http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/03/22/2162151/rail-deal-clears-way-for-fast.html
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Phoebe: Looks like the rail people in NC will have to deal with the GOP following their try to kill HrSR work.. It certainly appears that the GOP with a few exceptions wants to make all of the US automobile drivers. But that is not possible.
My example is suppose my mother who cannot drive wants to go to Raleigh. Now she will not ask me to drive her there because she would think it too much trouble for me to drive a round trip twice.But she will let me take her to the train station, ride the train, and have the person she is to visit pick her up at the Raleigh station.
I can get the Republicans to drop their objections. All we have to do is award the contracts to do the work to Halliburton and pay them 5 times what another vendor would charge.
We could turn this economy around a lot faster if the Republicans would stop fighting against and trying to undo every program designed to help.
The PR problem is caused by the absurd idea of calling 90 MPH "High Speed Rail". The public is not buying that and therefor keeps dividing the cost by the small speed advantage. They should call it what it is. It is a capacity upgrade that will allow them to run more trains and gain a little speed in the process. While they are straightening some curves and eliminating some RR crossings, the majority of the money is adding double track and passing sidings. It is, in fact, a speeding up of improvements that NC has been working on for ten years.
I know these arguments are political, but in as much as the Republicans have taken a course of action to repeal the stimulous in general and rail improvements in particular, there is no way to separate politics from this thread.
Carolina really does seem to be on the right track in developing a passenger service. But it's interesting how NS attempted to interfere with the project on state-owned track which it operates on. And I guess somebody has told the corporate-controlled GOP to vote down PTC money.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
blue streak 1 Phoebe: Looks like the rail people in NC will have to deal with the GOP following their try to kill HrSR work.. It certainly appears that the GOP with a few exceptions wants to make all of the US automobile drivers. But that is not possible. My example is suppose my mother who cannot drive wants to go to Raleigh. Now she will not ask me to drive her there because she would think it too much trouble for me to drive a round trip twice.But she will let me take her to the train station, ride the train, and have the person she is to visit pick her up at the Raleigh station.
Your could put her on Greyhound. It would not be as comfortable as the train. She might revel in the fact that she is traveling on a market based mode of commercial transport that was not owned and subsidized by the government.
According to the article referenced, the cost to shave 13 minutes off the running time from Charlotte to Raleigh is approximately $41 million a minute. It certainly adds a new ring to the saying that time is money. Only a government agency would believe that it is money well spent, especially when the spender is facing an annual deficit of $1.6 trillion, which will increase the national debt to more than $15 trillion.
Sam just perfectly demonstrated my point about calling this a high speed rail project. The speed increase from 79 to 90 mph is an infinitesimal 11 mph and the people who get apoplectic over anything with a dollar sign in front of it use that fact to make sarcastic comments about the price of that increase.
The right of way is owned by NC. Norfolk Southern maintains and operates the track. NCDOT wants to add more trains and the ROW is going to be included in the future SEHSR corridor. It has a lot of single track, which limits capacity, and many RR crossings that need to be eliminated or upgraded. NC has been working on those upgrades for years, that is why the project is "shovel ready". The time between the city pair has already been reduce significantly because the upgrades already done have eliminated several area speed restrictions.
The speed increase is a byproduct. The project is a capacity increase so they can run more trains.
On its face, and based on information contained in previous posts by Phoebe, this looks to be as worthwhile as passenger-rail projects get.
Two questions that could affect the discussion (and pardon me if this has been provided before): How much do passenger trains cost the state every year -- I'm thinking of just the operating subsidy -- and what kind of shape is N.C.'s budget in?
RALEIGH - North Carolina’s Amtrak ridership grew 15 percent in FY 2010, while the Amtrak National riders grew about six percent.The state-owned Piedmont, which travels four times daily between Raleigh and Charlotte with stops in six other North Carolina cities, had the largest percentage increase in the nation, 46 percent. One reason for this increase is that mid-day service was added in June.North Carolina’s Amtrak ridership saw an increase of more than 100,000 riders in the last fiscal year. Ridership was up from 688,595 to 791,157. Ticket revenues were up more than 19 percent. Amtrak National ridership, which includes all trains that run throughout the country, grew by 5.7 percent over 2009 from just over 27 million to 28.7 million passengers in 2010. Revenues were up nearly nine percent in 2010.“We are pleased to see that more and more people are taking the train,” said State Transportation Secretary Gene Conti. “We are confident that as we add more schedule options and increase travel speed, this trend will continue.” North Carolina’s Amtrak Piedmont and Carolinian trains are sponsored by the N.C. Department of Transportation and paid for through state funding and passenger fares. Amtrak is the state’s operating partner.
Politics in the country has sunk to the level that whatever one party wants the other is against....and if the 1st party then becomes against the idea they were originally for....the other party will then become for the idea they were originally against. This nonsense of talking past each other has to stop....the only thing that is happening is that the voters have become disgusted with both parties and their unwillingness to lead the country.
Phoebe Vet I know these arguments are political, but in as much as the Republicans have taken a course of action to repeal the stimulous in general and rail improvements in particular, there is no way to separate politics from this thread.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Balt:
True. We need fewer Republican Senators, fewer Democrat Senators, and more US Senators.
Fred:
I did not ignore your request for financial data. I thought I knew where I had those numbers, but I can't find them.
Sam1 Your could put her on Greyhound. It would not be as comfortable as the train. She might revel in the fact that she is traveling on a market based mode of commercial transport that was not owned and subsidized by the government. Not in a heartbeat; Comfortable no way. The 2 bus crashes in the NE last week showed many people how vunerable buses are in accidents. On top of that NY DOT did a spot check on some buses a few days after those accidents and the failure rate was what 50%? . No!! every bus or driver was taken out of service. Not what our bus advocates have been saying. According to the article referenced, the cost to shave 13 minutes off the running time from Charlotte to Raleigh is approximately $41 million a minute. You and our auto hard nosers have been victims of poor reporting by the newspaper. First: the reduced 13 minutes is to the new station that Phoebe mentioned which is 2-1/2 miles (?) further down the track. Second: No mention was been made that the new station will be tied to CLT's light rail system. That means many people will not need to drive in CLT taking many cars off the roads and streets. Business men will be able to have billable hours while riding to CLT and then go to business meetings in downtown CLT. So maybe my mother will be able to take light rail to the new station and catch the train. That way I would not have to drive her at all (many older persons do not want to inconvience their off spring. Third; Short reporting was made of the fact that this will improve NS's route from CLT - Raleigh. Since NC owns the line they may be able to get more rental income from NS if freight traffic increases by more reliable service. Fourth: The CSX flyover over NS near the new station will speed up NS thru and local freight service as CSX has a lot of conflicting moves. Will also eliminate passenger delays. Last year wife took Crescent and took a 10 minute delay at the crossing due to CSX having problems. Fifth: The 13 minute time saving will be effectively 16 minutes taking in account the further length of the trip into CLT. I admit that is not much time savings. However 13 minutes will give a scheduled time RGH - CLT of 3 Hours flat. When AMTRAK was able to get NYP - WASH times back below 3 HRS on ACELA and Metroliners the ridership increased substantially. Sixth: There will be a further published but not emphasized 15 minute savings when the 90 MPH segments go into service. Definitely will be below the above 3 Hrs. Seventh: No mention was made of the approximatel 45 (?) minute speed up already put into effect from earlier improvements. However there are many times NS freights still delay passenger trains until these improvements are made. Seventh: Every grade crossing that is eliminated means less delay for our automobile die hards and that much less exposure to a repeat of crossing collisions. Eighth: I suspect NC DOT will be looking for additional speed up to the 110 MPH if just to make up time. Ninth: The tie in to the proposed Richmond - Raleigh MSR has not been mentioned. That will be very important in the future. ( 2 to 2-1/2 hrs) Tenth: No comparsion to the costs for the I-85 / I-40 upgrade cost is made. All those narrow overpasses between Greensboro - Durham were a trucker's nightmare. certainly adds a new ring to the saying that time is money. Only a government agency would believe that it is money well spent, especially when the spender is facing an annual deficit of $1.6 trillion, which will increase the national debt to more than $15 trillion.
Not in a heartbeat; Comfortable no way. The 2 bus crashes in the NE last week showed many people how vunerable buses are in accidents. On top of that NY DOT did a spot check on some buses a few days after those accidents and the failure rate was what 50%? . No!! every bus or driver was taken out of service. Not what our bus advocates have been saying.
According to the article referenced, the cost to shave 13 minutes off the running time from Charlotte to Raleigh is approximately $41 million a minute.
You and our auto hard nosers have been victims of poor reporting by the newspaper.
First: the reduced 13 minutes is to the new station that Phoebe mentioned which is 2-1/2 miles (?) further down the track.
Second: No mention was been made that the new station will be tied to CLT's light rail system. That means many people will not need to drive in CLT taking many cars off the roads and streets. Business men will be able to have billable hours while riding to CLT and then go to business meetings in downtown CLT. So maybe my mother will be able to take light rail to the new station and catch the train. That way I would not have to drive her at all (many older persons do not want to inconvience their off spring.
Third; Short reporting was made of the fact that this will improve NS's route from CLT - Raleigh. Since NC owns the line they may be able to get more rental income from NS if freight traffic increases by more reliable service.
Fourth: The CSX flyover over NS near the new station will speed up NS thru and local freight service as CSX has a lot of conflicting moves. Will also eliminate passenger delays. Last year wife took Crescent and took a 10 minute delay at the crossing due to CSX having problems.
Fifth: The 13 minute time saving will be effectively 16 minutes taking in account the further length of the trip into CLT. I admit that is not much time savings. However 13 minutes will give a scheduled time RGH - CLT of 3 Hours flat. When AMTRAK was able to get NYP - WASH times back below 3 HRS on ACELA and Metroliners the ridership increased substantially.
Sixth: There will be a further published but not emphasized 15 minute savings when the 90 MPH segments go into service. Definitely will be below the above 3 Hrs.
Seventh: No mention was made of the approximatel 45 (?) minute speed up already put into effect from earlier improvements. However there are many times NS freights still delay passenger trains until these improvements are made.
Seventh: Every grade crossing that is eliminated means less delay for our automobile die hards and that much less exposure to a repeat of crossing collisions.
Eighth: I suspect NC DOT will be looking for additional speed up to the 110 MPH if just to make up time.
Ninth: The tie in to the proposed Richmond - Raleigh MSR has not been mentioned. That will be very important in the future. ( 2 to 2-1/2 hrs)
Tenth: No comparsion to the costs for the I-85 / I-40 upgrade cost is made. All those narrow overpasses between Greensboro - Durham were a trucker's nightmare.
certainly adds a new ring to the saying that time is money. Only a government agency would believe that it is money well spent, especially when the spender is facing an annual deficit of $1.6 trillion, which will increase the national debt to more than $15 trillion.
Someone who asked about the operating cost coverage. Here are the unaudited AMTRAK Piedmont only figures:
FY 2010 Revenue $4.3M. Operating expenses $3.3M Fully allocated costs - $3.6M. Probably because Piedmont uses NC DOT equipment and state owns stations?
FY 2011 thru Jan. Revenue $1.2M Operating costs $1.2M Fully allocated $1.3M.
These figures at least say operating costs are breaking even.
The operating costs of the Carolinian are not included and the ability of passengers to take the Piedmont one way and Carolinian the other way is not counted? Phoebee: does NC DOT get any figures for this type travel?
Another question for Phoeebe. What is the status of possible Wi-Fi on this route?
So in conclusion: This money is for capital costs not operating costs. Once NS gets the present work done and daily service restored and then a 3rd Piedmont is initiated the whole country may get an idea of what Henry's service advocacy position will mean.
From the Charlotte Observer article:
Greyhound is not a casino tour bus operator. A more meaningful comparison would be Greyhound's safety record between Charlotte and Raleigh. Citing the safety record of a New York tour bus operator is akin to arguing that the commuter train crash in California, which killed 25 people, is representative of the risks of rail travel between Charlotte and Raleigh.
Greyhound covers its costs and generates a small return for its shareholders. To be sure, it is less comfortable than a train, but it is hardly third world. But why should the taxpayers support a passenger rail system if the users are not willing to pay for the cost of the service? Not only do commercial bus operators cover their proportional user costs, part of the fuel tax that they pay goes to support mass transit and deficit reduction.
According to Amtrak's September 2010 Monthly Operating Report (C-2), which reported the results for FY10, the Piedmonts lost 5.2 cents per passenger mile or $600,000 before interest and depreciation. The average load factor was 46 per cent. For the first quarter of FY11, which ended December 2010, the Piedmonts lost 23.6 cents per passenger mile. The average load factor was 44.4 per cent. The results are before interest and depreciation, which a government entity can ignore for its product lines. Commercial bus operators and airlines cannot ignore these costs.
Most of the other advantages claimed are soft dollars. That may work for government activities, but they would not work for a competitive business. If a business followed Amtrak's business model, it would be out of business in a heartbeat.
If all of the advantages for the government spend cited are achievable, why does Amtrak or NC DOT need a large infusion of money from the financially strapped federal government to implement the improvements? If there were a high probability that they would generate the improvements that have been suggested, private investors would flock to invest in the project.
Like I said, $41million per minute adds a new ring to the saying time is money. As was pointed out, the newspaper did not mention a number of things that may be relevant to the ARRA investment in the rail infrastructure between Charlotte and Raleigh. Likewise, it did not say anything about the $14.1 trillion U.S. National Debt, which will be roughly $15.7 trillion at the end of FY2011. That will take it to approximately 108 per cent of GDP or nearly the level realized at the end of WWII. Yes, the federal infusion is a miniscule portion of the nation deficit, but it reflects a mindset. In practically every aspect of American life the attitude is that we got to have it now, irrespective of the long term financial consequences for future generations, which is the reason that the U.S. financial picture is bleak.
If readers of this post think that I am opposed to government spends (investments) with little hope of payback by the users, they are correct.
railfanjohn From the Charlotte Observer article: " "When we start having passengers on a freight rail line, that makes us nervous," John V. Edwards, Norfolk Southern's passenger policy director, said in December at a rail conference in Richmond." (emphasis mine) I can't beleive Mr.Edwards, a RAILROAD executive , would make such a statement! What is he "nervous" about? Passenger trains and freight trains have co-existed on the same tracks for 180 years!!! Do we now have people working for railroads (in higher management no less) who have NO IDEA how to operate trains? I guess ever since Graniteville (Jan. 2005) Norfolk Southern is afraid of their own shadow if there is any chance the public may be anywhere near its freight trains. This statement is completely ridiculous.
I'll admit "nervous" is a curious word to use. I suspect he'd have been better off saying "...we have concerns."
Those concerns have been well documented, of late. They are:
1. Taking on the cost of some additional liability.
2. Losing existing capacity on the line
3. Loss of reliability of existing freight train operation
4. Loss of future growth potential.
The facts are that NS has been and remains agreeable to passenger train service over their lines. NS and NC have a good, long term relationship and have planned, funded and executed many projects on the NCRR in recent years. All the details are on the NCDOT web site, FWIW.
NC and NS did not have much trouble reaching an agreement for this service. The trouble was at the FRA.
NS has even been a proponent of restored rail service between Petersburg and Norfolk VA, preparing an unsolicited cost estimate for service restoration.
NS has also revived the steam program - something a company that "is afraid of it's own shadow" would never take on!
This is all part of being a good corporate citizen - which, in the long run, is also good for the company.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
http://www.apta.com/resources/reportsandpublications/documents/HSRPub_final.pdf
Nice brochure, but it mostly falls/has fallen on deaf ears.
What would be great if eventually NC DOT can remove all the slow sections and enable the 175 miles to be operated in 2 hrs. with one stop in Greensboro. Be a great continuation of the Richmond - Raleigh HrSR?
That's the long term plan, but then the wacky new Republican majority is trying to derail it. They are not making any friends. They also just introduced a bill to reduce the state employees health benefits.
Sam1 Greyhound is not a casino tour bus operator.
Greyhound is not a casino tour bus operator.
No they are not. However I had the fortune to examine a parked new Greyhound bus next to a tour bus from the northeast. I could see no difference in the construction. The Greyhound appeared to be able to be opened like a can opener as happened in the northeast.
A question to those who know. Are all buses now manufactured built externally the same?
blue streak 1 Sam1: Greyhound is not a casino tour bus operator. No they are not. However I had the fortune to examine a parked new Greyhound bus next to a tour bus from the northeast. I could see no difference in the construction. The Greyhound appeared to be able to be opened like a can opener as happened in the northeast. A question to those who know. Are all buses now manufactured built externally the same?
Sam1: Greyhound is not a casino tour bus operator.
You mean 45' long and 102" wide or something else?
dakotafred On its face, and based on information contained in previous posts by Phoebe, this looks to be as worthwhile as passenger-rail projects get. Two questions that could affect the discussion (and pardon me if this has been provided before): How much do passenger trains cost the state every year -- I'm thinking of just the operating subsidy -- and what kind of shape is N.C.'s budget in?
http://www.letsgetmoving.org/images/uploads/pages/RTA-NC-HSR-summary.pdf
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/03/30/2182157/debate-cut-short-on-bill-to-kill.html
Phoebe Vet dakotafred: On its face, and based on information contained in previous posts by Phoebe, this looks to be as worthwhile as passenger-rail projects get. Two questions that could affect the discussion (and pardon me if this has been provided before): How much do passenger trains cost the state every year -- I'm thinking of just the operating subsidy -- and what kind of shape is N.C.'s budget in? http://www.letsgetmoving.org/images/uploads/pages/RTA-NC-HSR-summary.pdf http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/03/30/2182157/debate-cut-short-on-bill-to-kill.html
dakotafred: On its face, and based on information contained in previous posts by Phoebe, this looks to be as worthwhile as passenger-rail projects get. Two questions that could affect the discussion (and pardon me if this has been provided before): How much do passenger trains cost the state every year -- I'm thinking of just the operating subsidy -- and what kind of shape is N.C.'s budget in?
Catch 22!
From the Observer article:
"We ask that you consider the jobs impact. This is bridge work, this is roadway work. This isn't rocket science. This is stuff our folks do every day, when we have an opportunity," Jenkins said.
But Killian dismissed the jobs issue.
"Folks, what we need are private sector jobs," Killian told the committee. "We do not need publicly financed jobs. Taking federal dollars for temporary jobs in our state, it's not going to solve our economic problems."
The rail project has bridge and roadway work in it.
Some don't want "public sector" financed jobs.
So, what would be private sector bridge and roadway work? Is that an oxymoron?
Jobs are jobs, whether government or otherwise. They put food on the table, etc. for the wage earner and have an indirect contribution to the local economy.
Thanks for the subsidy info, Phoebe.
If the jobs are associated with activities that the users eventually pay for, then they are a sound investment. If they are associated with activities that will require on-going subsidies, perhaps in perpetuity, which the taxpayers have to foot, then they are not a sound investment. Ultimately, the on-going subsidies can negate the benefits generated initially by the jobs.
Passenger rail is a commercial venture irrespective of who operates it. It competes with other forms of commercial transport that are expected to pay their own way. The jobs created by passenger rail are not the same as jobs associated with the Department of Defense.
According to the document referenced, existing and newly funded rail services will require state subsidies of $12 million per year. No mention is made of federal subsidies. The promoters claim that the rail service will eventually generate revenues sufficient to cover the operating expenses. No mention is made of how the capital expenditures would be recovered. The projections fly in the face of experience in most environments.
According to the GAO's assessment of proposed high speed rail projects in the U.S., the proponents tend to overestimate revenues whilst understating costs. Clearly, this has been true for the California High Speed Rail proposal. The cost of the project has increased from $32.8 billion to more than $45 billion before a shovel has been turned. And the $45 billion does not include financing, which I would wager is absent from the North Carolina estimates. In most instances project proponents across the board tend to overlook the financing costs, which is akin to a person buying a car on time and not factoring in the interest payments on the loan.
Hopefully, we will be able to build a high (moderate) speed passenger rail network that will cover its operating costs and pay down the capital costs to the point where it can be spun off to private operators. Unfortunately, I don't think it will happen.
oltmannd Phoebe Vet: dakotafred: On its face, and based on information contained in previous posts by Phoebe, this looks to be as worthwhile as passenger-rail projects get. Two questions that could affect the discussion (and pardon me if this has been provided before): How much do passenger trains cost the state every year -- I'm thinking of just the operating subsidy -- and what kind of shape is N.C.'s budget in? http://www.letsgetmoving.org/images/uploads/pages/RTA-NC-HSR-summary.pdf http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/03/30/2182157/debate-cut-short-on-bill-to-kill.html Catch 22! From the Observer article: "We ask that you consider the jobs impact. This is bridge work, this is roadway work. This isn't rocket science. This is stuff our folks do every day, when we have an opportunity," Jenkins said. But Killian dismissed the jobs issue. "Folks, what we need are private sector jobs," Killian told the committee. "We do not need publicly financed jobs. Taking federal dollars for temporary jobs in our state, it's not going to solve our economic problems." The rail project has bridge and roadway work in it. Some don't want "public sector" financed jobs. So, what would be private sector bridge and roadway work? Is that an oxymoron?
Phoebe Vet: dakotafred: On its face, and based on information contained in previous posts by Phoebe, this looks to be as worthwhile as passenger-rail projects get. Two questions that could affect the discussion (and pardon me if this has been provided before): How much do passenger trains cost the state every year -- I'm thinking of just the operating subsidy -- and what kind of shape is N.C.'s budget in? http://www.letsgetmoving.org/images/uploads/pages/RTA-NC-HSR-summary.pdf http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/03/30/2182157/debate-cut-short-on-bill-to-kill.html
Texas State Highways 130, 45, and 121, amongst others, are private toll roads in the Lone Star state that were built by private operators. They were funded by the sale of bonds in the capital markets. In addition, the Houston Toll Road, as well as others, have been built by quasi-private or quasi governmental authorities. They receive no money from the state. They are financed by tolls. They are expected to pay for themselves.
SH130, which is a stones throw from my house, is on track to recover its costs and generate a return for the toll authority, which includes overseas investors.
Surely you will acknowledge, Sam, that such roads are an exception to the rule of public financing.
And many toll roads never fulfilled their original mission of paying of the bondholders in X years and becoming freeways. Instead they find ways (expansion, etc.) to remain toll roads forever: PA, OH, NJ, Garden State, IL, IN, and closer to TX, OK, just to name a few. Many have been in business over 50 years, the PA Turnpike Authority since 1937.
dakotafred Surely you will acknowledge, Sam, that such roads are an exception to the rule of public financing.
They are an exception. But they are also an example of how roads can be funded and paid for by the users without indirect subsidies from the general taxpayers. Equally important, the users know up front what it costs them to drive on the toll roads mentioned. The cost is not hidden.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.