amtrak officials grumble about the high cost of labor and restrictive work rules.
Amtrak is also working to improve the food it serves onboard while cutting the expense of preparing it. Management also hopes to find ways to economize in running its call centers, train stations and repair facilities.

 

[caravanman]

Let's hope at least the Train Drivers (Engineers) are trained to stay awake on duty!

Ed. B)