why can't amtrak offer more trains

[PennCentralFan]

I mean from St. Paul, MN there is a 7:50 am train to Chicago and a train at about 10:30pm that goes west on the Empire builder.

If you check the flight schedules there are dozens a flights a day between MSP and ORD or MID.

I know people who have looked at the train, but when they see the times offered between flying and training they take the airplane since it has more times.

Most people I know believe that going by train is more relaxing and fun compared to the hassles of airports.

There are at least 3 trains a day from Chicago to Detroit.

I don't think Amtrak's future is by providing land cruises. It's future is in providing reliable and frequent service.

Please enlighten me on amtrak's current scheduling situation? Is it limited rail access, people just don't like trains, or is it the Republicans who hate public transportation.

 

[Amtrak OBS Gone Freight]

Is it limited rail access, people just don't like trains, or is it the Republicans who hate public transportation.

Maybe not necesarily the "people don't like trains" part, but it is a combination of things which you have listed. In addition there are equipment contraints in order to operate what we have now, the all mighty dollar, clean up from the past, etc. Equalized funding would help greatly, but I feel that will be more up to the states and private investment (like that is gonna happen without generous subsidy from the government).

As far as your observation on part of what Amtrak's future responsibility is, you are right on track there with that remark. But who's gonna step up to the plate? That's one of the big questions if you ask me. OBS...

 

[Guest_Gingee]

I think Amtrak needs to lower their prices. It does cost more to take a train than a plane and it takes longer also. hmmmm

 

[AmtrakWPK]

If they are losing money right and left now, what's going to happen to the balance sheet if they greatly reduce the ticket cost? And of course if you were sitting in that airline's airplane seat for 24 or 36 or 48 straight hours instead of 2 hours, I suspect the airline ticket would cost a whole lot more, too. If they can get a new customer to buy a ticket for that seat every three hours or so, it doesn't have to be a very high ticket price for them to break even.

On a per-hour basis the rail ticket is sure cheaper. And for a trip of a week or two (i.e., take the train to a destination, stay for a week, then return), rail is a whole lot cheaper than air for me since I don't have to mortgage the house in order to pay the parking bill for my car at Orlando International Airport. A week's parking tab costs more than the round-trip airline ticket. Parking at Amtrak WPK is free, short or long-term. And about 50 feet from the rails, instead of a mile and a half walk through Orlando International Airport. And no 45-minute wait for security screening, either. The more I think about it, the cheaper (and more convenient) Amtrak seems to get. And so far my luggage on Amtrak has never left the North American continent. Never been misdirected at all, in fact.

Even if they suddenly got huge mobs of additional people that wanted to ride, (unlikely unless ticket cost comes close to zero, which is literally illegal under the most recent congressional mandates), they don't have the extra equipment to add to the trains for them to ride in. As it is, the pricing system they use is at least loosely yield-based, meaning the prices at least try to track the supply v. the demand on a per-seat and per-sleeper-room basis, which in theory maximizes the revenue generated. I like a cheap ticket just as much as you do, believe me, but at the same time I can appreciate what they are trying to do, which is to maximize the $$$ yield to the company. And I really want Amtrak to stay in business.

 

[sechs]

What this really brings to light is the glut of airline capacity which continues to depress fares. If airlines reduced the number of flights and priced to make a healthy profit, passenger train would look more competitive.

Furthurmore, if passenger rail were subsidised to the same degree as passenger air, Amtrak would be able to increase the number of trains and, maybe, even reduce prices.

 

[Guest]

As it is, the pricing system they use is at least loosely yield-based, meaning the prices at least try to track the supply v. the demand on a per-seat and per-sleeper-room basis, which in theory maximizes the revenue generated. I like a cheap ticket just as much as you do, believe me, but at the same time I can appreciate what they are trying to do, which is to maximize the $$$ yield to the company. And I really want Amtrak to stay in business.

lol, i wish i could afford to pay full price for train tickets, since i'm well aware of Amtrak's perpetual underfunded state. but however, the 'Hot Deals' section and using promotional codes are the only way i can afford train tickets to some parts of the country(but excluding short trips), considering i'm just a poor college student...

 

[boratwanksta]

As it is, the pricing system they use is at least loosely yield-based, meaning the prices at least try to track the supply v. the demand on a per-seat and per-sleeper-room basis, which in theory maximizes the revenue generated.  I like a cheap ticket just as much as you do, believe me, but at the same time I can appreciate what they are trying to do, which is to maximize the $$$ yield to the company.  And I really want Amtrak to stay in business.

lol, i wish i could afford to pay full price for train tickets, since i'm well aware of Amtrak's perpetual underfunded state. but however, the 'Hot Deals' section and using promotional codes are the only way i can afford train tickets to some parts of the country(but excluding short trips), considering i'm just a poor college student...

i posted that btw, since sadly that's the truth....

maybe the post-Dubya years, we'll finally have a president that respects Amtrak and gives it sufficient funding. at least i can dream and hope that'll finally happen!

 

[George Harris]

maybe the post-Dubya years, we'll finally have a president that respects Amtrak and gives it sufficient funding. at least i can dream and hope that'll finally happen!

I can remember when this was though about Nixon / Ford. Then we got Carter who directed teh biggest bloodbath Amtrak ever took - loss of the Floridian, National Limited, Texas Chief, North coast Hiawatha, and maybe a couple of others, none of which have ever come back.

Amtrak is and always has been primarily a creature of Congress with the executive branch mainly standing around clueless as best and in the way at worst. The problem with that has alwasy been that each congressman plays to his home turf audience only, so national coherence has never occurred. The long distance part has never been properly funded because the northeastern politicians were wanting all the money to go to the corridor with only a pittance to keep the rubes in the hinterland from revolting. Only Reistrup and Claytor of all Amtrak presidents, really seemed to have a vision that got beyond Richmond and Buffalo, if it got that far with some of these characters. Then the rail oriented congressmen from the rest of the country never really let the money needed be spent in the northeast trackage because they wanted it for their own pet projects, and since their trains ran on freight railroad trackage, they saw no need to spend money on fixed faccilities that would allow better speed out of the trains anywhere.

We hve no worthwhile rail passenger service because nobody, and I mean nobody with the political clout to do anything about has any vision whatsoever in this area.

George

 

[Boxcar]

I can remember when this was though about Nixon / Ford. Then we got Carter who directed teh biggest bloodbath Amtrak ever took - loss of the Floridian, National Limited, Texas Chief, North coast Hiawatha, and maybe a couple of others, none of which have ever come back.

Good point George and so true about ALL politicians. I hope more people come to realize that not all Republicans are against Amtrak funding or rail travel just as all Democrats are not for abortions. I see that there are votes on both sides of the aisle for both funding and cuts.......BD

 

[jefffromark]

Why isnt the word PAYCUT ever used here in the forum - seems every other transportation mode is under the gun why isnt AMTRAK!

 

[Save Our Trains Michigan]

Why isnt the word PAYCUT ever used here in the forum - seems every other transportation mode is under the gun why isnt AMTRAK!

Because the Railroads are setup diffrent from any other transportation system we are under the Railway Labor Act which says how much RR employees have to be paied work rules and Amtrak is in the Railway Labor Act and if anyone thinks that you can just open it up and change things in it your wrong.

 

[Oldtimer]

Pay cut!!!

In 1981 the Reagan administration cut Amtrak wages to 12% below the national varriers wages for the same jobs. Well before the airlines took cuts. I have worked in both industries and Amtrak wages are negotiated under the Railway Labor Act not set by the Act and the Majority of Amtrak workers got their last wage increase on Jan. 1, 2000! Yes that is 6 and 1/2 years ago. Thousands of employees have been laid off even so the number of passengers is increasing. Moral is terrible. Now you can tell the remaining employees that they have to take a paycut!