5 ms·

Took Amtrak from LA to San Jose last week, which was a good experience. The train runs along the coast for a good stretch, from Ventura through Vandenberg and t

Took Amtrak from LA to San Jose last week, which was a good experience. The train runs along the coast for a good stretch, from Ventura through Vandenberg and then through the hills. It's certainly not the fastest way to go (~10 hours) but you can leave in the morning, have a couple of sit down meals on the way, watch the world go by, work if necessary, and be in San Jose in the evening. Probably not something to do regularly, but a great occasional change from flying. Since Amtrak is often delayed due to freight having priority, traveling the other way is more risky from a scheduling point of view, since the train starts in Seattle and could already be heavily delayed by the time it gets to San Jose. https://www.amtrakvacations.com/travel-styles/famous-routes/coast-starlight https://www.amtrakvacations.com/travel-styles/famous-routes/...

pkulak 1y ago
> due to freight having priority Fun fact: by law, Amtrak has priority. Not that it matters much, even back when laws themselves mattered.
- JadeNB 1y ago
  > Fun fact: by law, Amtrak has priority. Not that it matters much, even back when laws themselves mattered. Are you sure about that? I've never looked up the law, but my understanding is that, for most (all?) of its routes, Amtrak is running on privately owned track, and, on such track, freight has priority. (I'm surprised at the number of downvotes. The replies indicated that I'm wrong, which is awesome in the sense that I like riding Amtrak and want it to have priority, and so I understand the frustration; but I think that I cannot be the only one who has heard from every Amtrak rider they've talked to that freight has priority, and surely it's a good thing to seek an authoritative answer? Maybe it looked like I was rhetorically saying that someone was wrong rather than honestly seeking clarification.)
  - MBCook 1y ago
    Yep. Federal law requires passenger trains to get priority. But for some reason the government basically stopped enforcing it like 40 years ago. So in practice it tends to work the other way.
    - strken 1y ago
      I've been told that there's a legal loophole where freight trains are built to be too large to fit into overtaking loops, and so don't need to use them.
  - cogman10 1y ago
    Yes [1]. [1] https://www.planetizen.com/news/2025/09/135986-amtrak-trains-get-priority-over-freight-legal-settlement https://www.planetizen.com/news/2025/09/135986-amtrak-trains...
  - crockeo 1y ago
    My understanding is that as part of the Amtrak Improvement Act[1] Amtrak is given preference over freight rail, even on private track. However only the Department of Justice may enforce this, which it has done only once. Fair warning I haven't read the text of the law in full, only heard this second hand. https://www.congress.gov/bill/93rd-congress/house-bill/15427 https://www.congress.gov/bill/93rd-congress/house-bill/15427
  - blendergeek 1y ago
    Due to the history of Amtrak this is actually true. The railroads in America (while privately owned and operated) were built with much government subsidy. The railroad companies originally provided passenger service. Eventually, to ensure this service continued a law was passed that prohibited railroads from dropping passe nger service. After the rise of personal cars coinciding with the massive federal investment in car infrastructure in the 1950s with the interstate hughway system, passenger rail travel was in free fall in the late 60s and the railroad companies begged to be allowed to end passenger service. Congress stepped in and nationalized the passenger service exempting the railroad companies from their mandate to provide passenger service while requiring them to give passenger trains priority in scheduling. So, TL;DR passenger trains have legally mandated priority over the freight trains of the host railroad.
- returningfory2 1y ago
  To the downvoters: this comment is correct. E.g. [1] for an example of this being enforced. Apparently the problem is the law is not enforced that much? And that there are loopholes around it. [1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/norfolk-southern-agrees-give-amtrak-trains-highest-priority-over-freight-trains-and-make-its https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/norfolk-southern-agrees-give-...
- andrewguenther 1y ago
  It's not an enforcement issue so much as it is a heavily exploited loophole. Part of the reason freight trains are so long is so that they can't fit in passing sidings. Since Amtrak does fit, they end up having to yield because the freight trains simply cannot. Could this be fixed by legislation on max train length to ensure all trains fit in sidings? Yes. Will that legislation get passed? No. An interesting video on the subject: https://youtu.be/qQTjLWIHN74?si=t3u3iyZj1kRQQUCe https://youtu.be/qQTjLWIHN74?si=t3u3iyZj1kRQQUCe
  - oofbey 1y ago
    Classic America. Laws favor industry and commerce over individuals. Because lower prices benefits everybody. Uh huh.
  - bluGill 1y ago
    Amtrak says this but the freight disagree. At this point I assume both sides are lieing.
    - crooked-v 1y ago
      Amtrak isn't lying. You can see that the freight trains are too long by literally just watching one.
    - manquer 1y ago
      Having a enforced max length on any route especially those with commuter service is not a bad idea, it is the tendency of freight to scale up the number of cars as much as possible for efficiency, passenger services work better shorter with more frequent services. Yes there are myriad other reasons Amtrak gets delayed, it is not like this is the only bottleneck they have, but that doesn't mean this is not also a key problem.
      - tacticus 1y ago
        long trains are great for reducing cost and reducing total profit by delivering slower less frequent services :\
- mschuster91 1y ago
  The problem is, overtaking is one thing when you got two parallel rails and ample point switches. But when you don't have them or only every 100km or whatnot, or any of the potential places (such as in a train station) just isn't long enough to accept and buffer a 3 miles long train... then good luck, there just is no physical opportunity for the faster passenger train to speed ahead, not to mention the absurd amount of energy wasted in braking and then re-accelerating that 3 mile freight monster. Fixing this would be possible - either by limiting the maximum length of a train or by forcing the extension of parallel rail segments. The former makes logistics significantly more challenging plus it requires more staff (which is the real problem, long haul isn't wanted much these days, neither rail nor road), the latter is darn expensive and someone has to foot the bill - Congress certainly won't.
  - rlpb 1y ago
    > ...not to mention the absurd amount of energy wasted in braking and then re-accelerating that 3 mile freight monster. > Fixing this would be possible - either by limiting the maximum length of a train... It can't be both. Splitting a freight train and then stopping and starting the smaller trains would take the same amount of energy as stopping and starting the single long freight train. Unless they're deliberately moving empty freight cars to make it artificially long.
    - cjbgkagh 1y ago
      The smaller trains wouldn’t have to stop as frequently. The total number of stops increases but the average rail cart sees fewer stops.
- bombcar 1y ago
  Amtrak trains have priority until they fall out of their slot.
- nunez 1y ago
  I thought they didn't due to the rails they use being privately owned...
jeltz 1y ago
Working on trains is also often nice so you do not really lose much time. You can just do a normal workday at the train including lunch and then quit working for the day when you arrive.
catlover76 1y ago
Seems good. If you're driving, you kind of have to bracket ~10 hours for that trip anyways.
hamdingers 1y ago
I do that route all the time, "work from train" days before in-office events in SF are one of my greatest pleasures. If I had one wish it would be a second daily Coast Starlight offset 12 hours from the current one. LA Union to SJ Diridon is roughly 9am to 8pm in both directions, so my second train would be the perfect night train from LA to SF.
cmckn 1y ago
I took the Amtrak Cascades from Seattle to Portland recently and was pretty impressed. It’d be a bit silly to fly, but it’s long enough that if I drove myself I’d be kinda tired when I arrived. On the train I got to nap and eat something. The boarding experience is great and the staff were pros. It’s not cheap though; I think it was about $90 each way for business class, and about $70 for coach. I plan on taking it to Vancouver BC next. :)
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
wslh 1y ago
by comparison: ~3 hours is the Barcelona-Madrid trip via AVE with a slightly bigger distance.

pkulak 1y ago

> due to freight having priority Fun fact: by law, Amtrak has priority. Not that it matters much, even back when laws themselves mattered.

JadeNB 1y ago
> Fun fact: by law, Amtrak has priority. Not that it matters much, even back when laws themselves mattered. Are you sure about that? I've never looked up the law, but my understanding is that, for most (all?) of its routes, Amtrak is running on privately owned track, and, on such track, freight has priority. (I'm surprised at the number of downvotes. The replies indicated that I'm wrong, which is awesome in the sense that I like riding Amtrak and want it to have priority, and so I understand the frustration; but I think that I cannot be the only one who has heard from every Amtrak rider they've talked to that freight has priority, and surely it's a good thing to seek an authoritative answer? Maybe it looked like I was rhetorically saying that someone was wrong rather than honestly seeking clarification.)
- MBCook 1y ago
  Yep. Federal law requires passenger trains to get priority. But for some reason the government basically stopped enforcing it like 40 years ago. So in practice it tends to work the other way.
  - strken 1y ago
    I've been told that there's a legal loophole where freight trains are built to be too large to fit into overtaking loops, and so don't need to use them.
- cogman10 1y ago
  Yes [1]. [1] https://www.planetizen.com/news/2025/09/135986-amtrak-trains-get-priority-over-freight-legal-settlement https://www.planetizen.com/news/2025/09/135986-amtrak-trains...
- crockeo 1y ago
  My understanding is that as part of the Amtrak Improvement Act[1] Amtrak is given preference over freight rail, even on private track. However only the Department of Justice may enforce this, which it has done only once. Fair warning I haven't read the text of the law in full, only heard this second hand. https://www.congress.gov/bill/93rd-congress/house-bill/15427 https://www.congress.gov/bill/93rd-congress/house-bill/15427
- blendergeek 1y ago
  Due to the history of Amtrak this is actually true. The railroads in America (while privately owned and operated) were built with much government subsidy. The railroad companies originally provided passenger service. Eventually, to ensure this service continued a law was passed that prohibited railroads from dropping passe nger service. After the rise of personal cars coinciding with the massive federal investment in car infrastructure in the 1950s with the interstate hughway system, passenger rail travel was in free fall in the late 60s and the railroad companies begged to be allowed to end passenger service. Congress stepped in and nationalized the passenger service exempting the railroad companies from their mandate to provide passenger service while requiring them to give passenger trains priority in scheduling. So, TL;DR passenger trains have legally mandated priority over the freight trains of the host railroad.
returningfory2 1y ago
To the downvoters: this comment is correct. E.g. [1] for an example of this being enforced. Apparently the problem is the law is not enforced that much? And that there are loopholes around it. [1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/norfolk-southern-agrees-give-amtrak-trains-highest-priority-over-freight-trains-and-make-its https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/norfolk-southern-agrees-give-...
andrewguenther 1y ago
It's not an enforcement issue so much as it is a heavily exploited loophole. Part of the reason freight trains are so long is so that they can't fit in passing sidings. Since Amtrak does fit, they end up having to yield because the freight trains simply cannot. Could this be fixed by legislation on max train length to ensure all trains fit in sidings? Yes. Will that legislation get passed? No. An interesting video on the subject: https://youtu.be/qQTjLWIHN74?si=t3u3iyZj1kRQQUCe https://youtu.be/qQTjLWIHN74?si=t3u3iyZj1kRQQUCe
- oofbey 1y ago
  Classic America. Laws favor industry and commerce over individuals. Because lower prices benefits everybody. Uh huh.
- bluGill 1y ago
  Amtrak says this but the freight disagree. At this point I assume both sides are lieing.
  - crooked-v 1y ago
    Amtrak isn't lying. You can see that the freight trains are too long by literally just watching one.
  - manquer 1y ago
    Having a enforced max length on any route especially those with commuter service is not a bad idea, it is the tendency of freight to scale up the number of cars as much as possible for efficiency, passenger services work better shorter with more frequent services. Yes there are myriad other reasons Amtrak gets delayed, it is not like this is the only bottleneck they have, but that doesn't mean this is not also a key problem.
    - tacticus 1y ago
      long trains are great for reducing cost and reducing total profit by delivering slower less frequent services :\
mschuster91 1y ago
The problem is, overtaking is one thing when you got two parallel rails and ample point switches. But when you don't have them or only every 100km or whatnot, or any of the potential places (such as in a train station) just isn't long enough to accept and buffer a 3 miles long train... then good luck, there just is no physical opportunity for the faster passenger train to speed ahead, not to mention the absurd amount of energy wasted in braking and then re-accelerating that 3 mile freight monster. Fixing this would be possible - either by limiting the maximum length of a train or by forcing the extension of parallel rail segments. The former makes logistics significantly more challenging plus it requires more staff (which is the real problem, long haul isn't wanted much these days, neither rail nor road), the latter is darn expensive and someone has to foot the bill - Congress certainly won't.
- rlpb 1y ago
  > ...not to mention the absurd amount of energy wasted in braking and then re-accelerating that 3 mile freight monster. > Fixing this would be possible - either by limiting the maximum length of a train... It can't be both. Splitting a freight train and then stopping and starting the smaller trains would take the same amount of energy as stopping and starting the single long freight train. Unless they're deliberately moving empty freight cars to make it artificially long.
  - cjbgkagh 1y ago
    The smaller trains wouldn’t have to stop as frequently. The total number of stops increases but the average rail cart sees fewer stops.
bombcar 1y ago
Amtrak trains have priority until they fall out of their slot.
nunez 1y ago
I thought they didn't due to the rails they use being privately owned...

jeltz 1y ago

Working on trains is also often nice so you do not really lose much time. You can just do a normal workday at the train including lunch and then quit working for the day when you arrive.

catlover76 1y ago

Seems good. If you're driving, you kind of have to bracket ~10 hours for that trip anyways.

hamdingers 1y ago

I do that route all the time, "work from train" days before in-office events in SF are one of my greatest pleasures. If I had one wish it would be a second daily Coast Starlight offset 12 hours from the current one. LA Union to SJ Diridon is roughly 9am to 8pm in both directions, so my second train would be the perfect night train from LA to SF.

cmckn 1y ago

I took the Amtrak Cascades from Seattle to Portland recently and was pretty impressed. It’d be a bit silly to fly, but it’s long enough that if I drove myself I’d be kinda tired when I arrived. On the train I got to nap and eat something. The boarding experience is great and the staff were pros. It’s not cheap though; I think it was about $90 each way for business class, and about $70 for coach. I plan on taking it to Vancouver BC next. :)

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

wslh 1y ago

by comparison: ~3 hours is the Barcelona-Madrid trip via AVE with a slightly bigger distance.