Amtrak moving forward to stop all, most LDT

[sttom]

One way we could mitigate having to have station agents everywhere is having those call boxes like the UK has. But that would require having an call center! 

 

[Thirdrail7]

But that would require having an call center! 

Specifically, a call center staffed with people that know what is going on.

Did I just say that?

 

[Inlander]

Management needs to address  that call centre urgently it's costing the company business. I have had 5 separate dealings with it this year before I could get my booking finalised. I was travelling on a USA rail pass for multiple journies. Somehow they sold me two passes, then had to refund one of them. You wait over 30 mins on the phone and when you send emails it takes over 2 weeks to get a response. The operators have very poor product knowledge. 

 

[user 14106]

One thing I think could come of the letter is that it could force management to finally publicly spell out and reveal their full intentions and vision. While those intentions are starting to become clear through statements that have been made and actions that have been taken, they are still operating under a cloak of mystery and have not had to yet publicly state that “yes our vision is to eliminate these trains and run these instead.” We have gotten conflicting statements about whether they remain committed to a national network, maybe this will now force them to remove all ambiguity and spell out their intentions and plans. This would assist those opposed to that vision in being prepared for what seems like could be a nasty battle between Anderson and those opposed to his positions (RPA, unions, etc) at the reauthorization process. Management has a much better position at reauthorization if they can continue to keep the plans wrapped somewhat in secrecy until they are fully prepared to make their case.

I do eagerly await the response.

 

[user 14106]

Just to add what I would say is the core thing that is yet to be revealed is this: does the present management outright hate the national network and want to break it up at all costs? Or are they simply using it as a hostage to get things Amtrak has wanted for years (more predictable appropriations like five year funding or something like that, a solid plan for Gateway and other NEC priorities, refleeting, and maybe some federal funding to get more corridors going.) Would they be perfectly happy if congress threw them a big chunk of change to keep running the LD trains AND address some of these other things?

Sorry fixed a bunch of incorrect auto corrections my darn phone made to my post!

 

[RPC]

Okay, I'm reading Anderson's actual testimony and seeing, "As a result of the age profile of Amtrak and California’s multilevel fleets, a “sweet spot” appears between FY2026 and FY2031 for an optimally timed multilevel railcar replacement acquisition to standardize, modernize, and expand equipment on current multilevel routes...Congress will need to make decisions about the long-term prospects of these routes and provide sufficient associated funding levels so that Amtrak can procure appropriate types and quantities of this custom rolling stock." This could be interpreted not as "let's dump these trains" but as "if we don't move on this now these trains are going away because it will become unsafe to run the equipment." And he's putting the onus on Congress to act. He's got a point: if Amtrak just keeps cosmetically renovating these cars (or not), once the welds on the frames start popping it's going to be "game over" for the western trains.

 

[cpotisch]

if Amtrak just keeps cosmetically renovating these cars (or not), once the welds on the frames start popping it's going to be "game over" for the western trains.

“Just keeps cosmetically renovating”? I’m pretty sure they’ve only renovated the Superliner once, and it was just the SL-Is, so that statement seems a bit harsh. 

And as far as I can tell, there is no indication that the cars are falling apart like that. There are plenty of issues with the plumbing and HVAC, but the frames seem perfectly sound. Point is, it’s not like Amtrak has just been repeatedly giving the Superliners plastic surgery to cover up a broken hip.

 

[jis]

One of the documents that goes into making the sausage of the Reauthorization for next five years is a plan and funding projections from Amtrak. They should be submitting that within a few months. Usually they provide a longer term context to justify the five year Authorization request. Often their request is not accepted in toto and is modified, sometimes substantially. We will know which way the winds within Amtrak are blowing when this document comes out, and then start contributing towards fixing it to create an Authorization Bill that makes sense,. As usual, in that process, we will win some and lose some, but hopefully the most important things will get addressed, now that a significant number of legislators are already aware that all is not well.

Of course then comes the Appropriation for 2020, which from all indications will not be bad top line number wise. The question will be how much straight-jacketing is put in to prevent Anderson from doing certain things with the money. Incidentally we should see an Appropriation request from Amtrak too, which will also give and indication of where they think they are going.

 

[neroden]

Actually the odd thing about the so called appropriation for SWC is that it is just a set aside from the general appropriation for National System telling him he cannot spend it on anything else. If they trusted him (e.g., if he was someone like Claytor) they would most likely not have done a set aside. Just a minor detail worth noting. I think he can expect a lot more of micro management of this sort, which at the end of the day is bad IMHO.

That's Congress's style, yes.  I think he's going to get massively micromanaged by legislation, because he did stupid stuff which ticked off Congress.  This is bad in the long run.

My fear is that Congress will simply remove the F&B language and possibly replace it with F&B restoration language and not add anything in appropriation and let him figure out how to restore F&B. Congress is very well known for doing unfunded mandates.

Yes, this is also Congress's style.

Personally I like things to be above board. But for that to happen, Anderson also needs to be above board and fix his frickin' accounting which through no fault of his, he inherited. But there is no reason for him to blindly follow its nonsensical outcomes.

Yeah.  He should really just *do that*, fix the accounting.  I know it costs money, but it's worth it.

At the end of the day everyone might come out bloodied and Amtrak still on the verge of collapse. That is the fear I have and I don't like it.

I expect, at this point, that Congress will preserve the national network by micromanagment, require a certain level of food service by micromanagement, earmark a large portion of Amtrak's budget for specific things (they already earmark for ADA and the SWC -- there will be more), tell Anderson to fix his damn accounting, and then Anderson will resign and the next guy will have to deal with it.

 

[jis]

if Amtrak just keeps cosmetically renovating these cars (or not), once the welds on the frames start popping it's going to be "game over" for the western trains.

Fortunately, we are at least several decades away from welds popping. :lol:

 

[Thirdrail7]

This article with quotes from Mr. Gardner should leave no doubt about their vision for Amtrak 2.0!

At Amtrak, it’s no longer 1950

https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/at-amtrak-its-no-longer-1950/

Here are a few brief, fair use quotes, with my emphasis added:

Not overlooked by Gardner is the change in American demographics. “Millennials take over as the largest American cohort this year, replacing Baby Boomers as Amtrak’s core market. As demographics change, so must Amtrak’s public purpose,” he says.

The Amtrak network, hastily cobbled by Congress beginning in 1970, was secondary to relieving privately owned, primarily freight railroads of the unsustainable financial hemorrhaging of hauling passengers. That 1950s-era route structure, although occasionally tweaked, is, says Gardner, out of touch with the additional 118 million people who now live in America compared to 1971—exemplified by the millennials who tend to cluster in metropolitan areas and desire public transit out of environmental consciousness and convenience.

Amtrak, says Gardner, has not met their expectations—not along the population-dense Northeast Corridor (NEC),where market share is being lost to amenity-stocked motor coaches with more convenient suburban boarding points nor between many intercity pairs that lack Amtrak service entirely. An example is the 240-mile Houston-Dallas corridor, linking the nation’s 4th and 5th largest metropolitan regions.

“Too many population centers rely on a single, often chronically late long-distance train a day, with uncompetitive trip times and intermediate-point arrival and departure times that run counter to leisure time and business travel demands,” Gardner says.

“That a sizeable number of travelers are willing to spend four hours on a bus between Washington, D.C. and New York indicates we’ve created neither enough station access to the NEC nor capacity to compete with other discretionary travel modes,” Gardner says. “If we can provide a service that meets or exceeds the bus competitor at the right price, people will trade up to rail in those markets.”

I was going to say a sizable numbers of travelers are willing to spend four hours on a bus because the prices are FAR cheaper than a train and the walk up prices aren't excruciatingly expensive...but I guess that is why I'm not in charge! ^_^

As for Amtrak long-distance routes, trains typically pass through vibrant and growing intermediate cities at such inconvenient times and with so few frequencies as to discourage a wealth of new riders. “We must address younger riders early in their working careers who seek commercially relevant 21st century service, not the 20th century Amtrak model,” Gardner says.

“Millennials,” says Gardner, “have no relationship to the past network, or the pre-airline and pre-Interstate Highway glory days of rail. They seek utility and comfort—grab-and-go food and workplace productivity. We are not a preservation society. Our job is to create modern and relevant products and services that can grow rail trips and provide real transportation value with the scarce public dollars we receive.”

I mentioned this in the past:



As such, things like the dining car isn't going to appeal to Millennials.

Here's the bottom line:

Inescapable is that of 32 million Amtrak riders last year, just roughly 650,000 booked sleeping accommodations. “While we believe there is still a market for long-distance rail travel that provides an experience, the obvious real demand is for corridor trains of 300 to 400 miles connecting intermediate city pairs with frequent, conveniently timed service,” Gardner says.

“Corridors work for the same reason unit trains work for freight railroads,” he says. “We must focus on actually moving people by offering convenient alternatives to congested highways and limited air service—not just traversing landscape. That a city pair like Atlanta and Charlotte doesn’t have fast, frequent Amtrak service is an outrage. We are developing a long-range plan to grow the network across the nation in the corridors we think offer the most promise.”

What has stopped Atlanta and Charlotte from making a train?  Additionally, who will fund the equipment for this 'frequent" and fast corridor service? Is there a plan to life the 750 mile restriction?

Finally, there is nothing like feeding your corridor with a long distance bridge. It works like a charm in a lot of places.

At any rate, it really seems like they are interested in corridor operation. I wonder who they will charm to pay for it.

 

[cpotisch]

Geez, the NEC has ample capacity from short distance trains. There are a total of four long distance trains that run on the NEC, and one of them is only tri-weekly. Meanwhile the NER, Palmetto, Acela, Carolinian, Pennsy, and Keystones provide dozens and dozens of trains in each direction every day (though those last two only do so between NYP and PHL).

Yet the mere presence of the Cardinal, Crescent, and Silvers are the reason so many people take the bus? Just wow. hboy:

 

[jis]

How about the thought of Long Distance trains that connect corridors without providing "an experience"?

This should be a fun Authorization debate....

Actually it is hard to disagree with the desire to add corridor services in promising corridors. The disagreement from my perspective is whether interconnecting hubs of such corridors holds some priority or not, and unlike my generation mates, I am not too particular about the "experience" thing as long as the fundamental transportation facilities are provided that are efficient, clean and user friendly, with reasonable supply of food and creature comforts en route. For example, I don;t mind starting a service on a promising corridor, even a rather longish one to be for all practical purposes long distance with a Coach and Cafe service if there are sufficient number of people willing to take the service. I would not hold such up while people bicker about the level of Sleeper service and Diner service. So shoot me.

As usual the battle will be if someone proposes taking away an existing service in the process. It is hard to discuss such without looking at specific proposals, since everything at the end of the day is a tradeoff. I am sure there will be much mutual back scratching negotiations between various interest groups as things go along, like in everything else.

As you say Thirdrail, it should be fun to see who they charm to get all this funded.

 

[Thirdrail7]

As usual the battle will be if someone proposes taking away an existing service in the process. It is hard to discuss such without looking at specific proposals, since everything at the end of the day is a tradeoff. I am sure there will be much mutual back scratching negotiations between various interest groups as things go along, like in everything else.

As you say Thirdrail, it should be fun to see who they charm to get all this funded.

Well, I think we can look at the Southwest Chief News & Future Operations thread and the associated plan for their tactics:

The presentation even includes a little bribe for future service. We're on your side and we want to run corridor trains in your state. This is consistent with a few things I've stated before:https://www.dropbox.com/s/397rbtfluu9uifp/Dismantling-National-System-Trains-3-4.pdf?dl=0

You see the floating bribe for more corridor service on page 16. I suspect they will attempt to do they same thing again. The thing is, the Ld network is paid for by federal dollars. Corridor service sticks the states with the full costs. How many states will want that?

At any rate, I think the message is clear (although it has been clear to me for some time.) I am anxiously awaiting their long range plan for the network (which I thought would have come out last summer.)

 

[jis]

Well, I think we can look at the Southwest Chief News & Future Operations thread and the associated plan for their tactics:

You see the floating bribe for more corridor service on page 16. I suspect they will attempt to do they same thing again. The thing is, the Ld network is paid for by federal dollars. Corridor service sticks the states with the full costs. How many states will want that?

At any rate, I think the message is clear (although it has been clear to me for some time.) I am anxiously awaiting their long range plan for the network (which I thought would have come out last summer.)

Yup. They will keep trying until either they are fired or it happens, depending on who wins the argument in Congress. That has always been the case. Remember Gunn? The reason for winning does not even have to make any logical sense. It is "politics, the art of the possible" (quoting Juan Peron character from the musical Evita)

I think the long range plan has to show up before they can submit a reauthorization request, or at least as part of it. Otherwise their request is toast.

 

[west point]

So Gardner quotes a figure of 650,000 sleeper passengers out of 32M.   That is a facetious argument when sleeper space is so expensive and many legs of the  sleeper lines are still sold out.   If CAF had for whatever reason already delivered the V-2 sleepers and they filled up then what would he have said?

 

[jebr]

I'm curious what amenities are stocked on the average motor coach that Amtrak doesn't have, especially in the NEC! Their market research also seems quite off if the other advantage is "suburban boarding points" - if anything, that's a detraction for access at the destination, and only somewhat of an advantage at the origination point if there's cheaper/more-subsidized parking at the suburban boarding point.

Assuming both the train and bus run to a particular destination, price and schedule are what drives me to the bus versus the train. Amtrak is more comfortable and has better amenities (sure, the bus has wi-fi, but it's so slow as to be worthless.) However, when my only option is a single train a day, often at 4-6x the price of a booked-well-in-advance Megabus ticket, I'll take the Megabus with my preferred schedule and deal with the lower comfort levels.

That said, if Amtrak thinks moving from center city to suburbia is going to help their ridership, they have more of a car-centric mindset than any public transportation company should ever have.

 

[neroden]

Well, I think we can look at the Southwest Chief News & Future Operations thread and the associated plan for their tactics:

So they're planning to start off with fraud -- lying about the costs of the other trains.  This doesn't surprise me.  We already have the data necessary to fight back against that in the form of the RPA White Paper ("Amtrak's Route Accounting: Fatally Flawed, Misleading and Wrong").  But we need to boil it down: Amtrak is flat-out lying about the costs of operating these trains, and that's that.

https://www.railpassengers.org/happening-now/news/releases/amtraks-route-accounting-fatally-flawed-misleading-wrong/

Also, if they seriously think "suburban boarding points" are attractive to ANYONE, they're stuck in the 1950s or 1970s.

*********.

 

[neroden]

So Gardner quotes a figure of 650,000 sleeper passengers out of 32M.   That is a facetious argument when sleeper space is so expensive and many legs of the  sleeper lines are still sold out.   If CAF had for whatever reason already delivered the V-2 sleepers and they filled up then what would he have said?

Gardner needs to be fired.  It's becoming clear he's the one defrauding Mr. Anderson.  This fraud is his baby, for whatever reason.  Perhaps he can be exposed.  Nobody likes it when their underlying is defrauding them; someone needs to let Mr. Anderson know he's being defrauded.

 

[neroden]

It is obvious that Mr. Gardner isn't a millennial and knows nothing about what millennials want.

Yes, certainly, millennials want fast, reliable, comfortable, convenient ground transportation between metropolitan stations.

Like Chicago to New York.  Or Chicago to DC.  Or Chicago to Denver.  Or Los Angeles to Chicago.  Or Miami to New York.  Or... yeah, you get the point, right?  There is no magic "300-400 mile" limit.

-----

Here's what I'm afraid of: Mr. Anderson has made a lot of enemies, and I'm pretty sure Congress is about to hand him his head.  But what if he isn't the problem?  We have to make Congress aware that Mr. Gardner is also the problem and needs to be fired.  Otherwise Gardner may manipulate the next Amtrak CEO too.

Both Gardner and Anderson are spreading falsified numbers.

If they'd just get their accounting straight I wouldn't be so contemptuous.

 

[neroden]

Gardner gets this wrong too:

“That a sizeable number of travelers are willing to spend four hours on a bus between Washington, D.C. and New York indicates we’ve created neither enough station access to the NEC nor capacity to compete with other discretionary travel modes,” Gardner says. “If we can provide a service that meets or exceeds the bus competitor at the right price, people will trade up to rail in those markets.”

No.  It indicates that a lot of people are very, very poor.  Amtrak is the premium service, the buses are all cheaper.

Anyone who actually hangs out with millennials understands this. It's strictly money.  They would all prefer the train, and would go out of their way to take it, but they're pinching pennies.

I have talked at times about the great demographic cultural divide -- there is a huge gap in attitudes which happens right around my birth year.  The center of it is 1974 birth year (the bottom of the baby bust), but around that year, some people fall on one side, some on the other side.  I'm lucky enough to fall on the young side, so I get along really really easily with "millennials" and "post-millennials". And often very poorly with people four years older than me, even those of similar political and social views; there's just a gap in understanding.

Gardner, despite being practically my age, is clearly falling on the wrong side of the demographic cultural divide, because he's just not getting this stuff right; he sounds like a planner from the 1970s.  I mean, he's right that millennials don't need traditional waitstaff table service, but he seems to think millennials get "grab and go" food because they *want* to.   No, it's because they're overworked and out of time.  They'd rather have more relaxed meals, if they can (while still having a chance to obsessively stare at their phones).

And every millennial I've met has wanted to travel in a sleeper compartment.  Most just can't afford it.

Of course, the one thing we all agree with Gardner and Anderson on is that On Time Performance is crucial.

 

[Thirdrail7]

Gardner needs to be fired.  It's becoming clear he's the one defrauding Mr. Anderson.  This fraud is his baby, for whatever reason.  Perhaps he can be exposed.  Nobody likes it when their underlying is defrauding them; someone needs to let Mr. Anderson know he's being defrauded.

Here's what I'm afraid of: Mr. Anderson has made a lot of enemies, and I'm pretty sure Congress is about to hand him his head.  But what if he isn't the problem?  We have to make Congress aware that Mr. Gardner is also the problem and needs to be fired.  Otherwise Gardner may manipulate the next Amtrak CEO too.

Ummm...isn't it pretty obvious what is happening here? Gardner, the man that  came from Congress, had a hand in crafting PRIIA and has risen to the top ranks of the corporation is probably lining up to be the next CEO.

 

[user 14106]

I understand why Amtrak management wants to focus on adding corridors. But there’s an obvious flaw in this - why should the federal government divert money from the long distance routes to pay money to setup corridors for states who refuse to invest in them when you have other states who are willing to setup corridors and provide the funding and are doing so now? Nothing is stopping Georgia and the Carolinas from setting up an Atlanta to Charlotte corridor other than that the legislatures in those states probably don’t want to pay for it - why should I pay for that corridor with my federal tax dollars when my state is willing to invest in corridors?

I’m ok with federal funding for grants to help states get corridors started if those states are willing to make the necessary investment and incentives to try to encourage states to do so. But that really is irrelevant to the long distance routes and should be (and likely will be) a separate issue. But some of these areas where Amtrak seems to be salivating over simply do not have the support at the state level which is the real reason why there isn’t a corridor.

 

[bretton88]

I understand why Amtrak management wants to focus on adding corridors. But there’s an obvious flaw in this - why should the federal government divert money from the long distance routes to pay money to setup corridors for states who refuse to invest in them when you have other states who are willing to setup corridors and provide the funding and are doing so now? Nothing is stopping Georgia and the Carolinas from setting up an Atlanta to Charlotte corridor other than that the legislatures in those states probably don’t want to pay for it - why should I pay for that corridor with my federal tax dollars when my state is willing to invest in corridors?
 
I’m ok with federal funding for grants to help states get corridors started if those states are willing to make the necessary investment and incentives to try to encourage states to do so. But that really is irrelevant to the long distance routes and should be (and likely will be) a separate issue. But some of these areas where Amtrak seems to be salivating over simply do not have the support at the state level which is the real reason why there isn’t a corridor.
 

Amtrak is trying to say there's a better return on that existing funding in the corridor, versus the LD train. It's just a reshuffling of existing dollars.

 

[user 14106]

I understand why Amtrak management wants to focus on adding corridors. But there’s an obvious flaw in this - why should the federal government divert money from the long distance routes to pay money to setup corridors for states who refuse to invest in them when you have other states who are willing to setup corridors and provide the funding and are doing so now? Nothing is stopping Georgia and the Carolinas from setting up an Atlanta to Charlotte corridor other than that the legislatures in those states probably don’t want to pay for it - why should I pay for that corridor with my federal tax dollars when my state is willing to invest in corridors?
 
I’m ok with federal funding for grants to help states get corridors started if those states are willing to make the necessary investment and incentives to try to encourage states to do so. But that really is irrelevant to the long distance routes and should be (and likely will be) a separate issue. But some of these areas where Amtrak seems to be salivating over simply do not have the support at the state level which is the real reason why there isn’t a corridor.
 

Amtrak is trying to say there's a better return on that existing funding in the corridor, versus the LD train. It's just a reshuffling of existing dollars.

Again I understand their perspective and I have no problem with evaluating the long distance network for changes on a case by case basis to the way they are served  in ways that could make the services more useful to more people within their existing routes while providing TRAIN service to all present stations - options that do not include cutting out big sections with bus bridges. I do think there are some changes that could make sense. I have mentioned some thoughts for this before with routes I am more familiar with but I could see a desire to split up the Crescent at Atlanta as it would be come more useful for ATL-NYP travel (and all travel between) with the trains OTP struggles. The NYP-ATL segment would probably still be overnight so you'd probably still have sleepers on there - ATL-NOL would probably be a day train so you'd probably see sleepers go away there. I would not, however, support as an example eliminating the Crescent and replacing it with a Charlotte-Atlanta corridor with multiple trains per day. That sort of a corridor is meant to be funded by the states and that is my point about taking federal dollars that are serving large interstate long distance corridors and handing them to a small segment where states should be funding it. Another example of something that might make sense is rethinking NYP-MIA. One thought I've had about that is a two train one during the day and one at night approach running along the Meteor's path may make more sense than the present Star/Meteor setup as it would give people two truly different options. Essentially you could run the Meteor at night with more sleepers and then extend the Palmetto to Jacksonville and setup some type of system of shuttle trains to replace the pieces in the Carolinas and Florida lost by not running the Star that would connect to whichever of the two made sense. It Should only be once per day in each direction for these "Shuttles" unless the states wanted to invest in a true corridor. However I likewise, here, would not support eliminating the Star/Meteor and replacing them with a Florida corridor with multiple trains per day and replacing everything else with buses or nothing.