How Amtrak could become Solvent...

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Remember the fact that a massive percentage of people, especially here, have little or no common courtesy and simply don't give a crap about everybody else's sanity.

Can you imagine the sound of an impatient dog that's been kept in the storage rack for 7 hours in between smoke stops? The smell released from frightened animals and, again, those who've simply waited too long? Can you imagine the amount of passengers begging or (more commonly) demanding the conductor or attendant to let them off at a 30 second stop so they can walk their dog or let their cat get some air? Oh yeah, and don't forget that trains commonly run hours late, adding far more time between smoke stops and the amount of time a passenger thought they'd have their animal on board.

The article spoke of pets in sleeper cars. Holy crap (literally)!!! When many people have their own pvt room that's not really their's, they usually have no problem being gross, and that will undoubtedly include some people ignoring or not even noticing animals leaving surprises for the next occupant. And dogs tend to bark ALOT in the morning when waking their owners up for food. Rooms on Amtrak aren't exactly soundproof! There's also the potential for pets to get loose, which they will every now and again, and run through the length of a car, pissing a lot of people off. That's more of a threat for sleepers than coach, but it's still there. I say more of a threat for sleepers because many will surely let their pets out of their carrying cases/cages at some point.

Allowing pets in the baggage car, maybe, during decent weather. But not around the rest of the passengers.
 
I think it should absolutely be an option for sleeper passengers. I would love to take my dog with me on the train - he is a little pug and would love it. And I agree that amtrak could probably charge hefty fees for it.
 
There was a "service" dog on our recent trip for two ladies that did not have any obvious need, but the little guy was sooo quiet and sweet. Wasn't an issue at all, even went under the table in the diner with us (we were seated with the ladies in the diner as well as being across the aisle in a roomette from them). Completely forgot the dog was under the table and almost stepped on it!

But how do you draw the line between quiet lap dog and barking obnoxious rover? It's a can of worms Amtrak just can't (and shouldn't) open.

These ladies pulled a fast one as far as I'm concerned, and it not only worked but was completely fine and enjoyable with everyone that came in contact with the dog. But for every good dog experience, there will be a bad one, and being woken up by a barking dog would sure make me never ride again. I think that article was the most bizarre thing I've ever read. Simply ludicrous idea.
 
There was a "service" dog on our recent trip for two ladies that did not have any obvious need, but the little guy was sooo quiet and sweet. Wasn't an issue at all, even went under the table in the diner with us (we were seated with the ladies in the diner as well as being across the aisle in a roomette from them). Completely forgot the dog was under the table and almost stepped on it!
But how do you draw the line between quiet lap dog and barking obnoxious rover? It's a can of worms Amtrak just can't (and shouldn't) open.

These ladies pulled a fast one as far as I'm concerned, and it not only worked but was completely fine and enjoyable with everyone that came in contact with the dog. But for every good dog experience, there will be a bad one, and being woken up by a barking dog would sure make me never ride again. I think that article was the most bizarre thing I've ever read. Simply ludicrous idea.
Some people have service dogs for "stress" related issues. I encountered one of those situations last year. I'll leave it to others to debate the legitimacy of that.

The problem I can see now it Sleeper space is sold to someone with dog. Since rooms aren't "deep cleaned" en route (and probably not even during the few hours when they turn equipment) that space is then sold to someone with an allergy to pet dander. I can see a myriad of issues coming from that scenario.
 
For some people it would be okay for dogs to be on board, for others it may be unbearable. I think there is a big difference between a service animal & a pet. If a pet is ok with traveling that is also a good thing, but some do not travel well at all. Others have mentioned the messes from their waste, but a dog also can get sick which is just as bad. You can't open any windows for fresh air, either. There seems to be a lot of people with dog allergies now, so that would be awful for them. I personally think it would be okay if these issues could be solved, but then where do you draw the line on what animals are allowed on board? Would I be able to bring my Blue & Gold Macaw? Most people would object, & rightly so. I cannot guarantee that he would be absolutely quiet on the train! I would never put him in baggage, either. He may indeed enjoy it, but I don't think I'll ever find out. He does enjoy car rides, but then needs a 'calm down period' before I can handle him again.
 
This would make Amtrak profitable? How is that gonna work?

Lets say I want to make a million dollars a year off this in revenue. Lets consider a reasonable expense of $10 a dog, and figure a service fee of $50, ok?

So $40 a dog. On one train, a million bucks. Now keep in mind that a train runs 365 days a year. That each train runs twice a day- one in each direction. 1000000/365 (days) / 2 (runs per day) / 40 (amount of money per dog). So on each train we would have to carry an average of essentially 35 pets to turn a million bucks.

And lets remember Amtrak used to allow this- and the numbers were more like 3 or 4 dogs a train, not 35.

And few routes would be made profitable by $1 million. I think the Auto Train loses about 4 million a year, with allocated costs. So it would need to carry A HUNDRED AND FORTY FREAK'N DOGS EACH DAY TO BREAK EVEN.

Forget about how objectionable the plan is. It doesn't work mathematically.
 
Thanks for the numbers GML. Thirty-five dogs per train? Talk about crazy! As much as I love dogs, that would be way too many to have in the confined spaces on a train! Even if most were in baggage, it wouldn't take long for it to smell like a kennel instead of a train! Not to mention the risk of dogfights. I don't think dogs are the answer. Maybe Amtrak should take up shipping frozen fish instead! :lol:
 
Remember the fact that a massive percentage of people, especially here, have little or no common courtesy and simply don't give a crap about everybody else's sanity.
Can you imagine the sound of an impatient dog that's been kept in the storage rack for 7 hours in between smoke stops? The smell released from frightened animals and, again, those who've simply waited too long? Can you imagine the amount of passengers begging or (more commonly) demanding the conductor or attendant to let them off at a 30 second stop so they can walk their dog or let their cat get some air? Oh yeah, and don't forget that trains commonly run hours late, adding far more time between smoke stops and the amount of time a passenger thought they'd have their animal on board.

The article spoke of pets in sleeper cars. Holy crap (literally)!!! When many people have their own pvt room that's not really their's, they usually have no problem being gross, and that will undoubtedly include some people ignoring or not even noticing animals leaving surprises for the next occupant. And dogs tend to bark ALOT in the morning when waking their owners up for food. Rooms on Amtrak aren't exactly soundproof! There's also the potential for pets to get loose, which they will every now and again, and run through the length of a car, pissing a lot of people off. That's more of a threat for sleepers than coach, but it's still there. I say more of a threat for sleepers because many will surely let their pets out of their carrying cases/cages at some point.

Allowing pets in the baggage car, maybe, during decent weather. But not around the rest of the passengers.
The sound of an impatient dog can't be any worse than the sound of a screaming baby who won't shut up for anything.

I'd rather have an impatient dog that a baby.

I am sure parents can also demand the conductor lets them off at a 30 second stop so their kid could get fresh air.
 
Aren't service dogs well trained compared to your average pet? IE they don't have as many accidents or make noise?

I'd laugh if they put heat and air conditioning in the bag, next they'll say Amtrak would have to stock pet food and the TAS's would have to scoop poop if Bowser makes between smoke stops...

Yes I get that airlines allow them on board-- but airplanes don't stay in the air for 50 hours.... And honestly I haven't seen a pet carrier at an airport in years.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As a dog owner, I'm against this.

Even if allowed the only space suitable would be a bedroom.

Will the next thing added to the stop list be 'Pit Stops'?
 
Aren't service dogs well trained compared to your average pet? IE they don't have as many accidents or make noise?
I'd laugh if they put heat and air conditioning in the bag, next they'll say Amtrak would have to stock pet food and the TAS's would have to scoop poop if Bowser makes between smoke stops...

Yes I get that airlines allow them on board-- but airplanes don't stay in the air for 50 hours.... And honestly I haven't seen a pet carrier at an airport in years.
Any animal, no matter how well trained it is, still must go when it needs to go. Most properly housetrained dogs can have an 'accident' if they are not able to get outside to go when they need to.

I think that would be another major problem IF Amtrak ever allowed any dogs other than service animals, especially on long distance trains.

My son was going to put his cat on the plane recently, but changed his mind because he didn't want the cat in the cargo hold for nine hours.
 
The sound of an impatient dog can't be any worse than the sound of a screaming baby who won't shut up for anything.
I'd rather have an impatient dog that a baby.

I am sure parents can also demand the conductor lets them off at a 30 second stop so their kid could get fresh air.
Wrong on every count. Not to mention, babies wear diapers, people aren't allergic to them.
 
The author of the post discredited themselves the first second that he used the phrase "how Amtrak can become solvent." That implies a complete lack of knowledge of Amtrak and US transportation policy in general. It's one thing to argue that pets should be carried aboard trains (which I don't necessarily agree with unless I saw a well-researched plan on how it would work), but to suggest that Amtrak can eliminate their operating subsidy by carrying pets is ludicrous.

There's only one way that Amtrak can be profitable on above the rails costs: massive capital and infrastructure investment. European services (and services in other countries that don't get an operating subsidy) run without an operating subsidy because they've received massive investments in high speed, dedicated infrastructure that makes them highly competitive (or superior) to all other modes of transportation in terms of travel time (and fast travel times brings in high revenue travelers).

If this is such a great idea, why don't airlines, for instance, allow unlimited number of pets in the cabin of the aircraft?

If the author wants to take a stand on Amtrak's pet policy, fine. But they're cleared not qualified to wade into any issues surrounding Amtrak's funding structure. I hate this sort of stuff because it continues to perpetrate the myth that if only we change a few things about Amtrak, it will magically become profitable. That's the attitude that brought us Mail & Express, CCCs, and a lot of other poorly thought out experiments. Let's not make pet carriage one of them.
 
This would make Amtrak profitable? How is that gonna work?
Lets say I want to make a million dollars a year off this in revenue. Lets consider a reasonable expense of $10 a dog, and figure a service fee of $50, ok?

So $40 a dog. On one train, a million bucks. Now keep in mind that a train runs 365 days a year. That each train runs twice a day- one in each direction. 1000000/365 (days) / 2 (runs per day) / 40 (amount of money per dog). So on each train we would have to carry an average of essentially 35 pets to turn a million bucks.
I bet they could charge LOTS more, like $100/dog, and people would still pay it. The fee on most planes is $100-$200, why make it less than that?

I do agree that its not really practical and amtrak will never do it.
 
The author of the post discredited themselves the first second that he used the phrase "how Amtrak can become solvent." That implies a complete lack of knowledge of Amtrak and US transportation policy in general. It's one thing to argue that pets should be carried aboard trains (which I don't necessarily agree with unless I saw a well-researched plan on how it would work), but to suggest that Amtrak can eliminate their operating subsidy by carrying pets is ludicrous.
There's only one way that Amtrak can be profitable on above the rails costs: massive capital and infrastructure investment. European services (and services in other countries that don't get an operating subsidy) run without an operating subsidy because they've received massive investments in high speed, dedicated infrastructure that makes them highly competitive (or superior) to all other modes of transportation in terms of travel time (and fast travel times brings in high revenue travelers).

If this is such a great idea, why don't airlines, for instance, allow unlimited number of pets in the cabin of the aircraft?

If the author wants to take a stand on Amtrak's pet policy, fine. But they're cleared not qualified to wade into any issues surrounding Amtrak's funding structure. I hate this sort of stuff because it continues to perpetrate the myth that if only we change a few things about Amtrak, it will magically become profitable. That's the attitude that brought us Mail & Express, CCCs, and a lot of other poorly thought out experiments. Let's not make pet carriage one of them.
There has been discussionn for years of putting a "pet car" on the Auto Train, to be sponsored by a pet food company - Purina, etc. The car would be a separate piece of equipment, only for pets and staffed by a representative of the pet food company. It would be a rolling kennel and the pet food company would sell pet food and other pet related items in the car. The Auto Train passengers would be able to "visit" their animals enroute and if necessary, they would walk them at the Florence middle of the night stop. Plans have been drawn, however the concept has gone no further. In my opinion, this is the only sensible route for pets and there is a strong demand on the part of the snow-birds to take their pets on the Auto Train. I fully agree with all the negative comments above regarding pets on any other route. It just doesn't work and the money is not there either.
 
Not to mention, babies wear diapers, people aren't allergic to them.
I'm allergic to them.

They make my face turn red and my ears pound and my fists clench and my blood pressure skyrocket and even make me hyperventilate. Also they give me a huge desire to turn them into footballs with the goal post being an open vestibule door, but that's a different story.

I bet they could charge LOTS more, like $100/dog, and people would still pay it. The fee on most planes is $100-$200, why make it less than that?
I do agree that its not really practical and amtrak will never do it.
Allright. Lets make it 90 profit per purr-or-pooch. Let me re-run the numbers for Amtrak's only LD train to cover its above the rails expenses... 4,000,000/365/2/90= 61 dogs on each train, 122 a day, to make the Auto Train profitable over the rails. Its still not realistic.

And for perspective, I'm a bit of a furry. I love dogs, cats, mice, gerbils, rats, snakes, tigers, and just about every other living animal there is, and I wouldn't mind most of them as a pet. I still don't want them on a train I'm on. I have enough problems with poorly trained adult humans who know when they are being rude and obnoxious, more than enough with children who should have at least an inkling of it. And they at least, when making inappropriately on the floor, generally confine so doing to the restrooms.

Dogs and cats are unconscious of human politeness when trained to their best, and still will make on the floor if they aren't taken out for long enough. And we are talking about very well trained animals. Now consider that their are Amtrak passengers who think appropriate training for a screaming kid in the dining car who wants ice cream is to tell them to keep screaming, they aren't getting it. If I had done that in my youth, I would have a hand-shaped welt on my face for a week.

Can you really expect most of these people to train their animals any better then their children? I'm not thinking of your well trained cats/dogs/birds, Mercedes. I'm sure you and they would comport themselves well. I'm thinking of the other 95%- and want no part of it.
 
We have a beautiful, well trained and precious Bichon dog. We got her when we were living in France.

In Europe, dogs and cats are welcome in almost all public places. We were able to take our dog on

the local and long distance trains, excluding anything goint to England. Our dog has made eight transAtlantic

flights from France/Netherlands to the USA without incident. I would take her in the airplane cabin and

she would be fine for the 8 hour trip.

I do not think pets should be permitted on Amtrak trains. I usually travel in a sleeper, but even in that

environment, it would be difficult for pets. Firstly, they need to go the bathroom, which is not possible

on the train. Even at smoke stops, there are not facilities for pets. Secondly, strange noises often cause

dogs to bark. Finally, while most pet owners would be very careful in keeping the accommodations clean,

there is always some people who have no regard for others and would leave a mess for the next person.

I love my dog and I care for her like a person, but I don't think pets should be allowed on our trains.
 
There has been discussionn for years of putting a "pet car" on the Auto Train, to be sponsored by a pet food company - Purina, etc. The car would be a separate piece of equipment, only for pets and staffed by a representative of the pet food company. It would be a rolling kennel and the pet food company would sell pet food and other pet related items in the car. The Auto Train passengers would be able to "visit" their animals enroute and if necessary, they would walk them at the Florence middle of the night stop. Plans have been drawn, however the concept has gone no further. In my opinion, this is the only sensible route for pets and there is a strong demand on the part of the snow-birds to take their pets on the Auto Train. I fully agree with all the negative comments above regarding pets on any other route. It just doesn't work and the money is not there either.
Now that sounds like a worthwhile proposal. I could get behind something like that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top