5 ms·

Amtrak offers this with "roomettes" all the way up to 4-person rooms, though whether it's an overnight or a day trip depends on your origin and destination (for

by FTA 9y ago

Amtrak offers this with "roomettes" all the way up to 4-person rooms, though whether it's an overnight or a day trip depends on your origin and destination (for example, Chicago to Dallas is an overnight). You mention that Germany had eliminated all but the profitable ones--well, the U.S. government loses money on these routes to keep them running even in spite of the high prices. I'd usually pay $800 roundtrip for CHI->DAL; meals _are_ included and you get I believe up to two carry-ons and two checked bags for free. I will say it is definitely a lower stress option. You can show up 30 minutes before your train is leaving and there's no security lines. Depending on the station, it could be just an empty train station in a rural town or a large station interconnected with other transport services (e.g. Boston, Chicago). The population you are traveling with is much different compared not only to airlines but also coach on the train. Generally your sleeper carmates are retired folks who don't want to deal with the hassle of TSA, running between connections, arriving three hours early, and so on. I've met some extremely nice people with amazing stories (you are seated with strangers at meals, so this is almost forced on you). If you are not in a hurry and have a few extra bucks, it's worth it at least once to experience the journey, especially across the Upper Midwest or coasts.

mschuster91 9y ago
> I'd usually pay $800 roundtrip for CHI->DAL; By car (and Google Maps measuring) that's about 3.000km total. Hamburg-Munich is about 1.500km total, so half the distance. But ÖBB Nightjet tickets start for ~160€ to 250€ roundtrip, about half the price and Amtrak is losing money? How is that even possible?
- SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago
  Probably because the trains never fill up.
- chrischen 9y ago
  They're losing money because that's a ridiculously expensive price and people looking to just get from point A to B would not pay that.
  - ghaff 9y ago
    So they should cut their prices and lose even more money? The basic problem is that outside of the Northeast Corridor--which is very popular, profitable, and getting new infrastructure investment--there are very few city pairs in the US that have the right combination of density and distance. Effectively the Northeast Corridor makes all the money that Amtrak then loses in the rest of the country. This is a few years old but summarizes Amtrak profit (or lack thereof) by route: http://reasonrail.blogspot.com/2014/11/amtrak-routes-by-2014-cost-recovery.html http://reasonrail.blogspot.com/2014/11/amtrak-routes-by-2014...
    - chrischen 9y ago
      Sometimes something is just obsolete. Their uncompetitive price reflects that.
      - ghaff 9y ago
        Yes. But, it's not politically tenable to simply shut down rail service in the US outside of the Northeast Corridor. (Nor is it obvious that would be a good decision at a national level for many reasons.)
- nine_k 9y ago
  You don't have to maintain the air you fly through, but you must maintain the track you travel by. Unless there is a lot of freight traffic, the maintenance will be more expensive than your income from tickets. Europe is just much denser than US Midwest, so both passenger and freight traffic is more intense for a unit of track length, thus more economical.
  - jetti 9y ago
    Just FYI ÖBB Nightjet is a train and not a plane. I looked it up to see comparisons but I had the same assumption as you based on the name. Also, Amtrak doesn't maintain the track that is up to the track owner to do the maintenance. Amtrak does pay money to each track owner to use their tracks but it isn't an access fee and it is incremental.
- FTA 9y ago
  Here's their budget plan from a few years ago: https://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/458/748/FY14-Budget-Business-Plan-FY15-Budget-Justification-FY14-18-Five-Year-Financial-Plan.pdf#page=70 https://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/458/748/FY14-Budget-Business-Pl...
- yourapostasy 9y ago
  > ...about half the price and Amtrak is losing money? > > How is that even possible? Amtrak runs routes across a very large area, they run more infrequently than European schedules, and their capital equipment is aging. Combine these with the factors the Economist article brought up that user totalZero wrote about, and you end up with a very messy, expensive, customer-inconvenient situation. The American freight rail system is the envy of the world, but it comes at the cost of the passenger rail system, which doesn't access to nearly the same scale of subsidies that road and air transport networks enjoy in the US. If you are traveling by yourself, can book well in advance, don't require access to a shower facility, have lots of flexibility with your timetable, and have your own means of an Internet connection, then Amtrak is a great, low-stress, inexpensive, energy-efficient travel option for this inter-city range to longer ranges. Among some use cases where Amtrak doesn't fit as well are: * If you worry about securing valuables while sleeping (cable lock alarms work as long as you fit the valuables into overhead space, of which there is always plenty, but if you have more than that to worry about, then ship ahead if you can). * If you have a restrictive diet that Amtrak doesn't cater to (bring your own works well, freeze ahead of time and that will get you through a continuous 3-day itinerary). * Traveling with children (the rooms with beds are more expensive than equivalent airfare for everyone in many cases). * Must have continuous cell-based Internet access (big swathes of land in Western US have simply zero cell signal coverage, and a speeding steel tube isn't the best platform to pick up signals even in the best cell coverage areas, an observation car if you have one is the best, I'm trying a satellite phone next time I ride Amtrak into the Western US).
- jetti 9y ago
  There is more to it than just a single rail line. Who owns the rail that ÖBB Nightjet uses? Amtrak has to make payments to the owners of the rail that they ride on. They are incremental payments and not access fees but that is still a cost. Second, Amtrak has many more employees (including their own police force), which will add cost. Third, Amtrak also owns at least 2 train stations (Union Station in Chicago and Penn Station in NYC) which will add to their liabilities. Finally, the routes in the US are much longer (typically) than what would be in Europe. That means less riders in a given timeframe which would mean an increase in ticket prices.
  - the_mitsuhiko 9y ago
    OeBB needs to pay to the individual companies that own the track. In Austria that is OeBB Infra which is an independent company. In Germany to dB Netz etc.
    - mschuster91 9y ago
      Yep, and neither ÖBB Infra nor DB Netz are known for cheap rates... actually, at least for DB Netz, you can do the calculations on your own computer using the ratio calculator (http://fahrweg.dbnetze.com/fahrweg-de/kunden/leistungen/trassen/uebersich_tps2018/14035134/trassenpreisauskunft.html http://fahrweg.dbnetze.com/fahrweg-de/kunden/leistungen/tras...). Hamburg-Munich alone the track fees end up with 5k €, plus electricity usage, usage of shunting vehicles, usage of train stations, trash/sewage disposal... it adds up.
jetti 9y ago
The problem with Amtrak is that it takes so long. My wife and her family went to Orlando from Chicago last December and flying was way too expensive for all 4 of them. They ended up driving, after not wanting to, but I looked into Amtrak for them. It would've taken 36 hours to get from Chicago to Orlando with 2 major stretches. The second stretch was 19 hours and had NO food car. I assume you can buy stuff at the station to bring on the train with you but going for 19 hours with absolutely no real food is just crazy. On top of that, it cost much more than airfare for the whole family. I actually looked at Amtrak from San Fransisco to LA to see how it compares to Cabin. I'm not sure which pickup location is most common in SF or LA but I assumed the major (or what seemed to be) rail station for the start. You can get a bus for about $115 (max) that is just under a 6 hour ride. Or you can take a bus up to Oakland and then take the train down to LA. That cost ~$240 but includes a room on the train. The downside to that is it is a 12 hour train ride, so close to 13 hours to get from SF to LA. If the US would invest in high speed rail I, personally, would be much more inclined to take passenger rail (especially when I have kids) but until then I'm stuck with shitty TSA lines and the stress of flying.
- ghaff 9y ago
  In San Francisco, there is no Amtrak station in the city proper. It's on the other side of the bay. I believe there's a connecting Amtrak-operated bus from the Ferry Building to Emeryville.
  - closeparen 9y ago
    Sure, but this <1 hour bus ride is well within the margin of error on your 30+ hour train ride. It shouldn't make a meaningful difference.

by FTA 9y ago

mschuster91 9y ago

> I'd usually pay $800 roundtrip for CHI->DAL; By car (and Google Maps measuring) that's about 3.000km total. Hamburg-Munich is about 1.500km total, so half the distance. But ÖBB Nightjet tickets start for ~160€ to 250€ roundtrip, about half the price and Amtrak is losing money? How is that even possible?

SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago
Probably because the trains never fill up.
chrischen 9y ago
They're losing money because that's a ridiculously expensive price and people looking to just get from point A to B would not pay that.
- ghaff 9y ago
  So they should cut their prices and lose even more money? The basic problem is that outside of the Northeast Corridor--which is very popular, profitable, and getting new infrastructure investment--there are very few city pairs in the US that have the right combination of density and distance. Effectively the Northeast Corridor makes all the money that Amtrak then loses in the rest of the country. This is a few years old but summarizes Amtrak profit (or lack thereof) by route: http://reasonrail.blogspot.com/2014/11/amtrak-routes-by-2014-cost-recovery.html http://reasonrail.blogspot.com/2014/11/amtrak-routes-by-2014...
  - chrischen 9y ago
    Sometimes something is just obsolete. Their uncompetitive price reflects that.
    - ghaff 9y ago
      Yes. But, it's not politically tenable to simply shut down rail service in the US outside of the Northeast Corridor. (Nor is it obvious that would be a good decision at a national level for many reasons.)
nine_k 9y ago
You don't have to maintain the air you fly through, but you must maintain the track you travel by. Unless there is a lot of freight traffic, the maintenance will be more expensive than your income from tickets. Europe is just much denser than US Midwest, so both passenger and freight traffic is more intense for a unit of track length, thus more economical.
- jetti 9y ago
  Just FYI ÖBB Nightjet is a train and not a plane. I looked it up to see comparisons but I had the same assumption as you based on the name. Also, Amtrak doesn't maintain the track that is up to the track owner to do the maintenance. Amtrak does pay money to each track owner to use their tracks but it isn't an access fee and it is incremental.
FTA 9y ago
Here's their budget plan from a few years ago: https://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/458/748/FY14-Budget-Business-Plan-FY15-Budget-Justification-FY14-18-Five-Year-Financial-Plan.pdf#page=70 https://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/458/748/FY14-Budget-Business-Pl...
yourapostasy 9y ago
> ...about half the price and Amtrak is losing money? > > How is that even possible? Amtrak runs routes across a very large area, they run more infrequently than European schedules, and their capital equipment is aging. Combine these with the factors the Economist article brought up that user totalZero wrote about, and you end up with a very messy, expensive, customer-inconvenient situation. The American freight rail system is the envy of the world, but it comes at the cost of the passenger rail system, which doesn't access to nearly the same scale of subsidies that road and air transport networks enjoy in the US. If you are traveling by yourself, can book well in advance, don't require access to a shower facility, have lots of flexibility with your timetable, and have your own means of an Internet connection, then Amtrak is a great, low-stress, inexpensive, energy-efficient travel option for this inter-city range to longer ranges. Among some use cases where Amtrak doesn't fit as well are: * If you worry about securing valuables while sleeping (cable lock alarms work as long as you fit the valuables into overhead space, of which there is always plenty, but if you have more than that to worry about, then ship ahead if you can). * If you have a restrictive diet that Amtrak doesn't cater to (bring your own works well, freeze ahead of time and that will get you through a continuous 3-day itinerary). * Traveling with children (the rooms with beds are more expensive than equivalent airfare for everyone in many cases). * Must have continuous cell-based Internet access (big swathes of land in Western US have simply zero cell signal coverage, and a speeding steel tube isn't the best platform to pick up signals even in the best cell coverage areas, an observation car if you have one is the best, I'm trying a satellite phone next time I ride Amtrak into the Western US).
jetti 9y ago
There is more to it than just a single rail line. Who owns the rail that ÖBB Nightjet uses? Amtrak has to make payments to the owners of the rail that they ride on. They are incremental payments and not access fees but that is still a cost. Second, Amtrak has many more employees (including their own police force), which will add cost. Third, Amtrak also owns at least 2 train stations (Union Station in Chicago and Penn Station in NYC) which will add to their liabilities. Finally, the routes in the US are much longer (typically) than what would be in Europe. That means less riders in a given timeframe which would mean an increase in ticket prices.
- the_mitsuhiko 9y ago
  OeBB needs to pay to the individual companies that own the track. In Austria that is OeBB Infra which is an independent company. In Germany to dB Netz etc.
  - mschuster91 9y ago
    Yep, and neither ÖBB Infra nor DB Netz are known for cheap rates... actually, at least for DB Netz, you can do the calculations on your own computer using the ratio calculator (http://fahrweg.dbnetze.com/fahrweg-de/kunden/leistungen/trassen/uebersich_tps2018/14035134/trassenpreisauskunft.html http://fahrweg.dbnetze.com/fahrweg-de/kunden/leistungen/tras...). Hamburg-Munich alone the track fees end up with 5k €, plus electricity usage, usage of shunting vehicles, usage of train stations, trash/sewage disposal... it adds up.

jetti 9y ago

The problem with Amtrak is that it takes so long. My wife and her family went to Orlando from Chicago last December and flying was way too expensive for all 4 of them. They ended up driving, after not wanting to, but I looked into Amtrak for them. It would've taken 36 hours to get from Chicago to Orlando with 2 major stretches. The second stretch was 19 hours and had NO food car. I assume you can buy stuff at the station to bring on the train with you but going for 19 hours with absolutely no real food is just crazy. On top of that, it cost much more than airfare for the whole family. I actually looked at Amtrak from San Fransisco to LA to see how it compares to Cabin. I'm not sure which pickup location is most common in SF or LA but I assumed the major (or what seemed to be) rail station for the start. You can get a bus for about $115 (max) that is just under a 6 hour ride. Or you can take a bus up to Oakland and then take the train down to LA. That cost ~$240 but includes a room on the train. The downside to that is it is a 12 hour train ride, so close to 13 hours to get from SF to LA. If the US would invest in high speed rail I, personally, would be much more inclined to take passenger rail (especially when I have kids) but until then I'm stuck with shitty TSA lines and the stress of flying.

ghaff 9y ago
In San Francisco, there is no Amtrak station in the city proper. It's on the other side of the bay. I believe there's a connecting Amtrak-operated bus from the Ferry Building to Emeryville.
- closeparen 9y ago
  Sure, but this <1 hour bus ride is well within the margin of error on your 30+ hour train ride. It shouldn't make a meaningful difference.