Passenger Trains > Why ride long distance trains at all?

I am just about done with LD Amtrak trains. Every time I want to go somewhere there is a service disruption of some sort. I have a conference in NOL in February and wanted to train both ways. Oh, no, can't do that. There is a service disruption ONE way. I canceled a trip from Texas in the fall because the Boston section of the Late Shore was not running. This is all too routine for Amtrak.

If Amtrak is not serious about its trains, why should the railroads, Congress, or any of us, take them seriously and try to support our trains?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/11 11:41 by goxmit.

goxmit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

In the current Amtrak environment, that should really read (note the change in wording):

> If Amtrak is not serious about its trains, why should the railroads, Congress, or
> any of us, take them seriously and try to support our trains?

I travel 30,000-50,000 miles a year on Amtrak long hauls (how many people can make that claim, and I don't mean crew members), and while there are problems and disruptions I have not been affected by one in about four years. I do try to work around them. And flying is a problem too: nothing beats sitting in an airplane for 12 hours on the ground in Bombay without food because Delhi was closed and two crews ran out of time, as happened to me a few years ago. Everything has problems. If you want to give up on Amtrak that's your decision, of course, but unless you travel many tens of thousands of miles a year you may have just had very bad luck.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/11 11:42 by Ptolemy.

Yes, all travel is difficult. However, the last two long distance trips that i have tried were "disrupted" after I reserved space and paid for it. Amtrak sends a message that there is no alternate transportation. I have never had that happen with an airline (and I travel a great deal as well). They always have an option (even if it is not a good one). So Amtrak is 0 for 2 with me in the last six months outside of the NE corridor. All of my corridor trips have been flawless over the past year.

My point is that Amtrak is not committed to what they do. "Oh, NS needs to do maintenance. Ok. We will vacate the line and tell customers to pound sand." And that is how it feels to a customer.

Ptolemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I travel 30,000-50,000 miles a year on Amtrak long
> hauls

That's probably four to six weeks a year aboard long distance trains. That's pretty incredible in itself.

goxmit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, all travel is difficult. However, the last
> two long distance trips that i have tried were
> "disrupted" after I reserved space and paid for
> it. Amtrak sends a message that there is no
> alternate transportation. I have never had that
> happen with an airline (and I travel a great deal
> as well). They always have an option (even if it
> is not a good one). So Amtrak is 0 for 2 with me
> in the last six months outside of the NE corridor.
> All of my corridor trips have been flawless over
> the past year.
>
> My point is that Amtrak is not committed to what
> they do. "Oh, NS needs to do maintenance. Ok.
> We will vacate the line and tell customers to
> pound sand." And that is how it feels to a
> customer.

I was given my money back from one airline (USAirways) because they "could not get me to my destination or return". It is not just an Amtrak trait!

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ptolemy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I travel 30,000-50,000 miles a year on Amtrak
> long
> > hauls
>
> That's probably four to six weeks a year aboard
> long distance trains. That's pretty incredible in
> itself.

It was 31 nights on sleeping cars (two nights in Europe and 29 on Amtrak) in 2010.

Make no mistake--I am not an apologist for Amtrak, and it infuriates me to see the mess they can make of things, especially being pushed around by the railroads and the "no alternate transportation" line we hear so much these days (I had to reroute myself on 3-14 when 5 was "no alternate transportation" earlier this year). In particular, I find the way they let the railroads push them around disgusting: the CSX business in Florida earlier this week was intolerable. But we do have to remember that all this is the product of nearly a century of cultural attitudes that have favored other modes, going back to 1920 or thereabouts when the Federal Highway Act was passed and subsidies to highways began. Airline subsidies began a few years later, and also in 1920 the Colorado Midland went bankrupt and was torn up, the first major removal of trackage. Attempts to save it were rejected by all as subsidies began to flow into other modes.

But I will not give up.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/11 12:06 by Ptolemy.

Very true. And I think that my frustration stems from the fact that Amtrak just does what the railroads demand now. There is, apparently, no pushback.

The Boston section of the Lake Shore if often canceled for weeks in the summer months, when it is most heavily used. No apologies, and no alternate transportation. And this business with the Crescent has been happening for a couple of years now. I get the need for maintenance, but I also think that Amtrak could find a way to make it work in conjunction with the railroads. Offer me a routing through Chicago. Or suggest an airline (I just looked and from Boston I have to connect somewhere--ugh).

The point is that I would like Amtrak to stand up to the railroads. Otherwise it appears that the trains are not really necessary, they are just for fun. And I do believe they are not just for fun but serve an important purpose.

Sigh.


Ptolemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ts1457 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ptolemy Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I travel 30,000-50,000 miles a year on Amtrak
> > long
> > > hauls
> >
> > That's probably four to six weeks a year aboard
> > long distance trains. That's pretty incredible
> in
> > itself.
>
> It was 31 nights on sleeping cars (two nights in
> Europe and 29 on Amtrak) in 2010.
>
> Make no mistake--I am not an apologist for Amtrak,
> and it infuriates me to see the mess they can make
> of things, especially being pushed around by the
> railroads and the "no alternate transportation"
> line we hear so much these days (I had to reroute
> myself on 3-14 when 5 was "no alternate
> transportation" earlier this year). In
> particular, I find the way they let the railroads
> push them around disgusting: the CSX business in
> Florida earlier this week was intolerable. But we
> do have to remember that all this is the product
> of nearly a century of cultural attitudes that
> have favored other modes, going back to 1920 or
> thereabouts when the Federal Highway Act was
> passed and subsidies to highways began. Airline
> subsidies began a few years later, and also in
> 1920 the Colorado Midland went bankrupt and was
> torn up, the first major removal of trackage.
> Attempts to save it were rejected by all as
> subsidies began to flow into other modes.
>
> But I will not give up.

We ride Amtrak often, with little problems. Flying is sure a bigger headache now days. It would be nice if Amtrak would re-establish the Chicago to Florida Train with sleepers. I believe once CSX gets the Boston track work thru the Berkshires done, this should improve the Boston Section of LSL 449-448.

DECA34 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We ride Amtrak often, with little problems.
> Flying is sure a bigger headache now days. It
> would be nice if Amtrak would re-establish the
> Chicago to Florida Train with sleepers. I believe
> once CSX gets the Boston track work thru the
> Berkshires done, this should improve the Boston
> Section of LSL 449-448.


I don't know. I recently flew back from Washington/Dulles to the west coast, leaving at 650pm on a Sunday evening, connected in Denver, both flights completely filled, and both flights operating on time or early, getting in before midnight. That's hard to beat. I was at work the next morning.

Nice trip. You rode first class, I hope. However, I enjoy the country and love the scenes outside the train window. You travel your way; others travel their way.


reindeerflame Wrote:
> I don't know. I recently flew back from
> Washington/Dulles to the west coast, leaving at
> 650pm on a Sunday evening, connected in Denver,
> both flights completely filled, and both flights
> operating on time or early, getting in before
> midnight. That's hard to beat. I was at work the
> next morning.

The point is that there should be room in this country, as in other industrialized countries, for all transportation modes. One should not be exclusive of others. People should have a choice. If you want to fly, fine, but don't deny me the preference for train, just as I would never say you should not fly. It becomes especially ridiculous--as we have seen on these threads--when those who never travel by train say people should not travel by train. I never fly (in the US) but would not tell people who fly they should go by bus.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again... we have starved the patient to the point that it is barely able to breathe... and then we all stand around its bed and yell at it for not being strong enough.

Ptolemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The point is that there should be room in this
> country, as in other industrialized countries, for
> all transportation modes. One should not be
> exclusive of others. People should have a
> choice. If you want to fly, fine, but don't deny
> me the preference for train, just as I would never
> say you should not fly. It becomes especially
> ridiculous--as we have seen on these threads--when
> those who never travel by train say people should
> not travel by train. I never fly (in the US) but
> would not tell people who fly they should go by
> bus.

From looking at your previous posts, I would say you are an archaeologist. I'm sure you are a very good one. But a person being expert in one field does not mean he is an expert in everything. You don't have a clue when it comes to economics. A country never has the resources to do everything, and one that tries to act like it does, quickly gets in trouble.

Here's my two cent worth. In a typical year, I'm on an overnight train anywhere from 5 to 20 nights. I do it because I normally enjoy the experience as opposed to using them for actual transportation. Typicaly, I take Amtrak or VIA one way and fly the return. I would not consider overnight travel if I had to be anywhere in a timley fashion and always try to allow a day in between the train and what ever it is I'm trying to get to. Some trips are just for the ride itself with no real other reason for going. Sad that these trains can't be more reliable but unfortunately that's today's reality. Of course planes can be delayed as well of course but normally, if it isn't weather related, another aircraft is available within a few hours or the broken one is fixed.

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You
> don't have a clue when it comes to economics.

I could say the same about you. To be sure, my highest degree is in archaeology, but I have published expertise in transportation policy and have been active in the field for over 30 years. One cannot be an expert in all things, but one need not be limited to one thing.

This sums it up best...


erielackawanna Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've said it before, and I'll say it again... we
> have starved the patient to the point that it is
> barely able to breathe... and then we all stand
> around its bed and yell at it for not being strong
> enough.

cashfare Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This sums it up best...
>
>
> erielackawanna Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I've said it before, and I'll say it again...
> we
> > have starved the patient to the point that it
> is
> > barely able to breathe... and then we all stand
> > around its bed and yell at it for not being
> strong
> > enough.

I concur wholeheartedly and use a similar analogy ... We treat Amtrak like it's a shark attack victim who is bleeding to death on the operating room table, and the only deliberation going on among the ER physicians is pure contempt over why the patient isn't donating his blood. Amtrak has been shamefully underfunded since its inception, and yet misguided congressmen point to the very flaws that this starvation has caused as evidence that Amtrak is broken.

I alternate between infuriation and incredulousness that this is the braintrust making decisions for my country.

Well I have been on Amtrak LD trains quite a bit the past three years. Know several of the Builder crew by name now. I love the train to say the least and so do my children. We always travel in a sleeper when our trip is overnight. Service ranges from horrible (not often) to outstanding (sometimes) but usually is adequate. I have also started to use Megabus from Pittsburgh. Easy and inexpensive and usually the drivers are super nice. I personally will not fly in this environment of TSA security. Simply my choice and I will not subject myself to having my privacy invaded. I also will NEVER ride another Greyhound bus as long as I live due the rudeness of the drivers. And let me tell you that Greyhound does not care if you complain. Yes Amtrak does have its problems from time to time but my worst train trip was better than my best trip on Greyhound to say the least.

Amtrak needs experienced mystery riders who report to upper management and upper management needs to listen and correct service problems....

I thought 448/449 were bustituted when CSX shuts it down for maintenence??