URPA

[GlobalistPotato]

Remember how GML described rail advocates?

You put 6 of them in a room, and on average, two of them will have three opinons while the other four sit around and talk about the old Amazing Limited that ran from the Frosty Shores of Maine to the Sunny Shores Of California with 15 dome cars and 30 sleepers and 200 coaches in a grand old time of 5 hours and always ran on time behind old reliable steam engine blankity blank. Which is the basic problem you have in rail advocacy, really.

Well, that's the impression I get from the United Rail Passenger Alliance. They do say some good things, and they do have some good plans for LD trains, but they REALLY don't like corridor trains or the NEC. That position I disagree with.

http://www.unitedrail.org/2008/01/10/this-week-at-amtrak-2008-01-05/

The guy writing about this gives a pretty good insight into how inflexible unions and strict government regulations were two big factors that prevented the railroads from innovating and adapting during the 1950s and 60s.

And some things like that.

But I don't agree with him saying that the NEC or trains like the Pacific Surfliner are "endless black holes." I really don't agree with that, although I can understand how there was political naughtiness going on when Amtrak took over the NEC.

I dunno. I mean, sure, if a short-distance train is operated once a day like a LD train and only goes up to 79 mph, then, yeah, that doesn't work out too well...

But I'd say that both corridor trains and LD trains have a place in Amtrak's future and should be expanded. Corridor trains in particular are also more feasible to become HSR.

Etc etc.

I tend to get the impression that NARP also has the "focus on the LD trains", but really, I think they like any new train, as long as it's a passenger train, and this train builds political support for further trains.

 

[stntylr]

Bruce Richardson really doesn't like Amtrak and feels that trains can be restored to their 1930's glory. Honestly I think LD trains have a tough road while there is much room for expansion with the corridor trains.

 

[RCrierie]

The guy writing about this gives a pretty good insight into how inflexible unions and strict government regulations were two big factors that prevented the railroads from innovating and adapting during the 1950s and 60s.

Railroads were THE most heavily regulated business in America in that time period; though they had had a slight amount of lessening of regulatory oversight in the late 1950s that let them begin to abandon really really really absurdly unprofitable routes around that time.

The big problem was that the ICC and the other various regulatory bodies continued to treat railroads as if they were THE only game in town for transportation; which was patently absurd, given the explosive growth of:

Airlines

Buses

Personal Automobiles

Heavy Trucks

that rendered the market much more competitive than in the 1880s; where if a town lost it's railroad line, it collapsed shortly afterwards.

 

[VentureForth]

I don't think Bruce hates Amtrak. Maybe the way its run and the fact that more bureaucrats than trainmen are at its helm, but not in the system. He is an advocate supporting long distance trains and revenue that sleepers, diners and small town stops contribute to the bottom line, not take away from it.