Do Cleveland passengers get screwed out of any opportunity to use the dining or snack cars since we are picked up and ride through the middle of the night? What are the hours that food is served? I cant seem to find that online anywhere.

Do Cleveland passengers get screwed out of any opportunity to use the dining or snack cars since we are picked up and ride through the middle of the night? What are the hours that food is served? I cant seem to find that online anywhere.

 

The snack car is 24/7, the dining car has b/l/d hours.

Do you know how late the dining car stays open?

Also you can bring your own snacks and drinks on the train.

Also you can bring your own snacks and drinks on the train.

 

I know, but if I go, I would like the whole experience! Atleast once. Future trips I would probably just pack my own.

 

The trip there departs from Cleveland at 2:59 AM and arrives in Chicago at 8:45 AM. That trip you would probably miss all meals. But might be able to get a sandwich or pizza in the snack car? If you are still awake lol.

 

The trip home departs from Chicago at 6:10 PM, and arrives back in Cleveland at 12:59 AM. This trip you would definitely be able to experience the diner car, and some daylight in the observation car.

 

Just found this on their website during the ticket buying process.

"Lunch reservations are taken from 11:30 am - 3 pm; dinner reservations are taken from 5 pm - 9 pm."

 

And this for the snack car.

"Food service is normally available from early morning until late evening, except during a few short periods as announced by the attendant. Hours of operation vary depending on train operation."

Also you can bring your own snacks and drinks on the train.

 

I know, but if I go, I would like the whole experience! Atleast once. Future trips I would probably just pack my own.

 

The trip there departs from Cleveland at 2:59 AM and arrives in Chicago at 8:45 AM. That trip you would probably miss all meals. But might be able to get a sandwich or pizza in the snack car? If you are still awake lol.

 

The trip home departs from Chicago at 6:10 PM, and arrives back in Cleveland at 12:59 AM. This trip you would definitely be able to experience the diner car, and some daylight in the observation car.

 

Just found this on their website during the ticket buying process.

"Lunch reservations are taken from 11:30 am - 3 pm; dinner reservations are taken from 5 pm - 9 pm."

 

And this for the snack car.

"Food service is normally available from early morning until late evening, except during a few short periods as announced by the attendant. Hours of operation vary depending on train operation."

 

I do know the dining car opens early in Chicago, before the 9 pm departure, for those wanting a late dinner.

You might get breakfast in diner on the Capitol coming into Chicago. You can certainly get some hot breakfast muffins, danishes, etc., juice, coffee in the cafe car.

 

BTW, check "train status" on the Amtrak website before heading to the station. It's best to wait at home than at the station. There is significant construction underway on raising clearances on the Capitol's route between Washington DC and Pittsburgh, and delays are possible. If the train (#29) is due to arrive Cleveland after the Lake Shore (train #49 from New York, as well #449 which is the Boston section) is due to arrive Cleveland, check the website to see if there are any coach seats available on #49/449. If so, go to the station and see if you can switch trains without extra cost.

If you plan ahead you can get a round trip ticket to new york through United Airlines for $142

 

Business travelers usually cannot plan ahead. And they still either have to wake up before dawn or spend for a New York hotel. The only way the plane becomes competitive with the overnight train is if either the flight goes supersonic or the hotel goes for $150 or less.

 

This is very, very true.  There is a significant commuter flight culture, just look at any Mon-Thur flight prices, that is where airlines make their money.  Point in case the wife was just informed yesterday that she needs to go to Philly next week, only Tue-Wed, flights from CLE->PHL nonstop were near $1,200!!  1 layover was closer to $600.  All this was on United.  She eventually choose to go US Air from CAK->PHL, also @$600, but nonstop. 

 

NYC is pretty much a similar situation.  Now imagine if there was an overnight sleeper car option.

If you plan ahead you can get a round trip ticket to new york through United Airlines for $142

 

what do you want Amtrak to do?  you could even throw in Megabus as being cheaper than both air and rail.

 

Amtrak is undercapasity and is using the same profit maximizing strategy that the Airlines have been using for decades.  charge as much for each seat as you can. since the demand for that seat is in excess of the supply.

 

Amtrak does this on the Acela, too.

 

until Amtrak can add more capacity I.E. more cars to each train fare will remain higher that they have normally been.

 

The new cars have been ordered and will do much to improve the quality of service and quantity of service. it just takes time. 

 

 

JMO, I find it kind of far-fetched that an overnight train is ever going to be a viable (let alone "competitive") alternative to flights for mainstream business travel, at least not for the foreseeable future. Put another way, any company that encourages personnel to take a 10-15 hour train ride instead of a two hour flight to save a few hundred dollars is going to have a really rough time hanging onto talent.  I'm sure there are exceptions, but I don't think this kind of argument is helpful for rail's credibility...

Really? Well let's put it this way: You're a business person with an appointment the next morning in a city about 800 miles away. You can a) fly in the night before and stay in a hotel and go to your appointnment the next morning or, b) you can get up in the wee hours and fly in that morning or, c) you can leave at about 8 pm, eat, sleep, work, surf the web, have a drink, go to bed and wake up the next morning and get off the train at about 8 am and then go to your appointment AND save the cost of a hotel and half your airfare before flying back the same day.

 

Sounds like a no-brainer to me.

^I'm sure many posters deal with the situation often and it would be interesting to hear their views. Clearly the overnight rail appeals to some people. I just think it's always going to be a relatively small share of the business market. Personally I would almost always choose the early flight or the hotel room, depending on how well rested I needed to be and how much I wanted to be home the night before. I'm a bona fide rail supporter (NARP member; very frequent NEC business traveler), so please understand that this not coming from a casual anti-rail bias.

 

In my experience, most business travelers, particularly those with families, either seek to minimize time away from home (early morning flights and all), or maximize fun time away from home, with hotel rooms, dinners, etc. I'm just not sure 10 hours on a train fits into that very well. And I don't think relatively minor cost savings [that accrue to the employer] are nearly enough to change this calculus. Again, I know there are exceptions, and it's entirely possible my experience in business travel is skewed and I'm not taking into account more cost-constrained segments of the market.

 

I suppose one interesting thing to know is what share of overnight train travelers in western European are business travelers. [i'm sure we all have anecdotal evidence one way or the other based on our overseas adventures, but that's probably not terribly useful.]

Here's a column I wrote last fall........

 

Ohio Passenger Rail News – Fall 2011

Train of Thought

Ken Prendergast

 

  Most federal rail capital improvement dollars are pouring into short-distance passenger rail corridors to boost train speeds above 100 mph. But a quiet revolution is growing in the dark. That revolution is with the overnight passenger train which is often assailed by knee-jerk critics as a waste of travel time and tax dollars.

 

  But travelers who do the math while surfing the Web of travel choices are finding overnight trains to be a saver of time and money. And they are saving time by plodding along at 79 mph without incurring significant capital funding needed to go faster.

 

    New York Times columnist Joe Sharkey made that discovery on a recent train trip from Tampa, FL to New York City which he described in a Dec. 12, 2011 piece titled “On a Long Train Trip, Rare Pleasures Return.” On his train he encountered Amtrak Product Development Officer Dennis Lyons who stated “We’re seeing more business travelers, usually on trips of about 500 miles but sometimes even all the way to New York.”

 

  High fuel prices have killed off many flights or forced airlines to turn to uncomfortable turboprops. Other flights have grown obscenely expensive. There are countless business travel markets of 500 miles or more in the populous area east of the Mississippi River. This is where the overnight train can excel. Consider a business traveler who lives in Syracuse, NY and wants to travel to Toledo, OH.

 

  The only flying option is on bankrupt American Airlines, which has no flights arriving Toledo before 11 a.m. So that means flying the night before and staying in a Toledo hotel. The nearly five-hour trip (with a change of planes at Chicago O’Hare) costs $513 round trip with a two-week advanced booking. A one-night stay in a Toledo hotel, according to Orbitz.com, costs between $39 and $109 (or $74 for the median price). Renting a standard-sized car from Enterprise for one day costs $75 with tax, bringing the total to $662.

 

  Driving 435 miles each way would take about seven hours, assuming no extended stops along the way and no weather delays. At the current IRS deduction rate of 55.5 cents per mile for business travel, the cost of driving round trip is $483. Adding $74 for the hotel, it brings the total travel cost to $557.

 

  Amtrak’s Lake Shore Limited leaves Syracuse at 9:41 p.m. and arrives Toledo at 5:55 a.m. Unfortunately the return train leaves Toledo after 3 a.m. but could be moved to an 11:30 p.m. departure by year’s end. With a two-week advanced purchase, the round trip coach seat is $61. If you want a bed and a private toilet, book a Viewliner roomette for $255 total. Add a rental car at Toledo and the total cost of the trip is just $330.

 

  The tremendous time saver of multi-tasking (in this case, sleeping while traveling) lets the train compete speed-wise with flying and driving in the westbound direction. It’s also less tiring than dealing with O’Hare Airport or seven hours of I-90 through the heart of the snow belt. And the price of competition wasn’t hundreds of million of dollars to improve the freight railroads’ tracks and signals to avail a 100+ mph train trip. The tracks for overnight trains are there today – but the trains aren’t.

 

  And that’s the only problem in this scenario. It doesn’t work for most trips because there aren’t enough trains. Or, imagine if Amtrak partnered with airlines to get round-trip travel discounts for taking the train one way and flying the other.

 

  Capital improvements would be needed to run more overnight trains reliably as more track capacity is needed on America’s busy freight railroads. But the cost per route-mile would likely be far less than many higher-speed rail projects now underway. For example, $1.4 billion is being invested to run multiple daily trains at 110 mph over the 280 miles between Chicago and St. Louis. About $600 million is being invested for 110 mph trains on the 300-mile Pontiac-Detroit-Chicago route.

 

  Both are worthwhile projects, but so would providing a half-dozen daily round-trip trains between Chicago and East Coast cities to offer a wide choice of departure times and routes. The cost of increasing track capacity, expanding stations and buying new trains could amount to $1 billion. Then there’s operating costs. Under federal law, Amtrak and its federal operating grant must support all routes longer than 750 miles. Amtrak’s Chicago-East Coast routes range in length from 780 to 1,160 miles.

 

  The problem is politics associated with the federal appropriations process. Amtrak must return to Congress every year to keep the trains running. The solution may be in corporate income tax credits like the 50 percent credit short-line freight railroads enjoy for capital improvements they make. Extend the credit to Amtrak or private operators for capital AND operating costs which are incurred for public benefit. A 50 percent tax credit for operating costs could work for Amtrak since its daily long-distance trains cover 43 to 66 percent of their operating costs from fares.

 

  Sometimes our enthusiasm for the next big thing causes us to overlook the value of things we already have. The overnight passenger train is one of them. More travelers are bringing its value to light for our leaders to see.

 

END

^For sure, where there are zero convenient flight options, the train is much more competitive. I definitely see the value of long haul routes to the business travelers in the third and fourth tier markets along the way, even daylight service.  I thought that was a great column. I just think the business traveler appeal really needs to stay strictly confined to those markets specifically (as you generally do). Anyone who makes a straight face case that overnight train between Cleveland and NYC, for example, is a viable mainstream business travel option puts the credibility of the train lobby at risk, IMO.

^For sure, where there are zero convenient flight options, the train is much more competitive. I definitely see the value of long haul routes to the business travelers in the third and fourth tier markets along the way, even daylight service.  I thought that was a great column. I just think the business traveler appeal really needs to stay strictly confined to those markets specifically (as you generally do). Anyone who makes a straight face case that overnight train between Cleveland and NYC, for example, is a viable mainstream business travel option puts the credibility of the train lobby at risk, IMO.

 

It'd be interesting to see what would happen if we had such service.

 

  Amtrak’s Lake Shore Limited leaves Syracuse at 9:41 p.m. and arrives Toledo at 5:55 a.m. Unfortunately the return train leaves Toledo after 3 a.m. but could be moved to an 11:30 p.m. departure by year’s end. With a two-week advanced purchase, the round trip coach seat is $61. If you want a bed and a private toilet, book a Viewliner roomette for $255 total. Add a rental car at Toledo and the total cost of the trip is just $330.

 

 

Did things change, because currently it cost $61 each way for a total of $122.00, not $61 for round trip. If you want to add a roomette for both trips, it brings the total up to $587.00. Add the rental car like you said and you are up to $662. And thats still leaves you arriving in Toledo at 5:55 am! And has you leaving Toledo at 3:20 am!

 

And I understand the conflict with flying for those markets, but for larger cities, its not a problem

 

 

Anyone who makes a straight face case that overnight train between Cleveland and NYC, for example, is a viable mainstream business travel option puts the credibility of the train lobby at risk, IMO.

 

You say that from the benefit of a NYC perspective, or perhaps without researching the options CLE-NYC or NYC-CLE. I have researched CLE-NYC-CLE round trips. The schedules are good on United but the two-week advance fares are horrifying!!!

 

Perhaps the train is not so competitive for someone doing a day of business in Cleveland since Cleveland hotels are cheap. But for a day of business in New York, the train is very competitive. Only United offers one airline schedule that lets you get to a meeting in Manhattan before 10 a.m. without paying for a New York hotel. And that flight is heavily booked and VERY expensive.

 

Even if more airlines offered better schedules into NYC, it still takes more than four hours to go from your Cleveland home to your Manhattan destination. That's 15-30 minutes from your house to the airport, 1 hour through the airport, 1.5-2 hours flight time, and 1+ hours to get from the plane to Manhattan.

 

If you have a 9 a.m. meeting in Manhattan and you used United's morning schedule that lets you make that meeting (at $1281 round trip with a two-week advance purchase), that means waking up at 4-4:30 a.m. If you have an 8 a.m. meeting, forget it. You MUST stay in a New York hotel. No other airline offers a flight that lets you get into Manhattan before 10 a.m. AND have a same-day return flight for less than $1,200 with a two-week advanced purchase.

 

Perhaps it works better for a New Yorker? I didn't bother looking that up because I don't care about New Yorker's transportation options. I care about Ohioans'. And their options stink.

Did things change, because currently it cost $61 each way for a total of $122.00, not $61 for round trip. If you want to add a roomette for both trips, it brings the total up to $587.00. Add the rental car like you said and you are up to $662. And thats still leaves you arriving in Toledo at 5:55 am! And has you leaving Toledo at 3:20 am!

 

And I understand the conflict with flying for those markets, but for larger cities, its not a problem

 

It may have changed for TOL-SYR, which is what those fares are for. Summer fares are often more expensive than fall/winter fares, which is when that was published.

 

Please note the sentence in my column: "Unfortunately the return train leaves Toledo after 3 a.m. but could be moved to an 11:30 p.m. departure by year’s end." That schedule change will not occur until major construction is done along the Capitol Limited route. When it is done, the Capitol is due to leave Chicago later (about 7:30 p.m.) and the Lake Shore will depart earlier at about 6 p.m., roughly the slot currently occupied by the Capitol. That will put it into Toledo about 11-11:30 p.m.

Did things change, because currently it cost $61 each way for a total of $122.00, not $61 for round trip. If you want to add a roomette for both trips, it brings the total up to $587.00. Add the rental car like you said and you are up to $662. And thats still leaves you arriving in Toledo at 5:55 am! And has you leaving Toledo at 3:20 am!

 

And I understand the conflict with flying for those markets, but for larger cities, its not a problem

 

It may have changed for TOL-SYR, which is what those fares are for. Summer fares are often more expensive than fall/winter fares, which is when that was published.

 

Please note the sentence in my column: "Unfortunately the return train leaves Toledo after 3 a.m. but could be moved to an 11:30 p.m. departure by year’s end." That schedule change will not occur until major construction is done along the Capitol Limited route. When it is done, the Capitol is due to leave Chicago later (about 7:30 p.m.) and the Lake Shore will depart earlier at about 6 p.m., roughly the slot currently occupied by the Capitol. That will put it into Toledo about 11-11:30 p.m.

 

I also checked in the winter and those were the same prices.  But that schedule change is still happening then? How will that affect Cleveland?

I find Amtrak's base fare (coach) is $61 plus $155 for a Viewliner room in the westbound direction and a coach seat eastbound is $61 for a total of $277 round trip. So the fare has risen $22 since last year.

 

The $61 round trip coach fare I cited is wrong. It's $122.

Anyone who makes a straight face case that overnight train between Cleveland and NYC, for example, is a viable mainstream business travel option puts the credibility of the train lobby at risk, IMO.

 

You say that from the benefit of a NYC perspective, or perhaps without researching the options CLE-NYC or NYC-CLE. I have researched CLE-NYC-CLE round trips. The schedules are good on United but the two-week advance fares are horrifying!!!

 

Perhaps the train is not so competitive for someone doing a day of business in Cleveland since Cleveland hotels are cheap. But for a day of business in New York, the train is very competitive. Only United offers one airline schedule that lets you get to a meeting in Manhattan before 10 a.m. without paying for a New York hotel. And that flight is heavily booked and VERY expensive.

 

Even if more airlines offered better schedules into NYC, it still takes more than four hours to go from your Cleveland home to your Manhattan destination. That's 15-30 minutes from your house to the airport, 1 hour through the airport, 1.5-2 hours flight time, and 1+ hours to get from the plane to Manhattan.

 

If you have a 9 a.m. meeting in Manhattan and you used United's morning schedule that lets you make that meeting (at $1281 round trip with a two-week advance purchase), that means waking up at 4-4:30 a.m. If you have an 8 a.m. meeting, forget it. You MUST stay in a New York hotel. No other airline offers a flight that lets you get into Manhattan before 10 a.m. AND have a same-day return flight for less than $1,200 with a two-week advanced purchase.

 

Perhaps it works better for a New Yorker? I didn't bother looking that up because I don't care about New Yorker's transportation options. I care about Ohioans'. And their options stink.

 

FWIW, Orbitz shows me flights from CLE to LGA on Delta, AA, and United that would all get me to a 10am meeting in Manhattan with available seats this Monday morning, so there is definitely some competition and carrier choice still.  Looking on Tuesday there were multiple flights that would get me to a 9am meeting.  Between EWK, JFK, and LGA, there are a lot of schedule and carrier options.  If you add CAK to the mix, there are four airlines that fly between the two regions (and lower prices).  Even last minute the price out of CLE seems to max out at about $600 one way.

 

Without a marketing study or polling info, I know it's just my opinion, but I still don't see these flight options losing out to an overnight train ride for a vast majority of business travelers. I certainly would not mind being wrong on this, but I think there's a credibility issue here, where a lot of train advocates are dismissed as "foamers" by policymakers, so they need to tread carefully.  YMMV.

Orbitz gave me none of those options. Even so, $600 one way is brutal -- unless you're one of those lucky people working at a Fortune 500 company and on an expense account.

 

I think we need to show the quality of the service, the time savings of multi-tasking (sleeping/traveling), the humane treatment, and the good price a business traveler can get by taking the train. Joe Sharkey noted some of them, and why we need more trains in the 400-800 mile market....

 

On a Long Train Trip, Rare Pleasures Return

By JOE SHARKEY

Published: December 12, 2011

 

I TRAVELED from Tampa, Fla., to Manhattan over the weekend. What a pleasure! Nobody hollered at me to sit down or turn off my electronic devices. Nobody warned me to obey all instructions from crew members.

 

“I didn’t get treated like a terrorist,” a man sipping a beer told me en route.

 

“Nobody patted me down,” added a woman, who joined the conversation.

 

O.K., the trip did take 26 hours, because it was by train — as opposed to more than two hours by air. I was experimenting with taking a long-distance train rather than flying. Would I do it again as a business traveler?

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/13/business/pleasures-return-on-a-long-train-trip.html

 

BTW, the price of booking a sleeping car includes meals in the dining car.

Anyone who makes a straight face case that overnight train between Cleveland and NYC, for example, is a viable mainstream business travel option puts the credibility of the train lobby at risk, IMO.

 

You say that from the benefit of a NYC perspective, or perhaps without researching the options CLE-NYC or NYC-CLE. I have researched CLE-NYC-CLE round trips. The schedules are good on United but the two-week advance fares are horrifying!!!

 

Perhaps the train is not so competitive for someone doing a day of business in Cleveland since Cleveland hotels are cheap. But for a day of business in New York, the train is very competitive. Only United offers one airline schedule that lets you get to a meeting in Manhattan before 10 a.m. without paying for a New York hotel. And that flight is heavily booked and VERY expensive.

 

Even if more airlines offered better schedules into NYC, it still takes more than four hours to go from your Cleveland home to your Manhattan destination. That's 15-30 minutes from your house to the airport, 1 hour through the airport, 1.5-2 hours flight time, and 1+ hours to get from the plane to Manhattan.

 

If you have a 9 a.m. meeting in Manhattan and you used United's morning schedule that lets you make that meeting (at $1281 round trip with a two-week advance purchase), that means waking up at 4-4:30 a.m. If you have an 8 a.m. meeting, forget it. You MUST stay in a New York hotel. No other airline offers a flight that lets you get into Manhattan before 10 a.m. AND have a same-day return flight for less than $1,200 with a two-week advanced purchase.

 

Perhaps it works better for a New Yorker? I didn't bother looking that up because I don't care about New Yorker's transportation options. I care about Ohioans'. And their options stink.

 

FWIW, Orbitz shows me flights from CLE to LGA on Delta, AA, and United that would all get me to a 10am meeting in Manhattan with available seats this Monday morning, so there is definitely some competition and carrier choice still.  Looking on Tuesday there were multiple flights that would get me to a 9am meeting.  Between EWK, JFK, and LGA, there are a lot of schedule and carrier options.  If you add CAK to the mix, there are four airlines that fly between the two regions (and lower prices).  Even last minute the price out of CLE seems to max out at about $600 one way.

 

Without a marketing study or polling info, I know it's just my opinion, but I still don't see these flight options losing out to an overnight train ride for a vast majority of business travelers. I certainly would not mind being wrong on this, but I think there's a credibility issue here, where a lot of train advocates are dismissed as "foamers" by policymakers, so they need to tread carefully.  YMMV.

 

I don't think these flight options will "lose out" to an overnight train. The train just offers another option for travlers who are tired of airline hassles and want an alternative. Will it work for everyone? No. Is that reason enough to not offer such a service? No.

 

Frankly, this country is undergoing a mobility crisis. Places like Toledo, Erie, Rochester, Syracuse, Utica and Albany will never have frequent low cost air service and airlines are even pulling out of mid distance service to larger cities---Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and St. Louis are a few---in favor of long haul service, where the money is. Southwest dropped Pittsburgh-Philadelphia service, leaving USAir. Fares went from $120 to $650. Now you'll have to pay the high fare or spend hours plodding along on the PA Turnpike. This is happening all over the country and the only choice left is to drive longer and longer distances.

 

If that makes me a foamer for advocating this, then so be it. I make no apologies for it. You might also be interested to know that a group of foamers called the National Association of Railroad Passengers is funding a study calling for exactly the sort of service we have been discussing here.

^Substantively we're on the same side. As I said before, I support Amtrak's long haul routes.  I'm card-carrying member of NARP. I like options. I believe y'all that these routes are important for business travel in third/fourth tier markets without good rail connections. I just disagree that describing a 10+ hour overnight train ride between two markets well served by air (e.g., CLE to NYC) as a competitive option for business travel is likely to resonate with many folks.  Not a big point, just a tactical disagreement.

PA: Planners Look to Speed, Improve Rail Service

Paul Nussbaum

Source: The Philadelphia Inquirer

Created: August 9, 2012

 

Aug. 09 -- What does the nation's busiest rail corridor need to make train service faster, more frequent, and more dependable?

 

Federal planners will be in Philadelphia this month as part of a nine-city visit to explore the future of the 457-mile Northeast Corridor between Washington and Boston.

 

The Federal Railroad Administration is in the early stages of a 38-month process to figure out how to improve rail travel on the corridor for the next 40 years.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.masstransitmag.com/news/10757537/pa-planners-look-to-speed-improve-rail-service

Amtrak Losing Millions Each Year on Food Sales

WASHINGTON — Amtrak lost more than $800 million on its food and beverage services over the last 10 years, largely because of waste, employee theft and lack of proper oversight, government auditors have found.

 

The railroad’s food and beverage service has never broken even since it was required by Congress to do so in 1981. The losses were the focus of a House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee hearing on Thursday that reflected partisan views over how Amtrak should be run. Republican lawmakers suggested that food services should be privatized. Democrats questioned the need for the hearing, saying the railroad was dealing with the losses.

 

Joseph H. Boardman, president and chief executive of Amtrak, confirmed the losses but said the railroad was taking steps to address the problem.  “We are still looking for ways to improve our cost recovery,” he said.

 

According to audits by the Government Accountability Office, an investigative arm of Congress, and the railroad’s own inspector general, Amtrak loses about $80 million a year selling food. Since 2002, Amtrak’s food service has lost $834 million.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/03/us/politics/amtrak-lost-834-million-on-food-in-last-decade-audit-finds.html

Amtrak Losing Millions Each Year on Food Sales

WASHINGTON — Amtrak lost more than $800 million on its food and beverage services over the last 10 years, largely because of waste, employee theft and lack of proper oversight, government auditors have found.

 

The railroad’s food and beverage service has never broken even since it was required by Congress to do so in 1981. The losses were the focus of a House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee hearing on Thursday that reflected partisan views over how Amtrak should be run. Republican lawmakers suggested that food services should be privatized. Democrats questioned the need for the hearing, saying the railroad was dealing with the losses.

 

Joseph H. Boardman, president and chief executive of Amtrak, confirmed the losses but said the railroad was taking steps to address the problem.  “We are still looking for ways to improve our cost recovery,” he said.

 

According to audits by the Government Accountability Office, an investigative arm of Congress, and the railroad’s own inspector general, Amtrak loses about $80 million a year selling food. Since 2002, Amtrak’s food service has lost $834 million.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/03/us/politics/amtrak-lost-834-million-on-food-in-last-decade-audit-finds.html

 

This is a load of horsecrap, staged by grandstanding Tea Party Republicans who zoom in on this as if it's the root of all evil. Food services have historically been a loss leader for many decades under Amtrak and the private railroads before 1971. Most railroads counted themselves lucky to get a return of 50 cents on the dollar, but diners and lounge cars were a necessity to attract first-class sleeper business. In the old days, railroads offered sometimes extravagant fare to attract and hold that business. B&O for example offered "Jefferson Davis overtones of flawless service" according to the late Lucius Beebe and its menu featured hush puppies and crab imperial. Illinois Central had the "King's Dinner" on its flagship Panama Limited. New York Central offered Lobster Newburg and had a special pickled watermelon rind for an appetizer that was a real delicacy. The dining car in those days was an experience not to be forgotten: White tablecloths, specially monogrammed china and heavy hotel grade silverware were the norm. While Amtrak does not reach these levels of service, it still must offer decent food and beverage service to entice people to ride.

Interesting NY Times article about more business travellers choosing Amtrak rail service over air travel in the Washington - New York - Boston corridor. 

 

Frustrations of Air Travel Push Passengers to Amtrak

By RON NIXON, THE NEW YORK TIMES

Published: August 15, 2012

 

WASHINGTON — Long a punch line for harried Northeast travelers, Amtrak has come to dominate commercial travel in the corridor connecting Washington, New York and Boston, and this summer its trains are packed.

 

A decade ago, Delta and US Airways shuttles were the preferred mode of travel between the cities.  But high fares, slow airport security and frequent flight delays — along with Amtrak’s high-speed Acela trains, online ticketing and workstation amenities — have eaten away at the airlines’ share of passengers.

 

Between New York and Washington, Amtrak said, 75 percent of travelers go by train, a huge share that has been building steadily since the Acela was introduced in 2000 and airport security was tightened after 2001.  Before that, Amtrak had just over a third of the business between New York and Washington.  In the same period, Amtrak said, its market share between New York and Boston grew to 54 percent from 20 percent.

 

READ MORE: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/16/business/hassles-of-air-travel-push-passengers-to-amtrak.html

 

August 2012

Romney threatens to eliminate Amtrak subsidy if elected; Eno's Schank weighs in on potential implications

By Angela Cotey, Associate Editor

 

In an Aug. 2 interview with Fortune that was transcribed and posted online yesterday, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney talked about his plan to improve the economy and reduce the deficit. Among his ideas: eliminate Amtrak ’s federal subsidy.

 

Romney didn’t divulge details on the Amtrak plan specifically; it was mentioned as part of a list of subsidy programs he planned to cut. Still, Amtrak officials and supporters will no doubt take Romney’s threats to heart.

 

This isn’t the first time a president or presidential hopeful has proposed slashing Amtrak funds. But the odds of it happening are much more realistic these days, says The Eno Center for Transportation  President and Chief Executive Officer Joshua Schank.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/article/Romney-threatens-to-eliminate-Amtrak-subsidy-if-elected-Enos-Schank-weighs-in-on-potential-implications--32113#

^No surprise here.  In addition to Romney's ideological flip-flops of election year convenience, just like the road builders and gas station/convenience store owners association  in Ohio pushed to kill the 3C, I'm sure similar forces and funders of political campaigns are pushing about Amtrak too.  Rail ridership is surging while the airlines are in trouble and driving is flat.  That's a threat to the status quo. 

 

Note that Romney isn't necessarily opposed to rail; he just wants to eliminate the federal subsidy.

 

It is conceivable that Amtrak could actually be profitable if the low traffic routes were eliminated. Unfortunately, decisions on routes and schedules are made for political purposes rather than for economic reasons.

 

"If you want to make enemies, try to change something." - Woodrow Willson

Why is it that rail is the only mode of travel expected to be profitable?

 

Note that Romney isn't necessarily opposed to rail; he just wants to eliminate the federal subsidy.

 

It is conceivable that Amtrak could actually be profitable if the low traffic routes were eliminated. Unfortunately, decisions on routes and schedules are made for political purposes rather than for economic reasons.

 

"If you want to make enemies, try to change something." - Woodrow Willson

 

Here's a variation on the Romney stance: "Look, I love my children; but with our family's finances, I just can't afford to feed them anymore."

 

Moving people does not make money. So where will the government subsidy be? In highways and aviation, the subsidy is in the infrastructure. For passenger rail, its in the operations. The reason it's not in the infrastructure for rail is because the railroads own, finance and manage their own infrastructure. Unless you want the government to own, finance and manage the railroads' infrastructure, then the subsidy will remain on the operating side.

 

If you want there to be passenger rail in the USA you have these options:

 

1. Subsidize the operating costs (current practice), or

2. Subsidize the capital costs (larger railroads resist this), or

3. Sell highways and airports to private interests (if no buyer for certain facilities, dismantle them).

 

Of course, for options 1-2, there are a million ways to subsidize. The recent practice is through direct grants. Conservatives hate grants. Another option is tax credits. Liberals hate tax credits.

 

And there are a mix of options involving low-interest loans, loan guarantees, tax-exempt bonds (how many airports and highways get financed), passenger ticket taxes, rail-based wi-fi user taxes, etc.

 

At the end of the day, remember this about Amtrak.......

 

1. In its first full year (1972), Amtrak carried 15.8 million passengers and required a federal operating subsidy of $153.4 million ($841 million adjusted for inflation);

2. In 2011, Amtrak carried 30.2 million passengers (a record it will break in 2012) and required a federal operating subsidy of $400 million;

3. A comparison to 1981 is even more stark on the fiscal side. Amtrak ridership grew to 21 million, but its federal operating subsidy grew to $720 million (or $1.8 billion in 2012 dollars). Today, Amtrak's federal operating subsidy is nearly one-fifth of what it was 30 years ago.

 

Since their inception, how many federal programs are serving twice as many people yet costing the federal government half as much in doing so? Amtrak is doing just that.

 

Shouldn't budget hawks be applauding Amtrak, not axing it, as an example for other federal programs on how to reduce the deficit?

 

If not, then what is really going on here?

'Why US taxpayers are gouged on Mass Transit"

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-26/u-s-taxpayers-are-gouged-on-mass-transit-costs.html

 

 

Just posted this to someone else, and is worthy of posting here....

 

Amtrak's 50 mph average-speed trains attracted 800,000 riders in Michigan last year. To handle the same traffic as those 10 daily Amtrak trains, it would take 36 daily double-deck Megabus vehicles with a 75% occupancy or 58 daily United Embraer RJ145 regional jets with a 75% occupancy. The presence of rail service takes stress and cost out of the highway and aviation systems, and it develops local economies around stations. When Amtrak's speeds are increased further, expect the ridership to easily top 1 million in Michigan.

 

We can follow their lead any time we want to.

A case for more trains, with the Midwest Hub as an example.

 

http://newurbanismblog.com/lowspeed-rail/

 

EDITORIAL

The Amtrak Option

Published: August 26, 2012

 

While some leaders understand the need for new investment, many Republicans are speeding in the wrong direction. Chris Christie, the governor of New Jersey, scrapped the most recent proposal in 2010, in the process forfeiting billions of dollars in federal aid mainly to burnish his political credentials as a cost-cutting Republican. That proposal was budgeted at about $9 billion. The cost is now estimated at $14.7 billion.

 

The Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, has promised that, if elected, he would cut Amtrak’s $1.5 billion annual federal subsidy. That is no way to run a railroad, especially one whose popular East Coast route is vital to the region’s economic prosperity and, of course, to the state Mr. Romney served as governor.

 

Mr. Romney, Mr. Christie and their Republican colleagues in Washington should be doing everything in their power to improve train service, not stand in the way.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/27/opinion/the-amtrak-option.html?_r=1&emc=eta1

Redirect of a question posted at the Cincinnati Streetcar thread.....

 

- High Speed Rail, I don't see that happening in a long time. Aside from Acela on the left and right coasts, are any other high speed lines being built in the US?

 

Depends on your definition of high-speed rail. Here are the official definitions.....

http://www.fra.dot.gov/rpd/HSIPR/ProjectFunding.aspx

 

+ New express high‑speed corridor services (operating speeds above 150 mph on primarily dedicated track) in select corridors of 200–600 miles.

 

+ Emerging and regional high‑speed corridor services (operating speeds up to 90–110 mph and 110–150 mph respectively, on shared and dedicated track) in corridors of 100–500 miles.

 

+ Upgraded reliability and service on conventional intercity rail services (operating speeds up to 79–90 mph).

 

This is where the projects are happening (and aren't):

http://www.fra.dot.gov/rpd/passenger/2243.shtml

 

And this is what the projects are:

http://www.fra.dot.gov/rpd/HSIPR/ProjectFunding.aspx

 

 

The title of this map should be "Ohio stands in the way of progress."  It's easy to see how in the 19th century Ohio became a powerhouse by connecting regions, via the rivers, lakes and canals.  Now in the 21st century we have a chance to connect again, via already existing networks, and our governor turned it down.  It just makes no sense.

The title of this map should be "Ohio stands in the way of progress."  It's easy to see how in the 19th century Ohio became a powerhouse by connecting regions, via the rivers, lakes and canals.  Now in the 21st century we have a chance to connect again, via already existing networks, and our governor turned it down.  It just makes no sense.

 

Which is why we don't intend to involve Ohio anymore in important decisions to diversify our transportation system. In the 40-year history of All Aboard Ohio, the only time Ohio decided to actually spend more than a cosmetic sum on improving passenger rail service was when the federal government offered 100 percent federal capital funds. It's time to realize our state leaders have no interest in helping communities offer transportation choices, especially those that benefit urban areas. Communities need to unite with each other, the private sector and the federal government in addressing their own needs and interests.

The title of this map should be "Ohio stands in the way of progress."  It's easy to see how in the 19th century Ohio became a powerhouse by connecting regions, via the rivers, lakes and canals.  Now in the 21st century we have a chance to connect again, via already existing networks, and our governor turned it down.  It just makes no sense.

 

Which is why we don't intend to involve Ohio anymore in important decisions to diversify our transportation system. In the 40-year history of All Aboard Ohio, the only time Ohio decided to actually spend more than a cosmetic sum on improving passenger rail service was when the federal government offered 100 percent federal capital funds. It's time to realize our state leaders have no interest in helping communities offer transportation choices, especially those that benefit urban areas. Communities need to unite with each other, the private sector and the federal government in addressing their own needs and interests.

 

Have to agree with KJP on this. Ohio has been a very tough nut to crack and it's time to stop tilting at windmills. The landscape is littered with attempts to get the state to move forward. Failed pie-in-the-sky bullet train plans ("We will build our high speed system on the ashes of Amtrak" - Art Wilkowski, 1976. In 2012 Art is six feet under, along with his bullet train and Amtrak is still with us.) muddied the waters and stifled efforts to get conventional trains going. Add to that a natural skepticism toward anything new and a state government that was (and is) completely under the thumb of highway contractors. As KJP notes, the state never supported trains of its own volition. It even turned down a chance to run a Youngstown-Cleveland commuter train with 100% federal funding when Conrail was formed. The only exception was the late, lamented 3C project, again with 100% federal funding. Ohio has never put any skin in the game. Now Kasich slammed the door on passenger rail, probably for a generation at least, and even after he's gone it's highly unlikely state "leaders" will suddenly see the light and whoop it up for passenger rail.

 

Better to forget about Ohio and find alternate ways to move forward.

 

Ohio: The heart of it all

 

Ohio: The hole in the donut.

Amtrak has funding for improving the station, but is awaiting the city which has a plan that could incorporate the Amtrak station in its planned transportation center, but is awaiting $20 million in funding:

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/grants/index.php

______________

 

Contact Jeff Appelbaum:

216-566-5548

[email protected]

 

 

Cuyahoga County wants to hide Amtrak station from convention center view

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio — Cleveland's downtown Amtrak station is so ugly that Cuyahoga County wants to hide it from visitors to its grand new convention center.

 

"The Amtrak station is an unsightly obstruction," said Jeff Appelbaum, the county's point man for the $465 million medical mart and convention center under construction on the downtown bluff overlooking the tracks.

 

The squat brown, 36-year-old building sits center stage in the vista from the convention center's floor-to-ceiling ballroom windows. So the county has hired a landscape architect to make suggestions -- possibly blocking the station -- before the convention center opens next July.

 

Appelbaum also wants to replace the tall trees north of the station with something smaller, to open up the view to Browns Stadium, the Great Lakes Science Center and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame beyond.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga-county/index.ssf/2012/08/cuyahoga_county_wants_to_hide_amtrak_station_from_convention_center_view.html

The title of this map should be "Ohio stands in the way of progress."  It's easy to see how in the 19th century Ohio became a powerhouse by connecting regions, via the rivers, lakes and canals.  Now in the 21st century we have a chance to connect again, via already existing networks, and our governor turned it down.  It just makes no sense.

 

Which is why we don't intend to involve Ohio anymore in important decisions to diversify our transportation system. In the 40-year history of All Aboard Ohio, the only time Ohio decided to actually spend more than a cosmetic sum on improving passenger rail service was when the federal government offered 100 percent federal capital funds. It's time to realize our state leaders have no interest in helping communities offer transportation choices, especially those that benefit urban areas. Communities need to unite with each other, the private sector and the federal government in addressing their own needs and interests.

 

Have to agree with KJP on this. Ohio has been a very tough nut to crack and it's time to stop tilting at windmills. The landscape is littered with attempts to get the state to move forward. Failed pie-in-the-sky bullet train plans ("We will build our high speed system on the ashes of Amtrak" - Art Wilkowski, 1976. In 2012 Art is six feet under, along with his bullet train and Amtrak is still with us.) muddied the waters and stifled efforts to get conventional trains going. Add to that a natural skepticism toward anything new and a state government that was (and is) completely under the thumb of highway contractors. As KJP notes, the state never supported trains of its own volition. It even turned down a chance to run a Youngstown-Cleveland commuter train with 100% federal funding when Conrail was formed. The only exception was the late, lamented 3C project, again with 100% federal funding. Ohio has never put any skin in the game. Now Kasich slammed the door on passenger rail, probably for a generation at least, and even after he's gone it's highly unlikely state "leaders" will suddenly see the light and whoop it up for passenger rail.

 

Better to forget about Ohio and find alternate ways to move forward.

 

Ohio: The heart of it all

 

Ohio: The hole in the donut.

 

BTW, is there/should there be an "Alternative to the State of Ohio" thread. We aren't the only ones who feel the state is not interested in doing anything that helps

As fewer people can afford to drive and more people take to the rails, transit and bikes, those who seek to preserve the status quo feel threatened.....

 

8/29/2012

GOP platform calls for ending Amtrak subsidy, high-speed rail funding

 

Yesterday at their national convention in Tampa, Fla., Republicans approved a party platform that calls for ending federal funding for Amtrak  and high-speed rail, and allocating more federal transportation dollars for highway projects instead of other transportation options, such as public transit, bicycling and pedestrian programs, according to national news reports.

 

The platform includes many measures that Republicans on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee pushed for during negotiations on the new, two-year $105 billion transportation bill that was enacted earlier this summer, news reports stated.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/news/GOP-platform-calls-for-ending-Amtrak-subsidy-highspeed-rail-funding--32233#

Amtrak has funding for improving the station, but is awaiting the city which has a plan that could incorporate the Amtrak station in its planned transportation center, but is awaiting $20 million in funding:

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/grants/index.php

______________

 

Contact Jeff Appelbaum:

216-566-5548

[email protected]

 

 

Cuyahoga County wants to hide Amtrak station from convention center view

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio — Cleveland's downtown Amtrak station is so ugly that Cuyahoga County wants to hide it from visitors to its grand new convention center.

 

"The Amtrak station is an unsightly obstruction," said Jeff Appelbaum, the county's point man for the $465 million medical mart and convention center under construction on the downtown bluff overlooking the tracks.

 

The squat brown, 36-year-old building sits center stage in the vista from the convention center's floor-to-ceiling ballroom windows. So the county has hired a landscape architect to make suggestions -- possibly blocking the station -- before the convention center opens next July.

 

Appelbaum also wants to replace the tall trees north of the station with something smaller, to open up the view to Browns Stadium, the Great Lakes Science Center and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame beyond.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga-county/index.ssf/2012/08/cuyahoga_county_wants_to_hide_amtrak_station_from_convention_center_view.html

 

Does the GOP article mentioning ending Amtrak subsidies essentially pull this 20 MM funding rug out from under the Cleveland station project?

Amtrak has funding for improving the station, but is awaiting the city which has a plan that could incorporate the Amtrak station in its planned transportation center, but is awaiting $20 million in funding:

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/grants/index.php

______________

 

Contact Jeff Appelbaum:

216-566-5548

[email protected]

 

 

Cuyahoga County wants to hide Amtrak station from convention center view

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio Cleveland's downtown Amtrak station is so ugly that Cuyahoga County wants to hide it from visitors to its grand new convention center.

 

"The Amtrak station is an unsightly obstruction," said Jeff Appelbaum, the county's point man for the $465 million medical mart and convention center under construction on the downtown bluff overlooking the tracks.

 

The squat brown, 36-year-old building sits center stage in the vista from the convention center's floor-to-ceiling ballroom windows. So the county has hired a landscape architect to make suggestions -- possibly blocking the station -- before the convention center opens next July.

 

Appelbaum also wants to replace the tall trees north of the station with something smaller, to open up the view to Browns Stadium, the Great Lakes Science Center and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame beyond.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga-county/index.ssf/2012/08/cuyahoga_county_wants_to_hide_amtrak_station_from_convention_center_view.html

 

Does the GOP article mentioning ending Amtrak subsidies essentially pull this 20 MM funding rug out from under the Cleveland station project?

 

Not yet. Romney has to be elected first.

And that project moves forward with or without Amtrak. What's more important in the near term is that the port authority levy is passed. If it's not, then they will look for funding elsewhere. The port authority request is already the city's second source its turned to for money for this project.

Why is it that rail is the only mode of travel expected to be profitable?

 

Note that Romney isn't necessarily opposed to rail; he just wants to eliminate the federal subsidy.

 

It is conceivable that Amtrak could actually be profitable if the low traffic routes were eliminated. Unfortunately, decisions on routes and schedules are made for political purposes rather than for economic reasons.

 

"If you want to make enemies, try to change something." - Woodrow Willson

 

What you refer to as "low traffic routes" sell out for many months of the year.  Running more trains on more routes would actually improve Amtrak's bottom line, but that requires a large up front investment in rolling stock and infrastructure. 

 

The only way the private railroads were ever able to make any money at all on passenger service is because:  1) Freight cross-subsidized the infrastructure costs; 2) For decades they moved almost all domestic intercity passenger traffic, and;  3) The passenger trains shipped large quantities of mail and express.  The railroads even subsidized the express part-- The Railway Express Agency was owned by the railroads, but it never really made any money over its lifetime. 

 

The bottom line is that the common-carrier passenger service is not much of a money maker at all.  The aggregate lifetime profit of the common-carrier airline industry is nil, and this is with express shipments and  taxpayer subsidies to airports, air traffic control, and security, and operating subsidies in some cases.  Greyhound has filed bankruptcy 2 or 3 times. 

 

What KJP says are the 3 options if you want rail service is right on. 

As fewer people can afford to drive and more people take to the rails, transit and bikes, those who seek to preserve the status quo feel threatened.....

 

8/29/2012

GOP platform calls for ending Amtrak subsidy, high-speed rail funding

 

Yesterday at their national convention in Tampa, Fla., Republicans approved a party platform that calls for ending federal funding for Amtrak  and high-speed rail, and allocating more federal transportation dollars for highway projects instead of other transportation options, such as public transit, bicycling and pedestrian programs, according to national news reports.

 

The platform includes many measures that Republicans on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee pushed for during negotiations on the new, two-year $105 billion transportation bill that was enacted earlier this summer, news reports stated.

That party has no intellectual rigor.  Their positions are based on RW radio and Fox News opinions.

 

It is conceivable that Amtrak could actually be profitable if the low traffic routes were eliminated. Unfortunately, decisions on routes and schedules are made for political purposes rather than for economic reasons.

 

 

The contention that Amtrak is too big is horribly inaccurate. The reality is that Amtrak is too small.

 

Guess what happens when you expand the Cardinal service from three times per week to a daily service? The subsidy per passenger-mile drops.

 

Guess what happens when you add several trains to the chronically sold-out Chicago-Cleveland-New York route? The subsidy per passenger-mile drops.

 

Guess what happens when you expand service on multiple routes throughout the the U.S. which have only one train a day or less? I already gave two hints......

 

Why does this occur? There is an often stated and frequently under-appreciated economic concept called economies of scale. There is also a diseconomies of scale, when something is too small or too large and cannot achieve maximum efficiency. When you have many stations along a route served by only one train that Amtrak must maintain, insure, depreciate and capitalize, that one train is not capable of producing enough ridership and revenue to sustain all of those stations. Is the solution to eliminate stations?

 

Nope, because then you start losing city-pair combinations which reduces traffic density, so you end up worsening the diseconomies of scale. The only choice is to add trains, to expand ridership, increase city-pair combinations, and create network revenue opportunities through linkages with other expanded routes. How much traffic and gas tax revenue do you think an Interstate highway would have if it were available only for one hour a day every day? Or if it didn't have any two-lane roads feeding into it?

 

FYI: An emerging pilot project is to add trains between Chicago-Cleveland-New York City (see the thread on this route) but will require significant capital costs in addition to the $2.2 billion already being made to this route. Because this route links two strong rail hubs (Chicago, Northeast Corridor), it offers some exciting network revenue opportunities. And yes, the early indications are that this expansion would reduce the operating subsidy per passenger-mile, especially if mail handling and other revenue enhancements were provided.

 

To solution is to expand service. Over the past 40 years, every time Amtrak services were cut, the economic performance of the rest of the system diminished. Amtrak has been in an expansion mode for more than a decade and its revenue-to-cost ratio has improved dramatically -- from revenues covering only about 50 percent of operating costs  in the 1990s to 86 percent last year.

 

Yes, Amtrak covers 86 percent of operating costs from revenues. Could it ever achieve self-sufficiency? On the capital side -- no. On the operating side -- possibly. But why should it? Again, rail is the only mode we expect to make an operating profit AND pay the full cost of its infrastructure. I can guarantee you one thing: if we start cutting routes, Amtrak's subsidy needs will only grow.

 

"If you want to make enemies, try to change something." - Woodrow Willson

 

"If you want to do something stupid, create policy without getting input from a variety of sources." - KJP

^KJP:  I see a great op-ed piece forming here.  Since Amtrak is in the media again because of the presidential campaign, this is probably a good time to write one and send it to the papers.  You might even be able to get it in some newspapers outside of Ohio.