Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Importance of national LD trains
Edit topic
Updated your discussion topic below.
Subject
Enter a subject for your topic. Maximum 150 characters.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
Regarding thoughts expressed here and elsewhere online contending that the corridors are much more important to Amtrak and that the long-hauls should be elminated, here is some analysis from the United Rail Passenger Alliance that shows the usage and load factors - and future for growth (it's in the LDs, folks!) for U.S. passenger trains. <br /> <br />This isn't saying the corridors aren't important, but according to this analysis, they appear to be overdeveloped and less used while the LD trains appear to be underdeveloped and more used. <br /> <br />This isn't to start an argument, but to provide ammo for those that support travel choice and to come up with info to counter the generalizations that passenger rail doesn't make sense outside of 300 mile corridors, etc. <br /> <br />Balance is what we need, both short and long-distance trains. I like and use both types of trains. Just like rural highways and Interstates and puddle-jumpers and big planes all play a role and are just as important in the scope of things. <br /> <br />The info comes in an email commentary. It's not yet on the group's Web site, this is excerpt of a 30-40 graf commentary stand. <br /> <br />http://www.unitedrail.org <br /> <br />The entire commentary is located on the Passenger Rail News list... <br /> <br />http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Passenger_Rail_News/message/2637 <br /> <br />http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Passenger_Rail_News/ <br /> <br />SUMMARY <br /> <br />AMTRAK SYSTEM OUTPUT <br />48% LDs <br />30% NEC <br />21% other corridors <br /> <br />PASSENGER LOAD FACTORS <br />69% LDs <br />45% NEC <br />37% other corridors <br /> <br /> <br />"In FY 04, the Northeast Corridor accounted for about 30.4% of system <br />output (long distance trains produced 48.3% and the other short distance <br />services about 21.3%). The NEC had 56% of system passenger revenue (based on the very high prices), while the long distance trains had 27.7% and the other short distance trains about 16.2%. <br />... <br />we do <br />have a remarkably consistent statement from Mr. Gunn to the effect of <br />where the federal subsidies go. He has said more than once that the <br />national system (I am not clear whether he means by that the long <br />distance routes, or ‘everything outside the NEC’) costs about $300 <br />million in subsidy to run; by necessity, after transitional transactional <br />costs are excluded, that means the rest, probably just the NEC, costs <br />$900 million in annual subsidy. <br />... <br />We think the long distance trains are closer to $200 million in cash costs ... <br />the long distance trains consume about a quarter of the annual subsidy, to <br />produce about half the output, while the corridor services consume three <br />quarters of the subsidy to produce a third of the output (if we are <br />covering just the NEC) or, the other half of the output (if we are <br />covering everything other than the long distance trains). <br /> <br />"The load factors show that the long distance trains are heavily used <br />where offered, and the long distance market is sharply underdeveloped, <br />and the corridor services are lightly used (relative to the volume of <br />service offered) and somewhat overdeveloped relative to actual demand. <br />AND - the corridor and NEC load factors would be MUCH lower if the purely <br />New York/Philadelphia traffic were to be excluded (this traffic amounts <br />to somewhere between 35 and 45% of ALL NEC traffic!), so all of what I am saying overstates the value and performance of the NEC segment if we are measuring true intercity rather than 90-mile regional traffic. <br />... <br />Each capital dollar invested into a long distance market therefore <br />produces about five to seven times more revenue and output than the same dollar invested into any short corridor market, especially in the NEC. <br /> <br />"If you assume the role of an investment banker (which is the role played <br />by the Congressional appropriations committees), where would you direct <br />the bulk of your investment capital based purely on financial and <br />econometric returns on that investment, rather than sociopolitical or <br />intuitive factors?"
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
E-mail Subscribe
Check the box below if you want to receive e-mail notifications when replies are made to this thread.
Receive notifications
Update Discussion Topic
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy