Amtrak_flyer

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 first article, I agree with mostly. It is unfair to compare the Alaska Railroad to Amtrak.

The second article, just another bashing of Amtrak. At the bottom of the article you can discuss your view about articles. I'd like to state my views, but I need a little research:

Consider the economics in two examples: The daily Empire Builder, connecting Chicago; St. Paul; Grand Forks, N.D.; Wolf Point, Mont.; Sandpoint Idaho; Spokane, Wash.; and Seattle and Portland, loses $206,301 a day. The daily Southwest Chief, connecting Chicago; Kansas City; Topeka; Lamar, Colo.; Albuquerque; Flagstaff, Ariz.; and Los Angeles, loses $333,698 a day.
Where does he get these numbers? Are they accurate? I believe you can operate all the long distance trains for about $300 million a year. Does this number include capital costs? He also fails to mention, Amtrak needs 1.2 billion to operate the NEC alone.

Fifty years ago, long-distance routes such as these carried many trains each day. But today, an infrastructure of stations, ticket agents, baggage handlers, custodians, Amtrak police, etc., exists to support a single daily train in each direction. Twenty minutes of hustle and bustle twice a day -- then 23 hours and 20 minutes as if the stations were in ghost towns.
Now this may be true I think. Operating trains 3 times per week can lead to high capital costs. He doesn't mention Amtrak can't afford the equipment to add frequencies and more routes. I'm very glad, however, he does not say how the Sunset Limited loses $466 per passenger.

One more question for you better number gurus: What if Amtrak doubled or even tripled their frequencies on the long distance routes? Would the $300 million be significantly increased or would it be better?

Chris
 
Back
Top