I remember seeing those trust plates on each of the bi-level cars, with the name of Continental Illinois Bank and Trust on each plate, when I was a teen. So it seems that the CNW was actually covering expenses and the interest on the trust leases, at least for a few years?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm Under Heineman, the CNW completely replaced its old cars by the early 1960's with the new bi-level fleet. As I recall, they were purchased through a Railway Equipment Trust, so the lease payments were probably included in the operating expenses. sam1 would probably be better able to make sense of that, however.
Under Heineman, the CNW completely replaced its old cars by the early 1960's with the new bi-level fleet. As I recall, they were purchased through a Railway Equipment Trust, so the lease payments were probably included in the operating expenses. sam1 would probably be better able to make sense of that, however.
In the case of an equipment trust certificate, the railroad buys the equipment, but it transfers the title to a financial intermediary (bank). The railroad usually has an equity position in it, i.e. 20 per cent of the cost of the equipment. The bank sells trust certificates to investors to finance the equipment; leases it to the railroad; and receives principal and interest payments to cover the balance owed on the equipment over the life of the trust. These payments flow through the income stream of the railroad.
The other major leasing options, from an accounting point of view, would be operating leases vs capital leases. In both cases the cost of the lease (principal and interest) flow through the income statement, but the timing is different. In addition, there are balance sheet (asset, liabilities, ownership, etc.) issues associated with capital leases vs. operating leases that would take considerable space to cover.
Ultimately, all the costs of a business flow through the income statement. As a general rule, operating expenses flow through the income statement during the period in which they are incurred. Capital items, i.e. plant, equipment, etc., are depreciated over time and, thus, the cost of these items, unless they are written off, flow through the income statement. As one might imagine, there are exceptions.
Falcon48 CSSHEGEWISCH In the early to mid-1960's, C&NW claimed to be turning a small profit on its suburban service, I don't know if this was based on solely related or fully allocated costs. At any rate, it didn't last long and C&NW began to lobby hard for the establishment of the RTA. I don't have access to CNW financial records, but the "profit" was almost certainly based on the spread between the commuter service's revenues and its direct operating costs, not "fully allocated costs". You should note, however, that that coverage of "fully allocated costs" isn't a good measure for commuter service profitablility either, since it includes many costs (e.g., a portion of the railroad president's salary) which would not be saved if the service was discontinued. Railroads have historically provided many services at less than fully allocated costs, particularly when they have excess capacity (as C&NW almost certainly had in the 1950's and early 60's). That's economically rational because a railroad may be better off with traffic that provides at least some contribution to its common costs than it would be by losing the traffic and earning no contribution. But that's probably academic as to commuter traffic. Then as now, providing commuter service - particularly on the scale C&NW did - requires huge capital costs, both for infrastructure and rolling stock, that the railroad would otherwise not have to spend. It's highly unlikely that C&NW's commuter revenues were fully covering the service's capital costs.
CSSHEGEWISCH In the early to mid-1960's, C&NW claimed to be turning a small profit on its suburban service, I don't know if this was based on solely related or fully allocated costs. At any rate, it didn't last long and C&NW began to lobby hard for the establishment of the RTA.
In the early to mid-1960's, C&NW claimed to be turning a small profit on its suburban service, I don't know if this was based on solely related or fully allocated costs. At any rate, it didn't last long and C&NW began to lobby hard for the establishment of the RTA.
You should note, however, that that coverage of "fully allocated costs" isn't a good measure for commuter service profitablility either, since it includes many costs (e.g., a portion of the railroad president's salary) which would not be saved if the service was discontinued. Railroads have historically provided many services at less than fully allocated costs, particularly when they have excess capacity (as C&NW almost certainly had in the 1950's and early 60's). That's economically rational because a railroad may be better off with traffic that provides at least some contribution to its common costs than it would be by losing the traffic and earning no contribution.
But that's probably academic as to commuter traffic. Then as now, providing commuter service - particularly on the scale C&NW did - requires huge capital costs, both for infrastructure and rolling stock, that the railroad would otherwise not have to spend. It's highly unlikely that C&NW's commuter revenues were fully covering the service's capital costs.
Though, as you say above, whether or not "C&NW's commuter revenues were fully covering the service's capital costs" may have been irrelevent -- it apparently had the capacity, the equipment, the tracks in place, etc. So, until such time as it would need to replace the capital equipment, it needn't cover the service's capital costs.
I agree with one of the other postings that it's unlikely the LIRR did this "at the moment". It was likely planned in advance. METRA in Chicago will also run extra trains for special events that increase passenger demand beyond what can reasonably be accomodated with normal schedules.
I never said there's no point in doing something, eg building capacity for a high peak, just that building a resource that is used a couple of hours a day is often not the best use of capital. The City of New York is quite content to do so (for the subway), becasue it enables the city to function.
And of the cars entering Manhattan - maybe they get driven to a parking lot and then get driven back in the evening.
Not all commuter rail loses money. For example, New Jersey Transit's Northeast Corridor Service between Trenton, NJ and New York Penn Station makes money. Also, express trains make the trip in just about an hour although local trains take somewhat more time.
Of course there are other considerations. There is no point in building bridges or tunnels into Manhattan for automobiles because once they get into Manhattan the roads are so full there is no place for them to go.
LIRR is, I believe, a commuter operation - so it is resourced for the weekday peaks. I assume therefore that there is quite a lot of stock sitting around over the weekend, and even off peak in the week that can be used for an extra service or two. Indeed having a full train running that would not otherwise be running is likely to make money, even after the cost of providing the crew. This sweating of assets is what, at least in the UK, leads to cheaper tickets on commuter services after 09:30.
On the other side commuter services lose money because the infrastructure is designed to cater for a high peak of a few hours a day and many trains are used for the same few hours a day. Having a $1m+ train carrying passengers twice a day for an hour each time is not the way to put a business in profit.
Leaving Penn Sta at 9:30 today, you arrive in Montauk around 2:30 and return in less than an hour to be back in Penn around 6:30P on Saturdays. Not much time at Montauk to go sightseeing. But. First, we have a two or more hour train ride and a 3 hour auto trip on each side of the LIRR schedule, so it is not fair to compare our day to a normal person's trip who lives in the Metro area. The schedule is differenty at least 3 times a year as there is the sparse fall and winter schedule followed by a few more spring trains, and the heavy summer schedule. There are earlier trains from Penn which would afford longer time in Montauk and still be back in the city in time to dine and take in a show or the opera. And weekends, especially in summer, from Friday though Monday morning have the heaviest and most frequent traffic of the year, an even Fri eve to Sun eve, is busy in the off season. ,
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Regarding a day trip to Montauk and back. In April of 1989, my wife and I made such a trip on Saturday. We found a restaurant that was open, ate lunch,and asked a taxi driver to take us out to the Point and then to our train. We were back in NYC in time to enjoy a performance of Madame Butterfly at the Met.
I do not know what changes have taken place in the last twenty-three years, so our trip may now be impossible.
Johnny
Yes, I caught my error late lat night, trains 2&3 to Penn, 5 to GCT. But I also see what the LIRR directions were. West Hempstead and Long Beach commuters were directed to PennSta for their trains while others were departing from Atlantic ave. In effect, the railroad lightened the crowd at Atlantic.
Of course there is a free transfer from the A to the J at B'way Junction East New York, Eastern Parkway, but:
The A is not directly adjacent to the LIRR station, and directions would be required to get people to the right platform.
The connection from the A to the J is not particularly easy, going from a subway to an elevated station by a hopefully working pair of escalators or stairs.
It involves two changes of trains instead of one.
By the way, it is the 2 and 3, and the 5 does not go to Penn Station. It does go to Grand Central Terminal though, and soon enough the LIRR will have a presence there.
After stating how much I think the LIRR has things together, especially in emergencies, there comes an apparent deadhead train derailment at the Atlantic Ave. terminal that first closed the line to Jamaica but has now resulted in half hourly service to and from Jamaica. But in the directions to passengers it implores most passengers to take the 3 or 5 train to Penn Sta. but does allow for some to go to Atlantic ave. However why not suggest the A train to Broadway Jct. and the J to Jamaica for some? I know the LIRR takes less than a half hour to Jamaica and the A&J combination make take the better part of an hour,but wouldn't that kinda make more sense then going all the way up to Penn Sta and then to Jamaica?
We did have a several hours layover and explored the town as well as having a very leasurely fish meal.
And even with the extra train ahead...the Montauk train is overwhelemd. It is what happens when you provide service and are known to be there for the customer and not the Congressman or stockholder.
Montauk Branch Customers:
The 1:23PM train from Montauk due Jamaica at 4:10PM, is operating 13 minutes late through Patchogue due to high volume of customers traveling.
From LIRR website this Sun afternoon (7/15): They better watch their step. If anybody finds out they actually provide service in stead of timetbles, well, you just don't know what will happen to the industry!
Montauk/Speonk Branch Customers:
An extra train will run from Speonk ahead of the 1:23PM train from Montauk due Jamaica at 4:10PM due to heavy passenger travel.
Several reortedly good ones...they may be open but they're not close! Less than an hour turn around time doesn't give you time to find a cab, get to the restaurat(s), order, eat, pay, find a cab, and be back trackside before you have a 2 to 4 hour wait for the next train! There is a soda vending machine at the auto repair shop to the right when you walk to end of station track.
I remember an excellent restaurant in Montauk. Did it close?
I would guess it is one of the more unique of the commuter services in the country...and one that has a great history. Some said the PRR bought the LIRR as much for the ability to take Philly Mainliner's private cars to the Hamptons and Mauntauk as to get the Sunnyside property. The Cannonball was train of parlor cars pulled out of Penn Sta. with DD1's to Jamaica where a K4 or G5 would grab on for the remaining 90 miles to the South Fork tip of the Island. One of the last parlor car commuter services in the country. Even today, the LIRR has reinstituted at seat beverage services on the Friday afternoon train from LIC and Hunterspoint terminals with coffee going back Monday mornings.
The Ridewithmehenry group has had several trips out there. The Sat. AM train is always crowded...but then so are almost all the other trains going out there all week long. Summer allows for a 9:30A out of NYP and a 6P return. However, no eating facilities at Montauk and not enough time to get into town and back, so bring your own lunch. But it is fun riding the train and seeing surf within a quarter mile of the train..on both sides!
It seems the train to Montauk is consumer friendly...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/nyregion/hamptons-party-starts-while-the-train-is-on-the-tracks.html
My guess is similar, Dakota201. I would assume they see how many they took out there Thursday through Saturday, guess how many go out Sunday early, see how many go back by Sat eve then start planning for Sunday. It as close as I think that they can do it successfully. But I have to salute them for doing it. I don't know how many DH moves are made either before or after, but it is a company that understands the are operating a passenger service and not just running trains.
Dakguy201 It is indeed refreshing to see a passenger railroad that has the equipment and personnel along with the will to respond to customer demand on relatively short notice!
It is indeed refreshing to see a passenger railroad that has the equipment and personnel along with the will to respond to customer demand on relatively short notice!
I suspect that these extra trains have been planned well in advance. Much easier to cancel same for what ever reason . ex; rain storm cuts passengers going to destination.
Yes, Amtrak does run extra's Thanksgiving and at other times...but that is with advance planning. And they are tight on the Corridor, too, because they really don't have that much extra equipment or extra crews...and when they do, often they borrow from commuter roads if they have anything available. But, nowhere else do I hear of the extras LIRR have called on the Montauk Branch...it is a very heavily used line and with the new signaling system they can run more trains than they used to but are still hampered by single track and limited equipment and crews.
I noted on the thread I started that Amtrak does that in response to airline emergencies in the NEC, by adding whatever equipment they have, and running late evening Washington-NY trips through to Boston and Boston-NY trips through to Washington. Also note Amtrak's yearly performance around Thanksgiving Day, with of course the help of borrowed MARC, SEPTAm NJT, and sometimes MBTA equipment.
Actually this is a new "who needs trains?" from several weeks ago.
Just looked at the LIRR web site and they cite two extra trains put on the Montauk branch to accomodate the heavy customer volume! Bet you can't do that with your railroad. All right, maybe you can, but is any other passenger carrier in the US today capable, and willing, to drag out equipment and call extra crews because of customer demand at the moment? Even if they planned it Friday, they are operating sharp understanding that they are expected to provide a service and then are willing to provide that service!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.