Bush to seek Amtrak subsidy cuts

[Sandman]

BBC Railways Link

This is probably a better source of information that my semi-informed ramblings. Network Rail is a not-for-profit company that is all but controlled by the government, but not actually state-owned. Or something.

[chequita guevara]

There used to be an Amtrak line from Chicago to Indianapolis. It was quick, comfortable, and usually packed. Then they cut it and forced everyone to ride Greyhound. It wasn't that much more expensive than the bus, either, $35 round trip.

[:) Smiley]

Cross country rail travel in the US was made obsolete in the second half of the 20th century by jet planes. Most private companies went bust or cut passenger service around the 60s.

Amtrak was created because there are plenty of towns across America that were built around rail lines- not enough population density to justify highways or airports. It's not politically acceptable to make these towns "obsolete".

[DanS]

Amtrak was created because there are plenty of towns across America that were built around rail lines- not enough population density to justify highways or airports. It's not politically acceptable to make these towns "obsolete".

In the lower 48 states, these towns wouldn't be destroyed by loss of rail passenger service. On the other hand, the freight rail system is highly developed throughout the US -- even to small towns -- and loss of freight rail access would be devastating for industry. But as stated, all of those rails are privately owned and only a very small subset run passenger service.

As I pointed out. That, however, is not the problem, but an effect of the problem.

Well, we've got a $117 gap between rail and bus (plus any operating subsidies that are going to be removed or reduced), which demonstrates the magnitude of the problem. Do you think it's possible for Amtrak to offer a $35 round trip ticket, or alternatively to make the gap a worthwhile purchase, given convenience, time-to-destination, etc.?

I'm skeptical.

[:) Smiley]

The train is faster than the bus. Also, the bus wasn't always that cheap, it's only since the beginning of Chinatown bus operations that the price dropped to $35.

Solution? Build Chinatowns across the country.

[DanS]

Originally posted by Spiffor

You have found your problem.

For the record:
Paris-Brussels per bus = 3h45
Paris-Brussels per train = 1h25

Well, the distance between Washington and New York is 225 miles, whereas it is 164 miles for Paris to Brussels. I would have thought that Paris to Brussels would be all freeway, but I guess not.

In any event, maybe I'm overestimating the time for the train. The Amtrak web site lists the $144 tickets at a 3 hour, 20 minute trip. Additionally, you might be able to knock off maybe an hour from the NYC <-> Washington trip with roughly the current infrastructure (but at a higher ticket price). Anything more would require new rights of way and bullet trains.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by DanS
Well, we've got a $117 gap between rail and bus (plus any operating subsidies that are going to be removed or reduced), which demonstrates the magnitude of the problem. Do you think it's possible for Amtrak to offer a $35 round trip ticket

Maybe not $35, but already it could have considerably lower prices if there were more customers. To attract customers, having faster trains would be a good idea. So is handing out generous rebates to some categories of the population (young, unemployed, old...), so that they can fill in the train. It's better to have a cheapo seat than an empty seat.

or alternatively to make the gap a worthwhile purchase, given convenience, time-to-destination

Unless the stations in DC and NY (and in the cities inbetween) are very remote from the city centre, and badly connected to cabs / mass transit, I don't see how train would be less convenient than bus. As for the speed, it's not like there aren't economically viable fast trains out there. Competing European countries have developed their own fast-train design aimed at accomodating old tracks. So you won't need any hugehugehuge investment to have satisfyingly fast trains.

You'll need the political will to do so however. And you'll need to clean up Amtrak's pathetic management, it seems.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by DanS
In any event, you might be able to knock off maybe an hour and a half from the NYC <-> Washington trip with roughly the current infrastructure (but at a higher ticket price). Anything more would require new rights of way and bullet trains.

Pendolino goes at 125-140 Mph, and is supposed not to require new tracks. If you take the stops between DC and NYC, that's still ca. 2 hours for the trip. That will be considerably more attractive than busses for those who can afford it. And for those who have rebates.

[DanS]

I DanS'ed you. The 2:20 figure is the Acela Express figure (which is one of those upgraded trains that you mention), and assuming an upgrade of the switching near New York City.

But those trains are pretty expensive. The Acela Express tickets now go for $252 round-trip.

Would it be right to subsidize those business travelers on the $252 round-trip ticket, when all the rest of us are choosing bus for $35 round-trip?

[DanS]

Solution? Build Chinatowns across the country.

To quibble, the bus services are run by the Chinese, but they don't stop in Chinatown in Washington, D.C.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by DanS
I DanS'ed you. The 2:20 figure is the Acela Express figure (which is one of those upgraded trains that you mention), and assuming an upgrade of the switching near New York City.

But those trains are pretty expensive. The Acela Express tickets now go for $252 round-trip.

Would it be right to subsidize those business travelers on the $252 round-trip ticket, when all the rest of us are choosing bus for $35 round-trip?

1. I'm not sure all the rest of you are choosing the bus, for exactly the same reason that most of you people prefer expansive planes over cheap buses to travel cross country. Speed matters.

2. A train has heavy fixed costs, but small variable costs, once you scheduled one. A train full of "subsidized" customers will lose far less money than an empty train. In turn, with an attendance being up, the train company won't have to charge the customer as much to recoup the costs. This will improve the competitiveness compared to other transportation forms.

[DanS]

This will improve the competitiveness compared to other transportation forms.

But just at the figures, Spiff! We could give away bus tickets to anybody who wants them, kill Amtrak, and end up way ahead.

[alva]

Well, the distance between Washington and New York is 225 miles, whereas it is 164 miles for Paris to Brussels. I would have thought that Paris to Brussels would be all freeway, but I guess not.

Is that all? 164 miles? Hmm, always thought it was more. As to the freeway part, it is mostly freeway ( if not all which I actually think it is ).

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by DanS
But just at the figures, Spiff! We could give away bus tickets to anybody who wants them, kill Amtrak, and end up way ahead.

... with slow transportation that clogs the highways.

[DanS]

It's not much slower. And the clogging of highways is minimal. Certainly much better than cars. If people want a faster trip, they can fly.