6 ms·

Amtrak is only somewhat successful when it is essentially a regional carrier, like LIRR in New York or Metra in Chicago. When it is a long distance train, it is

Amtrak is only somewhat successful when it is essentially a regional carrier, like LIRR in New York or Metra in Chicago. When it is a long distance train, it is a miserable failure from the financial side and customer experience. The Northeast corridor acts like a regional route, focusing on commuters, and that's what saves it. People in America refuse to use Amtrak for travel.

bobthepanda 7y ago
Amtrak's long distance service is more akin to the Essential Air Service, in that it connects lots of small, otherwise unconnected rural areas and is not expected to make a profit. Amtrak has always been a company with two halves, and Congress really should just split it to stop this Jekyll and Hyde tug of war about what exactly the company is supposed to do.
- maxerickson 7y ago
  To use Amtrak I have to take a bus to Chicago. edit: My mistake, Milwaukee.
  - bobthepanda 7y ago
    It doesn‘t connect every rural area, the same way that EAS doesn‘t.
    - maxerickson 7y ago
      It connects cities and passes through rural areas. https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/public/documents/Maps/Amtrak-System-Map-1018.pdf https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/p... A nice statistic would be some kind of report about travel times, densities and total populations. Looking at the map, there's some people that live at lower density that have a nearby station and then most people that live in metros have a nearby station.
- nordsieck 7y ago
  > Amtrak's long distance service is more akin to the Essential Air Service, in that it connects lots of small, otherwise unconnected rural areas and is not expected to make a profit. If that's true, it seems like those communities would be better served by subsidized long distance bus travel instead. I understand that doesn't make a whit of difference to congress, though.
  - mindslight 7y ago
    It doesn't sound like you've taken either a train or a bus long distance. Even four hours on a bus can be downright nauseating. Amtrak coach class beats flying for comfort. Never mind the people who have some money, but are adverse to flying, so they book sleeper cabins.
  - bobthepanda 7y ago
    Many of these old railroad routes are not neatly followed with highways, so such a replacement service may take much, much longer.
  - maxerickson 7y ago
    Amtrak does contract with regional bus carriers: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-RCED-95-138/html/GAOREPORTS-RCED-95-138.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-RCED-95-138/h...
chatmasta 7y ago
People refuse to use Amtrak because they’ve been conditioned to learn that a ticket is often more expensive than a plane ticket to the same destination, even at the last minute. Personally for Boston to NYC, I prefer the bus. It’s $15, faster than the train, more reliable and plenty comfortable for a few hours. Boston to DC I’d probably fly.
- catalogia 7y ago
  The comfort discrepancy between buses and trains isn't even close for me. Buses make me nauseous; reading a book on grayhound/bolt/etc is impossible for me and sleeping is only possible with drugs (e.g. dramamine.) Long bus trips make me feel ill, bored and tired all at the same time. I find the experience thoroughly unpleasant. Trains by contrast are actually a pleasure to be on; I'd rather be on a train than my own couch at home. Compared to buses, Amtrak trains have less shaking, less unexpected accelerations, more space to walk around, better scenery, and fresher air. In my opinion the only form of transit better than train is a ferry.
  - saalweachter 7y ago
    As a long distance commuter, that was my experience as well. For my commute, there is a bus, an regional rail and Amtrak. (And driving.) The bus is potentially the fastest, about 2 hours door to door, but for about half the trip I'm unable to do anything but stare straight ahead and focus on keeping my stomach settled, and about 1 in 10 trips there is a traffic delay that makes it take 3+ hours. The regional train varies between 2.5 and 3 hours, depending on how many stops that particular train makes, but it leaves me on the wrong side of town and the last fast train is at 7am. Amtrak is best for me, more coincidentally, because it happens to stop near my workplace, and because it makes few stops it's as fast as the fastest regional trains, for an average door to door of 2.2 hours. Both the regional and Amtrak trains tend to have delays about 1 in 50 rides or so, usually about 30-60 minutes. (Driving is about 2.5 hours door to door, parking under my workplace, and costs as much as a bus or train just in tolls and parking.)
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  >for Boston to NYC, I prefer the bus. It’s $15. Can you not get a ticket for $5 anymore? In the post-FungWa vacuum it seemed like everybody and their brother was running a bus line that charged $5 for a 1-way to NYC.
madenine 7y ago
Living in DC as a consultant, reliable Amtrak service meant I could make a 9:30AM meeting just about anywhere between DC and NY. 2-4 trips per month. Those early morning / early evening trips are packed with other business people doing the same thing you're doing. Full train of people quietly working/reading, maybe talking to a colleague. Very civilized. The few times I had to travel mid-day on the same routes? Shit shows of confused tourists, kids who don't want to sit still for 3 hours (don't blame 'em), and all manner of "what can go wrong will" (delays, issues with the heat/ac, issues with passengers, etc). Its like there's two parallel dimensions of Amtrak out there. I'd choose Amtrak 100% of the time for business travel if its an option, 0% of the time for pleasure.
- rayiner 7y ago
  I take Amtrak all the time between New York and DC for business. Why should people in Iowa subsidize each of those trips to the tune of $73 each way?
  - catalogia 7y ago
    > Why should people in Iowa subsidize each of those trips to the tune of $73 each way? Same reason people in rural or suburban communities subsidize city buses?
    - rayiner 7y ago
      For the most part, needy people ride city buses, not businesspeople, lawyers, and politicians as in OP’s anecdote about the northeast regional.
      - catalogia 7y ago
        I think city buses would be worthwhile even if dislikable people like lawyers used them. Wouldn't you agree?
        rayiner 7y ago
at-fates-hands 7y ago
This is so true. I went to visit my friend in Virginia. I took the AmTrak from Minneapolis out to the East Coast. It was basically hell until we got into Philly. Then it was just commuter rides and few switch overs until I was in DC. Then my friend picked me up and promptly got lost and dropped us into one of the worst neighborhoods in DC, but that's a story for another day. Basically the long haul was horrendous. Bumpy and loud and people constantly bothering me for one thing or another. I didn't get a wink of sleep until we hit Philly. The commuter trains I took were like a library. Quiet, smooth and nobody bothered me at all. I figured if I lived on the East Coast, I would probably use the train to commute, but those long rides across the country were painful - I'll never do that again.
- Merrill 7y ago
  Having taken Amtrack from NY to DC and Boston several times, I made the mistake of doing a NY to Raleigh, NC and back. South of around Richmond the service really deteriorates on single track competing with freight trains. The roadbed is old and bumpy from heavy freight usage. Turned out that there was a bad storm as well and the train slowed because they were uncertain about bridges, etc. It was 30 mph for hours and hours. Who would have thought that heavy rain would be a problem for a train?
mindslight 7y ago
Having taken a few cross country trips and talked to fellow passengers, I don't think "refuse" is the right word - more like "reluctant". Many people take Amtrak long-distance out of necessity, especially in areas not served by airports.
codingdave 7y ago
> People in America refuse to use Amtrak for travel. People in America are diverse, with diverse preferences and needs. I love taking Amtrak, and happen to live on one of the cross-country routes. I prefer it to airline travel in all ways. Clearly, the routes are sparse, so it does not always work out for me. But as a remote software engineer, I can work from the train, I can relax and read a book, and watch the scenery go by. The extra time it takes is not a problem. It is a great change of pace to sitting in my home office. There certainly are people who disagree, but generalizing that the whole country refuses to use the service is simply incorrect.
- yostrovs 7y ago
  When the number is 99%,I just round it up.

bobthepanda 7y ago

Amtrak's long distance service is more akin to the Essential Air Service, in that it connects lots of small, otherwise unconnected rural areas and is not expected to make a profit. Amtrak has always been a company with two halves, and Congress really should just split it to stop this Jekyll and Hyde tug of war about what exactly the company is supposed to do.

maxerickson 7y ago
To use Amtrak I have to take a bus to Chicago. edit: My mistake, Milwaukee.
- bobthepanda 7y ago
  It doesn‘t connect every rural area, the same way that EAS doesn‘t.
  - maxerickson 7y ago
    It connects cities and passes through rural areas. https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/public/documents/Maps/Amtrak-System-Map-1018.pdf https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/p... A nice statistic would be some kind of report about travel times, densities and total populations. Looking at the map, there's some people that live at lower density that have a nearby station and then most people that live in metros have a nearby station.
nordsieck 7y ago
> Amtrak's long distance service is more akin to the Essential Air Service, in that it connects lots of small, otherwise unconnected rural areas and is not expected to make a profit. If that's true, it seems like those communities would be better served by subsidized long distance bus travel instead. I understand that doesn't make a whit of difference to congress, though.
- mindslight 7y ago
  It doesn't sound like you've taken either a train or a bus long distance. Even four hours on a bus can be downright nauseating. Amtrak coach class beats flying for comfort. Never mind the people who have some money, but are adverse to flying, so they book sleeper cabins.
- bobthepanda 7y ago
  Many of these old railroad routes are not neatly followed with highways, so such a replacement service may take much, much longer.
- maxerickson 7y ago
  Amtrak does contract with regional bus carriers: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-RCED-95-138/html/GAOREPORTS-RCED-95-138.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-RCED-95-138/h...

chatmasta 7y ago

People refuse to use Amtrak because they’ve been conditioned to learn that a ticket is often more expensive than a plane ticket to the same destination, even at the last minute. Personally for Boston to NYC, I prefer the bus. It’s $15, faster than the train, more reliable and plenty comfortable for a few hours. Boston to DC I’d probably fly.

catalogia 7y ago
The comfort discrepancy between buses and trains isn't even close for me. Buses make me nauseous; reading a book on grayhound/bolt/etc is impossible for me and sleeping is only possible with drugs (e.g. dramamine.) Long bus trips make me feel ill, bored and tired all at the same time. I find the experience thoroughly unpleasant. Trains by contrast are actually a pleasure to be on; I'd rather be on a train than my own couch at home. Compared to buses, Amtrak trains have less shaking, less unexpected accelerations, more space to walk around, better scenery, and fresher air. In my opinion the only form of transit better than train is a ferry.
- saalweachter 7y ago
  As a long distance commuter, that was my experience as well. For my commute, there is a bus, an regional rail and Amtrak. (And driving.) The bus is potentially the fastest, about 2 hours door to door, but for about half the trip I'm unable to do anything but stare straight ahead and focus on keeping my stomach settled, and about 1 in 10 trips there is a traffic delay that makes it take 3+ hours. The regional train varies between 2.5 and 3 hours, depending on how many stops that particular train makes, but it leaves me on the wrong side of town and the last fast train is at 7am. Amtrak is best for me, more coincidentally, because it happens to stop near my workplace, and because it makes few stops it's as fast as the fastest regional trains, for an average door to door of 2.2 hours. Both the regional and Amtrak trains tend to have delays about 1 in 50 rides or so, usually about 30-60 minutes. (Driving is about 2.5 hours door to door, parking under my workplace, and costs as much as a bus or train just in tolls and parking.)
dsfyu404ed 7y ago
>for Boston to NYC, I prefer the bus. It’s $15. Can you not get a ticket for $5 anymore? In the post-FungWa vacuum it seemed like everybody and their brother was running a bus line that charged $5 for a 1-way to NYC.

madenine 7y ago

Living in DC as a consultant, reliable Amtrak service meant I could make a 9:30AM meeting just about anywhere between DC and NY. 2-4 trips per month. Those early morning / early evening trips are packed with other business people doing the same thing you're doing. Full train of people quietly working/reading, maybe talking to a colleague. Very civilized. The few times I had to travel mid-day on the same routes? Shit shows of confused tourists, kids who don't want to sit still for 3 hours (don't blame 'em), and all manner of "what can go wrong will" (delays, issues with the heat/ac, issues with passengers, etc). Its like there's two parallel dimensions of Amtrak out there. I'd choose Amtrak 100% of the time for business travel if its an option, 0% of the time for pleasure.

rayiner 7y ago
I take Amtrak all the time between New York and DC for business. Why should people in Iowa subsidize each of those trips to the tune of $73 each way?
- catalogia 7y ago
  > Why should people in Iowa subsidize each of those trips to the tune of $73 each way? Same reason people in rural or suburban communities subsidize city buses?
  - rayiner 7y ago
    For the most part, needy people ride city buses, not businesspeople, lawyers, and politicians as in OP’s anecdote about the northeast regional.
    - catalogia 7y ago
      I think city buses would be worthwhile even if dislikable people like lawyers used them. Wouldn't you agree?
      - rayiner 7y ago

at-fates-hands 7y ago

This is so true. I went to visit my friend in Virginia. I took the AmTrak from Minneapolis out to the East Coast. It was basically hell until we got into Philly. Then it was just commuter rides and few switch overs until I was in DC. Then my friend picked me up and promptly got lost and dropped us into one of the worst neighborhoods in DC, but that's a story for another day. Basically the long haul was horrendous. Bumpy and loud and people constantly bothering me for one thing or another. I didn't get a wink of sleep until we hit Philly. The commuter trains I took were like a library. Quiet, smooth and nobody bothered me at all. I figured if I lived on the East Coast, I would probably use the train to commute, but those long rides across the country were painful - I'll never do that again.

Merrill 7y ago
Having taken Amtrack from NY to DC and Boston several times, I made the mistake of doing a NY to Raleigh, NC and back. South of around Richmond the service really deteriorates on single track competing with freight trains. The roadbed is old and bumpy from heavy freight usage. Turned out that there was a bad storm as well and the train slowed because they were uncertain about bridges, etc. It was 30 mph for hours and hours. Who would have thought that heavy rain would be a problem for a train?

mindslight 7y ago

Having taken a few cross country trips and talked to fellow passengers, I don't think "refuse" is the right word - more like "reluctant". Many people take Amtrak long-distance out of necessity, especially in areas not served by airports.

codingdave 7y ago

> People in America refuse to use Amtrak for travel. People in America are diverse, with diverse preferences and needs. I love taking Amtrak, and happen to live on one of the cross-country routes. I prefer it to airline travel in all ways. Clearly, the routes are sparse, so it does not always work out for me. But as a remote software engineer, I can work from the train, I can relax and read a book, and watch the scenery go by. The extra time it takes is not a problem. It is a great change of pace to sitting in my home office. There certainly are people who disagree, but generalizing that the whole country refuses to use the service is simply incorrect.

yostrovs 7y ago
When the number is 99%,I just round it up.