What should Amtrak change?

[neutrino78x]

I have only ridden (rode? I think it's ridden) the corridor trains a couple times. I rode the San Juaquins and also the Surfliner last summer. One thing I wish they would do is put some kind of monitor in each car that tells you Car Number, Name of Train, Direction, and then which way to business class and which way to the cafe car. In other words a "you are here" type of display. I bought a business class ticket each time, but found myself lost on the train several times. Surely I'm not the only one! Edit: they need this feature in the long distance trains too. So far the only of those I have tried is the Coast Starlight, it was my ride home at the end of my enlistment, paid by the Navy, from Seattle to San Jose in a stateroom (well that's the Navy term, not sure if trains call it a stateroom lol).

I definitely think the Capitol Corridor, San Juaqins and Surfliner should be coordinated such that you can go from Bakersfield north up to Martinez, switch over to Capitol Corridor, go all the way south and switch to Surfliner, for a unified four hour ride. (Capitol Corridor would have to be extended to go south all the way to San Louis Obispo). And of course add "sidings", and eliminate all grade crossings such that the speed can be enhanced. Even just averaging 70 mph (112 km/h) instead of the current average which is more like 40 mph (64 km/h) would help a lot. I know this is in the California Rail Plan already. I definitely support doing this instead of California HSR because this is an enhancement of existing services and should be a lot cheaper.

 

[TheCrescent]

It's simply a livery, just like every airline, railroad, bus company, etc has....

And it’s not my favorite.

The current Acelas and current long-distance locomotives- blue and gray and some other colors- are very attractive.

Red, white and blue on stainless steel? Not as attractive.

 

[Cal]

One thing I wish they would do is put some kind of monitor in each car that tells you Car Number, Name of Train, Direction, and then which way to business class and which way to the cafe car. In other words a "you are here" type of display. I bought a business class ticket each time, but found myself lost on the train several times. Surely I'm not the only one! Edit: they need this feature in the long distance trains too. So far the only of those I have tried is the Coast Starlight, it was my ride home at the end of my enlistment,

I definitely agree, however in long-distance trains they actually do have them. On superliners there are electronic signs in the stairwell pointing where the cafe is IIRC, however I don't think most notice them.

 

[toddinde]

There's no need to bash a money making and highly popular sector. The NEC is successful. I agree that Amtrak is national in scope and monies should also be spent to provide reliable, daily service to other areas but I'd hesitate to pit one region against another. I don't think infighting will ultimately help Amtrak's improvement.

I am not against the NEC and completely agree that infighting is not constructive. I was responding to those who argue that the long distance trains need to go. I do not agree with that, and would point out that the NEC is enormously expensive in comparison with the rest of the system. That’s fine, and it’s worthy of investment, but not at the expense of everything else.

 

[jis]

Another important corridor is Chicago-Cleveland-Pittsburgh/Buffalo. RPA doesn't provide population within 25 miles of a station along the corridor, but the sums of the major metro areas along the corridor (Chicago, South Bend, Toldeo, Cleveland, Buffalo, and Pittsburgh), results in the following population statistics:

CHI-CLE: 14.5 million
CHI-BUF: 15.6 million
CHI-PIT: 16.9 million

Of these, 10 million people are accounted for in the Chicago metro area.

. . .

The suitability of the Water Level Route for hosting many corridor-like services has been mentioned several times by the likes of @neroden.

I would say a good start would be with three day trains....

1. New York - Buffalo - Cleveland/Toledo and possibly extended to Detroit when suitable high quality track becomes available between Toledo and Detroit

2. New York - Pittsburgh - Cleveland/Toledo

3. Chicago - Cleveland possibly extended to Pittsburgh

They would all be self standing day trains not connecting in particular to anything at either end, like the Palmetto.

 

[toddinde]

The suitability of the Water Level Route for hosting many corridor-like services has been mentioned several times by the likes of @neroden.

I would say a good start would be with three day trains....

1. New York - Buffalo - Cleveland/Toledo and possibly extended to Detroit when suitable high quality track becomes available between Toledo and Detroit

2. New York - Pittsburgh - Cleveland/Toledo

3. Chicago - Cleveland possibly extended to Pittsburgh

They would all be self standing day trains not connecting in particular to anything at either end, like the Palmetto.

What’s the point of standalone services that don’t connect? It’s a system, the trains have to connect.

 

[jebr]

What’s the point of standalone services that don’t connect? It’s a system, the trains have to connect.

There'd still be all the normal connections in New York and Chicago - just because the train isn't expressely timed for connections there doesn't meant they can't happen relatively easily. Run frequent enough service and you don't even have to worry about timing the connection - there's enough trains that you just catch the next one!

Also, not worrying about trying to intentionally connect to specific trains means you can focus your schedule development on what works best for traffic within the corridor. If one of those factors is that it gets in in time to catch the morning Hiawatha and Lincoln Service trains, great, if not that connection isn't worried about (and passengers may have a longer layover if they want to connect to those trains.)

 

[jis]

Besides, at the NY end no matter how late you arrive in the evening, one can always connect to the good old Night Owl covering all of the corridor from Boston to Newport News, and most commuter routes run past midnight out of NYP, and many have arrivals very early in the morning.

So the only real non connect issue is at the Chicago end, which can be addressed for the Hiawatha service by running an early enough Hiawatha and delaying the departure time a bit while making sure that arrival in Pittsburgh is before Oh-dark-thirty.

Frankly, one has to decide what one is trying to achieve. if you really want a train that serve the middle of the traditional LD train routes during daylight hours in the east, you cannot have them also connect with much at the two ends. New York is an exception since the choices are so vast there.

 

[neroden]

1. New York - Buffalo - Cleveland/Toledo and possibly extended to Detroit when suitable high quality track becomes available between Toledo and Detroit

There are many pieces of evidence that Detroit-upstate NY and Detroit-NYC services would get *lots and lots* of ridership once the annoying bus connection to Toledo was not necessary.

 

[neroden]

I have also suggested a full-length second overnight train on the LSL route, leaving Chicago at midday and arriving NYC early morning (before rush hour), and leaving NYC really late (after the shows get out) and arriving Chicago midday.

This runs through Ohio and Indiana in daytime, and provides overnight "skip the expensive NYC hotel room" service from NYC to upstate NY. And at NYC, by arriving super early and leaving super late it makes reliable same-day connections to ALL the services to the South. Also provides a better option for passengers who are delayed overnight in Chicago heading east.

 

[TheCrescent]

Amtrak should change from offering itself as “a social service that provides mobility to small towns”, “an alternate mode of transportation that allows you to see the US at ground level” and so many other reasons that help attract some business but aren’t what most people are looking for in transportation.

Amtrak should provide the most efficient way to get from Point A to Point B. If that means rescheduling overnight trains so that they leave late at night and arrive early in the morning, and otherwise focusing on higher and high-speed corridor trips, so be it. Then it would become a truly necessary (and hopefully profitable) operator.

 

[Qapla]

Many of these ideas (adding trains and adjusting schedules), while sounding good, rely on the cooperation of the host (freight) railroads who are not inclined to help ... no amount of Amtrak focus and/or good ideas will get anywhere as long as the freight railroads say "No"

 

[TheCrescent]

Many of these ideas (adding trains and adjusting schedules), while sounding good, rely on the cooperation of the host (freight) railroads who are not inclined to help ... no amount of Amtrak focus and/or good ideas will get anywhere as long as the freight railroads say "No"

True. My post above is likely the biggest pie-in-the-sky hope that has zero chance of ever occurring.

 

[west point]

I have also suggested a full-length second overnight train on the LSL route, leaving Chicago at midday and arriving NYC early morning (before rush hour), and leaving NYC really late (after the shows get out) and arriving in Chicago midday.

Like this post but we get to that old bug-a-boo. No equipment. Since no layover time in CHI, it will take 3 train sets. Have to suspect your train would require at least 3 sleepers each, 3 diners, 3 lounges and 4 -6 coaches depending on season. I cannot see any additional sleepers until maybe 2030. Coaches who know as well? By then the whole metrics of Amtrak will change. How? Have no idea.

 

[Ryan]

Amtrak should provide the most efficient way to get from Point A to Point B. If that means rescheduling overnight trains so that they leave late at night and arrive early in the morning, and otherwise focusing on higher and high-speed corridor trips, so be it. Then it would become a truly necessary (and hopefully profitable) operator.

What schedule would you change?

 

[jis]

Like this post but we get to that old bug-a-boo. No equipment. Since no layover time in CHI, it will take 3 train sets. Have to suspect your train would require at least 3 sleepers each, 3 diners, 3 lounges and 4 -6 coaches depending on season. I cannot see any additional sleepers until maybe 2030. Coaches who know as well? By then the whole metrics of Amtrak will change. How? Have no idea.

Or they could just introduce a Coach and cafe train like the Pioneer was initially and then add other stuff to it as they become available. One reason that the US gets less of everything is because there is a tendency to do nothing waiting for perfection to arrive.

But I agree with your contention that it won't happen. Afterall when the primary action of most when anything is suggested is to produce a long list of why it cannot happen instead of trying to make it happen.

 

[TheCrescent]

What schedule would you change?

The northbound Crescent, to leave Atlanta in the early evening and arrive in Washington at the start of the business day.

 

[jis]

The northbound Crescent, to leave Atlanta in the early evening and arrive in Washington at the start of the business day.

Can you propose some actual times taking into account the running time between the origin and destination?

Are you merely suggesting going back to the schedule just before the most current change? That in spite of knowing that NS has said they will not be able to stick to it, not that they stick to anything. But at least a schedule that they agree is doable is more likely to be enforced than one that they say is not. Of course STB could step in and change their minds for them, but until then.....

 

[MARC Rider]

Amtrak should change from offering itself as “a social service that provides mobility to small towns”,

But that's the whole reason why Amtrak gets the political support it needs to get funding for both the long-distance trains and the urban corridor service.

 

[TheCrescent]

But that's the whole reason why Amtrak gets the political support it needs to get funding for both the long-distance trains and the urban corridor service.

Airlines are seen as the most efficient way to get from Point A to Point B and the government floods them with money.

 

[Cal]

But that's the whole reason why Amtrak gets the political support it needs to get funding for both the long-distance trains and the urban corridor service.

Also instead of changing, it should really just expand more corridors with higher frequency. Not changing schedules (that work well anyway) to cater to a corridor which should be seeing intercity trains.

 

[TheCrescent]

For sleeping car passengers, Amtrak should offer a beverage upon departure, like airlines do.

If I am getting settled in on board, having a drink upon departure would be nice, instead of waiting for the cafe car to open or waiting for dinner (when an adult beverage is served).

 

[neroden]

Many of these ideas (adding trains and adjusting schedules), while sounding good, rely on the cooperation of the host (freight) railroads who are not inclined to help ... no amount of Amtrak focus and/or good ideas will get anywhere as long as the freight railroads say "No"

Well, this is why all the incompetently run freight railroads (who are chasing away business and driving it to trucks, which is against the national interest) should be bought out and nationalized. Quite affordable if Congress wanted to. I've advocated for that forever. Every other country in the world except two nationalized their railways, and only five stupid countries privatized railroads (which was a disaster everywhere except Japan, which is weird).

 

[TheCrescent]

Well, this is why all the incompetently run freight railroads (who are chasing away business and driving it to trucks, which is against the national interest) should be bought out and nationalized. Quite affordable if Congress wanted to. I've advocated for that forever. Every other country in the world except two nationalized their railways, and only five stupid countries privatized railroads (which was a disaster everywhere except Japan, which is weird).

That’s not accurate. Many countries have privatized their railroads. The European Union and many of its member states have allowed and encouraged private operators to run both freight trains and passenger trains.

Second, CSX’s market capitalization is $74 billion; Norfolk Southern’s is $67 billion. BNSF’s is estimated at far more (and forcing Warren Buffet to sell is realistic and easy, you think)? So it would require hundreds of billions of dollars to buy them, and that would mean not one cent of that used for track improvements for Amtrak; it would mean all of those funds were used to buy shares from private owners.

US freight railroads are far ahead of publicly-owned freight railroads in price per ton-mile of freight (i.e., they run more efficiently per dollar spent) and in terms of market share. In short, some US railroads do lead the world: US privately-owned freight railroads.

I am irritated as well over how Amtrak is treated by Class Is, but the simpler and cheaper solution is just to give Amtrak enough funds that it can build its own track and not worry about Class I interference. Nationalizing Class Is would be much more expensive and would result in reduced Class I performance.

So, in short: buying Class Is would cost hundreds of billions of dollars and not a cent would directly improve Amtrak. I’d rather spend hundreds of billions directly for improvements for Amtrak (new track, new cars, etc.).

 

[jimdex]

Are you merely suggesting going back to the schedule just before the most current change? That in spite of knowing that NS has said they will not be able to stick to it, not that they stick to anything. But at least a schedule that they agree is doable is more likely to be enforced than one that they say is not.

The problem is that NS has not been able to stick to the revised schedule, either, meaning that instead of a two-hour late Crescent leaving Atlanta at 10 p.m. rather the scheduled 8 p.m., a two-hour late Crescent now leaves Atlanta at 1:30 a.m. rather than the scheduled 11:30 p.m. This means that the northbound Crescent is "serving" its biggest non-NEC market at an unmarketable time.