End of Summer Amtrak article

[Amtrakfflyer]

This touches on a lot of relevant issues.
http://corridorrail.com/u-s-one-siz...3cvSfQfcN2tC_yO6T2fQLy67Zu4yemiMz5-kLEh6H5jLo

 

[JWM]

I have to fully concur with this article. While new OBB "Nightjet" trains prepare to a great increase in overnight travel in Europe with the ability to add or subtract cars according to need and a private start up, Midnight Trains, is doing the same thing, we take the fixed consist route to disaster. First, the Superliners have to be replaced. Second, they much be in individual cars not sets. Third, Sleeping Car passengers should have their own lounge open only to them. Next dining on tables with real place settings etc. It just goes on and on.

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

The linked article loss me. What was the point?

Why is it a update from last year?

Short haul and long haul trains are not the same.

Reference the Nightjet, the new trainsets are fixed and designed for two sets to be hook together so they can travel two different routes/cities. (Split apart at a intermediate station. With a another set get hook up to the train end station.) The ability to add single cars are not going to readily available to these trainsets, and not planned for this equipment.

 

[MARC Rider]

I wasn't too impressed with the article. The author seems to be focusing on the evil devil "Gardner" as the source of all of Amtrak's problems. But we all know that the problem with the evil devil "Gardner" is that he supports corridor service over long-distance service, especially, "experiential" long distance service on the secondary long-distance trains. And that the evil devil Gardner has some sort of secret agenda to kill the long-distance trains, only being restrained from doing so by Congress. But the most recent insult to Amtrak service is that state-funded Wolverine trains have been cancelled! Why would the evil devil Gardner want to do that? The state of Michigan is paying for the trains. Does the evil devil Gardner hate Michigan or something? It doesn't make sense.

In the real world, there are a lot more people in management than Gardner who have made some bad decisions, although it's not clear that at the time they made the decision, it was such a bad idea, or else, the bad decision was the least bad of all of the possible decisions. Or that other people beside Gardner just screwed up, and Gardner was trying to avoid being a micro-manager, which is something that I, being the recipient of micromanaging during my career, appreciate. Or it may be beyond Gardner and specific Amtrak managers, but rather a general belief among the managerial class in this country that employees that don't require a college education are abundant and fungible, and thus can be treated like dirt. Given that these problems are found in more companies and industries than Amtrak and passenger rail, that does seem likely.

That said, I agree that Amtrak has a lot of problems right now. But getting rid of Garner won't solve them.

 

[lordsigma]

Gardner has also only been running the show since January. Most of the problems were pretty much in place well before then. Yes he was a key part of leadership team over the last several years prior to that but ultimately he wasn’t the one making the final call until that point. It seems from my observation most that believe he is the source of all problems do so due to certain alleged comments he made during the Southwest Chief fiasco a few years ago. But just because he may have had an opinion (and may continue to have) about the NEC being the most important service and about the Ld trains costing a lot of money (and presumably supporting the dopey idea to break up the chief) doesn’t equate to engaging in intentional malice and sabotage today. Cost cutting and breaking even were pretty much priority one when Anderson was at the helm - and I suspect Anderson’s appointment and cost cutting mandate was very much a response to the administration at the time to try to keep the company from being a target for budget cuts by showing efforts to reduce operating losses. That’s not to say I agree with the mentality but I can see from a politics perspective why the board may have thought they needed to go that way.

That’s not to say Amtrak doesn’t have its continued problems and inefficiencies that do need attention but it seems important to many to pin things on one scapegoat when some of the issues may be more widespread and institutional throughout the company. I think a bit of realism is important and while we all want to see improvements and I think getting a full strength board seated with the prescribed representation would be a good start along with congressional oversight and pressure from advocacy groups like RPA - I think people need to be realistic about the executives. You don’t see too many people lining up to be Amtrak CEO - it’s a complex organization and lousy pay and benefits for the industry. Gardner probably isn’t perfect but if he’s willing to follow the law and take marching orders from a proper board and follow congressional overnight and be open minded id rather an insider like him that’s going to stick around for a while rather than a revolving door of retired CEOs who want to “fix Amtrak” and leave after a year. I think you’re going to find a hard time finding a CEO who doesn’t believe that the NEC is the prize.

 

[Amtrakfflyer]

http://corridorrail.com/u-s-amtrak-...ing-the-spirit-of-california-overnight-train/