Amtrak Bill Has Passed The Senate!
- Thread starter kmothersil
- Start date
Gandalf0444
FVRR member
Or maybe put 2 locomotives on it(preferably a did locomotive that you can just use as a cab)? Simplify things a little bit more here...We need some trains actually TERMINATING in Tampa, the Wye is a complete mess, and I think MU's should be used or a reverse-cab locomotive. The british have used that design for years and its proven great. Just imagine a double-cab P42 or F40
Fortunately for you, Amtrak is currently the world biggest heritage line, with quaintly old fashioned trains ambling slowly through the countryside, stopping for leisurely viewing opportunities at various sidings while waiting for the host railroad to run a local freight past. But most people want to get where they're going and don't really appreciate the branch line speeds of an Amtrak train.
If you want to see the scenery, you can see it just fine at 200 mph. I know, because I've ridden at 200 mph, and the view is great. And I got where I was going in time to do some things before I had to head back, unlike Amtrak, where I wouldn't have had time to make the whole trip.
As for safety, 200 mph at ground level is much safer than 600 mph at 50,000 feet. SNCF had a good survival ratio in their crash (was it one, or two so far) and JR's safety in a crash is undetermined, since they've never had a high speed derailment in 40 years. In fact, no Shinkansen passenger has ever been seriously injured. Not even me.
The private railways in Japan attracted more passenger by increasing the speed, not by decreasing it. People who are traveling want to arrive, not ride. If you want to spend long hours cooped up in a box, you can ride even farther in the same time, or you can go to another heritage line and ride slowly behind a real steam train. Amtrak should start running real trains and become an actual railroad.
Claudespringtransit
What are you looking at?
Yeah, they should have an engine on each end, back-to-back, like they do for the Acela and TGV!
trainzbroken
New member
Fortunately for you, Amtrak is currently the world biggest heritage line, with quaintly old fashioned trains ambling slowly through the countryside, stopping for leisurely viewing opportunities at various sidings while waiting for the host railroad to run a local freight past. But most people want to get where they're going and don't really appreciate the branch line speeds of an Amtrak train.
If you want to see the scenery, you can see it just fine at 200 mph. I know, because I've ridden at 200 mph, and the view is great. And I got where I was going in time to do some things before I had to head back, unlike Amtrak, where I wouldn't have had time to make the whole trip.
As for safety, 200 mph at ground level is much safer than 600 mph at 50,000 feet. SNCF had a good survival ratio in their crash (was it one, or two so far) and JR's safety in a crash is undetermined, since they've never had a high speed derailment in 40 years. In fact, no Shinkansen passenger has ever been seriously injured. Not even me.
The private railways in Japan attracted more passenger by increasing the speed, not by decreasing it. People who are traveling want to arrive, not ride. If you want to spend long hours cooped up in a box, you can ride even farther in the same time, or you can go to another heritage line and ride slowly behind a real steam train. Amtrak should start running real trains and become an actual railroad.
then give amtrak the millions or billions of dollars in funding that it needs to make all lines high speed. we only have 1 high speed corridor and that's the northeast with the acela trains which go at a max speed of 165
They do on a lot of trains. The Coast Surfliner uses a locomotive on the north end and a cab car on the south.
Interestingly, on my last trip to Tucson I saw a similar thing on the UP. Most trains had two locomotives up front and one on the rear.
ClaudeFirst of all, they've already got the USDOT HSR Corridors Study in full gear. There are 11 high speed corridors in name only at the moment, as they are:
Northeast Corridor
Gulf Coast Corridor
Southeast Corridor
South Central Corridor
California Corridor
Chicago Hub Network(In Midwestern Corridor)
Florida Sub-Corridor(In the Southeast Corridor)
and a few more....
Next of all, the Northeast Corridor is NO High speed rail line, as the trains in most areas can only go at a maximum speed of 89 MPH. The Acelas are clocked for 150 MPH, no more, but since the line hasn't been fully upgraded in approximately 50 years, since the reign of Pennsylvania Railway, the tracks are abound to be wobbly and stuff. Next of all, other trains, including freight, commuter, and more regional trains also obstruct the need for speed. Next, I believe that Amtrak should go for a "true" high speed rail HST. The Acela is not sufficient enough. Right now, something like a TGV Duplex and a TGV Atlantique with the newer 2nd Gen power cars would be nice. BUT, I think, before Amtrak could even boost its need for a more high speed system, it needs overall reforms, and more regional services. By Regional I mean Provincial and State-to-State(Ex:JAX to Birmingham, would be considered a Southern Regional). I believe a really good model to look at is British Railways Intercity/Regional/Scotrail Services. The Intercity services worked London to other major cities, while more Regional Services connected the suburbs, exurbs, small towns and less dense areas. ScotRail(Similar to Amtrak up to Canada) worked more Scottish lines, etc. They could use the Scotrail moel for trains from the US to Canada, and call it Amtrak Canada. The only service I can actually say is near to that would be CalTrans' Amtrak California and the Amtrak West Unit. While NCDOT has theirs, I would call it an extra state-wide commuter service, which is totally corny. NCDOT should go under the name Amtrak North Carolina, and so on. Amtrak West is probably a more unified region with California, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Montana, and Oregon. Amtrak Heartland could be Illinois, Texas, St Louis, Iowa, Minnesota, etc. Amtrak South would be considered Florida, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, North/South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Ohio, Etc, while Amtrak New England and Northeastern would be what the Northeast Corridor, Keystone Corridor, and Empire Corridor are at the moment. The Keystone should be extended further west, and the Empire should be electrified by overhead wires. I think that a more up to date replica of the Rohr turboliners would work great on more regional and short distance runs, or some form of DMU would work the lines. Push pull is also an option, but it should be avoided if possible. Also, doublecabbed engines would also do good, therefore, the engine can unhook, move to the other end of the train, and you'd move to the unobstructed cab. Also, hood units would not work as proper, engines with double cabs. They are usually built for freight units, and such. Amtrak, if they wanted to go an even further step, work like Railfreight did and have an Amtrak Cargo service or something, so they could also restart the Railway Post Office and other things like that. Anyways, there has to be a more regional system before any national system is structured. Like my Governor says, National or Nothing, but there has to be a more regional before a national system will work
I agree with Peter. This area is definitely being built up fast and is in need of rail passenger service again. On many of these routes, they were once multiple track, but Conrail managed to single track them. So in order to mitigate congestion, the 2nd and even 3rd track needs to go back into place.
There's also talk and studies being done to return service to the abandoned Lackawanna Cut-off. That Conrail nicely eliminated in the early 1980s. This was built so that the Lackawanna RR would avoid the many hills in western New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania during the early 1900s. Recent studies have shown that this is one of those perfect corridors since it parallels I80. This would help cut down the congestion on this corridor. I have driven I80 before and it is no fun in rush hour with the sun directly on the windshield for what seems like 10s of miles. It was one horribly tense drive with accidents galore from the sun glare.Taking the train would be a lot more relaxing if you ask me.
Up where I live the local transit authority (MBTA) is introducing wirelees internet on their commuter trains. So far there are only one or two cars per train, but eventually this will be on all cars. Since the trip takes me about 55 minutes into Boston North Station, this would be a worthy asset. Also by providing this service, this may be an incentive to increase the distance of the service because people would be able their work prior to coming into the office. This is definitely something that is very difficutl to do while driving (I've seen people do it, but I won't go off topic), and even worse trying to do this thing on a bus. I surely can't read while riding on a bus and I'm sure many other people can't either.
To be honest for short distances to medium distances, flying sucks. It's far less convenient than taking the train. There maybe more flights, but the hassles of getting in and out of an airport make the trip worthless and sometimes longer. A classic example is the short distance trip is from Manchester to New York City LAG that I took this past summer.
It took 4 hours counting airport scanning, loading, take-off and other delays.
I could have driven in 5 hours and Amtrak can make the trip from Boston in 3-1/2 hours. I live on an MBTA line so I could have made this a complete train trip except for local auto service on either side. Now with the air trip, this dropped me off in the Queens. If I wasn't being picked up by a friend at the airport, I would have had to take a cab, which would have cost quite a bit of money plus the time in traffic. The drive from LAG to Manhattan is not fun, and since I don't know the subway system well, I would have gotten lost anyway. The all train route would have dropped me off at Grand Central Station right in the middle of Manhattan, which is where I wanted to go in the first place. When I head down to NYC again, I will definitely take the train. The service cost about the same and there's definitely less stress.
The problem with Amtrak is they were serverely short-falled from day one, plus being a government entity, they were run as such wasting whatever funds they had on unnecessary things. If they were given what it was needed to do things right in the first place, we wouldn't have the broken system we have today. By the time Dave Gunn came along, the system needed a total rebuild, but the current administration, until January 20th, was more interested in airlines, and severely cut the funds. It was threat of total shutdown that got them to give up some money for the service.
Right now sadly we've let our rail system reach a level not seen since the early 1970s before Amtrak took over the passenger service. The powerplant has deteriorated and equipment is falling apart. No wonder they can't meet schedules no matter how hard they try. Combine this with increased freight rail sevice, they are even more hampered by scheduling problems particularly in areas where the track was singled from what was once a multiple-track corridor.
The answer here is for all parties to work together. Where the states contribute partially for the service they need along with the freight railroads and Amtrak. This system works pretty well here in MA. The MBTA owns most of the ROW in the state. They maintain the lines and the various parties that use the tracks contribute to the maintenance which is carried out by the MBTA.
With today's traffic congestion, and our persuit of better fuel efficiency, even though prices of fuel have dropped, less dependency on foreign fossil fuels, and a greener environment, rail is the way to go.
John
I can tell you why.... First of all, before my grandad retired from B&O, he knew way before the collapse of privatised railways that, it would be hard to get back with it. We might need to look at other scenarios and other nations who experienced similar tragedies.Look at britain's history, its similar to what we've been going through. They've overcome those problems now, and the whole system is privatised now, something that the USGOV wants Amtrak to do, but you cant expect it to happen all at once. In Britain, the "Big Four", comprising of LNER, SOU, LMS, and GWR, was on the verge of collapse, and after a while, they merged, and became a nationalized entity. Thats a similar story to Amtrak right? Well, after the railways nationalized, the British Railways were formed. During this time, until about the late 60's/early 70's, the railways were all in one. Then, during the 80s, thats when British Rail and Intercity services, and the advancement of crosscountry rail travel was born. After a while, the system split into different departments, and became sectorized. After a while, the national railways became more stable. Then after the late 80s/early 90s, they were healty enough to become private entities again, and they've had no problems ever since.
quote]
I agree with that. The problem with Amtrak is, in addition to being a government railroad, that they manage passenger lines and facilities all across the US. As such, they tend to really fix up some areas while completely ignoring other areas. I think, therefore, that maybe they should divide it up. Have separate companies manage and maintain the different corridors, but Amtrak should still have the NEC, and be the parent company.
I agree with that too, but being a government railway is actually better than being a privately owned corporation. They can't discriminate or be too greedy. I think that before any national network, a more regional service needs to be in place. I dont' mean things like NJT and SEPTA, as they are for more short/metro/exurb journeys. The United States isn't to big, and they aren't dumb either, we just have a rather conservative government who criticizes Amtrak for not being properly funded and using the funds properly, when the only persons they are criticizing is themselves. Amtrak West/CalTrans is a very good model to use for more regional services. They run within 2 or three states in that region(South, Midwest/heartland, Northeast, etc) and they use those for more shorter distance trains, similar to BR's Regional Railways, and use the actual Amtrak Intercity Trains similar to those of BR's Intercity Services. Then the larger metropolitan burbs should organize commuter lines(similar to PTEs and NSE such). Here's an analogy:
BR Intercity = Amtrak
BR Regional Railways = Amtrak California/Amtrak NC
PTE/NSE = Metra, MTA, Metrolink, Coaster, etc
Isaac
brickbuilder711
yard yobs
I would think that both options are viable and should be offered for Amtrak riders. It should be all up to the rider to determine if they should go for the nice, scenic ride or if they want to get to point B in time. At any time I'd rather ride high speed rail to get to New York than use a plane and in some instances, I'd resort to the slower, more scenic ride. Regional sectors belonging to a larger entity are an excellent idea, where the regions are more focused to that area and budgets are weighed to what areas really need fixes, yet we still would have the regulations and obligations of such an entity, like equal treatment. Amtrak is a great railroad but there are points where improvements are needed to build on Amtrak. Perhaps Amtrak could offer some new amenities in the services.
Many railroads and transit authorities have made the mistake to pull tracks that would really work for passenger trains. I would sure like something to alleviate congestion on I-80 as aforementioned, or even for the FEC ROW to Homestead in Florida to remain intact as to offer a light rail or commuter service rather than to use buses which consume more gas. The ROW was instead turned to a busway corridor which looks like an overspending on money, first to pull the tracks and then to pave miles of roads, sidewalks, lights, and stops. Now what they could have done was leave the corridor as it was, except double track it and sync the US1 traffic lights to the passing trains, that would have made sense. The same could have applied to the former ROW that led from Kendall to Downtown Miami. Instead MDTA spent BILLIONS that even got the attention of Reagan in which he said that the city could have paid for a limo for each of their citizens. The lights could have also been synchronized to the trains. I don't have a problem with the rest of the system that did not use up ROW, that doesn't matter, but if the tracks were upgraded for the passenger trains instead of pulled that could have even helped the FEC gain business and add/retain customers, picking up and setting out overnight.
Many railroads and transit authorities have made the mistake to pull tracks that would really work for passenger trains. I would sure like something to alleviate congestion on I-80 as aforementioned, or even for the FEC ROW to Homestead in Florida to remain intact as to offer a light rail or commuter service rather than to use buses which consume more gas. The ROW was instead turned to a busway corridor which looks like an overspending on money, first to pull the tracks and then to pave miles of roads, sidewalks, lights, and stops. Now what they could have done was leave the corridor as it was, except double track it and sync the US1 traffic lights to the passing trains, that would have made sense. The same could have applied to the former ROW that led from Kendall to Downtown Miami. Instead MDTA spent BILLIONS that even got the attention of Reagan in which he said that the city could have paid for a limo for each of their citizens. The lights could have also been synchronized to the trains. I don't have a problem with the rest of the system that did not use up ROW, that doesn't matter, but if the tracks were upgraded for the passenger trains instead of pulled that could have even helped the FEC gain business and add/retain customers, picking up and setting out overnight.
@Brickbuilder: I agree, Amtrak should finish its nationalisation, then move on to sectorisation, before it can get to privitisation. Like I said, BR/Intercity/Regional Railways is a good model to look at, as its gone to be privatised since I was born(90s). Sure, it took a good century to help the LNER, LMS, Southern, and GWR Railways, but it paid off in the end to have a nationalised system. Though the privatised corporations don't seem to be hot with some people. I do think that Socialised(Government-Run) Railways do have an advantage to them, but then they have their cons as well. With the privatisation of a railway, there is room for oppurtunity, though sometimes money comes before customers in a capitalised/private company. I'm not entirely sold of on a fully governmentally-run rail company, but I'm not keen on a private company either, just look at whats happened recently, economically. Like many people on the hill and around the nation are saying, we're up to the task of such service, but it needs accountability, stability, and demand. Since the lowering rate of oil, thats good in the terms of there being a cheaper value for oil, but that means less people would need the rails. Therefore, there is another fuel source needed to keep up with the usage. Electric trains are ultra-faster than most diesel/electro-diesel engines, and can surpass their clocked performance. But, anyways, back to the idea of nationalisation -> sectorisation -> privatisation....
A Intercity service would be complete with high-speed stock, electrification, and first/business/economy classing. A suitable train for such work would be a FR-TGV/UK-Pendolino/DE-ICE/JP-Shinkansen like train. Sleeper service might be an option, but if we need to have a more superior speed, say, 240 K/MPH(TGV Speed Record?), that would mean about a day's trip across the nation. That would be similar to a WDC-CHI-SEA, TPA-HOU-LAX, or WDC-CHI-SDG service or, in other words, Capitol(CL)/SW Cheif(SWC)/Empire Builder(EB). Ameneties could include bistro/lounge, AC outlets, lounge/observation car, and possibly a sleeper or some other special car if needed.
A more provincial/state/regional service, similar to the Ann Rutledge, Senator, Congressional, Surfliner, etc would be needed for smaller trips, such as visiting family, going to a convention, or a business trip. These trains would be locomotive-hauled or MU-run. Similar to a Metroliner MU, some diesel/electric propution will be useful for this kind of service. Such amenities could include a lounge, a bistro/club/cafe, and a business/economy class area. Also, unlike the Intercity services, they can include more station stops, more moderate speeds, and would run on the outside tracks of a 4-5-6 track corridor configuration. If the trains are to be locomotive-run, a double-cabbed locomotive would be needed, as to run around to the other side of the train without the hassle of a wye, turntable, or extra locomotive at the other end, as to save money and create more by having double cabbed locomotives on one train, as opposed to two one cabbed locomotvies on one train, making the availability for more locomotives and the ability to have more trains.
PTEs/NSE-style commuter service would be determined upon metropolitan areas of large sizes or areas of which service is available.
Stations/Public facilities would include a Club-lounge, restrooms, retail development, and track accessibility(overpasses or underpasses) with ADA standards and also keep the safety of passengers(instead of wooden boards on tracks for crossing over. Platforms would be needed at certain levels to co-inside the standards of the FRA, USDOT, the respective state DOT, and the rail operators. For instance, a VIA Renasannce car has a high-platform entrance, therefore, there would be a need to have either a high platform or a stepcase up to the doorway if there are low-floor trains that might work at the corresponding station.
Signalisation- In-cab signaling is used just about everywhere except the United States. A comprehensive, simple, yet managable signalling system would be needed. As opposed to different style signals such as the ones on the PRR/NEC, and ones on a UP line, all lines would have the same distinct signalling and would integrate the whole system. Gantries would be used on corridor lines and more moderate corridors, while trackside signaling would be more efficient and cost effective on short/suburban lines. All passenger trains would be given priority, unless they are early or any other circumstance, where a goods service can easily surpass a passenger service without bringing delays and confusion.
Crossings/Over-Underpasses- ALL rail lines should be divided from the roadways, especially high-dense and high-speed motor/auto/freeways. To ensure the proper flow of the roadway system and the safety of passengers, engineers, and the train this would be a need on all lines, regardless of classification and use.
Employing/Hours/Ethics/Cust. Svc-Employing rail service attendants(Hospitality), operators(Drivers), conductors(Managers), porters(First class hospitality), and signalmen(safety and movement of equipment) are vital of course to running a railway system. Giving incentives and good hours/pay to the employees are important for their prosperity, the railway's reputation, service and demand for jobs. Benefits such as healthcare and insurance would be available, unless they would rather go to a company of their choice. If they don't need benefits, the money that would be their benefit money would go into their paycheck. They could always get benefits if needed. Unions would be welcomed but not recomended, as I would believe in a workforce that doesn't sit down, go on strike, and expect a pay raise to get rewarded(It goes in work ethics too). Labour laws would apply, mind you. As far as customer service goes, if the customer is angry, upset, or mislead, that means the company is at fault. I was always taught the customer is always right, and they are right for a reason: They paid for your service, and if they expected your service, and haven't gotten it, then youve got something wrong. That is another big value I have when it comes to customer service, work ethics, etc. Bringing in opportunies from other companies such as stock manufacturing and repair, catering, etc would also be open, but only to a degree, as they are helpful, but they may not line up with the work ethics/policy/etc of the company that hired them
Anyways, thats just my two cents in how to run a railway company... If you think its better than fmr-CEOs David Gunn or Alex Cummant, call Amtrak and tell em. I could use a job :hehe: (joking, by the way)
Cheers
Isaac
A Intercity service would be complete with high-speed stock, electrification, and first/business/economy classing. A suitable train for such work would be a FR-TGV/UK-Pendolino/DE-ICE/JP-Shinkansen like train. Sleeper service might be an option, but if we need to have a more superior speed, say, 240 K/MPH(TGV Speed Record?), that would mean about a day's trip across the nation. That would be similar to a WDC-CHI-SEA, TPA-HOU-LAX, or WDC-CHI-SDG service or, in other words, Capitol(CL)/SW Cheif(SWC)/Empire Builder(EB). Ameneties could include bistro/lounge, AC outlets, lounge/observation car, and possibly a sleeper or some other special car if needed.
A more provincial/state/regional service, similar to the Ann Rutledge, Senator, Congressional, Surfliner, etc would be needed for smaller trips, such as visiting family, going to a convention, or a business trip. These trains would be locomotive-hauled or MU-run. Similar to a Metroliner MU, some diesel/electric propution will be useful for this kind of service. Such amenities could include a lounge, a bistro/club/cafe, and a business/economy class area. Also, unlike the Intercity services, they can include more station stops, more moderate speeds, and would run on the outside tracks of a 4-5-6 track corridor configuration. If the trains are to be locomotive-run, a double-cabbed locomotive would be needed, as to run around to the other side of the train without the hassle of a wye, turntable, or extra locomotive at the other end, as to save money and create more by having double cabbed locomotives on one train, as opposed to two one cabbed locomotvies on one train, making the availability for more locomotives and the ability to have more trains.
PTEs/NSE-style commuter service would be determined upon metropolitan areas of large sizes or areas of which service is available.
Stations/Public facilities would include a Club-lounge, restrooms, retail development, and track accessibility(overpasses or underpasses) with ADA standards and also keep the safety of passengers(instead of wooden boards on tracks for crossing over. Platforms would be needed at certain levels to co-inside the standards of the FRA, USDOT, the respective state DOT, and the rail operators. For instance, a VIA Renasannce car has a high-platform entrance, therefore, there would be a need to have either a high platform or a stepcase up to the doorway if there are low-floor trains that might work at the corresponding station.
Signalisation- In-cab signaling is used just about everywhere except the United States. A comprehensive, simple, yet managable signalling system would be needed. As opposed to different style signals such as the ones on the PRR/NEC, and ones on a UP line, all lines would have the same distinct signalling and would integrate the whole system. Gantries would be used on corridor lines and more moderate corridors, while trackside signaling would be more efficient and cost effective on short/suburban lines. All passenger trains would be given priority, unless they are early or any other circumstance, where a goods service can easily surpass a passenger service without bringing delays and confusion.
Crossings/Over-Underpasses- ALL rail lines should be divided from the roadways, especially high-dense and high-speed motor/auto/freeways. To ensure the proper flow of the roadway system and the safety of passengers, engineers, and the train this would be a need on all lines, regardless of classification and use.
Employing/Hours/Ethics/Cust. Svc-Employing rail service attendants(Hospitality), operators(Drivers), conductors(Managers), porters(First class hospitality), and signalmen(safety and movement of equipment) are vital of course to running a railway system. Giving incentives and good hours/pay to the employees are important for their prosperity, the railway's reputation, service and demand for jobs. Benefits such as healthcare and insurance would be available, unless they would rather go to a company of their choice. If they don't need benefits, the money that would be their benefit money would go into their paycheck. They could always get benefits if needed. Unions would be welcomed but not recomended, as I would believe in a workforce that doesn't sit down, go on strike, and expect a pay raise to get rewarded(It goes in work ethics too). Labour laws would apply, mind you. As far as customer service goes, if the customer is angry, upset, or mislead, that means the company is at fault. I was always taught the customer is always right, and they are right for a reason: They paid for your service, and if they expected your service, and haven't gotten it, then youve got something wrong. That is another big value I have when it comes to customer service, work ethics, etc. Bringing in opportunies from other companies such as stock manufacturing and repair, catering, etc would also be open, but only to a degree, as they are helpful, but they may not line up with the work ethics/policy/etc of the company that hired them
Anyways, thats just my two cents in how to run a railway company... If you think its better than fmr-CEOs David Gunn or Alex Cummant, call Amtrak and tell em. I could use a job :hehe: (joking, by the way)
Cheers
Isaac
brickbuilder711
yard yobs
Isaac, your ideas are very logical.
As for the facilities, I agree that the railroad should conform to height standards and providing a sufficient service for the customer.
Stations would be an excellent place to enter or disembark from your train as your views expressed. Tri-rail has set a few bad examples for stations, like in Hialeah Market or even in Deerfield Beach, as it is a straight to the point station. Lounges serve as an excellent resort in an additional way that railfans can meet up and discuss all things train. Societies can meet up, and everyone can relax while taking their adventurous trip.
As for how the railroads will respond to highways or roads, grade separation is extremely ideal. I perfectly prefer the Metrorail or any commuter rail service in Miami, should history have been altered, to be separated in tight areas like Hialeah. In other areas, like the US1 corridor, grade crossings could work too as traffic would be controlled in a more advanced fashion rather than two or three cars being given the green light then the light switches to red. 13 - 16 stations on that corridor alone from Homestead to Vizcaya in an at grade railway (makes for 25 miles) would allow motorists on US1 to get strings of green lights when a train passes, say every 15 minutes. Of course major roadways would be given a bridge over US1 and the tracks, only leaving minor roads crossing at grade. That would turn out more cost effective and easier on trying to take a left turn from the minor roads.
On the lines of priorities I was very upset to learn of CSX's greed to the dispatching rights of the SFRC, giving their unit freights the right of way in meets. Now TRCX won the rights to dispatch the area.
In order for the customer to be happy, the employee has to be happy with their job too! Lack of motivation can reduce the sufficence in service given to the customer. As you said, the railway needs to provide good hours and good benefits to the employees so they can enjoy working.
As for the facilities, I agree that the railroad should conform to height standards and providing a sufficient service for the customer.
Stations would be an excellent place to enter or disembark from your train as your views expressed. Tri-rail has set a few bad examples for stations, like in Hialeah Market or even in Deerfield Beach, as it is a straight to the point station. Lounges serve as an excellent resort in an additional way that railfans can meet up and discuss all things train. Societies can meet up, and everyone can relax while taking their adventurous trip.
As for how the railroads will respond to highways or roads, grade separation is extremely ideal. I perfectly prefer the Metrorail or any commuter rail service in Miami, should history have been altered, to be separated in tight areas like Hialeah. In other areas, like the US1 corridor, grade crossings could work too as traffic would be controlled in a more advanced fashion rather than two or three cars being given the green light then the light switches to red. 13 - 16 stations on that corridor alone from Homestead to Vizcaya in an at grade railway (makes for 25 miles) would allow motorists on US1 to get strings of green lights when a train passes, say every 15 minutes. Of course major roadways would be given a bridge over US1 and the tracks, only leaving minor roads crossing at grade. That would turn out more cost effective and easier on trying to take a left turn from the minor roads.
On the lines of priorities I was very upset to learn of CSX's greed to the dispatching rights of the SFRC, giving their unit freights the right of way in meets. Now TRCX won the rights to dispatch the area.
In order for the customer to be happy, the employee has to be happy with their job too! Lack of motivation can reduce the sufficence in service given to the customer. As you said, the railway needs to provide good hours and good benefits to the employees so they can enjoy working.
Another point that should be taken. On international trains, to speed up service, there should be non-stopers(NYC-Montreal, Chicago-Toronto,etc) as opposed to multi-stops. Therefore, once you go through security and border control, there is no stopping once the train is on its way. Though this is a great option, similar, more slower services would be viable, for those who don't mind the wait at the last station before the border. There would have to be strict platform boarding at times though. I also think that Amtrak, the hotels, airlines, rentals, and attractions should have an alliance with each other, especially for international travelers and travelers who don't mind taking a package journey. I do believe that Amtrak did have an "AmPack" sort of like thing, but I dunno. Regarding the club/lounge/waiting area, some sort of Club Amtrak, AmClub, Amlounge, or something along those lines would be great, as Amtrak has had this sort of thing, and they still might have it. Those with a ClubCard(Guest Rewards Incl. if you have enough points) could sit in the lounge at the station with the validity of station personnel, and once first class passengers, and business class passengers have been seated on board the train, ClubCard holders could be ushered next. Also, a similar onboard amenity in a car either towards the front or the rear for AmClub guests/cardholders to just relax and stuff. Also, Amtrak should give corporate companies options for business traveling, as opposed to waiting for them to come. I can agree on the ripping up of tracks, about 8 trails here in the Tampa Bay Megaregion have been former rail tracks, although they didnt rip em up, they just smacked tarmac over em. Telecommercials, Billboards, Magazine Adverts, transit wraps, etc should be a way to "get out the vote" so to speak. I don't really fancy having the "silhouette" advert though with the "cut-outs". Theyre too plain and tacky. They should have a kids thing with the rail-menus, to dos, and stuff, similar to a restaraunt. There would be colouring pages, whats for dinner, and things you can do at different places around the US. Even some railway history and national history would add a touch of education, fun, and flair. Unfortunately, all they can really care about at the moment is bribing congress to feed them hand and foot while the airlines need NO subsidization, because they are privatised first of all, and next of all, they don't have to worry about money because of all the revenue and stuff.
The advantage of a train over an airplane is that it can conveniently stop at intermediate stations to pick up and drop off passengers without an excessive delay. It would be rare to have two terminal stations with enough through passengers to justify non-stop service, but super-express service can stop at the major stations while slower trains would stop at other stations. The Shinkansens do it that way, differentiating between service levels based on the number of stops along the way.
A comfortable waiting room would be nice, particularly if there were a pleasant way for the customers to while away some money...I mean, time.
I wouldn't usher the passengers in the train, though. Each car is loaded separately, unlike an airplane where everyone has to squeeze through the same door, so there would just be a 5 minute warning of the trains aproach, then a one minute notice so passengers could get ready to meet the train. First and business class would be separate cars anyway, so why delay other cars being filled?If the airlines aren't being subsidized, who's paying for the air traffic controllers and other infrastructure? The airlines are all on the verge of bankruptcy half the time as it is. I think they need trains, too, so they can open more of the plane to business class.
Claudebrickbuilder711
yard yobs
The system mentioned in Tokkyu40's post is imminent in the NYCTA.
brickbuilder711
yard yobs
Particularly I would like to add that High Speed Rail in Florida would be an excellent idea as proposals implied for more than a fast ride. I would demonstrate the effect of Florida High Speed Rail on a conventional GFLTC trip to central Florida. Instead of driving no more than 80-90mph on the Turnpike or taking the Amtrak which presently consumes more time going to Central Florida a bullet train can truncate the time it takes for a Miami family to see Mickey Mouse or dare to ride SheiKra. The kids can get entertained within the hour it would thusly take to get to Central FL and be given a healthy but (hopefully) tasty meal.
As I said before an express and local service is ideal, analogical to a local manifest and a unit / major freight. A 3 track system with occasional inner sidings, the inner track unusually being local and the outer express is an idea. Imagine how clear I-4 or I-75 would be if an alternative was provided!
Last edited:
