Rising Fuel Costs Lead to Amtrak Fare Increase

Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
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.
jccollins

jccollins

Conductor
Joined
Nov 2, 2002
Messages
1,266
As rumored, here is the official word from Amtrak on the upcoming systemwide fare increases. -_-

News Release
National Railroad Passenger Corporation

60 Massachusetts Avenue NE

Washington, DC 20002

www.amtrak.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Media Relations (202) 906-3860

ATK-05-075

September 9, 2005

Rising Fuel Costs Lead to Amtrak Fare Increase

WASHINGTON - Amtrak today announced it will raise most fares between 5% and 7% to offset higher fuel costs and other expenses. The average fare nationally will increase $3 and the average fare in the Northeast Corridor will increase $4. The adjustments will go into effect September 20.

Rising oil prices have substantially increased the cost of locomotive diesel fuel and the prices of all other goods and services Amtrak consumes. While Amtrak has taken aggressive steps to reduce fuel and other expenses while running more trains this year, fuel costs have risen nearly 40% over one year ago and are expected to continue to increase.

Additionally, in the Northeast Corridor, fares for Smart Passes - monthly and 10-trip tickets - are being increased to reflect the growing fuel costs and a decision by Amtrak to reduce the deep discounts - as much as 70% - historically afforded Smart Pass passengers. The monthly tickets will be discounted at a 50% savings over the regular one-way fare (based on a passenger making 18 roundtrips per month) and a 20% savings for passengers purchasing 10-trip tickets. The 50% discount is the largest offered by Amtrak.

Reserved Service Expands

Amtrak will also expand reserved service on September 20 to virtually all trains in the Northeast, adding New York State Empire Service, Keystone trains between Philadelphia and New York, and shuttle trains between New Haven and Springfield to the previously reserved Regional, Metroliner and Acela Express trains. Clocker trains between Philadelphia and New York City will remain unreserved.

The expanded all-reserved service ensures every passenger a seat every time they board a train. While reservations are required, customers will still be able to purchase tickets for same day travel, as long as the train has not sold out beforehand. With all-reserved service, Amtrak is better able to monitor passenger demand and adjust train capacity accordingly.

About Amtrak

Amtrak provides intercity passenger rail services to more than 500 destinations in 46 states on a 22,000-mile route system. For schedules, fares and information, passengers may call 800-USA-RAIL or visit Amtrak.com.
Click to expand...
 
Are they saying $3 per ticket (price increase)? If so, that is hardly anything.
 
Guest_Gingee said:
Are they saying $3 per ticket (price increase)? If so, that is hardly anything.
Click to expand...
Well let's do the radio math here shall we. Let's take a Silver Service train for example.

Between WAS & MIA the engine will burn approx. 2000 of diesel.

9/04 cost (roughly) $4000

9/05 cost (roughly) $6000

Now an average Silver Serivce train will see about 600-700 people get on the train (not all at the same time). So they should cover the cost easily.
 
jccollins said:
As rumored, here is the official word from Amtrak on the upcoming systemwide fare increases. -_-
Click to expand...
Wow.... as if this was a surprise! LOL... OBS... :blink:
 
battalion51 said:
Guest_Gingee said:
Are they saying $3 per ticket (price increase)?  If so, that is hardly anything.
Click to expand...
Between WAS & MIA the engine will burn approx. 2000 of diesel.

9/04 cost (roughly) $4000

9/05 cost (roughly) $6000
Click to expand...
Do you mean 2000 gallons?

Here's another question I've been wondering. When there are two or loco's pulling Amtrak, are they both producing power? Does it depend on the grades of track. Are they using double the amount of fuel when using two locos? What kinda mileage do those things get?

Chris
 
Yes both are generally powered. Sometimes engines will deadhead to the specific trains destination for service (such occurs on the Coast Starlight very often). It depends on the grade of track/length of train as to whether or not the train will get 1-2-3 engines. It all depends on the route. The SWC uses 3, the Coast Starlight 2, the City of New Orleans 1. When it’s needed, 2 engines do not burn anymore fuel then 1. If the train were to run with 1 engine, it would burn just as much fuel and that engine would need to be re-fueled more often.
 
capltd29 said:
why are they increasing the NEC fares if they are powered by electricity, electric bill increase?
Click to expand...
Because that is where the money is. The NEC is as close to a captive market as Amtrak has. It represents half of all Amtrak ticket revenue. To make any real difference in the bottom line, any revenue enhancements must include the NEC, and probably should target the NEC.

A 5% increase went through on the NEC in June with no measurable impact on ridership. Amtrak is simply trying that again. The fuel cost issue is true for the national operation, but is simply an excuse on the NEC. Amtrak is trying to improve the bottom line and believes that hitting the NEC will do just that. They are probably right.
 
AMTRAK-P42 said:
Yes both are generally powered. Sometimes engines will deadhead to the specific trains destination for service (such occurs on the Coast Starlight very often). It depends on the grade of track/length of train as to whether or not the train will get 1-2-3 engines. It all depends on the route. The SWC uses 3, the Coast Starlight 2, the City of New Orleans 1. When it’s needed, 2 engines do not burn anymore fuel then 1. If the train were to run with 1 engine, it would burn just as much fuel and that engine would need to be re-fueled more often.
Click to expand...
Most of the time they will run both engines, but mangement is starting to request/require that one unit be taken offline to conserve fuel. Generally the train runs more efficiently with more power, but mangaement hasn't really done the studies to confirm it.
 
AmtrakFan said:
The Southwest Chief mostly only needs 2 Units according to Amtrak they used 2 for a while form Chicago to LA. But BNSF was so sick and tired of the Failers they went get a 3rd unit on that train.
Click to expand...
Well you can't forget the Golden Rule: "Treat others as you would like to be treated." BNSF is a very respectable, dignified railroad and treats Amtrak very well - often putting its own trains on sidings for Amtrak to remain on schedule or to allow Amtrak to keep moving when it is out of its scheduled time slot. Amtrak at the very least can run one extra locomotive unit on the trains to ensure they will not foul up BNSF's hard work to keep their line fluid.

Heck, if YouPee promised Amtrak that it could get trains over their line within a few HOURS of their schedules I would bet Amtrak would be willing to do almost anything, even if it involved assigning FIVE locos to each train (if they had them, of course)!

:lol:
 
I'm pretty sure that if you have two loco's running, you burn almost twice as much fuel as one. Both are running and the mu'd unit goes to the same throttle settings as the lead (unless one is offline then it idles or is DIT). Throttle settings shouldn't be as high with two units as opposed to one, so you would not burn twice as much fuel, but definately more than just the one unit. Each unit has it's own fuel tank unless amtrak has a fuel transfer system that I don't know about and thus would be refueled at the same time, but it probably wouldn't extend you out to the next fueling point on a particular route. In Galesburg (BNSF) we did have a cow/calf unit that had fuel transfer capability but I never seen it used.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top