The future of Amtrak and the long distance trains

[henryj]

The only real answer to the original question is Amtrak has no future in it's current form. The NEC needs to be a separate entity with it's huge costs and overhead and it can just be supported by the states through which it runs..............Oh yeah, I forgot, it makes money. Blahhahahahah. State supported corridor service can be bid on by any operator, including whatever becomes of Amtrak, but not with Federal tax money. The Long Distance trains should then be operated by a separate, private third party which may or may not be subsidized by the Feds. It's the only way we will ever really find out where all that bloated overhead belongs and which trains really break even or whatever.

 

[jis]

I know many of us enjoy the LD trains, but a much more effective rail network would be corridor service with hubs in major cities and many trains per day with dedicated tracks. LD trains exist because it's the best Amtrak can do since they have no capital funding for their own rail and higher quality/more rolling stock.

For most of the developed world, LD trains are an excursion type deal, most people don't consider them as an option to get from point A to point B.

Utter, arrant nonsense from someone who hasn't researched the trains in India, Russia, China, or even Western Europe.

Trains running the length of the LSL, Silver Service, CONO, Crescent, etc. are quite common and are used for real transportation.

This is true. I can indeed see an evolution paralleling what has happened in Europe with overnight and somewhat extended overnight service on select heavily traveled routs augmenting daytime corridor service.

 

[jis]

The only real answer to the original question is Amtrak has no future in it's current form. The NEC needs to be a separate entity with it's huge costs and overhead and it can just be supported by the states through which it runs..............Oh yeah, I forgot, it makes money. Blahhahahahah. State supported corridor service can be bid on by any operator, including whatever becomes of Amtrak, but not with Federal tax money. The Long Distance trains should then be operated by a separate, private third party which may or may not be subsidized by the Feds. It's the only way we will ever really find out where all that bloated overhead belongs and which trains really break even or whatever.

If anyone ever bothered to read PRIIA 2008 in detail they'd find that almost all of those are currently allowed, and so far in the period since PRIIA 2008 became law (5.5 years now), no one has stepped forward to use any of the provisions in that bill to move towards this direction. One had to drag the states kicking and screaming into taking responsibility for their own service. Somehow all those that were supposed to jump with joy and form a line to take over services have not materialized. I have no idea why not. Just stating what is currently observed.
Surprisingly Boardman's 2015 proposal tries to move further exactly in this direction, separating NEC accounts from everything else, and have clearly identified subsidies in the budget for each of the three segments of Amtrak, and it is the LD train aficionados that are screaming blue murder louder than anyone else. I wonder why. Perhaps the thought of the Acela and Regional revenue gravy train getting constrained for use only on the NEC is scary, I don't know. Afterall the average ticket price on an Acela is now higher than an average LD sleeper ticket price, and the darned things still keep getting sold out!

 

[guest_nj_2]

The government needs to take over train dispatching from private railroads.

Make it similar to the air traffic control system.

Imagine FedEx and UPS owning air traffic control systems -- passenger planes would

never leave the ground while cargo planed would take off/land continuously.

After this takeover, the on-time performance of Amtrak trains will improve dramatically,

and as one of the forum members said already, increase in on-time performance and

reliability of Amtrak trains is the first key step in enhancing the system.

Also, very little in the discussion so far centered on the Amtrak's *REALLY BLOATED

OVERHEAD*. Read: management. 24 "revenue managers", really ??? 4 well-qualified

ones would probably do a better job. In the recent weeks we got a nice information

about salaries at the top of Port Authority of NY and NJ (operating PATH trains, so

there is some relevance here). 150K+ for a person not even remotely qualified for

a job ??? Wonder what the situation at Amtrak management is, but won't be surprised if it is

similar to PANYNJ.

 

[jis]

It will take Amtrak a long time to get to the pure political patronage machine that PANYNJ is. You really have no idea how screwed up that outfit, which is viewed as a piggybank by both Governors, is.

Here is some interesting info about it: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/02/nyregion/report-traces-port-authoritys-flaws-to-a-crumbling-business-model.html?_r=2

But this is getting way off topic, suffice it to say that PATH is but a minor part of what PANYNJ does.

 

[mfastx]

Utter, arrant nonsense from someone who hasn't researched the trains in India, Russia, China, or even Western Europe.
Trains running the length of the LSL, Silver Service, CONO, Crescent, etc. are quite common and are used for real transportation.

It's not just about length. It's about frequency, speed and reliability as well, which Amtrak's LD trains do not have. And anyway, I was thinking of the LD trains that go through vast stretches of nothingness, arrive at major cities at like 2:00am, frequently are multiple hours late, and take 10 hours to go the same distance that you can drive in half the time.

The trains you listed don't fit into that classification quite as often as routes like the SL, EB, CZ, etc. I never meant to come off as saying LD trains in general can't be used for "real" transportation, but it would be a stretch to consider some of Amtrak's current LD routes viable for "real" transportation.

 

[afigg]

Also, very little in the discussion so far centered on the Amtrak's *REALLY BLOATED

OVERHEAD*. Read: management. 24 "revenue managers", really ??? 4 well-qualified

ones would probably do a better job. In the recent weeks we got a nice information

about salaries at the top of Port Authority of NY and NJ (operating PATH trains, so

there is some relevance here). 150K+ for a person not even remotely qualified for

a job ??? Wonder what the situation at Amtrak management is, but won't be surprised if it is

similar to PANYNJ.

Train dispatching over privately owned freight railroad lines is a very different situation than air traffic control of public airspace. Better to nudge the freight railroads to do a better job of dispatching Amtrak and commuter trains and sweeten the pot with public capital investments for track improvements where it benefits the total transportation infrastructure.

As for PANYNJ, Amtrak can only dream of having the capital funds and revenue that flows through the Port Authority. Which is why the PANYNJ has morphed into a political piggybank for the Governors of both states, as jis notes. There is really no comparison between the two.

 

[Ryan]

Unless you've got budget numbers and a solid plan for how you would do it better (and proof that it would work), talk of "bloated overhead" is nothing more than uninformed bloviating.

 

[RCrierie]

"What you meant to say here is "most went bankrupt, unable to compete with the massive government subsidies given to other modes of transportation"."

Actually, what you both meant to say is "most went bankrupt, unable to change their schedules or timetables because the government wouldn't let them." -- both in the pax/freight spheres.

Hell, look at CSX; they weren't profitable until the Staggers Act that allowed CSX to abandon thousands of miles of low traffic, high maintenance lines.

 

[guest_nj_2]

And constantly deflecting any suggestion that Amtrak can be "at fault" of anything is also nothing

else than a pure cheerleading.

The bottom line is that nobody (except a few "chosen ones") knows how much Amtrak managers

make, what their qualifications are and if their salaries are commensurate with the work they are

doing. You can get salary info for many Federal and State employees (Asbury Park Press database,

for example

http://php.app.com/fed_employees13/search.php),

but not about Amtrak managers.

The ultimate "judge" of the efficiency of the management system is the competition (which Amtrak does not have).

Until Amtrak is the only player in the field, there is no way to figure out if its management team is efficient or

not, "bloated" or not, etc. There is no question that Amtrak makes a lot of mistakes (taking certain amenities away

from trains is the most recent one), so constantly repeating "Amtrak is always right" is disingenuous at best.

 

[henryj]

The only real answer to the original question is Amtrak has no future in it's current form. The NEC needs to be a separate entity with it's huge costs and overhead and it can just be supported by the states through which it runs..............Oh yeah, I forgot, it makes money. Blahhahahahah. State supported corridor service can be bid on by any operator, including whatever becomes of Amtrak, but not with Federal tax money. The Long Distance trains should then be operated by a separate, private third party which may or may not be subsidized by the Feds. It's the only way we will ever really find out where all that bloated overhead belongs and which trains really break even or whatever.

If anyone ever bothered to read PRIIA 2008 in detail they'd find that almost all of those are currently allowed, and so far in the period since PRIIA 2008 became law (5.5 years now), no one has stepped forward to use any of the provisions in that bill to move towards this direction. One had to drag the states kicking and screaming into taking responsibility for their own service. Somehow all those that were supposed to jump with joy and form a line to take over services have not materialized. I have no idea why not. Just stating what is currently observed.
Surprisingly Boardman's 2015 proposal tries to move further exactly in this direction, separating NEC accounts from everything else, and have clearly identified subsidies in the budget for each of the three segments of Amtrak, and it is the LD train aficionados that are screaming blue murder louder than anyone else. I wonder why. Perhaps the thought of the Acela and Regional revenue gravy train getting constrained for use only on the NEC is scary, I don't know. Afterall the average ticket price on an Acela is now higher than an average LD sleeper ticket price, and the darned things still keep getting sold out!

Jis, out here In 'fly over country' I can tell you there is no such screaming. People here believe the LD trains are loaded up with unnecessary overhead to make the NEC look better. And that is supported by rail critics and journalist again and again. I am all for the Acela and Regional money being spent solely on the NEC. Do it now. But take your expenses with you too. Like I said, spin off the LD trains to a separate entity and let it run on it's own. Congress can support it or let it die. But lets end the charade. If the LD trains have to be privitazed then they will cease to be daily transportation options and become truly nothing but trains for tourist that only run at certain times. That would be sad indeed. But lets get these completely different businesses separated. The LD trains may end up in completely separate entities like western, Florida, and the rest. My guess on why hardly anyone is competing with Amtrak on the state corridor trains is equipment availability which will be solved gradually as the states buy their own equipment and of course, Amtrak can bid the job lower by cooking the books which an independent company can not do. Once the businesses are separate, they will not be able to do that.

 

[jebr]

And yet, as far as I have ever seen, you have failed to provide even a speck of concrete evidence to support your cooking the books claim. Or really, any of the claims you make around here.

I'm interested in seeing concrete evidence to back up your claims. Until then, your rantings are nothing more than rantings of a random person on the internet, which may or may not have any relation to actual reality.

 

[Paulus]

There are about 1,855 track-miles in the NEC that Amtrak owns, including Philadelphia to Harrisburg. At a high order expense of $200,000 per mile, that's only $371 million in MOW costs, including both labor and materials. The idea that the LDs are loaded down with the NEC is ridiculous.

 

[Ryan]

And yet, as far as I have ever seen, you have failed to provide even a speck of concrete evidence to support your cooking the books claim. Or really, any of the claims you make around here.

I'm interested in seeing concrete evidence to back up your claims. Until then, your rantings are nothing more than rantings of a random person on the internet, which may or may not have any relation to actual reality.

Don't hold your breath. I've been here for 5 years and still haven't seen any.

 

[henryj]

And yet, as far as I have ever seen, you have failed to provide even a speck of concrete evidence to support your cooking the books claim. Or really, any of the claims you make around here.

I'm interested in seeing concrete evidence to back up your claims. Until then, your rantings are nothing more than rantings of a random person on the internet, which may or may not have any relation to actual reality.

I am a retired CPA and as far as Amtrak will let us know, I used their own numbers to come up with my conclusions. You can dispute it all you want, but neither you, Ryan or any of the other foamers on here know anything about Amtrak accounting nor can you produce any evidence to support your claims or rantings. You just don't like my ideas nor any others like me that want the NEC spun off to a separate entity. You just want to continue soaking the rest of the country for your little trains. I think it's high time it stopped.

 

[jebr]

And yet, as far as I have ever seen, you have failed to provide even a speck of concrete evidence to support your cooking the books claim. Or really, any of the claims you make around here.

I'm interested in seeing concrete evidence to back up your claims. Until then, your rantings are nothing more than rantings of a random person on the internet, which may or may not have any relation to actual reality.

I am a retired CPA and as far as Amtrak will let us know, I used their own numbers to come up with my conclusions. You can dispute it all you want, but neither you, Ryan or any of the other foamers on here know anything about Amtrak accounting nor can you produce any evidence to support your claims or rantings. You just don't like my ideas nor any others like me that want the NEC spun off to a separate entity. You just want to continue soaking the rest of the country for your little trains. I think it's high time it stopped.

I like ideas that have some concrete evidence that I can see. Not just ideas backed by a retired CPA using Amtrak's numbers in some way, but not in a way that we can actually see the actual math that you're using to come to this point, that concludes that Amtrak cooks the books to make the NEC profitable.

By the way, the NEC are about as much "my trains" as they are yours. My only Amtrak train within 250 miles of here is the Empire Builder.

 

[The Whistler]

Lets get back to the facts that air travel and road travel are heavily subsidized by the government. You ride on roads right? The tax payer funds the bulk of the repair work. If you make the argument that government is supposed to turn a profit or else discontinue service, there would be no form of transportation available. Many people who live in small cities and towns along Amtrak routes have no other option available for long distance travel. Isn't government there to serve the public interest in these areas?

 

[neroden]

Surprisingly Boardman's 2015 proposal tries to move further exactly in this direction, separating NEC accounts from everything else, and have clearly identified subsidies in the budget for each of the three segments of Amtrak, and it is the LD train aficionados that are screaming blue murder louder than anyone else. I wonder why.

I'm only complaining because I think it's unfair and unreasonable to lump the Lake Shore Limited in with the Sunset Limited. I think the market segmentation is artificial and poorly thought out.
I am genuinely worried that attacks on "long distance trains" will be targeted at the Sunset Limited or Empire Builder or California Zephyr west of Salt Lake City... but will result instead in cuts to the Lake Shore Limited or Silver Service. Which would be, bluntly speaking, dumb.

 

[CHamilton]

Boardman is making the case for support of long-distance trains in local communities like Jackson, MS, and Tuscaloosa, AL. The decision to support passenger rail is increasingly being made in city councils and state legislatures. It's all very well to argue the minutia of Amtrak's budget here, but it would help if all of us spent some time with our local officials, so that they know we want them to support a robust national passenger rail network.

 

[jis]

Amen. Now only if someone can get our resident retired CPA off his attack horse we would be all set.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

A big problem I see is that Amtrak makes RFP's and give them to any companies from any country and tells them to build the deisgn. The thing is, Morrison-Knudson built the Viewliner I, but now CAF is trying to build the Viewliner II, presumably because Morrison-Knudson went bankrupt.

Pullman bult the Superliner I, Bombardier built the Superliner II, but who's gonna built a possible Superliner III? Well Bombarbier is alive, they surely could built it, but the design might end up going to the lowest bidder. What the heck is all this? This is like taking 777 blueprints and giving them to Tupolev, saying "Hey Tupolev, built this 777 with a bit of minor changes." Really?

And why don't Amtrak try good ways to appeal to Congress? For example, Chicago-Denver is quite popular and could use added capacity (Denver Zephyr, anyone?). Amtrak could first go to BNSF and see if they can offer another slot. Then they could go up to Congress and appeal to them, play around with language and graphics, show them why Amtrak deserves $150 million in capital to "double-up" from Chicago to Denver. Maybe even ask UP if they'd be willing to allow an extra frequency all the way to SLC. Seriously, $150 million isn't that much. Streamline service, and Amtrak can get it done. Amtrak needs to appeal to Congress, make good points and they'll get the money sooner or later. Right now Amtrak isn't even trying, they think they should just depend on expanding SD's and asking states to fund them. At least they should try to do something about the LD's!

Yeah, I know I just got some hate for that rant, but you'll hate me even more when I tell you that Amtrak's not exciting or interesting at all, drivng away younger riders like me. I know some even younger railfans who have dropped Amtrak just because in this changing world, Amtrak's not changing enough.

JMO.

 

[JayPea]

A big problem I see is that Amtrak makes RFP's and give them to any companies from any country and tells them to build the deisgn. The thing is, Morrison-Knudson built the Viewliner I, but now CAF is trying to build the Viewliner II, presumably because Morrison-Knudson went bankrupt.

Pullman bult the Superliner I, Bombardier built the Superliner II, but who's gonna built a possible Superliner III? Well Bombarbier is alive, they surely could built it, but the design might end up going to the lowest bidder. What the heck is all this? This is like taking 777 blueprints and giving them to Tupolev, saying "Hey Tupolev, built this 777 with a bit of minor changes." Really?

And why don't Amtrak try good ways to appeal to Congress? For example, Chicago-Denver is quite popular and could use added capacity (Denver Zephyr, anyone?). Amtrak could first go to BNSF and see if they can offer another slot. Then they could go up to Congress and appeal to them, play around with language and graphics, show them why Amtrak deserves $150 million in capital to "double-up" from Chicago to Denver. Maybe even ask UP if they'd be willing to allow an extra frequency all the way to SLC. Seriously, $150 million isn't that much. Streamline service, and Amtrak can get it done. Amtrak needs to appeal to Congress, make good points and they'll get the money sooner or later. Right now Amtrak isn't even trying, they think they should just depend on expanding SD's and asking states to fund them. At least they should try to do something about the LD's!

Yeah, I know I just got some hate for that rant, but you'll hate me even more when I tell you that Amtrak's not exciting or interesting at all, drivng away younger riders like me. I know some even younger railfans who have dropped Amtrak just because in this changing world, Amtrak's not changing enough.

JMO.

There certainly seems to be a lot of younger riders on the trains I've ridden. A very large percentage of the passengers on any train I've ridden fall into what I'd term the "younger" category. And even though I can't offer detailed statistic analysis, from what I remember and what I have observed, there have been more and more of the younger age riding Amtrak.

 

[jis]

A big problem I see is that Amtrak makes RFP's and give them to any companies from any country and tells them to build the deisgn. The thing is, Morrison-Knudson built the Viewliner I, but now CAF is trying to build the Viewliner II, presumably because Morrison-Knudson went bankrupt.

Pullman bult the Superliner I, Bombardier built the Superliner II, but who's gonna built a possible Superliner III? Well Bombarbier is alive, they surely could built it, but the design might end up going to the lowest bidder. What the heck is all this? This is like taking 777 blueprints and giving them to Tupolev, saying "Hey Tupolev, built this 777 with a bit of minor changes." Really?

It is nothing like that at all.
Amtrak gives requirements in RFP's that may include some details like "use the FRA standard shell specification". The responders respond with proposals on how they will meet the requirements and at what cost and then Amtrak chooses what it considers to be the best offer, and places an order with the vendor making that winning proposal.

it is more like United Airline selecting between Airbus and Boeing to provide aircraft that meet the requirements specified in United's RFP. If Boeing wins United buys 737, if Airbus wins it buys A320 or something like that. That is how competitive bid based procurement works everywhere, and it should for Amtrak too. It helps keep arms length separation between vendors and consumers and is generally considered a good thing in terms of avoiding formation of cartels which eventually leads to vendor lock in and price gouging down the line.

There is no guarantee that Morrison-Knudsen would have got this round of order even if they existed, and actually through M&A they do still exist in the form of Alstom USA, at least the part of Morrison-Knudsen that became Amerail and manufactured all but the first four Viewliner Is, looking at builder's plates. All their assets were acquired by Alstom. Of course Alstom did not get the contract for the Viewliner IIs.

As for Superliner IIIs, the company building the Corridor bilevels definitely would appear to have the inside track on that rather than Bombardier. Afterall those cars are compliant with the FRA bilevel specification, the Superliners are not quite so. Technology has moved on a bit in 30 years, and it would be unfortunately if we simply reverted back to the old times without taking advantage of technological advances.

 

[neroden]

Boardman is making the case for support of long-distance trains in local communities like Jackson, MS, and Tuscaloosa, AL. The decision to support passenger rail is increasingly being made in city councils and state legislatures. It's all very well to argue the minutia of Amtrak's budget here, but it would help if all of us spent some time with our local officials, so that they know we want them to support a robust national passenger rail network.

My local county is burning money trying to promote its airport. It's going to be hard to convince them that they should instead be advocating to restore passenger service. :-( I'll give it a TRY...

 

[Jackson Whole]

Lets get back to the facts that air travel and road travel are heavily subsidized by the government. You ride on roads right? The tax payer funds the bulk of the repair work. If you make the argument that government is supposed to turn a profit or else discontinue service, there would be no form of transportation available. Many people who live in small cities and towns along Amtrak routes have no other option available for long distance travel. Isn't government there to serve the public interest in these areas?

Road construction and maintenance are backed by high fuel taxes and a trust fund. Similarly, airports are supported by rather high passenger fees (look at a recent ticket), landing fees, aviation fuel taxes, and there is a trust fund. I'm not claiming use of these tax revenues are prudent and the trust funds are well-managed, they are not, but the mechanisms for self-funding are there.
Passenger trains? Oh yeah, there's a trust fund, for retirement pensions. Sorry, there's no there there.