goutal@dec-parrot.UUCP (01/20/86)
(Isn't Amtrak a city in Michigan?) I've been on Amtrak exactly once, back around '73 or so -- early on. I went from Boston to DC overnight in a coach, and back the same way, to go to a friend's wedding. It was in December. There was *no heat* till we got to the electrified section around Mystic. I was pretty put out, but still I enjoyed the overall experience; it's definitely seeing America at eye-level! More recently, my wife takes the kids to see her sister and her kids. We live in southern Moose Hampster (er, New Hampshire!) just about due north of Boston. The sister lives just outside Pittsfield, on the extreme western border of Massachusetts with New York state. We only have one car. <--<< (key point!) I need the car for work, so when they want to go, I drive them down to Framingham, and they take the Amtrak train from there out to Pittsfield. In the end, it is somewhat more expensive than driving, but a heck of a lot more pleasant for them, and, of course, I get to continue to get to work every day. The latter is the main advantage for us of using Amtrak! The freedom to walk around, eat, meet people, share babysitting, visit the online head -- those are relative luxuries! That is why we are distressed at the idea of Amtrak going away. We are *not* the well-pensioned retirees going on snazzy vacations! (By the way, someone recently mentioned that this line only goes once per day at an inconvenient time. That's true going east, as it departs Pittsfield around 10:00 a.m. and gets to Framinham around 2:00 p.m., but going the other way isn't bad -- 5:00-9:00 or something.) -- Kenn Goutal ...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-parrot!goutal
price@noscvax.UUCP (James N. Price) (01/27/86)
Fellow railfans--I think that some group or company that knows what they're doing and has some reasonable amount of money should be preparing to take over at least some of the Amtrak operation. The handwriting seems to be on the wall that, for better or worse, the government is hellbent on getting out of "training." I won't go into the various defenses of why the govt. should BE in training at this time. What I'd like to know is: who's thinking about the real future? It seems clear that the airplane space in this country is nearing saturation, but there's no travel alternative at the moment between 100 MPH trains and 500 MPH aircraft. What is needed is a high-speed ground transportation system (and I'm talking about at least 300 MPH) that can be integrated in with a commercial aircraft system. I'd like to see a jet-powered or float-on-air sled that can carry 100 people for example. I have a lot of other thoughts about what this system would look like, but right now I just want to know if anyone is seriously working on a concept like I've described. I spoke last week to a gentleman at the Federal Railroad Association and he told me that the fed. govt has zeroed R&D funding into high speed rail, for several years running. The most optimistic govt/ private sector coalition that he was aware of is the Florida High Speed Rail group that's looking into 150 MPH transportation between Miami, Orlando and Tampa (I believe). Any other such projects under development? My address is PRICE@NOSC.ARPA. Would appreciate some thoughts on the above. It seems clear to me that over the short haul, some alternative plans for running an Amtrak equivalent need to be made. For the long haul, we need some kind of ground transportation system that will allow transit from LA to New York in, say, 10 hours. Cheers--Jim Price P.S. The thoughts expressed above are mine and mine alone.