http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hPp5hvBKhiO1W5qP1obrGVE9vWVw

This seems like the new tactic: everything progressive is nineteenth-century, therefore bad. I bet this guy uses electricity – so nineteenth-century, believes in democracy as a form of government – so eighteenth century, reads and writes use phonetic characters – so 9th century -or-so B.C.!

I’m a sleeping car attendant on the Crescent. I hate having to say “We’re waiting here for a north bound freight train”. I hope that the attendants on your trips (especially on the Crescent)treated you well and that you’ll come back and ride again.
Rob A.
Sleeping car attendant
2010 / 1910

Take a look at the monthly management reports on Amtrak’s website (Amtrak.com>Inside Amtrak>Other reports) and you can see results by railroad. BNSF and CN are trying, but clearly UP and NS just don’t care.

I think population density does have more to do with rail travel than you think. People are more likely to take the train for medium distances instead of driving if having a car at their destination is unnecessary (or better, a nuisance). This is part of the reason why (NY) Penn Station is by far the busiest station in the Amtrak system.

Though not strictly population density, another related factor is distance between densely popular areas. Countries like Germany and Japan with many denseley populated and relatively close (by American standard) population centers are perfect for passenger rail. Here, it’s unlikely that taking a train from the West Coast to the Midwest is ever going to compete with air travel as far as cost and time (barring a carbon tax, of course). That said, there are plenty of US cities that would make excellent targets for increased rail travel (the Northeast Corridor cities, California, Vancouver-Seattle-Portland, Chicago and a bunch of cities around it, most notably Minneapolis, Houston-Dallas-Austin, Chicago-New York might even be realistic, although that’s already beginning to push it)

Lots going on at the state level with regard to planning for more and better passenger rail service. Check out what we’re doing in Ohio at http://www.ohiohub.org .

You’re talking to a bunch of New Yorkers here. What’s wrong with multifamily housing or homes on tiny lots? Saving money on heating and cooling? Getting to know your neighbors?

Not everyone prefers multifamily housing – of course. But many people do. And that type of value statement shouldn’t be presented as a knock against Portland. Forced into a gulag? O.K., that’d be fair, but forced into something that people might prefer anyway I think hints at an underlying bias on the author’s part.

Paul – I actually don’t think that housing density has a tremendous impact on a service like Amtrak. There’s no huge need to be within walking distance of a train station when you’re going to travel more than 500 miles away. Amtrak has a lot of suburban stops like Glenview, Ill., New Carrollton, Md., or Croton-Harmon, N.Y., where people can drive to the station. Better, a public policy that encourages people to drive 5 to 20 miles to a train than 700 miles to the final destination.

jb – I was counting rail fare only, not roomette accomodations. The roomettes, while not free, saved us from having to buy hotel rooms, so that washed out to a non-expense as far as I’m concerned.

Also, there’s a 20% discount for Student Advantage members…

The problem is the 19 hour travel time that costs more than a airline ticket actually. I can fly in a little over an hour for less. Even adding in airport times we are looking at maybe 3 hours travel time total. I am not going to count delays because both systems deal with these.

That’s the main issue. The system needs upgrades, but it needs more riders to get those upgrades. It won’t get more riders until upgrades are done, and even then that’s no guarantee.

Good for you and the new Mrs. We (Me, my Wife, and two grandchildren) have had a wonderful time traveling w/Amtrak. Just before Katrina wiped out the New Orleans/Jacksonville leg of the Sunset Limited, we took the Sunset Limited r/t to Oceanside, CA via Los Angeles. Wonderful, and this was just before the downsizing of the food service.(Was sorry to see this development but food is still good.) We had a delux bedroom (two sleeping rooms together to form a suite). Then last year we went cross coungtry again beginning in Florence, SC through Washington DC,on to Chicago and on to Los Angeles on the Southwest Chief. Again, wonderful. This time we had a family bedroom.

Sure there were some delays but we were generally on time arrivng at our destinations. AND, the delays were not a problem. We were on the train and enjoying every minute.

It would be a real shame to cut these long distance trains. What a National Treasure that may be going away if we can’t support it.

Just curious how the entire cross-country and return trip cost you only $569 per person. I recently priced a RT NYP-Chicago Union Station trip (Lake Shore Limited) and the roomette (not even a sleeper) was an extra $400 each way….thanks.

Because supply is set by a monopoly provider, there is no competition and limited room for increasing supply on rail travel along the eastern corridor. Therefore, if supply is (relatively) fixed, increasing demand increases price.

Aaron –

I personally love the train, and I will look forward to reading more of your travels. Sounds like a fun trip. However, there is a fundamental problem with rail travel in the US – namely, the country is not densely populated enough to warrant cross country rail travel. Yes, we have issues with rail ownership, and there are certainly many ways to improve Amtrak. But this problem of low population density does not allow cross country rail to operate well in the US. It’s the same fundamentals as subways. You must have a certain population density to support frequent subway service with many stops. You can’t have a subway in the suburbs because people are too spread. Rail across the US is like a subway in the suburbs.