05-29-2009, 11:32 AM
MountainMan Wrote:In 1916 the US Army sent a convoy from Washington DC to the West Coast. It took them 62 days to make the trip. The military long argued that moving men and material was all but impossible without a decent road system. Eisenhower's avowed reason for the Interstate Highway Act was national defense. I'm sure the trucking industry lobbied for it, and no doubt the railroad industry lobbied against it, and the Congressmen and Senators who saw endless pork in their future voted for it irregardless as long as it meant money for their states. Such is the nature of government actions.
Given the strain on the airlines to even stay in operation today, I'm wondering what form of transportation is left to handle the needs of the nation. I expect the government to assume ownership and operation of the nation's airlines and railroads in the near future, or lose them entirely.
I don't know what the future of the airlines holds. As far as I know, none of the airlines have ever made a profit. I think that the existing class 1 railroads since deregulation allowed them to abandon many of the branch lines are very profitable. In addition, many of the branch lines that have been taken over by shortline railroads that are non-union are also able to show a profit since they no longer need to work under union rules.
Unfortunately the situation with Amtrak probably needs a complete rethink in terms of goals and purpose, but it probably won't happen as long as the government is involved with it. Amtrak was set up to replace national rail passenger service that the railroads wanted to get rid of. That is fine except that the entire concept was seen as another source of "Pork" for powerful congressmen. When Amtrak was first established, they received cast off worn out equipment from the freight railroads. The result is that the only original equipment that Amtrak is still running are the original high level cars and the big dome from the Santa Fe El Capitan. They are still having to run unprofitable routes that are forced on them by powerful members of congress. They are not supposed to engage in commuter rail service, but do it in the Northeast corridor and Southern California, and probably other areas of the country in cooperation with local transit authorities. Of their cross country routes is there any besides the Southwest Chief, Sunset, and Empire Builder that consistently make a profit? I suspect the Auto Train probably does well in the fall going South, and the spring going North, but does that route run anywhere near full capacity when the "snowbirds" aren't migrating? Other routes that could be profitable for Amtrak are closed to them. An example here in California is San Francisco Bay area to Los Angeles via the central valley. They have done studies that indicate that a train running through Sacramento, Fresno, and Bakersfield to Los Angeles would consistently be full of passengers both ways for the entire route, but Southern Pacific first, and now Union Pacific refuse to allow passenger trains to use the Tehachapie pass. They don't want any passenger trains in the way of freight operations, and so far no one has found another practical route or room to add passenger tracks parallel to the existing freight tracks in the area. I think they may be looking into the possibility of running as far South as Bakersfield and then going West to join the Coast Route somewhere North of Santa Barbara and continue into Los Angeles on that route, but that would require Amtrak or Cal Trans to acquire right of way and build passenger quality rail from Bakersfield to the Coast.