homersimpsonlikestrains
Active Member
For example, it takes the Coast Starlight 12 hours to go from the SF Bay Area to Los Angeles. By contrast, driving that distance only takes 7 hours. Why?
Why do long distance Amtrak trains travel at very low speeds?
- Thread starter homersimpsonlikestrains
- Start date
skyliner
Well-Known Member
Is this a rhetorical question? Forgive me, I'm not trying to be facetious, but I thought Amtrak's scheduling issues and woes were fairly well known and documented. I'm about to head off to bed, so apologies for the somewhat brief response.
-The average speed of Amtrak long-distance trains is fairly slow. Track speed (i.e. max) for most non-electrified Amtrak trains is 79 mph. But add in station stops, winding track with lower speed limits, traffic delays, and other factors, and you get something much slower. There's ten stops between Emeryville and Los Angeles and plenty of curvy track requiring operation at slower speeds.
-Almost none of the track on which passenger trains operate is owned by Amtrak. Nearly all is owned and dispatched by freight railroads. Although Amtrak is supposed to have priority over freight traffic, but the reality is that passenger trains get very little priority from a practical perspective. Portions of many routes are single-track, so if there's a freight already on it, Amtrak will just have to wait in a siding until it clears. Every few years there are stories of epic delays on long-distance services, with trains like the Empire Builder or Southwest Chief arriving 18 or 20 hours late.
-The short version is that the US simply did not prioritize rail travel or mass transit at all when we decided to start building highways and airports. There is almost no independent rail infrastructure for medium and long-distance travel. Amtrak has been hobbled since its inception in 1971 by not having ownership over most of its track (the northeast corridor being the major exception), lackluster operational support by most of the railroads over which it operates, shifting political winds every few years demanding things like greater farebox recovery, service cuts, service additions, various NIMBY factors, FRA equipment requirements, and more.
The US is essentially in the stone ages when it comes to mass and intercity surface transportation, compared to the modern industrialized world. Granted, the population density in many areas does not support certain types of rail service, but we can't even properly figure out how to do it in areas that do. There's all sorts of reasons behind that, plus transit construction costs in the country are among the highest in the world.
I remember visiting Japan in the late 1980s. They were ahead of us in public transportation back then even compared to today. Heck, China has built more high-speed rail in the last ten years than we have in our entire history. Speaking of your SF-LA example, I do hope they get the California high-speed rail completed someday. That is one of the viable corridors for it, if done properly.
-The average speed of Amtrak long-distance trains is fairly slow. Track speed (i.e. max) for most non-electrified Amtrak trains is 79 mph. But add in station stops, winding track with lower speed limits, traffic delays, and other factors, and you get something much slower. There's ten stops between Emeryville and Los Angeles and plenty of curvy track requiring operation at slower speeds.
-Almost none of the track on which passenger trains operate is owned by Amtrak. Nearly all is owned and dispatched by freight railroads. Although Amtrak is supposed to have priority over freight traffic, but the reality is that passenger trains get very little priority from a practical perspective. Portions of many routes are single-track, so if there's a freight already on it, Amtrak will just have to wait in a siding until it clears. Every few years there are stories of epic delays on long-distance services, with trains like the Empire Builder or Southwest Chief arriving 18 or 20 hours late.
-The short version is that the US simply did not prioritize rail travel or mass transit at all when we decided to start building highways and airports. There is almost no independent rail infrastructure for medium and long-distance travel. Amtrak has been hobbled since its inception in 1971 by not having ownership over most of its track (the northeast corridor being the major exception), lackluster operational support by most of the railroads over which it operates, shifting political winds every few years demanding things like greater farebox recovery, service cuts, service additions, various NIMBY factors, FRA equipment requirements, and more.
The US is essentially in the stone ages when it comes to mass and intercity surface transportation, compared to the modern industrialized world. Granted, the population density in many areas does not support certain types of rail service, but we can't even properly figure out how to do it in areas that do. There's all sorts of reasons behind that, plus transit construction costs in the country are among the highest in the world.
I remember visiting Japan in the late 1980s. They were ahead of us in public transportation back then even compared to today. Heck, China has built more high-speed rail in the last ten years than we have in our entire history. Speaking of your SF-LA example, I do hope they get the California high-speed rail completed someday. That is one of the viable corridors for it, if done properly.
logandsawman
Well-Known Member
When I took Amtrak on the Empire Builder several times in 2012, our cruising speed was 79 MPH. They would sometimes go slower when there was freight traffic and they were timing the sidings. Freight always had precedence during that period (as today on that line, I think)
Dave LASM
Dave LASM
Smudge617
Well-Known Member
As freight is the mainstay of the various RR's income, and not passengers, I doubt it's likely to change, you can see from these two maps the disparity between the two.
Feel free to correct me if these maps are inaccurate
Compared to the US freight, (this map includes Amtrak)
Feel free to correct me if these maps are inaccurate
Compared to the US freight, (this map includes Amtrak)
NorthTexasRailroad
Well-Known Member
Given the size of America and the prevalence of highways (cars) and airports (planes), I don't see a huge expansion of Amtrak services. Even the planned additions aren't going to be faster than current speeds I think and will remain largely uncompetitive with other modes of transport. Yet, there are hardly any private passenger trains alternatives (e.g. Brightline in FL) either. My understanding is that passenger travel wasn't a money-making enterprise even for the freight railroads back in the day, so I don't see a whole lot changing any time soon.
Having actually been in charge the dispatching of a couple routes with AMTK operating over them, Amtrak does have priority, BUT the fact of the matter is there are just a lot of other trains out there for AMTK to dodge and weave through. We would actually start putting trains in sidings 100-125 miles in front of Amtrak and we still had some two on one meets. Because AMTK does run faster than freight trains it has to meet opposing trains and passes trains in the same direction. So AMTK has interference from EVERY train on the sub. On the other had, the freight trains are pretty much mostly traveling the same speed so they only have to worry about opposing trains, not about overtaking trains ahead of them.
MilwRoader_Steve
Well-Known Member
Wife and I will be taking an AMtrak trip this October. Minneapolis to Seattle to Portland to San Fran to Chicago and back to St. Paul. Should be fun. Working out the details of getting off early instead of SanFran and hitting the wine country for the two nights instead of the city.
Last time I rode Amtrak was 2002 Ft. Worth to St. Louis and back. I remember waking up and the conductor telling us we were pretty much stopped from about midnight until 0500 in a siding.
Before that we once had my mother come over from Dallas by Amtrak to Longview, Texas in the mid 90s, prob 1994/5. Scheduled as about 2-1/2 to 3 hours, not much more than driving and a reasonable ticket. Train was late into Dallas and she ended up waiting in the station for about 4 hours - not a good thing. And was that much or more late into Longview. First and last time we tried that. Pity - should have been an easy no-brainer alternative.
Last time I rode Amtrak was 2002 Ft. Worth to St. Louis and back. I remember waking up and the conductor telling us we were pretty much stopped from about midnight until 0500 in a siding.
Before that we once had my mother come over from Dallas by Amtrak to Longview, Texas in the mid 90s, prob 1994/5. Scheduled as about 2-1/2 to 3 hours, not much more than driving and a reasonable ticket. Train was late into Dallas and she ended up waiting in the station for about 4 hours - not a good thing. And was that much or more late into Longview. First and last time we tried that. Pity - should have been an easy no-brainer alternative.
logandsawman
Well-Known Member
Going in October you will get the cheaper rate also not the congestion with as many vacationers. When going from St. Paul to Williston ND in March the train had lots of room and also I thought a very reasonable rate.
When the wife bought a ticket in July to meet me the ticket cost about double.
We also had some horrendous wait times, usually on the Williston to St. Paul trip, I remember one such trip we were 8 hours late to arrive. That was when the depot was in the current Train Club digs.
Dave LASM
dgrafix
Well-Known Member
I have some experience of train times back in the day. I used to get the train every day from Weston to Bristol, sometimes from the main station, sometimes from milton halt. Through the late 80s early 90s there was and barely one train was on time during that period.
It was horrid times on UK rail. British members may remember the earlier BR adverts "we are getting there"?
Do not know how it is now in UK as i have not lived there in 20 years, but where i live now Sweden was good when i got here and went downhill for a while (I commute from Uppsala to Stockholm) Then it improved again. Generally it is pretty good and trains run at about 150-200Kmh (up to 125ish in the other scale).
There have been many problem days though, as any commuter anywhere will attest (power or infrastructure failures, fires, mad people loosing it and having police interventions) but usually delays are caused by either "signal faults" or "Unauthorised people on the tracks" (run them over i wanna get home!!
.. ok not -really- but it can feel that way sometimes).
The best trains i ever rode management wise (and i really have travelled around the world) was in Japan.. Those things run like clockwork. I remember getting a train and there was a screen with these crying cartoon characters with the Japanese text.. then followed by a plain blue screen in English. "Apologies for the 5 minute delay. Reason busy (or "people")" something like that. Basically a busy time, lots of people. You can be stood at a platform in UK or Sweden and the train turns up late. You are never given a reason unless it is extreme delay. Half the time there is no info at all.
It was horrid times on UK rail. British members may remember the earlier BR adverts "we are getting there"?
Do not know how it is now in UK as i have not lived there in 20 years, but where i live now Sweden was good when i got here and went downhill for a while (I commute from Uppsala to Stockholm) Then it improved again. Generally it is pretty good and trains run at about 150-200Kmh (up to 125ish in the other scale).
There have been many problem days though, as any commuter anywhere will attest (power or infrastructure failures, fires, mad people loosing it and having police interventions) but usually delays are caused by either "signal faults" or "Unauthorised people on the tracks" (run them over i wanna get home!!
.. ok not -really- but it can feel that way sometimes).The best trains i ever rode management wise (and i really have travelled around the world) was in Japan.. Those things run like clockwork. I remember getting a train and there was a screen with these crying cartoon characters with the Japanese text.. then followed by a plain blue screen in English. "Apologies for the 5 minute delay. Reason busy (or "people")" something like that. Basically a busy time, lots of people. You can be stood at a platform in UK or Sweden and the train turns up late. You are never given a reason unless it is extreme delay. Half the time there is no info at all.
Last edited:
Smudge617
Well-Known Member
Ain't nothing changed since either.I have some experience of train times back in the day. I used to get the train every day from Weston to Bristol, sometimes from the main station, sometimes from milton halt. Through the late 80s early 90s this was and barely one train was on time during that period.
It was horrid times on UK rail. British members may remember the earlier BR adverts "we are getting there"?
Do not know how it is now in UK as i have not lived there in 20 years, but where i live now Sweden was good when i got here and went downhill for a while (I commute from Uppsala to Stockholm) Then it improved again. Generally it is pretty good and trains run at about 150-200Kmh.
There have been many problem days though, as any commuter anywhere will attest (power or infrastructure failures, fires, mad people loosing it and having police interventions) but usually delays are caused by either "signal faults" or "Unauthorised people on the tracks" (run them over i wanna get home!!
The best trains i ever rode management wise (and i really have travelled around the world) was in Japan.. Those things run like clockwork. I remember getting a train and there was a screen with these crying cartoon characters with the Japanese text.. then followed by a plain blue screen in English. "Apologies for the 5 minute delay. Reason busy (or "people")" something like that. Basically a busy time, lots of people. You can be stood at a platform in UK or Sweden and the train turns up late. You are never given a reason unless it is extreme delay. Half the time there is no info at all.
AirbrushNo5
Well-Known Member
Last train I rode was Rome to Napoli / Rome to Firenze… high speed rail is the way to go…
mara plutoni
Well-Known Member
There is a huge difference between Americas (USA and Canada) and Europe.
Being on the Amtrak or Via trains is holiday and transport in the same days. The system in Europe is complicated to explain, but in all more a way to move from 1 place to another. We (Europe) have our problems with electric systems not the same in all countries, with border crossings in general not very smooth. Not only the currency may be different, the attitude towards public transport is not in all countries at the same level.
This month there was a strike in Germany for 3 days, so hardly any train running.
Even the rails do not match in all countries. This means either change of trucks, adjust wheels over axles or change trains at the border.
But most trains run frequently, this is every half an hour in Holland, more like a metro system, when they run.
Riding the train in the States or Canada is fun and a huge adventure!
Being on the Amtrak or Via trains is holiday and transport in the same days. The system in Europe is complicated to explain, but in all more a way to move from 1 place to another. We (Europe) have our problems with electric systems not the same in all countries, with border crossings in general not very smooth. Not only the currency may be different, the attitude towards public transport is not in all countries at the same level.
This month there was a strike in Germany for 3 days, so hardly any train running.
Even the rails do not match in all countries. This means either change of trucks, adjust wheels over axles or change trains at the border.
But most trains run frequently, this is every half an hour in Holland, more like a metro system, when they run.
Riding the train in the States or Canada is fun and a huge adventure!
Compared to the US, it is a metro system.
New York to Washington on Amtrak is about 225 miles and takes about 3.25 hrs, average 69 mph. Amsterdam to Paris is 300 miles and takes 4.5 hrs, average 66 mph. On Amtrak's own routes it is equivalent to European travel.
The Empire Builder travels 2200 miles, Chicago to Seattle, in 46 hrs, roughly 48 miles an hour on BNSF tracks. That's roughly Lisbon to Warsaw, 2100 miles, which (according to Google) takes about 44 hrs by rail, roughly 48 mph.
Amtrak might not be quite as bad as some people think.
mara plutoni
Well-Known Member
Dave so right. Whenever you have the time and want to enjoy the ride, go by train.
I travelled from New York to Chicago and beyond to Seattle. From there to Denver and after the meeting for work even to Orlando (before the hurricane struck New Orleans). But that was cheap and easy due to the monthly Pass for us being from Europe. Money and time, that is what you need.
Apart from oversees I never ever want to fly again, so in Europe I go by train.
I travelled from New York to Chicago and beyond to Seattle. From there to Denver and after the meeting for work even to Orlando (before the hurricane struck New Orleans). But that was cheap and easy due to the monthly Pass for us being from Europe. Money and time, that is what you need.
Apart from oversees I never ever want to fly again, so in Europe I go by train.
Rico
BN Modeller
Well finally someone is listening! (I’m one of many who’ve voiced my concerns)
Heres an article on getting people prioritized over freight…
Heres an article on getting people prioritized over freight…
mara plutoni
Well-Known Member
Rico one of the main differences between American and European system is the ownership of the tracks.
In Europe RR companies have to buy paths (in time and routes) to ride a train. In Holland except from some Museum RR nobody owns tracks.
(apart from factory tracks). The gouvernment based authority has to deal with passenger companies (used to be only 1 state owned one, NS) and freight hauling companies. No not the black and white rearing horse company
It's not so much priority, but the base is passenger service due to the fixed schedules (frequency and time). Lets say you want to have a trainservice every half an hour at .07 an 37, the other companies (freight or passenger) have to clear the tracks at that time and location.
Mostly our country have big train-hubs, Amsterdam, Utrecht being the bigger ones. Being a passenger you can change trains there with a good (= within 1/4 hour) connection to other trains or directions. Making this happen is a huge puzzle...
In Europe RR companies have to buy paths (in time and routes) to ride a train. In Holland except from some Museum RR nobody owns tracks.
(apart from factory tracks). The gouvernment based authority has to deal with passenger companies (used to be only 1 state owned one, NS) and freight hauling companies. No not the black and white rearing horse company
It's not so much priority, but the base is passenger service due to the fixed schedules (frequency and time). Lets say you want to have a trainservice every half an hour at .07 an 37, the other companies (freight or passenger) have to clear the tracks at that time and location.
Mostly our country have big train-hubs, Amsterdam, Utrecht being the bigger ones. Being a passenger you can change trains there with a good (= within 1/4 hour) connection to other trains or directions. Making this happen is a huge puzzle...
Bristolman2012
Active Member
My wife and I rode amtrack Chicago to New York 3 times . All three were between 19 to 20 hours and it sure beat driving a car .
mike
mike
Bristolman2012
Active Member
just read an article about the new Acela trains ( northwest corridor ) testing high speed runs supposedly going to go 160 mph once infrastructure upgraded . Long time ago ( I’m 80 ) 18 then but I was a gandy dancer for the rr and we did all of the track laying by hand .
mike
mike
You own a house. It has a nice den with a wide screen TV. I really like to watch my favorite news show on a wide screen TV. Every evening from 5 to 6 pm I want you to rearrange the furniture in your den so all the chairs face the TV. I will come over to your house every night with some of my friends and watch my show. You have to be out of the den and can't have anybody in the way. The driveway has to be clear for me and my friends to park and we have to be able to enter the house, take our seats, watch the show and depart unimpeded. Doesn't matter if you are painting the room or having a dinner party or want to watch a show you like. You have to let me use your house to do it. And I want you to buy brand new recliners for me to sit in. You can sit in them when I'm not using them, but you have to keep them clean and the leather polished. I will pay you a couple dollars a month if you do this, but if anything goes wrong and I it's not set up for me to be in the chair exactly then I want to be, you will lose that month's payment.
That is the "Amtrak" mandate.
If you think you would like that type of arrangement and it would work well for your family, great. If not, congratulations, you are a freight railroad.
