Jump to content

Talk:Amtrak/2006-2009 archive

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Missing png image?

When I looked at this page, I was surprised thatI could not see the image "Amtrak schematic.png" embedded in the article. At first I thought this was because someone vandalized the article, but after some examination, I found that for some reason my browser only shows a thick blue line where the image should be. If I click on the line, I am taken to the large version of the png file, which I can view without problems. I tried to tweak the code, but it makes no difference in my browser. Am I the only one who can't see this image? I'm using Firefox 1.0.7 on Win XP. -- llywrch 22:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Not just you. I'm not seeing the image at all, the thumbnail box is at the appropriate width, but as if the image is 0px high. According to the Mozilla page info/media tab, the image embedded in the page is http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Amtrak_schematic.png , which is not the thumbnailed version. It shows "width: 300px, height: 3386 px" "physical width:5165 px, physical height: 3386px". Something definitely is not right here. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 22:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
The article could do with the schematic again. It seems to be missing entirely. If it is still current it really should be included in the article again. Ralphbk 14:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I've been bold and re-uploaded the previous schematic at 50% size. The thumbnails now generate OK. Added image in the "Amtrak routes and services" section. --Ralphbk 15:45, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Reverted edits

I've just reverted some edits from the anonymous user at 24.22.127.149. The assertions made by this person are unproven statements that would be appropriate if they can be verified and documented. In particular, I take some exception to the statements

In addition to the national impact from its employees and passengers, there is a large impact from Amtrak on the national economy due to Amtrak presence in its major hub cities of Chicago, Washington, D.C, New York, and Los Angeles. Amtrak owns or operates inside the large Union Stations in these cities, and their usage by Amtrak has a very large impact on those cities economies.

I sincerely doubt that Amtrak is a significant factor in the economies of these cities in terms of the numbers of employed, and the effects to a city's economy of the loss of Amtrak service would be less significant than a loss of commuter rail. A statement that makes these assertions accompanied by factual statistics would be more meaningful than an unproven claim of "very large impact on those cities' economies".

The fact that Amtrak does not own tracks outside the NEC, and is subject to dispatching from the host freight railroads, presents a dilemma for Amtrak and delays for its passengers. Amtrak trains are often subject to extreme delays imposed by the freight railroads. Amtrak trains are often forced onto sidings for hours at a time while waiting for freight trains to pass. Although capable of speeds over 100 MPH, Amtrak trains are frequently limited to speeds of less than 40 MPH by freight railroad imposed speed restrictions. The delays most often show up on the freight railroads which have an inauspicious relationship with Amtrak and/or have poorly maintained track.

This is false. Amtrak trains are capable of speeds of 100 mph only on sections of track that have cab signals; federal regulations prohibit running above 79 mph in the absence of such systems. Though Amtrak's relationship with its freight-carrying hosts has often been shaky, the situation is much improved from the past. It is a fair statement to discuss the challenges of running a scheduled passenger service on lines dispatched by a railroad that has its own operational priorities, but the other assertions (regarding "forced onto sidings for hours at a time" and "limited to speeds of less than 40 mph" are not supported by any facts in the edits I reverted. — JonRoma 21:16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Amtrak portmanteau

I just commented out the following:

IT NEVER INCLUDED THE WORD "TRAVEL" IN ITS BLENDING AS EVIDENCED UNDER THE FIRST ITEM UNDER HISTORY ON AMTRAK'S OWN FACTS SHEET AT: http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Amtrak/am2Copy/Title_Image_Copy_Page&c=am2Copy&cid=1081442674300&ssid=174

It's still in the article, but as an HTML comment so it's not visible to readers, but apparent to editors. Slambo (Speak) 11:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC) In a brochure from 1972, Amtrak say, the name is American track & travel, now, Amtrak say in his hompage american and track! In a german book over world's railways is standing also american track and travel. Wat is now right?--212.99.205.172 18:38, 11 February 2006 (UTC) Mäfä from Germnay wikipedia According to the late Dr. Adrian Herzog, the name Amtrak came from an employee contest; and his was the winning entry. Dr. Herzog told me his entry came from the words "America, track, and travel." -- wlindley@wlindley.com 2006-03-01 According to Amtrak's own websites, Amtrak is short for "American Track": [1][2] But there are also sources that say it means "American Travel by Track", including page 38 of the June 1991 issue of Trains, part of an article written by Kevin McKinney, who was involved in the behind-the-scenes work of Amtrak's startup. Is this a case of revisionist history, or simply an error by one of the sides? --NE2 09:31, 30 November 2006 (UTC) The whole discussion is kind of pointless, because anybody with half a brain can tell that Amtrak is an invented word that blends American and track, but it never existed as a full form "American Track" or anything like that. It also doesn't belong at the beginning of an encylcopedia article. It should be more like a footnote, at best.--JBH23 15:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Why doesn't an explanation of where it came from belong near the beginning? Someone coming here wondering why it's called Amtrak should be able to get an answer easily. --NE2 16:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
That kind of argument can be used to put anything near the beginning. How many people do you think are wondering that and can't figure it out for themselves? Besides, evidence offered doesn't seem conclusive.--JBH23 15:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Given that we haven't figured it out, I think many people cannot. --NE2 09:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

History - an overstatement?

I am commenting on the following: "Historically, on routes where a single railroad has had an undisputed monopoly, passenger service was as spartan and as expensive as the market and Interstate Commerce Commission regulation would bear, since such railroads had no need to advertise their freight services. But on routes where two or three railroads were in direct competition with each other for freight business, such railroads would spare no expense to make their passenger trains as fast, luxurious, and affordable as possible, because it was considered to be the most effective way of advertising their profitable freight services." This is, I think, insightful and largely correct. But it isn't the whole story. I can't comment on the pre-World-War II situation, but after the war it was not clear to anyone that intercity passenger service would turn out to be a terrible investment. After making a major commitment to diesel-powered, streamlined equipment, the AT&SF found that its passenger revenues increased as much as 227% annually; Santa Fe remained a believer far longer than competing lines, and until its 1971 demise the Super Chief was still one of the finest trains in the history of railroading. There was a commitment there that, it seems to me, goes beyond advertising for the company's freight operations. To be sure, I'm not disputing the overall picture, but the above generalization isn't quite accurate. How should we fix this? Bryan 23:36, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Since nobody has objected to my call for improving this section in a couple of months, I've rewritten the section. Please take a look. Bryan 13:03, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Gaps in service

Maps in the 1970s indicated Amtrak service to many of the cities, particularly those in Ohio. Someone should research into when service was cut off.Dogru144 08:43, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Georgia in "Gaps in service"

The list of cities in th "Gaps in service" secion is of cities with no train service whatsoever, not defunct lines. It seems like the listing of Atlanta-Savannah is inappropriate here. I'm going to take it back out pending further discussion. --CComMack 22:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

It should be returned. This is reference to service from Atlanta to Savannah; of course, this reference does not ignore that there is service to each of these cities from other points. Web searches will reveal that efforts are under-way to restore service along this southeast-northwest route, probably with an intermediate stop in Macon, GeorgiaDogru144 08:43, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Citation needed

There have been few times in history when any intercity rail passenger operation in the world has been profitable, even with respect to only its operating costs, and passenger trains have never brought in enough revenue to pay their infrastructure costs. Even highly efficient private-sector railroads such as the Norfolk and Western Railway could not earn a profit, or even recover operating expenses for passenger service. The concept of Amtrak as a for-profit business was fatally flawed before the first passenger boarded. I'd like to know if that's true. This needs a citation. No I wouldn't consider myself an Amtrak supporter. --Rotten 13:50, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't think we can support that paragraph as it was written. I may have been the original contributor, but cannot find the source I used if I was. I have made some changes which are more well-documented. Vaoverland 00:12, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I am a supporter of passenger rail and I find the statement difficult to believe. The Grand Canyon Railway, for instance, must be profitable or it wouldn't be running.  :-) My understanding is that most lines in the US did better than break-even until the massive government subsidies to road and air began in the 1950s ... but I have no citation for that either! --N5UWY/9 - plaws 15:39, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
What the original author may be confused with is the fact that freight has always been far more profitable than passenger service. This was true even in the 19th and early 20th century. --Rotten 16:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Ah but if there is truely profit in a rail system, wouldn't that mean they would be all over the place? The statement is definetly true, by logic; NO form of transportation covers it's costs, save for walking/biking/skateboarding/etc. The Grand Canyon Railway, for instance, must be profitable or it wouldn't be running. <-- That statement cannot be true, or there would be no such thing as mass transit in the United States :) Just look at Amtrak! --Alphalife 01:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Living in Northern Arizona, I can tell you that the Grand Canyon Railway is profitable...but the ticket prices are unbelievably high. I went on it once during a special low-fare deal, and even though I only live 30 miles from it's southern terminus in Williams, I don't see myself riding it again, even though I am a train enthusiast. I guess they earn their money from tourists, not locals. 65.248.164.214 (talk) 20:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
There is a huge difference between scenic railroads/tourist trains, such as Grand Canyon Railway, and passenger rail services such as Amtrak and the various commuter rail systems. Amtrak and the commuter railroads exist for the purpose of moving large numbers of people from point "A" to point "B." Scenic railroads and tourist trains exist for the purpose of entertaining groups of people by either showing them interesting scenery, or allowing them to experience an uncommon mode of transportation (e.g. antique railcars pulled by antique locomotives).
The fact that some tourist trains are profitable cannot be used as the basis for an argument that Amtrak could be or should be profitable.
—BMRR (talk) 20:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Station/route template

Has there been any talk of making a template that shows next stop on different Amtrak lines, like what is done with SEPTA stations like this one: Ridley Park (SEPTA station)? Boneillhawk 21:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

It wouldn't be so simple to do, because for many stations the next stop varies by train.--Adam613 15:03, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Not Neutral

This article reads like an Amtrak press release and is not neutral IMHO. I have tried to add a little balance, with references. Highnote 03:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC) Non neutral please dont use the Cato Institute as a neutral citation, they are a politically motiavted libertarian organization, which by definition is not neutral.--Kev62nesl 06:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC) Comparison of Amtrak to other modes of transportation restored and extended in separate section. If you able to refute please do so, and do not simply resort to deleting facts that are inconvenient. Also, complaining that Cato is non-neutral in an article containing numerous links to advocacy groups is rather inconsistent. Highnote 19:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC) The facts were not inconvenient they just werent relevant to the section, however your statistics from an organizations whos goal is to destroy that thing makes those statistic not neutral and while consistence does matter something that is not neutral does not become neutral just because something else is not neutral. Also it is pretty clear that you are anti-amtrak, which isnt a problem, however your goal of inserting negative comments about the company just to be negative does seem to be a problem.--Kev62nesl 23:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I relabeled the link categories to advocacy sites "Support and Advocay" and put the Cato link with the CS Monitor report link in a catergory entitled "Amtrak criticism". That seems to be both even-handed and true. Kablammo 18:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

It is not neutral to compare safety statistics which treat an automobile as the equivalent of an entire train. A vehicle is not the equivalent of a train and composing a table which compares the rate of deaths per vehicle with the rate of deaths per train is inherently misleading. Kablammo 19:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC) The accurate comparison is between passenger miles. I added explanatory text following the existing safey table but I propose to remove that table entirely as it contains a misleading comparison, and use instead passenger-mile statistics. Kablammo 20:23, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Done. Present table directly compares between modes of transportation on the basis of fatalities per 100 million passenger (non-crew) miles. Kablammo 00:40, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
That is indeed a better metric. --Highnote 02:48, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

On that note, removed the last paragraph of the "Controversy" section as it read rather one-sided:

Proponents also argue that rail passenger service merits public support because it is safer, more convenient, and more comfortable than the competition. Amtrak serves many communities which have no air service or other public transportation. If rail operations received favorable treatment and capital support on par with automobile infrastructure and air transport, proponents argue that rail passenger service in America would not be so humble and would be more relevant to a greater number of passengers.

The rest controversy section might be fine as it is, or could do with a more balanced concluding statement (with citation this time). Sorry to the contributor of this paragraph, but overuse of the "some argue" tactic to get around NPOV is a pet peeve. --Anon 18:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Differing Thoughts on Energy Intensity

The Transportation Energy Databook has rather different numbers for energy intensities of modes of transportation (Table 2.10). I got a response from a source at the DOT who gave me an updated number of 2902 BTU / passenger-mile. Unforunately, BTS (the source in the article) has some other issues with its data. Transit buses are 15% more energy intensive than their numbers, as they did not include any fuel besides diesel when doing their analysis. The Transportation Energy Databook appears to be correct for this one. The remaining difference between the two sources is for light-duty trucks, and BTS appears to be correct as it uses more current data than the Transportation Energy Databook does. In the end, I don't know which should be linked to, since both are somewhat lacking.

On the theory that more data is better, I have added the Transportation Energy Databook table. Hat tip. --Highnote 03:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Quibbles about POV and references

I had tagged statements like Amtrak "was not a true railroad" because it did not own any track, with {{POV statement}}. These tags were removed without comment. I am rather annoyed that the issue was avoided rather than addressed. There is nothing at usage of the terms railroad and railway to support this definition, and without a reference it sounds like Wikipedia is making this assertion, which is not NPOV. (It also makes no sense to me that you can have an airline that does not own runways, but you can't have a railroad that doesn't own track.) I have now simply removed these statements, because I think they are also fairly spurious.

The pinnacle of passenger rail travel — and with it, the Golden Age of the passenger train — was reached in 1920, when 1.2 billion passengers were carried.

I marked this as POV, since it sounds like boosterism, but this tag was also removed without comment. I am rewriting this to remove "pinnacle" and "Golden Age"; if someone wants to document sources that use those terms, that would be fine. I had marked several very specific claims with {{fact}} to request references, but these were removed without comment. This is not OK; these specific claims need to be sourced, or they are subject to removal per Wikipedia:Verifiability. -- Beland 23:38, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

MI Ridership

Under the section Michigan Ridership it is claimed that "Amtrak's Michigan services are now the most profitable lines in the U.S." I believe the Northeast Corridor is the most profitable. Michigan services are still subsudized, its just that their ridership increase has been so great that it saved the state of MI about a million dollars in subsudies. See: http://www.southbendtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061124/News01/611240396/-1/NEWS01 I also was unaware that there will definately be improvements for higher speed service - I knew that the state was seeking it, but the federal government had not yet approved the funds, as far as I know. Unless anyone has evidence to contrary, I'd suggest removing this section of the article.

List of stations and boardings/alightings compiled from Amtrak fact sheets (fiscal 2006)

(warning: long list)

  • New York City (Penn Station), New York 7546208
  • Washington, DC 3859117
  • Philadelphia (30th St), Pennsylvania 3555646
  • Chicago, Illinois 2531836
  • Los Angeles, California 1414164
  • Boston-South Station, Massachusetts 988842
  • Sacramento, California 923699
  • Baltimore, Maryland 910523
  • San Diego, California 867873
  • Albany-Rensselaer, New York 761434
  • Wilmington, Delaware 712219
  • New Haven, Connecticut 631596
  • Newark, New Jersey 609184
  • Irvine, California 594324
  • Seattle, Washington 583766
  • BWI Thurgood Marshall Airport, Maryland 561505
  • Providence, Rhode Island 512974
  • Portland, Oregon 482695
  • Milwaukee, Wisconsin 481818
  • Emeryville, California 469236
  • Trenton, New Jersey 436058
  • Fullerton, California 414780
  • Solana Beach, California 413143
  • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 383380
  • Bakersfield, California 382393
  • Lancaster, Pennsylvania 368076
  • Metropark, New Jersey 362355
  • Davis, California 357831
  • Anaheim, California 325419
  • Route 128 (Boston), Massachusetts 312113
  • Stamford, Connecticut 304971
  • Oceanside, California 300680
  • Boston-Back Bay, Massachusetts 298340
  • Boston-North Station, Massachusetts 294686
  • Martinez, California 289233
  • Oakland, California 288232
  • Fresno, California 274024
  • San Juan Capistrano, California 258875
  • Santa Barbara, California 255263
  • Richmond, California 238893
  • Richmond, Virginia (Staples Mill) 231108
  • Lorton, Virginia (Auto Train) 207544
  • Sanford, Florida (Auto Train) 207544
  • New Carrollton, Maryland 206830
  • Stockton (San Joaquin St), California 193432
  • Santa Ana, California 169284
  • St. Louis, Missouri 166861
  • Rhinecliff, New York 155803

San Jose, California 151456 New London, Connecticut 150455 Hartford, Connecticut 150272 Hanford, California 150145 Hudson, New York 145350 Ann Arbor, Michigan 140413 Portland, Maine 139519 St.Paul-Minneapolis (Midway Station), Minnesota 137227 Kingston, Rhode Island 135796 Raleigh, North Carolina 122638 Orlando, Florida 121057 Denver, Colorado 119364 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 118708 Charlotte, North Carolina 114560 Suisun-Fairfild, California 114009 Springfield, Massachusetts 112465 Springfield, Illinois 110276 Kansas City, Missouri 110029 New Orleans, Louisiana 103616 Syracuse, New York 102934 Bloomington/Normal, Illinois 102733 Tacoma, Washington 101413 Kalamazoo, Michigan 98876 Atlanta, Georgia 96891 Newark Airport, New Jersey 96382 Newport News, Virginia 90880 Alexandria, Virginia 87979 San Luis Obispo, California 86819 Champaign-Urbana, Illinois 85967 Eugene, Oregon 85455 Berkeley, California 82409 Fort Worth, Texas 81630 Paoli, Pennsylvania 80936 Rochester, New York 78750 Merced, California 78585 Milwaukee Airport, Wisconsin 77387 Carbondale, Illinois 76840 Galesburg, Illinois 76464 Modesto, California 75518 New Rochelle, New York 75439 Great America/ Santa Clara, California 75146 Buffalo-Depew, New York 74463 Reno, Nevada 74300 Vancouver, Washington 73981 Goleta, California 73538 Greensboro, North Carolina 71784 Dearborn, Michigan 71184 Van Nuys, California 70610 Oxnard, California 69913 Whitefish, Montana 68223 Charleston, South Carolina 66272 Fredericksburg, Virginia 66125 Princeton Junction, New Jersey 65679 Elizabethtown, Pennsylvania 62526 Bridgeport, Connecticut 62374 Albuquerque, New Mexico 62240 Miami, Florida 61158 Tampa, Florida 60778 Exeter, New Hampshire 58872 Sturtevant, Wisconsin 58748 Poughkeepsie, New York 58564 Old Saybrook, Connecticut 57325 Toledo, Ohio 56228 Detroit, Michigan 55933 Jacksonville, Florida 54370 Battle Creek, Michigan 54238 Bellingham, Washington 53798 Roseville, California 51491 Grand Rapids, Michigan 50987 Durham-UNH, New Hampshire 50255 Salem, Oregon 49356 Chatsworth, California 48162 Rocky Mount, North Carolina 47456 Glenview, Illinois 47058 Savannah, Georgia 45965 Utica, New York 45854 Charlottesville, Virginia 45708 East Lansing, Michigan 45483 Ardmore, Pennsylvania 45261 Memphis, Tennessee 44502 Schenectady, New York 44181 Fayetteville, North Carolina 43736 Olympia/Lacey, Washington 43371 Exton, Pennsylvania 43367 Jefferson City, Missouri 43129 San Antonio, Texas 42188 Spokane, Washington 41862 Florence, South Carolina 41643 Ventura, California 41213 Burbank, California 40451 West Palm Beach, Florida 40304 Everett, Washington 39961 Macomb, Illinois 39896 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 39572 Dover, New Hampshire 39080 Durham, North Carolina 39035 Mount Joy, Pennsylvania 38448 Croton-Harmon, New York 38419 Williamsburg, Virginia 37957 Holland, Michigan 37672 Glendale, California 37550 Aberdeen, Maryland 37414 Simi Valley, California 36955 Minot, North Dakota 35829 Alton, Illinois 35614 Flagstaff, Arizona 34634 Columbia, South Carolina 34431 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 34413 Kirkwood, Missouri 34286 Auburn, California 33826 Wilson, North Carolina 33412 Middletown, Pennsylvania 33346 Naperville, Illinois 33250 Wells, Maine 32513 Dallas, Texas 32305 Westerly, Rhode Island 32178 Jackson, Mississippi 31736 Downingtown, Pennsylvania 31678 Indianapolis, Indiana 31446 Quantico, Virginia 31428 Rocklin, California 30462 Quincy, Illinois 30218 Meriden, Connecticut 30202 Cleveland, Ohio 29334 Kissimmee, Florida 28993 Klamath Falls, Oregon 28939 Edmonds, Washington 28617 Parkesburg, Pennsylvania 28009 Saratoga Springs, New York 27909 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 27512 Jackson, Michigan 26827 Albany, Oregon 26635 Fremont-Centerville, California 26611 Salt Lake City, Utah 26580 Hollywood, Florida 26156 Camarillo, California 25914 La Crosse, Wisconsin 25856 Royal Oak, Michigan 25587 Omaha, Nebraska 25496 Joliet, Illinois 24792 Longview, Texas 24449 Birmingham, Alabama 24376 Flint, Michigan 24181 Niagara Falls, New York 23703 Berlin, Connecticut 23348 Hayward, California 23177 Corcoran, California 23086 Saco-Biddeford, Maine 22896 Fargo, North Dakota 22771 Antioch-Pittsburg, California 22747 Homewood, Illinois 22314 Winter Park, Florida 22145 Pasco, Washington 22128 Grand Junction, Colorado 21756 Altoona, Pennsylvania 21417 Mount Vernon, Washington 21316 Williston, North Dakota 21300 Austin, Texas 20863 Kelso-Longview, Washington 20851 Cary, North Carolina 20682 Deland, Florida 20222 Winona, Minnesota 20214 Birmingham, Michigan 20023 Deerfield Beach, Florida 19997 Princeton, Illinois 19728 Grand Forks, North Dakota 19574 Stockton (downtown), California 19292 Centralia, Washington 18783 Woodbridge, Virginia 18333 Haverhill, Massachusetts 18330 Petersburg, Virginia 18296 Mattoon, Illinois 18241 Raton, New Mexico 18177 Carpinteria, California 17996 San Diego-Old Town, California 17898 Winter Haven, Florida 17882 Niles, Michigan 17788 South Bend, Indiana 17725 High Point, North Carolina 17687 Lees Summit, Missouri 17379 Buffalo-Exchange Street, New York 17342 Waterloo, Indiana 17330 Pontiac, Michigan 17318 Wenatchee, Washington 17310 Havre, Montana 16976 Lynchburg, Virginia 16847 Salisbury, North Carolina 16653 Shelby, Montana 16639 Yonkers, New York 16442 Osceola, Iowa 16437 Columbus, Wisconsin 16085 Rutland, Vermont 15931 Johnstown, Pennsylvania 15930 Lakeland, Florida 15625 Tukwila 15566 Mystic, Connecticut 15422 Little Rock, Arkansas 15330 Grover Beach, California 15300 Turlock-Denair, California 15300 Lincoln, Illinois 15249 Lafayette, Indiana 14242 Wasco, California 14225 Hammond, Louisiana 14069 Cincinnati, Ohio 14043 Sebring, Florida 13939 Ashland, Virginia 13331 Madera, California 13239 Huntington, West Virginia 13067 Kingstree, South Carolina 12996 White River Junction, Vermont 12798 Newton, Kansas 12772 Mount Pleasant, Iowa 12719 Mendota, Illinois 12652 Cornwells Heights, Pennsylvania 12558 Elkhart, Indiana 12489 Lamy (Santa Fe), New Mexico 12396 St. Cloud, Minnesota 12146 Greenville, South Carolina 12136 Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin 12119 Windsor Locks, Connecticut 11973 Centralia, Illinois 11860 Burlington, North Carolina 11797 Salinas, California 11769 Greenwood, Mississippi 11691 Effingham, Illinois 11580 Port Huron, Michigan 11417 Wallingford, Connecticut 11342 Temple, Texas 11314 Woburn, Massachusetts 11272 Ottumwa, Iowa 11190 Norman, Oklahoma 11098 East Glacier, Montana (summer only) 11067 Richmond (Main Street), Virginia 10982 Tuscon, Arizona 10965 Moorpark, California 10964 Greensburg, Pennsylvania 10942 Gallup, New Mexico 10860 Houston, Texas 10855 Yemassee, South Carolina 10790 Meridian, Mississippi 10732 Lincoln, Nebraska 10703 Kingman, Arizona 10663 Gainesville, Texas 10505 Oakland Coliseum, California 10342 Palatka, Florida 10100 Essex Junction, Vermont 10053 Warrensburg, Missouri 9787 Red Wing, Minnesota 9657 Windsor, Connecticut 9627 Selma-Smithfield, North Carolina 9605 Fort Madison, Iowa 9479 Brattleboro, Vermont 9393 Guadalupe, California 9371 La Plata, Missouri 9161 San Bernardino, California 9123 Cumberland, Maryland 9100 Ardmore, Oklahoma 9047 Chemult, Oregon 9015 Tomah, Wisconsin 8952 Hermann, Missouri 8941 Lewistown, Pennsylvania 8932 Amherst, Massachusetts 8928 Kankakee, Illinois 8644 Washington, Missouri 8639 Winter Park-Fraser, Colorado 8577 Plattsburgh 8549 Durand, Michigan 8513 Charleston, West Virginia 8508 Kannapolis, North Carolina 8450 Old Orchard Beach, Maine 8419 Erie, Pennsylvania 8371 Sedalia, Missouri 8337 St. Joseph/Benton Harbor, Michigan 8247 El Paso, Texas 8184 San Clemente Pier, California 8179 Pontiac, Illinois 8167 New Brunswick, New Jersey 7882 Coatesville, Pennsylvania 7865 Wolf Point, Montana 7753 Kewanee, Illinois 7370 Riverside, California 7345 Manassas, Virginia 7259 Lompoc-Surf, California 7253 Jesup, Georgia 7232 Tuscaloosa, Alabama 7222 Williams Junction, Arizona 7114 Hattiesburg, Mississippi 7063 Portage, Wisconsin 7051 Amsterdam, New York 6991 Oregon City, Oregon 6960 La Junta, Colorado 6931 Rome, New York 6879 Delray Beach, Florida 6822 Truckee, California 6804 Redding, California 6781 Newark, Delaware 6776 Lapeer, Michigan 6752 McComb, Mississippi 6606 Burlington, Iowa 6550 La Grange Road, Illinois 6435 Staunton, Virginia 6413 Topeka, Kansas 6403 Chico, California 6395 Dillon, South Carolina 6393 Martinsburg, West Virginia 6377 Fort Edward, New York 6366 Hammond-Whiting, Indiana 6356 Lodi, California 6293 Glasgow, Montana 6279 Garden City, Kansas 6278 Devils Lake, North Dakota 6272 Worcester, Massachusetts 6190 Needles, California 6132 Bryan, Ohio 6104 Texarkana, Arkansas 6017 Rugby, North Dakota 5975 Staples, Minnesota 5963 Carlinville, Illinois 5950 Pauls Valley, Oklahoma 5890 Sandpoint, Idaho 5789 West Glacier, Montana 5786 Libby, Montana 5652 Paso Robles, California 5647 Marshall, Texas 5641 Dwight, Illinois 5612 Slidell, Louisiana 5609 Du Quoin, Illinois 5328 Independence, Missouri 5287 Westport, New York 5126 Clemson, South Carolina 5065 Creston, Iowa 5002 Elko, Nevada 4854 Maricopa, Arizona 4837 Pittsfield, Massachusetts 4750 Huntingdon, Pennsylvania 4678 Denmark, South Carolina 4643 Victorville, California 4547 Sandusky, Ohio 4424 Trinidad, Colorado 4395 Gainesville, Georgia 4269 Dunsmuir, California 4281 Spartanburg, South Carolina 4252 Southern Pines, North Carolina 4246 Montpelier, Vermont 4150 Hamlet, North Carolina 4149 Brookhaven, Mississippi 4121 Dodge City, Kansas 4083 White Sulfur Springs, West Virginia 4075 Hastings, Nebraska 4073 Danville, Virginia 4065 Anniston, Alabama 4,014 Culpeper, Virginia 3,995 Taylor, Texas 3,896 Essex, Montana 3,862 Hutchinson, Kansas 3,858 Bangor, Michigan 3,855 Connellsville, Pennsylvania 3,837 Detroit Lakes, Minnesota 3,810 Las Vegas, New Mexico 3,809 Crawfordsville 3,676 Summit, Illinois 3,638 Ontario, California 3,592 San Marcos, Texas 3,587 Camden, South Carolina 3,582 Malta, Montana 3,582 Mineola, Texas 3,577 Laurel, Mississippi 3,552 Clifton Forge, Virginia 3,498 Latrobe, Pennsylvania 3,427 Winslow, Arizona 3413 Alliance, Ohio 3,379 Harpers Ferry, West Virginia 3,315 Palm Springs, California 3311 Poplar Bluff 3,220 Lawrence, Kansas 3,244 McCook, Nebraska 3,173 Bellows Falls, Vermont 3,113 Hinton, West Virginia 3,105 Ephrata, Washington 3,072 Cut Bank, Montana 3,049 Barstow, California 3045 Colfax, California 3038 Prince, West Virginia 3,035 Stanley, North Dakota 3,018 Walnut Ridge, Arkansas 2991 Rockville, Maryland 2984 New Buffalo, Michigan 2967 Ashland, Kentucky 2880 McGregor, Texas 2868 Okeechobee, Florida 2858 Waterbury, Vermont 2809 St. Albans, Vermont 2750 Yazoo City, Mississippi 2735 Granby, Colorado 2728 Elyria, Ohio 2726 Toccoa, Georgia 2672 Provo, Utah 2660 Fort Morgan, Colorado 2644 Newbern-Dyersberg, Tennessee 2598 Lake Charles, Louisiana 2549 Dowagiac, Michigan 2512 Sparks, Nevada 2482 Purcell, Oklahoma 2423 Plano, Illinois 2366 Yuma, Arizona 2295 Fulton, Kentucky 2288 Winnemucca, Nevada 2265 Browning, Montana (winter only) 2234 Michigan City, Indiana 2100 Bingen-White Salmon, Washington 2037 Alpine, Texas 2027 Tyrone, Pennsylvania 2024 Picayune, Mississippi 2001 Cleburne, Texas 1948 Framingham, Massachusetts 1856 Fair Haven, Vermont 1806 Port Henry, New York 1771 Lamar, Colorado 1738 Holdrege, Nebraska 1671 Hazlehurst, Mississippi 1661 Maysville, Kentucky 1604 Fort Ticonderoga, New York 1592 Gastonia, North Carolina 1582 Albion, Michigan 1463 Del Rio, Texas 1453 Whitehall, New York 1453 Helper, Utah 1445 Claremont, New Hampshire 1439 Wishram, Washington 1403 Malvern, Arkansas 1324 Dyer, Indiana 1310 Franconia-Springfield, Virginia 1238 Green River, Utah 1233 Lafayette, Louisiana 1207 Rantoul, Illinois 1189 Rensselaer, Indiana 1169 Randolph, Vermont 1123 Gilman, Illinois 1063 Arkadelphia, Arkansas 1020 Beaumont, Texas 903 South Portsmouth, Kentucky 873 Rouses Point, New York 868 Benson, Arizona 833 Montgomery, West Virginia 777 Pomona, California 764 New Iberia, Louisiana 733 Windsor-Mount Ascutney, Vermont 721 Connersville, Indiana 692 Philadelphia (North), Pennsylvania 605 Port Kent, New York 589 Schriever, Louisiana 586 Deming, New Mexico 580 Alderson, West Virginia 504 Lordsburg, New Mexico 305 Sanderson, Texas 259 Thurmond, West Virginia 221 Greenfield Village, Michigan 82 see what you make of it - — Rickyrab | Talk 20:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Good Article Review

This article is currently at Good Article Review. LuciferMorgan 11:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

"The 1997 cuts"...

...are mentioned several times, but the "modern history" section never says specifically what those actually were! In fact, the year 1997 is not mentioned at all in that section. 217.33.74.204 11:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

GA Delisted

This article was delisted as a good article at 11:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC) per the archived Good article review and the instructions at said archive. IvoShandor 11:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

energy intensity

There seems to be some variation in the estimates of Amtrak's energy intensity. The article currently gives Amtrak energy consumption as 2100 BTUs per passenger-mile, citing 2001 data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. However, the Department of Energy's Transportation Energy Data Book (see table 9.10) estimates a much higher 3257 BTUs per passenger mile for 2001, improving to 2713 BTUs per passenger-mile for 2005. FWIW, the DOE data agrees much more closely with the BTS data on the figures for commercial airlines (BTS estimates 3297 BTUs; DOE estimates 3278), so they don't appear to be using significantly different methodology in general; it's only their Amtrak numbers that disagree. --Delirium 04:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Guest Rewards

I just wanted to record for posterity the anonymous change that was rightly reverted yesterday by Discospinster, simply because it made me smile: Amtrak patrons are generally rewarded with long waits on the platform and being lied to by customer service. The tactic amtrak uses most often is to tell people that their train is going to be twenty minutes late, and then tell this to them again twenty minutes later and then again after another twenty minutes and then again. This way the person behind the desk isn't hung with a noose made of his own entrails for being honest and telling the customers that the train will actually be two hours late. - Ralphbk 06:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Project banners

For the record, I'm not really sure I grok the purpose in adding fifty (!) new WikiProject banners to the top of the page, but I also have no justification whatsoever to revert. So I went ahead and fixed up the header code so it's nice and compact; there's less clutter up top now than before the new banners went in. I suspect that those won't be the last edits, but they work for now. —CComMack (t–c) 15:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

This is definitely a "be bold" situation. I've removed these state banners and supplanted them with a {{WikiProject United States}} banner, which makes more sense given that Amtrak is a national operation whose directors are appointed by the U.S. President. Just because it has routes and operations nationwide doesn't mean it should go into every WikiProject...would you do the same for a trucking company whose trucks moved goods in every state? No...it is excessive. -- Huntster T • @ • C 07:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Very good point. Thanks. —CComMack (t–c) 01:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Phrase on General Fund unclear

Consider the following sentence from the current version of the article:

Highways, airports, and air traffic control all require large government expenditures to build and operate, coming from the Highway Trust Fund and Aviation Trust Fund paid for by user fees, highway fuel and road taxes, and, in the case of the General Fund, by people who own cars and do not.

I do not understand the phrase about "people who own cars and do not." The set of people who own cars plus the set of people who don't own cars is the universal set! In other words, the phrase could simply be "everyone". Perhaps the author intended to write "people who do not own cars"? But this also doesn't work because the General Fund is paid for by everyone, not just those who don't own cars. Either way, the phrase is unclear. How should it be rewritten? Vocaro 03:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Probably by either removing it, or digging up a citation if Gunn did indeed say this, and more accurately report what he said. This section has been unreferenced for some time now, though. --Delirium (talk) 06:45, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Project

I am dropping this from the Alabama project as it is not really at the core of our work. JodyB talk 22:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Edit war?

So, what's with the edit war on the usage of portmanteau? - Denimadept (talk) 16:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

There's discussion on Talk:Portmanteau. Slambo (Speak) 17:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, and I agree with your comment that this should be resolved there. - Denimadept (talk) 17:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Moved menu

I've moved the deleted Acela menu to that page. - Denimadept (talk) 20:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not a spelling issue

The difference between "insufficiencies" and "inefficiencies" is that they're two completely different words. - Denimadept (talk) 19:55, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Statistics

Reliability

European railways often publish figures, percentages generally, of trains running to time, cancellations, and so on. Are such figures available for Amtrak? Would it help to compare them to railways elsewhere, if they are? Les woodland (talk) 13:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)les woodland

Amtrak doesn't publish them, but the Bureau of Transportation Statistics does - see http://www.transtats.bts.gov/databases.asp?Mode_ID=5&Mode_Desc=Rail&Subject_ID2=0. (User-Sonria-not logged in) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.182.51.67 (talk) 21:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Population

I'm removing the comment about the increase in population because:

  1. There is no evidence that the the increase in ridership comes exclusively or even primarily from the increase in population.
  2. As Bluejack's new statistics made clear, ridership increased 12 percent while the population increased less than one percent. For the increase in ridership to be attributable to the increase in population, a disproportionate number of the new residents would have had to become regular Amtrak passengers.
  3. Its placement in the article is awkward and disrupts the flow of the text.

–Cg-realms (talk • contribs) 0:30, 14 June 2008 (EDT)

Ten Busiest Stations by Total Ridership in 2007

I'm not sure where this would go in the article, but for the record:

Rank Station Tickets From Tickets To Total Ridership
1 New York, NY 4,034,057 3,993,919 8,027,976
2 Washington, DC 2,066,154 2,042,415 4,108,569
3 Philadelphia, PA 1,838,794 1,835,461 3,674,255
4 Chicago, IL 1,385,424 1,389,227 2,774,651
5 Los Angeles, CA 733,471 730,818 1,464,289
6 Boston, MA 567,565 586,613 1,154,178
7 Baltimore, MD 485,904 491,475 977,379
8 Sacramento, CA 491,816 479,123 970,939
9 San Diego, CA 443,920 423,536 867,456
10 Albany-Rensselaer, NY 385,562 388,896 774,458

Source: Amtrak National Fact Sheet –Cg-realms (talk • contribs) 13:22, 15 June 2008 (EDT) Maybe there wasn't enough room for useful factual info, what with all the POV stuff defending Amtrak's subsidies. This article shows what's wrong with Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.136.15.34 (talk) 12:04, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Our map

de:File:Amtrak-Streckennetz.svg is a map of the Amtrak system created by the amazing German cartographer Chumwa. All this needs is a translation to English and we can use it. gren グレン 02:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Here
Here

Not really too much to translate. Here it is. gren グレン 02:31, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Contested statements removed to talk

  • In 1948, Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway CEO Fred Gurley reported a "complete reversal of our passenger traffic picture," with 1947 revenues exceeding those of 1936 by 220%.{{Fact|date=January 2007}}
  • Between 1946 and 1964, the annual number of passengers declined from 770 million to 298 million.[citation needed]
  • The number of U.S. commuter trains declined by more than 80 per cent, from more than 2,500 in 1954 to fewer than 500 in 1969.{{Fact|date=January 2007}}
  • In 1947, the ICC ruled that passenger trains could not exceed 79 miles per hour (127 km/h) without in-cab signaling systems; the systems were criticized as being unnecessary and prohibitively expensive; after the regulation, plans to develop intercity high-speed rail services were shelved.{{Fact|date=January 2007}}
  • The policies improved labor relations to some extent, even as Amtrak's ranks of unionized and salaried workers thinned.{{Fact|date=November 2007}}
  • In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, during which Amtrak kept running while airlines were grounded, the value of a national passenger rail service was briefly acknowledged in Washington. But when Congress returned to work following the attacks, the airlines received a $15 billion bailout package, and inattention toward Amtrak resumed.{{Fact|date=November 2007}}
  • Intractable positions staked out by labor leaders were blamed for part of the decline of passenger rail service in the early to middle 20th century, and labor union clout was widely credited with facilitating the creation of Amtrak in 1971.{{Fact|date=November 2007}}

Please do not restore this info to the article without a citation.--BirgitteSB 01:59, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Birgitte: Maybe you should read the references before deleting text. At least three of those facts you removed had references to the source in a preceding or subsequent sentence. There are about twelve footnotes in the four paragraphs from which the text was removed. Why don't you focus on something that really is unreferenced? No other part of the article is nearly as completely referenced as the section you carved up. This was a bad edit. ► DRTïllberġ ◄Talk 02:09, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Maybe you should calm down. If the info is supported by a citation, simply restore it noting that in the edit summary and strike the bullet here on the talk page. Those {{fact}} tags were placed well over a year ago, one even two years ago. That they stood in the article for such a long time is generally a reliable sign that they are marking a valid concern. But mistakes happen. Moving the material to the talk page is not any sort of final judgment on the material. When you see a mistake please fix it, that is how a wiki works. But your judgments of me are over the top. I do not plan on stopping my focus of going through Category:Articles with unsourced statements since January 2007 and moving all information tagged for more than a year to the talk page. If you still believe my editing is bad and needs to stop then open an RFC on my actions. Because I am not taking your exaggerated censure seriously and will need to hear a wider consensus on the matter before altering my actions.--BirgitteSB 05:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Stack of Pics near top of page

Is it just me, or does the stack of pics at the top of the page need moving? it looks odd to me between the box to the right and the blurb to the left. Maximum927 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC).

"Lowest Usage Rate" Reasoning

The previous statement was "...due to sparse service and a large number of congestion-free highways" outside major US metros. This is not exactly accurate, because first of all, low ridership causes sparse service in the first place. Also, the Interstate routes spanning between DC and Florida are sometimes congested, as is LA and Las Vegas, to name some examples.

The statement should be more general, which is that the Interstate freeway system and airlines are relatively developed in contrast to rail, whose demand has declined since the 1920s and technology stagnated largely since the 1950s, with a few minor improvements to the present day.

Facial (talk) 21:42, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Removed this

Poorly written and slatted: "Recent years have been among Amtrak's brightest; the corporation completed a significant rail project in the northeast in the early 2000s while its major competitors—particularly airlines—were affected by bankruptcies, 9/11, and rising fuel costs." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.210.62.248 (talk) 06:53, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Amtrak/2006-2009_archive&oldid=1136516367"