Restoring Desert Wind by reducing frequency of CZ

[seat38a]

I still contend that no matter how bizarre Californians are, they will not pass any initiative to fund a train that will mostly run in Nevada. They will be happy to fund something from LAX to Victorville. but I'd be surprised if they want to spend their tax money to enable high rollers to go to Nevada to spend their money and prop up Nevada's economy.

High rollers would not take the train to Vegas they have private jets that pick them up and fly them out there.

 

[jis]

Prop 1A barely passed for CAHSR, a state wide initiative for Las Vegas won't go anywhere.

I wouldn't exactly call a 5% difference barely.

Either way. You can nitpick away about 5%. It still is very unlikely that any significant percentage of people in northern California, and for that matter many people in Southern California would vote to spend their tax dollars on a train from LA to Vegas, and that too a slow pokey one as the resurrected Desert Wind would be.

I still contend that no matter how bizarre Californians are, they will not pass any initiative to fund a train that will mostly run in Nevada. They will be happy to fund something from LAX to Victorville. but I'd be surprised if they want to spend their tax money to enable high rollers to go to Nevada to spend their money and prop up Nevada's economy.

High rollers would not take the train to Vegas they have private jets that pick them up and fly them out there.

More the reason for not bothering since those that have the deep pockets to fund it through farebox apparently won't even bother to take it. SO the poor sap of the taxpayer would be stuck with an even greater part of the bill to fund the development of Nevada.

 

[neroden]

Nevada cares about a train to Las Vegas. California does not. Eventually Nevada probably will fund a train to Las Vegas.

 

[inthegauge]

More east versus west bull. Surprise, followed by a yawn. jis, neroden and many others hate the idea of western service improvements and so do the moderators of this board, right inline with Big A top management. This idea, much as I agree with it, is a non-starter on this board.

 

[SarahZ]

More east versus west bull. Surprise, followed by a yawn. jis, neroden and many others hate the idea of western service improvements and so do the moderators of this board, right inline with Big A top management. This idea, much as I agree with it, is a non-starter on this board.

 

[CHamilton]

We need a truly national, robust, passenger rail network. Multiple routes and frequencies. Can you imagine the fights if there could be only one flight daily between LAX and SFO? Or two flights a day between Chicago and NY? Or roads so backed up that it takes multiple hours to get between major cities...oh, wait, we already have that.

So let's stop fighting over scraps, and work to restore a rail system that is worthy of this country.

 

[gmushial]

Basically I have to agree with the comments... but do have to wonder if maybe the demographics haven't change since then, ie, a very large retiring boomer generation (that was more of the jet-setter generation then)... wonder if they might not be more inclined toward a train vs today's flying cattle cars? ... but that's presuming they plan and have money to travel in their retirement - always a big if.

 

[GG-1]

We also need to face the unfortunate fact that the Desert Wind was never a superior financial performer when it ran and is unlikely to be now.

Aloha

Jishnu, That seems surprising. Since every time I rode it the train was almost full.Vaguely remembering the rules for attending the Vegas conventions it was probably Friday, or Saturday night. From another Post about only serving LA-Vegas I question that as each time as I departed the train in Vegas from LA, about as many got on heading NE as got off for Vegas.

My observations being only oce each 5 years and only in the same direction is only a tiny blib in riders.

 

[jis]

Jishnu, That seems surprising. Since every time I rode it the train was almost full.Vaguely remembering the rules for attending the Vegas conventions it was probably Friday, or Saturday night. From another Post about only serving LA-Vegas I question that as each time as I departed the train in Vegas from LA, about as many got on heading NE as got off for Vegas.

My observations being only oce each 5 years and only in the same direction is only a tiny blib in riders.

A train can be completely full and overflowing and yet lose gobs of money. The financials of the Desert Wind, specially when it ran less than daily was pretty bad.
But one should also remember that when the Hi-Level Heritage fleet was retired, Amtrak really did not have enough equipment to run all of the then running Western trains daily, and something had to give. What gave was the sacrifice of the bottom rung trains that were not part of the original network. What saved the Sunset then was that it was part of the original network. I surmise that if Amtrak had been able to acquire the additional Superliners needed at that point somehow, there would have been no service cancellation. Shockingly, even back then cancellation of the Southwest Limited was considered at various times, but it survived again because of being part of the original network. Of course trains like the National Limited, and eventually Broadway Limited were not that lucky. So it is not like only Western trains get the shaft all the time either.

Incidentally for an example of very full trains bursting at their seams, that lose gobs of money, look at any suburban train in any large Indian city. Or for that matter any suburban/commuter train along the Northeast Corridor during rush hours, in the US.

However, farebox recovery is just one dimension in the overall scheme of justifying any service. What should be an important consideration is what additional social and business utility said service has. If a service induces additional commercial activity that improves the tax base or similar, significant farebox losses can be justified. A prime example of such is the NJT RiverLINE which has abysmal farebox recovery and yet is a significant economic and real estate activity inducer, something that the pre-existing bus routes with even more abysmal farebox recovery did not do for decades before the RiverLINE was put in place.

 

[jis]

More east versus west bull. Surprise, followed by a yawn. jis, neroden and many others hate the idea of western service improvements and so do the moderators of this board, right inline with Big A top management. This idea, much as I agree with it, is a non-starter on this board.

Actually I don't hate the idea of improving western trains at all. There is a reason that such is not happening now, and that is because we have chosen to elect a bunch of folks who do not wish to finance such. The responsibility for funding the LD network has to lie with Congress, and it has chosen not to do so.
There is a fundamental demographic problem that cannot be easily surmounted to make the western LD trains, except the Coast Starlight self-standing as far as cost and revenue goes. This is illustrated very clearly in this population density map:

This map shows several things, which may or may not surprise someone:

1. The alleged East vs. West thing is not a conspiracy, it is plain demographics. Roughly speaking east of the dividing line runing through Minneapolis, Kansas City San Antonio, the population density is significantly higher than west of it except along the Pacific Coast. Indeed more than 75% of the entire population of the US lives east of that line. Consequently it is easier to sustain an LD network east of that line, purely based on the number of people available to avail of such service.

2. Pacific Coast service is viable if handled carefully.

3. If it were possible, a Chicago - Kansas City - Denver sort of service could be made to work. Even Chicago - Denver may be workable

4. Salt Lake City to the Northwest is probably more viable than Salt Lake City to Southwesst

5. Just because LAX - Las Vegas may be viable, indeed for multiple frequency, does not imply that Las Vegas to Salt Lake City will be. Incidentally we see a similar issue with the CZ between RNO and SLC. Now if we were to reduce CZ to less than daily, the ridership lost is unlikely to be regained via a less than daily train on a different route. Indeed prior to Amtrak, service from SLC to Oakland had been less than daily for quite a while.

Mind you this is not to say that such trains should not exist. It just points out that when push comes to shove, which would be more vulnerable.

 

[WoodyinNYC]

I love that map.

The Lynchburger is being extended to Roanoke. Next the Dominion of Virginia plans to extend that train to Bristol, on the Tennessee border. I've said the next stop would be Knoxville, then Chattanooga, then Birmingham, and probably push on down to New Orleans to get serviced (with stops in Montgomery and Mobile.)

On the map, the density on that Appalachian/Tennessee River Valley corridor is even heavier than I'd imagined, far better than, say, Mobile-Jacksonville that many folks clamor to see restored. The population is there. Now all it needs is time and lots of money.

I also see promise for a Heartland Flyer running San Antonio-Austin-Ft Worth (Dalles)-Oklahoma City-Wichita-Kansas City-Omaha-Des Moines-Chicago.

What helpful map for us daydreamers. Thanks.

 

[MikefromCrete]

I love that map.

The Lynchburger is being extended to Roanoke. Next the Dominion of Virginia plans to extend that train to Bristol, on the Tennessee border. I've said the next stop would be Knoxville, then Chattanooga, then Birmingham, and probably push on down to New Orleans to get serviced (with stops in Montgomery and Mobile.)

On the map, the density on that Appalachian/Tennessee River Valley corridor is even heavier than I'd imagined, far better than, say, Mobile-Jacksonville that many folks clamor to see restored. The population is there. Now all it needs is time and lots of money.

I also see promise for a Heartland Flyer running San Antonio-Austin-Ft Worth (Dalles)-Oklahoma City-Wichita-Kansas City-Omaha-Des Moines-Chicago.

What helpful map for us daydreamers. Thanks.

Turning good reliable regional trains into LD's that could run hours late is not necessarily a good idea.

 

[chakk]

Nevada cares about a train to Las Vegas. California does not. Eventually Nevada probably will fund a train to Las Vegas.

I seriously doubt this, when there are so many flight options from the LA Basin. Southwest alone has 5 daily flights from Ontario, CA, 8 from LAX, 9 from Burbank, 8 from Orange County. Combined with other airlines, my WAG is that there are close to 50 daily flights between LA Basin airports and LAS, with capacity for 7,000 passengers.

 

[seat38a]

Nevada cares about a train to Las Vegas. California does not. Eventually Nevada probably will fund a train to Las Vegas.

I seriously doubt this, when there are so many flight options from the LA Basin. Southwest alone has 5 daily flights from Ontario, CA, 8 from LAX, 9 from Burbank, 8 from Orange County. Combined with other airlines, my WAG is that there are close to 50 daily flights between LA Basin airports and LAS, with capacity for 7,000 passengers.

At least on the California side, Amtrak California is not a tool to get people off of planes but people off the freeway. A train from LAX to LAS would not be used to compete with flights by a long shot (Unless HSR). It would be used as an alternative / to relieve the congestion on I15 which is busting at the seams already. After the great "Carmegadon," nothing has improved on the 405 freeway. Billions spent and its just a bigger parking lot. In the last 5 years, all roundtrip drive to Vegas always involved massive traffic jams both ways. The days of making it to Vegas in 4 hours by doing 70mph+ on I15 is over.

So its either spend billions to widen the freeway, which just turns into a bigger parking lot, or spend a fraction of it on an alternative transportation option to the car. San Joaquin isn't fast as a plane or as convienient as taking your own car, but its a 3'rd option to get from Los Angeles to the bay area. The Western corridor service really needs to be seen as an alternative to driving and traffic relief for the freeway than competing with planes or on the fare box recovery.

 

[neroden]

There is a fundamental demographic problem that cannot be easily surmounted to make the western LD trains, except the Coast Starlight self-standing as far as cost and revenue goes. This is illustrated very clearly in this population density map:

What Jis said. All of it. And thanks for the map.

Because trains are easier to support in the areas of higher population density, I believe that the correct strategy is to beef up the trains in the areas of higher population density first. Once we have a solid network in those areas, network effects will give us enough of a ridership base to extend a few more trains through the emptier areas.

Doing it in the other order is ass-backwards. If you were setting up a telephone network, would you do all the rural areas first and leave the cities until last? Uh, no, no you would not.

I love that map.....

On the map, the density on that Appalachian/Tennessee River Valley corridor is even heavier than I'd imagined

From that map: after the NEC, the three best routes on the map by population density are the CAHSR route, the Piedmont corridor (extended to Atlanta), and the Empire Corridor. In that order.
Other excellent routes include "3C" and Pittsburgh-Cleveland in Ohio, and the Front Range corridor in Colorado.

The best routes really pop right out of the map, don't they?

I really hope we can get high-speed rail on the Empire Corridor. This map makes it clear that it's actually one of the top three rail route priorities in the nation!