Why not split 448/449 from the LSL?

In my opinion, the problem with Amtrak’s announcement of the NGS was that this so-called ‘strategy’ was actually announced while so many critical issues remained unresolved. These were not minor details to be ironed out – they were potential showstoppers. The NGS should have been announced only after Amtrak had negotiated preliminary working agreements with the freight railroads, and after it had secured sufficient Congressional support to pay for it. This is not to say Amtrak should have been totally silent, but it should have promoted a ‘vision’ with fewer specifics. It was downright foolish of Amtrak management to be outlining new train services with so many critical questions unanswered.

Also, as a taxpayer I’m more than a little upset at the Warrington administration for going out and buying P42’s for these new services before those new trains were a done deal. It’s shameful that a perpetually cash-poor organization now has over 20 mothballed P40 diesels that are barely 10 years old.

Jim D.

Some blame for how it all played out? Sure, that's fair.

These were not minor details to be ironed out – they were potential showstoppers.

No one pretended otherwise. No one in authority, that is. The documents are quite clear on these points.

The NGS should have been announced only after Amtrak had negotiated preliminary working agreements with the freight railroads

At that point it would no longer have been a strategy. It would have been a done deal. That's a huge distinction.

Besides, everyone already knew the "vision" with "fewer specifics": more trains to more places more often. That didn't even need articulating.

mattfels wrote:At that point it would no longer have been a strategy. It would have been a done deal. That's a huge distinction.

Besides, everyone already knew the "vision" with "fewer specifics": more trains to more places more often. That didn't even need articulating.

A strategy does not cease to be a strategy at the moment its implementation commences. It remains a strategy as long it is is being carried out.

The difference between a "vision" and a "strategy" is that the latter is a road map for achieving a particular objective. With NGS, Amtrak had, for better or worse, a plan to increase service, etc. It had determined where it wanted to go and what kind of service it would provide in those expansion markets. Unfortunately, it didn't have a well thought out plan for implementing the changes it wanted to make.

Anyone who was halfway paying attention took careful note of the caveats and contingencies. Those who were intent on substituting feelings for facts were just setting themselves up for disappointment. They got it. But whose fault is that?

To suggest that Amtrak is somehow responsible for the supersized feelings of railfans who just can't be expected to read and process information properly is just loopy. All this victim talk is inappropriate. Real fans don't play the victim card.

Why don't y'all just drop the subject? It has been debated before, possibly on the old forum, and the conclusions reached were exactly the same as the conclusions that will be reached this time. Most correspondents will think the NGS press release, even with its caveats, was somewhere between "slightly premature" and "completely irresponsible." Mr. Fels will maintain that the caveats were adequate. Neither side will change opinion. Further discussion is pointless.

Put me in the "slightly premature" camp. That too is a fair comment. But that's as far as it gets with me. I don't see the point of the snipe hunt for "reasons" to hate George Warrington.

Had the proposals of the NGS been included within a "five year plan" (best line I can recall from the movie "Ninotchka" or its remake "Silk Stockings" was "I've been reading about your Five Year Plans for the past fifteen years"), that would have been one thing.

But that the "W Gang" choose to call a press conference and release the proposal in such manner that any "Man from Mars' news reporter (i.e. intelligent, but not an insider) walked away with the impression that NGS was going to happen within the next few months, was simply a gross misrepresentation.

It sure "buffaloed" a few of us folks participating at the predecessor Forum back then, present correspondent included.

Mr Fels, say what you wish, but this was simply indicative of how the 'W Gang" did business. I really sorrow for the NJT commuters that are stuck with them and their "management style" nowadays.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Had the proposals of the NGS been included within a "five year plan" (best line I can recall from the movie "Ninotchka" or its remake "Silk Stockings" was "I've been reading about your Five Year Plans for the past fifteen years"), that would have been one thing.

The various plans were to have been roleld out over the following three years. That was phase one. There was a phase two. There's your "five -year plan" in spades.

But that the "W Gang" choose to call a press conference and release the proposal

You mean the way David Gunn will do next week?

It sure "buffaloed" a few of us folks participating at the predecessor Forum back then, present correspondent included.

So? With all due respect, that was an easily buffaloed bunch. Way more than "a few" of those folks fell, and fell hard, for the "trust fund" plan that turned out to have a $60 billion hole in it. Oopsy daisy.

I sorrow for the people still trapped in the unproductive Warrington Witch Hunt. It's a racket without any real payoff. Time to quit.

mattfels wrote:I sorrow for the people still trapped in the unproductive Warrington Witch Hunt.

I feel sorry for the people still trapped in unproductive attempts to rehabilitate Warrington's sorry record at Amtrak. It's a racket without any real payoff. Time to quit