by JoeG
The title of this thread is "efficacy of long distance trains." But its focusing on current day Amtrak operations is the equivalent of an Efficacy of Railroads discussion in the fifties focusing on the NY Ontario and Western. (This beloved but dilapidated and inefficient railroad, often nicknamed the Old & Weary, got liquidated and scrapped in 1957.)
For historical and political reasons, Amtrak's "network" doesn't make sense. Often, "you can't get there from here." Last week I needed to go on a business trip to Columbus, OH. I would have liked to take Amtrak but it doesn't go there. Go to Cleveland and rent a car? Trains arrive in the middle of the night, and may be hours late.
Amtrak's per-passenger costs are needlessly high because of its infrequent service. Utility is low because of its infrequent service and non-connectivity. Timekeeping is reminiscent of a third world country. And, micromanaging of Amtrak by DOT and Congress only makes things worse.
The fact is, we are going to need an integrated public transportation network. We need one now, but we will need one much more in the future.
We will face millions of aging boomers who will become increasingly dangerous drivers. Personal vehicles cost more to buy and run every year; the IRS mileage rate for 2007 is likely to be about 50 cents per mile. And, as our population density increases, so does traffic congestion. In my youth in the sixties, I could zoom down pristine, almost traffic-free stretches of the new I80, as fast as I dared go in my family's '62 Ford Fairlane. Now? It's a parking lot.
What we need is vision and planning for future transportation needs. We absolutely must have national transportation planning that extends beyond road building. When I read threads like this one, where people are haggling over an annual government subsidy that amounts to $1 per person per year, I just get depressed.
In 1956 President Eisenhower signed the Interstate Highway bill, which pretty much finished off railroad long distance passenger service.
Maybe, in 2007, with a new Democratic majority in Congress, with a President hoping to stave off a Democratic presidential victory in 2008, and an Iraq war most likely finally coming to an end, some transportation vision can be found and acted on. Maybe the President can sign a Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Act which will provide funding for public transportation improvements, including freight railroad capacity improvements. There is no reason that American public tranportation has to lag behind that in Europe and Asia. If we spend the money to make our public transportation, including passenger railroads, the equal of that in France, Germany and Japan, it will be money well spent.
It is said that we currently spend $2 billion a week on the Iraq war. Now that the war's end is in sight, if we spent a fraction of this on our transportation infrastructure it would be money well spent. If it has to be borrowed, at least it will be borrowed to our national benefit.
Is this vision likely to be realized? I guess we don't have the national optimism we did in the fifties. But I can hope.
For historical and political reasons, Amtrak's "network" doesn't make sense. Often, "you can't get there from here." Last week I needed to go on a business trip to Columbus, OH. I would have liked to take Amtrak but it doesn't go there. Go to Cleveland and rent a car? Trains arrive in the middle of the night, and may be hours late.
Amtrak's per-passenger costs are needlessly high because of its infrequent service. Utility is low because of its infrequent service and non-connectivity. Timekeeping is reminiscent of a third world country. And, micromanaging of Amtrak by DOT and Congress only makes things worse.
The fact is, we are going to need an integrated public transportation network. We need one now, but we will need one much more in the future.
We will face millions of aging boomers who will become increasingly dangerous drivers. Personal vehicles cost more to buy and run every year; the IRS mileage rate for 2007 is likely to be about 50 cents per mile. And, as our population density increases, so does traffic congestion. In my youth in the sixties, I could zoom down pristine, almost traffic-free stretches of the new I80, as fast as I dared go in my family's '62 Ford Fairlane. Now? It's a parking lot.
What we need is vision and planning for future transportation needs. We absolutely must have national transportation planning that extends beyond road building. When I read threads like this one, where people are haggling over an annual government subsidy that amounts to $1 per person per year, I just get depressed.
In 1956 President Eisenhower signed the Interstate Highway bill, which pretty much finished off railroad long distance passenger service.
Maybe, in 2007, with a new Democratic majority in Congress, with a President hoping to stave off a Democratic presidential victory in 2008, and an Iraq war most likely finally coming to an end, some transportation vision can be found and acted on. Maybe the President can sign a Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Act which will provide funding for public transportation improvements, including freight railroad capacity improvements. There is no reason that American public tranportation has to lag behind that in Europe and Asia. If we spend the money to make our public transportation, including passenger railroads, the equal of that in France, Germany and Japan, it will be money well spent.
It is said that we currently spend $2 billion a week on the Iraq war. Now that the war's end is in sight, if we spent a fraction of this on our transportation infrastructure it would be money well spent. If it has to be borrowed, at least it will be borrowed to our national benefit.
Is this vision likely to be realized? I guess we don't have the national optimism we did in the fifties. But I can hope.