I/we traveled by train a lot when we were at my daughter's in England.....we lived just a little over a mile and a half from Ely Train Station.....once you learn their systems........traveling by train and tube is the best.......I could see not owning a vehicle if I had those options............ironically........the financing for the original tube system in London came from American financiers.........also we are spread out compared to them.........
Yes. “we are spread out compared to them.........”.
When it comes to railroad economics I am an expert. 32 years as an official at CSX in Sales and Marketing.
By the time I retired in January 2000 the Washington to Boston run was on my railroad: CSX. The federal government subsidizes the hell out of Amtrak and it is electrified between just south of Baltimore to Boston. To my knowledge it is the only section of U.S. rail under Amtrak that is electrified. It is fast and actually makes money, or made money when I retired.
Let me educate you on Amtrak. Amtrak was a Federal government program crammed down the throats of the U.S. railroad companies. We at the railroad could not say no because the feds meant business. We had this thing called the Interstate Commerce Commission and they dictated terms to private businesses that they dictated terms to, the private railroads.
I started to work for the L&N in May 1968, straight out of college. The L&N was getting out of passenger rail business (we actually did not know that the federal government would force us to do something that would make us lose money – we were stupid at that point) as you could not make any money hauling around human beings via rail. From Cincinnati to New Orleans (an L&N run) you could fly in a little over two hours at one third the price of going via rail and rail would take you hours and hours and hours. So unable to compete with buses and planes the railroads were getting out of the passenger business, or at the least we thought we were.
Then Uncle Sam decided that those damned railroads could not do that to those poor folks who wanted to travel via rail; although they were incredible low in numbers. So, the U.S government forced the railroads to offer passenger service at a loss.
Everyone talks about the great rail service in Europe or Japan or England. They never talk about the massive subsidies that it takes to haul people around in a postage stamp sized country. The United States and Canada are anything but small.
What most folks don’t know is that the U.S. railroads are the only railroads that actually are private and make money. You can’t make money moving people via rail except in extremely dense population areas such as from Washington DC to Boston.
Also, I totally agree with the size of the UK. “we are spread out compared to them.........”. That is the point.
From London (South England) to Thurso, Scotland (extreme Northern Scotland) it is a whopping 678 miles. From Cincinnati to New Orleans it is 806 miles. That is middle to south. Let us not talk about the distance from San Diego, CA to Caribou, ME: 3,289 miles. That is farther than from London to Moscow (1,924 miles). Those distances are made for airplanes. The cost to fly from London to Moscow is a fraction of rail between those points. Plus, when it takes three days instead of a few hours we human beings must eat and sleep which add more cost.
End of rant.
awf that was not pointed toward you. I understand what you posted.