Shuttle to the Airport
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE
Printable View
Shuttle to the Airport
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE
This is good. I just wish that the long-aborning Detroit to Ann Arbor commuter rail had a stop at the airport [[not more than a mile away requiring a shuttle bus and 2 waits). But this is still good.
The company has to pay a $10 departure fee!? Sheesh that's a lot. Please don't tell me that's the same for cabs. Usually departure fee charges are at the worst, $5 for taxi and shuttles I've seen for airports. Less surcharge for rail.
Still I'm glad it's coming. This was much needed
I'm sorry but that is absurd amount of money [[factoring in the $10 departure fee)... you can get a Rent-A-Car for that for 24 hours use....
I sort of agree Gistok, but I think it serves a different market than car rental. It is geared towards business travelers who get to expense it, and are looking for simple and easy trips between downtown and the airport. Car rental is definitely a better value, but you also have to worry about directions, parking, daily charges [[if you're staying a week, the shuttle price is the same as 24 hours; the rental would be a ton more). I do agree that it is very expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gistok
Does anyone know what IS the problem with the A2 commuter rail project? It's been talked about for so long with nothing to show for it, like BART's San Jose extension. I remember that in the mid-70's there was a morning train [[or two?) from Jackson to Detroit with early evening returns. There was also a Budd rail diesel car, a self-powered passenger car, that was handy and travel time for the train and the Budd car was just 45 minutes from Detroit to A2. I used Amtrak last summer and my supposed one hour travel time back to Ann Arbor was doubled because the train was put on another track and sat there for about an hour near Inkster. No explanation was given and I will never use Amtrak for anything again - it's the worst excuse for commuter transit ever. So what is so hard about putting a few cars in service between Ann Arbor and Detroit? Many people here would enjoy access to the DIA, music and sports venues, and some would even continue on to Birmingham/Troy for shopping. This would require about 4-6 morning inbound trips with late afternoon to late evening returns. Perhaps the Budd-type cars or even light rail would suffice. When I lived in the Bay Area there were occasional frustrations with BART, Caltrain, Muni, and the rest, but it was a dream compared to SE Michigan, which was actually better forty years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyinBrooklyn
Not when you factor in Gas and Parking downtown.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gistok
Regarding the rail, it is pretty sad. We have the rail, the cars, and locomotives in place, some money has/is being spent to upgrade the stops, but there is still no commitment for operating funds. The reality is that this will need to be supported with subsidies [[like any transportation project). Therefore, folks are scared to expand the system even where it has benefits because the whole funding mechanism is broke.
"I will never use Amtrak for anything again - it's the worst excuse for commuter transit ever."
That's because Amtrak isn't set up for commuters in Michigan. Nobody ever claimed it was. Amtrak in Michigan and throughout most of the country is for longer distance inter city travel. Most Amtrak trains only run once per day. The fact we have as many runs out of Detroit as we do is pretty remarkable, but don't blame Amtrak.
It would be like saying you'd never ride a bike again because there's no climate control.
Hell...at least there's drinks on Amtrak...makes delays a lot easier, I feel. :)
Don't forget the entities who toes would be stepped on if any form of commuter rail system get started lobbied to stall any plans for alternative transportation other than a car, taxi, van, or anything that would benefit these companies. Face it. This is a car dependent state and city. Los Angeles has a shuttle of a sort that would take you to their airport and that is the most car friendly city than DetroitQuote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
Amtrak isn't set up for commuters anywhere. The only area it is regularly used by some as a commuter service is the NE corridor, and it is outrageously expensive. People of even good income levels can't afford it on a daily basis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric_c
Amtrak was created as a for-profit long distance rail provider. They have
provided some services that are basically commuter rail in the Northeast
corridor, in California and from Portland to Boston. They have also been
selected as the contract operator for local agencies that manage commuter
rail system. If we live to see commuter rail in southeast Michigan, it is quite
likely that Amtrak will win the contract to operate it since they run six trains
every day here in the Detroit area.
Replying to a couple of things:
1. The new airport service is a nice idea and I hope it works, but it isn't transit.
2. The Detroit to Ann Arbor commuter rail isn't running yet for three reasons; solve these and they'll start it up tomorrow morning. First of all, there's no money with which to operate it. Second of all, there's no organization capable of operating it [[don't say "RTA"; the RTA has no staff and insufficient money to even operate a bare-bones office for a year). Third, the freight railways [[plural) which own various segments of the track won't allow it to operate until certain track improvements are made [[and those, at least, are in progress).
3. Amtrak runs most of its systems on tracks owned by the freight railways and at the mercy and sufferance of the freight railways. That's why it is so hard for Amtrak trains to stay on schedule. In the northeast, where Amtrak itself owns a good deal of the track, things are different.
Federal Funds could operate it the first year and ridership revenues could operate it afterQuote:
Originally Posted by professorscott
Federal funds are generally not available for operating expenses.
I was pleasantly surprised to read this. I remember hearing a few months ago that this was pretty much dead in the water.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eber Brock Ward
Spot on; and while we're at it, fare revenues are absolutely never sufficient to fund operating expenses. Transit is a taxpayer subsidized service, like almost everything else the government does.