Posted on 05/03/2010 6:06:28 AM PDT by Willie Green
US travelers have grown accustomed to long airport security lines, delayed and crowded flights, and congested roadways. It should come as little surprise to anyone, then, to encounter similar hassles on America's long-neglected passenger railroad, Amtrak. In an April 25 travel story, Washington Post reporters Andrea Sachs and Nancy Trejos described the plight of two chronically late trains to Washington-one from Boston, the other from Charlotte, NC.
Regular Amtrak riders from coast to coast have come to expect delays, and to be sure, many trains almost never run on time. However, the Post article only examined two schedules out of hundreds and only in one sliver of the country, giving readers an incomplete rendering of Amtrak's problems and their underlying causes. For the past 50 years, the United States has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on highways, and most agree that this investment gave the economy a critical boost and made it possible for Sun Belt cities such as Atlanta, Houston, Dallas and Phoenix to flourish.
Until the mid-20th century, passenger trains were the crown jewels of American travel. Hollywood celebrities, before they switched to less glamorous jets, used the ultimate chauffeurs, the 20th Century Limited between New York and Chicago and the Super Chief between Chicago and Los Angeles to bridge their bi-coastal social calendars. (In fact, "Chiefing" became another word for cross-country travel. Somehow, "Delta-ing" just doesn't sound the same.)
These trains were luxury cruise ships on steel wheels. You could have your hair cut or shoes shined, you could enjoy cocktails and live music, or fine dining on white tablecloths with real china and silver. By the time you retired to your sleeping compartment, your bed already would be made for you by an attendant.
The public ultimately abandoned passenger trains for automobiles and airplanes, and most private railroad companies dropped passenger service in 1971, leaving what remained to Amtrak. Though ridership has grown ever since, government subsidies, amounting to a fraction of federal highway spending, haven't kept pace with demand.
The neglect shows itself in many forms: equipment shortages and breakdowns, lackluster food service and spotty on-time performance. The Washington Post reporters got that part right: It's little wonder the romance is gone.
The Charlotte-Washington Carolinian, cited as an example by the reporters, is often delayed by freight trains. The reasons are simple: In the 1980s, freight hauler CSX abandoned the direct route Amtrak used between Richmond and Raleigh. This forced passenger trains onto a slower route between the capitals of Virginia and North Carolina.
It also forced them to share space with freight trains on the primary CSX freight route along the East Coast. Until the 1960s, this line was mostly double track, but ironically, the decline of passenger trains resulted in the removal of much of the second track. The solution to this problem may involve reversing one or both of these earlier capacity reductions: Restore the direct link between the two cities or rebuild the second track on the other route. The Post article also bemoaned the limitations of Amtrak's busiest route: The Northeast Corridor, which connects Washington to New York and Boston.
Amtrak's flagship train, the Acela, the closest thing we have in the US to fast trains in Europe or Asia, must twist its way at excruciatingly slow speeds through a series of tunnels in Baltimore that date back to the 1870s. It also must negotiate century-old bridges and tunnels between Newark and New York, and a circuitous coastline path between New Haven, Conn, and Providence, RI In short, there are few places where it can operate at its maximum speed of 150 mph.
The Northeast Corridor needs tens of billions of dollars to bring it up to modern standards. Some stretches were upgraded in the past decade, but most of it-the overhead electrical supply and train control system-dates back 75 years. The Pennsylvania Railroad, a private company, made that investment, not the US government.
However, Uncle Sam was a huge beneficiary of this project-in World War II, this precursor to multilane highways carried a staggering volume of troops, equipment and raw materials by the trainload-the Allies couldn't have won without it. Now under Amtrak's ownership and with freight traffic largely shifted to other routes, the Northeast Corridor is a dedicated passenger conveyor belt that's due for its biggest overhaul since the Great Depression.
Amtrak's national network isn't just an alternative for people who can't or won't fly or drive, or a joy ride for hardcore train enthusiasts. Passenger trains serve many rural communities that are hundreds of miles from the nearest commercial airport. In densely populated corridors such as Washington-New York, Chicago-St Louis, Los Angeles-San Diego and Portland-Seattle, trains, even at relatively modest speeds, offer considerable advantages over flying or driving.
President Barack Obama has pledged the most significant rail infrastructure investment in decades. Some of these funds will upgrade existing routes with faster speeds, improved train control systems and more frequent service. The rest will plant the seed of true high-speed rail: the fast, comfortable trains that other countries have embraced during the decades when America turned its back on passenger rail. It's been 40 years since the romance of rail travel faded from America's public consciousness. Now, it's not the romance, but a practical appeal that offers the best chance for reviving US intercity train travel. After years of investing almost exclusively in highway infrastructure, we no longer can afford to miss the train.
Kuwait pimping for Obama. I guess they and the Saudis paid good money to elect their Muslim.
When there was an actual market demand for intercity rail passenger service in this country, private railroads provided it far more efficiently than than today's Amtrak fans can possibly imagine.
This past fall I went to DC for the 9/11 rally via train.
I took a commuter bus from Augusta, Maine at 6:30 to Boston South station (1 15min stop in Prtland). Walked 100 yards from bus station to train station. Train left on time and arrived on time in DC.
I went to the other end of union station to board ‘metro’. One train took me across the river to Alexandria. Walked two blocks to Residence Inn. Passed Whole foods on the way and picked up supper. Was in bed by 9 PM.
When people here in Maine talk about a ‘light rail service’ I’m the first to call them crazy. We’ve only got 1.3 million people in the whole state. But the idea of have train service between Montreal,Bangor,Augusta, to Boston (and down the coast) should be looked at.
Last 2 Amtrak trips were between Fayetteville and Trenton. The train took 12-14 hours. I could have driven it in 8 for much less money and still stopped in a nice restaurant on the way.
It would be good if Amtrak was run properly, but it simply isn’t. It should be faster and more convenient, but it just isn’t.
On the one trip North, the Amtrak locomotive was unserviceable. So they called in buses, which were late, to take folks to DC, to catch another train to finish the trip...
I think its fair to say that much of America’s greatness derives from the fact we refuse to be herded like sheep or cattle....
frustrates the bejesus out of the all so knowing Ivy League sophomores who think they’re entitled to run the world...
Add to that their schedules are not very good and then the expense, it is just so much easier for me to drive my family to San Diego then take a train.
I wised up REAL fast. When I went back to Stockton I took a flight to San Francisco where my wife picked me up - drove home with hours to spare and at about the same cost.
$50 million PER MILE for high speed rail.
Just for the fun of it, I looked to see about taking Amtrak. It would cost me $840.00 a person, and take 5 days to get there, and involve 3 transfers!!! We have only 7 days, it would take 10 days to take the train, and that would not include any vacation time in Salt Lake City.
Compare that to $294.00, 7 1/2 hours, one transfer.
Obviously taking the Amtrak cross country (or half way cross country) could be a vacation on it's own, it is not a viable alternative to driving or flying.
Amtrak owns a lot of buses. A fundamental problem with train systems is that they fail ungracefully. One brake pad catching fire anywhere in the system can bring the whole system down. Trains are simply uncompetitive for time-reliable transportation.
Q. What is the best thing about Washington, DC?
A. They’ve got this train there which heads right out of town.
Make it official and change your FR screen name to James Taggart.
Just for the fun of it, I looked to see about taking Amtrak. It would cost me $840.00 a person, and take 5 days to get there, and involve 3 transfers!!!
Compare that to $294.00, 7 1/2 hours, one transfer.
I just checked Amtrak for a one-way ticket, Wisconsin Dells to Salt Lake...
$310 for an 83 hour trip, with transfers in Portland and Sacramento.
Not as bad as you suggest, but a quick look at an Amtrak route map should have reminded you that transferring in Portland and Sacramento is probably not the best way to go. (My guess is that they probably outsourced the computer route calculator to India or China), But anyway, click on "Multi=City" and scedule your trip : Wisconsin Dells to Chicago to Salt Lake.
That one comes up $190 and 38 hours of train travel.
(Plus a 22 hour layover in Chicago.)
That's quite a bit better, although still not competitive with air travel.
However, I really don't expect it to be for a 1200 trip.
Over that long distance, a jetliner would even be faster than maglev.
But that just illustrates the opportunity that exists for upgrading Amtrak service.
Older discontinued routes can be restored to provide more direct service and more frequent scheduling to drasticly reduce transit time.
We have to build infrastructure for the future,
Especially now that BP screwed up the offshore drilling... the cost of air travel is going to skyrocket.
Amtrak. We Suck Less. Sometimes.
eliminate all passanger trains!!
W-G,
It would be terrific if some of the new “stimulus” money were invested to buy new laser-straight right-of-ways. That change would eliminate delays caused because trains need to slow down to take tight-radius curves.
It would be terrific if some of the “stimulus” money were invested in high-tech road bed. For example, the “express tracks” between New York and Boston have many miles of “high speed” rail spiked to decaying wooden railroad ties. Those ties simply cannot be trusted to “handle” the stresses of trains moving over them at high speed.
It would be terrific if some of the “stimulus” money were invested in modern train signals and modern scheduling software. Then, more trains could use the same track, with less time lost from being “held” on sidings.
But I suspect that, once again, the “stimulus” money will be used to subsidize some of Amtrak’s operating costs, primarily salaries, perks and pensions.
Monopolies really do NOT operate for the benefit of their customers, do they?
Of course not.
That's precisely why the Freight Railroads should not be allowed to have monopoly ownership of the tracks and rail right-of-way.
The infrastructure itself (tracks & stations) should be government owned and maintained). Then private freight and passenger rail can all operate and compete fairly on the same track. Just like the airlines do in our airways and airports. Just like our trucking and busing companies do on our highways, and just like our barge and passenger ferries compete on our rivers, canals and waterways.
W-G,
Are you at all concerned that the “maintenance” you speak of would be performed by the same actors who “maintained” the collapsed I-35 bridge in Minneapolis and “maintained” the collapsed I-95 bridge in Greenwich, Connecticut?
How would you go about making an unaccountable government agency take (not “talk”) responsibility for the safety of rail passengers?
Class I US railroads make annual capital expenditures of over $200,000.00 per mile of track owned and yet charge the lowest freight rates in the world. One wonders whether Willie or any of the other rail fans on this forum actually have any transportation (or business, for that matter) experience.
Are you at all concerned that the “maintenance” you speak of would be performed by the same actors who “maintained” the collapsed I-35 bridge in Minneapolis and “maintained” the collapsed I-95 bridge in Greenwich, Connecticut?
No, not at all.
Passengers weigh a lot less than heavy freight,
and won't be collapsing any bridges.
When you’re done reading Willie’s answer, go to Google and type in something to the effect of: “passenger train wrecks bridges”.
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.
