Originally Posted by fastflyer
Do the numbers for Regional service refer to what I think they mean: the non-Acela and non-Metroliner services between Boston/ Springfield and Norfolk, including points in between like NYC, Philadelphia, and Washington?
That is correct.
Originally Posted by fastflyer
If I understand the Amtrak lingo correctly, Regional service does NOT include the DownEaster nor the Empire Services, nor the Keystone Services, nor the Vermont Services.
Also correct.
Originally Posted by fastflyer
How do the local trains lose almost as much money as the express trains are making in profit?
Well the operating costs are basically the same for the regional services as they are for the premium service. In fact they might even be a little higher, since some of the regional trains require a change from electric engines to diesel engines. Yet the fares for a regional train are often half what they are for the premium trains. In some cases, the regional fares are even less than half the premium fares.
Originally Posted by fastflyer
I am actually curious, because the locals I take are usually rather full. If they are losing all of the profit that the Acelas are pulling in, why not cut some local services, like Tuesday-Thursday services, for example?
Cutting service doesn't necessarily save money. First some of the station and yard crews would still need to be there regardless of how many trains arrive & depart. Secondly many of the regionals provide connections for passengers traveling on long distance trains. Without the regionals, you'd loose those passengers and their revenue on the LD trains.
Additionally the loss of the regionals would diminish Amtrak's buying power when it comes to food supplies. Finally, even though it's not considered part of operations, you'd still need to maintain the tracks, signals, and overhead wires.
They can't raise the fares, without loosing business to the Airlines and the buses. So Amtrak incurrs a loss, while still providing an essential service.