Hopefully, that trend will spread westward. I checked into taking Amtrak's Sunset Limited from Houston to L.A. and found out that it is scheduled to take about 59 hours... leave Thursday afternoon, arrive Sunday morning. But people who have taken it claim that it takes several more days because it shares freight rails, and often gets side-tracked (literally!) to wait while long freight trains pass.
But the trains in the East are on dedicated tracks, so the fact that they're becoming more popular gives hope that someday dedicated passenger rails will be laid in the West as well. Texas is on the list for high-speed rail funding between Houston and Dallas.
Discussion on:
Top
Rated
Rated
Minor errors.
Edited by Hates Idiots
Updated - 10th Oct
Just
In
In
Thanks.
Posted by Hates Idiots
16th Oct
Show:
+1
Vote
Mostly in the East
Posted by AlanLaRue
10th Oct
-4
Votes
Sadly, Facts Don't Matter to Republicans
The sad truth about rail travel is it was undermined by car, oil, and tire manufactures who wanted to sell cars/buses/trucks; not cost effectiveness or efficiency. (Well documented, not conspiracy) We put all our resources in highways and neglected our rail infrastructure. Now that we are under energy pressures people move back to trains, but republicans have a jihad against railroads.
Rail roads are the most energy efficient way to move people!!! There is no mode of transportation in America or the world that isn't subsidized; road construction and maintenance or air traffic controllers and runway construction and maintenance. Railroads don't get their fair shake because there is not large internal industry to drive advocacy, unlike roads and air travel.
The reason railroads can't meet their potential is they don't receive the proper priority and funding. Sure, there are efficiency issues, but nothing that can't be resolved with the proper political will.
Wake up America and tell your representative that rail is needed and necessary for the growth of our Economy. Unless you would rather sit in traffic an hour or two a day.
In 1949, Firestone Tire, Standard oil of California, Phillips Petroleum, GM and Mack Trucks were convicted of conspiring to monopolize the sale of buses and related products to local transit companies controlled by NCL and other companies; they were acquitted of conspiring to monopolize the ownership of these companies. The verdicts were upheld on appeal in 1951.[n 9] Bradford Snell summed up the controversial verdict, as the punishment so poorly matched the crime:
"The court imposed a sanction of $5,000 on GM. In addition, the jury convicted H.C. Grossman, who was then treasurer of GM. Grossman had played a key role in the motorization campaigns and had served as a director of Pacific City Lines when that company undertook the dismantlement of the $100 million Pacific Electric system. The court fined Grossman the magnanimous sum of $1."[n 10]
Rail roads are the most energy efficient way to move people!!! There is no mode of transportation in America or the world that isn't subsidized; road construction and maintenance or air traffic controllers and runway construction and maintenance. Railroads don't get their fair shake because there is not large internal industry to drive advocacy, unlike roads and air travel.
The reason railroads can't meet their potential is they don't receive the proper priority and funding. Sure, there are efficiency issues, but nothing that can't be resolved with the proper political will.
Wake up America and tell your representative that rail is needed and necessary for the growth of our Economy. Unless you would rather sit in traffic an hour or two a day.
In 1949, Firestone Tire, Standard oil of California, Phillips Petroleum, GM and Mack Trucks were convicted of conspiring to monopolize the sale of buses and related products to local transit companies controlled by NCL and other companies; they were acquitted of conspiring to monopolize the ownership of these companies. The verdicts were upheld on appeal in 1951.[n 9] Bradford Snell summed up the controversial verdict, as the punishment so poorly matched the crime:
"The court imposed a sanction of $5,000 on GM. In addition, the jury convicted H.C. Grossman, who was then treasurer of GM. Grossman had played a key role in the motorization campaigns and had served as a director of Pacific City Lines when that company undertook the dismantlement of the $100 million Pacific Electric system. The court fined Grossman the magnanimous sum of $1."[n 10]
Posted by JT4
10th Oct
0
Votes
Railroads are better funded per passenger mile than highways
"The reason railroads can't meet their potential is they don't receive the proper priority and funding."
Really? Actually, railroads receive more funding per thousand passenger miles than any other mode of transportation. Highways actually produce a slight revenue for the government. See http://www.bts.gov/publications/federal_subsidies_to_passenger_transportation/html/figure_02.html and http://www.bts.gov/publications/federal_subsidies_to_passenger_transportation/html/executive_summary.html .
Really? Actually, railroads receive more funding per thousand passenger miles than any other mode of transportation. Highways actually produce a slight revenue for the government. See http://www.bts.gov/publications/federal_subsidies_to_passenger_transportation/html/figure_02.html and http://www.bts.gov/publications/federal_subsidies_to_passenger_transportation/html/executive_summary.html .
Posted by zackers
12th Oct
+1
Vote
Partially true on dedicated tracks in the east.
Slightly less than half of the NYC to DC route and less than 25 percent of the NYC to Boston routes are on anything resembling dedicated rail.
Because of this, the occasional burst to higher speeds makes Acela only 18 to 20 minutes faster than the conventional diesel electric powered Northeast Regional on the NYC to Boston run.
The loss of dedicated rails in the 1960s and 1970s is why even Acela runs both of those routes slower than the steam engines of the 1940s.
The press release confirms the same sections of track tested this year saw high speed testing prior to Acela going operational years ago. At the time NIMBY protests over the noise levels of the fast trains kept them from ever going into service at those speeds.
http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/623/361/Amtrak-to-Operate-Test-Trains-at-165-mph-ATK-12-084.pdf
Dedicated tracks are a must for HSR or regional rapid rail to succeed. The one caution is that unless you are in the remote desert southwest, you will have some NIMBY fights with abutters over the noise.
Because of this, the occasional burst to higher speeds makes Acela only 18 to 20 minutes faster than the conventional diesel electric powered Northeast Regional on the NYC to Boston run.
The loss of dedicated rails in the 1960s and 1970s is why even Acela runs both of those routes slower than the steam engines of the 1940s.
The press release confirms the same sections of track tested this year saw high speed testing prior to Acela going operational years ago. At the time NIMBY protests over the noise levels of the fast trains kept them from ever going into service at those speeds.
http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/623/361/Amtrak-to-Operate-Test-Trains-at-165-mph-ATK-12-084.pdf
Dedicated tracks are a must for HSR or regional rapid rail to succeed. The one caution is that unless you are in the remote desert southwest, you will have some NIMBY fights with abutters over the noise.
Posted by Hates Idiots
Updated - 10th Oct
0
Votes
Double rail bed width NOW!
Now is the time to double the rail bed width of the network. This would make the cost per mile for shipping lower and allow passenger accommodations to be either roomier or cheaper by doubling the capacity per car. A wider rail bed would also allow the cars to be more stable with a wider footprint. The construction could be simplified by only laying one more rail adjacent to the existing rails and reusing one of the existing rails for the new track bed. This also allows the new track to be laid without affecting current rail usage.
Posted by whrinkles
10th Oct
0
Votes
Easier than a highway.
Adding another rail line to an existing railbed is easier than adding another lane to a highway.
Posted by Hates Idiots
Updated - 10th Oct
+1
Vote
Ridership up
Great, with the subsidies to riders as high as 100% per ticket, we're going broke faster. What other industry could survive this way? I'm sure someone will bring up the roads are built by the government, but, remember the drivers do pay for that plus every other project that can siphon off transportation funds.
Posted by philwhite42@...
10th Oct
+3
Votes
Do not forget the food subsidies.
A $16 hamburger for $9.50. A $3.50 soda for just $2.00.
http://www.inquisitr.com/292782/amtrak-food-costs-lead-to-834-million-in-losses-for-company/
http://www.inquisitr.com/292782/amtrak-food-costs-lead-to-834-million-in-losses-for-company/
Posted by Hates Idiots
10th Oct
-3
Votes
North America still in the rail dark ages...
Living in Europe sure has its advantages, especially with respect to public transport. In the UK alone there were 1.3 billion passenger journeys last year!
While North America (with it's admittedly different demographic) seeks to suck the planet dry of its last drop of oil so its citizens can drive around with a tonne or more of heavy steel each to protect them, or fly from city to city moving carbon from deep underground up into the upper atmosphere where it all heats us up unnecessarily, while decrying the building of passenger railways as some kind a socialist plot; the rest of the world cries with laughter over their stupidity and cries with despair over their waste.
Please wake up over there, you're screwing it up for everyone else. And yes, I am an American... the shame of it.
While North America (with it's admittedly different demographic) seeks to suck the planet dry of its last drop of oil so its citizens can drive around with a tonne or more of heavy steel each to protect them, or fly from city to city moving carbon from deep underground up into the upper atmosphere where it all heats us up unnecessarily, while decrying the building of passenger railways as some kind a socialist plot; the rest of the world cries with laughter over their stupidity and cries with despair over their waste.
Please wake up over there, you're screwing it up for everyone else. And yes, I am an American... the shame of it.
Posted by mjxguerra
10th Oct
+2
Votes
Excuse me, but...
...where does the bulk of the energy come from to run the rails in Britain?
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
10th Oct
0
Votes
Power in the UK/Europe
John,
That's the problem, I suppose, but the thing is, unlike the infernally combustible requirements of most Detroit iron it could come from anywhere that produces electricity. In the UK at least renewables are increasing all the time as the smoke-producers and nukes are switched off. It will take time of course; but the train will still use that power far more efficiently than said road iron, as the coefficient of friction 'twix steel wheel and steel rail is only a tiny proportion of that 'twix rubber and the road (hysteresis in rubber). Could go on and on, but I guess you'd be bored pretty soon. Mike
That's the problem, I suppose, but the thing is, unlike the infernally combustible requirements of most Detroit iron it could come from anywhere that produces electricity. In the UK at least renewables are increasing all the time as the smoke-producers and nukes are switched off. It will take time of course; but the train will still use that power far more efficiently than said road iron, as the coefficient of friction 'twix steel wheel and steel rail is only a tiny proportion of that 'twix rubber and the road (hysteresis in rubber). Could go on and on, but I guess you'd be bored pretty soon. Mike
Posted by mjxguerra
11th Oct
0
Votes
That is the assumption...
...but it's not the reality:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/researchtech/research/newline/carbonimpact.pdf/
When all factors of construction and operation are considered, conventional rail is only marginally more CO2 efficient than automobiles. (Buses beat them all) HSR is far less efficient.
Oh, and that's a British study, btw.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/researchtech/research/newline/carbonimpact.pdf/
When all factors of construction and operation are considered, conventional rail is only marginally more CO2 efficient than automobiles. (Buses beat them all) HSR is far less efficient.
Oh, and that's a British study, btw.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
11th Oct
-4
Votes
train travel USA
In spite of the right wing political winds whose goal is derailing any government involvement in moving people by rail Amtrack is still here. Our republican controlled political process is so niggardly in financial support, it's outstanding that people clamoring for rail still sqeeze in the system.
Remember Amtrack is forced to use privitely owned - and poorly maintained - track serving the moving of freight.
Find an old map showing railroad systems before the enlightened removal of tens of thousands of miles of track happened. It's truly amazing.
Will the passenger trains ultimately be forced to play PostOffice? Forced to prepaying billions of retirement dollars so the system is crippled. I hope not.
Remember Amtrack is forced to use privitely owned - and poorly maintained - track serving the moving of freight.
Find an old map showing railroad systems before the enlightened removal of tens of thousands of miles of track happened. It's truly amazing.
Will the passenger trains ultimately be forced to play PostOffice? Forced to prepaying billions of retirement dollars so the system is crippled. I hope not.
Posted by affordablecomputerguy@...
Updated - 10th Oct
+4
Votes
Minor errors.
I am not sure what is behind the obsession with blaming Republicans.
It was politicians across the political spectrum that became enamored with the automobile and the job producing roads and highway construction they created. From mayors to presidents the decisions of those democrats and republicans changed the USA from a rail using society to a car based one. Many large labor unions also supported highway construction for the jobs it gave dues paying members.
To single out one party and dump all of the blame for the decline of railroads on them is petty election year fodder for the mindless drones that will swallow any garbage put out there.
With that being said, you are lacking one key bit of information on this topic when you blame republicans. Amtrak, the governments hail mary pass to save passenger rail service, was created by law in 1971 under a law signed in 1970 by Nixon. A republican. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak
The lack of dedicated rails for passenger service can largely be blamed on the US government closing down rail lines after forming Amtrak. They did it as a budget cutting measure. Democrat and republican bureaucrats decided to run Amtrak on private freight lines to save maintenace costs while paying minimal fees for the track use. They dumped the maintenance costs on private businesses.
In the late 1970s I watched government contractors rip up miles of the express line that ran through my city and surrounding towns that used to carry the Portland Maine or Concord NH to Boston to NYC and beyond trains. The railbed running through my home town used to hold 4 sets of tracks. Today it has only 2 which must now carry over 45 passenger trains and several freight trains per day.
You can take a skimobile from the Massachusetts border all the way to Canada on one converted rail trail in NH, but trains have to switch tracks a dozen times to make the same trip. A recent attempt to reopen a coastal line from Boston to Portland Maine ran into a problem in Newburyport MA where the town had illegally ripped up a mile of track for a new trail system. The problem was found when a train was sent north as part of a track test. They nearly derailed the train when the track just ended.
That is the story across the US.
And the Post Office is buried by an unsustainable retirement plan. Thank god the railroad retirement plan does not suffer the same poor planning.
It was politicians across the political spectrum that became enamored with the automobile and the job producing roads and highway construction they created. From mayors to presidents the decisions of those democrats and republicans changed the USA from a rail using society to a car based one. Many large labor unions also supported highway construction for the jobs it gave dues paying members.
To single out one party and dump all of the blame for the decline of railroads on them is petty election year fodder for the mindless drones that will swallow any garbage put out there.
With that being said, you are lacking one key bit of information on this topic when you blame republicans. Amtrak, the governments hail mary pass to save passenger rail service, was created by law in 1971 under a law signed in 1970 by Nixon. A republican. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak
The lack of dedicated rails for passenger service can largely be blamed on the US government closing down rail lines after forming Amtrak. They did it as a budget cutting measure. Democrat and republican bureaucrats decided to run Amtrak on private freight lines to save maintenace costs while paying minimal fees for the track use. They dumped the maintenance costs on private businesses.
In the late 1970s I watched government contractors rip up miles of the express line that ran through my city and surrounding towns that used to carry the Portland Maine or Concord NH to Boston to NYC and beyond trains. The railbed running through my home town used to hold 4 sets of tracks. Today it has only 2 which must now carry over 45 passenger trains and several freight trains per day.
You can take a skimobile from the Massachusetts border all the way to Canada on one converted rail trail in NH, but trains have to switch tracks a dozen times to make the same trip. A recent attempt to reopen a coastal line from Boston to Portland Maine ran into a problem in Newburyport MA where the town had illegally ripped up a mile of track for a new trail system. The problem was found when a train was sent north as part of a track test. They nearly derailed the train when the track just ended.
That is the story across the US.
And the Post Office is buried by an unsustainable retirement plan. Thank god the railroad retirement plan does not suffer the same poor planning.
Posted by Hates Idiots
Updated - 10th Oct
-4
Votes
Republicans
One thing you can say about Republicans is that it's difficult to compare today's crop to the pre-Clinton Republicans. It appears to me all they're interested in is blocking anything the Democrats propose regardless of how good an idea it is. They've gone so far as to vote against their own bills when Democrats agreed with them. It borders on treason when you hear someone like Mitch McConnell say his number one job is to make Obama a one term President. That sounds to me like it's more about political power than running a country.
The Post Office's retirement plan suffers from a Republican passed law that requires them to fund the health care for retirees for the next 75 years (more like 70 now) by 2016. That means they're funding retiree health care for people that haven't even been born yet. To me that's just a Republican jab at the Post Office as the largest unionized employer in the US.
The Post Office's retirement plan suffers from a Republican passed law that requires them to fund the health care for retirees for the next 75 years (more like 70 now) by 2016. That means they're funding retiree health care for people that haven't even been born yet. To me that's just a Republican jab at the Post Office as the largest unionized employer in the US.
Posted by riverat1
Updated - 10th Oct
+1
Vote
Please document that law.
I would love to see a government retirement plan that actually plans for the future.
It would be like seeing a living T-Rex in Times Square.
It would be like seeing a living T-Rex in Times Square.
Posted by Hates Idiots
11th Oct
+1
Vote
Look it up yourself.
Just Google the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006. It's in Title VIII. It looks like the "75 year" is someones interpretation but it's also true that the USPS is required to fund retirees health care in a way that no other entity, public or private is required to do.
Social Security is a retirement plan that has never failed to make a scheduled payment and is fully solvent into the 2030's. All it would take to fix any problems it has is to raise the income cap a modest amount.
Social Security is a retirement plan that has never failed to make a scheduled payment and is fully solvent into the 2030's. All it would take to fix any problems it has is to raise the income cap a modest amount.
Posted by riverat1
Updated - 15th Oct
0
Votes
Thanks.
I'll look it up.
Posted by Hates Idiots
16th Oct
+1
Vote
You know what I call a "risky scheme"?
Entrusting your retirement money to politicians.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
12th Oct
+1
Vote
Alternative to Flying...
it might also have something to do w/ the airline industry becoming such a horrible and increasingly costly customer service experience. perhaps more and more people are thinking that if they can' take the train, they will.
Posted by confoundednj
11th Oct
+1
Vote
And what makes you think that taking the train will be any better?
What makes you think that the TSA would not make train travel just as miserable as plane travel? After all, it's called the "Transportation Security Administration", not just the "Airport Security Administration" for a reason.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
12th Oct