The railroads desperately wanted to get out of the railroad passenger business. They made huge bucks off of freight, the transportation of people was insignificant. By the mid 1950's, the passengers were leaving the railroads and started to use the airlines. The airlines had fancy 4 engine prop planes, like the Constellation, which flew non-stop, to the West Coast. You could get to your destination in one day. By the late 1950's, the airlines started flying jet aircraft. Those were the days of luxurious, roomy and FAST air travel.

An interesting article, from the August 13, 1956 issue of Time Magazine, illustrates how much the railroads wanted to get out of the passenger business. They asked the ICC for 50% fare increases, to offset their "supposed" losses, on the transportation of passengers. In reality, it was a corporate loss that existed only on paper. It was created by an accountant with an incredible imagination.

Before the creation of Amtrak, passenger train travel was operated by different railroads.  Amtrak was created, which I believe has done an incredible job of keeping rail travel going, despite having next to ZERO support from Congress. Amtrak "inherited" crappy equipment and dilapated buildings, but they still managed to keep train travel going for over a third of a century, competing with jet air travel.

People forget that air travel receives massive amounts of government subsidies. The landing fees that the airlines pay is a lot of money, but those fees don't pay for everything. Federal, state and local governments know how important an efficient airport is for a healthy economy. It is vital to subsidize air travel. Without an efficient transportation hub, a city will wilt and die.

A prime example of a government subsidy, would be the grant that Gary, Indiana received for their airport. The Gary airport is a stones throw from the Illinois border and the Chicago border. Gary, Indiana officials wanted to transform their airport into the third Chicagoland airport. They received a grant of several million dollars to move railroad tracks, which run through an important part of the airport. That money is not being repaid by any airline landing fees. Currently there are not any commercial airlines flying into the Gary/Chicago airport.

Another example would be: when the third busiest airport in Illinois was in danger of being sold to developers, the two neighboring towns bought the airport. The airport was privately owned and was an incredibly busy airport with private & corporate jets. The airport was vital to the Chicago suburban economy It was also important to keep the corporate & private air traffic away from the traffic at O'Hare.

The two towns that purchased the airport each paid 5% of the price, Illinois paid, I believe, 20%. The remainder was paid by a federal grant. As I said before, airports get a massive amount of subsidies.  
 
Highways are also heavily subsidized. Yes, we all pay a huge amount of gasoline taxes. Most of the gasoline tax that we pay is a state gas tax. We also pay a federal gas tax. 

When a highway is built or rebuilt, federal money pays for 80% and the state pays for 20%. The state gas tax pays for the 15 to 20 years of upkeep on the road, prior to it becoming a major rebuilding project. The federal money also pays the majority of the land purchase cost, when the highway is first built. Yes, the money came from federal taxes, that we paid. Just the same, the highway was subsidized by taxes other than a gas tax, which was directly paid by the motoring public.

All of those words, to get to my main point. Amtrak gets the shaft. Congress has historically under-subsidized train travel. Amtrak is vital to the hundreds of little towns, along it's many routes. A lot of those towns would wither and die, without the train. It is a shame that America places so little importance on train travel. President Obama wants to improve high-speed train travel. In my opinion, that is nice, but an increase of the frequency of the trains is far more important. A lot of Amtrak routes have 1 train a day.

I would prefer to travel by train, on medium length trips. I can't do that. I travel to autograph shows and I usually need to travel on a weekend. Travel to a destination and back in 2 & 1/2 days is impossible with one train a day. 

I just don't know why the trains can't pull hundreds of train cars. More passengers on one train will lower the costs. Amtrak can offer a far cheaper fare because they have 20 times the number of passengers, than an Amtrak train would have today. The train engine has the physical capability to haul more cars, and if more passengers are traveling, a cheaper fare could be charged. A cheaper fare would mean more passengers would be willing to fill those extra seats. 

Another problem is the right of way. The one time that I traveled on Amtrak to the East Coast, there was a delay of over 10 hours. I was traveling to Virginia from Chicago. Amtrak wasn't at fault, the freight railroads had their trains blocking an intersecting rail line and the passenger train had to wait. A few hours out of Chicago, we sat in front of a house in Indiana for the time it took to eat a sit down dinner, along with a lengthy conversation. We were waiting for a freight train to move. The same thing happened at other times, during the same trip.

Pullman train travel was the preferred mode of long distance travel prior to Amtrak. The train companies operated  passenger trains for over a hundred years, but when the airlines started to siphon the passengers, the railroads started to dislike the passenger buisness. They wanted out and the Federal government realized that passenger train travel was very important. The problem is, their opinion of the degree of importance would be the $64,000 question. Congress wanted to protect train travel, because of all of the small towns that would die off from a lack of public transportation. Congressmen & Senators needed to protect his/her state and the towns that would be directly affected. The trouble is, Congress never fully subsidized Amtrak, it was always hanging on by a thread. 

During the mid 1950's a Pullman train was a fantastic way to travel. You might say that it was a gentile way to travel. You could take your time and enjoy the scenery. It was a rolling hotel with a restaurant attached. The service was impeccable. Of course, in those days the service was also impecable on the airlines. These days, the airline industry doesn't know the meaning of service.

In my humble opinion, two steps forward and one step back, or maybe, one step forward and two steps back. You be the judge.

Below is a magazine ad for passenger train travel during 1955.

  







Tweet