Amtrak struggles with late trains (AP, via Yahoo)

By SARAH KARUSH, Associated Press Writer 46 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The Capitol Limited, an Amtrak train from Chicago, is scheduled to arrive in Washington every day at 1:30 p.m. But frequent rider Edda Ramos knows better than to make plans for the afternoon or evening.

She knows a late arrival — sometimes by an hour or two, sometimes by seven or eight — "is the one thing you can count on."

The 764-mile route is among Amtrak's most dismal performers, with just 11 percent of trains arriving within 30 minutes of their scheduled time last year. But the problem exists to one degree or another on the majority of Amtrak routes.

The main reason: In most of the country, the national passenger railroad operates on tracks owned by freight railroads, and the tracks are badly congested.

With freight traffic soaring in recent years, Amtrak's never-stellar on-time performance declined to an average of 68 percent last year, its worst showing since the 1970s. When the routes where Amtrak owns the tracks are excluded, the on-time performance last year fell to 61 percent.

Even the lawmakers who vote on Amtrak's subsidies of more than $1 billion annually have gotten caught in the holdups. Earlier this month, House Democrats traveling to a retreat in Williamsburg, Va., arrived two hours late after getting stuck behind a CSX freight train with engine trouble. .....(more)

The complete piece is at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070227/ap_on_re_us/amtrak_late_trains

so how do we go about fixing this?

Airlines have subsidies and government built facilities. Railroads don't have it that good.

They never have. This is not news.

taking my car to work again. The drive is almost 40 miles one way and often just stop-and-go. Even considering that, I usually get home sooner than I would with the train.

The last week it broke down twice in the morning and I was more than 2 hours late for work each time. In the evening is is almost always late. We are stuck behind freight trains on a daily basis. I can't make any arrangements for the evenings because I never know when I get home. At work, I have to schedule appointments late enough in the morning out of fear that the train will be late again. I am glad that my boss is so flexible and understanding. Any other organization would have fired me already.

Something needs to be done to improve Amtrak and all public transportation. I've seen many of my fellow riders quit taking the train because of Amtrak's unreliability.

war monenies being spent.

The European trains, particularly in the north, are almost frighteningly efficient.

...that the freight trains are limited to 40mph maximum, and the passenger trains can go 80mph maximum. So if you get stuck behind a freight train, your speed is cut in half. Also, when I was riding the Sunset Limited through a long flat desolate stretch of Texas at very slow speed, one of the other passengers asked the engineer why we were going so slow...he said the rails are in such poor condition from lack of maintenance that it was unsafe to travel at higher speeds. Given fuel prices, it is inevitable that our nations rail system will get much heavier useage, because of the efficiency inherent in moving goods and people by train...so how come we're not maintaining our rail infrastructure?

Cuts two ways:

1) Reduces track capacity: What used to be a 3-track main 40 years ago may now be two or even one (with occasional passing sidings) track. Net effect cuts the property tax by 1/3 or 2/3 respectively.

2) Better (read: faster) track is more expensive and costs more to build, resulting in a higher tax base on the property. While you may need to go 80 MPH to haul people effectivly, the RRs that own the track only need to go 40MPH to make money hauling coal, cars, etc. Needless to say, why build expensive infrastructure that is overkill (for their needs) when you can have shabby facilities that have less cost (taxes, capital and maintenance).

There you have it.

Electrified Systems were accessed higher value than non-electrified systems.

Now this could all be avoided if taxes were done on the value of the LAND as opposed to the Improvements of the Lands, but that is the Henry George School of Economics. George said ONLY Land should be taxed, thus encouraging the maximum use of that LAND. George believed people who improved land should get the benefit of those improvements and Taxes on improvements was an impediment to improving land.

on the other hand, why should someone get value from just owning land? He or she did NOTHING to improve the land and thus why should such people get the money for just owning land?

THe classic situation is common in the third world, peasants work the land and have to pay their landlords "rent" for the use of the land. What do these landlords do to improve the land? nothing, what improvements that are done are done by the workers working the land (and then only for that years crop for the landlord may give the land to someone else next year).

In many ways landlordism is the main problem in the Third World. George's proposal to stop that is to tax the value of the land but NOT the buildings or other improvements on the land.

Another example, look at most intersections, you will see gas stations or other business at that location. Why are their in that location? To get Customers. Why do customers go to that location? because it is in an intersection of two roads. Who built the roads? The state. Who gets the benefit of the increase in value of the property do to the building of the roads? It is NOT the state whose construction made the property valuable. It is some Lucky land owner who did NOTHING to improve the value of his land, the land increased in value do to the action of the State. George said if that is the case why should the STATE not get the increase value? Now if the land owner takes his land and puts a business on it, that is his improvement and the state should NOT get any benefit from the actions of the landowner to improve his property,

The same goes for other improvements, sewerage, water installation etc. Improvements by neighbors for example I build a Million Dollar mansion in an area, the area becomes a "Hot" place to live. While anyone who builds a mansion in area should NOT be taxed for building the large house, but should be taxed for the increase value of the land do to all the expensive homes going up around it.

The same should go for Railroads, there should NOT be taxed depending on the improvements they make to their right of way, but only on the value of the Right of way. This would encourage more Improvements to railroads.

the train from Kansas City, MO to Saint Louis, Mo. Now, the drive only takes about three hours, but my husband was going to be driving there (it was for a conference) a couple of days later and so we didn't really want two cars, and I didn't want to put up with the greater expense and hassle of flying. There had been a violent rainstorm the day before, and apparently some sections of track were washed out or under water or in some way not usable. We kept on stopping, or getting behind freight trains which, as others have already pointed out, take priority over passenger travel. A trip that was supposed to last five hours took ten. I have not been willing to get on a train since then. Which is a real shame, because I'm a huge supporter of public transportation, and prefer to take it whenever possible rather than drive.

...waited 8 hours for their train after I dropped them at Union Station.

Needless to say, they're getting a link to this article now.

The people who don't mind 7-hour-late train trips are retirees, people on leisurely vacations, and railfans. As long as trains don't run on time, these are who will ride.

However, for there to be a serious passenger service, air and auto would suffer and the powers that be won't allow this to happen. Therefore, passenger rail in the U.S. will remain a "hobby" mode.

Being hours behind is NOT unusual. I use to use it once in a while but it only comes once a day and always late. Against he problem is Fright lines. The Pennsylvania main line is down to three sets of tracks (During WWII it had as many as Five). This causes all types of delays, but increases efficiency by only having to keep three sets of tracks in shape.

One last note, while the Main line only has three sets of Tracks, it is hauling more fright then doing WWII when the line had five. About five years ago the State agree to help Conrail pay for enlarging the Gallizin Tunnels so that double stack trailers could be hauled. When that was done, Conrail shut down one of th Gallizin Tunnels and installed two sets of tracks in the remaining Tunnel (A third set of tracks can go through the New Portage Tunnel which was already capable of taking extra tall cars since it was built in 1854 by the State when the New Portage Railway replaced the Old Portage Railway on the old Pennsylvania Canal, which was sold to the Pennsylvania Railroad in 1859).

Thus right now you can run FOUR lines of Tracks through the main line of the Pennsylvania line (Five if the other Gallizin Tunnel is expanded to expanded). Getting to the Tunnels on the Pittsburgh side of the Tunnel is not a problem, there is enough space. It may be a tight fit on the Altoona side (But then all you have to do is re-open the New Portage Railroad line on the other side of the Mountain, you have to cut through new US 22 which cuts across the New Portage Railroad line but that is a quick cut and the rest of the right of way still exists, including the stone bridges).

Sorry, the problem is the Railroads do NOT want increase reliability, fright does NOT care when its gets to where it is going (And if it does, that has been going by Truck since the 1960s). The best solution (Short of Nationalization) is to require Norfolk and Southern (The present owner of the Old Pennsylvania Main Line) to permit Amtrak to install two lines of its own into their right of way for use by Amtrak, with Amtrak having priority. Permit Fright on such tracks, but MUST give way to Passenger Service. This is doable, provided some sort of funding source is given to Amtrak to pay for these improvements (I advocate an increase Gasoline tax both to discourage oil usage AND to provide funds to Amtrak to improve its Tracks).

I think its three from Altoona to Johnstown (over the hill) and two everywhere else between HBG and PGH.

Crying shame.

One line goes to the Conemaugh River and the Kiskiminetas River to the Allegheny and then down to Pittsburgh. At least two other lines go via Greensburg.

In Pittsburgh Itself, I google earth the old PRR Main line and it is three tracks from Downtown to the Ohio line on the north side of the Ohio (You have three more lines SOUTH of the Ohio plus two lines for the P&LE which goes along the hillside along the South Shore of the Ohio and Monongahela River. Along the Old PRR from Pittsburgh East, you have only two lines, but room for more. Hillman Library has on line a picture of the old Penn Avenue Incline from the 1950s which shows 13 line sunder the incline as it ran over the PRR Main line. Some of this has been sold off (For example two lanes for the East Bus-way), but you have plenty of Room for expansion and if I was running Amtrak I would be running tracks on the bus-way and running single or double car(s) at least 4 times times per day instead of one large train per day.

My Point the Room exists, what is needed is the will to FORCE Norfolk and Southern to install two more sets of tracks for priority use of Passenger service. The biggest obstacle to this is the Department of Transportation Rule forbidding light Railroad cars (like PAT's LRVs) from running on Fright lines. This is done in Europe all the time (The Europeans rely on SIGNALING to prevent Accidents, not heavy steel to protect passenger once a car is hit as the US rule presumes).

If you increase Gasoline taxes by a Dollar a Gallon, you have the revenue to do the above (I am assuming the Dollar a Gallon Tax will go to Mass Transit in addition to Amtrak). The tax should be FORBIDDEN to be used as operating subsidies, but used to upgrade systems so that the over all transportation system operates better.

The Hillman Library Collection of old Pictures:
http://images.library.pitt.edu/cgi-bin/i/image/image-idx?xc=1&page=index&g=imls

but even if the rule prohibiting LRVs on freight lines were waived, PAT's LRVs still couldnt run on most rail lines.

PAT's track is at PA Broad Guage (5 feet 2 inches) while standard guage is 4 feet 8 and 1/2 inches.

Sorry - i am a real train nerd.

Holler if you want to hear about train travel in Russia.

Over at the Broadtop railroad they are tracks with both the three feet narrow gage of the Broadtop line and 4'8 1/2" standard Gage line (You end up with three rails, one common rail, one at three feet and third at 4'8 1/2").

Anyway, while I did mention the LRVs, LRVs can be made in standard Gage (and most are in Europe and other places where LRVs Operate). My point was such size cars could be used, not the actual LRVs used by PAT. I would opt for the Electric drive of the LRVs, but there is nothing that says Amtrak can not run a diesel single car unit like those made by Colorado Rail Car Company. I hate to say it, but such single car trains running more frequently will solve many of the problems of Amtrak. For example while on-time service may stay what it is now, the fact you are running more trains means people may not have to wait as long for a train to come along.

I once looked at how I would operate such a system. The biggest problem is the time to travel between New York City and Chicago via Philadelphia. The ideal time to operate in New York City and Philadelphia forces the train to hit Pittsburgh and Chicago at times when people do NOT want to travel. The Only solution is to run them 24 hours a day, every 1-2 hours.

Lets look at some numbers to explain what I mean. Any train that goes from New York City will hit Pittsburgh 9 hours and 15 minutes later, and then Chicago 9 hours later. Thus this train if it operates on time will travel 18 hours and 15 minutes. If it leaves New York at 5:00 PM for the evening Rush Hours, it hits Pittsburgh 1:00 AM and Chicago 10:00 AM. Not bad for Chicago, but terrible for Pittsburgh. If you leave to earlier you get to Pittsburgh and Chicago earlier, but you have the same problem, the train hits the wrong time in the area between Philadelphia and Toledo to be of much use in those cities. On the other hand if you run the train 24 hours a day at 2 hour intervals, you can serve those areas in addition to Chicago and New Jersey.

Worse because it took 18 hours to get to Chicago, it will take another 18 hours to get back to New York. Thus if the Train reverses it gets to Pittsburgh at 6:00 PM (Good time for Pittsburgh) but New York City at 2:00 AM.

I hate to say it the best solution is to purchase 20 trains (One every two hours with 2 spares), if you want to have service every two hour service, if you service want every one hour service, 40 trains (LRVs cost about 3 Million a Piece, the Colorado Rail Car is about 5 million a piece). Thus if you buy 40 Colorado Rail Car (Diesel powered) at 5 million a piece that is $200 Million just on train cars. Now the right of way will have to be negotiated with Norfolk and Southern but assuming no additional fees from Norfolk and Southern for us of their right of way (In exchange for use of the tracks when not is use by the Passengers cars) you will still have to spent at least another $200 millions on upgrades to the right of way (Making them wheelchair accessible would cost a good bit of money).

The above is LOW for I once ran across an estimate as to the cost of extending the LRV to Oakland from Downtown Pittsburgh, and the estimate was just one Billion Dollars, but that was for right of way, and digging UNDER the existing street system, I expect less cost for a inter-city rail system upgrade but money will have to be spent.

Thus before we even get to the issue of subsidies the actual train ticket you are spending at least $400 million dollars. I would not be surprise if the cost exceeds one Billion Dollars. In my opinion it needs to be done, but getting Congress to agree to it will require pressure from the people, and people will NOT pressure them to do so unless we have a criss. In many parts of the US we are in a transportation Crisis, and people are opting for Rail as a solution. The next step is to realize regional rail without intercity rail is a waste of time and effort. A New York City via Philadelphia Rail Passenger rail line makes sense. You hit New Jersey with its Traffic, Philadelphia and its traffic, Harrisburg, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Toledo and Chicago.

Once that line is in place and if successful (and I believe it would be) than another line from Boston to Albany through upstate New York, through Ontario to Detroit and then Chicago. Another heavily populated area (Connecting Rails between Albany and NYC and Detroit and Toledo would complement both lines).

A third line would be DC to Pittsburgh. In fact it might be better to run one train from New York City, but then at Philadelphia run every other train to DC first and then Pittsburgh (Through the better solution might just have Connections in DC and Philadelphia with the existing train system, of course upgraded to 24 hour service, and then have the trains to Chicago from Philadelphia, DC and Boston).

Other rail lines also look good, but outside the above area the population is more spread out thus the lines will NOT be as profitable as the above three lines. Extend the Boston to DC line to Florida. Add a Charleston SC to Atlanta, Birmingham AL, Jackson MS, Barton Rouge, and to Houston and Dallas (With another line connecting Dallas with Austin, San Antonio and back up to Houston. Chicago to St Paul and West if profitable (Population starts to really thin out then. Chicago to Indianapolis and Cincinnati and Lexington Ky and then Atlanta (More a connecting line than anything else). Cincinnati to Columbus Ohio to Cleveland. Chicago to Springfield Ill, then to St Louis than to Little Rock then to Houston.

I would be hesitate to go further then the above (Except for the West Coast) for you would be building lines that serve less and less people. On the West Coast I would build a line from Vancouver via Seattle, Portland OR, San Fransisco, LA and end in Tijuana.

My point is the best solution to train travel in the US is to INCREASE the number of trains per day. You can NOT do that unless you make each train smaller. 24 one car passenger trains operated by one person is better than one train with a crew of 24. 12 One car Passenger trains are better than 1 train with a crew of 12. People will take the train if it comes at convenient times for them. The only way to make it convenient to more people is to make such trains more frequently. The only way to do so is to go to one car trains.

No my first choice is a LRV systems. LRVs are used on rail lines in Europe, but are to light to be used on US Fright line by US law (The law needs repealed). If you can not have an electric powered LRV system installed then a Diesel rail is my second choice.

Colorado Rail Car Company:
http://www.coloradorailcar.com/

Broadtop Railroad:
http://www.ebtrr.com/
http://www.febt.org/

n/t

Mom's from Johnstown.

Or almost never. People just try to avoid going over those Mountains unless they have to.

15 FREAKING HOURS worth of delays and stop and go, from the time I stepped onto the train station in Syracuse to the moment I set foot onto DC.

Its a real shame too, because I can see rail as a very comfortable means of traveling (better than flying) if it were just a more reliable means to get to your destination.

By the time I got to New York, about 3 breakdowns and 10 delays later, the weekend was half over.

I guess I was really lucky.

I had another delay between Newport News and DC because of a power outage as a result of a severe thunderstorm.

Rarely with any trouble. And the Acela Express is quite nice.

As I understand it, it's also the most successful; the reason the ticket prices are so high is to subsidize the other lines.

For LA, I fly.

Once you have to travel more than 600 miles, you should fly. 600 miles provide a lot of stops. Now the train itself can go further than 600 miles, but it must be operating in a matter that most of its passengers will NOT travel the whole way. Thus the Short trips in emphasis in my other posts even on trains that go halfway across the country.

http://www.narprail.org/cms/index.php

I love Amtrak :hi:

Every time I'm late picking someone up- their train's on time. It's uncanny! LOL.