It is with some hesitancy that I post a link to the report Long Distance Trains: A Foundation for National Mobility. I hesitate because the report is provided by the National Association of Railroad Passengers, an organization which has its critics. Actually, I was led to the report by those very critics. If, I wondered, NARP is so ineffective wouldn’t it be reasonable to see for myself why it is ineffective? And so I did a little net surfing around the NARP website. The report here is of interest because its main focus is on long distance trains and long distance trains get the most criticism.
There are a few important statistics: Since 2000 our population has grown 11.6 per cent. Road travel has grown a little over half at 6.7 per cent. Air travel has grown at a much slower level, 2.2 per cent. The report argues the reason is because our roads and air routes are “plateaued,” so crowded that many people now avoid them. Also, air lines tend to concentrate on our largest cities leaving mid sized cities with few flights and high fares while small places have lost their service entirely. Amtrak President Joe Boardman has pointed out intercity bus service is actualy declining because buses also are backing away from smaller places to serve only large cities which the the only places they can make a profit. So if our roads and airways cannot keep up with our need to travel, what is left?
Of course trains are left. Amtrak trains provide our long distance service and much intercity service. (The report does not deal with commuter service between cities). Intercity train ridership has grown 3 times as fast as our population and long distance ridership has grown twice as fast as population. NARP believes that either we increase Amtrak service or we increasingly limit the mobility of Americans.
One can argue facts until blue in the face. Funding of Amtrak is political and will continue as a way of sharing the wealth. North Dakota senators will not vote for Hurricane Sandy relief unless they get money for Amtrak. (Quite frankly, North Dakota gets farm money by the wheel barrows full and is now overflowing with oil money, so it may not need Amtrak money to balance things out). The newsline article that “long distance trains are at a cross roads” is just the same debate that always rages. Amtrak ridership has increased about 40% since the mid '90’s because air fares have gone thru the roof (and will go higher once there is only one domestic airline).
I don’t think anything will happen with Amtrak as it is one way the rural population gets some of its cash back from the feds.
North Dakota ranked 44th in per capita contribution to the federal government. as of 2007, each resident receiving $4856 more than sent to DC. Compare that to Minnesota #2, which sends $7431 more to DC than it receives, per capita.
Yes, half of farm income is welfare and they have a very good lobbying team. Would like to know how much of that welfare goes back to lobby against shippers who want to make a few bucks.
And we often do argue the facts until we are blue in the face. Since Amtrak is the only show in town I hope it continues. Then I read about the guy who wants to wage a “holy jihad” against Amtrak. I just hope I can ride Amtrak without being made to feel my safety is threatened.
FederaL support for agriculture varies highly by crop. Probably the worse case support is sugar, but people have their own pet examples such as the ethanol subsidies. Many folks in farm states wish the Feds would simply end their involvement in the industry or restrict it to crop insurance activities.
However, the total subsidies are a relatively small item. Did you know that 75% of the Department of Agriculture’s budget is SNAP (formerly called food stamps), and it is expanding rapidly?
Long distance Amtrak trains are essential for cross-continent mobility for the handicapped and elderlly. A much repeated statementm and probablly will have to be repeated a thouseand times more.
That is not Amtrak’s mandate. It is supposed to provide transportation for the most people, which means providing a fast service many times per day on routes serving many major metro areas. Providing land cruises for niche markets is not.
If we need this, then let’s do it…efficiently - with better coverage. Amtrak’s LD trains are a very expensive and inefficient way of accomplishing this.
I’m not sure I’m following you here, Don. NARP has a plan for better passenger rail coverage of the nation but I don’t think that is what you mean. Do you have your own map with your own lines on it?
Don is correct but the capital costs will be very high. Just operating with more passengers will reduce the operating loss + operating losses / passenger but that cannot happen quickly. Just looking at the single level routes. ------ There reuirements are 20 -21 operating train sets and with a reasonable availability of 85% requires 23 -24 total sets although at first new equipment may require either more or less for new car teething problems. No matter what total time of trains need to meet or beat present schedules. 1. -Changing train length from 9 - 14 cars requires 115 additional cars The PRIIA for the Silver Meteor stated that one additional coach provided a net operating loss redction of $700,000 2. #1 would also require 25 additional locomotives both #1 &3. Also 2 -1/2 dual mode locos for the NYP - ALBANY route. 3. Making the Cardinal daily would require an additional -15 cars ? and 2 locos 4. Second motors for the NEC portion would require 19 more due to southboud earyl morning departures from NYP however that may be mitigated by turns ot WASH to NEC TRAINS ? 5. To lenghten these trains will require
No !! ! Just that AMTRAK’S request of $2.1B for next year can easily be justified by these figures. I would like to see $3B requested and the additional amount set aside be applied to the need to have AMTRAK’S 100 single level cars per year ordered for a multi year purchase. ( see fleet strategy plan version 3.1 ). The present 130 car order is certainly not at that leve of productionl but can be accelerated to the 100 figure within a year ? Now all we need to do is convince Congress ???
BTW does anyone know the progress of the Vewliner - 2 construction ??
Maximize stops at the greatest travel markets on the route at times people are awake.
This means you chop and flip the Eastern LD train into day trains and drop thier diners and sleepers. Serve the intra-FL market with intra-FL trains. Fix the food service - contract it out or re-engineer the whole thing.
Start with a clean sheet of paper, not the 1950 Official Guide.
Not to detract at all from your point: I think there are others:
Improve on-time performance to boost ridership
Consider fuel savings in new (and rebuilt) equipment and locomotive choices. (Looks like that may already be happening with that new EMD design, if the picture is more than hopeful angling… ;-} )
Add amenities (more subsidy cost in the short run) to improve both ridership and returning customers (less subsidy cost, unless additional passengers up to some point require additional subsidy per head rather than having an effective marginal cost of almost zero)
Bring back the package express idea, this time in collaboration with the railroads, FedEx Ground, the USPS, etc. (Might be at least one thing harking back to the '50 OG at that!)
I am not sure about that “maximize seats per train”; it sounds to me like a Menk/Biaggini shortening-the-seat-track-to-fit-more-in-a-car kind of “economy”. The only time to ‘maximize seats’ is on services, like those deserving bilevels in the NEC, where existing equipment is maxed out and people are more concerned with any seat than getting a comfortable one.
One of the great advantages I see in train travel is that you aren’t limited to a bus-class seat. I can bear miserable footroom on an airplane, or even in a car. NOT on a bus, or anything else that runs relatively slow with lots of other people’s stops…
Be interesting to see at what point various kinds of labor-saving device, electronic or ‘virtual’ aids, and the like will reduce the need for actual crew on these trains. I have a kind of half-dread of a “Julie”-like app that has answers right on my cell phone for things that stewards and conductors now offer… or that lets me pre-order a packaged meal that comes in on a cart or a tray for me to pick up and eat by my lonesome. Nice for some Corridor-type service, perhaps not so nice elsewhere.
It appears that a breakdown of the costs of LD travel needs a strong look - see.
Like many other posters I have wondered at the published fgures and have wondered whether some of the costs of short haul is present in reported LD costs. Maybe looking at the avoiadable costs can give us a better idea of what is going on.?? In no particular order these are just some of those costs.
Host RR charges. A whole bucket of worms and maybe is subject to confidentiality agreements maybe at least as a total per mile charge for each route.
a. Charges based on max passenger train speeds on each section of track ?.
b. Type of dispatching. CTC, ABS, dark territory? How much effort to dispatch ex;… BNSF’s speedway vs the no traffic Raton route.?
c. Charges for loaner host locos
d. Host RR crews
e. Detour vs. Freight RR charges
Station cost. – Can vary by at least ownership by local owner with no charges to AMTRAK to charges for every little glitch…
a. Owned and maintained by local government.
b. locally owned but leased by AMTRAK ----- maintenance by ?
c. Leased from host RR
d. AMTRAK owned
e, Un manned
f. AMTRAK agents either part tiime or full time. – How costed ?
g. utilities
h. costs for each stqtion needs listing.
How are trains charged when the LD trains when on AMTRAK’S TRACKAGE IE; NEC
I’ve already said that I think it is unrealistic to see Amtrak trains as part of an entitlement for people with disabilities. Joe Boardman points out that in the last year there has been a 16 per cent increase in identifiable people with disabilities who choose Amtrak. I think, then, they would need to be persuaded to use taxicabs or buses. Free airline tickets are not now available to them.
How could you clain that providing Amtrak riders with free airline tickets would be much cheaper than providing the train itself. Airlines are gladly given fifteen to twnty billion dollars is subsidies. Who pays for air traffic control? ,TSA?, air terminal costs? You seem to parrot the same old tripe that Dubya palmed off when he wanted to zero out funding for Amtrak and you know (I hope you would) the credibility of GWB or the lack thereof.
Well, he could start by noting the amount of the airline subsidies that come out of Amtrak’s budget. Amtrak’s assigned subsidies being the only ‘subsidy’ topic that is relevant in this discussion.
It’s immaterial from Amtrak’s point of view whether airlines are subsidized any amount, and I am not exactly sure why you do not or will not understand that.
If all those costs are subsidized from a different branch of the government, and the result is lower ticket prices, then Amtrak along with anyone else would get the benefit of that lower price.
And this is not a political forum, so leave the ‘Dubya’ crap at home.