Comments on: Dear President-Elect Obama, We Need Trains, Too!

By: Larry Davis

Larry Davis — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 11:55:11 +0000

Since I returned from three years as a teacher in South Korea, I’ve been bemoaning the lack of decent train and bus service in the US. How incredibly ill-advised it was to allow our mass transit systems to decay to such an extent, market or none. I’ve had great experiences on such lines as the California Zephyr, the Silver Meteor and the Montrealer in the 80s and 90s. Three years ago, I rode the train from Houston to Atlanta and was forced to get a hotel room in New Orleans for an overnight layover, then the train was seven hours late into Atlanta the next day because every time a freight train was met, it was the Amtrak train which was shunted onto a side track to sit and wait. It is a national embarrassment. The problem is, Americans are impervious to embarrassment, it sometimes seems.

Travel by Greyhound and you will see how the poorest Americans and European students on holiday get around. It is arduous, I’ll tell you. When I think of all the ways the hundreds of billions of dollars spent in Iraq could have benefitted this country… Lord help us.

By: Eric Spiritfeather-Gibson

Eric Spiritfeather-Gibson — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 05:04:00 +0000

i have bacpacked throughout central america and just dont understand why the public transportation in a 3rd world is astronomically better than here. you can get to any little village on or off the map through public transit systems. thats where i want my taxes to go. if i could depend on a transit system like that here i would save a fortune. i want to yell “People Wake the %!$@ up already. the technology has been around for 70 years or more. like the old story of sliced bread. didnt invent the bread or the slicer, but put them together. jobs ect…

By: Judith Harris

Judith Harris — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 19:10:49 +0000

I could not agree more – thank you, Peter Bridges. Even benighted Italy has its new fast train connecting the city centers of Milan and Rome in only 3-1/2 hours, much faster than air transport.
The U.S. has suffered from a development model that was deeply flawed, with ever more outlying suburbs at the expense of the city center and of the community that is both reflected and fostered by the city. To cite economist Schumpeter speaking of “creative destruction,” this economic crisis is our chance to carve out a new way.

By: PEMAN

PEMAN — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:47:55 +0000

Mr. Hansbrough has an interesting idea, that of the “Slip Coach”.
But the idea has already been tried. In the British Isles
a special car at the end of the train was manned by an engineer or a specially trained conductor.
Approaching a station where the train would not have a scheduled stop, the employee would man a special cab in the last car, effect an uncoupling and through an application of the air brake bring the “Slipped” car to a stop at the intermediate station platform.
Of course, another locomotive would have to be ready to remove the car from the platform after the stop was completed.

By: Jon Esty

Jon Esty — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:33:55 +0000

Peter makes an excellent statement of the current problems faced by Amtrak in its attempts to deliver intercity passenger rail service in the US. Unfortunately, the US has chosen to invest in highways and airports in preference to passenger rail in marked comparison to Europe and Pacific Rim countries who seem to better understand the efficiencies, reliability, and conveniences of rail.

I strongly agree with his point about the connectivity trains once provided for towns and small cities around the country. This level of service has never been able to be duplicated by air or bus travel to most locations, a fact which has helped lead to isolation of large portions of the country for those who may not have access to an automobile or may not wish to drive.

I would hope that the new administration’s Recovery and Reinvestment Plan would include significant funding for intercity rail. It’s true that expanding rail capacity for both freight and passenger trains would be a very expensive proposition but there are significant modest improvements that can be made starting with investments in new passenger cars and locomotives, station renovations, double tracking in places where significant congestion exists, expanding passenger train frequencies in existing corridors, and initiating new long distance trains.

By: Interurbans

Interurbans — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:43:21 +0000

Great article, thanks. I travel by train in other parts of the world and trains are as much a part of the thinking as freeways are here. The trains are fast, frequent, on time and dependable. I can go on and on the advantages of traveling by train instead of driving or flying but one word seams to cover it ant is everything they “work”.

When taking American business associates on a subway or train overseas they are awed by the positive experience and ask why we do not have such systems at home. At first they want to take a taxi or fly because they do not know better, but after their experience it is the subway or train every time.

One of the things the high speed railroads do to reduce dwell time at stations is have each car marked on the platform where the riders “queue-up” so when the train arrives every one is ready to board and a stop can be 30 seconds and the train is off again. There are local and express tracks so express trains go through station at full speed on inner tracks away from the platforms.

Passenger trains can and do work well and will be used when they are rebuilt. They can be faster, more convenient and less expensive than driving or flying. The idea of reclaiming abandoned rail lines especially in urban areas is a must to start with. Then capacity can be rebuilt to allow for high speed and dependable passenger rail service and at the same time rail fright traffic capacity can be increased so that much of the contain traffic now on the highways can return to the rails freeing up the highways so the money that would be spent to improve them would be spent to rebuild our lost rail networks instead.

Rail is a much more efficient and faster way to move goods and people that uses less imported energy and causes less pollution.

By: Peter Bridges

Peter Bridges — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:42:04 +0000

I am grateful to Robert Ramsay for pointing out my mistake about the route of the California Zephyr–a mistake all the more embarrassing since I have on occasion watched the Zephyr running on the BNSF in Colorado. In any case, the editor has kindly let me correct the mistake; I trust no one will see that as Orwellian.

By: Ron DeGray

Ron DeGray — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:06:34 +0000

Great and important article and comments. Lash asks, “How do we get more people to ride trains?”. My thought is to make them fast, frequent, comfortable and Inter-modal.

Glastonbury, Connecticut; rdegray@mac.com

By: Lash Hansborough

Lash Hansborough — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:53:27 +0000

Dear Peter,
This is an excellent and timely article, one that I wish I had written. I have a couple of suggestions for you to consider.
One immediate thing to do is that all “abandoned” rail lines be reclaimed by the U.S. government as federal property. One line that comes to mind is from Canon City through Leadville and under Tennessee Pass. If we need multiple links, we should ensure existing links do not disappear.
I am as frustrated as you are with passenger delays by freight traffic. One (expensive) way around this might be determine were the most delys take place and lay track for passenger train use only. Surely that would not be difficult in Nebraska, but other choke points may be more challenging.
How do we get more people to ride trains? Hand out some free federal passes so that more people will get to enjoy (hopefully) the experience of train travel at least once. It’s a classic “come on.”
While in graduate school, I and some other students looked into ways to improve short-haul commuter train service. I came up with the idea of a “transfer car” attached to the rear of the train so that it would not have to stop at stations.
This transfer car is detached after being loaded with people who want to get off at the next station. It slows down, and pulls off onto a siding with the station. As the train goes by the station on the main line, another transfer car already at the station leaves, catches up with and attaches to the train. Those passengers move to the main train, and the cycle can be repeated. Thus no time is lost by the train itself, and the commute time can be substantially shortened.
I have more thoughts on train travel and how to make it more attractive. Perhaps we can continue this discussion in the future. I hope so.

Lash

By: Robert A. Ramsay

Robert A. Ramsay — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:49:42 +0000

Peter Bridges is correct in saying that we need a modern passenger railroad system for America. I agree completely!

One minor correction, however. He says the California Zephyr runs on the Union Pacific through Nebraska from Chicago to Denver. In actual fact, the CZ runs entirely over the former Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad (BNSF today) but over the UP (foprmer D&RGW) west of Denver to Salta Lake City. The Burlington is entirely single-track through Nebraska and thus the many delays.