I'm writing my senior thesis paper about Amtrak!

[GlobalistPotato]

In my language arts class, my last assignment (before the final exam) is to write a multi-page thesis paper. The subject I choose was about Amtrak, and more specifically it's future.

My main point is that Amtrak will need a dedicated funding source (such as trust-fund) to fund their operations and expansions under a clear goal with good leadership.

My approach would be to present the thesis statement in the paragraph, then follow with 4 or 5 lessons/examples from Amtrak's past, and probably throw in a foreign lesson as well.

The lessons I've come up with so far are:

1) The formation of Amtrak, highlighting Nixon's goof-ball plan for Amtrak, the early problems with inherited equipment (Rainbow Era), and how the arrival of new equipment plus the purchase of the NEC gave the railroad ridership growth.

2) Give the lessons from Amtrak's better presidents, such as Paul Reistrup and David Gunn. ("David L Gunn: the Steve Jobs of Amtrak".)

3) The lesson behind George Warrington. How NOT to run Amtrak. :help: :help: :help:

4) The state-funded corridors, with California being the prime example. Explain importance due to PRIIA, the 10th Amendment (for the Constitutionalists :lol: ), and how it provides quality service.

5) Amtrak's insane boss, Congress. How the White House, Congress and FRA tend to hurt Amtrak more than they help them. Basically, I'm going to bash a good part of the status-quo.

Then, I'll go into how Amtrak improves in the future. How the status-quo makes that impossible.

Does that sound good?

I do think the background information behind Amtrak and the basic facts behind in at the beginning of the paper after my thesis statement. Most people out there aren't really aware of how Amtrak works or where the serve.

Any ideas? Thoughts?

 

[pennyk]

It sounds like it will be very interesting. I would love to read it.

 

[Steve4031]

I think you have a good grasp of the situations, and it would be an interesting paper. I wrote a few of these in high school, and got questioned about jargon by some teachers. One, who shall remain nameless, referred to individual cars as "trains". After I sharply corrected her, I got a phone call home. Even though I was right, I was wrong. I also remember having points taken off because of the way I used the word consist. In most circles, it is a verb. In the railroading industry, its used as a noun. The teacher didn't get it, and I lost points on that one. So be careful of the jargon.

 

[tp49]

I think you have a good grasp of the situations, and it would be an interesting paper. I wrote a few of these in high school, and got questioned about jargon by some teachers. One, who shall remain nameless, referred to individual cars as "trains". After I sharply corrected her, I got a phone call home. Even though I was right, I was wrong. I also remember having points taken off because of the way I used the word consist. In most circles, it is a verb. In the railroading industry, its used as a noun. The teacher didn't get it, and I lost points on that one. So be careful of the jargon.

Or conversely when I have to write something and use either jargon or an acronym I find a way to define it early so people know.

An example for an acronym is the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) then use FRA for the remainder of what I am writing. For jargon if you are allowed to place footnotes I'd use a footnote when introducing a term. The caveat of course is if a high school paper would require footnotes or endnotes.

 

[Tumbleweed]

I think you have a good grasp of the situations, and it would be an interesting paper. I wrote a few of these in high school, and got questioned about jargon by some teachers. One, who shall remain nameless, referred to individual cars as "trains". After I sharply corrected her, I got a phone call home. Even though I was right, I was wrong. I also remember having points taken off because of the way I used the word consist. In most circles, it is a verb. In the railroading industry, its used as a noun. The teacher didn't get it, and I lost points on that one. So be careful of the jargon.

Sounds like you could/should have "taught the teachers"......

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

I think you have a good grasp of the situations, and it would be an interesting paper. I wrote a few of these in high school, and got questioned about jargon by some teachers. One, who shall remain nameless, referred to individual cars as "trains". After I sharply corrected her, I got a phone call home. Even though I was right, I was wrong. I also remember having points taken off because of the way I used the word consist. In most circles, it is a verb. In the railroading industry, its used as a noun. The teacher didn't get it, and I lost points on that one. So be careful of the jargon.

Some dictionaries do recognize the railroad definition, and even the railroad pronunciation. That is, with the accent on the first syllable.

 

[Train2104]

I would have a look at Trains Magazine's article on Amtrak's challenges and history. (cover story July 2011)

 

[GlobalistPotato]

I think you have a good grasp of the situations, and it would be an interesting paper. I wrote a few of these in high school, and got questioned about jargon by some teachers. One, who shall remain nameless, referred to individual cars as "trains". After I sharply corrected her, I got a phone call home. Even though I was right, I was wrong. I also remember having points taken off because of the way I used the word consist. In most circles, it is a verb. In the railroading industry, its used as a noun. The teacher didn't get it, and I lost points on that one. So be careful of the jargon.

Or conversely when I have to write something and use either jargon or an acronym I find a way to define it early so people know.

An example for an acronym is the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) then use FRA for the remainder of what I am writing. For jargon if you are allowed to place footnotes I'd use a footnote when introducing a term. The caveat of course is if a high school paper would require footnotes or endnotes.

Yeah, that would be an issue. But what I'm most concerned about is making everything fit and flow together. For instance, how do the failures of George Warrington fit into my thesis about Amtrak's future and expansion?

I would have a look at Trains Magazine's article on Amtrak's challenges and history. (cover story July 2011)

Already did that. Trains Magazine is one of my written sources.

 

[Anderson]

Potato,

I'm likely going to be working on a pro-Amtrak paper soon as well. The head of one of the groups I'm involved in is actually quite open to a paper putting down arguments about rail being less expensive than building highways, etc. So I'd be interested to see what you have to say in your paper, and hopefully I'll find myself citing you.

 

[GlobalistPotato]

Potato,

I'm likely going to be working on a pro-Amtrak paper soon as well. The head of one of the groups I'm involved in is actually quite open to a paper putting down arguments about rail being less expensive than building highways, etc. So I'd be interested to see what you have to say in your paper, and hopefully I'll find myself citing you.

Well, I'm probably going to talk about the political and business models that would allow Amtrak to better serve passengers with its existing trains and where the priorities are for expanding passenger rail. And basically say Amtrak needs to have a dedicated funding source like other modes of transportation. And what Congress is to expect from Amtrak (ie, not demanding "Guidepaths to self-sufficiency"), while at the same time expanding Amtrak in a rational way (for instance, the first new LD train would be a revived CHI-Florida Train, not the North Coast Limited).

I would explain some current "easy fixes" that would improve Amtrak's ridership/cost recovery, customer service, and reliability. Ie, purchasing new equipment to expand trains that are at full capacity. Reforms that need to be made in the FRA to reduce operating costs for Amtrak or a possible private operator. Possible funding mechanisms to fund specific LD corridors. Etc.

 

[Anderson]

We're going to be talking about a lot of the same things, I think...don't forget things such as cutting back underused LD segments while beefing up higher-demand segments (the CZ leaps to mind here, as does the Crescent).

Honestly, I've come to the conclusion that what Amtrak needs, above all else, is a continuing capital budget of $200-250 million/year (give or take) so that they can arrange for a continuous operation producing railcars. That alone...not having to wait years and years between car orders (which drives up the maintenance budget) and not having to pay for the winning bidder to build or reopen a railcar factory every time. At least outside of HSR trainsets (where there just isn't the car demand), being able to carry out steady replacements would enable at least some savings on the capital expense side (Amtrak could still bid out the operation, or aspects of the operation, of their railcar production to an outside company, but the operation would be kept intact and more or less continuously operating...you can scale something up or down at least marginally based on demand, but you're always going to have car replacement demand).