Amtrak Questions
 

In reference to my trip discussed here http://www.fodors.com/forums/threads...p;tid=35092252

We are debating whether to take Amtrak in lieu of getting rental cars. Few questions that I have

1. How on-time are they on average?
2. How early do you need to be at a station? Is it suggested to be the 2 hours (like at an airport)
3. How loud are the trains?

Your thread suggests you are looking at midwest, long-haul trains. They're a better bet than most of the East Coast trains, but not exactly up to European standards, or even Canadian standards.

1. How on-time are they on average?
Rarely. Don't count on being there within an hour of ETA. You might be, but you can also be hours delayed.

2. How early do you need to be at a station? Is it suggested to be the 2 hours (like at an airport)
No, because security doesn't take the time it probably should. However, unless you have reserved seats, you do want to be there in good time to be in line to board -- it can be chaotic, and you want to be sure you know where in the station you're going and where, on the platform, you'll be expected to board. It may more than pay for itself to pay a porter (a vanishing breed) to help you with luggage because they can sometimes get you down a special elevator before the crowds arrive. Two hours? No. One hour, probably; 30 min., cutting it close.

3. How loud are the trains? Hard to know how to answer that. Compared to what? Where on the train are you talking about?

I don't have the same view of
AMTRAK that many who have responded to previous threads do. I take at least one long-distance AMTRAK trip a year (this year, 2 are planned) and thouroughly enjoy them.

The only real drawback, if it is for you, is their on time record. You can never count on the long distance trips being on time. Sometimes they are, often not. For me that's not a problem because I never schedule close connections and, if we are late, I just sit back and continue to enjoy the ride.

The benefits, for me, are many. It is a relaxing way to travel, I'm able to enjoy the passing scenery without the distractions driving would impose, and I meet many interesting folks I'd never have the opportunity to meet otherwise.

Every one has to make up their own mind but I strongly believe that whether you are going to enjoy an AMTRAK trip depends more on you and your expectations than it does on AMTRAK.

1) short-distance trains and Amtrak buses are usually on-time, long-distance - rarely

2) 15-30 minutes, call in advance if the train is late

3) don't think they are loud, some routes are very shaky

It is 2 short trips that we are thinking about:

1. Chicago to Milwaukee on a Monday morning

2. Milwaukee to Minneapolis on Tuesday afternoon.

Then possibly picking up a rental car if we feel that we need one in each city

Unfortunately, in most of the country the tracks are owned by freight companies - not Amtrak. so freight trains take precedence and Amtrak comes when it comes.

If time doesn't matter - then consider it - but look at the costs (trains aren't cheap versus car rental for more than one person).

I love those baseball trips. Have one or two planned next summer myself.
I looked at your itinerary and you can do this by train at least the part between Chicago and Milwaukee. There is frequent service between these cities and train travel time vs car travel time is certainly faster and this is one of the best on times routes in all of amtrak (95%).
So you can fly to Chicago and go to the cubs and white sox games then go by train to Milwauke where you can get off at the airport station pick up your car and tailgate at the Brewers Park and then drive on up tot he Twin Cities.
Yep, thats what I would do.
There is also one train per day between Milwaukee and the Twin Cities if you choose to go that route. Its a nice trip along the Mississippi river. It leaves late afternoon with a late evening arrival in MNPLS but you might miss a game with that trip.

As mentioned, that's a problem in the US that Amtrak does not own the tracks.

Depends on the route, but some are notoriously late (Starlight between Seattle and LA is one that is regularly 4, 8, even 10 hours behind schedule!) Depends on the kind of trip you have planned whether this would be a terrible inconvenience or if you could just figure it into your schedule.

You only need to be at the station early enough to be there when they board the train.

Do you mean loud once you are inside them and under way? No not particularly loud.

1. The on time percent can vary by route, and also depending upon the landlord railroad. See http://www.amtrakdelays.com ,and type in the train numbers and a location. As has been mentioned, the tracks are owned by the freight railroads, and some, such as Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Canadian Pacific have been more tolerant of Amtrak than others. The difference between freight railroads handling of Amtrak can be significant, as I've noticed in my travels.
Canadian Pacific owns the route that Amtrak travels between Chicago and Saint Paul, and they have improved the track dramatically over what it was like a decade ago. It's much smoother than most track out east.
The freight RRs also have to pay for track maintenance and upkeep from their own pockets, which can affect Amtrak's performance over particular routes as well.

Your expectations can color your trip. Those who expect absolute perfection, straight out of the Orient Express, will be disappointed. It should be noted that even during the Glory Years, super luxurious trains often lost money, but were operated as public relations moves. I have had trips where I have encountered a group having the times of their lives, in coach no less, while others on the same train thought it was lousy. The difference was in the attitude, as the ones who were having fun were using the time to bond with their spouse and friends, and the train was simply a means to that end.

So, with those caveats, you could show up at the station about a half hour before boarding. The train from Milwaukee, in addition to what the other poster mentioned, uses double deck equipment, and is quiet (unless you have a school group aboard - the students can be noisy). Maximum speed over the MKE - MSP route is 79 mph.

We seem to have a slight disagreement about how early to get to the station.

If you know the station and where the tracks are, have your ticket already, and are not encumbered with a lot of luggage, it's probably okay to push it to 15-20 min. ahead of time at a station such as Minneapolis or Milwaukee. But there are times you need to allow a little more time -- at a very big and unfamiliar station; when you have a lot of luggage; when the train is very popular and full, and you don't have reserved seats. For the midwest routes, there's usually no problem, although Chicago's station can be a challenge under some circumstances.

But FYI if you're dealing with DC, PHila, or NYC, you really will need the extra time or you can get into kind of a mess.

I should add to my previous post, that the route between Milwaukee and Saint Paul has two of the most cooperative landlord railroads for Amtrak. CP Rail and BNSF, as of this date, have made a reputation of getting Amtrak over their rails with very little hassle. Other railroad landlords, such as Union Pacific out west and CSX in the eastern United States, have not been so cooperative. Going between Milwaukee and St. Paul should be hassle free.

why not?

http://www.megabus.com/us/index.php

I work parttime as a TA and have booked ONE Amtrak trip and I won't do that again. He went mid country to the west and back again, taking a more southerly course west to CA and then north and east. He missed the main thing he made the trip for...one of the northern national parks becsuse of work being done on the tracks. He was rerouted, missed the park and the hotel he was booked at. (AND he couldn't even reach them in time to avoid being charged for one night!!) There were several other snags in what I thought to begin with was 'too much train' but he was determined. But the problems encountered were Amtraks and not of his doing!

One fellow passenger told him that on one of his trips, the train stopped in the middle of nowhere for hours while waiting for a replacement crew as the present crew's time was up. I too find that hard to believe but why would someone make something like that up?!

I would take the train ONLY if I did not care when - or if - I made it to where I wanted to go.

JMHO

PS Add to all the above, the privilege of being inconvenienced is not cheap!!

esd, train crew's duty time regulations are imposed on their employers by their union, similarly but not identically to the duty/rest times imposed on the US airline industry by the FAA. When the train crew member or the pilot has reached his/her max duty time for a 24 hour period, he or she stops, no argument allowed.

Very interesting. Thanks for the info that validates something that seemed hard to believe.

esd - just to elaborate on Bobmrg's comments. The hours that train crews and airline crews can work has been strictly regulated for years. As far as train crews go, their hours are also governed not just by their union rules but by the Dept of Transportation, the Federal Railroad Administration and the Railroad Hours of Service Act (which was first enacted by Congress over 100 yrs ago).

As Bob says, once the plane or train crew have reached their limits, they stop - no questions, no arguments, and no exceptions.

I hope the airline crews don't stop in the middle of the flight...or there would be lot of planes falling out of the sky :-D

AAF Frequent flyer comments on planes falling out of the sky, not quite as drastic but as in many cases NW UA DL and other airlines, simply cancel the flight, stranding the passengers at the airport. Why do you think there are so many flight cancellations at the end of the month? Its because the pilots and other crew have timed out and the airlines today have few spare crews available because of all the past cutbacks and layoffs.
Same thing on Amtrak. Government has starved the system for years and not enough crew to go around when things go wrong.

Did you notice the :-D

I know how the system works but I was just replying to the following statement:

<i>once the <b>plane</b> or train crew have reached their limits, they stop - no questions, no arguments, and no exceptions.</i>

Good one AA. I knew the minute I hit the post button, I'd get a comment on that one!!!

Of course. Just making sure evreyone is awake!

Oh, yeah, it happened to me too! On Chicago-Emeryville Zephyr train, we were somewhere in the mountains, and the loudspeaker announced: we're waiting for the replacement crue.

Why couldn't they switch the teams at some train stop? This is such a silly rule!

Faina - the rule, of course, is to avoid fatigue. You probably had an unexpected delay (even more than Amtrak is used to) and the Zephyr wasn't near its usual stop for crew change so you got to sit and enjoy the mountains longer than you thought you were going to.

With the airlines, they try to avoid the problem occuring in mid-flight (makes for a rather messy situation, right AA???) so the airlines either cancel the flight or wait at the gate for a new crew.