3 hours behind

[4xchamp]

My first time ever taking a train and it's over 3hours late not off to a good start. Does anybody know if they will make up that time or should I change all my reservation?

 

[Ryan]

Maybe they make up the time.

What train? What's the rest of your itinerary. Much of it is situationally dependent.

Need more detail.

 

[Lola Sorensen]

I am on an epic Amtrak journey this summer. I left Jacksonville, FL on July 24, traveled to Washington, DC on a Viewliner train (can't remember the exact line it was), which was about an hour late leaving Jacksonville. As I recall, it did make up time during the night, as they often do. One Sleeping Car Assistant told me there is time built in to the schedule, and they plan on nighttime travel to help make the schedules. From DC to Chicago I was on the Cardinal, another Viewliner. It was on time. I loved the Cardinal line, and learned from someone on the train that it is called "The Cardinal" because every state it travels through has the cardinal as its state bird. Cool, huh.

In Chicago I got the California Zephyr, which left on time but we got stuck in Galesburg, IL for several hours because of a mechanical difficulty. Although we did make up some time at night, we were 5-6 hours late getting in to Denver. I loved the Zephy, love the observation cars, the dining car, and the little bit newer roomette. I spent a couple of weeks in Colorado and then on August 11, boarded the Zephyr again bound for Sacramento where I would change trains for the Coast Starlight and a trip up to Portland, OR. We were a few hours late getting in to Sacramento, and the Coast Starlight, which was due out at midnight, didn't leave until 2am. That was a long layover and even though I wandered around Sacramento Old Town and had dinner, etc, by 2 am I was ready to fall into that bed, which the SCA had all ready made up for us. The next morning I continued to enjoy the absolutely spectacular scenery as we traveled through the Sierras and up to Oregon.

Now I'm in Oregon for another week and then will board the Empire Builder to begin the trip back East. Even on the Amtrak website, they say you should expect delays on that line because of the interference of so much freight travel, I assume from all the coal and natural gas transport, but do not know for sure. Here's the thing, for me anyway: I LOVE train travel and I realize you have to have flexibility in your schedule, plus a sense of humor, to best enjoy train travel as it is today. While I was in DC, I picked up a folder about joining an organization that would lobby for more funding to Amtrak that would allow upgrades to the trains themselves and to the tracks Amtrak owns. Which brings my to another thing and the reason for so many late trains: Amtrak has to give way to the freight companies that own the tracks, since freight is a bigger money cargo than people are. Bottom line seems to be money, but it makes me wonder why we have this system of private ownership of the tracks anyway. After all, nobody owns our highways and interstate systems. I think it makes a lot more sense for the rail tracks in this country to be publicly owned and maintained, and for all the trains to have equal right-of-way when it comes to who gets to go when. So I guess that's my rant for the day. I will still always pick the train when I have to travel. It is lovely and civilized and comfortable and outshines air travel in every way except time.

 

[afigg]

My first time ever taking a train and it's over 3hours late not off to a good start. Does anybody know if they will make up that time or should I change all my reservation?

Would help if you told us which train you are on and whether the other reservations are ticketed connections on Amtrak. Long distance train or corridor train? California, Mid-west, or east coast? But, if the train is 3 hours late, no it won't be able to make up that much time. The train might sometimes make up 1/2 hour or an 1 hour at the endpoint of the route, but often a late train gets later.

There are so many late trains on the Amtrak system right now, can't even guess which train the poster is on. :huh:

 

[Karl1459]

... Bottom line seems to be money, but it makes me wonder why we have this system of private ownership of the tracks anyway. After all, nobody owns our highways and interstate systems. I think it makes a lot more sense for the rail tracks in this country to be publicly owned and maintained, and for all the trains to have equal right-of-way when it comes to who gets to go when ...

Properly run, imho, private industry is often more responsive to market opportunities and is often more cost efficient than government provided services. Not always, just often. When rail lines were being first built (1830's-1890's) it was mostly with private money, the various state and federal governments either did not have the tax resources or will to build the rail lines (and the states were much more independent of each other... we cannot get Massachutes, Connecticut, New York, Maryland, etc to agree to fund the NEC even with the obvious benefits. The rational behind the land grants is explained in Stephen Ambrose's "Nothing Like It In The World"* as the nation needed transcontintal rail and post Civil War simply did not have the money... it could only come from private enterprise.

While compared to the rest of the world our passenger rail is pathetic, yet our private freight railroads have done an incredible job in moving freight and lessening the numbers of trucks on the roads. To have parallel infrastructure makes sense only in the most heavily trafficed corridors, most LD and smaller corridor markets the cost of a second infrastructure would still simply be prohibitive (actually a fourth, considering the highway system and the airport system as transportation infrastructure).

Realistically the public funding will need to be in a form of private/public partnership creating an enviroment where timely passenger rail is embraced by the freight railroads, whether as a direct profit for operations or by secondary effects of public investment.

 

[neroden]

Bottom line seems to be money, but it makes me wonder why we have this system of private ownership of the tracks anyway. After all, nobody owns our highways and interstate systems. I think it makes a lot more sense for the rail tracks in this country to be publicly owned and maintained,

It does. The reason for private ownership of the tracks is

(a) historical accident

(b) there's a weird, crazy lobbying faction in this country which tries to privatize EVERYTHING (hence the sell-off of Conrail, which was government-owned)

State governments have been buying up tracks piecemeal for a while. You can keep lobbying them to buy up more, it seems to be the best way to improve things.

(FWIW, state governments owning large sections of track are Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, New Jersey, Michigan, and North Carolina. Local governments / "commuter rail authorities" own big hunks in several other states such as New York and California.)

Where the freight haulers are tenants of the state, they tend to treat passenger trains pretty well.