Die, Amtrak, die
By adamg - Mon, 05/19/2008 - 10:04am.
Atari_Age writes that from aboard an Amtrak train stuck in Rhode Island:
... Amtrak, you're a rotting corpse of a once impressive railway system.
You completely and utterly suck. ...
| 
| 
I agree - they should shut
I agree - they should shut down Amtrak.
I disagree. America needs
I disagree. America needs rail transit now more than ever. It needs to be better funded and given better political attention, so a relatively simple trip from Boston to NY doesn't have to cost $80 each way. And we need to accelerate the building of high speed rail in places like the LA-Vegas corridor.
Unfortunately I think it is going to take a recession and ridiculous gas prices for people to start appreciating this.
Maybe both right?
"Shutting down" Amtrak is certainly a bad idea if it would mean "shutting down" rail travel, which we clearly need more, and not less, of if we want to reduce oil consumption, carbon emissions and driver frustration. However, some would argue that the existence of Amtrak is what makes rail travel crappy in this country and that we would be better off selling parts of the system back to its original owners - the old railroads - and allowing them to run it based on market driven forces. Although I'm not so trustful of "the market," one factor that cripples Amtrak year in and year out is that it is forced by Congressmen to service parts of the country that, were it private, would NEVER get service because of the low density and literal no-ridership that goes on there. If Amtrak were privitized, the argument goes, it would quickly improve and make less expensive service to profitable areas where lots of pepple ride the train (NE corridor) and elimenate service to those that don't. There are certainly many other hurdles to get over - like CSX owning all the tracks - but its an interesting idea.
Never gonna happen
The freight railroads absolutely, passionately do not want to take on the responsibility of passenger travel. (Again)
Keep Amtrak, but actually fund it
They need a real budget. Their entire allocation to run the entire nationwide rail system for a year is about the cost of one highway interchange in Detroit.
Of course, building a road is an "investment", building a railroad is always a "subsidy".
With $4 gas, there really is no excuse to have such a pathetic, barely-funded national rail system.
The opposing view
Steve Garfield also posts from an Amtrak train, but he is loving the trip.
Its no secret that Bush has
Its no secret that Bush has no love for Amtrak, and has at every opportunity tried to undercut it. Sweet is the irony then that despite all his "efforts", rail ridership has begun to rapidly expand the last two years as a not-entirely-indirect result of his administration's failed energy, economic, and foreign policies. Amtrak is nowhere near healthy, but if your daily commute were as impinged by the right of way and speed issues Amtrak has to combat, you would likely never leave the house.
To say do away with Amtrak is moronic. We've already tried doing that (in a half ass way, mind you). How about something novel instead? Embrace it, feed it, cut off the blockages on it.
Do some research, see just how incredibly efficient it is as a method of transportation in terms of fuel per passenger. I'm not a sky-is-falling peak oil pundit like James Kuntsler, I don't think our airports will be cockroached and cobwebbed in 10 years, but I think that rail will take up much more of our transportation balance very soon, and for now its best to build on the armature of Amtrak.
What do you expect?
If you click the link, the guy thinks that he can actually:
1) get to the airport
2) check in
3) get through security
4) board
5) fly
6) get to nyc
7) get from the airport ...
and do it in less time than even a delayed train trip on amtrak?
Excuse me but ... BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH!
And he wouldn't even get the free wifi to bitch about sitting in the airport while the flight was delayed by two or more hours, or when it was sitting on the tarmac at Logan Armpit or Kennedy for an hour or more.
It's not entirely
It's not entirely unbelievable.
I recently took a trip to North Jersey in April.
I left my apartment at about 6:00AM and drove to Wellington. Rode the Orange Line to State and switched to the Blue Line and took that to the Airport. I was at the terminal by 6:45AM.
I checked in and went through security and was at my gate by 7:10. Boarded my flight at 7:30. We took off around 8:00. We disembarked around 9:00 at Newark International. We got to where we were going in North Jersey around 10:15-10:30.
So all in all it took 4 hours and some change, door to door, to go about 30 miles from the Newark Airport.
Whereas with the Amtrak you'll have a ride time of 3 and a half to 4 and half hours (not including travel to and from train stations) assuming there aren't any problems.
YMMV.
Lucky You
You managed to get through Logan security in 25 minutes? On a weekday morning? I know it can be done, but it is rarely experienced IMHO. I usually grab a large coffee to sip, and I've only once had to dump any of it at the scanner end of the line.
You were also going to Newark and not Kennedy. HUGE difference. Newark can be a nightmare, but it isn't the persistant never ending nightmare that Kennedy is.
Somebody's got a case of the Mondays
Yea, it was a Monday morning and I can only begin to imagine what kind of cluster-fu*k New York airports can be. Hell, just going to the Port Authority is awful.
Laguardia
God help you if you have to fly into Laguardia. You simply won't get there. "Wait" has no meaning in that time space continuim. I think that train v. plane to NYC is probably a wash in terms of time if you are talking about getting into the City. However, the insane hastle of airports weighs it way in favor of rail for me. On Acela at least you can get there five minutes before the train leaves, keep your shoes on, comfortable seat, and be right at your desintation when you get off. Its also much easier to get to rail if you live in town but I can understand that factor diminishes if you have to travel far to get to S.Station.
Don't forget us suburbanites and almost-suburbanites
128 is downright convenient, albeit with fairly pricey parking (although not as bad as at Logan).
Why, just yesterday, I dropped my father and his wife off there after the kidlet's dance recital at Dedham High (good thing we didn't leave five minutes later, though - because we would have gotten stuck on 128 south, thanks to a car that chose that time to erupt in flames).
Why I wish they would fix Amtrak
Red Line T from Davis to South Station, Lakeshore Limited to Chicago, Empire Builder to Portland, and then Tri-Met.
I can get to Portland, OR to visit family entirely by rail - or I could if I could count on the train from Boston to Chicago to ever get there on time! There is only a 4 hour window between the Lakeshore Limited's scheduled arrival in Chicago and the Empire Builder's departure, but I have been warned by Amtrak that the Lakeshore Limited rarely gets there within that time window.
As it is, I am planning to use Amtrak to get up and down the northwest coast this summer. $168 for 4 people to get from Portland to Vancouver, $84 to Seattle. You can't buy gas and car rental that cheap!
er... I didn't really think anyone would actually read that post
yikes. :D
I didn't really think anyone would actually read that post - certainly not outside a small group of friends.
Seriously, I thought I was just writing a one-off rant, mainly to myself. Surprised it was picked up anywhere.
Also, I *am* aware that the rail vs. flight comparison is a stretch. But less so than, say, 10 years ago when the Amtrak fares were far cheaper than air travel to NY.
I openly admit - if it wasn't obvious from the post - that I wrote the post in what I'd kindly call a fit of pique. I was pretty ticked off, for sure.
I also offer up - and will attach to the original post - that many of my other trips were completely uneventful and perfectly nice.
Even then, though, I have noticed the deterioration, both in service and infrastructure (meaning the trains themselves) on the regional Acela - and more recently even the extremely expensive Acela express.
I have also learned (pointed out in these comments, too) that many of those "switching problems" and "line maintenance" issues are not even under Amtrak's jurisdiction.
Look, I *want* Amtrak to thrive. I use it a lot. It just doesn't seem to be doing anything that feels like improvement at the moment. It seems to be... declining. We really do need a rail system - one that is both functional and welcoming. Someone at a government or corporate level needs to actually give a crap and address the issue.
And, yeah, we know that's not gonna happen - because no one really cares, apparently.
That's okay
Just keep in mind that you had the luxury of venting to the intertubes while in that ticked off state.
That wifi opportunity is something my dad didn't have when he connected through NY Kennedy and sat on the runway for over an hour for no good reason! (they said they didn't have a gate ... the plane landed on time at a slack time and they didn't have a gate?)
At least when the train is delayed, you can still get in a good flame ... or just get what work done that you can.
I believe I was on that train
I started at 30th Street Station, where the board said "15 minutes late" -- but actually departed close to 40 minutes late.
The first major delay en route to Boston was due to a downed power line. Apparently earlier in the day, another train had knocked the line down, and instead of actually fixing the problem, they just closed one track. So we sat for 45 minutes waiting for a train traveling in the opposite direction to pass.
Then the train moved again. For a little while, anyway. Because in Providence (I think), we were stopped because the crew was no longer allowed to work. The engineer had been driving for 12 hours and was not permitted to continue. So we stayed there for almost an hour until a new crew came to finish the ride.
It was a very very long day for me, and it was all made a little worse with the cafe car running out of food.
I agree that Amtrak leaves a lot to be desired, however, I still prefer it to flying when going to NYC. It's sometimes harder deciding how to get to Philly, but the schedule is more flexible, it's less expensive, and I can bill during the hours I'm on the train. Or watch a DVD.