Passenger Trains > FRA Long-Distance Trains Comment Submission Date Approaching

A reminder to all who are interested in Amtrak Long-Distance train service that the requested date for comments on the FRA Long-Distance Service Study now underway is approaching on March 17. There is still time to submit comments on the study process and its goals in its initial phase.

Link to the project website, with comment submission tool - scroll all the way to the end for the submission tool: Amtrak Daily Long-Distance Service Study – Study to evaluate the restoration of daily long-distance intercity rail passenger service and the potential for new Amtrak long-distance routes (fralongdistancerailstudy.org)

Comments may also be submitted by e-mail to: contactus@fralongdistancerailstudy.org

The March 17 submission date is not obvious from the website, but is indicated in one or more of the various PowerPoint slide decks that can be downloaded and reviewed. Unfortunately I did not notice it until recently to put out this alert, although this study and at least one submission by a TO member have previously been discussed on this forum. I do not know if the study will continue to accept comments after March 17 for this initial phase of the study.

If you submit comments, please do download and read the slide decks from the project website - they give important background information on the study and its focus. Much of the information will probably be known to many of us, but is nicely encapsulated in the slides for the presentation and focus groups that have been conducted in the past two months with various stakeholder groups, including particularly municipalities and government entities, and local, regional and state planning entities. Many of those people need some education about long-distance passenger trains, or a refresher, and the slide decks do a pretty good job of that task. And they certainly give context for any comments which you may make.

If you comment, please make it germane to the focus of the study, which is about long-distance service ROUTES.  The study is NOT about the operational details of the services which Amtrak offers, or did offer in the past, or could offer in the future. This is the NOT the place for your comments about scheduling issues, equipment, staffing, management practices, or amenities like dining car meals. This is about fundamental routes to be operated which are 750 miles in length or longer, which is the statutory definition of a long-distance route.

Yesterday, I sent in a fairly long submission, suggesting: 1) Additional trains per day in some long-distance corridors, particularly daytime service trains for corridors which serve urban centers otherwise served only during nighttime hours. This was a point of study made in the slide decks. I offered the Lake Shore Limited route between Chicago, Toledo, Cleveland and Buffalo as an example of one such route for better daytime service to those cities in addition to the overnight train. 2) Restoration of the Floridian route in some form to serve the huge traffic flows from the Midwest to Florida. 3) Partial restoration of the National Limited route as a Kansas City - St. Louis - Terre Haute - Indianapolis branch of the Cardinal, with the possibility of sufficient additional traffic over time to make the Cardinal a daily service. This point was my top priority, and I gave extensive analysis of non-airline passenger traffic flows between those former National Limited points and points on the existing Cardinal route east of Indianapolis in support of my case. Data was drawn from an official USDOT online tool that is cited in the project slide decks.

This study is an opportunity for advocacy for Amtrak long-distance service and routes in response to a federal mandate for such a study by FRA in the new Infrastructure Law. Many people have expressed ongoing concerns about Amtrak long-distance trains and their future - it is a nearly endless theme on this forum. This is an opportunity to have direct input into a congressionally-mandated study in its initial phase.

MC



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/23 15:19 by ironmtn.

Thing is will Ammanagment comply once this is all said and done?

Posted from Android

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thing is will Ammanagment comply once this is all
> said and done?

We do not know, and we cannot know in advance. But the process must start somewhere. We can't just sit on the sidelines, endlessly complaining about Amtrak and nostalgically remembering Olden Tymes if we care about this matter. The advocacy channels that are open to us must be used.

I emphasize again: this is a congressionally-mandated study from a specific statutory provision of the new Infrastructure Law. It is being done by a federal agency which has been tasked by Congress to do the study, and which has some oversight functions over Amtrak. The study casts a wide net to advocacy groups and governmental planning entities with standing before their state and regional governments. That is about as much theoretical influence as one could put together on this matter. When there is such an opportunity, it should be utilized.

We cannot let the past determine the future, and just throw up our hands and say, "it's of no use". We have to use the tools that are at our disposal, such as they are. And you can't determine the future - and many process steps still to come, many of them unknown and not able to known at this time - if you don't start somewhere with the tools that you have, and then work through each step along the way as they emerge. Too many people today want to have a full blueprint of action all drawn out and locked in or they won't act. But actually accomplishing important things, no matter how large or small, has never really been that way for those who ultimately succeed. They start, move ahead, and figure out what they need to figure out as they move ahead.

And it's no different in this case. Including ultimately with Amtrak.

MC



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/23 15:14 by ironmtn.

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thing is will Ammanagment comply once this is all
> said and done?

Amtrak will do what the stake holders dictate. Oh wait, that is the voting public. 

Sorry.

Living in New Mexico and having ridden both routes, I provided short comments on the need for twice daily service on the Southwest Chief route and daily service on the Sunset Limited.

Thanks for the reminder and encouragement Ironmtn. Yes, very important for passenger rail advocates to participate. 

I strongly encourage the advocacy for 2 x daily service. Less infrastructure requirements then for entirely new (or resurrected) routes. Not to discourage new routes but they should be done with a minimum frequency of 2 times daily.

Already submitted my ideas thru RailPac’s submission.

longliveSP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Amtrak will do what the stake holders dictate. Oh
> wait, that is the voting public. 

I think the correct term is steak holders. Us folks only have balogna.

TAW

ironmtn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ProAmtrak Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Thing is will Ammanagment comply once this is
> all
> > said and done?
>
> We do not know, and we cannot know in advance. But
> the process must start somewhere. We can't just
> sit on the sidelines, endlessly complaining about
> Amtrak and nostalgically remembering Olden Tymes
> if we care about this matter. The advocacy
> channels that are open to us must be used.
>
> I emphasize again: this is a
> congressionally-mandated study from a specific
> statutory provision of the new Infrastructure Law.
> It is being done by a federal agency which has
> been tasked by Congress to do the study, and which
> has some oversight functions over Amtrak. The
> study casts a wide net to advocacy groups and
> governmental planning entities with standing
> before their state and regional governments. That
> is about as much theoretical influence as one
> could put together on this matter. When there is
> such an opportunity, it should be utilized.
>
> We cannot let the past determine the future, and
> just throw up our hands and say, "it's of no use".
> We have to use the tools that are at our disposal,
> such as they are. And you can't determine the
> future - and many process steps still to come,
> many of them unknown and not able to known at this
> time - if you don't start somewhere with the tools
> that you have, and then work through each step
> along the way as they emerge. Too many people
> today want to have a full blueprint of action all
> drawn out and locked in or they won't act. But
> actually accomplishing important things, no matter
> how large or small, has never really been that way
> for those who ultimately succeed. They start, move
> ahead, and figure out what they need to figure out
> as they move ahead.
>
> And it's no different in this case. Including
> ultimately with Amtrak.
>
> MC

I get that, but like I said, will Ammanagment comply

Posted from Android

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ironmtn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ProAmtrak Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Thing is will Ammanagment comply once this is
> > all
> > > said and done?
> >
> > We do not know, and we cannot know in advance.
> But
> > the process must start somewhere. We can't just
> > sit on the sidelines, endlessly complaining
> about
> > Amtrak and nostalgically remembering Olden
> Tymes
> > if we care about this matter. The advocacy
> > channels that are open to us must be used.
> >
> > I emphasize again: this is a
> > congressionally-mandated study from a specific
> > statutory provision of the new Infrastructure
> Law.
> > It is being done by a federal agency which has
> > been tasked by Congress to do the study, and
> which
> > has some oversight functions over Amtrak. The
> > study casts a wide net to advocacy groups and
> > governmental planning entities with standing
> > before their state and regional governments.
> That
> > is about as much theoretical influence as one
> > could put together on this matter. When there
> is
> > such an opportunity, it should be utilized.
> >
> > We cannot let the past determine the future,
> and
> > just throw up our hands and say, "it's of no
> use".
> > We have to use the tools that are at our
> disposal,
> > such as they are. And you can't determine the
> > future - and many process steps still to come,
> > many of them unknown and not able to known at
> this
> > time - if you don't start somewhere with the
> tools
> > that you have, and then work through each step
> > along the way as they emerge. Too many people
> > today want to have a full blueprint of action
> all
> > drawn out and locked in or they won't act. But
> > actually accomplishing important things, no
> matter
> > how large or small, has never really been that
> way
> > for those who ultimately succeed. They start,
> move
> > ahead, and figure out what they need to figure
> out
> > as they move ahead.
> >
> > And it's no different in this case. Including
> > ultimately with Amtrak.
> >
> > MC
>
> I get that, but like I said, will Ammanagment
> comply

Why would Amtrak be obligated to comply with random comments from the public?

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I get that, but like I said, will Ammanagment
> comply

No, you don't "get that". By the very fact that you ask the same question again, and set the precondition that Amtrak will "comply" shows that you do not in fact "get it".

You can't set a pre-condition like that when some process like this study is just beginning. Bringing about change never works that way - anywhere. You have to engage in the process, work for the best outcome, and then use the best case you've got when all is said and done to try to effect the change. In this, or any other endeavor.

If you don't start because you aren't sure that the party you want to change will do so, then you're never going to bring about change in anything. Whether it's Amtrak, or anything else.

I sure hope for your sake that you're just trolling when you make a remark like that. Because if you are really serious that you need to have an assured outcome in your favor when you start a change process, I think you're gonna have a lot of tough sledding in your career and in life. Much less in trying to bring about some change with Amtrak. Here's hoping that you can find a way to a more constructive point of view.

MC



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/23 22:11 by ironmtn.

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I get that, but like I said, will Ammanagment
> comply
>
> Posted from Android

This is a study where they will make recommendations to Congress. If Congress acts on any of these then yes Amtrak will comply (and will be required by law to do so.) those route proposals with grassroots support from the advocacy community and attention from lawmakers will surely be in a stronger place for future implementation. That’s why it’s important to participate in this process - advocacy is going to be very important here.

My sort of 2nd frequeuncy idea is a neo Three Rivers/ Bway Ltd. The Pittsburgh transfer situation is terrible and most of that business has been killed off. We know there is a strong potential market between Trenton-Johnstown and points west of Pittsburgh which Amtrak killed. Two Lake Shore Ltds or a Daily Cardinal does not help that one bit. 

I'd say thru cars, but Pennsylvanian Airo transets will not be easily yanked apart and cars switched. 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/16/23 12:32 by joemvcnj.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My sort of 2nd frequeuncy idea is a neo Three
> Rivers/ Bway Ltd. The Pittsburgh transfer
> situation is terrible and most of that busienss
> has been killed off. We know there is a strong
> potential market betwen Trenton-Johnstown and
> point west of Pittsburgh whicjh Amtrak killed. Two
> Lake Shore Ltds or a Daily Cardinal does not help
> that one but. 
>
> I'd say thru cars, but Pennsylvanian Airo transets
> will not be easily yanked apart and cars
> switched. 


So just run 2 sets. Like every other first world country does.

ChicagoCoyote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> joemvcnj Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > My sort of 2nd frequeuncy idea is a neo Three
> > Rivers/ Bway Ltd. The Pittsburgh transfer
> > situation is terrible and most of that busienss
> > has been killed off. We know there is a strong
> > potential market betwen Trenton-Johnstown and
> > point west of Pittsburgh whicjh Amtrak killed.
> Two
> > Lake Shore Ltds or a Daily Cardinal does not
> help
> > that one but. 
> >
> > I'd say thru cars, but Pennsylvanian Airo
> transets
> > will not be easily yanked apart and cars
> > switched. 
>
>
> So just run 2 sets. Like every other first world
> country does.

And stick a whole Airo train set on the rear of the Capitol Ltd. I don't think so. . 

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My sort of 2nd frequeuncy idea is a neo Three
> Rivers/ Bway Ltd. The Pittsburgh transfer
> situation is terrible and most of that busienss
> has been killed off.

This one definitely should be on the list. My others would be Florida - Atlanta - Chicago , Atlanta - Meridian - Fort Worth, Pioneer, NCH, and Desert Wind. Add on top of that extension of CONO to Orlando and daily sunset and cardinal.

ironmtn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ProAmtrak Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > I get that, but like I said, will Ammanagment
> > comply
>
> No, you don't "get that". By the very fact that
> you ask the same question again, and set the
> precondition that Amtrak will "comply" shows that
> you do not in fact "get it".
>
> You can't set a pre-condition like that when some
> process like this study is just beginning.
> Bringing about change never works that way -
> anywhere. You have to engage in the process, work
> for the best outcome, and then use the best case
> you've got when all is said and done to try to
> effect the change. In this, or any other
> endeavor.
>
> If you don't start because you aren't sure that
> the party you want to change will do so, then
> you're never going to bring about change in
> anything. Whether it's Amtrak, or anything else.
>
> I sure hope for your sake that you're just
> trolling when you make a remark like that. Because
> if you are really serious that you need to have an
> assured outcome in your favor when you start a
> change process, I think you're gonna have a lot of
> tough sledding in your career and in life. Much
> less in trying to bring about some change with
> Amtrak. Here's hoping that you can find a way to a
> more constructive point of view.
>
> MC

Well guess what, since you think my question doesn't hold water, good luck on whatever suggestions show up, because chances are as long as Gardner and Co. are still there, not much will change with the LD Network!

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Well guess what, since you think my question
> doesn't hold water, good luck on whatever
> suggestions show up, because chances are as long
> as Gardner and Co. are still there, not much will
> change with the LD Network!

...unless Congress says otherwise. They are the ones who mandated the work.

TAW

TAW Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ProAmtrak Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Well guess what, since you think my question
> > doesn't hold water, good luck on whatever
> > suggestions show up, because chances are as
> long
> > as Gardner and Co. are still there, not much
> will
> > change with the LD Network!
>
> ...unless Congress says otherwise. They are the
> ones who mandated the work.
>
> TAW

They already violated some of the demands from Congress, Joe explained that, so go figure how that'll turn out, can't wait to see this and just shake my head when Gardner and Co. just sidesteps the demands Congress will put to them!

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> They already violated some of the demands from
> Congress, Joe explained that, so go figure how
> that'll turn out, can't wait to see this and just
> shake my head when Gardner and Co. just sidesteps
> the demands Congress will put to them!

Used to be that ignoring or being contemptuous toward Congress wa a Bad Thing.

Let's hope it becomes a Bad Thing again.

TAW

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TAW Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ProAmtrak Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > Well guess what, since you think my question
> > > doesn't hold water, good luck on whatever
> > > suggestions show up, because chances are as
> > long
> > > as Gardner and Co. are still there, not much
> > will
> > > change with the LD Network!
> >
> > ...unless Congress says otherwise. They are the
> > ones who mandated the work.
> >
> > TAW
>
> They already violated some of the demands from
> Congress, Joe explained that, so go figure how
> that'll turn out, can't wait to see this and just
> shake my head when Gardner and Co. just sidesteps
> the demands Congress will put to them!

There is a clear solution at least for you. Don't waste your time participating in the process if you think it is pointless. There are many others who clearly don't agree with you and are unlikely to agree with you even if you scream from the rooftops until the cows come home. So either you can carry on as is or conserve your energy for expedning it in some other fruitful venture :D

Here is the win win for you ... if it works, everyone gets a few more trains. If it does not you can say "I told you so". LOL!