Amtrak may have competition...

[RRSignal]

That pretty much nails the problem though: Travelling by train is often more expensive (even with the regionals, not just Acela) and you still need a car when you get there, unless you are travelling to a city with good transit options or in the rare case your destination is within walking or biking distance. Nor is that taking into account the fact that riders typically pay about half the real fare of rail travel; the other half is subsidy.

The train is better during rush hour, but I can make DC in about 3 hours driving, versus 2.5 hours from Trenton.

 

[dbroadie]

I don't see this ever happening. Another blow-hard from our do nothing congress. (Either side of the aisle)
As far as the airlines go, and the same can be said for rail passenger service,
"You want to make a little money -- Spend a lot and buy an airline".
Doug

 

[amtrak2041864]

I have been reading the High Speed Rail forums and you guys are a bunch of hypocrites. You guys love trains but you guys stick to your cars and Airlines. I feel as High Speed Rail is the future but you look to the past to see the future. You guys make no sence, I am apart of the Next Generation that are open mind thinkers but most of the people that opposing HSR is stuck in the mindset of it is like it is and that is how it would stay. Which to me is very sad that America the land of great opportunity is preventing itself Of this great opportunity. I am 15

 

[H222]

This just gives a bad name for all teenagers.

Come onnnnn. the US is 20-something trillion in debt and you expect to sway all people over from cars and planes with a very expensive proposal? Cars are easier because you go directly to your destination, people like control of their movements (as, in, driving themselves) and they don't have to sit next to a tramp with a 6-pack in one hand and a bong in the other. Planes are a bit more of a hassle but at 600-700mph an hour you're still going faster than trains.

"Open-Minded thinkers" also need to see the disadvantages to things sorry bud.

 

[Blutorse4792]

I have been reading the High Speed Rail forums and you guys are a bunch of hypocrites. You guys love trains but you guys stick to your cars and Airlines.

I commute via train 8-10 times a week, not counting rapid transit.

I'd love it if HSR was viable in the U.S. but so far, I've seen little evidence that it'll be anything more than a shiny waste of money.

 

[slabay]

One thing to remember about trains vs. planes, though, is to look at where you want to be in addition to how far you are going. For example, Boston-New York on the Acela is 3hrs 35 mins, while by air is 1 hr 20mins. Obviously, air is a shorter trip, but the train is going to take you to the center of the city, while the airports are towards the fringes of the city. Factor in the TSA hassles checking in, being at the airport early, getting to the airport on either end of the trip and what not, the train could actually be faster. Tampa-Orlando in Florida has been kicked around several times for a high speed rail corridor. You'd NEVER be able to fly from Tampa to Orlando as quickly as a train would get you there, once you factor in all the airport hassles.

Unfortunately, outside of the major corridors, everywhere else is just too spread out and the infrastructure isn't there for a high speed train to be feasible.

 

[RRSignal]

Lol, "open mind thinkers" = believing unlimited money grows on trees and magically appears in people's wallets

Yeah, sounds familiar.

Amtrak, I realize you are only 15, but when you grow up and actually have to work for a living, you'll find you have to pay for a lot of other things besides trains. In fact, by the time you pay for everything else, there won't be much left for trains. The same principle applies nationally.

P.S. A word to the wise: Don't go around trying to demonstrate "open-mindedness". Invariably, those folks tend to be the least open-minded of all. Just a bit of advice here.

 

[RooRocz]

Yes, because the way to attract foreign investment and spur economic growth is to stop funding infrastructure and put thousands of people out of work. This proves that we're in on the austerity game, which has done wonders for economies in Europe.

 

[Blutorse4792]

Alright, so instead of reinvesting in the crumbling infrastructure we already have, we should dump billions into this because "I like trains!" and "I want to be hip and trendy like Europe!"

 

[RooRocz]

What "crumbing infrastructure we already have" may look like:

SEPTA Norristown Bridge. Will be closed permanently to traffic, cutting off heavily used intermodal station, sometime this Spring because there is no funding to fix it.

SEPTA 52nd Street Bridge. You can poke a hole through a girder with your finger. It is a public health hazard, and there is no money to fix or remove it.

SEPTA City Hall Station: a maze of corridors that drop paint flakes on you and smell of pee. There's no money to put in signage directing you where to go, creating a rather ugly mess. People avoid the subway here in Philadelphia, because no one can understand it (despite the fact that we only have two lines!)



Fixing any one of these things would be cheaper, quicker, and move significantly more people than adding a lane to an Interstate highway ever would. Any of these projects could be eligible for "HSR" money, which is really "bring our rail infrastructure up to the bare minimum" money.


Our interstate highway system is already pretty well built-out, and simply maintaining what we already have isn't enough. Most of our structurally deficient bridges are on rural back roads and highways, and while fixing them is a priority for the sake of public health and safety, the fact is that the only place we really have left to invest in "new" infrastructure is high-speed rail. We've probably already hit "peak car" and studies show that more and more young people are returning to inner cities where cars are simply not necessary (or practical: it takes me 30 minutes to get to the waterfront (3 miles away) vs. 10 minutes by subway) for getting around.


Couple that with the obvious explosion in low-cost bus lines (Megabus, Bolt Bus, etc.) and we can see clear trends against car use in the future. It's obvious that we're looking for alternate methods of transportation, and regional and intercity rail is the most obvious high-capacity answer. Massive investment in intercity rail and public transportation will take strain off our airports and highways, and create thousands of jobs in construction and manufacturing.


In fairness, though, I think that if we kill subsidies for Amtrak, we should probably also end subsidies for the Interstate Highway System and the airlines.

 

[amtrak2041864]

No, I dont want to just only see two forms of transport why can't there be a third option cars for short trips, trains for medium and planes for long haul. I think if America had a more diverse transit system it would make traveling in the country a breeze. Why can't I live in New York but Work in Washington DC. High Speed rail changes the way we travel, and opens doors never thought to ever be open. That is why I get offended when reading the fourms. And if I was working and had to pay taxes I would gladly pay more to see HSR develop in my region. I love trains I do but I know how expensive it is but the price can be brought down if states work with Amtrak as did Illinois. It is so expensive because Amtrak is taking the bill all of it. But if states work with Amtrak, it can probably be cut in half and if private investors get in the mix. But also lets think about it what is the cost of doing nothing. ? To expant infrastructure that now serves major cities it would cost more then building a High Speed Rail line. Two tracks vs adding two more lanes on either side of a freeway. And even if the Quality of life would diminish, having to drive everywhere and the air around you clogged. I would know because everytime I walk to school. I get that feeling, I did my research. And I am planning on writing to my congress man about this matter.

 

[Blutorse4792]

What "crumbing infrastructure we already have" may look like:

SEPTA Norristown Bridge. Will be closed permanently to traffic, cutting off heavily used intermodal station, sometime this Spring because there is no funding to fix it.

Seems to me if it was truly vital to that intermodal station, the freight railroads would want to pay to fix it.

SEPTA 52nd Street Bridge. You can poke a hole through a girder with your finger. It is a public health hazard, and there is no money to fix or remove it.

And the state of Pennsylvania hasn't any superfluous programs they could cut to get some money to fix it or tear it down?

SEPTA City Hall Station: a maze of corridors that drop paint flakes on you and smell of pee. There's no money to put in signage directing you where to go, creating a rather ugly mess. People avoid the subway here in Philadelphia, because no one can understand it (despite the fact that we only have two lines!)

Do people avoid it because of its sorry state, or is it in such a sorry state because so few people use it?

Fixing any one of these things would be cheaper, quicker, and move significantly more people than adding a lane to an Interstate highway ever would. Any of these projects could be eligible for "HSR" money, which is really "bring our rail infrastructure up to the bare minimum" money.

So how about we start calling it a "Fix our crumbling infrastructure" program and focus it entirely on doing just that?

Our interstate highway system is already pretty well built-out, and simply maintaining what we already have isn't enough. Most of our structurally deficient bridges are on rural back roads and highways, and while fixing them is a priority for the sake of public health and safety, the fact is that the only place we really have left to invest in "new" infrastructure is high-speed rail.

So let's focus on the public health and safety before we delve into new stuff.

We've probably already hit "peak car" and studies show that more and more young people are returning to inner cities where cars are simply not necessary (or practical: it takes me 30 minutes to get to the waterfront (3 miles away) vs. 10 minutes by subway) for getting around.

If all of these people are going to be using it, surely it'll start bringing in enough money for some improvement, no?

Couple that with the obvious explosion in low-cost bus lines (Megabus, Bolt Bus, etc.) and we can see clear trends against car use in the future. It's obvious that we're looking for alternate methods of transportation, and regional and intercity rail is the most obvious high-capacity answer. Massive investment in intercity rail and public transportation will take strain off our airports and highways, and create thousands of jobs in construction and manufacturing.

Doesn't seem like a good idea to pour billions into something that might possibly be used at some indeterminate point in the future simply for the sake of creating (relatively) few temporary jobs.

In fairness, though, I think that if we kill subsidies for Amtrak, we should probably also end subsidies for the Interstate Highway System and the airlines.

Obviously. Why wouldn't we?

 

[NIARTcar]

Alright, so instead of reinvesting in the crumbling infrastructure we already have, we should dump billions into this because "I like trains!" and "I want to be hip and trendy like Europe!"

Well, we definately must invest more in our pre-exisiting infrastructure to bring it back to a more safe and efficient state. However, I feel rail is going to play a key component in future transportation endevours. I don't want to start the fight over the fuel crisis, but it is quite obvious at this time that fuel prices are not going to level out, but rather continue to rise, effectively raising the operating costs of conventional diesel, gas, and jet engines currently utilized in our transit systems. You think the subsidies are bloated now, in the coming years its going to be much worth.

Electric power so far seems to be the most viable for future transportation. However, though small personal vehicles used for cross town shopping runs can easily cope with the sever limitations of this technology, there is no real sign that this can be scaled up to the distances need for intercity or interstate transportation. This is the point that rail (electrified) fits into the sollution to the problem. Though with our current poor infrastructure, rail is terribly inefficient, it has great potential to be just the oposite, extremely efficient in both energy ussage and movement of people. In terms of energy usage, consider the nature of this platform. The wheels carrying a railcar have a very small contact point on the rail, in addition, both are of matalic composition. Throw in aerodynamic streamlining, and this all adds up to low levels of frictions and drag which make a very efficient vehicle. Couple this with planned movements and efficient trips utilizing minimal stop and go "traffic" situations and you have cars and busses beat for long journeys easily.

cheers

 

[RRSignal]

In fairness, though, I think that if we kill subsidies for Amtrak, we should probably also end subsidies for the Interstate Highway System and the airlines.

Sure. It would have little effect on either as airlines mostly pay their own way, as do drivers in the way of fuel taxes.

 

[RRSignal]

And the state of Pennsylvania hasn't any superfluous programs they could cut to get some money to fix it or tear it down?

Oh, we have tons of those, and Philly especially. But everybody has their hand out.

So how about we start calling it a "Fix our crumbling infrastructure" program and focus it entirely on doing just that?

That makes sense. ARRA was supposed to do that - to the tune of $105 billion for the infrastructure stuff alone (the total bill for ARRA will be $830 billion.) Seems most of that money is gone already. Worse still, only $750 million was allocated to fixing crumbling infrastructure, versus $8 billion allocated to pie-in-the-sky HSR and intercity rail projects.

 

[RRSignal]

SEPTA 52nd Street Bridge. You can poke a hole through a girder with your finger. It is a public health hazard, and there is no money to fix or remove it.

I don't want to see those bridges close, but, perhaps, if SEPTA hadn't squandered over $100 million (so far) on replacing their relatively new signalling system on the Regional Rail, they'd have some money left for such capital improvements like those bridges. And it's been known for years that the 52nd Street bridge needs replacing.

 

[JCitron]

I don't want to see those bridges close, but, perhaps, if SEPTA hadn't squandered over $100 million (so far) on replacing their relatively new signalling system on the Regional Rail, they'd have some money left for such capital improvements like those bridges. And it's been known for years that the 52nd Street bridge needs replacing.

Massachusetts' MBTA is just as bad. They lost about that in revenue that they "can't seem to find". In the mean time, the MBTA/Pan Am Railway bridge across the Merrimack River in Haverhill is reduced to slow orders because it's now in poor shape. They've done a mishmash of repairs but nothing I would call consequential.

Perhaps it's time to remove the political appointees to the agencies and bring in real railroad and transportation-oriented people. At least with the latter group, they'd focus their energy on revitalizing the power plant instead of making political points and taking kick-backs.

John

 

[H222]

No, I dont want to just only see two forms of transport why can't there be a third option cars for short trips, trains for medium and planes for long haul.

Because People don't want it...

I think if America had a more diverse transit system it would make traveling in the country a breeze.

More Expensive too

Why can't I live in New York but Work in Washington DC.

How Fast do you expect these trains to travel?

High Speed rail changes the way we travel, and opens doors never thought to ever be open.

Political Waffle.

And if I was working and had to pay taxes I would gladly pay more to see HSR develop in my region.

Orly?

I love trains I do but I know how expensive it is but the price can be brought down if states work with Amtrak as did Illinois. It is so expensive because Amtrak is taking the bill all of it. But if states work with Amtrak, it can probably be cut in half and if private investors get in the mix.

Illinois + Amtrak = 2 Investors. Amtrak + no-one = 1 Investor.

And I am planning on writing to my congress man about this matter.

Use Spellcheck

Jamie

 

[RRSignal]

I wanted to pick those points apart but couldn't stop shaking my head.

 

[amtrak2041864]

Because People don't want it...



More Expensive too



How Fast do you expect these trains to travel?



Political Waffle.



Orly?



Illinois + Amtrak = 2 Investors. Amtrak + no-one = 1 Investor.



Use Spellcheck

Jamie

Will do, oh at 190mph (That is High Speed Rail) And how I think the people do want it if Amtrak northeast corridor has taken 80% of intercity travel between Washington and New York and 50% between New York and Boston and is ever increasing. So don't make assumptions because you are wrong. And why are you guys so negative towards High Speed Rail? I thought I would get positive commits toward the subject but sometimes you can't trust your own men. Also I bet you guys never really calculated the amount of time you spend using an Airline to get from New York to Washington from time from city center to the city center of destination? Food for thought.