- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Amtrak is a heavily-subsidized rail service with Russian quality at Swiss prices
Posted on 7/11/14 at 11:54 am to Napoleon
Posted on 7/11/14 at 11:54 am to Napoleon
The cost of rail is what keeps it away. No rail service in the world makes money, they are all subsidized by the government. Amtrak operates on the rail owned by the railroad companies and have no control over it, the railroads only wanted 1 company to deal with, at hence amtrak.
1
Posted on 7/11/14 at 11:58 am to Napoleon
What's not to like about a mode of transportation that takes 36 hours to get somewhere, including several 3am connections, and costs as much if not more than a flight?
Posted on 7/11/14 at 12:02 pm to shutterspeed
There is an Amtrak station near us in Atlanta. It's not cheap, it's not good, it's not fast. So why do people take it (mostly minorities, here)?
Scared of flying? Goes to cities not well serviced by air?
Scared of flying? Goes to cities not well serviced by air?
Posted on 7/11/14 at 12:03 pm to SUB
quote:
I remember researching prices for a trip and it was more expensive than flying, which makes no sense
That is usually correct and it takes much longer depending on the journey. Took 24 hours from Tuscaloosa to NYC. Unless Amtrak starts buying tracks from someone and putting up some high speed rails it really doesnt make sense for long distance compared to flying, and the only reason I took the train was because someone was scared
of flying. shouldve let their arse ride that train by themselves. This post was edited on 7/11/14 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 7/11/14 at 12:08 pm to Napoleon
quote:except when you factor in that driving there is 100x worse
A weekend round-trip from D.C. to New York, on trains leaving at a reasonable hour (e.g., not in the middle of the night) will run you about twice that much, or $0.98 per mile
Amtrak is worth it to avoid traffic, tolls, paying for gas, and being unable to do things like go to the bathroom, eat, drink, etc
Posted on 7/11/14 at 12:13 pm to Veritas
Wife and son were on a train this Tuesday, coming to Slidell from Atlanta. Train hit a truck in Georgia, driver of truck was not hurt, then had an unscheduled stop. Arrival time was supposed to be 6 and they ended up in Slidell at 8:30.
Posted on 7/11/14 at 12:15 pm to Pilot Tiger
Everyone should do it once for the experience. Some places are scenic and you may not see them otherwise. There's a route along the northern border that I'd like to do with the kids. It's goes to Glacier National Park. Supposed to be breathtaking.
It isn't for everyone especially if you are on a strict schedule. It is my understanding that the Amtrak trains do not have the right of way of the railroad so if a business or commercial trail is coming through, Amtrak has to yield and pull over while the "real train" does their business on the main line, Loading and unloading etc. So it's a lot of sit and wait.
It isn't for everyone especially if you are on a strict schedule. It is my understanding that the Amtrak trains do not have the right of way of the railroad so if a business or commercial trail is coming through, Amtrak has to yield and pull over while the "real train" does their business on the main line, Loading and unloading etc. So it's a lot of sit and wait.
Posted on 7/11/14 at 12:19 pm to paddys pub
quote:
Amtrak operates on the rail owned by the railroad companies and have no control over it, the railroads only wanted 1 company to deal with, at hence amtrak.
Here is the problem passenger rail is a very very very distant second to the freight that runs on those lines. Until there are tracks dedicated to passenger travel or Amtrak gets some kind of priority it will never change.
Not to mention the car and airline industry will lobby heavily against any attempt to make train travel truly useful outside of the north east or California.
Posted on 7/11/14 at 12:20 pm to Napoleon
I've ridden the West Coast Surfliner tons of times. It's the tits.
Posted on 7/11/14 at 12:27 pm to Pilot Tiger
Anyone ever heard of the auto train?
I-95 is pretty much an awful experience, end to end.
https://www.amtrak.com/auto-train
I-95 is pretty much an awful experience, end to end.
https://www.amtrak.com/auto-train
Posted on 7/11/14 at 12:38 pm to Napoleon
(no message)
This post was edited on 12/27/14 at 2:15 am
Posted on 7/11/14 at 1:12 pm to Dizz
quote:
Not to mention the car and airline industry will lobby heavily against any attempt to make train travel truly useful outside of the north east or California.
Bingo. While other countries spent their transportation money more evenly between airports, highways, and rail the US has done very little with rail. Even though our highway infrastructure is crumbling and can't seem to keep up in many areas with population growth we still refuse to put money into alternative forms of transportation.
It reminds me of a conversation I had with a coworker several years ago.
"I would take the bus but don't because it doesn't go where I need to go."
"So we need to expand the system then."
"Why would we expand it when no body uses it?"
Replace bus with passenger rail and it sums it up perfectly. It won't get better until we make it better.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News