Food on Amtrack question
Phil-c
Tfter work tasks are done and dusted .Thinking about
grabbing a rail pass and doing some exploring via train and take leave
while over there .
Have heard and read various stories about Amtrack food
Any feedback or suggestions from the brains trust on here who have
recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
Kswck
"Phil-c" <invalid@invalid> wrote in message
news:4a50...@news.x-privat.org...
Bobo Bonobo®
It's pretty good, but might get old because the menu does not vary
much at all. Amtrak, if you can afford 1st Class, it is the best way
to travel. If you've got a pass, you can stop lots of places for a
day at a time.
http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Amtrak/am2Route/Horizontal_Route_Page&c=am2Route&cid=1081442673827&ssid=133
You could stop in Gallup, New Mexico and rent a car to explore New
Mexico and Arizona. Some of the scenery is otherwordly.
--Bryan
George Shirley
Last Amtrak train I was on had vending machines for food. Plus their
safety record is terrible. Don't think Amtrak is anything like the
European and British systems, it is nowhere near that good. Remember
that Amtrak is run by our government and you should be familiar with how
bad that is.
Wayne Boatwright
Having experienced and greatly enjoyed the pre-Amtrak days of train travel in
the US, as well as train travel in Europe, I wouldn't take Amtrak if it were
free, and believe me, it's not cheap.
--
Wayne Boatwright
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To the old saying that man built the house but woman made of it a
"home" might be added the modern supplement that woman accepted
cooking as a chore but man has made of it a recreation. ~Emily Post
Bobo Bonobo®
wrote:
> On Sun 05 Jul 2009 12:10:56p, Phil-c told us...
>
> > Will be in the states later this year
>
> > Tfter work tasks are done and dusted .Thinking about
> > grabbing a rail pass and doing some exploring via train and take leave
> > while over there .
>
> > Have heard and read various stories about Amtrack food
>
> > Any feedback or suggestions from the brains trust on here who have
> > recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
>
> Having experienced and greatly enjoyed the pre-Amtrak days of train travel in
> the US, as well as train travel in Europe, I wouldn't take Amtrak if it were
> free, and believe me, it's not cheap.
You are a fool. Coach fares are quite cheap, and the rail passes are
an even better deal. First class is pricey, but for long trips
there's no tedious driving, no accommodations costs, night after
night, free meals, and the chance to see America from ground level.
Only a rich sonofabitch to whom money is little object would write
something like, "I wouldn't take Amtrak if it were free."
>
> --
> Wayne Boatwright
--Bryan
Bobo Bonobo®
The reason why the USA doesn't have health care for all is because of
sonsofbitches who go around preaching their self serving crap like,
"...run by our government and you should be familiar with how bad that
is," and a sufficient number of stupid working people buy into their
crap. All of the long routes have dining cars, and medium length runs
have snack bars. George gave himself away as someone who is opposed
to the very *idea* of Amtrak, so read his evaluation with that in
mind.
It is an enjoyable and practical way to see some of the spectacular
natural beauty of the USA.
--Bryan
cshenk
George Shirley wrote:
> Phil-c wrote:
> > Will be in the states later this year
> > Tfter work tasks are done and dusted .Thinking about
> > grabbing a rail pass and doing some exploring via train and take leave
> > while over there .
Phil, it's not bad but it's not the food of OZ or Japan level either.
>It is an enjoyable and practical way to see some of the spectacular
>natural beauty of the USA.
>--Bryan
Agreed. It's not the same level as other countries have for trains, but it
can be quite decent. It's main detraction where I am is all lines are
considered 'short' up and down the east coast so we dont have the fancy
sleepers or dining cars. Still even with that, not a bad ride at all.
bulka
I like Amtrak - would much rather do that than drive, fly or, on my
way to hell, a bus.
It is different east and west of Chicago. East is more like a
commuter train, with a snackbar and a microwave. West, there are cool
viewing cars and dining cars. It's been too long for me to give a
food report - I remember decent, slightly boring food. Depending
where you are coming from though, it might be an introduction to
"normal American" food. Like the interstate, you'll get better food
if you leave the trail.
Some stations (Denver) have a good location for a pleasant few hours
layover. Others (Chicago, Detroit) are near things, but you'd want a
native guide. Enjoy the adventure.
The Ranger
news:cfab1098-19d7-47af...@j32g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 5, 5:16 pm, Duh'Wayne Boatwright <wayneboatwri...@arizona.usa.com>
>> On Sun 05 Jul 2009 12:10:56p, Phil-c told us...
>>> Will be in the states later this year
>>> Tfter work tasks are done and dusted .Thinking about
>>> grabbing a rail pass and doing some exploring via train
>>> and take leave while over there .
>> Having experienced and greatly enjoyed the pre-Amtrak
>> days of train travel in the US, as well as train travel in Europe,
>> I wouldn't take Amtrak if it were free, and believe me, it's
>> not cheap.
> You are a fool. Coach fares are quite cheap, and the rail
> passes are an even better deal. First class is pricey, but for
> long trips there's no tedious driving, no accommodations
> costs, night after night, free meals, and the chance to see
> America from ground level. Only a rich sonofabitch to whom
> money is little object would write something like, "I wouldn't
> take Amtrak if it were free."
Sombitch. The world's gonna end tomorrow. I'm in complete agreement with
Bonehead.
We took the train as a family to TX one year and to the PNW another. Both
times, while not cheap, were grand adventures. The daughter-units have
already asked if they can run an extended tour of the States for their
graduation gifts.
The food is unremarkable but certainly edible and the viewing cars are
fantastic. If you're lucky enough to have another traveler that knows what's
where up there, it's an even better trip. The few Aussies I play futbol with
are gregarious and unafraid of ANY social situations so you're gonna have a
blast. Hope you enjoy your trip!
Be sure to read Bulka's article, too.
The Ranger
Goomba
> Any feedback or suggestions from the brains trust on here who have
> recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
Sadly, you're about 30 years late for classic railroad food. It is
horrid sandwich type fare nowadays, although trains out west might still
do food...?
Wayne Boatwright
Yep, 30+ years ago, especially up through the 1950s, American train travel
was practically luxurious (not Orient Express luxurious, but luxurious
nevertheless). Dining car tables were laid with fresh linen cloths and
napkins; table settings were china, logo'd with the train line, and heavy
silverplated flatware and coffee pitchers, sugar, and creamer. Meals were
delicious and prepared to order from fresh meats and produce. Passengers
were truly catered to. If you were taking a long trip, sleeping
compartments were really very nice, each with it's own bathroom.
--
Wayne Boatwright
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to find a stew that will give me heartburn
immediately, instead of at three o'clock in the morning. ~John
Barrymore
Bobo Bonobo®
They do. The train from Chicago to Los Angeles (the Southwest Chief)
is a joy if you go first class. It is pricey, and the roomettes
accommodate one average adult top bunk, and a bit larger person on the
bottom. My wife and I shared a bottom bunk while my son slept
upstairs, and it was tight, but that made it cozier. Larger rooms
with larger sleeping arrangements are available, but they're more
expensive.
Westbound, it goes through KC at 10:55pm, so flat, boring Kansas is
during sleepytime. Pretty much the same Eastbound, as KC is reached
at 7:26am. http://www.amtrak.com/timetable/may09/P03.pdf
The scenery from Trinidad, CO to Gallup, NM is spectacular, and both
ways the trip is from mid morning to mid evening.
--Bryan
Sqwertz
I found the food on my last 3 day trip to be quite good and well
worth the extra $50 I spent to upgrade to a sleeper car. Sleeper
seats get free meals. So that was 11 meals for $50. Plus I got the
Handicap sleeper room which slept 3 and had it's own shower (TV,
Radio, etc..)
-sw
Sqwertz
> Last Amtrak train I was on had vending machines for food. Plus their
> safety record is terrible. Don't think Amtrak is anything like the
> European and British systems, it is nowhere near that good. Remember
> that Amtrak is run by our government and you should be familiar with how
> bad that is.
I have travelled over 8,000 miles on Amtrak and have never seen a
vending machine.
I'm just sorry I didn't discover the dining car over the snack bar
sooner. All the waiters have been pretty weird, though.
=-sw
Sqwertz
> Agreed. It's not the same level as other countries have for trains, but it
> can be quite decent. It's main detraction where I am is all lines are
> considered 'short' up and down the east coast so we dont have the fancy
> sleepers or dining cars. Still even with that, not a bad ride at all.
Huh? The Crescent and Silver Meteor both have sleepers and dining
cars. I've taken them both in the last 4 years.
-sw
Sqwertz
I still beg to differ my last trip on the Crescent run 2 years ago
had a dining car, lounge/smoking car, snack car, 2 cars of sleepers,
and the food in the dinning car was very good.
It all depends on the chef of the day. I think I had the braised
short ribs three times. Awesome. The fillet was just a fillet,
though.
-sw
Bobo Bonobo®
> On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 20:02:48 -0400, Goomba wrote:
> > Phil-c wrote:
>
> >> Any feedback or suggestions from the brains trust on here who have
> >> recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
>
> > Sadly, you're about 30 years late for classic railroad food. It is
> > horrid sandwich type fare nowadays, although trains out west might still
> > do food...?
>
> I still beg to differ my last trip on the Crescent run 2 years ago
> had a dining car, lounge/smoking car, snack car, 2 cars of sleepers,
> and the food in the dinning car was very good.
I'm very happy about the high speed CHI to STL train that's almost
inevitable. That train won't have dining, of course. The next to be
hoped for high speed line is STL to KCY. The real joy though are the
routes like the Crescent, the City of New Orleans, Texas Eagle, and my
personal favorite, the Southwest Chief. I'm sure some of the others
are charming too. Rail is a very efficient way to move people and
commodities, and while rail might be economically less efficient than
truck for many consumer goods, that's partly because CO2 costs haven't
been priced in, and labor costs have counted against efficiency
because of the cost of health insurance for the additional labor. I
ask all of you, don't we want jobs? Don't we want to responsibly
transition away from CO2 intensive modes of operation? I contend that
we need to move toward single payer insurance, but that it needs to
happen slowly. I know I seem really extreme with my food stuff on
here, and I *am* that way about food. I believe in that "art of the
possible" thing.
Right now we have the most pro-passenger rail administration in modern
history.
Joe Biden? Huge fan of Amtrak. Ray LaHood? Republican in the
cabinet as Transportation Sec. Very pro train. He might end up being
the most significant Trans. Sec. since the position was created.
>
> It all depends on the chef of the day. I think I had the braised
> short ribs three times. Awesome. The fillet was just a fillet,
> though.
Sometimes a fillet is just a fillet.
>
> -sw
--Bryan
Dave Smith
It couldn't be much worse than my food experience on Via on a trip from
Calgary to Vancouver back in 1984. Our train was supposed to leave
Calgary at 10 am but didn't get away until 11. We went to the dining car
at 12. The special was a bowl of peas soup, a hamburger and potato
chips. The soup was watered down about 2 to 1, the hamburger was just a
cheap frozen patty on a cheap bun and there were no potato chips. When I
asked the waiter what happened to the chips he said they ran out. I
thought that was a pretty lame excuse considering that the train had sat
for well over an hour in one of the biggest cities in west for so long
and this was the first meal hour since then.
A porter came to our roomette mid afternoon to see if we wanted a
reservation for the fifth and final seating at 10 pm. Everything else
was booked. Our son was only 6 at the time so we could not wait that
long. Instead, we got stale sandwiches from the machine and nuked them.
I took my son for breakfast around 6 am. He asked for the continental
breakfast, juice, muffin and tea. The waiter came along ans slid an
order of toast across the table, then brought the juice and tea. I asked
about the muffin. He said they were out of muffins and that he had
brought the toast.
The scenery was amazing, but the food was a major disappointment. We
were only on the train for one day so we survived. I hate to imagine
what it would be like for someone making a cross country trip.
In 1993 we spent two weeks travelling around Europe on a pass. The food
on European trains was good. When they stopped in major cities you had
time to get off and shop in the stations and there was always great food
available at reasonable prices.
Paul M. Cook
"Phil-c" <invalid@invalid> wrote in message
news:4a50...@news.x-privat.org...
I spent 2 weeks on a train journey but that was 20 years ago. The food was
fine. I enjoyed it. It's mostly simple fair like meatload and mashed
potatoes but you'll not be unhappy with it/
Paul
Bobo Bonobo®
They are a lot more expensive these days. Upgrading to a sleeper from
KCY to ABQ cost $265 for the little roomette.
>
> -sw
--Bryan
Bobo Bonobo®
Sometimes typos are pretty funny. "Meatload."
My wife and I were talking about our next train vacation, maybe next
year. Problem is, now that my son is 7, turning 8 later this year, no
way to put 3 of us into a roomette. When he was littler they looked
the other way (VERY nice of them since technically we were breaking
the rules), but now we'd need two roomettes or a family bedroom. I
came up with an idea. We have a niece who is 12, and her little
brothers are 2 and <1, so their family isn't about to embark on a road
trip. If they would pay for just her train fare, which would include
half of a roomette to share with my son, we could cover all the rest
of her expenses, mostly just meals, and maybe a few admission fees.
That way she'd get to go on a vacation where she gets to see natural
wonders and the like.
This niece is a very nice, very well behaved kid. She goes to the
symphony with us several times a year, and this year got her own
season ticket, so she'll be going with us at least six times. She
gets along great with my son. For ~$500 they could send her off on a
two week vacation. I should ask my MIL whether she thinks that would
be affordable for them.
>
> Paul
--Bryan
Dan Abel
Wayne Boatwright <waynebo...@arizona.usa.com> wrote:
> On Sun 05 Jul 2009 12:10:56p, Phil-c told us...
>
> > Will be in the states later this year
> >
> > Tfter work tasks are done and dusted .Thinking about
> > grabbing a rail pass and doing some exploring via train and take leave
> > while over there .
> >
> > Have heard and read various stories about Amtrack food
> >
> > Any feedback or suggestions from the brains trust on here who have
> > recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
>
> Having experienced and greatly enjoyed the pre-Amtrak days of train travel in
> the US, as well as train travel in Europe, I wouldn't take Amtrak if it were
> free, and believe me, it's not cheap.
Well, the old days are gone. Really gone. People take the plane. The
food is just not the same.
Given that, my wife likes the train. She took it recently to Salt Lake
City, Utah. She's not a foodie, and thought the food was OK. There was
both a snack bar and a meal car.
The price was unbeatable. She rode coach, and it was US$65 each way (18
hours). There was no way we could have bought gas for that.
--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
da...@sonic.net
Andy
Trouble is, it's Amtrak!
Next trouble is, the food generally sucks.
Third trouble is, Amtrak train air circulation systems suck! I got on
Amtrak train in NYC and got off at home in Philadelphia a couple hours
later with bronchitis. Same as airplane air!
I'll road trip before I'll ever Amtrak where leisure is concerned. I
certainly won't consider the Amtrak cuisine an important prerequisite for
riding the rails.
Andy
Kswck
"George Shirley" <gsh...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:0p84m.19324$he4...@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
Amtrak has never broken even in any year since it has been operating. A
study a few years ago suggested that the whole thing be scrapped and a new
national railway be built-revamping the old one would be TOO expensive. Oh,
the jobs it would create and the money that the Dems (who LOVE to
spend<other people's> money) could put forward. Cost? Hey, the US has
already nationalized insurance companies, car companies, etc. What's one
more industry?
Sqwertz
They accidentally canceled my coach seat from NO to DC and didn't
have any coaches left. And then when I went to board the train they
didn't have any sleepers left - except the handicap sleeper. 72sq
feet of unobstructed floor space + room for the fold-down/fold-out
amenities was quite a steal for the extra $50. Oh, and the 11 meals
;-)
They also had 1st run movies playing on the TV. Movies still
playing in the theaters and not on DVD yet. All I was missing was a
wet bar. Fortunately there was an upscale Safeway within walking
distance from the station in Atlanta. Looks like it's a Kroger now.
I could have sworn it was a Safeway at the time <shrug>. I remember
buying a bunch of Belgian ales and some squid salad.
-sw
Michel Boucher
$607e...@cv.net:
> Oh,
> the jobs it would create and the money that the Dems (who LOVE to
> spend<other people's> money) could put forward.
Are you suggesting they are spending the money of Germans or French people?
All governments spend from the public purse, but "conservative" governments
spend much more than most than non-conservative governments do, as
experience with dexter (but hardly dexterous) administrations has
demonstrated. And they also promote this fiction that they are better
money managers than their adversaries when in reality they have no idea
where the purse strings end.
--
Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest
of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest
good of everyone. - John Maynard Keynes
Kswck
"Michel Boucher" <alsa...@g.mail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9C4095F75295...@216.196.97.131...
HUH?
Michel Boucher
$607e...@cv.net:
> HUH?
You don't understand English?
Goomba
> My wife and I were talking about our next train vacation, maybe next
> year. Problem is, now that my son is 7, turning 8 later this year, no
> way to put 3 of us into a roomette. When he was littler they looked
> the other way (VERY nice of them since technically we were breaking
> the rules), but now we'd need two roomettes or a family bedroom. I
> came up with an idea. We have a niece who is 12, and her little
> brothers are 2 and <1, so their family isn't about to embark on a road
> trip. If they would pay for just her train fare, which would include
> half of a roomette to share with my son, we could cover all the rest
> of her expenses, mostly just meals, and maybe a few admission fees.
> That way she'd get to go on a vacation where she gets to see natural
> wonders and the like.
> This niece is a very nice, very well behaved kid. She goes to the
> symphony with us several times a year, and this year got her own
> season ticket, so she'll be going with us at least six times. She
> gets along great with my son. For ~$500 they could send her off on a
> two week vacation. I should ask my MIL whether she thinks that would
> be affordable for them.
>> Paul
>
> --Bryan
Or you could be a generous, gracious uncle and just pay her fare too,
since you'll also probably benefit from her company (a little
babysitting perhaps?) while on this trip. Did no one ever treat you to
something nice as a kid...? Pass it on!
Goomba
> Well, the old days are gone. Really gone. People take the plane. The
> food is just not the same.
>
> Given that, my wife likes the train. She took it recently to Salt Lake
> City, Utah. She's not a foodie, and thought the food was OK. There was
> both a snack bar and a meal car.
>
> The price was unbeatable. She rode coach, and it was US$65 each way (18
> hours). There was no way we could have bought gas for that.
>
I'd rather shoot myself then be on a train for 18 hours when I could
just fly. My time is worth something to me. I'm all for saving a penny
when I can, but not abusing myself in the process. Of course driving and
flying too have become almost painful and dreary whereas they used to be
so much more comfortable. <sigh> I miss the days of comfortable air
travel....
While I was attending a conference in New Orleans a couple of years ago,
my sister too Amtrak from Houston to New Orleans to meet up with me. I
think the fare was dirt cheap but it was a miserable 12 hours for her in
a very dirty train. The train had started out days prior in Los Angeles
so by the time it got to Houston it wasn't exactly in primo condition.
Many, many years ago when 14, I actually took the train from Washington,
DC to Washington State all by myself. Something I'd NEVER let my own
kids do but hey... times were simpler then, huh? I recall the dining
cars very fondly and loved the apple pie a la mode. I remember that the
stewards made you write your dinner order down for them. Perhaps to
minimize mistakes, I dunno?
The Cook
wrote:
When I was 16 years old I took at train from Delray Beach, FL to
Trenton, NJ, a cab to McGuire AFB. Stayed overnight there and flew a
MATS plane to Rhine-Main AFB. All alone. I had a great time.
You're right I would never have let my kids do something like that.
I had hoped to take a tour on the American Orient Express but never
did it. At least for right now they are out of business.
--
Susan N.
"Moral indignation is in most cases two percent moral,
48 percent indignation, and 50 percent envy."
Vittorio De Sica, Italian movie director (1901-1974)
Gregory Morrow
> On Jul 5, 5:16 pm, Wayne Boatwright <wayneboatwri...@arizona.usa.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sun 05 Jul 2009 12:10:56p, Phil-c told us...
>
> > > Will be in the states later this year
>
> > > Tfter work tasks are done and dusted .Thinking about
> > > grabbing a rail pass and doing some exploring via train and take leave
> > > while over there .
>
> > > Have heard and read various stories about Amtrack food
>
> > > Any feedback or suggestions from the brains trust on here who have
> > > recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
>
> > Having experienced and greatly enjoyed the pre-Amtrak days of train travel in
> > the US, as well as train travel in Europe, I wouldn't take Amtrak if it were
> > free, and believe me, it's not cheap.
>
> You are a fool. Coach fares are quite cheap, and the rail passes are
> an even better deal. First class is pricey, but for long trips
> there's no tedious driving, no accommodations costs, night after
> night, free meals, and the chance to see America from ground level.
> Only a rich sonofabitch to whom money is little object would write
> something like, "I wouldn't take Amtrak if it were free."
Well, what do you expect from an effete pussy-mouthed motherfucker
like Lil' Wayne...
The "amusing" part is that while he makes hoity-toity and disparaging
comments as if he were to the manor born, he - by his own admission -
barely has two kopecks to rub together. He and his boyfriend
*together* can barely pay the monthly air conditioning bill for the
double - wide they shack up in down there in Phoenix, in fact...
LOL...
Anyways, Amtrak is a great way to travel if you have the time. And it
can be pretty reasonable, frex if you buy a roundtrip between Chicawgo
and St. Louis it can be much cheaper even than driving, not to add
less stressful [I'll add that St. Louis also has a new Amtrak station
that IIRC connects to Metrolink, they finally got rid of that infamous
"Amshack" station under the highway bridge]. That particular route is
so popular that IIRC last year two additional roundtrips were added,
and rail ridership at least on the Midwest Corridor routes is way up
last I read...hopefully some of that "stimulus" money will be used to
upgrade track and so speed up service on these routes. The problem
with speed is that outside of it's Eastern Corridor routes Amtrak
leases the use of track from various freight lines, so freight trains
get first priority, and freight train lines have no need to invest in
"high speed" trackage...
IIRC foreigners can get Amtrak US rail passes at a very advantageous
rate, I don't know if these are available to US citizens. In any case
I know a number of overseas visitors that have traveled exclusively on
Amtrak for their US holidays, it's a big adventure for them, they get
to see our famous "wide open spaces". A coupla years ago I met two
English gals here in Chicawgo, it was their first visit to the US.
They flew into Boston, then used Amtrak to travel to NYC, DC, Chicago,
Memphis, and down to New Orleans, then from NO back up to NYC from
where they departed. They had a blast, no complaints at all, people
were extraordinarily friendly to them when they learned they were
visiting from abroad. Next visit they'll be flying into Chicago, then
the Southwest Chief to LA, Coast Starlight up to SF, up to Seattle,
then the Empire Builder back to Chicago and back home...
They took regular coaches all the way, the Amtrak coach seats are
pretty comfortable, akin to first-class airline seats, plenty of room
to spread out, recline, to sleep. Natcherly if you have the dough to
get a roomette or whatever that'd be great on a long trip. IIRC meals
are included in the price of the premium fares...
As for food, you can take your own on-board...invest in a small cooler
or whatever. I've had many a pleasant picnic lunch on the train
between CHI and STL, watching the cornfields roll by...you can get
wine and beer in the snack car.
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
> On Sun 05 Jul 2009 05:02:48p, Goomba told us...
>
> > Phil-c wrote:
>
> >> Any feedback or suggestions from the brains trust on here who have
> >> recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
>
> > Sadly, you're about 30 years late for classic railroad food. It is
> > horrid sandwich type fare nowadays, although trains out west might still
> > do food...?
>
> Yep, 30+ years ago, especially up through the 1950s, American train travel
> was practically luxurious (not Orient Express luxurious, but luxurious
> nevertheless). Dining car tables were laid with fresh linen cloths and
> napkins; table settings were china, logo'd with the train line, and heavy
> silverplated flatware and coffee pitchers, sugar, and creamer. Meals were
> delicious and prepared to order from fresh meats and produce. Passengers
> were truly catered to. If you were taking a long trip, sleeping
> compartments were really very nice, each with it's own bathroom.
Ntcherly, but how much did all this cost in *present day* dollars,
Lil' Wayne...??? Out of your league, for sure, but then you're a
parasite so you don't know the real cost of things, then or now...
Sure, train travel in the old daze was better, so was airplane travel,
but why cry about out it. Travel today by plane or train is *far*
cheaper and thus more accessible to the average folk today, so I'll
take "today", thank you very much.
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
> Dan Abel wrote:
> > Well, the old days are gone. Really gone. People take the plane. The
> > food is just not the same.
>
> > Given that, my wife likes the train. She took it recently to Salt Lake
> > City, Utah. She's not a foodie, and thought the food was OK. There was
> > both a snack bar and a meal car.
>
> > The price was unbeatable. She rode coach, and it was US$65 each way (18
> > hours). There was no way we could have bought gas for that.
>
> I'd rather shoot myself then be on a train for 18 hours when I could
> just fly. My time is worth something to me. I'm all for saving a penny
> when I can, but not abusing myself in the process. Of course driving and
> flying too have become almost painful and dreary whereas they used to be
> so much more comfortable. <sigh> I miss the days of comfortable air
> travel....
> While I was attending a conference in New Orleans a couple of years ago,
> my sister too Amtrak from Houston to New Orleans to meet up with me. I
> think the fare was dirt cheap but it was a miserable 12 hours for her in
> a very dirty train. The train had started out days prior in Los Angeles
> so by the time it got to Houston it wasn't exactly in primo condition.
Yup, those long-distance trains can get fairly ratty towards the end
of their run. Several times I took the Texas Eagle from St. Louis to
Chicago, maybe another train that had come all the way from LA. In
the future I took the local Midwest Corridor trains on the STL - CHI
run. Of course starting out on a long distance train for the CHI -
STL run is okay, the train is very clean and fully - stocked amenity -
wise and whatever, with a fresh crew. And "fresh" passengers, lol...
Another "issue" is that of time, some Amtrak routes are notoriously
outta whack schedule - wise. So if you are pressed for time or have
to be somewhere at an exact time, beware...!!!
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
> On 6-Jul-2009, "Kswck" <ks...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> > the jobs it would create and the money that the Dems (who LOVE to
> > spend<other people's> money) could put forward. Cost? Hey, the US has
> > already nationalized insurance companies, car companies, etc. What's one
> > more industry?
>
> Passenger rail travel has already been nationalized; that's what created
> Amtrak, when the US goverment took over passenger rail from the railroads.
>
Which were failing, remember grand old names like Pennsylvania Central
and New York Central, the Rock Island Line, etc....many of the trains
were decrepit, they dated from the 1930's even. Cheap jets and the
Interstate highway system killed inter-city US rail travel...
> If you don't think Amtrak is a government success, imagine what healthcare
> will be like once the government takes it over.
Without the creation of Amtrak we wouldn't even *have* a national rail
system, with the possible exception of a few Northeast Corrider
routes...
Highways and the airways and the auto companies get huge government
subsidies, I don't begrudge Amtrak the relatively paltry sums it gets
from the Feds...
And it's simplistic to compare Amtrak to a national healthcare
system...
--
Best
Greg
notbob
> recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
I've eaten on Amtrack within the last 20 mos.
I've been regularly riding the California Zephyer, which is a historic run
from San Francisco Bay Area (SFBA) to Chicago, for the last 15 yrs. It's
not as nice as the trains in the 50s, but I still enjoy it.
Apparently, amenities like food, drink, accomadations vary greatly around
the country on different runs. The CZ is pretty good. Its worst
accomodations were better than the best accomadations on the last plane trip
I suffered (about the same time). Food is not three star, or even one, but
it's better than Applebee's. I always enjoyed a nice dinner of fish or
steak with a couple sides and choice of wines. I noticed on my last trip,
paper tableclothes had replaced the cloth of old. The food was still ok.
Between scheduled meals on the dinning car, the observation car has a snack
bar with pre-packaged sandwhiches, microwave junk food, and beer and
cocktails. I never had to buy food off the train.
I've always enjoyed the laid back ambience of the train. You can walk
around, meet people, good restrooms, etc. I've met several nice ppl from
Europe on rail passes. Last trip, I ran into a buncha quakers. Since I
happened to be sporting an quaker-style beard at the time, we hit it off
great. Real nice ppl.
A lot depends on the time of week you travel. One trip, every seat was
taken. My last trip, there were less than a dozen ppl per coach. This means
you have both seats to yourself and the seats have leg supports like a
recliner chair. There's plenty of leg room, unlike any plane I've been on.
Myself, I'd rather spend 44 hrs on a train than 30 mins on a plane (I'll
lend you my gun, Goomba! ;). I do confess to being a true train nut. I've
been riding on 'em for 55 yrs.
nb
Bobo Bonobo®
> On 6-Jul-2009, "Kswck" <ks...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> > spend<other people's> money) could put forward. Cost? Hey, the US has
> > already nationalized insurance companies, car companies, etc. What's one
> > more industry?
>
> Amtrak, when the US goverment took over passenger rail from the railroads.
>
> will be like once the government takes it over.
>
in charge. Do you really think that *they* have your best interests
in mind? You can't be that stupid.
--Bryan
BigDog1
> Will be in the states later this year
>
> Tfter work tasks are done and dusted .Thinking about
> grabbing a rail pass and doing some exploring via train and take leave
> while over there .
>
> Have heard and read various stories about Amtrack food
>
Amtrak food is, at best, mediocre. At worst, barely edible - but it
does fill the hole. And, unless meals are included in your package
it's expensive. Menus for the various lines are available on the
Amtrak web site.
Last summer I decided to travel on Amtrak to visit my family 1800
miles away. Mainly for the adventure. I lived in Germany for ten
years from the early 70's to the early 80's and traveled all over
Europe and Scandinavia by train. Hadn't been on a long distance train
trip in the States since the early 60s. Never again! It took as long
as driving (almost 5 days total on the round trip), and cost almost
50% more (just under $2K). I guess if you're making short trips
between cities it's OK, but if you're making a long trip and are used
to traveling on European trains, you won't be happy with Amtrak.
brooklyn1
"Gregory Morrow" wrote:
Lil' Wayne Boatwrong blabbles:
>
> Yep, 30+ years ago, especially up through the 1950s, American train travel
> was practically luxurious (not Orient Express luxurious, but luxurious
> nevertheless). Dining car tables were laid with fresh linen cloths and
> napkins; table settings were china, logo'd with the train line, and heavy
> silverplated flatware and coffee pitchers, sugar, and creamer. Meals were
> delicious and prepared to order from fresh meats and produce. Passengers
> were truly catered to. If you were taking a long trip, sleeping
> compartments were really very nice, each with it's own bathroom.
Ntcherly, but how much did all this cost in *present day* dollars,
Lil' Wayne...??? Out of your league, for sure, but then you're a
parasite so you don't know the real cost of things, then or now...
Sure, train travel in the old daze was better, so was airplane travel,
but why cry about out it. Travel today by plane or train is *far*
cheaper and thus more accessible to the average folk today, so I'll
take "today", thank you very much.
Obviously Duh'Weenie is recounting some old TV flicks... he never traveled
by rail... years ago he was hustlin' rides at interstate rest stops by
giving blowjobs.
Bobo Bonobo®
I went down there today to exchange some tickets. It's very nice, but
there is no free parking even for ticketing, and no long term parking
whatsoever. Luckily my wife was with me.
> That particular route is
> so popular that IIRC last year two additional roundtrips were added,
> and rail ridership at least on the Midwest Corridor routes is way up
> last I read...hopefully some of that "stimulus" money will be used to
> upgrade track and so speed up service on these routes. The problem
> with speed is that outside of it's Eastern Corridor routes Amtrak
> leases the use of track from various freight lines, so freight trains
> get first priority, and freight train lines have no need to invest in
> "high speed" trackage...
Secretary LaHood is from central Illinois, and has been a huge
supporter of Amtrak.
It is fitting that the Lincoln train will be the first high speed
outside the Northeast, partly because Obama professes to be a Lincoln
fan. Biden is the most pro Amtrak of them all. MO Gov. Nixon and IL
Gov. Quinn are both gung ho for it. It's hard to imagine what could
derail the plan.
>
> IIRC foreigners can get Amtrak US rail passes at a very advantageous
> rate, I don't know if these are available to US citizens.
That used to be the case. I looked at their website and that category
of pass seems to no longer exist. Maybe the strength of the Euro vis-
a-vis the Dollar has something to do with that change. A 30 day pass
is $579, with a limit of 12 boardings. CHI to LAX would be considered
one segment.
> In any case
> I know a number of overseas visitors that have traveled exclusively on
> Amtrak for their US holidays, it's a big adventure for them, they get
> to see our famous "wide open spaces". A coupla years ago I met two
> English gals here in Chicawgo, it was their first visit to the US.
> They flew into Boston, then used Amtrak to travel to NYC, DC, Chicago,
> Memphis, and down to New Orleans, then from NO back up to NYC from
> where they departed. They had a blast, no complaints at all, people
> were extraordinarily friendly to them when they learned they were
> visiting from abroad. Next visit they'll be flying into Chicago, then
> the Southwest Chief to LA, Coast Starlight up to SF, up to Seattle,
> then the Empire Builder back to Chicago and back home...
>
> They took regular coaches all the way, the Amtrak coach seats are
> pretty comfortable, akin to first-class airline seats, plenty of room
> to spread out, recline, to sleep. Natcherly if you have the dough to
> get a roomette or whatever that'd be great on a long trip. IIRC meals
> are included in the price of the premium fares...
Meals are included with all accommodations.
>
> As for food, you can take your own on-board...invest in a small cooler
> or whatever. I've had many a pleasant picnic lunch on the train
> between CHI and STL, watching the cornfields roll by...you can get
> wine and beer in the snack car.
Just make DAMNED SURE not to bring your own alcoholic beverages
(unless you have a sleeper). The fines are huge.
>
> --
> Best
> Greg
--Bryan
Dave Smith
>> spend<other people's> money) could put forward. Cost? Hey, the US has
>> already nationalized insurance companies, car companies, etc. What's one
>> more industry?
>
> Amtrak, when the US goverment took over passenger rail from the railroads.
>
> If you don't think Amtrak is a government success, imagine what healthcare
> will be like once the government takes it over.
Curiously, the passenger rail system works very well in Europe, and I
have no problem with the government run health care system here. I have
done well by it.
Dave Smith
> Last summer I decided to travel on Amtrak to visit my family 1800
> miles away. Mainly for the adventure. I lived in Germany for ten
> years from the early 70's to the early 80's and traveled all over
> Europe and Scandinavia by train. Hadn't been on a long distance train
> trip in the States since the early 60s. Never again! It took as long
> as driving (almost 5 days total on the round trip), and cost almost
> 50% more (just under $2K). I guess if you're making short trips
> between cities it's OK, but if you're making a long trip and are used
> to traveling on European trains, you won't be happy with Amtrak.
I had a great time travelling around Europe on a rail pass. You can get
just about anywhere by rail. We would stop at the ticket counter and
tell them where we were thinking of going and they would print out a
couple of itineraries for us with different departure times and showing
the connections we had to make. Most of our stopovers where just a few
minutes. We had to get off the train and check the board to see what
track our next train was leaving from and scoot over there and hop on
the next one. I have waited longer for subway transfers. Our longest
connection time was only 20 minutes.
European train stations are also conveniently located close to nice and
reasonably priced hotels. The larger stations also had nice shops and
restaurants.
notbob
> Passenger rail travel has already been nationalized; that's what created
> Amtrak, when the US goverment took over passenger rail from the railroads.
....as are all passenger rail in all countries. No passenger rail system
could survive without govt subsidy. The US is about the lowest.
> If you don't think Amtrak is a government success, imagine what healthcare
> will be like once the government takes it over.
Bush almost killed amtrack single-handidly (he tried). I forget how badly he cut
subsidies, but it now surviving on less a than one third of its former levels..
nb
brooklyn1
"Gregory Morrow" <gregor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
And it's simplistic to compare Amtrak to a national healthcare
system...
Simplistic nothing, it's not even rational... tawkin' magnetudes of money
wider apart then from here to another solar system. National health care is
a farce, it's fixing what ain't broken. Anyone who goes without health
insurance it's because they *choose* too, the no account ignorant self
centered bastards would rather spend their premium dollars on weekend bar
hopping, fancy schmancy dining, sporting event seats, chi chi duds, and what
have you. Then when they get sick they cry the poor me two penny opera.
Private health insurance is readily available and reasonably priced. When
an employer furnishes healthcare it's a benefit same as any others, it's in
lieu of pay... when you lose a job you don't retain vacation pay either.
Losing benefits is incentive to get another job as quickly as possible, not
milk the unemployment titty. And still the employee has to subsidize the
premiums, pay co-pays, and abide by the limits of service. The only ones
getting free for nothing health insurance are our illustrious elected
officials, like Obaminable.. he's got a lot of gall waving about a health
insurance carrot that ain't shit while the hipocrit still smokes. But the
masses of asses are gonna bite... and then all those who work are gonna be
buying better health care than they have for the hordes of welfare crackhead
worms who never worked and never will. Why do you think Obaminable is
wanting it... anyone with an IQ should be able to figure it out... a welfare
worm loser gets the same vote as a hard working citizen. Obaminable is a
welfare worm too, he has never held a job either... and no way no how is
elected official employment.
Gregory Morrow
Yup...*exactly*...and he failed at picking up hitch-hiking sailors
until he started donning a wig and a dress...now he's just another old
withered queen who has to resort to kiddy - diddling...
LOL...
--
Best
Greg
Michel Boucher
40d6-a494-c...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.com:
> Cheap jets and the
> Interstate highway system killed inter-city US rail travel...
But they are far from being as efficient on fuel use. Trains beat
everything there. That is why they are still in use around the world,
except in Norf Amerigovespucciland where logic is doity woid.
Oh, Ich bin vergesse, you believe the Reagan will return (in the spirit)
from Rancho del Cielo with a chorus of liberal economoists (pun intended)
and issue from the woodwork out to reset the world as it was at the time of
Emmanuel the Christ, so no need for conservation...burn it all now!
brooklyn1
"notbob" <not...@nothome.com> wrote in message
news:Vfu4m.16010$iU7....@newsfe01.iad...
than one is traveling. Rail tickets are pricy for a single, the price of
tickets for the typical family of four make the cost of traveling by rail
outrageous. I've known quite a few people who choose to travel by rail, all
are admittedly either very poor long distance drivers or are ascared to fly.
The round trip Amtrack ticket from Albany to NYC is close to $100, and I
still need to drive an hour to the depot, and then I still need a ride from
midtown to eastern LI. I can drive the round trip for about the same $100,
but I can drive with 2-3 passengers for the same $100. Needless to say
traveling by rail is no bargain. And aside from cost truly long distance
rail travel holds one hostage for a real long time.
brooklyn1
"Gregory Morrow" <gregor...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:869f76d8-dc76-4c0c...@26g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
brooklyn1 wrote:
LOL...
If not for abject poverty Duh'Weenie would love one of those Micheal Jackson
hidden Never Land pedo peepee petting closets.
Phil-c
> "Phil-c" <invalid@invalid> wrote in message
> news:4a50...@news.x-privat.org...
>> Will be in the states later this year
>>
>> Tfter work tasks are done and dusted .Thinking about
>> grabbing a rail pass and doing some exploring via train and take leave
>> while over there .
>>
>> Have heard and read various stories about Amtrack food
>>
>> Any feedback or suggestions from the brains trust on here who have
>> recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
>
> fine. I enjoyed it. It's mostly simple fair like meatload and mashed
> potatoes but you'll not be unhappy with it/
>
> Paul
>
>
What makes you think I would not be happy with it ?
And things tend to change over 20 years . However thank you for your input.
Jean B.
> Phil-c said...
>
>> Will be in the states later this year
>>
>> Tfter work tasks are done and dusted .Thinking about
>> grabbing a rail pass and doing some exploring via train and take leave
>> while over there .
>>
>> Have heard and read various stories about Amtrack food
>>
>> Any feedback or suggestions from the brains trust on here who have
>> recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
>
>
>
> Next trouble is, the food generally sucks.
>
> Third trouble is, Amtrak train air circulation systems suck! I got on
> Amtrak train in NYC and got off at home in Philadelphia a couple hours
> later with bronchitis. Same as airplane air!
>
> I'll road trip before I'll ever Amtrak where leisure is concerned. I
> certainly won't consider the Amtrak cuisine an important prerequisite for
> riding the rails.
>
> Andy
There you are! I was actually thinking of dropping a little line.
Did you go away for the holiday?
--
Jean B.
Andy
Fear and loathing in New Jersey! :D
Andy
Bobo Bonobo®
Hey Greg, accusing a person of sexually exploiting children crosses a
line.
It's like contending that a person has committed rape or murder.
Usenet is pretty much say-anything-what-the-hell, but if he sued you,
you'd deserve it. My testimony would benefit you, because I'd say
that I doubt that any of the regulars on this NG believe that Wayne
sexually exploits children. Insult him all you want, but when you
accuse a person of committing nasty felonies that you have to proof
for...
Fu(k, why do I bother?
>
> --
> Best
> Greg
--Bryan
Arri London
Phil-c wrote:
>
> Will be in the states later this year
>
> Tfter work tasks are done and dusted .Thinking about
> grabbing a rail pass and doing some exploring via train and take leave
> while over there .
>
> Have heard and read various stories about Amtrack food
>
> Any feedback or suggestions from the brains trust on here who have
> recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
Have not recently eaten on board any Amtrak train. When travelling that
way in the past, always brought my own food on long journeys. The
stations are normally (but not always) in the centres of towns, so
getting supplied isn't typically a problem.
Did that same throughout Europe and UK. Don't get me started on
old-style British Rail food LOL. It hasn't improved with the cutting up
of the system. Even Dickens had something to say about it in his day :)
Phil-c
system . Certainly the dreaded *railway sandwich*
They must have had special bakers to be able to convert the flours and
yeasts into -------- well a cross between a wall tile and plaster caste
with a cheese that had the flavour of cardboard and the aroma of old
socks .
The ham ! Well never been able to slice it as thin as those railway
caterers the upside was the pickle, it had some taste at least but
salty as all get out .
But when returning from boarding school it was a 2 and a bit day
journey and three train changes .
Not until we got to Parkes where one could get on the silver city
comet did life improve.
Having Air Con when outside was 105F and above and a decent bit of food
on board unlike the muck on the way out from Sydney
The weird Thing in oz we still have a number of different railway gauges
standard like the yanks and EU Narrow and wide gauge
Although now , most of the mainlines are standard or dual gauge
so when changing Guages and trains the quaintly named Refreshment rooms
offered decent fare in freezing cold mornings and a cop of Cocoa and
dreadful sandwich or a meat pie or pastie went down and stuck to your
ribs for a decent while . But in hindsight was truly dreadful
Quote
SILVER CITY COMET
Commenced operations between Parkes and Broken Hill on 27 - September 1937.
It was the first fully air � conditioned Diesel powered train in the
British Empire.
Power van DP 101 was the first of five built in the NSW Railway workshop
at Eveleigh in 1937.
Ritchie Bros of Auburn NSW, built twelve air � conditioned passengers
cars of which three are preserved at the Sulphide Street Railway Museum
Broken Hill.
As built in 1937, the power van was fitted with two Harland, and Wolf, 8
� cylinder diesel engines of 246 kw at 1200 revs. Power was transmitted
through a Voith Sinclair turbo transmission, step up gearbox and final
drive on the inner axle of each bogie, giving a top speed of 130 kph.
Two National diesel generator sets provided for auxiliary power, train
lighting and electric kitchen.
The powervans were refitted in the early 1950s with four GM 6 � 110
diesel engines of 186 kw, given a total of 744 kw for traction.
These were arranged in two banks of two, driving a GM torque converter
through a step � up gearbox and original final drive.
Auxilary power is supplied by two standard Waygood GM Generators sets
of 50 kw at 120 volts.
The Silver City Comet was last in service in November 1989 after 52
years of service. It was transferred to the Railway museum Broken Hill
in 1990.*-
Bob Terwilliger
>> you'll not be unhappy with it/
>>
> What makes you think I would not be happy with it ?
Read more carefully.
Bob
Bob Terwilliger
> I'd rather shoot myself then be on a train for 18 hours when I could just
> fly. My time is worth something to me. I'm all for saving a penny when I
> can, but not abusing myself in the process. Of course driving and flying
> too have become almost painful and dreary whereas they used to be so much
> more comfortable. <sigh> I miss the days of comfortable air travel....
You're looking at it the wrong way: If you don't believe that your vacation
starts until you reach your destination, then yes, you should get there as
quickly as possible. But people who take the train often view the *trip* as
part of the vacation. Last year Lin and I took the train across the Donner
Pass to Reno simply because it's a gorgeous trip through the mountains. I
also hope someday to take the train from Sacramento to Portland (Oregon)
because of the spectacular scenery.
Bob
Bob Terwilliger
>>> Oh, the jobs it would create and the money that the Dems (who LOVE to
>>> spend<other people's> money) could put forward.
>>
>> Are you suggesting they are spending the money of Germans or French
>> people?
>>
>> All governments spend from the public purse, but "conservative"
>> governments spend much more than most than non-conservative governments
>> do, as experience with dexter (but hardly dexterous) administrations has
>> demonstrated. And they also promote this fiction that they are better
>> money managers than their adversaries when in reality they have no idea
>> where the purse strings end.
>>
>
> HUH?
Allow me to translate: "Right-wing governments are not as good as left-wing
governments."
Come to think of it, you can pretty much translate *all* of Michel's posts
that way.
Bob
Bob Terwilliger
>> Cheap jets and the Interstate highway system killed inter-city US rail
>> travel...
>
> But they are far from being as efficient on fuel use. Trains beat
> everything there. That is why they are still in use around the world,
> except in Norf Amerigovespucciland where logic is doity woid.
>
> Oh, Ich bin vergesse, you believe the Reagan will return (in the spirit)
> from Rancho del Cielo with a chorus of liberal economoists (pun intended)
> and issue from the woodwork out to reset the world as it was at the time
> of Emmanuel the Christ, so no need for conservation...burn it all now!
I think you shouldn't post anymore until the absinthe has worked its way out
of your system.
Bob
Dave Smith
> You're looking at it the wrong way: If you don't believe that your
> vacation starts until you reach your destination, then yes, you should
> get there as quickly as possible. But people who take the train often
> view the *trip* as part of the vacation. Last year Lin and I took the
> train across the Donner Pass to Reno simply because it's a gorgeous trip
> through the mountains. I also hope someday to take the train from
> Sacramento to Portland (Oregon) because of the spectacular scenery.
As disappointed as I was with the food on Via Rail from Calgary to
Vancouver, the scenery was amazing. Travelling through Switzerland and
then down into Italy also had incredible mountains to see. You can just
sit there and watch and not have to worry about steering or brakes...
though you might want to hope that the engineer has seen it enough to
pay attention to the controls. The trip from Nice to Paris passed
through some beautiful areas. It was quite enjoyable. It really was a
very pleasant way to travel.
Pete C.
Europe is smaller and higher population density than the US. Europe's
passenger rail model doesn't scale well to fit the US, it has little to
do with politics.
Wayne Boatwright
Bob, I totally agree with you in principle, but would not want to make a
lengthy train trip on today's North American trains.
We lived in St. Louis when I was eleven years old, and my dad travelled for
most of his work, which was national. My mother and I travelled by train
from St. Louis to Seattle taking a northern route. We had a sleeping
compartment, and the train also had a Vista-Dome car, along with well
appointed dining and lounge cars. My dad had flown to Seattle and joined
us there. We made many stops along the way, but worked our way down the
west coast, spent time in San Francisco and Los Angeles, then continued
homeward taking a southern route, ending in Tupelo, MS, where most of
family lived at the time. We spent a week there visiting relatives before
boarding another train returning to St. Louis.
This was a six-week trip and everything was top-rate. Being an engaging
youngster, I somehow managed to be invited to see the engine and watch the
operations for a short while.
It was an exciting trip, and I can't even imagine what I (we) would have
missed if we had simply flown to the west coast from St. Louis. The train
stations in the larger cities where we changed trains or had short layovers
were grand and spectacular.
--
Wayne Boatwright
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Welcome to the Church of the Holy Cabbage. Lettuce pray. ~Author
Unknown
Gregory Morrow
Heehee, Bob...I wuz gonna say...
;-P
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
> Gregory Morrow <gregor...@earthlink.net> wrote in
> news:5b163992-513e-
> 40d6-a494-c...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.com:
>
>> Cheap jets and the
>> Interstate highway system killed inter-city US rail travel...
>
> But they are far from being as efficient on fuel use. Trains beat
> everything there. That is why they are still in use around the world,
> except in Norf Amerigovespucciland where logic is doity woid.
>
Except that trains get peeps - and goods - *where* they are needed. Not
everyplace in the US is on the rail grid. A century ago most every town in
America was connected by rail, but something *better* came along: the
internal combustion engine...
> Oh, Ich bin vergesse, you believe the Reagan will return (in the
> spirit) from Rancho del Cielo with a chorus of liberal economoists
> (pun intended) and issue from the woodwork out to reset the world as
> it was at the time of Emmanuel the Christ, so no need for
> conservation...burn it all now!
"Oh, LOOK at all of that of lovely oil shale up there to our NORTH in
CAPITALIST - friendly ALBERTA...I wonder if they'd like to SECEDE and join
us down here in the 'lower 48'...Alberta's JUST like TEXAS, ya know...!!!"
:-P
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
Yup, in a place like the Netherlands or Switzerland or most other European
places the population density is such that trains are practicable for much
travel, not so in the US. Vast areas have no access to rail service at
all...
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
> Gregory Morrow <gregor...@earthlink.net> wrote in
> news:5b163992-513e-
> 40d6-a494-c...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.com:
>
>> Cheap jets and the
>> Interstate highway system killed inter-city US rail travel...
>
> But they are far from being as efficient on fuel use. Trains beat
> everything there. That is why they are still in use around the world,
> except in Norf Amerigovespucciland where logic is doity woid.
>
How's VIA Rail doing these daze up there, Michel...???
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
Being an
> engaging youngster, I somehow managed to be invited to see the engine
> and watch the operations for a short while.
"engaging younster" = "scurrilous budding homosexual"
--
Best
Greg
Dale P
news:4a50...@news.x-privat.org...
>
> Tfter work tasks are done and dusted .Thinking about
> grabbing a rail pass and doing some exploring via train and take leave
> while over there .
>
> Have heard and read various stories about Amtrack food
>
> Any feedback or suggestions from the brains trust on here who have
> recently eaten on board Amtrack ?
The Amtrak dining rooms are okay. Not special, but okay, and the price is
medium. The snack bar can vary so much by the person running it. I have
seen an aggressive snack bar guy running drink and evening specials that
were just fine for that venue. It will not measure up to the standards of
UK and Europe, and yet one of the most overpriced meals we ever had was on
the train in Italy. Should have stuck to the snack bar that day!! Relax
and enjoy the ride and you will have a great trip.
DP
George Shirley
about the same Wayne. My experience in the eighties totally sucked. To
get from where we live to Washington, DC meant we spent almost a whole
day on a train to New Orleans (about a three-hour drive by car, an
overnight stay in a hotel, and then two days on the train to DC. Same
thing coming back. We ended up flying, it wasn't cheaper but it was a
better way to make the trip.
An earlier poster on this subject had it right, in the NE the Amtrak
trains are primarily commuter trains and the only true passenger trains
go west from Chicago, Houston, etc. Even those don't have many amenities
anymore.
The railroads dropped passenger service because freight was more
profitable. Eisenhower's "military highways", aka Interstate Freeways,
sounded the death knell on passenger trains.
Michel Boucher
news:0000c1e4$0$7751$c3e...@news.astraweb.com:
>> Oh, Ich bin vergesse, you believe the Reagan will return (in the
>> spirit) from Rancho del Cielo with a chorus of liberal economoists
>> (pun intended) and issue from the woodwork out to reset the world as
>> it was at the time of Emmanuel the Christ, so no need for
>> conservation...burn it all now!
>
> I think you shouldn't post anymore until the absinthe has worked its
> way out of your system.
If I had wanted a comment from the peanut gallery, I would have inserted a
space for it, thank you.
brooklyn1
"Gregory Morrow" <xz444...@xxpafja.ch> wrote in message
news:X4udndIzWfy_WM_X...@earthlink.com...
> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
> Being an
>> engaging youngster, I somehow managed to be invited to see the engine
>> and watch the operations for a short while.
>
>
>
>
>
Michel Boucher
> Except that trains get peeps - and goods - *where* they are needed.
> Not everyplace in the US is on the rail grid. A century ago most
> every town in America was connected by rail, but something *better*
> came along: the internal combustion engine...
If that was so obviously the case, why did Europe not follow suit? An
example of perfection suits all, not just a few.
>> Oh, Ich bin vergesse, you believe the Reagan will return (in the
>> spirit) from Rancho del Cielo with a chorus of liberal economoists
>> (pun intended) and issue from the woodwork out to reset the world as
>> it was at the time of Emmanuel the Christ, so no need for
>> conservation...burn it all now!
>
> "Oh, LOOK at all of that of lovely oil shale
Tar sands, getcher facks straight.
> up there to our NORTH in
> CAPITALIST - friendly ALBERTA...I wonder if they'd like to SECEDE and
> join us down here in the 'lower 48'...Alberta's JUST like TEXAS, ya
> know...!!!"
Well, speaking from the centre, let me say PLEASE, TAKE THEM! We will be
able to get good government back and those religious nutbars can go hijack
parliamentary democracy in your country and leave us alone. Losing Alberta
will be like losing an annoying boil.
Michel Boucher
> How's VIA Rail doing these daze up there, Michel...???
Is that a pale attempt at...dare we say it...sarcasm?
Via Rail is doing fairly well, considering it was on the chopping block in
the last days the Macaroni government (roundabout 1990):
From their Performance Report:
Since 1990, VIA has focused on reducing overhead, administrative and
operating costs, while improving the quality of service to attract more
customers and increase revenues.
As a result, the level and quality of passenger rail service across the
country have improved, while costs to the public for operating the service
have fallen. Between 1990 and 2006:
VIA reduced total operating funding by 59% ($241 million) annually, while
absorbing approximately 30% of inflation.
* Total operating expenses dropped by 14% ($78 million) annually.
* Total revenues increased by 108% ($154 million) annually.
* Passenger miles increased by 14%.
* Cost recovery increased by 117%, from 29 cents to 63 cents of revenue
earned per dollar of operating expenses.
It is not unusual for a train between Ottawa and Toronto to be full. For
short drives (2 hours or less) a bus is sometimes more appropriate, but for
long drives (and we have a lot of those in Canada), the train goes most
anywhere, or within range of anywhere, from sea to shining sea.
Wayne Boatwright
> My experiences with US trains in the fifties and early sixties were
> about the same Wayne. My experience in the eighties totally sucked. To
> get from where we live to Washington, DC meant we spent almost a whole
> day on a train to New Orleans (about a three-hour drive by car, an
> overnight stay in a hotel, and then two days on the train to DC. Same
> thing coming back. We ended up flying, it wasn't cheaper but it was a
> better way to make the trip.
>
> An earlier poster on this subject had it right, in the NE the Amtrak
> trains are primarily commuter trains and the only true passenger trains
> go west from Chicago, Houston, etc. Even those don't have many amenities
> anymore.
>
> The railroads dropped passenger service because freight was more
> profitable. Eisenhower's "military highways", aka Interstate Freeways,
> sounded the death knell on passenger trains.
>
It's all kind of sad, really...
--
Wayne Boatwright
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is every cook's opinion ~no savory dish without an onion, but
lest your kissing should be spoiled your onions must be fully
boiled. ~Jonathan Swift
notbob
> It's all kind of sad, really...
Yes, it is. There's been a major resurgence in trains for entertainment,
like historic steam locomotive runs, wine trains, etc, but those are short
run local trips, typically seasonal. There was an attempt to re-introduce
high-end pleasure train runs like the American Orient Express and tours
connected to cruise ship stop-offs, but those have fallen on hard times or
shut down altogether in the face of the continuing bad economy.
One thing is certain, many Americans have never abandoned their love affair
with train travel. I hope with rising fuel costs and frustration with the
horrid air travel experience, there may still be a place for enjoyable train
travel. It's a personal choice, really. Suffering being herded like cattle
and frantically stuffed into a flying can like sardines only to experience a
google map view of the world and arrive in 2 hrs to again suffer the same
stockyard crush. That nightmare as opposed to a leisure stroll to and
inside the train for a relaxing kicked back 40 hrs with breathtaking scenery
at every turn, time to read, snooze, chat and/or dine with interesting ppl.
Pshaw! My life is not so short I need to go a thousand miles in 2 hrs.
nb
T
waynebo...@arizona.usa.com says...
The only trains I've ever been on is commuter rail and subways. Other
than that I won't do Amtrak because it's just too inconvenient.
My MIL lives in North Carolina. Last year we flew - that was an
experience I'd rather not repeat. Horrible, horrible, horrible.
Delays for weather, for mechanical issues, and all. Missed our connector
at Reagan because our incoming flight from Norfolk was delayed. Next
flight home wouldn't be until the next mornign so I asked if there was a
Boston bound flight we could be switched onto. Yup, one leaving at 6PM
arrive Boston a little before 9PM. I figure we could just take the MBTA
Silver Line back to South Station and then the Providence commuter from
there.
The Boston bound flight didn't take off until well after midnight. Seems
that one needed a replacement APU that had to be flown in from Chicago!
Not only that, they routed our luggage to Manchester, NH. We got into
Boston Logan at 2:30AM. By this point the MBTA had stopped running so we
were able to raise a friend to get us back to Providence.
This year we drove. Much better.
T
says...
>
> On 6-Jul-2009, "Kswck" <ks...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> > the jobs it would create and the money that the Dems (who LOVE to
> > spend<other people's> money) could put forward. Cost? Hey, the US has
> > already nationalized insurance companies, car companies, etc. What's one
> > more industry?
>
> Passenger rail travel has already been nationalized; that's what created
> Amtrak, when the US goverment took over passenger rail from the railroads.
>
> If you don't think Amtrak is a government success, imagine what healthcare
> will be like once the government takes it over.
Invalid comparison. AMTRAK was designed to fail. Any public transist
system needs massive subsidies to exist. But year after year they keep
trying to cut the budgets for such things.
And while we're at it, what about the USPS? It is absolutey hamstrung by
its dependence on the internal combustion engine.
T
says...
>
> On 2009-07-06, l, not -l <lal...@cujo.com> wrote:
>
> > Passenger rail travel has already been nationalized; that's what created
> > Amtrak, when the US goverment took over passenger rail from the railroads.
>
> could survive without govt subsidy. The US is about the lowest.
Not only that, look at the massive subsidies made for that thing we call
the automobile. Did we think for a moment that those highways, et al
just appeared? No, we paid for it with tax dollars.
Airlines get subsidies too.
Here is what I'd like to see:
High speed rail that criss-crosses the U.S. Speeds of 200MPH or more. At
each high speed hub connect with airport for international flights.
You could do it in the U.S.
T
@verizon.net says...
> Simplistic nothing, it's not even rational... tawkin' magnetudes of money
> wider apart then from here to another solar system. National health care is
> a farce, it's fixing what ain't broken. Anyone who goes without health
> insurance it's because they *choose* too,
>
Sure, I've got the $4,000 a month to pay for premiums for two people.
You're again missing the point. You have close to 50 million people in
the U.S. without health insurance.
I'd venture that 99.9% of those without didn't choose to be without
insurance.
T
alsa...@g.mail.com says...
>
> Gregory Morrow <gregor...@earthlink.net> wrote in news:5b163992-513e-
> 40d6-a494-c...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.com:
>
> > Cheap jets and the
> > Interstate highway system killed inter-city US rail travel...
>
> But they are far from being as efficient on fuel use. Trains beat
> everything there. That is why they are still in use around the world,
> except in Norf Amerigovespucciland where logic is doity woid.
>
> from Rancho del Cielo with a chorus of liberal economoists (pun intended)
> and issue from the woodwork out to reset the world as it was at the time of
> Emmanuel the Christ, so no need for conservation...burn it all now!
Yes trains are much more efficient and they prove that hybridization
really works. That's right, electric motors drive virtually every train
out there today. They're powered by diesel generators.
Here in the northeast we still have a viable freight and passenger rail
system. I absolutely love the fact that I can take an MBTA commuter
train from Providence to Boston and other points served by the MBTA.
Michel Boucher
news:MPG.24bd4f11a...@news.eternal-september.org:
> High speed rail that criss-crosses the U.S. Speeds of 200MPH or more. At
> each high speed hub connect with airport for international flights.
>
> You could do it in the U.S.
TGVs have been proposed time and time again to improve passenger/freight
rail service (our rails are in considerably better condition than US rails)
but the political will (at least in Canada) is not there.
The Harpo government suckles at the teat of the petroleum industry and if
you say a bad woid about mother's truckin', you are in for a nasty glare
from the Minister of Transport. And he'll probably shout obscenities in
your ear as well.
Gregory Morrow
> In article <h2tmlc$51m$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, lal...@cujo.com
> says...
>>
>> On 6-Jul-2009, "Kswck" <ks...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>> the jobs it would create and the money that the Dems (who LOVE to
>>> spend<other people's> money) could put forward. Cost? Hey, the US
>>> has already nationalized insurance companies, car companies, etc.
>>> What's one more industry?
>>
>> Passenger rail travel has already been nationalized; that's what
>> created Amtrak, when the US goverment took over passenger rail from
>> the railroads.
>>
>> If you don't think Amtrak is a government success, imagine what
>> healthcare will be like once the government takes it over.
>
> Invalid comparison. AMTRAK was designed to fail. Any public transist
> system needs massive subsidies to exist. But year after year they keep
> trying to cut the budgets for such things.
Some things in the "public service" realm simply cannot make a profit. Does
national defense make a "profit"? Do schools, roads, law enforcement, NASA,
public libraries, many other things...???
>
> And while we're at it, what about the USPS? It is absolutey hamstrung
> by its dependence on the internal combustion engine.
Yep, no more mail trains...
:-)
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
> T <kd1s....@cox.nospam.net> wrote in
> news:MPG.24bd4f11a...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> High speed rail that criss-crosses the U.S. Speeds of 200MPH or
>> more. At each high speed hub connect with airport for international
>> flights.
>>
>> You could do it in the U.S.
>
> TGVs have been proposed time and time again to improve
> passenger/freight rail service (our rails are in considerably better
> condition than US rails)
Of *course* they are, Canada has far fewer people and consequently there is
less wear - and - tear on the rails...
--
Best
Greg
Michel Boucher
>> TGVs have been proposed time and time again to improve
>> passenger/freight rail service (our rails are in considerably better
>> condition than US rails)
>
> Of *course* they are, Canada has far fewer people and consequently
> there is less wear - and - tear on the rails...
And they were kept up until more recently than 1979.
blake murphy
> Kswck wrote:
>
>>>> Oh, the jobs it would create and the money that the Dems (who LOVE to
>>>> spend<other people's> money) could put forward.
>>>
>>> Are you suggesting they are spending the money of Germans or French
>>> people?
>>>
>>> All governments spend from the public purse, but "conservative"
>>> governments spend much more than most than non-conservative governments
>>> do, as experience with dexter (but hardly dexterous) administrations has
>>> demonstrated. And they also promote this fiction that they are better
>>> money managers than their adversaries when in reality they have no idea
>>> where the purse strings end.
>>>
>>
>> HUH?
>
> Allow me to translate: "Right-wing governments are not as good as left-wing
> governments."
>
> Come to think of it, you can pretty much translate *all* of Michel's posts
> that way.
>
> Bob
...and reverse the terms, and you have many of kswck's as well.
blake
blake murphy
> On 6-Jul-2009, "Kswck" <ks...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>> the jobs it would create and the money that the Dems (who LOVE to
>> spend<other people's> money) could put forward. Cost? Hey, the US has
>> already nationalized insurance companies, car companies, etc. What's one
>> more industry?
>
> Passenger rail travel has already been nationalized; that's what created
> Amtrak, when the US goverment took over passenger rail from the railroads.
>
> If you don't think Amtrak is a government success, imagine what healthcare
> will be like once the government takes it over.
no, i'd think i'd rather imagine the VA or medicare, which those people
covered by them seem to be pretty happy with.
your pal,
blake
blake murphy
> l, not -l wrote:
>
>> On �6-Jul-2009, "Kswck" <ks...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>> the jobs it would create and the money that the Dems (who LOVE to
>>> spend<other people's> money) could put forward. Cost? Hey, the US has
>>> already nationalized insurance companies, car companies, etc. What's one
>>> more industry?
>>
>> Passenger rail travel has already been nationalized; that's what created
>> Amtrak, when the US goverment took over passenger rail from the railroads.
>>
>
> Which were failing, remember grand old names like Pennsylvania Central
> and New York Central, the Rock Island Line, etc....many of the trains
> were decrepit, they dated from the 1930's even. Cheap jets and the
> Interstate highway system killed inter-city US rail travel...
>
>> If you don't think Amtrak is a government success, imagine what healthcare
>> will be like once the government takes it over.
>
> Without the creation of Amtrak we wouldn't even *have* a national rail
> system, with the possible exception of a few Northeast Corrider
> routes...
>
> Highways and the airways and the auto companies get huge government
> subsidies, I don't begrudge Amtrak the relatively paltry sums it gets
> from the Feds...
>
> And it's simplistic to compare Amtrak to a national healthcare
> system...
jesus, greg, you're making sense here. you taking supplements or
something?
blake
blake murphy
> l, not -l wrote:
>> On 6-Jul-2009, "Kswck" <ks...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>> the jobs it would create and the money that the Dems (who LOVE to
>>> spend<other people's> money) could put forward. Cost? Hey, the US has
>>> already nationalized insurance companies, car companies, etc. What's one
>>> more industry?
>>
>> Passenger rail travel has already been nationalized; that's what created
>> Amtrak, when the US goverment took over passenger rail from the railroads.
>>
>> If you don't think Amtrak is a government success, imagine what healthcare
>> will be like once the government takes it over.
>
> Curiously, the passenger rail system works very well in Europe, and I
> have no problem with the government run health care system here. I have
> done well by it.
the salient point is that the u.s. spends *twice* per capita and not only
is getting worse results in terms of health, not everyone is covered. it
doesn't take a genius to know that something's wrong with the system.
your pal,
blake
blake murphy
> "Gregory Morrow" wrote:
> Lil' Wayne Boatwrong blabbles:
>>
>> Yep, 30+ years ago, especially up through the 1950s, American train travel
>> was practically luxurious (not Orient Express luxurious, but luxurious
>> nevertheless). Dining car tables were laid with fresh linen cloths and
>> napkins; table settings were china, logo'd with the train line, and heavy
>> silverplated flatware and coffee pitchers, sugar, and creamer. Meals were
>> delicious and prepared to order from fresh meats and produce. Passengers
>> were truly catered to. If you were taking a long trip, sleeping
>> compartments were really very nice, each with it's own bathroom.
>
> Ntcherly, but how much did all this cost in *present day* dollars,
> Lil' Wayne...??? Out of your league, for sure, but then you're a
> parasite so you don't know the real cost of things, then or now...
>
> Sure, train travel in the old daze was better, so was airplane travel,
> but why cry about out it. Travel today by plane or train is *far*
> cheaper and thus more accessible to the average folk today, so I'll
> take "today", thank you very much.
>
> Obviously Duh'Weenie is recounting some old TV flicks... he never traveled
> by rail... years ago he was hustlin' rides at interstate rest stops by
> giving blowjobs.
can't stay away from fantasizing about other people giving blowjobs, can
you, sheldon?
blake
blake murphy
> "Gregory Morrow" <gregor...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:869f76d8-dc76-4c0c...@26g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> Yup...*exactly*...and he failed at picking up hitch-hiking sailors
> until he started donning a wig and a dress...now he's just another old
> withered queen who has to resort to kiddy - diddling...
>
> LOL...
>
> If not for abject poverty Duh'Weenie would love one of those Micheal Jackson
> hidden Never Land pedo peepee petting closets.
jesus, get a room, you two. you can argue about who is and who is not
giving a blowjob to whom.
blake
Goomba
> the salient point is that the u.s. spends *twice* per capita and not only
> is getting worse results in terms of health, not everyone is covered. it
> doesn't take a genius to know that something's wrong with the system.
>
> your pal,
> blake
of course the fact that other countries don't toss the same enormous
resources at extremely premature babies, elderly needing dialysis,
various last ditch cancer treatments and all the other odd and assorted
disease and disorders the people in the US like to go for. We're not
going to be very happy when rationing, waiting lists and limitations are
placed on our choices.
Gloria P
And the members of Congress seem to be pretty well covered and happy
with THEIR government-run insurance.
gloria p
Gloria P
>
> the salient point is that the u.s. spends *twice* per capita and not only
> is getting worse results in terms of health, not everyone is covered. it
> doesn't take a genius to know that something's wrong with the system.
>
Amen! Also, comparing it to rail travel is pointless because everyone
needs medical care at some time in their lives, it's not optional when
you are deathly sick or injured.
On the other hand, do we ever really NEED to travel? How many people in
the U.S. would travel by rail often even if it were cheap and
convenient? The majority of travel (other than some summer vacations,
Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays) is for business. Would business
travelers take the train to meetings, spending days en route? There are
too many more convenient other options.
gloria p
Bobo Bonobo®
Would you rather have your ELECTED representative government doing the
rationing, or businesses whose SOLE RESPONSIBILITY is the fiduciary
well being of their shareholders?
No one in any forum has made a good argument against transitioning to
the US Federal Govt. being the single health insurer. The only
reasonable argument is over how quickly the transition should take
place. Here I--like the President--part with more Liberal/Left
folks. We didn't even take the axe to the tobacco industry. Include
a public option, and the private insurers will indeed fade away, but
it need not be a catastrophic collapse. A lot of pension funds are
heavily invested in insurance companies, which were considered stable
growth.
There are already "rationing, waiting lists and limitations" on health
care for so many of our fellow citizens. There but for the grace of
God, or luck or whatever go both you and I. The "rationing, waiting
lists and limitations" exist NOW. They are a product of health
insurance companies' employees whose entire job it is to figure out
how to deny claims.
Answer me this, ANY OF YOU, why would you rather have entities wholly
focused on denying care to maximize their profits be the gatekeeper of
your medical services that a government that you elect in more or less
free and fair elections?
Not a rhetorical question, and non-answers might well indicate
cowardice.
Bryan
George
It depends, trains are perfect for relatively short trips. There is no
economy of time to say fly from Boston to Philly if you consider actual
time involved with traveling to the airport check ins, security etc.
Most US trains were gone before my time but I spent lots of time in
Japan. Trains go everywhere there just like they used to in the US. It
is quite efficient to simply walk a few blocks and get on a train and be
on your way. And the Shinkansen "bullet train" travel over 180 MPH on
many stretches. That generally gets you most places faster than an
airplane could.
George
Exactly, lots of money is spent on really expensive stuff that they just
don't do elsewhere.
Mark Thorson
>
> Most US trains were gone before my time but I spent lots of time in
> Japan. Trains go everywhere there just like they used to in the US. It
> is quite efficient to simply walk a few blocks and get on a train and be
> on your way. And the Shinkansen "bullet train" travel over 180 MPH on
> many stretches. That generally gets you most places faster than an
> airplane could.
Many, but not all. Quoting from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seikan_Tunnel
Once the tunnel was completed, all railway transport
between Honshu and Hokkaido used the tunnel. However,
for passenger transport, 90% of people use air due to
the speed and cost. For example, to travel between
Tokyo and Sapporo by train takes more than ten hours
and thirty minutes, with several transfers. By air,
the journey is three hours and thirty minutes, including
airport access times. Deregulation and competition in
Japanese domestic air travel has brought down prices
on the Tokyo-Sapporo route, making rail more expensive
in comparison.