From: stephen@sprunk.org   
      
   On 07-Apr-15 21:03, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:   
   > For a rather modest investment in more track and rolling stock,   
   > Amtrak could double its ridership.  The demand is there.  The   
   > political will is not.   
      
   Unfortunately, railroads are an incredibly capital-intensive business,   
   so you need a pretty significant investment in track to make _any_   
   difference in speed or capacity, though it should be pointed out that   
   the freight RRs _already_ need major track investments for their own   
   traffic, and a fairly small contribution by Amtrak would likely sway   
   them toward investing in the particular routes Amtrak uses, thus getting   
   Amtrak a lot more bang for their buck than you'd expect.   
      
   Adding rolling stock is much simpler, at least until you need to add   
   more crew (or especially locos) to a particular run.  But many Amtrak   
   trains are sold out due to being far too short, and profitability would   
   be increased (or losses reduced, for LD routes) by adding a few cars to   
   each train--or by adding a few new trainsets and consolidating the   
   remaining ones.  However, fare revenue will never match expenses when   
   Amtrak's trains are competing with bicycles, not cars or buses, on   
   speed--and that's where track improvements come in.   
      
   S   
      
   --   
   Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein   
   CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the   
   K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)