I have often pondered how overseas visitors react to our passenger rail service in California. Those that do their research ahead of time most likely rent a car, especially if they want to do the loop of Coast and Parks (Yosemite, Kings Canyon etc.) This is especially true with Highway One being reopened at Big Sur. The limitation of a single daily train on the Coast Route makes trip planning difficult, not to mention limiting capacity and availability. In the urban areas there has been some improvement, especially on the San Jose – San Francisco Caltrain service which could almost be described as European. But southern California remains little more than a route map with mediocre service recently reduced even further.
This is particularly sad on the Los Angeles County owned portions of the Metrolink network. With public agency control over both the real estate and the operation the only excuse for the failure to provide frequent and competitive service is the lack of recognition of the potential of regional rail, coupled with the lack of political will to overcome localized opposition. For a very brief while my former “home station”, Downtown Burbank, almost had 2 trains per hour all day to and from LAUS, provided by a combination of Antelope Valley and Ventura line trains. Sadly the intervals were 20/40 instead of 30/30, because of the lack of double track in the west San Fernando valley, the infamous Raymer/Bernson project. But it was a step in the right direction until recent cutbacks left holes in the middle of the day.
Speaking of those cutbacks, services throughout the State seem to be suffering from mechanical difficulties, most of which can be traced back to deferring scheduled maintenance. It’s been a tribute to the older General Motors built locomotives that they kept California corridor and commuter services running in spite of missing overhauls at the recommended intervals. Deferred maintenance is borrowing from the future, usually without the foreseeable means to pay it back. Railroads have been doing it since the first day, usually leaving the next generation of railroaders to pay off the debt at much higher cost. “A stitch in time saves nine”!
SB 742 and the Thruway buses.
The original California legislation setting up the Thruway bus network was specifically designed to limit the use of these buses to be feeders to rail, and not for use between points on the buses’ route. Opposition from lobbyists for the existing bus operators convinced the State that they should be protected from competition from this state-subsidized new operator. However, over the past four decades intercity bus service has diminished to a shadow of the operations of Greyhound and Trailways in the twentieth century. RailPAC’s vision has consistently been not only in favor of making the Thruway routes available to intermediate points and non-rail passengers but also encouraging other bus operators to participate in the program through some kind of code-sharing and joint promotion. The theory is that the more service there is on a given route and the more available connections it becomes more attractive to potential riders. In 2019 Senator Allen and RailPAC pushed for the passage of a bill to permit just that. SB742 was passed and became law, and yet there are still many routes where passengers cannot buy tickets. The worst offender seems to be LOSSAN which controls the route along the coast from Santa Barbara north in conjunction with the Pacific Surfliner.
It’s difficult to find information about bus connections on the Pacific Surfliner website. Under destinations the map only shows the rail stations, not bus connection points. I tried booking a sample trip, from Santa Barbara to King City. Pacific Surfliner transferred me to the Amtrak booking site which identified a bus to King City, but would not let me buy a ticket! I tried to game the system by buying a ticket from Carpinteria instead and that didn’t work either. I suppose the lesson here is not to be complacent. Just because a bill is passed and becomes law, it doesn’t mean it has been put into effect. I for one confess to being asleep at the switch. Please contact me if you have similar difficulties booking a journey that you would like to make/..
San Joaquin Valley service.
Gold Runner? Hard seats, unsuitable for long journeys. Lack of refreshments, unsuitable for long journeys. Trains that break down. New rolling stock that is unsuitable for the type of service. Rolling stock that is overspecified for ADA requirements to the detriment of 99.8% of the traveling public. (How many airlines or bus lines provide wheelchair access to every seat?) resulting in ridiculously wide aisles and narrow seats. Numerous breakdowns oif locomotives and cars. And it’s not just me. Respected transportation writers such as Roger Rudick of Streetsblog as well as RailPAC Board members and regular members have voiced similar comments in terms much stronger than mine. It’s clear that the service is not designed with the long-distance traveler in mind, but rather to provide a “basic economy” experience at the lowest cost. One senses the hand of the State Treasurer here.
On a brighter note, overall patronage and revenue is up throughout the State thanks mostly to high gasoline prices. These prices may come down a little but I forecast that they will remain elevated while the “oil shock” works its way slowly through thousands of mile long supply chains. This is NOT the time for service cuts, or for service failures that drive away repeat business. Comments? pdyson@railpac.org
