You make a very good point and I concede to your local knowledge. Reading the article revealed that the $32 figure is an average with the actual figures ranging from a PROFIT of $41 per passenger (on the Acela Express) to a LOSS of $462 per passenger (on the Sunset Limited). The fact that the "high speed" service between Boston and Washington is actually making a profit, while the equivalent Northeast Regional service is making a loss of $5 per passenger, is a good sign for the future of high speed rail in the US. While I was there I also noted that the existing track from Chicago to St Louis (I believe) was being upgraded for a high speed service.
The article also stated that the problem with the profit/loss method of assessing the worth of rail services is that you cannot just take the services in isolation. Removing the loss making services is very likely to badly affect the profitable services as they are all part of an interdependent network.
I know of no commuter, regional or long distance passenger (ignoring the specialist tourist services) anywhere in the world that makes a profit on its rail operations alone. All are subsidised by governments or other commercial operations. Japan's much praised Bullet Trains, for example, have never made a cent on their rail operations but the railway company is making profits from land deals and activities associated with the operations of the railways such as shopping malls next to stations, etc.
Yes, I did have a chuckle over the fact that high speed rail in Europe, Japan and China operates on its own dedicated tracks while the Acela Express shared its paths with freight, regional and commuter services. The two trips that I took ran without any delays which is probably a tribute to the traffic controllers on the NE corridor.
I can't speak for England (perhaps my next overseas trip) but here in Australia air travel is becoming more expensive and regional air services are slowly disappearing. Regional train services are either just "hanging on" or slowly dying in the eastern states but have disappeared completely just about everywhere else - so the choice is between the car or your feet.
I have been hearing a great deal about the safety record of your domestic US airlines - the one I flew on from Philadelphia to Scranton and then to Chicago was a frequent guest star on the TV show "Air Crash Investigation". It did not do my confidence any favours when they announced that my flight from Philadelphia to Scranton was delayed indefinitely because the aircraft was "in the maintenance hanger".
Here in Australia a major budget airline was recently grounded (and is still out of service) because its pilots flew too low on two separate landing approaches plus it was unable to find all its maintenance paper work.
Peter ware
Hi Pete,
Good points and thanks for posting them. Amtrak is fortunate in having backers within the House and Senate that push for subsidies for them. Especially in the East Coast area. We are getting many of the same horror stories here in the states about airline pilots as well as ground crews. Plus the TSA idiots and the way they search people and the fact that tons of valuables are stolen from baggage on a daily basis because the baggage can't be locked by the owner is really turning people off to air travel. Of course, that is the whole intent of the terrorists.

Plus the same story of air travel prices going up while service is going down is hurting the airlines. However, this society is still an "immediate gratification" society and taking a train vacation to California from New York doesn't sit well when it takes you 3-4 days just to get to California. People don't care about what they see along the way, which is a shame. All they care about is getting from point A to point B in the shortest amount of time. And THAT is what killed passenger train travel in the USA. While you will have small areas like the Northeast Corridor that depend on trains for commuter travel, long distance train travel just isn't in the cards for most folks.
Last edited: