Amtrak ridership is up, but passengers grouse about frequent delays

[Jkid]

Source: Washington Post

Amtrak's Northeast Regional train No. 177 was scheduled to arrive at Union Station at 1:25 a.m., but at that witching hour, it had made it only as far as Philadelphia, where it was stopped cold.

A half-asleep passenger asked a more conscious traveler what had happened. "Someone got hit by another train" farther south, outside Wilmington, Del., he replied.

In the cafe car, the staff had laid out free bottled water, trail mix, shortbread cookies, crackers and a cheese spread. But the travelers wanted their beds, not a buffet. The train finally left Philly at 2:58 a.m., arriving in Washington a little over two hours later. The sun was rising, and cabs were scarce.

Days later, a customer service representative called a passenger to apologize for the delay. "There was a trespasser," she said, offering a vague, slightly mysterious explanation. "It was beyond our control."

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/22/AR2010042205620.html?sid=ST2010042302250

---

Inexcusable. The Congress knew about this with Amtrak for decades and does little about it and continues to fund the automobile and the airline industry. Obviously, the root cause of the delays is the rail freight companies so the US Government could have taken over the companies to resolve the problem.

Yet they did not.

Amtrak should just say this in addition to "Learn to Live with it" to it's passengers: "Get a car (if you can afford it), we do not have the balls to tell Congress that CSX is the root problem causing the delays".

Because for all intents and purposes, the pricing practices the airlines are doing, and the Amtrak delays are just pushing people, even though who can't afford to drive, to get cars.

[Captain Hilts]

1. Yes. CONGRESS gives BILLIONS to highways and airlines but a pittance to Amtrak. nt

[naaman fletcher]

23. I take Amtrak quite a bit.

I love being on the train with nothing to do, and turning off the phone, laptop, etc.

Two big problems:

1. The food and bar service stinks, as the employees have zero incentive to provide proper service like a waiter or waitress in a restaurant does.

2. The delays caused by people committing suicide on the tracks. You get hit by a train, your splatter all over the place. Why the fark should the train have to stop for hours? Screw it. You're dead. Too bad.

[Captain Hilts]

27. I agree. They need to give an entire traincar to Krispy Kreme or Panera or something. The whole car

There is NO excuse for giving people drinks wastefully that are:

1)Warm
2) In a can
3) Also a plastic cup
4) With ice that dilutes it.

This combination is:
1) awkward to use on a train
2) wasteful of materials
3) generates a lot of needless trash
4) ensures a lousy beverage

[maxsolomon]

2. 7 years ago i took the train from Seattle to Portland to pick up a car

driving to Portland takes 2.5 hours.

the train took 6.

[NoNothing]

3. Come again?

I doubt it was rail freight companies that caused some dumbass to stand in front of a train and get himself killed. I doubt it was rail freight companies that wrote the regulations concerning death investigations and coroner procedures. The underlying problem is that the US rail grid will never be faster or more convenient than air travel for long trips without truly staggering amounts of money spent on infrastructure upgrades.

[Fruittree]

6. Having ridden Amtrak numerous times

I'd say they are mostly on time. Delays are caused by the fact that the freight trains have absolute right of passage on the rails. If a freight train needs to go through, the Amtrak train is forced to sit and wait. I think when you ride Amtrak, you have to take a different perspective on the whole travel thing - It's not about getting where you're going as quickly as possible, it's about the trip there. If a person is going to get frustrated at delays, they need to fly or drive which those modes of transportation have their issues as well. As an aside, I think we should invest more in trains...We, as a family, have had some great times on Amtrak.

[NoNothing]

8. Freight traffic causes delays, true

But almost never does freight traffic cause delays of hours and hours. Generally only some kind of death on the tracks or damage to the rails can do that.

And while I ride Amtrak and I support Amtrak's existence, I am skeptical that we should invest much more in trains. Peoples' spending habits clearly show that the vast majority prefer their travel to be fast and cheap, so IMO our focus should be on upgrading our air infrastructure.

[Dr.Phool]

11. Sorry, but they've just made air travel such a pain in the ass, I quit.

And, I'm a licensed pilot and aviation buff.

I'd take a lot of money from the military, and build rails and high speed trains. Lots of them.

[NoNothing]

13. My point

Is that with the same amount of money you could make air travel *even better*. If you're going to invest money somewhere, the logical place to do it is air travel because you get more of what people want - high speed and low cost - for the same amount of investment.

[TankLV]

37. If we gave trains the same amount we do to just the airlines, we'd make train travel even better!

Where's the BILLIONS for trains that they gave to the airlines?

Where's the BILLIONS more for all the terminals and BRAND NEW AIRPORTS?

Sorry, but your "logic" if faulty at best.

Trains have been proven to be faster and cheaper at shorter hauls. Period. There is no questioning that FACT. The rest of the world PROVES it daily.

The "logical" place to do it where it is succeeding DESPITE ALMOST ZERO SPENDING!!!

at least you have an apt moniker...

[ProudDad]

57. ABSOLUTELY!

I'm also a pilot and aviation buff and will NOT take a plane again unless I absolutely HAVE TO...and I don't...

TSA and the fascist bullshit "war on terra(tm)" have taken care of that ... since Osama won.

[Gormy Cuss]

14. The vast majority of people don't have access to reliable train transport.

Solve that problem and what people prefer may change. I lived in Boston for years and traveled to NYC regularly. Once they upgraded the New Haven changeover Amtrak was both time and cost competitive to flying or driving once all costs and transfer times were included. The only real competition were buses.

We could have popular rail service in any of the highly urbanized areas of the country if the investment were made to make it so. We need dedicated or priority tracks in order to make that happen.

[NoNothing]

15. Boston to NYC is not a "long trip"

And that kind of regional city-to-city connection is exactly where we should be upgrading rail connections.

I'm talking about trips like New York to Miami, or Chicago, or Los Angeles, where Amtrak has routes that will never be competitive. I think they should be kept, but investing a lot of money in them is pointless.

[Gormy Cuss]

20. It's the length considered the perfect niche -- 200 miles.

The new focus on rail service is serving high density destinations that are between 150-500 miles apart because that is the competitive range.

Long haul trains will lose out to air travel for people traveling from terminus to terminus. The real issue with long haul Amtrak trains is whether the smaller communities on the route can benefit from the connection to the larger cities. The long haul trains in the west go through areas that are many miles from even a decent sized regional airport. In many, there aren't scheduled buses either. Trains once a day are the only option to driving long distances.

[Captain Hilts]

32. There's a HUGE federal subsidy for airports in Johnstown, PA and Utica, NY, for example. WHY?

[mrmpa]

39. Talk to John Murtha

he got pork for the Johnstown airport, but he's dead, can't talk to him about it.

[Captain Hilts]

53. Yep. And Sherry Boelhert in Utica. It's the small airport subsidy that built needless airports

all over the country.

Johnstown's barely an hour from Pittsburgh and Utica an hour from Syracuse.

[proudohioan]

43. Because everyone wants to go to Johnstown to research their genealogy??

Just a guess.......

Utica, NY? Got no clue there!

[Fruittree]

16. I understand what you're saying

- I know most people prefer to fly but I guess I like the feeling of distance that I get with a train. I flew twice in my life and hated it - Just the whole feeling of moving too fast. (That plus I had a woman sitting in front of me on one plane who cried the whole distance saying "We're going to crash..")The main thing I find I don't like about Amtrak is not the time or the delays but just the feeling that the whole thing is run-down. There's nothing quite like having all the bathrooms breakdown when there are still 4 more hours worth of trip to go. Also, the expense of getting a room on Amtrak is prohibitive for most. That's where I think investment would make all the difference. I actually think it would be a positive if our society starts to value something more than fast and cheap.
As for the freight delays - I'm not sure you're right. They become cumulative over a long distance. But I bet you are correct that the really long delays are due to other problems either with the train itself or something happening on the tracks.

[ProudDad]

56. It routinely causes hours and hours of delay where I live...

The freight having the right of way caused me to cancel my last trip when my DEPARTURE was delayed by over 4 hours!

See below:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4356358#4356828

Passenger trains may make sense in the Northeast Corridor but here in the West, forget it!

The last time I took the Coast Starlighter in California from S.F. to L.A. -- it was 2 hours late in departure and over 4 hours late getting into L.A.

It's systemic...

Now in the olden days, passenger trains used to have the right of way...but the corporations took care of that...

[Greyskye]

63. West Coast Amtrak has problems

Went from Sacramento CA to Salem OR in January. The trip up was over two hours late departing (due to mechanical problems); instead of leaving at midnight, the train left at 2:30 am. That was sure fun, the turn of the century wooden benches in the depot are so comfortable!

On the return leg, the train left on time and pulled into Sacramento an unannounced hour+ ahead of schedule. Oh joy, more waiting for my ride to show up now. :grr:

[enlightenment]

17. But if we are going to have viable passenger rail

we have to improve performance. Yes, it will take longer and people who use rail understand that - but viability means convincing people that they have a chance of getting to their destination (job/event/etc) on time, even if they have to allow more time for the trip from the outset.

I agree with you on the joy of rail travel. I love trains and if someone has all the time in the world it is a great way to see the country . . . but it will never expand and improve if it continues to be seen as a 'luxury' rather than a necessity.

We need rail connecting major cities, both in the east and in the west (where it is absolutely dire); but it needs to work. I remember putting my kid on the train in Denver for a trip to Grand Junction (western slope of the Rockies). It is less than 300 miles by road and takes a few hours to drive. It took 11 hours for Amtrak to make the trip; the scheduled length of the trip was 8 hours. It wasn't weather or rail conditions - it was simply administrative and logistical delays.

That length of time is unacceptable to people trying to get from point A to point B, rather than taking a leisure trip. They'll drive or they'll fly - and that's more potential revenue lost to the railroad.

Again, if we want viable rail travel, we have to radically improve the performance. That will take money and infrastructure and commitment on the part of the government, the states, and the people.

I hope we have the will to do it.

[NoNothing]

19. But what would be the point?

With the amount of money it would take to get rail travel to that level of performance, we could radically improve air travel to make it even cheaper, faster, and more convenient. A lot of these arguments seem to just accept it as a given that we need to make rail better, even though air travel is *already* better in almost every regard.

[Captain Hilts]

31. Air travel is not energy efficient or as versatile or as reliable in bad weather. nt

[enlightenment]

34. In the west, where distances between major cities tends to be

greater, I can see your point - but 'short hop' air travel is expensive, wasteful (less time at altitude means more fuel burned - there used to and may still be a flight that went from Denver to Colorado Springs. That's so short that the plane barely gets to altitude before it starts the descent!), and largely unnecessary.

There are upsides and downsides to both air and rail; we have spent decades devoting all our energy to one to the detriment of the other and what do we have to show for it? Air travel has its place, but so does rail. Air travel can be incredibly pricey and because it is unregulated and lacks any competition outside its own industry, we are at the whims of the airlines in that regard. Many people would choose not to fly, if they could. Many people can't afford it. Many turn to their automobiles instead.

Rail can take longer - a lot depends on the length of the trip. I once checked out the difference between taking the train from London to Manchester and taking a plane. Cheapest airfare I found was a return (roundtrip) for 65GBP. The trip would have taken 1 hour and 5 minutes and the lead time would have been minimally another 2 hours to get to the airport, check-in, go through security, etc . . . so a little over 3 hours total. Probably longer because the airport for that cheap flight was Gatwick, which is a considerable way from the city. Oh, add the cost of the train trip to Gatwick. The express takes 1/2 an hour and costs another 29 quid for a return. The regular train takes about 40-50 minutes and costs between 15 and 20 quid for a roundtrip.

The rail trip cost 54GBP return. It took just shy of 2-1/2 hours to travel and the lead time (getting to the station, getting on the train) took me less than an hour, including dragging my bag onto the Tube - and cost 1.20p on my OysterCard.

So, the train took essentially the same amount of time with a lot less stress! I'd love to see a similar choice in the States.

[Fruittree]

22. I agree - in order for rail travel to thrive

i does have to be better managed. There's no excuse for some of the delays that occur. I've travelled cross country several times by train and there was one time we were supposed to leave at 9:30 pm. The train finally came in a 4 am. No reason was given- That type of thing needs to be resolved. It just makes people angry and does not lead to repeated ridership.
I really hope we put some money and effort into it..

[Captain Hilts]

30. Yes, I've had excellent luck with trains being on time. nt

[Xithras]

67. That's because the rails are privately owned.

That is the fundamental problem, and difference, with the rail system in the U.S. as compared to rail systems in other countries.

The rails are the private property of the for-profit rail freight corporations. Amtrak runs over 20,000 miles of rail routes, but only owns about 750 miles actual track. For the rest, Amtrak is expected to squeeze their routes in between the owners cargo traffic.

In Japan, Germany, France, Britain, India, and every other country with government operated rail service, the government owns the tracks. That's not the case here, and it's the reason why government operated rail will never work here the way it does in other countries.

[givemebackmycountry]

4. And we are going to build a state of the art high speed railway nationwide-

Yeah right.
It's sad, but I'm thinking that we as a country can't and won't do anything really great ever again.
Too many special interests have their hands in the shit pie and they stifle our ability to do anything.
Some piece of shit company writes a check to some piece of shit politician, and all of a sudden they are a player when normally they would be laughed out of the room. (See KBR/Halliburton).

The United States is a fat, bloated, diseased hooker naked on the bed with legs spread wide.
If you got the cash, you get a shot at the title.

We suck.

[Captain Hilts]

54. Current railstock could to an effective job if there were decent track so no delays. nt

[Psephos]

61. the US is not a fat, bloated, diseased hooker on the bed with legs spread wide

Good things happen in the US. Bad things happen in the US. In this regard, we are like all other countries.

This time, like all times, is a very good one, if we but
know what to do with it.
- Ralph Waldo Emerson

It sounds like you are perhaps running low on ideas about what to do with this time. I hope you are able to replenish the supply, one way or another. Not for the sake of others, or for the sake of the US, but for your own well-being and fulfillment.

Good luck and good energy to you.

[peace13]

5. In the last four months I have made two round trips on Amtrak from Ohio to Salt Lake City .

The people who work for Amtrak are very helpful hard working folks. I loved both trips but if you travel by train you can't look at your watch. Let's face it rocks slide, cattle cross, and sometimes engines fail. It is no less convenient than the airlines who cancel flights, lose bags, and hold people hostage on tarmacs.

I would like to see money put into the rail system and link the new high speed trains with the traditional lines. It is a great way to travel and you meet interesting people along the way!

[proudohioan]

18. How did that work out for you, overall?

I live in Cleveland, and I know that the Amtrak leaves a some really weird time of day, but damn, air travel has become a major pain in the ass for me. My kids travel a couple of times a year from Cleveland to Denver to visit their dad; I know that would be the same train as the one to SLC; is it still the California Zephyr?

[peace13]

25. Yes it is still the California Zephyr.

I got on in Sandusky at 4AM which is a little trying but after the train came I stuck my earphones on and closed my eyes until Chicago. There is plenty of time to make the connections on the way out. Coming back from Denver to Chicago take the earlier train that gets into Chicago around three thirty PM. That gives you time to catch the last train out if you happen to be running late out of Denver. We were late getting to Chicago both times on that leg but it didn't matter because there was supposed to be a three hour layover. I got off one train and onto the other and we were on time getting into Sandusky! No harm done.

The fares are pretty cheap if the kids can sit up all of the way out there. I had the sleeper car and loved it. Two young people could travel nicely in the small unit. The Amtrak employees are nice and they really do keep track of people on the train. I highly recommend it. Watching the world go by on the train is very sweet. I took books but didn't read half of what I thought that I would simply because there were things to watch and people to talk to. There is the dining car if you want real meals but many of the young people that I saw had small coolers with them.

My sister was in Idaho in assisted living and I went back and forth on trips to help her. She is moving to Ohio next week so I won't have to travel that route anymore. I intend to take the train all of the way to California when I get the chance but that will not be for a while as I will have my hands full with my sister here. It is all good though. I am so happy to have her near by. Peace, KIm

[proudohioan]

28. Thank you for the info...

The last time I did Amtrak was back in 1996, Denver to Memphis, via layover in Chicago. I loved every minute of it, and am glad to hear that things are still good with Amtrak.

Great to hear that you will have your sister close to you, and that she will have you to give her a hand & hug at anytime! Ohio is wonderful, and I'm sure that your sister will grow to love it.

Peace,

Theresa

[peace13]

35. And thank you for the kind words! n/t

[proudohioan]

42. You are most welcome. Best of luck! nt

[xxqqqzme]

45. If you do get a sleeper unit for your kids,

their meals will be included in the fare. I don't know the ages of your children but the lower level of the club car has a 'movie' at night after dinner. The sleeper unit is a tight fit for adults but fine for youngsters. The sleeper car steward takes reservations for lunch & dinner and are generally very helpful and pleasant, your kids should not be afraid to ask them questions. I have noticed, though, many 'sleeper car' diners who do not tip their waitress or waiters after their included meals. It is also customary to give your car steward a 'little' something when you arrive at your destination.

I have traveled across the country - California to DC; California to West Virginia; California to Indiana; many times to New Mexico on the Chief; many times to Sacramento to the Coast Starlight. I have had breakfast, lunch & dinner w/ delightful people, talked w/ Europeans accustomed to traveling by train; have email corresponding friendships w/ more than a few.

The last time I was on a plane was in 1997. It was a 2 hour flight. My disabilities made that flight sheer torture. On a train I can stretch out, walk around, delight in the scenery and meet delightful people. I don't plan on ever getting on another plane again.

[proudohioan]

46. Thank you for the tips.....

my kids are in their teens, so really, a sleeper's probably not necessary for them. But what a wonderful experience that you have described; stretching, walking about, delightful scenery and chatting with all walks of humanity! That in itself should make the extra few hours spent on a train worthwhile for the experience alone. The boys love "Deviled Ham", cheese cubes, chips, etc... in general, any kind of junk food.... it really sounds do-able and wonderful!

Thank you again!

:hi:

[madmom]

7. Several years ago I took Amtrak from Ohio to Maryland, what would have been an

8 hour drive ended up being about a 12-13 hours ride. Just outside of Toledo Ohio, some idiot left an empty car parked on the train crossing. We did not hit it but we had to wait till the sheriff investigated, a tow was arranged, and all the other work that went along with it. Was it Amtrak's fault, was it the government's fault? NO It was because some idiot thought it would be fun to cause a disruption.
Would I do the ride over again even with disruptions? You betcha!;)

[KittyWampus]

9. I love trains, dislike the disorganized inefficient mess that's ours BUT why blame Amtrack f/ delay

caused by a fatality?

I was on the LIRR going into the city and we got delayed by a death on the tracks. And the article says the passengers were at least accommodated with some refreshments.

I could have been furious, but someone was dead. You know?

[Dr.Phool]

10. I've traveled Amtrak a few times.

They were comfortable, enjoyable trips. But the schedules suck.

Take a Amtrak bus from Clearwater, Fl. to Orlando to catch the train. Arrive at Florence, SC at 10:30 pm. No place to rent a car, and I have another 60 miles to my destination. Return trip. Train departs at 3:30 am.

They need their own right of way and more trains.

[harmonicon]

12. I agree that it's a real problem

The Amtrak line that I ride on (and rarely) is plagued with delays. My last trip on it the train was a few hours late... sometimes it's worse, and sometimes it's ok. Now when I fly into Chicago, instead of taking Amtrak to where I need to go, I take the South Shore line 1/2 of the way and get a ride the other half. The problem is that when time is tight, Amtrak can not be depended on. Sure, here in the UK delays frequently happen, but not delays of hours ... there would be another train scheduled before that could even happen. Yes, it takes longer than driving, but you get from city center to city center quickly, don't have to worry about parking, etc. I would travel more in the US if it had a reliable rail network.

[mwooldri]

21. Who owns the tracks? Who controls them?

If it's the freight train companies that own and/or operate that bit of track, then whose traffic are they going to favour over that piece of track? I've seen plenty of Amtrak trains from New Orleans up to NYC - or even the shorter one from Charlotte to Washington DC be delayed for quite some time waiting for a Norfolk Southern freight train to pass. Faster trains need priority - and there's still too much single track... dual track will increase capacity, better track layout will increase speed, new rolling stock will increase speed.

Aren't Amtrak still running what would be considered very old trains? I don't know how Richard Branson did it in the UK - he bid for some rail franchises and as part of the franchise commitment he would replace all the rolling stock with brand new trains that could go faster. He honored his pledge but the rail regulator took one of his franchises away...

Mark.

[hayu_lol]

24. Different laws rule AMTRAK passage in different states...

North/South corridor on the west coast: California: Freights have right of way. Oregon/Washington: AMTRAK has right of way by state law.

You have to keep in mind that taxpayers pick up the tab for the elaborate air control system and the airports. AMTRAK owns no rails anywhere...the freight companies do own their own land and rails and pay all expenses of maintaining that track right of way.

Passenger traffic really needs it's own track, sidings, and yards/repair facilities.

[mwooldri]

41. Nice to know some states are providing some leverage.

Some of the railroad rights of way (and land) here in NC are owned by the State, just Norfolk Southern maintain and operate the lines.

I'd partly agree with you on the needs for passenger rail. The whole darned rail network needs upgrading to accommodate the growing need for rail, be it passenger or freight. Passenger and freight can share the rails if there is enough rail for them to share, and as long as the faster trains get right of way. It would be entirely impractical to roll out a whole entire new passenger rail network. Upgrade what we have, replace what was destroyed, get government funding for some nice Pendolino trains, and we can get a proper railway infrastructure in place.

But it'd be extremely expensive... one of the reasons why trains can't travel so fast is because the lines have too many railway crossings. They need to be eliminated - improves safety, allows for greater speed, doubling track allows for much more capacity than just single track with passing places, my gosh it would be expensive, expensive, expensive. Would provide an awful lot of jobs though...

[Captain Hilts]

29. I know it's ConRail through NY state. nt

[Dr.Phool]

33. No more Conrail.

CSX and NS divided up the spoils.

[Captain Hilts]

36. True that. I used to have an office in the NS headquarters building. nt

[elleng]

40. DID you, Cap'n?

I was at 'icc' (stb) before spoils 'divided up,' and ended up (with others) repesenting NS in that debacle!

[Captain Hilts]

52. I worked in the Sovran Bank building and NS had their headquarters there. Those guys

were SO much more cheerful than the bankers!!

Norfolk & Western/Norfolk Southern almost got ALL of Conrail, if I remember correctly...It's a good thing they need to share it with the Chessie System...

[elleng]

60. HI, CHESSIE!

Conrail was split up fairly evenly between NS and CSX. HUGE egos just couldn't let one prevail!

Had/have REAL CONCRETE jobs to do, provide service and compete, so no wonder they were more cheerful than bankers!

[woo me with science]

26. Why is it "grousing" if the delays are frequent?

And why give an example of a delay that was completely out of their control? Is the implication that they can do absolutely nothing about "frequent" delays?

[LaPera]

38. Privatization is better-Corporations always charge more but they are more reliable-never cut corners

customer concerns & safety are more important to them than profits...and when allowed no regulations what so ever, corporations will always be only fair, they'll do what's the right thing for the customers & it's workers, profits are secondary to corporations, unlike the government.

Just look at the airline industry, there are almost never any flight delays, nor flights cancellations ....Yes, corporations will always charge more once they control the market - but for good reasons, simply because they want to pay their workers well, so there are never any delays.

[proudohioan]

44. Did you forget ......

that :sarcasm: logo?

[JanMichael]

48. Beat me to it. nt.

[proudohioan]

50. I figured as much. I'm sure everyone else knew what you meant, too. nt

[ProudDad]

58. Bull-feathers!

It's the privatized freight companies that CAUSE the passenger train delays...

They own the track and won't allow any priority for human beings -- the Chinese made Wal-Mart CRAP they haul is much more important...to their bottom line...

You have a rather naive and skewed view of corporations...

Corporations are sociopath, check it out:

THE PATHOLOGY OF COMMERCE: CASE HISTORIES

To assess the "personality" of the corporate "person," a checklist is employed, using diagnostic criteria of the World Health Organization and the standard diagnostic tool of psychiatrists and psychologists. The operational principles of the corporation give it a highly anti-social "personality": it is self-interested, inherently amoral, callous and deceitful; it breaches social and legal standards to get its way; it does not suffer from guilt, yet it can mimic the human qualities of empathy, caring and altruism. Four case studies, drawn from a universe of corporate activity, clearly demonstrate harm to workers, human health, animals and the biosphere. Concluding this point-by-point analysis, a disturbing diagnosis is delivered: the institutional embodiment of laissez-faire capitalism fully meets the diagnostic criteria of a "psychopath."

http://www.thecorporation.com/index.cfm?page_id=312

This is the evil you're defending...???

[FarCenter]

47. A couple times per year, a suicide will stop the local commuter trains as well

Don't know why it takes them so long to resume traffic. I'd think that they could move the body to the side for investigation and resume the trains in 15 minutes.

[proudohioan]

49. How gory! nt

[Skink]

51. I took amtrack cross country once cause they let my luggage ride free.

I had to get to a gig and with lots of equiptment it was the most economical option.


Just the piece of mind that no airline would drop my musical instruments was enough and I got to see the country at eye level.

[ProudDad]

55. I used to love taking the train but the last time I tried...

I got to the station at 12 midnight for the 12:30 train east to Austin, TX...

I was told that the train wouldn't get in until 2:00 AM and would have to hold in the station until 2:30am... Ok, I figured, bought the ticket and sat down with my book...

At about 1am, the station agent came out and told us the train wouldn't be in until 4:00 AM...

I got a ride home...

Then New Mexico was closed the day after next when I tried to drive east...but that's a story for another time...

[ProudDad]

59. And, having spent months in Europe...

Traveling by TRAIN exclusively...

Which was a pleasure and...

You could set your watch by the prompt train schedules...

And which dropped you off right in the city centers...

And which were faster than flying from London to Paris...

I know how it COULD be done...

But it won't be...the wrong sociopaths are in charge here...

http://www.thecorporation.com/index.cfm?page_id=312

[elleng]

62. but think about the history and the geography.

Its an entirely different thing, and not comparable at all.

ps, joke/question: are there 'right' sociopaths somewhere???

[Jkid]

64. I'm surpised that this thread is up so here's some Actual 4chan Quotes

I actually posted this story on the /n/ - Transportation imageboard.
(http://boards.4chan.org/n/res/171839)
------------------------
Anonymous 04/25/10(Sun)12:29 No.171846

I feel your pain the MBTA "massachussets bus and train acc." sucks dicks for breakfast on that kind of shit. theres always a "Signal problem" or disabled train causing delays. I need to go to work man, not OK.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. !!Q+dsI/uvfZo 04/25/10(Sun)13:16 No.171854

and this is different from flight delays, how?

stop subsidizing the auto and aero industries and i'll bet amtrak magically starts getting on time..

Anonymous 04/25/10(Sun)14:42 No.171878

>>171875
elsewhere the railways are ordinarily administered by a state body to ensure uniform standards and everyones use of it, with freight on spurs and/or at night
unless its in the middle of nowhere like the ore trains in Australia, then sure they can own their own private railway.

Anonymous 04/25/10(Sun)17:29 No.171888

>>171878
Therein lies the problem. The subscribing railways prefer to put their own traffic first. In the UK, where train and track are separate, there is an arrangement whereby the network favours passengers by day and freight by night, which is part of why drivers earn more with freight operators.

Anonymous 04/26/10(Mon)01:34 No.172029

>>171839

Realistically, the problem is not going to change anytime soon: freight has priority because freight owns the track.

>>171875
>Federal law can be changed to allow passenger trains the highest priority on the railways.
It could, but it won't be. The railways, and industry in general, would have a shit fit. It would represent a MASSIVE power grab by Congress, since the lines are privately-owned. Also, as it presently stands, freight rail is far more important to the economy than passenger rail.

Obviously it needs to be remedied, but until proponents can point to significantly more public support for rail than it now has, nothing will happen. In all likelihood, unless and until passenger rail is profitable enough to be re-privatized, nothing will happen.

Anonymous 04/26/10(Mon)02:10 No.172038

>>172029
so scale up passenger Public Transportation

Anonymous 04/26/10(Mon)04:10 No.172055

>>172038
US fed gov't is in debt. They'd be funding high-speed rail anyways. Amtrak averages 70 mph ~ 112 kmph. Slow as hell.

Anonymous 04/26/10(Mon)07:39 No.172069

>>172055
the debt is mainly from military spending + medicare having to work through private system
slash defence budget, universal healthcare

Anonymous 04/26/10(Mon)07:45 No.172070

>>171875
>>172029
> Federal law can be changed to allow passenger trains the highest priority on the railways
this isn't law already? the BNSF gives passenger trains highest priority. i thought it was at least common (if not mandatory)...

Anonymous 04/26/10(Mon)10:04 No.172077

>>172070
That's what the law says, yes. It's just that Amtrak is a joke outside the Northeast and the freight lines routinely ignore the law.

Anonymous 04/26/10(Mon)10:05 No.172078

>>172070
rail is fuckedup in the USA, look at the 79mph restriction and the safety regulations forcing trains to be built like tanks

Anonymous 04/26/10(Mon)13:52 No.172112

>>172086
who else but the government can lift the hilariously outdated and disproved-in-practice laws?

Anonymous 04/26/10(Mon)14:30 No.172116

>>172070
>>172077
freight operators and state passenger rail services in the North East prioritize their shit ahead of Amtrak in the Northeast too, one of the many things that slows down the Acela.

Anonymous 04/26/10(Mon)14:32 No.172118

>>172086
deliberate government intervention and willful neglect are the cause of this
there is no reason that under popular control this cannot be reversed.
And who runs the rail systems elsewhere in the world?
SNCF in France is a government owned corporation just like Amtrak and they work fine.

[NaturalHigh]

65. Frequent and LONG in my experience.

AMTRAK totally ruined a weekend family meeting for us in Saint Louis a few years ago. Fortunately for us, my wife and I, unlike our sisters-in-law, chose to drive. It was a long trip, but at least we weren't delayed and left sitting on a parked train for hours.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

66. ...and everything is timely at the airport.

:patriot: