Amtrak

[I-275westcoastflorida]

Its not really that they dont want to spend money on them though is could be but the fact almost nobady uses the trains anymore so thats why.

[monsoon]

Its not really that they dont want to spend money on them though is could be but the fact almost nobady uses the trains anymore so thats why.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not quite so fast. Train travel is very successful in some places. See this thread for more on this subject.

I am in agreement that Amtrak should be broken up.

[BlueFlag]

I was just thinking about Amtrak.

There are some that say shut it down and break it up.

There are some that say save it.

But, I can't seem to find anyone with any thoughts or answers to these questions.

Has anyone heard of any company or companies ready, willing, or able to step in when Amtrak is broken up, to buy or take over all or some of the lines?

Has anyone heard of, for lack of a better term, any game plan when they do shut down?

I imagine the rolling stock will be sold or auctioned off and the government will use the proceeds to pay off any of Amtrak's outstanding debts.

Who gets to use, what used to be Amtrak's track?

Will those lines be auctioned off as well?

Or, Will the government take ownership of Amtrak lines to recoup past funding and lease track time to other rail companies that still need to run on those rails.

What would happen? If, Amtrak employees suddenly said, lets go on strike.

Would that even matter since there may be no Amtrak in a few months anyway?

Anyone with any thoughts or information?

[Cotuit]

Amtrak to introduce airline-like peak-fare program

[Snowguy716]

Look at this website:

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/passengerrail/highspeed.html

The midwest wants to build and update their tracks for high speed train use. It sounds like they'd want Amtrak to operate the trains once it was finished. Basically, the trains would be safe for 110mph on tracks that would route freight trains around them so that a trip from St. Paul to Chicago would be 5 hours rather than 8.

I think this is a great idea. We need to be expanding rail travel (run on electricity!), not tearing up rail lines and expanding freeways. Besides, everybody knows that expanding freeways doesn't relieve congestion.

[tombarnes]

That's great news! I hope something will come of it.

[thewhister]

Frankly it is strange that railroad tracks are not considered a public infrastructure. Road are for public good. Airports are public entities. Shoot even seaports are government financed for the economic good! So how in the world did the Backbone that built and expanded this country become the beotch Child now.

Seems like the railroad tracks should be funded and maintained like our highways. Federal government can dish out the money (although states should have more authority than the feds IMO) and the states maintain the system.

As it is setup now the Freight rails maintain the tracks in their territory and they are crying fowl about highway and airport funding.

Seem like the goverment should "Eminent Domain" tracks and call it for the economic good of the country. Least this would probably foster better competition for freight service within the rail industry.

Also didn't the government fund the railroad construction back in the days?

Some industry links:

http://www.aar.org

http://www.tomorrowsrailroads.org/

[jpl02]

I agree rail is a viable option, but too many times, rail lines are foolishly planned. We have many miles of empty tracks, but do they make good routes for commuter and light rail trains? Think about this......a lot of railroad tracks were built adjacent to factories, in the heart of industrial sections of cities, or other places where the people aren't. You have to build rail to serve people and commerce, not derelict parts of cities.

Tri-Rail in South Florida, perfect example. It runs on an former CSX rail line parallel to I-95 (a plus).......BUT.........it falters because the majority of structures along I-95 are not homes, shopping areas or other destinations better served by transit, but by factories, warehouses and other places people don't want or need to go. The original intent of Tri-Rail was to be a temporary traffic solution to the massive I-95 widening in the late 80s and early 90s, but it was decided to keep it. Tri-Rail was a great concept, but poorly planned due to the above mentioned reasons.

Let's embrace rail, but let's do so with common sense.

[thewhister]

I agree rail is a viable option, but too many times, rail lines are foolishly planned. We have many miles of empty tracks, but do they make good routes for commuter and light rail trains? Think about this......a lot of railroad tracks were built adjacent to factories, in the heart of industrial sections of cities, or other places where the people aren't. You have to build rail to serve people and commerce, not derelict parts of cities.

Tri-Rail in South Florida, perfect example. It runs on an former CSX rail line parallel to I-95 (a plus).......BUT.........it falters because the majority of structures along I-95 are not homes, shopping areas or other destinations better served by transit, but by factories, warehouses and other places people don't want or need to go. The original intent of Tri-Rail was to be a temporary traffic solution to the massive I-95 widening in the late 80s and early 90s, but it was decided to keep it. Tri-Rail was a great concept, but poorly planned due to the above mentioned reasons.

Let's embrace rail, but let's do so with common sense.

Yes, I agree but it seems the infrastructure is in distrepair, dismantled or abandoned. In Raleigh, rail lines came from all directions to downtown and had many companies servicing passengers. It is interesting to see these stations being used as something else today.

I always wondered how Tri-Rail operated along the I-95 corridor. I remeber going to Ft. Lauderdale and seeing signs for Tri-Rail stations and was scratching my head if people acutally used the system. It would be an interesting system to look at for the Triangle area in North Carolina. Since the TTA is planing on using the existing track right of ways for it. Does each transit authority Tri-Rail serves run bus service frequently for it to be viable?

Seem like this is a similar issue the TTA system is facing, besides the funding issue from the FTA.

[Snowguy716]

You can build traditional style tracks that allow trains to go 200mph. We should expand this service. With high speed trains, mid-distance travel would be competitive with flying.

You think about it... you want to take a train from Minneapolis to Chicago. The trip would be between 3 to 4 hours by train if it was high speed (200mph). To fly, you have to get to the airport about 90 minutes in advance, check your luggage, wait, board, wait more, then fly 1 hr. 10 minutes, then taxi and pick up your luggage.. it's a 3 hour ordeal before it's done with a lot of stress. Riding a train doesn't have hte hassle. You get your ticket from an automated machine, hop aboard with your luggage, and get off... so much more convenient. Plus you can walk around on the train.