Passenger Trains > Short Chief

Southwest Chief 3(13) this morning at Lugo (Cajon Pass).  Bag, one Transition Sleeper, one full Sleeper, diner, lounge, one Coach.

Virtual Railfan screen grab



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/20 11:29 by GenePoon.

---

Beautiful photo of an almost pint-sized train in low season.

REALLY nice picture.

Makes you wonder, though. This lonely little train can accomodate 200 passengers, yet traverses a number of major travel markets.

Amtrak can't attract enough passengers to AT LEAST fill an econoically viable 12 car train ONCE a day.

49 years into its existence, Amtrak's market share remains a rounding error in all but a few markets.

It's not all Amtrak's fault, of course, but the company has never had leadership that seems to care about this fact. 

Most of the rest of the world would have a robust schedule of corridor and longer distance trains on this route, but it "can't be done" in the U.S.

 

Great exposure!

BB

Great picture, just great, but tiny train.  I just refuse to believe this isn't calculated downsizing and marginalizing by Amtrak. Is this a deliberate choice to only run one coach west of Kansas City? Something is a foot and I do not think it is at all good for SWC route.

Almost looks like a painting. Beautiful.   
How can Amtrak expect to sell coach tickets with only one coach on the train ? 

Simple....They are fudging the %'s. No cars=dropping ridership=discontinuation.

A coach was set out at Needles earlier this morning off this train.

ST214 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Simple....They are fudging the %'s. No
> cars=dropping ridership=discontinuation.

Explain please?

Even I did not think the official consist would include only 1 coach.

Posted from Android

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Even I did not think the official consist would
> include only 1 coach.
>
> Posted from Android

There was two before one was set out at Needles.

So sounds like a BO setout at needles

As for Amtk mgmt....its been anywhere from totally non caring political appointment, to, at best IMHO, a place holder...dont make waves, get your govt pension.

No one ive seen has ever been a real chearleader for rail travel...someone who believed or cared enough to go up against the likes of Mica and play hardball.

Unfortunately, the late 60 thru the early 90's was a low point for rail travel in general.  The American public was enamored with jet travel and new cars, and trains were seen as a leftover from the past.

With new generations coming along now, who grew up with more robust commuter train and light rail service, and no fascination with the declining quality of air and automobile travel.....Amtrak may be poised for a resurgence......but it needs a true believer at the helm.    Richard Anderson is a true believer in railroad passenger travel in corridors.  He has battled the freight RR;s.  He's trying to rebuild equipment, and GET THE TRAINS TO RUN ON TIME.

Alas, he is not a liesure travel guy. Doesnt care about liesure travel at all....and really doesnt see "carrying grandma and grandpa from Havre to Rapid City" as a viable trainspotation model for rail travel ....unless it is subsidized as "essential transportation" .

Also I dont think his health issues have helped any.

Im optimistic about rail travel in the future.  The older generations who saw rail travel as a reminder of the depression and WWII are passing on, and newer generations that have no love for air travel or sitting in traffic car comoing on.

Remember travelling with the familty in a station wagon...thats toast.   Then it was the mini-van.  Thats toast too.   And the new generations dont sit around and complain about paying taxes, either.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/16/20 17:09 by pdt.

They aren't able to meet demand on the Chicago-Kansas City corridor with this reduced consist, and they aren't doing the drop coach anymore.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Even I did not think the official consist would
> include only 1 coach.
>
> Posted from Android

I know a lot of times you like to jump to conclusions, but if you had bothered to read a post 2 hours before yours...

stuporchief Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Most of the rest of the world would have a robust
> schedule of corridor and longer distance trains on
> this route, but it "can't be done" in the U.S.

Has nothing to do with any "can't be done in the US."

Has everything to do with national transporation policies. Here in the US, there isn't one.

jst3751 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> joemvcnj Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Even I did not think the official consist would
> > include only 1 coach.
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> I know a lot of times you like to jump to
> conclusions, but if you had bothered to read a
> post 2 hours before yours...

I did read it and so I posted it saying figured it was a BO car set out someplace from the start of this thread.  

jst3751 Wrote:

> Has everything to do with national transporation
> policies. Here in the US, there isn't one.

The U.S. has had a crystal clear transportation policy for nearly a century:  nearly unlimited taxpayer subsidies for air and highway transportation and next to nothing doled out to its railroad competition.  What you see with Amtrak and rail transportation, in general, is the result.  That the railroads have survived at all is a testament to their much greater fuel and labor efficiency compared to competing modes of transportation.  If, by some miracle, the massive direct and indirest taxpayer subsidies were stripped from the highways and airways, both passenger and freight rail transportation would actually be far more competitive in the transportation marketplace, but, of course, that is a polticial non-starter no matter what political party holds Congress or the White House--thay are all "owned" by the highway and airline lobby--arguably the most powerful polticial lobby on the planet.

WW Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jst3751 Wrote:
>
> > Has everything to do with national
> transporation
> > policies. Here in the US, there isn't one.
>
> The U.S. has had a crystal clear transportation
> policy for nearly a century:  nearly unlimited
> taxpayer subsidies for air and highway
> transportation and next to nothing doled out to
> its railroad competition.  What you see with
> Amtrak and rail transportation, in general, is the
> result.  That the railroads have survived at all
> is a testament to their much greater fuel and
> labor efficiency compared to competing modes of
> transportation.  If, by some miracle, the massive
> direct and indirest taxpayer subsidies were
> stripped from the highways and airways, both
> passenger and freight rail transportation would
> actually be far more competitive in the
> transportation marketplace, but, of course, that
> is a polticial non-starter no matter what
> political party holds Congress or the White
> House--thay are all "owned" by the highway and
> airline lobby--arguably the most powerful
> polticial lobby on the planet.

Bending to the whims of lobbiest does not equate to a national transporation policy. 

pdt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So sounds like a BO setout at needles
>
> As for Amtk mgmt....its been anowhere for totally
> non caring political appointment, to, at best,
> IMHO, a place holder...dont make waves, get your
> govt pension.
>
> No one ive seen has ever been a real chearleader
> for rail travel...someone who believed or cared
> enough to go up against the likes of Mica and play
> hardball.
>
> Unfortunately, the late 60 thru the early 90's was
> a low point for rail travel in general.  The
> American public was enamored with jet travel and
> new cars, and trains were seen as a leftover from
> the past.
>
> With new generations coming along now, who grew up
> with more robust commuter train and light rail
> service, and no fascination with the declining
> quality of air and automobile travel.....Amtrak
> may be poised for a resurgence......but it needs a
> true believer at the helm.    Richard Anderson
> is a true believer in railroad passenger travel in
> corridors.  He has battled the freight RR;s. 
> He's trying to rebuild equipment, and GET THE
> TRAINS TO RUN ON TIME.
>
> Alas, he is not a liesure travel guy. Doesnt care
> about liesure travel at all....and really doesnt
> see "carrying grandma and grandpa from Havre to
> Rapid City" as a viable trainspotation
> model....other than to have it subsidized as
> "essential transportation" .
>
> Also I dont think his health issues have helped
> any.
>
> Im optimistic about rail travel in the future. 
> The older generations who saw rail travel as a
> reminder of the depression and WWII are passing
> on, and newer generations that have no love for
> air travel or sitting in traffic car comoing on.
>
> Remember travelling with the familty in a station
> wagon...thats toast.   Then it was the
> mini-van.  Thats toast too.   And the new
> generations dont sit around and complain about
> paying taxes, either.

Richare Andersen has health issue?

stuporchief Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> REALLY nice picture.
>
> Makes you wonder, though. This lonely little train
> can accomodate 200 passengers, yet traverses a
> number of major travel markets.
>
> Amtrak can't attract enough passengers to AT LEAST
> fill an econoically viable 12 car train ONCE a
> day.

What makes you think a 12 car train is more economically viable than a 6 car train?