17 ms·
I took the Empire Builder a couple weeks ago, and the Lakeshore Limited + California Zephyr last year. As much as I enjoyed the trips, I have to admit that they
by scyclow 8y ago
I took the Empire Builder a couple weeks ago, and the Lakeshore Limited + California Zephyr last year. As much as I enjoyed the trips, I have to admit that they longer lines are incredibly impractical. Amtrak is operating at a huge loss per passenger ($32 on average)[1], and the prices aren't even that much cheaper than flying. It's viable for people with more time than money, but most of the passengers are just weirdos who enjoy wasting their time taking the train cross-country in 2018 (like me).
In any case, I'm sorry to see them thinking about nixing the dining car, since it was one of my favorite parts. The food is surprisingly good (if not over priced), and it's a great way to meet random people from around the country. Coming from the liberal New York tech-bubble, I definitely met a bunch of people I wouldn't have otherwise had a chance to talk to.
But at least they're not getting rid of the observation car! Sitting in it through the Rockies on the Zephyr was a great way to see that beautiful stretch.
[1] https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/transportation/privatizing-amtrak https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/transportation/privatiz...
- shriphani 8y agoI took the california zephyr after 2 harsh years (professionally); from Chicago to SF. So many inner demons were vanquished on that trip. That train route is truly a love-letter to America - the Colorado river, the Sierra Nevada, beautiful life-changing stuff.
- imh 8y agoThat sounds beautifully scenic. What time of year would you recommend for it?
- f_allwein 8y agoEverything you could possibly want to know about cross country trains: https://www.seat61.com/UnitedStates.htm https://www.seat61.com/UnitedStates.htm
- hn_user2 8y agoSeat61 has been an amazing resource for traveling the world by train. Until you just mentioned it in this context, I had never thought to use it for beta about train travel in the USA. Looks like I know what I'm reading the rest of the day.
- Balgair 8y ago> That train route is truly a love-letter to America Jesus, now that is a great line! You should write more poetry, or just more in general.
- tspike 8y agoI don't disagree with your comment, but the thing that often gets lost in these discussions is that at least for the Empire Builder, people generally aren't using it to go from Chicago to Portland or Seattle. Sure, a flight from Chicago to Seattle would be much faster and cheaper. But what about getting from Minot to Whitefish? Or Spokane to Wenatchee? I personally use it 2-3 times a week to go between Bingen and Portland. Most of the people I ride with eastbound are going to Pasco or Sandpoint or Spokane, not Chicago.
- scyclow 8y agoThat's a fair point. As uneconomical as it is for Amtrak, there really isn't much in the way of long-distance transportation options for people in some of these small towns.
- rdl 8y agoBus? (Sometimes operated by Amtrak, even)
- scyclow 8y agoTechnically yes, but if I had to take a bus for 20+ hours I'd want to shoot myself.
- seanmcdirmid 8y agoI did it for 4 days (cross country for $49!) as a 16 year old. It is definitely an adventure.
- cc439 8y agoMost of those trips appear to be under 3.5 hours each way... Why not drive since it's likely faster and cheaper than the train?
- xvedejas 8y agoThat's just about the distance that I prefer to take Amtrak over driving or flying (mostly I travel SF <-> Fresno). I can get work done, unlike when driving, and I don't have to deal with all the pains of getting to the airport early and going through security.
- op00to 8y agoHow much does the US subsidize air travel via FAA, airport subsidies, etc? What about road subsidies? It’s like somehow rail has to be profitable on its own, but not bus or air.
- scyclow 8y agoI don't know the numbers, but I'd be shocked if air and bus lost as much money per trip as trains. Part of what makes the train appealing for the longer rides is that if you're taking coach half of the car is empty and you know you won't have to sit next to anyone.
- throwawayjava 8y agoHow do you define "loss" in this context?
- scyclow 8y agoNet loss. So, if a ticket costs $10, and it costs the bus an average $12 per passenger, they'd have a $2 loss per passenger.
- throwawayjava 8y agoBut in terms of comparisons. That metric is really difficult to define for a roadway or an entire network of airports and the transit systems that connect them to cities.
- justin66 8y ago> I don't know the numbers, but I'd be shocked if air and bus lost as much money per trip as trains. Just a thought, but if you're interested in numbers, it's an eye-opener to look at how much money airlines have lost for shareholders, bondholders, and the government via bankruptcies. If passenger rail was ever capable of tearing chunks out of the economy the way the airlines are, it must have been a century ago. From 2011: "The industry in aggregate has lost about $60 billion over the 32 years since deregulation" https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/12/16/143765367/why-airlines-keep-going-bankrupt https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/12/16/143765367/why-... I'm pretty sure airlines are one of those unusual industries in the US (like banking) that have throughout their existence lost more money than they've ever actually generated in profit and have been kept whole by the government. Sorry I don't have any hard figures on that.
- danielecook 8y agoMy parents took us as kids on several long train trips. The trips are among my most cherished memories from childhood. We usually would train out and fly back. A few of the lines wind their way through the Rockies - the scenery is really beautiful.
- starpilot 8y ago> I definitely met a bunch of people I wouldn't have otherwise had a chance to talk to. To elaborate on this, Amtrak staff will seat you with strangers to fill up tables. Kind of excruciating for an introvert, but looking back I had some good conversations.
- scyclow 8y agoOn the first night of my last trip I was really bummed out that they didn't sit me next to the group of Amish folks. Instead I had to eat dinner with a family from New Jersey :P
- jlarocco 8y agoDo you know why they don't raise the price to cover the loss? $32 doesn't seem like a big deal for long distance transportation.
- IncRnd 8y agoThey regularly raise the rates, and they keep losing money.
- lobster_johnson 8y agoI was considering taking a trip from NYC, since I like railway journeys. The NYC-Montreal (10.5 hours) and NYC-Toronto (12.5 hours) trips would be perfect... but they only have the café cars, which means microwaved, pre-made airline food. Apparently Amtrak considers these to be "short-distance" journeys, which don't have dining cars. I don't know if these ever had dining cars, but the idea of spending an entire day with just frozen pizza on the menu is just out of the question. And then there are the couch seats. Who wants to be in a couch seat overnight for 12+ hours? Sleeper cars were $1,500 (!) for the dates I checked. Coming from Europe, where trains are modern and super cheap, this was extremely depressing to me. I just checked the Empire Builder for a random date in May, and they charge $2,000 for a sleeper car. It's a 45-hour journey!
- ikawe 8y agoI recommend packing most of your food. Sandwiches, granola, nuts, fruit, raw veggies. Not exciting food, but better than microwave hotdogs, and even with a spartan meal plan the trip is totally worth it. Also some routes have a stop over which gives you an hour or so to scramble for a hot meal. Another pro tip for the thrifty, bring a blanket and sleep on the floor in the observation car. Ear plugs help in case other people are hanging out, but usually it’s pretty quiet for at least 6 hours. You can wake up and watch the sun rise. You can always grab a nap in your seat later, but I have trouble sleeping more than an hour in a chair, whereas even on a hard floor I can zonk out for hours.
- db48x 8y agoFrom the price you were probably looking at the larger bedroom, rather than the roomette, which is generally half the price.
- lobster_johnson 8y agoNo, roomette. Chicago-Portland direct round trip, in mid-May, is $1,900 for the two-person "Superliner Roomette". I checked a bunch of possible journeys, and the cheapest round-trip roomette ticket was $1,000.
- Bucephalus355 8y agoHuge loss? They cover 94% of their operating costs. The federal government only provides the remaining 6%. What if a specific National Park, arguably of equal value to the Amtrak lines, generated 94% of its own money?
- scyclow 8y agoHmm, looks like the data I cited was a bit dated. Amtrak mentions 94% for their 2016 fiscal year [1], which isn't bad. [1] https://media.amtrak.com/2016/11/amtrak-delivers-strong-fy-2016-financial-results/ https://media.amtrak.com/2016/11/amtrak-delivers-strong-fy-2...
- rayiner 8y agoThe long distance lines are heavily subsidized by the northeast regional, at great cost to those passengers. Congress also covers all capital costs.
- fulafel 8y agoIt's also viable for people who feel air travel is immoral due to its heavy climate change accelerating effect.
- Fnoord 8y ago> but most of the passengers are just weirdos who enjoy wasting their time taking the train cross-country in 2018 (like me). If you waste time while you're travelling with public transport you're doing it wrong. For example, something like an e-reader is pretty thin and weights a few hundred grams and can hold thousands of books. Noisy? I bought half decent earplugs the other day for just 12 EUR. All you gotta do is take them with you. But you'd do that in an airplane as well. Add to that, airplanes are terrible for the environment; trains are less bad.