Some great video of Amtrak's "Downeaster" on You-Tube.  Credit gildone for e-mailing this to me.  Great stuff.  makes me homesick for New England and wishing we had such service here.

 

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Amtrak+downeaster&search=Search

My last good trip on a train was on the Pennsylvanian a few months before they annulled the train at PGH.  It was actually on time.  I sat in that big seat stretching to reach the footrest on the seat in front of me (I'm 6' tall).  I read and listened to CD's as the scenery went by.  I haven't been so relaxed while traveling since and won't be again until we have service in Ohio I can actually use.  A good trip on a train is the best relaxation therapy there is. 

By Eileen Blass, USA TODAY file

 

Commuter Scott Clinton steps on an express train at 30th Street Station in Philadelphia heading to Paoli, Pa., in this 2006 USA TODAY file photo. Congress and the White House are in rare agreement that it makes sense to expand Amtrak service where demand is the greatest.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-03-09-amtrak_N.htm

 

Amtrak may expand with federal funds

USA TODAY

March 9, 2007

 

By Raju Chebium, Gannett News Service

 

WASHINGTON — States could receive millions of dollars from Washington beginning next year — for the first time — to run more trains between cities within 400 miles of each other.

 

 

http://www.ble.org:80/pr/news/headline.asp?id=18138

 

Senate Democrats propose $1.78 billion for Amtrak

(The Associated Press circulated the following article by Sarah Karush on March 15.)

 

WASHINGTON -- The Senate’s budget plan includes a boon for Amtrak - $1.78 billion for intercity passenger rail, nearly twice the amount proposed by President Bush and even more than Amtrak’s own budget request.

 

The amount, announced Wednesday by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J, is included in the plan being unveiled by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D. It matches the amount called for in a broad, six-year Amtrak authorization bill introduced in January by Lautenberg and Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss

 

The $1.78 billion includes $100 million in the form of matching grants for states to use to develop rail service on key corridors in their territory and $50 million to pay for upgrades needed to make Amtrak stations compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Amtrak’s request, including those two items, totaled $1.68 billion.

 

Amtrak spokeswoman Karina Romero called the proposed $1.78 billion “very encouraging.”

 

It’s unlikely that Congress will give Amtrak more than it asked for, though theoretically the extra money could be moved over to expand the state grant program.

 

Amtrak wants to establish such a program to help states fund their own rail service over frequently traveled routes that have no rail connection or limited service. Already, 14 states pay Amtrak for service, but supporters of a matching program say many more would seek to expand service if federal support was available.

 

President Bush is also a supporter of the idea. His budget proposal also calls for $100 million for state matching grants, though it would pare Amtrak’s direct subsidy down to $800 million.

 

Amtrak is getting $1.3 billion for the current fiscal year. The railroad’s funding prospects are considered better now that Democrats control Congress.

 

“We’re on our way to building a 21st-century rail system, one that continues to serve travelers like those in New Jersey, but that will serve new passengers as we expand our corridor service,” Lautenberg said in a statement. “We’re finally giving people a real choice between the congestion of our highways and airports and the convenience of a train.”

 

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Business travel on the train as a pleasant experience.... imagine that?  This could be Ohio under the Ohio Hub Plan.

 

Images USA on track with its message

 

March 14, 2007

BY LEWIS LAZARE Sun-Times Columnist

 

We were flabbergasted, quite frankly, when at lunch recently an executive at a large local public relations agency announced she recently traveled to Minneapolis from Chicago for a business meeting. That part of the revelation wasn't what floored us. Rather, it was her decision to make the trip via train, not plane.

 

http://www.suntimes.com/business/lazare/295460,CST-FIN-lew14.article

Rail bond would upgrade Portland-Brunswick lines

MaineToday.com

 

By PAUL CARRIER, Staff Writer 

Saturday, March 17, 2007

 

The passenger rail link from Boston to Portland will stretch north to Brunswick in the next few years if Senate President Beth Edmonds has her way, but the "if" in that equation is a big one.

 

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/news/statehouse/070317railroad.html

 

The delays continue on Ohio Amtrak trains. Today:

 

Train 30, EB Capitol Ltd, running 5.5 hours late

Train 29, WB Capitol Ltd, due to arrive Chicago at 4:14 p.m. (7.5 hours late)

Train 48, EB Lake Shore Ltd, info N/A due to unknown rail service disruption

Train 49, WB Lake Shore Ltd, due to arrive Chicago at 5:32 pm (7.75 hours late)

 

I suspect some of this was due to the snowstorm on the East Coast. But the delay to Train 30 was from axle/traction motor problems. I don't know what the unknown service disruption was to Train 48, but it appears to have been annulled. Welcome to the Third World.

Only in the US would trains not be an all-weather mode of transportation...

 

 

You gotta watch this....

 

NARP region 6 & 7, including Indiana and Ohio, will have a joint meeting with Midwest High Speed Rail in Chicago on Saturday, March 24. I posted it in the Events section some time ago, and it's time for a reminder. To see the Events post, click here.

 

I plan to attend. I'll stay at the Airport Econo Lodge in South Bend on Friday night, and catch South Shore #502 at 7:40 a.m. EDT. It arrives in Chicago a few minutes late for the start of the meeting, but it's a short walk from Van Buren Station to the meeting site.

Having been chastised some time back for taking photos on the platform after arriving in Chicago Union Station, I finally determined that Amtrak does have a stated policy in that regard. I think the paranoia is unwarranted, but that's not my decision. At least they do have an official policy, and now I know that my encounter wasn't just the result of security run amok.

 

Dear ------

 

Thank you for contacting us.

 

Taking pictures of the train in the station is prohibited for safety and security reasons. If you're going to be in the Chicago,IL train station you may want to obtain permission from the manager in Station Services. Explain what you want to do and they'll be able to approve or not approve of you wanting to take pictures.

 

Sincerely,

-----

Amtrak Customer Service

 

what got me in trouble:

 

 

 

 

Good pix.... never understood the attitude of railroads toward railfans.  They can actually be the best eyes and ears for security if their efforts are properly channeled and organized. New Jersey Transit (NJT) was the same way it drew such a storm of protest that they dropped the prohibition.

Metra was Nazi about photography too, for a while. It was so bad that local cops would stop railfans who were photographing passing trains from the public right-of-way, and detain them for the railroad cops. Metra finally reined that in and published a statement that says something to the effect that photography is permitted from any place that is accessible to the general public. There are still some rogue railroad and municipal cops who haven't gotten the message.

 

I had a uniformed CTA employee come after me when I was taking photos from the EL platform at Belmont, but I was able to slip onto a train just as the doors were closing. I've also heard that there really aren't restrictions against taking photos on CTA from places accessible to the public, and that's the only time I've been challenged doing it.

 

I can't see the sense in Amtrak's prohibiting photos of trains in Union Station, but it's a rule. Railroads are dictatorships, and despite the fact that Amtrak operates with public funds, the mentality prevails. Unilateral edicts from above can only be obeyed, never questioned, and never "interpreted." For subordinates, to violate that principle is to attract unwanted attention.

 

The safety part of it doesn't make sense, nor does the security part. How is an individual with a hand-held camera any greater hazard to self, others, or company property than a small woman in heels piloting a sixty-pound piece of wheeled luggage down the platform half at a run?

 

People with evil intentions don't necessarily need photographs to hatch and carry out their nefarious plans, and if they did need photographs or even video, it wouldn't be difficult to obtain them without being noticed. A saboteur or terrorist certainly wouldn't stand in the middle of a platform in plain view of railroad and station personnel, slowly and carefully framing and composing a photo with a big ol' DSLR, and then walk a few steps and repeat the whole procedure.

 

There really isn't a reason for it. It's just company policy. :-P

I can't help but to laugh every time I see an Amtrak locomotive... they are decades behind what the rest of the world is using. 

Makes me weep. This nation ought to have a passenger rail system that is the envy of the world, not one that's "Third World."   

I can't help but to laugh every time I see an Amtrak locomotive... they are decades behind what the rest of the world is using. 

 

If you are referring to this locomotive....

 

 

....that's not a locomotive. It used to be one, an F40PH. Now it's a de-motorized "cabbage" car (cab - baggage). Note the baggage door cut midway down the side of the unit. Amtrak smartly re-used these by removing their engines, adding train-line cables, but keeping the locomotive controls in the cab for use in push-pull service. The train-line cables connect with those running below the passenger cars and the locomotive at the other end of the train that have been similarly retrofitted so the controls in the cabbage can operate the locomotive when running in push mode. Push-pull trains don't have to be turned at the ends of their runs. It saves time and crew costs, and saves money in acquiring cab-only passenger cars. It also improves safety in the event of a grade-crossing accident, as a cab-only passenger car isn't as sturdy as a locomotive and no passengers ride in the cabbage cars. Some decry Amtrak for being "wasteful" but these cabbage cars were a very cost-effective move by Amtrak.

 

Now, if we want to lament the type of locomotives Amtrak is using to power their trains, then that's another matter. But I still don't think it's accurate. These locomotives are as advanced as any in the world for the duties they are being asked to perform, that being 79 mph diesel-powered passenger operations. And, they're made in America at General Electric's plant in Erie, Pennyslvania.

 

Below is the P32AC-DM. It can operate on diesel fuel or electricity (it has a third-rail "shoe" for electrical pickup) and has on-board computer diagnostics to ensure the power plant is running at maximum efficiency and automatically makes corrections to fuel/power flow when it's not. It has one of the most efficient alternating current traction motors available, has in-cab signals that display the track/signal status ahead and the cab is even air-conditioned....

 

 

This is a P42DC, also made by GE, and has the same features as the P32 except that it isn't dual mode. Generating up to 4,000 hp direct current, the P42's are more powerful than just about any locomotive out there, except for some of the newest U.S. freight units. It's powered by diesel fuel and is the locomotive Amtrak typically uses on most of its trains. It's every bit as advanced as anything else in the world for the kind of 79 mph, non-electrified service its designed for....

 

 

These are GM-built F59's, also a very advanced unit used in non-electrified territory, most notably on the West Coast. These are Amtrak's newest locomotives, manufactured by General Motors' former Electro-Motive Division. I'll put these up against anything else in the world, too....

 

 

Another of Amtrak's newest locomotives is the Acela HHP (high horsepower), for use in powering non-Acela conventional cars in electrified territory. I believe there is a diesel version of this unit as well, but I can't recall for sure...

 

 

Some European locomotives, notably diesel units....

 

France...

 

Munich Germany....

 

UK BR Class 47....

 

Virgin's Class 43 HST, an oldie but a goodie (at least in appearance, not in reliability)....

When I posted that photo of the F40PH-turned-cabbage-car on my web site, I referred to it as "neutered".

 

One of the big pluses to control cabs on the Union-Station end of push-pull trains is at there's no locomotive roaring in notch 8 to maintain head-end power, up next to the head house as detraining passengers walk past. After many years of traveling to Chicago on the Broadway, it's nice to be able to walk from a coach to the station without having to cover my ears against the deafening racket. Steam locomotives weren't nearly so obnoxious.

 

 

I've spoken to engineers who absolutely hate the HEP generators (for the unitiated, a Head-End Power generator produces the electricity for the train's lights, air conditioning, heat etc) inside the locomotives, especially the old F40's. The HEP units whine loudly and, while Rob is right about them being loud on the outside of the train, you can imagine what they're like inside the locomotive. Newer locomotives like the P42's have soundproofed cabins, so the HEPs aren't as loud as in the F40's. But you're still in the same metal box as the HEP, so the noise is still pretty loud.

A little more on HEP vs the old way.

 

< :type: >

In the steam era, passenger cars were heated by steam piped back from the boiler. With the need of flexible connections between cars, plus all the controls and valves, maintaining the system was labor intensive, but if well-maintained it worked well.

 

Then, each car had its own electrical system, typically 30 volts DC although some of the later ones were 60V DC. A generator under the car drove from the axle, usually with a belt or a geared shaft, and a set of big, heavy, expensive lead-acid batteries stored enough power to keep the lights and air conditioning going during station stops or when the train slowed to speeds below 27 mph (because the generator cut out at low speeds). For long layovers, cars had motor-driven generators mounted underneath that could be plugged into 408 volt 3-phase power in the station to keep the electric system up and running. Most cars had train-line connections so that they could be connected to an adjacent car with a jumper cable in case a generator failed.

 

Air conditioning was usually run from the generator-battery system, but some roads used ammonia-absorption refrigeration that works on the same principle as the propane-fueled refrigerators in campers and RVs. They used steam instead of a gas flame to provide the heat that drives the cycle.

 

In the diesel era up through early Amtrak, passenger cars still used the steam-heat and axle-generator system, and both diesel and electric locomotives in passenger service carried huge, oil-fired, complicated and temperamental steam generators that most firemen despised.

 

When Amtrak created the specifications for new locomotives and cars, they designed an integrated system using HEP generators and all-electric cars. As they rebuilt older ("Heritage Fleet") cars, they retrofitted them for HEP. The new system is much easier to maintain, and improves reliability. On the downside, when the HEP fails, every car in the train loses lights, heat and AC. On trains with two locomotives, the HEP generator in either one can sustain the cars at some level. If there's only one locomotive, without HEP you're SOL.

</ :type:>

Article published Mar 23, 2007

 

Heading east, sleep in; heading west, no rest

 

By Jim Carroll

[email protected]

 

Erie is soon going to see the Lake Shore Limited in a whole new light -- daylight.

 

Amtrak is changing the schedule for the train, known locally for middle-of-the-night connections at Erie's Union Station.

 

http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070323/NEWS02/703230359/-1/NEWS/

The first photo below is a train from the UK.  The second photo is the US.  The UK train still looks more sophisticated but the gap isn't as wide as I had thought it was.

 

 

From the Oxford (OH) Press

Amtrak stop, train overpass in city plan

Planning commission also examines plans for a bypass from Conteras to Kehr Road.

 

By Sean Strader

 

Staff Writer

 

Friday, March 23, 2007

 

A Locust Street train overpass and an Amtrak station remain possibilities for the future of Oxford transportation after a Thoroughfare Plan discussion by the city's Planning Commission on Monday.

 

The commission also examined plans for the southwestern portion of a bypass from Contreras to Kehr Road.

 

 

http://www.oxfordpress.com/search/content/oh/story/news/local/2007/03/21/op032307thoroughfare.html

The first photo below is a train from the UK.  The second photo is the US.  The UK train still looks more sophisticated but the gap isn't as wide as I had thought it was.

 

Amtrak's rolling-stock technology has come a long way from the largely-pre WWII fleet that it inherited (although some of those cars were wonderfully comfortable and long-lived when properly maintained). Stations are another story. With the exception of a few major cities, a lot of Amtrak passenger stations served by long-distance trains are pretty third-world and others are, although nicely preserved, badly outdated. The closest-to-home example is Waterloo, Indiana, which serves Fort Wayne (pop. 200K) with an asphalt platform and an open-sided plexiglas bus shelter and sickly-yellow gas-discharge lighting on tall poles. Bad weather? Sit in your car on the steeply-sloping crushed-stone parking strip. You may have a long wait, but there's a gas station about four blocks away where you can get marginally-drinkable coffee and use the restroom.

It isn't the locomotive that are bad as much as it the cars. Amfleet I (mid-1970's) is cramped, with rifle slot windows and has a bad habit of having the restrooms freeze in cold weather. Amfleet II is an improvement, with more spacious seating and wider windows, but it's still a makeshift solution. Horizonliner day coaches are really commuter cars retrofitted for intercity service and have the same rifle slot windows as Amfleet I cars. All of these need to be replaced by true intercity equipment and the sooner, the better.

Absolutely!

Then there are the eastern long distance services, which rely on a patchwork fleet of Amfleet II cars (125 coaches/25 cafe cars), 40 Viewliner sleepers and about 25 rebuilt postwar diners, plus a motley assortment of former sleeping cars used as crew dorms, baggage cars, etc. I did a back of the envelope estimate and came to the conclusion that Amtrak needs about 300-350 new LONG DISTANCE cars to replace what it uses now and also to add capacity to existing trains (the Lake Shore Limited runs with about ten cars now, it used to run with 14-18) and some limited new service.

 

I have this in a file...I'll have to see if I can find it.

A L L  A B O A R D  O H I O

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                      Contact: Ken Prendergast, Director

March 30, 2007                                                               Research/Communications

 

All Aboard Ohio welcomes daylight Amtrak train to Cleveland

 

CLEVELAND – All Aboard Ohio, a nonprofit organization, today announced it welcomed what is hopefully an initial attempt at improving passenger train services in Ohio.

 

Starting April 3, Amtrak’s daily eastbound Lake Shore Limited (Train #49) will offer daylight service between Cleveland and cities in New York. The same train will also offer overnight service between Chicago and downtown Cleveland. Train #49 is scheduled to arrive Cleveland from Chicago at 6:22 a.m. and depart for New York at 7 a.m. First-class compartments, economy coach seating, lounge and dining services are available.

 

This will be the first time in 36 years that convenient train schedules have been offered in these busy travel markets. Here are some key points regarding this new schedule:

 

 All Aboard Ohio and the Ohio Congressional Delegation wrote letters to Amtrak's president and board chairman asking for more usuable train services to Ohioans.

 

 Amtrak is continuing to negotiate with freight railroad CSX Corp. to reschedule the daily westbound Lake Shore Limited (Train #48) over CSX’s tracks to serve Cleveland at a more convenient time than the current 3:30 a.m. arrival.

 

 The new eastbound schedule allows business travelers from Chicago to travel by train to attend a 9 or 10 a.m. meeting in Cleveland without waking before 4 a.m. to catch a 6 a.m. flight in Chicago. Even if Train #49 is delayed up to 2 hours by frequent freight train traffic, business travelers can still make their meeting on-time thanks to the train’s 6:22 a.m. scheduled arrival in downtown Cleveland.

 

 While Cleveland gains from the rescheduling, Toledo loses. The Lake Shore Limited will serve Toledo at less convenient times. Amtrak’s only other daily train service to Ohio, the Capitol Limited, also serves Toledo. This situation, as well as record Amtrak ridership in 2006 and volatile gasoline prices, underscore a need for more trains and thus more federal funding in partnership with states like Ohio.

 

 Two bills (S.294 and H.R. 1300) were introduced to Congress to address America’s woefully under-capitalized rail system by unclogging railroad traffic bottlenecks, allowing Amtrak to acquire new train equipment and availing federal funding for new, short-distance services like those envisioned in the state’s emerging Ohio Hub Plan, including fast trains linking Cleveland - Columbus - Dayton - Cincinnati (3-C Corridor). All Aboard Ohio strongly encourages Gov. Ted Strickland and ODOT Director James Beasley to urge the Ohio Congressional Delegation to support both bills.

 

VIDEO/PHOTO OPPORTUNITY: Starting April 3rd, 7 a.m. departure of Train #49 from Cleveland Amtrak Station, off South Marginal Road, between W. 3rd and E. 9th streets.

 

END

Two friends of mine are dedicated rail travelers, and have used the Lake Shore Limited often for business travel to New York. The latest schedule change has made the Waterloo, IN, departure at 1:40 a.m. unusable for them. They've cancelled their sleeper reservations for an upcoming trip and made airline reservations.

 

Without multiple trips throughout the day on long-distance trains it's impossible to provide attractive service at both endpoints and midpoints, no matter when the trains run. If there were two trains running opposite each other, I think a good place to start would be with an overnight train between NY and Chicago emphasizing sleepers with some coach availability, and a train that passes through Indiana and Ohio during the day with mostly coaches and one or two sleepers based on an updated version of the PRR Slumbercoach.

 

I liked the Slumbercoach. With its compact, nested compartment design, it seemed to me to be an efficient way to maximize sleeper capacity and provide privacy for those passengers desiring it, with minimum overhead. I'm not a big guy, and the smaller bed was completely adquate for me.

Way to go KJP!!

 

:clap:

There should be a PD article tomorrow on this.

That is good news.

 

 

I got this from the PD Reader Advisory Forum.

 

 

Dear Readers,

 

Reporter Grant Segall is working on a story about AMTRAK's decision to restore daytime service from Cleveland to New York, with a planned 7 a.m. departure.

 

He is looking for people who might be likely to use the train, which takes 13 to 15 hours to get to New York, in order to avoid the hassles of air travel. If you think you might use this service, or even if you have a strong negative opinion of it, Grant would like to hear from you.

 

The story will run tomorrow, so if you are going to contact him, you will have to do it right away. Please include your name, city of residence and a daytime phone number, and send your remarks to [email protected].

 

Thank you,

 

Ted Diadiun

 

Reader Representative

That's been floating around on the Ohio Environmental Council's network today. The train isn't scheduled to take 15 hours to get to New York City from Cleveland (though sometimes it does!). And it's important to note that it serves several intermediate markets (ie: CLE-BUF, CLE-ROC, CLE-SYR) at running times that are as fast or faster than by car, and certainly less expensive than by air. Most airfares to Rochester and Syracuse from Cleveland top $700. And KeyBank execs often make that run to visit banking operations in that area (Key used to be HQ'ed in Albany).

And keep in mind, Winter weather isn't the greatest. At times communities up there nearly cut off, with air and road modes shut down, due to lake-effect squalls. These are much less likely to affect the trains.

 

The schedule is a bow to reality, I think. Late connecting passengers from western trains at Chicago and freight congestion on NS probably played a greater role in this change than any desire to serve Cleveland. Still, I'll take it!

 

If ridership shoots up as result of this change (and the same change for the westbound Lake Shore), a case could be made for extending New York-Buffalo trains to Cleveland.

From the NARP Hotline:

http://www.narprail.org/cms/index.php/hotline/more/hotline_494/

 

The House Appropriations Subcommittee with jurisdiction over Amtrak held a hearing on Wednesday on Amtrak’s Fiscal 2008 budget request.  Testifying were Amtrak CEO Alex Kummant and FRA Administrator Joseph Boardman. 

 

Committee Chairman John Olver (D-MA) opened the hearing with the following quote, “Faced as we are with clogged highway traffic and congestion in our air transportation system we simply cannot afford to abandon what has been established as a highly serviceable and, where properly planned, convenient form of transportation.  The record of this legislation does not attack the technological achievements of the motor vehicle and aviation industries however, transportation should not rest on one or two modes.  To solve the problems arising from the side effects of several modes such as pollution and congestion, we must preserve and improve railroad service.”

 

Olver then asked attendees who that quote was from and to most people’s surprise, it was Representative Harley Staggers’ (D-WV, 19xx-19xx) opening statement at a hearing on the creation of Amtrak in 1970.  Olver used this quotation to illustrate how little things have changed over the years.

 

Kummant re-emphasized the need for a full appropriation of $1.53 billion, noting progress in infrastructure work and improved financial accounting in the company.  Boardman again said that the Administration supports passenger rail, but not Amtrak, arguing that a budget of $800 million would require “tough decisions to be made.” When asked by Rep. Joseph Knollenberg (R-MI) about progress on reductions in sleeping and dining car costs, Kummant said that there has been progress on improving food and beverage losses, noting especially the Diner-Lounge concept.  However, he noted that he has “slowed down” proposed rationalization of the sleeping car capacity.  “I am concerned that we didn’t look closely enough at the revenue impacts,” Kummant told the committee, “There is much less to be had on sleeper cost reductions and probably more risk on revenue reductions, so I’ve slowed that and we’re focusing on (improved economics) of dining car service.” Kummant also said that there is at least a conceptual idea of permitting private operators to operate sleeping car service on some long distance trains, in much the same manner that the American Orient Express got started operating on the back of the Capitol Limited in the early 1990’s.

 

I didn't want to start a separate thread for this:

 

The political blog Daily Kos is drafting energy proposals for the US they would like to submit to congress for consideration.  Part of their proposal includes a passenger rail investment act.  Right now they are trying to draft a broad framework.  Here's what they have so far:

 

http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Energize_America_Passenger_Rail

It's very interesting that a group like this is so interested they feel the need to make a formal statement on the need for better passenger rail. These poeple could become very powerful allies if they are cultivated and are the sort to make their views known forcefully and in great numbers. I wonder how receptive they'd be to getting legislative updates and action alerts?

 

Gildone has been chatting with them. Maybe he could ask whether they'd go for that?

Where did you find that? I looked all over the LMJ site and didn't see a thing. Thanks for posting it!

 

It's a decent story, aside from the misID of my title and the strange subhead (likely written by an editor who apparently didn't read the story -- happens all the time).

Here's a short follow-up to my trip to the NARP/MHSRA joint meeting in Chicago on March 24. It's mostly the same thing I posted in the Transportation Forum on SSP in the Midwest Transit Thread:

 

I attended the meeting in Chicago, and thought it was well worth the time and effort to get there. I drove from Fort Wayne to South Bend and took the South Shore from there, and then walked the short distance from Van Buren Station to the meeting venue at the Union League Club. Travel-wise, it would have been more convenient to take Amtrak from Waterloo, but the unreliability of that service time-wise ruled it out for me.

 

After a near-steady diet of hearing people lament what we've lost, it was refreshing and encouraging to hear people there talking of possibilities and positive changes in the political environment and in public perception of passenger rail. Alfred Runte's address was inspiring; he has an almost-evangelical passion for progressive ideals, and he's an eloquent speaker. I bought his book, and I'm about halfway through it. I'm already familiar with much of what he wrote in it, but I hope more people with less familiarity read it; it should help open their eyes.

 

The comment by Milwaukee's Alderman Bauman caught my attention: “Suffice it to say that guided buses are not a cheap form of light rail but a very expensive version of a bus service.” I wish more people would wake up to that, although if BRT can be used to stake out future light rail ROW and build ridership toward eventual rail implementation, I'm not totally opposed to it. Sometimes baby steps are necessary.

 

Regarding long-distance trains, the perception that they're counterproductive to effective passenger rail service in the US, and not an important, integral, productive part of a national system is, to a large degree, the result of statistical and accounting manipulations that distort the facts. Runte covers that quite effectively in his book.

 

Critics of long-distance passenger trains tend to compare traveling from New York to Chicago or Chicago to Los Angeles by train with making the same trip by air, from the perspective of the business traveler. What they neglect is that unlike airplanes, passenger trains connect intermediate cities and towns that sometimes are not well-served by airlines, and they provide a valued service to non-business travelers who make up more than half the long- and intermediate-distance travelers in the United States.

Thanks for the report, Rob.

 

I think it's important to note that business travelers don't constitute the other half. I don't remember the breakdown by purpose of trip, but business travel nationwide by intercity rail is relatively small. Obviously it's more substantial in the Northeast, Midwest corridors, the West Coast and a few other places. Sadly, that's where some view rail as the only places where it's worth keep. Like trips to grandmother's house to Thanksgiving aren't important... Gee, whatever happened to the family values mantra of the neocons?

 

But, you're right, that too many people (especially those inside the D.C. Beltway) think of a train as a plane in terms of traveling from point to point, and serving only those locations. When I did the media interviews Friday about the Lake Shore rescheduling, the reporters were surprised to learn the train stops in Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse...etc etc.

 

The question came up twice when reporters asked who would spend 12 hours on a train when it takes 8 hours to drive to New York City. I bet them that they couldn't drive from Cleveland to Buffalo, Rochester or Syracuse any faster (legally) than they could by train.

 

The reporter from the Morning Journal wasn't aware the train stopped in Sandusky, then asked if that was the last station in Ohio (westward). I informed him that the LSL also stops in Toledo and Bryan. Geography... sheesh.

 

He (and others) would probably be amazed at how many stations are served by the western long-hauls....

 

Coast Starlight (Seattle - Los Angeles) - 29 stations

Largest population center served enroute:  San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose MSA at 7 million

Smallest population center served enroute:  Dunsmuir, Calif. at 1,900 people

 

Southwest Chief (Chicago - Los Angeles) - 32 stations

Largest population center served enroute:  Kansas City MSA at 1.8 million

Smallest population center served enroute: Williams, Ariz. at 3,000 people (freakin' metropolis compared to the other routes' smallest!) 

 

California Zephyr (Chicago - San Francisco) - 34 stations

Largest population center served enroute:  Denver/Boulder MSA at 2.6 million

Smallest population center served enroute:  Granby, Col. at 963 people (Colfax, Calif at 1,496 is a close second. A few others are in the 2,000 to 5,000 range)

 

Texas Eagle (Chicago - Los Angeles) - 40 stations

Largest population center served enroute:  Dallas/Ft. Worth CMSA at 5.2 million

Smallest population center served enroute:  Sanderson, Texas at 861 people (runners up - Lordsburg, NM 3,379; Walnut Ridge, Ark 4,925; Maricopa, Ariz.'s 900 population doesn't really count in my book because it's the Phoenix-area station)

 

Empire Builder (Chicago - Seattle/Portland) - 46 stations

Largest population center served enroute:  Minneapolis/St. Paul MSA at 3 million

Smallest population center served enroute:  West Glacier, Montana at 250 people (a dozen other stations across Montana and North Dakota have 1,000 to 5,000 people yet are spaced up to 100 miles apart - talk about isolation! The Empire Builder is their only link to the outside world in winter.)

 

And, just in you were wondering the smallest city in Ohio to have an Amtrak station is... (drumroll please) ...Bryan, Ohio with 8,333. Its station regularly draws more Amtrak riders per year than Bryan has residents in the town, as it draws from a pretty large area.

New York here we come: By day train

Amtrak alters Lake Shore schedule

Monday, April 02, 2007

Grant Segall

Plain Dealer Reporter

 

Soon you can take a train to the Big Apple without tripping the night fantastic in Cleveland.

 

Starting today, Amtrak's Lake Shore Limited from Chicago to New York will pass through town in daylight instead of the wee hours. The change will also mean more wakeful hours in Elyria, the Lake Shore's only other stop in Northeast Ohio.

 

 

http://www.cleveland.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1175503044163760.xml&coll=2

 

 

Some rip-and-read radio copy....

_________________

 

Amtrak Adjusts Early-Morning Schedule   

04-02-2007 5:42 AM

 

(Cleveland, OH) -- People who ride Amtrak's Lake Shore Limited from Cleveland to New York City won't have to get up so early in the morning. The rail service changed its schedule to allow an eastbound stop in Cleveland at 7 a.m., three hours later than before. Amtrak officials say the only downside is passengers won't arrive in New York until 6:45 p.m. The Lake Shore Limited's westbound timetable to Chicago will remain unchanged for now.

 

Metro Networks Communications Inc., A Westwood One Company

I love how the P-D article refers to "rail buffs", as if no one else would have an interest in riding a train.  That is so typically narrow-minded of most media. 

I wasn't too happy about that either. Do those who advocate for better airline or highway transportation constitute aviation and road buffs? What if they, as we, simply believe that people deserve better transportation?? I guess that makes all advocates (regardless of issue) a buff.

Here is what I have submitted as a letter to the editor at the P-D:

 

Your story "New York Here We Come: By Day Train" (April 2,2007)was factual and well done, with the exception of one point.

 

Why is it that anyone favoring passenger rail travel is seemingly always characterized as a "rail buff".  I am involved with passenger rail planning for the State of Ohio and a life-long advocate. I find the moniker of "rail buff" to be shallow and even insulting to myself and my colleagues.

 

It's as if no one else in Ohio or elsewhere would favor paseenger rail travel. In fact, many people use passenger rail for business travel as well as for pleasure.  Many use it because they have no access to a car or choose not to fly or drive. Would you call people who do use our highways or aiprorts as "buffs"?  I think not.

 

 

I love how the P-D article refers to "rail buffs", as if ... 

...they show up nekkid.

That would be "In-the-buffs."

Keep on chugging...woooooo woooooooooooo.... :roll:

KJP - Re the Morning Journal article^^^ - it's nowhere to be found on their crappy website (same crappy site the News Herald uses), so my fingers flew across the keyboard and entered it in manually (since it had your quotes, it was worth adding to UO).

Wow! Thanks for doing that!!   :type: