Talk:Amtrak/2006-2009 archive

Missing png image?
When I looked at this page, I was surprised thatI could not see the image "Amtrak schematic.png" embedded in the article. At first I thought this was because someone vandalized the article, but after some examination, I found that for some reason my browser only shows a thick blue line where the image should be. If I click on the line, I am taken to the large version of the png file, which I can view without problems. I tried to tweak the code, but it makes no difference in my browser. Am I the only one who can't see this image? I'm using Firefox 1.0.7 on Win XP. -- llywrch 22:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Not just you. I'm not seeing the image at all, the thumbnail box is at the appropriate width, but as if the image is 0px high.  According to the Mozilla page info/media tab, the image embedded in the page is http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Amtrak_schematic.png, which is not the thumbnailed version.  It shows "width: 300px, height: 3386 px" "physical width:5165 px, physical height: 3386px".  Something definitely is not right here.  --ChrisRuvolo (t) 22:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The article could do with the schematic again. It seems to be missing entirely. If it is still current it really should be included in the article again. Ralphbk 14:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I've been bold and re-uploaded the previous schematic at 50% size. The thumbnails now generate OK. Added image in the "Amtrak routes and services" section. --Ralphbk 15:45, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Reverted edits
I've just reverted some edits from the anonymous user at 24.22.127.149. The assertions made by this person are unproven statements that would be appropriate if they can be verified and documented. In particular, I take some exception to the statements
 * In addition to the national impact from its employees and passengers, there is a large impact from Amtrak on the national economy due to Amtrak presence in its major hub cities of Chicago, Washington, D.C, New York, and Los Angeles. Amtrak owns or operates inside the large Union Stations in these cities, and their usage by Amtrak has a very large impact on those cities economies.

I sincerely doubt that Amtrak is a significant factor in the economies of these cities in terms of the numbers of employed, and the effects to a city's economy of the loss of Amtrak service would be less significant than a loss of commuter rail. A statement that makes these assertions accompanied by factual statistics would be more meaningful than an unproven claim of "very large impact on those cities' economies".
 * The fact that Amtrak does not own tracks outside the NEC, and is subject to dispatching from the host freight railroads, presents a dilemma for Amtrak and delays for its passengers. Amtrak trains are often subject to extreme delays imposed by the freight railroads. Amtrak trains are often forced onto sidings for hours at a time while waiting for freight trains to pass. Although capable of speeds over 100 MPH, Amtrak trains are frequently limited to speeds of less than 40 MPH by freight railroad imposed speed restrictions. The delays most often show up on the freight railroads which have an inauspicious relationship with Amtrak and/or have poorly maintained track.

This is false. Amtrak trains are capable of speeds of 100 mph only on sections of track that have cab signals; federal regulations prohibit running above 79 mph in the absence of such systems. Though Amtrak's relationship with its freight-carrying hosts has often been shaky, the situation is much improved from the past. It is a fair statement to discuss the challenges of running a scheduled passenger service on lines dispatched by a railroad that has its own operational priorities, but the other assertions (regarding "forced onto sidings for hours at a time" and "limited to speeds of less than 40 mph" are not supported by any facts in the edits I reverted. &mdash; JonRoma 21:16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Amtrak portmanteau
I just commented out the following:
 * IT NEVER INCLUDED THE WORD "TRAVEL" IN ITS BLENDING AS EVIDENCED UNDER THE FIRST ITEM UNDER HISTORY ON AMTRAK'S OWN FACTS SHEET AT: http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Amtrak/am2Copy/Title_Image_Copy_Page&c=am2Copy&cid=1081442674300&ssid=174

It's still in the article, but as an HTML comment so it's not visible to readers, but apparent to editors. Slambo (Speak) 11:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC) In a brochure from 1972, Amtrak say, the name is American track & travel, now, Amtrak say in his hompage american and track! In a german book over world's railways is standing also american track and travel. Wat is now right?--212.99.205.172 18:38, 11 February 2006 (UTC) Mäfä from Germnay wikipedia According to the late Dr. Adrian Herzog, the name Amtrak came from an employee contest; and his was the winning entry. Dr. Herzog told me his entry came from the words "America, track, and travel." -- wlindley@wlindley.com 2006-03-01 According to Amtrak's own websites, Amtrak is short for "American Track": But there are also sources that say it means "American Travel by Track", including page 38 of the June 1991 issue of Trains, part of an article written by Kevin McKinney, who was involved in the behind-the-scenes work of Amtrak's startup. Is this a case of revisionist history, or simply an error by one of the sides? --NE2 09:31, 30 November 2006 (UTC) The whole discussion is kind of pointless, because anybody with half a brain can tell that Amtrak is an invented word that blends American and track, but it never existed as a full form "American Track" or anything like that. It also doesn't belong at the beginning of an encylcopedia article. It should be more like a footnote, at best.--JBH23 15:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Why doesn't an explanation of where it came from belong near the beginning? Someone coming here wondering why it's called Amtrak should be able to get an answer easily. --NE2 16:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That kind of argument can be used to put anything near the beginning. How many people do you think are wondering that and can't figure it out for themselves?  Besides, evidence offered doesn't seem conclusive.--JBH23 15:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Given that we haven't figured it out, I think many people cannot. --NE2 09:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

History - an overstatement?
I am commenting on the following: "Historically, on routes where a single railroad has had an undisputed monopoly, passenger service was as spartan and as expensive as the market and Interstate Commerce Commission regulation would bear, since such railroads had no need to advertise their freight services. But on routes where two or three railroads were in direct competition with each other for freight business, such railroads would spare no expense to make their passenger trains as fast, luxurious, and affordable as possible, because it was considered to be the most effective way of advertising their profitable freight services." This is, I think, insightful and largely correct. But it isn't the whole story. I can't comment on the pre-World-War II situation, but after the war it was not clear to anyone that intercity passenger service would turn out to be a terrible investment. After making a major commitment to diesel-powered, streamlined equipment, the AT&SF found that its passenger revenues increased as much as 227% annually; Santa Fe remained a believer far longer than competing lines, and until its 1971 demise the Super Chief was still one of the finest trains in the history of railroading. There was a commitment there that, it seems to me, goes beyond advertising for the company's freight operations. To be sure, I'm not disputing the overall picture, but the above generalization isn't quite accurate. How should we fix this? Bryan 23:36, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Since nobody has objected to my call for improving this section in a couple of months, I've rewritten the section. Please take a look. Bryan 13:03, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Gaps in service
Maps in the 1970s indicated Amtrak service to many of the cities, particularly those in Ohio. Someone should research into when service was cut off.Dogru144 08:43, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Georgia in "Gaps in service"
The list of cities in th "Gaps in service" secion is of cities with no train service whatsoever, not defunct lines. It seems like the listing of Atlanta-Savannah is inappropriate here. I'm going to take it back out pending further discussion. --CComMack 22:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It should be returned. This is reference to service from Atlanta to Savannah; of course, this reference does not ignore that there is service to each of these cities from other points.  Web searches will reveal that efforts are under-way to restore service along this southeast-northwest route, probably with an intermediate stop in Macon, GeorgiaDogru144 08:43, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Citation needed
''There have been few times in history when any intercity rail passenger operation in the world has been profitable, even with respect to only its operating costs, and passenger trains have never brought in enough revenue to pay their infrastructure costs. Even highly efficient private-sector railroads such as the Norfolk and Western Railway could not earn a profit, or even recover operating expenses for passenger service. The concept of Amtrak as a for-profit business was fatally flawed before the first passenger boarded.'' I'd like to know if that's true. This needs a citation. No I wouldn't consider myself an Amtrak supporter. --Rotten 13:50, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think we can support that paragraph as it was written. I may have been the original contributor, but cannot find the source I used if I was. I have made some changes which are more well-documented. Vaoverland 00:12, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I am a supporter of passenger rail and I find the statement difficult to believe. The Grand Canyon Railway, for instance, must be profitable or it wouldn't be running.  :-)  My understanding is that most lines in the US did better than break-even until the massive government subsidies to road and air began in the 1950s ... but I have no citation for that either!  --N5UWY/9 - plaws 15:39, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * What the original author may be confused with is the fact that freight has always been far more profitable than passenger service. This was true even in the 19th and early 20th century. --Rotten 16:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah but if there is truely profit in a rail system, wouldn't that mean they would be all over the place? The statement is definetly true, by logic; NO form of transportation covers it's costs, save for walking/biking/skateboarding/etc. The Grand Canyon Railway, for instance, must be profitable or it wouldn't be running. <-- That statement cannot be true, or there would be no such thing as mass transit in the United States :) Just look at Amtrak! --Alphalife 01:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Living in Northern Arizona, I can tell you that the Grand Canyon Railway is profitable...but the ticket prices are unbelievably high. I went on it once during a special low-fare deal, and even though I only live 30 miles from it's southern terminus in Williams, I don't see myself riding it again, even though I am a train enthusiast. I guess they earn their money from tourists, not locals. 65.248.164.214 (talk) 20:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * There is a huge difference between scenic railroads/tourist trains, such as Grand Canyon Railway, and passenger rail services such as Amtrak and the various commuter rail systems. Amtrak and the commuter railroads exist for the purpose of moving large numbers of people from point "A" to point "B."  Scenic railroads and tourist trains exist for the purpose of entertaining groups of people by either showing them interesting scenery, or allowing them to experience an uncommon mode of transportation (e.g. antique railcars pulled by antique locomotives).
 * The fact that some tourist trains are profitable cannot be used as the basis for an argument that Amtrak could be or should be profitable.
 * —BMRR (talk) 20:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * —BMRR (talk) 20:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Station/route template
Has there been any talk of making a template that shows next stop on different Amtrak lines, like what is done with SEPTA stations like this one: Ridley Park (SEPTA station)? Boneillhawk 21:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't be so simple to do, because for many stations the next stop varies by train.--Adam613 15:03, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Not Neutral
This article reads like an Amtrak press release and is not neutral IMHO. I have tried to add a little balance, with references. Highnote 03:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC) Non neutral please dont use the Cato Institute as a neutral citation, they are a politically motiavted libertarian organization, which by definition is not neutral.--Kev62nesl 06:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC) Comparison of Amtrak to other modes of transportation restored and extended in separate section. If you able to refute please do so, and do not simply resort to deleting facts that are inconvenient. Also, complaining that Cato is non-neutral in an article containing numerous links to advocacy groups is rather inconsistent. Highnote 19:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC) The facts were not inconvenient they just werent relevant to the section, however your statistics from an organizations whos goal is to destroy that thing makes those statistic not neutral and while consistence does matter something that is not neutral does not become neutral just because something else is not neutral. Also it is pretty clear that you are anti-amtrak, which isnt a problem, however your goal of inserting negative comments about the company just to be negative does seem to be a problem.--Kev62nesl 23:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I relabeled the link categories to advocacy sites "Support and Advocay" and put the Cato link with the CS Monitor report link in a catergory entitled "Amtrak criticism". That seems to be both even-handed and true.  Kablammo 18:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

It is not neutral to compare safety statistics which treat an automobile as the equivalent of an entire train. A vehicle is not the equivalent of a train and composing a table which compares the rate of deaths per vehicle with the rate of deaths per train is inherently misleading. Kablammo 19:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC) The accurate comparison is between passenger miles. I added explanatory text following the existing safey table but I propose to remove that table entirely as it contains a misleading comparison, and use instead passenger-mile statistics. Kablammo 20:23, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. Present table directly compares between modes of transportation on the basis of fatalities per 100 million passenger (non-crew) miles. Kablammo 00:40, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * That is indeed a better metric. --Highnote 02:48, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

On that note, removed the last paragraph of the "Controversy" section as it read rather one-sided: ''Proponents also argue that rail passenger service merits public support because it is safer, more convenient, and more comfortable than the competition. Amtrak serves many communities which have no air service or other public transportation. If rail operations received favorable treatment and capital support on par with automobile infrastructure and air transport, proponents argue that rail passenger service in America would not be so humble and would be more relevant to a greater number of passengers.'' The rest controversy section might be fine as it is, or could do with a more balanced concluding statement (with citation this time). Sorry to the contributor of this paragraph, but overuse of the "some argue" tactic to get around NPOV is a pet peeve. --Anon 18:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Differing Thoughts on Energy Intensity
The Transportation Energy Databook has rather different numbers for energy intensities of modes of transportation (Table 2.10). I got a response from a source at the DOT who gave me an updated number of 2902 BTU / passenger-mile. Unforunately, BTS (the source in the article) has some other issues with its data. Transit buses are 15% more energy intensive than their numbers, as they did not include any fuel besides diesel when doing their analysis. The Transportation Energy Databook appears to be correct for this one. The remaining difference between the two sources is for light-duty trucks, and BTS appears to be correct as it uses more current data than the Transportation Energy Databook does. In the end, I don't know which should be linked to, since both are somewhat lacking.
 * On the theory that more data is better, I have added the Transportation Energy Databook table. Hat tip. --Highnote 03:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Quibbles about POV and references
I had tagged statements like Amtrak "was not a true railroad" because it did not own any track, with. These tags were removed without comment. I am rather annoyed that the issue was avoided rather than addressed. There is nothing at usage of the terms railroad and railway to support this definition, and without a reference it sounds like Wikipedia is making this assertion, which is not NPOV. (It also makes no sense to me that you can have an airline that does not own runways, but you can't have a railroad that doesn't own track.) I have now simply removed these statements, because I think they are also fairly spurious.
 * The pinnacle of passenger rail travel &mdash; and with it, the Golden Age of the passenger train &mdash; was reached in 1920, when 1.2 billion passengers were carried.

I marked this as POV, since it sounds like boosterism, but this tag was also removed without comment. I am rewriting this to remove "pinnacle" and "Golden Age"; if someone wants to document sources that use those terms, that would be fine. I had marked several very specific claims with to request references, but these were removed without comment. This is not OK; these specific claims need to be sourced, or they are subject to removal per Verifiability. -- Beland 23:38, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

MI Ridership
Under the section Michigan Ridership it is claimed that "Amtrak's Michigan services are now the most profitable lines in the U.S." I believe the Northeast Corridor is the most profitable. Michigan services are still subsudized, its just that their ridership increase has been so great that it saved the state of MI about a million dollars in subsudies. See: http://www.southbendtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061124/News01/611240396/-1/NEWS01 I also was unaware that there will definately be improvements for higher speed service - I knew that the state was seeking it, but the federal government had not yet approved the funds, as far as I know. Unless anyone has evidence to contrary, I'd suggest removing this section of the article.
 * I suppose it depends on what we mean by "most profitable." Most profitable compared to expenses, or most profit overall? Michigan has certainly seen a surge in ridership this year...Mackensen (talk) 18:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I would strike the section as uncited. I'd be shocked if the Michigan services (including the non-state-funded Wolverine) were doing better than break-even, and the Auto Train does make a profit... —CComMack (t–c) 01:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * In any case, this very specialized, undocumented section seems to have no place in a general article about Amtrak. I support removing the section.JBH23 14:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

List of stations and boardings/alightings compiled from Amtrak fact sheets (fiscal 2006)
(warning: long list) San Jose, California	151456 New London, Connecticut	150455 Hartford, Connecticut	150272 Hanford, California	150145 Hudson, New York	145350 Ann Arbor, Michigan	140413 Portland, Maine	139519 St.Paul-Minneapolis (Midway Station), Minnesota	137227 Kingston, Rhode Island	135796 Raleigh, North Carolina	122638 Orlando, Florida	121057 Denver, Colorado	119364 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania	118708 Charlotte, North Carolina	114560 Suisun-Fairfild, California	114009 Springfield, Massachusetts	112465 Springfield, Illinois	110276 Kansas City, Missouri	110029 New Orleans, Louisiana	103616 Syracuse, New York	102934 Bloomington/Normal, Illinois	102733 Tacoma, Washington	101413 Kalamazoo, Michigan	98876 Atlanta, Georgia	96891 Newark Airport, New Jersey	96382 Newport News, Virginia	90880 Alexandria, Virginia	87979 San Luis Obispo, California	86819 Champaign-Urbana, Illinois	85967 Eugene, Oregon	85455 Berkeley, California	82409 Fort Worth, Texas	81630 Paoli, Pennsylvania	80936 Rochester, New York	78750 Merced, California	78585 Milwaukee Airport, Wisconsin	77387 Carbondale, Illinois	76840 Galesburg, Illinois	76464 Modesto, California	75518 New Rochelle, New York	75439 Great America/ Santa Clara, California	75146 Buffalo-Depew, New York	74463 Reno, Nevada	74300 Vancouver, Washington	73981 Goleta, California	73538 Greensboro, North Carolina	71784 Dearborn, Michigan	71184 Van Nuys, California	70610 Oxnard, California	69913 Whitefish, Montana	68223 Charleston, South Carolina	66272 Fredericksburg, Virginia	66125 Princeton Junction, New Jersey	65679 Elizabethtown, Pennsylvania	62526 Bridgeport, Connecticut	62374 Albuquerque, New Mexico	62240 Miami, Florida	61158 Tampa, Florida	60778 Exeter, New Hampshire	58872 Sturtevant, Wisconsin	58748 Poughkeepsie, New York	58564 Old Saybrook, Connecticut	57325 Toledo, Ohio	56228 Detroit, Michigan	55933 Jacksonville, Florida	54370 Battle Creek, Michigan	54238 Bellingham, Washington	53798 Roseville, California	51491 Grand Rapids, Michigan	50987 Durham-UNH, New Hampshire	50255 Salem, Oregon	49356 Chatsworth, California	48162 Rocky Mount, North Carolina	47456 Glenview, Illinois	47058 Savannah, Georgia	45965 Utica, New York	45854 Charlottesville, Virginia	45708 East Lansing, Michigan	45483 Ardmore, Pennsylvania	45261 Memphis, Tennessee	44502 Schenectady, New York	44181 Fayetteville, North Carolina	43736 Olympia/Lacey, Washington	43371 Exton, Pennsylvania	43367 Jefferson City, Missouri	43129 San Antonio, Texas	42188 Spokane, Washington	41862 Florence, South Carolina	41643 Ventura, California	41213 Burbank, California	40451 West Palm Beach, Florida	40304 Everett, Washington	39961 Macomb, Illinois	39896 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma	39572 Dover, New Hampshire	39080 Durham, North Carolina	39035 Mount Joy, Pennsylvania	38448 Croton-Harmon, New York	38419 Williamsburg, Virginia	37957 Holland, Michigan	37672 Glendale, California	37550 Aberdeen, Maryland	37414 Simi Valley, California	36955 Minot, North Dakota	35829 Alton, Illinois	35614 Flagstaff, Arizona	34634 Columbia, South Carolina	34431 Fort Lauderdale, Florida	34413 Kirkwood, Missouri	34286 Auburn, California	33826 Wilson, North Carolina	33412 Middletown, Pennsylvania	33346 Naperville, Illinois	33250 Wells, Maine	32513 Dallas, Texas	32305 Westerly, Rhode Island	32178 Jackson, Mississippi	31736 Downingtown, Pennsylvania	31678 Indianapolis, Indiana	31446 Quantico, Virginia	31428 Rocklin, California	30462 Quincy, Illinois	30218 Meriden, Connecticut	30202 Cleveland, Ohio	29334 Kissimmee, Florida	28993 Klamath Falls, Oregon	28939 Edmonds, Washington	28617 Parkesburg, Pennsylvania	28009 Saratoga Springs, New York	27909 Glenwood Springs, Colorado	27512 Jackson, Michigan	26827 Albany, Oregon	26635 Fremont-Centerville, California	26611 Salt Lake City, Utah	26580 Hollywood, Florida	26156 Camarillo, California	25914 La Crosse, Wisconsin	25856 Royal Oak, Michigan	25587 Omaha, Nebraska	25496 Joliet, Illinois	24792 Longview, Texas	24449 Birmingham, Alabama	24376 Flint, Michigan	24181 Niagara Falls, New York	23703 Berlin, Connecticut	23348 Hayward, California	23177 Corcoran, California	23086 Saco-Biddeford, Maine	22896 Fargo, North Dakota	22771 Antioch-Pittsburg, California	22747 Homewood, Illinois	22314 Winter Park, Florida	22145 Pasco, Washington	22128 Grand Junction, Colorado	21756 Altoona, Pennsylvania	21417 Mount Vernon, Washington	21316 Williston, North Dakota	21300 Austin, Texas	20863 Kelso-Longview, Washington	20851 Cary, North Carolina	20682 Deland, Florida	20222 Winona, Minnesota	20214 Birmingham, Michigan	20023 Deerfield Beach, Florida	19997 Princeton, Illinois	19728 Grand Forks, North Dakota	19574 Stockton (downtown), California	19292 Centralia, Washington	18783 Woodbridge, Virginia	18333 Haverhill, Massachusetts	18330 Petersburg, Virginia	18296 Mattoon, Illinois	18241 Raton, New Mexico	18177 Carpinteria, California	17996 San Diego-Old Town, California	17898 Winter Haven, Florida	17882 Niles, Michigan	17788 South Bend, Indiana	17725 High Point, North Carolina	17687 Lees Summit, Missouri	17379 Buffalo-Exchange Street, New York	17342 Waterloo, Indiana	17330 Pontiac, Michigan	17318 Wenatchee, Washington	17310 Havre, Montana	16976 Lynchburg, Virginia	16847 Salisbury, North Carolina	16653 Shelby, Montana	16639 Yonkers, New York	16442 Osceola, Iowa	16437 Columbus, Wisconsin	16085 Rutland, Vermont	15931 Johnstown, Pennsylvania	15930 Lakeland, Florida	15625 Tukwila	15566 Mystic, Connecticut	15422 Little Rock, Arkansas	15330 Grover Beach, California	15300 Turlock-Denair, California	15300 Lincoln, Illinois	15249 Lafayette, Indiana	14242 Wasco, California	14225 Hammond, Louisiana	14069 Cincinnati, Ohio	14043 Sebring, Florida	13939 Ashland, Virginia	13331 Madera, California	13239 Huntington, West Virginia	13067 Kingstree, South Carolina	12996 White River Junction, Vermont	12798 Newton, Kansas	12772 Mount Pleasant, Iowa	12719 Mendota, Illinois	12652 Cornwells Heights, Pennsylvania	12558 Elkhart, Indiana	12489 Lamy (Santa Fe), New Mexico	12396 St. Cloud, Minnesota	12146 Greenville, South Carolina	12136 Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin	12119 Windsor Locks, Connecticut	11973 Centralia, Illinois	11860 Burlington, North Carolina	11797 Salinas, California	11769 Greenwood, Mississippi	11691 Effingham, Illinois	11580 Port Huron, Michigan	11417 Wallingford, Connecticut	11342 Temple, Texas	11314 Woburn, Massachusetts	11272 Ottumwa, Iowa	11190 Norman, Oklahoma	11098 East Glacier, Montana (summer only)	11067 Richmond (Main Street), Virginia	10982 Tuscon, Arizona	10965 Moorpark, California	10964 Greensburg, Pennsylvania	10942 Gallup, New Mexico	10860 Houston, Texas	10855 Yemassee, South Carolina	10790 Meridian, Mississippi	10732 Lincoln, Nebraska	10703 Kingman, Arizona	10663 Gainesville, Texas	10505 Oakland Coliseum, California	10342 Palatka, Florida	10100 Essex Junction, Vermont	10053 Warrensburg, Missouri	9787 Red Wing, Minnesota	9657 Windsor, Connecticut	9627 Selma-Smithfield, North Carolina	9605 Fort Madison, Iowa	9479 Brattleboro, Vermont	9393 Guadalupe, California	9371 La Plata, Missouri	9161 San Bernardino, California	9123 Cumberland, Maryland	9100 Ardmore, Oklahoma	9047 Chemult, Oregon	9015 Tomah, Wisconsin	8952 Hermann, Missouri	8941 Lewistown, Pennsylvania	8932 Amherst, Massachusetts	8928 Kankakee, Illinois	8644 Washington, Missouri	8639 Winter Park-Fraser, Colorado	8577 Plattsburgh	8549 Durand, Michigan	8513 Charleston, West Virginia	8508 Kannapolis, North Carolina	8450 Old Orchard Beach, Maine	8419 Erie, Pennsylvania	8371 Sedalia, Missouri	8337 St. Joseph/Benton Harbor, Michigan	8247 El Paso, Texas	8184 San Clemente Pier, California	8179 Pontiac, Illinois	8167 New Brunswick, New Jersey	7882 Coatesville, Pennsylvania	7865 Wolf Point, Montana	7753 Kewanee, Illinois	7370 Riverside, California	7345 Manassas, Virginia	7259 Lompoc-Surf, California	7253 Jesup, Georgia	7232 Tuscaloosa, Alabama	7222 Williams Junction, Arizona	7114 Hattiesburg, Mississippi	7063 Portage, Wisconsin	7051 Amsterdam, New York	6991 Oregon City, Oregon	6960 La Junta, Colorado	6931 Rome, New York	6879 Delray Beach, Florida	6822 Truckee, California	6804 Redding, California	6781 Newark, Delaware	6776 Lapeer, Michigan	6752 McComb, Mississippi	6606 Burlington, Iowa	6550 La Grange Road, Illinois	6435 Staunton, Virginia	6413 Topeka, Kansas	6403 Chico, California	6395 Dillon, South Carolina	6393 Martinsburg, West Virginia	6377 Fort Edward, New York	6366 Hammond-Whiting, Indiana	6356 Lodi, California	6293 Glasgow, Montana	6279 Garden City, Kansas	6278 Devils Lake, North Dakota	6272 Worcester, Massachusetts	6190 Needles, California	6132 Bryan, Ohio	6104 Texarkana, Arkansas	6017 Rugby, North Dakota	5975 Staples, Minnesota	5963 Carlinville, Illinois	5950 Pauls Valley, Oklahoma	5890 Sandpoint, Idaho	5789 West Glacier, Montana	5786 Libby, Montana	5652 Paso Robles, California	5647 Marshall, Texas	5641 Dwight, Illinois	5612 Slidell, Louisiana	5609 Du Quoin, Illinois	5328 Independence, Missouri	5287 Westport, New York	5126 Clemson, South Carolina	5065 Creston, Iowa	5002 Elko, Nevada	4854 Maricopa, Arizona	4837 Pittsfield, Massachusetts	4750 Huntingdon, Pennsylvania	4678 Denmark, South Carolina	4643 Victorville, California	4547 Sandusky, Ohio	4424 Trinidad, Colorado	4395 Gainesville, Georgia	4269 Dunsmuir, California	4281 Spartanburg, South Carolina	4252 Southern Pines, North Carolina	4246 Montpelier, Vermont	4150 Hamlet, North Carolina	4149 Brookhaven, Mississippi	4121 Dodge City, Kansas	4083 White Sulfur Springs, West Virginia	4075 Hastings, Nebraska	4073 Danville, Virginia	4065 Anniston, Alabama	4,014 Culpeper, Virginia	3,995 Taylor, Texas	3,896 Essex, Montana	3,862 Hutchinson, Kansas	3,858 Bangor, Michigan	3,855 Connellsville, Pennsylvania	3,837 Detroit Lakes, Minnesota	3,810 Las Vegas, New Mexico	3,809 Crawfordsville	3,676 Summit, Illinois	3,638 Ontario, California	3,592 San Marcos, Texas	3,587 Camden, South Carolina	3,582 Malta, Montana	3,582 Mineola, Texas	3,577 Laurel, Mississippi	3,552 Clifton Forge, Virginia	3,498 Latrobe, Pennsylvania	3,427 Winslow, Arizona	3413 Alliance, Ohio	3,379 Harpers Ferry, West Virginia	3,315 Palm Springs, California	3311 Poplar Bluff	3,220 Lawrence, Kansas	3,244 McCook, Nebraska	3,173 Bellows Falls, Vermont	3,113 Hinton, West Virginia	3,105 Ephrata, Washington	3,072 Cut Bank, Montana	3,049 Barstow, California	3045 Colfax, California	3038 Prince, West Virginia	3,035 Stanley, North Dakota	3,018 Walnut Ridge, Arkansas	2991 Rockville, Maryland	2984 New Buffalo, Michigan	2967 Ashland, Kentucky	2880 McGregor, Texas	2868 Okeechobee, Florida	2858 Waterbury, Vermont	2809 St. Albans, Vermont	2750 Yazoo City, Mississippi	2735 Granby, Colorado	2728 Elyria, Ohio	2726 Toccoa, Georgia	2672 Provo, Utah	2660 Fort Morgan, Colorado	2644 Newbern-Dyersberg, Tennessee	2598 Lake Charles, Louisiana	2549 Dowagiac, Michigan	2512 Sparks, Nevada	2482 Purcell, Oklahoma	2423 Plano, Illinois	2366 Yuma, Arizona	2295 Fulton, Kentucky	2288 Winnemucca, Nevada	2265 Browning, Montana (winter only)	2234 Michigan City, Indiana	2100 Bingen-White Salmon, Washington	2037 Alpine, Texas	2027 Tyrone, Pennsylvania	2024 Picayune, Mississippi	2001 Cleburne, Texas	1948 Framingham, Massachusetts	1856 Fair Haven, Vermont	1806 Port Henry, New York	1771 Lamar, Colorado	1738 Holdrege, Nebraska	1671 Hazlehurst, Mississippi	1661 Maysville, Kentucky	1604 Fort Ticonderoga, New York	1592 Gastonia, North Carolina	1582 Albion, Michigan	1463 Del Rio, Texas	1453 Whitehall, New York	1453 Helper, Utah	1445 Claremont, New Hampshire	1439 Wishram, Washington	1403 Malvern, Arkansas	1324 Dyer, Indiana	1310 Franconia-Springfield, Virginia	1238 Green River, Utah	1233 Lafayette, Louisiana	1207 Rantoul, Illinois	1189 Rensselaer, Indiana	1169 Randolph, Vermont	1123 Gilman, Illinois	1063 Arkadelphia, Arkansas	1020 Beaumont, Texas	903 South Portsmouth, Kentucky	873 Rouses Point, New York	868 Benson, Arizona	833 Montgomery, West Virginia	777 Pomona, California	764 New Iberia, Louisiana	733 Windsor-Mount Ascutney, Vermont	721 Connersville, Indiana	692 Philadelphia (North), Pennsylvania	605 Port Kent, New York	589 Schriever, Louisiana	586 Deming, New Mexico	580 Alderson, West Virginia	504 Lordsburg, New Mexico	305 Sanderson, Texas	259 Thurmond, West Virginia	221 Greenfield Village, Michigan	82 see what you make of it - &mdash;  Rickyrab | Talk 20:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * New York City (Penn Station), New York	7546208
 * Washington, DC	3859117
 * Philadelphia (30th St), Pennsylvania	3555646
 * Chicago, Illinois	2531836
 * Los Angeles, California	1414164
 * Boston-South Station, Massachusetts	988842
 * Sacramento, California	923699
 * Baltimore, Maryland	910523
 * San Diego, California	867873
 * Albany-Rensselaer, New York	761434
 * Wilmington, Delaware	712219
 * New Haven, Connecticut	631596
 * Newark, New Jersey	609184
 * Irvine, California	594324
 * Seattle, Washington	583766
 * BWI Thurgood Marshall Airport, Maryland	561505
 * Providence, Rhode Island	512974
 * Portland, Oregon	482695
 * Milwaukee, Wisconsin	481818
 * Emeryville, California	469236
 * Trenton, New Jersey	436058
 * Fullerton, California	414780
 * Solana Beach, California	413143
 * Harrisburg, Pennsylvania	383380
 * Bakersfield, California	382393
 * Lancaster, Pennsylvania	368076
 * Metropark, New Jersey	362355
 * Davis, California	357831
 * Anaheim, California	325419
 * Route 128 (Boston), Massachusetts	312113
 * Stamford, Connecticut	304971
 * Oceanside, California	300680
 * Boston-Back Bay, Massachusetts	298340
 * Boston-North Station, Massachusetts	294686
 * Martinez, California	289233
 * Oakland, California	288232
 * Fresno, California	274024
 * San Juan Capistrano, California	258875
 * Santa Barbara, California	255263
 * Richmond, California	238893
 * Richmond, Virginia (Staples Mill)	231108
 * Lorton, Virginia (Auto Train)	207544
 * Sanford, Florida (Auto Train)	207544
 * New Carrollton, Maryland	206830
 * Stockton (San Joaquin St), California	193432
 * Santa Ana, California	169284
 * St. Louis, Missouri	166861
 * Rhinecliff, New York	155803
 * Well, I was able to dump it into an excel spreadsheet and it divided into two columns just fine--thanks for compiling this. Mackensen (talk) 21:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It was originally compiled on an Excel spreadsheet, and you're welcome. &mdash;  Rickyrab | Talk 04:21, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Dumping this into List of Amtrak stations by usage might make sense. Mackensen (talk) 18:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Or possibly reconfiguring list of Amtrak stations to use a sorted table (see list of New York City Subway stations). --NE2 18:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Good Article Review
This article is currently at Good Article Review. LuciferMorgan 11:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

"The 1997 cuts"...
...are mentioned several times, but the "modern history" section never says specifically what those actually were! In fact, the year 1997 is not mentioned at all in that section. 217.33.74.204 11:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

GA Delisted
This article was delisted as a good article at 11:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC) per the archived Good article review and the instructions at said archive. IvoShandor 11:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

energy intensity
There seems to be some variation in the estimates of Amtrak's energy intensity. The article currently gives Amtrak energy consumption as 2100 BTUs per passenger-mile, citing 2001 data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. However, the Department of Energy's Transportation Energy Data Book (see table 9.10) estimates a much higher 3257 BTUs per passenger mile for 2001, improving to 2713 BTUs per passenger-mile for 2005. FWIW, the DOE data agrees much more closely with the BTS data on the figures for commercial airlines (BTS estimates 3297 BTUs; DOE estimates 3278), so they don't appear to be using significantly different methodology in general; it's only their Amtrak numbers that disagree. --Delirium 04:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Guest Rewards
I just wanted to record for posterity the anonymous change that was rightly reverted yesterday by Discospinster, simply because it made me smile: ''Amtrak patrons are generally rewarded with long waits on the platform and being lied to by customer service. The tactic amtrak uses most often is to tell people that their train is going to be twenty minutes late, and then tell this to them again twenty minutes later and then again after another twenty minutes and then again. This way the person behind the desk isn't hung with a noose made of his own entrails for being honest and telling the customers that the train will actually be two hours late.'' - Ralphbk 06:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Project banners
For the record, I'm not really sure I grok the purpose in adding fifty (!) new WikiProject banners to the top of the page, but I also have no justification whatsoever to revert. So I went ahead and fixed up the header code so it's nice and compact; there's less clutter up top now than before the new banners went in. I suspect that those won't be the last edits, but they work for now. —CComMack (t–c) 15:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * This is definitely a "be bold" situation. I've removed these state banners and supplanted them with a WikiProject United States banner, which makes more sense given that Amtrak is a national operation whose directors are appointed by the U.S. President.  Just because it has routes and operations nationwide doesn't mean it should go into every WikiProject...would you do the same for a trucking company whose trucks moved goods in every state?  No...it is excessive. --  Huntster  T • @ • C 07:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Very good point. Thanks.  —CComMack (t–c) 01:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Phrase on General Fund unclear
Consider the following sentence from the current version of the article: "Highways, airports, and air traffic control all require large government expenditures to build and operate, coming from the Highway Trust Fund and Aviation Trust Fund paid for by user fees, highway fuel and road taxes, and, in the case of the General Fund, by people who own cars and do not." I do not understand the phrase about "people who own cars and do not." The set of people who own cars plus the set of people who don't own cars is the universal set! In other words, the phrase could simply be "everyone". Perhaps the author intended to write "people who do not own cars"? But this also doesn't work because the General Fund is paid for by everyone, not just those who don't own cars. Either way, the phrase is unclear. How should it be rewritten? Vocaro 03:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Probably by either removing it, or digging up a citation if Gunn did indeed say this, and more accurately report what he said. This section has been unreferenced for some time now, though. --Delirium (talk) 06:45, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Project
I am dropping this from the Alabama project as it is not really at the core of our work. JodyBtalk 22:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Edit war?
So, what's with the edit war on the usage of portmanteau? - Denimadept (talk) 16:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * There's discussion on Talk:Portmanteau. Slambo (Speak) 17:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, and I agree with your comment that this should be resolved there. - Denimadept (talk) 17:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Moved menu
I've moved the deleted Acela menu to that page. - Denimadept (talk) 20:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not a spelling issue
The difference between "insufficiencies" and "inefficiencies" is that they're two completely different words. - Denimadept (talk) 19:55, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Reliability
European railways often publish figures, percentages generally, of trains running to time, cancellations, and so on. Are such figures available for Amtrak? Would it help to compare them to railways elsewhere, if they are? Les woodland (talk) 13:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)les woodland
 * Amtrak doesn't publish them, but the Bureau of Transportation Statistics does - see http://www.transtats.bts.gov/databases.asp?Mode_ID=5&Mode_Desc=Rail&Subject_ID2=0. (User-Sonria-not logged in)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.182.51.67 (talk) 21:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Population
I'm removing the comment about the increase in population because: –Cg-realms (talk • contribs) 0:30, 14 June 2008 (EDT)
 * 1) There is no evidence that the the increase in ridership comes exclusively or even primarily from the increase in population.
 * 2) As Bluejack's new statistics made clear, ridership increased 12 percent while the population increased less than one percent. For the increase in ridership to be attributable to the increase in population, a disproportionate number of the new residents would have had to become regular Amtrak passengers.
 * 3) Its placement in the article is awkward and disrupts the flow of the text.

Ten Busiest Stations by Total Ridership in 2007
I'm not sure where this would go in the article, but for the record: Source: Amtrak National Fact Sheet –Cg-realms (talk • contribs) 13:22, 15 June 2008 (EDT) Maybe there wasn't enough room for useful factual info, what with all the POV stuff defending Amtrak's subsidies. This article shows what's wrong with Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.136.15.34 (talk) 12:04, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Our map
de:File:Amtrak-Streckennetz.svg is a map of the Amtrak system created by the amazing German cartographer Chumwa. All this needs is a translation to English and we can use it. gren グレン 02:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC) Not really too much to translate. Here it is. gren グレン 02:31, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Contested statements removed to talk

 * In 1948, Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway CEO Fred Gurley reported a "complete reversal of our passenger traffic picture," with 1947 revenues exceeding those of 1936 by 220%.
 * Between 1946 and 1964, the annual number of passengers declined from 770 million to 298 million.
 * The number of U.S. commuter trains declined by more than 80 per cent, from more than 2,500 in 1954 to fewer than 500 in 1969.
 * In 1947, the ICC ruled that passenger trains could not exceed 79 mph without in-cab signaling systems; the systems were criticized as being unnecessary and prohibitively expensive; after the regulation, plans to develop intercity high-speed rail services were shelved.
 * The policies improved labor relations to some extent, even as Amtrak's ranks of unionized and salaried workers thinned.
 * In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, during which Amtrak kept running while airlines were grounded, the value of a national passenger rail service was briefly acknowledged in Washington. But when Congress returned to work following the attacks, the airlines received a $15 billion bailout package, and inattention toward Amtrak resumed.
 * Intractable positions staked out by labor leaders were blamed for part of the decline of passenger rail service in the early to middle 20th century, and labor union clout was widely credited with facilitating the creation of Amtrak in 1971.

Please do not restore this info to the article without a citation.-- Birgitte SB  01:59, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Birgitte: Maybe you should read the references before deleting text. At least three of those facts you removed had references to the source in a preceding or subsequent sentence.  There are about twelve footnotes in the four paragraphs from which the text was removed.  Why don't you focus on something that really is unreferenced?  No other part of the article is nearly as completely referenced as the section you carved up.  This was a bad edit.  ►  DRT  ïllberġ ◄ Talk 02:09, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe you should calm down. If the info is supported by a citation, simply restore it noting that in the edit summary and strike the bullet here on the talk page.  Those fact tags were placed well over a year ago, one even two years ago.  That they stood in the article for such a long time is generally a reliable sign that they are marking a valid concern.  But mistakes happen.  Moving the material to the talk page is not any sort of final judgment on the material.  When you see a mistake please fix it, that is how a wiki works.  But your judgments of me are over the top.  I do not plan on stopping my focus of going through Category:Articles with unsourced statements since January 2007 and moving all information tagged for more than a year to the talk page.  If you still believe my editing is bad and needs to stop then open an RFC on my actions.  Because I am not taking your exaggerated censure seriously and will need to hear a wider consensus on the matter before altering my actions.-- Birgitte  SB  05:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Stack of Pics near top of page
Is it just me, or does the stack of pics at the top of the page need moving? it looks odd to me between the box to the right and the blurb to the left. Maximum927 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC).

"Lowest Usage Rate" Reasoning
The previous statement was "...due to sparse service and a large number of congestion-free highways" outside major US metros. This is not exactly accurate, because first of all, low ridership causes sparse service in the first place. Also, the Interstate routes spanning between DC and Florida are sometimes congested, as is LA and Las Vegas, to name some examples.

The statement should be more general, which is that the Interstate freeway system and airlines are relatively developed in contrast to rail, whose demand has declined since the 1920s and technology stagnated largely since the 1950s, with a few minor improvements to the present day.

Facial (talk) 21:42, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Removed this
Poorly written and slatted: "Recent years have been among Amtrak's brightest; the corporation completed a significant rail project in the northeast in the early 2000s while its major competitors&mdash;particularly airlines&mdash;were affected by bankruptcies, 9/11, and rising fuel costs." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.210.62.248 (talk) 06:53, 18 October 2009 (UTC)