I don't ride the Carolina trains and I am a rail fan. That being said, it appears that NC could achieve the same results with a much smaller subsidy to Greyhound or another bus company than with its passenger rail system.
Phoebe Vet 384 passengers a day is 64 passengers per train, assuming even distribution, which is unlikely, in one city. Subsidy is a red herring. All mass transit is subsidized.
384 passengers a day is 64 passengers per train, assuming even distribution, which is unlikely, in one city.
Subsidy is a red herring. All mass transit is subsidized.
An average of 64 passengers per day is slightly more than the capacity of a Greyhound bus. The ITC in Fort Worth, which appears to be smaller than the Raleigh Amtrak Station, handles more than 20 Greyhound, Amtrak, and local bus movements in a 24 hour period without breaking a sweat.
Subsidies are real money paid by taxpayers. Only those who don't understand finance or don't want to understand it believe it is a red herring.
All forms of commercial transport in the U.S. receive some government subsidies. In 2007 federal subsidies averaged 24.18 cent per passenger mile for Amtrak as compared to .0044 cents for commercial air and .0138 cents for motorists. Even if local government subsidies jacked up the commercial air and motorist subsidy by a nickel per passenger mile, which is probably not true, they would not be anywhere near the subsidies required by passenger rail.
Only passenger rail, i.e. Amtrak, commuter rail, light rail, etc., depend on large subsidies paid by non-users.
Sam:
I ride the Carolinian and have ridden the Crescent. They run pretty much on time in the Carolinas, where they run on NS track. The delays I have experienced have all occurred in Virginia on CSX track where the train sits stationary for up to an hour watching freight trains go by.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Phoebe Vet http://www.charlotteobserver.com/breaking/story/428582.html
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/breaking/story/428582.html
Unfortunately, the press frequently reports only part of the story. Here are some examples from the referenced story.
Last year more than 140,000 riders stepped on or off the six trains that stop each day at the modest brick station on West Cabarrus Street..... A record Thanksgiving crush saw as many as 900 passengers a day streaming through a station.......
On an annual basis these numbers, assuming that they are correct, which is always suspect when they are rounded to even numbers, works out to an average of 384 passengers per day passing through the Raleigh Station. The station may be inadequate for peak travel days, but 384 passengers between 7:00 a.m. and 9:13 p.m., based on the pictures of the station, are not likely to jam it.
Amtrak passenger counts were up ..... 20 percent in North Carolina during the fiscal year that ended in September -- and not just because of $4 gas.....
The number of riders on the Carolinian increased 15.3 per cent during FY2008, whilst the Piedmont saw an increase of 30.4 per cent. The average number of riders per train was 247.51, although how many rode from end point to end point is not made public by Amtrak or North Carolina DOT. However, the average load factor on the Carolinian was 60 per cent, whilst the average load factor on the Piedmont was 43.2 per cent, suggesting that the trains operated below capacity except on peak travel days.
Revenues were up 29.8 per cent on the Carolinian and 18.8 per cent on the Piedmont. Unfortunately, the revenues were not sufficient to cover the fully allocated costs. The Carolinian covered its average passenger per mile operating costs by ½ cent per mile, but after application of interest, depreciation, and other charges, it lost money. The Piedmont lost 11.1 cents per passenger mile before interest, depreciation, and other charges. These items added an average of 16.61 cents per passenger mile, thereby turning the operating profit on the Carolinian to an estimated loss of 16.09 cents per passenger mile while boosting the loss on the Piedmont to 27.71 cents per passenger mile.
Amtrak's Jeff Mann says the trains that pass through North Carolina arrived on schedule 85 percent of the time in November, compared to 64 percent in November 2007.
The Carolinian arrived at its end points 39.3 per cent on time, whilst the Piedmont achieved an on time arrival of 70.1 per cent, which given its shorter run is as expected. The Silver Star, which is the other train serving Raleigh, arrived on time at its end points 45.1 per cent of the time. Although Raleigh is not an end point for the Star, it is difficult to believe that its on time arrival at Raleigh was much better than its end point arrival times.
The standard one-way fare from Cary to Greensboro is $9.50, but Stover pays $77 for a 10-ride ticket. With additional discounts from a frequent-rider rewards program, each trip costs him about $7.....
The article failed to mention that Stover's trip from Cary to Greensboro costs Amtrak $12.68 on the Carolinian or $20.78 on the Piedmont on average. Thus, depending on the train that he rides, Mr. Stover gets a taxpayer subsidy of $3.18 per trip on the Carolinian or $11.28 on the Piedmont before the frequent- rider rewards program.
My problem with articles like this one is the same as my problem with NARP's drumbeating. Both highlight the positive features of passenger trains without telling the whole story. I doubt Mr. Stover or the taxpayers know that each time he boards the train he is being lifted up by the taxpayers.
Phoebe Vet Two and a half hours from an airport is not my definition of convenient. The scheduled carriers of all sizes serve fewer than 750 airports in the US. That's an average of 15 per state, though obviously size and population will make it vary from state to state. If you eleiminate the small contract carriers who just feed the hubs, it is considerably fewer. Small cities are constantly haggling with the airlines to keep their service because it's not profitable. As far as TSA is concerned, Making you take off your shoes and put them through the x-ray machine is paranoid. Prohibiting big bottles of shampoo is paranoid. Patting women's breasts because their underwire registers on the metal detector is paranoid. Dumping my 58 year old wife's purse out on the belt because they couldn't tell what the horse head key fob on her key chain was is paranoid. Pretty much everything TSA does is paranoid, and if you are afraid to fly if they quit doing it then you are paranoid. No one is trying to replace air travel with rail. The argument is that there is a place for both. Regional trains that go to an airline hub city should stop at the airport or the locality should run service that connects the train station and the airport. It would probably cost that person from Rocky Mount less to take the train to Charlotte than it would to park for a week at the Charlotte airport while they are on vacation.
Two and a half hours from an airport is not my definition of convenient.
The scheduled carriers of all sizes serve fewer than 750 airports in the US. That's an average of 15 per state, though obviously size and population will make it vary from state to state. If you eleiminate the small contract carriers who just feed the hubs, it is considerably fewer. Small cities are constantly haggling with the airlines to keep their service because it's not profitable.
As far as TSA is concerned, Making you take off your shoes and put them through the x-ray machine is paranoid. Prohibiting big bottles of shampoo is paranoid. Patting women's breasts because their underwire registers on the metal detector is paranoid. Dumping my 58 year old wife's purse out on the belt because they couldn't tell what the horse head key fob on her key chain was is paranoid. Pretty much everything TSA does is paranoid, and if you are afraid to fly if they quit doing it then you are paranoid.
No one is trying to replace air travel with rail. The argument is that there is a place for both. Regional trains that go to an airline hub city should stop at the airport or the locality should run service that connects the train station and the airport. It would probably cost that person from Rocky Mount less to take the train to Charlotte than it would to park for a week at the Charlotte airport while they are on vacation.
The worse case scenario is 2.5 hours, which would be found in most instances in far west Texas. For most Texans the drive to an airport with commercial airline service is one to 1.25 hours.
Paranoid is in the eyes of the beholder. My experience does not support your experience, and I fly at least once a month. Moreover, surveys have shown that most airline passengers, whilst they don't like the security procedures, believe the TSA intrusions are reasonable given the threat.
Many passenger rail advocates, including the supporters of the Vision for the future, as well as many people who post to these forums, say they want a national passenger rail system that would in effect duplicate the nation's air and highway systems. Unfortunately, they have put forth few realistic proposals on how to pay for it, other than to run to the federal and state governments with tin cup in hand.
Given the pressing financial challenges facing the United States, I don't believe that we can afford a national passenger rail system unless we are willing to accept European tax levels to pay for it. And I am not willing to go there.
Passenger trains make sense in a few high density corridors, as well as for commuter operations in mega cities, but these are the only places that they make sense.
Phoebe Vet Sam: Airlines make a profit only because they only serve the most profitable routes, which is probably how it should be. But that serves the transportation needs of only those in the big cities. I can take an airline flight from Charlotte to DC, or NYC, or Dallas, etc. I cannot take an airline flight from Charlotte to Rocky Mount, NC, or Danville, Va. but I can go there by train. Flight times look great when you can fly direct, but if you fly from one small city to another small city it is going to be an all day trip. Plan a trip from Petersburg, Va to Salisbury, NC via air and via train. Compare the time and cost, DOOR TO DOOR. Don't forget to add the hour to deal with the paranoid security at the airport, and the 30 minutes waiting for them to properly age your luggage. Don't forget to add the checked bag fees. The round trip fare on Amtrak is $64 the round trip far from Charlotte to Richmond on USAirways is $138 then you still have to get transportation to and from Petersburg and Salisbury. It is feasable for a train to make frequent stops, it is not for an airplane. No one in here is advocating replacing any form of transportation, each has it's advantages and disadvantages. However, high speed, and short haul rail should both be part of the integrated transportation system.
Airlines make a profit only because they only serve the most profitable routes, which is probably how it should be. But that serves the transportation needs of only those in the big cities.
I can take an airline flight from Charlotte to DC, or NYC, or Dallas, etc. I cannot take an airline flight from Charlotte to Rocky Mount, NC, or Danville, Va. but I can go there by train.
Flight times look great when you can fly direct, but if you fly from one small city to another small city it is going to be an all day trip. Plan a trip from Petersburg, Va to Salisbury, NC via air and via train. Compare the time and cost, DOOR TO DOOR. Don't forget to add the hour to deal with the paranoid security at the airport, and the 30 minutes waiting for them to properly age your luggage. Don't forget to add the checked bag fees. The round trip fare on Amtrak is $64 the round trip far from Charlotte to Richmond on USAirways is $138 then you still have to get transportation to and from Petersburg and Salisbury.
It is feasable for a train to make frequent stops, it is not for an airplane.
No one in here is advocating replacing any form of transportation, each has it's advantages and disadvantages. However, high speed, and short haul rail should both be part of the integrated transportation system.
I was addressing the assertion in a previous post that airlines and intercity bus companies don't make money. The assertion is incorrect. Neither is the view that airlines only service the most profitable routes. In some instances, they fly feeder routes that lose money, but they operate them to get passengers to a hub, where they can connect to a long distance flight that contributes to the bottom line.
Practically every city in Texas with a population above 50,000 has viable commercial air service. Included amongst these are Abilene, Beaumont, Bryan, Del Rio, Longview, McAllen, San Angelo, and Tyler. More importantly, however, every city in Texas, with the exception of Sanderson, is within 2.5 hours driving time of an airport with commercial air service. Most are within an hour drive of a point with commercial air service.
I have yet to encounter a paranoid TSA person. In Austin and Dallas, for example, the amount of time to clear security, with the exception of a few busy periods around the holidays, is a about 10 to 15 minutes. It is true, however, that you should be at the airport at least an hour in advance of flight time. Part of this is due to the fact that most airlines begin boarding 20 to 30 minutes before the scheduled departure.
The reason Amtrak's fares are competitive with airfares is because it receives a massive taxpayer subsidy. If it realized the same average subsidy per passenger mile as the airlines, it would have to raise its fares to a level far in excess of airfares. In a previous post I compared the cost of driving vs. taking Amtrak from Georgetown, Texas to Dallas. Amtrak is currently offering a special fare of $24. It is only able to do so because of the subsidy.
The driving time from Charlotte to Rocky Mount, according to MapQuest, is 3 hours, 42 minutes. This would be the best option for many people. Doing so would give them a car at their destination. Otherwise, they might have to rent one, which can be a major expense for people traveling by a commercial carrier, i.e. air, bus, rail, etc. This is the major reason why 88 per cent of all intercity trips in the U.S. are made by car.
I support rapid rail - trains averaging 80 to 85 mph - in relatively short, high density corridors, i.e. Dallas to Fort Worth, Austin to San Antonio, etc. I don't support long distance trains although I ride them since I am paying part of the tab irrespective of whether I use them. High speed rail may be good for bragging rights, but the results do not justify the costs. I have yet to see a serious proposal for a nation awash in debt to fund it. Those who point to California should note the state's budget problems. The tax increases required to close the budget shortfall are mind boggling.
clarkfork Is there any provider of scheduled passenger transportation that makes money? Airlines haven't; most have been in bankruptcy. Intra city bus lines have lost money for years. The same is true of subways and commuter rail. Inter city bus transportation (Greyhound) has been on the skids for years. Of course, passenger rail, before and after Amtrak, has been a money losing enterprise. Are people really willing to pay what scheduled carrier cost? Directly by fare box or indirectly through form 1040?
Is there any provider of scheduled passenger transportation that makes money? Airlines haven't; most have been in bankruptcy. Intra city bus lines have lost money for years. The same is true of subways and commuter rail. Inter city bus transportation (Greyhound) has been on the skids for years. Of course, passenger rail, before and after Amtrak, has been a money losing enterprise.
Are people really willing to pay what scheduled carrier cost? Directly by fare box or indirectly through form 1040?
For the year ended December 31, 2007, U.S. airlines reported operating profits of $7.4 billion and net income of $4.6 billion. Of the 24 reporting airlines five had a net operating loss and seven had a net income loss. The 2008 figures are not complete, but the picture is likely to be a bit bleak this year.
Greyhound is owned by First Group PLC., which is headquartered in the U.K. It reported in 2007 that all of its North American (NA) divisions, including Greyhound, had net operating profits and net incomes. It did not break out the NA earning by division, in part I suspect because it had acquired Greyhound during the year and was trying to sort out the accounting. The U.S. and U.K. use a different accounting model.
Greyhound had an operating profit of $81 million during the first half of 2008. Revenues increased by more than five per cent while operating costs were nearly flat. Interestingly, Greyhound carries about the same number of passengers as Amtrak. But it serves more than 3,100 stations vs. approximately 500 for Amtrak. It also has an 80+ per cent on time record, which beats Amtrak's on-time performance, although Amtrak's NEC on time record is better than 80 per cent. The long distance trains wreck Amtrak's on time record.
During 2007 commercial airline passengers received a federal subsidy of approximately .0049 cents per passenger mile whilst Amtrak's passengers received an average subsidy of 24.45 cents per passenger mile. Motorists received a federal subsidy of approximately .0138 cents per vehicle mile. I am comfortable in saying that Greyhound's passengers received a similar subsidy, i.e. the same as motorists. In addition, all commercial carrier passengers received small state and local subsidies, but the amount is very difficult to determine.
Every user of commercial carriers in the U.S. pays for part of the service through the 1040 as you have indicated. However, wealthier tax filers pay more than less well off filers. In fact, during 2006, which is the latest year for audited figures, 41.3 per cent of those filing a federal income tax return paid no federal income tax.
You're correct. No one should have to subsidize a commercial activity that he or she does not use. i.e. Amtrak, Greyhound, Delta Airlines, etc. Unfortunately, we live in a country that subsidizes every form of transport, thereby distorting the market for them and causing a significant misplacement of resources. It is not likely to change.
To me the concept is morally reprehensible. NO taxpayer should be expected to subsidize the preferences of another person. Personal travel is exactly that, personal. When I travel it is not to contribute to the common good, it is for my personal good, whether it be to sightsee, attend a wedding or even to conduct my personal business. Even travel to and from work: I get the paycheck, I choose the location of both my home and my job. If they are not within walking distance, is that the fault of my fellow taxpayers? In other words, my travel does nothing for the common good. And isn't this is true of most all travel?
It is reasonable to tax individuals for the common good. Things like national defense, police and fire, immediately come to mind. Streets and roads are probably a common good. Maybe schools, at least in theory. Much of everything else that people are taxed for is not for the common good but for the good of individual.
Now that I have got that off my chest---
It seems that the only passenger transportation that make money are the unscheduled (charter?) operators. For example: cruise ships, dinner trains, museum trains, charter bus lines and taxicabs.
Historically freight business probably subsidized passenger bussiness. For example, mail and express on passenger trains. Also, wasn't Greyhound in the small parcels business. Didn't scheduled airlines carry package freight in the belly. Even the Titanic and the Lusitania were carrying freight when they sunk.
Perhaps they only way for passenger transportation to break even is to somehow combine it with freight business. Mixed train on charter?
This is not a good idea. 200 years ago, when transportation meant "horse," the horse breeeders, horse feeders, and horse poop-scoopers all worked together. People riding horses helped maintain the rights-of-way as necessary.
Today, there are many separate industries involved in transportation. Passenger rail is not profitable, so it is not a viable investment option. It would be unfair to saddle the freight railroads with the burden of supporting passenger trains. Most other nations, including some with vast intercity distances, have realized that efficient public intercity transportation is only possible with massive government investment.
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham
TN already has a Rail Tax Fund. It is used to keep the short lines open in rural parts of the state. It is needed to provide rail access to factories that keep folks employed. Some of the money may be used to link the new VW plant to the rail network. The fund was used to keep the Nashville & Eastern part o the old TC operating. The freight RR's pay a portion of their diesel fuel tax into this fund.
DMU: Since there is talk of infrastructure improvement anyway by the new administration then take that money putting it into construction of an 80+ MPH ROW. This ROW would improve not only passenger speeds but freight - especially intermodal. This is giving many construction jobs and adds a permanent improvement to the US's infrastructure not some fleeting give back to citizens. Only Railroads have not had much investment in improving its infrastructure. The only exception is some commuter lines.
The U.S. has been there, done that!!! ALL the Railroads in the northeast went bankrupt! Lots of others in other parts of the country also went Bankrupt. The Government had to form Conrail and Amtrak to keep the trains rolling less the Bankrupt Courts would have had the rails sold for scrap to pay the debt. (as they did with the N.Y.O.& W.)
Yes, Freight Railroads make money, more money than any other U.S. transportation systems ( Air, Truck, Bus). You can run a 100 car Freight Train at 45 mph with a two man crew and make a good profit. You can NOT run a 10 car Passenger Train at 80 mph with a six man crew and make a profit.
BUT, the REAL cost is the upgrading and maintaining of the track for 80 mph service, and then running only a few trains a day at that speed. Just think of the rail size (weight) and tie replacement costs. Above 80 mph you have the Grade Crossing replacement problem. (overpass, underpass, or 4 quadrant gates)
In a Country 3,000 miles wide, rail passenger service will not work at a profit outside of a few "Corridors" of 500 miles or less.
Don U. TCA 73-5735
Whether passenger rail is subsidized by government, motorists, airline passengers, or freight carriers, it is a misuse of scarce economic resources. And it props up a mode of transport that cannot stand on its own.
There is an exception. Passenger rail makes sense in relatively short, high density corridors where the cost of building additional highway and airway capability is prohibitive. Subsidizing the capital costs for these projects is probably justified.
Interestingly, some corridors cover their operating expenses. If the subsidies were removed from all modes of transport, including motoring, some corridors, if they were managed properly, could break even.
The premise of the article is wrong. The frt RRs are not "flush with cash". Although profitable, the industry, as a whole, is still not revenue adequate. An additional tax on RR profits will only continue to hurt the industry at a time when they could use additional capital to help with capacity expansion.
I think, new or expanded corridors can be justified, in part, by avoiding or delaying highway and airport expansion, then the capital costs could reasonably come, in part, from fuel and aviation taxes.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
lattasnip9 http://railroadpassengers.blogspot.com/2008/11/something-big.html
http://railroadpassengers.blogspot.com/2008/11/something-big.html
And this is considered a novel concept??? That's pretty much what the railroads were doing prior to May 1, 1971.
It is somewhat beyond me why the freight railroads should be singled out to subsidize long distance passenger rail. Why not the butchers, the bakers and the candlestick makers?
Why not just go ahead and join the NARP?? - al
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.