In all the recent fuss about cancelled airline flights the news media, specifically, the Dallas Morning News, for one, have not mentioned AMTRAK as an alternative. For example, the Texas Eagle is an excellent work-around for someone headed for Little Rock, St. Louis, or Chicago. It gets one there the next day instead of spending the night in a motel and taking chances that the airline might have a flight available anytime soon.
Is passenger rail really so invisible or disliked that it doesn’t even get a passing word?
I did see a stand up piece from O’Hare on TV sometime Thursday in which a reporter mentioned train (not specifically Amtrak) as an alternative. The sad thing is that Amtrak does not have the spare capacity in equipment to respond to the kind of demand this situation is likely to generate.
It is too bad they don’t, with all the misery airlines put their customers through, this might have been an opportunithy to win some repeat business.
Boston, New York, Washington, no problem! Forget about Air.
Sit down and streach out in a train less than 10 years old. Clean Trains, Elite Crews. A train every hour! When you add Airport Time, the train is faster and runs in all weather.
The 40 year old NARP party line on passenger trains as part of a balanced transportation system aside, what about Amtrak as an alternative?
I see three fallacies with this line of reasoning. The current airline situation is the result of FAA inspections turning up mechanical problems (possible faults in wires or wire connectors) in certain type of airplanes. What about the Talgos being taken out of service? What about the low availability of the TurboTrains and Metroliners back in the day? I am not being snarky here with “You think the airlines have problems, what about Amtrak?” My point is that all common carrier modes are regulated by safety authorities, and all common carrier modes are at risk that big chunks of transportation capacity be taken off line on account of a safety concern. I don’t see trains as having any special immunity.
The second fallacy is that Amtrak or trains in general provide an alternative to the poor grade of service provided by the airlines. Without going into the accounts of Amtrak horror stories matching airline horror stories, again, customer service is one of the consideration with any common carrier mode of transportation. Again, I don’t see anything inherent in Amtrak or in trains that they would provide better customer service; given that Amtrak receives direct government subsidies, there is some reason to believe that the culture and incentive systems for Amtrak may result in a somewhat lower standard of customer service than the airlines.
The final fallacy is one that Amtrak is the alternative or backstop to a major disruption of airline operations. You were not my first choice to ask to the prom, but Amy Cheerleader, who is much more sought after by all the guys than you, didn’t even return my phone call, and I really think you should drop whatever you are doing, spend a ton of money on a dress you will wear once, and go out with me.
I was on the road this past week, having flown from San Antonio to Norfolk, Virginia via Atlanta. While I was on a Delta flight and not affected, a co-worker with an American Airlines itinerary was not as fortunate. They did end up being booked on a Continental flight from Norfolk to Houston, but they had to drive the rest of the way to San Antonio (approximately 200 miles).
Meanwhile another Airline (Frontier) declared bankruptcy this past week, but will remain flying according to the news.
I hope Amtrak was able to pick up up some passengers in areas where they have good frequency of service.
I did not mean to suggest that we view AMTRAK as a backup to airlines or that we fund it to fill that role by buying a lot of extra equipment. I merely noted that the local media had a lot of focus on Dallas - Fort Worth Airport and discussed 1000’s of people stranded and inconvenienced without once mentioning passenger rail.
I am sure from my experiences on the Texas Eagle that there were some vacancies this past week that AMTRAK would gladly have filled. My point is that my curiosity is unsatisfied because my local news media didn’t say anything. And I’m wondering why they did that when AMTRAK is pretty much right under their nose in Dallas.
I will send the Dallas Morning News a short e-mail asking them.
Several years ago a fierce rain/snow storm closed almost all airports in southern New England and the New York area while I was on business in New London, CT. I changed from plane (Providence, RI, to Washington, DC) to train and had to stand in the end vestibule all the way to New York because a lot of other people did the same thing. Although tunnels in New York had been flooded, they were clear by the time my train arrived. Once I got a seat, the remainder of the trip was great.
Speaking of fuel consumption, have any of you noticed that airliners lately fly at about 400 MPH instead of 500 plus? That’s what my GPS is telling me. I suspect that they very carefully take into account load and weather, etc., to optimize the flight profile for fuel use. I think in the “old days” they went for shortest flight times.
Just for once, the media might have gotten it right.
With the number of flights cancelled and the number of people wanting transportation, filling every seat on every Amtrak train would have barely shortened the line of people waiting to use restrooms in air termini. That assumes that there is Amtrak service to start with.
In the case of my home town, site of one of the busiest airports in the country, Amtrak is something that happens a long way away in an inconvenient direction. The only alternative to flying is a road trip through some of the most desolate countryside this side of Mars - assuming that the stranded traveler can get a motor vehicle to use outside of the County limits set by most rental agencies.
If the media had even breathed, “Amtrak,” thousands of strandees would have besieged the local ticket offices - only to discover that the ocean liner they needed was actually a bass boat in relative passenger capacity.
Trains in the Northeast Corridor are now “All Reserved”, Regional trains can have “standies” at certian times, like snow storms.
The Acela is Business Class (2 & 2 across seating) or First Class (1 & 2 across seating) only, and “standies” are never allowed. All persons on-board are listed, ticked or not. Big windows, reclining seats, fold down large tables, 115 volt electrical outlets by the seats, Beer On Tap in the Grill car, they beat the Airlines in there 500 mile run.
Outside of the NEC and it’s branches, Chicago, California and perhaps a few other places, Amtrak is almost completely invisible. I doubt 1 in 10 Altantans even know that their city is served by Amtrak and only 1 in 10 of those have any idea where the train comes from or goes to.
At least Amtrak has one advantage if the Engines fail you are not meeting the ground at TERMINAL VELOCITY aka a CRASH were they sort out the pieces of the plane from the passengers with a microscope.
If I was in the airport and my fly got cancelled, this would be the next thing on my mind or better yet! if I was working with the airlines and I got a bunch of mad, yelling, cussing people. I would write a big sign and hold it up and the beginning of my line that reads:
“AMTRAK OR GREYHOUND!” take your pick and keep moving! cause your complaints will do nothing but aggrevate others
All the more reason I would expect the media to offer the information as part of their service to the public.
I sent my e-mail to the Dallas Morning News. We’ll see how they respond.
There was a letter in today’s paper suggesting the U.S. of A. should have a modern passenger rail system like those of other modern nations. Please see “We need to Get On Board.”
It’ll be interesting in the next decade or so to see how many of the “other modern nations” are able to keep funding those trains.
How to fund their social services in the near future is already a major concern. Something may have to give (besides their immigration policies; that card has already been played).
Is the media under any obligation to be a service to the public? Are they even under any obligation to be “fair” about their reporting?
I think neither. They are about making money and historically have been about taking sides on issues. In the first 100 years or more, the media was all about taking sides politically. Nobody even expected “fair and balanced” reporting – or even truthful reporting!
Occasionally, when Amtrak’s budget battles become national news, the local paper will do a pro-passenger rail op-ed piece, but other than that, Amtrak is below the radar most of the time, even for the media.
“Is the media under any obligation to be a service to the public?”
I don’t think newspapers are under any obligation. The Federal Communications Commission used to require radio and TV stations to provide a certain degree of public service, but I don’t know if that is still true.
Here is a simple example of what I’m thinking. When the paper reports on a street or intersection that rain has flooded out, it normally includes suggested routings to avoid the inconvenience. At my age, I’ve grown accustomed to that kind of service, so I was surprised that my newspaper didn’t do it (they didn’t mention buses, either).
I agree with you about AMTRAK being below the radar most of the time, and I think that’s kind of sad.
You can thank Wick Moorman and NS for that. Did you know that part of the employee bonus this year is based on train performance and all the NS operated Amtrak trains are included in the calculation AND the Crescent, Lake Shore and Capitol are monintored and reviewed in detail every week?
You might be able to say that the UP and CSX don’t care about the Amtrak trains, but you can’t say it about NS.
So one person wrote a letter to the editor saying the USA should have a passenger rail system like Japan or Europe. Big deal. I bet the letter writter didn’t mention the cost of what it would take to do it throughout the country–or the annual subsidized deficits. US passenger train travel works in a very few places such as the NE corridor with its dense population (although last I heard most travelers going the full distance from Boston to Baltimore/DC area still prefered to fly). Otherwise, the market isn’t there.
As for comparing USA travel to those countries, there’s one big difference everyone overlooks-the size of those countries in comparison to the USA. Heavily subsidized passenger rail makes sense in Belgium or the Netherlands. It doesn’t in a large country with tremendous rural areas such as the USA.
Question for someone who’s more familiar with government owned railroads abroad: Am I correct in assuming that they, unlike the privately owned USA freight railroads, do not have to pay property taxes to the local governments?
If you quote Boston to DC, you are right, but if you check NYC to DC, More people travel by rail than by air. If you check NYC to Philadelphia, almost 70% travel by rail.
The faster the trains go, the more people use them. Somewhere around 4 hour trips is when the airlines start to pull ahead.
Spend a couple of hours in the station in Baltimore and observe the number of people who get on and off each train. The market is there, it is just being inadequately served.