From your link:
So, once again, U.S. cities are paying more in order to subsidize service to rural areas. Are you sure it’s Democrats who want this to continue?
Apparently, since it’s Democrats that are pushing it. And what’s this about rural areas? It’s pretty much every line that’s losing money outside the northeast corridor. Milwaukee to Minneapolis, Chicago to St. Louis, Reno to Oakland, Seattle to Portland, etc.
If it wasn’t for the few profitable runs in the Northeast, Amtrak woild have lost a lot more than $174 million in 2017 since as you point out, the profitable lines had to subsidize the losing ones, and there was still an overall loss.
2 summers ago I got to spend time in Europe, and much of that in Germany and France and with lots of long distance travel within the perspective country and got a perspective of high speed train vs high speed road travel.
In Germany, which invested in their road system and the beloved autobahn, it was apparent to me, while driving around 200 kph, that I am at, actually beyond the upper limit of what can be the average car speed in a society, and it is very intensive to drive at that speed for long distances, it takes its toll. And I had to admit that 200 kph is not a reasonable option for standard car travel (though awesome to experience) in society. It was sort of a sad realization that I am beyond maxed out of what a car based society could be expected to travel at. We are at a dead end of car travel speed.
Then in France I traveled (as often as I could) on the TGV (TVG?) and was traveling at over 300 kph, and actually hit 200 mph using the US system. It was amazing and felt like flying on the ground with the background changing vary fast, even distance hills would be here and gone in no time.
So 2 countries one went for roads the second went for rails, and from an environmental standpoint, well there is serious talk about imposing a national speed limit on the Autobahn to reduce carbon emissions. It seems like roads hit the dead end for such travel and rail system has room to advance and has such a track record of doing exactly that.
So, in the interest of fiscal responsibility, let’s build some more high-speed lines in the densely-populated northeast, and cut service entirely in the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, etc. We’ll have Amtrak turning a profit in no time. Think we could get any Republican legislators on board with that plan?
It’s not as well known as the TGV, but Germany has a pretty good high-speed network with their ICE trains. If you didn’t take those, you missed out. One of my favorite trips was from Brussels to Frankfurt. We left a little late, and I think the engineer was trying to make up time. The train is rated for 300 kph, and we were holding a pretty steady 296. Made it to Frankfurt on time.
Say what? I just checked on Amtrak and a coach ticket is considerably less than that. Amtrak tickets are unfortunately like airline tickets in that they can vary wildly in price depending on your departure date. Not wanting to cherry-pick – and being lazy, I checked the price on the Empire Builder departing next Friday, the 16th, figuring any bargains would be gone and a weekend trip would be pricier. One-way is $315, round trip departing Seattle the Friday following is $150 more for a total of $465.
A sleeper will be considerably more. None were left on the 16th departure but moving forward in time comes up with a roomette, the smallest available for around $800 one way with the return an additional $300.
Another expense to consider is that meals are included in the sleeper fare while coach passengers must buy their own. Amtrak doesn’t mind you bringing aboard your own grub but will neither heat nor cool it for you.
Indeed so.
We did a trip once to Germany where a friend (American but living temporarily in the Saar) met us in Frankfurt and we traveled on the train to Munich. Took a few hours and it might have technically been faster in a car but he had the foresight to bring lots of beer (!) and food (!) with him, so we had a great time catching up and getting refreshed. And there was a lot more space in the train car and bathroom breaks whenever we wanted without slowing us down.
There are cases where travel by car or by plane are preferable but this was not one of them. Rail can and does have its place.
I get your overall argument, but please explain why anyone would want to take such a method of travel? I could be from Chicago to Seattle in five hours on a plane, much cheaper, without having to sleep at all, let along in in a tiny box.
I mean, I can’t fathom a scenario why anyone would take that train.
I agree with you. Train travel seems best for medium haul routes, not long haul. Air seems to be the only way to really cover long distance travel in our modern society for now (though proposed SpaceX sub orbital spaceship travel may be coming).
Though that would not change that people from Chicago may want to go to Kansas City and those from Kansas city may want to go to Denver and those Denver may want to go to Salt Lake City, and those people may want to go Biose, and those people may want to go to Sacramento and it may be one day a viable train route for those reasons and they just may be willing to sell tickets for those like you because the train is going there anyway.
A small percent of the population is afraid to fly.
And some of us simply like trains.
If I need to be somewhere at a given time, I’ll probably fly even though I hate the associated bushwa. But given my druthers, and if there’s a more-or-less direct connection, I’d rather take the train. It helps that when I’m on vacation, I regard being on the train part of the vacation itself rather than a means of getting from point A to point B.
My sister-in-law, who is naturally somewhat paranoid, refused to get on a plane for years after 9/11, that event scared her so bad. When she had to travel long distances, which wasn’t that often, she took the train.
I wouldn’t drive my own car any significant distance if I had an alternative no matter how much energy I would save. I hate driving.
Not many people do. I think mostly that Desert Dog was refuting Sam Stone’s claim that such a trip “will set you back by over $1000”.
The other thing is that trains don’t just serve the endpoints of their routes. People might want to take the train from Seattle to Spokane, Sandpoint to Whitefish, Fargo to Minneapolis, or St. Paul to Chicago. Some of those are trips where high-speed rail might well have advantages over driving and flying. I doubt that it’s enough to make the whole Seattle-Chicago route profitable, but a fair analysis should look at all the potential passengers, not just end-to-end.
Indeed, it was. I didn’t mention it in that post because it would bury the lede, but come Thursday I will depart for a rail excursion from Maricopa (Phoenix) to Los Angeles to Chicago to Pittsburgh to Altoona to DC to New Orleans back to Maricopa on August 1st.
Total price of transportation: $300 – because I got it on sale. It’s currently $500. Now there are considersable costs on top of that, meals (being coach I have to pay for them) and rooms – knowing Amtrak’s OT performance could be better there’s at least an overnight stay at all connections but one.* Three nights in Altoona at a railfan B&B and three more in DC where my nephew lives.
Obviously, as with Otto it is the journey that is more important in this case than arriving and HSR is not a factor.
*With a 12-1/2 hour layover in Los Angeles for the Southwest Chief, I’m crossing my fingers.
To be honest, the price I quoted was for the sleeper, but that’s because on the site I was looking at it looked like the train only had sleepers or ‘bedrooms’ which were $1700. I just assumed everyone got a sleeper or a bedroom if they were going on a 69 hour train ride, which I believe is the time it takes on Amtrak between Chicago and Los Angeles.
How do you ride coach for 69 hours?
By sitting on your ass, how do you think? 
Seriously, though, it’s not like you’re stuck on an airliner for that length of time. The seats are much wider* and have a lot more legroom than the fanciest class on an airplane and you’re free to get up and wander around. In fact you have to in order to get a bite to eat. There are legrests and footrests and they recline quite a bit. Unless the track’s maintenance is really subpar I’ve not had any trouble sleeping. Indeed, historically I’ve had trouble staying awake in the afternoons.
*They don’t even have an armrest between the seat-pairs.
I too enjoy train travel. It’s easy to sleep in coach for me since I’m fairly small, but I admit, I’d prefer a room with a bed.
DesertDog, that trip sounds like a blast. I hope you have a great time.
Still though… 69 hpurs of sitting vs a 3.5 hour flight is a pretty hard sell. Especially if the train ride costs as much as a plane ticket, which it does.
Towards the end, the cross-country passenger trains in Canada tried to sell thrir rides as ‘experiences’ like a cruise. They made no sense any more as efficient transportation. The 'experience ’ thing attracted a few people who like trains, but not enough to keep passenger rail from going under.
69 hours might be too much, but I have taken a 10 hour train ride instead of a 1 hour flight, when I wasn’t in a hurry. That was perfectly fine. As said, train seats are utterly unlike airplane seats. They’re more akin to the most comfortable easy chair in your living room. I had no trouble sleeping in them.
Where are you getting 69 hours from?
I just looked it up, and I could get a ticket from Chicago to La for $146 that would take a 19 hours, 10 minutes.
And of course, that’s not high speed rail. High speed rail would obviously be much faster.
As long as we are talking numbers, I’m also curious as to where you got your $500 million a mile figure from. I’m not seeing anything close to that. The California project which would be travelling through mountains, needing bridges and tunnels, averaged at $82-$154 million per mile, bt most estimates I see over generally flat land is around $10-$15 million per mile.
I think that you are seriously overinflating the costs and times associated with HSR, while seriously underestimating the costs and times of your other imagined alternatives.