On the Acela: hot towels, high hopes, slow ride
By Derrick Z. Jackson, Globe Staff, 7/27/2001

THE ACELA IS a two-thirds-baked loaf of bread, luring you near the oven with
the promise of its aroma and maddening because you cannot eat it because the
core is still glop.

Like a lot of journalists, I have tried the Acela. My interest stems from
two memories, one distant and one recent. Twenty-two years ago, I tried
commuting by train from New York to Boston to date my future wife.

Despite being on a young reporter's salary, Amtrak's torture chamber of
six-hour rides quickly lost me to airplanes. In the last 20 years, I have
used the Boston-to-New York train fewer than five times to take the kids to
Manhattan.

This summer I rode several trains in Germany. If you want to get an idea of
what Amtrak is up against, the leg from watery Hamburg to all-business
Frankfurt was 304 miles. The trip took 3 hours, 55 minutes, an average speed
of 78 miles per hour. And on time to the minute.

The distance from Boston to New York is 215 miles. The Acela train I rode
this week took 3 hours, 40 minutes. They say the train reaches 150 miles an
hour. The true average speed was 59 miles an hour. The German train was
thirty-two percent faster. The Acela was also 10 minutes late. By Amtrak's
books, it was on time. In Germany, five minutes late means you are
officially late.

At least the Acela looks like a German intercity express. It has a similar
space-shuttle nose cone. The seats are spacious. You actually get far more
personal service in first class than in German first class. The staff in
this car, Rodney Cruse and Vodrey Miller, showed me to my seat, offered me a
hot towel, a hot breakfast, very freshly brewed coffee, and free newspapers.

The seating in the rest of the train rivaled that of first class. The
photographic views of egrets, boats, and coves were matched by the library
calm of passengers working on laptop computers, reading, listening to music,
or talking in respectful tones.

The serenity was only seat deep. For just a few minutes after Providence,
the Acela reached German rail speeds. Then, like the old days, the train
crept toward Manhattan along commuter rail lines in industrial southern
Connecticut. The only positive note in this section was the merciful
elimination of the legendary 20-minute stop in New Haven to switch modes of
power.

Including taking the subway to South Station and the Acela to Penn Station,
the total time was 4 hours, 17 minutes. I have often beaten that time by
car.

I had lunch with a friend in Queens, then took the airshuttle home.
Including my cab ride to La Guardia Airport, the plane to Logan and the
subway home, the total travel time was 2 hours, 25 minutes.

If I had been in a car, I would just be getting to Hartford.

At Hamburg-to-Frankfurt speed, the Acela would get from Boston to New York
in 2 hours, 45 minutes. At that time, Amtrak would easily become the favored
way to go from downtown Boston to New York. Comfort and downtown arrivals
would easily overtake the cramped speed of jets that land on the outskirts.

Until then, the Acela, especially at the near-airline prices it charges,
remains a tease of luxurious sloth. Once the novelty of reaching 150 miles
an hour for a few minutes wears off, its only use for people who are
watching the clock is when The Weather Channel clears out the airport with
hysterical storm forecasts.

This could change if our transportation priorities were rearranged.
President Bush wants to spend $32 billion on highways and $13 billion on
airports, but only $521 million on Amtrak, which is facing staff cuts.

There is a movement in Congress to let Amtrak borrow $1.2 billion a year for
the next 10 years, but the General Accounting Office recently estimated that
it would cost between $2.5 billion and $3.5 billion a year for the next 20
years to give the United States a full-blown, high-speed passenger rail
system.

For about one-10th the annual cost of building highways, we could create a
rail system that could cut car congestion and pollution. For about one-third
to one-fifth of the cost of subsidizing airport projects, high speed rail
might reduce the need to schedule 10 planes for 8 a.m. takeoffs.

For a fraction of our traditional transportation priorities, we could have a
complete transportation system. For that reason, we should finish the job.

If the Acela remains a Christmas Lionel instead of becoming a vital,
faster-than-automobile form of travel, we ensure more clogging of the skies
and traffic slowing to the point where 59 miles an hour will seem like a
very high speed. A train only two-thirds baked will keep our cars and planes
under the broiler, with drivers hungry and passengers burning up.

Derrick Z. Jackson's e-mail address is jackson@globe.com.


This story ran on page A19 of the Boston Globe on 7/27/2001.
© Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company.
==========
**NOTICE:  In accordance with 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.**
==========