Joe Boardman talks LD trains to LA Times

[The Chief]

Here's an excerpt from Part 1:

Amtrak’s president talked about the role of long-distance routes (he’s bullish) and why rail fares aren’t likely to go down any time soon.

and links to Part 2 and Part 3.

Mr. Boardman has some good notes. Enjoy.

 

[Larry H.]

After our vigorous discussion of amenities customers may or may not wish for the fares they paid, its interesting that we see Broardman sitting in exactly the kind of passenger car surrounding that many people seem to expect.. Well evidently the management's private car hasn't discovered plastic seats and Spartan amenities? Then another nice shot of the coast starlight first class lounge, another car that almost no one gets to ride but a few selected customers on the west coast. So perhaps the management has the same attitude as seen by much of government now days, the perks go to the few and the rest of us can be happy with bench seating.

I did not either like to see him so off handedly dismiss the las vegas train as if unless someone spent lots of money, and not amtrak, they were not interested. Sounds like more of the same when it comes to the route structure. On the positive side he did say he would like to see the long distance fleet replaced in 10 or so years. I only hope he remembers his private car and coast starlight lounge when he is approving the new designs, what is good enough for the management and one premier train should be good enough for everyone. It was also telling that price structure of ever increasing rates is evidently fine with him. Perhaps I missed the part about encouraging ridership?

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

"The president (Boardman) was vague about why Amtrak is reluctant to pursue service to Sin City. “If there was enough investment … it might work,” he said, with improvements such as double-tracking and upgraded track. The question is: Who would fund and construct it?"

I am sorry but I thought Amtrak and the Federal Goverment allready paid for the double tracking to Las Vegas? I recall an problem about turtles that held up the project.

The only reason I know why Amtrak is not use these route is equipment, lack of will, and of course they want someone else to cover any operational losses.

The equipment was going to be an Talgo set, that was sent north. Would not like to be in the room when Amtrak tells Washington, and Oregon that they going to take away an Talgo set to run the Sin City Service.

Just-Thinking

 

[Trogdor]

The equipment was going to be an Talgo set, that was sent north. Would not like to be in the room when Amtrak tells Washington, and Oregon that they going to take away an Talgo set to run the Sin City Service.

Well, seeing as how the State of Washington wound up purchasing the "Las Vegas Talgo" set, I don't think Amtrak would have much to say about the train's allocation.

 

[TVRM610]

After our vigorous discussion of amenities customers may or may not wish for the fares they paid, its interesting that we see Broardman sitting in exactly the kind of passenger car surrounding that many people seem to expect.. Well evidently the management's private car hasn't discovered plastic seats and Spartan amenities? Then another nice shot of the coast starlight first class lounge, another car that almost no one gets to ride but a few selected customers on the west coast. So perhaps the management has the same attitude as seen by much of government now days, the perks go to the few and the rest of us can be happy with bench seating.

I did not either like to see him so off handedly dismiss the las vegas train as if unless someone spent lots of money, and not amtrak, they were not interested. Sounds like more of the same when it comes to the route structure. On the positive side he did say he would like to see the long distance fleet replaced in 10 or so years. I only hope he remembers his private car and coast starlight lounge when he is approving the new designs, what is good enough for the management and one premier train should be good enough for everyone. It was also telling that price structure of ever increasing rates is evidently fine with him. Perhaps I missed the part about encouraging ridership?

I do not understand your point of view... Amtrak Coach is plenty comfortable. As long as Amtrak keeps the cars clean, and well maintained (which most of them are) you can't expect luxury for everyone. I ride Amtrak coach all the time... stop whining.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

By the way Beech Grove is not all that amazing for private varnish, that's just a couch. There's not much luxury to it at all-- compare that to the executive cars for NS, CSX and UP, Amtrak's is rather middle-class.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Then another nice shot of the coast starlight first class lounge, another car that almost no one gets to ride but a few selected customers on the west coast

Hey I've ridden it, twice, and I'm from Ohio-- once was free the other time was for a hundred bucks. Seriously, hundreds of people ride in it every week, thousands per year, its not like you have to be anything special to ride in the PPC. Just purchase a sleeping-car ticket on the CS.

 

[Larry H.]

After our vigorous discussion of amenities customers may or may not wish for the fares they paid, its interesting that we see Broardman sitting in exactly the kind of passenger car surrounding that many people seem to expect.. Well evidently the management's private car hasn't discovered plastic seats and Spartan amenities? Then another nice shot of the coast starlight first class lounge, another car that almost no one gets to ride but a few selected customers on the west coast. So perhaps the management has the same attitude as seen by much of government now days, the perks go to the few and the rest of us can be happy with bench seating.

I did not either like to see him so off handedly dismiss the las vegas train as if unless someone spent lots of money, and not amtrak, they were not interested. Sounds like more of the same when it comes to the route structure. On the positive side he did say he would like to see the long distance fleet replaced in 10 or so years. I only hope he remembers his private car and coast starlight lounge when he is approving the new designs, what is good enough for the management and one premier train should be good enough for everyone. It was also telling that price structure of ever increasing rates is evidently fine with him. Perhaps I missed the part about encouraging ridership?

I do not understand your point of view... Amtrak Coach is plenty comfortable. As long as Amtrak keeps the cars clean, and well maintained (which most of them are) you can't expect luxury for everyone. I ride Amtrak coach all the time... stop whining.

Luckily I have become used to these defenders. Yes I would say that as coach service goes amtrak is fine.. Its not coach however that the real question concerns, its those who are paying up to 10 times the coach fare. Would you not agree that perhaps they might expect something a bit nicer than a plastic lounge with card tables for dinners and lounges? No that was a silly question, of course you wouldn't.

 

[Trogdor]

Seriously, what is wrong with this forum? Can we not have one damn thread that doesn't devolve into extremist bickering and attacks?

 

[Larry H.]

Then another nice shot of the coast starlight first class lounge, another car that almost no one gets to ride but a few selected customers on the west coast

Hey I've ridden it, twice, and I'm from Ohio-- once was free the other time was for a hundred bucks. Seriously, hundreds of people ride in it every week, thousands per year, its not like you have to be anything special to ride in the PPC. Just purchase a sleeping-car ticket on the CS.

Wonderful then should we expect one on all long distance trains when the new equipment is ordered? By the way the day we rode the coast starlight there was no lounge after traveling for days and spending several thousand to get their. If government is supposed to be so prone to level all playing fields now then I certainly expect to see the same kind of lounge when I travel.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

I don't know what's in the works for new Superliners-- right now they have barely gotten through the Viewliner pre-order phase. The PPC is hard to keep up, they need to pay for themselves. So my thinking is you might be able to find some way to make a lounge car that supports itself.

And I'm sorry you were on a CS sans a PPC, sounds like it was bad-ordered. How about instead of being bitter and boring the rest of us why don't you write Boardman a nice long letter?

 

[MrEd]

If I understand what the president is saying, most customers are on the NEC but 80% of the money recieved from federal funds go to 3 long distance trains (empire builder, coast starlight and southwest chief). Doesn't seem right.

 

[LA Resident]

Here's an excerpt from Part 1:

Amtrak’s president talked about the role of long-distance routes (he’s bullish) and why rail fares aren’t likely to go down any time soon.

and links to Part 2 and Part 3.

Mr. Boardman has some good notes. Enjoy.

If the stated reason for keeping the long-distance trains is to provide service to out-of-the-way rural towns--and not to keep rail enthusiasts and assorted train boosters enthralled--then why the need for so much fancy equipment? You could make do with coaches, a minimum-style diner ala CCC, and maybe berths. In fact, that is what Via Rail does to serve the rural denizens along its Canadian route.

But Via Rail also caters to the Amtrakapologist-types as well, offering superb first-class service for those willing to pay for it.

Why can't Amtrak do both? By adopting the Via Rail example, it certainly wouldn't lose more money on its long-distance routes than it does now (if you believe the 80% figure). It might also attract more riders from both spectrums: the rural folk that Amtrak says is the primary reason for the trains and the foamers who can't wait to get on another train.

One more thing: the rationale for not restarting LA-Vegas service is pretty thin. The decision logically would be based on ridership studies, not some argument about having to double-track the entire UP line from Yermo to Vegas. If the ridership would support the train--and equipment was available, I have little doubt that UP and Amtrak would reach agreement for at least a single train each way. The line is in as good shape today for a passenger train as it was more than a decade ago.

 

[afigg]

If I understand what the president is saying, most customers are on the NEC but 80% of the money recieved from federal funds go to 3 long distance trains (empire builder, coast starlight and southwest chief). Doesn't seem right.

That is not what Boardman said. He said that 80% of the subsidies go to the LD trains as a group. The writer listed 3 of the LD trains as an example. Amtrak's funding is split into 2 major parts: operational subsidy and capital maintenance/equipment funding. I believe the 80% figure is from the operational subsidy, not from the larger capital funding, most of which goes to maintain the NEC & other Amtrak owned lines and fleet maintenance & purchases. The LD trains are part of the fleet maintenance, but the NEC and corridor trains make up a big chunk of the fleet. For FY10, the budget as appropriated was $553 million for operating subsidy and $584 million for capital (out of $975 million requested) and $144 million for ADA compliance projects. There are are a lot of numbers and breakdowns of the costs & revenues in the Amtrak annual & monthly reports if you want to see where the money goes and how much the LD costs to operate after revenue is collected.

 

[RTOlson]

One more thing: the rationale for not restarting LA-Vegas service is pretty thin. The decision logically would be based on ridership studies, not some argument about having to double-track the entire UP line from Yermo to Vegas. If the ridership would support the train--and equipment was available, I have little doubt that UP and Amtrak would reach agreement for at least a single train each way. The line is in as good shape today for a passenger train as it was more than a decade ago.

Real-world decisions don't have to be based on logic, although it would be nice if it were. The decision is based on meeting the host railroad's conditions before allowing service on its line. In this case, Union Pacific has some pretty high demands to expand its infrastructure to accommodate what could be two more trains on its line (one each way). Of course, some plans call for more daily trains.

 

[AlanB]

I am sorry but I thought Amtrak and the Federal Goverment allready paid for the double tracking to Las Vegas? I recall an problem about turtles that held up the project.

Amtrak and the Fed did indeed pay for the double tracking of this route. Double track that UP now enjoys and has filled close to capacity. By the time the turtles issue was resolved, UP turned around and claimed that they no longer had enough capacity for Amtrak, and they wanted more improvements to the line. Amtrak balked and we landed where we are today.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Sounds like a job for the court system.

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

Amtrak and the Fed did indeed pay for the double tracking of this route. Double track that UP now enjoys and has filled close to capacity. By the time the turtles issue was resolved, UP turned around and claimed that they no longer had enough capacity for Amtrak, and they wanted more improvements to the line. Amtrak balked and we landed where we are today.

Nice, can we the tax payers get our money back. I know, but I just had to ask.....

 

[sunchaser]

Amtrak and the Fed did indeed pay for the double tracking of this route. Double track that UP now enjoys and has filled close to capacity. By the time the turtles issue was resolved, UP turned around and claimed that they no longer had enough capacity for Amtrak, and they wanted more improvements to the line. Amtrak balked and we landed where we are today.

Nice, can we the tax payers get our money back. I know, but I just had to ask.....

:lol: :lol: :lol: I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for that check!!!

 

[Donctor]

Here's an excerpt from Part 1:

Amtrak’s president talked about the role of long-distance routes (he’s bullish) and why rail fares aren’t likely to go down any time soon.

and links to Part 2 and Part 3.

Mr. Boardman has some good notes. Enjoy.

If the stated reason for keeping the long-distance trains is to provide service to out-of-the-way rural towns--and not to keep rail enthusiasts and assorted train boosters enthralled--then why the need for so much fancy equipment? You could make do with coaches, a minimum-style diner ala CCC, and maybe berths. In fact, that is what Via Rail does to serve the rural denizens along its Canadian route.

But Via Rail also caters to the Amtrakapologist-types as well, offering superb first-class service for those willing to pay for it.

Why can't Amtrak do both? By adopting the Via Rail example, it certainly wouldn't lose more money on its long-distance routes than it does now (if you believe the 80% figure). It might also attract more riders from both spectrums: the rural folk that Amtrak says is the primary reason for the trains and the foamers who can't wait to get on another train.

If Amtrak followed the "VIA" path, the United States would be without a national rail system very quickly.

 

[Eric S]

Here's an excerpt from Part 1:

Amtrak's president talked about the role of long-distance routes (he's bullish) and why rail fares aren't likely to go down any time soon.

and links to Part 2 and Part 3.

Mr. Boardman has some good notes. Enjoy.

If the stated reason for keeping the long-distance trains is to provide service to out-of-the-way rural towns--and not to keep rail enthusiasts and assorted train boosters enthralled--then why the need for so much fancy equipment? You could make do with coaches, a minimum-style diner ala CCC, and maybe berths. In fact, that is what Via Rail does to serve the rural denizens along its Canadian route.

But Via Rail also caters to the Amtrakapologist-types as well, offering superb first-class service for those willing to pay for it.

Why can't Amtrak do both? By adopting the Via Rail example, it certainly wouldn't lose more money on its long-distance routes than it does now (if you believe the 80% figure). It might also attract more riders from both spectrums: the rural folk that Amtrak says is the primary reason for the trains and the foamers who can't wait to get on another train.

If Amtrak followed the "VIA" path, the United States would be without a national rail system very quickly.

Precisely. Adjusting for different subsidy levels, Amtrak provides more service (whether measured in train-miles, or passenger-miles) than VIA Rail does. (TRAINS magazine had an article a few years ago analyzing just that issue.) Outside of the Ontario-Quebec (Windsor-Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal-Quebec) corridor, VIA Rail is almost entirely irrelevant, even in cities it serves, due to its less-than-daily service and pricing structure.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

First of all, thanks for the link, it’s proven to be a rather interesting read.

Now let’s take a look at some of the unasked questions and unresolved paradoxes.

1. Ridership is up with no reason given for why but the very next point is that on-time performance is up. However, this is acknowledged as being tied to the recession, which is presumably a temporary condition. What will keep trains on-time in the future? What will keep ridership levels up once on-time performance resumes its usually dismal levels?

2. Long-distance trains are explained as being an unbalanced subsidy slanted toward rural folks, the same folks who generally vote for politicians who are against funding public transportation. Personally I enjoy having LD trains to use, but whatever costs are being spent on depots and maintenance to serve tiny rural towns is not in Amtrak's best interests in my view.

3. The debate over LD trains is nonsensical says the President, but his response is to tout how Amtrak is able to help provide staff and funds to aid highway and airline transportation. Talk about nonsensical. So the home team should continue to receive state funding in order to help train and assist the visiting teams? Go Amtrak, the unsung water boy of the transportation world! At his point is where he says “We’re the United States, we’re supposed to care about each other.” This is where he just completely loses me. What era is this guy living in? Caring for others is now called "socialism," in case he hadn't noticed. We're not in this together, which is why we can't have nice things like fast, punctual trains or reasonably priced health care. Does this man ever read the news?

Sounds like a job for the court system.

UP would win any lawsuit brought against them once it reached the Roberts court.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Yes, but would they pay to fight it all the way up?

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Yes, but would they pay to fight it all the way up?

If you had a guaranteed win at the highest court in the land wouldn't you fight it until you reached that point? Why on earth wouldn't UP? It's not like they don't have the money. Seeing how our Supreme Court has swung hard toward blatant judicial activism I wouldn't be surprised to see Amtrak's mandate contested by one or more freight carriers at some point in the next several years. With additional rolling stock and funding there is the possibility of increased frequencies or even new routes. This could eventually put a damper on increases in freight that may be building as the jobless recovery gains steam. That could put renewed interest in curtailing Amtrak's mandate through legal challenges that probably wouldn't have succeeded until now. Seeing as how the Roberts Court has decided to begin ignoring precedents that far predate Amtrak's formation I wouldn't put it past them to end whatever legal leverage Amtrak still has if and when given a case broad enough to do so.

 

[Larry H.]

Regarding small town stations. I don't know about every where, but along the City route only a few of the stations are staffed by amtrak. I have to drive two hours to buy a ticket if It needs to be done with an agent. Our small station is unmanned and amtrak has nothing to do with it. The next town north has volunteers that help with some services at certain times. The next town up has a dismal falling down wreck of a station that they have said for years they were going to improve an haven't, at least the last time I was though it. So amtrak is not saddled with anything like the stations railroads once manned. When I first moved here all the stations were manned by railroad staff, no longer.