Texas central says "within 10 years' so maybe 2023? No details whatever. Using an existing route? Totally new is likely given their projected speed. Financing? I wouldn't bet on it. VHSR routes have all been government built and then in some cases, run by a private operator.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
ontheBNSF But the private sector is already planning to doing it. These organizations aren't receiving government so obviously their is a profit to be made. http://www.allaboardflorida.com/ www.texascentral.com/ www.rockymountaineer.com http://www.vegasxtrain.com/ One last point about the subsidies, regulations, and general visible hand government were not in this area there would be more incentive to create profitable and private passenger rail and transit that is what my point is. Cheers
But the private sector is already planning to doing it. These organizations aren't receiving government so obviously their is a profit to be made.
http://www.allaboardflorida.com/
www.texascentral.com/
www.rockymountaineer.com
http://www.vegasxtrain.com/
One last point about the subsidies, regulations, and general visible hand government were not in this area there would be more incentive to create profitable and private passenger rail and transit that is what my point is. Cheers
The FEC initiative is the most interesting - since it is corridor service and a source of money. But, I can't figure out how they can make the number work. They have to spend $1.5B to get going and will only have total revenue of $150M per year. If they carried a third of the $150 to the bottom line, that leaves a 30 year simple payback period and no profit.
The Las Vegas train has some funding but will operate in a much narrower niche - sort of like the Reno Fun train. The Rocky Mountaineer is already operating in the "tour train" niche. It really isn't general transportation It is an excursion ride. The Texas Central is a pipe dream. They have no money.
One can also make the argument that subsidized transport creates an overall higher level of economic activity than in the unsubsidized case. That transport is an economic catalyst, if you will. The downside is the subsidized case may create less efficient construction and/or operation.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
ontheBNSFBut the private sector is already planning to doing it.
All Aboard Florida is a private effort within one state to provide service over a 260 mile corridor. It parallels roadways which are now congested and most likely will become more congested in the future. At present it seems to be in the planning states. Certainly it has possibilities but I don't see how it can be compared to Amtrak which is a national system.
The Rocky Mountaineer is a Canadian train. I don't see that it has implications for Amtrak.
The Vegas X Train is a special purpose operation to connect the Los Angeles area to casinos. I suspect it is being bankrolled by some of the casinos. Today the casino industry is a lot more competitive than it was when Las Vegas began and the hope is that this fancy train will lure customers to the gambling tables. Perhaps it will succeed.
Atlantic City casinos tried the same idea with ACES, the Atlantic City Casino Express from New York to AC. The idea failed and ACES no longer runs. Some say the route was the problem. ACES ran from New York to Philadelphia and then to AC. Critics say it should have gone straight across New Jersey, a shorter route.
Again, whether the Vegas X Train succeeds or fails I don't see it as having much to do with Amtrak.
The Rocky Mountaineer is run purely as a land cruise. Fares start at around $1,000 for a one way trip between Calgary/Banff and Vancouver, a distance of roughy 800 miles. That does include hotel accommodation at Kamloops, where it stops overnight. You can only book for the whole trip; there is no service to any intermediate towns (not even Kamloops). And if you miss the train in early October, it will be a long cold wait for the next train in May of the following year.
The tax institute ( whose political leaning I have no idea ) has issue a statement that AMTRAK receives less subsidity than the auto public. I have no way to verify their figures so if anyone can confirm or refute please do so.
http://taxfoundation.org/article/gasoline-taxes-and-tolls-pay-only-third-state-local-road-spending
I didn't see that in the link, as it only mentions mass transit, not Amtrak. I did note that even adding in the federal gas tax, highways nationally are only having ~50% of expenses covered by "user fees" hence the need to raise gasoline taxes.
The Tax Foundation is a non-partisan tax research group based in Washington, D.C. As it disputes some findings by a "left-leaning" group, it's pretty clear it is not a liberal group..
blue streak 1The tax institute ( whose political leaning I have no idea ) has issue a statement that AMTRAK receives less subsidity than the auto public.
The article itself seems a pretty straight forward comparison of costs. Mainly, it looks at state and local funding of transportation. Of course property taxes pay a large part of the state and local part and are unrelated to road use. I did not see any reference to Amtrak.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.