Entertaining is exactly the word that I use for all of this nonsense.
Rich
We, as a country, cannot afford what that level of entertainment will cost.
2 Likes
Agreed
1 Like
I donât agree with these last comments. Iâll leave it at that.
As long as passenger trains are using our system of freight railroads, I donât think weâll solve the problems of late passenger trains. If it were possible to build a dedicated system of tracks alongside the present freight railroads, much like Brightline in Florida, we might be able speed things up, but we wonât see anything like that for LD trains in our lifetimes.
We have a great system of airlines for longer distances. I donât believe we should spend huge amounts of tax money to prop up the LD trains .
2 Likes
Airlines might seem great to you but I am guessing you probably never flew before they were deregulated? I did and US domestic now is mostly crap today in my view. Lots of frequent flyer miles back from when I was a consultant and I remember duct tape on overhead bins and Kool Aide vs soda on a Dallas to San Antonio Delta Airlines flight. Understood that airline has reformed since but Delta is still only half way to where it used to be under the regulated regime. Check out âFly Guyâs Cabinâ on FB and read all the comments of all those happy airline employees today. 
Lack of funds, Texas tried to completely rebuild UP and shift itâs mainline West between I think it was DFW and San Antonio but could have been Austin and San Antonio. In return Texas would get the existing former MoPac line. Fell apart because Texas could not get itâs act together.
The other point I will make here is HSR is not needed in a lot of state run corridors that are only 2-3 hours in drive time duration, They only need high frequency and car competitive times. Chicago to Milwaukee is an example, 85 miles, follow the WisDOT plan of continuous capital improvement and I think that corridor will come close to if not exceed the break even threshold, probably with a top speed of only 90 mph. They could do the same with Chicago to Madison (maybe 3 hours after track upgrades). Both lines can continue to haul freight.
2 Likes
Wrong. Iâm old enough that I flew quite a bit before deregulation. I also remember how expensive it was.
This thread is about LD trains. Right now I can take a LD train to Los Angeles for $333 (coach seat) and spend nearly 52 hours on Amtrak. Or I can pay $275 and spend four hours on the plane. Now explain why we should sink tax money onto LD trains.
Texas did get its act together. They refused to spend tax money on this.
2 Likes
We canât afford a lot of what is coming, many of it will be hidden taxes (tariffs) and costs (another round of tax cuts mainly for the idle rich) to most of us. Amtrak LD service is unlikely to improve, maybe not exist.
There are many routes with major population centers that could be linked by former major trunk lines now lightly used or are small feeder railroads now. But it wonât happen.
2 Likes
Why should it?
Same here. My wife feels differently. 
Rich
3 Likes
I have an idea 
Let us speed up trains by half an hour. Letâs get to station B earlier.
Yippee half an hour extra at station B. What shall I do with the extra time?
The office doesnât open for another half hour.
Letâs have a coffee. Oh it is not ready yet. They were not expecting me for another half hour.
It is raining. What to do with the extra half hour?
Off course this scenario is all tongue in cheek. Does the extra half hour achieved make a huge difference to the cost of speeding up a journey?
David
Part of the issue in the United States as I am sure it is in the UK as I have seen rural UK passenger station stops via YouTube. A lot of the rural stations need to be a little more destination friendly to the traveler. Example, have a board/sign with phone numbers or QR codes of places to stay, transport options from the station, etc. Airports have that usually, not always with a train station. Drop off and Pick up dedicated rideshare spaces in parking lot. Local Edition Hertz or other rental car place nearby, etc, etc. You would think rail advocacy groups would be all over the stations issue and making them more user friendly because it is cheap to do but they have train tunnel vision in the United States. Ancillary means to boost ridership is rarely discussed.
I think LD train schedules in the United States can be sped up especially the ones with state corridors along their lines which have speed ups underway. So for example, Texas Eagle between Chicago and St. Louis. Speed limit is 110 mph but I believe they limit the Texas Eagle to far less than that due to the age of the equipment and the fact it was not designed to travel at 110 mph. So future LD equipment specs are an issue as well in my view. Does the increased purchase price of the equipment to make it 125 mph capable justify the schedule speed ups? Canât tell you that.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Related topic and as a FYI, I am sure you have seen this in the UK, certainly true of the US:âŚ
A big problem with rail passenger train advocacy in the United States is the railfan community itself. For starters across social media, whenever a conversation gets started they do these absolutist plops to the conversation which kind of kills the discussion and if the plop does not end the discussion they start an argument. When I say social media I mean rail passenger advocacy social mediaâŚThe TRAINS forums are OK for these type of discussions in my view and it is why the TRAINS forums exist.
Railfans / enthusiasts show up at rail passenger advocacy meetings unprepared (never having read the past work or rail studies) and with limited knowledge of the subject, they take the discussion off on various irrelevant tangents and sometimes it is a trip down nostalgia lane (herding cats analogy) definitely not respecting the prior work done already and just showing up fresh at a meeting is an issue. In part this is why they have the âfoamerâ label I suspect.
So my philosophy at this late age and having experienced the faltering start and stop with rail passenger advocacy groups is contact with stakeholders first via whatever means and see what help they need or what their status is. Public discussion meetings, have a place but the public meeting facilitator use a moderating technique so everyone gets heard at the public comments section. WisDOT I think has excelled at this. So I love to attend WisDOT meetings but I usually avoid sponsored meetings of public advocacy groups if there are too many railfans intermixed. Just not time efficient.
2 Likes
The top allowable speed for Amtrakâs Superliner cars is 100 mph. The maximum allowable speed for the P42DC locomotives is 110 mph.
There are sections of the route between Chicago and St. Louis where the Texas Eagle can run 100 mph. Between St. Louis and San Antonio, as well as San Antonio to LAX, the top speed is 79 mph.
For the four years ended FY24, long-distance riders as a percentage of Amtrakâs total ridership declined from 18.4 percent in FY21 to 13 percent in FY24, a decline of 29.2 percent. Over the same period ridership on the NEC increased by 18.1 percent, i.e., from 36.2 percent to 42.8 percent of total ridership.
2 Likes
We could really use high speed inter-city rail.
Rich
Between selected cities - not universal.
Not all cities are realistic end points.
Oh, I agree with that, but consider Chicago-St. Louis. The distance is roughly 300 miles. So, even at a speed of 100 MPH across the entire route, that is still a 3-hour trip. Admittedly, that beats 5 hours by car. But donât high speed trains do 200 MPH? That would mean a 90-minute trip. Not bad.
Rich
But donât high speed trains do 200 MPH? That would mean a 90-minute trip. Not bad.
Rich
They can reach such speeds, but not constant. High speed trains can be seen in Northumberland, England. Travel through Morpeth at 200mph you would finish up in the North Sea. 
David
Yeah, but there are no large bodies of water between Chicago and St. Louis. 
Rich
1 Like
Morpeth is a long way away from the North Sea. 
.
No matter what train it is Morpeth Curve is 20mph. 
David
1 Like
I have never seen it do above 80 mph using my cell phone app. I have not ridden it in over 2 years though. The cars might be 100 mph capable but I think it highly unlikely Amtrak will let them run above 90 mph if they even allow that speed. I suspect the concern is age.
2 Likes
Agree. I would not support high speed rail between Chicago and Milwaukee for example. It would be a waste of money and not a necessary priority at this point. Build HSR between Milwaukee and Twin Cities first, then think about Chicago to Milwaukee. A big problem with the HSR approach is wanting to build it everywhere all at once. That is going to lead to a taxpayer revolt at some point. Build a decent medium distance demonstration project and make it private-public partnership vs all government and then I think we have a good chance. Brightline West will probably be the first online, it is not 200+ mph but they are also looking at bottom line as well for an initial startup. Why load the Balance sheet up with debt. Some people say Miami to Orlando will never recoup itâs costs but how many years of data do we have on that? Also we have no clue what the Tampa extension will bring in as far as ridership. So lets wait until system buildout as well before we pronounce a failure or success. Thank goodness, Fortress Investments is far more patient than the average railfan.
Then reduce the airlines shorter flight market share with targeted marketing and enhancements. I really do not think this is a big ask. LD trains can sponge off the SD and state run corridors for speed when Amtrak Management gets around to obtaining LD capable equipment they are comfortable with running higher speed.
2 Likes