Will full service dining ever return to the Western trains?

[Qapla]

Almost 9 out of 10 long-distance trips are taken by personal vehicle, 7 percent of long-distance trips are taken by air, while 2 percent are by bus (including scheduled, charter, and other bus trips). Train travel represents almost 1 percent of long-distance trips.

Based on those numbers - we should discontinue planes, buses and trains - if we are going to base % of travel by a particular method as the measure.


However, when talking to actual people - I often hear things like "are there still busses" and "are there still trains" - many people that might use those methods are unaware they still operate. Advertising helps with this problem

 

[chrsjrcj]

I almost wonder if the low mode share for rail on long distance trips is because of the barebones national network. It really doesn't make sense to look at total mode share when you can look at Amtrak's own load factors and see that long distance trains are near the top of the list and point to the need for more frequency and routes. The 4th largest city in the US has service 3 days a week and the 5th largest has none at all.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

I almost wonder if the low mode share for rail on long distance trips is because of the barebones national network. It really doesn't make sense to look at total mode share when you can look at Amtrak's own load factors and see that long distance trains are near the top of the list and point to the need for more frequency and routes. The 4th largest city in the US has service 3 days a week and the 5th largest has none at all.

And city pairs that are natural for rail transit have hardly anything. The Charlotte NC, Greenville SC, Atlanta GA, Birmingham AL should have multiple frequencies per day. Looking at JUST the Crescent there should be multiple daily trains from at least DC to Birmingham.
Boston to Birmingham
DC to Birmingham
existing train from NYC to NOL
old Gulf Breeze Route from NYC-Mobile
the proposed Crescent Star route from NYC to Dallas via Mississippi.

Those 5 trains would be a great start along with a few corridor trains that run Charlotte - Atlanta - Birmingham - Huntsville.

 

[Nick Farr]

At present, the Amtrak LD routes serve three distinct populations:

1) People who want to enjoy the scenery or the vacation experience of the train.
2) People traveling to/from rural cities not served by other modes of transportation.
3) People who need to travel across the country but cannot or prefer not to drive or fly.

The NEC is the only true alternative to flying or driving. The big reason for this is the level of Public Transportation service in the major cities served on the NEC. You can take the T from your house in Boston, get on the NEC, then take Metrorail from Washington DC's Union Station to wherever you're going in DC. Same for NYC, Philly, etc.

One of the things people keep forgetting about Intercity corridors is that without comprehensive Public Transportation options and/or vibrant urban cores, people will just people will just drive instead of taking Intercity rail.

This is of course before you factor in reasons for there being connections between cities. Washington DC and NYC have the strongest connections between them among cities of that distance in the US.

 

[ehbowen]

One of the things people keep forgetting about Intercity corridors is that [ithout comprehensive Public Transportation options and/or vibrant urban cores, people will just people will just drive instead of taking Intercity rail.

Not necessarily. Neither Houston nor Los Angeles is known for extensive public transportation options, but that didn't stop our traveling party of 11 from having a great trip to Hollywood and Disneyland. We had friends drop us off at the station in Houston and we were able to rent a car at the station in L.A. (actually, two cars...one a Grand Caravan!)

Likewise, when a friend and I went to St. Louis for a conference family members dropped us off at HOS and the St. Louis station was within walking distance of our hotel. People are flexible; we can adapt as long as the basic building blocks are available.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Not necessarily. Neither Houston nor Los Angeles is known for extensive public transportation options, but that didn't stop our traveling party of 11 from having a great trip to Hollywood and Disneyland. We had friends drop us off at the station in Houston and we were able to rent a car at the station in L.A. (actually, two cars...one a Grand Caravan!)

Likewise, when a friend and I went to St. Louis for a conference family members dropped us off at HOS and the St. Louis station was within walking distance of our hotel. People are flexible; we can adapt as long as the basic building blocks are available.

Agreed. When I have visited Disneyland it was much easier to get there by train (transfer at Union Station to a Surfliner, take a free public transit bus to Disneyland / Convention Center hotel.) There is also a subway stop at Union Station.. is the Boston T any more extensive than LA's Subway? I'm not sure. I've used them both and they both get me where I need to go.

New Orleans and Memphis both have simple streetcar systems with stops just outside the station. Hop on and you can get where you need to go in downtown.

Portland and Chicago have great transit. The list could go on.

1) People who want to enjoy the scenery or the vacation experience of the train.
2) People traveling to/from rural cities not served by other modes of transportation.
3) People who need to travel across the country but cannot or prefer not to drive or fly.

All 3 of those for me. However, #1 shouldn't be a reason Amtrak exists. That's why scenic railroads exist.

#2 .... sure that sounds good in theory but in reality for every small rural town that amtrak serves there's probably 100 just as rural towns without any transit options.

#3 I do believe that there should be a way for people who cannot fly to travel comfortably across the country. Greyhound doesn't count, especially with all the transfers and "everybody off the bus for cleaning." In theory, a 1st class intercity bus could provide this as well but Amtrak gets the job done.

I don't think that list is complete though. Anything that is a single overnight competes with flying for some people. Business travelers, college students, etc. Depending on the schedules, a single overnight train can work just as well and sometimes be more convenient than flying especially if the train reduces a long uber ride or strange transfer.

 

[ehbowen]

I've said this before but I'll say it again: If you are physically and financially blessed with the ability and means to own and operate an automobile, the entire North American continent is your oyster. But, if you are not so blessed, then at least at present you are not even a third-class citizen. I know that the majority are not going to leave their comfortable cars and/or fast airplanes. But we need to have quality alternatives.

 

[me_little_me]

At present, the Amtrak LD routes serve three distinct populations:

1) People who want to enjoy the scenery or the vacation experience of the train.
2) People traveling to/from rural cities not served by other modes of transportation.
3) People who need to travel across the country but cannot or prefer not to drive or fly.

The NEC is the only true alternative to flying or driving. The big reason for this is the level of Public Transportation service in the major cities served on the NEC. You can take the T from your house in Boston, get on the NEC, then take Metrorail from Washington DC's Union Station to wherever you're going in DC. Same for NYC, Philly, etc.

One of the things people keep forgetting about Intercity corridors is that without comprehensive Public Transportation options and/or vibrant urban cores, people will just people will just drive instead of taking Intercity rail.

You have left out a significant group - those that want/need to go to another city but not "cross country". I would not consider Greenville, SC to Birmingham to be cross country, e.g.

1. It is not a scenic ride
2. It is served by both bus and airlines but neither is convenient or fast because there is no direct route
3. It is not cross country. It is strictly inter-city.
4. Neither is served by "good" public transportation
5. I might not own a car
6. Neither city is rural

I can use my car or ask someone to drive me to Greenville station and be met in Birmingham station by someone (or use taxi, Uber, Lyft and either/both ends).

 

[jruff001]

Not necessarily. Neither Houston nor Los Angeles is known for extensive public transportation options, but that didn't stop our traveling party of 11 from having a great trip to Hollywood and Disneyland. We had friends drop us off at the station in Houston and we were able to rent a car at the station in L.A. (actually, two cars...one a Grand Caravan!)

Deleted. Apologies to ehbowen; I misread the post I was responding to.

 

[jiml]

More like the 1990’s all over again.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking while trying to remember the last major round of cuts. If the pattern follows that era it might not all be bad news.

 

[tricia]

What? Get real! You're saying that very few people would have friends/family to drive them to the airport (station) if they planned a long trip, and/or rent a car when they arrived at their destination? Which planet did you come from?
....

Amtrak's skeletal route map makes this a hard sell for many of us. I live a good two hours from the nearest Amtrak station.

 

[tgstubbs1]

Amtrak's skeletal route map makes this a hard sell for many of us. I live a good two hours from the nearest Amtrak station.

Americans love cars. A good argument for Nationwide Auto Train.

 

[Barb Stout]

I almost wonder if the low mode share for rail on long distance trips is because of the barebones national network. It really doesn't make sense to look at total mode share when you can look at Amtrak's own load factors and see that long distance trains are near the top of the list and point to the need for more frequency and routes. The 4th largest city in the US has service 3 days a week and the 5th largest has none at all.

I'm sure this is a big part of the low ridership issue. Also, which cities (4th and 5th largest) are you referring to?

 

[ehbowen]

Amtrak's skeletal route map makes this a hard sell for many of us. I live a good two hours from the nearest Amtrak station.

Another bit of supporting evidence for the position that the cure to what ails Amtrak is more Amtrak.

I'm sure this is a big part of the low ridership issue. Also, which cities (4th and 5th largest) are you referring to?

The fourth would be Houston...one train (Sunset Limited) which runs only three days a week. (There is a daily bus connection to/from the Texas Eagle at Longview for/from points north.) The fifth would be Phoenix, Arizona, which has no rail service whatsoever although the same Sunset Limited does stop in outlying Maricopa. The thre-day-a-week schedule and irregular performance, however, has played havoc with finding and keeping a Thruway operator to provide shuttle service to some more populous points in the metro area.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Americans love cars. A good argument for Nationwide Auto Train.

That statement is quite dated.

 

[jruff001]

What? Get real! You're saying that very few people would have friends/family to drive them to the airport (station) if they planned a long trip, and/or rent a car when they arrived at their destination?

My apologies, I misread your post. I'll delete my comment.

 

[Barb Stout]

The fourth would be Houston...one train (Sunset Limited) which runs only three days a week. (There is a daily bus connection to/from the Texas Eagle at Longview for/from points north.) The fifth would be Phoenix, Arizona, which has no rail service whatsoever although the same Sunset Limited does stop in outlying Maricopa. The thre-day-a-week schedule and irregular performance, however, has played havoc with finding and keeping a Thruway operator to provide shuttle service to some more populous points in the metro area.

Oh yeah, Phoenix. How could I forget? I used to live there, well, in Tempe anyways. I remember checking into trains to go to 2 different places that I frequently visited when I lived in Tempe, Bismarck ND and Columbus OH, but found out there was no trains to these 3 places, so totally forgot about trains for the next several decades. For awhile, even flights to Bismarck were skimpy, but not as skimpy as trains.

 

[Qapla]

A thought came to mind ... it seems many want to "compare" the LD train to air travel for getting from point A to point B. While it is true that both forms of transportation provide that service - maybe too much importance is being put on that aspect of using either.

Most fly to get from one place to another quickly ... not because they "enjoy" it (yes, I know many who fly for their work and they only do it because they must) and a LD train cannot get them there that fast. So, it is proposed that trains are used by those who can't fly or just love trains.

Maybe, just maybe it is time to emphasize the relaxed pace of train travel. Just because many fly to get someplace fast does not mean they ALWAYS want to be in a hurry. They may just not be aware there is a plausible alternative and they don't want to drive - the passenger train fits the bill. Often, it is presented as a "last choice" or afterthought because "a plane is faster".

Recently I have seen a number of ads on TV about vacation spots. While they are touting their new safety protocol in this "new normal" none of them are promoting a "fast" vacation. They are promoting "r e l a x a t i o n".

Amtrak LD trains should/could be prompted as a "relaxed" way to travel ... not as a competition to the "fast plane" but an alternative to the "fast pace" that many people want to get away from at times.

The fifth would be Phoenix, Arizona

This all depends on which data/list you look at. On some lists Phoenix is #5 and Philadelphia is #6 while other lists have them in the opposite order.

Here is a list:
1 New York
2 Los Angeles
3 Chicago
4 Houston
5 Phoenix
6 Philadelphia
7 San Antonio
8 San Diego
9 Dallas
10 San Jose
11 Austin
12 Jacksonville
13 Fort Worth
14 Columbus
15 Charlotte


Regardless of the exact order of these cities, looking at the list and the Amtrak service map - the largest city connections are dismal when it comes to passenger service and should be corrected.

 

[Nick Farr]

Not necessarily. Neither Houston nor Los Angeles is known for extensive public transportation options,

This goes to show you how misinformed you are: Los Angeles has has has one of the most comprehensive and fastest growing public transit systems in North America. I can't think of a single method of Public Transportation that is not somehow employed somewhere in Los Angeles.

You're also making the wrong comparison by just looking at the city size. You really need to look at the entire Metropolitan Statistical Area to properly determine rail services to implement. Most of the 10 largest MSAs are covered by existing or planned intercity rail options.

1 New York City-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA MSA (Served by the NEC)
2 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA MSA (Planned California High Speed Rail, Existing Amtrak California services)
3 Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI MSA (Heart of the LD transportation network)
4 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX MSA (Planned Texas High Speed Rail)
5 Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX MSA (Planned Texas High Speed Rail)
6 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV (Served by the NEC)
7 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL MSA (Brightline, Silver Service, Palmetto)
8 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD MSA (Served by the NEC)

It isn't until you get to the 9th and 10th largest MSAs that rail services fall of a cliff in terms of planned and existing services:

9 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Alpharetta, GA MSA (Palmetto)
10 Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ MSA (Debatable service)

 

[Nick Farr]

A thought came to mind ... it seems many want to "compare" the LD train to air travel for getting from point A to point B. While it is true that both forms of transportation provide that service - maybe too much importance is being put on that aspect of using either.

Amtrak's main competitive advantage in this era is being a much safer alternative to Air Travel as far as likelihood of contracting COVID.

Amtrak has attempted mass market advertising and it hasn't really gained much traction because of it.

The problem is Amtrak on the corporate side has inherited a culture trapped in the past while charged with becoming profitable in the future. This keeps them from really pursuing advertising or directing things to niche markets where they might be able to grow ridership beyond what it is now. It also keeps them from pursuing entrepreneurial options to improve On-Board Services while also being hampered to cut them by Congressional interference.

 

[toddinde]

A couple of thoughts on food service. First, if we can save the trains, better food service will return. That will happen when Amtrak management gets serious about running the railroad. Second, improved food service will follow commitment to the long distance trains. Third, it will, like everything in Amtrak’s history, be driven by congressional mandate. Food service must be of a high quality, and be available to all passengers, coach or sleeper.

 

[toddinde]

I'm torn between these two points of view. As Devil's Advocate says, once it's gone, it's probably gone for good, so fighting to preserve what little there is might be worthwhile.

However I really question whether directly subsidizing the LD network is a good use of taxpayer funds. Also, currently Amtrak is the butt of many jokes and as such may be hindering other passenger rail opportunities in the U.S. as an example of why it can never work - so I fear that the current flawed network may actually be harming future possibilities. (Though this is probably a discussion for a different thread.)

That's why every time I can take a LD Amtrak train trip, I do so with gratitude and thinking it might be my last one.

You need to stop with the nonsense about wise use of taxpayer money. Even with Amtrak’s highly inflated accounting, the long distance trains require a subsidy of $500 million a year. Do you have any idea of how absolutely infinitesimal that is in the scheme of the federal budget? As others have said, once they’re gone, they’re gone. All the investment taxpayers have made in stations, yards, terminals and maintenance facilities: Gone. Skilled workforce: Gone. These trains have been proven to produce economic activity in the towns they serve that vastly outweighs any subsidy. Remember, that $500 million in subsidy is creating billions in economic activity which goes away with the trains. If a train served 10,000 passengers a year at a station in a county with a population of 30,000, that is incredible market penetration. The long distance trains have been a whipping boy for those who want to divert resources to the never ending black hole that is the Northeast Corridor. I’m not willing to see the United States abandon intercity passenger rail while every other developed country in the world is expanding theirs, including long distance and overnight trains. All to save a few hundred million dollars in a multi-trillion federal budget. Ridiculous.

 

[railiner]

Americans love cars. A good argument for Nationwide Auto Train.

CN tried a variation of that across Canada, once upon a time...it wasn't too successful...even though the roads were not as good as now, and trains ran better.

http://tracksidetreasure.blogspot.c...~:text=Car-Go-Rail, introduced,of Car-Go-Rail.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Amtrak's main competitive advantage in this era is being a much safer alternative to Air Travel as far as likelihood of contracting COVID

Is it safer?

 

[Nick Farr]

... the never ending black hole that is the Northeast Corridor...

The NEC is the only Amtrak Service that effectively competes with every other intercity transportation service, on top of being profitable.

I was strongly agreeing with you up to this point: The NEC is not the enemy of Passenger Rail in the US, it is the model.