Finally, some support in high places for rail travel in America:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-biden/why-america-needs-trains_b_412393.html
“Gabby Johnson is right!”
Unfortunately, the people who run Amtrak generally have it wrong. I looked into taking my family on the Acela from our home in the Boston Burbs to New York City. The tickets are the same price as a full-fare airplane ride. This may not be much to high rollers like Joe Biden (and former Amtrak head Mike Dukakis) but for us working stiffs who have to pay for the tickets ourselves with after-tax dollars, well, the economics say “Just drive the car.”
Similarly, I was looking at the “Downeaster” service from Boston to Portland, Maine, to connect with a proposed ski bus up to the Sunday River area. Unfortunately, the earliest train on Saturday morning wouldn’t get me to the mountain much before noon, and I’d have to leave shortly after lunch on Sunday to get the last train back that evening. A few years back, there actually was a ski train which ran from Portland to Sunday River, but, with connecting service like this, it’s no wonder that it wasn’t popular enough to keep running.
Hear, hear!
In good old Europe, we are well pampered when it comes to taking the train. But we had to learn the hard way as well. Run-down equipment, slow service, bad connections and high fares don´t make people take the train. A role model for how to develop showcase train service is certainly Switzerland. Trains run with the precision of a Swiss watch, passengers enjoy a load of on-board comfort, the trains are fast and quiet and pricing is fair. In Germany, we see some step-up improvents in this direction, but not in all regions.
But: With the exception of long distance travel, passenger trains don´t earn their feed and have to be susidized heavily. But that´s the way it has been even in the best years of rail travel.
Switzerland is the nicest layout I’ve ever seen.
You could not be more right, Mr. Beasley. The whole country is just one big model railroad!
To be successful trains must be fast, frequent, and on time. Except on the NE Corridor Amtrak is none of those.
I take the train when it is consistent with my travel plans. I do not compare the cost to air travel because I quit going to the airport when they installed the East German style checkpoints. I only compare rail to automobile. If there are only one or two of us traveling and the train actually goes where I need to go I take the train even if it takes longer because it is a more pleasant way to travel. Unfortunately, the train does not always serve the places I want to go.
When we go to the Timonium Train show, we take Amtrak to DC and the Metro to our hotel. The Metro into DC to do the museums on one or two days. Then the Metro to Union Station, Amtrak to Baltimore, and the Light rail to the Timonium fair grounds. We never need a car.
I like that routing–makes a lot more sense–
When I go to Toronto ON–I take VIA to TO’s Union Station --get on TTC subway–which is right there–go to transfer point get on subway car to destination—eh Voila!! there!—
If I took car-----BIG Parking Fees Await[:O]
Biden’s story is interesting. He was elected to the Senate at age 29 and had to wait a little past the regular swearing-in date until he turned 30 (by the constitution you have to be 30 to be a Senator) to actually take office. During that interim period his wife was killed in an accident, and he decided that rather than uproot his young kids in a situation like that, instead he would keep them all in the family home. So he began to spend a couple of hours one-way every day commuting by rail from Delaware to D.C. and back. He continued to do that the entire time he was in the Senate.
Many years ago I drove to DC for a convention. I left the car at the hotel and took the Metro everywhere we went. After that I saw no need to take the car at all. The Metro also goes to the airport if you are inclined to put up with that.
In Baltimore the light rail went everywhere we wanted to go except the B&O museum. For that we had to take the bus from the inner harbor.
Well as far as Amtrak goes their auto train is some what of a joke here on the east coast. A good idea in principal but you have to pick it up in Lorton Va. just outside of D.C. and it takes you to Sanford Fla. What about all the people who live north of D.C. lets say our friends up in Maine or Boston. Maybe it’s a matter of logistics or some other corporate mumbo jumbo but I can’t see why they shouldn’t have an auto train terminal in every major city on the eastern seaboard. Here you have a clear ct advantage over the airlines fro families and their not capitalizing on it, doesn’t make sense.
I live about 35 miles south of Hamburg. Going into town takes about 45 - 60 minutes by car, plus an average of $ 15 parking fee. The train takes me in just 30 minutes to downtown Hamburg, the ticket includes all metro-, bus- and subway lines, so I can get anywhere I want. No parking fee, no hassle, I can even get a coffee and a hot dog on the train - and the return fare is less than the parking fee!
One problem with New York is that the Amtrak station is right in the center of the city. There is no place to load cars. I suppose they could put a facility in New Jersey, but that would mean a long delay while the cars were added to the train. The area is very built up, and acquiring that amount of real estate could be a problem, too.
Also, the tunnels used for trains going through New York are old, and might not accomodate the auto carriers. The Long Island Railroad, for example, can’t run some of its equipment into certain Manhatten stations because there isn’t enough clearance.
I’m not sure that an auto-train from Boston would be cost-effective, either. We travel to Florida frequently. Flights are frequent and, if we pick our dates right, very inexpensive. Door to door, it’s about 7 hours. The train, on the other hand, would be a couple of days, and at least as expensive. When dealing with a week-long vacation timeframe, most travellers would rather spend their time at their destination instead of in transit.
It’s not a train, but the story of the ferry from Portland, Maine to Nova Scotia is instructive. They used to have a couple of standard large ocean-going ferries running this route. They carried cars and offered sleeping accomodations (and gambling) for the overnight runs. These old boats were retired in favor of “The Cat,” a high-speed hydrofoil ferry. Travel time was cut in half, so they didn’t need to run an overnight boat.
We took this boat last year. It was OK, but the TV ads which made it look like a luxury cruise ship were misleading. It was crowded, with pretty much every seat being full. It was more like a big, fat airplane than a cruise ship. It was also expensive - the round trip for our car and 3 people was close to a thousand dollars. When compared with the driving time of about 14 hours, the 5-hour trip seems good, but when you add on the loading time and the long delays while all those people try to get through customs / security at once, I would drive next time.
Not that I would have a choice. The Cat, which collected government subsidies in addition to the high fares, has been shut down.
I’m happy to take public transportation when I can, but most of the time driving is both more convenient and more cost-effective.
In DC I agree, who needs a car. In Baltimore you must not have needed or wanted to see very much of it if the light rail took you everywhere you needed to go. As a life long Baltimore area resident, I can tell you that except for your train show conncetion to Timonium, the Baltimore light rail is of little use to most of us in the area.
Baltimore is layed out like a wagon wheel, with 12 “spokes”, or suburban corridors that connect the suburbs to the city. The light rail serves two of those, the metro one. The other nine suburbs have no such mass transit other than poorly run bus service. Three “distant” suburbs are served by the MARC train service.
Back in the day, most of these twelve “spokes” had trolley lines, we replaced them why?
Even in the terrible traffic we have here, I can get most places by car much faster than by bus or light rail, assuming it even goes from were I am to my destination. The nearest train station to my house is 16 miles away, going in the opposite direction from Baltimore. There’s a good plan, drive 16 miles the wrong way to take the MARC train to Penn Station to than take the light rail to Timonium to the train show. Its only 20 miles from my house to Timonium, through a buch of windy back roads and takes only 30 min. That train trip would take 2-1/2 hrs.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not againt mass transit, but, maybe I am, since I don’t think it should be subsidized by the rest of us. But I don
Not true in the past here in the US. From the 1880’s to the 1950’s the government moved the mail by rail. The fees paid for this supported the passenger trains on which the mail was carried. Paying passengers where just cream off the top.
Today, that same post office expendature goes to trucking companies who move the mail on the highways and thereby subsidizing the interstate highway system through the fuel and road use taxes.
If that same money was still moving the mail by rail, the passenger trains here would still be running and making money.
It was only after the decline/elimination of the Railway Post Office service that railroads moved to abandon passenger service in the US.
Sheldon
I was addressing it from the transient traveler’s perspective. Local commuter is a different ball game.
I lived in Laurel for a while in the mid '60s, courtesy of Uncle Sam. I worked at The Governor Ritchie Drive-In in Glen Burnie in 1967.
Boston is also a spoke-and-hub system. (Boston sometimes refers to itself as The Hub, but the implication is “Hub of the Universe.”) The T, the light rail and subway system, is pretty good in terms of covering the metro area. However, the commuter rail which links in the outer suburbs leaves much to be desired. It really is “commuter rail,” and is focused on providing service for daily commuters, not occasional riders who might want to attend the theater or a sporting event.
And, as a hub-and-spoke system, it’s basically useless for going anywhere except in and out of the city. I can drive to work in about 20 minutes, or I can drive for 15 minutes to a train station, pay to park, ride a train for 10 minutes and then walk another 15 minutes to work, rain or shine. Since downtown is not my destination, the people who run the T don’t care about me, except when it comes time to raise taxes state-wide to pay for their pensions.
In all fairness, the same inefficient bureaucrats also spend state revenues to support the bungling Turnpike Authority, which runs highways I never use. (Except, oddly, when I drive to Springfield for the upcoming train show later this month!)
I’ll agree with that…If I want to get anywhere on another line, I have to take the hour-and-15-minute ride in from Westborough Station, switch trains, and then then go right back out of the city. By the time I get there it’ll be time to go home in time for dinner!
I wrote a letter to the Lt. Governor Tim Murray (a huge proponent of commuter rail) as well as to the editor of the Worcester Telegram asking for the line between Worcester and Ayer (on the Fitchburg Line, which is getting upgrades that will allow 80 mph track speeds) to get commuter rail service.
Then instead of commuting in and out on the slow Worcester line, I could walk right from work at the Museum of Science to North Station, hop aboard a Fitchburg Line train, speed out to Ayer at 80 mph, and then take the Worcester-Ayer shuttle to a local station like Clinton or West Boylston!
But due to the MBTA’s equipment shortage, their multi-million dollar debt, and the fact that it would take milli
In the 1950’s, USA had the best trains in the world. Our family traveled by train in different directions from Chicago. It was a great way to travel. Dome cars were the best of all.
Unfortunately, the public was convinced that planes and cars were better, and the government invested huge sums on highways and airports. That was too way much competition for railroad trains. Fares could not be increased to keep up with rising costs. Trains became unprofitable and service was cut back. The US Post Office took mail off of the trains which was a huge blow to revenues for passenger trains. Eventually, Congress created Amtrak allowing railroad companies’ passenger trains to go out of businiess.
Amtrak’s mandate from Congress was to be financially self sufficient. Congress, however, continued to stack the deck against trains being profitable. Highways and airports were expanded.
Today, airports lose money and highways lose money. Somehow, however, Amtrak is expected to make money. Its critics will cite it as an example of government inefficiencies.
Today, too, railroad trains continue to be much more fuel efficient than competing modes. I question the wisdom of governemnt losing money on highways and airports which are less fuel efficient than railways. If Uncle Sam is going to lose money on transport, why not lose it on railways?
I suspect if railways continued to be the primary transport mode, America would not need to buy its oil from foreign sources. Imagine the implications.
Meanwhile, I’ll operate my HO 1950’s era passenger trains and enjoy the hobby.
Cheers, everybody. All Aboard.
Amtrak would do well to concentrate on what trains do best, short and intermediate travel instead of cross country routes. While I would rather spend 3 days on a train than 3 hours on a plane, and many on this board I’m sure might share the sentiment, most of the traveling public just wants to get there as quickly as possible. Their focus is on the destination rather than the journey. For long distance travel, its no contest between choosing train or plane. But regional railroads which can take people from the heart of one city to the heart of another can make an attractive option to the plane. By the time one takes into account the time and expense of either long term parking or taking a cab ride to the airport, often located a good distance from the center of the city, getting to check-in 2 hours before take off so you can pass through all the security measures, sitting on the tarmack waiting your flight’s turn in line, time in the air, waiting for you luggage to arrive at baggage claim, and then another long cab ride back into town, in many cases you can save time and money by taking the train. For that reason, many professional sports teams now travel by train rather than plane when moving between eastern seaboard cities.
Unfortunately, for most of the country, this sort of intermediate travel is not an option. Amtrak service into Columbus, OH hasn’t been available for over 30 years and when it was here, it came through in the middle of the night. There has been talk for almost as long about creating a 3C corridor train linking Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati and possibly another Cincinnati, Dayton, Toledo route, but so far, that’s all it’s been. One commision after another has been appointed to “study” it but it’s never gotten beyond that stage. I happen to think the 3C corridor could work economically. When I go to Cleveland for a sporting event, I stop on the outskirts of the city and ride the commuter train into downtown. It’s cheaper than parking and