Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Want airline food? Take Amtrak

railwayage.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 225 posts

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#91

Post by throwawayjava »

scyclow wrote: post #81
op00to wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much does the US subsidize air travel via FAA, airport subsidies, etc? What about road subsidies? It’s like somehow rail has to be profitable on its own, but not bus or air.

I don't know the numbers, but I'd be shocked if air and bus lost as much money per trip as trains. Part of what makes the train appealing for the longer rides is that if you're taking coach half of the car is empty and you know you won't have to sit next to anyone.

How do you define "loss" in this context?

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#92

Post by starpilot »

scyclow wrote: post #61

I took the Empire Builder a couple weeks ago, and the Lakeshore Limited + California Zephyr last year. As much as I enjoyed the trips, I have to admit that they longer lines are incredibly impractical. Amtrak is operating at a huge loss per passenger ($32 on average)[1], and the prices aren't even that much cheaper than flying. It's viable for people with more time than money, but most of the passengers are just weir…

> I definitely met a bunch of people I wouldn't have otherwise had a chance to talk to.

To elaborate on this, Amtrak staff will seat you with strangers to fill up tables. Kind of excruciating for an introvert, but looking back I had some good conversations.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#93

Post by scyclow »

throwawayjava wrote: post #91
scyclow wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know the numbers, but I'd be shocked if air and bus lost as much money per trip as trains. Part of what makes the train appealing for the longer rides is that if you're taking coach half of the car is empty and you know you won't have to sit next to anyone.

How do you define "loss" in this context?

Net loss. So, if a ticket costs $10, and it costs the bus an average $12 per passenger, they'd have a $2 loss per passenger.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#94

Post by solotronics »

jMyles wrote: post #82

I have traveled Amtrak quite a lot - across the country on the Empire Builder, Southwest Chief, and California Zephyr. And many other routes. I think the food is usually decent - the veggie burger is reliably edible. What I can say is terrible - and what has caused me to cease using Amtrak - is the presence of the DEA. In case you haven't experienced this, the DEA sometimes raids specific sleeper cars at a station, d…

wow I am really surprised this was triggered by cryptocurrency. this is terribly authoritarian and disappointing. if you don't mind me asking are you a US citizen? if so contact your local congressperson and file a complaint with the DEA office.

has your friend ever had anything similar happen traveling by air?

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#95

Post by xyzzyz »

tspike wrote: post #66
scyclow wrote: post #61

I took the Empire Builder a couple weeks ago, and the Lakeshore Limited + California Zephyr last year. As much as I enjoyed the trips, I have to admit that they longer lines are incredibly impractical. Amtrak is operating at a huge loss per passenger ($32 on average)[1], and the prices aren't even that much cheaper than flying. It's viable for people with more time than money, but most of the passengers are just weir…

I don't disagree with your comment, but the thing that often gets lost in these discussions is that at least for the Empire Builder, people generally aren't using it to go from Chicago to Portland or Seattle. Sure, a flight from Chicago to Seattle would be much faster and cheaper. But what about getting from Minot to Whitefish? Or Spokane to Wenatchee? I personally use it 2-3 times a week to go between Bingen and Por…

Flying from Spokane to Wenatchee is really not much slower than Amtrak. It's probably much more expensive though.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#96

Post by DoreenMichele »

cc439 wrote: post #75
tspike wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree with your comment, but the thing that often gets lost in these discussions is that at least for the Empire Builder, people generally aren't using it to go from Chicago to Portland or Seattle. Sure, a flight from Chicago to Seattle would be much faster and cheaper. But what about getting from Minot to Whitefish? Or Spokane to Wenatchee? I personally use it 2-3 times a week to go between Bingen and Por…

Most of those trips appear to be under 3.5 hours each way... Why not drive since it's likely faster and cheaper than the train?

Some people don't drive.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#97

Post by jandrese »

protomyth wrote: post #46
akshat_h wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, maintaining tracks is expensive, especially in a large country like USA, as compared to just maintaining two airports. Kinda makes me wonder how much money is spent on road maintenance that we are not thinking as a cost while driving.

Amtrak doesn't own most of the track they use. They pay track usage payments to the freight railroads that actually own the track. In FY 2009 that was $115.4 million (3.3% of total operation cost). Cannot find the current numbers. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...

$115.4M seems really cheap. You couldn't lay too many miles of track for that, especially if you're buying land rights along the way.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#98

Post by jandrese »

imglorp wrote: post #29
reaperducer wrote: post #5

Amtrak's current food is far superior to airline food. I'm speaking as a regular Empire Builder, Sunset Limited, and Southwest Chief first class passenger. The only disappointment is that for some reason, I can't get food served in my room on the Sunset Limited. No problems on the other routes. It's kind of sad if Amtrak has to sacrifice freshly-prepared food for airline heat-n-eat fare. But if it means an additional…

> Full trains are a bigger problem than fresh food for Amtrak. And upgrading their network to Positive Train Control should be a higher priority than full trains and food. They've had several fatal crashes recently that PTC might have avoided.

I thought the holdup with PTC is that the freight companies don't care about it so aren't bothering to instrument the tracks.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#99

Post by jlarocco »

scyclow wrote: post #61

I took the Empire Builder a couple weeks ago, and the Lakeshore Limited + California Zephyr last year. As much as I enjoyed the trips, I have to admit that they longer lines are incredibly impractical. Amtrak is operating at a huge loss per passenger ($32 on average)[1], and the prices aren't even that much cheaper than flying. It's viable for people with more time than money, but most of the passengers are just weir…

Do you know why they don't raise the price to cover the loss? $32 doesn't seem like a big deal for long distance transportation.

Re: Want airline food? Take Amtrak

#100

Post by justin66 »

scyclow wrote: post #81
op00to wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much does the US subsidize air travel via FAA, airport subsidies, etc? What about road subsidies? It’s like somehow rail has to be profitable on its own, but not bus or air.

I don't know the numbers, but I'd be shocked if air and bus lost as much money per trip as trains. Part of what makes the train appealing for the longer rides is that if you're taking coach half of the car is empty and you know you won't have to sit next to anyone.

> I don't know the numbers, but I'd be shocked if air and bus lost as much money per trip as trains.

Just a thought, but if you're interested in numbers, it's an eye-opener to look at how much money airlines have lost for shareholders, bondholders, and the government via bankruptcies. If passenger rail was ever capable of tearing chunks out of the economy the way the airlines are, it must have been a century ago.

From 2011: "The industry in aggregate has lost about $60 billion over the 32 years since deregulation"

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/12/16/143765367/why-...

I'm pretty sure airlines are one of those unusual industries in the US (like banking) that have throughout their existence lost more money than they've ever actually generated in profit and have been kept whole by the government. Sorry I don't have any hard figures on that.

Post reply on HN