Comment box Scope: summary, information Tone: neutral Opinion: a little bit at the end Sarcasm/humor: none The new Floridian train will travel between Chicago, IL and Miami, FL with major...
Comment box
Scope: summary, information
Tone: neutral
Opinion: a little bit at the end
Sarcasm/humor: none
The new Floridian train will travel between Chicago, IL and Miami, FL with major intermediate stops in Cleveland OH, Pittsburgh PA, Washington, D.C., Raleigh NC, Columbia SC, Jacksonville FL, Orlando FL, and Tampa FL. (And a couple dozen minor intermediate stops.) It will be a single-seat ride the whole way instead of requiring a transfer in Washington DC from the Capitol Limited to the Silver Star.
There will be coach seats as well as roomette tickets available in first class. The trains also have Accessible Bedrooms for riders in wheelchairs.
The Floridian will start operating on November 10, 2024. The Amtrak article says that it's going to be "temporary," but it doesn't specify an end date. (The East River Tunnel Project will take at least 3 more years.) If the new route is popular enough, they'll probably keep it.
Personally I think this is good. Single-seat train service is a big benefit because transfers are annoying, slow, and scary to people who don't take trains very often.
My concern, as with all long-distance Amtrak routes, is that the tracks remain under private ownership, that the trains continue to be diesel-powered (instead of electric, which is greener, cheaper, and more efficient), and that the track alignments prevent high speeds. I would like to see those things addressed.
One train a day is fine for long-distance stuff like this, though it would be nice to have more timing options.
I read the wiki on diesel locomotive emissions about a year ago and was absolutely shocked. It kinda killed domestic train travel for me. Huge fan of TGVS, shinkansen, and the high speed rail in...
I read the wiki on diesel locomotive emissions about a year ago and was absolutely shocked. It kinda killed domestic train travel for me. Huge fan of TGVS, shinkansen, and the high speed rail in Spain as well as Italy I've ridden.
I've ridden Acela a few times and the north east regional plenty. But shit, the emissions made me think wtf is the point compared to domestic jets.
Comment box Scope: summary, information Tone: neutral Opinion: somewhat, more so at the end Sarcasm/humor: none Train travel, including diesel train travel, is typically less energy-intensive and...
Comment box
Scope: summary, information
Tone: neutral
Opinion: somewhat, more so at the end
Sarcasm/humor: none
Train travel, including diesel train travel, is typically less energy-intensive and lower-carbon than flying, but older rolling stock tend to be the exception to that rule. A lot of Amtrak's fleet is quite old, from the 1970s. The new Amtrak Airo trains will be a lot greener ("90% less particulate emissions") and more efficient. I'm not sure whether they'll run on this particular route.
The newest diesel engine technology (Tier 4) from 2008-2015 is surprisingly efficient, but the emissions are still there. The EPA has adopted Tier 4 as the standard for new diesel technology. The Airo trains would have to meet Tier 4 standards. (Much existing rolling stock has been grandfathered in and doesn't meet these criteria, so it has to be replaced.)
Tier 5 diesel emission regulations can supposedly reduce NOx and PM emissions by 50-90% (from a Tier 4 baseline) according to the California Air Resources Board's calculations, but the technology doesn't exist yet. They are aiming for 2028-2030. The EPA would have to adopt these standards for them to apply outside of California though. They probably will, but the phase-in wouldn't happen until like 2035.
But electric trains are so much lighter, more efficient, and cleaner that there is really no good excuse not to use them. I think that some policymakers are waiting for battery-electric trains to magically become cost-effective enough to use instead of building out traditional electric overhead catenary wires or on-ground third rails, both of which are expensive, but that's a decade out at best and has a lot of disadvantages. I think it's important to build electric infrastructure now.
The Acela and Northeast Regional are fully electric trains. Some US cities have fully electrified regional trains, like Philadelphia, but other cities (like Boston) haven't bothered. San Francisco just electrified its Caltrain tracks and was therefore able to decrease travel times by 25% and increase service. California High-Speed Rail and Brightline West will both be fully electric with speeds around 200 mph. Brightline West is expected to be constructed by 2028. CAHSR is currently under construction, with the first segment in the Central Valley finishing around the same time and being operational around 2030.
We need a lot more investment into railroads though. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law of 2021 spearheaded by Joe Biden was a great step forward and invested tens of billions into the network, but it's not enough.
It's also worth noting that flying is also lower carbon than an equivalent number of people driving the same distance. It's been awhile since I specifically looked for an analysis of it, but it...
Train travel, including diesel train travel, is typically less energy-intensive and lower-carbon than flying,
It's also worth noting that flying is also lower carbon than an equivalent number of people driving the same distance. It's been awhile since I specifically looked for an analysis of it, but it uses somewhere on the order of half the energy. (The exception is obviously EVs.) Moving a hundred people in one weight-optimized vehicle, in a relatively straight line, beats hundreds of smaller vehicles going to the same place.
Same goes for moving goods by boat: there's "sticker shock" for the carbon footprint of a container ship, and certainly ways that could reduce it if economics weren't a factor, but its hands down the most energy efficient way of moving freight over long distances.
It's usually safe to assume that any form of mass transit is more efficient than the default of personal vehicles.
Diesel trains also have some lesser known advantages...
Diesel trains are typically driven by electric motors, for the torque, and are only using the diesel power plant to generate electricity. Hypothetically, you could replace the diesel generators with something more carbon efficient down the line, without the outlay of expensive power infrastructure all the way down the rail system.
Trains are conveniently modular. The part that drives the train can be replaced relatively easily.
Comment box Scope: comment response, information Tone: neutral Opinion: none Sarcasm/humor: none There is some research into biofuels and hydrogen-powered trains, neither of which would require...
Comment box
Scope: comment response, information
Tone: neutral
Opinion: none
Sarcasm/humor: none
Hypothetically, you could replace the diesel generators with something more carbon efficient down the line, without the outlay of expensive power infrastructure all the way down the rail system.
There is some research into biofuels and hydrogen-powered trains, neither of which would require electrical catenary wires.
I'm not convinced that this is the best option, and the people who are more into train tech than I am tend to hold the same opinion (partially for operational reasons more so than environmental ones), but I can't speak on it enough to be useful.
Trains are conveniently modular. The part that drives the train can be replaced relatively easily.
There is such thing as a diesel multiple unit (DMU) train, in which each car is self-propelled, but they are comparatively niche in the US mostly due to FRA regulations. These trains do not use locomotives, so to replace the propulsion you have to replace every car.
More common are electric multiple unit (EMU) trainsets. They are advantageous in many local systems, especially subways, which have service patterns that require them to start/stop often. EMUs have better acceleration/deceleration and are quieter than DMUs and locomotives. Once you make the investment into electrical infrastructure, it makes sense to replace your entire fleet, which is an additional capital cost. Philadelphia's new purchase of EMUs on the L was about $750 million. After that, they can be cheaper or more optimal operationally than a locomotive for this kind of use-case.
Amtrak doesn't use DMUs/EMUs to my knowledge. The retired Metroliner was an EMU they inherited from the Pennslyvania Railroad, but that no longer runs. They are technically just as modular as any other train, but it's possible that MU systems present an operational challenge on Amtrak's extraordinarily slow long-distance routes. More engines to worry about failing in the middle of the desert. (But also more redundancy? I.D.K.) That said, the Shinkansens in Japan are EMU, as I think are most high-speed railroads in China and a few in Europe, so it can certainly be done effectively.
I love long train journeys, and the idea of starting in a Chicago winter and seeing the seasons roll by over a couple of days with a tropical beach at the end is very appealing! Looks like it’s...
I love long train journeys, and the idea of starting in a Chicago winter and seeing the seasons roll by over a couple of days with a tropical beach at the end is very appealing!
Looks like it’s already available in the booking system, scheduled at 46h29m, so two full days for all intents and purposes. The main reason I’ve never had the chance to do a long US train trip is cost, and this seems to be following that trend: on a random Thursday I picked in December, seats are a fairly reasonable $113, but there’s no way anyone should be spending two nights in one; roomettes are $734 and full rooms $1,257 - although those both seat two so effectively halved if you’re travelling with another person. Flights on the same day are ~3h (call it 6h accounting for airport travel and security) and ~$70, for comparison.
I get why that disparity exists: it’s a feedback loop of underinvestment, prohibitively long journey times, reduced demand, higher per-person costs, and effective subsidies to the airline industry in the form of massive public spending on infrastructure. But the fact remains that as someone who’d be enthusiastic to take this trip, and could even probably make the timeline work for the sake of an interesting experience, I still probably won’t be able to justify it.
I have taken long Amtrak trips in coach twice and it's not that bad. The seats were comfortable with plenty of leg room and space. I traveled from the west coast and the views were to die for.
I have taken long Amtrak trips in coach twice and it's not that bad. The seats were comfortable with plenty of leg room and space. I traveled from the west coast and the views were to die for.
That's good to know! There's definitely a bit of my own bias on this one, I have some pretty significant sleep issues so I'd be too out of it to appreciate anything past hour 22 or so if I didn't...
That's good to know! There's definitely a bit of my own bias on this one, I have some pretty significant sleep issues so I'd be too out of it to appreciate anything past hour 22 or so if I didn't have somewhere to lie flat and rest properly, but taking a look without that lens the seats actually do look pretty comfortable.
Comment box Scope: personal experiences Tone: neutral Opinion: yes Sarcasm/humor: none If you're going to take a long-distance coach overnight, I recommend bringing a sleep mask, earplugs (active...
Comment box
Scope: personal experiences
Tone: neutral
Opinion: yes
Sarcasm/humor: none
If you're going to take a long-distance coach overnight, I recommend bringing a sleep mask, earplugs (active or passive), neck and/or head pillow, and lumbar support pillow (or other pillow for your back).
The seats recline a lot, so it's not like sleeping on an airplane. The seats are also roomier, even in coach. However, the train makes stops at like 3am so there is some shuffling noise as people board. If they are boarding with children, you will unfortunately be subjected to the young ones' lack of volume control.
It's overall quite pleasant and I really enjoy my long-distance Amtrak trips. The gentle rocking of the train helps me sleep actually. The cafe cars are also quite nice. I think it's worth it, but for your first trip maybe just do a single overnight rather than multiple, just in case it isn't for you.
I really appreciate the advice - you and @boxer_dogs_dance have convinced me that I was hasty in saying nobody should be doing coach for that amount of time, and I'm pleased that makes it a more...
I really appreciate the advice - you and @boxer_dogs_dance have convinced me that I was hasty in saying nobody should be doing coach for that amount of time, and I'm pleased that makes it a more accessible option than I thought, although for me specifically I think it's still going to be a choice between roomette or just not doing it.
I've really enjoyed similarly long trips in China, India, and Pakistan when I've had a proper sleeping compartment, and I've felt like utter crap after the couple of single overnight seated trips I've done in Western Europe, so for something I'd be doing primarily for the experience I'd want to prioritise making that experience comfortable. I'm also very fortunate in that I could plausibly choose that option - but definitely not so well off that it's a no brainer!
It kind of loops back to where I've ended up when looking at long-distance Amtrak before: I'd really like to do it, but not so much that it's an absolute must try for me. The desire to go doesn't trump the high chance of messing up my sleep on a coach ticket (FWIW I specifically take daytime flights wherever possible for the same reason), so then it becomes a question of justifying it against the other experiences I could spend the sleeper ticket price on - and the numbers are high enough that something else tends to win out there.
Do we have any sense of how long different legs of this journey would realistically take? I say realistically since I know Amtrak isn’t known for their on-time performance outside of the Northeast...
Do we have any sense of how long different legs of this journey would realistically take? I say realistically since I know Amtrak isn’t known for their on-time performance outside of the Northeast corridor.
Comment box Scope: summary, information Tone: neutral Opinion: none Sarcasm/humor: none The Capitol Limited can get from Chicago to DC (~700 mi) in 17h25m, averaging an impressively slow 40 mph....
Exemplary
Comment box
Scope: summary, information
Tone: neutral
Opinion: none
Sarcasm/humor: none
The Capitol Limited can get from Chicago to DC (~700 mi) in 17h25m, averaging an impressively slow 40 mph. The Silver Meteor can get from DC to Miami (~1060 mi) in 23h35m, averaging a similarly slow 45 mph. If you were currently taking the train from Chicago to Miami on this route, you would also have to account for the layover time, which could be a few hours.
The new Floridian service operates on existing routes, so it would take about the same amount of time minus the layover. That's 41h on paper, or just shy of two full days. Pretty slow. But rather pleasant in a Roomette.
The slowness can be attributes to two things, mostly:
Track alignment and curve radius: the trains can't take tight curves very fast or else they will derail. Since a lot of tracks were built following rivers and other very bendy things to get through mountain ranges, there are lots of curves. You can realign tracks to have wider curves, but it's expensive and usually requires some earth work. Elevation changes may require expensive bridges/tunnels. The Appalachian Mountains are an enormous east-west barrier, including in western Pennsylvania.
At-grade road crossings: The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) limits trains to a max speed of 79 mph (often less) in areas with nearby at-grade road crossings. Most freight railroads do not have grade-separated crossings from roads, meaning cars can drive over the tracks. Trains are very large and take a few miles to stop. This presents a safety risk when brain-lacking people drive automobiles onto the train tracks and subsequently get hit by trains. The FRA has this speed limitation anywhere such collisions are physically possible. Grade separations (overpasses/tunnels) can allow for much higher operating speeds, but they tend to cost tens of millions of dollars each. That's okay, but it takes a while and the freight railroads don't have a whole lot of incentive to pay for it because they already legally have right-of-way.
There are other causes of delays, including track maintenance issues and signaling systems. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will address some of this, but the host railroads will continue to be partly responsible. More funding is necessary for Amtrak to acquire and build its own high-speed tracks.
The states of Virginia and North Carolina are currently investing billions into the S-Line and other rail projects that will increase operating speeds considerably. These projects are funded in part by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Travel times will be reduced somewhat as a result, although it will take dramatically more funding to see speeds upward of 110 mph in most areas. See Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor for more information.
Amtrak on-time performance has gotten a lot better in the past decade. If there's a significant delay, it's most likely to be on a route shared with Norfolk Southern or Union Pacific. The other operators are more okay. You can see Amtrak's "freight report cards" on their website. They give them letter grades. Currently, no one has anything worse than a B-, which is amazing. NS in particular used to be a lot worse!
Amtrak is legally provided the right-of-way when operating passenger service on host railroads, but the railroads have traditionally been ambivalent toward Amtrak. This is because the enforcement mechanism for the law requires the Department of Justice to get involved in a particular way, which they just haven't bothered to do for literally 50 years. But this year (2024), the DOJ sued Norfolk Southern for violating the law by giving their own trains priority over Amtrak. This will encourage all the freight railroads to treat Amtrak better, which will improve on-time performance considerably.
Anything that will encourage more collaborations along the lines of the 2004 hit song "Let's Go" by Trick Daddy feat. Twista and Lil John is a positive in my book.
It's the psycho [person] Twista from Chicago
Rollin' with the Miami [person], that'll crush ya
Anything that will encourage more collaborations along the lines of the 2004 hit song "Let's Go" by Trick Daddy feat. Twista and Lil John is a positive in my book.
Comment box
The new Floridian train will travel between Chicago, IL and Miami, FL with major intermediate stops in Cleveland OH, Pittsburgh PA, Washington, D.C., Raleigh NC, Columbia SC, Jacksonville FL, Orlando FL, and Tampa FL. (And a couple dozen minor intermediate stops.) It will be a single-seat ride the whole way instead of requiring a transfer in Washington DC from the Capitol Limited to the Silver Star.
There will be coach seats as well as roomette tickets available in first class. The trains also have Accessible Bedrooms for riders in wheelchairs.
The Floridian will start operating on November 10, 2024. The Amtrak article says that it's going to be "temporary," but it doesn't specify an end date. (The East River Tunnel Project will take at least 3 more years.) If the new route is popular enough, they'll probably keep it.
Personally I think this is good. Single-seat train service is a big benefit because transfers are annoying, slow, and scary to people who don't take trains very often.
My concern, as with all long-distance Amtrak routes, is that the tracks remain under private ownership, that the trains continue to be diesel-powered (instead of electric, which is greener, cheaper, and more efficient), and that the track alignments prevent high speeds. I would like to see those things addressed.
One train a day is fine for long-distance stuff like this, though it would be nice to have more timing options.
I read the wiki on diesel locomotive emissions about a year ago and was absolutely shocked. It kinda killed domestic train travel for me. Huge fan of TGVS, shinkansen, and the high speed rail in Spain as well as Italy I've ridden.
I've ridden Acela a few times and the north east regional plenty. But shit, the emissions made me think wtf is the point compared to domestic jets.
I'm here for more electric trains. Please.
Comment box
Train travel, including diesel train travel, is typically less energy-intensive and lower-carbon than flying, but older rolling stock tend to be the exception to that rule. A lot of Amtrak's fleet is quite old, from the 1970s. The new Amtrak Airo trains will be a lot greener ("90% less particulate emissions") and more efficient. I'm not sure whether they'll run on this particular route.
The newest diesel engine technology (Tier 4) from 2008-2015 is surprisingly efficient, but the emissions are still there. The EPA has adopted Tier 4 as the standard for new diesel technology. The Airo trains would have to meet Tier 4 standards. (Much existing rolling stock has been grandfathered in and doesn't meet these criteria, so it has to be replaced.)
Tier 5 diesel emission regulations can supposedly reduce NOx and PM emissions by 50-90% (from a Tier 4 baseline) according to the California Air Resources Board's calculations, but the technology doesn't exist yet. They are aiming for 2028-2030. The EPA would have to adopt these standards for them to apply outside of California though. They probably will, but the phase-in wouldn't happen until like 2035.
But electric trains are so much lighter, more efficient, and cleaner that there is really no good excuse not to use them. I think that some policymakers are waiting for battery-electric trains to magically become cost-effective enough to use instead of building out traditional electric overhead catenary wires or on-ground third rails, both of which are expensive, but that's a decade out at best and has a lot of disadvantages. I think it's important to build electric infrastructure now.
The Acela and Northeast Regional are fully electric trains. Some US cities have fully electrified regional trains, like Philadelphia, but other cities (like Boston) haven't bothered. San Francisco just electrified its Caltrain tracks and was therefore able to decrease travel times by 25% and increase service. California High-Speed Rail and Brightline West will both be fully electric with speeds around 200 mph. Brightline West is expected to be constructed by 2028. CAHSR is currently under construction, with the first segment in the Central Valley finishing around the same time and being operational around 2030.
We need a lot more investment into railroads though. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law of 2021 spearheaded by Joe Biden was a great step forward and invested tens of billions into the network, but it's not enough.
It's also worth noting that flying is also lower carbon than an equivalent number of people driving the same distance. It's been awhile since I specifically looked for an analysis of it, but it uses somewhere on the order of half the energy. (The exception is obviously EVs.) Moving a hundred people in one weight-optimized vehicle, in a relatively straight line, beats hundreds of smaller vehicles going to the same place.
Same goes for moving goods by boat: there's "sticker shock" for the carbon footprint of a container ship, and certainly ways that could reduce it if economics weren't a factor, but its hands down the most energy efficient way of moving freight over long distances.
It's usually safe to assume that any form of mass transit is more efficient than the default of personal vehicles.
Diesel trains also have some lesser known advantages...
Diesel trains are typically driven by electric motors, for the torque, and are only using the diesel power plant to generate electricity. Hypothetically, you could replace the diesel generators with something more carbon efficient down the line, without the outlay of expensive power infrastructure all the way down the rail system.
Trains are conveniently modular. The part that drives the train can be replaced relatively easily.
Comment box
There is some research into biofuels and hydrogen-powered trains, neither of which would require electrical catenary wires.
I'm not convinced that this is the best option, and the people who are more into train tech than I am tend to hold the same opinion (partially for operational reasons more so than environmental ones), but I can't speak on it enough to be useful.
There is such thing as a diesel multiple unit (DMU) train, in which each car is self-propelled, but they are comparatively niche in the US mostly due to FRA regulations. These trains do not use locomotives, so to replace the propulsion you have to replace every car.
More common are electric multiple unit (EMU) trainsets. They are advantageous in many local systems, especially subways, which have service patterns that require them to start/stop often. EMUs have better acceleration/deceleration and are quieter than DMUs and locomotives. Once you make the investment into electrical infrastructure, it makes sense to replace your entire fleet, which is an additional capital cost. Philadelphia's new purchase of EMUs on the L was about $750 million. After that, they can be cheaper or more optimal operationally than a locomotive for this kind of use-case.
Amtrak doesn't use DMUs/EMUs to my knowledge. The retired Metroliner was an EMU they inherited from the Pennslyvania Railroad, but that no longer runs. They are technically just as modular as any other train, but it's possible that MU systems present an operational challenge on Amtrak's extraordinarily slow long-distance routes. More engines to worry about failing in the middle of the desert. (But also more redundancy? I.D.K.) That said, the Shinkansens in Japan are EMU, as I think are most high-speed railroads in China and a few in Europe, so it can certainly be done effectively.
I love long train journeys, and the idea of starting in a Chicago winter and seeing the seasons roll by over a couple of days with a tropical beach at the end is very appealing!
Looks like it’s already available in the booking system, scheduled at 46h29m, so two full days for all intents and purposes. The main reason I’ve never had the chance to do a long US train trip is cost, and this seems to be following that trend: on a random Thursday I picked in December, seats are a fairly reasonable $113, but there’s no way anyone should be spending two nights in one; roomettes are $734 and full rooms $1,257 - although those both seat two so effectively halved if you’re travelling with another person. Flights on the same day are ~3h (call it 6h accounting for airport travel and security) and ~$70, for comparison.
I get why that disparity exists: it’s a feedback loop of underinvestment, prohibitively long journey times, reduced demand, higher per-person costs, and effective subsidies to the airline industry in the form of massive public spending on infrastructure. But the fact remains that as someone who’d be enthusiastic to take this trip, and could even probably make the timeline work for the sake of an interesting experience, I still probably won’t be able to justify it.
I have taken long Amtrak trips in coach twice and it's not that bad. The seats were comfortable with plenty of leg room and space. I traveled from the west coast and the views were to die for.
That's good to know! There's definitely a bit of my own bias on this one, I have some pretty significant sleep issues so I'd be too out of it to appreciate anything past hour 22 or so if I didn't have somewhere to lie flat and rest properly, but taking a look without that lens the seats actually do look pretty comfortable.
Comment box
If you're going to take a long-distance coach overnight, I recommend bringing a sleep mask, earplugs (active or passive), neck and/or head pillow, and lumbar support pillow (or other pillow for your back).
The seats recline a lot, so it's not like sleeping on an airplane. The seats are also roomier, even in coach. However, the train makes stops at like 3am so there is some shuffling noise as people board. If they are boarding with children, you will unfortunately be subjected to the young ones' lack of volume control.
It's overall quite pleasant and I really enjoy my long-distance Amtrak trips. The gentle rocking of the train helps me sleep actually. The cafe cars are also quite nice. I think it's worth it, but for your first trip maybe just do a single overnight rather than multiple, just in case it isn't for you.
I really appreciate the advice - you and @boxer_dogs_dance have convinced me that I was hasty in saying nobody should be doing coach for that amount of time, and I'm pleased that makes it a more accessible option than I thought, although for me specifically I think it's still going to be a choice between roomette or just not doing it.
I've really enjoyed similarly long trips in China, India, and Pakistan when I've had a proper sleeping compartment, and I've felt like utter crap after the couple of single overnight seated trips I've done in Western Europe, so for something I'd be doing primarily for the experience I'd want to prioritise making that experience comfortable. I'm also very fortunate in that I could plausibly choose that option - but definitely not so well off that it's a no brainer!
It kind of loops back to where I've ended up when looking at long-distance Amtrak before: I'd really like to do it, but not so much that it's an absolute must try for me. The desire to go doesn't trump the high chance of messing up my sleep on a coach ticket (FWIW I specifically take daytime flights wherever possible for the same reason), so then it becomes a question of justifying it against the other experiences I could spend the sleeper ticket price on - and the numbers are high enough that something else tends to win out there.
Do we have any sense of how long different legs of this journey would realistically take? I say realistically since I know Amtrak isn’t known for their on-time performance outside of the Northeast corridor.
Comment box
The Capitol Limited can get from Chicago to DC (~700 mi) in 17h25m, averaging an impressively slow 40 mph. The Silver Meteor can get from DC to Miami (~1060 mi) in 23h35m, averaging a similarly slow 45 mph. If you were currently taking the train from Chicago to Miami on this route, you would also have to account for the layover time, which could be a few hours.
The new Floridian service operates on existing routes, so it would take about the same amount of time minus the layover. That's 41h on paper, or just shy of two full days. Pretty slow. But rather pleasant in a Roomette.
The slowness can be attributes to two things, mostly:
There are other causes of delays, including track maintenance issues and signaling systems. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will address some of this, but the host railroads will continue to be partly responsible. More funding is necessary for Amtrak to acquire and build its own high-speed tracks.
The states of Virginia and North Carolina are currently investing billions into the S-Line and other rail projects that will increase operating speeds considerably. These projects are funded in part by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Travel times will be reduced somewhat as a result, although it will take dramatically more funding to see speeds upward of 110 mph in most areas. See Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor for more information.
Amtrak on-time performance has gotten a lot better in the past decade. If there's a significant delay, it's most likely to be on a route shared with Norfolk Southern or Union Pacific. The other operators are more okay. You can see Amtrak's "freight report cards" on their website. They give them letter grades. Currently, no one has anything worse than a B-, which is amazing. NS in particular used to be a lot worse!
Amtrak is legally provided the right-of-way when operating passenger service on host railroads, but the railroads have traditionally been ambivalent toward Amtrak. This is because the enforcement mechanism for the law requires the Department of Justice to get involved in a particular way, which they just haven't bothered to do for literally 50 years. But this year (2024), the DOJ sued Norfolk Southern for violating the law by giving their own trains priority over Amtrak. This will encourage all the freight railroads to treat Amtrak better, which will improve on-time performance considerably.
Anything that will encourage more collaborations along the lines of the 2004 hit song "Let's Go" by Trick Daddy feat. Twista and Lil John is a positive in my book.