If you had to eliminate one Amtrak route...

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.
You are apparently totally ignoring the fact that the At has no connectivity.
I'm not ignoring it, it just doesn't matter. It would provide no benefits whatsoever.
This. The Auto Train serves a unique market. It doesn't act like a typical part of the LD network because it isn't.

If this were a rational conversation—and if this conversation hadn't taken place two months ago—more people would be posting.
 
Well, let's raise the point I brought up earlier (and while I consider that discussion settled, it makes sense here): During the spring and fall, the Auto Train does a lot of one-way traffic (to FL in the fall, from FL in the spring). This means that you're hauling a full train one way, and a half-empty one the other way that has to carry the same crew, consist, etc. I would suggest running an Ambus to/from WAS-LOR and to/from ORL-SFA at those times (make it a seasonal operation and/or an off-season operation and pitch it as such) and using that to fill space. Likewise, there are going to be times that the Auto Train is going to sell out of autorack space when it doesn't sell out of on-board space. Again, if this is a common occurrence, it wouldn't be hard to allocate a limited number of seats (say, 20-30) to such a service and pitch it.
I like Anderson's open mind about things. My idea was merely an extension of his one. I didn't say "unlimited seats for regular passengers", just that the train should but open to them in case the (for some reason) want to take it instead of the SS/SM.

I also didn't want to reopen the discussion, but I saw this thread and wanted to post it anyway. Many people were talking about the SL, which could be helped if extra equipment from the At is taken off to support it, including SL East and daily service. Though UP is still a hard nut to crack and CSX is not easy, either.
 
]I mean that I want more demand for Amtrak even though we can't make longer consists yet.
What good will that demand do, when there isn't any capacity available?
We can add more trains if we get more demand. We don't have the equipment yet so take it off the AT.

You are apparently totally ignoring the fact that the At has no connectivity.
I'm not ignoring it, it just doesn't matter. It would provide no benefits whatsoever.
Benifits? Serve more people! Start more trains if you have to. Even start more Auto Trains but they should carry regular pax as well. No equipment? Take off AT! Less people taking AT, more people taking trains nationwide, overall better for Amtrak.
Even more people take planes and cars, so get rid of Amtrak and concentrate on cars and planes. That way you'll serve way more people :lol: :help:
 
You are apparently totally ignoring the fact that the At has no connectivity.
I'm not ignoring it, it just doesn't matter. It would provide no benefits whatsoever.
This. The Auto Train serves a unique market. It doesn't act like a typical part of the LD network because it isn't.
Your post is hard to understand. If it isn't an LD or SD then it should be axed right now! No use keeping an LD that is not a LD! You mean the Auto Train is not even part of Amtrak "job", operating passengers trains (LD/SD) in the US?

If it is not an LD but obviously not a SD, then it is not like any part or the Ld or SD system, and anything out of that is thus not Amtrak's business. This is not the case so what do you really mean?

You mean you want to make the AT part of the Interstate system?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Swadian, here is an idea. For a moment assume Auto Train is not a part of Amtrak at all. Forget the Auto Train even exists on Amtrak network. Since Auto Train runs on an exclusive route with no connections to other Amtrak trains as per your argument, so let's just think the Auto Train is NOT Amtrak at all. Let's go one step ahead and say it is not a train at all, it is an independent transport service on rails that takes vehicles and their occupants from some random point A to random point B. It is not a part of Amtrak, it is run by a hypothetical company called Auto Train Inc. It has no relation to Amtrak and it runs full almost all year round so its owners do not want to share their equipment with Amtrak. With this in mind, we have achieved what you want. Boom! NO AUTO TRAIN ANYMORE ON AMTRAK! There is a contraption called Auto Train that takes rich people from Washington to Florida and does not serve more Americans as you'd have liked, but hey, its not Amtrak so let it be where it is and lets concentrate on rest of the Amtrak network.

Happy?
 
]I mean that I want more demand for Amtrak even though we can't make longer consists yet.
What good will that demand do, when there isn't any capacity available?
We can add more trains if we get more demand. We don't have the equipment yet so take it off the AT.

You are apparently totally ignoring the fact that the At has no connectivity.
I'm not ignoring it, it just doesn't matter. It would provide no benefits whatsoever.
Benifits? Serve more people! Start more trains if you have to. Even start more Auto Trains but they should carry regular pax as well. No equipment? Take off AT! Less people taking AT, more people taking trains nationwide, overall better for Amtrak.
I'm sorry, is the East Coast not a part of the United States? It is a WIDE pat of the NATION, nationwide. The train provides service to a niche market of people who like it BECAUSE it takes cars. Many of these riders have no other experience with Amtrak. Cutting it would not incentivize them to take Amtrak anywhere else in the system. Think, the Auto Train cannot be judged solely on its passenger loads. The other trains' numbers are inflated because they can have multiple passengers occupying the same seat for different segments of the trip. I'm completely with you on your plan to extend the AT to WAS. Once you give me the money for eminent domain to buy property, the money to construct tracks, platforms, and facilities to offload cars onto that new land, and the infrastructure (roads, utilities) to reach it I will gladly support you. Good luck! If this service stays great as it is and does NOT open up to non-car passengers, then there is absolutely tno need whatsoever to HAVE connections.
 
You are apparently totally ignoring the fact that the At has no connectivity.
I'm not ignoring it, it just doesn't matter. It would provide no benefits whatsoever.
This. The Auto Train serves a unique market. It doesn't act like a typical part of the LD network because it isn't.
Your post is hard to understand. If it isn't an LD or SD then it should be axed right now! No use keeping an LD that is not a LD! You mean the Auto Train is not even part of Amtrak "job", operating passengers trains (LD/SD) in the US?

If it is not an LD but obviously not a SD, then it is not like any part or the Ld or SD system, and anything out of that is thus not Amtrak's business. This is not the case so what do you really mean?

You mean you want to make the AT part of the Interstate system?

I think you're doing this intentionally. I'm out.
 
And yet another AU thread spirals uncontrollably into a messy crash and burn ...
Sorry about crashing the thread. I was just expressing my opinion but other people wanted to argue. Let's just quit discussing the topic since some people don't want to anymore.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And yet another AU thread spirals uncontrollably into a messy crash and burn ...
Sorry about crashing the thread. I was just expressing my opinion but other people had to argue. Let's just quit discussing the topic since some people don't want to anymore.
Not sure it's fair to say "they HAD to argue"

they were just expressing their opinions as fairly as you were

Am I wrong here?
 
And yet another AU thread spirals uncontrollably into a messy crash and burn ...
Sorry about crashing the thread. I was just expressing my opinion but other people had to argue. Let's just quit discussing the topic since some people don't want to anymore.
Not sure it's fair to say "they HAD to argue"

they were just expressing their opinions as fairly as you were

Am I wrong here?
I guess they just wanted to, but it seems that everytime I express opposition to the AT people argue intensely. Every single post is met with at least one counter-post. That's why it almost seems automatic. It's fair, though, since I countered them as well.

But hey, let's just drop it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And yet another AU thread spirals uncontrollably into a messy crash and burn ...
Sorry about crashing the thread. I was just expressing my opinion but other people had to argue. Let's just quit discussing the topic since some people don't want to anymore.
Not sure it's fair to say "they HAD to argue"

they were just expressing their opinions as fairly as you were

Am I wrong here?
I guess they just wanted to, but it seems that everytime I express opposition to the AT people argue intensely. Every single post is met with at least one counter-post. That's why it almost seems automatic. It's fair, though, since I countered them as well.

But hey, let's just drop it.
Since everyone argues intensely, that should tell you that this is a serious subject. I don't believe you have convinced one single member of this forum that your opinion is sound, so I would agree, let's drop the subject and move on! Let's find another train that runs full and elinimate it, since not everyone can ride it!!
 
And yet another AU thread spirals uncontrollably into a messy crash and burn ...
Sorry about crashing the thread. I was just expressing my opinion but other people had to argue. Let's just quit discussing the topic since some people don't want to anymore.
Not sure it's fair to say "they HAD to argue"

they were just expressing their opinions as fairly as you were

Am I wrong here?
I guess they just wanted to, but it seems that everytime I express opposition to the AT people argue intensely. Every single post is met with at least one counter-post. That's why it almost seems automatic. It's fair, though, since I countered them as well.

But hey, let's just drop it.
Since everyone argues intensely, that should tell you that this is a serious subject. I don't believe you have convinced one single member of this forum that your opinion is sound, so I would agree, let's drop the subject and move on! Let's find another train that runs full and elinimate it, since not everyone can ride it!!

The reason every one argues against it is because it's a stupid premise. Hey, if you think it's a good idea, then go ahead and keep thinking it. The fact that so many people are against it should tell you something.
 
Some of the corridor services should be run soley by the state they are in. They're already generally funded by the state, but they shouldn't be "Amtrak". Most of what makes up the Illinois Services should be run by the State, not by Amtrak, ie: The Illini & Saluki, the Carl Sandburg & Illinois Zephyr, the Missouri River Runner & the Lincoln Service. Same goes for the Michigan services: The Pere Marquette, Wolverine and Blue Water should all be run by the state, not by Amtrak. The Keystone is redundant to the Pennsylvanian (though with local stops). Revert the Piedmont to North Carolina. Ethan Allen and the Hoosier State.

I'm not saying these are bad routes that need to be eliminated. I'm saying that they should not be part of the National Plan. Let the states run them. Let them even code share with Amtrak for connections and reservations. But remove connection guarantees, let Amtrak take back their rolling stock and let the states pay for new equipment. The fact is that Illinois, Indiana, North Carolina, New York, Pennsylvania and Michigan are all quite recipient of national tax dollars to fund losing local ridership.

As I started this post, a lot of that is already happening through state sponsorships, etc. And it's great to have a national identity such as Amtrak. But Amtrak should be left to regionals and long distance. Not in-state corridors.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That should tell you something about how ridiculous your opinion is.
The reason every one argues against it is because it's a stupid premise. Hey, if you think it's a good idea, then go ahead and keep thinking it. The fact that so many people are against it should tell you something.
Seriously? What's wrong with you guys? Still bashing me about my posts! You keep your opinion, I keep mine. I've had enough of this and I think many others have, too. Calling me stupid or not taking the AT seriously is not going to change my opinion or make this thread better!

Please just stop bashing me and talk about some other stuff. I feel like you're bashing me, not my opinion.
 
That should tell you something about how ridiculous your opinion is.
The reason every one argues against it is because it's a stupid premise. Hey, if you think it's a good idea, then go ahead and keep thinking it. The fact that so many people are against it should tell you something.
Calling me stupid or not taking the AT seriously is not going to change my opinion or make this thread better!

I feel like you're bashing me, not my opinion.
1 - We do respect the AT, just not your opinion. The AT is a very important train and we care about its existence.

2 - Probably both, deservedly both
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top