Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Please answer my ignorant questions about AMTRACK [vanity]
29 May 2012 | me

Posted on 05/29/2012 9:17:57 AM PDT by Feline_AIDS

Alternate title for this post:

Dreams from My Freightcar: A Story of Pace and Incompetence

1. Why can't private passenger trains operate like plane companies?

2. Why don't we rip up some old tracks and turn them into true high-speed elevated rail that travels at 500 kilometers/hr?

3. Why is Amtrack, as it is now, so inefficient and crappy when train transportation is supposedly so efficient (CSX's 430+miles/gallon fuel)

4. There seems to be an inverse relationship of luxury to efficiency. Plane travel is torture, but it's efficient. Train travel could be luxurious since it's not fuel inefficient, but is time inefficient. Why is this ratio not considered for leisure travel? In other words, weight doesn't seem like it should be a serious consideration in train travel like it is in air travel, so why don't we have palatial luxury compartments? Is there a limit to the length of a passenger train?

5. Is Amtrack not as bad as I think it is? (All I know is I thought maybe I'd take a train on a leisure trip, but found the prices were outrageous, at least compared to flying.)


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: amtrack; highspeedrail; obama; trains; vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last
To: Buckeye McFrog

The only reason people take the Boston to NYC trains is because the cab ride in from the airport is $40 and 45 minutes. The Amtrack drops you off at Penn station 34th Street and 7th/8th Avenue right under Madison Square Garden in midtown Manhattan. That is the only reason I ever took it.

Also, it cost $45/day or more to park a car in NYC. It adds up if you are going to be there for a few days.


21 posted on 05/29/2012 9:36:29 AM PDT by woodbutcher1963
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: svcw

I watch Top Gear and they do a lot of races across Europe car vs different public transportation. So far, I don’t think public transportation has won yet.

Even flying a small private plane from the south of France to London was slower than the drive.


22 posted on 05/29/2012 9:37:22 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Feline_AIDS

One disadvantage is the poor scheduling. Taking a train at 5:00 am isn’t fun. On the other hand, so far at least, you and your luggage don’t have to go through TSA screenings.


23 posted on 05/29/2012 9:37:22 AM PDT by fatnotlazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

ShadowAce, you bring up a very good point. All trains must run on track. To save money during the building of track, most of the track in the United States is single track. Since it is privately owned, it is like a private road. Private companies use the track for their own trains, and charge other freight companies to use their rail lines.

To make the train transportation market similar to the air carrier market, you would need to nationalize all of the physical rail, many of the rail stations, and then create a national rail managment center to direct traffic. Considering that there are some rail lines / corridors that are already heavily used, you would need to further invest the building of additional rail lines / bridges / corridors / spurs

All of this adds up to a very expensive proposition.


24 posted on 05/29/2012 9:37:56 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: freeangel

I think that he got tombstoned awhile ago. He was starting to get more and more militant and less and less rational with his postings. I suspect that he angered the wrong admin/mod.


25 posted on 05/29/2012 9:38:08 AM PDT by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Feline_AIDS
Union and competition with interstate highway and planes. High-speed rail (124 mph to 155 mph) is way too expensive to construct and would never turn a profit.

Trains only compete with highway and planes in high density populations like the northeast but only for 2 people or less. Once you have more than 2 people in your traveling party driving a car is more economical.

26 posted on 05/29/2012 9:38:13 AM PDT by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Feline_AIDS

Ask John Galt.


27 posted on 05/29/2012 9:38:22 AM PDT by IM2MAD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Feline_AIDS

Simple answer- AMTRAK is a Government-Run Company.
‘nuf said...


28 posted on 05/29/2012 9:40:22 AM PDT by tcrlaf (Election 2012: THE RAPTURE OF THE DEMOCRATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo
These people generally have impressive looking, yet functionally worthless CV’s and end up in positions where they can unintentional inflict the worst damage possible

"The Peter Principle" lives.

29 posted on 05/29/2012 9:40:22 AM PDT by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I remember that episode. (Great show, Top Gear)
Are you watching that new show with Richard Hamond, where he tries to learn to operate big equipment in three days?
Very entertaining.
Yep, the train is slow and easy - I still love train travel.


30 posted on 05/29/2012 9:41:40 AM PDT by svcw (If one living cell on another planet is life, why isn't it life in the womb?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
"Why don't we rip up some old tracks and turn them into true high-speed elevated rail that travels at 500 kilometers/hr?" Whoare "we"? Do you have a mouse in your pocket? Last time I headed out with a pickaxe and pulled up a few sleepers, I was arrested. So I say "we" to refer to "everyone, including companies, interested in passenger train travel." And the mouse in my pocket is named Plugs McDrunkface after our illustrious VP, but as you might imagine, he's not good for anything, so I wasn't referring to him when I said "we."
31 posted on 05/29/2012 9:42:10 AM PDT by Feline_AIDS (A gun in hand is better than a cop on the phone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Feline_AIDS
High s;peed rail requires the near complete elimination of sharp or even medium curves in the track. The track has to be welded rail with near daily maintenance.
32 posted on 05/29/2012 9:43:41 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Feline_AIDS

Too many destinations...something like 500 cities served. Some of those routes have got to be losers.


33 posted on 05/29/2012 9:45:14 AM PDT by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Feline_AIDS

Here is the explanation from the Amtrak Historical Society:

The Chiefs, the Limiteds, the Zephyrs. They were more than passenger trains. They surrounded us with impeccable comfort and tantalized our palates with elegant dining fare as they whisked into a world of romance and mystique.

During the 1940s the passenger train began fighting a battle against the airplane and private automobile. By the 1960s the passenger train was rarely considered as a means of travel. Schedules were erratic, trains were run down, and more often than not the journey was a miserable experience.

Then, in October, 1970, in an attempt to revive passenger rail service, congress passed the Rail Passenger Service Act. That Act created Amtrak, a private company which, on May 1, 1971 began managing a nation-wide rail system dedicated to passenger service.
__________________________________
I’m old enough to have ridden the Super Chiefs when they were in their prime, but as the explanation notes they went downhill rapidly with the advent of air and interstate. In the 70s, Amtrak had reasonable rates and we could go to New York from North Carolina on an overnight ride cheaper than flying. Some parts of the journey were slow due to bad track and the trains were always late even then. Now the rates are often higher than flying and the schedules are just as bad.


34 posted on 05/29/2012 9:48:04 AM PDT by DeFault User
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Feline_AIDS

Amtrak was supposed to be a temporary measure until somebody figured out how to run passenger rail profitably in a world of freeways and airplanes. That was 40 years ago. Clinton gave them a big boost in funding that was only supposed to last 5 years at the end of which they were either supposed to become self sustaining or cease to exist, neither happened. If you take the time to understand those facts all your questions are answered.


35 posted on 05/29/2012 9:50:40 AM PDT by discostu (I did it 35 minutes ago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: svcw

Yeah I like trains too. I just don’t want to make taxpayers fund them.


36 posted on 05/29/2012 9:51:42 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Tenacious 1

As a frequent user of the Amtrak Cardinal, I think I can answer a few of those questions.

The direct line Indy-Lafayette tracks (NYCentral Line) were pulled up in the 80’s. The train now must go Indy-Crawfordsville-Lafayette, adding 40 miles to the trip, over rail lines owned by two different companies.

The real problem for this train is the bottleneck on the Chicago Southside. Amtrak has to add 60 minutes to the schedule due to this, and sometimes sits for far longer than that, just short of the east-west mainline. This effects the train both ways.

Once off the Chicago area tracks and on the Monon, heading southbound, it usually does very well.


37 posted on 05/29/2012 9:52:25 AM PDT by tcrlaf (Election 2012: THE RAPTURE OF THE DEMOCRATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Feline_AIDS

Wow... Total highway miles of road in the United States (all public roads/streets):
1960: 3.5 million miles
1960: 3.7 million
1980: 3.8 million
1990: 3.9- million
2000: 3.9+ million
2009: 4.05 million

Total Rail miles (excluding doubled tracks and sidings):
1960: 207,334 miles
1970: 196K
1980: 165K
1990: 120K
2000: 99.2K
2010: 93.9K
(AMTRAK miles: 24K in 1980... declining to 21.1K in 2009)

Meanwhile: there were 254.2 MILLION registered passenger vehicles in the US in 2009. Why take the train if you spent the money to have the convenience of a car?

(Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics/Research and Innovative Technology Administration)


38 posted on 05/29/2012 9:53:27 AM PDT by alancarp (Liberals are all for shared pain... until they're included in the pain group.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #39 Removed by Moderator

To: Feline_AIDS

“I’m asking why private companies don’t do this.”

Because private companies want to make a profit.


40 posted on 05/29/2012 9:56:18 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson