Moorman lays it out in simple ( so congress can understand ) terms. Note how he pursues North Portal bridge. If Portal bridge fails or becomes inoperative for some long period of time that effectively shuts down the NEC as even one North river tunnel failure would not.
Next priority appears to be the B&P new tunnels and Susquehanna river draw bridge which has a lot of openings, is subject to NS freights entering, and MARC train originations giving more 4 MTs . You still have Bush River and Gunpowder river bridges to complete 4 MTs.
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/passenger/intercity/moorman-calls-for-amtrak-investment.html?channel=41
Moorman also was interviewed on CNBC today:
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000593516&play=1
$28B over 20 years sounds very doable.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
So I would say this is good news and reflects on the advantages of having a former railroad CEO with a lifetime of experience at the helm of the ship with no real interest in the position long-term vs. a tenured government bureaucrat.
Did Wick finally get Congress with they Big Heads on the Hill, The Money that Amtrak needs to everything into a A shape or like last 30 years Big talk with little money every year??
One month in and we have no real idea of what the legislative agenda of the new administration will be in so many areas, including tranportation in general and railroads in particular.
The devil of legislation is always in the details, not a 140 character tweet!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD One month in and we have no real idea of what the legislative agenda of the new administration will be in so many areas, including tranportation in general and railroads in particular. The devil of legislation is always in the details, not a 140 character tweet!
Yes he scrimped on money on staff the last 4-5 months of the campaign (compared with his opponent that spent lavishly) so they did zero work on policy prior to being elected and then he had to flesh out more of his cabinet picks which he spent a lot of time choosing. No surprise they are 4-6 months behind. Although I think he is ahead with heathcare as he is going to borrow heavily from Congress on that.
CMStPnP BaltACD One month in and we have no real idea of what the legislative agenda of the new administration will be in so many areas, including tranportation in general and railroads in particular. The devil of legislation is always in the details, not a 140 character tweet! Yes he scrimped on money on staff the last 4-5 months of the campaign (compared with his opponent that spent lavishly) so they did zero work on policy prior to being elected and then he had to flesh out more of his cabinet picks which he spent a lot of time choosing. No surprise they are 4-6 months behind. Although I think he is ahead with heathcare as he is going to borrow heavily from Congress on that.
Link to video of the hearing. Moorman is introduced at 43:18.
http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings?ID=059064F8-8D58-4725-98BC-61CC53DBCB08
Here is an article that says Moorman's statement is half true. It compares the population of the US in 1990 to today and number of riders then to today. It also notes total % of Amtrak riders to total US trips has decreased. Have to agree with their statements but what is their agenda ?
IMO although they say Moorman is half true they are half true in neglecting the fact of no total additional equipment allocated by Congress in the same time period.
https://billypenn.com/2017/02/21/whats-missing-from-amtraks-claim-that-we-rely-more-than-ever-on-trains/
oltmannd $28B over 20 years sounds very doable.
"Doable", yes. But it is an entirely different question whether this President or this Congress will throw anything but words at the problem. We'll see.
Tom
blue streak 1 Here is an article that says Moorman's statement is half true. It compares the population of the US in 1990 to today and number of riders then to today. It also notes total % of Amtrak riders to total US trips has decreased. Have to agree with their statements but what is their agenda ? IMO although they say Moorman is half true they are half true in neglecting the fact of no total additional equipment allocated by Congress in the same time period. https://billypenn.com/2017/02/21/whats-missing-from-amtraks-claim-that-we-rely-more-than-ever-on-trains/
I do not know what their "agenda" (if any) is. I do see that the stagnation in passenger numbers the last few years has nothing to do with equipment allocated by Congress. The key stat to support or refute that claim is load factor: "Trains were also emptier than in the previous year, with a 50.9 percent average load in 2016, compared to 51.3 percent in 2015."
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm blue streak 1 Here is an article that says Moorman's statement is half true. It compares the population of the US in 1990 to today and number of riders then to today. It also notes total % of Amtrak riders to total US trips has decreased. Have to agree with their statements but what is their agenda ? IMO although they say Moorman is half true they are half true in neglecting the fact of no total additional equipment allocated by Congress in the same time period. https://billypenn.com/2017/02/21/whats-missing-from-amtraks-claim-that-we-rely-more-than-ever-on-trains/ I do not know what their "agenda" (if any) is. I do see that the stagnation in passenger numbers the last few years has nothing to do with equipment allocated by Congress. The key stat to support or refute that claim is load factor: "Trains were also emptier than in the previous year, with a 50.9 percent average load in 2016, compared to 51.3 percent in 2015."
ROBERT WILLISON schlimm blue streak 1 Here is an article that says Moorman's statement is half true. It compares the population of the US in 1990 to today and number of riders then to today. It also notes total % of Amtrak riders to total US trips has decreased. Have to agree with their statements but what is their agenda ? IMO although they say Moorman is half true they are half true in neglecting the fact of no total additional equipment allocated by Congress in the same time period. https://billypenn.com/2017/02/21/whats-missing-from-amtraks-claim-that-we-rely-more-than-ever-on-trains/ I do not know what their "agenda" (if any) is. I do see that the stagnation in passenger numbers the last few years has nothing to do with equipment allocated by Congress. The key stat to support or refute that claim is load factor: "Trains were also emptier than in the previous year, with a 50.9 percent average load in 2016, compared to 51.3 percent in 2015." I think Amtrak has been hurt some by the decreasing cost of gasoline. Also the growth of ultra low price bus companies. Their conclusion is he stated a half truth. Or perhaps he 1/2 way to becoming a politian.
I think Amtrak has been hurt some by the decreasing cost of gasoline. Also the growth of ultra low price bus companies. Their conclusion is he stated a half truth. Or perhaps he 1/2 way to becoming a politian.
Such a low load factor has been present for years. To me, it suggests that Amtrak is running too many empty trains on routes with low demand while straining capacity on others. Poor equipment allocation by Amtrak.
ROBERT WILLISONI think Amtrak has been hurt some by the decreasing cost of gasoline. Also the growth of ultra low price bus companies. Their conclusion is he stated a half truth. Or perhaps he 1/2 way to becoming a politian.
Contrary to popular belief and numerous studies have shown this. Not a lot of people who travel by LD train would consider the bus and vice versa. Understood you can't convince all the readers of Trains Magazine Forums of this but it is shown in both NARP and DOT studies that only some of the passengers are transferrable and it is usually well below 50%. Same goes for intercity.
CMStPnP ROBERT WILLISON I think Amtrak has been hurt some by the decreasing cost of gasoline. Also the growth of ultra low price bus companies. Their conclusion is he stated a half truth. Or perhaps he 1/2 way to becoming a politian. Contrary to popular belief and numerous studies have shown this. Not a lot of people who travel by LD train would consider the bus and vice versa. Understood you can't convince all the readers of Trains Magazine Forums of this but it is shown in both NARP and DOT studies that only some of the passengers are transferrable and it is usually well below 50%. Same goes for intercity.
ROBERT WILLISON I think Amtrak has been hurt some by the decreasing cost of gasoline. Also the growth of ultra low price bus companies. Their conclusion is he stated a half truth. Or perhaps he 1/2 way to becoming a politian.
ROBERT WILLISONmight want to check out company called megabus. A company that offers bus service not only in the US but throughout the world. They operate in many cities with no stations and tickets are bought on their web site. They offer service between NYC to Boston for as little as a dollar. They are highly competitive in every market they operate. Many articles have citing them as competing with not only with Amtrak but the legacy bus lines.
I stand by what I stated. Went over this ad nauseum back when I lived in Wisconsin with bus companies opposed to rail expansion. Megabus is not the first deep discount bus operator in the states and I seriously doubt it has any impact on survey results.
CMStPnPdeep discount
CMStPnP ROBERT WILLISON might want to check out company called megabus. A company that offers bus service not only in the US but throughout the world. They operate in many cities with no stations and tickets are bought on their web site. They offer service between NYC to Boston for as little as a dollar. They are highly competitive in every market they operate. Many articles have citing them as competing with not only with Amtrak but the legacy bus lines. I stand by what I stated. Went over this ad nauseum back when I lived in Wisconsin with bus companies opposed to rail expansion. Megabus is not the first deep discount bus operator in the states and I seriously doubt it has any impact on survey results.
ROBERT WILLISON might want to check out company called megabus. A company that offers bus service not only in the US but throughout the world. They operate in many cities with no stations and tickets are bought on their web site. They offer service between NYC to Boston for as little as a dollar. They are highly competitive in every market they operate. Many articles have citing them as competing with not only with Amtrak but the legacy bus lines.
ROBERT WILLISON CMStPnP deep discount CMStPnP ROBERT WILLISON might want to check out company called megabus. A company that offers bus service not only in the US but throughout the world. They operate in many cities with no stations and tickets are bought on their web site. They offer service between NYC to Boston for as little as a dollar. They are highly competitive in every market they operate. Many articles have citing them as competing with not only with Amtrak but the legacy bus lines. I stand by what I stated. Went over this ad nauseum back when I lived in Wisconsin with bus companies opposed to rail expansion. Megabus is not the first deep discount bus operator in the states and I seriously doubt it has any impact on survey results. and I stand by my statement. I have family living in the Northeast. They live in the city, have great jobs. Just like they use uber, they get on their phones, check the prices and hop the bus for Boston for a third less. Times they are a changing.
CMStPnP deep discount
and I stand by my statement. I have family living in the Northeast. They live in the city, have great jobs. Just like they use uber, they get on their phones, check the prices and hop the bus for Boston for a third less. Times they are a changing.
And I'll second Robert. Folks I know in WI use Megabus from the Twin Cities (it stops in Madison). And I have seen Megabus arrive and depart at Union Station in Chicago with many passengers, mostly young. I have no information of number of passengers carried, but they claim 50 million in the 10 years of US operation.
schlimmin
Update: http://las.depaul.edu/centers-and-institutes/chaddick-institute-for-metropolitan-development/research-and-publications/Documents/BusStudy2017-FinalWeb.pdf
Hey can't open your last updated.What was thier conclusion s.
It should open. They make many observations, short and long-term outlook and no executive summary. Here is one:
1. Years of relatively flat traffic and passenger revenues culminated in targeted cuts by prominent carriers in 2016, but revenues from passenger operations appear on an upward trajectory and are likely to grow around three percent this year. Several factors, including an uptick in the price of fuel, suggest that market forces that have marginalized the growth in bus traffic are subsiding.
ROBERT WILLISON Hey can't open your last updated.What was thier conclusion s.
I was able to open the site and download the report. It is a very interesting read.
I opened it with Chrome. I also opened it with Firefox and Internet Explorer. I have the latest version of all three browsers installed on my computer. Chrome and Firefox opened it immediately; IE took a long time.
If your only broswer is IE, download Chrome or Firefox. Everyone should have a least two browsers on their computer.
Make sure you browser is not blocking the site. Try turning the pop-up blocker off.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
Thanks guys won't open on my phone, I'll open tomorrow when I can fire up my puter.
ROBERT WILLISON CMStPnP BaltACD One month in and we have no real idea of what the legislative agenda of the new administration will be in so many areas, including tranportation in general and railroads in particular. The devil of legislation is always in the details, not a 140 character tweet! Yes he scrimped on money on staff the last 4-5 months of the campaign (compared with his opponent that spent lavishly) so they did zero work on policy prior to being elected and then he had to flesh out more of his cabinet picks which he spent a lot of time choosing. No surprise they are 4-6 months behind. Although I think he is ahead with heathcare as he is going to borrow heavily from Congress on that. fortunately or unfortunately spending is in the hands of Congress. They are not inclined to spend and borrow money for Trump's promise's. This includes infrastructure, Health care, a 21 billion wall or another moonshot. He can tweet till he is blue in his face, won't happen.
fortunately or unfortunately spending is in the hands of Congress. They are not inclined to spend and borrow money for Trump's promise's. This includes infrastructure, Health care, a 21 billion wall or another moonshot. He can tweet till he is blue in his face, won't happen.
Judging by your bizarre posting style (triplicates?), you are hardly in a postion to insult other posters.
schlimm ROBERT WILLISON schlimm blue streak 1 Here is an article that says Moorman's statement is half true. It compares the population of the US in 1990 to today and number of riders then to today. It also notes total % of Amtrak riders to total US trips has decreased. Have to agree with their statements but what is their agenda ? IMO although they say Moorman is half true they are half true in neglecting the fact of no total additional equipment allocated by Congress in the same time period. https://billypenn.com/2017/02/21/whats-missing-from-amtraks-claim-that-we-rely-more-than-ever-on-trains/ I do not know what their "agenda" (if any) is. I do see that the stagnation in passenger numbers the last few years has nothing to do with equipment allocated by Congress. The key stat to support or refute that claim is load factor: "Trains were also emptier than in the previous year, with a 50.9 percent average load in 2016, compared to 51.3 percent in 2015." I think Amtrak has been hurt some by the decreasing cost of gasoline. Also the growth of ultra low price bus companies. Their conclusion is he stated a half truth. Or perhaps he 1/2 way to becoming a politian. Such a low load factor has been present for years. To me, it suggests that Amtrak is running too many empty trains on routes with low demand while straining capacity on others. Poor equipment allocation by Amtrak.
Or, poor understanding of elasticity of demand, something Moorman says is Amtrak's top priority.
That is, understanding demand pricing. Perhaps off-peak pricing needs to be reducued and peak pricing needs to be increased?
oltmannd Or, poor understanding of elasticity of demand, something Moorman says is Amtrak's top priority. That is, understanding demand pricing. Perhaps off-peak pricing needs to be reducued and peak pricing needs to be increased?
One would have to examine the load factor route by route to make an informed decision. Demand pricing is not possible on most LD routes since the "service" is only one train/day.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.