I did a D.C. to Miami (and back) voyage many years ago that sounds vaguely similar. It was scheduled as a "mere" 24 hour trip and ended up taking over 30 (flying takes less than 3 and costs about the same and driving takes about 15 hours).
At one point our section of the train was disconnected and transferred to another train, except that train was 2 hours late. All told we waited 4 hours with no electricity or lights and nowhere to get off in the meanwhile.
We weren't in cabins and it was virtually impossible to sleep because of all the kids and drunk people opening and closing the doors to the cars all night.
We had a working dining car for approximately 1 meal going down and 2 meals coming up.
It was an excruciating enough that I've sworn off ever riding trains in the U.S. again. I did briefly consider taking the Accela recently on a D.C. to NYC trip (in theory it takes just about the same amount of time), but decided it's just easier to fly.
I've taken trains in Italy, France, England and South Korea and they're glorious experiences by comparison.
It's a shame too, because the U.S. is a beautiful country to see travelling by land...except at least on the routes I've been on which run mostly through hard neighborhoods or industrial wastelands.
If you get a chance to visit the US again on the west coast, take the Coast Starlight, especially if you can take it northbound out of Los Angeles. It's one of Amtrak's long-haul routes, so, especially going southbound, plan in a few hours of delay in getting to your destination, but it's one of the most beautiful trips you can make. You'll see the ocean, wind through the mountains, see farmland, see deltas, see a lot of the country for what it really is.
One of the things to keep in mind about rail in the US is that, unfortunately, freight rules, and passenger rail is kept a distant second. So any scheduling problems, and the passenger trains get bumped back farther and farther, leading to the problems you described. If you're on one of the corridors that are handled mostly by passenger consortiums -- the Northeast Corridor, or Southern California -- you tend to get much better quality of service, but when you're out of those areas, it does get pretty craptastic, unfortunately. It's better than the dark days of the late seventies to early nineties, but it's still not nearly as good as it should be.
If you're going from NW DC to Manhattan the Accela is usually faster door to door from DC, because you're going from Union Station to Penn, as opposed to going to National, going through security, and then arriving at the outskirts of NYC and taking a cab into the city.
It's also much more comfortable, and both the Accela and the regionals have a pretty good on-time percentage in on that route.
It's the only decent Amtrak route, but well recommended.
I live in Philadelphia and use Amtrak to go up to New York on the weekends, where I used to live. The train ride is actually faster than the most-distant points on the NYC subway, so in a way I feel like I'm actually in a distant part of the same city.
Anyway...the Northeast Corridor is great. Especially in the middle of the night when its cheap, and theres no traffic on the rails.
Yeah, and from Penn you can jump on the Subway and get most places in the city without too much fuss (though it might be hard to get luggage through the turnstiles with you).
Let's just say that it's appealing enough to be on my options list for travel whenever I go the NYC.
It meets airline carry-on requirements, but can be easily be slipped on and off in urban environments as needed. It probably won't work so well if you need to wear a suit jacket, but is otherwise great.
DC<->NYC/Boston is actually not bad (Acela or not). A lot more businessfolk so it's kept up more nicely. If you get there early enough you can get on the "Quiet" car. People are serious as shit about the "Quiet" car. Business class is pretty nice too (and surprisingly affordable).
Second it for the NEC (North East Corridor) from DC as far up as Boston. The train saved me on several occasions during this and past winters when snow storms snarled up the airways and airports. Although trains will also stop running at some point, it takes way more to do so.
In the case of travel between DC-NYC, it's even better since Union and Penn Stations are right in the hearts of the cities.
For example, flights were snarled for days and cancelled all day this last winter and I ended up getting a ride on empty, snow covered streets only plows were running on to the train that was still running with only slight delays.
Part-way through a trip from D.C. to Boston I ordered a sandwich and a can of ginger ale on the train. I did not specify a brand of ginger ale, but the clerk told me that they were out of Schweppes, and that he didn't want to bother charging me for Canada Dry, so he gave it to me for free.
I know that they have better systems for trains in general, but all of those countries also have a much smaller area to cover by train than America. It's no surprise that the quality of trip with a train there would be much higher.
US actually has (arguably) the worlds best freight rail system in large part because the size makes long distance trucking less appealing. The real issue is cars and air traffic is heavily subsidized and freight has priority on most lines.
PS: For comparison the entire EU moved less than 1/10th a much freight miles (Mass * distance) as the US dispite having a similar sized economy.
To be fair, the EU has more ports and a shorter distance from ports to the final destination, and ships are more fuel efficient than rail, so there's less need for long distance rail transport in the EU.
In researching that, I came across http://www.trforum.org/journal/downloads/2013v52n2_04_Freigh... , which argues that (in 2000) 83% of the differences in ton-miles can be explained by increased use of sea/non-surface mode transport, reduced distances, and a commodity mix, specifically coal transport. (Something like 40% of US rail tonnage-miles from coal, while it's about 15% of the EU's.)
I'd be curious as to what the growth of rail freight is like in the US — I know it's been increasing year-after-year in the EU, ever since the rail freight market was opened up to competition.
At one point our section of the train was disconnected and transferred to another train, except that train was 2 hours late. All told we waited 4 hours with no electricity or lights and nowhere to get off in the meanwhile.
We weren't in cabins and it was virtually impossible to sleep because of all the kids and drunk people opening and closing the doors to the cars all night.
We had a working dining car for approximately 1 meal going down and 2 meals coming up.
It was an excruciating enough that I've sworn off ever riding trains in the U.S. again. I did briefly consider taking the Accela recently on a D.C. to NYC trip (in theory it takes just about the same amount of time), but decided it's just easier to fly.
I've taken trains in Italy, France, England and South Korea and they're glorious experiences by comparison.
It's a shame too, because the U.S. is a beautiful country to see travelling by land...except at least on the routes I've been on which run mostly through hard neighborhoods or industrial wastelands.