Quote:

1) Amtrak equipment sitting in Beech Grove is not in service, or it wouldn't be there. Many of the cars have suffered wreck damage and have been there for years account Amtrak DOESN'T HAVE THE MONEY TO FIX THEM.

What a wonderful way to run a railroad! I guess this just illustrates how much of a "throw away" society we are. We build nice, new Superliner and other types of cars, run them for a few years, and then park them after they sustain wreck damage, never to run again. It reminds me of all those shipping containers that are piling up at our ports. They use 'em once to bring junk over from China and then toss them into big piles once they get here. Too bad some of that Obama stimulus money can't be used to repair wrecked cars. Nah, let's use it instead to make station platforms ADA compliant.

Quote:

2) I don't think anyone ( except Congress ) expects Amtrak to be a profit center; but it is realistic to expect it to cover as much of its' costs as possible.

And, hopefully, the same expectations will be applied to all other modes of transportation.

Quote:

3) The Los Angeles - Salt Lake City route was not a part of Amtrak's original system; Trains # 35 & 36 were added in 1977. EwePee was accommodating at the time;

All I'm asking is, why can't they be accommodating NOW? Is that too much to ask?

Quote:

more recently they have seen other RR's extort track improvement monies from various passenger rail entities in exchange for new or increased service levels.

And such a wonderful way to do business! I like your word, "extort". I guess if the banks, savings and loans and auto manufacturers (to name a few) can fleece the U.S. taxpayer, the freight railroads may as well jump on the bandwagon too! If people start to question why their palms are extended for a handout when their balance sheets are so healthy, they can always claim they're "too big to fail"!

Quote:

The argument can be made that BNSF HAD BETTER be operating passenger trains on time, due to all the track & signal improvements the passenger RR's have funded.

When you say "passenger RR's", don't you really mean us taxpayers? And, if BNSF wanted to, they could probably accept all that public money earmarked for track improvements and STILL put the screws to Amtrak and other passenger operators with impunity in the form of crappy dispatching. IF they wanted to. Thankfully, they don't. They understand the value of good public relations. Not so for UP. A few years ago, UP caused a real ruckus by accepting taxpayer money to have its Los Angeles Subdivision upgraded for Metrolink commuter service. Then, they really started putting the screws to Metrolink in the form of horrendous dispatching. Things got so bad that Metrolink formally complained to the Surface Transportation Board. Metrolink was given a quick lesson in finding out what a "paper tiger" the STB was/is. The STB basically told Metrolink to pound sand. In essence, the STB ruled that UP had every right to accept public funds and turn right around and run their railroad any way they so desired. If they wanted to park a Metrolink train in a siding for five hours, it apparently didn't bother the STB in the least. If Metrolink didn't like it, they could build their own parallel railroad. To understand all of this, you have to go back to the reasons for the abolishment of the Interstate Commerce Commission and the formation of the STB. When UP was busy gobbling up MKT, CNW, DRGW and SP, they realized that, eventually, the ICC would probably start to express misgivings over its voracious appetite of western railroads. Hearings would soon be held regarding things like monopolies and anti-trust considerations. How could UP head off this worrisome chain-of-events? Simple. Crank up lobbying efforts to have the ICC abolished and replace it with a more-friendly STB. Since the STB has been established, it has enjoyed a much-too-cozy relationship with the railroads it's supposed to be regulating. Members of the STB frequently have had ties to railroads prior to their nominations, or directly after their terms of service. STB Chairman Linda Morgan was hired by UP's Washington, D.C., law firm. Her successor, Roger Nober, was hired by BNSF. The railroad counsel to House Republicans, John Brennan, was hired by UP. I guess there's such a shortage of lawyers and lobbyists in Washington that these people have to be pose as regulators of railroads one month and a lobbyists of railroads the next. Go figure! Who would have ever thought there'd be a shortage of lawyers!

Quote:

Think LOSSAN & VBC - SEA - PDX corridors. ( Yes I know LOSSAN isn't really BNSF any more, however it was when many early improvements were made.) Can't blame EwePee for trying.

UP is so repulsed at the prospect of having to operate passenger trains over their lines that they turned down some taxpayer money to spruce up the line over Donner Pass. Amtrak should have never discontinued the Desert Wind or The Pioneer. If they were strapped for cash at the time, they should have operated the trains with one locomotive and one car, just to maintain the "franchise" over the lines. When better financial times came along, they could have brought the trains back up to full-service levels. However, now that the trains have been fully discontinued, UP can now play the "kill it with capital" game whenever talk resurfaces about reinstating the trains.

Quote:

4) Amtrak's own feasibility study released earlier this year attaches very high dollar amounts to restarting this service, as well as Trains # 9 & 10 and # 25 & 26. ALL NEW equipment would be required, per Amtrak's own study. ( The current equipment is aging rapidly as it is.) EwePee isn't the only one with Pie - in - the - Sky ideas.

Obviously, Amtrak is playing the same "kill it with capital" game, since, for whatever reason or reasons, they're not interested in reviving the service. Amtrak is really good at doing things like re-introducing ice cream and china in their dining cars. Or making station platforms ADA compliant. Or turning some of their coaches into rolling billboards. But if you ask the president of Amtrak when a train to Vegas will be re-instated, you'll get that look from him that's similar to a deer who's caught in an automobile's headlights. At the very best, we might see a train re-established over the Florida East Coast, but there's been so many broken promises and delay tactics that I can only say I'll believe it when I see it. I can't help but wonder if Amtrak even has a clue these days as to how to start a new service over a new route. All of the people who were behind those projects years ago have now retired.

Quote:

5) The statement " At 03:00 AM, when there's little traffic on the Interstates,..." was quite funny to me personally. However the statement is at least 20 years out of date in regards to any of the California corridors listed, as well as Portland - Seattle - Vancouver BC. The truck traffic on these corridors at night is at least the equal to auto traffic during the day. Interstate 15 from the Devore Wye to Stateline was a bottleneck for years, day & night, until a 3rd &/or 4th lane was added North of Victorville recently.

Well, we all know that traffic on the Interstates has become horrendous over the last twenty years, but I still feel that, by and large, traffic is much less congested at 03:00 AM than it would be during traditional rush hours or other times of the day.

Quote:

6) The issues of Positive Train Control, its' implementation & expense, will continue for some time to come. The freight RR's argue that it was mandated, but NOT funded, by Congress after a passenger RR screwed up in Chatsworth and serves to protect passenger trains; therefore passenger RR's have to pay for it. The passenger RR's argue that the freight RR's own the track, for the most part, and will also receive benefit from it thru closer train spacing; therefore the freight RR's should pay for it, or at least share the costs. After all, would you pay to install a GPS system in an automobile you don't own & barely use ???

The freight railroads have a much more influential lobbying group in Washington, as opposed to any lobbying efforts that will be advanced by Amtrak. Therefore, if I were a betting man, I'd predict that, whatever the freight railroads want, the freight railroads will get. Isn't that the way it's always traditionally been?