What would you add?

Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
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.
My top 3:

Quiet Cars on Mo/Il cooridor services. This seems feasible its acheap change and will give a nice experience especially as they roll out and try to market high speed rail.

Rail to Madison Wisconsin possibly a BNL-Rockford-Madison route?

An eastbound rail connection other than CHI from STL. KCY-STL-IND could really connect LD options. Perhaps even split the daily Cardinal service at IND to STL and CHI.
 
ainamkartma said:
If I could magically do one thing to improve Amtrak and the national passenger rail system, it would be to make the trains reliably faster than driving.
Click to expand...
Well, I agree. But I'd do it differently, because the so-called "freight" railroads have been uncooperative and borderline-criminal operations for so long. These would be the keys for me:1) Have as much track as possible purchased by states. The states can then set the priority of passenger traffic, and the freight operators have to listen. The advantage to the freight operators is that they no longer pay property taxes on the lines. If they balk at selling... raise their property valuations to the prices they are asking for, and start charging 'em the tax. :wicked grin:

2) As you said: Within Amtrak, a total commitment to on-time performance. Delays caused internally to Amtrak should be completely unacceptable.

3) Fund a program to remove key causes of delay: "South of the Lake" passenger tracks for starters.
 
neroden said:
ainamkartma said:
If I could magically do one thing to improve Amtrak and the national passenger rail system, it would be to make the trains reliably faster than driving.
Click to expand...
Well, I agree. But I'd do it differently, because the so-called "freight" railroads have been uncooperative and borderline-criminal operations for so long. These would be the keys for me:1) Have as much track as possible purchased by states. The states can then set the priority of passenger traffic, and the freight operators have to listen. The advantage to the freight operators is that they no longer pay property taxes on the lines. If they balk at selling... raise their property valuations to the prices they are asking for, and start charging 'em the tax. :wicked grin:
Click to expand...
This is an excellent suggestion, Neroden. Perhaps part of the overall strategy for implementing regional rail service along the Front Range should be for Colorado to impose much heftier taxes on the freight RRs. The state could justify it from the standpoint that if BNSF and UP are profiting from all that coal traffic which prevents critical transportation needs from being met, they're going to have to pay dearly. This could also spur action towards building new rail segments to the east, making it possible for commodities trains (namely, coal trains traveling from WY to TX) to completely bypass Denver. An eastern bypass has been suggested by the Colorado Rail Passenger Assocation as a way to make regional rail service possible, although negotiating the how (who builds the segments, who owns them, how is capacity on the main corridor guaranteed for passenger service, etc.) would be the tricky part.
 
Ryan said:
Perhaps his intent is that the tax money raised is to be used by the state to build their own track (or turn around and give the money back as a subsidy to build more infrastructure)?
Click to expand...
That's a possibility. Or, if the host RRs are faced with the *threat* of significantly higher taxes, they may be more eager to work with the state towards developing a solution for regional rail service (which may include additional capacity on the existing route or new lines to the east).
 
Add service:

1. Los Angeles to Las Vegas

2. Houston to Dallas/Fort Worth

3. Newton to Oklahoma City/Tulsa

Cut service:

1. Minneapolis to Spokane - improve service between Chicago and Minneapolis, add a second train via Rockford and Madison, add trains between Spokane and Portland and Seattle, potentially extend Northwest regional service to Boise

2. San Antonio to Los Angeles

3. Charlottesville to Cincinnati - add improved daily service from Chicago to Cincinnati, have daily bus service from Charlottesville to Charleston and Chicago to Charleston
 
WestBerkeleyFlats said:
Cut service:

1. Minneapolis to Spokane - improve service between Chicago and Minneapolis, add a second train via Rockford and Madison, add trains between Spokane and Portland and Seattle, potentially extend Northwest regional service to Boise
Click to expand...
Cutting service is a bad idea in general, but this one is particularly bad. With the Bakken oil fields generating a lot of traffic to Williston from both directions, and not a lot of other good alternatives to getting there, removing Amtrak service is a terrible idea.
I'd love to see an additional frequency MSP - CHI. It's a terrible idea to do that by removing service to North Dakota and Montana.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"A lot" is a relative term - http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/28/us-amtrak-finances-insight-idUSKBN0OD17R20150528:

"The shale boom has helped swell passenger numbers, which are up 28 percent between 1997 and 2014.

The increase comes from workers like John Dirby, who rides the Empire Builder from his Montana home to North Dakota's oil fields, where he works as a truck driver, a 10-hour trip. It's longer than by car but worth it, he says. "I spend tons of time for that job driving already. Why would I want to add on more time behind a wheel?"

But the demand isn't enough to make it financially viable: the service lost $34.8 million between October and March, more than the same period in the previous fiscal year when it lost $31.9 million.

Many seats remain empty. When a Reuters reporter traveled from St. Paul, Minnesota to Williston, several sleeper cars were vacant at various intervals. In the coach cabin each passenger had at least a two-person seat to themselves for most of the trip."

I'd keep connecting bus service to Fargo and Grand Forks. If people want to extend it to and from Williston in each direction, then that's fine. Oil "booms" have a way of dissipating fairly quickly.
 
WestBerkeleyFlats said:
Add service:

1. Los Angeles to Las Vegas

2. Houston to Dallas/Fort Worth

3. Newton to Oklahoma City/Tulsa

Cut service:

1. Minneapolis to Spokane - improve service between Chicago and Minneapolis, add a second train via Rockford and Madison, add trains between Spokane and Portland and Seattle, potentially extend Northwest regional service to Boise

2. San Antonio to Los Angeles

3. Charlottesville to Cincinnati - add improved daily service from Chicago to Cincinnati, have daily bus service from Charlottesville to Charleston and Chicago to Charleston
Click to expand...
WestBerkeleyFlats, I kind of think you and I have the same mindset which means you and I will get along but I've gotten very negative feedback from other members of this forum will not like anytime you say to cut service. I agree with you that it is reasonable to cut some service to add service that will result in higher ridership or revenue. Amtrak works with a limited budget so unless Amtrak increases their budget they have to give back something to introduce or expand service.

That being said, while the Empire Builder does lose a lot of money, so does almost every LD route with the possible exception of the Auto Train.

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/728/748/Amtrak-Monthly-Performance-Report-July-2015.pdf

So I tend to look at ridership and revenue (R & R) to compare LD trains. The Empire Builder from Oct. 14-July 15 is second only to the Coast Starlight in ridership. The Auto Train by far makes the most revenue with the Empire Builder (EB) just ahead of the California Zephyr (CZ). You do make a point with the empty seats but to me there is too much demand and revenue to cut the EB.

By the way, your link gave me an error but this one worked for me:

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-to-see-why-amtraks-losses-mount-hop-on-the-empire-builder-train-2015-5

I would agree with you on the Cardinal. It has the lowest ridership (just below the Sunset Limited) and by far the lowest revenue. Not to mention the two endpoints of the train, CHI and NYP are served by the Lake Shore Limited (LSL) and CHI and WAS are by the Capitol Limited (CL) with both the LSL and CL much faster. I have a personal beef with the Cardinal because Amtrak cut a train that served my local area twice in the last 20 years while keeping the Cardinal.
 
So let me get this straight:

Amtrak cutting a train leaving you with only 4 different ways to get to Chicago (including one without transfer) = wrong

Amtrak cutting a train that would leave millions of people with no train service whatsoever = totally cool

That's some seriously delusion and selfishness. And you wonder why you get negative feedback?
 
Ryan said:
So let me get this straight:

Amtrak cutting a train leaving you with only 4 different ways to get to Chicago (including one without transfer) = wrong

Amtrak cutting a train that would leave millions of people with no train service whatsoever = totally cool

That's some seriously delusion and selfishness. And you wonder why you get negative feedback?
Click to expand...
Those millions of people do not include the Virginia section between Charlottesville and WAS because they will still be able to take NER trains directly to NYP/PHL/BAL and can connect in WAS with the CL. You think that would be unfair to them but it's OK if Eastern Pennsylvania has to transfer in PGH in the middle of the night?

Just find a way to accommodate Cincinnati and I have no problem taking away West Virginia service. The entire state of West Virginia has less than 2 million people so "millions of people" certainly is inaccurate.

http://www.wcpo.com/news/state/state-ohio/feds-announce-plan-to-study-daily-passenger-rail-service-in-midwest

As much as you want to believe Amtrak exists only for the public good, they also want to make money. If WV doesn't bring enough money into the Amtrak system to make it worthwhile, then I have no problem with Amtrak pulling the plug on them. I'd say the same about Philly but luckily their the 3rd largest Amtrak market.

And to me a CHI to PHL train that takes over 25 hours is UNACCEPTABLE.

Other than "to serve the people of West Virginia", give me a reason why you would rather have a 25 hour train than a 21 hour train (and one that can serve bigger markets).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Millions of people is certainly accurate when you factor in Virginia west of CVS and Ohio east of CIN.

Last time I checked, the people between CVS and CIN are just as much Americans as you and I are and deserve access to the same transportation options are you and I have. I guess you'll just have to suffer through with your 4 different options to get to Chicago. I feel so sorry for your difficult situation.
 
And all this desire to cut someone else's service because the poor babies from Philly have to change trains? Tsk tsk. :p

Actually I with many others have campaigned for the restoration of through service via PGH including proposing the through cars idea to Amtrak. But have zero sympathy for cutting service somewhere else to achieve that, and will oppose such a proposal mightily.

We should be campaigning for growth of coverage, not for shuffling the deck chairs involving reducing coverage merely for enhancing the convenience of some. Just IMHO of course.
 
jis said:
And all this desire to cut someone else's service because the poor babies from Philly have to change trains? Tsk tsk. :p

Actually I with many others have campaigned for the restoration of through service via PGH including proposing the through cars idea to Amtrak. But have zero sympathy for cutting service somewhere else to achieve that, and will oppose such a proposal mightily.

We should be campaigning for growth of coverage, not for shuffling the deck chairs involving reducing coverage merely for enhancing the convenience of some. Just IMHO of course.
Click to expand...
Got any money?
 
535 of my best friends down the street do. Maybe they can cut loose a small portion of the money they give away to the oil companies and provide us with decent transportation options instead. Crazy talk, I know.
 
Ryan said:
Millions of people is certainly accurate when you factor in Virginia west of CVS and Ohio east of CIN.

Last time I checked, the people between CVS and CIN are just as much Americans as you and I are and deserve access to the same transportation options are you and I have. I guess you'll just have to suffer through with your 4 different options to get to Chicago. I feel so sorry for your difficult situation.
Click to expand...
There are only 2 stops in Virginia west of Charlottesville on the Cardinal (Staunton and Clifton Forge). There are NO station stops in Ohio east of Cincinnati on the Cardinal.

OK, if you want to keep the Cardinal, would you support this? Bring back the BL/TR and make the LSL CHI to BOS only? No one would lose service. The NYP passengers would have to take the BL/TR instead of the LSL. I believe it would only be 2 hours longer than the LSL now. Passengers between NYP and ALB could either connect with the LSL in ALB or the BL/TR in NYP, which ever is closer. You can say it would be unfair to NYP but making them spend an extra 2 hrs. on a train is nowhere near as bad as making PHL spend an extra 6 hrs. on a train (or transfer).
 
Let's see: We want to cut service to Glacier Park and Whitefish, two very popular destinations? And add another day and more expense to those travelers from Seattle to Chicago? Not to mention travelers from Spokane, who would have to now backtrack to Seattle or Portland in order to get to Chicago? Or adding another day (or two) for folks wishing to get to Seattle or Portland ?? I don't normally make editorial comments about others' opinions as we are all entitled to them, but this idea ranks right up their with a guest of a few years ago who, among other things, advocated more service to Arizona by way of a bridge spanning the Grand Canyon. In other words, a very foolish idea.
 
Ryan said:
The three stops on the Ohio river in Kentucky would like a word with you.

Crazy idea. Bring back the Broadway Limited and don't cut anything. Why is that so hard to advocate for?
Click to expand...
You didn't mention KY in your last post.

As for bringing back the BL, does Amtrak have the money to do so? That's the hard part.
 
WestBerkeleyFlats said:
Cut service:

1. Minneapolis to Spokane - improve service between Chicago and Minneapolis, add a second train via Rockford and Madison, add trains between Spokane and Portland and Seattle, potentially extend Northwest regional service to Boise
Click to expand...
I think you don't have to cut the EB to add a second train from CHI to Minneapolis (MSP?) Just extend one of the Hiawatha trains going to Milwaukee in each direction.

Of course it's going to cost more money and the states probably need to come in but at least according to this article it's being discussed.

http://www.startribune.com/second-amtrak-train-from-st-paul-to-chicago-would-be-popular-new-study-says/311615131/
 

Latest posts

Back
Top