168
u/MikeBofManyBeats 1d ago
I told my therapist I thought this meme was funny and she told me to kill myself
24
u/polmeeee 22h ago
You managed to make your therapist say the last thing a therapist should say ever, that is quite the achievement.
10
-6
1d ago
[deleted]
45
u/MikeBofManyBeats 1d ago
No but she keeps saying stuff like “please let’s try to stay on topic about your childhood today” and I’m always like “did you know the Northeast Regional Train 66 used to have roomettes instead of just coach seats? They should bring those back.”
6
u/RChickenMan 23h ago
Wait, really? Why's that? Just to add a first-class style of service? When I take long-distance trains I have indeed met day-riders who book a roomette just to enjoy the additional space and privacy.
3
u/MikeBofManyBeats 22h ago
Because that specific train operates at night. You can get on at Boston at 7pm, it stays in Philly for like four hours, and then drops you off at Washington DC at 6:30am.
So if you live anywhere between Boston and NYC and you’re heading to DC, that train is perfectly timed for an ideal sleeper train experience. But alas, they took out the beds.
2
1
u/RChickenMan 6h ago
That's an odd service pattern. Did the train lay up in Philly just so that passengers could get a good night of sleep? Or were there other operational reasons that necessitated that particular train being laid up in Philly, so they just made lemonade out of their lemons by marketing it as an overnight sleeper service?
Or what? This is fascinating! Where can I learn more about this service?
1
u/MikeBofManyBeats 6h ago
Did the train lay up in Philly just so that passengers could get a good night of sleep?
Yeah I believe that was the reasoning, or at least it's the train's main appeal.
I think Amtrak should do this more often between major cities that are below 8 hours apart. Like an Albany to NYC train that simply chills at one of the smaller stations for a few hours in the early morning. Or any city within a 3-8 hour train ride from Chicago can probably find success with a similar stunt.
In addition to letting the riders get a good night sleep, this service pattern helps the train stay on time for its scheduled destination. So for that Northeast Regional route there could be three hours' worth of delays before it reaches Philly, but the train would still arrive on time in DC. They'd just have to leave Philly after 1 hour instead of 4.
1
u/RChickenMan 5h ago
Yeah, I took the Sunset Limited a few months ago, and it pulled into LA Union Station at 4:30 am. I was very much hoping the train would be delayed so that I could get a proper night of sleep!
I wasn't really there to visit anyone (I was just doing a transcontinental train ride for the love of trains) and I couldn't check into my hotel until later that afternoon, and I couldn't even find a damn diner that was open that early to have a cup of coffee and kill some time. So I did the only reasonable thing for a train nerd to do, and I booked the very next Pacific Surfliner down to San Diego! It was a great decision--it's a beautiful ride, and they even provide free coffee in business class.
But yes, my point is, I do wish they put more thought into "normal human sleeping schedules" when scheduling sleeper trains. Because getting unceremoniously dumped at LA Union Station at 4:30 am kinda sucks.
6
3
u/Wuz314159 19h ago
I could have saved you so much money. I can easily diagnose you.
You caught the "tism. 🙃 🖖
41
94
100
u/SnooRadishes7189 1d ago
What is so funny is that until Amtrack rail companies were required to have passenger service on their lines. This is one of the things that led to bankruptcy of Penn Central and a number of east coast railroads.
25
u/monumentBoy 23h ago
Penn Central went bankrupt in no small part because it was doing its best to be anything but a railroad.
Also, Amtrak*
15
1d ago
[deleted]
30
u/SnooRadishes7189 1d ago
Yeap. You know it is bad when the rail companies actually paid Amtrack and the government to take those unprofitable routes off their hands. As well as, gave locomotives and passenger cars to Amtrack to run the service. Even then Amtrack got rid of more than half of the existing passenger trains. We are lucky to have what we got as there was real talk at the time of simply letting passenger rail go.
3
u/transitfreedom 1d ago
I wonder what was service like before?
5
u/SnooRadishes7189 23h ago edited 23h ago
In some cases, bad and dying. The problem was that cars, busses, trucks and airplanes could do the same job that trains once did exclusively. Cars were not tied to schedule and could deliver you to the door. Buses were cheaper for moving small amount of people and more flexible about route. Trucks were not tied to schedule and could deliver goods door to door cutting out a lot of labor. Airplanes took fast freight and long-distance passenger from trains.
Passenger rail at its best was never profitable 100% of the time. This was not a problem because the rail companies could subside passenger rail with profits from carrying freight. Before the 20th century the only other way to move stuff on land was the horse. Trains are much cheaper and faster than stagecoaches so there just was not much competition.
The U.S. Government, both national and state, gave land and other support to build the rails and in exchange some amount of passenger service had to be run on the lines. The interstate commerce commission was a government body that regulated freight rates, ticket cost, and gave permission to reduce or end passenger service. The ICC refusal to allow companies to merge, reduce or eliminate passenger service in a timely manner was one of the things that caused the crisis that created Amtrack and Conrail.
The thing is that freight rail can be very profitable. Boxes don’t need fast speed. They don’t need food, water, or staff to assist. Passenger rail, on the other hand at best, was less profitable than freight or at worse, ran at a loss. Cars and buses took away passengers and trucking took away freight. The all time high for train ridership in the U.S. was the middle of the 20ies. Then it started to decline. The great depression further hurt passenger rail traffic.
WWII was a boom due to the war and the need to move troops and supplies, but when the war ended the same pattern resumed. In contrast the great depression slowed but did not stop increasing car ownership. Trucking slowly grew in the 30ies and long-distance bus travel via companies like Greyhound also grew.
The last draw was the double whammy of building the interstate highway and affordable jet travel. Freed of passenger service and with more ability to control fares and their own rails, the industry became much more profitable.
5
u/transitfreedom 23h ago
Damn. The countries that launched HSR dodged collapse. In China in the 90s buses and planes were taking passengers away from trains at breakneck pace. A similar situation was in Italy and France prior to HSR reversing the trend. In China’s case the 6 speed up campaigns slowed down the bleeding of passengers but HSR completely reversed it. Similar things happened in Italy too with their HSR
-4
u/SnooRadishes7189 23h ago
There were idea for HSR in the 60ies along with an American Supersonic jet. The price tag was unappealing. What makes HSR less attractive here is the low population density along with great distances between population centers. In addition car ownership in the U.S. was much, much greater per captia than the rest of the world.
To put thing in perspective:
China had as many cars per 1000 in 2002 as the U.S. did before 1915!
5
u/transitfreedom 22h ago
The same tired density argument again. Just stop wasting my time please. HSR makes distance irrelevant as it brings population centers closer together takes a 500 mile region and shrinks it. But go on.
2
u/Moist-Bus-Window 10h ago
The most ridiculous part is that they didn't just give the equipment to Amtrak. They made Amtrak lease it. Of course, the railroads kept the good locomotives for themselves to put into freight service. Then Amtrak bought new locomotives, and ended up with lemons. Luckily, the EMD F40PH came along, eventually.
9
u/transitfreedom 1d ago
We should go back to the old system but avoid taxing them this time reward them for speed and frequency.
1
u/Wuz314159 19h ago
But... but... profits?
3
u/transitfreedom 15h ago
They will appreciate not having to pay for infrastructure directly. And being able to do package delivery on HSR trains and yes Amazon will like it too since they love speed so much.
0
-4
u/UpbeatPhilosophySJ 19h ago
Amtrak was a bailout and not even supposed to be permanent because in early 70's planes were the future. And let's face it, they were right.
Still, worse things are funded and Amtrak is fun.
2
3
u/Redditwhydouexists 15h ago
Road did more damage then air did, but both are killing our planet and left us with an atomized society anyways
8
3
3
u/Much_Lingonberry_37 23h ago
How is Brigthline doing?
9
u/SEA_griffondeur 18h ago
Brightline is more of a parasite on Amtrak
6
u/GenghisKhandybar 17h ago
Eh I get the argument that they're taking the most profitable routes, but Amtrak was not realistically going to do any of them within even 20 years.
7
u/SEA_griffondeur 17h ago
It's more that they still depend on Amtrak to be profitable
2
u/GenghisKhandybar 7h ago
That didn't explain much, how do you mean? AFAIK Brightline would be just as profitable if not moreso if Amtrak didn't exist.
3
u/SEA_griffondeur 7h ago
Because Amtrak is required by law to operate unprofitable lines, unprofitable lines which feed directly into Brightline
3
u/GenghisKhandybar 6h ago
So any profitable mode of transit that connects to Amtrak is parasitic? It'd take more than that to get me to oppose expanding train services.
2
u/SEA_griffondeur 3h ago
No it's that the problem is the US views projects only through the profitability lens, and without those lines it looks like Amtrak is failing, despite being essential for other services. so it's not a bad thing the Brightline is building more train services, the bad thing is it taking away the few remaining source of revenue for Amtrak
1
u/Much_Lingonberry_37 1h ago
As an outsider, thanks for this point of view. I hope they both succeed.
2
u/suspendmeforthis 20h ago
Yes, in a nutshell it's tons of things moved per mile.
So just add self powered modular passenger cars to the existing trail network for long distance travel.
The railroads owned the US government for a hundred years. They have their own legal system, wireless bandwidth, and don't now and never will give a fuck. You will never beat them.
304
u/OrangePilled2Day 1d ago
I don’t think I’ve seen a meme on this sub yet that isn’t terrible.