General Amtrak Discussion

[DaveKCMO]

interesting lawrence perspective on the southwest chief...

Waiting for the train

Riding the train can make for a long day in Lawrence. While most of the town settles down for the day, or has yet to rise, Amtrak riders begin their day heading west at 12:32 a.m. or east at 5:42 a.m. State Sen. Marci Francisco met neighbor James Dunn at the Amtrak this morning shortly after midnight, both on their way to the Kansas State Historic Preservation Society Conference in Dodge City. "I thought you might be on this train, in fact, I was even going to call to find out," Francisco and to Dunn. The tickets cost $49 each way, which a AAA discount brings to $83.30 for the round trip

Inside the station, Jade Sanchez, 24, of Albuquerque, New Mexico, drifts in and out of sleep to the sound of train bells in the distance. "It's too normal here, I'm ready to go home," said Sanchez. The No. 3 Southwest Chief train will drop her off in Albuquerque in 15 hours, about the same as the drive.

[Belle the dog]

Have taken the train to the west coast.  Nice train, as Amtrak goes.  Certainly doesn't compare with the Santa Fe Super Chief which was the train's predecessor.  Don't expect a dining car with Belgian damask linen, silver finger bowls, or china depicting native American art.  The Super Chief champagne dinner is only a memory. 

However, a nice ride.

Coach seats are large and comfortable.  Pretty good for a family where riding the train is a great adventure.  For a couple, riding in a roomette is far more comfortable.  There is a shower on the lower level of each Pullman car which is a pleasant option.

[advocrat]

I road Southwest Chief to Lamy (Sante Fe) in 1995. It was a great trip all around except for the cigarettes in the glassy lounge car-that's all changed now. My wife and I got a deluxe stateroom. Now the cost was high, but I compared and calculated the cost of a flight to Albuquerque, and a car to Sante Fe + two nights in a hotel (because the deluxe stateroom was our hotel room for two nights) and the cost of meals for those two days and the cost was within 20 dollars of flying there and stayin' in Sante Fe two additional nights.

I considered the train ride to be part of the vacation, and the scenery was worth it. The food was fine. The comfort and anxiety avoidance level was elevated, and the train was on-time going out, and only 30  minutes overdue coming back. The train dropped us off at 8:15 on a Memorial day morning and we were home in twenty minutes as opposed to 50 minutes + if we had come from MCI.

[cityscape]

So I decided to go see a friend in St. Louis this weekend and since I had some time I thought it might be kind of fun and relaxing to take Amtrak into St. Louis.  I did it a long time ago and it was okay.  Basically, the Train was two hours late on Friday making it an eight hour trip instead of a six hour trip.  Then to top it all off I took the early train today heading back to KC and the train broke down 8 miles outside of Jefferson City.  I've now been sitting on this train for about 3.5 hours not moving while they try to fix the engine.  So I decided to hook up my cell phone to my computer and post on the forum!  I'm being told that they are now sending a freight train to pull us to Jefferson City where we'll board buses to KC.  So I guess what I've learned is that driving or flying is ALWAYS better than the train at least the ones here in Missouri.  Hopefully I make it back today!  I'll update you all tomorrow.  Oh yeah, I almost forgot; we have no power which means that there is no A/C and it is about 90 degrees outside and certainly feels the same in the train!

[GRID]

Good luck cityscape, I feel your pain.

[staubio]

It isn't ALWAYS like that at all. I've done that trip 3 or 4 times and the worst problem I've had is an hour or two behind schedule. It certainly has its struggled, though, and you have run into some extraordinary circumstances.

As long as you can be somewhat flexible and the engine doesn't blow up, it is a pretty good option.

The train to Chicago is FAR better than driving.

[ComandanteCero]

I'm a fan of Amtrak, but i don't think i would take the train to St. Louis.  It's just easier and faster to take my car (even when the train is running on time).  And i don't mind driving 4 hours.

Now, KC to Chicago is a different story.  I'll take Amtrak going to Chicago any day, even if there are delays (which i've luckily only had once, and it was just an hour while coming out of Chicago), it's worth it.  Not only because it's nicer to ride in the train 7-8 hours more than it is to drive 8-9 hours, but i don't have to worry about parking once i get into the city (and since i'm usually downtown that can easily be 25 bucks a night).

[Highlander]

I'm a fan of Amtrak, but i don't think i would take the train to St. Louis.  It's just easier and faster to take my car (even when the train is running on time).  And i don't mind driving 4 hours.

Now, KC to Chicago is a different story.  I'll take Amtrak going to Chicago any day, even if there are delays (which i've luckily only had once, and it was just an hour while coming out of Chicago), it's worth it.  Not only because it's nicer to ride in the train 7-8 hours more than it is to drive 8-9 hours, but i don't have to worry about parking once i get into the city (and since i'm usually downtown that can easily be 25 bucks a night).

One thing I very much like about train travel over air travel is being in the heart of the city once I arrive and not having to find your way to the city from the airport.  Even in Europe some cities are not very well set up to deliver people from the airport and even in cities like London where they are, it can be very expensive. 

[advocrat]

So I decided to go see a friend in St. Louis this weekend and since I had some time I thought it might be kind of fun and relaxing to take Amtrak into St. Louis.  I did it a long time ago and it was okay.  Basically, the Train was two hours late on Friday making it an eight hour trip instead of a six hour trip.  Then to top it all off I took the early train today heading back to KC and the train broke down 8 miles outside of Jefferson City.  I've now been sitting on this train for about 3.5 hours not moving while they try to fix the engine.  So I decided to hook up my cell phone to my computer and post on the forum!  I'm being told that they are now sending a freight train to pull us to Jefferson City where we'll board buses to KC.  So I guess what I've learned is that driving or flying is ALWAYS better than the train at least the ones here in Missouri.  Hopefully I make it back today!  I'll update you all tomorrow.  Oh yeah, I almost forgot; we have no power which means that there is no A/C and it is about 90 degrees outside and certainly feels the same in the train!

Cityscape. I am real sorry you had a bad trip. I had one also, and these things shouldn't happen. I've also had wonderful trips to St. Louis on the train, and when I do I brace myself for a possible delay (Union Pacific railroad often shafts Amtrak schedule priority), but most of the time it is on time (like last April when it left St. Louis on the second, and arrived in Lee's Summit a couple of minutes early.)

I would caution you to not be too confident about air travel. I think about a two hour trip to Albuquerque that turned into 9 hours, with a broken engine, no explanation from the airline and I had to fend for myself to get another flight on another airline. I also figured this couldn't happen twice on the same trip but it did on the way back. Only 7 hours getting back this time, but the same lousy customer service. And there was the time we sat on the runway at Lambert in St. Louis during a thunderstorm (2 hours) and they didn't let anybody get out of their seats to go to the bathroom until many were ready to do it in their seats.

Don't forget about the Missouri ice storm folks who got trapped on I-70 last year. Many ran out of gas and this compounded the problem. What was it? oh yeah, some big-ass tractor trailers couldn't make it up a grade and caused a thirty mile back-up or something like that.

I'm not trying to excuse Amtrak-rail travel should have a lot more safeguards and contingency plans, and I won't excuse or glorify other modes of transportation when they screw up as well.

[cityscape]

So I'm finally back.  10.5 hour trip.  They ended up putting us on buses from Jefferson City after 4.5 hours of sitting with no power.  The Conductor for Amtrak rode back with us and apologized basically saying that the Missouri routes are the worst for Amtrak because of the current situation with Union Pacific he also mentioned that some of the oldest trains server KC-STL.  It does sound like trains to Chicago or New Mexico are the way to go, but I most likely will avoid the KC-STL route from now on.  Even if it was on time it is still about 2+ hours longer than it would be to drive.   

[staubio]

I would caution you to not be too confident about air travel. I think about a two hour trip to Albuquerque that turned into 9 hours, a broken engine, no explanation from the airline and I had to fend for myself to get another flight on another airline. I also figured this couldn't happen twice on the same trip but it did on the way back. Only 7 hours getting back this time, but the same lousy customer service.

This is true. I'm hearing about and reading about more horror stories with air travel this season than ever. I was in Calgary for business a month ago and my 1.5 hour layover turned into 7 hours sitting in Denver. Flights were canceled all over the place for no apparent reason.

All modes of transportation are crap these days. We need a reliable high speed rail network.

[ReutherMonkey]

This is true. I'm hearing about and reading about more horror stories with air travel this season than ever. I was in Calgary for business a month ago and my 1.5 hour layover turned into 7 hours sitting in Denver. Flights were canceled all over the place for no apparent reason.

1 month ago it was pouring in about 2/3 of the country, including a couple of the biggest airports in the world. In air travel, if there are delays, it's usually weather. Shoddy equipment failure is a rarity in air travel considering the number of passengers served

All modes of transportation are crap these days. We need a reliable high speed rail network.

Not if it's run by Amtrak.
Unless we nationalize the rails in this country and prioritize passenger travel over freight, we won't see reliable, OR high speed.

[bahua]

My brother and sister-in-law live literally right next to the Amtrak Station in Naperville, but even so, I'll always fly to Chicago. It's the cheapest way to rack up rapid rewards points.

However, when I can manage it, I'll always take the train to Galesburg to visit family in Peoria. Six hour drive, four hour train ride.

[anniewarbucks]

All modes of transportation are crap these days. We need a reliable high speed rail network.

And they keep getting worse every day. I wish that we had the transportation system like they do in Europe.

[advocrat]

And they keep getting worse every day. I wish that we had the transportation system like they do in Europe.

Everybody who rides the trains in Europe marvel and gush about how wonderful they are, and say how they wish the United States had passenger trains like they have there.  So what's keeping it from happening here? I know that the #1 excuse is that the auto industry has control over how we travel. Aside from that many will say that it's too expensive, vs. the number of people that would ride. - Is it possible that more people would ride if it was more reliable, on time, and available?

What would YOU (not just Annie) do to change things? Would you forward a semi-form letter to the legislature and the governor if it was provided to you with the content, the e-mail, or an address link?

[cityscape]

I think it has something to do with the government heavily subsidizing the Airline industry and that if we did a national high-speed rail system that it would cripple the Airline industry thus causing massive layoffs and hurting the economy.

[kard]

Everybody who rides the trains in Europe marvel and gush about how wonderful they are, and say how they wish the United States had passenger trains like they have there.  So what's keeping it from happening here? I know that the #1 excuse is that the auto industry has control over how we travel. Aside from that many will say that it's too expensive, vs. the number of people that would ride. - Is it possible that more people would ride if it was more reliable, on time, and available?

What would YOU (not just Annie) do to change things? Would you forward a semi-form letter to the legislature and the governor if it was provided to you with the content, the e-mail, or an address link?

The three main differences I see between Europe and the US affecting train travel are:

1)  Distance between destinations
2)  Population Density between destinations
3)  Overall political / social climate for subsidizing rail

Lets pick ONE of them to work on first. 

[WSPanic]

Everybody who rides the trains in Europe marvel and gush about how wonderful they are, and say how they wish the United States had passenger trains like they have there.  So what's keeping it from happening here? I know that the #1 excuse is that the auto industry has control over how we travel. Aside from that many will say that it's too expensive, vs. the number of people that would ride. - Is it possible that more people would ride if it was more reliable, on time, and available?

What would YOU (not just Annie) do to change things? Would you forward a semi-form letter to the legislature and the governor if it was provided to you with the content, the e-mail, or an address link?

Would've been great if we had developed in the same way as Europe, but they had pretty good head start on widespread infratstructure for railways. Coupled with the fact that everything is relatively close in distance for the most part, it developed in a much different way.

The east coast of the US has a much older rail infrastructure and the cities are much closer together. And you see lots of train travel between NY, PA, MA, etc. Couple that with the auto and airline industries and you have some good reasons.

I agree it would be a nice option to have.

[bahua]

1)  Distance between destinations
2)  Population Density between destinations
3)  Overall political / social climate for subsidizing rail

I see "Complete lack of competition, internal or external" as one to add to that list.

[advocrat]

Would've been great if we had developed in the same way as Europe, but they had pretty good head start on widespread infratstructure for railways. Coupled with the fact that everything is relatively close in distance for the most part, it developed in a much different way.

Actually, U.S. and Europe were on par with railroads until post-WWII, when the U.S. systematically abandoned this mode of travel, and Europe repaired and improved theirs. Now neither weather or terrorism grounds or stops their rail traffic, and being largely electrified it is environmentally friendlier and not so affected by the price of gasoline, So America has screwed itself and its citizens, convincing itself that we are better off traveling on highways by car or flying.  It's quite alright to talk about a 2 hour "flight" from KC to Chicago, but nobody ever adds onto that the drive from let's say Clinton, Missouri, the parking and bus ride at airport, the 50 minute wait in the terminal, the 20 minute boarding episode, the 10 minute taxi on the tarmac. Then you can enjoy the 2 hour flight (with a similar addition of getting your baggage, ground transportation and shuttle to your destination on the other end.  
The east coast of the US has a much older rail infrastructure and the cities are much closer together. And you see lots of train travel between NY, PA, MA, etc. Couple that with the auto and airline industries and you have some good reasons.

I agree it would be a nice option to have.